Student Name

Teacher Name

Class Here

Date

Reading Response #2

The article discusses how our private information is not so private anymore. It suggests,

that we are generating data too fast to keep up with, and even if we did, it is generating faster

on more and more devices every day. Consequently, Americans’ personal data ends up in

unanticipated places, we don’t even know what can be learned from our data that we produce.

The reading provides actual events where our data was compromised, and our trust was tested.

They used examples like: The Cambridge Analytica, Snowden, and Equifax to give reasons why

the public should be concerned and informed about their data information. I’ve never heard of

any of these cases before, but they all happened for a reason, “we are playing a losing game”

when we should be playing a “fair game.”

It went on to talk about how big names in business, like Mark Zuckerburg and Tim Cook,

expressed that “we shouldn’t be regulated” and that “self-regulation is no longer viable.” Are

these brand names speaking for the people’s concerns or are they more concerned with

keeping their company’s unregulated, unwatched. Next it brings up how the computers

processing power doubles every 18-24 months, this means that we double the amount of

digital information in the world every two years. In reaction to this, there have been proposals
to the legislator about different things, that focus on specific topics from the main issue.

America already has a privacy regime, but even though we have one doesn’t mean that its up to

date. Our system can’t keep up with the fast-evolving internet, our laws are just reactions to

common concerns; but by the time we address the problems new one’s spawn.

It discusses how “public exposure” and enforcement from the law can protect privacy,

but even if we do have privacy laws, the internet generates more data faster all the time, faster

then our government can process more efficient laws. It goes on to say that our privacy is

compromised because of traveling or sharing it with others, but if privacy has the right

foundation it can survive. In addition, one of the main factors to this battle is the consent form,

we never read those, we just blindly and willingly sign away them. Even if we did read it over,

some data is being auto collected, never asking for your consent and doesn’t really notify you of

the collection. The consumers don’t even know what companies do with our data or how they

operate at all, they are finding new ways to use our data to learn information about us.

The Federal Trade Commission should be enforcing seven basic principles: individual

control, transparently, respect for the content in which the data was obtained, access and

accuracy, focused collection, security, and accountability; these are also referred to as, “fair

information practices principles.” Next it discusses an EU law, that many big businesses have

adopted, but it explains that it wouldn’t be good for America. Furthermore, it also reviews

other organizations and how they both have similar agreements on personal information when

it comes to the privacy debate. Finally, it concludes with a message to everyone that the

consumers are noticing that it’s a “losing game” and if it doesn’t change then we might stop

playing; but if you ask me, we will always play the game, like a cat and a mouse.