Social Networking Era

Social networking era : the need for privacy legislation in death ?

 

With the flourishing of social networks, our time is not zero privacy era, but the era of negative privacy – our privacy on the one hand by the omnipresent spy, on the other hand more privacy, but it is our own circle of friends or a micro Bo hand over, large address, credit card numbers, to your eating and sleeping little. Privacy “has not, to disappear in your keyboard to beat unsuspecting moment.”

Lori Andrews watching this, “I know who you are, I know what you did: Privacy death in the era of social networks,” I feel quite frightened.

In this era of flat network, whether it is at the high temples or the distant rivers and lakes, everyone has their own circle of friends, “no matter how small the individual also has its own brand”; both spouses may point Like every show affection for each other , but their lives playing phone sitting on the sofa corner; several years and no friends gathered one, not talk, but holding the phone to each other point like, circle to circle to go. Video is so advanced, letter never worth than gold, there is no network flames are not even March.

For those big V, their online life may appear to some of the more interesting. Casually made a face, we can usher in thousands of forwarding and praise. Eyes every day, countless comments and private messages flood, so that they feel more and more like a big shot, memorial marking the emperor feeling.

Slightly distant from us that the police may be a circle of friends while playing, while searching for criminal intelligence through social media; and while criminals may also be made to it, while a similar “vacation”, “travel” so the key to identify targets of crime.

At the other end of the mobile terminal, it is data aggregators and social networking operator alliance. Data Integration Chamber of Commerce gathering in various ways to retrieve user information, then this information will be included in a particular user group. Businesses through these information through social platform for network operators, to provide you with targeted advertising. Even if you do not buy anything this time, does not mean you always do not buy anything, more does not mean you will not Shunzui recommend to your friends, attention itself make the products to attract attention, in the long run as well as businesses and platforms makes money.

For Chinese readers, it really is our network daily life, even that of our daily lives. Although primarily Facebook and other social media operations and influence in the United States discussed in this book, but on the issues discussed in this book is concerned, we are not at the diaphragm.

One theme of this book is to reveal the challenges face book Empire of privacy meticulous. As a law professor Lori Andrews in the book, a large number of relevant case reference to US courts for wording provided fresh information, the authors did not forget to always find a way out from a legal perspective.

Andrews believes that Facebook is not just for government functions supplement, which itself constitutes an independent economic system and regulations of the country. Facebook Although expensive for the “country”, but it is not a democratic country, “it unilaterally redefined the social contract – so that the original privacy becomes public, the original privacy becomes public; third party wants to obtain information about individuals Privacy Information easy. “” My every action is mysteriously being recorded down, and there are data aggregators to analyze them, and then sell this information to sort out the good companies, which is likely to include me n I want to sue the house. For this violation of privacy and security behavior, I not only kept in the dark, but also completely helpless. “

For example, police can easily through social media, to investigate in a traditional society that they can not arbitrarily carried out. In traditional society, without a warrant, the police can not trespass homes, but through social networks, the police can a family photo from the face of the book, expand surveillance and investigation. Although this is euphemistically called enforcement, but the normal procedure of contempt and violation of human rights was obvious. Andrews In summary, operating procedures like face book Constitution, like computer manuals, “the allocation of rights of all point in one direction, facebook holding a trump card, the rights of citizens can exercise little – unless completely leave the platform,” while the United States many of the existing laws, more freedom of expression is protected by the name social networking platform, rather than standing on the privacy of users being deprived of their depleted side.

It is difficult to appear in the traditional society of. In traditional society, the Constitution and other laws will protect our privacy, without demanding special procedures, our letters will not be open, our phone would not be tapped. But the rise of social media, so that these traditional values ​​are wiped out, the background of social media data mining engineers and other persons, be free to observe our every move. In the ever-changing era of big data objects everyone is being analyzed, whether politicians or businesses, will be holding a microscope to treat their lips to God.

Andrews also focus on “social networks and the judicial system.” Social networking era, the judiciary is facing a severe test. Andrews, for example, when you are in trial, the judge may busy tweeted; Reviewed by prosecutors and jurors may be instant friends, and even a sexual relationship; the jurors may put your case to send book on her face, or through your Facebook information and other retrieval result, we decided to judgment …… so many, are likely to occur. Andrews cited 2008 data show that more than 40 per cent of judges will use social networks, and lawyers in the proportion is as high as 56%.

Situation jury also no better, or even worse. Under normal circumstances, the evidence they need to determine the truth, the criminals sent to prison, also accused innocent; if the trial possible interference by the local media, and the trial judge may easily. But in a social network, these normal do not exist. Andrews cited many examples, there were a juror released “I do not know how to choose, so I have to make a survey” and his “friend” is strongly represented on the face should be convicted in the book; the juror So are disqualified, the parties to an acquittal. But if the same behavior, not being caught braids defense counsel, the outcome is obvious.

Andrews has also noted that despite the court expressly prohibited, but jurors use of social networks, still resulting in more than false positives – they are used to retrieve the lawyers information in search engines, find the defendant previously done bad things, assess witness credibility, and even went to the crime scene by Google Maps. In this case, the smart Defendant sides, naturally possible online manufacturing point “dirt” to shake the judge juror. These acts, apparently damaged the fair trial rights of the accused, the defense counsel did not, after all, an opportunity to correct the error message jurors, but not to the jury for questioning. Andrews cited in the case, most of the irregularities of the jury, have been revoked qualifications, but certainly no lack of the net, and even a case, juror tweeted during an adjournment to present its case, and was debate lawyers to seize the handle; in another case, when the mayor accused of corruption trial, in which he and five jurors are “friends”; a judge in the investigation, found that one of the jurors even in the face Shufa message, calling for “Judge Go to hell.”

Involving social networks throughout the United States for more stringent regulation of the jury. But the problem is that, as a party, hit so trendy jury, how can you do?

Social Networks constitution: possible? How so?

For young face book world, the young people come here first, is directed at freedom of association, freedom of speech and to show self-growth opportunity comes. In my opinion, this people and had traveled to the New World on the Mayflower no different. New world order should have what rules? The United States or other democratic countries can continue to apply the Constitution in here? …… A lot of problems, the present that has an optimistic answer. But in fact, with the rapid expansion of Facebook in the business world, and it brings us convenience, but also increasingly brutal, arrogant, imperious. As cited in the book, like the Internet was originally an ideal tool for democracy, but too much emphasis on personality, and allows the public domain after a variety of processing and classification algorithms, were deliberately designed to be completely different, no longer applies to the dialogue.

More obvious difference with the traditional world, the traditional democracies, individuals of course is treated as an individual; however, the network constituted in social media empire, the right was completely subversive, often marked with a variety of individual labels, be considered as part of the collective. In case you have no knowledge, you may be artificially re-division of the class, credit card companies may accordingly reduce your credit limit, the bank may be more cautious when lending. Andrews revealed dense collection of electronic identity that people can lead to psychological risk, financial risk, the risk of discrimination and social risks, but in this case, “the law relating to digital monitor virtually no protection, very little remaining Regulations can only deal with a few telephone early technology, …… even when the legal basis, the law may also be those who will be placed on scientific and technological development for the implementation of individual rights and exceptionally easy to act, at the same time inadvertently data aggregators to provide vulnerability of judges desecrated. “

In the book’s final, Andrews lists some of the fundamental rights of a social network should be protected by the Constitution, including the right things, freedom of speech and freedom of expression, places and information privacy, thoughts, feelings and emotions of privacy, portrait control over the right to a fair trial, the right to a fair jury, freedom, freedom of association and the right to due process right to be notified, without discrimination. Andrews will be right at the head of the social network networking Constitution, deserves attention. Her starting point that is the Middle East countries such as Internet blockade Egypt, Libya and other countries. The theoretical origins dating back to freedom of expression and universal values, the authors of the blame in the first place.

In fact, this never buy anything on the network “net blind” Andrews, the constitution of this social network, at least for now appears to be wishful thinking, even in her own words, “probably sounds stupid . “

Source : hihuadu