Continuous breaches of the public sphere has increased the urge to make a change. Focused prodominitly in Britain a new uprising of protests have risen concerning the use of personal digital information that, as it seems, is not private at all. Interpret corporations have great access to our information although technically through consent, not all users of the Internet are fully aware of how much of their information can be stored or even how easily it can be accessed without their knowledge.
Talk of a digital bill of rights has been mentioned and in ‘The Conversations’ 21st April “What Use Would a Bill of Rights Be?” article this option is discusses in a manner that provoked many questions about the rights Internet users currently have and the potential if their were to be such a change that is suggested.
The concept of personal information as payment for the use of products was mention in the bill of rights article. This form of payment looks to be the only fitting payment for the use of digital data, one needs to give to receive, however the extent of this payment seems quite unfair. Internet corporations see little value in personal information, where apps and websites store large amounts of data for one individual and only then does It suffice for the use of one product!
Indeed the Internet is a growing commodity and as it grows so does its expense. Ussrs are required to pay for the information and data they use regardless of how useful it will be to them in the future, that’s right I’m talking about Cary crush and FarmVille. It is the users priority to deliberate whether their time and currency is worth the data they are receiving. The fact that users are paying is not the issue here. The issue is that users are paying for somthing they have deemed as free, so not once it’s too late do they realise how much of their personal data has been used to pay for their addictive ‘gaming’.
For something that has been running for so long and has had the chance to find a solution for quite some time, the Internet is still stuck in a rut between working for the benefit of its users or its masters. Surveillance is somethig that scares me and should definitely scare more people than it actually does. The extent of the surveillance we are subjected to is unbelievable however it has reached this point because we’ve allowed it to. We are naive and it’s true we don’t fully understand how valuable our privacy is untill it has been taken away however that should not mean that it is right to exploit us.
This day and age of data retention and personal survelence reminds me of the classic distooian play 1984. Depicting a world where privacy didn’t exist and people were simply cogs in machine, running purely for a big corporation. George Orwell was able to predict the turn of our technology not through extra terrestrial beings or artificial intelligence taking control but from ourselves. Multiple ‘wars’ broke out every week with a different cintender. Civilians under cinstant watch in case they showed any signs of free will and strictly no leaniency for personal time or pleasure.
What’s sad is that this horridly depiction may soon be our legitimate future. Orwell showed a world of his worst fears and we have only encouraged its progression. I for one think a bill of rights is a brilliant idea. Although it may not stop survelence entirely it may hinder its control and bring attention to its harmfulness. The digital and online world of legislation is a tricky place, by creating a bill of rights the these rules and regulations may be combined in one form of legislation to work for the public. At least then will users have legislation to stand on