Privacy Vs National Security
You can’t just choose between national security and privacy, it isn’t that black and white; the key is finding the balance between them for the right time. Privacy vs. national security has been an ongoing national and international debate that has many different ways to approach it from. There are certain things people must know before debating this topic, one of which being The Patriot Act. This is an example of a national Act attempting to balance national security and privacy. There’s also an example of this topic much closer to home with the Apple FBI scandal, which happened earlier this year. This debate is so hard to solve because it is ever changing with different current events.
Mr. Howard uses spacing to his advantage to deliver main
points in his article in The Huffington Post. “If technology companies are forced to create ‘back doors’ for governments to decrypt user data or devices, it weakens consumer protections against crime.” (Alexander Howard) This is an example of Mr. Howard using spacing to his advantage to make a point. By separating this into it’s own section it emphasizes the point and makes the reader focus on it more. These “back doors” (Alexander Howard) could lead to personal information about civilians being leaked into hacker’s hands while only providing a small chance to catch any terrorist activity. Without knowing what application the terrorists are using to communicate over, it is nearly impossible for the government to monitor all activity or even most while keeping the risk of hackers stealing their information. “Let’s make sure that any debate over privacy and security considers how our right to be secure in our persons, papers and personal effects extends online.” (Alexander Howard) This is another example from Mr. Howard of separating this quote from the rest of the article, especially with this one because it is the ending. Another important part of this article is the diction of the author and how it brings out the bias. The author uses his diction to further extend his points. This is evident throughout the article mixed in with other literary devices. “It’s also inevitable that the Islamic State and other jihadis will build or adopt services with stronger encryption, which will in turn drive Western intelligence services to develop more powerful computers to break it.” (Alexander Howard) This quote can be picked apart to look at the author’s diction to see his bias. He uses words like “inevitable” (Alexander Howard) giving the feeling of hopelessness to the reader while discussing creating back doors for encrypted applications for communication. This is important because the author is subtly trying to convince the reader of his own opinions. The phrasing of the quote is also noteworthy. The fact that Mr. Howard says that the Islamic State would develop a stronger encryption and the “Western intelligence services” (Alexander Howard) would have to catch up to them by building a more powerful computer, saying this without any factual proof. The author’s combination of spacing and diction allows this article to sway people’s opinions on the issue.
Mr. Howard uses spacing to his advantage to deliver main
points in his article in The Huffington Post. “If technology companies are forced to create ‘back doors’ for governments to decrypt user data or devices, it weakens consumer protections against crime.” (Alexander Howard) This is an example of Mr. Howard using spacing to his advantage to make a point. By separating this into it’s own section it emphasizes the point and makes the reader focus on it more. These “back doors” (Alexander Howard) could lead to personal information about civilians being leaked into hacker’s hands while only providing a small chance to catch any terrorist activity. Without knowing what application the terrorists are using to communicate over, it is nearly impossible for the government to monitor all activity or even most while keeping the risk of hackers stealing their information. “Let’s make sure that any debate over privacy and security considers how our right to be secure in our persons, papers and personal effects extends online.” (Alexander Howard) This is another example from Mr. Howard of separating this quote from the rest of the article, especially with this one because it is the ending. Another important part of this article is the diction of the author and how it brings out the bias. The author uses his diction to further extend his points. This is evident throughout the article mixed in with other literary devices. “It’s also inevitable that the Islamic State and other jihadis will build or adopt services with stronger encryption, which will in turn drive Western intelligence services to develop more powerful computers to break it.” (Alexander Howard) This quote can be picked apart to look at the author’s diction to see his bias. He uses words like “inevitable” (Alexander Howard) giving the feeling of hopelessness to the reader while discussing creating back doors for encrypted applications for communication. This is important because the author is subtly trying to convince the reader of his own opinions. The phrasing of the quote is also noteworthy. The fact that Mr. Howard says that the Islamic State would develop a stronger encryption and the “Western intelligence services” (Alexander Howard) would have to catch up to them by building a more powerful computer, saying this without any factual proof. The author’s combination of spacing and diction allows this article to sway people’s opinions on the issue.