My daughter’s smartphone buzzed when she was out of the room. I picked it up to see who was texting her and was puzzled by the message that previewed on the screen, so I read the entire exchange. What I discovered concerned me. When I talked to her about it, she turned the tables on me and said I’d invaded her privacy. The issue I discovered is important and I don’t want to lose the chance to guide her behavior, but now we’re arguing only about privacy and whether I trust her. How much privacy should I allow my daughter?
The New Yorker magazine once had a cartoon showing a storefront office with the company name on the window: "None of Your Damn Business Inc." If it were publicly traded, the corporation's stock would be down this morning.
Last week, I reported on the federal government's massive new student-tracking database, which was created as part of the nationalized Common Core standards scheme.
The court previously has said that police may use drug-sniffing dogs at will during routine traffic stops and may search cars without a warrant, based on their own determination of probable cause. Now that it has said a dog's alert by itself suffices for probable cause, a cop with a dog has the practical power to search the car of anyone who strikes him as suspicious.
If one were to read the Federal Trade Commission’s recent staff report discussing ways to protect consumer privacy in mobile apps, one might conclude the federal government genuinely was concerned about consumer privacy.
On January 22, 1973, seven robed men in Washington, D. C. decreed that abortion on demand is the new law of the land in these United States. With the bang of a gavel, they nullified virtually any state law at the time restricting abortion.