Essay on Internet Privacy - Cookies and Privacy on the Internet

Cookies: Privacy on the Internet?      Ã‚   Today, many web sites on the internet can use "cookies" to keep track of passwords and usernames and track the sites a particular user visits (Cookiecentral.com). But, the use of cookies to track user's browsing habits is becoming a concern of many internet users. These concerned people are beginning to think of cookies as an invasion of privacy. Companies with web sites can use cookies to track what sites you visit frequently and then select specific ad banners to send to you on the web while surfing (Cookiecentral.com). Electronic Frontier Foundation's program director, Stanton McCandlish points out, "The potential problem is that companies without a sense of ethics could be doing [the] same thing and selling addresses to offline marketers" (news.cnet.com). The government should realize the hazards of internet cookies and enforce a ban on their use.    For those not familiar with the internet type of cookie, http://www.cookiecentral.com/ provides the definition of a cookie and some of the ways they are used. The site states, "a 'cookie' is a small piece of information sent by a web server to store on a web browser so it can later be read back from that browser." When you visit a cookie-using site on the web, that site will save a small text file in your browser's folder or directory. This file will tell them who you are if you ever visit their site again. The site goes on to explain in more detail the different areas where a cookie can be used. The various tasks that can be performed by a cookie listed include online ordering, targeted marketing, user ID's, and site personalization. It is true that there are some beneficial uses of cookies. For example, personalizing a certain ... ... sites' cookies, these sites will not gain anything from you. If everyone were to stop allowing cookies on their personal computers, web sites would find that cookies do not benefit their business and would possibly stop using them. Tell others about any concerns you may have regarding cookies. You may educate someone about cookies that knew nothing before and help him or her understand why cookies are not an essential part of the internet.         Works Cited Cookies. <http://www.cookiecentral.com /news/0-1003-200-327461.html> (31 Oct. 1999). Privacy in the Digital Age. "Jerry Berman's Testimony". <http://www.cdt.org/testimony/Berman.test.House.5.27.99.shtml> (31 Oct. 1999). Shaking the Cookie Jar. "New Cookie Technology or Existing Cookie Technology Under Attack". <http://www.cookiecentral.com/dscprop.htm> (31 Oct. 1999).   

The War of Americans

Over the course of the last half-century the U. S. has enjoyed unprecedented power in every aspect whether it be politically, economically, militarily, or by any other means. In its dominance of world politics since WWII, the U. S. has been able to cast its influence around the globe. However, the U. S. experienced a gradual decline in its sovereignty over the course of this era as well. A prime example was in 1973 when OPEC raised oil prices drastically over the course of the next two years. â€Å"OPEC†s ability to increase at will the world price of its precious product highlighted the industrial world†s dependence on foreign sources of energy. (Keylor, p. 346) Being a sovereign nation requires not being subject to external forces, being able to conduct an independent foreign policy, and being able to control events within your own borders. Today, U. S. sovereignty continues to decline for a number of reasons. The only question is whether it is healthy or harmful for the U. S. to do so. The first reason why U. S. sovereignty is declining is due to what is known as interdependence. This phenomenon developed after WWII with the creation of the UN, GATT, the IMF and other such intergovernmental organizations. All of these served to create linkages between the major nations of the world in the postwar era. Membership in such organizations makes the U. S. subject to international law. Rosecrance†s identification of the trading state signifies the shift away from geopolitical influence and towards a global economy. Both the roles of international trade and foreign investment have increasingly become a greater element of U. S. economic importance. Additionally, the tying together of economies from around the world has lead to an increase in economic warfare. The increased use of economic sanctions and other such measures can be contributed to their perceived effectiveness in obtaining foreign policy goals. The U. S. integration into the world economy leaves it susceptible to the economic decisions of its trading partners and providers of raw materials. Reliance on import and export goods is an essential part of the U. S. economy. This can be seen in every day life. Just think about how much gas prices have increased recently as the result of a few nations restricting their oil supplies in order to raise prices. While the countries responsible for this could all be readily defeated by the U. S. in war, the U. S. is powerless to combat their practices. Aside from its place in the world market, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction also serves to limit the sovereignty of the U. S. First off, new nuclear powers, which would likely include a number of aggressive authoritarian states, will lack the resources to manage the elaborate command and control capabilities required. â€Å"Even if hostile countries somehow catch up in an arms race, their military organizations and cultures are unlikely to catch up in the competence race for management, technology assimilation, and combat command skills. (Betts, p. 29) In addition to proliferation of nuclear weapons, there is also wide concern among U. S. leaders about the spread and development of biological weapons. The rise of religious nationalism and anti-U. S. sentiments in nations such as Iraq give cause for concern to the U. S. that an attack using biological weapons is possible. â€Å"One simple fact should worry Americans more about biological than about nuclear or chemical arms: unlike either of the other two, biological weapons combine maximum destructiveness and easy availability. † (Betts, p. 32) Even more threatening to U. S. sovereignty is the treat of terrorist attack to our nation†s soil. The proliferation of the aforementioned weapons is worrisome to U. S. officials that a horrendous nuclear of biological terrorist attack is feasible. The possibility of such and attack places a serious hindrance on the U. S. ability to protect its citizens within its borders. Conspirators of such an attack could be based within the U. S. or abroad, which makes it increasingly difficult to guard against. Additionally, it is impossible to deter such a course of action. When a nation is attacked, the government behind the attack is readily identified and a counterattack can be undertaken. However, when it is unknown as to who is behind the attack, it makes it impossible to deter it from occurring since â€Å"retaliation requires knowledge of who has launched an attack and the address at which they reside. † (Betts, p. 34) Such concerns have increased since the end of the Cold War as there is widespread doubt surrounding the degree of control Russia used in disposing of their nuclear weapons. The information revolution also poses a serious threat to U. S. overeignty. The increasing opportunities for interaction through technological advances in communications and transportation make information more readily accessible. The strong reliance on the behalf of the U. S. on information infrastructure makes it vulnerable to attack. (Wriston, p. 179) â€Å"The smallest nation, terrorist group, or drug cartel could hire a computer programmer to plant a Trojan horse virus in software, take down a vital network, or cause a missile to misfire†¦ The United States† increasing reliance on massive networks may make it more, not less vulnerable. † (Wriston, p. 80) As with the problem of an armed terrorist attack, it is extremely difficult to determine who is responsible for a break-in of a private, supposedly secure, U. S. government web page. Fortunately, we have not yet witnessed any such form of information warfare; however, imagining the form it might take and protecting against it has become the preoccupation of a presidential commission and numerous task forces. (Wriston, p. 179) Despite the erosion of U. S. sovereignty, it is still by far the most powerful nation in the world today. I for one would welcome the erosion of U. S. overeignty since it furthers interdependence in world politics and serves to perpetuate world peace. The greater the economies of the world are intertwined, the less likely it is that a nation will go to war with another that it is linked to by a web of transnational relationships. It may also be in the best interests of the U. S. to lose some of its sovereignty since the world is moving towards civilizational entities (Western, African, Islamic, etc. ) as identified by Samuel Huntington. (Huntington) If he is correct in his prediction, then the U. S. is better off belonging to one of these civilizations rather than standing alone.

Male Abuse Is The Hidden Side Of Domestic Violence

Men don’t tell Male abuse is the hidden side of domestic violence. Representative sample surveys of the population show that abuse is a fifty-fifty proposition when it comes to intimate partner violence. The only exception to these figures is shown in the major national survey produced by the National Violence Against Women survey which found that thirty-six percent of the victims are male (Kimmell, 2001). The issue is not that men don’t tell, no one actually asks. Women on the other hand have the public knowledge that domestic violence occurs. They have shelters and crisis lines to seek help, and there is also someone who cares enough to ask. This equivalent does not exist for men because quite possibly of discrimination.†¦show more content†¦Since these accounts run counter to the stereotypes of male-female relationships, they usually take on the headline grabbing notion of a â€Å"man bites dog† story. Even the police these days are surpris ed by the number of women who are being charged with assault of their intimate partners. Concord, New Hampshire saw a 13% increase in arrest of women for domestic assault in a four year period. Vermont saw a seven percent increase in domestic violence charges filed against women during the same period. And Boulder, Colorado saw 25% of its domestic violence charges being filed against women (Kimmel, 2001). Research on gender symmetry as it relates to domestic violence has been greatly explored. Martin Fiebert (1997) found seventy-nine empirical studies and nearly twenty reviews of literature which supported gender symmetry amongst couples. Archer (2000) reviewed eighty-two studies that supported gender symmetry. In understanding domestic violence, we generally rely on two types of information. The â€Å"crime victimization studies,† which rely greatly on large-scale aggregate data on victimization, and â€Å"family conflict studies,† which provides measurements i n the prevalence of aggression between couples (Kimmel, 2001). These two data sources relay different rates of domestic violence, simply because they are measuring two different things. Crime Victimization Studies Information about crime victimization is gathered from a number of sources.