Q&A 2

1. A company that digitizes documents, converting paper documents to digital form,

often scans documents containing sensitive information such as medical records

and tax returns. The company hires relatively unskilled employees to organize the

documents and prepare them for scanning.

 (a) describe some possible risks

There are many risks that the company is taking by hiring unskilled employees that handle various confidential, personal, and private documents. The unskilled employee could easily misuse these powerful documents in many different ways. The employee could perhaps make copies of the documents and use them in fraudulent situations. Even if the worker isn’t doing illegal things, he or she can be careless, and leave important documents out in the open, or misplace documents, never to be found again, which can cause severe problems for individuals.  

(b) describe some actions the company can take or policies  it can adopt to

reduce the risks.

            There quite a few actions the company can take as well as policies they can create to limit and reduce risk. If an unskilled employee is hired for this specific job or task to handle confidential documents such as these ones, they can receive mandatory training, including passing a proficiency test, before starting. I would highly suggest the company adopt a policy that only skilled workers are qualified to work in this position, because of how important it can be. It can cost millions if the wrong mistakes are made.

2. People who fled Hurricane Katrina left behind and lost important documents such as birth certificates, employment records and property records. A government

agency proposed establishing a database where people could voluntarily store

copies of essential personal records 

 (a) Give some arguments in favor of this proposal

It is very unfortunate that these people lost and/or left behind many of their personal documents. Offering a database where people can voluntarily store copies of essential personal records could be very helpful indeed. This way, if any natural disasters, or anything unexpected occurs, and people cannot retrieve all of their important documents, they have a means of accessing the information still. It would be like keeping a separate backup for your computer, in case a virus strikes, you can access and restore your important information.

(b) What are some possible problems that might arise?

            There are quite a few possible problems that might arise from this proposal. One of the main problems would be the public’s trust. Many people don’t trust the government fully, and may not trust the government to hold onto their most important documents. Also, because it would be voluntary, many people would not do it for just that reason alone. Also, because some natural disasters occur spontaneously, people may not feel the need to store their documents until after the disaster is already occurring.

 (c) Would you use such a database? Why or why not?

            I would not use such database because I feel it isn’t very secure. I feel more secure having the fate of my documents in my own hands. I would rather keep all of my most important documents in a safe, accessible place, so that I can gather them quickly in an emergency.

3. In 2006 AOL released a database of 21 million web search queries. A paper about

it is:  http://www.fi.muni.cz/kd/events/cikhaj-2007-jan/slides/kumpost.pdf

 One of the queries was “How to kill your wife” and other related queries by the

same person. (The database does not appear to still be on-line.)

(a) Give arguments for allowing law enforcement agents to search the query

database of search engine companies periodically to detect plans for

criminal activities.

I feel since there is freedom of speech there also is freedom to read as well as write too. The same goes for what is written on public databases, which gives law enforcements the right read these queries too. If there are people out there that are stupid enough not only to commit the crime, but to brag about it on blogs and queries, or search for information via search engines, then they should definitely be caught by whatever means necessary.

 (b) Give arguments against allowing such searches.

There are many problems against allowing such searches. First of all, it greatly intrudes upon our privacy. There are many forms of expression out in the world, even the rapper Eminem often talks about how he would kill his ex-wife. He hasn’t done it. For example, if 1 million people search how to kill your wife, some for laughs, some for stupid reasons, and just 1 of those million people actually kills his wife, is it really necessary for law enforcement to put each of the million people through a lawful process? It just doesn’t seem right. America is a free country, and if we plan to remain free, these kind of searches cannot be permitted.

 (c) Which arguments do you think are stronger? Why?

            I believe that such searches should NOT be allowed. Millions of people should not be put under scrutinizing eyes of the law, just because of someone that deviates so far from the norm. I believe there should be some way to stop these people who are hinting at how they are going to commit a terrible crime, but I don’t believe searching private query’s and search engine databases is the answer. Chances are those who are going to commit crimes will just get smarter, and avoid being detected, while millions of innocent people will be put through criminal processes, when they do not deserve it.