The biggest threat to privacy is not Elon Musk

“People are scrambling” to see if Elon MuskThe programmers have reached their own information, and the federal intelligence employee explained HuffPost. About a week ago, a Forbes I read the title, “Elon Musk and a student loan data, raises anxiety.” On the same day a CNN The title says, “The Minister of Internal Security, Nayyim, says Dodge The team has access to the agency’s data. “After a week NBC Reading the title, “The highest social security official moves after the dispute with Dog on sensitive data.” These news reports indicated a few federal government computer systems that were reached by billionaire Elon Musk and his team, at the request of President Donald TrumpUnder the auspices of making the government more effective. In the defense of the project, Parliament Speaker Mike Johnson, R, said. While a lot of the media’s attention focused on satisfying musk from the right and distorting it from the left, there was a scarcity of discourse on how to collect data everywhere, not Musk or his team, is the biggest threat to people’s privacy.

The modern digital economy is thrived on the destruction of privacy. Many of the technologies we rely on today – from GPS to the Internet to the touch screen – were originally Funded By the US government to monitor and communicate in wartime. In the post -Cold War era, these innovations were marketed, which led to a rise Silicon Valley. However, it was the aftermath of September 11, 2001 (9/11) that strengthened partnership Between large technology and government. Under the Star of National Security, the federal government responded to the September 11 attacks with new laws that enabled collective data. As a result, large technology companies have gained tremendous power by providing data for intelligence agencies. The result was Capital economy for monitoringAs user data has become the most valuable commodity.

With the expansion of data collection, private industries realized their huge value. Insurance companiesfor Angelfor Advertisersfor Police departmentsfor Social network service providersAnd even Educational institutions Requesting access to user information to improve their models and increase profits to the maximum. The Internet is called “Free services“It was just a group surveillance interface. Everything from driving in a car to check a hotel to make reservations in a restaurant to voids and televisions with the so -called smart technology that collects behavioral data, often without a clear user approval. This mania with data is nourished Prediction analyzes It allows technology companies to anticipate and treat consumer behavior.

Moreover, the line between the monitoring of companies and the government is often unclear, as many companies whose profits from collecting data have contracts with the federal government to collect citizens’ data. Indeed, in 2013, a government contractor turned into the amounts of violations Edward Snowden It revealed the extent of collective monitoring, revealed how intelligence agencies, collusion with large technology, and took advantage of legal gaps to spy on citizens. Such practices avoid constitutional protection of privacy from the government by allowing monitoring by the agent from companies that financially depend on government contracts and favorable organizational and tax policies. In this process, the privacy has become almost old.

Despite Congress sessions and general screaming, Legislators It often showed that there is no understanding – or worse, in the rapid erosion of privacy. In fact, instead of addressing the basic issues raised by SNODEN, the media and politicians focused on Snowden himself, and drawn it as a traitor While ignoring the broader effects of his disclosure. Recently, the legislators’ indifference to local espionage was clear in the negation of the non -owned social media platform of the United States Tikhak. While concerns about foreign monitoring at Tiktok hands are valid, the same criticisms-with regard to data collection, addictive algorithms, manipulation-can be applied equally with technology giants in the United States such as Amazon, Facebook and Google. However, these companies face a much lower audit than Congress. Companies are also working with the federal government monitoringfor Collection and content moderation.

Some reject the risks of collective monitoring with the shallow argument: I do not do anything wrong, so why should I care? Like thinkers George Orwell and Hana Arndt Taking this question decades ago, noting that privacy erosion is characterized by exploitative systems – such as farm slavery, and totalitarian systems such as Nazi Germany and Patriarchate.

Monitoring is also a unique danger because what is legal today may become illegal tomorrow. For example, people in the states have suddenly the laws of the trigger became the search for miscarriage or even its discussion Crime overnight Following the cancellation of the Roe V Supreme Court. Wade. A crime was difficult to avoid for people who provided them with health information Great technology Through supposed health applications that monitor menstruation.

More importantly, the monitoring damage is not limited to those accused of violations. Victims of prosecution and those who live with unrelated individuals depend on their safety and stability. Successful social movements – such as work, women’s rights and civil rights movements – have relied on privacy to regulate strategically, communicate and package without interference or suppression of those in power. In addition, companies use data collection to justify amplification costs – such as rent and insurance -With reducing the basic services of low -income societies. Likewise, LGBTQ+ youth and young people who are interrogating or exploring their sexual lives, who may not be out yet, are at risk of being subjected to being subjected.

Worse, data analysis tools are far from being neutral; It reflects the biases of creators. Studies indicate that these tools offend the classification of colored people in an inconsistent manner CriminalsCreate additional barriers for already marginalized groups.

Big Tech has been greatly convinced that they are more powerful than they are really, as they sell illusion of communication, activity and democracy – even with the division of its products products and its democratic decline. Worse, these companies showed preparation for bowing to power, embracing information control policies and Dei under democratic leadership, only to abandon all of this with the Republic administration.

The panic on Elon Musk’s domination of the wide user data has proven that no single entity should practice this amount of strength. But users have a real power, and they must use it to pressure the giants of government and technology to protect privacy and end the collection of exploitative data. If the United States wants to remain democratic – as laws are applied and the will of the people really reflect – the draft privacy law is the first decisive step. This framework must include:

• Data profit distribution: A federal law requests companies to compensate citizens for their harvested data. Capitalization for monitoring, you may find companies, very expensive to maintain the market price.
• The right to erase: Citizens must have the right to demand the deletion of their personal data. This includes strict penalties for collecting unauthorized data and prohibiting it on accessible data policies.
• Data decentralization: Strict laws should be prevented from collecting, sharing, or storing data without the citizen’s explicit approval.
• Surveillance -free areas: Cars, hotels, schools, homes, and other personal spaces must be announced areas free from monitoring, which makes digital monitoring in these areas illegal. Some argue that monitoring enhances safety, but real security comes from a better police – and not from handing over basic privacy rights. After all, what is the police protected if your rights have already been?
• Protection of canceling subscription: Privacy should never be the admission price for the use of basic services. It should be illegal for companies to delegate data collection as a condition of access, with severe penalties for violations.

The privacy police is not just an abstract perfect – it is a necessary protection against the bypass of companies and government infiltration. Today, politicians and media numbers exceed the great technology, yet they spent years. Therefore, the real accountability will not come from institutions that support the current situation. Independent journalists, activists and ordinary citizens who have long been alarm have been alarm.