Q&A about ethics, computing, and logistics of the course.
No question is too silly, naive, controversial, basic, or advanced.
Before we start, answer in your journal:
Your phone has recorded where you have been for the last year.
We’ve covered what privacy is and whether “I agree” is informed consent. Here are some questions left to discuss:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause […] and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Ratified in 1791. How do “papers and effects” apply to a smartphone, a cloud account, or location data?
| Case | Holding |
|---|---|
| Katz v. United States (1967) | The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places: a reasonable expectation of privacy test: “(1) that a person have exhibited an actual expectation of privacy and (2) that the expectation be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.” |
| United States v. Miller (1976), Smith v. Maryland (1979) | Third-party doctrine: no expectation of privacy in information you voluntarily give to a third party (bank records, numbers dialed) |
| Riley v. California (2014) | Police need a warrant to search a cell phone seized during an arrest |
| Carpenter v. United States (2018) | Police need a warrant to get historical cell-site location records (7+ days) from a phone company |
If the third-party doctrine were applied to everything, what would be left of the Fourth Amendment today?
Mapping a cell phone’s location over the course of 127 days provides an all-encompassing record of the holder’s whereabouts […] revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.
Chief Justice Roberts, majority opinion
Carpenter requires a warrant to compel a phone company to hand over location data. But what if the government simply buys it?
Traditional warrants name a suspect and ask for their data. Newer warrants work the other way around:
Everyone in the area (or who searched) becomes a potential suspect.
Design decision → civil liberties outcome: where data is stored is an ethical choice.
Data that is not collected cannot be subpoenaed. What does this mean for app designers?
Who are the stakeholders? Can students give voluntary consent to surveillance required to pass a course?
There is no comprehensive federal privacy law in the U.S. Instead, laws cover specific sectors:
States have moved faster than Congress:
The General Data Protection Regulation treats data protection as a fundamental right:
What would change in the apps you use if GDPR applied in the U.S.?
Your group is a legislative staff team. Choose one scenario:
For your scenario:
Reflect on what you liked and disliked about this lecture, what you learned, and what you wished you’d learned.