The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not s

游客2024-10-10 11

问题 The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not seem harmful—so much so that many consumers do it with no questions asked. Yet that one action can set in motion a cascade of silent events, as that data point is acquired, analyzed, categorized, stored and sold over and over again. Future attacks on your privacy may come from anywhere, from anyone with money to purchase that phone number you surrendered. If you doubt the multiplier effect, consider your e-mail inbox. If it’s loaded with spam, it’s undoubtedly because at some point in time you unknowingly surrendered your e-mail to the wrong Web site.
Do you think your telephone number or address is handled differently? A cottage industry of small companies with names you’ve probably never heard of—like Acxiom or Merlin—buy and sell your personal information the way other commodities like corn or cattle futures are bartered. You may think your cell phone is unlisted, but if you’ve ever ordered a pizza, it might not be. Merlin is one of many commercial data brokers that advertises sale of unlisted phone numbers compiled from various sources—including pizza delivery companies. These unintended, unpredictable consequences that flow from simple actions make privacy issues difficult to grasp, and grapple with.
In a larger sense, privacy also is often cast as a tale of "Big Brother"—the government is watching you or a big corporation is watching you. But privacy issues don’t necessarily involve large faceless institutions: A spouse takes a casual glance at her husband’s Blackberry, a co-worker looks at e-mail over your shoulder or a friend glances at a cell phone text message from the next seat on the bus. While very little of this is news to anyone—people are now well aware there are video cameras and Internet cookies everywhere—there is abundant evidence that people live their lives ignorant of the monitoring, assuming a mythical level of privacy. People write e-mails and type instant messages they never expect anyone to see. Just ask Mark Foley or even Bill Gates, whose e-mails were a cornerstone of the Justice Department’s antitrust case against Microsoft.
And polls and studies have repeatedly shown that Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns. The general defense for such indifference is summed up a single phrase: "I have nothing to hide." If you have nothing to hide, why shouldn’t the government be able to peek at your phone records, your wife see your e-mail or a company send you junk mail? It’s a powerful argument, one that privacy advocates spend considerable time discussing and strategizing over.
It is hard to deny, however, that people behave different when they’re being watched. And it is also impossible to deny that Americans are now being watched more than at any time in history. [br] It can be inferred from the fourth paragraph that the author thinks

选项 A、Americans are actually concerned about privacy issues.
B、Americans are indifferent to privacy concerns.
C、Americans are very frank about privacy concerns.
D、Americans are puzzled about privacy concerns.

答案 A

解析推理判断题。第4段第1句指出调查和研究证明美国人对隐私问题漠不关心，但根据后文连续几个假设问句可以推断出，美国人实际上很关住他们的隐私问题，故C错误；B只是一种表面现象；文中没有提及他们对隐私的关注是否“迷惑”．D也不对。

转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3795514.html

相关试题推荐

随机试题

最新回复(0)

The simple act of surrendering a telephone number to a store clerk may not s

TheUniversityofSouthernCaliforniahasthelargestnumberofinternationalst

TheUniversityofSouthernCaliforniahasthelargestnumberofinternationalst