rivacy has changed. in the modern age, this is a discussion from maryland. >> good afternoon and welcome to the annapolis book festival, i'm asking you to turn off your cell phones so that we don't disturb these fine gentlemen here. for the first 30 minutes i'm going to be asking questions and i'm going to ask you to line up and asked questions and comments are welcome as well my name is bruce swartz and i am the head of the academic technology department here and i welcome you. i just want to throw out some points that i would like you to consider and then also when you want to do your questions. first internet threat report increases have risen by 23% last year. an 11% was the retail market and 10% in the education sector. a friend of mine just said that samsung smart tv has a clause that says please be aware that if your spoken words include other sensitive information, that will be among the data captured to a third-party through use of voice recognition. on a daily basis we hear about the nsa surveillance and so with that i would like to introduce is fine gentlemen and for the first 30 minutes i will be asking them questions and then we will invite you to come up to the microphone. to my right is mark the president and executive director of the electronic privacy information center in washington to the. he teaches this at georgetown and testifies on emerging privacy and civil liberty issues. he has testified before the 9/11 commission on purity and liberty protecting privacy and has authored many things for federal and state courts, he is a coeditor of the in the modern age. in the center we have a university professor in international relations at george washington university. he taught at columbia university harvard is in a school and the university of california at berkeley. richard pozen are ranked him among the top 100 intellectuals and he's the author of the new normal, finding a balance between individual rights and the common good. at the end we have jim dwyer, he writes in "the new york times" and he has worked for 35 years. last year he published an interactive book called innocence and guilt and science that uses games and videos and multimedia tools to show how the mistakes we make in everyday life can become embedded in criminal justice systems. he has written and co-authored other books including 102 minutes, the unforgettable story to invite inside the twin towers, which was a national book award finalist. he is the author of more often than money a book about young men looking to protect their privacy on facebook. so first, we are going to start with jim. during a recent conversation that we had you mentioned that private he and privacy settings are an illusion. can you talk about that a little bit and then you have something very interesting show is on the scene. >> we all know that we do not want mom to be looking at the picture of us on facebook with the budweiser logo or any other number of crazy things that could end up in a public space like facebook. so facebook has made binding control part of its users and that says, okay, i can set up this post so it's only seen by this body of friends, or that only goes to the people on my softball team or what have you. but one thing that is never excluded from not as whatever you put up there, that facebook itself is a mission and it even knows when you have second thoughts, when it started to write something and exit out before you hit the post button. and they've actually done some extensive studies about what they consider this content. most of us would consider it you know part of the speech. but we are in an age when i can set it to be the big bang moment of the digital age. like things are taking shape in ways that we have no ability to discern at this time. and privacy is a terrifyingly complicated part of it. but we should all consider where the world wide web came from where many of the most useful features came from they were built by individuals and they were not built by corporations, they were the ideas of a few people that were able to use this rather than major capital equity to make important advances. as i was writing about these boys that were college students who wanted to build an alternative to facebook. and one of the places that has this do it yourself drag yourself up by your bootstraps dna that i think is intrinsic is mesilla and i want to show you a tool of what they have to your browser. and so we are seeing what is up at the screen. so there are add-ons that you can attach to your browser and there's one called light beam that i am fond of. and so what this does is keep an eye upon who or what has attached itself to a browser without you necessarily knowing it. until right now this doesn't look like a lot. and so what we are going to do here is try a couple of things. let's see it espn worldwide leader in something or another, "the new york times", i've heard of that. and let's try c-span, let's see what happens when we put that in. >> c-span.org is the name. okay. and there we are. and so let's just go let's say say citibank, it happens to be a bank that i know. and all of those represent third-party trackers that have attached themselves to my browser in the last 90 seconds. and somehow facebook got in there as well. and google is in or. facebook.com, google.com, there is the span, which is connected here and so they kind of, as you can see are cousins by marriage and there is video. and so then they have google. collecting every bit of information and auctioning it off every second of the day. so that's to the site that you have up there right now. >> correct. >> so up there you will see that as and if we just add a few more things, putting it in with whatever you might be interested in shopping for you're going to find the entire screen is going to be in motion with this thing. so it is sort of meant to terrify you. [laughter] but only in the sense that when kids take drivers ed they are shown videos of car crashes and what happens when you don't wear your seatbelt. and this includes the level of tracking that is invisible. >> is that terrifying? >> well, i don't think that it's terrifying, but it's actually a reflection of how we are in the early stages of a policy discussion and that is why we decided to write about. and not only as jim has just described as enormous frustration of people trying to understand the people who collect information about them but also the big policy legislative questions that the congress confronts, the courts confront diplomats between the united states and the european union, currently discussing the flow of data and we are in the midst of one of the most significant policy debates concerning the use of technology and i would just say returning to the book briefly that it is partly about the beginning of an organization that i found with various colleagues and friends more than 20 years ago called the electronic privacy information center and the book traces the history. here is the remarkable part how familiar these issues are. and what we are concerned about is the use of vulnerable technology that did not provide adequate privacy for e-mail e-mails and what we were concerned about is the lack of security and stability and this has been a very big debate since mr. snowden disclosed documents in june of 2013. and there is a fine expectations for privacy in the modern age. this is also about the many people that we have worked with and the expert advisors who are technology experts and those that provided the building blocks for modern security standards that all of you rely upon when you go online and you make a purchase through amazon and you type in your credit card number, there's a reason you can do that securely and that is because in the early days certain decisions were made about ensuring that your credit card number can pass to the host computer without anyone getting access to it. at least in theory if that works at the great thing because business online becomes possible. but when it doesn't work there are enormous problems. so for the last 20 years we have also looked at the challenges pointing to the risks that the nsa created when they said that we don't necessarily want people and it's possible that that might be misused and that could be used in ways that pose risks to public safety and i would not dispute that, of course, but in a decision about technical standards for the internet that diminishes the privacy that users might otherwise be entitled to, there is a substantial risk. and that is that the cyberattacks that we are experiencing from adversaries that they result from the decisions that have been made to diminish the level of privacy and security that would otherwise be available. so we see this in a big picture about how this is when people go online and it's also a fascinating regulatory facilities. and this includes whether internet companies raised in the united states provide adequate protection for the eu consumers that go to these internet companies and provide personal information. part of what is going on is a contract between two legal systems. the european union said more than 20 years ago we want to have a comprehensive approach to privacy protection and that this is very important. and we will establish this in any business and it will be subject to that approach and that is the baseline in the european union. and we had a moment, let's say about 40 years ago where we decided to put the federal government, and we chose most of this with the private sector, sector by sector privacy protections for your cable subscriber records and not your magazine subscription. as we enter the internet age we say that we are not even sure that we need lot because evil can make choices that have all of these different options available to them and especially as we make the decision not to put this into law the consequence is that there's very little privacy protection for internet users today for us-based services and the europeans are saying that we are not happy about that arrangement and we think that the u.s. is going to need to do more and finally just to get to the third part of the book as we talked about the history of the organizations and litigation strategies, we have this and part of that is to oppose the nsa encryption and we have 50,000 people to sign up and that is like a chat room or something, but 20 years ago and felt like half the internet, we did this with lots of cases and so forth and the last part of the book tried to set out concrete recommendations because it is very much my view the problems that we need to find solutions for, which is not the same thing as aimed at these are problems that can be solved and anyone who has worked in the realm of protection has said i figured out how to call their pollution and water pollution and it probably wouldn't take those comments very seriously. and coming back to these examples i don't think that internet usage should spend their evenings trying to figure out who is collecting data about changing privacy settings or anything like that, i think that the service should be designed to provide a high level of privacy to the individual and if the individual continues to disclose information, that should be their choice and no one is ever offered the ability to exchange data to others. but we are objecting to the current default setting which basically says that the companies can take your information unless you object. that seems entirely unfair. it's a bit like an auto manufacturer saying that we have safety features on this car things like that and so they are all sitting in the trunk and if you want to take advantage you can figure out how to install that's stuff and isn't it fun to drive a car. and is that where we are today fundies the internet? another's privacy stuff somewhere and if you have the time good luck with it. and i think that we need to think about the protection of privacy and that is the default, let's establish safeguard and have freedom and choice discloses personal data as we choose. >> there was the world that changed after 9/11 that we talk about. and we have known that many cities have put up cameras and this includes the conviction of the bomber for the marathon largely attributed to some of the images that were obtained. we hear that individuals are being trafficked to and from the syria and we have also seen if anyone has traveled on route 95 that there is a type of thing that is hovering. so if you have an opportunity, can you talk a little bit about this, are we in a new normal? >> thank you. i will talk about this new normal. talking about this for one minute so we can talk about what we can suggest. and my concern is that [inaudible] my argument is that we tend to think about him like lawyers when we should think about them as human beings. not a lot the other side says that he is a lovely kid and both sides have two extreme positions and it is what both sides bring to the table. and so one side says i can't do this without anyone taking my picture. and they say that everyone is part of this. and that it's too extreme. and so i suggest instead and so i suggest a dialogue that includes conflicting major challenges. so on the one hand you have the ability to make this country great and on the other hand we all want to be concerned. and i'm not interested in this exaggeration. and so the next step is the constitution and because of the fourth amendment [inaudible] and so the fourth amendment on this is because it says that there will be no unreasonable searches. and so [inaudible] and so these are the questions. [inaudible] >> thank you. >> i think that yes we have that with the 4000 people who have been trained to commit some of the most barbaric acts and [inaudible] because of the contemplation. i don't want to kill them and i would like to know they be baby for the first six months and to call. and so do you agree. people come back to me and they had a temperature. [inaudible] and they will stay home for 21 days. i say one by one. and then we will close with this challenge. and because we have this situation and so we are coming up with what was pleaded today. and they have pleaded this with the newspaper and so the newspapers decided they are going to start these efforts and we are dropping some charters. and so we have talked about this intermission just as we have said. and i wonder if they should be the ones to judge. but let's assume that they will not talk about this with al qaeda in yemen [inaudible] and maybe they have crossed the line here. and we have limited time here and i want to get additional points. and as i pointed out to help your industry has been a victim of attack. and i want to talk about technology and human behavior and gps devices in our pocket, we regularly swipe their cards and are asked to give our social security numbers for loans and they say that we are not pushing back about this social security numbers are being stolen fraudulent tax returns are being filed in other people's names. >> let me just jump on in. it's wonderful to be on a panel and we have debated these issues since before this. also about emerging challenges and issues and we are looking at this perspective and i think that we would appreciate many of those. coming to your question also the wonderful contribution who is a specialized field that is called behavioral economics and so why is it that people don't do more to protect privacy, why don't they spend more time checking privacy settings or the advertisers who are following them online. in the short answer is that it's not rational. .. >> i wondered if i could jump over to this. >> i just want to say we have five more minutes until we are taking audience questions. [laughter] >> talking about these interesting convergence issues and pressures we want to protect ourselves and someone who may have been on the territory and i have no problem with the government having a process for doing that stuff. and so what snowden and the other revelations have talked about is that there are no meaningful process. and what it points out is a dialogue and it shall not be unreasonable. so there has to be determination of reasonability and so where has that happened and i think that when people assume to be talking about this and that is i think, the real alarming piece of what had come out of this last several years. >> i don't want some public intellectual making those decisions. that is why we are writing this book and given more time to have the dialogue. so very often it is about the environment and it's about men and women. so we need this conversation to balance it and so i just want to add one other completely different point as to why we are not spending more time updating the technology. so we are asking the question of what is important. and the answer used to be that it is part of this. and so we gave a pep talk and i start by saying that you need an inflatable santa claus on your roof tops. and then i said that you need this. and i lost my audience. and i said how about this and you're asked me to leave. [laughter] but it's an important time, it becomes so interesting that there are more things. and it's not going to happen. there are a lot of economic challenges and a lot of people, because it turns out that additional income really does not buy you this and so the question that we are asking and so once you have those basic needs satisfied. i am saying that once we are all up to this level, we need to continue as we express our affection and then it becomes consumerism is part of psychological pathologic. and this includes how we are limiting things. >> anyone have a question or comment or idea two. >> good afternoon. you talk about how companies are acknowledging what they do through data. and so when you click the terms of service you kind of agree to that, given the option anyway, we take the thing that costs nothing, we get a little bit of time to see. and so all of these free things that make my life infinitely easier, what i am paying is that google knows how i live my life. >> yes, that's an excellent question and you point to the fact that most privacy policies on websites show that terms and conditions do not provide privacy protection and that's it for and transformable waywardness glover if you visit our website or do business and this is what we will do with our personal data and you have accepted those and we already see that problem as dumping that needs to change and i don't think that companies should routinely disclose the responsibility and i think that health care companies and banks and others have been subject to this. customers and clients have been subject to those as well because it is their data and their credit card information and social security numbers of become available to criminals and that is your information that the company has obtained and then try to claim and that goes into part two which is what is the real cost and it's very difficult for you to ss one of the things that you have none of the price mechanisms that we understand so well and if you walk into a store and you see one in 70 and the other is 100 dirty, you try to figure out if it's worth paying the extra $60 and we would say we are all pretty smart consumers not that we are trying to buy a lot of stuff because we have limited resources and we are trying to figure out how to use this and we don't understand at all what happens in the online economy will he we make those decisions and companies are giving you free stuff because they are trying to drive out competitors and they actually have a better product or service if they can survive. but if they are forced out by a company, that