The magnetism of social networking encourages users to share personal information with more than their known friends. In order to expand their circle of “friends”, these people blatantly open themselves up to the whole internet community. Many users no longer value their privacy the way they did before. There is always new technology that becomes accessible, and makes data sharing easier and more enticing.

There are some interesting facts behind Facebook users. Analysts have grouped its more or less 800 million users into three groups. The first set of users includes those who log on at least once daily. The second ones are those who log on at least once a week. The third group includes those members who log on less often. Just recently, a telephone survey was conducted involving the use of Facebook by 2,000 adult respondents. The survey looked into how these respondents value their privacy as it pertains to social networking.

On the whole, the result of the survey showed that the more users log on to Facebook, the less they become concerned about privacy invasion. One respondent openly said that he does not really care if people know about his online favorites or behavior. This user declared that he uses Facebook several times a day, either to meet online with his friends, or to play a popular Facebook-based game.

With the development of DNA technology, human society has been benefited in many ways. From unheard of to well-known cases, the use of DNA has helped the police in crime investigation for the past several years. Some privacy concerns were recently brought out involving DNA profile collection. Officials have moved to keep a file of police officers’ DNA. The police have cited privacy concerns over this.

Police officials have ordered the DNA testing of law enforcement personnel. This was done to rule out speculations that a police officer was involved in a sophisticated crime. Behind this unpopular order were the deaths of eight women in Louisiana in 2009. These were a case of serial killings that showed a high level of criminal “workmanship”. This started rumors, pointing to a police officer as the suspect. All officers in Louisiana soon agreed to undergo testing with no questions asked. In conclusion, the killer was not among them.

To some officers, this DNA collection was just like leaving a specimen as they do for routine medical examinations. There was no thought of privacy risk involved. They agree to the idea that having a DNA file of police officers will save time in conducting crime scene investigations as it would be easier for them to spot unidentified genetic materials found at crime scenes.

Faster web browsing speed is one of the capabilities that users most want, and look for in a browser. With lots of information waiting to be accessed, innovations and improvements in web browsing technology are always on the move. One after another, products are introduced, promising better online experiences and improved features. Amazon has just set the date of November 15, 2011 for the release of its newest tablet, Kindle Fire. Amazon foresees that this will be the closest competitor of the iPad.

The product is a full-color, 8GB, 7-inch multi-touch tablet and uses Silk as its browser. Among its many improved capabilities, Silk boasts of a faster surfing speed and increased battery life as its major advantages. Amazon will use its Elastic Compute Cloud, or EC2, in order to route all web connections from the Kindle Fire to the web page. From this process, it is clear that “everything” between the users and the internet passes through Amazon’s EC2.

Privacy concerns were once again triggered by the aforementioned fact. One blogger wrote that all of the user’s web surfing habits will have to pass through Amazon’s Cloud. He added that there is no doubt that Amazon will have every opportunity to track everything that you do online. In fact, Amazon has stated this fact in its Terms and Conditions for using Silk. It specifically acknowledged that URLs and certain identifiers will stay in its server for 30 days.

Social networking is number one among the busiest places on the internet. Among these many sites are the three giants – Facebook, Twitter, and Google+. These three have become well-liked with their sharing buttons, “Like”, “Follow” and “+1”, respectively. Users can find these sharing buttons on all of the pages, and all they have to do is click on these buttons to show acceptance. The problem is that users can be tracked on every page that contains these buttons, even if they do not click on them. Consequently, users become targets of advertisements, and worse than that, they could lose a lot of their privacy.

Without the user’s knowledge, this unwanted tracking is happening. Information sharing technology has advanced to the limits that codes can be attached to every page. This is most familiar among social networking companies. These file sharing buttons are placed in a web page and they are just waiting to be clicked. As if having its own mind, the code works as the user visits a page, recording the individual’s “presence” and compiling a profile of his or her preferences. After a while, the user becomes a target of advertisements based on what products he or she shows an interest in.

Internet users who have discovered the advantages of using a proxy server have proven its benefits in many ways. Many people find faster speed as the greatest advantage. My personal experience in this area helped me surf faster and to better enjoy my virtual world. Without much fuss, the problem I had with uploading my blogs was solved when I used an anonymous proxy.

This time, bypassing filters can be added to the good things that can come from using an anonymous proxy. Essentially, it can effectively block much of the spyware and junk that is sent to your computer. This is the common problem that most users encounter, and you can be saved from it. Although this can be solved by using technical know-how, encountering the problem repeatedly is very troublesome.

A recent newspaper editorial regarding online anonymity has spawned a great deal of comments. The article declared that in these times, people should be limited from being anonymous. The writer argued that there are too many anonymous comments polluting the internet. It was also suggested that newspapers should ban these anonymous comments entirely. This is because these anonymous comments have only added to the bulk of online trash, including false accusations and name-calling attacks.

One critic reacted by saying that this kind of argument is not only inaccurate but also dangerous. He said that online anonymity protects different groups of people. He admitted that anonymity maybe abused by some, especially those who are spreading “vitriolic bile” without limits. However, this is not enough reason to entirely ban online anonymity. As of now, many newspapers have established policies regarding this issue, while others have entirely banned such “privilege”.

The main reason given by those who banned it is for online civility. While this can be true, and as any newspaper should always strive for civility, there is more to being identified online than just the name. Those who favor anonymity say that identification presents a great risk. This risk most often hinders people from speaking their minds for fear of retribution. They also pointed out that history has a lot of stories to tell about anonymous writings that made great contributions to society.

Facebook is considered a giant in the field of social networking. It does not stop making improvements and changes in its features that are aimed at improving user experience. Always considering the privacy of its users, Facebook is constantly ahead, thinking of new ways to please millions of people. The company has had its share of criticisms, but it never gives up resolving every issue. Many times it has received disapproval from people because of the way it builds a large group of online friends. However, it has tried even harder to venture into new user experiences, and it is succeeding.

A newly introduced feature allows users to create their own “vanity”, or customized URL. This time, it is made more accessible because now users can register their pages more easily. Before, Facebook required that the newly created page should have at least 25 “Likes” before it could be registered. The reason for this is that the page should be liked in order to guarantee its acceptability by other users.

The vanity URL is an alternative offered to users who want to build a new page, but who also want to get a unique URL that is not difficult to remember. This was once the concern of those who wanted to endorse a cause or a brand. This better option will now allow the user to select a username that is not only unique, but is also shorter and easier to remember.

Another employee has found the courage to sue his former employer for violation of privacy. A state training manager was fired for timesheet violations, but filed a lawsuit against the Labor Department through the New York Civil Liberties Union. In his own version, the employee alleged that he was tracked with a GPS device that police placed in his personal car. Describing the action, a NYCLU lawyer called such use of GPS technology as an “unprecedented degree of government intrusion”.

In defense of himself, the employee explained why he felt he was fired from his post. He said that it was more of a punishment for having stood up on behalf of other employees. He said that some employees were pressured to attend a prayer breakfast sponsored by a Governor. The Department of Labor claimed differently, saying that his improper filing of timesheets is what cost him his post.

What has the GPS tracking device to do with the case? To put him under surveillance, the device was used to keep a record of the times he actually did his job. According to allegations, he claimed pay for hours when he was not doing his work. The plan was to track him during his official working hours. What happened was that the monitoring went beyond normal working hours, even going on during evenings and weekends. To aggravate the situation, even the employee’s vacation with his family was monitored.

Teachers are questioning a law regarding teacher-student communication and the opposition has already reached the court. In Missouri, a law was passed prohibiting teachers from having private communications with students over the internet. This prompted a teachers’ association to bring a complaint to court naming the state, the Governor and the Attorney-General as defendants.

A Missouri state Senator, who is the sponsor of the new law, said that it does not violate free speech and other rights. These were the grounds contained in the teachers’ objections filed by the Missouri State Teachers’ Association. The Senator added that no part of the law stops any means of communication. What it prohibits only is concealed communication between teachers and students, most especially those students who are minors. If parents, administrators or the public can view the internet site, then teachers and students can communicate over the internet.

Schools are required, with the adoption of the law, to fine tune their policies to comply with it. Teachers aired their negative reaction and said that banning this kind of contact is unconstitutional. They explained their opposition by pointing out the vagueness and broadness of the act. The law does not define clear boundaries between which conduct is permitted and which is not. Furthermore, it seems to limit the exercise of the First Amendment rights between teachers and students.

Aside from the issue of GPS tracking and anonymity in public places, there is also the issue of online surveillance. Resistance was raised against the use of GPS technology for tracking people without a proper warrant. There is now the possibility of losing one’s privacy when the Court allows GPS tracking by the police. This means that GPS tracking devices will be put in public places, and no one will be exempt from being watched.

Aside from public places, people inhabiting the virtual world might also lose their anonymity. With this so-called online surveillance, “movements” of people in cyberspace can be monitored. One example of this technology is Facebook’s face-recognition feature, which was announced last June. In simple terms, this technology allows the scanning of all photos found in its database and attaching to it the user’s name. The image of one user is then automatically tagged and matched with images that are found anywhere else. If the user used his or her real name, as required, he or she can be indentified wherever he or she “goes”.

Using the same technology in the foregoing information, the police could identify previously unidentified criminals. What they could do is post the image of the suspect on Facebook and identify him or her with face-recognition. However, Facebook has received a public outcry regarding the use of this automatic tagging technology. As a result, it decided to give users the choice to opt out of this technique instead of “forcing” it on all of its subscribers.