Is privacy a negative right or a positive right, explain?
As far as I think privacy is a negative right so far to an individual, he can be private unless someone doesn’t intrude in their privacy. Also, it is limited right as there are certain situations in which privacy is infringed upon (cookies and so on)
Provide an example of a situation where people must disclose personal information to a private organization to get something they want.
An example for the above-mentioned situation is:
To get a job we need to provide our personal information including name, phone number, emails, passport number and in some cases, we need to submit our medical reports.
Do you agree with Scott McNealy’s statement that people have “zero privacy” and should just get over it?
I disagree with the above specific statement as internet serves as a public network and there is your choice either you share your privacy with others or not. The choice of someone sharing the data over the internet give the privacy level. If you do post of any content on the internet you can limit the state of privacy which can in turns raise the privacy level of the data. If you want to share any content over the internet you need to go through the privacy, check up in a deep.
Critics of grocery club cards give examples of card-member prices being equal to the regular product price at stores without customer loyalty programs. In other words, customers who want to get food at the regular price must use the card. Customers pay extra if they do not want to use the card. Is it fair for a store to charge us more if we do not want to use its loyalty card? Explain your reasoning.
The advancement of a decent faithfulness program starts by figuring out what the activity can pick up. Just with explicit business destinations would one be able to build up the essential cycles and choose if they work effectively. Most importantly, let us recollect what a program of steadfastness can’t do. It can’t fabricate reliability in any obvious sense. Dedication signifies “unwaveringness.” It is a steady responsibility. You’re not a vacillating companion when you’re faithful to something a way of thinking, an individual, an item. Furthermore, if this conflicts with your desires, you stay with it.
No, it is not fair for a store to charge us more if we do not want to use its loyalty card because it’s our choice either we pay by cash or another card. It is our right to maintain our pay and we don’t need to take permission from other to make my payment.
If you voluntarily have your body scanned at a department store, who should own that information, you, or the store? Should the store have the right to sell your body measurements to other businesses? Explain your reasoning.
Answer: On this case the owner of that information would be the store as I don’t own the store. No, the store doesn’t have any right to sell my body measurements to other businesses without my concern.
Explanation: I voluntarily have my body scanned there and they have right to keep the information for the future improvement in the quality of the services but on the other hand they don’t have any rights to sell my body measurement because it is related to the privacy of me and if they use this information for negative task I might be affected by their deeds.
While the cost of automobile insurance varies from person to person, based on the driving record of everyone, health insurance premiums are typically uniform across groups of people, such as all the employees of a company. However, most health care costs are incurred by a minority of the population.
Insurance agencies when all is said in done work on the reason that out of 1,000,000 individuals paying expenses, two or three hundred thousand will really guarantee on harms. The exceptional sum also is assorted relying on the estimation of protected property or term inclusion on account of life insurance. This way the excellent sum gathered from a dominant part of individuals will get the job done to pay to a minority of petitioners. Nonetheless, in medical coverage this reason isn’t exceptionally steady since claims rely on the ailment and period of protected students.
Today it is possible to take a blood sample from a person and to extract a genetic profile that reveals the person’s disposition to certain diseases? Debate the proposition that health insurance rates should be tailored to reflect everyone’s propensity to illness.
No by taking a blood sample of a person cannot identify the persons disposition of the person instead it just gives the confirmation of the diseases. Increasing and improvement in the technological discoveries in the medical field increase and accelerate, genetic test is now playing a huge role in medical as well as life and health insurance. The information so obtained from the genetic tests has the potential in increasing the population mortality though still challenges exist as there are number of countries which are against the genetic test. Therefore, Health insurance rates therefore should be tailored to reflect each individual’s propensity to illness in order to be fair to both the vast majority of people and also to the health insurance companies.
Give an example of a piece of information privacy that a person should not have to reveal to anyone else. Give an example of a piece of information that society should be able to demand that a person reveal.
An example of piece of information that a person shouldn’t have to reveal to anyone is medical record of a person. Since these records are considered and recorded as confidential private documents.