This scared the citizens of that era, around the 1950’s. They grew up in a time where they did not question authority, and this meant the government. This surrender of their will to their government would have made it easy for them to be controlled. Since at about this time  technology was going places that mankind could never have foreseen, Orwell’s fictional world seemed more imminent than ever. Ever since America broke off from the British rulers those decades ago, we have always had a healthy skepticism for any sort of government power. Although the government is not all controlling, people still are prone to views of it taking over and of martial law. The biggest problem and fear people have though is with privacy, and to this extent the government is the least of their worries.

The government has the power to invade our privacy, no doubt about it. Would they really use it though? Probably not. Although 1984 is an excellent novel and recommended reading for anyone and everyone, its ideas did not come to fruition. We have long surpassed the year 1984 and our society, even today, is nothing like Orwell predicted. What he nailed head on though is our dependence on technology, and for this we have to applaud him. Orwell described great systems where people could interact, but it would cost the public most of their anonymity and privacy; sounds like the social networking giants of today? To this end, it is not the government that is going to strip us of all of our privacy, it is ourselves. Instead of the cameras being on every street corner, watching passerby, they are on our web cams, projecting our faces to friends all over the world.

Why did Orwell pronounce these social aspects as a bad thing then?  He saw the dangers of OTHER PEOPLE seeing everything about our lives. This certainly rings true today: think of all of the kidnappings and other crimes that have stemmed from an overly revealing online profile! Unlike the conscientious writer, people do not think of their audience when they put up all of the stuff they do on their personal sites. Many, to complete strangers, leak many sensitive details of their life, and get burned for it later. These sites are arguably the best way for a criminal to find out about you and find out where to strike you. Your Internet site can reveal ways to get into your life that you would never think to tell anyone.

This is due to a principle where humans cannot limit the output they have in non-face to face contact. Nearly everyone suffers from this deadly syndrome, and strangely, no one seems to notice. No one ever seems to think before they post the information they want on their site; no mental screening process occurs. Only the criminals realize, and before you know it, you have just told them your address, and that you won’t be home for the weekend. When you get back, your stash of cash and other valuables might be with a new owner. Although Orwell wasn’t completely accurate in his message, there is still something to be learned. Big Brother is always watching, and alongside him is a crafty hacker, watching, waiting, biding his time till the opportunity for a strike presents itself. Be mindful, don’t give Big Brother your information, and he won’t pass it too the criminal.

What happened was he wrote a letter to his dad and left it in an unsealed envelope. The letter described his confusion with his actions, and how he was disturbed that he killed another man. Prison officials seized the letter and used it as evidence against the man in a case against him. This letter provided irrefutable proof that he did indeed kill the man, and this would certainly land him a guilty charge, with no contest. This man would be in prison for the rest of his life, if not land him on death row.

In court, prison officials argued that the letter wasn’t sealed, and that all prisoners have to have all of their mail scanned and censored, both out-going and incoming. This, they argue, would have had the letter found anyway, so they would have gotten him like that. They also argue the letter is good evidence. The man argues that his Fourth Amendment rights were being violated by them reading and seizing his un-sent letter. Even though it was unsealed, they still should have not been allowed to get into it. By doing this, the evidence should be negated he said, and he wasn’t planning on sending the letter anyway, it was just a venting system.

This is an interesting case. People would side with the prisoner for his appeal to pathos in which the prison guards had no right to steal the letter as he hadn’t sent it, but the other side appeals strongly to their logos; the letter incriminated an existing criminal and the crime was murder, the most severe off all. The question is, are privacy laws reserved for even cold blooded killers?

The answer apparently is no. The court ruled that the guards had a strong right to take the prisoners mail, and now he will stand trial for murder with this huge piece of evidence in front of him. It is doubt able at best that the trial will be unbiased, even without this new discovery.

As long as you are out in the free world though, the Constitution protects you. Everyone has a right to privacy law’s protection, and it is our sovereign right as American citizens. No one can take this right away, try as they might in today’s society. You are a free person on the Internet as well. The only one that should be able to read your documents without your permission is you. Consider this when weighing the decision of getting an anonymous proxy server or not.

In the UK, there are government CC cameras around seemingly every corner, and here in the U.S., we have our beloved Patriot Act. These acts seem to keep chipping away at our rights: unreasonable search and seizures are not permitted.

Some people do not care about this freedom; “why is it a problem if you’ve got nothing to hide?” That’s not the point: these freedoms are inherited upon birth and are now being infringed at a rapid rate. States are beginning to plan actions that will effectively ban anonymous proxy servers, which allow you to remain anonymous online.

The government is looking for loopholes to bypass our rights right now. The Constitution states that the government can’t directly obtain information, so they are going through Google, and getting them to send browser histories and other information.

An anonymous proxy can provide you shelter from this blatant privacy invasion. Free proxies are easily identified as being proxies, but fee-based proxies are much better at cloaking what they are. Using one of these proxies would allow you security from the information man-hunt and no one would even know you are using an anonymous proxy.