Discussion Reply 2
A new social media app is offering itself to you for free. If you upload a picture to it, the app will show how you will look at 10 years. John Doe, a friend of yours, says not to use the app as it will then possess your biometric facial data. Jane Doe, another friend of yours, says that she heard the app shares the facial data with a security firm that helps the government detect terrorists at airports. Should you use this app? Why or why not? If John Doe is right, would an utilitarian say it is right to use the app? Why or why not? If Jane Doe is right, would a social contract theorists say it is right to use the app? Consider the role the Fourth Amendment at play here.
Reply by Joe
When it comes to deciding whether to utilize the app, I personally would. I chose it because it’s an entertaining app that allows me to visualize myself in 10 years. To have the power to view your future self is an interesting thought that would catch the curiosity of many individuals. I’ve always been amused by the idea of seeing when your face characteristics change as you age. Whether you begin to grow grey hair or if the phrase “black doesn’t crack” applies to you. I also think it’s fantastic that a security organization uses face data to aid in the detection of terrorists. Most individuals wouldn’t be able to notice, let alone uncover, such a clever method. I appreciate John Doe’s point of view, because facial data might get into the wrong hands and be used for illegal purposes. It’s tricky because you can’t take your info back after you’ve put it out there. Jane Doe’s point, on the other hand, makes the concern drift away. Only if there is a contractual agreement in place would a social contract theorist accept it as being correct. They will only share their facial data if they are assured that it would be used for good rather than harmful. They wouldn’t use the app if they didn’t believe it was appropriate. The Fourth Amendment adds an interesting element to it, as it might empower an officer with just cause to use the data to aid a case (United States Courts, 2020). That adds a fresh aspect to John Doe’s argument about not utilizing the app. Despite all the facts and potential, I continue to support Jane Doe and her use of the app. Whatever facial data can do, if you’re not doing anything wrong, there’s nothing to be concerned about.