"It's kind of interesting that the right to privacy is just a product of a certain stage of historical development, and it's not 'it will continue to exist after it appears, and it will always be pursued and worth pursuing after it has been pursued by human beings.'" This angle is so novel, I'm afraid no one can think of it, right?"

Feng Jianxiong's whimsical inferences about the causes and consequences of privacy suddenly made all five judges feel that a new window has been opened in front of them.

Feng Jianxiong struck while the iron was hot, and completely extracted the most important part of his opinion:

Therefore, the scope of privacy has never been fixed, but has evolved with the times with the changes in society and technology. Information that was once thought to be indifferent may become reluctant to disclose to unspecified third parties at a certain stage of society because of the increased importance of this information.

But we also cannot deny that the opposite is always true: a lot of historical information that should not have been made public in the eyes of most people has become dispensable with the advancement of technology and society. Rather than restricting the development of science and technology for the sake of imaginary privacy protection, it is better to adapt to the current situation and adjust the scope of the definition of privacy with the times......"

"Well, it's too powerful, it's very layered. Shi Nicole, Feng Yiji, Zhou Tianyin and other girls secretly shouted in the stands and couldn't help but want to applaud. The rest of the audience was relatively reserved, but they had to admit that these words were tight.

"The opponent's defense friend is taking the effect as the cause, and the strong words are reasonable!" On the positive side, Bai Jingyou, the third debater, saw that his teammates were still thinking, and hurriedly answered the call,

"MAY I ASK THE OTHER PARTY, ACCORDING TO YOUR MEANING, ISN'T IT THAT TECHNOLOGY CAN DETECT MORE PERSONAL INFORMATION, THEN THESE PERSONAL INFORMATION ARE NOT WORTH PROTECTING? SO IF HUMAN BEINGS LEAVE COOKIES ON THE INTERNET, THEY DESERVE TO BE STOLEN? WHEN THEY MAKE PHONE CALLS AND LEAVE CALL RECORDS, THEY DESERVE TO BE KNOWN WHAT THEY TALKED TO AND TO WHOM?

Bai Jingyou just finished speaking and sat down, and Tian Haimo immediately sneered at each other:

We're just saying that technology will change the scope of privacy. For example, in the era of no cameras, everyone felt that 'where they went every day' was a private piece of information, and they shouldn't know where you went unless they hired a private investigator to follow you with malicious intent. But with the advancement of science and technology and the development of urban security monitoring, what about the situation?

I'll just give you an example from my own experience: when I came to Hujiang yesterday, I stayed in a hotel at night and watched your city TV station. I was very pleased to see a report: there was a criminal case of burglary against a technology company in Zhangjiang Hi-Tech Park, and the police tracked the suspect all the way to Xinzhuang Greenland Island through surveillance, and finally caught the suspect.

In the process of this kind of tracking, the ordinary innocent citizens who were implicated, where they went that day, this once private data, will also be ruthlessly retrieved - if according to the other party's point of view, is it not that we should limit the development and promotion of security monitoring technology in order to protect the privacy of citizens? Is it the best to let the bad guys go?

Bai Jing was anxious: "We just said that we should criticize the invasion of privacy and use it to do bad things, but we didn't say that it can't be used as a criminal investigation method to fight crime! The police's collection of personal privacy information is, of course, compliant and legal, and cannot be mixed up!"

However, the risk of privacy leakage brought about by the development and popularization of Internet technology is not the same concept as the progress of security monitoring technology! It is very likely to be used by bad people.

Tian Haimo continued to press aggressively: "In this way, the opponent's defense friend thinks that the difference between 'reasonable invasion of privacy' and 'unreasonable invasion of privacy' is only whether it can be obtained for private power?

Then let me ask you, if GPS mobile phone positioning is also popularized in the future, GPS positioning data can also greatly facilitate judicial factual judgment. Help trace the person and provide evidence of a crime or alibi. But is the opponent preparing to think that the development of GPS location data should be restricted because 'GPS location data may be called by private companies or third-party data service providers'?

"It's up to the situation to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis, depending on how likely it is to be exploited by the bad guys, how can we generalize. On the other side, Gu Heren found that Bai Jingyou was a little encircled, and gradually lost his support, so he hurriedly killed his teammates halfway.

Tian Haimo was very determined, secretly thinking that the serial set prepared by Xiaoxiong a few days ago was really good. She smiled slightly, and continued to attack:

"Okay, so let's turn back the wheel of history and cite an area where there is absolutely a possibility of 'privacy data violations by bad actors' – let's say we go back to 30 years ago, back to a time when DNA testing didn't exist. Is it true that when humans invented DNA identification technology, it was an invasion of the privacy data of human beings who had left DNA traces?

You know, as long as any individual can buy a PCR machine, a DNA tester, you can monitor who has been in a certain place at any time, and you don't need official authorization at all, and bad people can do it. In this case, according to the opinion of the opponent's defense friend, we should not invent and popularize the DNA test, even if it has such obvious great achievements in reducing the crime rate!"

"This ...... This is a stealing concept, and it can't be compared like this!" Gu Heren was slightly at a loss, and still felt a little confused: Why did a team like Jinling Normal University become so powerful this year?

It shouldn't be.

But after all, he has been a well-known troll for many years, and he has deep qualifications, so he knows that he must not be led away by the other party at this time, and he must immediately ask questions to change the topic.

So he didn't think about it and said crookedly: "Just now, the opponent's defense friend kept trying to prove the importance of information disclosure by fighting crime, which is very dangerous, because it is very likely to lead to unarmed civilians being more unscrupulously violated by those who have mastered the power of technology!"

Why did the United States develop into such frequent violent cases today? Isn't it because the US government can abuse guns, so it has no choice but to heed the voice of the people and allow the people to carry guns to protect themselves.

If the U.S. government had been able to exercise the same self-discipline as our government from the beginning and strictly control the use of guns by public power, I am afraid that it would be as harmonious as our country today, right? Therefore, when calling for the convenience and transparency brought by a technology, we should not only look at the theory, but also see who can control this transparency. If only the strong side can use this tool, and the weak side can't use it, then it is better not to use this tool!"

Gu Heren's words resonated with several compassionate judges and some audiences, and for a while, the psychological balance tilted in the direction of the Fudan University team.

But Feng immediately took over with a tricky answer: "I'm glad that the other side has admitted this – that is, the problem is not that the Internet has the potential to expand the transparency of individual behavior and reduce the scope of privacy." Rather, we need to ensure that the transparency brought about by the development of Internet technology can be used fairly by all sectors of society. In that case, why are we still restricting the development of Internet technology? Haven't you and I reached a consensus on this issue? All that remains to be discussed is the question of how to ensure fairness!"

The four members of the Fudan team were stunned when they heard this, and suddenly felt that this sentence was really difficult to refute.

"That's right! What we should be concerned about is the transparency of information brought about by new technologies, and how to be fairly used by the rich and poor, the powerful and the unpowered, rather than restricting the development of technology itself! This angle is so good!" The host Sa Beining felt that his eyes lit up, and when he looked at the audience again, most people seemed to be moved by this kind of analysis.

"No...... No! The opponent is taking it for granted with idealism! What we are discussing today is a social issue, not a utopian theory, so any viewpoint should be combined with social practice and be operable.

I would like to ask the opponent's defense friend: In today's world, is it true that in today's world, where the police and the people do not have guns, there are fewer homicides, and it is safer; or, like the United States, where all the police and the people have guns, and there are fewer homicides? If it is not possible to ensure that everyone has a fair gun for the time being, is it more socially responsible to ban guns on a single pole?"

Feng Jianxiong sneered: "Your analogy is not comparable at all!"

Gu Heren immediately asked: "If you want to have evidence, then please cite the social model of 'in the future, so that the poor and the rich will have the same possibility of accessing transparent data from the Internet'! Don't wait for the day when your family members are defrauded miserably due to the leakage of personal information brought about by the Internet, you will regret it again!"

"Of course you can!" Feng Jianxiong did not show weakness, "I think the increase in data transparency brought by the Internet is not fundamentally different from any time in history." Just as anyone can buy a camera for security monitoring, everyone can buy a DNA meter to identify who has recently been to a public place.

In the future, as long as the procedures are lawful and the demands are reasonable, any citizen should have the right to request access to public surveillance data, and every party to a divorce case should have the right to fairly apply to the telecommunications/mobile company to disclose his or her spouse's GPS whereabouts. As long as the legal guarantee of the State confirms that such a claim is fair to all in terms of access authority, there is no problem.

Moreover, as I said earlier, the right to privacy only arises when human society develops to a specific historical stage, that is, the stage of 'socialized mass production, division of labor and cooperation of strangers'. The purpose is to solve the problem that this is a society of strangers, and if others know about my situation and I don't know about other people's situation, I may be in danger and suffer a loss. In the society of acquaintances, there is no concept of privacy.

In the future, it is precisely the great development of data and information technology brought about by the Internet that may fundamentally eliminate the social basis for the existence of the right to privacy, the 'society of stranger collaboration', and bring mankind back to the society of acquaintances.