Public Forum Case Outline: Negation(Against)

Writing the Constructive

Opening: “A vulnerability in an organization's IoT microcosm is a "taunt" to exploit by malicious

hackers” - James Scott, Senior Fellow, Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology. Many
people have devices that access the Internet and use them as a part of their everyday lives, but
they don’t realize the control it has and where all of the information goes.

My partner and I negate the resolution which states: “On balance, the benefits of the Internet
of Things outweigh the harms of decreased personal privacy.”

Definitions: Internet of Things: The connection of technology and all devices via the Internet.
Transferring and receive data from everyday objects and devices that are connected to the
Internet.
Personal privacy: The right to have your personal information private from companies, groups,
or individuals. You are the only one that can access it unless others have the right or authority.

Internet of Things:

1. Main Argument One: Loss of privacy and security

a. (Sub point A) Point: Since all of our devices are connected and share data
daily, it is hard to keep information confidential. Hackers and unauthorized users
can get a hold of your information and use it in any way they want.

i. Evidence: From August 14th, 2015 to August 14, 2016, around 110
million Americans had a hacker expose their personal information.
According to Business Insider, the 2015 Icontrol State of the Smart Home
study found that 44% of all Americans were “very concerned” about the
possibility of their information getting stolen from their smart homes, while
27% were “somewhat concerned.” With that level of worry, the consumers
were hesitant to purchase connected devices.

ii. Explanation: Getting hacked is a reality and hackers can access your
personal information to use wherever they want. Even though people can
put up a firewall, people don’t know how it works, hackers can still get
through it, and some people don’t want to spend the extra money on it.

b. (Sub point B) Point: Once you get into one device, you can access all the
information within that device.

i. Evidence: Amazon echo is a great example of a device that is

convenient to the user. However, it poses major security risks to the user.
For example, Domino’s Pizza allows you to connect their app to your
Amazon Echo. In order for this to work, you will need to enter your credit
card information, home address, and email address into the app. If you
say “Alexa, order me my favorite pizza”, it will automatically charge your
credit card, email you a receipt, and notify your local Domino’s that an
order has been placed. With just one simple phrase, all of these steps
have been done without having you confirm any details. The Amazon
 Echo and other devices save your personal information, so if hacked, it
will give hackers access to all important data that is linked with that
device. Researchers have tested the microphones of many devices
including the Amazon Echo and have been able to hack into them and
give them commands with a sound that is impossible for humans to hear.
Researchers have been able to hack into real, on the market devices with
enough time and tools, which means hackers would likely be able to
replicate their efforts.

ii. Explanation: Information within a device is linked with other information,

so it is very easy to obtain your valuable information by just having
access to one device.

2. Main Argument Two: Complexity

a. Sub Point A: People are uneducated about the Internet of Things.

i. Evidence: A study was conducted by the professors at the University of

Pennsylvania and the University of California, Berkeley. The professors
conducted interviews with 1,000 adult Internet users. The first question
asked was “Please tell me whether or not you want the websites you visit
to give you tailored ads.” Of the 1,000 adult Internet users surveyed, 21%
of them said that they were uninterested in tailored ads. Then, the
participants were told how users get targeted for tailored ads. When told
that tailored ads track users on their site, the percentage rose to 28%.
When told that tailored ads track users on other sites, the percentage
rose to 46%. When told that tailored ads track users even when they are
offline, the percentage rose to 66%.

ii. Explanation: People don’t realize how everything is connected. If you

look something up, related topics are recorded by the device and can be
accessed at any time. Even if you delete your search history, the device
still holds related topics and uses them for things such as ads.

b. Sub Point B: It’s growing faster than we realize.

i. Evidence: According to Intel, the company stated that in 2006, 2 billion

devices were part of the Internet of Things. In 2015, they stated that 15
billion devices were part of Internet of Things. What’s even more
shocking? According to the International Data Corporation, Intel, and the
United Nations, they forecast that by 2020, there will be a total of 200
billion devices connected to the Internet of Things. Nowadays even our
cars are connected to the Internet of Things and can be hijacked. Control
over car electronics can be set by wireless transmission of false signals.
This was proven by scientists who experimented with a Jeep Cherokee.
The scientists started blasting cold air at the maximum setting, switching
the radio station, turning the windshield wipers on, and most dangerous of
all, turning the accelerator off. All of this was done from a laptop 10 miles
away from the car.
 ii. Explanation: As more devices are added to the Internet of Things it will
only get more complex. The people that are aware of the Internet of
Things usually think that it just links devices together when really it
creates its own personal network and becomes a much more powerful
system.

3. Main Argument Three: Evolution

a. Sub Point A: The Internet of Things will control our lives soon.

i. Evidence: In 2016, a Nielsen Company audience report revealed that

adults in the United States devoted about 10 hours and 39 minutes each
day to consuming media during the first quarter of the year. The report
included how much time they spent daily using their tablets, smartphones,
personal computers, multimedia devices, video games, radios, DVDs,
DVRs and TVs. Also, the Internet of Things will soon take over millions of
traditional jobs. An Oxford study in 2013 titled “The Future of
Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?” concluded
that 47% of U.S. jobs are at risk of being replaced by machines.

ii. Explanation: As technological advancements occur and technology

serves as a more convenient way for us to do things, we will spend more
and more time utilizing it, which means less and less time to do other
things. The Internet of Things is taking control over us from both our
homes and the workplace. People have been dreaming of a future where
technology caters to our every need. If we succeed in replacing humans
with computers to manage everything around us, what will happen to the
humans? Unemployment rates would rise because there would be no
need for us to work anymore. You can argue that jobs will open up in the
technology field, but not everybody wants a career in that field. People
are needed to create and program all of this new technology, but this is a
complex field and the number of jobs that are being depleted due to
technology is far greater than the jobs that are being created due to
technology.

b. Sub Point B: Increased dependability results in an increased chance of being

hacked.

i. Evidence: On May 12th of this year, the National Health Service of

England and Scottland was hit by a large ransomware attack that affected
at least 16 of its organizations. Within 2 days of the initial attack, 150
additional countries were also affected by this attack. The ransomware
used in this attack had no decryptor readily available and patients could
not get the medical care they needed due to missing files.

ii. Explanation: As the Internet of Things evolves and we rely on it more

and more to store our information, the chance of getting hacked is greater
due to the power and data that can be accessed.
Closing Statement: Therefore, my partner and I negate the Resolution that states, On balance,
the benefits of the Internet of Things outweigh the harms of decreased personal privacy.