Data Security in Precision Agriculture: How Machine Learning Will Exacerbate the Privacy Risks of Farming
Anna Johnson As precision agriculture technology advances, privacy concerns plague farmers who fear that their agricultural data could be exploited by data processors. Despite these concerns, the federal government has failed to enact agricultural data protection laws. With the rise of machine learning (ML), federal and state legislators should act urgently to prohibit AI-driven, farming data misuse. Since data security threats in agriculture can disrupt the stability of the commodities market, a coordinated, industry-specific approach ensuring the privacy of agricultural data must be taken. This paper analyzes the privacy risks created by ML in precision agriculture and proposes legislative and...
BLOG POST: Connecting the Patchwork: National Regulation of Data Privacy in the United States*
*This is article is a Blog post, it is not an IPTF Journal article. SAMANTHA TORRE A recent study revealed that nearly three-quarters of Americans surveyed reported feeling “resigned” to the use of their personal data for marketing purposes.[1] In the study, even consumers indicating they want control over their own data lack understanding about how their data can be gathered and used.[2] That same study showed that only fourteen percent of Americans believed that companies could be trusted to use their data with the consumer’s “best interests in mind.”[3]Consumers express particular concern about what companies do with their data.[4] One example of a...
BLOG POST: Closing the Third Party Doctrine Loophole: An Argument for the Blockchain Integrity Act*
*This writing is a Blog post. It is not a published IPTF Journal article. Mira Ward When James Madison wrote the Fourth Amendment, he likely never predicted that 250 years later, Americans would argue for privacy over Bitcoin transactions.[1] During the Revolutionary War, the Fourth Amendment protected American colonists from unwarranted searches and seizures.[2] In 1967, the Court built upon Fourth Amendment jurisprudence in Katz v. United States.[3] Katz specified that a person must have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” to protect their interest from search and seizure.[4] For example, Katz ruled that a reasonable privacy interest exists over that which is physically enclosed from the public, such...
