How private can you expect your personal information to be in the next century? Should internet providers and apps be able to collect and sell personal, non-damaging information?

These questions have been around for some time, and they cause conflicts because they are open to interpretation. This problem stems from a lack of previous precedent on various privacy restrictions. In fact, there is no guaranteed freedom of privacy in our nation’s Constitution, partially due to the lack of technology at the time. This means that any law regarding online privacy will be decided exclusively in the coming years, and Congress must decide where to draw the line.

Recently, Congress voted to keep a set of internet privacy protections approved in October from taking effect later this year. These restrictions would have prevented internet providers, such as Verizon and AT&T, from collecting, storing and possibly selling their clients personal browsing history and app usage. This information has become valuable in the past couple years, and it’s not as new as one may think.

Internet browsers love to collect information, and they partner with companies to provide personalized advertisements based on their client’s browsing history. For example, this means the teenage girl won’t see an advertisement for men’s clothing simply because her browsing history indicates she shops on a women’s shoe website. It also means that advertisements may appear for products consumers have viewed in the past, making a second attempt to persuade a purchase.

This type of marketing makes sense for a browser, and it’s financially harmless to the user. Browsers like Google Chrome and Mozilla Firefox are free to use, and therein lies the discrepancy. As a free service, Chrome can make money by helping companies better reach potential customers. In a sense, this is how you pay to use the free service; the company must make money, and by agreeing to the terms of service, you forfeit that expectation of privacy. But what about a paid service, such as your phone contract?

Undoubtedly, there is something in their lengthy service agreement as well. Most consumers, however, don’t recognize this violation of trust. The ongoing joke that no one reads the terms and conditions applies, so by not reading, you open yourself up to various privacy invasions.

It one again comes down to a middle ground. Consumers in today’s generation must decide how much privacy they will pay for today’s convenience. Companies aren’t going to start raffling off social security numbers at their stores, but it’s important to recognize when a company is making a little extra on the side at your loss of privacy. Whether or not a consumer believes the “if you’re innocent, you have nothing to hide” standby greatly impacts their opinion on history sharing.

As a free service, it’s hard to blame browsers like Chrome from creating a target market. It’s in the paid services we find the problem. As a customer of these services, you already pay, and to pay once more with your privacy is a violation of trust. Arguably, companies have the right to do so, especially when consumers are so eager to check the terms and conditions box.