Monday, May 9, 2011

Virtual Emotions

Kurzweil discussed the ideas of nanotechnology and molding ourselves with machines. The future, perhaps, involves us being like cyborgs, part human and part machine. This already sort of exists as we replace certain body parts with machines, such as limbs or pacemakers. However, a recent Japenese invention has created a machine that emulates kissing. Before, machines have been about aiding our bodies, but this is perhaps one of the first steps to using machines to please us emotionally.

The machine allows a person in one place to have their emulation of kissing transformed to another machine at another place. Kind of like the idea of the virtual workplace, you are experiencing another person without actually being together. This could easily be manipulated, as the article says, to fantasies where people are kissing someone like a celebrity (perhaps celebrities selling their “kissing” style). This explores the ethics of removing emotion from the physical.
(Extra Credit)

Twitter

A recent political event that has been covered extensively in the US media is the death of Osama Bin Laden. The event, which took place last week, became a national event that was announced by the president during a special speech. However, even before the president gave his speech, the event had been live-tweeted on Twitter by Sohaib Athar, a Twitter user in Abbottabad, where Osama was found. Unbeknownst to Athar, he tweeted about the capture of Osama when remarking about some sort of event going on near his home.

What this relates to is the idea of net neutrality, especially in terms of the freedom social networks provide. Athar was able to comment on the event happening in his town because of the freedom that the Internet allows for every person to have a profile on Twitter and the ability to post on it. People were able to understand this event in the way people in the town did thanks to the freedom Twitter allows. Twitter allowed Athar a voice, which has led to him having 104,589 followers and coverage on the national media. Without the freedom of the Internet, this likely would have never been possible.
(Extra Credit)

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Net neutrality

This article talks about net neutrality and how if we continue to use net neutrality, the infrastructure would remain “dumb” because every website would have the same delivery rate; this means that no website would get more high speed internet for their website over other websites. If net neutrality were to be abolished, websites would get more privilege over other websites if they pay a certain fee for the high broadband internet service. There is not a bill the supports or does not support net neutrality in the United States, instead there are guideline rules that telecommunication services have to follow. These guidelines restrict certain websites having more privilege over others. Also, the internet is an important topic because the internet has always been open to everyone, which means that everyone has the same kind of access to the same content. Net neutrality has been receiving a lot more debate in the political world and Obama has campaigned for net neutrality while he was running for presidency, and he also still promotes and fights for net neutrality.

Panopticon

This article discusses the possibility that internet users may become more monitiored while they are online. This would mean that not only is their email being monitored, but their chat rooms, news posts, networks online, and possibly many other online activities would be monitored as well. The reasons that a panopticon is because there has been more need for security, especially since there is content on the internet such as pornography, how to make a bomb, hackers, viruses, and so on.
Having a panopticon on the internet might decrease undesirable behavior on the internet because internet users would not know if they were being watched or not. Not knowing if you are being watched would decrease undesirable behavior because the individuals using the undesirable websites, or doing undesirable things while on the internet, would know that there is a possibility that they would be caught doing the things they should not be doing, resulting in getting them in trouble.
Today, our actions are being tracked on the internet because information is being gathered through our internet searches. This is creating a daily me internet because the ads that will then pop up on the website that you are currently looking at will be similar to the information that you are searching for. This can be turned off to a certain extent by turning off your cookies in your web browser. Some websites will not allow you to use their website if you do not have your cookies on because they gather information from you to give to marketers.

Obama = Steve Jobs

“Is the distribution and dissemination of ideas sufficient to foster and create a social revolution?” “The Internet is nothing more than binary code”

Although the author of this article clearly understands that the Internet is important, he may be kicking himself today as he (and many, many others), were downright wrong as they underestimated in their predictions of what the internet was capable of. But besides the outdated techno information from this article, the principals remain the same, and it gives us a transformation identity that shows what we as people and users want to use the internet for.

“The ultimate corporate goal may be to develop a cultural structure that assists producers of products to know what consumers want before the consumers even know. When private groups take control of public institutions, individual constitutional rights no longer apply”

The important thing to note here is that the private institutions have taken control of the internet completely, and were able to do this because of the way they were able to convince the users. Facebook has convinced us that it is cool to have more friends, in turn addicting us to the site and giving us a base that we didn’t even know we needed- but everyone else is doing it. They are able to use all of our information and violate privacy because they simply don’t have any rules against it- we let them, but we didn’t really KNOW we let them. An article from Advertising Age explains some of the tricky practices that go on behind the scenes, that make us users think certain things are cool, or the new ‘trend,’ even though it’s skewed. http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-14565085/ALL-HAIL-OUR-DIGITAL-OVERLORDS.html When dealing with the new mobile apps, there is only one government overlord that owns the rights to everyones souls (aka their iphone)- Apple. An quote from Apple states, "Apps must comply with all local laws and may not put an individual or targeted group in harm's way," This sounds an awful lot like a governing rule, and it is. Any company or individual that wants to put out an app- must go through Apple. This structure seems to have taken over the government since this article. Although the government has some control, for example, Obama’s new internet governing law that was proposed in 2010- http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2022653,00.html Although this attempts to control the internet, it doesn’t hold a dime to the rest of the marketplace that is owned and controlled by Google, Apple, Facebook, Yahoo and other e-giants

Facebook Privacy

In the last ten years the internet has progressed from a little-known entity of the military to a growing world cultural phenomenon. With the use of the world wide web, people are able to connect, share, and have open communication with friends. One website that reveals personal information is facebook. Recently facebook changed their hypertext transport protocol from https:// to http://. This small change means that the webpage is no longer as secure and is more open with sharing information between clients and the servers. Facebook doesn't want to promote privacy settings or 'opt out' options because of the advertising money through a more unsecured network.
The S in the https stands for secure. When this appears in the browser link the website is no longer able to other people 'ease-drop' on your computers communication with the website. If you fill out any forms or submit any information about yourself on a non https:// webpage other people can be watching and collecting data allowing your information to be sent out anywhere on the internet. The main thing to remember about https:// websites is to never enter your credit card numbers or social security number on an unsecured site.
Commercial Privacy Bill of Rights are currently working on online privacy protection along with friends and people looking out for others by posting alerts. The well circulated facebook post began in February and got copied and pasted all over the net:
'While on facebook, look at your URL address; if you see http: instead of https: then you dont have a secure session and you can be hacked. Go to Account, Account Settings, Account Security and click change. Check at least the first setting, FB defaults to the non-secure setting.'

Big Brother or Big Sister?

The New Panopticon is interesting in that the author argued that there was a shift between the government monitoring individuals to the private sector monitoring individuals. I think that whoever, private or public, monitors someone elses information is spying on them in violation of the SPIRIT of the Right to Privacy. There was no way our fore-fathers could have known that such abuses would take place, so it is up to our generation to rectify this. Perhaps it is time for a constitutional convention.

What is really interesting to me about this is that Osama Bin Laden did not have the Internet or phone service hooked up to his Pakistani hideout. It is pretty obvious to me that he knew that are ways in which we are monitored everyday and by taking himself back into a time before the Internet he forced a surveillance industry that is based largely on technology to go back in time with him. Of course he hid with the Pakistani's help, but nonetheless I think the lack of the Internet and a phone helped him hide.

Power is going to be abused. In the 21st century they monitor our phones, our computers, and basically everything about us. The only way to escape it is to live somewhere remote literally disconnected from it all, but are those that do this hiding from something or are they just not wanting to be apart of the digital era?

There was obviously a mix here. http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20110502/sc_livescience/hitechsurveillanceplusoldfashionedintelligenceworkfoundosamabinladen