Sunday, November 20, 2011
Monday, November 14, 2011
Blog #4: Privacy online
Facebook. The demise of us all. Or at least it’s Jennifer O’Brien’s. The first-grade teacher may lose her job, stated an article last week on Reuters.com, after calling her young students “future criminals.”
Could this be called a privacy issue? Why of course it could. First of all, it’s the same old claim, O’Brien voluntarily put her thoughts out there for the world to see, those thoughts are no longer private. Second of all, this issue isn’t so much a privacy one as it is a sensitivity one.
All these Facebook “privacy” issues that are popping up in the news, consist mostly of “inappropriate” statements or pictures. But Facebook is no more than the weak link in the chain of “ignorance is bliss.” If Facebook is guilty of one thing, it’s of making it a whole lot harder to be ignorant.
Privacy is lost on Facebook. All Facebook does is show the real us: What people really think, how people really act, what people really look like when they’re drunk. It’s the evidence. Just because we wouldn’t see it if it wasn’t posted on the Book, doesn’t mean it’s not the truth.
Everyone’s been in this situation. We’ve all had embarrassing pictures posted of us, we’ve all devised status’s that we later regret, some of us have even been caught by authority figures in sticky online-depicted situations.
But this is what I want to know: Who’s the rat? I mean really, I will be the first to say it, half O’Brien’s class is probably going to be future criminals. How did her Facebook post travel from her measly 333 friends to the parents of her students and further still, the principal of the school?
True, perhaps she should have kept her thoughts to herself instead of volunteering them to the online world. True, maybe she should have been more courteous to the little munchkins that she’s entrusted to oversee everyday. But is it also not true that the little brats give her hell seven hours a day, five days a week?
Apparently, O’Brien’s complete status had been updated to, "I'm not a teacher - I'm a warden for future criminals!" She wrote the status after her students allegedly hit her and stole money from her.
Would parents sue if she said the same thing to their faces in a parent-teacher conference? How is it different that the words were stated behind the parents backs rather than to their faces? Where they more dangerous this way? No student was named.
Teachers are people too. They are allowed to express their frustration in their everyday jobs to the online world just like the rest of us do. And parents out there need to toughen up a little. Yes, these are their darling children, their darling children that stole money from their teacher.
We are human beings and we are going to do what we want to do, say what we want to say, and hopefully tiptoe the terrible stuff through the our newsfeeds. This matter all comes down to who is smart enough to not get caught and who is stupid enough to flaunt the evidence that evicts them.
If parents and teachers are going to cause such a hullabaloo and be so damn dramatic about having online profiles (aka Facebook pages), perhaps they should just sign off and leave it to those of us who are little less sensitive. Those of us who use it for fun, not to fish around for the trouble that it stirs up.
Could this be called a privacy issue? Why of course it could. First of all, it’s the same old claim, O’Brien voluntarily put her thoughts out there for the world to see, those thoughts are no longer private. Second of all, this issue isn’t so much a privacy one as it is a sensitivity one.
All these Facebook “privacy” issues that are popping up in the news, consist mostly of “inappropriate” statements or pictures. But Facebook is no more than the weak link in the chain of “ignorance is bliss.” If Facebook is guilty of one thing, it’s of making it a whole lot harder to be ignorant.
Privacy is lost on Facebook. All Facebook does is show the real us: What people really think, how people really act, what people really look like when they’re drunk. It’s the evidence. Just because we wouldn’t see it if it wasn’t posted on the Book, doesn’t mean it’s not the truth.
Everyone’s been in this situation. We’ve all had embarrassing pictures posted of us, we’ve all devised status’s that we later regret, some of us have even been caught by authority figures in sticky online-depicted situations.
But this is what I want to know: Who’s the rat? I mean really, I will be the first to say it, half O’Brien’s class is probably going to be future criminals. How did her Facebook post travel from her measly 333 friends to the parents of her students and further still, the principal of the school?
True, perhaps she should have kept her thoughts to herself instead of volunteering them to the online world. True, maybe she should have been more courteous to the little munchkins that she’s entrusted to oversee everyday. But is it also not true that the little brats give her hell seven hours a day, five days a week?
Apparently, O’Brien’s complete status had been updated to, "I'm not a teacher - I'm a warden for future criminals!" She wrote the status after her students allegedly hit her and stole money from her.
Would parents sue if she said the same thing to their faces in a parent-teacher conference? How is it different that the words were stated behind the parents backs rather than to their faces? Where they more dangerous this way? No student was named.
Teachers are people too. They are allowed to express their frustration in their everyday jobs to the online world just like the rest of us do. And parents out there need to toughen up a little. Yes, these are their darling children, their darling children that stole money from their teacher.
We are human beings and we are going to do what we want to do, say what we want to say, and hopefully tiptoe the terrible stuff through the our newsfeeds. This matter all comes down to who is smart enough to not get caught and who is stupid enough to flaunt the evidence that evicts them.
If parents and teachers are going to cause such a hullabaloo and be so damn dramatic about having online profiles (aka Facebook pages), perhaps they should just sign off and leave it to those of us who are little less sensitive. Those of us who use it for fun, not to fish around for the trouble that it stirs up.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
Blog #3: Cybercrime
While doing a little bit of in-depth research about cybercrime, I was interested to find Estonia in the title of so many articles. Estonia is the center of European countries to concentrate on threats and fight cybercrime, but the crime still seems to be flourishing, and the punishments for those caught, increasing.
The most recent article, posted on Wednesday, November 9, 2011, details the arrest of six Estonians and one Russian who have been wreaking havoc on computers since 2007. The individuals could face prison terms anywhere between five to 30 years.
Now, the first thought that passed through my head was how miserable the prison conditions are in that area of Europe. But are their crimes really worth up to 30 years in prison?
Their massive scheme earned them a whopping $14 million and infected an estimated four million computers in over 100 countries, including several NASA computers. But thirty years? That’s a lifetime. How did we let them get away with their massive fraud for more than four years?
If you ask me, they don’t deserve that severe of a punishment as much as we deserved the consequences we suffered for those years they got away with it. If our technological abilities are that much weaker than that of Estonian hackers, then we deserve to be tortured by their computer viruses.
I understand how dangerous the growing problem of cybercrime is. I understand the delicate information that countries store in computers, information that could lead to their demise if snatched by the wrong hands, but countries need to focus on protection plans that prevent attacks rather than hunting criminals from 2007 to 2011 and then attacking the attacker and jailing them for thirty years.
Technology is developing so rapidly and so inexpensively that nearly everyone has a computer and internet. And anyone with the internet at their fingertips can become a hacker. The funny thing is, we hand out technology so readily but so few people really know how to use it or understand the power they are capable of with the machines in their households.
However, although I believe that the key to protection is prevention, and countries are trying to tackle this approach quickly, I also believe that no matter how prepared we become, there will always be hackers that are smarter, faster and more capable than the government. It’s the consequence we suffer from allowing free and ready internet access to the world.
Which is worse, the threat of cybercrime? Or the regulation of internet access? And is it solely the responsibility of the government to create protection for the public? Or can the public do something more to protect themselves than simply purchasing Norton and not emailing their social security number?
Almost two thirds of all adult web users globally have fallen victim to some sort of cybercrime, according to the 2011 Norton Cybercrime Report. But if you ask me, I’d rather deal with that all day, any day, rather than lose my internet privileges. Of course, I’m also not NASA and don’t have highly secretive information to hide…
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Blog #2: Digital Divide
Steve Jobs died at age fifty six. At age twenty two, he had created the fledgling fingers of a technology that would, 34 years later, turn into a technological empire. An article
Jobs was a college dropout. A technology genius. He was, and remains to be, one of few. In fact, many people in today’s society don’t have computers, access to computers or knowledge of how to function computers. There is a distinct line drawn between these people and everyday computer users. There is an even more distinct line drawn between Steve Jobs and these people. Can both interact equally in society?
The Digital Divide. It’s a controversial topic to say the least. Some argue that it doesn’t exist at all. Though delusional, those who think that the digital divide isn’t a problem can be comforted by recent research printed in an article
But the digital divide still exists. And it’s still quite a problem that needs to confronted and diminished.
So, was Jobs aware of what he had created and handed over to society? And did society know what they were readily accepting and taking on into our lifestyles? Jobs gave the public an opportunity to rapidly advance our capabilities by supplying us with advanced, yet simple to use technology software. In turn, society has indeed advanced (very rapidly) and carelessly left behind many to fend for themselves without equal opportunities to use the same technologies and advance themselves.
But to me, the real question goes beyond those effected for the worse by the digital divide, and encompasses both people like Steve Jobs, who crown the top of the technology world, those everyday users with constant access to internet and technologies, and those who have no access to either.
It brings up the question: Are humans evolving too fast? Can we as a whole, as a society, as a species, evolve rapidly enough to keep up with the advancement of technology that we are creating, wallowing in and mass distributing.
Steve Jobs lived only fifty six years. In half of his lifetime, he created a machine that has evolved so quickly, it’s forever transformed our society as we know it. We have already bypassed the point of “can’t live without it.” At what point does our existence turn into one of the creepy sci-fi films where we have lost all control and are consumed by our product? that shows internet use is continually increasing despite race, income and other social distinguishes. So yes, overall, more people are using the internet as time goes on. that highlights Jobs life, brings light to just what he left in the lap of society.
Jobs was a college dropout. A technology genius. He was, and remains to be, one of few. In fact, many people in today’s society don’t have computers, access to computers or knowledge of how to function computers. There is a distinct line drawn between these people and everyday computer users. There is an even more distinct line drawn between Steve Jobs and these people. Can both interact equally in society?
The Digital Divide. It’s a controversial topic to say the least. Some argue that it doesn’t exist at all. Though delusional, those who think that the digital divide isn’t a problem can be comforted by recent research printed in an article
But the digital divide still exists. And it’s still quite a problem that needs to confronted and diminished.
So, was Jobs aware of what he had created and handed over to society? And did society know what they were readily accepting and taking on into our lifestyles? Jobs gave the public an opportunity to rapidly advance our capabilities by supplying us with advanced, yet simple to use technology software. In turn, society has indeed advanced (very rapidly) and carelessly left behind many to fend for themselves without equal opportunities to use the same technologies and advance themselves.
But to me, the real question goes beyond those effected for the worse by the digital divide, and encompasses both people like Steve Jobs, who crown the top of the technology world, those everyday users with constant access to internet and technologies, and those who have no access to either.
It brings up the question: Are humans evolving too fast? Can we as a whole, as a society, as a species, evolve rapidly enough to keep up with the advancement of technology that we are creating, wallowing in and mass distributing.
Steve Jobs lived only fifty six years. In half of his lifetime, he created a machine that has evolved so quickly, it’s forever transformed our society as we know it. We have already bypassed the point of “can’t live without it.” At what point does our existence turn into one of the creepy sci-fi films where we have lost all control and are consumed by our product? that shows internet use is continually increasing despite race, income and other social distinguishes. So yes, overall, more people are using the internet as time goes on. that highlights Jobs life, brings light to just what he left in the lap of society.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
COM 305 - Blog #1
Coming hand in hand with the technology boom is the modern, highly successful fad of online dating.
Studies show that out of the 54 million single people in the U.S., five million use an online dating service. Dating sites are growing day by day and the entire industry is worth approximately $4 billion worldwide.
For those unfamiliar to the online dating scene, users who join can enter information and post pictures of themselves for other singles to see. After subscribing, they then have the opportunity to scroll through other possible singles in their area, or any area for that matter, view pictures of potential mates, read the information provided about each person and then pick who they think would best suit them in a relationship according to the limited to extensive amount of information they’ve acquired.
Of course there is always the possibility that those who subscribe to dating sites aren’t telling the whole truth in the information and pictures they advertise. For example, a picture posted of a person could very well be a high school shot. If no one can monitor whether your information is accurate, then why not shave a few years off your age? Or shave a few pounds off your weight?
That’s the beautiful thing about online dating, the people you meet only see what you choose to let them see. They only see the person you project to them.
But how is it that 17% of couples who married last year, met on an online dating service? Could online dating be the way to go? Is it healthier and does it guarantee a more stable marriage? And if so, why?
According to a post written by Julie Spira, online strategist, author and relationship expert, eHarmony has launched a new dating site called Jazzed. The site aims not at serious long-term relationships like its parent company eHarmony, but more towards relationships for a younger age group that may not quite guarantee marriage, but instead a fun, entertaining courtship.
EHarmony allegedly launched Jazzed to compete with other social dating sites such as Zoosk and OKCupid.
The real question is, money matters aside, what’s all this hype about dating sites, and how come more and more keep cropping up? Jazzed is aimed at the young age group of eHarmony members, 18-34 years. Since when do 18-year-olds need an online dating service to find dates? Most. kids that age are still in high school.
Yet online dating remains successful and is growing by the day. And why not? Why spend two hours putting on make-up and shaving when you can have a conversation bare-faced in your PJ’s while sitting on your own couch? Why stress about your appearance when online dating offers an outlet?
Instead of appearance first - personality second, online dating allows you to portray your very best aspects only, which may or may not be your looks.
This could explain why the average courtship between online couples is only 18.5 months compared to nearly 42 months for offline couples. Dating sites cut to the chase, they eliminate the nervous face-to-face introduction, the do-they-like-me stage, the months of trial and error, personality discovery. All these features are laid out from the beginning, and users pick only the people they prefer.
Jazzed and other dating sites are specifically aimed at easy, instant, virtual dates. They work with other media outlets to create successful mobile dating, integrating social media options such as Facebook, Twitter and iPhone apps. Their huge success proves just what an impact this media age has on our personal lives.
*All online dating stats from Dating Sites Reviews
Studies show that out of the 54 million single people in the U.S., five million use an online dating service. Dating sites are growing day by day and the entire industry is worth approximately $4 billion worldwide.
For those unfamiliar to the online dating scene, users who join can enter information and post pictures of themselves for other singles to see. After subscribing, they then have the opportunity to scroll through other possible singles in their area, or any area for that matter, view pictures of potential mates, read the information provided about each person and then pick who they think would best suit them in a relationship according to the limited to extensive amount of information they’ve acquired.
Of course there is always the possibility that those who subscribe to dating sites aren’t telling the whole truth in the information and pictures they advertise. For example, a picture posted of a person could very well be a high school shot. If no one can monitor whether your information is accurate, then why not shave a few years off your age? Or shave a few pounds off your weight?
That’s the beautiful thing about online dating, the people you meet only see what you choose to let them see. They only see the person you project to them.
But how is it that 17% of couples who married last year, met on an online dating service? Could online dating be the way to go? Is it healthier and does it guarantee a more stable marriage? And if so, why?
According to a post written by Julie Spira, online strategist, author and relationship expert, eHarmony has launched a new dating site called Jazzed. The site aims not at serious long-term relationships like its parent company eHarmony, but more towards relationships for a younger age group that may not quite guarantee marriage, but instead a fun, entertaining courtship.
EHarmony allegedly launched Jazzed to compete with other social dating sites such as Zoosk and OKCupid.
The real question is, money matters aside, what’s all this hype about dating sites, and how come more and more keep cropping up? Jazzed is aimed at the young age group of eHarmony members, 18-34 years. Since when do 18-year-olds need an online dating service to find dates? Most. kids that age are still in high school.
Yet online dating remains successful and is growing by the day. And why not? Why spend two hours putting on make-up and shaving when you can have a conversation bare-faced in your PJ’s while sitting on your own couch? Why stress about your appearance when online dating offers an outlet?
Instead of appearance first - personality second, online dating allows you to portray your very best aspects only, which may or may not be your looks.
This could explain why the average courtship between online couples is only 18.5 months compared to nearly 42 months for offline couples. Dating sites cut to the chase, they eliminate the nervous face-to-face introduction, the do-they-like-me stage, the months of trial and error, personality discovery. All these features are laid out from the beginning, and users pick only the people they prefer.
Jazzed and other dating sites are specifically aimed at easy, instant, virtual dates. They work with other media outlets to create successful mobile dating, integrating social media options such as Facebook, Twitter and iPhone apps. Their huge success proves just what an impact this media age has on our personal lives.
*All online dating stats from Dating Sites Reviews
Monday, April 18, 2011
John Dufresne
In this blog, I write about people who have changed my life. Experiences I’ve shared with friends and neighbors alike. Sad, funny, touching stories that have shaped me into the person I am now. Out of all the people who have impacted me, both significantly and slightly, one persons words changed my life more than anyone else’s.
I was assigned to read a book by John Dufresne last semester for my short story writing class. “The Lie That Tells A Truth,” is a book about writing technique and how to become a better writer. But more than just that, it’s also largely about John’s life.
Junior year was the hardest scholastic year of my life. The workload was overwhelming from classes alone, and while I wasn’t studying, I was trying to remain un-fired from two separate jobs. I was working more than forty hours per week and had hardly any time to go out and get drunk at night like most college students. Despite my stress about school and work, the end of the year was creeping ever closer, as was the end of my college experience. I was continually and glaringly aware of the “light” at the end of the tunnel. What the HELL was I going to do after I graduated? The thought loomed in the back of my mind all year long, and trust me, it’s still there, although, it isn’t as glaring since I read John’s book.
I flipped through the book casually, hardly paying attention to his words since it was an assigned book. I may not have read the whole thing from cover to cover, but one passage stood out at me. Whether I was paying particular attention that day, or whether his words rang so clear as my eyes passed over them that I automatically focused, I’m not sure. But the passage was burned into my brain and evidently meant so much to me that I later (currently) wrote about it.
You get to revise your life again and again until you’re living the life you set out to live. You get to examine yourself, and if you’re not doing what you want to be doing, you get to start over. You create the world you want to live in, and you go there. No one else gets to write your story. Every day is an opening sentence, a new beginning. Every morning is a new youth, every afternoon an aging, every sleep a little death. And in every sleep, the dreams you have deferred will haunt you.
I read it again and again, over and over. A weight was lifted off my shoulders. Not only did the thought of a JOB after college now sound insignificant, but the passage made me reanalyze my whole life. I, and only I, am in utter control of my own life and what happens to me. I constantly worry about making mistakes and what will happen to me and ultimately ending up unhappy. But after reading John’s passage, I looked at my life in a new light. If ever I’m unhappy, I thought to myself, I’ll just find a way, do something, that will make me happy again. It’s as simple as that.
In the beginning of second semester, John came to campus and spoke in the college auditorium. I went to see his speech and the whole time he was speaking, I stared at him and thought….You are the wisest man I know and you’ll never know how you changed the way I thought about my life.
I was assigned to read a book by John Dufresne last semester for my short story writing class. “The Lie That Tells A Truth,” is a book about writing technique and how to become a better writer. But more than just that, it’s also largely about John’s life.
Junior year was the hardest scholastic year of my life. The workload was overwhelming from classes alone, and while I wasn’t studying, I was trying to remain un-fired from two separate jobs. I was working more than forty hours per week and had hardly any time to go out and get drunk at night like most college students. Despite my stress about school and work, the end of the year was creeping ever closer, as was the end of my college experience. I was continually and glaringly aware of the “light” at the end of the tunnel. What the HELL was I going to do after I graduated? The thought loomed in the back of my mind all year long, and trust me, it’s still there, although, it isn’t as glaring since I read John’s book.
I flipped through the book casually, hardly paying attention to his words since it was an assigned book. I may not have read the whole thing from cover to cover, but one passage stood out at me. Whether I was paying particular attention that day, or whether his words rang so clear as my eyes passed over them that I automatically focused, I’m not sure. But the passage was burned into my brain and evidently meant so much to me that I later (currently) wrote about it.
You get to revise your life again and again until you’re living the life you set out to live. You get to examine yourself, and if you’re not doing what you want to be doing, you get to start over. You create the world you want to live in, and you go there. No one else gets to write your story. Every day is an opening sentence, a new beginning. Every morning is a new youth, every afternoon an aging, every sleep a little death. And in every sleep, the dreams you have deferred will haunt you.
I read it again and again, over and over. A weight was lifted off my shoulders. Not only did the thought of a JOB after college now sound insignificant, but the passage made me reanalyze my whole life. I, and only I, am in utter control of my own life and what happens to me. I constantly worry about making mistakes and what will happen to me and ultimately ending up unhappy. But after reading John’s passage, I looked at my life in a new light. If ever I’m unhappy, I thought to myself, I’ll just find a way, do something, that will make me happy again. It’s as simple as that.
In the beginning of second semester, John came to campus and spoke in the college auditorium. I went to see his speech and the whole time he was speaking, I stared at him and thought….You are the wisest man I know and you’ll never know how you changed the way I thought about my life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)