Should there be real prison time for someone connected to a death on the internet? What about a rape? I think penalties should mirror real life. Having said that, proving damage done and who is directly responsible are not so easily proven. Would heavier regulation help suppress it?
In 1983, there was a very different kind of trial for a rape committed in New Bedford, Massachusetts. A woman whose demeanor was bordering on promiscuous was gang raped in a bar. Her attackers received a light sentence in a plea deal. Angered by the plea deal, she convinced her attorney to prosecute the onlookers who were said to encourage the rape by “egging on” participants. In 1988, a movie “The Accused” was made about the case. (Incidentally, the prosecutor won the case against the encouraging onlookers.)
We prosecute people for internet identity theft and cancel their accounts when they display inappropriate behavior but what if things went a step further and somebody died? Would real prosecution and real prison time be feasible? Crimes of theft are cut and dry. Something was stolen, someone stole it and they should be prosecuted; prison time should be real. But crimes regarding intangible items are much more difficult. How do you prove mental anguish and post traumatic stress is related to something that was said to you or done to you on-line? After all, you can simply shut off the computer and walk away right?
The Buffalo News recently published an article about a college student who committed suicide live on the internet. The student suffered from bipolar disease. He set up his web cam, took some pills and talked to onlookers until he collapsed. Some concerned viewers contacted police but the police arrived too late to save. The student was pronounced dead on arrival.
The disturbing part of this story is that some of the viewers were reportedly encouraging him to commit suicide and were taunting him. Were these individuals responsible for the student’s death? Would he have committed suicide without their coaxing? This is a very difficult action to prove. The student was diagnosed with a serious mental illness and had allegedly threatened suicide in the past. But we all “cry wolf” once in a while and who could know if the student was crying wolf again? Was it a game? The onlookers may not have felt that there was a real danger. How could they have known that the pills were even real?
This was a real death. Was it an accident, was it provoked or was it inevitable? Should the onlookers who encouraged be prosecuted and if so, how severely? If the website had been regulated, would it have made a difference?
The student’s father is pushing for tougher regulation standards on the internet. If it were possible, I don’t think regulation would necessarily be wrong. However, I think it would be like “chasing a ghost.” New sites pop up all the time and there simply isn’t enough manpower to watch every site. Regulators would (as they do now) have to rely on the reporting of concerned citizens. As in the case in point and many others, prosecutors are simply too late to avoid irreversible damage. I think what we need instead, is education. A campaign should be put in place to promote reporting of wrongdoing or unethical behavior. Without it, our internet may be forced to surrender to regulation. We typically can’t skip commercials when viewing streaming media clips, why not include a public service message? I believe in education before regulation.
I read an interesting article regarding former President Bill Clinton’s endorsement of the “User Empowerment Approach” which believes in personal responsibility and personal regulation by parents in order to keep children safe. Can we be personally responsible? After all, we can’t be watching all the time, can we? There are some compelling arguments for and against regulation. Interestingly, one of the arguments is that parents are not as technologically advanced as their children and therefore, find it difficult to monitor them. Again, education is here is the key! As a parent, I try and stay up to date on the latest technology and I talk to my kids about it. They actually enjoy helping me learn and find it amusing when I struggle. However, every new technology that I learn helps me talk to (educate) my kids about what is OK and what is not. My presentation of an up-to-date and reasonable argument with substance makes all the difference.
http://www.buffalonews.com/nationalworld/national/story/502264.html
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094608/synopsis
http://shelley.toich.net/projects/STS110/internet-regulation.html
Monday, November 24, 2008
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Is a transparent government possible?
Transparency, what does that really mean? Well according to Dictionary.com it could mean:
3. free of deceit
4. easily understood or seen through (because of a lack of subtlety); "a transparent explanation"; "a transparent lie"
Well, I find that it would be nearly impossible for anyone, let alone the government, to be “free of deceit.” That would require abstinence from “little white lies” and skewed use of persuasive tools. I don’t think any human is capable of being “free of deceit.” Imagine if we had to be? Has anyone see the movie Liar Liar with Jim Carrey? There are some things that just shouldn’t be said and some that no matter how gently they are said they will be misconstrued by the receiver. In government, it would mean full disclosure and we should certainly not have that; the terrorists would all know our strategies!!
“Easily understood” should be the definition we are looking for. We want this for our government. However, I am not sure that a weekly posting of the weekly Democratic address will do that. I do believe however, that it can and should be a contributor. I think a (small) part of President-elect Barack Obama’s success can be attributed to his astute use of the internet and social networking tools. However, I am wary of his gift for rhetoric. His gift for rhetoric was a benefit to him in the election. It created a tremendous “hype” around him which caused him to be compared to a rock star. It will continue to benefit him as he deals with leaders in the future. It is something though, to be aware and careful of. It means he has the gift to "sway" us; to deceive us should he choose. The question is, will he use this gift to bring us to a more transparent government?
John McCain was a respected war hero. That does not automatically mean he is fit to lead our country. Barack Obama is a gifted speaker. That does not automatically mean he is fit to lead our country. What it could mean, is that he is persuasive and has immense capability to be deceitful. We can only hope that he will be the man to change the way things are presented to our nation. Will he be able to walk that fine line between what we need to know to protect us and what we shouldn’t know to protect us? The Sarbanes-Oxley Act followed the failure of Enron. It opened eyes to the misrepresentations that many businesses were making in their non-standard financial statements. Barack Obama is coming in and riding on that wave. He is coming in at a time where issues of transparencies have already taken center stage; actions have already been put in place. Let’s hope he is the man to carry that over to government. Let’s hope that he is capable of change. We must remember that he presides over a heavily democratic congress; which is exactly what President George W. Bush did.
The use of social networking tools can help us move toward a more transparent government. It is important to note though, that the reason isn’t so much that government will be talking as much as it is that more people will be talking and expressing their opinions to a much larger audience. Nobody has all the answers. The more people who talk, the more ideas we experience. Remember, an educated consumer is the best shopper; it’s about time we become more versed in our government and its policies. The use of internet and social networking tools is becoming an increasingly popular way to communicate. I firmly believe that if you want to get the word out to everyone, you have to include these tools in your communication strategy. According to a political spokesperson that is exactly what President-elect Obama is doing. "This is just one of many ways that he will communicate directly with the American people and make the White House and the political process more transparent," spokeswoman Jen Psaki told us last night.
A nice beginning. (Vargas, 2008)
Citations
transparent. (n.d.). WordNet® 3.0. Retrieved November 16, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transparent
The Internet Movie Database, 2007, http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0119528/
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act
Enron, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron
Vargas, J.A., The YouTube Presidency, Washingtonpost.com, November 14, 2008, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/14/the_youtube_presidency.html
3. free of deceit
4. easily understood or seen through (because of a lack of subtlety); "a transparent explanation"; "a transparent lie"
Well, I find that it would be nearly impossible for anyone, let alone the government, to be “free of deceit.” That would require abstinence from “little white lies” and skewed use of persuasive tools. I don’t think any human is capable of being “free of deceit.” Imagine if we had to be? Has anyone see the movie Liar Liar with Jim Carrey? There are some things that just shouldn’t be said and some that no matter how gently they are said they will be misconstrued by the receiver. In government, it would mean full disclosure and we should certainly not have that; the terrorists would all know our strategies!!
“Easily understood” should be the definition we are looking for. We want this for our government. However, I am not sure that a weekly posting of the weekly Democratic address will do that. I do believe however, that it can and should be a contributor. I think a (small) part of President-elect Barack Obama’s success can be attributed to his astute use of the internet and social networking tools. However, I am wary of his gift for rhetoric. His gift for rhetoric was a benefit to him in the election. It created a tremendous “hype” around him which caused him to be compared to a rock star. It will continue to benefit him as he deals with leaders in the future. It is something though, to be aware and careful of. It means he has the gift to "sway" us; to deceive us should he choose. The question is, will he use this gift to bring us to a more transparent government?
John McCain was a respected war hero. That does not automatically mean he is fit to lead our country. Barack Obama is a gifted speaker. That does not automatically mean he is fit to lead our country. What it could mean, is that he is persuasive and has immense capability to be deceitful. We can only hope that he will be the man to change the way things are presented to our nation. Will he be able to walk that fine line between what we need to know to protect us and what we shouldn’t know to protect us? The Sarbanes-Oxley Act followed the failure of Enron. It opened eyes to the misrepresentations that many businesses were making in their non-standard financial statements. Barack Obama is coming in and riding on that wave. He is coming in at a time where issues of transparencies have already taken center stage; actions have already been put in place. Let’s hope he is the man to carry that over to government. Let’s hope that he is capable of change. We must remember that he presides over a heavily democratic congress; which is exactly what President George W. Bush did.
The use of social networking tools can help us move toward a more transparent government. It is important to note though, that the reason isn’t so much that government will be talking as much as it is that more people will be talking and expressing their opinions to a much larger audience. Nobody has all the answers. The more people who talk, the more ideas we experience. Remember, an educated consumer is the best shopper; it’s about time we become more versed in our government and its policies. The use of internet and social networking tools is becoming an increasingly popular way to communicate. I firmly believe that if you want to get the word out to everyone, you have to include these tools in your communication strategy. According to a political spokesperson that is exactly what President-elect Obama is doing. "This is just one of many ways that he will communicate directly with the American people and make the White House and the political process more transparent," spokeswoman Jen Psaki told us last night.
A nice beginning. (Vargas, 2008)
Citations
transparent. (n.d.). WordNet® 3.0. Retrieved November 16, 2008, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/transparent
The Internet Movie Database, 2007, http://us.imdb.com/title/tt0119528/
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act
Enron, Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron
Vargas, J.A., The YouTube Presidency, Washingtonpost.com, November 14, 2008, http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/14/the_youtube_presidency.html
Friday, November 14, 2008
Opening a can of worms
As I read through the reading regarding net neutrality I felt like I was running through a labyrinth. First, definitions of net neutrality were similar but yet different. It is like trying to define what is meant by communication. It means different things to different people. I felt dizzy after reading the arguments for and against. However, a few themes came through, money, regulation and monopoly.
In the end, I came away with a few things. Net neutrality really wasn’t about freedom or free trade to the corporations but it was all about money. Nobody wants regulation because who wants rules? They only restrict us from doing whatever we want. Monopolies hurt us in the end. As a watch corporations like AIG get bailed out by the government, I see how monopolies can hurt. Here is a corporation that grew large enough that it carried enough weight in our economy to get a "pass" when its business failed. In support of its greed, after receiving a bailout loan from the government, AIG flexed its “Teflon” muscles and blew a considerable amount of that money on a spa retreat for bigwigs and then spent more on executive payouts. So who really makes the rules when colossal entities are players? Corporations want a competitive market but in order to get large, they seek to kill their competition.
The current debate:
The most common theme for the definition of net neutrality was freedom and equality. Freedom for users’ access and equality for Internet services and service providers were the main arguments. However, many issues clouded the arguments, which is what typically happens when lines are drawn. Rock stars and corporations argued “on behalf” of users saying that users have a right to visit the websites that they want at equal speeds and levels of accessibility regardless of content. Internet service providers argued that in order to foster a competitive environment, there needed to be platforms and levels of access that came with pricing structures in order to keep internet technologies on an evolutionary path. A plethora of “what ifs” ensued, primarily in fear of regulation. Analogies (which in my mind tend to cloud the issues) also emerged; users (computers) were even equated to toasters and irons!
Whose interests are at stake and what are they?
Herein lays the problem. Who can speak on behalf of others? Aren’t the rock stars who argued against file sharing of their music a bit hypocritical when they argue that the internet should be free and without regulation? (Don’t they mean as long as it doesn’t affect us?) Do they have the right to speak on behalf of all users?
Do corporations have a right to say “it isn’t fair to our users” when what they really fear is loss of profitability? Internet service providers have to make money to stay afloat just like everyone else but they want more than just business funding. They argue that in order to keep technology moving, which would allow them to improve their services, they need to make more money and be in a competitive market. Again, they are not just there to provide a service to customers; they are there to make money.
A few years ago, we had a rainy summer and people were not watering lawns nor were they using as much public water. The public was shocked when the water authority said they had to raise rates. There was a simple misunderstanding of the basic principle. Water is not entirely free; money is needed to run any and all businesses. If people were not using as much water, not as much money was coming in. The water authority wasn’t looking for profit, they were low on funding. So why do I tell this story? Well at the same time, the bottled water industry was surging. People were also using less public water for drinking and a twinkle of panic started the notion that we could stand to lose our public (“free”) water supply to a “water for profit” industry. Could we lose internet freedom to an internet for profit industry?
Support or oppose and why?
I am not really in support of net neutrality because I am in favor of some regulation. What would happen to our society if we had no laws and people could do whatever they wanted? On the flip side, what would happen if our government had complete control? Neither is good.
What has bled into the net neutrality argument is regulation of the internet (not just access to it.) It has moved away from speed and freedom to that speed to regulation of the places we go. Without any regulation in our society, it would surely fail. Since the internet is becoming a larger and larger part of our society, it should be regulated as well. The Wikipedia reading says it all, “network neutrality regulations threaten to set a precedent for even more intrusive regulation of the Internet.” We fear too much regulation.
I don’t know what the answer is but I know that all things objectionable will never be removed from the internet. However, we need to return to the notion of Web 2.0 technologies. That is the real beauty of the internet. Perhaps the net needs to be split in the way that radio was split between public and satellite radio? Maybe the best route is to have separate internets? Is that even possible? Users and corporations alike have to remember that every freedom comes with a price.
In the end, I came away with a few things. Net neutrality really wasn’t about freedom or free trade to the corporations but it was all about money. Nobody wants regulation because who wants rules? They only restrict us from doing whatever we want. Monopolies hurt us in the end. As a watch corporations like AIG get bailed out by the government, I see how monopolies can hurt. Here is a corporation that grew large enough that it carried enough weight in our economy to get a "pass" when its business failed. In support of its greed, after receiving a bailout loan from the government, AIG flexed its “Teflon” muscles and blew a considerable amount of that money on a spa retreat for bigwigs and then spent more on executive payouts. So who really makes the rules when colossal entities are players? Corporations want a competitive market but in order to get large, they seek to kill their competition.
The current debate:
The most common theme for the definition of net neutrality was freedom and equality. Freedom for users’ access and equality for Internet services and service providers were the main arguments. However, many issues clouded the arguments, which is what typically happens when lines are drawn. Rock stars and corporations argued “on behalf” of users saying that users have a right to visit the websites that they want at equal speeds and levels of accessibility regardless of content. Internet service providers argued that in order to foster a competitive environment, there needed to be platforms and levels of access that came with pricing structures in order to keep internet technologies on an evolutionary path. A plethora of “what ifs” ensued, primarily in fear of regulation. Analogies (which in my mind tend to cloud the issues) also emerged; users (computers) were even equated to toasters and irons!
Whose interests are at stake and what are they?
Herein lays the problem. Who can speak on behalf of others? Aren’t the rock stars who argued against file sharing of their music a bit hypocritical when they argue that the internet should be free and without regulation? (Don’t they mean as long as it doesn’t affect us?) Do they have the right to speak on behalf of all users?
Do corporations have a right to say “it isn’t fair to our users” when what they really fear is loss of profitability? Internet service providers have to make money to stay afloat just like everyone else but they want more than just business funding. They argue that in order to keep technology moving, which would allow them to improve their services, they need to make more money and be in a competitive market. Again, they are not just there to provide a service to customers; they are there to make money.
A few years ago, we had a rainy summer and people were not watering lawns nor were they using as much public water. The public was shocked when the water authority said they had to raise rates. There was a simple misunderstanding of the basic principle. Water is not entirely free; money is needed to run any and all businesses. If people were not using as much water, not as much money was coming in. The water authority wasn’t looking for profit, they were low on funding. So why do I tell this story? Well at the same time, the bottled water industry was surging. People were also using less public water for drinking and a twinkle of panic started the notion that we could stand to lose our public (“free”) water supply to a “water for profit” industry. Could we lose internet freedom to an internet for profit industry?
Support or oppose and why?
I am not really in support of net neutrality because I am in favor of some regulation. What would happen to our society if we had no laws and people could do whatever they wanted? On the flip side, what would happen if our government had complete control? Neither is good.
What has bled into the net neutrality argument is regulation of the internet (not just access to it.) It has moved away from speed and freedom to that speed to regulation of the places we go. Without any regulation in our society, it would surely fail. Since the internet is becoming a larger and larger part of our society, it should be regulated as well. The Wikipedia reading says it all, “network neutrality regulations threaten to set a precedent for even more intrusive regulation of the Internet.” We fear too much regulation.
I don’t know what the answer is but I know that all things objectionable will never be removed from the internet. However, we need to return to the notion of Web 2.0 technologies. That is the real beauty of the internet. Perhaps the net needs to be split in the way that radio was split between public and satellite radio? Maybe the best route is to have separate internets? Is that even possible? Users and corporations alike have to remember that every freedom comes with a price.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Second Life can be a peaceful and informative place.
After I downloaded the software, I looked up my location with information I received from my welcome e-mail. I visited http://secondlife.com/showcase/ to begin. I wasn’t sure how Second Life would run for me because my laptop’s processor was labeled as slow. Things did not seem too bad though.
My first experience was the soft and peaceful sound of bells; perhaps they were wind chimes. Either way, it was a lovely sound. I visited the American Cancer Society’s island in Nonprofit Commons. I had to do a search to find it because it wasn’t on the pick list. I entered the American Cancer Society’s Island on a pathway which was lined with brightly lit lanterns. I had read a while back about lanterns that could be lit by participants in the American Cancer Society’s “Relay for Life” which is Second Life’s version (four years running) of the real life Relay for Life that began in 1985 to provide awareness and raise money for the cause.
The island was so quiet and peaceful. I began to walk around. My movements were not smooth and I didn’t feel like I was walking normally but moving about erratically as if I was being chased. This made me feel a bit foolish. My strange movement did not worry me though, I didn’t see anyone around. As a matter of fact, I didn’t see ANYONE around for a long time.
At first, I walked along a walkway and passed several empty stages and what appeared to be meeting rooms. There was a certain tropical feel to the island. There was a lot of water, a great deal of green and everything appeared to be open to the elements. This only added to the peacefulness and serenity of the island. I came upon a sign for the Relay for Life looking for volunteers. I was “offered” some gifts but couldn’t figure out how to grab or take them. (I will have to go back.)
I walked some more and came upon a Book of Hope. I was unable to read thorough it though, only the cover. As a matter of fact, all the signs and pictures I saw were blurry until I actually clicked on some of them. Wait! There is someone coming…but she passed me right by. She did not slow down long enough for me to catch her name or try and interact. How strange, only two of us on the island, I thought she would say hello.
I came upon an elevator which told me I was on the 5th floor; I used the elevator to go to the 4th floor which featured breast cancer information. There was a larger than life-size book with facts about breast cancer; it was supported by graphs. I was able to walk around the front of the book to see that facts were from the previous year. There were a few offices with brightly colored furnishings but nobody was in them. As I returned to the elevator, I was able to pick up an information pamphlet.
I would say that my first time experience in Second Life was nice. I admit that I was nervous that I might encounter a flood of avatars and feel overwhelmed, but I only saw one and she did not talk to me. I was able to move about without incident and collect my information. I came upon one location where ACS would e-mail additional information to me. The island was full of places where you could get information about cancer and also, places where you could donate.
It was a peaceful place, almost eerie. Whenever I was near water, I could hear the sound of a running brook. If nothing else, the island was calming. I wondered if it was a bustling place when the Relay for Life was in full swing. As I moved to depart I passed my free gift again. I was still unable to get it BUT, I was able to shrug and say, “I dunno.” I was only able to walk a little further before Second Life crashed. Even that, was quiet.
The island was interesting enough for me to want to go back. I still have some things to learn like how to walk without bumping into walls or walking off pathways (and what is this jumping thing?) Perhaps I will learn to like it. I would say that Second Life was at the very least, compelling. The ACS's island was a nice place to start. I think it is also a good place to get information.
My first experience was the soft and peaceful sound of bells; perhaps they were wind chimes. Either way, it was a lovely sound. I visited the American Cancer Society’s island in Nonprofit Commons. I had to do a search to find it because it wasn’t on the pick list. I entered the American Cancer Society’s Island on a pathway which was lined with brightly lit lanterns. I had read a while back about lanterns that could be lit by participants in the American Cancer Society’s “Relay for Life” which is Second Life’s version (four years running) of the real life Relay for Life that began in 1985 to provide awareness and raise money for the cause.
The island was so quiet and peaceful. I began to walk around. My movements were not smooth and I didn’t feel like I was walking normally but moving about erratically as if I was being chased. This made me feel a bit foolish. My strange movement did not worry me though, I didn’t see anyone around. As a matter of fact, I didn’t see ANYONE around for a long time.
At first, I walked along a walkway and passed several empty stages and what appeared to be meeting rooms. There was a certain tropical feel to the island. There was a lot of water, a great deal of green and everything appeared to be open to the elements. This only added to the peacefulness and serenity of the island. I came upon a sign for the Relay for Life looking for volunteers. I was “offered” some gifts but couldn’t figure out how to grab or take them. (I will have to go back.)
I walked some more and came upon a Book of Hope. I was unable to read thorough it though, only the cover. As a matter of fact, all the signs and pictures I saw were blurry until I actually clicked on some of them. Wait! There is someone coming…but she passed me right by. She did not slow down long enough for me to catch her name or try and interact. How strange, only two of us on the island, I thought she would say hello.
I came upon an elevator which told me I was on the 5th floor; I used the elevator to go to the 4th floor which featured breast cancer information. There was a larger than life-size book with facts about breast cancer; it was supported by graphs. I was able to walk around the front of the book to see that facts were from the previous year. There were a few offices with brightly colored furnishings but nobody was in them. As I returned to the elevator, I was able to pick up an information pamphlet.
I would say that my first time experience in Second Life was nice. I admit that I was nervous that I might encounter a flood of avatars and feel overwhelmed, but I only saw one and she did not talk to me. I was able to move about without incident and collect my information. I came upon one location where ACS would e-mail additional information to me. The island was full of places where you could get information about cancer and also, places where you could donate.
It was a peaceful place, almost eerie. Whenever I was near water, I could hear the sound of a running brook. If nothing else, the island was calming. I wondered if it was a bustling place when the Relay for Life was in full swing. As I moved to depart I passed my free gift again. I was still unable to get it BUT, I was able to shrug and say, “I dunno.” I was only able to walk a little further before Second Life crashed. Even that, was quiet.
The island was interesting enough for me to want to go back. I still have some things to learn like how to walk without bumping into walls or walking off pathways (and what is this jumping thing?) Perhaps I will learn to like it. I would say that Second Life was at the very least, compelling. The ACS's island was a nice place to start. I think it is also a good place to get information.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
On-line reading has its benefits
The topic I chose for this assignment was last week’s testimony by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. The “in-print” article was pulled from The Buffalo News (business section) and was entitled “Greenspan rejects blame for economic crisis.” My on-line article was from CEP News The Real-Time Source for Global Economic & Market News (a Canadian website) and was entitled “Midday News Recap: U.S. Jobless Claims Rise, Greenspan Testifies.”
My preference is to read the printed versions of articles. I can usually access the same articles both “in-print” and on the web. You might wonder what kind of an idiot wastes time looking at both. Frankly, reading from a computer screen hurts my eyes. To read news stories from my Blackberry or phone is like reading the fine print on a contract. One benefit to “in-print” publications (newspapers, weekly journals) is that they can be quickly tucked away in my purse or briefcase; not so easily done with a laptop. I will say however, that the benefits of on-line articles far outweigh those of “in-print.” I can see why some people prefer them; there are places to go and people to see!
The article from The Buffalo News provided me with the same basic information and quotes as the on-line article. (The article from The Buffalo News was also available in their website.) It included a picture of former chairman Greenspan testifying. Unfortunately, it began on one page (D6) but finished on another (D7) so I had to flip and fold the page then search for the headline in order to finish reading it. There were no additional references on Greenspan, the FDIC or the Treasury where I could learn more about the testimony nor were there references to other articles. The article provided basic “highlight” information.
The article from CEP News offered much more. In addition to some common quotes such as the "once-in-a century credit tsunami", there was some additional basic economic information. The Buffalo News article was more critical of Greenspan and focused on his comments and accountability; the CEP News article was more informational and included many statistics.
The on-line story provided a way to print, e-mail or submit the story to several social networking sites (reddit, Digg, del.icio.us, newsvine). It also offered a section where you could review “Recent Related Stores” such as “U.S. Consumer Confidence Plummets to All-Time Low in October”
In addition, one of the benefits to on-line reading is its search capability. You can use CTRL and “F” key to open a quick search. That means if you wanted to find a certain quote or name, it could be easily done.
Here is what I do to combine the benefits of both. I set up news alerts via websites like Google and Bizjournals (they offer weekly publications in Buffalo, Rochester and Albany) for topics and names that interest me the most. I get news highlights from these sites that I can review quickly. They lead me to the full story should I choose to read it. If I am short of time, I print out the article and take it with me.
Usually, in addition to references, on-line articles usually offer hyperlinks that you can click on to learn more about the topic or person the article was written about. This one did not.
Citations
1. Crutsinger M., Gordon M., October, 24, 2008, “Greenspan rejects blame for economic crisis,” The Buffalo News, Business Today, D6
2. Huebl S., October, 23, 2008, “Midday News Recap: U.S. Jobless Claims Rise, Greenspan Testifies”, CEP News The Real-Time Source for Global Economic & Market News, http://www.economicnews.ca/cepnews/wire/article/single/144442/
My preference is to read the printed versions of articles. I can usually access the same articles both “in-print” and on the web. You might wonder what kind of an idiot wastes time looking at both. Frankly, reading from a computer screen hurts my eyes. To read news stories from my Blackberry or phone is like reading the fine print on a contract. One benefit to “in-print” publications (newspapers, weekly journals) is that they can be quickly tucked away in my purse or briefcase; not so easily done with a laptop. I will say however, that the benefits of on-line articles far outweigh those of “in-print.” I can see why some people prefer them; there are places to go and people to see!
The article from The Buffalo News provided me with the same basic information and quotes as the on-line article. (The article from The Buffalo News was also available in their website.) It included a picture of former chairman Greenspan testifying. Unfortunately, it began on one page (D6) but finished on another (D7) so I had to flip and fold the page then search for the headline in order to finish reading it. There were no additional references on Greenspan, the FDIC or the Treasury where I could learn more about the testimony nor were there references to other articles. The article provided basic “highlight” information.
The article from CEP News offered much more. In addition to some common quotes such as the "once-in-a century credit tsunami", there was some additional basic economic information. The Buffalo News article was more critical of Greenspan and focused on his comments and accountability; the CEP News article was more informational and included many statistics.
The on-line story provided a way to print, e-mail or submit the story to several social networking sites (reddit, Digg, del.icio.us, newsvine). It also offered a section where you could review “Recent Related Stores” such as “U.S. Consumer Confidence Plummets to All-Time Low in October”
In addition, one of the benefits to on-line reading is its search capability. You can use CTRL and “F” key to open a quick search. That means if you wanted to find a certain quote or name, it could be easily done.
Here is what I do to combine the benefits of both. I set up news alerts via websites like Google and Bizjournals (they offer weekly publications in Buffalo, Rochester and Albany) for topics and names that interest me the most. I get news highlights from these sites that I can review quickly. They lead me to the full story should I choose to read it. If I am short of time, I print out the article and take it with me.
Usually, in addition to references, on-line articles usually offer hyperlinks that you can click on to learn more about the topic or person the article was written about. This one did not.
Citations
1. Crutsinger M., Gordon M., October, 24, 2008, “Greenspan rejects blame for economic crisis,” The Buffalo News, Business Today, D6
2. Huebl S., October, 23, 2008, “Midday News Recap: U.S. Jobless Claims Rise, Greenspan Testifies”, CEP News The Real-Time Source for Global Economic & Market News, http://www.economicnews.ca/cepnews/wire/article/single/144442/
Friday, October 24, 2008
Technology is changing our world. The internet in particular is a major contributor. Because of this year’s unprecedented election, politics have become popular and hip. A record number of people followed the primary election this year. This year’s election is expected to draw a record number of voters. (To all you new voters, watch out! You can expect your summons for jury duty in a year or two.)
Blogs are a major part of social networking. People who write blogs are usually people who have something to say. Because it is a hot topic right now, it is easy to find bloggers discussing politics. In my humble opinion, if you are in politics or business and you don’t have a blog, you are seriously missing the boat. Blogs are not just for the young. You can learn a lot from these bloggers.
A candidate who does not have a blog misses the opportunity to get candid feedback. The candidate should also have someone reading blogs written about them. This enables the candidate to get the word on the street. The candidate can take these words to heart and fix or tweak what could turn out to be a significant weak spot in their campaign.
Here is the required blog information:
· Title - BuffaloPundit
· URL - http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/archives/7031
· Name/Occupation: Alan Bedenko, Buffalo attorney
· Date of birth: September 2003
· Technorati ranking: is 107,824
The tone of this blog is pretty strong, although the author makes it clear that the blog is purely his opinion and that he is not afraid to speak his mind. He notes in his FAQ “you’ve got a big mouth” and “Nothing I write here or anywhere else under the BuffaloPundit handle is attributable to anyone except myself.” (Bedenko, 2003) I think however, that his comments are well thought out and do try and tackle both sides of the fence. Here is one of his direct comments about himself.
“The beauty of the way that I run my site is that I am completely unbeholden to anyone. I have no financial or political stake in the outcome of any election - local or otherwise. Although I am an unrepentant Democratic partisan, I have given Republicans credit when it’s due, I have supported Republican candidates, and I have criticized Democrats when I thought it necessary. Am I a loyal Democrat? I like to think so. But I don’t unthinkingly go along with candidates just because of the “D” at the end of their names.” (Bedenko, 2008)
He is quite self-assured. I do respect his writing although I don’t always agree.
I think I will probably lose a point on this blog because I don’t really have a solid argument about the effect of blogs on Buffalo. However, I can say that I was surprised that they were a bit difficult to find. Most of the blogs that I found were based on the election and came from a bigger fish (non-local.) I am not sure if I am just not that great at searching or if there just aren’t that many people who blog about politics in Buffalo. I have a good friend (yes, I have friends) who is fiercely passionate about policy and politics, has only one entry on her blog about politics and her support for Obama. Does that mean that Buffalonians are more “talkcentric” than “blogcentric”?
Citations:
1. Bedenko, September, 2003, http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/the-buffalo-pundit-faq-10)
2. Bedenko, October 24, 2008, http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/archives/date/2008/10
Blogs are a major part of social networking. People who write blogs are usually people who have something to say. Because it is a hot topic right now, it is easy to find bloggers discussing politics. In my humble opinion, if you are in politics or business and you don’t have a blog, you are seriously missing the boat. Blogs are not just for the young. You can learn a lot from these bloggers.
A candidate who does not have a blog misses the opportunity to get candid feedback. The candidate should also have someone reading blogs written about them. This enables the candidate to get the word on the street. The candidate can take these words to heart and fix or tweak what could turn out to be a significant weak spot in their campaign.
Here is the required blog information:
· Title - BuffaloPundit
· URL - http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/archives/7031
· Name/Occupation: Alan Bedenko, Buffalo attorney
· Date of birth: September 2003
· Technorati ranking: is 107,824
The tone of this blog is pretty strong, although the author makes it clear that the blog is purely his opinion and that he is not afraid to speak his mind. He notes in his FAQ “you’ve got a big mouth” and “Nothing I write here or anywhere else under the BuffaloPundit handle is attributable to anyone except myself.” (Bedenko, 2003) I think however, that his comments are well thought out and do try and tackle both sides of the fence. Here is one of his direct comments about himself.
“The beauty of the way that I run my site is that I am completely unbeholden to anyone. I have no financial or political stake in the outcome of any election - local or otherwise. Although I am an unrepentant Democratic partisan, I have given Republicans credit when it’s due, I have supported Republican candidates, and I have criticized Democrats when I thought it necessary. Am I a loyal Democrat? I like to think so. But I don’t unthinkingly go along with candidates just because of the “D” at the end of their names.” (Bedenko, 2008)
He is quite self-assured. I do respect his writing although I don’t always agree.
I think I will probably lose a point on this blog because I don’t really have a solid argument about the effect of blogs on Buffalo. However, I can say that I was surprised that they were a bit difficult to find. Most of the blogs that I found were based on the election and came from a bigger fish (non-local.) I am not sure if I am just not that great at searching or if there just aren’t that many people who blog about politics in Buffalo. I have a good friend (yes, I have friends) who is fiercely passionate about policy and politics, has only one entry on her blog about politics and her support for Obama. Does that mean that Buffalonians are more “talkcentric” than “blogcentric”?
Citations:
1. Bedenko, September, 2003, http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/the-buffalo-pundit-faq-10)
2. Bedenko, October 24, 2008, http://buffalopundit.wnymedia.net/blogs/archives/date/2008/10
Friday, October 3, 2008
Imposters & Death
Instant messenger (IM http://www.aol.com/) services allow me to connect quickly and easily to my friends and family. At work, I use a similar program called “Sametime” to connect me with my coworkers. Sametime is associated with our LotusNotes accounts and is restricted to users within our organization’s intranet. That means at work, I can only talk to those I work with (providing they also have access to Sametime on their computer.)
I have a son who attends college in Vermont. It can be costly to talk to him on the phone and texting is way too tedious for long conversations. I use the IM to chat with him if he happens to be on-line.
At work, on “Sametime” my name onscreen is my actual name. When using Sametime, it is important for me to be professional. Reputation is clearly at stake. Outside of work on IM, I use a specific “handle” so that I am anonymous to everyone but my chosen friends & family. If someone got wind of or was able to figure out my password, they could easily assume my identity. To make matters worse, they could sign on and change my password. This happened to my son when he was in high school. A few of his friends said he was on-line during school hours when he lacked access to a computer. He investigated and decided that someone must have figured out his password. We deleted his account. Fortunately for him, the imposter did not change his password which could have made things much worse. Here, his reputation could easily have been damaged.
My daughter had a similar but much more serious situation. She frequently used IM to chat with her friends. When she and her friends visit each other, they frequently go on-line and chat. One night, when she was home she discovered that someone else was using her IM account. She found this out because she was chatting with herself. The imposter would type in a sentence and she would respond with “who is this?” and see her chat trail in one font and color and the imposter’s chat trail in different font and color. Both chat trails displayed her username (handle.)
She immediately asked who it was. The conversation soon escalated to one of a sexual nature including solicitations and strong words. We advised the imposter that we were reporting them to AOL. We immediately reported the incident to AOL who investigated but never discovered who it was. The account was closed immediately. It was terrifying but she was convinced that it was one of her friends who thought they were being funny. She had shared her password with several of her friends (who all denied involvement.) Both my son’s and my daughter’s reputations were at stake. Further, the imposter could have conducted criminal activity.
Both of my children thought nothing of sharing their password with friends. Perhaps it was not a friend that was on at all. Kids can be very careless with their security. I don’t think they realize how serious these breaches are.
I will share another story with you. A friend of mine got into trouble when he misrepresented himself to someone he thought was an eighteen year-old woman. He had shaved off twenty-five years and re-joined the Marines (for his alter-ego.) He had begun chatting with this woman and they soon developed a romantic on-line relationship. Unknown to him, the woman was actually in her forties and was misrepresenting herself by using a pseudonym; her very own eighteen year-old daughter. He soon discovered that a coworker was also having an on-line affair with the same woman. Things escalated between the two men and one ended up dead. This man went to prison. He risked his reputation and lost big. The woman not only risked her own, but also her daughter’s reputation. Identity and reputation need to be taken seriously. Be careful of how you represent yourself.
I have a son who attends college in Vermont. It can be costly to talk to him on the phone and texting is way too tedious for long conversations. I use the IM to chat with him if he happens to be on-line.
At work, on “Sametime” my name onscreen is my actual name. When using Sametime, it is important for me to be professional. Reputation is clearly at stake. Outside of work on IM, I use a specific “handle” so that I am anonymous to everyone but my chosen friends & family. If someone got wind of or was able to figure out my password, they could easily assume my identity. To make matters worse, they could sign on and change my password. This happened to my son when he was in high school. A few of his friends said he was on-line during school hours when he lacked access to a computer. He investigated and decided that someone must have figured out his password. We deleted his account. Fortunately for him, the imposter did not change his password which could have made things much worse. Here, his reputation could easily have been damaged.
My daughter had a similar but much more serious situation. She frequently used IM to chat with her friends. When she and her friends visit each other, they frequently go on-line and chat. One night, when she was home she discovered that someone else was using her IM account. She found this out because she was chatting with herself. The imposter would type in a sentence and she would respond with “who is this?” and see her chat trail in one font and color and the imposter’s chat trail in different font and color. Both chat trails displayed her username (handle.)
She immediately asked who it was. The conversation soon escalated to one of a sexual nature including solicitations and strong words. We advised the imposter that we were reporting them to AOL. We immediately reported the incident to AOL who investigated but never discovered who it was. The account was closed immediately. It was terrifying but she was convinced that it was one of her friends who thought they were being funny. She had shared her password with several of her friends (who all denied involvement.) Both my son’s and my daughter’s reputations were at stake. Further, the imposter could have conducted criminal activity.
Both of my children thought nothing of sharing their password with friends. Perhaps it was not a friend that was on at all. Kids can be very careless with their security. I don’t think they realize how serious these breaches are.
I will share another story with you. A friend of mine got into trouble when he misrepresented himself to someone he thought was an eighteen year-old woman. He had shaved off twenty-five years and re-joined the Marines (for his alter-ego.) He had begun chatting with this woman and they soon developed a romantic on-line relationship. Unknown to him, the woman was actually in her forties and was misrepresenting herself by using a pseudonym; her very own eighteen year-old daughter. He soon discovered that a coworker was also having an on-line affair with the same woman. Things escalated between the two men and one ended up dead. This man went to prison. He risked his reputation and lost big. The woman not only risked her own, but also her daughter’s reputation. Identity and reputation need to be taken seriously. Be careful of how you represent yourself.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Ah the stories I could share
According to Wikipedia, privacy on the Internet means you have the “ability to control what information one reveals about oneself over the Internet, and to control who can access that information.” However, if you read on, Wikipedia states that it really doesn’t exist. In my blog today, I am going to concentrate on privacy issues with social networking and teens. Do they really understand privacy and its value?
Social networking is life for today’s youth. Conversations that used to be conducted in person are now done on-line. When my son was in high school, he used AOL chat. After a while, he stopped using the phone and simply went on-line to communicate with friends. One day he forgot what his homework assignment was. I found him sitting in front of the computer with a blank stare; he was waiting for his friend to get on-line so he could ask him about the assignment. It never occurred to him that he should just pick up the phone and call. This is a perfect example of how the teens view social networking as real life.
So what are some of the privacy problems this could create? In face to face conversation, people could overhear your conversation if they lingered nearby. These in-person conversations commonly get repeated. What gets repeated though, is the “translation” of what was said. This “translation” includes someone else’s perception and regurgitation of what was said. If a group of us stood in a circle and had each person whisper the same sentence to each other one after the other, by the time it got completely around the circle would be a very different sentence. That is because things get “lost in translation.” People know this and take into consideration that this regurgitation is hearsay. These private conversations that are regurgitated can be argued. “I didn’t really say that.”
With chat, transcripts can be saved and printed. So if you are talking about someone else in an on-line chat session, you better trust whoever you are talking to. If you have a fight, that “private” conversation can easily be repeated and shared verbatim. This is a difficult concept for teens to grasp because to them, chatting is normal everyday conversation. Conversation flows just as if they were talking to someone in the hall at school or on the telephone. Let me share another story with you. In my old neighborhood, a young girl (eighth grade) had a visit from police because of photographs of a classmate that she put up on her MySpace page. She was accused of “cyberbullying.” She violated the privacy of her classmate when she posted her photograph on-line. Now if she had shown that picture to a friend in the hallway at school, she may have been in trouble at school, but probably not with the police. She could have easily burned or shredded the picture (and negative) and the evidence would have been gone forever. It would simply become hearsay.
According to Bob Sullivan’s article Privacy Lost: Does anybody care?, young people have lost sight of the value of privacy. Sullivan has a great quote in the article that really sums it up “it’s like health: When you have it, you don’t notice it. Only when it’s gone do you wish you’d done more to protect it.” The pictures, comments and conversations that are ubiquitous on the Internet, are retrievable and very difficult to completely delete. Teens don’t realize that unless their computer is “wiped” clean, everything is retrievable. Things sent over the Internet can be traced back to their IP address.
In Dana Boyd’s article Social Network Sites: Public, Private, or What?, Boyd talks about mediated publics (public gathering via some form of technology) and their unique features. The one that stuck with me was “persistence. What you say sticks around.” This is something for all of us to take to heart. Teens seem to have difficulty either comprehending or simply remembering this. According to Boyd, their reaction to the lack of barriers to their privacy is the assumption that people don’t have any reason to look at their stuff. Well that may be true…now.
I have one more (true) story to share. Four “tween” friends had a slumber party and were fooling around with Photoshop. They took a picture of themselves in their bathing suits and put black boxes over their bikinis. The result made it look like they were nude and had blocked out the private areas. The girls thought this was hilarious. However, another (concerned) friend saw this picture via her connection to their MySpace page and told her mom. That parent downloaded the picture and sent it anonymously to the girls’ principal. So what was thought to be private wasn’t. In this case, the lack of privacy was a good thing. So take heed if you haven’t put your social networking in perspective lately!
One last note, the movie Eagle Eye opens today...it might be a good illustration of privacy and identity issues.
Citations
Social networking is life for today’s youth. Conversations that used to be conducted in person are now done on-line. When my son was in high school, he used AOL chat. After a while, he stopped using the phone and simply went on-line to communicate with friends. One day he forgot what his homework assignment was. I found him sitting in front of the computer with a blank stare; he was waiting for his friend to get on-line so he could ask him about the assignment. It never occurred to him that he should just pick up the phone and call. This is a perfect example of how the teens view social networking as real life.
So what are some of the privacy problems this could create? In face to face conversation, people could overhear your conversation if they lingered nearby. These in-person conversations commonly get repeated. What gets repeated though, is the “translation” of what was said. This “translation” includes someone else’s perception and regurgitation of what was said. If a group of us stood in a circle and had each person whisper the same sentence to each other one after the other, by the time it got completely around the circle would be a very different sentence. That is because things get “lost in translation.” People know this and take into consideration that this regurgitation is hearsay. These private conversations that are regurgitated can be argued. “I didn’t really say that.”
With chat, transcripts can be saved and printed. So if you are talking about someone else in an on-line chat session, you better trust whoever you are talking to. If you have a fight, that “private” conversation can easily be repeated and shared verbatim. This is a difficult concept for teens to grasp because to them, chatting is normal everyday conversation. Conversation flows just as if they were talking to someone in the hall at school or on the telephone. Let me share another story with you. In my old neighborhood, a young girl (eighth grade) had a visit from police because of photographs of a classmate that she put up on her MySpace page. She was accused of “cyberbullying.” She violated the privacy of her classmate when she posted her photograph on-line. Now if she had shown that picture to a friend in the hallway at school, she may have been in trouble at school, but probably not with the police. She could have easily burned or shredded the picture (and negative) and the evidence would have been gone forever. It would simply become hearsay.
According to Bob Sullivan’s article Privacy Lost: Does anybody care?, young people have lost sight of the value of privacy. Sullivan has a great quote in the article that really sums it up “it’s like health: When you have it, you don’t notice it. Only when it’s gone do you wish you’d done more to protect it.” The pictures, comments and conversations that are ubiquitous on the Internet, are retrievable and very difficult to completely delete. Teens don’t realize that unless their computer is “wiped” clean, everything is retrievable. Things sent over the Internet can be traced back to their IP address.
In Dana Boyd’s article Social Network Sites: Public, Private, or What?, Boyd talks about mediated publics (public gathering via some form of technology) and their unique features. The one that stuck with me was “persistence. What you say sticks around.” This is something for all of us to take to heart. Teens seem to have difficulty either comprehending or simply remembering this. According to Boyd, their reaction to the lack of barriers to their privacy is the assumption that people don’t have any reason to look at their stuff. Well that may be true…now.
I have one more (true) story to share. Four “tween” friends had a slumber party and were fooling around with Photoshop. They took a picture of themselves in their bathing suits and put black boxes over their bikinis. The result made it look like they were nude and had blocked out the private areas. The girls thought this was hilarious. However, another (concerned) friend saw this picture via her connection to their MySpace page and told her mom. That parent downloaded the picture and sent it anonymously to the girls’ principal. So what was thought to be private wasn’t. In this case, the lack of privacy was a good thing. So take heed if you haven’t put your social networking in perspective lately!
One last note, the movie Eagle Eye opens today...it might be a good illustration of privacy and identity issues.
Citations
- Internet Privacy, Wikipedia.com, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interniet_privacy
- Cyberbullying, UrbanDictionary.com, http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=cyberbullying
- Sullivan, Bob, October 17, 2006, “Privacy Lost: Does anybody care?”, MSNBC.com
- Boyd, Danah. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Public, Private, or What?”, Knowledge Tree 13, May. http://kt.flexiblelearning.net.au/tkt2007/?page_id=28
Friday, September 19, 2008
Online Economies-COM125
The Economies of Online Cooperation
If I understand correctly, the driving force behind Web 2.0 is gift economies. Wikipedia describes gift economies as a “social theory in which goods and services are given without any explicit agreement for immediate or future quid pro quo.” I feel that this is the most attractive feature that the internet has to offer. The Internet’s free information and free services as well as its social networking aspect have touched our world in so many ways.
Consider the person who purchases a product which they “think” is broken; an inexpensive item the purchaser has paid only a few bucks for. Ten or fifteen years ago, if you either couldn’t figure out how to use it or if it was broken, you would probably just toss it out. Today, you can simply send an e-mail to the company requesting information, access a list of frequently asked questions, or even participate in a live chat. If you lose the directions for a product, you can simply download a new set. Remember that Rubik’s cube you had when you were young? If you can’t remember how to solve it, you can just download a new set of directions or visit one of many sites devoted to showing you how it can be solved. All of this is of course, done for free.
Most of the companies existing today have chosen to maintain a website with a page on the website devoted to helping customers with repairs or customer service issues. A nice complement to these websites is the development of networking sites and bloggers who offer advice to the public. Why do they offer this free advice? Is it frustration with getting help from the company compelling them to share their solutions? Perhaps they were looking for the company website and chose to explore the other ‘hits’ that came up with the company website.
My feeling is that people learn from each other. We can never presume to see a complete set of perspectives on a product, nor can we expect to have experienced all of its problems. People form groups in order to give information, get information or to collaborate. Groups may start out as a handful of people who simply couldn’t find out enough information about a product so they thought brainstorming was the way to go. Others are formed from self-made experts who want to share what they know (AKA show off their knowledge base.) I think sites like comp.sys.laptops site mentioned by Kollock in his article The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace, is one of these sites. Still others are formed because learning is a two-way street. It is a little known fact that teachers learn more when they teach than they did when they were learning to teach. I think this is the real reason people form groups. They know that they knowledge they will gain is worth the time commitment.
The instructor for my class Virtual Worlds in Organizations (COM483) has put this principle into effect. He has a section on the UBLearns website called “students helping students”. What this does is offer students the opportunity to offer advice, receive advice, and share observations. What it also does is create an open learning environment for both parties. It really enhances the learning environment. The teacher gets a first hand look at what his students are having trouble with and also offers a window into how students perceive things. Students can choose to contribute or elect not to (no quid pro quo.) The teacher monitors the site and makes corrections when necessary. It is free and bears no preconceived notions or expectations. In other classes this could even eliminate a student's need for a tutor. It's a win-win situation for everyone because we all learn at the same time.
Citations:
Wikipedia Gift Economies- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economies
Rubik's Solver.com, 2007 -http://www.rubikssolver.com/
Saxton, Greg, 2008, Virtual Worlds in Organizations, UBLearns -https://myub.buffalo.edu/course/pw/scripts/crs_sched.cgi?switch=showclass&semester=fall&division=1&dept=COM®num=037796
Kollock, Peter (draft), 1999, The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace -https://ublearns.buffalo.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2fwebapps%2fblackboard%2fexecute%2flauncher%3ftype%3dCourse%26id%3d_61661_1%26url%3d
If I understand correctly, the driving force behind Web 2.0 is gift economies. Wikipedia describes gift economies as a “social theory in which goods and services are given without any explicit agreement for immediate or future quid pro quo.” I feel that this is the most attractive feature that the internet has to offer. The Internet’s free information and free services as well as its social networking aspect have touched our world in so many ways.
Consider the person who purchases a product which they “think” is broken; an inexpensive item the purchaser has paid only a few bucks for. Ten or fifteen years ago, if you either couldn’t figure out how to use it or if it was broken, you would probably just toss it out. Today, you can simply send an e-mail to the company requesting information, access a list of frequently asked questions, or even participate in a live chat. If you lose the directions for a product, you can simply download a new set. Remember that Rubik’s cube you had when you were young? If you can’t remember how to solve it, you can just download a new set of directions or visit one of many sites devoted to showing you how it can be solved. All of this is of course, done for free.
Most of the companies existing today have chosen to maintain a website with a page on the website devoted to helping customers with repairs or customer service issues. A nice complement to these websites is the development of networking sites and bloggers who offer advice to the public. Why do they offer this free advice? Is it frustration with getting help from the company compelling them to share their solutions? Perhaps they were looking for the company website and chose to explore the other ‘hits’ that came up with the company website.
My feeling is that people learn from each other. We can never presume to see a complete set of perspectives on a product, nor can we expect to have experienced all of its problems. People form groups in order to give information, get information or to collaborate. Groups may start out as a handful of people who simply couldn’t find out enough information about a product so they thought brainstorming was the way to go. Others are formed from self-made experts who want to share what they know (AKA show off their knowledge base.) I think sites like comp.sys.laptops site mentioned by Kollock in his article The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace, is one of these sites. Still others are formed because learning is a two-way street. It is a little known fact that teachers learn more when they teach than they did when they were learning to teach. I think this is the real reason people form groups. They know that they knowledge they will gain is worth the time commitment.
The instructor for my class Virtual Worlds in Organizations (COM483) has put this principle into effect. He has a section on the UBLearns website called “students helping students”. What this does is offer students the opportunity to offer advice, receive advice, and share observations. What it also does is create an open learning environment for both parties. It really enhances the learning environment. The teacher gets a first hand look at what his students are having trouble with and also offers a window into how students perceive things. Students can choose to contribute or elect not to (no quid pro quo.) The teacher monitors the site and makes corrections when necessary. It is free and bears no preconceived notions or expectations. In other classes this could even eliminate a student's need for a tutor. It's a win-win situation for everyone because we all learn at the same time.
Citations:
Wikipedia Gift Economies- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economies
Rubik's Solver.com, 2007 -http://www.rubikssolver.com/
Saxton, Greg, 2008, Virtual Worlds in Organizations, UBLearns -https://myub.buffalo.edu/course/pw/scripts/crs_sched.cgi?switch=showclass&semester=fall&division=1&dept=COM®num=037796
Kollock, Peter (draft), 1999, The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace -https://ublearns.buffalo.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_id=_2_1&url=%2fwebapps%2fblackboard%2fexecute%2flauncher%3ftype%3dCourse%26id%3d_61661_1%26url%3d
Friday, September 12, 2008
COM125-Copyright-Protecting Creativity or Cash?
The written word is fiercely guarded its authors. Many years ago, a waitress published her first book in what she hoped would be a successful series. This author went under the name of J.K. Rowling. Her book was Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. The book was an enormous hit, selling millions of copies. J.K. Rowling went on to write six additional books. Harry Potter’s fan base was beyond measure. Fan clubs, websites and blogs ensued. Her books were reviewed in articles and on news shows; several of the books were made into movies which also made millions.
A man named Steven Jan Vander Ark loved the Harry Potter series. For ten years, he feverishly collected information about Harry and his friends and followed every word. He created a website that was followed by many, including J.K. Rowling herself. So why then, did Mr. Vander Ark and his would-be publisher end up in a heated court battle? It boils down to copyright infringement. Vander Ark decided to publish his collection of information (from his website) as a Harry Potter Encyclopedia called the Harry Potter Lexicon.
The basis of copyright law is original work. J. K. Rowling’s claim was that there was no supplemental analysis (no original work) in Vander Ark’s book. She had invested seventeen years in writing the series using her original and unique ideas. Vander Ark took these ideas, scaled them back, organized them and tried to sell them. The book contained no original ideas, and Rowling claimed no original analysis. Further, she also claimed that Vander Ark’s book would inhibit the sales of her forthcoming book, a Harry Potter almanac.
There is a very interesting article that takes some different positions on the lawsuit that I recommend reading, specifically the blogs at the bottom. Many references are made to other similar lawsuits and to a lawsuit placed by Vander Ark himself against Warner Brothers who tried to use information from his website (see the Nov 3 comment.)
According to the assigned reading, An Introduction to Copyright “Copyright law is part of intellectual property law.” That means that Rowling’s books, all her little tidbits of information and Harry Potter “facts” belong to her. True facts, cannot be copyrighted, non-fiction “facts” can. Rowling put in her imagination and creativity, her time and a lot of hard work. Vander Ark put in a lot of time and hard work but no imagination and no creativity. His work was not original, it was just reorganized.
I think Rowling tried to serve the public good but it backfired on her. Rowling tried to walk a fine line. According to most of the articles I scanned and read, there seemed to be a consensus that she was very gracious to her fans in allowing them to use and mimic her characters and story lines on websites. This certainly helped her fans. Vander Ark’s website was very good and very well put together. Rowling herself was a self-proclaimed reader. Fans who read the books came to learn much more about the characters than they typically would have known after finishing them.
The only problem with this freedom is that it will ultimately be abused by someone who is misled or simply looking for a way to make a buck. Unfortunately, it was only a matter of time before someone tried to capitalize on it. According to the reading mentioned above, copyright infringement is designed to give creative people incentives. I don’t agree with this angle. Creative people are creative by nature; there is a certain drive there. A creative person’s mind doesn’t stop working just because they can’t make money off of their ideas.
Now, don’t get me wrong here, I agree that copyright infringement laws should be in place. People have to pay the bills. I am not sure I agree with the duration. According to the reading mentioned above, is seems to be designed to protect the copyright throughout a person’s lifetime and then some. In our fast-paced world, I am not sure how useful that is. Things become outdated much more quickly today that they did before. I hope they shorten this duration. To serve the public good, sometimes you build on the ideas of others.
I agree with Rowling’s lawsuit and feel she was right to file it. It is unfortunate though, that she had to. Let’s hope this does not inhibit the freedoms extended by authors in relation to fan websites.
Citations
1. Lattman, Peter, Harry Potter & the Copyright Infringement Lawsuit, Wall Street Journal, November 2007, Retrieved September 12, 2008, from http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/11/02/harry-potter-the-copyright-infringement-lawsuit/
2. The Stacks, retrieved September 12, 2008 from http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/
3. Associated Press, Rowling launches lawsuit against Harry Potter lexicon, CBS News, November 10, 2007, retrieved September 12, 2008 from http://www.cbc.ca/arts/books/story/2007/11/10/rowling-lexicon-lawsuit.html?ref=rss
4. Eligon, John, Rowling Wins Lawsuit Against Potter Lexicon, New York Times, September 8, 2008, B3, New York edition, retrieved September 12, 2008 from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/nyregion/09potter.html?bl&ex=1221105600&en=acda2111e537322e&ei=5087%0A
Monday, September 1, 2008
COM125 Assn2-Phishing
Today I am going to write about “phishing.” Now, I did not spell that wrong, I don’t mean fishing like you would do on a boat or dock. It isn’t the name of a band or a club. It is a dangerous form of identity theft (aka ID theft.) According to Dictionary.com, phishing is “A method of identity theft carried out through the creation of a website that seems to represent a legitimate company.” I mean fishing for information. It is fraud and it is illegal!!
Have you ever received an e-mail from your bank asking you to update your password? What about from E-Bay asking you to update your PayPal account? What about from a popular shopping site asking you to update your credit card information? Because we live in a digitized society, this all may seem very legitimate. In truth, you would never be contacted this way. When logging on to the organization’s site normally and accessing your account the way you always have, you would be prompted for an update. Why wouldn’t your bank or a vendor contact you via e-mail? Isn’t that a major medium for communication today? The truth, is NO. Phishing is very real and it is what is known as a scam.
S0 what happens with a phishing scam? A very crafty criminal (aka “the scammer”) sits at home and creates a fake website for a reputable bank or company. These websites look very, very authentic. They are fashioned after the organization’s real website and match up right down to the logo! Next, the scammer creates an e-mail. The e-mail typically includes a request to update a password or credit card information and a warning (!) that your account will be frozen or cancelled. Lastly and most importantly, there will be a link. The link will look authentic and will probably include the name of the organization the scammer is impersonating. The link will take you to a fake website, not the one you use. Some noteworthy signs of a phishing e-mail are misspellings and if you roll your mouse over the link, somewhere down below in your e-mail window you will see the actual link-it won't be from the organization.) Next, the scammer obtains a mailing list of e-mail addresses and sends the e-mail to tens of thousands of recipients.
The scammer is hoping to gain your personal information which will give them access to your accounts. You may be thinking that this would be obvious. You may be thinking that you are a smart and educated adult who would spot a scam a mile away. I can tell you that I have spoken to high school students, college students, smart working adults, smart educated retirees and even IT professionals who have become victims of phishing scams. Scammers are very good at what they do and they do it in volume. They may send out 30,000 phishing e-mails and get two responses. For them, that means they earn between $6,000 and $20,000. A nice profit.
Another item of note is that a scammer will collect your information but not use it right away. They will do some additional research on you to find out more of your personal information; they will put in address changes to start getting mail from your bank and any other company who you have credit with. They will build a personal database on you and then squirrel it away for a year or two (or sell it.) In a year or two the scammer will begin to use it. It helps them to wait because you will probably not remember when you responded to that original e-mail. You may not remember it at all. This makes it more difficult for the authorities to trace it back to the scammer.
So what do you do if you think you are a victim? First, file a police report. Next, contact the three major credit reporting agencies: Equifax, TransUnion and Experian. They will put a fraud flag on your account. Contact your bank and your credit card agencies to cancel all accounts. Contact the US Postal Service to make sure there has not been a change of address put in for you. Collect all of your account information and start a file. Keep track of all the calls you make, who you talk to, and what was said. You will need this diary to keep things organized. Don’t be surprised if you don’t have access to your accounts; the scammers are very good at what they do. It usually takes years to undo what the scammers have done.
How can you prevent ID theft? The best thing you can do is monitor your credit report each year. You can get a copy of your credit report from each of the three agencies for free each year. I suggest spreading it out. Request one from Equifax every April, request one from TransUnion every August and request one from Experian every December. Monitor these reports for inaccuracies. If you are a victim of ID theft, this is the first place it will show up. You can request one free report annually from each agency via the offical website (annualcreditreport.com.) If you go to freecreditreport.com or the individual agency sites you will be charged. These sites are legitimate and will all give you what you need but will charge you. Next, get information from the ID theft government site.
I taught ID theft awareness as part of a financial literacy program I ran for work. I hope this blog provides some awareness to you. I urge you all to monitor your reports and visit the ID theft website! Here is another interesting article on phishing A brief history of Phishing: Part I.
Have you ever received an e-mail from your bank asking you to update your password? What about from E-Bay asking you to update your PayPal account? What about from a popular shopping site asking you to update your credit card information? Because we live in a digitized society, this all may seem very legitimate. In truth, you would never be contacted this way. When logging on to the organization’s site normally and accessing your account the way you always have, you would be prompted for an update. Why wouldn’t your bank or a vendor contact you via e-mail? Isn’t that a major medium for communication today? The truth, is NO. Phishing is very real and it is what is known as a scam.
S0 what happens with a phishing scam? A very crafty criminal (aka “the scammer”) sits at home and creates a fake website for a reputable bank or company. These websites look very, very authentic. They are fashioned after the organization’s real website and match up right down to the logo! Next, the scammer creates an e-mail. The e-mail typically includes a request to update a password or credit card information and a warning (!) that your account will be frozen or cancelled. Lastly and most importantly, there will be a link. The link will look authentic and will probably include the name of the organization the scammer is impersonating. The link will take you to a fake website, not the one you use. Some noteworthy signs of a phishing e-mail are misspellings and if you roll your mouse over the link, somewhere down below in your e-mail window you will see the actual link-it won't be from the organization.) Next, the scammer obtains a mailing list of e-mail addresses and sends the e-mail to tens of thousands of recipients.
The scammer is hoping to gain your personal information which will give them access to your accounts. You may be thinking that this would be obvious. You may be thinking that you are a smart and educated adult who would spot a scam a mile away. I can tell you that I have spoken to high school students, college students, smart working adults, smart educated retirees and even IT professionals who have become victims of phishing scams. Scammers are very good at what they do and they do it in volume. They may send out 30,000 phishing e-mails and get two responses. For them, that means they earn between $6,000 and $20,000. A nice profit.
Another item of note is that a scammer will collect your information but not use it right away. They will do some additional research on you to find out more of your personal information; they will put in address changes to start getting mail from your bank and any other company who you have credit with. They will build a personal database on you and then squirrel it away for a year or two (or sell it.) In a year or two the scammer will begin to use it. It helps them to wait because you will probably not remember when you responded to that original e-mail. You may not remember it at all. This makes it more difficult for the authorities to trace it back to the scammer.
So what do you do if you think you are a victim? First, file a police report. Next, contact the three major credit reporting agencies: Equifax, TransUnion and Experian. They will put a fraud flag on your account. Contact your bank and your credit card agencies to cancel all accounts. Contact the US Postal Service to make sure there has not been a change of address put in for you. Collect all of your account information and start a file. Keep track of all the calls you make, who you talk to, and what was said. You will need this diary to keep things organized. Don’t be surprised if you don’t have access to your accounts; the scammers are very good at what they do. It usually takes years to undo what the scammers have done.
How can you prevent ID theft? The best thing you can do is monitor your credit report each year. You can get a copy of your credit report from each of the three agencies for free each year. I suggest spreading it out. Request one from Equifax every April, request one from TransUnion every August and request one from Experian every December. Monitor these reports for inaccuracies. If you are a victim of ID theft, this is the first place it will show up. You can request one free report annually from each agency via the offical website (annualcreditreport.com.) If you go to freecreditreport.com or the individual agency sites you will be charged. These sites are legitimate and will all give you what you need but will charge you. Next, get information from the ID theft government site.
I taught ID theft awareness as part of a financial literacy program I ran for work. I hope this blog provides some awareness to you. I urge you all to monitor your reports and visit the ID theft website! Here is another interesting article on phishing A brief history of Phishing: Part I.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
An Introduction To Me
I grew up in a small town south of Buffalo, NY. My parents were not believers in the value of college. I was a fun loving gal so after high school I thought I would take a year off before beginning college. That year is now commonly known in my family as the “kiss of death.” It is the reason that I am a college student at forty-three years of age. I am old by some standards but young by others. I am a true example of the “non-traditional student.” I started college twenty years ago…..that’s right twenty. There were two breaks of about five years each when I had my children and my husband finished his college. I started at UB many years ago as a Business major but changed to Communication. I will be graduating after the spring 2009 semester.
I love the atmosphere in college, especially at UB. UB’s young hip atmosphere coupled with its multicultural nature makes it a wholly educational place. One semester before my anticipated graduation date, I will be losing my job due to the closing of my location. For me, this is scary but the timing is good. I will leave college with a degree, a newly enhanced skill set, and a lot of experience in a professional environment. I am excited about starting a new career and love the new path I decided to follow. (Secretly, I am terrified!)
My classmates help keep me in tune and that helps me with my kids. My kids help keep me in tune and that helps me in college. I lead a very busy life but I love the life I have. I have a great family and a golden retriever named Romeo (AKA Rome-dog.)
I dislike people who are mean and people who don't enjoy life. The most valuable asset someone can have is a sense of humor. My husband has a quick wit and that is what I love the most about him. I love funny stories and I have a lot of them. The problem is that I can’t really tell a story the way it was meant to be told. Said another way, I tell a lot of "I guess you had to be there" stories (but they are still funny to me.) I listen to Sirius comedy radio (unless my daughter is in the car, then we listen Sirius AltNation which I also enjoy.)
I like to be around people who are not ordinary even though I consider myself to be a very ordinary person. But being ordinary just means I am being real. I think that's what people like about me; what you see is what you get.
I am very time starved because I am raising a family of five, I take a minimum of two classes a semester, and I work full time (at least for the time being.) In between the commutes, the homework and the kid chauffeur service I try and squeeze in some fun. I love movies but usually catch them on DVR, I love to ski in the winter and watch my kid’s events. I have a football player, a swimmer and a drummer (who also plays basketball.) I love Buffalo Sabers’ hockey and Buffalo Bills football.
What will I do with my spare time after college? I will catch up with the life I have been missing because of class!! I will also learn to golf (is that an old person sport?) I say nay-nay!
This is the required link.
I love the atmosphere in college, especially at UB. UB’s young hip atmosphere coupled with its multicultural nature makes it a wholly educational place. One semester before my anticipated graduation date, I will be losing my job due to the closing of my location. For me, this is scary but the timing is good. I will leave college with a degree, a newly enhanced skill set, and a lot of experience in a professional environment. I am excited about starting a new career and love the new path I decided to follow. (Secretly, I am terrified!)
My classmates help keep me in tune and that helps me with my kids. My kids help keep me in tune and that helps me in college. I lead a very busy life but I love the life I have. I have a great family and a golden retriever named Romeo (AKA Rome-dog.)
I dislike people who are mean and people who don't enjoy life. The most valuable asset someone can have is a sense of humor. My husband has a quick wit and that is what I love the most about him. I love funny stories and I have a lot of them. The problem is that I can’t really tell a story the way it was meant to be told. Said another way, I tell a lot of "I guess you had to be there" stories (but they are still funny to me.) I listen to Sirius comedy radio (unless my daughter is in the car, then we listen Sirius AltNation which I also enjoy.)
I like to be around people who are not ordinary even though I consider myself to be a very ordinary person. But being ordinary just means I am being real. I think that's what people like about me; what you see is what you get.
I am very time starved because I am raising a family of five, I take a minimum of two classes a semester, and I work full time (at least for the time being.) In between the commutes, the homework and the kid chauffeur service I try and squeeze in some fun. I love movies but usually catch them on DVR, I love to ski in the winter and watch my kid’s events. I have a football player, a swimmer and a drummer (who also plays basketball.) I love Buffalo Sabers’ hockey and Buffalo Bills football.
What will I do with my spare time after college? I will catch up with the life I have been missing because of class!! I will also learn to golf (is that an old person sport?) I say nay-nay!
This is the required link.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)