Final Blog Post; The New Digital Normal

The New Digital Normal 

    

    Technology is a tool. A tool that can be used for both good and for evil. But how do I use it and in what ways does that affect me? 

    Over the last few years, technology has had sweeping advancements in our society. Artificial intelligence and facial recognition are two of the largest enhancements we've seen that have very positive aspects but also negative ones.

    In 'The Age of AI' documentary by Frontline, we see the ways in which artificial intelligence and technology advancements have worked their way into our society for better and for worse. It examines the rapid growth and grasp technology has on us as people. This included the integration of automatic and artificial intelligence that is taking over basic human labor, health care, education and so much more. The most shocking of these advances would be the integration of surveillance through facial recognition. This is becoming increasingly popular and governments around the globe are transitioning to this kind of data and collecting more and more of it. 

    Giant tech companies like Facebook, Google, Apple, and Amazon also benefit from the government's efforts to collect as much data as possible. That's scary. So how does the data I share (willingly or unwillingly) online affect me and those around me? And how do I know if my relationship with technology is positive or negative? 

    To examine this, I decided to use the data my phone stores of my daily use of social media apps and the average amount of time I spend per day on my phone. From there, I decided to get as much data from the apps I use most often to see what kind of content I engage with and to see if that engagement affects the ads I see and even my overall mental health. My hope was that examining my own data may help me understand what kind of data is being sold to companies or being stored about me. 

My Top Apps:

1) Instagram

2) TikTok

3) Snapchat

Average Amount of Time Spent on My Phone Daily:

4 hours and 30 minutes

    With these apps and the amount of time spent on my phone daily, how much of my data is actually being collected?

Turns out a lot. 

    My top app, Instagram, is probably the app that collects the most data from me. I believe this because of the people, organizations, and accounts I follow as well as the general content I engage with. To find out more, I went into my settings on the app then clicked to view my activity. Here, I could see just about all of my activity on the app and was able to request to download my information to see all the content I shared with Instagram. The results were insane. I found out that Instagram had a lot more data about me than I had originally thought. It had saved every single piece of data from posts I've saved, message requests, to the comments I've read. It was crazy. All of this data was from my interactions with the app, but it was still scary to see that it was down to the date, time, and location of where I did these things. 

    My second top app, TikTok, was a bit more difficult to retrieve my data from. Nonetheless, I was most interested in the algorithm. TikTok is known for its artificially generated algorithm for its users and I was curious how my interaction on the app lead me to the algorithm I have today. I found that it really is just a matter of your engagement with the content. I was able to see how my engagement with different videos, audios, creators, and followers impacted what I saw on the app. For reference, I receive a lot more funny or comedic TikTok videos on my feed as opposed to the more trending videos because that is the content I engaged with more. (I also enjoy the cute animal videos as well, but who doesn't?) It was really interesting to see that something as simple as a like or a quick scroll through the comments influenced my feed so drastically and that TikTok had a condensed record of what exactly I liked and didn't. 

    The last app that took up most of my screen time (and data) was Snapchat. I think solely based off of Snapchat's privacy policy and general app structure, one would think our data on this app is a bit more secure or protected. But through my snooping, I found that this wasn't entirely true. Even though the app is designed to delete snaps and chats after 24 hours, it still keeps a record of your data and has a record of every single snap you've ever received or sent as well as when you add someone new or subscribe to a creator. That's crazy! I could scroll back to when I first downloaded the app and saw what time it was when I sent my first snap to my friend 7 years ago. 

    It was crazy to see how much of my data was actually being stored by these apps. Now with this newfound knowledge of technology and what data it takes, how does that affect my relationship with it?

    To put it bluntly, there is no such thing as incognito anymore. It seems as if in this era of technology Big Brother and tin foil hats don't quite capture the evergrowing implications of surveillance. However, I don't write this to say that technology is the worst thing ever because I don't think that. If it weren't for technology, I wouldn't be able to connect with my friends from when I was younger, I wouldn't be able to call my mom, and I certainly wouldn't have the opportunity to engage with people and content online to enhance my studies. There are many positive aspects to technology, I think we just need to be a bit more cautious of the way we use it and how much data we share. 

    As for my overall relationship with technology, I would say it's a positive and healthy one. I believe
that I was always pretty aware of the dangers of technology as my parents eased us into things like cell phones and I didn't own one myself until I was about 14. I also by nature am a pretty modest and skeptical person when it comes to my online presence, so I have always been stingy with the data I share as well as being careful with what I post. I think if more people approached technology with more caution, we may see people second-guessing the amount of information they put online. If this begins to happen, I believe it may lessen the risks of a total surveillance state, which I don't think any of us want.   

    Looking to the future, there are a few different opinions on technology and its advancements. By giving your devices and media platforms permission to detailed information like your location, web searches, and more, you essentially hand them insight into your daily life routine, friends, and your interest. At the end of the day, it comes down to you whether you think this is a violation of your privacy or not. 

    Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis stated in 1890 in The Right to Privacy that 'each person is entitled to full protection in terms of person and property.' This is especially applicable to today as emerging technology and social media platforms continue to become a larger part of our everyday lives. The idea of privacy invasion by these platforms is becoming more prominent.

    With the gradual increase of our devices and social media platforms collecting our data and seeing how they use it, we begin to see different questions and opinions emerge. When does the data collection cross the line? Some people say it's already at an extreme and that this type of 'digital spying' is absurd and creepy. Others believe that this kind of data collection is harmless if it provides a more enhanced user experience. There isn't really a right or wrong answer as to how one feels about this, it's simply personal preference. But when (or if) it gets to become a civil liberties issue in America, I think there will be an outrage. 

    For now, let's not freak out about our data or overall privacy. I think we simply just need to be a bit more skeptical with the data we choose to share and where it is shared. We truly wouldn't be where we are today as a society if it weren't for technology. I wouldn't even be here writing this blog. Technology does so much to connect us to one another and the advancements it has made in just a few short years are remarkable. We as humans just need to be more cautious of the amount of information we are willing to hand over to technology and big tech or social media companies. We don't want to get to a point where we no longer use technology, but technology uses us. 

    The next time you visit a website and it prompts you for your email, maybe take a second to find the 'x' button rather than using autogenerated texts to enter your information. Small decisions like these over time can keep you, your data, and those around you much safer in the continuously growing digital world. 

Blog Post 10; EOTO Reflection - Citizen Journalism

 Citizen Journalism 

    For our final EOTO, we explored topics related to the media and technology. Awareness, mediasphere, theories, policy, and artificial intelligence were the areas we observed. One topic within these areas that intrigued me through watching other groups present was citizen journalism. 

    Right now, I am a citizen journalist through this blog. My mother who writes lengthy essay-style posts on Facebook is also a citizen journalist. Any form of information writing that is not done by a professional journalist, but an individual, is considered citizen journalism. And it's extremely important. 

    I learned that citizen journalism has been around since the Boston Massacre of 1770. However, with the integration of new technology, specifically the internet, citizen journalism has become more and more prominent and more and more essential to piecing stories together. Think about how many photos and videos we see in news stories today. All of those photos and videos are not captured by professional journalists. They are captured by ordinary people. 

    This is why citizen journalism is so vital. Without people capturing monumental moments of news on their phones, we would not have the ability to piece or illustrate a story. 

    Citizens in disaster zones have been able to provide instantaneous text and visual reporting from the scene. People in countries that are tied down by political upheaval can report on development, and even people in countries where the news and broadcast media is controlled by the government can use a variety of technology to share information. 

    Because of these brave citizens, the term citizen journalist has been debated as if it's even accurate. 

    The term and use of citizen journalism were first coined in South Korea where an online entrepreneur, Oh Yeon-ho, stated in 2000 that "every citizen is a reporter." Following this surge of people actively reporting news themselves, Oh and three of his colleagues founded an online newspaper that provided daily news because they were unimpressed with the traditional press in South Korea. 

    Since then, and since the internet and technology have expanded drastically, there has been a spawn of thousands of news sites and bloggers reporting independently. However, this independent citizen journalism is a double-edged sword. This kind of reporting and writing opens the door for misinformation and bias as well as the incorporation of one's personal opinion. I would argue though, that these aspects have very minimal negative aspects as even the mainstream media is biased and publishes misinformation. 

    At the end of the day, citizen journalism is crucial. It is needed to keep mainstream journalism thriving. In a sense, it is almost our duty as citizens to report, analyze, and interpret events on our own. Not only does it help us to shape our ideas and opinions, but it shows the mainstream media that we as citizens don't need them and that we are capable of uncovering the truth on our own. 

Blog Post 9; The 'Idea' of Suffrage

 The 'Idea' of Suffrage

    Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations, or in this case ideas, is a theory that explains how and why new ideas spread. One historical moment that I wanted to explore with Rogers' theory was Women's Suffrage and the ideas and events that spread and lead up to the 19th amendment.

    The theory uses time and penetration to explain the ways new ideas develop. This theory is divided into five different elements (penetrations) of development; Pioneers, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late Adopters, and Laggards. The theory is also divided by periods of time that correspond to the development; Experimental, Uptake, Critical Mass (which is the most important), Maturation, and Saturation. 

    To explain how all of these factors played into the women suffragist movement, we can observe in chronological order the events that help explain what propelled these ideas forward. 

1) The Pioneers & Experimental Time:

    The first big way in which we see the women suffrage movement take place is in Seneca Falls, New York in 1847. It was here that the first women's rights convention was held. 62 women and 32 men signed a Declaration of Sentiments, which was modeled from the Declaration of Independence. This outlined grievances and set the agenda for the future of the women's rights movement. 

    It was here where women had the first chance to officially assemble and start a change to improve their lives. Up until this point in time, women had continuously been pushed out of government and told they did not belong. 

2) Early Adopters & the Uptake Time:

    After this introduction to the women's suffrage movement, we see women in their daily life making changes to have their voices heard. There was a surge of women entering the workforce and even creating their own outlets to help spread the movement. 

    Amelia Bloomer was one of the first women to actually publish a newspaper in the United States. "The Lily" was founded by Bloomer in 1849 in her New York home. What is so significant about her newspaper is that it was written by women for women. This was a huge deal. However, her husband, and other men, were not too fond of this idea. But she persevered and broke down the facts on the "women-centric" newspaper. 

    Due to Bloomer and other notable American women who put their voices out for the public to hear, it pushed out a very important message to the United States that women's voices needed to be heard. This dedication to writing, reporting, and advocating continuously was a big reason why we as women have these rights today. If it wasn't for people like Bloomer, imagine how different news and our country would be.

3) Early Majority & Critical Mass Time:

    Almost 20 years later and American women still saw no change. Fortunately, with the continued advocacy and increasing popularity of the suffrage movement, women felt they had a glimmer of hope in 1867 when the Women's Suffrage amendment was introduced into Congress. It was rejected. This denial only added more fuel to the fire.

    A few years later in the 1871 election, Susan B. Anthony registered in New York and voted for Ulysses S. Grant. Through this action, Anthony was arrested, tried, and convicted in 1873. While her defense using the Equal Protections Act wasn't successful, this again only added more fuel to the fire.  

    1877. Change was happening. The Women's Suffrage Amendment was finally introduced to Congress. This version that was accepted even includes language that was used later on when finalizing
the 19th amendment. 

    Years of self-advocating, writing, reporting, assembling, and protesting were starting to pay off, but we still hadn't reached our goal of equal rights. More organizations were formed, more papers were written, and more protests started. This was the critical time to keep fighting. 

4) Late Adopters & Maturation 

    Women still continued to fight. They were not giving up no matter how long it took. It took 100 years. 100 years later in 1920, the 19th amendment was finally passed and allowed women the equal right to vote. The amendment was finally certified as law by the Constitution. 

  "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on the account of sex." 

    Years of work had finally paid off. A bit late, 100 years to be precise, but the change had happened. Women had equal rights and it opened doorways to many more opportunities for the United States. 

5) Laggards & Saturation

    According to Rogers' theory, saturation stops at about 85% meaning that there's a small percentage of people who simply won't adopt the idea. This is still true today. The groups of people who don't adopt the idea are called laggards.

     There are still countries around the world that don't have equal rights for women. These countries are the laggards. Countries like Saudia Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates still don't allow women to vote. Others like Uganda, Pakistan, Kenya, Oman, Qatar, Egypt, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, and Zanzibar simply make it hard for women to vote or have other rules to oppress them.    

    There is still a lot of work to be done to ensure women everywhere have equal rights. The fight for women's rights still rages on. These methods of oppression today may be small, but they are very present and it's important to keep fighting to make sure this idea of equality doesn't sit and saturate into the minds of those who can change it. We have to continue advocating and bringing our concerns to the table. Even if it takes another 100 years, it will be worth it. If we sit back and do nothing, can we still say we are part of a democracy?

    Using Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation we can see what worked to propel the women's suffrage movement forward to elicit change. We need to learn from the past and use today's methods to advocate for the change we want to see.

"Whenever women gather together, failure is impossible."

                                                    - Susan B. Anthony

Blog Post 8; EOTO 2 - What is the TIA?

What is the TIA?

    The Total Information Awareness program is probably the closest thing to a "Big Brother" program that has been seriously contemplated in our country. 

    The program was started in February of 2003, shortly after the tragedy of 9/11. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, a branch of the Department of Defense that works on military

research, initiated this program that called for recording and analyzing all digital information from U.S. citizens. The program is based on a vision of pulling together as much information as possible with as many people as possible into a humongous database. The TIA is headed by John Poindexter who once famously said that it was his job to withhold information from Congress. 

    The TIA makes our information available to government officials so they can sort through it to identify terrorists. However, the amount of public and private information in our lives is continuously growing every second and a government project that seeks to put all that information together is terrifying.  

    After American citizens extensively expressed their concerns and news reports provoked criticism of the program, it was officially discontinued. But it was never actually discontinued. The TIA is/was a government program, so new surveillance programs were created and simply just provided a new form of surveillance. 

    Programs like the TIA are based on the premise that the best way to protect America and its citizens against terrorism is for the government to collect as much data and information as possible about everyone. With the number of computers, cell phones, laptops, and even video games today, that's a whole lot of information about a whole lot of people. 

    It's been speculated (and proven) that these programs can incorporate not only government records but individuals' medical and financial records, political affiliations, travel history, prescriptions, purchases, phone calls, emails, internet searches, school records, even personal and family information. 

That's insane. 

    In the last decade, there has been an explosion in the amount of tracking and data and information stored in the United States. Experts state this is because of two factors;

1) Technology

    The growing expansion of technology with things like computers, cameras, location trackers, wireless communications, and others, makes it that much easier to track, store, analyze and sell any information about an individual. 

2) Commercialized Use of Our Data

    Corporations big and small have discovered that detailed information about their consumers is extremely valuable. They squeeze every last penny out of this revenue resource. This is why when you visit a website for the first time, you are almost immediately asked for your email, phone number, or address if not all three. After being forced to enter this information to view a product, as a result, private-sector incentives are aligned with the governments' interest to track everyone. The government has not been very quiet about buying that data either, and it is seen as a primary source for databases and programs like the TIA.

    It is insane how that information about us is generated in such sneaky ways. The data that retains all our information on our online activities is so rich that if it was compiled together, it may almost seem like there was a video camera following us around 24/7. These surveillance programs would, and are, making that a reality. 

Do we really want that?

    If it isn't already clear enough, let's visit some of the issues these surveillance programs bring. 

    First, it would kill privacy in America. Under these programs, every single aspect of our lives would be readily available to government officials. If anything, we would have the right to expect our lives will become an open book when we have not done and are not even suspected of wrongdoing. We'd be living in constant fear. 

    Secondly, it harbors a strong potential for abuse of power. The motto of the TIA is that "knowledge is power" but how much power is too much? I say that personal data being handed to government officials so they can track people is a bit extreme and inevitably, some of those officials will abuse that power. It's already happening. Even if the American people were to speak against it more, experience has shown that when large numbers of people challenge the government, some parts of the government react by increasing surveillance and using it against critics. The undeniable truth is that super-databases would only lead to super-abuses. 

    Third, it is based on virtual dragnets instead of personal suspicion. These databases would seek to 'protect' us by monitoring everyone for potential signs of wrongdoing by continuously sifting through the online data of Americans. It would ruin the very values the government is supposed to be protecting. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? 

    Fourthly, it simply wouldn't be effective. The program is based on highly questionable assumptions about how our data can be tapped to prevent terrorism. There are pretty good reasons to suspect that that wouldn't work...it would all be based on subjective conclusions. If that isn't enough to prove this issue, then I don't know what is. 

    Finally, the programs fail basic balancing tests. Balancing tests are tests in which the court weighs competing interests to decide which interest prevails. The benefits of this program being able to stop terrorism are speculative but the damage it would do to American freedom is crystal clear.

    One current issue that really demonstrates how these issues of surveillance have been ignored by the government is the CIA. As of February 10, 2022, The Associated Press announced that the CIA has a program that collects American data. While neither the agency nor lawmakers would disclose specifics about what data they were collecting, it was alleged that the CIA has been hiding details about this program from both the public and Congress for a long time. 

    As seen, there have been concerns about what information is collected by these programs for years, and these concerns are driven, in part, by past violations of our civil liberties. However, intelligence agencies are required to take safety steps to protect U.S. information. This includes redacting the names of any American from reports, which is called 'unmasking' unless their identity is relevant. 

    In the course of any lawful collection, the CIA may acquire information about people who are in contact with foreign nationals. But I think we can safely say that that is not the only case in which they acquire information, they have the ability to abuse their power and I have no doubt they do. 

    Intelligence agencies are also subject to guidelines on handling the destruction of Americans' data. While those guidelines and laws have evolved over time to adapt to the changes in technology, response to previous revelations, and domestic spying, I can only assume that our data is not destroyed but put away 'just in case' they need it in the future.

    This information and new reports raise serious concerns about the kind of information the CIA is tackling in bulk and how these agencies use that information to spy on Americans. Patrick Toomey, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, said "The CIA conducts these sweeping surveillance activities without any court approval, and with few, if any, safeguards imposed by Congress."

Knowing that this is happening right now, today, I can't think of any other word to describe this other than terrifying. 

    While the cons of these surveillance agencies are extensive, there is a positive aspect. These programs were created with the intent of being a safety measure for Americans, and while that's not really true anymore, the programs benefit defense research objectives in ways that likely would not happen if any other type of technology were used. If these programs were not implemented by our government, we would not have the ability to communicate and monitor potential threats to our country. 

    Now knowing a bit more about the Total Information Awareness program and other surveillance programs, I think the key takeaway is to be careful with the data you share. We can't control what other people, or the government, does with our data, but we can be careful with the data we share. Power is a delicate privilege and we continuously see people and agencies abusing that power. Our privacy is important and we need to take as many measures as we can to protect it. It may seem odd, but it's a great way to protect not only ourselves but also our loved ones. 

Extra Post; The 20's and How They Roared

The 20's and How They Roared

    Age of the Red Hot-Mamas, the Flapper Era, the Jazz Age, the Golden Twenties, or the Mad Decade. Whatever you use to describe the 1920s, we can all agree this age was full of liberation. Change was happening in all sorts of ways; politics, race, music, gender, and even art were transformed and challenged in this era making this one of the most puzzling eras for historians to study. 

    To backtrack a bit on the idea of a progressive era, the 1920s were a time in which there was a strong hostility towards the government, especially federal power. After the war and entering the new decade, newspapers, journals, and congressional debates reverberated with stories of the evils of federal government expansion using the word bureaucracy to invoke the idea of a government that was pervasive to individual initiative. People obviously didn't like that so this is why we saw such a great deal of progression and advocacy for change in this era. 

    Despite this big shift in public opinion of the government, we also see the 1920s being an era of what some call a cultural renaissance. This came from the very ambivalence and irresolvable tensions over the ideas about the past and possibilities of the future. Much of this renaissance was for the benefit of

African-Americans and for women. We would not have the America we do today if it wasn't for this cultural renaissance in the 1920s. In New York, this was seen in the 'Harlem Renaissance' which was a rich and indulging time with music and art. Jazz music in particular is what brought people together. The musicians in this time, despite being of different races, would get together after hours and perform together. Many argue that jazz is/was the release of all suppressed emotions at once. Jazz music served in several ways as a precursor to 50s be-bop and rock' n' roll as well as 80s pop and 90s rap. It was things like this that led to the rapid-changing modern world we see today as many people were experiencing the freedom of expression through art for the first time.  

   

    In addition to the political and racial liberation, one of the biggest forms of progression in the 20s was women's suffrage. For years, women had been pushed to the bottom of the list, only allowed to be in public if they were accompanied, and told their opinions didn't have a place in government. 

    While the word suffrage is derived from Latin in the word "suffragium" it simply means the right to vote. Part of the larger social movement of Women's Rights and the fight for equality within patriarchal societies was the Women's Suffrage Movement in the United States. A seventy-two-year-long period in which women had no say in their government was over. Enough was enough, and while women had already started their own newspapers and groups, it was time for a change. After years of advocating and working for change, the women's suffrage movement came to an end and the 19th amendment was passed. Women now had the right to vote. This was huge. 

     These issues for women weren't just central to the United States, they spanned across Canada, Australia, Central America and Asia. The work done by American women inspired the whole world. Some in big ways others in small ways, but because of the determination and strength American women had, we now have equal rights. Imagine how different our country and even our world would be if this amendment was not passed.  

    This movement also resulted in women feeling more free and confident. Cutting their hair, shortening their skirts, and leaving their homes unaccompanied were things that in a civilized society would be labeled as absurd. But then, and today, it was the new normal and paved the way to women's liberation. 

    

    Everything that emerged in the 20s is still mirrored into today. Our music, our clothes, our art, our politics all stem from the liberation and progression of the past. There's that word again; liberation. The word that defines the time of the 1920s. No matter how you think, describe, or reminisce in the 20s, that is the one word everyone can agree that is the word of the decade. 

This liberation was the roar.

    I wonder when the next liberation will be and what changes and progression we'll see then?

    

Blog Post 7; What's Really Private?

What's Really Private?

    After learning about online privacy (or lack thereof) I decided to Google myself. Luckily, the only thing that popped up was my Facebook profile which doesn't have much detailed information about me anyway. But what about others who may have embarrassing photos or posts? What does a quick Google search of their name entail? 

    The issues that come with online privacy and censorship are extensive and worsening every single day. To get a baseline idea, I'll touch on some of the largest factors contributing to online privacy issues.     For starters, whenever you download an app, specifically a social media app, you are agreeing to an Adhesion Contract which means that one party of the contract has the power. Guess who holds that power...the social media company. This means they have access to all of your data, posts, and
information and can use it however they want. 

    Secondly, a Shrink-Wrap Contract hinders your privacy and usage of a technology product. This contract basically allows and disallows what you can and cannot do such as downloading Third-Party apps on an iPhone. By purchasing the device and opening it, you automatically agree to this contract, hence the name Shrink-Wrap Contract. 

    Thirdly, Click-Wrap Contracts state that every single app has a contract. Circling back to the Adhesion Contract, this means based on the apps' contract, they can store, use, and practically do whatever they want with your information without your consent. You already downloaded the app and agreed to the Adhesion contract, so that is all they need.

    How do these contracts affect our daily life? One of the biggest ways that privacy policies are argued is through surveillance equipment. We continuously see the uses and abuses of modern technology. License plate readers and cell tower domes are the most well-known ways law enforcement and the government can abuse technology to track individuals. Local law enforcement and police stations can use a license plate reader to track where you go in your day-to-day life, even outside your home. Cell dome towers can track the location of any mobile phone and what it is being used for. What is even crazier is that local police stations can and are using a technology called Stingray devices that attach to a car. That car can then go drive into neighborhoods and other areas to see how many phones are inside a given household. Another big privacy concern that is growing with the iPhone and other technology is facial recognition. Today there are about 18 billion faces online that can be recognized, attached to a name, and then access all online data. This facial recognition was originally owned by Face.com, now all of it is owned by Facebook. Even things like cookies on websites fill our technology with malware and send our information to other people. Scary right? What do they even need that information for? The short answer is they don't. They only keep it 'just in case' they need it.

    It's argued that the police and government use and keep that information for potential blackmail,  reference in legal issues, or online advertisements. I find these defenses or excuses completely unacceptable as this level of privacy invasion is a massive civil liberties issue. Luckily, there are ways we as innocent people can prevent this privacy invasion from getting worse. 

 

  The first thing we can do is address these issues with our city and state governments. They can then create laws to prohibit the police force and state government from using this kind of technology in certain manners, such as tracking people. By prohibiting this use on the state and local level, it makes it much harder for larger government powers to access it.

    Secondly, we can use online communication apps that have strong encryption technologies that protect privacy and surveillance. Apps with encryption are apps that have strong security measures that protect users' data. The strongest apps for this are Apple's iMessage and Facetime and WhatsApp. This is partially the reason why many people today are swapping to Apple products, as they use strong encryption technology in many of their applications and products. 

    Finally, we can take some lessons from the Greeks in our future use of social media as they took the time to think about what happens when gods, humans, and immortality mix over time. Here are the most important lessons and what we can learn from them;

                      1. Sisyphus: Be careful what you post.

                      2. Orpheus: Don't dig into other people's past data or posts.

                      3. Atalanta: Remember the purpose of your post.

                      4. Narcissus: Don't fall in love with your own reflection. 

    One last lesson to include from a Latin-American, Jorge Luis Borges, who was a great poet that was threatened by the thugs of the Argentine military. When he was captive and threatened, he said, "Oh come on, how else can you threaten, other than with death?" 

    The lesson to take from this is immortality. What we post online is there forever, kind of like a tattoo. We can never escape it or get rid of it. 

    Whether we like it or not, online privacy affects all of us and we are all being watched in one way or another. This invasion of privacy affects those around us like our family and friends so be sure to share the important steps we can take and lessons we can learn to help keep our information as private as possible. Everything we say, do, post, comment, like, share and follow online is permanent. Technology and the internet is a tool, but we must use it wisely. We must be stingy with the data we share, the sites we visit, and the things we do online. If not, that electronic tattoo we thought we left behind may come back around to bite us. 

Blog Post 6; EOTO Reflection - A Piece of New Technology

A Piece of New Technology 

    EOTO's give us as students to opportunity to collaborate with our classmates while also learning and researching something new on our own. For our first EOTO's we all had to research a kind of technology that has advanced communication. One form of technology that I learned about from another group was emails.

    Emails are so important to today's communication. I had never even stopped to think about how often I use and rely on emails.

    The inventors of the email were Shiva Ayyaduari and Ray Tomlinson. It is widely agreed upon that email was officially invented in 1978 in Newark, NJ by Ayyaduari. Ayyaduari was 14 at the time of the invention of the email, which I found remarkable. It is noted that Tomlinson is responsible for the creation of the '@' symbol. Ayyaduari is credited for creating email etiquette and structure with; To, From, BCC, CC, Subject, Body and Attachment. I learned that there was actually some dispute between the inventors as to who created the structure, but on August 3rd, 1982, the U.S. government gave rightful credit to Addyaduari. However, both inventors were notable computer scientists and programmers who both contributed greatly to the creation of email. 

    Email and other similar formats had actually been in use in the 1960s before it was officially invented. Places like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and UMDNJ used email for business purposes. When email was formally introduced, it had a great impact on the military and education systems. It then completely branched to businesses. While this was a great advantage to workplace communication, it came with its set of issues. 

    Employees, while they did use email for work purposes, actually ended up creating personal emails to communicate with other people during work hours. This caused a great disturbance and some emails sent by employees resulted in their removal from companies. This chaos led to companies creating policies for employee emails and regulating the emails they sent and received. These policies are still in effect today to help with business confidentiality and professionalism. Obviously, some people did not like these policies, but in the end, it worked out with the introduction of personal laptops and computers where people could email freely. 

    Emails were and still are a monumental part of communication today that I feel is so easily forgotten. From school to business to annoying advertisements, emails are one of the most prominent ways we connect with people. Email is also a vital form of communication because it is much more formal than social media or texting and this is extremely important to know as a student. 

    I know that in my everyday life I use my personal and school email probably more times than I can count on my hand. Let's not forget that the technology we use today all started somewhere and that we should always learn about its development and its history. This is why these EOTO presentations are so valuable. Learning about things we may not have even thought about can help us appreciate it more.

Extra Post; Facebook and the Metaverse?

Facebook and the Metaverse?

    After checking the news on Monday, January 31, I saw this article from the New York Times, "How Facebook Is Morphing Into A Meta." This caught my attention and I decided to read to see how this social networking company is gearing towards the metaverse. I also was curious to see what that meant for the future of social media.

    Before reading this article, I only had a slim understanding of the metaverse and how it relates to social media, but the article gives a great definition. It starts by describing the origins of the metaverse and how it is a fully-realized digital world that exists beyond the one we live in. They continue by observing how the metaverse is continuously expanding (which is honestly terrifying) and that it has gained momentum during the online shift of the pandemic. The term today refers to a variety of experiences, environments and assets that exists in the virtual space. 

    One example they give of what the metaverse looks like today is video games where you can build your own world, which has metaverse tendencies, similar to social media. The metaverse is now slowly creeping into our reality through virtual-reality headsets and in cryptocurrency.

    Mark Zuckerburg, the founder and CEO of Facebook, announced in October that he was betting on the metaverse. Meta is essentially the parent company of Facebook and Instagram. This would introduce people to shared visual worlds and experiences across different software and hardware platforms. This announcement resulted in lots of concern and lots of excitement. 

    Big tech is shifting a drastic way, and it's all leading towards a metaverse monopoly. Even larger companies like Google, Apple, and Microsoft have been working on metaverse-based projects. 

    As mentioned, the ambition that Facebook has to create different software, hardware, and other technology for the metaverse means more sensors in people's homes that can collect vast amounts of data. Users would then be trusting Facebook to keep all of their data private. What could go wrong, right? 

    Today, many people are choosing to delete Facebook or simply reduce their use of social media and trust is a key factor in this. However, Facebook and the AI algorithm lead people to extreme content that has been under the spotlight and at the center of allegations towards the company. It has been argued over and over again that Facebook, along with others, put profit over people.

    To look at this in a different light, Meta has pursued a transformation that has been good for some. It has created thousands of new jobs in labs that create hardware and software, allowed for those who work in social networking to apply for better jobs, and given engineers a new area of study. The company has even grown to where they have been able to rebrand some products such as the Oculus virtual-reality headsets.

    However, these good things quickly cross the line into a potential privacy nightmare. Part of the idea of the metaverse, for Facebook specifically, is the immersive mixed reality business meetings. Employees could be forced to participate in this new working ethos or risk losing their jobs. Furthermore, if companies and employers decide to be a metaverse company, people would have to give out their personal data to a company that only works when something is in its best interest. 

    Meta now has more than 68,000 employees and has grown 14 times its size since 2012 when it was first introduced. Its market value has risen to an estimated $840 billion and is now entrenched in online advertising and social networking.

    Due to this massive growth, a Facebook whistleblower, Frances Haugen, has been anxiously warning those who are involved in Meta and the metaverse. In a recent interview with the Associated Press, Haugen said the virtual reality world could give Facebook another monopoly online. This would make the app even more addictive and give it the chance to steal even more personal information from users. Haugen even makes the point to stress the issues this would cause as people would unplug from the actual reality in which we live, which I say is even scarier. 

    This, of course, would impact the collection of people's data, force people to put more sensors in their homes, and remove any kind of privacy people thought they had online. 

    Trust in Facebook is low (although that is nothing new or surprising based on its reputation) and experts remain skeptical about the safety, privacy and implications of the metaverse for the younger generation of tech users. 

    The average age of a Facebook user is 41, and that is increasing each year. The social network is now doing whatever it needs to reach younger audiences, so we must be cautious of that as more and more kids are introduced to technology at earlier ages.  

    Into the future, many people in the tech industry hypothesize the metaverse will be the beginning to an era in which our virtual lives will play a role just as important as our physical lives. Experts warn that this could still turn out to be another internet fad that could even be dangerous. 

    While the shift may give Meta a head start to the next phase of the internet, we should take a moment to breathe before we panic about online privacy even more. The metaverse still remains a largely theoretical concept. It's a complex and concerning issue, but thankfully the metaverse isn't something that's going to build overnight. It has been estimated that it will take 10 to 15 years to become anything close to the vision set out by Meta and others. In the meantime, people should just see Meta as it is, a new name for Facebook, which I doubt officially happening because the name is so iconic today. 

    From this blog post, my intention was not to scare anyone further about online privacy or the metaverse. I simply thought it was interesting to see how the internet is growing. I also was able to learn some new things about online privacy and social network, which was helpful. I think social media can be a wonderful tool when used with caution and by sharing this development in the tech world, hopefully, I can make someone more aware of the potential dangers we could see in the future. The internet is big and filled with unknowns. It's important to be as informed as possible to keep our information as private and safe as we can. 

Blog Post 5; Why War?

Why War?

    War is, without a doubt, a very prevalent topic in news today. We see, read, and hear about all of the events and tensions contributing to the hostilities between two nations, but why is it that we never see, read, or hear strong anti-war voices in media? 

    To find these anti-war sources it seems that we have to do intense internet digging to find them. Two sources that are leaders in online anti-war publications are AntiWar.com and The American Conservative. Each of these sites offers news on wars and tensions that are happening right before us, while the media refuses to cover it. Although no one likes war, it is vital that someone deliver the truth. 

    AntiWar.com is arguably the leading platform to deliver this news. They state that they are devoted to the cause of non-interventionism and that their politics are strictly libertarian. AntiWar.com's work is

read by libertarians, pacifists, leftists, greens, and independents alike. They even welcome the criticism and opposition from imperialism from those on the right.

    Their opposition to war is rooted in a concept from its parent foundation, the Randolph Bourne Institute. The Randolph Bourne Institute is a program that provides a space for those concerned about foreign policy and its implications in the United States. The Institute eventually took AntiWar.com under their wing as a fellows program, making it what we know today. 

    Bourne's concept that inspired AntiWar.com is that "War is the health of the State." Bourne emphasized that after every war, America has made a "great leap" into statism. Bourne also states "it is during war that one best understands the nature of that State."

    At its core, the nature includes an ongoing increasing threat to individual liberty and the centralization of political power.

    The American Conservative is not conservative in the way we may initially think today. The American Conservative was founded by renowned conservatives who were appalled by the actions, fallacies, and deceptions of neoconservatism they say. TAC classifies themselves as Main Street conservatives. For them, it means to cherish local communities, liberties secured by the Founders, foundations of faith and family, and peace. 

    The American Conservative rests its principles on three beliefs. First, it is addressed that they are a republic, not an empire. TAC states that this alone should be reflected in our foreign policy. (Newsflash, it's not anymore). Secondly, TAC believes that families, community, and voluntary associations are the foundation of a virtuous society and that public policy should serve based on these ends. Finally, faith, family, tradition, and heritage are endangered by big government, corporations, and even revolutionaries so TAC defends religious liberties.

 

   The American Conservative strives to restore American constitutional conservatism which is not about debt and warfare. It never was supposed to be. TAC prioritizes liberty, localism, strong middle-class advocacy, and staying out of foreign wars that don't put Americans at stake. These values are without a doubt, exactly what America needs right now. The American Conservative says that this is what a salutary, honorable, attractive, and winning American conservatism looks like.

    Principle over party.

    As I write this blog post, there has actually been an extreme development between the United States and Syria. As of late Wednesday night, February 3, 2022, US Special Forces raided Northwest Syria against an ISIS leader and killed civilians in the process. This is a huge deal. For one thing, I could not find a source that covered the entire story except for AntiWar.com. Every other news source I looked to only had quick snippets of what happened. While this was a developing story, why did AntiWar.com provide more information than any of the mainstream media? 

    

    To expand a bit, late Wednesday US troops raided the ISIS leader's (al-Qurayshi) house in Northwest Syria and clashed with gunmen for about two hours. In this process, about 13 other people were killed which included women and children. President Biden was watching this raid and announced Thursday morning that the operation was successful. Biden stated that "In a final act of cowardness, with no regard to the lives of his family or others in the building, he (al-Qurayshi) chose to blow himself up and took several family members with him, just as his predecessor did." Biden also blames the death of the 13 civilians on al-Qurayshi's decision. 

    

    John Kirby, the spokesman for the Pentagon also stated that al-Qurayshi blew himself up before even engaging with the US special forces and that the troops only engaged in a gunfight with other individuals who approached the house after the US arrived. 

    While this is a tragic and concerning story, why did I only get the full story from AntiWar's post? Why is the mainstream media refusing to cover all the details of this?

    Even with this one example, we can see why anti-war voices need to be more prominent in the media. If not, we may end up only having false information regarding war and other hostilities in our world. 

    AntiWar.com is already fighting the next information war and is dedicated to stopping the war hawks and leaders who think they are going to be allowed to get away with it. The War Party is already well-organized, well-financed, and very focused on what they want. This includes, according to AntiWar writers, a renewal of the cold war, increased military spending (which I would argue we spend more than enough there already), and a globalist mission that would project American power.  What I find more terrifying is that they know how to get it by mobilizing special interest groups and vital corporate allies in a propaganda war designed to potentially win the hearts and minds of the American people. 

    These voices are strong, the anti-war voices, on the other hand, not so much. 

    Everyone wants peace, at least in theory, but there is no one designated group to fight for this. This is why we need anti-war voices in the media. This is why sources like AntiWar.com and The American Conservative exist. They have to be a voice to bring awareness and truth to these issues in our world. 

    We are living in a time bursting with monumental historical moments and possibilities. Political and cultural circumstances are changing in a drastic way. The anti-war sources and others have to be the leaders to educate Americans on what is truly happening. 

    Overall, or at least in my personal opinion, the media sucks. Not entirely, but for the most part, it has turned into something that feeds into political propaganda and enhances the fears of its viewers and readers. Is it too much to ask to actually see a news story that tells you the entire truth? It should not take sufficient internet digging to find a post that is at least somewhat transparent with the issue at hand. 

    This is why we need better writers, journalists, and educators. If not, we end up feeding into the lies the media screen feeds us.