Technologies and Politics of Control - User contributions [en]

Final Projects

2014-05-13T17:29:43Z

Marissa1989: /* Submissions */

{{AssignmentCal}}

== Instructions ==

''Please name your file "wikiusername_Final," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters.'' So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Final.doc."

'''Upload your file here: [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Special:Upload Upload file]

Once you've uploaded your file, please link to it following the format below:

*Name or Pseudonym:
*Title:
*Link:

If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Special:ImageList list of uploaded files].

<big><big>'''Also, the course evaluation is now live. [http://www.extension.harvard.edu/course-evaluations Log in to the HES website] to complete the evaluation.'''</big></big>

==Submissions ==

*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:Castille|Castille]] 23:45, 9 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Self Help or Self Harm? Tumblr's governance of its self harm communities
*Link:http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:CastilleRath_LSTU_FINAL_PAPER.doc

------
*Name or Pseudonym: ([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 18:06, 12 May 2014 (EDT))
*Title: Controlling our personal genomes: How has 23andMe changed its policies, norms, and architecture in response to the recent FDA ban and how has this impacted data sharing?
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Monroe_Final.docx

----
*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 13:29, 13 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Airbnb: Online Trust theory & Lessig's four modalities of control.
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Final_project_barkey.pdf
----

*Name or Pseudonym: ([[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 21:51, 12 May 2014 (EDT))
*Title: Forum policy guidelines at Anandtech.com: Examining the CPU's and Overclocking sub-forum behavioral characteristics.
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Dancoron_Final.doc

----

*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 00:30, 13 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Censoring the Bitcoin Community
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Bitcoin_Project,_Daniel_Rogowski.docx

----

*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 00:30, 13 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Comparing Forum Communities for Two Major Online Games
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:LSTU_Assignment5.pdf

----

*Name or Pseudonym: Luciagamboaso
*Title: Control vs. collaboration: The case of Mexico’s Open Data Policy government-run platform
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Luciagamboaso_FinalAssignment.pdf

----
*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:akk22|akk22]] 11:40, 13 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Gendered Online Communities: Targeted Harassment and Successful Interventions
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Final_akk22.pdf

----
*Name or Pseudonym: [[User:Castille|Castille]] 23:45, 9 May 2014 (EDT)
*Title: Self Help or Self Harm? Tumblr's governance of its self harm communities
*Link:http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:CastilleRath_LSTU_FINAL_PAPER.doc

Assignment 4 Submissions

2014-04-22T23:49:03Z

Marissa1989: /* Submissions */

{{AssignmentCal}}

Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (assignments submitted 4 days late or later will have a maximum grade of 1 point).

''Please name your file "wikiusername_Assignment4," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters.'' So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Assignment4.doc."

'''Upload your rough draft here: [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Special:Upload Upload file]'''

'''If you'd like peer feedback on an updated version of your rough draft, you can submit it here: [[Assignment 4 Peer Review]]'''

Please make sure the name of your file includes your name or pseudonym (example: Name_Assignment4.doc) to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment. Please follow the format below:

*Name or pseudonym:
*Project title:
*Link to rough draft: (add your link here)

If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Special:ImageList list of uploaded files].

==Submissions==

{{AssignmentInfo|Dan Coronado|Examining Anandtech's forum policy - Through the four modalities of Regulative Constraint|
[[http://http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/?title=File:Dancoron_Assignment4.doc&oldid=1988]]}}
([[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 15:20, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Akk22|Gendered Online Communities|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Akk22_assignment4.docx‎]]}}
([[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 14:02, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Marissa Barkey|Airbnb & Controlling Trust through Lessig's four modalities |
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Marissa_Draft_4.docx]]}}
([[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 19:49, 22 April 2014 (EDT)))

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Margo Monroe|Controlling our personal genomes|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Monroe_Assignment_Four.docx]]}}
([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 08:21, 1 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|MikeJohnson|Twitch Plays Pokémon - How Mediating Gameplay Changes the Game|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:MikeJohnson_Assignment4.pdf]]}}
[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 16:47, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Philip Seyfi|Bounties and underrepresented topics|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/LSTUE-120Assignment4.pdf]]}}
([[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 04:52, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 09:01, 22 April 2014 (EDT)|Who Sets the Norm on Youtube Communities?|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assingment_4.docx]]}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Castille Rath|Self Help or Self Harm?: Tumblr's governance of its self harm community|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:CastilleRath_ASSIGNMENT_FOUR.doc]]}}
([[[User:Castille|Castille]] 11:40, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|jkelly|Regulation of User Comments on Bitch Media|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Jkelly_assignment4.odt]]}}
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 12:37, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Daniel Rogowski|Censoring the Bitcoin Community|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Bitcoin_Project,_Daniel_Rogowski.docx]]}}
([[[[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 12:54, 22 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Psl|Crowd Control: PubMed Commons scientific forum|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:PSLAssignment4_DRAFT_withSupp.pdf]]}}
[[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Twood|They’re Not Gonna Take It: YouTube’s Control Of The Anime Mashup Community
|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Twood_assignment_four_final_project_draft.doc]]}} [[User:Twood|Twood]] 13:22, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Erin Saucke-Lacelle|Rough Draft: Effect of rules & regulations on political discussion|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Assignment4-ErinSaucke-Lacelle.pdf]]}}
[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 15:36, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Jon Radoff|Rough Draft: Comparing Forum Communities for Two Major Online Games|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Radoff_Assignment4.pdf]]}}
[[User:Jradoff|Jon Radoff]] 16:30, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Watson|Rough Draft: Liveleak and the Syrian Crisis|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Watson_assignment4_final_paper_draft.pdf]]}}
[[User:Watson|Watson]] 17:06, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Emmanuelsurillo|Assignment Four Rough Draft |
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Harvard_Paper_4_Final.docx]]}}
[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 17:24, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Vance.Puchalski|Regulators and the Spread of (Mis)Information|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Vance.Puchalski-Assignment4.docx]]}} [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 17:21, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

Hacking, Hackers, and Hacktivism

2014-04-22T05:06:42Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 22'''

Spend five minutes with anyone who studies “hackers” and you will quickly learn that the term is used to define a wide array of discrete subcultures, from homebrew computer programmers all the way through to military-industrial network vulnerability experts. If there is one unifying characteristic amongst all of these cultures (and there may not be), it is most likely the acknowledgement between these groups that the limitations imposed by code as a mode of regulating behavior can, and should, be subverted. Today we look to hackers, who they are, what they do, and what rules and norms govern those who do not recognize code as a governing influence.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; Defining hackers, hacking, and hacktivism

* [http://gabriellacoleman.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Coleman-Phreaks-Hackers-Trolls.pdf Gabriella Coleman, Phreaks, Hackers, and Trolls: The Politics of Transgression and Spectacle (from ''The Social Media Reader'')]

* [http://vimeo.com/46450688 Molly Sauter, Activist DDOS Campaigns: When Similes and Metaphors Fail] (video, watch from to 1:56 to 21:44)

:* Sauter uses the term "DDoS" throughout. This is an abbreviation for "distributed denial of service," a specific form of attack to a web server described in more detail [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDos#Distributed_attack here].

* [https://soundcloud.com/bwalker/doing-it-for-the-lulz Benjamen Walker, Doing it for the LULZ (from ''Too Much Information'')] (11:00 to 22:45 only, language at times is NSFW. ''Too Much Information'' drifts between fiction and non-fiction, but this excerpt is non-fiction.)

; Law and law enforcement

* [http://www.justice.gov/criminal/cybercrime/docs/ccmanual.pdf United States Department of Justice, Prosecuting Computer Crimes] (read pages 1-11: Introduction to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and Key Definitions)

* [http://www.cjr.org/cloud_control/scripps_hackers.php Sarah Laskow, Reporting, Or Illegal Hacking]

; Case studies

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Payback Wikipedia, Operation Payback]

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Chanology Wikipedia, Project Chanology]

* [http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2013/impact-aarons-law-aaron-swartzs-case Andy Sellars, The Impact of "Aaron's Law" on Aaron Swartz's Case]

* [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/04/appeals-court-reverses-hackertroll-weev-conviction-and-sentence/ David Kravets, Appeals Court Reverses Hacker/Troll "Weev" Conviction and Sentence]

* [http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/2013/1113/Hacking-tool-threatens-Healthcare.gov-site Jeff Ward-Bailey, Hacking Tool Threatens Healthcare.gov Site]

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/576-the-cyber-war-threat-has-been-grossly-exaggerated Intelligence Squared Debate: "The Cyberwar Threat Has Been Grossly Exaggerated"] (an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford-Style_debate#Oxford-Style_debate Oxford-style debate] with Marc Rotenberg, Bruce Schneier, Mike McConnell, and Jonathan Zittrain; watch the video of the debate)

* [http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/v107/n2/795/LR107n2Matwyshyn.pdf Andrea Matwyshyn, Hacking Speech: Informational Speech and the First Amendment]

* [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/technology/chinese-hackers-infiltrate-new-york-times-computers.html?_r=0 Nicole Perlroth, Hackers in China Attacked The Times for Last 4 Months (''New York Times'')]

* [https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-parties-use-influence-to-halt-operation-payback-101120/ TorrentFreak, Pirate Parties Use Influence to Halt Anonymous’ Operation Payback]

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/interactive/events/2012/10/soghoian Christopher Soghoian, The Growing Trade in Software Security Exploits]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:28, 17 December 2013 (EST)</div>

:In July 2012, someone successfully hacked my iphone and installed spy software on it. Any and all movements on my iPhone were being stored/tracked unbeknownst to me, including app activity (Chase Bank, emails, etc) for one month. I found out about it when I had taken my iPhone in a shop to get checked out - the screen would glitch at times and would randomly lose about 1% per minute. (I learned this was when my GPS data was being tracked up to minute). Among other things, the next step was to file a police report of this incident for my personal safety, as I’ll never be certain which data of mine was compromised. At the time I went to local police, either they didn’t care enough or they just didn’t have proper protocol to handle it.
:I understand this is a miniscule crime, in comparison to the huge cyber-crimes in the class readings. However, it lead me to research how equipped local police are for such smaller incidences. The result: They're not. (yet). I’m certain similar, smaller crimes will only increase over time and will be dealt with by the local police. While crime is increasingly moving online, state and local police are having a hard time keeping up. If the case is significant enough, the police have to hire specialized cyber-security companies to conduct digital investigations. The techniques the police will need to be equipped with are going to have to be more “IT specialist” and less “Law and Order” over the next few years. It seems hackers will be one step ahead, at a local level, until the police shift their skill set to more IT training. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:41, 21 April 2014 (EDT)
-----
Cyber warfare will take on a greater importance in conventional warfare and Government hackers will be crucial to this. It only makes sense as weapons, communications and systems become more sophisticated. Hackers may be used to break into countries systems to steal data and cause widespread disruption or break into the phones of country leaders and their key staff. This is evidenced in the Ukraine crisis by relentless hacking attacks on Russian websites by Ukraninan hackers and visa-versa. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-05/russia-ukraine-standoff-going-online-as-hackers-attack.html [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 01:06, 22 April 2014 (EDT)

Hacking, Hackers, and Hacktivism

2014-04-21T06:41:48Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

Informing the Public in the Internet Age

2014-04-15T03:05:11Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 15'''

The profusion of low-cost media production and distribution has led to the rise of an alternative citizen-led media sector. Is this a passing fad of enthusiastic amateurs or the beginning of a fundamental restructuring of the way media and news are produced and consumed? Will the current trends lead to more information, better information, and better informed people or to an infinite stream of unreliable chatter? Will it lead to a more politically engaged populace or to an increasingly polarized society that picks its sources of information to match its biases and ignorance?

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; The whos and wheres of modern journalism

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Overview_MR.pdf Persephone Miel and Rob Faris, News and Information as Digital Media Come of Age] (read executive summary)

* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Typologies_MR.pdf Persephone Miel and Rob Faris, A Typology of Media Organizations] (skim)

* [http://transition.fcc.gov/osp/inc-report/INoC-Executive_Summary.pdf Federal Communications Commission, Information Needs of Communities] (read executive summary, skim overview)

* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks_Chapter_7.pdf Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks (Chapter 7)] (read from 225 ("Our second story focuses…") to 241 (end before "On Power Law Distributions, Network Topology, and Being Heard"); read from 261-66 ("Who Will Play the Watchdog Function?"))

; Threats and issues

* [http://www.journalism.org/2014/03/26/state-of-the-news-media-2014-overview/ Amy Mitchell, The State of News Media 2014]

* [http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/493/picture-show?act=0#play This American Life, Picture Show] (audio, from 0:00 to 5:09)

* [http://law.wlu.edu/deptimages/Law%20Review/68-2Jones.pdf RonNell Anderson Jones, Litigation, Legislation, and Democracy in a Post-Newspaper America] (Section I only)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3TRKPSmoZk Brendan Nyhan, Biases Abound] (about 15 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.newrepublic.com/article/112554 Yochai Benkler, The Dangerous Logic of the Bradley Manning Case]

* [http://archive.pressthink.org/2009/01/12/atomization.html Jay Rosen, Audience Atomization Overcome: Why the Internet Weakens the Authority of the Press]

; New technologies and models

* [http://globe.mediameter.org/ Catherine D'Ignazio, Ali Hashmi, and Ethan Zuckerman, Mapping the (Boston) Globe] (play with the website)

* [http://banyanproject.com/index.php?title=Main_Page Banyan Project, Introduction and Overview]

* [http://thephoenix.com/boston/news/111660-muckrock-city/ Chris Faraone, MuckRock City (''Boston Phoenix'')]

* [http://www.niemanlab.org/2012/05/from-cold-calls-to-community-building-propublica-tries-to-make-crowdsourcing-more-meaningful/ Adrienne LaFrance, From Cold Calls to Community Building, ProPublica Tries to Make Crowdsourcing More Meaningful (''Nieman Journalism Lab'')]

== Optional Readings ==

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXZAIrDI66E&playnext=1&list=PL1E8598023D37F7AC&feature=results_video Jonathan Zittrain, 2009 Richard S. Salant Lecture on Freedom of the Press] (the lecture starts at 19:45)

* [http://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/syria_not_orphan_boy_pic.php?page=1 Sara Morrison, The Photo That Cried Wolf]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>
----

I just came across this video about a different kind of censorship that is happening on Facebook:
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9ZqXlHl65g#t=392]
It's really interesting to consider that censorship is not only happening as a result of laws or terms of use, but now as a way of "forcing" people/companies to pay. [[User:Castille|Castille]] 13:12, 9 April 2014 (EDT)

----

I'm very thankful for the readings on the implications of the new media revolution on the Fourth Amendment as it's an issue I've never thought about before. Indeed, if the laws are not appropriately updated, these changes could have a massive impact on the freedom of journalism. I wonder whether one way to work around the issue would be to form some form of unions that would encompass many individual amateur reporters, providing them with legal protection, but without limiting the freedoms of the individual participants.--[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:14, 13 April 2014 (EDT)
----

The Information Age and proliferation of media outlets seem to present a double-edged sword situation: while it's wonderful that we have access to a plethora of "news" from around the world and about whatever subjects in which we have a particular interest, there is also very little transparency in terms of the filters through which reporters and stations may be processing and delivering stories. By this I mean that there is no regulation to disclose what the stance of the company or organization might have, and how that stance might color the stories, which are generally presented as factual-- and indeed they may be-- but are oftentimes only offering one of many perspectives on an issue. Of course, maybe the solution is not to bind this freedom of speech with rules but instead to expect viewers to be intelligent enough to carry out their own research if they are so inclined. While this is a valid argument, is it "fair" to expect viewers to have to become reporters themselves? And what about the fact that the "truth" of a situation is virtually impossible to establish in many cases? Ultimately, all of the information available (or not available) is likely to leave the public either misinformed, blissfully ignorant of other points of view, or confused instead of truly informed.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 17:27, 13 April 2014 (EDT)

: There is a constant sense of urgency and ‘pride in the newsroom’ to be the first to unveil critical information in a developing story. I worked at ABC News in 2011 and everyone there could tell you who broke what information first against their competitors - CNN, NBC, etc, on almost any story they’ve worked on. While I don’t think this industry-race is any different before the internet age, I do think the pressure and urgency has upped the stakes. Now that a pool of captured-this-on-my-iPhone citizen journalists have entered the pool along with individual bloggers - it’s as if staying on top or getting critical information first has been causing numerous reporting blunders and mistakes from the big media companies that would have happened less frequently years ago. Almost every big name media company has learned a lesson the hard way about fact-checking in recent years. Accuracy will outweigh the race to finish in first place; but that is easier said than done within the industry [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 23:05, 14 April 2014 (EDT)
----

I think Brendan Nyhan's talk about biases lends some weight to the idea that new decentralized and less professional media outlets can be problematic. While I'm not as concerned as some people might be about a de-professionalization of media outlets (I'm sure there are many capable reporters, writers, editors, etc. than just those employed at major newspapers and other media outlets), I can understand why writers, editors, etc. in the media can benefit from a level of standard training. Learning best practices in order to avoid some of the issues Nyhan raises regarding readers' biases seems really important! Nyhan says that the technology we have at our disposal makes it easy to buttress our own views and ignore the ones we don't agree with (much like Sunstein's fears about the polarization of the blogosphere), so it's important that journalists don't encourage this behavior and type of thinking by the way they structure headlines and articles. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 22:38, 13 April 2014 (EDT)
----

Jay Rosen's piece "Audience Atomization Overcome" balances some of the arguments made about problems with the changes occurring in traditional media outlets. It serves as a good reminder that, while newspapers and other traditional news media can do a great public service by holding the government and other large institutions accountable to the public, they also (intentionally or not) set the agenda at the inevitable cost of certain issues. He aptly points out that much as journalists like to think they can engage in their work without being political, the very act of choosing to write or not write about a topic is a political statement, or at the very least implies that the topic is worthy of public discourse. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 22:54, 13 April 2014 (EDT)
----

This is a little off topic, but for anyone who was particularly interested in the article on MuckRock and its FOIA requests, you should check out the work that Ryan Shapiro (a PhD candidate at MIT) is doing.[http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/11/foia-ryan-shapiro-fbi-files-lawsuit] (Full disclosure- Ryan is a friend!) [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:08, 13 April 2014 (EDT)

Privacy Part 2: Government Surveillance

2014-04-09T03:39:06Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 8'''

Last week we looked at big-picture concepts of privacy and how the Internet and Internet companies reflect these issues. This week we dive into the specific question of surveillance by governments: how the Internet allows governments to observe their (and other governments') citizens, and what that does to us and the Internet as a system.

Joining us for this week are Berkman fellow and online security expert [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/bschneier Bruce Schneier] and Berkman Clinical Instructional Fellow [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/cwalsh Kit Walsh].

There is a [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2014/04/unownedinternet related event] at Harvard Law School earlier on this class day that may be of interest to students (RSVP required).

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; Government vs. Corporate Surveillance

* [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/04/yes-there-actually-is-a-huge-difference-between-government-and-corporate-surveillance/ Brian Fung, Yes, There Is Actually a Huge Difference Between Government and Corporate Surveillance]

* [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/10/the_trajectorie.html Bruce Schneier, The Trajectories of Government and Corporate Surveillance]

* [http://towcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Letter-Effect-of-mass-surveillance-on-journalism.pdf Emily Bell et al., Comment to Review Group on Intelligence and Communication Technologies Regarding the Effects of Mass Surveillance on the Practice of Journalism] (pages 9-12 ("Mass surveillance raises issues beyond individual surveillance," "Secret and confusing law," and "Chilling Effects") only)

; Case Study - the NSA Scandal and Surveillance Policy

* [http://www.theguardian.com/world/interactive/2013/nov/01/snowden-nsa-files-surveillance-revelations-decoded#section/1 The Guardian, NSA Surveillance Revelations Decoded] (peruse)

* [https://www.eff.org/nsa-spying/timeline Electronic Frontier Foundation, Timeline of NSA Domestic Spying] (peruse)

* [http://www.newrepublic.com/article/115002/invasive-nsa-will-protect-us-cyber-attacks Jack Goldsmith, We Need an Invasive NSA]

* [http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/01/edward_snowden_doesn_t_deserve_clemency_the_nsa_leaker_hasn_t_proved_he.single.html Fred Kaplan, Why Snowden Won't (and Shouldn't) Get Clemency]

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0d_QDgl3gI Bruce Schneier, The Battle for Power on the Internet] (approx. 12:30, watch all)

; Surveillance and U.S. law

* [http://www.dmlp.org/blog/2013/nsas-spying-powers-reading-statute Kit Walsh, The NSA's Spying Powers: Reading the Statute]

* [http://justsecurity.org/2013/10/23/laura-donohues-comprehensive-case-bulk-metadata-collection/ Steve Vladeck, Laura Donohue's Comprehensive Case Against Bulk Metadata Collection]

:* If you're interested, the Donohue article can be found [http://justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Just-Security-Donohue-PDF.pdf here].

== Optional Readings ==

* The Jennifer Granick / Orin Kerr debates on metadata and the Fourth Amendment

:* [http://justsecurity.org/2013/09/23/metadata-fourth-amendment/ Granick's opening]
:* [http://justsecurity.org/2013/09/23/debate-metadata-fourth-amendment-reply-jennifer-granick/ Kerr's response]
:* [http://justsecurity.org/2013/09/27/metadata-4a-round2-jg/ Granick's reply]
:* [http://justsecurity.org/2013/09/27/debate-round-2-metadata-fourth-amendment-response/ Kerr's sur-reply]

* [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/09/the_limitations.html Bruce Schneier, The Limitations of Intelligence]

* [http://iheid.revues.org/321 Johannes Köppel, The International Dimension of the SWIFT Affair]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Maybe I'm missing something, but what, exactly, has the government been doing with the information they have gotten through the NSA? It doesn't seem like they've been using it to incriminate individual citizens or even monitor them too extensively-- otherwise, wouldn't they have been able to track down would-be criminals prior to them committing crimes, a la Minority Report? They also don't seem to be monitoring it for the purpose of censorship, as is the case in China and Russia or the HUAC. And how are they even conducting their "research"? Do individuals actually go through all of that information, or is it a case whereby a machine compiles data and directs NSA employees' attentions only to cases where there are a multitude of 'questionable' searches/calls/etc.? As far as foreign policy is concerned, the act of spying on other governments has been practiced since the beginning of history. Does the advent of technology change what is acceptable in regards to spying, or only make it more accessible? With nuclear war so very possible in our times, it seems like some sort of action must be taken to monitor the intentions of other countries and their relations with the US and alliances with other countries, since transparency seems to be an impossible ideal for all countries.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:52, 5 April 2014 (EDT)

:* The problem is that we don't know what they do with the information because that is secret, and is also used for secret trials in secret courts. The problem is that even if the use of the information is benevolent and well-intentioned, it is worrisome because we're creating the technological foundation for totalitarianism. Now, I don't actually think we're extremely close to creating a totalitarian state but it doesn't mean that it isn't worrisome or that in the wrong political environment we might eventually get there. [[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 08:25, 8 April 2014 (EDT)
::* Ah, gotcha! No wonder I felt like I was missing something-- we all are! I didn't realize that they're actually hiding what they're doing with the information. Do you know what theory for how they are using the data is most likely?
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:19, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----

The Guardian article- informative content, but I want to comment on its amazing user interface. This is where the web should be heading. In the same way that HTML provides markup to words and sentences, the interactive features of this article help to mark up the thoughts & ideas presented in the article. Very nicely done. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 22:55, 6 April 2014 (EDT)
:*I couldn't agree more. The interface was AMAZING! Don't think I've ever seen an article like that before.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:19, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----

I am very interested to see what new data mining policies are made or both the government and corporations. Despite the reveal that we lack privacy (collection of lots of personal data from each sector), it would be nice if we had the right to know which data and on what terms data is collected on us. Agreed these are probably in the majority of privacy agreements I don't read. Trying harder to be transparent and clear with these privacy regulations would help society to at least be not as shocked by large government leaks.
([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 17:58, 7 April 2014 (EDT))

----

The Brian Fung article makes a fine point about the higher "cost" of switching from the United States to a different country, due to the government's monopoly on a range of services. However, this strikes me as a weak way to compare corporate data mining to government intrusion. In my opinion, the purpose of having a Constitution containing guaranteed rights is so that these costs need not be considered or incurred in the first place. If the US government needs to collect private information about its citizens, then it needs to be done within the restrictions of the Fourth Amendment. If exceptions need to be made it needs to be done with the public's knowledge and consent. [[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 08:35, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

I too came away from the Brian Fung article feeling dissatisfied with the comparison of government and corporate intrusion-- especially in light of this week's readings that make it abundantly clear to me that we are not able to "quit" or opt-out of either corporate data mining or government surveillance. I lived overseas in Asia and Europe with my last job and certainly didn't "quit" the United States, in fact I anticipated a greater impact on my "hard-to-measure modicum of privacy"- both tangible and intangible. As Fung suggests, most expats or Americans on short-term contracts overseas whom I knew and worked with openly acknowledged the higher level of scrutiny anticipated regarding correspondence, finances, and eve relationships once overseas- especially for those who intended to return to working life in the US after a time. Interestingly, the majority of these individuals were often more comfortable with- and even welcomed- decreased privacy given the positive correlation in their minds with increased security for their work and families while overseas. I will be interested to see whether cases related to data privacy and online surveillance engage the fourth amendment in the coming years- and especially whether the legal landscape at the highest levels is equipped to respond to such a quickly-evolving corporate and government culture of surveillance. [[User:akk22|akk22]] 10:39, 8 April 2014 (EDT)
----

Regarding the 'huge difference between government and corporate surveillance.' | There's so much to talk about on this topic, so I'll keep it short by playing a bit of devil's advocate. Is there truly that much of a significant difference between the two surveillance types? Both are working towards the same goal: the protection and accumulation of dollars. In the corporate sense, surveillance allows for the ability to make more dollars. With government surveillance, it allows for the preservation of the capitalist system — to maintain the corporate ecosystem. (Hence the argument that corporations still have a stronghold on our online privacy, regardless of who is responsible for the act of surveillance.) [[User:Twood|Twood]] 09:31, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

:*It seems unfair to me to suggest that government surveillance is solely to preserve the corporate ecosystem-- surely, issues of national security extend to individuals as well as corporations. I think that government surveillance is much more geared towards protection of the individual than corporate surveillance, which is completely for the purpose of accumulating capital. [[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:19, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----

Given the choice between Government or Corporations in regards to abuse of data - I’d like to trust the government more, as long as we reach a point where they’re transparent to citizens on how it’s being used and to what extent.
Corporations will use the data to increase profit, which therefore means mapping out and predicting the spending habits of consumers in order to target them. I hope it’s not wishful thinking to believe our data would be more secure within Government Data centers. Data security at corporations will vary considerably and that means personal data is more exposed to hacking, theft and misuse by unscrupulous individuals or corporations. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 23:39, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----

Playing Devils Advocate as well, I'm less concerned with government collection of data traffic. The massive collections that exist and increase exponentially on a daily basis are still subject to human interaction. Hiring of skilled staff with Hadoop, Hive, Pig, HBase, R, etc., are still subject to the human element. Threats are real within national security and threats are many. One might argue that we cannot handle sifting the data for agreed upon missions. I'm certainly not worried about my conversation requesting the more mundane issues of life. I am worried however, about the collection, packaging, selling and reselling of corporate collected data. The data crosses so many entities that control is truly impossible. There is a reason the Romans would hide items under a Rose bush - Messengers can always be intercepted.[[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 13:59, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----
The Battle for Power on the Internet was a great talk and made some great points. I like his idea of the quick versus the strong, saying that the marginalized was quick to use the Internet to organize but although the institutions were slower, they use power more effectively. I’m looking forward to talking more about this in class.
[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 14:06, 8 April 2014 (EDT)
-----
After reading all materials it seems that it is impossible to be secured from survellience in the "century of technologies". From one hand, the government survelliance aims to protect us from terrorizm and other hazards. From another hand, it restricts the people's right on freedom of speech. But, nowadays I didn't see that just ordinary citizen was killed because of the content of his message. Let's assume that the content of email is accessed by government, but it doesn't become public. But, the situation is different when it comes to active person, whose speechs/e-mail could rise threats to government. If the threat already exist, this person would be under survellience even in times BC and now, in time of technologies. So, the internet doesn't play a great role here. Still, there are some tools which could somehow prevent the cyber attacks: for example strong code combination. If the code is secure, then it will be diffucult for the computer to break your code. Aysel Ibayeva ([[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 14:37, 8 April 2014 (EDT))

----
I thought this might be useful as well: "Big data is here to stay, as it should be. But let’s be realistic: It’s an important resource for anyone analyzing data, not a silver bullet." http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/opinion/eight-no-nine-problems-with-big-data.html?src=me&module=Ribbon&version=context&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Most%20Emailed&pgtype=article [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 14:53, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

----

Whether consciously or uncosciously, Bruce Schneier in The Battle for Power on the Internet voice not only the obvious warning as to the ever increasing powers corporations and governments are gaining, but also the reason we this should not stop us from exploring new technologies may and probably will magnify that power even further in the decades to come. Yes, the magnification effect does, in the long run, give superior powers to larger actors, but as Schneier described so well, small, nimble, distributed actors tend to be at least a few years, if not decades ahead of the curve, which makes sure that as any good uses arise from new technology as the detrimental effects that follow. Privacy, liberty, and similar values are of great importances, but that should not be a reason to protest new developments such as Google Glass, cloud computing or bioengineering. The technologies we now all use daily certainly gave corporations and the government better access to our data, but they have also undoubtedly improved our lives. There is no reason to believe that things should be any different with most of the technologies that are on the horizon, that many are so concerned about. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 14:56, 8 April 2014 (EDT)
----

Surveillance is almost impossible to avoid in this age. Technology ranging from something as powerful as a Google search to simple phones, there is no avoiding be tracked, traced and watched. Governments have always been known to survey on one or two individuasl but now the NSA has a “domestic spying program” that collects millions of emails and contact information from Internet service providers. While major news reporting agencies like The New York Times have reported against corporate and government surveillance, the attacks that “The Times “ suffered by what the FBI called “hallmarks of hacking by the Chinese military” seem to justify an invasive NSA for the protection of US citizens.

Edward Snowden released ground-shaking evidence about government surveillance. While some people claim that he released more information then he should have, others claimed that he did a great service to his country and even called on the president to grant him “some form of clemency”. While for some it may be difficult to justify his decision, his actions sparked a new way of thinking over government surveillance and how the NSA will proceed in future programs. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

------

Personally, I am not sure if it is just me or there may be others, but I do not think that government surveillance is a bad thing altogether. Having said that, I am also a firm believer in transparency in governments' handling of data. For instance, in the internet telephony world, also known as VoIP, some third world country governments (e.g. Senegal) use internet surveillance to track and catch the fraudsters. In many West African countries, governments make it clear to their citizens that they will be spying on anyone (in order to intimidate those who would attempt to divert their international incoming calls by the use of "Sim Boxes" and other devices). Although this is not necessarily targeted to everyday citizens, their "surveillance" help them save millions of dollars annually. Therefore, I believe that as long as government internet surveillance is practiced for the good cause in a transparent manner, it could be a good thing for the society.

[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikmbacke]] 14:59, 8 April 2014 (EDT)

Assignment 3 Submissions

2014-04-02T05:08:54Z

Marissa1989:

{{AssignmentCal}}

'''''Please note that the deadline for this assignment has moved from March 25th to April 1st.'''''

This assignment is due on April 1st. Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (assignments submitted 4 days late or later will have a maximum grade of 1 point).

''Please name your file "wikiusername_Assignment3," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters.'' So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Assignment3.doc."

'''Upload your file here: [[Special:Upload|Upload file]]'''

Once you've uploaded your file, please link to it following the format below:

*Name or pseudonym:
*Description:
*Link to your outline: (the file you uploaded)

If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the [[Special:ImageList|list of uploaded files]].

==Submission Instructions==

You can use the same bullet format if you wish:

*Name or pseudonym:
*Description:
*Link to your outline:

Optionally you can use a new template to create a title box for your assignment. In order to do this use the following format:

<pre>
{{AssignmentInfo|Name|My assignment description|Link to your file}}
</pre>

If used properly you should see the following:
{{AssignmentInfo|My Name|My assignment description|http://yourlinkhere}}

And if you're feeling very adventurous, you may also use some new templates for comments and responses:

<pre>
{{Comment|type your comment here}}
</pre>

Should look like:
{{Comment|Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consetetur sadipscing elitr, sed diam nonumy eirmod tempor inviduntut labore et dolore magna aliquyam erat, sed diam voluptua. }}

You can enter a response in a similar way:

<pre>
{{Response|type your response here}}
</pre>

Should look like:
{{Response|thank you very much for commenting on my assignment.}}

'''If you are not using the comment boxes, please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post.'''

==Submissions==

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Lucia Gamboa|Framework of control in government run collaborative platform|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Luciagamboaso_Assignment3.docx}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Marissa Barkey|Trust & Verification in an online peer-to-peer marketplace|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Project_Outline_3.pdf}}
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 01:08, 2 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Daniel Rogowski|Censorship on Bitcoin's Forum|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Drogowski_assignment_3.docx}}[[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 14:23, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Akk22|Gendered Online Communities: Targeted Harassment and Successful Interventions |
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Assignment3.docx]]}}
[[User:Akk22]]

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Dan Coronado|Examining forum control policies at Anandtech.com – the good, the bad and the ugly!|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Dancoron_Assignment3.docx]]}}
[[User:Dancoron]]

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Castille Rath|Tumblr's Self-Harm Blogs|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/CastilleRath_ASSIGNMENT_THREE.doc]]}}
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 11:52, 25 March 2014 (EDT)

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Jane Kelly|Bitch Media's Comment Policy & User Behavior|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Jkelly_assignment3.odt}}

{{AssignmentInfo|Watson|Assignment 3 Project Outline|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Watson_assignment3.docx}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Margo Monroe|Controlling our personal genomes|
[[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Assignment3Outline_Monroe.docx]]}}
([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 08:21, 1 April 2014 (EDT))

----

{{AssignmentInfo|PSL|PubMed Commons|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Psl_Assignment3Outline.pdf}}
[[User:Psl|Psl]] 12:34, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo| [[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 13:58, 1 April 2014 (EDT) |An Analysis of Two Youtube Communities and Norms|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:LSTU_Assingment_3.docx}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Philip Seyfi|Reputation systems and unbalanced communities|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/LSTUE-120Assignment3_%281%29.pdf}}
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 14:00, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|VACYBER|The DEFCON Hacker Community: a response to the recent leaks of increased governmental surveillance?|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/VACYBER_Assignment_3.pdf}}
[[User:VACYBER]]

----

{{AssignmentInfo|MikeJohnson| Twitch Plays Pokémon - How Mediating Gameplay Changes the Game|
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/MikeJohnson_Assignment3.pdf}}
[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson 15:22, 1 April 2014 (EDT)]]

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Twood|YouTube’s Independent Music Communities: Mechanisms and Effects of Control|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Twood_Assignment3.docx}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Erin Saucke-Lacelle|Effect of rules & regulations on political discussion|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Assignment3-ErinSaucke-Lacelle.pdf}}

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Emmanuelsurillo|MacRumors Forums|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Harvard_Paper_3_Third_Draft_.docx}}

----
{{AssignmentInfo|TriciaByrnes|Are moderators an effective way of policing a forum|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_3_LSTU_120.doc}}
[[User:TriciaBy|TriciaBy]] 16:54, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Vance Puchalski|Regulators and the Spread of (Mis)Information|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Puchalski-Assignment3.docx; http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Puchalski-Raw_Data.xlsx}} [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 16:59, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----

{{AssignmentInfo|Art.Mescon|The Void Between Etsy.com and Its Sellers|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Art.Mescon_Assignment_3.docx}}
[[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 17:05, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

----
{{AssignmentInfo|Jradoff|Comparison of Free-to-Play Online Game Communities|http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Radoff_LSTU120_Assignment3.rtf}}
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 17:05, 1 April 2014 (EDT)

Privacy Part 1: Corporate Data Gathering

2014-03-31T06:11:30Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 1'''

A persistent fear throughout all of the Internet’s operation is the Internet’s treatment of a person’s own privacy. We have a hard time defining the term, much less determining what role it should play in deciding the whos, whats, and hows of Internet governance. Nevertheless, the Internet’s present evolution indicates that unless we spend time contemplating the reinforcing privacy online, our interests may fall to the interests of profitability, online behavior regulation, and cybersecurity.

Over the next two weeks we'll look at privacy, beginning with general concepts of privacy, how data is measured and gathered on the web, and some specific legal responses to privacy concerns. Next week we'll build on these concepts with an eye toward government surveillance and law enforcement.

Our own [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/dobrien David O'Brien] will be leading the class discussion this week.

== Assignments ==

'''''The deadline for [[Assignments#Assignment_3:_Project_Outline|Assignment 3]] moved from March 25th to today, April 1st.''''' Please [[Assignment_3_Submissions|upload your assignment]] prior to class today.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; Conceptualizing privacy

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1127888 Daniel Solove, ''Understanding Privacy'' (Chapter 1)] (skim)

; Privacy and data

* [http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory Chris Anderson, The End of Theory]

* [http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139104/kenneth-neil-cukier-and-viktor-mayer-schoenberger/the-rise-of-big-data Viktor Mayer-Shoenberger, The Rise of Big Data]

* [http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/12/securitymatters_1213 Bruce Schneier, Why Anonymous Data Sometimes Isn't]

* Play around with some of the websites by [http://latanyasweeney.org/ Latanya Sweeney]

:* [http://thedatamap.org/ The Data Map]

:* [http://aboutmyride.org/more.html About My Ride]

:* [http://aboutmyinfo.org/ About My Info]

; Corporate data practices

* [http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/12/07/how-dataium-watches-you/ Jeremy Singer-Vine, How Dataium Watches You]

* [http://www.interactually.com/linkedin-creepiest-social-network/ David Veldt, LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network]

* [http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323777204578189391813881534 Jennifer Valentino-Devires, Jeremy Singer-Vine, Ashkan Soltani, Websites Vary Prices, Deals Based on Users' Information] (if this appears behind a paywal, [http://blogs.wsj.com/wtk/ play around with the WSJ's interactive graphics])

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/20 Jonathan Zittrain, ''The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'' (Chapter 9)]

* [http://www.bitsbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/chapter2.pdf Hal Abelson, Ken Ledeen, and Harry Lewis, ''Blown to Bits'' (Chapter 2)] (pages 36-42)

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/privacy Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0'' (Chapter 7)] (focus on "Privacy in Public: Data")

* [http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/11/01/parents-survey-coppa.html danah boyd, Why Parents Help Children Violate Facebook’s 13+ Rule]

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_States Wikipedia, Privacy Laws of the United States]

* [http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295.html Solveig Singleton, Privacy as Censorship]

* [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/business/media/26privacy.html?_r=0 Noam Cohen, It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know It (''New York Times'')]

* [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/05/the_eyes_and_ea.html Bruce Schneier, Surveillance and the Internet of Things]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

This week's readings on privacy have been really thought provoking. Whether we have a 'right' to internet privacy is a tough subject to ponder, as we have no obligation to use the internet, thus making our use subject to a company's terms, yet there are also a number of other factors to consider. Some of the biggest concerns are that the "data collection" isn't merely studied but disseminated, and also that that collection doesn't end at internet usage. It infiltrates every aspect of our lives, with surveillance footage being taken unbeknownst to those being viewed. I'm not sure if it was in this class or in another discussion, but supposedly we're not far away from a kind of optical monitoring whereby stores can track what a shopper looks at most intently to cater advertising to them specifically. Where does this invasion of privacy end?

Adding to the links above, I found this article linked in one of the above articles. It's very informative and interesting.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DD1F3FF93AA3575BC0A9609C8B63

Sidebar- loved the article by Veldt on LinkedIn... I, too, have always wondered HOW they can suggest people who I know in real life but with whom I haven't had any connection with via social networks or even e-mail.

[[User:Castille|Castille]] 16:33, 29 March 2014 (EDT)

:Great questions on privacy, Castille, just to piggy-back on what you've brought up….
:Data gathering will become more intrusive, especially as we advance technologically. This will impede on personal privacy to a point where it becomes a major issue. For example, Google glasses will open many avenues for companies to gather personal data.
:But where do ethics come in?
:Companies don't have moral ethics if it means they can convert personal data into potential profits. It may already be too late to legislate laws and then how do we enforce them? Its actually quite alarming how much personal information is available digitally and more to come as new devices (such as wearables) make it easier for companies (and other individuals) to exploit. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:09, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

----
The data we can gather through automation is undoubtedly incredible. The weakness with big data lies in the quality - relying too much on the results spit out from the tools could lead to numerous mistakes. That’s when human intellect comes into play; real-time observation and analysis will be critical for spotting errors.
Human ingenuity is the source of progress. Any company can better leverage the data available to them and generate a competitive advantage, as long as they’re equipped with inquisitive minds and critical thinkers who can best apply the data presented. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:01, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

Privacy Part 1: Corporate Data Gathering

2014-03-31T06:09:27Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 1'''

A persistent fear throughout all of the Internet’s operation is the Internet’s treatment of a person’s own privacy. We have a hard time defining the term, much less determining what role it should play in deciding the whos, whats, and hows of Internet governance. Nevertheless, the Internet’s present evolution indicates that unless we spend time contemplating the reinforcing privacy online, our interests may fall to the interests of profitability, online behavior regulation, and cybersecurity.

Over the next two weeks we'll look at privacy, beginning with general concepts of privacy, how data is measured and gathered on the web, and some specific legal responses to privacy concerns. Next week we'll build on these concepts with an eye toward government surveillance and law enforcement.

Our own [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/dobrien David O'Brien] will be leading the class discussion this week.

== Assignments ==

'''''The deadline for [[Assignments#Assignment_3:_Project_Outline|Assignment 3]] moved from March 25th to today, April 1st.''''' Please [[Assignment_3_Submissions|upload your assignment]] prior to class today.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; Conceptualizing privacy

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1127888 Daniel Solove, ''Understanding Privacy'' (Chapter 1)] (skim)

; Privacy and data

* [http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory Chris Anderson, The End of Theory]

* [http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139104/kenneth-neil-cukier-and-viktor-mayer-schoenberger/the-rise-of-big-data Viktor Mayer-Shoenberger, The Rise of Big Data]

* [http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/12/securitymatters_1213 Bruce Schneier, Why Anonymous Data Sometimes Isn't]

* Play around with some of the websites by [http://latanyasweeney.org/ Latanya Sweeney]

:* [http://thedatamap.org/ The Data Map]

:* [http://aboutmyride.org/more.html About My Ride]

:* [http://aboutmyinfo.org/ About My Info]

; Corporate data practices

* [http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/12/07/how-dataium-watches-you/ Jeremy Singer-Vine, How Dataium Watches You]

* [http://www.interactually.com/linkedin-creepiest-social-network/ David Veldt, LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network]

* [http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323777204578189391813881534 Jennifer Valentino-Devires, Jeremy Singer-Vine, Ashkan Soltani, Websites Vary Prices, Deals Based on Users' Information] (if this appears behind a paywal, [http://blogs.wsj.com/wtk/ play around with the WSJ's interactive graphics])

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/20 Jonathan Zittrain, ''The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'' (Chapter 9)]

* [http://www.bitsbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/chapter2.pdf Hal Abelson, Ken Ledeen, and Harry Lewis, ''Blown to Bits'' (Chapter 2)] (pages 36-42)

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/privacy Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0'' (Chapter 7)] (focus on "Privacy in Public: Data")

* [http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/11/01/parents-survey-coppa.html danah boyd, Why Parents Help Children Violate Facebook’s 13+ Rule]

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_States Wikipedia, Privacy Laws of the United States]

* [http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295.html Solveig Singleton, Privacy as Censorship]

* [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/business/media/26privacy.html?_r=0 Noam Cohen, It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know It (''New York Times'')]

* [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/05/the_eyes_and_ea.html Bruce Schneier, Surveillance and the Internet of Things]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

This week's readings on privacy have been really thought provoking. Whether we have a 'right' to internet privacy is a tough subject to ponder, as we have no obligation to use the internet, thus making our use subject to a company's terms, yet there are also a number of other factors to consider. Some of the biggest concerns are that the "data collection" isn't merely studied but disseminated, and also that that collection doesn't end at internet usage. It infiltrates every aspect of our lives, with surveillance footage being taken unbeknownst to those being viewed. I'm not sure if it was in this class or in another discussion, but supposedly we're not far away from a kind of optical monitoring whereby stores can track what a shopper looks at most intently to cater advertising to them specifically. Where does this invasion of privacy end?

Adding to the links above, I found this article linked in one of the above articles. It's very informative and interesting.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DD1F3FF93AA3575BC0A9609C8B63

Sidebar- loved the article by Veldt on LinkedIn... I, too, have always wondered HOW they can suggest people who I know in real life but with whom I haven't had any connection with via social networks or even e-mail.

[[User:Castille|Castille]] 16:33, 29 March 2014 (EDT)

:::Great questions on privacy, Castille, just to piggy-back on what you've brought up….
Data gathering will become more intrusive, especially as we advance technologically. This will impede on personal privacy to a point where it becomes a major issue. For example, Google glasses will open many avenues for companies to gather personal data.
But where do ethics come in?
Companies don't have moral ethics if it means they can convert personal data into potential profits. It may already be too late to legislate laws and then how do we enforce them? Its actually quite scary how much personal information is available digitally and more to come as new devices (such as wearables) make it easier for companies (and other individuals) to exploit. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:09, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

----
The data we can gather through automation is undoubtedly incredible. The weakness with big data lies in the quality - relying too much on the results spit out from the tools could lead to numerous mistakes. That’s when human intellect comes into play; real-time observation and analysis will be critical for spotting errors.
Human ingenuity is the source of progress. Any company can better leverage the data available to them and generate a competitive advantage, as long as they’re equipped with inquisitive minds and critical thinkers who can best apply the data presented. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:01, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

Privacy Part 1: Corporate Data Gathering

2014-03-31T06:01:43Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''April 1'''

A persistent fear throughout all of the Internet’s operation is the Internet’s treatment of a person’s own privacy. We have a hard time defining the term, much less determining what role it should play in deciding the whos, whats, and hows of Internet governance. Nevertheless, the Internet’s present evolution indicates that unless we spend time contemplating the reinforcing privacy online, our interests may fall to the interests of profitability, online behavior regulation, and cybersecurity.

Over the next two weeks we'll look at privacy, beginning with general concepts of privacy, how data is measured and gathered on the web, and some specific legal responses to privacy concerns. Next week we'll build on these concepts with an eye toward government surveillance and law enforcement.

Our own [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/dobrien David O'Brien] will be leading the class discussion this week.

== Assignments ==

'''''The deadline for [[Assignments#Assignment_3:_Project_Outline|Assignment 3]] moved from March 25th to today, April 1st.''''' Please [[Assignment_3_Submissions|upload your assignment]] prior to class today.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings ==

; Conceptualizing privacy

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1127888 Daniel Solove, ''Understanding Privacy'' (Chapter 1)] (skim)

; Privacy and data

* [http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory Chris Anderson, The End of Theory]

* [http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/139104/kenneth-neil-cukier-and-viktor-mayer-schoenberger/the-rise-of-big-data Viktor Mayer-Shoenberger, The Rise of Big Data]

* [http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/12/securitymatters_1213 Bruce Schneier, Why Anonymous Data Sometimes Isn't]

* Play around with some of the websites by [http://latanyasweeney.org/ Latanya Sweeney]

:* [http://thedatamap.org/ The Data Map]

:* [http://aboutmyride.org/more.html About My Ride]

:* [http://aboutmyinfo.org/ About My Info]

; Corporate data practices

* [http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/12/07/how-dataium-watches-you/ Jeremy Singer-Vine, How Dataium Watches You]

* [http://www.interactually.com/linkedin-creepiest-social-network/ David Veldt, LinkedIn: The Creepiest Social Network]

* [http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323777204578189391813881534 Jennifer Valentino-Devires, Jeremy Singer-Vine, Ashkan Soltani, Websites Vary Prices, Deals Based on Users' Information] (if this appears behind a paywal, [http://blogs.wsj.com/wtk/ play around with the WSJ's interactive graphics])

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/20 Jonathan Zittrain, ''The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It'' (Chapter 9)]

* [http://www.bitsbook.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/chapter2.pdf Hal Abelson, Ken Ledeen, and Harry Lewis, ''Blown to Bits'' (Chapter 2)] (pages 36-42)

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/privacy Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0'' (Chapter 7)] (focus on "Privacy in Public: Data")

* [http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2011/11/01/parents-survey-coppa.html danah boyd, Why Parents Help Children Violate Facebook’s 13+ Rule]

* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy_laws_of_the_United_States Wikipedia, Privacy Laws of the United States]

* [http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295.html Solveig Singleton, Privacy as Censorship]

* [https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/26/business/media/26privacy.html?_r=0 Noam Cohen, It’s Tracking Your Every Move and You May Not Even Know It (''New York Times'')]

* [https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/05/the_eyes_and_ea.html Bruce Schneier, Surveillance and the Internet of Things]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

This week's readings on privacy have been really thought provoking. Whether we have a 'right' to internet privacy is a tough subject to ponder, as we have no obligation to use the internet, thus making our use subject to a company's terms, yet there are also a number of other factors to consider. Some of the biggest concerns are that the "data collection" isn't merely studied but disseminated, and also that that collection doesn't end at internet usage. It infiltrates every aspect of our lives, with surveillance footage being taken unbeknownst to those being viewed. I'm not sure if it was in this class or in another discussion, but supposedly we're not far away from a kind of optical monitoring whereby stores can track what a shopper looks at most intently to cater advertising to them specifically. Where does this invasion of privacy end?

Adding to the links above, I found this article linked in one of the above articles. It's very informative and interesting.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE3DD1F3FF93AA3575BC0A9609C8B63

Sidebar- loved the article by Veldt on LinkedIn... I, too, have always wondered HOW they can suggest people who I know in real life but with whom I haven't had any connection with via social networks or even e-mail.

[[User:Castille|Castille]] 16:33, 29 March 2014 (EDT)

----
The data we can gather through automation is undoubtedly incredible. The weakness with big data lies in the quality - relying too much on the results spit out from the tools could lead to numerous mistakes. That’s when human intellect comes into play; real-time observation and analysis will be critical for spotting errors.
Human ingenuity is the source of progress. Any company can better leverage the data available to them and generate a competitive advantage, as long as they’re equipped with inquisitive minds and critical thinkers who can best apply the data presented. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 02:01, 31 March 2014 (EDT)

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-03-05T08:31:41Z

Marissa1989:

{{AssignmentCal}}

===Submission Instructions===

''Please note that we have updated the [[Final_Project#Frequently_Asked_Questions|final project page's FAQ section]] based on some student questions that have come to us over the past week.''

This assignment is due on February 25. Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (assignments submitted 4 days late or later will have a maximum grade of 1 point).

Please name your file "wikiusername_Assignment2," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters.'' So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Assignment2.doc."

Upload your rough draft here: [[Special:Upload|Upload file]]. If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the [[Special:ImageList|list of uploaded files]].

In the submissions section below please post the following information:

*Name or pseudonym:
*Prospectus title:
*Link to prospectus: (add your link here)

==Comments==

Everyone will receive an additional participation grade for this assignment. You should read through everyone's proposals after they are uploaded and add constructive comments below the proposal on which you're commenting. Comments should be submitted by March 5 so you have time to incorporate them, if applicable, into your project outline. '''Please remember to sign your comments by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post.''' If we don't know who you are we can't give you credit for finishing this assignment!

----

*Name: Jolie Ho - Wan Lap Ho
*Instagram vs Flickr
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Jolie_Assignment_2.docx
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:15, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: How do you propose to collect data to answer the last question? [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:22, 27 February 2014 (EST)

Hey Jolie! You picked a really fascinating topic to cover! Just a few thoughts I hope will help. How do you plan on pinpointing how all the users behave differently, just because there are so many registered accounts you might be able to find people who behave nearly the same or certain individuals who have accounts on both Instagram and Flickr. Just as a mere suggestion maybe you can find a niche that is unique to each site and compare them? Maybe Instagram has thousands of pictures of food and seflis while Flickr has more professional content? I hope this will help you! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:15, 1 March 2014 (EST)

::I really like your topic to dive into why Instagram has been so successful compared to Flicker. It may be interesting to compare the age groups of each users. Instagram seems more accessible because it is a phone app that is simple and immediate to use, whereas Flicker users upload a batch of vacation photos, etc. I like Emmanuel's suggestion to compare the content between users. Another suggestion which relates to the selfies/food photos may be to compare the users themselves. I think older people tend to use Flickr and therefore may not post as much. However, younger people (who no long user facebook) posting to instagram all the time would provide a way for facebook to get back that market. ([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 14:31, 2 March 2014 (EST))

::Hi Jolie: This is a very interesting topic, with many possible areas focus on! (Also, a nice mix between the tech and creative worlds.) You mentioned that Instagram and Flickr diverge where mobile apps are concerned. This looked particularly interesting, especially following the Flickr app's overhaul. Anecdotally, via Twitter, it looked as though the Flickr update was a major talking point in both the Instagram and Flickr user groups. My thought was that it may be interesting to look at whether this major app update had any bearing on either of the two communities, as it may have impacted some of your research questions. Best! [[User:Twood|Twood]] 09:33, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Jolie, good choice of topic. Flickr and Instagram are great examples of user generated content applications where control practices play a integral part. I like your idea to compare and contrast the sites. Also, I think it's insightful how you noted that Flickr has been around longer but is not as successful, and your desire to find out why, Instagram is more successful. That question I think, leads you into a analysis of the successful tactics of each site. However, instead of viewing their success in light of stock prices as is usually done, in keeping with our class theme it seems that you will ask how do the sites control practices help with their success or failure. Perhaps as you look for those answers, you may find some trends that other companies may want to emulate or avoid to make their sites/apps successful. Your research could lead to consulting work for you! All the best on your project.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:43, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:: Hello Jolie, very interesting topic choice, both Flickr and Instagram represent emerging content applications that are quite popular. My one concern with your topic would be your question pertaining to the behavior of users on the site. Both Flickr and Instagram are massive sites and would be very difficult to mine for information without some type of selection bias. Have you considered sourcing a third-party site that tracks information on these two applications? Possibly a forum about rules for these two sites? I just think it would be a very daunting task to use Flickr and Instagram as your sources. I can't wait to see the final result, good luck. [[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 14:05, 4 March 2014 (EST)

--
Hi Jolie,
Great topic! I would love to see how the privacy policies of flickr differ from that of Instagram as well as that of Facebook, being a Publicly traded company,whose privacy policy from user perspective seems to be waning on one hand and waxing on the other. since Instagram is now a Facebook company do you plan to explore Facebooks privacy policy as well? This may be helpful and interesting since, a company that been acquired usually subscribes to the parent company's policies, sooner or later. Can't wait to view your final project. [[User:404consultant|404consultant]] 17:16, 4 March 2014 (EST) aka Ronika Lewis

----

*Name: Drogowski - Daniel Rogowski
*Regulating Digital Currencies: The Bitcoin Conundrum
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Regulating_Digital_Currencies-_The_Bitcoin_Conundrum_Daniel_Rogowski.docx
[[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 14:58, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: How would this differ from other imaginary items of trade like currency/commodity derivatives and futures and virtual commodities like pork bellies? [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:17, 27 February 2014 (EST)

Dear Daniel,
What an interesting topic! I was not even aware that state governments recognized these currencies. Would you be able to come up with more material if you focus on one or two countries and their reaction to the online currency? Also Ichua gave great advice; maybe one country’s reaction and policies to multiple online currencies would help in the scope of observation. Your idea of creating a website to report and share your findings is really novel! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

:: Very interesting topic Daniel. Ive been following the progress of Bitcoin as a personal interest. Apart from the regulatory challenges Bitcoin poses for Governments, its also vulnerable to cyber attacks which can erode trust in using the currency. Whilst the actual Bitcoin itself is heavily encrypted, the Bitcoin exchanges are vulnerable to hacking and cyber theft as evidenced recently by the successful attacks on Mt Gox, one of the world's largest Bitcoin exchanges. It would be interesting to observe the effect (if any) this would have on the regulatory view of the currency by Governments. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:47, 2 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Daniel, you've picked an interesting, and narrowly defined topic, and you have concrete steps for your methodology of answering the questions that you've come up with. I think you have a very good framework with which to start your project, all that's left is to fill in the blanks to the outline you've created for yourself. Good work up front. Also, presenting your project in website form is quite appropriate I think for your topic, it underscores your point in a way.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:55, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Great topic!! Have you considered discussing the ways in which bit coins are used for illegal purposes?(ex: The Silk Road- Where people can use bit coin to anonymously purchase illegal goods such as narcotics and firearms)
[[User:Benh|Benh]] 13:31, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Daniel: This really is a fantastic topic! Your research questions are very focused, which is great given the many ways you could run with the subject. I'm not certain if this will help, but: Here in Canada, there has been quite a lot of coverage regarding Bitcoin ATMs popping up. Here's one such article: http://winnipeg.ctvnews.ca/winnipeg-s-first-bitcoin-atm-now-accepting-cash-1.1688529. And another: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bitcoin-machine-comes-to-montreal-1.2525050. However, who knows how long these machines will remain in operation given the buzz now surrounding Canadian banking self-regulations: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/19/bitcoin-bank-of-montreal_n_4817319.html. Looking forward to reading more. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 14:37, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Daniel,
Cryptocurrencies "present a significant regulatory challenge," yet should they be regulated? I posit that, indeed, the regulation of cryptocurrencies are a conundrum precisely because they are not intended for governmental manipulation or regulation. What-say-you? The focus of your research "on the intended effect and consequences of legislation on Bitcoin by analyzing responses to regulation" is, as you know, timely and relevant and it seems if every few days there's a new chapter to the saga... Mt.Gox!

Do you think, in the scope of this project and the time given for this class, it will be possible to track Bitcoin in visual ways v. textual ways, i.e., mapping the activity of Bitcoin in areas rumored to be hit through regulation v. chat rooms, forums, and news/article posts.

Specifically, can it be shown that Bitcoin activity increases or decreases after news reports of regulations and/or arrests are announced, e.g., BitInstant? Is activity greatest after rumors of regulation or published reports of regulation? Can new users be tracked and, if so, are they most active after newsreports of regulation initiatives? I believe these are some specific trends you may want to look at.

Altruistically, I am interested in Bitcoin, as I'm sure everyone, particularly in this class, could say that, and my original intent was to focus on Bitcoin and/or revolutions. I believe this class and our chosen topics provide an opportunity for mutual assistance and editing, and, perhaps (gasp) collaboration. Finally, recently, I heard someone say, or rather I read, that the people who want regulation for Bitcoin and who are clamoring for government regulation are not true to the revolutionary ideals of Bitcoin and thus compromise the system as a whole. Do you think this can be proven?[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 17:31, 4 March 2014 (EST)

- Daniel, I hope you plan to have a blog on your website! I am super excited about your final project. I was just reading on Bitcoin, given all talk of it, and my research left me with the impression that Bitcoin, like Litecoin, is not SEC regulated since no once seems to know who started it, yet it is trackable and traceable (think ICANN). With only 42 million bitcoins issuable (If I remember correctly), the assumption is that at some point bitcoins will be issued in the .0000001 and .0000001 increments. This is why I believe it is unregulated in the US currently since the US Treasury (to my knowledge) doesn't have a cap on how many bills can be in circulation, yet they print and destroy money at their leisure. All the best in your research Daniel[[User:404consultant|404consultant]] 17:31, 4 March 2014 (EST)aka Ronika Lewis

----

*Pseudonym: Marissa1989
*Prospectus title: The rise of the collaborative consumption movement: Analyzing effective control of communication, structures of gaining trust & verification, and legal issues.
*Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_2_Barkey-2.pdf
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 23:37, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:Hi, Marissa! I used AirBnB to rent out my apartment last summer and it actually resulted in me being robbed by the person to the tune of $10,000-- not including the rent for the summer, which he didn't pay (I didn't get any of it back, either, despite the insurance). It was a nasty situation. Anyways, from what I understand, the majority of communication on AirBnB is done privately. Without staging anything or intervening, how do you plan to observe enough to answer your question(s)? I think this is basically the same concern with one of the other treatments I read, regarding Facebook. I do think the security of platforms like AirBnB is of great concern and would be a very interesting subject to study in depth![[User:Castille|Castille]] 21:16, 28 February 2014 (EST)
:::Thanks for the Feedback, Castille, That is such a rough situation to have been in and likely one of biggest fears of hosts on airbnb.com. So sorry this happened to you! The security concern on Airbnb.com will be an important piece in my project, especially since so many people worldwide are using the site and opening their homes to strangers. There are a few horrific airbnb experiences, and I will research how airbnb.com handled these security flaws in their trust and verification system [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 03:31, 5 March 2014 (EST)

Dear Marissa,
I loved the idea for your prospectus! Just as a suggestion, would you consider comparing a few corresponding sites like 9flats, Couchsurfing International, or Hospitality Club? You could analyze how they handle different verifiability and security issues while also comparing how the sites are constructed to better “vet” their users. This may yield insight on how trustworthy their users are to each other. You might even want to inquire if one has had “major” legal issues in the past. I hope this helps! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:32, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Marissa, (I posted this comment on Saturday, March 1st, but it looks as though it was deleted somehow.) I cannot wait to read your paper. Your research topic focuses on a very interesting tension; you write of the concept of "virtual social capital," which attempts to take the sociological concept of "social capital" and see how it translates in present day collaborative consumption environments. For background on social capital look to Pierre Bordieu. Your topic also speaks to another tension: the intersection of internet-based activity and the potential repercussions that this activity has in "meat-space." That is, renters attempt to gauge the social capital of tenants because they fear theft, property destruction etc. in their homes. Therefore, social capital is extremely important in the home-sharing economy. My suggestion to you is that you narrow your focus. AirBnB is an expansive community so you wish to focus on one geographic location and look at rental profiles in a specified price range. As your reader, I would be curious to know: do higher priced rentals equal greater social capital as measured by "response rate" and "overall quality." These are quantifiable measures that you can implement in exploring your topic. Great idea! [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 18:00, 4 March 2014 (EST)(originally posted March 1st, 2014)

::: Thank you, Vance. I like the idea of perhaps shifting the prospectus to an angle on the importance of social capital in regards to trust and verification online. There is a high value placed on reputation/ratings in digital peer-to-peer marketplaces. I appreciate the feedback! [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 03:31, 5 March 2014 (EST)

Greetings Marissa!

Your topic is very interesting and it appears we have a few of the same elements in the companies we have selected to research: Verification and trust. From what I understand, you are addressing issues of users on auction/garage sale platforms surrounding the tiers of user verifiability. In other words, who is protecting one user from being taken advantage of by another user.

The comment you posted on the wiki under my topic in regards to the effectiveness of how the sites that I have selected deal with inaccurate comments made about companies by the general public are dealt with is of great importance-the public can ruin a business for no other reason than spite. In other words, who protects the companies from users.

The proposal you submitted intrigues me in many ways. By studying the community of airbnb.com, it appears you will be analyzing the controls implemented to make the site successful (verification, quality feedback, security, payment, userability and collaboration).

In summary, it appears we are both working on protection issues, and if the verification process is significant enough to gain consumer trust.

Would you mind if I ask how you plan to analyze the user? I would be interested in your methodology, and we may even find each other’s approach helpful to each other. We may even be able to compare and contrast the communities with a similar approach and work together if you would be interested.
--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:18, 3 March 2014 (EST)
::::Hi Melissa, I'd love to discuss methods for analysing users on both our projects and perhaps collaborate on how reputation is built in our communties. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 03:31, 5 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Marissa, great topic! You are hitting on many of the themes of the class with your proposal. One thing I thought about when reading your prospectus was how this collaborative way of business could be a model for types of activities. This community type platform that you are studying could be used in other settings that could help communities to work more closely together by sharing resources, and collaborating when they need to buy and sell things. Perhaps, your research will highlight the ways that these communities are successful and not successful. And furthermore, your research could highlight the processes that other businesses and governments could take to emulate the best of these sites(indirectly by from the behavior and processes you observe). I know that this is not necessarily what your research will be focused on but perhaps a social scientist or entrepreneur reading your final project with find tools within your analysis to help them to build something we might not have seen before. All the best on in your work![[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:19, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Marissa,
I am very interested in your topic, for I live on a hotsprings in the California desert, a former BnB, and I dream to rent it out full-time as a BnB. Many of my acquaintances use airbnb to make a living or at least as an income supplement, yet I have never used airbnb.com. How am I to know their "methods of implementing trust and verifiability assures the highest measure of safety to make the host or traveler feel comfortable, notwithstanding the possibility of theft, vandalism, or legal issues that are at risk? Am I, as an interested non-user, simply to take this as fact. I don't understand how this is possible. What does it mean, given the experience of Castille above?

How does airbnb.com succeed or fail in "user trust" as it pertains to "security, usability, verification, payment, collaboration, and quality feedback." Do you think Castille, if willing, could help narrow your focus or shed light into the project? Finally, airbnb.com has been involved in legal proceedings brought by NYC and other locales. Do you think you'll have any time, or interest, in focusing on these pressing issues, for the intervention of government may wreak havoc into their business model. What are users and hosts saying about this government encroachment into private party contracts. Will it spell the doom of the business model?[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 17:31, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 18:36, 25 February 2014 (EST)
*Change.org vrs Ripp Off Report
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Harvard_Research_Paper-Final.docx

Dear Melissa,
What a great topic and area of coverage!!! I’m hoping my comments and questions will be of help to you! Which site succumbs more readily to outside pressure and take down requests? Also you mentioned that a susceptible compliant to both is that they are accused of not “vetting” their sources. You could possible test to see which one (if either of them do) checks them more thoroughly. This might be, and I know nothing about it, accomplished by putting posts of your own and noting if they require any amount of proof, citation, source, or quote of any kind. I really hope this helps you! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:35, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Thank you so much Emmanuel! Your ideas are superb and very helpful!
--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 13:17, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Melissa, these sites can be a boon for consumers in helping to identify unscrupulous businesses and thus avoiding them. The issue that I find with these sites, that's never been effectively dealt with, is how do they identify and remove potentially inaccurate comments attacking a business as a result of say, a personal vendetta by a disgruntled employee or a customer who was unreasonable. Many small and medium size businesses rely on word of mouth for new customers. If the site allows the comments to remain, it may affect the business. This in effect may lead to possible blackmail of businesses by threatening to post inaccurate information on these sites. I'm also very interested in the sample groups and postings that you choose. Great topic! [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:47, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Marissa, Excellent insight and the problems posed are valid. Your questions are helping to me and assist in narrowing the topic-which is clearly too broad at the moment.
--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 13:17, 3 March 2014 (EST)

: Hi Melissa, Just a quick note, because I loved your prospectus so much (it's such a creative take on the assignment, but still seems to hit on all the prof's requirements, really amazing job). With your '''Q1''', ''Why would one site be more popular?''- I can;t help but wonder, does the fact that it has such a simple, perfect 1-word URL have any effect? Also, due to the time (2007) & place (USA) I automatically assumed this website was somehow related to Obama's election campaign- though from quick Google search there doesn't seem to be any direct link. Anyways, just wanted to say, I really like your prospectus. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 21:49, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::These are great questions! I had actually looked at Ripoffreport.com’s trajectory as a topic initially.

::As I am certain you have found through your research, the company has come under great scrutiny by virtue of their corporate arbitration program. Allegedly, the tool is offered by the company to allow firms who have received negative reviews on the Ripoffreport.com site to resuscitate their reputation. There is a catch, however, of which irony—given what Ripoffreport.com claims to stand for—that is not lost on watchers. The arbitration program itself charges an initial fee of $1500 to $2000 with slighted firms paying upwards of $100k, as some have alleged. Moreover, the “arbitration” is not dealt with by reputable non-profit arbitration organizations; instead, slighted companies allege that Ripoffreport’s own lawyers arbitrate cases, which is clearly a conflict. As such, this goes back to an excellent question you raise about the lack of vetting process for consumer reviews, which should really be the initial point-of-contact for the model. Arguably, Ripoffreport.com’s business model is largely seen by tech industry insiders as belonging to a certain group of tech founders born out of the early 2000’s tech boom, who engage in questionable business practices. This peripheral group of tech founders bring no real, quantifiable engineering innovation to the tech ecosystem; instead, they create channels—via website(s)—to advance financial schemes, providing quasi-products to consumers. I look forward to reading your paper, and kudos to you for what I believe will be an interesting read indeed! [[User:Watson|Watson]] 15:45, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 14:32, 25 February 2014 (EST)
*Twitch Plays Pokémon – How Mediating Gameplay Changes the Game
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/MikeJohnson_Assignment2.docx

:Hey Mike, it would absolutely be my pleasure to provide feedback to you. I won't go too far before having the time to focus & read it completely- so my first feedback to you is: if you didn't pick such an interesting topic, I would have actually read the full prospectus. However after reading your first paragraph, I ended up watching TPP and reading its subreddit and forgot to finish reading your prospectus! hahaha. But this weekend I'll spend time focusing and try to provide you feedback, hopefully as good as the feedback you gave me (: [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 10:34, 28 February 2014 (EST)

::Hi Mike! After reading [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]]'s comments below, I'm kinda worried about posting my comments, cus I think I understood your questions from a different point of view.
::*First of all, my question- how do you approach your 2nd qualitative question? I'm not completely sure I understand what you mean by vulnerability.
::*Second, my advice, feel free to take it or leave it: to keep within scope of this project (2500 word paper seems so short!), I believe it may be easier to tackle Qualitative questions #1 & 3, and your second quantitative question (''Has it helped or hurt the game to impose such controls?''). I get the impression that these questions would be the ones that would be easiest to answer from following the community discussion on the subreddit. That being said, if we were writing 8000 word papers, it would be so much fun for you to really dive into the architecture & UX of the game itself, while paralleling it with the subreddit(!!!). Really awesome topic & prospectus.
::[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 22:16, 3 March 2014 (EST)

:After reading your prospectus, I have a few questions based on your questions, or maybe some questions that combine the ones you already have. It seems clear from what you write in your prospectus that the user experience is absolutely vulnerable to the controls imposed by the game, but I'm curious to know in what ways. Were users bumping up against controls they didn't like before there were changes, or was it only after the controls of the creator were made clear (he made himself known in an explicit way, rather than operating quietly in the background) that users began to find fault? (Another way of thinking about this might be- were a lot of users thinking about the controls imposed by the game before the creator's changes forced them to think about it?) If I understand the current set up correctly, it seems that users still have the option to have commands parsed as they go instead of waiting for them to be tallied and then implemented. So, were the controls only seen as problematic once users considered that there was one person making a decision that affected every user? Is the lack of democratic decision-making behind the scenes a bigger problem for users than the actual changes in user experience?

:As far as your quantitative question goes, I'm wondering if there's any way for you to know how many users stopped playing the game after the creator made changes? Do you have a means of seeing the changes over time? [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 14:16, 2 March 2014 (EST)

----

*[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 14:03, 25 February 2014 (EST)
*How does the online Flickr community operate within the Creative Commons feature? How do they share their work, and work together?
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Prospectus_for_final_paper_Michael_Thomas.docx

Dear Michael,
I find your prospective very interesting! I thought to give you these few suggestions. I hope they will help! You might want to see what percentage of Flickr users are a part of the Creative Commons community and whether it consists of a majority or a minority. Another area of research might be into the other forms of control that Flickr uses to protect copyrighted material, and then to compare them with Creative Commons to see if they are as effective, prevalent, or well known. Also, when there are infringements in copyright policy, do people respond to correction or do they just ignore and continue violating the rules? Lastly, how does the Creative Commons community handle repeat violators (if there are any)? Wish you the best! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:43, 1 March 2014 (EST)

You've mentioned architectural methods used to encourage correct attribution, but another architectural detail to consider is how and whether Flickr encourages users to publish their content under (cc) as opposed to (c) and if so, whether the users are in fact aware of the rights they retain and give away. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 12:28, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Hi Michael: I think this is an interesting and nicely focused way to examine Creative Commons — through one very robust example. And even if you don't end up using a comparison of communities in your final project, my thinking is that it may be worth doing a comparison, even for your own purposes. Perhaps a comparison with another leviathan of online Creative Commons, like a YouTube or Vimeo. Because, although their systems aren't perfect, the act of comparing and contrasting may offer some perspective. Just a thought. Hopefully it helps! [[User:Twood|Twood]] 15:02, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 10:42, 25 February 2014 (EST)
*Framework of control in government run collaborative platform
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_2_LGS.docx‎

: Hi Lucia, are there specified rules of engagement so that government effort to filter or modify inappropriate inputs are minimized? [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:32, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Lucia, This is looks to be very interesting - I was wondering if you can be more specific on what types of data the initiative is exploring. Are they looking for statistical data mainly, do you vote on what subjects you are going to put on the website or research? It looks like a great example of policy control via the government. I would to know more about the website and its overall goals - something that helps define its missions parameters, as I visited the website main page and got an idea of what they were saying - I am just needing some more clarity that's all. But again, the subject looks like a great idea and should be very interesting...[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 18:48, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Hey Lucía!
I think your choice of study fits perfectly with the theme of the course! Perhaps you can also investigate to see if they are stifling public opinion or whether they are flooding the docs with pro-government voices to influence the theme towards their agenda? Also as a suggestion, can you see if it is truly open to everyone? Maybe you would like to find another similar program that the government has tried in the past (assuming that they have tried). Do the number of participants fluxuate? Is there a trend in what the government sees as inappropriate? Or is it just random edits that are corrected by the government? I hope these comments can help you! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:13, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

Lucia,
Great idea and I also like the organization to your thought. Will you get enough data from your set? Do you plan on mentioning the privatization by using GoogleDoc. (Google, Inc.)? I like how specific you question is and I like the attention you pay to it. I hope you might consider briefly touching on other potential influences on your study, such as, how you categorize comments, what is keeping your community small if it is truly open to everyone and other questions posed in the above comments. Overall this seems to be the start of a potentially intriguing paper. Good Luck! - Art.Mescon

----

*Assignment 2:
*Gendered Online Communities: Targeted Harassment and Successful Interventions
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Akk22_assignment2.docx
*[[User:akk22|akk22]] 10:23, 25 February 2014 (EST)

::I'd really like to read and comment on your prospectus, but it seems like the file didn't upload. Happy to respond to it once it's up!
::[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 20:57, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:I second Jkelly's comment. This look very intriguing and I'd like to learn more about your plans for the project! [[User:Twood|Twood]] 23:14, 3 March 2014 (EST)

:Third. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 11:58, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:Sorry everyone, the link was working for me- I've re-uploaded! Many thanks for letting me know. [[User:akk22|akk22]]

----

*Assignment 2:

*Can websites with online forums, control the behavior of its members for the sake of growth?

*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Dan_Coronado_assignmen_2b.docx

[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:Hello, Dan! Admittedly, I had never heard of “Anandtech.com” prior to reading your prospectus, but I’m glad that you told me about it. I really like their “Cable TVification” assessment of the internet in recent years. After reading your prospectus it seems to me that you are focusing on Lessig’s norms as regulators within the site’s forums, as well as “laws" instituted by the website. It is an interesting subject, because as you say, this particular forum is very successful in fostering an environment where users are likely to return. That said, I see that you qualify users of the site as “good,” and I’m curious to know how you will operationalize this term for your project. You mention words like “courteous” and “helpful,” but I’m wondering: what characteristics do you think you will look for when observing, in order to qualify a “good user.” For comparison, do you have an example of what behavior that “bad” users might entail? Lastly, I see that there are literally millions of post on the forum; you may wish to focus on a specific topic and/or date range in order to have a more manageable data set to observe. I’m interested to see what you’re project will entail, especially being that I am also observing forums for my project. [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)

: Hi Vance, thanks for taking the time to look at my prospectus - Basically, what I meant to convey is that these are the characteristics of a "good" website, a website that demonstrates use and activity to by the administrators and its members/users. What I will be focusing in on is, how is the site's control policy administered and conveyed to its members, both historically and presently, through the links in my prospectus – and to answer your question about bad behavior in online forums, yes I will, as I think that is a critical component regarding context – And this also goes out too Marissa as well, what I really wanted to focus in on was how does bad behavior and is control policies in its forums, effect a webite economically - as I think ths would even go further towards Lessig's FOUR norms of regulation on where the dot lands - but for obvious reasons, that could end up being too big. However, I still might toss something like that in - My goal is to pick out a couple of instances of the control poliy being implemented and see what the results were based on specific incident/instance was there a ban and how long was it for - what was the reason, what was the community's response to that action and so forth... - Again, thanks for the input and suggestions.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:59, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Dan, forums have proven very useful mediums for learning and troubleshooting. What would be interesting is how forums deal with covert advertising I.e. Forum posters who may be businesses, subtly advertising their own goods or services under the guise of responding to threads without paying for advertising rights. Would paid advertisers pose potential conflicts of interest to the neutrality of forums? I'd also be interested in seeing how you compare the Anandtech's forum controls against others. Would you choose similar types of forums with respect to content type? [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:47, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Marrisa, I tried to include your response with Vance's up top :O) [[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:59, 3 March 2014 (EST)

Hey Dan!
If you are mainly comparing Anandtech’s forum site policies, maybe you could also compare past versions of the rules? Also, you might want to see if Anandtech has any unique features in toxicity control that would make it standout from other less successful forums. Overall the concept is fantastic! [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:16, 3 March 2014 (EST)

Hi Emmanuel, thanks for the feedback - ya, I am going to try and put some type of onus on Anandtech as well, and see if some of their reactions to their policies could be considered a little over zealous or a bit too far reaching. Most times, their admins/moderators are pretty decent, but again, like everyone else, there are times when a few of their admins/moderators could be having a bad day and maybe be a little too heavy handed - we'll see, stay tuned to find out. just a little humor :o) Thanks again for the input.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:59, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Assignment Two:

*A Web of Lies and Licentious Lure: Temptation, Divorce, and the Internet

* http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Divorce_and_the_Internet_Harvard_Project.docx

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 17:24, 24 February 2014 (EST)

:First of all, GREAT TITLE!!! Second of all, this seems like an extremely interesting subject and I'd love to read more about it. I do wonder whether you'll be able to get access to the material you might be looking for by doing "undercover investigation" and the other research methods you listed. It seems to me that the kind of exchanges you're discussing would be difficult to observe on Facebook as they likely wouldn't be out in the open. I may be completely mistaken, but I was also under the impression that the assignment encouraged examining a more open forum or something of the like where observation was more feasible. I know that there are public matchmaking sites and I would assume there are also forums geared towards those who wish to have illicit affairs, so that might be an area into which you may want to delve. [[User:Castille|Castille]] 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Castille - Thank you for your uplifting encouragement and I am also glad you brought up the open forum. I did not realize that we could not go undercover in doing this but now I am in the process of searching for an open forum like the ones you mentioned that are targeted towards marriage communities grappling with the problems of infidelity on the internet. I am crossing my fingers that I can find the right resource because I am passionate about the topic! --[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 15:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:I also love the topic and find the subject very interesting! I share Castille's concerns above. It seems challenging to get access to the materials you will need to answer these questions. I wonder if there is an open forum somewhere in the internet where angry divorcees can go to vent about how social media ruined their marriage? It may be a biased site, but it may provide resources to other statistics or materials that may help? Or if there is a community you could observe and monitor the degree of online flirting? ([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 14:48, 2 March 2014 (EST))

Margorm - Thank you for the feedback. I admit I am less advanced in studying the internet and technology as a whole, but I am in the process of finding a more narrowed down open forum that targets this topic. Due to my occupation, I do not have social media and have lived my personal life mostly "off-line" unlike most in my generation. That being said, this is a great learning opportunity for me to delve into these online communities and construct a study that unveils cyber social norms and how they impact the modern family. --[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 15:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Wow very cool subject - and one I am sure that deserves a lot of attention these days. With that said, it seems that this subject matter could be a thesis or dissertation as the material collected probably seems to be endless. I was wondering what specific community are you going to target on facebook, as this looks to be potentially a very large paper? I have to admit that I am fascinated to see what other statistics this might uncover, as I am sure we all have heard stories of spouses leaving their significant other for someone they met online. Yet maybe, you can focus on something more specific then a facebook community - as there might be other communities or even forums that have support groups for such instances or circumstances that you mentioned earlier. Maybe seeing how they interact with each other and what rules or policies can be observed and commented on. Overall the topic is really great and I am sure it will have some very interesting content that is fascinating.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 19:13, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Dancoron - I appreciate the compliment and the insight! I mentioned to the others that I am in the process of searching for the perfect forum to study but finding one is harder than I had hoped. I know there are sites like Ashley Madison which are extremely controversial in that they actually are tryst websites for married couples who want to have discreet affairs. There is actually a group out there that is advertising and trying to garner support to shutdown the site, but this goes back to the freedom of speech dilemma that we have been discussing in class. Obviously, controversial sites like this and sugardaddy.com have a negative impact on society but measuring or controlling this is more complex. I think an open forum where users discuss the issue would be most beneficial for me to find; yet, I am wondering how to compile the data of my observation? It will be more qualitative driven than quantitative depending on what I uncover.--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 15:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:Your title choice definitely catches the eye and I think you are on to a very interesting subject choice here. I am going to echo the sentiment of a few others here who have pointed out that you may want to explore other forums for gathering information. I think a facebook community would be difficult to uncover what you are looking for. Is there a blog somewhere in which people go to ask advice in dealing with such issues? If this really contributes to 60% of divorces I am sure there are more sites out there that you can leverage for your research. It also seems to me like you are hinting at two different subjects, the first being pornography and divorce, the second being social media and divorce (in particular facebook). I would reccommend sticking to the first subject, not only is it more unique, but it also removes the issue associated with using facebook as a source (I think we were asked to avoid it). I think you have a great start here and can't wait to see the final result. [[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 13:56, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Drogowski - Thank you for your helpful and supportive comments! I think that the pornography angle may be better than trying to deal with social media as a whole. That was my initial thought but the feedback helps! I will look into forums targeting pornography addiction online and divorce. I am sure there has to be some forum out there for struggling marriages in these situations. In college I will never forget an amazing presentation from a man who came to our school to preach against online pornography. This man traveled around the country to give his presentation because he said his online addiction ruined his marriage and he wanted to educate and bring awareness to the issue.--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 15:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----
Very interesting subject matter Amy!

You may have selected one of the most controversial and highly emotional subjects out of all proposals presented. I would agree with Dancoron. The questions outlined could lead to a doctoral dissertation. Additionally, Castille does bring a good point to light, in that we are encouraged to avoid any work as an “alias”.

I think many of us are having trouble (to include myself) narrowing the research down to a tolerable amount of data collection for an in depth analysis.

In your proposal, you suggested comparing and contrasting divorce rates. What sources would you be comparing and contrasting? Are you speaking to different communities in the United States or on a larger level? Or, are you addressing the male/female divorce ratio?

Secondly, will you be cross-examining two nations who have access to Facebook, in efforts to compare and contrast divorce ratios in direct correlation to Facebook usage?

If your research goals are to use Facebook as the platform for study concerning divorce, it may be difficult to get access to this information unless you are accepted into a person’s profile, group or community. In efforts to stay objective, I don’t think you would want to study anyone that you personally know. Pornography could be a difficult study, in direct correlation to pornography with the controls Facebook allows for each individual user.

Would it be possible for you to follow a smaller, more open group that readily blogs/views pornography that is open to the public for data collection in a short period of time?

Unfortunately this is completely out of my arena. I have never been married and I don’t view porn sites. But, your topic is fabulously interesting.

Good luck with your research and I can’t wait to see your results.

--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 20:29, 3 March 2014 (EST)

Melissa - Thank you so much for your encouraging words and helpful feedback! I did not realize that this could be a future dissertation but if I end up really enjoying the research I might turn into one as I still have not decided my topic yet! I am very passionate about the topic because the internet has become such a part of our lives and no doubt impacts families, relationships, marriages, and the way we (on a human level) think about what is right and wrong morally.

When I wrote up my Prospectus I was a bit general with it but I think I will stick to pornography online and its impact on marriage. For now, I will steer away from comparing/contrasting different nations, divorce rates, etc. because that might be too wide/inconclusive in scope. My research may be more qualitative than quantitative but it appears that may be the case for many projects. I have always gravitated towards controversial topics and this one has been a long passion of mine since college. For now, I am in search of online forums that target couples struggling with pornography online addictions and my aim will be to analyze their conversations and draw my conclusions on these observations. In the analysis, I am wondering if we are allowed to quote the users or how we can effectively encapsulate the findings? Any advice on this avenue is highly appreciated!

Thanks again for the help! I feel fortunate to have this information-sharing forum with my classmates!
--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 15:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Assignment Two:
*Who has the right to control our personal genetic information?
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Monroe_Assignment_Two.docx

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 18:30, 23 February 2014 (EST)
: Hi Margo, I'm not sure if you'll ever read this, but if you do, would you by any chance be interested in working on your project in a group? I'm highly interested in this topic (in part because I'm considering founding my next startup in this field), and I've been following it both from a distance as an observer, and from the inside as a customer of 23andMe. I'd love to dig deeper and work with you on this project. Cheers, Philip Seyfi --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 19:28, 24 February 2014 (EST)

:Hi [[User:Margorm|Margorm]]! I love your topic. Your prospectus, combined with our brief discussions in class have really made me wonder- if 23andme is part of the first iteration of DNA decoding tools for personal use, where will we be in 25 years (: Just my general thoughts on this great topic- my comments specifically regarding your prospectus are below:
::*I really like that you asked whether the FDA is the best agency to regulate DNA testing, especially your last sentence ''what regulatory bodies outside of the FDA should be paying attention to this personalized and identifiable database?''. Throughout this class, I've had similar types of questions many times.
::*It is '''very''' cool that you are taking an empirical approach to the community discussion, however it seems that the data you will collect (assessing changes in attitudes of community members) will be more apt to answer your 2nd question (''How has the ban on delivering health-related risk assessments to the 23andMe community impacted the consumer’s trust toward the product?''), rather than the underlined question that I referred to in my previous bullet.
:Please note that I am most interested in your underlined question regarding the FDA! However my advice is that your second question regarding attitudes & trust may be easier to study with respect to your methodology.
:[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 12:07, 25 February 2014 (EST) - updated 03 March 2014 ~11pm

:It seems clear that although institutional positions and statements are mostly contrary to the patentability of human genes as such, however international patent offices (U.S., Europe, and Japan) have accepted the patenting of human DNA sequences if they meet the technical and legal requirements, including the “utility”. DNA occurs naturally in the human body and should not be patented by a single company that can then use its patents to limit scientific research and the free exchange of ideas. As said by Koepsell “Laws of patent are meant to be used to protect inventions — things that engineers are doing — not things that scientist discover” (Holman, 2007). A regulatory block of decoding tools for personal use would seem to be an exercise in economic control. I believe you'll find an ample supply of public opinion in regards to attitudes of community members. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 10:28, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-Margo- In relation to your topic, what is your opinion as to Apple recently integrating fingerprint scanners into the iPhone (5s)? Do you believe that Apple can store our personal information through this technology?
[[User:Benh|Benh]] 13:49, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:: Margo- Absolutely love the topic choice you've made. I recently took a course that focused on the ethics of biotechnology and found it to be one of the most intriguing topics I have studied. 23 & me is an excellent site to discuss in your work, as I am sure you are aware of the relationship between the site and google. There will be no shortage of sources for your research and I think judging from your prospectus you are off to an amazing start. If you would be interested in working together on this as a group project I would be very interested in collaborating with you. I would propose creating a website of our findings (which I can create) and can provide some additional insight on the topic. Please send me an email @ danielrogowski@fas.harvard.edu if that would interest you. Regards, Daniel. [[User:Drogowski|Drogowski]] 14:17, 4 March 2014 (EST)
----

Hi Margo,

I am sorry that I have never heard of 23andme. However, you have opened my eyesight into this new subject and has raised my attention to this concern.
Also, I am really interested in your question "is the FDA the correct agency to regulate 23andMe, a company who claims to be an information - not diagnostic - service?"
This also leads to another question, can we hold 23andme liable for the health information that they provide to the users as they are claiming to be an information - not diagnostic - service?

[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 15:37, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

[[User:Castille|Castille]] 18:58, 22 February 2014 (EST)
*Assignment Two:
*LESS IS MORE?; Tumblr's Policies Against Self-Harm
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:CastilleRath_ASSIGNMENT_TWO.doc

::Castille, I think you have a really excellent topic here. My first thought is that it would probably be helpful to choose a particular self-harming behavior that's discussed on Tumblr to help narrow the scope of your work. Additionally, while these issues can and often are related, I imagine that the Tumblr communities that surround each issue probably have a distinct culture. This topic makes me think of the Jessica McKenzie piece, "Obeying French Courts, Twitter Hands Over Identities of Users Who Employed Anti-Semitic Hashtag" we read in week four. I would be curious to know how many of the controversial hashtags are actually used in subversive ways. Some of the reactions to Tumblr's policy change seem to touch on this when users write that they use these tags to address their own struggle with self-harming behavior. After these policy changes got some press, did it shed enough light on these self-harm blogs to inspire users to use these potentially triggering hashtags in new and positive ways?
::[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 13:56, 26 February 2014 (EST)

::Thanks for your feedback! I'm planning to narrow the scope to primarily center on pro-suicide blog postings, but I think I'll have to use some other examples such as cutting and possibly even pro-eating disorder blogs, as they all seem to interact with each other. It appears from my research thus far that the communities are intrinsically linked much more so than I expected. I agree, it would be interesting to see if things have changed-- though I'm not quite sure how to gauge pre-policy versus post-policy changes. If you have any ideas, I'd love to hear them! [[User:Castille|Castille]] 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)

:: Hi Castille, fantastic topic! I like your approach to analysing this topic and its a subject which is very controversial & personal. I agree, the main challenge for any Government is to try and regulate the numerous blogs and hashtags on sites like Tumblr, effectively putting a suicide watch on them. Would this be an effective use of tax payer funds and how many suicides could this prevent? What would be the process be if a potential suicide victim was identified? We have to be careful not to act in a knee-jerk reaction when there is a death and expect the Government to do something about it. I think there needs to be a balance of responsibility between these site operators and the Government. I'm very interested in the outcome of your topic. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:47, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Castille --

This is such an excellent topic choice and it is so important for our society today, in particular for the youth and young vulnerable minds of our generation. The fact that the site changed its policy to allow blogs that engaged in "discussion, support, encouragement, and documenting the experiences of those dealing with difficult conditions like anorexia, bulimia, and other forms of self-injury” may actually make the policy more convoluted for the website than it had hoped. In one sense, it seems that they were making amends to promote free speech and also to allow healthy dialogue about such behaviors. However, there becomes a "grey line" as to what discussions are supportive or encouraging against such behaviors. For example, an element of perception is involved in that some users (particularly immature, younger generations) may view discussion boards about anorexic "experiences" as an enticement of curiosity to engage in such behaviors rather than to refrain from them. As your research unfolds, it will be interesting to see how the "new" policy fares amongst the users. Often times, it seems when a website makes a new policy, it is loosely "enforced" for a while and then it eventually dies out and goes back to square one. Maybe a compare and contrast of the impact before and after the two policies were enacted could be an interesting angle.

I am interested in how you would monitor the data from the group within or just as an outside observer? You mentioned that you would like to join the group (if that is allowed), and I am thinking of doing the same thing in my research. However, someone had mentioned that this may not be allowed or that we are not supposed to use an alias? It looks like we both need to clarify this part.

Great work and I look forward to seeing the results!

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 13:14, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Watson
*To Publish Or Not: Social Media and the Syrian Conflict
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Watson_Assignment2.docx
[[User:Watson|Watson]] 23:33, 23 February 2014 (EST)

Greetings Watson!

A few questions:

How would you determine which distribution channel the Syrian opposition used the most?

How would you be able to detect the limitations of public information if it has not been disclosed?

If you were to select two media channels to compare/contrast, would there be enough data available in those two communities to properly “diagnose”, or is the data withheld from the public?

If you chart a paper on what capacitated the Syrian opposition groups to communicate their cause, will this information lead to a report or a true communal study on the Internet?

Very interesting proposal and I wish you the best in your research!

--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 20:47, 3 March 2014 (EST)

:: Thank you for the insightful questions, Melissa![[User:Watson|Watson]] 15:45, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:This is a very interesting topic. There is a lot to examine here, especially since a large part of the attacks and arguments happened online. An interesting topic would be to mention the Syrian Electronic Army and the many acts of online vandalism that they did. You can find more info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Electronic_Army The Internet was certainly a tool in the conflict. An interesting focus would be to investigate their motives and the impact this electronic army had on the Syrian conflict.

[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 21:01, 3 March 2014 (EST)

:: This is very helpful, thank you![[User:Watson|Watson]] 15:45, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Greetings, Watson!

I am intrigued by your topic because I truly believe that social media is becoming the new stomping ground for collective action and has incredible potential to spawn modern revolutions of many types. Have you considered comparing and contrasting how the Wall Street movement/protest was influenced by social media comparable to the events in Syria? I read an article a while back that discussed how the internet in Syria was literally shut down for several days and there was great speculation that this was actually an inside job to prevent the power of social media and communication. What a frightening and disturbing abuse of power! This act alone may show to a certain extent how the power of the internet and social media was suppressed by the regime. I wish I could recall the article but if I find it I will send it your way.

I am speculative that social media is more powerful than youtube in terms of collective action, but this is a conjecture. The youtube video tried in that Garcia vs. Google case was said to have prompted the entire uprising yet only about 500 people had actually viewed the video. It seems the video became a type of "figure" for the push and was used as more of a platform by the social media community to promote action even if most had not even seen the video. For better of worse, the "mob mentality" is alive and well on the internet. In any event, I am curious to see how your research pans out!

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 13:33, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:: You raised some excellent points, thank you for helping! [[User:Watson|Watson]]

------

*Assignment 2
* Instagram: a public space for free expression?
* http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:LRS_IS_prospectus.docx
[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 21:42, 24 February 2014 (EST)

:: Laura – Instagram is not only the biggest mobile photo sharing app, but is also now owned by Facebook, and thus a disproportionate amount of mobile peer to peer communication falls to the censorship whims of this company. This is an incredibly worthy area to research, if not lofty. Since Instagram now allows direct, private communication of photos, you have to wonder if there is a difference in how moderated these communications are versus a post intended for the public that uses hashtags (let us not forget that the hashtag’s original use was searchability, not irony). That said it might be very difficult monitor the differences in speed and effectiveness of what gets censored without interfering with the community you’re observing. One way may be to follow news events (such as this recent one: http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=9448993) that show Instagram’s policy enforcement in action. The issue with that approach is that it is cherry picking the successful takedowns rather than observing uncensored posts that are breaking the terms of service. Another option may be monitoring Instagram’s list of banned hashtags and searching synonyms or alternate hashtags, but again this is a difficult aspect of their policy to observe in action.
::I believe there is still strategizing to be done to design your observation of the community, above merely reporting their policy. I hope my take somehow helps you with this endeavor!
::[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 09:55, 1 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi, Laura! I think Instagram is a really great topic and will provide a massive amount of material, which I think can be beneficial and detrimental. It seems you might want to consider focusing on a specific aspect of censorship on Instagram, like nudity, drug references, or profanity (if any of those are prohibited-- I don't know their specific terms of use). What aspect of Instagram's censorship do you find to have the highest potential to become problematic? Is their choice as a company to disallow certain messages/images actually infringing on free speech, when they don't have any power over whether an individual chooses to express himself (IE he/she is still capable of posting the material on another site), they merely control/monitor the postings on their own site? [[User:Castille|Castille]] 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Laura!

I am not familiar with Instagram but I know it is a very popular application with my friends and I feel out of the loop for not being involved with it. As you mention this application is extremely popular worldwide so studying the nodes of its infrastructure and the social norms, policies, etc. associated with it is a valiant effort for understanding our modern generation and evolving cyber world. Are there any particular rules or norms that you are aiming to target? For example, perhaps studying one specific violations related to pornography, harmful behavior, violence, etc. may help to narrow it down. I admit I am not familiar with Instagram, but I would imagine a site of this magnitude has a tremendously challenging struggle in policing such offenses. Is there a way for users to report offenses observed within the community? If so, I would be curious to know how often reports are filed and whether or not they are acted on. Many times, I feel that users on sites like this witness offensive material but refrain from acting on it because they do not believe their report will be followed-up on. It would be interesting (I know this would be difficult to do) to find which types of users are most judicious in filing reports on offensive behavior. For example, I would guess that the teenage generation is less concerned or bothered by offensive material that may have become immune to them in contrast to members of the older generation that have jumped on the social media bandwagon later in life.

Best of luck in your cyber adventure!

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 14:08, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

* [[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 21:56, 24 February 2014 (EST)
* Comparing Regulation of Free Expression in Online Game Forums
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Prospectus-Radoff.txt Prospectus Text]

:Hi Jon- My first thoughts on your prospectus have to do with scope. In comparing these three different games, I think there might be too many factors to consider-- subscription-based vs. free, PC vs. iOS, etc. I wonder if it wouldn't be more manageable to tackle your research questions if you focused in on two games that were more similar so that you have fewer variables to contend with when you're thinking about your research questions. My instinct is that working with WoW and League of Legends would work since you can still attempt to tackle each of Lessig's four forces. I'm not sure how much the law in the US varies from that in Finland, but removing Clash of Clans from the equation might help the narrow your scope in that sense as well. [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 14:27, 2 March 2014 (EST)

----

* jkelly
* Does "toxic" online culture stifle feminist discourse?
* http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Jkelly_Assignment_2.odt
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 22:15, 24 February 2014 (EST)

:: Jane – It is a great idea to compare feminist discussion within the confines of a feminist-oriented website to discussion in a public space without this slant. The regulations on discussion are obviously going to be wildly different in each of these communities. You identify Facebook and Twitter as less thoughtful in their discussion for feminist topics - perhaps as a result of their differences in comment policy? I was interested in the comment policy of Bitch Media that you mentioned in the prospectus, so I looked it up. (For others: it can be found here: http://bitchmagazine.org/comments-policy) One line that stood out to me was the following: “As far as moderation of this space goes, guest bloggers moderate the comments on their respective posts, but website moderators will step in when necessary.” – Does this mean that each blog post is technically regulated in a different way? It is not a deal killer if so, because it sparked the following idea: Because FB and Twitter are big places, could you find a smaller community (that is not inherently feminist-oriented) that is discussing the same thing as mentioned in one or a few of the Bitch Media posts, and compare the discussions directly? Just a thought!
::[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 11:54, 26 February 2014 (EST)

::Does ''anyone else'' see the awesome irony of a woman named Jane writing about Bitch magazine? Am I the only one on here who was a teenage girl in the '90s? I remember clear as day, reading [http://bitchmagazine.org/article/ten-things-hate-about-jane Bitch's criticisms of Jane] back in 1998. BTW [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] I hope you understand that as a very longtime fan of Bitch magazine I am in no way criticizing your project, I actually think it's '''such''' a cool topic. You & I would probably have been awesome friends as teenagers. p.s. This doesn't count as a comment on the prospectus!!! I hope. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 21:44, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:::Haha, thanks so much for sharing that Erin!! I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing, but when you see words and phrases like "fake, sanctimonious," "self-obsessed," "narcissism," "blithe unconcern with which they suggest spending huge amounts of money on items of debatable utility," and "overweening focus on the superficial, ersatz do-it-for-you tone, and fake individualism" in just a quick scan of the article, it's bound to be a fun read. Thanks! [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 08:53, 27 February 2014 (EST)

----

Watson,
It looks like you have powerful ideas to work with. It seems like you have found a great, debatable field to jump into. You first paragraph had a number of broad, bold questions, and you did slightly narrow your possibilities as you continued. To narrow it further than social media sites, which are quite large, would you consider choosing, perhaps a specific community page on different site to compare? Something like a Facebook group page on both sides of the conflict and a myspace page from both sides as well? If I were writing your paper based on social media, those 4 pages alone would be more than enough data. That being said, I think you will find a great topic here given what sounds like a strong, interesting research subject. If this were your first draft of a short paper I would recommend eliminating a lot of vague questioning from the beginning, but here, it presents a number of good ideas from which to find your niche. Good Luck! - Art.Mescon

----

*Name: Erin Saucke-Lacelle
*Prospectus title: Effect of rules & regulations on political discussion
*Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/ErinSaucke-Lacelle-Assignment2.pdf
[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:33, 24 February 2014 (EST)

:: Hi Erin, I agree with your hypothesis about alienation. For example the weak and poor citizens do not have access to the internet and will be left out of the discussion. Their needs are often under-represented or not represented at all. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 08:04, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:::Thank you for the feedback [[User:Ichua|Ichua]]! Your comment makes me wonder though- for this project, we are assigned to studying an online community. Wouldn't the nature of the assignment therefore assume that all students completing this assignment will be leaving out the interest and opinions of people who do not have access to the Internet? Also, I am curious what you mean when you refer to 'weak' citizens? Again, thanks so much for the feedback! [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 11:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)

::::"Weak" = "Not powerful", have no voice or influence in government discussions and policy-making. Some politicians even believe these people should not participate in voting. Typically viewed as a country's liability rather than an asset. In a country like the Philippines with a total population of 90 million, a great economic revolution can happen if the 40 million in poverty and unemployed are mobilized. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:49, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: Erin - I think the comparison of two subreddits with different regulations is a solid method of studying the effect of regulation on political discussion. I also believe the two subreddits you have chosen make for a great comparison. The only reservation I have in your prospectus is the focus on word count of the regulations as indicative of the rigor of the moderation. For example, one subreddit may simply say "Discussion of Russia is forbidden" - which in five words hampers more conversation than either of the two sets of regulations do in actuality. I do not think the word count is a meaningful statistic. Apropos your question of whether those without internet access will be under-represented in our studies, I would say that because we are focusing on specific small communities to begin with, we are under-representing the reactions (to control) of everyone in the world who is not in that community. The vast majority of the world is not included. Our focus is on only those within the community itself that we can observe. Ultimately I believe your project is designed very well. Since I too am studying a subreddit for my project, I will be following your progress closely!
::[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 11:23, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:::Hi [[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]]! Thank you very much for the feedback, very good point about the empirical data on the rules, hopefully I can expand when I have 2500 words to work with. BTW, I just wanted to comment- the question about people without Internet access was actually [[User:Ichua|Ichua]]'s question. My understanding of the assignment is to study ''only'' online communities for this assignment (and not offline humans, which excludes anyone who doesn't or can't access the Internets). My question that [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] commented on is whether ''"users are intimidated by the effort or research required to post, thus limiting participation to a narrow audience"''. Sidenote- '''Thank you''' very much for introducing us to the Twitch Plays Pokémon phenomenon in class. So freaking cool. My God do I ever love the Internet.-[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]]

:::: Thanks Erin! I think it is absolutely amazing as well, and I've never played Pokémon. If you would like to read my prospectus and help me think about potential research questions using their subreddit, I am all ears. [[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 11:34, 27 February 2014 (EST)

----

*Name: Ian Chua
*Prospectus title: Resolving National Issues With Online Collaborative And Interactive Cognitive Mapping
*Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/LSTU-E120_Assignment2_IanChua.pdf
[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 06:31, 25 February 2014 (EST)

: I learned from Erin that a project of this nature has its limitations. Government leaders or concerned individuals need to go to Ground Zero and observe for themselves the problems of the poor and weak citizenry. And if democratic rule has failed to eliminate poverty, why not consider compassionate rule?

::@[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] you know, I might be wrong!!! Not sure yet, I guess, til we hear back from more students, or the prof/TAs (: [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 15:40, 25 February 2014 (EST)

: Hi Ian, great topic and I like the innovative approach you're taking. I agree that social media is an important medium for Governments to gauge public mood or opinion. In fact, Australia's Prime Minister, Tony Abbott recently spent $4 million to analyse social media and gauge the public mood on certain policies he introduced. From my understanding, you're looking to build something like a mind map to organise the social media feedback and also meta tag it? This would effectively allow content to be searched and categorised similar to a knowledge base. Just a couple of questions though....How will you apply the cognitive map? Do you have a specific social media medium and Government in mind? Looking forward to reading the final outcome! [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:42, 2 March 2014 (EST)

Hi Ian, I believe your cognitive map is a great tool to solve the problem of transparency and traceability of complaints towards government policies posted on social media. However, I believe that building the tool yourself is not only time consuming but it makes the second part, which is the essence of the assignment, depend on the success of the map. I would propose for you to focus on a map that serves similar purposes (if existing) that is already running with an established community. I do not mean to get your hopes down but just help you be aware of the time constraints.

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 15:09, 4 March 2014 (EST)
----

*Name: P. Scott Lapinski
*Prospectus title: “Crowd Control”. Content and community controls which impact scholarly communication within the PubMed Commons scientific forum
*Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/PSL_Assignment2.rtf
[[User:Psl|Psl]] 11:57, 25 February 2014 (EST)

::I was unaware of this community exits, and I think it will be a great place for graduate students and researchers to find which papers they should be reading. For example, if I need to utilize a method that is slightly outside of my field, this community will help identify the appropriate and esteemed papers. This may also serve as a better model for Peer Review (one day). Because PubMed is already an exclusive database primarily for biomedical researchers, I am interested to what you observe. I am worried that because only pubmed users (or people using a University IP address) have access to pubmed articles, open access will play a minimal role in which articles spark more conversation. Unfortunately, people tend to converse about papers in high-impact journals like Nature and Science, and I would expect these articles to compete with the open access ones. Perhaps an observation of which articles receive complaints about not being open-access for the curious science lover who is no longer in academia may be an interesting perspective.. ([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 13:45, 2 March 2014 (EST))

:::Hi Paul! Thank you for introducing me to PubMed Commons! I have to agree with [[User:Margorm|Margorm]]: people who are 'allowed' to comment on PubMed articles often have access to most articles through their Universities or Institutions. That being said, since first reading your prospectus, I've thought so much about the access to PubMed Commons. In order to be part of the community, the major factor is that you are an author of a paper appearing in PubMed. An author can 'invite themselves' only if PubMed has your email address on file. For personal/professional interest of being a member of this site, I've checked with 8 different people (who are all corresponding authors on separate PubMed articles) whether they could invite themselves, and only 1 of the 8 authors could gain access. I understand why it is important for PubMed to confirm identity, however I believe this factor will strongly limit the adoption of PubMed Commons. It should also be noted that I am not an average PubMed author- most scientists I talked to about this think 'social media is stupid' or a waste of time. Very few will go through the trouble of asking 8 separate authors to try to log in, until they find one person who can. However, exactly as Margo pointed out, "This may also serve as a better model for Peer Review (one day)".
:::[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:29, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Name: VACYBER
*Prospectus title: Regulatory steps for hacking tools in light of the tremendous potential for fiscal and data loss
*Link to prospectus:http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:VACYBER_Assignment2.docx
[[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 12:46, 25 February 2014 (EST)

::I can see where this topic would make an interesting focal point for a review article or commentary on the exploitation opportunities, (legal and criminal) that open source software packages like these permit. As an administrator of several IT systems myself, reading your prospectus has made me curious to learn more about NESSUS and Metasploit, and perhaps use them to test out weaknesses in my own servers.

::Let's continue along that thought...and say I will download and experiment with this software... I'm using this scenario "hypothetically" in hopes that it may help you focus more on the key question(s) you are hoping to answer, and to also consider "from where" you will be able to make some observations to address that question. In other words, where might you be able to follow some online community activity over the next few weeks, and observe some interactions between the users, developers, and IT administrators who work with these software packages?

::So, after just now learning of these open source packages, I want to download them on my Linux box and experiment. I want to see how others have installed, implemented, and customized the software to exploit a variety of possibilities. Is there an open community where I can lurk and maybe participate in a discussion to learn about various ways I can use this software to test out my servers for vulnerabilities and bugs? What kind of controls might I be subjected to within that community that may prevent me from discussing specifics about what known vulnerabilities have been discovered, and what security holes one can exploit? If I discover a major security flaw, can (or should) I document this within that online community? Are there normative, legal, and/or architectural controls that prevent or discourage divulging too much information within his community? I noticed a discussion forum at http://discussions.nessus.org/welcome, and https://community.rapid7.com/community/metasploit... would these be the communities you were considering?

::Anyway, hoping this helps out. I just wanted to raise these questions as a way to help you identify the specific online community where some observable activity will occur, and focus in on what controls you hope to be able to see playing-out during the rest of the semester. You may already have that in mind, but it wasn't in the prospectus, so I thought I'd raise the questions here. I think knowing the answer to these questions will help put the ideas into the context of the Final Project's objectives and should also help with the next task of building the outline in Assignment 3. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 14:25, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::This is excellent topic! Cybersecurity or technology security—and its development, in general—is a burgeoning field in the tech space. From what I gather, your topic addresses security and privacy issues between entity and consumer, and the ramifications of such. A good question you raised was, “Should hacking tools be regulated considering the tremendous potential for fiscal and data loss?” Absolutely, there should be some kind of regulation. One could think of hacking tools (i.e., those for systems testing) as analogous to dangerous materials in that in the wrong hands, they could wreak havoc once deployed. For instance, there are certain international regulations for nuclear material, the mount kept or obtained by a certain country, and the like. The question may go down to intent. Is an entity obtaining and/or using such material for good ends? Hacking is somewhat of a nebulous word, because hacking for good reasons (i.e., testing) is an integral part of systems, but hacking for nefarious reasons by an unknown entity is another thing altogether. As a matter of opinion, there is a stasis in the ‘white-hat’ versus ‘black-hat’ idiom, as it does not fully encapsulate the various areas in the field. That said, it is worth noting that some large tech companies have systems locks in the event of an unknown entity trying to access their servers, despite their release of patches.

::I hope this is helpful and I look forward to reading your paper! [[User:Watson|Watson]] 15:45, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Name: Twood
*Prospectus Title: Online Independent Music Communities: The Mechanisms and Effects of Copyright Control
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Twood_Assignment2.rtf
[[User:Twood|Twood]] 14:03, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: Somehow the uploaded RTF file had been converted to a CALC spreadsheet file, making some of the contents hard to read. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:08, 27 February 2014 (EST)

:: Hi Twood. I find your paper topic to be incredibly interesting and well-thought out. I wish I had constructive criticism to give you, but I find that you are on the right path. My only question at the moment: how do you plan on measuring the response of community members to the each sites' control mechanisms? [[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 11:41, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Twood, I find this to be a very cool topic and being a musician myself, makes it even more so. I have never ever been a fan of sampling music outright and then adding a new beat and some remixing to make it one's own, just not my style. I like the prospect of you examining a smaller or less commercialized community musically (as compared to You tube). Again, as own who owns small studio at home and records pretty solidly, it is always great to see musicians recording and producing their own stuff from scratch with small home studio setups. I hope you show an example of a community catching someone in the act of stealing another's music or idea and what the outcome of that interaction will be - because as musicians we always borrow, modify or improves someone else's cord progression or guitar lick to make it our own. So, it would be great to see if you could hint about that distinction - as I am sure it comes up a lot in communities like this. But, overall really nice topic to concentrate on.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 19:42, 2 March 2014 (EST)

::You have a clearly focused thesis! The topic of copyright law as it relates to online communities is arguably still in its early development stages. Digital music and the conventional music industry as a whole (which some former music executives have asserted as hardly the industry it once was!) struggles to reformat their former hard copy-based business model. BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC have had to make significant changes to the collection of mechanical royalties, which makes your analysis of the independent ecosystem all the more relevant. It will be interesting to see where and how the communities will develop given the changes in technology, and how laws to same might become more specialized. The beginnings of a Web 2.0-influenced idea will surely evolve via the adaptation of Web 3.0, which is still not quite a framework.

::Best of luck in your paper![[User:Watson|Watson]] 15:45, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----------

*Name: Cheikh Mbacke
*Prospectus Title: Re/Code: A Neutral Endorser of Disruptive Technology Companies
*Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Cheikh_Mbacke_Assignment_2.txt
[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:15, 25 February 2014 (EST)

: Cheikh, I'm looking forward to reading your paper. Online technology journalism is indeed a most interesting industry... after all, a tech journalist with sufficient influence can single-handedly kill an up and coming technology project with billions in R&D costs, and this is particularly worrying given how easy it is for a competing company with a sufficient budget to influence said journalists, as well as how often these journalists write reviews having used the product in questions for mere minutes, or without necessary expertise in the are where such product can be useful. That said, my suggestion to you is to narrow your topic to one single research question. At the moment, you paper risks going astray as you intend to cover a wide array of very different concerns. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 12:06, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:Cheikh, I too echo Seifip's suggestion about a more narrowed focus- this is a fascinating topic but could easily get bogged down. I have a friend who writes for wired and this is a common concern, that particularly influential voices in the consumer and tech review space can impact the success of a product or the cache of a given brand based on subjective and not always sound journalistic coverage. There is also a concern about sponsorship or heavy-handed promotion of certain products to tech journalists (or any niche industry coverage for that matter). Looking forward to the report! [[User:akk22|akk22]] 16:11, 4 March 2014 (EST)
------

*Name: Emmanuelsurillo
*Prospectus title: "emmanuelsurillo_Assignment2.doc."
*Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:%22emmanuelsurillo_Assignment2.doc.%22.docx [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:41, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:You raise some great research questions to examine within these communities. You might want to narrow your focus more. Will you be talking about the legalities of “jail-breaking” and it’s effect on the Apple and Android market? Considering the topics we discussed in class, it might be interesting to develop your research to mention the view of major companies toward these forums and the rogue developers. Once an iphone is jail-broken, it losses its apple warranty coverage. This might be a topic you want to bring up with your research. Good luck! [[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 21:36, 3 March 2014 (EST)
----

Greetings Emmanuel,

You have selected a really “hot” topic. Mobile applications appear to be taking over actual web development these days. I’m in the process of creating a new site, for the general public, to locate assistance after they have been harmed by other entities. The developer of my site highly recommended that I create a mobile app at the same time. He is correct and the only reason I do not plan to follow his suggestion is directly related to cost.

I’m unclear of the real statistics, but Internet users seem to be using phones as their selected source of information more frequently than computers. Most people carry their phones (even to bed) but fewer seem to be in constant travel with their laptop.

I am not familiar with the sites you listed in your proposal since I am not a mobile application developer, but I am happy to learn there are forums to enhance applications through large communities.

It appears many of our classmates are attempting to use a compare/contrast approach, which seems logical, if we want to identify how resourceful one community is versus another. Your research will be extremely useful to many, and I would like to pass your results onto my developer after you have completed all the hard work (smile).

A few questions for you:

“I want to compare how useful and productive these web sites are to the users end for accomplishing these goals.”

1. How do you plan to compare and contrast the central 7-9 questions outlined in your proposal for the final project? In other words, will you be able to summarize the data from each research question in one succinct paragraph to meet the page requirements?
2. Do you think it would be easier to select 2-3 questions presented in your proposal to dig a little deeper or perhaps ask a few others from the class to join you on a team to cover all the questions presented?

I ask these questions, because I am struggling with these issues myself. I believe if I ask enough people in our community who are using a similar approach, I will (eventually) determine a model that may be useful for my own research.

Another suggestion: Could we potentially find a group of people in our research community (class) that are interested in using a similar approach, but still collectively analyze the communities we selected for personal purposes? In other words, I am certain most students have selected the entities of study for some reason, such as personal satisfaction or business achievement. However, Andy has made it clear that he would entertain teams multiple times. In fact, the option has been posted on every page of our instructions for the main project. In fact, the option has been posted so many times that I am beginning to think he may be giving us a subtle hint or clue: “This assignment will be more effective if you work collectively together and you may gain more valuable research by teaming”. I don’t read minds, but…

Example:

I am attempting to look at the effectiveness of two sites created to allegedly help people who have been taken advantage of by either an entity or a person. Section 203 under the Communication Decency Act assists people in their ability to say whatever they think, regardless if correct.

You are comparing two mobile application sites to analyze how useful and productive the sites are for the users to include accuracy and validity.

Marissa is researching the validity of airbnb.com, and looking at the controls put in place by the website to protect people.

I still have many proposals to read today, but it does appear that many of us are running in a few general hypothetical areas of question:

Which site is more effective due to the controls implemented by the site itself? (Compare/Contrast)

Can the data on these sites be considered valid? Is so, why or why not?

Could we potentially work together on a research methodology for all three sites to compare and contrast if the model is effective in and of itself while measuring the data across the board for multiple communications? In summary, we could compare and contrast the model that we collectively created against the sites we personally selected.

My biggest concern with many of our proposals is that they are too broad and we will not find the depth. Most of our topics could be potential dissertations; unfortunately we are lacking 5 years of research time (smile). I plan to look for commonality in proposals submitted-perhaps we can all make this better together. Could we potentially try to use our class community to research the depth of the Internet communities.?

Just thoughts.

Cheers!
--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 17:07, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
Hi Emmanuel,

Great topic!!
I am not sure if you would like to go into that direction, but from my point of view, I would say there is a big difference in the active level between iphone users via Android users in forum.
Iphone users are usually not as active as Android users in forum. And I think this is a really interesting topic to look into.

On the other hand, I think it would be a good idea to narrow down your topic as there are 9 research questions that you are planning to coverin your paper. It would be difficult to talk about each question in depth with the words limit.

[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 03:42, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Hello Emmanuel,
Have you considered discussing recent legislation rendering unlocking phones illegal in the United states?
[[User:Benh|Benh]] 14:11, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 15:42, 25 February 2014 (EST)
*Architectural choices for a better Q&A community (StackOverflow)
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/LSTUE-120Assignment2.pdf

::Hi [[User:Seifip|Seifip]]! Few bits of feedback for you. First of all, I like that you tied back to Lessig's regulators. Very strong prospectus overall. Second, I wonder how you define an ''effective way of shaping an online community'' ? I assume that you didn't define 'effective' because of the 400-word limit for this assignment. My advice would be for you to perhaps draw specific comparisons between StackOverflow and another online developer support community. Alternatively (and perhaps more fun), you might change the phrasing of your research question to something like 'In what ways does X architectural element affect conversation on StackOverflow?'. Overall though, I think this is a very strong topic for your final project, because developer communities are some of the most in-depth technical discussions on the web. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:47, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::: Thanks for your feedback, Erin! I'll consider narrowing down the research question to a single element. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 10:57, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::
Hi Philip,
Great topic! I think that, given the increase in number of programmers relying more and more on credible forums Such as StackOverflow (which has elements of Wikis, blogs, etc) for Q&A, API, CMS, and other Web documentations, it's not only relevant to reflect on the architecture of such forums but necessary as well. You raised a very interesting question about the effectiveness of shaping an online community based on that community's user interface's architecture. I definitely encourage you to proceed with this great topic and look forward to reading more.
By the way, thank you very much for your valuable time and feedback. Indeed, I will take your observations into consideration. --[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 13:13, 4 March 2014 (EST)

::Philip, total code noob here!...
As stated, "genuinely dangerous" wikis, etc. are problems. Can you show how the architecture of StackOverflow corrals, or fails to corral, the potentially dangerous code within its architecture. Is the architecture of StackOverflow analogous to architecture in the physical world, e.g., holding cells, drunk tanks, SCIF "skiff" areas http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_Compartmented_Information_Facility, not to mention bank vaults, moats (water and dry), atm machines, and police car backseats, etc? What are the structural components used to contain the potentially dangerous code? Again, can physical architecture be used to explain the structural elements, e.g., bricks/mortar, razor wire/concertina wire/barbed wire, reinforced steel? Personally, I'd love to know as I went to school for architecture, yet I’m not strictly working in the field, and I find the concept of computing architecture fascinating... are there parallels that can be used to build a better site, have they been used, can parallels be made for the non-informed reader?

Are we to assume that StackOverflow has configured a successful or unsuccessful solution? Is it better, worse, or different than its rivals? Is it successful, and thus continues to exist (and possibly thrive), because of the criticisms from Programming Reddit and Experts Exchange users?

Your Lessig quote, can you expound upon it within the paper? If so, perhaps, providing example(s)of what it means in re your project?

Is there a better way of delineating the questions in StackedOverflow that have been skewed beyond their original intention?[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 14:57, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----

*Name: Art.Mescon
*Title: Do Etsy’s regulations aim to help buyers and/or sellers or are they primarily protective of the company itself, leaving third parties on their own to seek out reputable transaction partners?
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Art.Mescon_Assignment2.docx

::You raise some great ideas in your prospectus that would make for an interesting research paper around Etsy. However, I wonder if it might be best to focus more on the controls for which you can already observe playing out within the Etsy community's online activities? In other words, the community norms and architecture controls within Etsy itself (user-"self-regulation" and Etsy's-"private-regulation") might be the most reliable "observable data" that you will be able to anticipate over the next few weeks. The government level controls (public-regulation) you suggest may require moving outside this community, and I am not sure that a useful discussion (with observational data) will be possible within the page limit, nor would it be crucial to answering your research question.

::I like the research question very much, and I think it couches the challenges you hope to observe within the methodology you propose. Also, I anticipate that the community interactions over the next couple of months should provide you with enough observational data to answer your question. One more tip on the question... What would you think about starting the question with "How" rather than "Do"...? Play around with the phrase of your question, and see how it feels. My thinking is that you will allow yourself some flexibility in what you will truly have to report on when it comes time to write up the results. The answer to a "Do" question requires one to choose a yes or no and your findings will likely challenge any "absolute" judgment call... So don't let yourself get cornered into having to make that choice (at least not at this early stage). By starting the question with "How do Etsy’s regulations...", will allow you to have more flexibility to report on what the observations will show, and your can balance your discussion section on some good and not-so-good controls that play out over the next few weeks.

::Last point. In your sentence "I intend to identify how Etsy controls, or fails to control content in a manner that is advantageous to their users.", I wasn't sure if by "users" you meant the buyers, sellers, or both. My mind is interpreting that "user" is the buyer in this sentence’s context, and the word "content" is used to define both the items and community sellers that are being controlled. True? That distinction may be important to clarify as the full report gets written, because the Etsy controls and observations being gathered will (I suspect) impact buyers vs sellers vs content each a little differently. On a similar note... To cut down on the need to follow every buyer, seller and thing in "Top Searches" for this community, do you think it would be helpful to focus on just one type of craft? I don't know enough about Etsy specifically to determine if that would work for this project, but it might be another way to find a sub-group/sub-community limit, and still provide you with enough observational data to draw some conclusions.

::Hoping these comments are helpful! [[User:Psl|Psl]] 12:22, 28 February 2014 (EST)

----

Title: YouTube Comment Filtering and Other Cyberbullying Initiatives

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Lpereira_Prospectus.docx

[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 16:07, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: Might be interesting to determine whether and how Youtube encourages positive comments and discourage negative or hate comments. Ultimately, it would be ideal if the character of misbehaving individuals could be improved. Some ideas might be the use of "Like" and "Dislike" votes on these comments and/or the award/deduction of "attitude points". The individuals posting hate and aggressive comments could be prohibited from further postings if the attitude point reaches a certain limit. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:02, 27 February 2014 (EST)

::I really like the focal point you will be observing, and you are quite right in pointing out that this "negativity" is becoming an unfortunate reality for many "open comment" sections within these online spaces. Even what can begin as constructive dialog and healthy debate, can quickly degenerate into blather, flames, and hate words when anonymity can be so effectively used as a shield. Interestingly, we can't always point our finger at just one "troll" injecting some deliberate provocation...because sometimes the breakdown occurs with the 3 or 4 community members who (hither to) we're exchanging words in a perfectly eloquent & respectful manner. But the hate, racism, and bullying that poison the dialog on these comment-boards are on a much more disturbing level, and one that certainly will make for an interesting study.

::So, The broad question that I am hearing in your prospectus is "What are the most important controls that an online service provider can successfully implement to intercept and discourage cyberbullying, hate-speech, and irrelevant negativity? The sub-question then would be "How effective and/or constraining are those controls on the community's ability to engage with each other in a meaningful unbiased dialog about the content? (YouTube in this example)?

::Have you given some thought to the subject matter that you will focus on, as a way to observe how these comments progress? It may be helpful to put your lens onto a consistent subject to observe the cycle of communication. From there you should be able to witness what prompts the conversation to begin in the first place; when do counter-points get introduced, how long is constructive dialog able to bridge back and fourth, what is the "poison-pill" that kills the conversation, and when do the controls kick-in?. (Observing where the controls kick in would obviously be the essential part to report on, not so much each of those elements of the cycle of communication I itemized there.)

::I’d be curious to also know if the observation shows that the cycle of communication is more (or less) positive throughout based on the type of subject that initiates the conversation? News stories on "hot button" topics or baseball contrasted with (say) a page dealing with baking fudge probably have different trajectories of "success" in remaining positive. (I am thinking about the inherent behavior of the potential community members themselves… one lends itself to polarized opinions with predictable “zealots” appearing in either camp, while the other community may be more welcoming of differing opinions and tastes). SO for example, thinking of an individual wearing that New York Yankees hat in Fenway Park on game day....vs... a group of bakers talking about chocolate vs. peanut butter fudge recipes…The former is likely to risk some taunting, a black eye, a broken tooth, and perhaps a small riot... while those in the latter group, might, at worst, receive only a cavity. Anyway, my point is that it might be interesting compare a couple of focused topics of conversation as a way of discovering a smaller sub-community that builds around a YouTube comment-board (With one engaging in a "Hot button" topic.... While the other group is discussing something seemingly non-polarizing.)[[User:Psl|Psl]] 12:00, 28 February 2014 (EST)

::Hate speech and Internet harassment are major players in the controversy surrounding freedom of speech. While it is a newsworthy topic, it is very broad and difficult to condense into a single essay. Building upon PSL’s suggestion about separating research, there are some controls you may wish to include in your research. For example, topics like a YouTube video claiming President Obama is the Anti-Christ are more likely to receive negative comments than a video of a kitten playing with yarn. Additionally, current events have a huge impact on the attention a video may receive. Looking back on the kitten video, there would be a massive public reaction if the yarn the kitten was playing with had a toxic dye in it that was killing kittens shortly after playing with it. Current events and the way stories are portrayed in the media have a significant impact over how users react in comment sections on YouTube. [[User:Julie|Julie]] 13:20, 4 March 2014 (EST)

----
I really like your topic about company removing comments to avoid negativity on websites. I would like to comment on the part where Youtube is trying to enable a tool for the video up-loaders to review the comments before they are published. I understand this is a tool to avoid cyberbullying, however, I think this one tool might be over limiting on freedom of speech. Users can choose not to publish the comments that are harassing, they can also remove comments that are criticizing or even just some comments that they do not like. Youtube needs to control this tool in a better way to avoid that.

[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 15:17, 4 March 2014 (EST)
----

*Ben Harmatz
*Government Entities: Internet Surveillance and Censorship
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Harvard_NSA_1_draft_copy.doc
[[User:Benh|Benh]] 16:49, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: Hi Ben. While I think your prospectus brings up the interesting and very pertinent topic of government control, surveillance, and censorship, I think that it is simply far too broad of a topic. For the assignment, we are supposed to monitor the activities of users on a particular site or group of sites, but looking at the internet as a whole is far too much for an 8-10 page paper! Perhaps consider government control, surveillance, and censorship while observing a particular website that has been named as a victim (by the media) of NSA's surveillance and dig deeper there. [[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 13:02, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Ben! I believe your topic and outline focus on a topic extremely relevant to class and pose good research questions; however, as you mention yourself you are proposing more of a thesis research type project rather than looking at how these questions apply to a specific community or small set of communities online. Perhaps you can find a concrete example of an online platform were content from its community has been regulated by a government agency. You could look at https://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/government/ there is a specific request to from a local law enforcement official to remove a search result linking to a news article about his record as an officer. They say that they did not remove the search result so maybe you can identify what article it was and see if any community responded to this request for takedown. Just an idea.. Hope my feedback is of help!

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 15:56, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Hello Ben! Your thesis is definitely an interesting and pressing issue. However, as LRsanchez said, it may be too broad for an 8-10 page paper. You may want to narrow the focus of your issue from either a domestic or international perspective, where issues of legality and ethics vary widely. Choosing one perspective will also narrow down some of your questions and help you zero in on a specific community. [[User:Julie|Julie]] 15:43, 4 March 2014 (EST)

------

*Patricia Byrnes
*Title: Are moderators effective for policing and protecting a site from illegal use?
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Patricia_Byrnes_Assig._Two.doc
[[User:TriciaBy|TriciaBy]] 16:59, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:Patricia, First off, love your idea, moderating internet speech, as well as your methodology: if what you want to measure is moderating behavior, norms, and free speech concerns, the “Politics & Leaders” forum is a fantastic place to do so since It appears that discussions there can turn from heated to vituperative in the blink of an eye! With respect to your research question, by specifying “effective,” I assume that you will quantify instances of behavior that violate the established rules of the site. This method is good since you give yourself a verifiable and quantifiable measure. You can then use Lessig’s and other scholars work to explain these data. Now, you say that you wish to "research the rules and regulations of the site,” which looks like it might be an insurmountable task. I visited the site’s “Super Editor handbook” and I see that it is quite extensive. Perhaps you might want to focus specifically on one type of violation, such as "3.4.1 Discouraged Ranking Themes - Personal Experience / Personal Preference Rankings” ? [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)

: This is a very interesting topic, and a complement of sorts to mine. As Vance has mentioned, it might be a good idea to focus on a single type of infringement. Also, keep in mind that looking up formal charges for infringement may not lead to a very accurate data point given that many take down notices are delivered through more traditional, private systems such as email (as an owner of several websites, I've received quite a few infringement notifications pertaining to content post by our users, all of them as a personal email, none through the official DMCA means or through our hosting provider). --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 12:23, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-----

Hi Ben,
You topic hits home for many of us. I like the social value of the topic you are discussing. I was wondering what angle you were intending on pursuing and which communities you are intending on focusing on. Things to consider might be: how you are going about your research?; are you discussing a specific incident like Verizon giving data to the NSA or Comcast selling data? Will you be studying public chatrooms, Facebook groups, news outlets or legal cases? In terms of the angle of your paper, will it be economic, philosophical, environmental, legal or what? I really like you subject matter on a broad level, but how are you planning on developing you arguments? Good Luck! - Art.Mescon

-------

*Name or pseudonym: Vance.Puchalski
*Regulators and the Spread of (Mis)Information
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Puchalski-Assignment2.docx
[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 17:17, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:As an extension student and a reader of both sites, I agree that extension student is often more accurate especially due to the required affiliation. You should consider when collecting your data that often information is not so black and white. A lot of people on these treads seek opinion, which is more of a personal thought rather than right or wrong. A lot on forums is opinion based, not fact based and so I think you should prepare for your data to be filled with a lot of gray areas, which you might already be expecting. The correlation between accuracy and monitoring is certainty an interesting topic. Anyway, great research topic and I’m interested to see your findings. Good luck! [[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 21:20, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Vance! I was pleased to read your prospectus and intent to "shed new light on the issue of censorship, regulators, and accuracy of information on the Internet." I also enjoyed your comparison of Harvard's forums and how each of their architectures play an important role in the accuracy of the information they produce. I also think that you raised very interesting questions and effectively correlated regulating forces vis-a-vis the accuracy of information. I am definitely looking forward to reading more. Good job!
[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 17:01, 4 March 2014 (EST)
----

*A. Tom Anteus
*Cryptocurrency Uses in Conflict Zones Around the World
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Cryptocurrency_Uses_in_Conflict_Zones_Around_the_World.pdf
[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 17:26, 25 February 2014 (EST)

:: Hi Tom, intriguing topic! I'm a keen follower of the Bitcoin revolution myself so have been naturally drawn to your prospectus and Daniel's as well. However I would say its quite difficult to follow your proposal. I'm not quite sure how you intend to analyse and measure the use of cryptocurrency in conflict zones. Which conflict areas will you be targeting? Do you intend to follow forums or analyse chatter on various websites. If so, which ones? [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:36, 2 March 2014 (EST)

:: One interesting avenue to explore might be how government control of internet in countries like China affect, and could affect the adoption and use of Bitcoin. I've followed Bitcoin for a long time and one of my concerns has always been that Bitcoin is dependent on some infrastructure that is relatively vulnerable to government control and influence, and that if Bitcoin ever grew sufficiently to compete with official state currencies it might invite even more internet regulation. --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 12:14, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-----

*Julie Dubela
*Mapping Social Media Debate on the OHCHR Report on North Korea
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Julie_Assignment2.txt
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 18:37, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Julie, great prospectus. I find the whole North Korea situation appalling from a global response perspective. A lot of the articles, commentary and reactions from people around the world have been effectively muzzled. Your approach to analyse public reaction through social media is methodical and well thought through. Your plan to use specific tools to collect information from twitter hash tags, Google trends etc and follow up by analysing them to find common themes and trends is great. I look forward to reading the final report! [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 07:52, 2 March 2014 (EST)

::Hi Julie! Good job on your topic selection. I think that you raised very interesting points that are worthy of discussion. The problematic of human rights in North Korea is a sensitive and complex one to deal with. However, I am very intrigued by your methodology and strategy to intelligently use social media and other reliable analytic to scale your findings. I personally did not know some of those tools that you intend to utilize to track and illustrate your results (so thank you for mentioning them on your prospectus). I'm absolutely looking forward to reading more and finding out how you would execute your strategy. [[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 14:44, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:Hi Julie, this is a terrific topic. I am very impressed by the effort you are prepared to undertake to collect and analyze public reaction via social media, especially given the extraordinary measures taken by (likely) gov't actors to manage messaging about anything having to do with national interest and activities. During the second class session when country-specific examples of regulation and online community engagement were raised, I thought specifically of the North Korean Case and greatly look forward to this report! [[User:akk22|akk22]] 15:54, 4 March 2014 (EST)
----

*Andrew Grant
*Quantified Self and Qualified Liability: Strava and Lessig's Four Forces
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Andrew_Grant_Assigmnment_Two_02252014.docx
[[User:AndrewGrant|Andrew Grant]]

::Andrew, your prospectus sounds fantastic. Lots of interesting questions being asked in light of Lessig's Four Forces and the Quantified Self movement. I think that you many be asking too many questions for an 8-10 page paper, if you are to go into sufficient depth for each one. Do you think that it's realistic to answer the five research questions in so short of a paper? Other than that, I think you are off to a great start and I am interested in hearing more about it. [[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 11:49, 28 February 2014 (EST)

----

In general, it might be helpful to state why your project is important and how the outcome of the research might help regulate/control or improve human behavior on the internet. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 19:58, 27 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Andrew! I believe the behavior of the community you are analyzing is interesting particularly after the incident tied to it. I would only recommend, if you have not already considered it, that you focus particularly on how Lessig’s four forces exert or fail to exert control over this particular community. I believe that a before and after as your question 5 proposes would be a great way to approach this if there is a way to compare community participation in these two time periods.

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 16:17, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Copyright Part 2: Enforcement and Balances

2014-03-04T05:24:13Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''March 4'''

Digital technologies spawned the proliferation of sharing of media and music, which has led to a number of controversial legal and technological strategies for control and copyright enforcement. “Controversial” may be putting it lightly; the ongoing fight between copyright owners and Internet evangelists is one of the most popularly debated fights surrounding Internet control.

This class focuses on how copyright is enforced online, with particular emphasis on the "notice-and-takedown" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), which allow Internet service providers to limit their liability for the copyright infringements of their users if the ISPs expeditiously remove material in response to complaints from copyright owners. The class will also look to the now-famous fight concerning SOPA and PIPA, and other attempts to more strictly regulate against online piracy.

Joining us will be [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/aholland Adam Holland], who works here at Berkman on the [https://www.chillingeffects.org/ Chilling Effects] project.

== Assignments ==

The second half of assignment 2 (commenting on prospectuses) is due ''before class'' today. Information on the assignment can be found [[Assignments#Assignment_2:_Prospectus|here]].

<onlyinclude>
== Readings/Watchings ==

; The DMCA Notice-And-Takedown Process

* Digital Media Law Project, [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/copyright-claims-based-user-content Claims Based on User Content] and [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content Protecting Yourself Against Copyright Claims Based on User Content]

* [https://www.eff.org/takedowns Electronic Frontier Foundation, Takedown Hall of Shame] (peruse)

* Chilling Effects, [http://www.chillingeffects.org/about About] and peruse the [http://www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi weather reports].

* [http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/24/how-google-did-the-right-thing-with-the-nascar-crash-video-and-why-it-matters/ Matthew Ingram, Paid Content, How Google did the right thing with the NASCAR crash video, and why it matters]

; Case Study - SOPA/PIPA

* [http://futureoftheinternet.org/reading-sopa Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, A Close Look at SOPA]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/01/15/mit-media-lab-opposes-sopa-pipa/ Ethan Zuckerman and Joi Ito, MIT Media Lab Opposes SOPA, PIPA]

; The big picture

* [http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-traffic-drops-in-america-grows-in-europe-131111/ Ernesto Van Der Sar, BitTorrent Traffic Drops in America, Grows in Europe]

* [https://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120405/11221818390/perspective-complexities-copyright-creativity-victim-infringement.shtml Erin McKeown, A Perspective On the Complexities of Copyright and Creativity from a Victim of Infringement]

== Optional Readings ==

; Case Study - ISP "Six Strikes

* [http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/feb/01/copyright-alert-system-and-six-strikes/ Brooke Gladstone, Interview with Jill Lesser of Center for Copyright Information (''On The Media'')]

* [http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2013/02/25/the-6-likely-impact-of-six-strikes/ Jonathan Bailey, Plagiarism Today, The 6 Likely Impact of Six Strikes]

; Case Study - Operation In Our Sites

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1835604 Andy Sellars, Seized Sites: The In Rem Forfeiture of Copyright-Infringing Domain Names]

* [http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/02/02/super-bust-due-process-and-domain-name-seizure.html Wendy Seltzer, Super Bust: Due Process and Domain Name Seizure]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Yet again, related to an earlier class, but another interesting write-up was just published on The Verge: [http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/25/5431382/the-internet-is-fucked The Internet Is Fucked (but we can fix it)] --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 19:05, 26 February 2014 (EST)

----

Ditto, not related to Copyright, but the theme of the class in general, politics & control of the Internet. The Quebec government started [http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/02/26/quebecs_language_watchdog_targets_stores_use_of_english_on_facebook.html fining businesses] for not writing in French on their Facebook pages. I've never understood why Canada has such a stereotype of being 'nice'. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:37, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:Erin, thanks for sharing this. Seems like a really interesting example of the ways in which the Internet and digital technologies are a new place for old and ongoing debates to play out. With so much of our lives now taking place online, it makes sense that concerns about language, heritage, and culture have to be grappled with anew. I wonder if some of the push-back from business owners-- like the one in this article who says "Facebook has nothing to do with Quebec"-- stems from the idea that the Internet is a malleable and border-less place and confusion over what laws govern speech on a global forum run by a US-based company. And yes, I have heard some Quebecois friends get a little less than "nice" when it comes to discussing their francophone heritage... [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 15:16, 2 March 2014 (EST)
::Wow! That's crazy. Do you know what justification they have (or are using) to fine the businesses? Is it a case like the ADA, which prohibits discrimination against disabilities by such measures as requiring all public establishments to follow building codes to ensure disabled individuals are accommodated? By this I mean, is Quebec doing this so that French-speaking people are not excluded?[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

The highly controversial Section 512 of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. § 512 provides a “safety zone”, where online service providers could operate shielded from liability charges on account of copyright infringement. Service providers function by allowing people to modify, post, and search content on their servers. By hosting foreign content that is not generated by the OSP or ISP, they were placing themselves into position of being held liable on infringement charges. This changed in 1998, because as long as roughly three essential steps were taken, an OSP could take advantage of the “safe-harbor” clause. One of those steps is the “expeditious” removal of infringing content. On the other side, the alleged offender can send a counter-notice disputing the copyright holders claim. This might seem in favor of the public domain with an anti-copyright agenda, but it does not diminish the copyright holders privileges in any way. This provision also allows the first step of prosecution in the form of takedown notices. While these measures are beneficial for the public good and provide a degree of protection, they seem utterly inefficient in situations like Erin McKeown experienced. In an attempt to control infringers and pirates, the ICE has engaged in domain seizures, which resulted in tens of thousands of innocent websites being shut down. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 22:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Takedown Hall of Shame has excellent examples of cease and desist letter offenders, even citing unusual claims such as one over the copyright privileges of a monkey’s photos! That is where major companies should take and follow Google’s example of standing up for users rights. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), MIT points out that to stop pirating has many dangerous side effects including but not limited to being unconstitutional in violating certain aspects of free speech. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:06, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I was unable to find out anything about how many actions have been taken under the Copyright Alert System. Are there any known statistics on how many of these notices have been sent out or how many consumers have been affected? (whether centrally managed, or done by a third-party watchdog like EFF?)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:48, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I'm in a creative industry where intellectual property is important (software / online games). Yet I think that criminalization of intellectual property violations is ridiculous.

I called all my U.S. senators and representatives back when SOPA/PIPA was in the legislative process--I found it highly offensive. It seems absurd to me that someone would be placed in jail for copyright infringement, or that we are making agencies of the U.S. government an arm of private industry by using them to enforce this (not to mention giving government broad control over shutting down content that some moneyed interest finds objectionable).

The argument used by the industry is that copyright violation is equivalent to theft. I agree that many cases of copyvio are totally wrong, but I don't see why it can't be handled entirely through civil systems. The fact is that intellectual property violations *are* different from stealing a physical good, simply because in the former case we're dealing with a nonrival good (i.e., if you steal my car then I can't use it anymore; if you copy my software package, I've lost some potential revenue from you but you haven't deprived my ability to sell it to others). Furthermore, intellectual property violations are way more complex--these are cases that just aren't as clear-cut as showing that a theft actually occurred when you are caught with my stolen car.

I listened to the songs mentioned in the "Touch the Sun" / "Slung-lo" controversy referred to in the reading materials. I empathize with the creator of Slung-lo if they really feel their creation was improperly exploited, but I simply don't see the basis for their claim. But upon my listening I found both songs to be different, and the lyrics were (as far as I could tell) totally different. Billions of songs get made--lots will be similar. I shudder to think that a large and well-funded copyright holder could use claims like this to abuse others with the threat of criminal enforcement.
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:58, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

It seems that SOPA, PIPA, and the DCMA all seem to be working towards the same goal, that of eradicating copyright infringement/piracy. Why is the DCMA not sufficient? Internet piracy is a huge issue for the motion picture and music industries (and I'm sure for plenty of other industries) as it is stealing. I agree with Jradoff that it's not ''quite'' as bad as actual theft of property and therefore might not warrant a jail sentence, but it is essentially the same thing. What is the difference between going into a Best Buy and stealing a DVD or CD and stealing it from home? It seems the primary difference is simply the ease of convenience for the thief. I think we have only been desensitized to this kind of theft because it is so prevalent in society. Anyways, if we agree that internet piracy is "wrong", what can be done to curtail it further than the rules currently in place (i.e. the DCMA)? Have SOPA and/or PIPA been revised? In this article that I found on Forbes [http://www.forbes.com/sites/derekbroes/2012/01/20/why-should-you-fear-sopa-and-pipa/], author Derek Broes claims to have testified before Congress to propose "many solutions, none of which violate our First Amendment Right to Free Speech", but he does not elaborate on any specific alternatives or amendments to SOPA/PIPA. What effective alternatives are there, which would go above and beyond what is already in place, but wouldn't be as "harmful" as SOPA/PIPA? Is there still talk of a new iteration of the legislature? I would imagine that with the onslaught of backlash from the initial bills, they would have to call them something different to mitigate any potential hate...[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
:The former government in Australia tried for many years to implement a voluntary scheme to crack down on piracy through a series of discussions with ISPs, instead of having the government legislating enforcement of copyright. The meetings stopped happening, as the representatives from iiNet (large Australian ISP), would often get up and walk out of the meetings.
:About 18 months ago, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis made a case against iiNet which attempted to hold them liable for their users on BitTorrent for piracy purposes, which was taken to the High Court. The entertainment industry was attempting to hold the ISP's liable because it is obviously not economically viable, (even if it is in fact possible) to prosecute each piracy user individually. iiNet was successful in their defense to which the High Court unanimously ruled the ISP is not liable for the acts of their users.
:iiNet’s routine business of providing access to the internet will not, by itself, mean that they authorise their customers' acts of copyright infringement. At the same time, iiNet is not obliged to contact customers or terminate their accounts in response to notices from copyright owners. Although users are liable for copyright infringement, it is hardly enforced at all in Australia. Australia is needing legislative reform in regard to copyright laws, as their attempts to enforce it have been futile. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 20:41, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::: I should also note that this is very low on the government's agenda. Most of the pirated entertainment comes from the USA. There’s no motive or benefit for the Australian Government to fight against illegal downloading on behalf of the American entertainment industry. In addition, most websites used by Australians to pirate, like BitTorrent and Pirates Bay, are American-based websites, which adds another disincentive for them. Unfortunately, a lot of piracy goes on here all too easily without intervention or blocking; almost makes me wonder if (per capita), more piracy happens here. Unless it becomes a political issue or the Australian government loses money over it, they’ll remain reluctant to spend the time or energy to fix it. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:03, 4 March 2014 (EST)

:Exciting-- I was just searching Google for an episode of Girls that I accidentally deleted from my DVR and found the following notification at the bottom of the search page:
In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org. [[User:Castille|Castille]] 00:22, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-----

It was interesting to read more on DMCA. I've never been too familiar with the specifics of the law but have faced it's effects constantly on YouTube as so many videos are removed over copyright claims. Reading more on it, I found this article very interesting: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/ten-years-later/ It portrays DMCA in a positive light, going as far as saying it "saved the web." I don't completely agree with the article, but I do think that content creators should have some safety net to ensure that their content cannot be used without proper credit or consent. And so, some safety net needs to be present but a filter that is too large is very concerning. The list of Takedown Hall of Shame is an alerting example of filtering gone wrong for the wrong reasons. It would interesting to see the solutions we come up with in the future. Will greater efforts of copyright regulation always be followed by an internet protest as large as the SOPA/PIPA one?

[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 20:45, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
:Piracy is a major issue in Australia. The copyright laws are more loose than compared with other countries such as the US and it is relatively easy to download content illegally. Before watching a movie, an advertisement airs with the line “You wouldn’t steal a car, you wouldn’t steal a handbag, you wouldn’t steal a movie. Downloading pirated films is stealing. Piracy - it’s a crime!”. I understand this commercial has a moral angle in hopes to minimise illegal downloading. However, If someone steals a car, handbag or wallet, a physical object that belongs to someone else has been removed without permission or payment. That would be theft. In one sense, if you download something illegally, it is a digital copy that changes hands. (‘Copy’ being the operative word). With piracy, nobody is physically deprived of anything, which is why I think most Australians don’t have a moral conflict when downloading illegally, which makes the advertisement’s suggestion that you are ‘stealing’ seem ludicrous.
:Of course, this pirate ‘thief’ can make the work available to anyone for profit. However, not all online piracy is done for profit. Those profiting from piracy are the people selling copied films and CDs out of the back of their car, and people selling software ‘compilation’ disks.
:Which brings me to the point, while the original creator might not be deprived of something, they ARE missing potential earnings. This is the difficult problem to solve. The past 10-odd years, we have seen a large value transfer from studios and publishers to those who will illegally download. However, I question whether or not the aspect of lost income from the entertainment industry is accurate. How is this measured? Are these estimated numbers exaggerated, or is this an honest reflection of loss for the entertainment industry?
:One of the main objectives of the Copyright Alert System is to return the earnings to the entertainment industry and original owners of content. But in the end, will this system end up throttling the internet and the principles associated, i.e. free speech, that we believe the internet should stand for?
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:24, 4 March 2014 (EST)

Copyright Part 2: Enforcement and Balances

2014-03-04T05:11:53Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''March 4'''

Digital technologies spawned the proliferation of sharing of media and music, which has led to a number of controversial legal and technological strategies for control and copyright enforcement. “Controversial” may be putting it lightly; the ongoing fight between copyright owners and Internet evangelists is one of the most popularly debated fights surrounding Internet control.

This class focuses on how copyright is enforced online, with particular emphasis on the "notice-and-takedown" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), which allow Internet service providers to limit their liability for the copyright infringements of their users if the ISPs expeditiously remove material in response to complaints from copyright owners. The class will also look to the now-famous fight concerning SOPA and PIPA, and other attempts to more strictly regulate against online piracy.

Joining us will be [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/aholland Adam Holland], who works here at Berkman on the [https://www.chillingeffects.org/ Chilling Effects] project.

== Assignments ==

The second half of assignment 2 (commenting on prospectuses) is due ''before class'' today. Information on the assignment can be found [[Assignments#Assignment_2:_Prospectus|here]].

<onlyinclude>
== Readings/Watchings ==

; The DMCA Notice-And-Takedown Process

* Digital Media Law Project, [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/copyright-claims-based-user-content Claims Based on User Content] and [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content Protecting Yourself Against Copyright Claims Based on User Content]

* [https://www.eff.org/takedowns Electronic Frontier Foundation, Takedown Hall of Shame] (peruse)

* Chilling Effects, [http://www.chillingeffects.org/about About] and peruse the [http://www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi weather reports].

* [http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/24/how-google-did-the-right-thing-with-the-nascar-crash-video-and-why-it-matters/ Matthew Ingram, Paid Content, How Google did the right thing with the NASCAR crash video, and why it matters]

; Case Study - SOPA/PIPA

* [http://futureoftheinternet.org/reading-sopa Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, A Close Look at SOPA]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/01/15/mit-media-lab-opposes-sopa-pipa/ Ethan Zuckerman and Joi Ito, MIT Media Lab Opposes SOPA, PIPA]

; The big picture

* [http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-traffic-drops-in-america-grows-in-europe-131111/ Ernesto Van Der Sar, BitTorrent Traffic Drops in America, Grows in Europe]

* [https://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120405/11221818390/perspective-complexities-copyright-creativity-victim-infringement.shtml Erin McKeown, A Perspective On the Complexities of Copyright and Creativity from a Victim of Infringement]

== Optional Readings ==

; Case Study - ISP "Six Strikes

* [http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/feb/01/copyright-alert-system-and-six-strikes/ Brooke Gladstone, Interview with Jill Lesser of Center for Copyright Information (''On The Media'')]

* [http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2013/02/25/the-6-likely-impact-of-six-strikes/ Jonathan Bailey, Plagiarism Today, The 6 Likely Impact of Six Strikes]

; Case Study - Operation In Our Sites

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1835604 Andy Sellars, Seized Sites: The In Rem Forfeiture of Copyright-Infringing Domain Names]

* [http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/02/02/super-bust-due-process-and-domain-name-seizure.html Wendy Seltzer, Super Bust: Due Process and Domain Name Seizure]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Yet again, related to an earlier class, but another interesting write-up was just published on The Verge: [http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/25/5431382/the-internet-is-fucked The Internet Is Fucked (but we can fix it)] --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 19:05, 26 February 2014 (EST)

----

Ditto, not related to Copyright, but the theme of the class in general, politics & control of the Internet. The Quebec government started [http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/02/26/quebecs_language_watchdog_targets_stores_use_of_english_on_facebook.html fining businesses] for not writing in French on their Facebook pages. I've never understood why Canada has such a stereotype of being 'nice'. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:37, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:Erin, thanks for sharing this. Seems like a really interesting example of the ways in which the Internet and digital technologies are a new place for old and ongoing debates to play out. With so much of our lives now taking place online, it makes sense that concerns about language, heritage, and culture have to be grappled with anew. I wonder if some of the push-back from business owners-- like the one in this article who says "Facebook has nothing to do with Quebec"-- stems from the idea that the Internet is a malleable and border-less place and confusion over what laws govern speech on a global forum run by a US-based company. And yes, I have heard some Quebecois friends get a little less than "nice" when it comes to discussing their francophone heritage... [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 15:16, 2 March 2014 (EST)
::Wow! That's crazy. Do you know what justification they have (or are using) to fine the businesses? Is it a case like the ADA, which prohibits discrimination against disabilities by such measures as requiring all public establishments to follow building codes to ensure disabled individuals are accommodated? By this I mean, is Quebec doing this so that French-speaking people are not excluded?[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

The highly controversial Section 512 of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. § 512 provides a “safety zone”, where online service providers could operate shielded from liability charges on account of copyright infringement. Service providers function by allowing people to modify, post, and search content on their servers. By hosting foreign content that is not generated by the OSP or ISP, they were placing themselves into position of being held liable on infringement charges. This changed in 1998, because as long as roughly three essential steps were taken, an OSP could take advantage of the “safe-harbor” clause. One of those steps is the “expeditious” removal of infringing content. On the other side, the alleged offender can send a counter-notice disputing the copyright holders claim. This might seem in favor of the public domain with an anti-copyright agenda, but it does not diminish the copyright holders privileges in any way. This provision also allows the first step of prosecution in the form of takedown notices. While these measures are beneficial for the public good and provide a degree of protection, they seem utterly inefficient in situations like Erin McKeown experienced. In an attempt to control infringers and pirates, the ICE has engaged in domain seizures, which resulted in tens of thousands of innocent websites being shut down. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 22:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Takedown Hall of Shame has excellent examples of cease and desist letter offenders, even citing unusual claims such as one over the copyright privileges of a monkey’s photos! That is where major companies should take and follow Google’s example of standing up for users rights. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), MIT points out that to stop pirating has many dangerous side effects including but not limited to being unconstitutional in violating certain aspects of free speech. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:06, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I was unable to find out anything about how many actions have been taken under the Copyright Alert System. Are there any known statistics on how many of these notices have been sent out or how many consumers have been affected? (whether centrally managed, or done by a third-party watchdog like EFF?)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:48, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I'm in a creative industry where intellectual property is important (software / online games). Yet I think that criminalization of intellectual property violations is ridiculous.

I called all my U.S. senators and representatives back when SOPA/PIPA was in the legislative process--I found it highly offensive. It seems absurd to me that someone would be placed in jail for copyright infringement, or that we are making agencies of the U.S. government an arm of private industry by using them to enforce this (not to mention giving government broad control over shutting down content that some moneyed interest finds objectionable).

The argument used by the industry is that copyright violation is equivalent to theft. I agree that many cases of copyvio are totally wrong, but I don't see why it can't be handled entirely through civil systems. The fact is that intellectual property violations *are* different from stealing a physical good, simply because in the former case we're dealing with a nonrival good (i.e., if you steal my car then I can't use it anymore; if you copy my software package, I've lost some potential revenue from you but you haven't deprived my ability to sell it to others). Furthermore, intellectual property violations are way more complex--these are cases that just aren't as clear-cut as showing that a theft actually occurred when you are caught with my stolen car.

I listened to the songs mentioned in the "Touch the Sun" / "Slung-lo" controversy referred to in the reading materials. I empathize with the creator of Slung-lo if they really feel their creation was improperly exploited, but I simply don't see the basis for their claim. But upon my listening I found both songs to be different, and the lyrics were (as far as I could tell) totally different. Billions of songs get made--lots will be similar. I shudder to think that a large and well-funded copyright holder could use claims like this to abuse others with the threat of criminal enforcement.
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:58, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

It seems that SOPA, PIPA, and the DCMA all seem to be working towards the same goal, that of eradicating copyright infringement/piracy. Why is the DCMA not sufficient? Internet piracy is a huge issue for the motion picture and music industries (and I'm sure for plenty of other industries) as it is stealing. I agree with Jradoff that it's not ''quite'' as bad as actual theft of property and therefore might not warrant a jail sentence, but it is essentially the same thing. What is the difference between going into a Best Buy and stealing a DVD or CD and stealing it from home? It seems the primary difference is simply the ease of convenience for the thief. I think we have only been desensitized to this kind of theft because it is so prevalent in society. Anyways, if we agree that internet piracy is "wrong", what can be done to curtail it further than the rules currently in place (i.e. the DCMA)? Have SOPA and/or PIPA been revised? In this article that I found on Forbes [http://www.forbes.com/sites/derekbroes/2012/01/20/why-should-you-fear-sopa-and-pipa/], author Derek Broes claims to have testified before Congress to propose "many solutions, none of which violate our First Amendment Right to Free Speech", but he does not elaborate on any specific alternatives or amendments to SOPA/PIPA. What effective alternatives are there, which would go above and beyond what is already in place, but wouldn't be as "harmful" as SOPA/PIPA? Is there still talk of a new iteration of the legislature? I would imagine that with the onslaught of backlash from the initial bills, they would have to call them something different to mitigate any potential hate...[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
:The former government in Australia tried for many years to implement a voluntary scheme to crack down on piracy through a series of discussions with ISPs, instead of having the government legislating enforcement of copyright. The meetings stopped happening, as the representatives from iiNet (large Australian ISP), would often get up and walk out of the meetings.
:About 18 months ago, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis made a case against iiNet which attempted to hold them liable for their users on BitTorrent for piracy purposes, which was taken to the High Court. The entertainment industry was attempting to hold the ISP's liable because it is obviously not economically viable, (even if it is in fact possible) to prosecute each piracy user individually. iiNet was successful in their defense to which the High Court unanimously ruled the ISP is not liable for the acts of their users.
:iiNet’s routine business of providing access to the internet will not, by itself, mean that they authorise their customers' acts of copyright infringement. At the same time, iiNet is not obliged to contact customers or terminate their accounts in response to notices from copyright owners. Although users are liable for copyright infringement, it is hardly enforced at all in Australia. Australia is needing legislative reform in regard to copyright laws, as their attempts to enforce it have been futile. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 20:41, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::: I should also note that this is very low on the government's agenda. Most of the pirated entertainment comes from the USA. There’s no motive or benefit for the Australian Government to fight against illegal downloading on behalf of the American entertainment industry. In addition, most websites used by Australians to pirate, like BitTorrent and Pirates Bay, are American-based websites, which adds another disincentive for them. Unfortunately, a lot of piracy goes on here all too easily without intervention or blocking; almost makes me wonder if (per capita), more piracy happens here. Unless it becomes a political issue or the Australian government loses money over it, they’ll remain reluctant to spend the time or energy to fix it. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:03, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-----

It was interesting to read more on DMCA. I've never been too familiar with the specifics of the law but have faced it's effects constantly on YouTube as so many videos are removed over copyright claims. Reading more on it, I found this article very interesting: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/ten-years-later/ It portrays DMCA in a positive light, going as far as saying it "saved the web." I don't completely agree with the article, but I do think that content creators should have some safety net to ensure that their content cannot be used without proper credit or consent. And so, some safety net needs to be present but a filter that is too large is very concerning. The list of Takedown Hall of Shame is an alerting example of filtering gone wrong for the wrong reasons. It would interesting to see the solutions we come up with in the future. Will greater efforts of copyright regulation always be followed by an internet protest as large as the SOPA/PIPA one?

[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 20:45, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

Copyright Part 2: Enforcement and Balances

2014-03-04T05:03:20Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''March 4'''

Digital technologies spawned the proliferation of sharing of media and music, which has led to a number of controversial legal and technological strategies for control and copyright enforcement. “Controversial” may be putting it lightly; the ongoing fight between copyright owners and Internet evangelists is one of the most popularly debated fights surrounding Internet control.

This class focuses on how copyright is enforced online, with particular emphasis on the "notice-and-takedown" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), which allow Internet service providers to limit their liability for the copyright infringements of their users if the ISPs expeditiously remove material in response to complaints from copyright owners. The class will also look to the now-famous fight concerning SOPA and PIPA, and other attempts to more strictly regulate against online piracy.

Joining us will be [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/aholland Adam Holland], who works here at Berkman on the [https://www.chillingeffects.org/ Chilling Effects] project.

== Assignments ==

The second half of assignment 2 (commenting on prospectuses) is due ''before class'' today. Information on the assignment can be found [[Assignments#Assignment_2:_Prospectus|here]].

<onlyinclude>
== Readings/Watchings ==

; The DMCA Notice-And-Takedown Process

* Digital Media Law Project, [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/copyright-claims-based-user-content Claims Based on User Content] and [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content Protecting Yourself Against Copyright Claims Based on User Content]

* [https://www.eff.org/takedowns Electronic Frontier Foundation, Takedown Hall of Shame] (peruse)

* Chilling Effects, [http://www.chillingeffects.org/about About] and peruse the [http://www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi weather reports].

* [http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/24/how-google-did-the-right-thing-with-the-nascar-crash-video-and-why-it-matters/ Matthew Ingram, Paid Content, How Google did the right thing with the NASCAR crash video, and why it matters]

; Case Study - SOPA/PIPA

* [http://futureoftheinternet.org/reading-sopa Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, A Close Look at SOPA]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/01/15/mit-media-lab-opposes-sopa-pipa/ Ethan Zuckerman and Joi Ito, MIT Media Lab Opposes SOPA, PIPA]

; The big picture

* [http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-traffic-drops-in-america-grows-in-europe-131111/ Ernesto Van Der Sar, BitTorrent Traffic Drops in America, Grows in Europe]

* [https://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120405/11221818390/perspective-complexities-copyright-creativity-victim-infringement.shtml Erin McKeown, A Perspective On the Complexities of Copyright and Creativity from a Victim of Infringement]

== Optional Readings ==

; Case Study - ISP "Six Strikes

* [http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/feb/01/copyright-alert-system-and-six-strikes/ Brooke Gladstone, Interview with Jill Lesser of Center for Copyright Information (''On The Media'')]

* [http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2013/02/25/the-6-likely-impact-of-six-strikes/ Jonathan Bailey, Plagiarism Today, The 6 Likely Impact of Six Strikes]

; Case Study - Operation In Our Sites

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1835604 Andy Sellars, Seized Sites: The In Rem Forfeiture of Copyright-Infringing Domain Names]

* [http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/02/02/super-bust-due-process-and-domain-name-seizure.html Wendy Seltzer, Super Bust: Due Process and Domain Name Seizure]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Yet again, related to an earlier class, but another interesting write-up was just published on The Verge: [http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/25/5431382/the-internet-is-fucked The Internet Is Fucked (but we can fix it)] --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 19:05, 26 February 2014 (EST)

----

Ditto, not related to Copyright, but the theme of the class in general, politics & control of the Internet. The Quebec government started [http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/02/26/quebecs_language_watchdog_targets_stores_use_of_english_on_facebook.html fining businesses] for not writing in French on their Facebook pages. I've never understood why Canada has such a stereotype of being 'nice'. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:37, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:Erin, thanks for sharing this. Seems like a really interesting example of the ways in which the Internet and digital technologies are a new place for old and ongoing debates to play out. With so much of our lives now taking place online, it makes sense that concerns about language, heritage, and culture have to be grappled with anew. I wonder if some of the push-back from business owners-- like the one in this article who says "Facebook has nothing to do with Quebec"-- stems from the idea that the Internet is a malleable and border-less place and confusion over what laws govern speech on a global forum run by a US-based company. And yes, I have heard some Quebecois friends get a little less than "nice" when it comes to discussing their francophone heritage... [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 15:16, 2 March 2014 (EST)
::Wow! That's crazy. Do you know what justification they have (or are using) to fine the businesses? Is it a case like the ADA, which prohibits discrimination against disabilities by such measures as requiring all public establishments to follow building codes to ensure disabled individuals are accommodated? By this I mean, is Quebec doing this so that French-speaking people are not excluded?[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

The highly controversial Section 512 of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. § 512 provides a “safety zone”, where online service providers could operate shielded from liability charges on account of copyright infringement. Service providers function by allowing people to modify, post, and search content on their servers. By hosting foreign content that is not generated by the OSP or ISP, they were placing themselves into position of being held liable on infringement charges. This changed in 1998, because as long as roughly three essential steps were taken, an OSP could take advantage of the “safe-harbor” clause. One of those steps is the “expeditious” removal of infringing content. On the other side, the alleged offender can send a counter-notice disputing the copyright holders claim. This might seem in favor of the public domain with an anti-copyright agenda, but it does not diminish the copyright holders privileges in any way. This provision also allows the first step of prosecution in the form of takedown notices. While these measures are beneficial for the public good and provide a degree of protection, they seem utterly inefficient in situations like Erin McKeown experienced. In an attempt to control infringers and pirates, the ICE has engaged in domain seizures, which resulted in tens of thousands of innocent websites being shut down. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 22:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Takedown Hall of Shame has excellent examples of cease and desist letter offenders, even citing unusual claims such as one over the copyright privileges of a monkey’s photos! That is where major companies should take and follow Google’s example of standing up for users rights. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), MIT points out that to stop pirating has many dangerous side effects including but not limited to being unconstitutional in violating certain aspects of free speech. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:06, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I was unable to find out anything about how many actions have been taken under the Copyright Alert System. Are there any known statistics on how many of these notices have been sent out or how many consumers have been affected? (whether centrally managed, or done by a third-party watchdog like EFF?)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:48, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I'm in a creative industry where intellectual property is important (software / online games). Yet I think that criminalization of intellectual property violations is ridiculous.

I called all my U.S. senators and representatives back when SOPA/PIPA was in the legislative process--I found it highly offensive. It seems absurd to me that someone would be placed in jail for copyright infringement, or that we are making agencies of the U.S. government an arm of private industry by using them to enforce this (not to mention giving government broad control over shutting down content that some moneyed interest finds objectionable).

The argument used by the industry is that copyright violation is equivalent to theft. I agree that many cases of copyvio are totally wrong, but I don't see why it can't be handled entirely through civil systems. The fact is that intellectual property violations *are* different from stealing a physical good, simply because in the former case we're dealing with a nonrival good (i.e., if you steal my car then I can't use it anymore; if you copy my software package, I've lost some potential revenue from you but you haven't deprived my ability to sell it to others). Furthermore, intellectual property violations are way more complex--these are cases that just aren't as clear-cut as showing that a theft actually occurred when you are caught with my stolen car.

I listened to the songs mentioned in the "Touch the Sun" / "Slung-lo" controversy referred to in the reading materials. I empathize with the creator of Slung-lo if they really feel their creation was improperly exploited, but I simply don't see the basis for their claim. But upon my listening I found both songs to be different, and the lyrics were (as far as I could tell) totally different. Billions of songs get made--lots will be similar. I shudder to think that a large and well-funded copyright holder could use claims like this to abuse others with the threat of criminal enforcement.
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:58, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

It seems that SOPA, PIPA, and the DCMA all seem to be working towards the same goal, that of eradicating copyright infringement/piracy. Why is the DCMA not sufficient? Internet piracy is a huge issue for the motion picture and music industries (and I'm sure for plenty of other industries) as it is stealing. I agree with Jradoff that it's not ''quite'' as bad as actual theft of property and therefore might not warrant a jail sentence, but it is essentially the same thing. What is the difference between going into a Best Buy and stealing a DVD or CD and stealing it from home? It seems the primary difference is simply the ease of convenience for the thief. I think we have only been desensitized to this kind of theft because it is so prevalent in society. Anyways, if we agree that internet piracy is "wrong", what can be done to curtail it further than the rules currently in place (i.e. the DCMA)? Have SOPA and/or PIPA been revised? In this article that I found on Forbes [http://www.forbes.com/sites/derekbroes/2012/01/20/why-should-you-fear-sopa-and-pipa/], author Derek Broes claims to have testified before Congress to propose "many solutions, none of which violate our First Amendment Right to Free Speech", but he does not elaborate on any specific alternatives or amendments to SOPA/PIPA. What effective alternatives are there, which would go above and beyond what is already in place, but wouldn't be as "harmful" as SOPA/PIPA? Is there still talk of a new iteration of the legislature? I would imagine that with the onslaught of backlash from the initial bills, they would have to call them something different to mitigate any potential hate...[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
:The former government in Australia tried for many years to implement a voluntary scheme to crack down on piracy through a series of discussions with ISPs, instead of having the government legislating enforcement of copyright. The meetings stopped happening, as the representatives from iiNet (large Australian ISP), would often get up and walk out of the meetings.
:About 18 months ago, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis made a case against iiNet which attempted to hold them liable for their users on BitTorrent for piracy purposes, which was taken to the High Court. The entertainment industry was attempting to hold the ISP's liable because it is obviously not economically viable, (even if it is in fact possible) to prosecute each piracy user individually. iiNet was successful in their defense to which the High Court unanimously ruled the ISP is not liable for the acts of their users.
:iiNet’s routine business of providing access to the internet will not, by itself, mean that they authorise their customers' acts of copyright infringement. At the same time, iiNet is not obliged to contact customers or terminate their accounts in response to notices from copyright owners. Although users are liable for copyright infringement, it is hardly enforced at all in Australia. Australia is needing legislative reform in regard to copyright laws, as their attempts to enforce it have been futile. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 20:41, 3 March 2014 (EST)

::: I should also note that this is very low on the government's agenda. Most of the pirated entertainment comes from the USA. There’s no motive or benefit for the Australian Government to fight against illegal downloading on behalf of the American entertainment industry. In addition, most websites used by Australians to pirate, like BitTorrent and Pirates Bay, are American-based websites, which adds another disincentive for them. Unfortunately, a lot of piracy goes on here all too easily without intervention or blocking. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:03, 4 March 2014 (EST)

-----

It was interesting to read more on DMCA. I've never been too familiar with the specifics of the law but have faced it's effects constantly on YouTube as so many videos are removed over copyright claims. Reading more on it, I found this article very interesting: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/10/ten-years-later/ It portrays DMCA in a positive light, going as far as saying it "saved the web." I don't completely agree with the article, but I do think that content creators should have some safety net to ensure that their content cannot be used without proper credit or consent. And so, some safety net needs to be present but a filter that is too large is very concerning. The list of Takedown Hall of Shame is an alerting example of filtering gone wrong for the wrong reasons. It would interesting to see the solutions we come up with in the future. Will greater efforts of copyright regulation always be followed by an internet protest as large as the SOPA/PIPA one?

[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 20:45, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

Copyright Part 2: Enforcement and Balances

2014-03-04T01:41:00Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''March 4'''

Digital technologies spawned the proliferation of sharing of media and music, which has led to a number of controversial legal and technological strategies for control and copyright enforcement. “Controversial” may be putting it lightly; the ongoing fight between copyright owners and Internet evangelists is one of the most popularly debated fights surrounding Internet control.

This class focuses on how copyright is enforced online, with particular emphasis on the "notice-and-takedown" provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA"), which allow Internet service providers to limit their liability for the copyright infringements of their users if the ISPs expeditiously remove material in response to complaints from copyright owners. The class will also look to the now-famous fight concerning SOPA and PIPA, and other attempts to more strictly regulate against online piracy.

Joining us will be [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/aholland Adam Holland], who works here at Berkman on the [https://www.chillingeffects.org/ Chilling Effects] project.

== Assignments ==

The second half of assignment 2 (commenting on prospectuses) is due ''before class'' today. Information on the assignment can be found [[Assignments#Assignment_2:_Prospectus|here]].

<onlyinclude>
== Readings/Watchings ==

; The DMCA Notice-And-Takedown Process

* Digital Media Law Project, [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/copyright-claims-based-user-content Claims Based on User Content] and [http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/protecting-yourself-against-copyright-claims-based-user-content Protecting Yourself Against Copyright Claims Based on User Content]

* [https://www.eff.org/takedowns Electronic Frontier Foundation, Takedown Hall of Shame] (peruse)

* Chilling Effects, [http://www.chillingeffects.org/about About] and peruse the [http://www.chillingeffects.org/weather.cgi weather reports].

* [http://paidcontent.org/2013/02/24/how-google-did-the-right-thing-with-the-nascar-crash-video-and-why-it-matters/ Matthew Ingram, Paid Content, How Google did the right thing with the NASCAR crash video, and why it matters]

; Case Study - SOPA/PIPA

* [http://futureoftheinternet.org/reading-sopa Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Alicia Solow-Niederman, A Close Look at SOPA]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/01/15/mit-media-lab-opposes-sopa-pipa/ Ethan Zuckerman and Joi Ito, MIT Media Lab Opposes SOPA, PIPA]

; The big picture

* [http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-traffic-drops-in-america-grows-in-europe-131111/ Ernesto Van Der Sar, BitTorrent Traffic Drops in America, Grows in Europe]

* [https://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120405/11221818390/perspective-complexities-copyright-creativity-victim-infringement.shtml Erin McKeown, A Perspective On the Complexities of Copyright and Creativity from a Victim of Infringement]

== Optional Readings ==

; Case Study - ISP "Six Strikes

* [http://www.onthemedia.org/2013/feb/01/copyright-alert-system-and-six-strikes/ Brooke Gladstone, Interview with Jill Lesser of Center for Copyright Information (''On The Media'')]

* [http://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2013/02/25/the-6-likely-impact-of-six-strikes/ Jonathan Bailey, Plagiarism Today, The 6 Likely Impact of Six Strikes]

; Case Study - Operation In Our Sites

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1835604 Andy Sellars, Seized Sites: The In Rem Forfeiture of Copyright-Infringing Domain Names]

* [http://wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2011/02/02/super-bust-due-process-and-domain-name-seizure.html Wendy Seltzer, Super Bust: Due Process and Domain Name Seizure]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Yet again, related to an earlier class, but another interesting write-up was just published on The Verge: [http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/25/5431382/the-internet-is-fucked The Internet Is Fucked (but we can fix it)] --[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 19:05, 26 February 2014 (EST)

----

Ditto, not related to Copyright, but the theme of the class in general, politics & control of the Internet. The Quebec government started [http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/02/26/quebecs_language_watchdog_targets_stores_use_of_english_on_facebook.html fining businesses] for not writing in French on their Facebook pages. I've never understood why Canada has such a stereotype of being 'nice'. [[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 23:37, 26 February 2014 (EST)

:Erin, thanks for sharing this. Seems like a really interesting example of the ways in which the Internet and digital technologies are a new place for old and ongoing debates to play out. With so much of our lives now taking place online, it makes sense that concerns about language, heritage, and culture have to be grappled with anew. I wonder if some of the push-back from business owners-- like the one in this article who says "Facebook has nothing to do with Quebec"-- stems from the idea that the Internet is a malleable and border-less place and confusion over what laws govern speech on a global forum run by a US-based company. And yes, I have heard some Quebecois friends get a little less than "nice" when it comes to discussing their francophone heritage... [[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 15:16, 2 March 2014 (EST)
::Wow! That's crazy. Do you know what justification they have (or are using) to fine the businesses? Is it a case like the ADA, which prohibits discrimination against disabilities by such measures as requiring all public establishments to follow building codes to ensure disabled individuals are accommodated? By this I mean, is Quebec doing this so that French-speaking people are not excluded?[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

The highly controversial Section 512 of the DMCA, 17 U.S.C. § 512 provides a “safety zone”, where online service providers could operate shielded from liability charges on account of copyright infringement. Service providers function by allowing people to modify, post, and search content on their servers. By hosting foreign content that is not generated by the OSP or ISP, they were placing themselves into position of being held liable on infringement charges. This changed in 1998, because as long as roughly three essential steps were taken, an OSP could take advantage of the “safe-harbor” clause. One of those steps is the “expeditious” removal of infringing content. On the other side, the alleged offender can send a counter-notice disputing the copyright holders claim. This might seem in favor of the public domain with an anti-copyright agenda, but it does not diminish the copyright holders privileges in any way. This provision also allows the first step of prosecution in the form of takedown notices. While these measures are beneficial for the public good and provide a degree of protection, they seem utterly inefficient in situations like Erin McKeown experienced. In an attempt to control infringers and pirates, the ICE has engaged in domain seizures, which resulted in tens of thousands of innocent websites being shut down. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 22:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Takedown Hall of Shame has excellent examples of cease and desist letter offenders, even citing unusual claims such as one over the copyright privileges of a monkey’s photos! That is where major companies should take and follow Google’s example of standing up for users rights. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA), MIT points out that to stop pirating has many dangerous side effects including but not limited to being unconstitutional in violating certain aspects of free speech. [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 00:06, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I was unable to find out anything about how many actions have been taken under the Copyright Alert System. Are there any known statistics on how many of these notices have been sent out or how many consumers have been affected? (whether centrally managed, or done by a third-party watchdog like EFF?)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:48, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

I'm in a creative industry where intellectual property is important (software / online games). Yet I think that criminalization of intellectual property violations is ridiculous.

I called all my U.S. senators and representatives back when SOPA/PIPA was in the legislative process--I found it highly offensive. It seems absurd to me that someone would be placed in jail for copyright infringement, or that we are making agencies of the U.S. government an arm of private industry by using them to enforce this (not to mention giving government broad control over shutting down content that some moneyed interest finds objectionable).

The argument used by the industry is that copyright violation is equivalent to theft. I agree that many cases of copyvio are totally wrong, but I don't see why it can't be handled entirely through civil systems. The fact is that intellectual property violations *are* different from stealing a physical good, simply because in the former case we're dealing with a nonrival good (i.e., if you steal my car then I can't use it anymore; if you copy my software package, I've lost some potential revenue from you but you haven't deprived my ability to sell it to others). Furthermore, intellectual property violations are way more complex--these are cases that just aren't as clear-cut as showing that a theft actually occurred when you are caught with my stolen car.

I listened to the songs mentioned in the "Touch the Sun" / "Slung-lo" controversy referred to in the reading materials. I empathize with the creator of Slung-lo if they really feel their creation was improperly exploited, but I simply don't see the basis for their claim. But upon my listening I found both songs to be different, and the lyrics were (as far as I could tell) totally different. Billions of songs get made--lots will be similar. I shudder to think that a large and well-funded copyright holder could use claims like this to abuse others with the threat of criminal enforcement.
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 13:58, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----

It seems that SOPA, PIPA, and the DCMA all seem to be working towards the same goal, that of eradicating copyright infringement/piracy. Why is the DCMA not sufficient? Internet piracy is a huge issue for the motion picture and music industries (and I'm sure for plenty of other industries) as it is stealing. I agree with Jradoff that it's not ''quite'' as bad as actual theft of property and therefore might not warrant a jail sentence, but it is essentially the same thing. What is the difference between going into a Best Buy and stealing a DVD or CD and stealing it from home? It seems the primary difference is simply the ease of convenience for the thief. I think we have only been desensitized to this kind of theft because it is so prevalent in society. Anyways, if we agree that internet piracy is "wrong", what can be done to curtail it further than the rules currently in place (i.e. the DCMA)? Have SOPA and/or PIPA been revised? In this article that I found on Forbes [http://www.forbes.com/sites/derekbroes/2012/01/20/why-should-you-fear-sopa-and-pipa/], author Derek Broes claims to have testified before Congress to propose "many solutions, none of which violate our First Amendment Right to Free Speech", but he does not elaborate on any specific alternatives or amendments to SOPA/PIPA. What effective alternatives are there, which would go above and beyond what is already in place, but wouldn't be as "harmful" as SOPA/PIPA? Is there still talk of a new iteration of the legislature? I would imagine that with the onslaught of backlash from the initial bills, they would have to call them something different to mitigate any potential hate...[[User:Castille|Castille]] 15:51, 3 March 2014 (EST)

----
The former government in Australia tried for many years to implement a voluntary scheme to crack down on piracy through a series of discussions with ISPs, instead of having the government legislating enforcement of copyright. The meetings stopped happening, as the representatives from iiNet (large Australian ISP), would often get up and walk out of the meetings.
::About 18 months ago, Australian Attorney-General George Brandis made a case against iiNet which attempted to hold them liable for their users on BitTorrent for piracy purposes, which was taken to the High Court. The entertainment industry was attempting to hold the ISP's liable because it is obviously not economically viable, (even if it is in fact possible) to prosecute each piracy user individually. iiNet was successful in their defense to which the High Court unanimously ruled the ISP is not liable for the acts of their users.
::iiNet’s routine business of providing access to the internet will not, by itself, mean that they authorise their customers' acts of copyright infringement. At the same time, iiNet is not obliged to contact customers or terminate their accounts in response to notices from copyright owners. Although users are liable for copyright infringement, it is hardly enforced at all in Australia. Australia is needing legislative reform in regard to copyright laws, as their attempts to enforce it have been futile. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 20:41, 3 March 2014 (EST)

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-03-02T12:52:38Z

Marissa1989:

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-03-02T12:47:38Z

Marissa1989:

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-03-02T12:42:31Z

Marissa1989:

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-03-02T12:36:40Z

Marissa1989:

Assignment 2 Submissions

2014-02-26T04:37:33Z

Marissa1989: /* Comments */

Assignment 1 Submissions

2014-02-12T23:15:34Z

Marissa1989: /* Submissions */

{{AssignmentCal}}

===Submission Instructions===

'''This section of the website is crawled by search engines. If you do not want your name to appear in a search connected with your writing, use your class wiki username.'''

''Please make sure the name of your file includes your name or pseudonym (example: Name_Assignment1.doc) to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment.''

Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (final deadline: Tuesday, February 12, 5:30pm ET).

Upload your file here: [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/Special:Upload Upload file]. After you upload your file, please post a link to it in the "Submissions" section below in the following format:

* Your Name or Chosen Pseudonym:
* Link to rule: (URL of the Wikipedia editing policy you chose)
* Link to article: (URL of the Wikipedia article you edited)
* Link to report: (URL of the file you uploaded)

If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2013/Special:ImageList list of uploaded files].

Need help editing? [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_edit_a_page Check out this guide]

===Submissions===
Please post your link to your report below, in the following format:

*Jolie jolietheone

*Link to rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

*Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratosphere_Girl#Plot

*Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Assignment_1.docx

[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 17:27, 11 February 2014 (EST)

*Mikewitwicki

*Rule: NPOV; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance_mandate

*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Michael_Thomas_assignment1.docx

[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 14:29, 11 February 2014 (EST)

* AmyAnn0644

* Rule Chosen: Verifiability -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

* Wiki Edited: Marwari Yuva Manch -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwari_Yuva_Manch

* Posted Link to Assignment Submission: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:AmyAnn0644_Assignment1.docx
--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 16:39, 10 February 2014 (EST)

[[User:Andy|Andy]] 19:58, 14 November 2013 (EST)
----

* MikeJohnson (course Wiki), MDJAnalyst (on Wikipedia)
* [RULE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability]
* [ARTICLE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_2014J]
* [REPORT: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/MikeJohnson-Verifiability.pdf]

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 12:22, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

* margorm (class wiki), marengo5 (Wikipedia)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability WP:VERIFY]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosensor - Revamped the section on Interferometric Reflectance Imaging Sensor]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment1_Monroe.rtf Verifibility Report by Margo Monroe]

([[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 19:19, 10 February 2014 (EST))
----

*AKK22 (on this wiki, and Wikipedia)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability Verifiability]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprout_(TV_network) Sprout]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Kauth_Assignment1.pdf Report PDF]

----

* Jradoff (on this wiki), Tarinth (on Wikipedia)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability WP:V]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_systems Generative systems]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment1Radoff.txt Report Text]

[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 12:21, 8 February 2014 (EST)

----

* Dancoron (in the class wiki), DCorona501st (is my name on Wikipedia)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability WP:VERIFY]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roland_Corp - My addition Roland JV-80 Synthesizer & ROland SR-JV80 Expansion boards]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Dancoron_assignment1.doc My report of Verifiability]
[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 15:33, 8 February 2014 (EST)

----
* Castille (on class Wiki), Stille1002 (on Wikipedia)
* [RULE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view]
* [ARTICLE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workers%27_compensation]
* [REPORT: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:CastilleRath_ASSIGNMENT_ONE.doc]
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:30, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

* jkelly (class wiki). jkelly88 (Wikipedia)
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability Verifiability]
* [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunset_Tree The Sunset Tree]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Jkelly_Assignment1.doc Assignment 1]
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 21:36, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

* ichua (class wiki); iyhchua (Wikipedia)
* [RULE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view]
* [ARTICLE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posterior_compartment_of_leg]
* [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:LSTU-E120_Assignment1_IanChua.pdf Assignment 1]
[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:11, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

* Watson
* Rule chosen: NPOV -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
* Wiki Edited: Silk Road(marketplace) -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(marketplace)
* Posted Link to Assignment Submission: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Watson_Assignment1.docx
--[[User:Watson|Watson]] 23:22, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

* Drogowski (on this Wiki) drogowski (on Wikipedia)

* Rule Chosen: Verifiability -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability

* Wiki Edited: Uniform Investment Adviser Law Exam -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Investment_Adviser_Law_Exam

* Posted Link to Assignment Submission: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Daniel_Rogowski_LSTU_Project_1.docx

----

* Your Name or Chosen Pseudonym: Philip Seyfi ([[User:Seifip|Seifip]])
* Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
* Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Oxford
* Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Seyfi%2C_Philip_-_Assignment_1.pdf
----
* Your Name or Chosen Pseudonym: Aysel Ibayeva
* Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
* Link to article:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance
* Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Verifiability.docx. [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 11:27, 11 February 2014 (EST)Aysel Ibayeva

----
* Pseudonym: Twood
* Rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
* Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_journalism
* Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_one_twood.rtf [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:29, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

* Pseudonym: Deluxegourmet / Erin Saucke-Lacelle
* Link to rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
* Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positron_emission_tomography#Safety
* Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:ErinSaucke-LacelleAssignment1.rtf
[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 12:56, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Lucia Gamboa
* [RULE: Verifiability -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability]
* [ARTICLE: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_broadband_plans_from_around_the_world#Mexico]
* [REPORT: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_1_LGS.docx]

----

*Lpereira
*[Rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability]
*[Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_market]
*[Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Lpereira_assingment_1.docx]

----

*PSL (Class wiki), Kleinzach2001(on Wikipedia)
*[Link to rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view]
*[Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Central]
*[Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/PSL_Assignment1.rtf]

----
*[Rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research]
*[Article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribute_act ]
*[Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:TriciaByrnes_Asg.1.txt]
* TriciaBy --[[User:TriciaBy|TriciaBy]] 15:18, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----
*AndrewGrant
*[Rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability]
*[Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalalau_Trail]
*[Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:AndrewGrant_assignment1_02112014.docx]

----

*[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:41, 11 February 2014 (EST)
*Link to rule: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability)
*Link to article: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_the_United_States)
*Link to report: (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment_One.docx)

-------------
*[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 16:30, 11 February 2014 (EST)
*Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Cheikh_Mbacke_Assignment_1.txt
*Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
*Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travel_behavior

-------------
*Link to Report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Wikipedia_Assignment_Harvard.docx
*Link to Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Scorsese
*Link to Rule: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
*[[User:Benh|Benh]] 17:09, 11 February 2014 (EST)
-------------

*Your Name or Chosen Pseudonym: Finelinebilly (Wikipedia)
*Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research
*Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_university_school_of_general_studies
*Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Puchalski-Assignment1.pdf
[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 17:22, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

*Chosen Pseudonym: VACYBER
*Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
*Link to article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(computer_security)#Script_kiddie
*Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:WIKI_Assignment_1_VACyber.docx
[[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 10:59, 12 February 2014 (EST)

----
*Chosen Pseudonym: Marissa1989
*Link to rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
*Link to article:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Australia
*Link to report: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:NeutralPointofView_WikiAssignment.pdf
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 18:15, 12 February 2014 (EST)

A Series of Tubes: Infrastructure, Broadband, and Baseline Content Control

2014-02-11T22:00:08Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 11'''

The late Senator Ted Stevens famously said in a 2006 committee meeting that the “Internet is not something that you just dump something on; it’s not a big truck. It’s a series of tubes.” While he was ridiculed widely at the time, Senator Stevens’s remarks actually reveal an interesting hortatory description of what the Internet should be (though given the rest of his comments, apparently not one that he intended). What Stevens’s metaphor suggests is that the physical conduits of the Internet should act like nothing more than non-judgmental conduits of the rest of the world’s traffic. We will see this week, however, that this is not a true reflection of how the tubes work, and we have strong debates as to what the government's role should be in ensuring that large enough "tubes" reach all those who would like to be online. The big questions for this week: What are the “tubes” of the Internet? Should the tubes have a role in controlling the throughput content? What is the role of government when it comes to developing and regulating our Internet-tubes?

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Comparing and measuring connectivity

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPzjUMdpmSw The Berkman Center, How Do We Connect To The Internet?] (about 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Final_Report-C1_15Feb2010.pdf Yochai Benkler, Next Generation Connectivity] (executive summary and introduction only)

; What is the role of government?

* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality Wikipedia, Net Neutrality]

* [http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/01/net_neutrality_d_c_circuit_court_ruling_the_battle_s_been_lost_but_we_can.html Marvin Ammori, The Net Neutrality Battle Has Been Lost, But Now We Can Finally Win the War]

* [http://www.wired.com/opinion/2014/01/one-talking-comes-net-neutrality/ Berin Szoka and Geoffrey Manne, The Feds Lost on Net Neutrality, But Won Control of the Internet]

* [http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/05/bright-ideas-nunziato-on-virtual-freedom-net-neutrality-and-free-speech-in-the-internet-age.html Daniel Solove, Interview with Dawn Nunziato on her book ''Virtual Freedom'']

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD9Ss3SI2v8 Susan Crawford, remarks at the 2013 National Conference on Media Reform]

* [http://techliberation.com/2011/03/01/more-confusion-about-internet-freedom/ Adam Thierer, More Confusion about Internet “Freedom” (Tech Liberation)]

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet Sam Biddle, How to Destroy the Internet (Gizmodo)]

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/digitaldemocracy/internetarchitecture.html Ethan Zuckerman & Andrew McLaughlin, Introduction to Internet Architecture and Institutions]

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (pages 3-9)

* [https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/taking-stevens-seriously/ Ed Felten, Taking Ted Stevens Seriously]

* [http://www.renesys.com/2013/11/mitm-internet-hijacking/ Jim Cowie, The New Threat: Targeted Internet Traffic Misdirection]

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

[[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|Assignment 1]] is due ''before class'' today (i.e., February 11th before 5:30pm ET). You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==

{|class="wikitable" border=3 style="margin: auto; background-color:#FFFFCC;"
|align="center"|<big>'''REMINDER'''</big>
|-
|style="background-color:#FFFFFF;"|Your comments must be submitted '''before 4:00PM ET''' on the Tuesday we hold class in order to count for participation credit. Please see the [[Class Participation|participation policy]] for more information.
|}
<br/>
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

I believe there is an underlying question surrounding the debate of net neutrality which is to what extent the state should intervene. The easy answer is to the point were the state does not crowd out investment and innovation. Even though in practice this is a hard thing to evaluate and achieve, I believe that regulatory bodies lose sight of it at times and should come back to this premise when deciding on a ruling that harms competition or stifles already functional markets.

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 16:30, 11 February 2014 (EST)
----

My personal opinions of net neutrality and connectivity became muddled as I read through this week’s reading. My initial viewpoint supported open access and little/no regulation. Data shows that the top countries that meet the benchmarks defined by Benkler (penetration, capacity, and price) establish an open access community and let competition be the harbinger of innovation. The US also got to its current internet state via open access and has since became the middle of the pack once it restricted open access when the FCC abandoned Telecommunications Act of 1996 in 2001 and 2002. If we restrict open access, and information/broadband companies hold monopolies (like Comcast), why should they improve their services since the end game always ends up being a question of efficient profits? However, my opinion on how the government should be involved once I watched Susan Crawford give her remarks at the 2013 National Conference on Media Reform. While her words seemed to agree with my formed opinions on open access and connectivity, her solution focused on using the power of the government to instate infrastructure similar to how highways and telecommunications became ubiquitous. This left me with the question (which everyone seems to have and why this is hotly debated) of how much regulation should be instituted by the government and other regulatory bodies? Although a n00b in this area, my take away thoughts are that some body must exisit to deliver open connectivity and access to the people. The only way to meet Benkler Benchmarks are to develop innovative strategies and technologies - new materials and information delivery systems - to drive down cost, which will increase capacity penetration. This will require that the government invest in science and engineering research and set benchmarks to ensure that the correct infrastructure is provided to achieve this benchmarks. Private funding is also an option, but private institutions usually have a mission that is company driven and not “we the people” driven.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 11:03, 9 February 2014 (EST)

: Open and free access to the internet is possible for one who has a ham radio operator license. In some sense it is not really "open" because of technical barrier since it requires acquisition of new technical skills. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMPRNet [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 11:30, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

While working on Assignment One and doing the readings this week on Net neutrality, I have been left with a lot of confusion as to how much regulation I find appropriate. On one hand, I think the internet, as with the spoken word, should be unrestricted to allow freedom of speech and communication. In this age, there are forums for people to express themselves, learn extensively about every possible interest, exchange information and news immediately, and connect to others from around the world in a way never before seen in history. There are now outlets and communities for all-- no longer are people isolated. While that might be troublesome from a standpoint of privacy, in my opinion an issue just as pressing arises dealing with unrestricted hate language. With the internet providing a barrier between individuals, hateful language is easy to disperse as there is no immediate visible repercussion. People are allowed to hide behind their computers and anonymity, sometimes spewing shocking, racist, sexist or otherwise offensive language just to incite anger and controversy (this behavior is often referred to as "trolling"). With school systems and the like actively taking a stand against bullying, should internet bullying also be restricted? Whose responsibility is it to ensure the safety (mental, emotional, physical) of the public who use the internet-- the website itself? The government? Some other agency which is set up to police the internet? Or would things be more fair if a simple internet ID was implemented, which identified users so that they were held responsible for their postings? I would tend to go with the last option, so as not to actually implement a rule of neutrality, which would be restricting free speech and infringing upon basic human rights.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 00:14, 8 February 2014 (EST)

: I like your comments. The Singapore government is very concerned about this and planning to take some practical measures, including one similar to your last option. See:
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/pm-outlines-new-approach-online-engagement-0 [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 11:47, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

I've been a Wikipedian for a long time, although not recently. One of the interesting things to look at in the context of Wikipedia is the deletionist/inclusionist divide (I think the deletionists have basically won). I wrote the original article on this subject on Wikipedia, and I thought some of you might find it interesting: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deletionism_and_inclusionism_in_Wikipedia Deletionism and Inclusionism in Wikipedia]. I was the original author of this article (I'm [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tarinth Tarinth] on Wikipedia) and it has an interesting history as an article, in that there was a fairly concerted attempt to have the article deleted as soon as I had created it. For further background on the subject, the following is an NPR interview I gave on the topic back in 2007: [http://weekendamerica.publicradio.org/programs/2007/01/20/marked_for_deletion.html "Marked for Deletion"]

My general feeling about Wikipedia: to move beyond casual editing, you need to become part of what amounts to a technological priesthood, and you have to fall in line with the prevailing philosophy to succeed at that. (Nevertheless, I do think Wikipedia is really awesome and super-useful, and it'll be fun to make some edits to an article again)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 10:31, 8 February 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for sharing! As I'm sure you know, Wikimedia is trying to break down the technological barriers to entry, but the normative social order and its impact on edits is an interesting issue to explore more. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 14:15, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

In both the first and second lecture, someone had mentioned that Wikipedia isn't accepted by universities as an acceptable source. To be fair, this isn't a problem with Wikipedia, because universities will ordinarily not accept Britannia as a source either. This is because these are both "tertiary sources," and in academic writing, you need to use either primary sources (original documents, etc.) or secondary sources (peer-reviewed articles, journalistic articles, etc.).
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 10:44, 8 February 2014 (EST)

:As I mentioned during the last class, Wikipedia has a pretty good page detailing the various studies conducted to test the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_wikipedia reliability of Wikipedia]. I think your point about tertiary sources is exactly right, and at least with Wikipedia (if people are following the guidelines in articles) you should be able to drive to those primary and secondary sources. And, of course, if you find an issue with Wikipedia, fix it! :-) [[User:Andy|Andy]] 14:12, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

I had a discussion about Wikipedia with my wife and two sons while waiting for my flight from Changi Airport, Singapore, to Manila, Philippines, awhile ago. To my surprise, both my sons were aware of the problems with Wikipedia. They noted that while some of the citations were good, at least 50% was either crap or had broken links. They don't use Wikipedia seriously but scavenge its sites as a quick way of finding references from good citations.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:48, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN INTERNET CONNECTIVITY
CASE STUDY: SINGAPORE

The Ministry of Education and the Infocomm Development Authority had developed a set of specifications which e-learning vendors like my company must fulfill in terms of internet bandwidth, especially in national emergencies such as SARS, when schools are required to close to avoid spread of a virus, etc. In such cases, students are required to continue their studies online at home. To ensure requirements on internet access times are met, server load tests were carried out based on simulations for various numbers of concurrent users. We also had a contract with Oracle to work with our engineers and programmers to optimize the Php/MySQL coding. It was money well-spent.

In the past, the hardware was the major limitation. Video server vendors could only promise 50 concurrent users per server. This made connectivity into the internet broadband network too expensive because you need to pay for each server connection plus rack space....until I saw Steve Jobs on Youtube launching the new Mac G4 XServe demonstrating it can deliver video streams to 1000 iMacs. At that time I was working for the government and was the first person to order 2 units of G4 6 months ahead of its anticipated delivery. With 1000 concurrent users possible with the G4 XServe, I quit my job and started my e-learning company a year later in 2000.

Then, we found that the schools' internet bandwidth was the problem. The network in the school could only accomodate 3 classes of 40 students each, or a total of 120 students concurrently accessing our online videos. When there were more than 3 computer labs being used concurrently, all the PC's showed the online video had stalled. This happened to schools which subscribed for only 1 or 2 Mbps internet connectivity with their ISP. Schools using 5 or 10 Mbps had no issue. Over the years, the schools had upgraded their bandwidth connectivity to at least 5 or 10 Mbps. Today, almost all the secondary schools are using our online math program.

Two years ago, I was sourcing for better servers with fast solid-state drives (SSD's). The I/O with the storage devices could also significantly affect the access times, especially for connections to our database. But to our pleasant surprise IBM had produced new hard-disks that were even faster than SSD's! Subsequent server load tests we carried out showed significant improvement in access times with the new machines. Further improvement in access times were also obtained after modifying many segments of our code in consultation with Oracle.

But had the MOE and the schools not been pro-active in improving their internet infrastructure, online learning on a nation-wide scale in schools would not have been possible.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 14:03, 9 February 2014 (EST)

:The drive to having broadband in schools is a big part of communications policy in the US, as well. Several times in our communications law (Title 47 of the U.S. Code) Congress has indicated a clear preference for high-speed access in elementary and secondary schools. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:44, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

WIKIPEDIA EDITING SYNTAX VS HTML

This may not be directly relevant to our coming lecture, but may be helpful for those who intend to add more than just texts to a Wikipedia page. I was wondering how a table or a URL might be added to a Wikipedia page and thought this could be done using HTML. To my pleasant surprise, there is a menu at the top of the edit page in edit mode which allows you to click to insert a table, etc., to minimize coding time. But it was a disappointment to find there is no math equation editor. Help for input of math expressions can be found in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Displaying_a_formula.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:10, 9 February 2014 (EST)

: I finally figured out how to edit special tables from this Wiki help link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Table#Alignment [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:12, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

APPRECIATING LSTU-E120

I'm beginning to appreciate the information presented in this course. The guidelines about editing Wikipedia and Assignment 1 exercise can help make Wikipedia a better place. While checking out some Wikipedia sites to assess their use for Assignment 1, I found many places in need of citations. For Assignment 1, I would attempt to search for appropriate citations and add these but if not, I now know how to add the "Citation needed" tag. But I also found citations used that were inappropriate....how do I flag these if I could not find appropriate citations?

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:30, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

ONLINE PRE-QUALIFICATION TEST FOR WOULD-BE WIKIPEDIA EDITORS

Perhaps Wikipedia should require would-be editors to thoroughly read its policy and guidelines and make them take a rigorous online test which they need to pass before allowing them to do any edits on Wikipedia.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:40, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

NET NEUTRALITY VS FAIR USE POLICY: BIG BUFFET VS HUNGER RATION

In countries like S. Korea, US, or Singapore, where there are lots of internet bandwidth to spare, it is convenient to implement a net neutrality policy. More than 90% of the population in Singapore live in public housing apartments and all units are now provided with fibre-optic cables. But in the Philippines, the ISPs are greedy corporations and charge high prices for very poor services. They also cheat customers by telling them that they get unlimited access and unlimited surfing but disconnect them when they hit an unspecified MB of data transfers or total access time on a daily basis. Connectivity is typically restored at midnight. This had been my experience with all the ISPs since I moved to Manila for medical school in June 2012. If you come to my condo in Sampaloc, you will see on my desk all variety of routers, modems, and so-called broadband sticks from Globe, Smart, and Sun. PLDT never showed up despite contacting them twice. One reason why internet connectivity was very bad was because users get deliberately disconnected without their knowledge. However, this was all indicated in fine print in contracts which customers signed without reading under a Fair Use Policy. The Fair Use Policy is used to discourage customers from using the internet too much! The amount of MB or total time accessed used to determine service disconnection depends on the computed average MB transferred and average total time accessed. Finally, I decided to return to Singapore every weekend so that I could view the recorded lectures online for my Harvard Extension School coursework. Subsequently, the situation got better when Smart offered a promo of truly free 10-day unlimited access for purchasing their new broadband stick. But after the 10-day period subscription to the service was very expensive. I found it so much cheaper to buy 3 new broadband sticks every month. To my great relief, in August 2013, Smart began to offer a new 4G device for Php 7,000 upfront plus Php 995 for every 30 days of truly unlimited access. I am one of the few lucky guys who got this device as Smart does not sell this in the university belt area. I had to travel more than an hour to Mandaluyong to buy it. This is all very hard to fathom, especially when Smart has a 4G antenna in front of my block.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 14:30, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

I find it very surprising that Yochai Benkler's article presents Japan as a country that emphasized ubiquitous, seamless connectivity. Having lived in the country, I would most certainly place it in the first category: ultra high speeds, but rarely there. The internet in Japan is "just there" only if you happen to have a mobile phone, with a relatively expensive data plan, haven't reached your limit, and don't happen to be in a subway.

I think that the problem with the study might be, that although it's more nuanced that most papers on connectivity, it's still not nuanced enough. For example, it uses the metric: Wi-Fi hotspots per 100000. But there's a huge difference between 100 open WiFi hotspots, 100 paid hotspots by one provider, or 100 paid hotspots from 20 providers incompatible with each other. Not to mention that there are many different pricing plans for access to said paid hotspots that can have a big impact on how useful they are.

Japan, for example, would probably not fare very well in this metric if the above-mentioned considerations would have been taken into account. Everyone who has visited the country, even its capital, knows that free hotspots are few and far between, paid hotspots are expensive and often require you to subscribe for long stretches of time, and even if you do pay for the access you'll soon find that different establishments side with different WiFi providers and if you really want a seamless experience you'll need to subscribe to at least 2-3 different WiFi providers at once.

(That said, it's worth noting that my point of view is that of someone who spends a lot of time in European and Asian countries with excellent, ubiquitous, and often free or dirt cheap connectivity, not someone from rural US.)
--[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 16:09, 10 February 2014 (EST)

:Great points! I believe later in the full report Benkler notes that Japan is more of a middle-of-the-pack performer on other metrics, including 3G penetration and price (though Japan has been growing very quickly in the former). Your point about the WiFi access points is a good one - I'm not sure if the OECD study that's referenced here took price into account when developing the definition of what is a "public hotspot." [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:51, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

In Australia, net neutrality issues hardly impact us and receive minimal attention from consumers or industry. This week’s reading further piqued my curiosity to research what Australia is doing differently to keep these problems at bay, as we generally mimic structures of technology from America.

Unlimited broadband data plans in America planted seeds to the problems that sprouted with net neutrality. Services meant for access-granting could otherwise be boring and bill customers for simply providing access, however, a power struggle emerged within the market. The ISP’s that provide unlimited broadband failed to create additional revenue parallel to their traffic growth. This business model leaves a lot of temptation for the ISP’s to manipulate traffic, direct users to favoured websites, attempt to stifle their competitors or simply block them out. How else would a provider increase company revenue? This model also give little incentive for the ISP’s to invest in upgrades to capacity or network speeds for their customers, because they wouldn’t profit off of it.

Curiously, Australia does not have any laws in place regarding net neutrality, the ISP’s are structured to have disincentives for discriminating or favouring traffic based on source type. Australian ISPs operate on a volumetric billing system, so the user pays per MB, at a fixed rate, with a pre-determined speed and download capacity. Customers have a choice to upgrade to higher speeds and expand their download capacity, and ISPs manage congestion based on the customer’s willingness to pay. Blocking or manipulating web traffic would have an anticompetitive effect on the ISP. This system gives stronger incentives to maximise transition of all traffic regardless of source type, because that would translate to bigger profits. High market competition paired with low-entry barriers weakens incentives for ISPs to block content. Telstra, an Australian ISP, operates on a metered broadband system. If you choose Telstra as your provider, they have a list of partner sites that can be used on an unlimited basis. This is an effective way to steer the direction of customers without having to manipulate their open-access connectivity to other websites, if they so choose to use them.

ISPs should act as an affordance that suggest, rather than dictate, how their services are to be used. It would be naive to think that American ISPs could simply restructure to a volumetric system, which would run a huge risk of sending their customers running to their competitors who still provide unlimited access.
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 23:17, 10 February 2014 (EST)

: Talking about competition, there is hardly any competition amongst ISP's in Philippines. PLDT directly or indirectly own Smart and Sun. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:02, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] and [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] - if you don't mind my asking, what do you pay for broadband, and what is your average download and upload speed? You can use services like [http://www.speedtest.net/ Speedtest] to check. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 07:46, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::: Currently from my location in Sampaloc, Manila, using www.speedtest.net, I am getting 2.26 Mbps for downloads and 0.20 Mbps for uploads. I am paying Php 995 (about USD 25) for every 30 days of unlimited access using Smart's 4G network with ZTE's LTE device Model MF93D (made in China). I am now quite happy with the download speed, but not the upload speed as I have to upload videos for 1st and 2nd Year med school class lectures. It is actually very cheap now for me and I can bring the 4G device while travelling around Manila. This is a very far cry from my situation prior to August 2013. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:16, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::: I am on a plan with Telstra that costs $50 AUD per 8 Gigs of data. This sounds expensive by American standards, but bear in mind, minimum wage in Sydney (city) is around $22 AUD per hr. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 16:52, 11 February 2014 (EST)

:::: Using speedtest.net from my location, at my work computer in Sydney city (This isn't my home plan as noted above, I will test that when I'm home today) Download Speed is 14.06mbps and Upload Speed is 2.04 Mbps. Good by Australian standards - this pales in comparison to America. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 17:00, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::Also, to Marissa's point about competition, it's an interesting question whether folks would be as worried about net neutrality if there was genuine competition in the US over broadband, but that's typically not the case. Major metropolitan areas will have, at most, two or three choices, and for huge sections of the US there is only one cable provider in their area. Some cities have tried to build municipal networks to provide other choices, but several state legislatures have prevented cities in their states from doing so. Australia, as you probably know, is considering the near-opposite approach, embarking on a heroic effort to build [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Broadband_Network fiberoptic lines to every building] in Australia. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 07:52, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

UNSUNG WINTER HEROES OF THE TUBES

During my 4 years in West Lafayette, IN, from 2004-2008, we had very good internet access. But occasionally when the internet goes down, especially during winter, the internet outage extends throughout the whole state or several states. I learned that the technicians sometimes work under tough or hazardous conditions to restore damaged lines.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:02, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

FROM TUBES TO AIRSPACE

If any government intend to quickly setup broadband internet or intranet access, technology is now available which enable one to do so using very long range wifi or ethernet radio. The main transmission antenna can be installed and connected to a server within a day. Transmission can be up to 120km at 200 Mbps with equipment like the RAD's AirMux-400. Additional repeaters can be added for places which do not have line-of-sight. Cheap and powerful desktop receivers are also available. This can be a temporary solution until more stable networks such as those based on fiber-optics are installed. If I recall, my costing was merely Php 200,000 (USD 5,000) for a 50km range at 100 Mbps, including equipment and labor for installation and setup. Sounds good for poor and impoverished communities.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

NET NEUTRALITY IMPRACTICAL FOR COUNTRIES WITH BIG INCOME GAPS

Private ISP corporations want to make profit but governments want internet services to be delivered to the poor at almost no cost. To do so would require government ownership or regulated differential pricing and/or the provision of separate internet networks: one for entertainment and commerce and the other for education.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:36, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Net Neutrality is the question which must be maintained by government and private entities in close cooperation. Of course, the ISPs want to make greater profits by means of prices fluctuation for different websites, traffics and etc. In this case, the government can be some kind of
"referee" by preventing the IPS to speculate with the mentioned aspects. However, we should bear in mind that the government cannot keep the total governance in its hands as this policy may lead to some restrictions in the development of this sphere in future. So, I think that the met neutrality must be recognized by law and the legislation must set the general rules and protect the consumers from being somehow harmed by the IPS. Still, IPS must possess enough freedom for development and advancement of the services they are engaged in.[[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 09:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)Aysel Ibayeva

----

In response to Castille, I am also finding myself at a crossroad on the issue of promoting liberty and safeguarding citizens by preventing injustices. I think this is a topic of endless, profound debate. I thoroughly enjoyed the weekly readings and found Adam Thierer's article "More Confusion about Internet 'Freedom' " to be particularly powerful and convincing. While I did not agree with all of the points he made, I think he makes a valid, logical argument debunking the mainstream point of view that has been engrained in us as a society. I did not realize the extent of power the FCC maintains over the internet and, as he mentions, these are not even elected officials. How can they promote the values or digital issues that we, the people of the internet, hold dear. Shouldn't we have a say in these decisions that directly impact the cyberspace we access on a daily basis? He admits there will inevitably be problems in a free information marketplace; however, in the name of innovation via the promotion of creativity and ingenuity within our society, perhaps these mistakes are well worth the risk and stunting this technological growth/exchange could do more damage than good.

I was surprised to find the end of the article when Thierer ultimately bashes the Senator's initial statement that Net neutrality is “the First Amendment issue of our time.” At first I thought he was in agreement with Senator Franken but he saw this as more of an attack on the goal of the first amendment. When I initially read Franken's statement I took it to mean that the internet is becoming a general issue for freedom of speech.

Thierer suggests that instead of putting more faith in these central planners, we should look to the evolutionary market forces through a bottom-up response as the "cyber-progressivists" have argued (Thierer 2011). The most important point that Thierer discusses, in my opinion, was when he mentioned that people are driven by incentives, but they are only truly free to do so if they are not held at the whim of a higher governing authority and this authority has a track record of always being two steps behind the latest technological advancements. They cannot keep up and in trying to do so, they are ultimately thwarting overall progression. While I cannot go as far as saying that I believe all regulatory intervention is tyranny as Thierer ends up insisting, I tend to agree with his overall convictions. However, as Castille pointed out, there are clearly times when it appears the government should step in to protect its citizens on the web. On the other hand, one intervention leads to another and it becomes a fast moving "slippery slope".

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 10:57, 11 February 2014 (EST)

:There's a reason this has been a hot issue for about a decade! There are very compelling arguments to be made on all sides. Thierer does gloss over the fact that the FCC's actions are constrained by Congress, and Congress (at least in theory) is dependent upon the people, so as a matter of structure the influence of the public has a role, though we all know how hard that is to achieve in practice. The First Amendment issues themselves are fascinating and an area where I spend a lot of my time thinking about these issues; I hope to get to some of that in class today. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:58, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::Thierer complains, "We are asked to ignore our history lessons, which teach us that centralized planning and bureaucracy all too often lead to massively inefficient outcomes..." However, this is taking the libertarian complaint of inefficiency (that I normally side with) out of its economic context. If he were to balance the concerns of profitability of the architecture of the industry (for the ISPs) and of the fiber networks themselves, and weigh them against the potential economic growth as a result of ubiquitous internet, Thierer would find that one far outweighs the other in importance. [[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:48, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

When the key Net Neutrality cases were being presented before the court a few years back, I remember being firmly on the side of the FCC and hoping that a strict ruling against Comcast would have preserved Net Neutrality... or at least what I presumed "net neutrality" to encompass back then. I see that my view of Net Neutrality was overly narrow at that time...and although I still do not want to see service providers have that much power to manipulate what legal content a user chooses to access online, I see from the readings that the scope of the "problem" would, probably, neither have been fully resolved in a ruling that went in favor of the FCC. Constraints, as discussed last week, would have most likely just shifted, and placed regulated pressure on a marketplace. (an example might be thinking of an ISP that truly wants to enter the market and offer customers a filtered, "safe", online experience for certain families... they indeed would have subscribers and be successful and appeal to some sectors that opt for a “safe online community”). Conversely, with the judges ruling allowing the FCC to walk away with the ability to regulate the entire internet is more than a little worrisome knowing that political cycles could have such sweeping powers to re-define the internet landscape. And while service providers still enjoy their own monopolies within any given township of users who have only 1 (maybe 2) choices for an ISP, it seems that the consumer is the only one who lost some ground in the Net Neutrality rulings.

I think the reading "Net Neutrality and Free Speech in the Internet Age" strikes closer to where we need to be focusing our attention. To quote from the interview directly: "Dawn argues for an affirmative conception of the First Amendment, under which public and powerful private gatekeepers of Internet communications are subject to the First Amendment’s mandate to ensure the free flow of communications in the digital age." - Here too I originally presumed that the First Amendment *did* apply across-the-board to all communication...Internet, printing press, public speech - but I guess it is that word "public" that becomes an "undefined zone" within virtual spaces online. Is there anything like a national or municipal park in the Internet world where the marketplace has no sway on how we choose to behave in that public zone? Or is every “online space” in which we choose to speak or participate analogous to traveling to private island governed by the values (and whims) of the a single gatekeeper rather than any one nation's constitutional rights? (Why did Mr. Roarke and Tattoo just come to mind...?).
[[User:Psl|Psl]] 12:31, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

MAGNA CARTA FOR PHILIPPINES INTERNET FREEDOM (MCPIF)

See: http://democracy.net.ph/mcpif/full-text/

What do you think of Section 5(e)?

Schools in Singapore has a restriction policy. Only selected websites are permitted to be accessed within the school's network.

We also teach parents how to allow their children to access only selected websites and block all others to prevent children from playing online games and accessing pornographic and other undesirable websites.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:42, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

WEBSITES BANNED IN SINGAPORE

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/extramarital-dating-website-ceo-disappointed-mdas-ban-20131109

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/05/23/us-singapore-internet-odd-idUSS2322899620080523

http://yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-504.htm

http://therealsingapore.com/content/singapore-government-plans-ban-websites-such-pirate-bay

See also Internet Filtering in Singapore:
https://opennet.net/studies/singapore

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:50, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have used Wikipedia as a starting point to gather resources and verify the accuracy of the information. I have never been a contributor. This assignment has proved useful in "breaking me out of my shell." I am reminded of the quote from an article that I ran across by Tom Simonite. In the article, The Decline of Wikipedia, he stated: "When Wikipedians achieved their most impressive feat of leaderless collective organization, they unwittingly set in motion the decline in participation that troubles their project today." I fear the mechanism is stifled from further growth due to its collective and bureaucratic structure. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 13:13, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

This week’s assignment was very enlightening. I am a casual browser in Wikipedia and have used it just for some very general preliminary information before going into the topic deeper in other websites. I was familiar with the issues of the website but I never really stepped behind the initial pages to edit or evaluate the rules. This was very helpful but I also suffered a bit on the learning curve being a complete beginner on that end. Regardless, I found it very interesting.

Now for the topic of government’s roles of the Internet, I think this would be best avoided. The Internet is where our freedom of speech gets most prolific and also most obscene. There’s room for it all and we should keep it like this. When control enters the picture it is a dangerous slope and it is never black and white. How do you decide what should be banned? Everyone will give a different method and a consensus is nearly impossible. I’m interest to see what the class will say on this topic.
[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 13:28, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

According to research conducted by Yochai Benkler about search for improvement of high-capacity networks for the next generation in different developed and developing countries is based on download speed and complete connectivity. His study demonstrates the strengths and weaknesses in the broadband deal in several countries and makes a comparison to the technological transition in the next generation, while the video shows briefly how connectivity works today and makes a comparison between the most developed and developing countries. In analyzing both materials, I made the conclusion that the opportunities and technological barriers, experiences and skills gained by the different players in the innovation system flowing through this economic activity to another, establish a specific context for each country or region, that is that any set of economic incentives generate different incentives and constraints to innovation. To the extent and in cases where the divergence between economic incentives and stimulating innovation represented by externalities is substantial, differences are gradually decreased. [[User:Gisellebatista|Gisellebatista]] 14:08, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Working on Assignment One (and the Wiki rule of neutrality in particular) got me thinking about objectivity as it relates to online journalistic content. It struck me that objectivity has been losing its power online, at least in the journalistic and content spheres. Outside of academic circles, the online news that gets the most attention seems to be quite opinionated — they are the articles that lead to shares, ‘likes’, high-fives, vitriol, and discussion. But it’s also these same pieces that people go to for sources of information. Often biased information. A couple of the readings have addressed this fact: that online communities and the net in general has a categorizing effect… so that it becomes not so much a large “worldwide web”, but a large collection of smaller, almost navel-gazing webs.

There’s a bit of a bipolarity going on here. As an example, Wikipedia seems to be doing a solid job of promoting objectivity, and yet online biases seem break through the clutter faster. On one hand we crave objectivity for our sources, and on the other hand we crave opinions for our entertainment. (Maybe it’s as simple as that? But it rarely is…)

When looking at different Wiki articles, a bit of a pattern started to emerge: Those articles that deviated from one rule, were more likely to deviate from at least one of the other rules, as well. This made it particularly difficult to focus on editing just the one area and led to making amendments of other rules as well. I found that as I delved deeper into the editing process, more issues seemed to pop up that “needed” editing — I could see how it could become quite addictive for regular Wiki editors.

I also found the idea of branching out to edit an article for which I had no previous knowledge to be daunting — even with sufficient sources at my disposal. It would be interesting to look at a study of how much prior knowledge Wiki editors have about the subjects they are editing… [[User:Twood|Twood]] 14:15, 11 February 2014 (EST)

:I would agree with Twood-the task of verifying sources for accuracy is daunting. The three fundamental rules Wiki has placed ( at first) seem simplistic. Application takes the steps to a different level. I found myself in the most interesting research hole imaginable. The error rate is high on Wiki-but understandable. --[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:36, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Having created and submitted a single Wikipedia article previously, I had a reasonable familiarity with Wikipedia before completing Assignment 1. However, approaching Wikipedia as an editor with a targeted rule to address in a pre-existing article brought up many questions about the role of the individual, the community and the regulation of speech. A number of the readings helped work through these questions for me, none more so than Professor Dawn Nunziato's interview on net neutrality and free speech. I was pleased to consider the two conceptions of the first amendment in the context of the internet and regulation of speech online. As Nunziato explains, under the affirmative conception of the first amendment, "individuals enjoy an affirmative right to speak, free from content and viewpoint discrimination — regardless of whether such discrimination occurs at the hands of the government or other powerful regulators of speech." She also confirms, as I have understood from my lay person's perspective as a frequent user of web and social media, that the affirmative conception of the first amendment "has not taken root" in the internet context because the private entities that control internet speech are not subject to the first amendment's mandate prohibiting censorship. This of course leads to concern about whether our internet communication is really free-- and also leads to the unique case of Wikipedia. As we learned in other readings this week, and in completing Assignment 1 itself, there are certainly "gatekeepers" for speech on Wikipedia, but in a different form from broadband providers, email servers, and search engines that Nunziato cites. The community of editors on Wikipedia, and such reliability control features as autoconfirmed editors, serve as a less tangible but equally omnipresent entity that has the power to censor- but to protect from unreliable or overly biased information, rather than a singular interest. Whether Wikipedia can at the same time ensure neutrality and protect free speech is clearly an ongoing debate.

[[User:akk22|akk22]] 15:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Internet is a global infrastructure so measuring, defining, and ultimately controlling it can be accomplished in a variety of ways. In measuring speed, broadband, and the “always on” ubiquitously networked society, the US ranked mid to poor in performance and among the absolute lowest in category of price and future planning. This is one of the key issues debated in politics along with open access policies, network neutrality, First Amendment rights, and the FCC’s broad powers over regulating the Internet. The network neutrality view is that “broadband providers and wireless carriers should be prohibited from discriminating against speech on the basis of viewpoint or content” the right for all information to travel the Internet equally without discrimination. There have been several occurrences of major ISP’s manipulating the content provided on an individualized basis just because it benefited their own interests. How much regulation should we place over the Internet or should we just leave it to the great innovators and major corporations to work it out? [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:46, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----------------

As a first time contributor to Wikipedia, thanks to this class in general and assignment one in particular, I came to realize that it would be very difficult for governments to regulate the internet as it is already an enormous task for individual web-based organizations, such as Wikipedia, to manage all its editors. For example, bearing Wikipedia's first rule in mind (also known as "NPOV"), I read a few articles and edited one that was completely not in line with Wikipedia's policies. There was no citation from reliable sources of any kind. Besides, the author stated a lot of his opinions as facts and vice versa.

Having said that, I believe that if it is that hard for organizations such as Wikipedia to regulate their own user bases, which are relatively small portions of a countries' populations, and make them all stick to the rules, let alone governments of developed nations who manage an entire population with many fundamental rights and freedom to regulate the internet in the traditional governmental ways of regulating.

Finally, I am not totally dismissing the idea that governments should not intervene on internet issues. It is not impossible to regulate it to some extent. On the contrary, I think it is even necessary for governments and individual internet organizations to collaborate and continue to establish policies and regulations that will be in the benefits of their populations and users, respectively.
[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:55, 11 February 2014 (EST)

A Series of Tubes: Infrastructure, Broadband, and Baseline Content Control

2014-02-11T21:52:55Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 11'''

The late Senator Ted Stevens famously said in a 2006 committee meeting that the “Internet is not something that you just dump something on; it’s not a big truck. It’s a series of tubes.” While he was ridiculed widely at the time, Senator Stevens’s remarks actually reveal an interesting hortatory description of what the Internet should be (though given the rest of his comments, apparently not one that he intended). What Stevens’s metaphor suggests is that the physical conduits of the Internet should act like nothing more than non-judgmental conduits of the rest of the world’s traffic. We will see this week, however, that this is not a true reflection of how the tubes work, and we have strong debates as to what the government's role should be in ensuring that large enough "tubes" reach all those who would like to be online. The big questions for this week: What are the “tubes” of the Internet? Should the tubes have a role in controlling the throughput content? What is the role of government when it comes to developing and regulating our Internet-tubes?

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Comparing and measuring connectivity

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPzjUMdpmSw The Berkman Center, How Do We Connect To The Internet?] (about 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/Berkman_Center_Broadband_Final_Report-C1_15Feb2010.pdf Yochai Benkler, Next Generation Connectivity] (executive summary and introduction only)

; What is the role of government?

* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality Wikipedia, Net Neutrality]

* [http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/01/net_neutrality_d_c_circuit_court_ruling_the_battle_s_been_lost_but_we_can.html Marvin Ammori, The Net Neutrality Battle Has Been Lost, But Now We Can Finally Win the War]

* [http://www.wired.com/opinion/2014/01/one-talking-comes-net-neutrality/ Berin Szoka and Geoffrey Manne, The Feds Lost on Net Neutrality, But Won Control of the Internet]

* [http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/05/bright-ideas-nunziato-on-virtual-freedom-net-neutrality-and-free-speech-in-the-internet-age.html Daniel Solove, Interview with Dawn Nunziato on her book ''Virtual Freedom'']

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD9Ss3SI2v8 Susan Crawford, remarks at the 2013 National Conference on Media Reform]

* [http://techliberation.com/2011/03/01/more-confusion-about-internet-freedom/ Adam Thierer, More Confusion about Internet “Freedom” (Tech Liberation)]

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://gizmodo.com/5912383/how-to-destroy-the-internet Sam Biddle, How to Destroy the Internet (Gizmodo)]

* [https://cyber.law.harvard.edu/digitaldemocracy/internetarchitecture.html Ethan Zuckerman & Andrew McLaughlin, Introduction to Internet Architecture and Institutions]

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (pages 3-9)

* [https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/taking-stevens-seriously/ Ed Felten, Taking Ted Stevens Seriously]

* [http://www.renesys.com/2013/11/mitm-internet-hijacking/ Jim Cowie, The New Threat: Targeted Internet Traffic Misdirection]

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

[[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|Assignment 1]] is due ''before class'' today (i.e., February 11th before 5:30pm ET). You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==

{|class="wikitable" border=3 style="margin: auto; background-color:#FFFFCC;"
|align="center"|<big>'''REMINDER'''</big>
|-
|style="background-color:#FFFFFF;"|Your comments must be submitted '''before 4:00PM ET''' on the Tuesday we hold class in order to count for participation credit. Please see the [[Class Participation|participation policy]] for more information.
|}
<br/>
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

I believe there is an underlying question surrounding the debate of net neutrality which is to what extent the state should intervene. The easy answer is to the point were the state does not crowd out investment and innovation. Even though in practice this is a hard thing to evaluate and achieve, I believe that regulatory bodies lose sight of it at times and should come back to this premise when deciding on a ruling that harms competition or stifles already functional markets.

[[User:Luciagamboaso|Luciagamboaso]] 16:30, 11 February 2014 (EST)
----

My personal opinions of net neutrality and connectivity became muddled as I read through this week’s reading. My initial viewpoint supported open access and little/no regulation. Data shows that the top countries that meet the benchmarks defined by Benkler (penetration, capacity, and price) establish an open access community and let competition be the harbinger of innovation. The US also got to its current internet state via open access and has since became the middle of the pack once it restricted open access when the FCC abandoned Telecommunications Act of 1996 in 2001 and 2002. If we restrict open access, and information/broadband companies hold monopolies (like Comcast), why should they improve their services since the end game always ends up being a question of efficient profits? However, my opinion on how the government should be involved once I watched Susan Crawford give her remarks at the 2013 National Conference on Media Reform. While her words seemed to agree with my formed opinions on open access and connectivity, her solution focused on using the power of the government to instate infrastructure similar to how highways and telecommunications became ubiquitous. This left me with the question (which everyone seems to have and why this is hotly debated) of how much regulation should be instituted by the government and other regulatory bodies? Although a n00b in this area, my take away thoughts are that some body must exisit to deliver open connectivity and access to the people. The only way to meet Benkler Benchmarks are to develop innovative strategies and technologies - new materials and information delivery systems - to drive down cost, which will increase capacity penetration. This will require that the government invest in science and engineering research and set benchmarks to ensure that the correct infrastructure is provided to achieve this benchmarks. Private funding is also an option, but private institutions usually have a mission that is company driven and not “we the people” driven.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 11:03, 9 February 2014 (EST)

: Open and free access to the internet is possible for one who has a ham radio operator license. In some sense it is not really "open" because of technical barrier since it requires acquisition of new technical skills. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMPRNet [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 11:30, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

While working on Assignment One and doing the readings this week on Net neutrality, I have been left with a lot of confusion as to how much regulation I find appropriate. On one hand, I think the internet, as with the spoken word, should be unrestricted to allow freedom of speech and communication. In this age, there are forums for people to express themselves, learn extensively about every possible interest, exchange information and news immediately, and connect to others from around the world in a way never before seen in history. There are now outlets and communities for all-- no longer are people isolated. While that might be troublesome from a standpoint of privacy, in my opinion an issue just as pressing arises dealing with unrestricted hate language. With the internet providing a barrier between individuals, hateful language is easy to disperse as there is no immediate visible repercussion. People are allowed to hide behind their computers and anonymity, sometimes spewing shocking, racist, sexist or otherwise offensive language just to incite anger and controversy (this behavior is often referred to as "trolling"). With school systems and the like actively taking a stand against bullying, should internet bullying also be restricted? Whose responsibility is it to ensure the safety (mental, emotional, physical) of the public who use the internet-- the website itself? The government? Some other agency which is set up to police the internet? Or would things be more fair if a simple internet ID was implemented, which identified users so that they were held responsible for their postings? I would tend to go with the last option, so as not to actually implement a rule of neutrality, which would be restricting free speech and infringing upon basic human rights.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 00:14, 8 February 2014 (EST)

: I like your comments. The Singapore government is very concerned about this and planning to take some practical measures, including one similar to your last option. See:
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/pm-outlines-new-approach-online-engagement-0 [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 11:47, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

I've been a Wikipedian for a long time, although not recently. One of the interesting things to look at in the context of Wikipedia is the deletionist/inclusionist divide (I think the deletionists have basically won). I wrote the original article on this subject on Wikipedia, and I thought some of you might find it interesting: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deletionism_and_inclusionism_in_Wikipedia Deletionism and Inclusionism in Wikipedia]. I was the original author of this article (I'm [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tarinth Tarinth] on Wikipedia) and it has an interesting history as an article, in that there was a fairly concerted attempt to have the article deleted as soon as I had created it. For further background on the subject, the following is an NPR interview I gave on the topic back in 2007: [http://weekendamerica.publicradio.org/programs/2007/01/20/marked_for_deletion.html "Marked for Deletion"]

My general feeling about Wikipedia: to move beyond casual editing, you need to become part of what amounts to a technological priesthood, and you have to fall in line with the prevailing philosophy to succeed at that. (Nevertheless, I do think Wikipedia is really awesome and super-useful, and it'll be fun to make some edits to an article again)
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 10:31, 8 February 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for sharing! As I'm sure you know, Wikimedia is trying to break down the technological barriers to entry, but the normative social order and its impact on edits is an interesting issue to explore more. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 14:15, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

In both the first and second lecture, someone had mentioned that Wikipedia isn't accepted by universities as an acceptable source. To be fair, this isn't a problem with Wikipedia, because universities will ordinarily not accept Britannia as a source either. This is because these are both "tertiary sources," and in academic writing, you need to use either primary sources (original documents, etc.) or secondary sources (peer-reviewed articles, journalistic articles, etc.).
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 10:44, 8 February 2014 (EST)

:As I mentioned during the last class, Wikipedia has a pretty good page detailing the various studies conducted to test the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_wikipedia reliability of Wikipedia]. I think your point about tertiary sources is exactly right, and at least with Wikipedia (if people are following the guidelines in articles) you should be able to drive to those primary and secondary sources. And, of course, if you find an issue with Wikipedia, fix it! :-) [[User:Andy|Andy]] 14:12, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

I had a discussion about Wikipedia with my wife and two sons while waiting for my flight from Changi Airport, Singapore, to Manila, Philippines, awhile ago. To my surprise, both my sons were aware of the problems with Wikipedia. They noted that while some of the citations were good, at least 50% was either crap or had broken links. They don't use Wikipedia seriously but scavenge its sites as a quick way of finding references from good citations.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:48, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN INTERNET CONNECTIVITY
CASE STUDY: SINGAPORE

The Ministry of Education and the Infocomm Development Authority had developed a set of specifications which e-learning vendors like my company must fulfill in terms of internet bandwidth, especially in national emergencies such as SARS, when schools are required to close to avoid spread of a virus, etc. In such cases, students are required to continue their studies online at home. To ensure requirements on internet access times are met, server load tests were carried out based on simulations for various numbers of concurrent users. We also had a contract with Oracle to work with our engineers and programmers to optimize the Php/MySQL coding. It was money well-spent.

In the past, the hardware was the major limitation. Video server vendors could only promise 50 concurrent users per server. This made connectivity into the internet broadband network too expensive because you need to pay for each server connection plus rack space....until I saw Steve Jobs on Youtube launching the new Mac G4 XServe demonstrating it can deliver video streams to 1000 iMacs. At that time I was working for the government and was the first person to order 2 units of G4 6 months ahead of its anticipated delivery. With 1000 concurrent users possible with the G4 XServe, I quit my job and started my e-learning company a year later in 2000.

Then, we found that the schools' internet bandwidth was the problem. The network in the school could only accomodate 3 classes of 40 students each, or a total of 120 students concurrently accessing our online videos. When there were more than 3 computer labs being used concurrently, all the PC's showed the online video had stalled. This happened to schools which subscribed for only 1 or 2 Mbps internet connectivity with their ISP. Schools using 5 or 10 Mbps had no issue. Over the years, the schools had upgraded their bandwidth connectivity to at least 5 or 10 Mbps. Today, almost all the secondary schools are using our online math program.

Two years ago, I was sourcing for better servers with fast solid-state drives (SSD's). The I/O with the storage devices could also significantly affect the access times, especially for connections to our database. But to our pleasant surprise IBM had produced new hard-disks that were even faster than SSD's! Subsequent server load tests we carried out showed significant improvement in access times with the new machines. Further improvement in access times were also obtained after modifying many segments of our code in consultation with Oracle.

But had the MOE and the schools not been pro-active in improving their internet infrastructure, online learning on a nation-wide scale in schools would not have been possible.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 14:03, 9 February 2014 (EST)

:The drive to having broadband in schools is a big part of communications policy in the US, as well. Several times in our communications law (Title 47 of the U.S. Code) Congress has indicated a clear preference for high-speed access in elementary and secondary schools. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:44, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

WIKIPEDIA EDITING SYNTAX VS HTML

This may not be directly relevant to our coming lecture, but may be helpful for those who intend to add more than just texts to a Wikipedia page. I was wondering how a table or a URL might be added to a Wikipedia page and thought this could be done using HTML. To my pleasant surprise, there is a menu at the top of the edit page in edit mode which allows you to click to insert a table, etc., to minimize coding time. But it was a disappointment to find there is no math equation editor. Help for input of math expressions can be found in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Displaying_a_formula.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:10, 9 February 2014 (EST)

: I finally figured out how to edit special tables from this Wiki help link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Table#Alignment [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:12, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

APPRECIATING LSTU-E120

I'm beginning to appreciate the information presented in this course. The guidelines about editing Wikipedia and Assignment 1 exercise can help make Wikipedia a better place. While checking out some Wikipedia sites to assess their use for Assignment 1, I found many places in need of citations. For Assignment 1, I would attempt to search for appropriate citations and add these but if not, I now know how to add the "Citation needed" tag. But I also found citations used that were inappropriate....how do I flag these if I could not find appropriate citations?

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:30, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

ONLINE PRE-QUALIFICATION TEST FOR WOULD-BE WIKIPEDIA EDITORS

Perhaps Wikipedia should require would-be editors to thoroughly read its policy and guidelines and make them take a rigorous online test which they need to pass before allowing them to do any edits on Wikipedia.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 22:40, 9 February 2014 (EST)

----

NET NEUTRALITY VS FAIR USE POLICY: BIG BUFFET VS HUNGER RATION

In countries like S. Korea, US, or Singapore, where there are lots of internet bandwidth to spare, it is convenient to implement a net neutrality policy. More than 90% of the population in Singapore live in public housing apartments and all units are now provided with fibre-optic cables. But in the Philippines, the ISPs are greedy corporations and charge high prices for very poor services. They also cheat customers by telling them that they get unlimited access and unlimited surfing but disconnect them when they hit an unspecified MB of data transfers or total access time on a daily basis. Connectivity is typically restored at midnight. This had been my experience with all the ISPs since I moved to Manila for medical school in June 2012. If you come to my condo in Sampaloc, you will see on my desk all variety of routers, modems, and so-called broadband sticks from Globe, Smart, and Sun. PLDT never showed up despite contacting them twice. One reason why internet connectivity was very bad was because users get deliberately disconnected without their knowledge. However, this was all indicated in fine print in contracts which customers signed without reading under a Fair Use Policy. The Fair Use Policy is used to discourage customers from using the internet too much! The amount of MB or total time accessed used to determine service disconnection depends on the computed average MB transferred and average total time accessed. Finally, I decided to return to Singapore every weekend so that I could view the recorded lectures online for my Harvard Extension School coursework. Subsequently, the situation got better when Smart offered a promo of truly free 10-day unlimited access for purchasing their new broadband stick. But after the 10-day period subscription to the service was very expensive. I found it so much cheaper to buy 3 new broadband sticks every month. To my great relief, in August 2013, Smart began to offer a new 4G device for Php 7,000 upfront plus Php 995 for every 30 days of truly unlimited access. I am one of the few lucky guys who got this device as Smart does not sell this in the university belt area. I had to travel more than an hour to Mandaluyong to buy it. This is all very hard to fathom, especially when Smart has a 4G antenna in front of my block.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 14:30, 10 February 2014 (EST)

----

I find it very surprising that Yochai Benkler's article presents Japan as a country that emphasized ubiquitous, seamless connectivity. Having lived in the country, I would most certainly place it in the first category: ultra high speeds, but rarely there. The internet in Japan is "just there" only if you happen to have a mobile phone, with a relatively expensive data plan, haven't reached your limit, and don't happen to be in a subway.

I think that the problem with the study might be, that although it's more nuanced that most papers on connectivity, it's still not nuanced enough. For example, it uses the metric: Wi-Fi hotspots per 100000. But there's a huge difference between 100 open WiFi hotspots, 100 paid hotspots by one provider, or 100 paid hotspots from 20 providers incompatible with each other. Not to mention that there are many different pricing plans for access to said paid hotspots that can have a big impact on how useful they are.

Japan, for example, would probably not fare very well in this metric if the above-mentioned considerations would have been taken into account. Everyone who has visited the country, even its capital, knows that free hotspots are few and far between, paid hotspots are expensive and often require you to subscribe for long stretches of time, and even if you do pay for the access you'll soon find that different establishments side with different WiFi providers and if you really want a seamless experience you'll need to subscribe to at least 2-3 different WiFi providers at once.

(That said, it's worth noting that my point of view is that of someone who spends a lot of time in European and Asian countries with excellent, ubiquitous, and often free or dirt cheap connectivity, not someone from rural US.)
--[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 16:09, 10 February 2014 (EST)

:Great points! I believe later in the full report Benkler notes that Japan is more of a middle-of-the-pack performer on other metrics, including 3G penetration and price (though Japan has been growing very quickly in the former). Your point about the WiFi access points is a good one - I'm not sure if the OECD study that's referenced here took price into account when developing the definition of what is a "public hotspot." [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:51, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

In Australia, net neutrality issues hardly impact us and receive minimal attention from consumers or industry. This week’s reading further piqued my curiosity to research what Australia is doing differently to keep these problems at bay, as we generally mimic structures of technology from America.

Unlimited broadband data plans in America planted seeds to the problems that sprouted with net neutrality. Services meant for access-granting could otherwise be boring and bill customers for simply providing access, however, a power struggle emerged within the market. The ISP’s that provide unlimited broadband failed to create additional revenue parallel to their traffic growth. This business model leaves a lot of temptation for the ISP’s to manipulate traffic, direct users to favoured websites, attempt to stifle their competitors or simply block them out. How else would a provider increase company revenue? This model also give little incentive for the ISP’s to invest in upgrades to capacity or network speeds for their customers, because they wouldn’t profit off of it.

Curiously, Australia does not have any laws in place regarding net neutrality, the ISP’s are structured to have disincentives for discriminating or favouring traffic based on source type. Australian ISPs operate on a volumetric billing system, so the user pays per MB, at a fixed rate, with a pre-determined speed and download capacity. Customers have a choice to upgrade to higher speeds and expand their download capacity, and ISPs manage congestion based on the customer’s willingness to pay. Blocking or manipulating web traffic would have an anticompetitive effect on the ISP. This system gives stronger incentives to maximise transition of all traffic regardless of source type, because that would translate to bigger profits. High market competition paired with low-entry barriers weakens incentives for ISPs to block content. Telstra, an Australian ISP, operates on a metered broadband system. If you choose Telstra as your provider, they have a list of partner sites that can be used on an unlimited basis. This is an effective way to steer the direction of customers without having to manipulate their open-access connectivity to other websites, if they so choose to use them.

ISPs should act as an affordance that suggest, rather than dictate, how their services are to be used. It would be naive to think that American ISPs could simply restructure to a volumetric system, which would run a huge risk of sending their customers running to their competitors who still provide unlimited access.
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 23:17, 10 February 2014 (EST)

: Talking about competition, there is hardly any competition amongst ISP's in Philippines. PLDT directly or indirectly own Smart and Sun. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:02, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] and [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] - if you don't mind my asking, what do you pay for broadband, and what is your average download and upload speed? You can use services like [http://www.speedtest.net/ Speedtest] to check. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 07:46, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::: Currently from my location in Sampaloc, Manila, using www.speedtest.net, I am getting 2.26 Mbps for downloads and 0.20 Mbps for uploads. I am paying Php 995 (about USD 25) for every 30 days of unlimited access using Smart's 4G network with ZTE's LTE device Model MF93D (made in China). I am now quite happy with the download speed, but not the upload speed as I have to upload videos for 1st and 2nd Year med school class lectures. It is actually very cheap now for me and I can bring the 4G device while travelling around Manila. This is a very far cry from my situation prior to August 2013. [[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:16, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::: I am on a plan with Telstra that costs $50 AUD per 8 Gigs of data. This sounds expensive by American standards, but bear in mind, minimum wage in Sydney (city) is around $22 AUD per hr. [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 16:52, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::Also, to Marissa's point about competition, it's an interesting question whether folks would be as worried about net neutrality if there was genuine competition in the US over broadband, but that's typically not the case. Major metropolitan areas will have, at most, two or three choices, and for huge sections of the US there is only one cable provider in their area. Some cities have tried to build municipal networks to provide other choices, but several state legislatures have prevented cities in their states from doing so. Australia, as you probably know, is considering the near-opposite approach, embarking on a heroic effort to build [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Broadband_Network fiberoptic lines to every building] in Australia. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 07:52, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

UNSUNG WINTER HEROES OF THE TUBES

During my 4 years in West Lafayette, IN, from 2004-2008, we had very good internet access. But occasionally when the internet goes down, especially during winter, the internet outage extends throughout the whole state or several states. I learned that the technicians sometimes work under tough or hazardous conditions to restore damaged lines.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:02, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

FROM TUBES TO AIRSPACE

If any government intend to quickly setup broadband internet or intranet access, technology is now available which enable one to do so using very long range wifi or ethernet radio. The main transmission antenna can be installed and connected to a server within a day. Transmission can be up to 120km at 200 Mbps with equipment like the RAD's AirMux-400. Additional repeaters can be added for places which do not have line-of-sight. Cheap and powerful desktop receivers are also available. This can be a temporary solution until more stable networks such as those based on fiber-optics are installed. If I recall, my costing was merely Php 200,000 (USD 5,000) for a 50km range at 100 Mbps, including equipment and labor for installation and setup. Sounds good for poor and impoverished communities.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

NET NEUTRALITY IMPRACTICAL FOR COUNTRIES WITH BIG INCOME GAPS

Private ISP corporations want to make profit but governments want internet services to be delivered to the poor at almost no cost. To do so would require government ownership or regulated differential pricing and/or the provision of separate internet networks: one for entertainment and commerce and the other for education.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 01:36, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Net Neutrality is the question which must be maintained by government and private entities in close cooperation. Of course, the ISPs want to make greater profits by means of prices fluctuation for different websites, traffics and etc. In this case, the government can be some kind of
"referee" by preventing the IPS to speculate with the mentioned aspects. However, we should bear in mind that the government cannot keep the total governance in its hands as this policy may lead to some restrictions in the development of this sphere in future. So, I think that the met neutrality must be recognized by law and the legislation must set the general rules and protect the consumers from being somehow harmed by the IPS. Still, IPS must possess enough freedom for development and advancement of the services they are engaged in.[[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 09:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)Aysel Ibayeva

----

In response to Castille, I am also finding myself at a crossroad on the issue of promoting liberty and safeguarding citizens by preventing injustices. I think this is a topic of endless, profound debate. I thoroughly enjoyed the weekly readings and found Adam Thierer's article "More Confusion about Internet 'Freedom' " to be particularly powerful and convincing. While I did not agree with all of the points he made, I think he makes a valid, logical argument debunking the mainstream point of view that has been engrained in us as a society. I did not realize the extent of power the FCC maintains over the internet and, as he mentions, these are not even elected officials. How can they promote the values or digital issues that we, the people of the internet, hold dear. Shouldn't we have a say in these decisions that directly impact the cyberspace we access on a daily basis? He admits there will inevitably be problems in a free information marketplace; however, in the name of innovation via the promotion of creativity and ingenuity within our society, perhaps these mistakes are well worth the risk and stunting this technological growth/exchange could do more damage than good.

I was surprised to find the end of the article when Thierer ultimately bashes the Senator's initial statement that Net neutrality is “the First Amendment issue of our time.” At first I thought he was in agreement with Senator Franken but he saw this as more of an attack on the goal of the first amendment. When I initially read Franken's statement I took it to mean that the internet is becoming a general issue for freedom of speech.

Thierer suggests that instead of putting more faith in these central planners, we should look to the evolutionary market forces through a bottom-up response as the "cyber-progressivists" have argued (Thierer 2011). The most important point that Thierer discusses, in my opinion, was when he mentioned that people are driven by incentives, but they are only truly free to do so if they are not held at the whim of a higher governing authority and this authority has a track record of always being two steps behind the latest technological advancements. They cannot keep up and in trying to do so, they are ultimately thwarting overall progression. While I cannot go as far as saying that I believe all regulatory intervention is tyranny as Thierer ends up insisting, I tend to agree with his overall convictions. However, as Castille pointed out, there are clearly times when it appears the government should step in to protect its citizens on the web. On the other hand, one intervention leads to another and it becomes a fast moving "slippery slope".

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 10:57, 11 February 2014 (EST)

:There's a reason this has been a hot issue for about a decade! There are very compelling arguments to be made on all sides. Thierer does gloss over the fact that the FCC's actions are constrained by Congress, and Congress (at least in theory) is dependent upon the people, so as a matter of structure the influence of the public has a role, though we all know how hard that is to achieve in practice. The First Amendment issues themselves are fascinating and an area where I spend a lot of my time thinking about these issues; I hope to get to some of that in class today. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:58, 11 February 2014 (EST)

::Thierer complains, "We are asked to ignore our history lessons, which teach us that centralized planning and bureaucracy all too often lead to massively inefficient outcomes..." However, this is taking the libertarian complaint of inefficiency (that I normally side with) out of its economic context. If he were to balance the concerns of profitability of the architecture of the industry (for the ISPs) and of the fiber networks themselves, and weigh them against the potential economic growth as a result of ubiquitous internet, Thierer would find that one far outweighs the other in importance. [[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:48, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

When the key Net Neutrality cases were being presented before the court a few years back, I remember being firmly on the side of the FCC and hoping that a strict ruling against Comcast would have preserved Net Neutrality... or at least what I presumed "net neutrality" to encompass back then. I see that my view of Net Neutrality was overly narrow at that time...and although I still do not want to see service providers have that much power to manipulate what legal content a user chooses to access online, I see from the readings that the scope of the "problem" would, probably, neither have been fully resolved in a ruling that went in favor of the FCC. Constraints, as discussed last week, would have most likely just shifted, and placed regulated pressure on a marketplace. (an example might be thinking of an ISP that truly wants to enter the market and offer customers a filtered, "safe", online experience for certain families... they indeed would have subscribers and be successful and appeal to some sectors that opt for a “safe online community”). Conversely, with the judges ruling allowing the FCC to walk away with the ability to regulate the entire internet is more than a little worrisome knowing that political cycles could have such sweeping powers to re-define the internet landscape. And while service providers still enjoy their own monopolies within any given township of users who have only 1 (maybe 2) choices for an ISP, it seems that the consumer is the only one who lost some ground in the Net Neutrality rulings.

I think the reading "Net Neutrality and Free Speech in the Internet Age" strikes closer to where we need to be focusing our attention. To quote from the interview directly: "Dawn argues for an affirmative conception of the First Amendment, under which public and powerful private gatekeepers of Internet communications are subject to the First Amendment’s mandate to ensure the free flow of communications in the digital age." - Here too I originally presumed that the First Amendment *did* apply across-the-board to all communication...Internet, printing press, public speech - but I guess it is that word "public" that becomes an "undefined zone" within virtual spaces online. Is there anything like a national or municipal park in the Internet world where the marketplace has no sway on how we choose to behave in that public zone? Or is every “online space” in which we choose to speak or participate analogous to traveling to private island governed by the values (and whims) of the a single gatekeeper rather than any one nation's constitutional rights? (Why did Mr. Roarke and Tattoo just come to mind...?).
[[User:Psl|Psl]] 12:31, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

MAGNA CARTA FOR PHILIPPINES INTERNET FREEDOM (MCPIF)

See: http://democracy.net.ph/mcpif/full-text/

What do you think of Section 5(e)?

Schools in Singapore has a restriction policy. Only selected websites are permitted to be accessed within the school's network.

We also teach parents how to allow their children to access only selected websites and block all others to prevent children from playing online games and accessing pornographic and other undesirable websites.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:42, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

WEBSITES BANNED IN SINGAPORE

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/singapore/story/extramarital-dating-website-ceo-disappointed-mdas-ban-20131109

http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/05/23/us-singapore-internet-odd-idUSS2322899620080523

http://yawningbread.org/arch_2005/yax-504.htm

http://therealsingapore.com/content/singapore-government-plans-ban-websites-such-pirate-bay

See also Internet Filtering in Singapore:
https://opennet.net/studies/singapore

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 12:50, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have used Wikipedia as a starting point to gather resources and verify the accuracy of the information. I have never been a contributor. This assignment has proved useful in "breaking me out of my shell." I am reminded of the quote from an article that I ran across by Tom Simonite. In the article, The Decline of Wikipedia, he stated: "When Wikipedians achieved their most impressive feat of leaderless collective organization, they unwittingly set in motion the decline in participation that troubles their project today." I fear the mechanism is stifled from further growth due to its collective and bureaucratic structure. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 13:13, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

This week’s assignment was very enlightening. I am a casual browser in Wikipedia and have used it just for some very general preliminary information before going into the topic deeper in other websites. I was familiar with the issues of the website but I never really stepped behind the initial pages to edit or evaluate the rules. This was very helpful but I also suffered a bit on the learning curve being a complete beginner on that end. Regardless, I found it very interesting.

Now for the topic of government’s roles of the Internet, I think this would be best avoided. The Internet is where our freedom of speech gets most prolific and also most obscene. There’s room for it all and we should keep it like this. When control enters the picture it is a dangerous slope and it is never black and white. How do you decide what should be banned? Everyone will give a different method and a consensus is nearly impossible. I’m interest to see what the class will say on this topic.
[[User:Lpereira|Lpereira]] 13:28, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

According to research conducted by Yochai Benkler about search for improvement of high-capacity networks for the next generation in different developed and developing countries is based on download speed and complete connectivity. His study demonstrates the strengths and weaknesses in the broadband deal in several countries and makes a comparison to the technological transition in the next generation, while the video shows briefly how connectivity works today and makes a comparison between the most developed and developing countries. In analyzing both materials, I made the conclusion that the opportunities and technological barriers, experiences and skills gained by the different players in the innovation system flowing through this economic activity to another, establish a specific context for each country or region, that is that any set of economic incentives generate different incentives and constraints to innovation. To the extent and in cases where the divergence between economic incentives and stimulating innovation represented by externalities is substantial, differences are gradually decreased. [[User:Gisellebatista|Gisellebatista]] 14:08, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Working on Assignment One (and the Wiki rule of neutrality in particular) got me thinking about objectivity as it relates to online journalistic content. It struck me that objectivity has been losing its power online, at least in the journalistic and content spheres. Outside of academic circles, the online news that gets the most attention seems to be quite opinionated — they are the articles that lead to shares, ‘likes’, high-fives, vitriol, and discussion. But it’s also these same pieces that people go to for sources of information. Often biased information. A couple of the readings have addressed this fact: that online communities and the net in general has a categorizing effect… so that it becomes not so much a large “worldwide web”, but a large collection of smaller, almost navel-gazing webs.

There’s a bit of a bipolarity going on here. As an example, Wikipedia seems to be doing a solid job of promoting objectivity, and yet online biases seem break through the clutter faster. On one hand we crave objectivity for our sources, and on the other hand we crave opinions for our entertainment. (Maybe it’s as simple as that? But it rarely is…)

When looking at different Wiki articles, a bit of a pattern started to emerge: Those articles that deviated from one rule, were more likely to deviate from at least one of the other rules, as well. This made it particularly difficult to focus on editing just the one area and led to making amendments of other rules as well. I found that as I delved deeper into the editing process, more issues seemed to pop up that “needed” editing — I could see how it could become quite addictive for regular Wiki editors.

I also found the idea of branching out to edit an article for which I had no previous knowledge to be daunting — even with sufficient sources at my disposal. It would be interesting to look at a study of how much prior knowledge Wiki editors have about the subjects they are editing… [[User:Twood|Twood]] 14:15, 11 February 2014 (EST)

:I would agree with Twood-the task of verifying sources for accuracy is daunting. The three fundamental rules Wiki has placed ( at first) seem simplistic. Application takes the steps to a different level. I found myself in the most interesting research hole imaginable. The error rate is high on Wiki-but understandable. --[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:36, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

Having created and submitted a single Wikipedia article previously, I had a reasonable familiarity with Wikipedia before completing Assignment 1. However, approaching Wikipedia as an editor with a targeted rule to address in a pre-existing article brought up many questions about the role of the individual, the community and the regulation of speech. A number of the readings helped work through these questions for me, none more so than Professor Dawn Nunziato's interview on net neutrality and free speech. I was pleased to consider the two conceptions of the first amendment in the context of the internet and regulation of speech online. As Nunziato explains, under the affirmative conception of the first amendment, "individuals enjoy an affirmative right to speak, free from content and viewpoint discrimination — regardless of whether such discrimination occurs at the hands of the government or other powerful regulators of speech." She also confirms, as I have understood from my lay person's perspective as a frequent user of web and social media, that the affirmative conception of the first amendment "has not taken root" in the internet context because the private entities that control internet speech are not subject to the first amendment's mandate prohibiting censorship. This of course leads to concern about whether our internet communication is really free-- and also leads to the unique case of Wikipedia. As we learned in other readings this week, and in completing Assignment 1 itself, there are certainly "gatekeepers" for speech on Wikipedia, but in a different form from broadband providers, email servers, and search engines that Nunziato cites. The community of editors on Wikipedia, and such reliability control features as autoconfirmed editors, serve as a less tangible but equally omnipresent entity that has the power to censor- but to protect from unreliable or overly biased information, rather than a singular interest. Whether Wikipedia can at the same time ensure neutrality and protect free speech is clearly an ongoing debate.

[[User:akk22|akk22]] 15:19, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Internet is a global infrastructure so measuring, defining, and ultimately controlling it can be accomplished in a variety of ways. In measuring speed, broadband, and the “always on” ubiquitously networked society, the US ranked mid to poor in performance and among the absolute lowest in category of price and future planning. This is one of the key issues debated in politics along with open access policies, network neutrality, First Amendment rights, and the FCC’s broad powers over regulating the Internet. The network neutrality view is that “broadband providers and wireless carriers should be prohibited from discriminating against speech on the basis of viewpoint or content” the right for all information to travel the Internet equally without discrimination. There have been several occurrences of major ISP’s manipulating the content provided on an individualized basis just because it benefited their own interests. How much regulation should we place over the Internet or should we just leave it to the great innovators and major corporations to work it out? [[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:46, 11 February 2014 (EST)

----------------

As a first time contributor to Wikipedia, thanks to this class in general and assignment one in particular, I came to realize that it would be very difficult for governments to regulate the internet as it is already an enormous task for individual web-based organizations, such as Wikipedia, to manage all its editors. For example, bearing Wikipedia's first rule in mind (also known as "NPOV"), I read a few articles and edited one that was completely not in line with Wikipedia's policies. There was no citation from reliable sources of any kind. Besides, the author stated a lot of his opinions as facts and vice versa.

Having said that, I believe that if it is that hard for organizations such as Wikipedia to regulate their own user bases, which are relatively small portions of a countries' populations, and make them all stick to the rules, let alone governments of developed nations who manage an entire population with many fundamental rights and freedom to regulate the internet in the traditional governmental ways of regulating.

Finally, I am not totally dismissing the idea that governments should not intervene on internet issues. It is not impossible to regulate it to some extent. On the contrary, I think it is even necessary for governments and individual internet organizations to collaborate and continue to establish policies and regulations that will be in the benefits of their populations and users, respectively.
[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:55, 11 February 2014 (EST)

A Series of Tubes: Infrastructure, Broadband, and Baseline Content Control

2014-02-11T04:20:47Z

Marissa1989: /* Class Discussion */

A Series of Tubes: Infrastructure, Broadband, and Baseline Content Control

2014-02-11T04:17:42Z

Marissa1989:

A Series of Tubes: Infrastructure, Broadband, and Baseline Content Control

2014-02-11T04:17:14Z

Marissa1989:

Paradigms for Studying the Internet

2014-02-04T22:13:54Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 4'''

Before we can even begin exploring the who's, what's, and why's – we need to answer the critical question of how. Indeed, the phrase "studying the web" could embrace a staggering world of possible routes to explore, even before beginning to examine its relationship with society and culture. We need something to guide us through this massive field of (very interesting!) foxholes, and link the ideas we encounter into a consistent piece. We need some kind of structure to allow us to understand what we are looking at, the same way a chemist thinks of things in terms of atoms and molecules, or a philosopher can think about things in terms of schools of thought.

This class will explore different frameworks for studying the web, which will structure both the discussion and topic matter covered in the course, as well as the methodology that you should apply to your assignments. The second hour of the class will focus on applying these concepts to Wikipedia, and teeing up the [[Final Project|final project]] for the class, where we will discuss the research prompt, talk about some successful projects from prior years, and plot out the deadlines for the rest of the semester.

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Mechanisms of control

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/what_things_regulate Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0,'' Chapter 7] (read intro, "A Dot's Life," and "On Governments and Ways to Regulate")

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (read 1-3 and 9-22)

* [http://www.danah.org/papers/2011/WhiteFlight.pdf danah boyd, White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook] (read 1-11, skim 12-18, read 19-end)

; The effects of control

* [http://arstechnica.com/features/2008/06/book-review-2008-06-2-admin/ Nate Anderson, Book Review: Jonathan Zittrain's "The Future of the Internet And How to Stop It" (from ''Ars Technica'')]

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It] (Chapter 1, "The Battle of the Boxes," and Chapter 4, "The Generative Pattern," only)

* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks_Chapter_11.pdf Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks] (pp. 379-396 only; stop at "The Physical Layer")

== Optional Readings ==

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbYQ0AVVBGU Jeffrey Lin, Play Nice: the Science and Behavior of Online Games] (Focus on 0:00-27:17. It's a long video, but an interesting exploration of how one company uses game design to regulate griefing and other online bad behavior. Some of the discussed language is NSFW.)

* [http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/10/the-contribution-conundrum-why-did-wikipedia-succeed-while-other-encyclopedias-failed/ Megan Garber, The contribution conundrum: Why did Wikipedia succeed while other encyclopedias failed?, Nieman Journalism Lab]

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=310020 Orin Kerr, The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law] (Focus on sections I and II)

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

Assignment 1 is due before next week's class (February 11th). Details of the assignment will be discussed in today's class; see [[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|this page]] for further information. You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 11:49, 8 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Therefore, to maintain order, ensure efficient government, and improve social justice, kings, presidents, and prime ministers must be the chief architect of their country's internet code. They must be multi-skilled or have the support of a talented and scholarly team.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:39, 31 January 2014 (EST)

----

It seems lots more fun to watch than just read: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7UlYTFKFqY

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 03:30, 2 February 2014 (EST)

:Zittrain's talks are always a lot of fun! But we chose the two chapters in order to focus on a few of the specific things we'd like to dive into for this class. His book talk is much more general. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 08:46, 2 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Zittrain chapters give a good overview of how the Internet had been developed up to circa 2008, but there have been some significant changes--and possible reversals of the "generative" model since that time. The increasing role of SaaS platforms, centralized APIs, and operating platforms with a much more pervasive level of control relative to older operating systems (e.g., IOS, Android, and social networking platforms like the Facebook developer platform) have reintroduced an aspect of large, single-point-of-failure, commercially controlled systems. Whereas Cluetrain envisioned a future of "small pieces loosely joined," the Internet of today might be better described as "lots of small pieces largely dependent on a few large, commercially-controlled pieces." These few large pieces raise concerns in terms of limiting the potential for innovation, negotiation with gatekeepers (which, as rightly discussed in the Zittrain chapters, was one of the things that killed innovation on earlier mobile platforms) and the shifting of business opportunities across the market from creators to platform owners. Will there be another wave of generative platforms that will wear down the the current trend to centralization, and if not, how can we best ensure continuous innovation on the Internet?
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 20:27, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:At an [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2014/02/defending_an_unowned_internet event last night] Prof. Zittrain mentioned another possible enclosure movement for generativity I hadn't thought of before: many web services are finding themselves at the receiving end of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDoS#Distributed_attack DDoS Attacks] for one reason or another. As a result, services are moving from their own servers capable of withstanding such attacks - primarily [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Web_Services Amazon Web Services], but there are a few others as well. If all of the Internet moves to just one of three or four web servers, that gives those servers tremendous power to cut off something they may not like. That's a form of "contingent generativity" that could cut off a lot of the social good that both Zittrain and Benkler flag in their articles. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:28, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Coming off of last week's reading (specifically John Perry Barlow's "A Declaration of Independence of the Internet"), I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" particularly interesting. Even before reading boyd's piece, Barlow's "Declaration" seems hilariously naive in 2014, though I can certainly appreciate the utopian vision it's based on. The idea that the world that we exist in (the physical reality described by Orin Kerr) won't intrude on the virtual world of the Internet seems impossible. (Did they really not believe that the best AND worst parts of us would be present?) The role of the Internet in our everyday social lives has, of course, increased exponentially since 1996, so it only makes sense that who we are and how we behave in the physical world will translate to equivalent behavior on the Internet. The ways in which behavior on the Internet effects people in the physical reality of their lives (particularly when it comes to harassment, threatening behavior, etc.) lends a great sense of urgency to figuring out how we should think about the Internet and the law.
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:18, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:Both boyd and Hargittai use a lot of pre-Internet scholarship in their writings for this course - a nice reminder that new technology does not necessarily mean new approaches to scholarship. But as Benkler notes, it is not that we are simply repeating the 20th century with shinier objects. There is something different about the way that information travels today that changes the ecology of information and cultural production. We can either adopt that change or legislate/architect it away. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:36, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I agree with Ichu's remarks about the need to somehow maintain order and to do so utilizing a talented and scholarly task force. My question would then be how this team would be selected/elected? Another potential issue would be how to ensure justice in a system where internet code is controlled by one's government or sole government official/king/president? In our reading by Orin Kerr, he highlights how these conflicting external and internal perspectives on the internet add fuel to the problem of internet law. The internet has two personalities in its vast internal cyberspace and also in acting as a physical network; striking a balance between the two and incorporating both identities into a legal system continues to evade and frustrate authorities.

In response to Megan Garber's reading on Wikipedia, I find that Wikipedia often does not get the credit or praise it deserves. Admittedly, no online community-built encyclopedia can be fool-proof, but the reason why Wikipedia has prevailed is its relative reliability. I have used the site extensively and it has provided me with a quick summary of events on a particular debate or issue. Garber's reasons for Wikipedia's success are logical in that familiarity is the cornerstone for many website's success rates. The ease of navigating the site and the non-committal method of editing or adding to the work encourages more users to contribute. I would also argue that, beyond the cultural/socio-economic/racial influences that cause users to migrate from site to site (such as from myspace to facebook), the constantly changing platform of facebook has led many to stray from the site. This is difficult to prove, of course, but when I had a Facebook account I recall many complaints from my peers about all of the changes that kept happening occurring on the site. It seemed that every week we had to ajust to a new feature or re-learn how to navigate. Accordingly with Garber's theory, the "familiarity" factor was diminishing for users and people tend to resist change especially on a site that they have grown accustomed to.

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 04:08, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I was also interested in Megan Garber's point that the authorless structure of Wikipedia lowers the pressure of contributing. It certainly makes sense to me (and, I'm sure, to anyone who has read the comment section of any news article or blog post ever written...) that anonymity can encourage participation. When there's lower pressure to perform and you aren't faced with high stakes when you get involved, it's easier to bring yourself to contribute. This seems to tie in to Zittrain's point about the success of Wikipedia: it developed somewhat un-self-consciously and organically, rather than as a top-down "knowledge project" initiated by large universities. Oversight of the development of new technologies would presumably put a damper on this type of growth at any and all levels. I think this is nicely addressed by Zittrain's point that we're not looking at choosing between technology and non-technology, but a hierarchy and polyarchy.

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 12:48, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Lawrence Lessig’s article focuses on liberty in Cyberspace and how various modes of regulation effect that liberty. He focuses on four different ways that the web can be regulated,1)the Law, 2)social norms, 3) the market, and 4)architecture. Lessing tries to get us to think differently, more critically, about different mechanisms that can lead to restriction of freedom on the Web.

For instance, with the architecture of the Web, Lessing asserts that the written code of programs inherently can either provide more freedom, or restrict freedom, and access.
And when it comes to the law, Lessing points out that “The efficient answer may well be unjust.” He gives an example of the law requiring life sentences for stealing car radios.

We all would probably agree that that is overboard and excessive. And, with that absurdity planted in our minds, Lessing then shows how a coder could easily put a restriction in the radios code that would make stealing the radio less desirable for thieves. Which would in turn make it unnecessary for such a draconian law of life sentences for car radio thieves.
This example makes me think about Aaron Swartz, a friend of Lessigs, whom took his own life in 2013. Aaron was prodigy kid who helped create RSS feed, and Reddit at a young age. He later became what you might call an internet activist, and made enemies in the federal government for some hacking activities. He was eventually charged with multiple felonies by the Federal government for hacking MIT’s JSTOR server.
Lessing talks about how law and code can either liberate or restrict the Internet.
I believe Swartz’s case shows how the MIT/JSTOR rules of access, restricted information on the Web, and how federal laws were excessive and restricted innovation and liberty for Web users. And lastly, Swartz’s case shows how one coder tried to use hacktivism, to liberate information on the web.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:58, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I found the essay I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" both interesting and reflective of what I have witnessed. In particular, I thought the comment that “Subculturally identified teens appeared more frequently draw to MySapce while more mainstream teens tended towards Facebook,” was especially true. We may pride ourselves on a strong sense of individualism, but remnants of the herd mentality are always present. MySpace simply offers a way to share interests that are different and more “specialized” than Facebook. I could not help but wonder if the trend is continuing with an exodus from Facebook. From a personal observation, I’ve noticed that usage among many 16-22 year olds on Facebook is dropping. The pages may still be up with random notices but the real communication and new communities are being centered on Twitter. I’m not sure if this is a spike, a trend or a progression to escape a Mainstream Facebook with parental oversight. What may be of more concern is that Twitter allows the segregation of subcultures and races more easily than previous options. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 14:09, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have been following the most recent work of Lawrence Lessig for about a year, so it’s exciting to read “Code 2.0” and make connections between that and his work on copyright law, amateur creativity, Creative Commons, etc.
By providing some background on the US government’s inclination towards “indirect” regulation, Lessig paints a frightening picture of the extent to which the state can control entities for its own benefit. The case of New York v. US focuses on the question of indirection and the states, which disallows the federal government from co-opting the states for its own ends. In effect, this case establishes that the government must take responsibility for its actions and remain transparent in its interactions with the states. My question is, however, why isn’t there such precedent for indirection and the American people?
Rust v. Sullivan is a prime example of the government’s indirect regulation of its citizens. By ordering doctors, who work in government-funded clinics, to discourage the use of abortion as a family planning method, the Reagan administration furthered its aim to reduce the incidence of abortion. The lack of transparency of the government, in using doctors to discourage their patients from obtaining abortions, is most disturbing. A patient has no way to discern the state’s motives, which masquerade behind the advice of a medical professional.
A somewhat similar issue occurred (and continues to occur) in the deeding of land prior to 1948. Such deeds prevented the property covered by that deed from being sold to people of a particular race. While this law is no more, its remnants are still very much alive in the US today. As Lessig explained, communities remained segregated by “a thousand tiny inconveniences of architecture and zoning… highways without easy crossings were placed between communities… railroad tracks were used to divide.” Despite the fact that integration is made difficult by these subtle methods of control, the most troubling part of this it is so very challenging to see the link between the regulation and its consequence. The government’s lack of transparency, while being a rather genius way to accomplish their own goals, is what is so threatening to our liberty. Lessig ends by suggesting that cyberspace is a new terrain in which the government can wield power inconspicuously and endanger our freedom.

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 14:50, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

IMPROVING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ACCELERATING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Traditionally, colleges and universities limit the number of students admitted into their institutions primarily due to resource constraints. But with the internet, everyone can have access to higher education, regardless of their prior academic failures.

And higher education can even be made almost free! This brings liberty and freedom to the weak and poor. Economic progress can be accelerated. Is this possible? Is this desirable?

WHY THE GOVERNMENT MUST OWN THE COUNTRY'S INTERNET BACKBONE

In the Philippines, the internet backbone is mainly owned and operated by profit-oriented private corporations. Hence, the poor has no access to the internet. With over 40% of the population, or 40 million Filipinos in poverty, and internet infrastructure in most schools are grossly inadequate or absent, only the government can remedy the situation by owning a substantial part of the country's internet backbone. Profit opportunities can still exist for corporations if there are two separate internet backbone: one solely for government administration and education, and the other for private entertainment and commerce.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:32, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Wikipedia is offered in other languages, which is a feature offered almost from inception. How does wikipedia get around the challenge when (i.e.) an English and a German wikipedia page on the same subject feature different citations, or when one page has more depth than the other? This would make a great deal of knowledge inaccessible to people who don't speak the language. Does monolingualism emerge as a barrier for Wikipedia?

[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 15:43, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I could not agree more with Ichua. Your point of colleges and universities being somewhat limited due to resource constraints makes me think of tech and educational revolutionaries such as Salman Khan and his YouTube channel. Although his efforts are not mainstream yet, it is a good example of how the internet could bring about freedom, social justice, economic improvement, and access to higher education to the weak and poor. The same goes with "edX" and other disruptive technologies that could very well contribute to knowledge economies now and in the future.

[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:42, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

An introduction into a "Dots" life brings scrutiny on the constructs of regulation through the market, architecture, law and social norms. As we engage in our conversations dealing with cyberspace, it will be interesting to see which one of the four areas outlined will prove to be the most critical-or will they all hold equal weight in the outcome of how we grow as a society online?

[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:51, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

The multifaceted and ambiguous nature of the Internet along with its sheer size has presented a challenge for analysts, researchers, and governments alike to collect, study, organize, present and control data in a useful way. As Benkler, Zittrain, and Palfrey show you must understand how the infrastructure works, which they categorized into 3 main levels, otherwise it would not be possible to access what they need to monitor and regulate their own sphere of Internet.

As Jonathan Zittrain expounds upon “the generative pattern” we see that even though having a sterile system like the iPhone or an enclosed “garden” like AOL has is benefits including in the security realm, not allowing an open platform stifles peoples creativity. Indeed Wikipedia would not work if generativity was not allowed.

Even in the world of the Internet racism and ethnical divides took part in shaping how society socializes online. Students’ opinions of different socializing networks were full of stereotypical references insinuating that just as in the classroom,
subcultures have existed and do exist today correlating how people relate to one another over the Internet.

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:59, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I greatly appreciated Lawrence Lessig's invocation of John Stuart Mill's "On Liberty" in "What Things Regulate" because Mill's treatise on libertarian ideals speak to controversies over internet regulation, especially the concerns over free speech that we discussed last week and will undoubtedly continue discuss over the course of the semester. I believe that Mill's "harm principle," as illustrated in "On Liberty" speaks directly to these issues of censorship. I'm not a philosophy major, but as I interpret Mill's writing, individuals should only be limited in their expression if such expression poses direct harm to individuals. (This concept was hilariously depicted in an episode of "The Simpsons" entitled "Lisa on Ice.") According to Mill, I should be allowed to swing my fists up until the point that they make physical contact with your face.

Of course, the internet does not allow for physical contact, but Mill explicates that certain expressions do not require contact to cause harm. He gives the example of protestors who oppose price increases for corn; to castigate the corn dealer in print would not constitute harm, but to picket at his doorstep would. I believe that free speech on the internet is important, but undoubtedly, acts such as cyber bullying do seem to cause harm based on the groundwork that Mill provided [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 16:01, 4 February 2014 (EST)
----

Conceptually the internet and the regulatory framework that Lawrence Lessig presents must be viewed from an international context. What is normative behavior in one country is not in another and can feed the digital inequality/divide further. What is architecturally most beneficial does not always treat all economies the same. Same is true for laws and market analysis - the internet as an international dialog. This international lense must be used to reconcile these 'regulatory' concepts. The political debate between nations on acceptable behavior in physical space is certainly real in this space as well - what constitutes causing harm to a nation's infrastructure if that infrastructure and data exists largely in a cloud in another nation? [[User:Rstempfley|rgs]] 16:50, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Paradigms for Studying the Internet

2014-02-04T20:47:16Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 4'''

Before we can even begin exploring the who's, what's, and why's – we need to answer the critical question of how. Indeed, the phrase "studying the web" could embrace a staggering world of possible routes to explore, even before beginning to examine its relationship with society and culture. We need something to guide us through this massive field of (very interesting!) foxholes, and link the ideas we encounter into a consistent piece. We need some kind of structure to allow us to understand what we are looking at, the same way a chemist thinks of things in terms of atoms and molecules, or a philosopher can think about things in terms of schools of thought.

This class will explore different frameworks for studying the web, which will structure both the discussion and topic matter covered in the course, as well as the methodology that you should apply to your assignments. The second hour of the class will focus on applying these concepts to Wikipedia, and teeing up the [[Final Project|final project]] for the class, where we will discuss the research prompt, talk about some successful projects from prior years, and plot out the deadlines for the rest of the semester.

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Mechanisms of control

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/what_things_regulate Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0,'' Chapter 7] (read intro, "A Dot's Life," and "On Governments and Ways to Regulate")

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (read 1-3 and 9-22)

* [http://www.danah.org/papers/2011/WhiteFlight.pdf danah boyd, White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook] (read 1-11, skim 12-18, read 19-end)

; The effects of control

* [http://arstechnica.com/features/2008/06/book-review-2008-06-2-admin/ Nate Anderson, Book Review: Jonathan Zittrain's "The Future of the Internet And How to Stop It" (from ''Ars Technica'')]

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It] (Chapter 1, "The Battle of the Boxes," and Chapter 4, "The Generative Pattern," only)

* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks_Chapter_11.pdf Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks] (pp. 379-396 only; stop at "The Physical Layer")

== Optional Readings ==

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbYQ0AVVBGU Jeffrey Lin, Play Nice: the Science and Behavior of Online Games] (Focus on 0:00-27:17. It's a long video, but an interesting exploration of how one company uses game design to regulate griefing and other online bad behavior. Some of the discussed language is NSFW.)

* [http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/10/the-contribution-conundrum-why-did-wikipedia-succeed-while-other-encyclopedias-failed/ Megan Garber, The contribution conundrum: Why did Wikipedia succeed while other encyclopedias failed?, Nieman Journalism Lab]

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=310020 Orin Kerr, The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law] (Focus on sections I and II)

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

Assignment 1 is due before next week's class (February 11th). Details of the assignment will be discussed in today's class; see [[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|this page]] for further information. You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 11:49, 8 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Therefore, to maintain order, ensure efficient government, and improve social justice, kings, presidents, and prime ministers must be the chief architect of their country's internet code. They must be multi-skilled or have the support of a talented and scholarly team.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:39, 31 January 2014 (EST)

----

It seems lots more fun to watch than just read: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7UlYTFKFqY

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 03:30, 2 February 2014 (EST)

:Zittrain's talks are always a lot of fun! But we chose the two chapters in order to focus on a few of the specific things we'd like to dive into for this class. His book talk is much more general. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 08:46, 2 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Zittrain chapters give a good overview of how the Internet had been developed up to circa 2008, but there have been some significant changes--and possible reversals of the "generative" model since that time. The increasing role of SaaS platforms, centralized APIs, and operating platforms with a much more pervasive level of control relative to older operating systems (e.g., IOS, Android, and social networking platforms like the Facebook developer platform) have reintroduced an aspect of large, single-point-of-failure, commercially controlled systems. Whereas Cluetrain envisioned a future of "small pieces loosely joined," the Internet of today might be better described as "lots of small pieces largely dependent on a few large, commercially-controlled pieces." These few large pieces raise concerns in terms of limiting the potential for innovation, negotiation with gatekeepers (which, as rightly discussed in the Zittrain chapters, was one of the things that killed innovation on earlier mobile platforms) and the shifting of business opportunities across the market from creators to platform owners. Will there be another wave of generative platforms that will wear down the the current trend to centralization, and if not, how can we best ensure continuous innovation on the Internet?
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 20:27, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:At an [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2014/02/defending_an_unowned_internet event last night] Prof. Zittrain mentioned another possible enclosure movement for generativity I hadn't thought of before: many web services are finding themselves at the receiving end of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDoS#Distributed_attack DDoS Attacks] for one reason or another. As a result, services are moving from their own servers capable of withstanding such attacks - primarily [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Web_Services Amazon Web Services], but there are a few others as well. If all of the Internet moves to just one of three or four web servers, that gives those servers tremendous power to cut off something they may not like. That's a form of "contingent generativity" that could cut off a lot of the social good that both Zittrain and Benkler flag in their articles. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:28, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Coming off of last week's reading (specifically John Perry Barlow's "A Declaration of Independence of the Internet"), I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" particularly interesting. Even before reading boyd's piece, Barlow's "Declaration" seems hilariously naive in 2014, though I can certainly appreciate the utopian vision it's based on. The idea that the world that we exist in (the physical reality described by Orin Kerr) won't intrude on the virtual world of the Internet seems impossible. (Did they really not believe that the best AND worst parts of us would be present?) The role of the Internet in our everyday social lives has, of course, increased exponentially since 1996, so it only makes sense that who we are and how we behave in the physical world will translate to equivalent behavior on the Internet. The ways in which behavior on the Internet effects people in the physical reality of their lives (particularly when it comes to harassment, threatening behavior, etc.) lends a great sense of urgency to figuring out how we should think about the Internet and the law.
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:18, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:Both boyd and Hargittai use a lot of pre-Internet scholarship in their writings for this course - a nice reminder that new technology does not necessarily mean new approaches to scholarship. But as Benkler notes, it is not that we are simply repeating the 20th century with shinier objects. There is something different about the way that information travels today that changes the ecology of information and cultural production. We can either adopt that change or legislate/architect it away. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:36, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I agree with Ichu's remarks about the need to somehow maintain order and to do so utilizing a talented and scholarly task force. My question would then be how this team would be selected/elected? Another potential issue would be how to ensure justice in a system where internet code is controlled by one's government or sole government official/king/president? In our reading by Orin Kerr, he highlights how these conflicting external and internal perspectives on the internet add fuel to the problem of internet law. The internet has two personalities in its vast internal cyberspace and also in acting as a physical network; striking a balance between the two and incorporating both identities into a legal system continues to evade and frustrate authorities.

In response to Megan Garber's reading on Wikipedia, I find that Wikipedia often does not get the credit or praise it deserves. Admittedly, no online community-built encyclopedia can be fool-proof, but the reason why Wikipedia has prevailed is its relative reliability. I have used the site extensively and it has provided me with a quick summary of events on a particular debate or issue. Garber's reasons for Wikipedia's success are logical in that familiarity is the cornerstone for many website's success rates. The ease of navigating the site and the non-committal method of editing or adding to the work encourages more users to contribute. I would also argue that, beyond the cultural/socio-economic/racial influences that cause users to migrate from site to site (such as from myspace to facebook), the constantly changing platform of facebook has led many to stray from the site. This is difficult to prove, of course, but when I had a Facebook account I recall many complaints from my peers about all of the changes that kept happening occurring on the site. It seemed that every week we had to ajust to a new feature or re-learn how to navigate. Accordingly with Garber's theory, the "familiarity" factor was diminishing for users and people tend to resist change especially on a site that they have grown accustomed to.

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 04:08, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I was also interested in Megan Garber's point that the authorless structure of Wikipedia lowers the pressure of contributing. It certainly makes sense to me (and, I'm sure, to anyone who has read the comment section of any news article or blog post ever written...) that anonymity can encourage participation. When there's lower pressure to perform and you aren't faced with high stakes when you get involved, it's easier to bring yourself to contribute. This seems to tie in to Zittrain's point about the success of Wikipedia: it developed somewhat un-self-consciously and organically, rather than as a top-down "knowledge project" initiated by large universities. Oversight of the development of new technologies would presumably put a damper on this type of growth at any and all levels. I think this is nicely addressed by Zittrain's point that we're not looking at choosing between technology and non-technology, but a hierarchy and polyarchy.

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 12:48, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Lawrence Lessig’s article focuses on liberty in Cyberspace and how various modes of regulation effect that liberty. He focuses on four different ways that the web can be regulated,1)the Law, 2)social norms, 3) the market, and 4)architecture. Lessing tries to get us to think differently, more critically, about different mechanisms that can lead to restriction of freedom on the Web.

For instance, with the architecture of the Web, Lessing asserts that the written code of programs inherently can either provide more freedom, or restrict freedom, and access.
And when it comes to the law, Lessing points out that “The efficient answer may well be unjust.” He gives an example of the law requiring life sentences for stealing car radios.

We all would probably agree that that is overboard and excessive. And, with that absurdity planted in our minds, Lessing then shows how a coder could easily put a restriction in the radios code that would make stealing the radio less desirable for thieves. Which would in turn make it unnecessary for such a draconian law of life sentences for car radio thieves.
This example makes me think about Aaron Swartz, a friend of Lessigs, whom took his own life in 2013. Aaron was prodigy kid who helped create RSS feed, and Reddit at a young age. He later became what you might call an internet activist, and made enemies in the federal government for some hacking activities. He was eventually charged with multiple felonies by the Federal government for hacking MIT’s JSTOR server.
Lessing talks about how law and code can either liberate or restrict the Internet.
I believe Swartz’s case shows how the MIT/JSTOR rules of access, restricted information on the Web, and how federal laws were excessive and restricted innovation and liberty for Web users. And lastly, Swartz’s case shows how one coder tried to use hacktivism, to liberate information on the web.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:58, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I found the essay I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" both interesting and reflective of what I have witnessed. In particular, I thought the comment that “Subculturally identified teens appeared more frequently draw to MySapce while more mainstream teens tended towards Facebook,” was especially true. We may pride ourselves on a strong sense of individualism, but remnants of the herd mentality are always present. MySpace simply offers a way to share interests that are different and more “specialized” than Facebook. I could not help but wonder if the trend is continuing with an exodus from Facebook. From a personal observation, I’ve noticed that usage among many 16-22 year olds on Facebook is dropping. The pages may still be up with random notices but the real communication and new communities are being centered on Twitter. I’m not sure if this is a spike, a trend or a progression to escape a Mainstream Facebook with parental oversight. What may be of more concern is that Twitter allows the segregation of subcultures and races more easily than previous options. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 14:09, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have been following the most recent work of Lawrence Lessig for about a year, so it’s exciting to read “Code 2.0” and make connections between that and his work on copyright law, amateur creativity, Creative Commons, etc.
By providing some background on the US government’s inclination towards “indirect” regulation, Lessig paints a frightening picture of the extent to which the state can control entities for its own benefit. The case of New York v. US focuses on the question of indirection and the states, which disallows the federal government from co-opting the states for its own ends. In effect, this case establishes that the government must take responsibility for its actions and remain transparent in its interactions with the states. My question is, however, why isn’t there such precedent for indirection and the American people?
Rust v. Sullivan is a prime example of the government’s indirect regulation of its citizens. By ordering doctors, who work in government-funded clinics, to discourage the use of abortion as a family planning method, the Reagan administration furthered its aim to reduce the incidence of abortion. The lack of transparency of the government, in using doctors to discourage their patients from obtaining abortions, is most disturbing. A patient has no way to discern the state’s motives, which masquerade behind the advice of a medical professional.
A somewhat similar issue occurred (and continues to occur) in the deeding of land prior to 1948. Such deeds prevented the property covered by that deed from being sold to people of a particular race. While this law is no more, its remnants are still very much alive in the US today. As Lessig explained, communities remained segregated by “a thousand tiny inconveniences of architecture and zoning… highways without easy crossings were placed between communities… railroad tracks were used to divide.” Despite the fact that integration is made difficult by these subtle methods of control, the most troubling part of this it is so very challenging to see the link between the regulation and its consequence. The government’s lack of transparency, while being a rather genius way to accomplish their own goals, is what is so threatening to our liberty. Lessig ends by suggesting that cyberspace is a new terrain in which the government can wield power inconspicuously and endanger our freedom.

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 14:50, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

IMPROVING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ACCELERATING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Traditionally, colleges and universities limit the number of students admitted into their institutions primarily due to resource constraints. But with the internet, everyone can have access to higher education, regardless of their prior academic failures.

And higher education can even be made almost free! This brings liberty and freedom to the weak and poor. Economic progress can be accelerated. Is this possible? Is this desirable?

WHY THE GOVERNMENT MUST OWN THE COUNTRY'S INTERNET BACKBONE

In the Philippines, the internet backbone is mainly owned and operated by profit-oriented private corporations. Hence, the poor has no access to the internet. With over 40% of the population, or 40 million Filipinos in poverty, and internet infrastructure in most schools are grossly inadequate or absent, only the government can remedy the situation by owning a substantial part of the country's internet backbone. Profit opportunities can still exist for corporations if there are two separate internet backbone: one solely for government administration and education, and the other for private entertainment and commerce.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:32, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Wikipedia is offered in other languages, which is a feature offered almost from inception. How does wikipedia get around the challenge where (i.e.) both an English and a German wikipedia page on the same subject feature different citations, or where one page has more depth than the other? This would make a great deal of knowledge inaccessible to people who don't speak the language. Does monolingualism emerge as a barrier for Wikipedia?

[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 15:43, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I could not agree more with Ichua. Your point of colleges and universities being somewhat limited due to resource constraints makes me think of tech and educational revolutionaries such as Salman Khan and his YouTube channel. Although his efforts are not mainstream yet, it is a good example of how the internet could bring about freedom, social justice, economic improvement, and access to higher education to the weak and poor. The same goes with "edX" and other disruptive technologies that could very well contribute to knowledge economies now and in the future.

[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:42, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Paradigms for Studying the Internet

2014-02-04T20:45:35Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 4'''

Before we can even begin exploring the who's, what's, and why's – we need to answer the critical question of how. Indeed, the phrase "studying the web" could embrace a staggering world of possible routes to explore, even before beginning to examine its relationship with society and culture. We need something to guide us through this massive field of (very interesting!) foxholes, and link the ideas we encounter into a consistent piece. We need some kind of structure to allow us to understand what we are looking at, the same way a chemist thinks of things in terms of atoms and molecules, or a philosopher can think about things in terms of schools of thought.

This class will explore different frameworks for studying the web, which will structure both the discussion and topic matter covered in the course, as well as the methodology that you should apply to your assignments. The second hour of the class will focus on applying these concepts to Wikipedia, and teeing up the [[Final Project|final project]] for the class, where we will discuss the research prompt, talk about some successful projects from prior years, and plot out the deadlines for the rest of the semester.

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Mechanisms of control

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/what_things_regulate Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0,'' Chapter 7] (read intro, "A Dot's Life," and "On Governments and Ways to Regulate")

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (read 1-3 and 9-22)

* [http://www.danah.org/papers/2011/WhiteFlight.pdf danah boyd, White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook] (read 1-11, skim 12-18, read 19-end)

; The effects of control

* [http://arstechnica.com/features/2008/06/book-review-2008-06-2-admin/ Nate Anderson, Book Review: Jonathan Zittrain's "The Future of the Internet And How to Stop It" (from ''Ars Technica'')]

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It] (Chapter 1, "The Battle of the Boxes," and Chapter 4, "The Generative Pattern," only)

* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks_Chapter_11.pdf Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks] (pp. 379-396 only; stop at "The Physical Layer")

== Optional Readings ==

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbYQ0AVVBGU Jeffrey Lin, Play Nice: the Science and Behavior of Online Games] (Focus on 0:00-27:17. It's a long video, but an interesting exploration of how one company uses game design to regulate griefing and other online bad behavior. Some of the discussed language is NSFW.)

* [http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/10/the-contribution-conundrum-why-did-wikipedia-succeed-while-other-encyclopedias-failed/ Megan Garber, The contribution conundrum: Why did Wikipedia succeed while other encyclopedias failed?, Nieman Journalism Lab]

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=310020 Orin Kerr, The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law] (Focus on sections I and II)

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

Assignment 1 is due before next week's class (February 11th). Details of the assignment will be discussed in today's class; see [[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|this page]] for further information. You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 11:49, 8 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Therefore, to maintain order, ensure efficient government, and improve social justice, kings, presidents, and prime ministers must be the chief architect of their country's internet code. They must be multi-skilled or have the support of a talented and scholarly team.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:39, 31 January 2014 (EST)

----

It seems lots more fun to watch than just read: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7UlYTFKFqY

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 03:30, 2 February 2014 (EST)

:Zittrain's talks are always a lot of fun! But we chose the two chapters in order to focus on a few of the specific things we'd like to dive into for this class. His book talk is much more general. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 08:46, 2 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Zittrain chapters give a good overview of how the Internet had been developed up to circa 2008, but there have been some significant changes--and possible reversals of the "generative" model since that time. The increasing role of SaaS platforms, centralized APIs, and operating platforms with a much more pervasive level of control relative to older operating systems (e.g., IOS, Android, and social networking platforms like the Facebook developer platform) have reintroduced an aspect of large, single-point-of-failure, commercially controlled systems. Whereas Cluetrain envisioned a future of "small pieces loosely joined," the Internet of today might be better described as "lots of small pieces largely dependent on a few large, commercially-controlled pieces." These few large pieces raise concerns in terms of limiting the potential for innovation, negotiation with gatekeepers (which, as rightly discussed in the Zittrain chapters, was one of the things that killed innovation on earlier mobile platforms) and the shifting of business opportunities across the market from creators to platform owners. Will there be another wave of generative platforms that will wear down the the current trend to centralization, and if not, how can we best ensure continuous innovation on the Internet?
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 20:27, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:At an [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2014/02/defending_an_unowned_internet event last night] Prof. Zittrain mentioned another possible enclosure movement for generativity I hadn't thought of before: many web services are finding themselves at the receiving end of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDoS#Distributed_attack DDoS Attacks] for one reason or another. As a result, services are moving from their own servers capable of withstanding such attacks - primarily [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Web_Services Amazon Web Services], but there are a few others as well. If all of the Internet moves to just one of three or four web servers, that gives those servers tremendous power to cut off something they may not like. That's a form of "contingent generativity" that could cut off a lot of the social good that both Zittrain and Benkler flag in their articles. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:28, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Coming off of last week's reading (specifically John Perry Barlow's "A Declaration of Independence of the Internet"), I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" particularly interesting. Even before reading boyd's piece, Barlow's "Declaration" seems hilariously naive in 2014, though I can certainly appreciate the utopian vision it's based on. The idea that the world that we exist in (the physical reality described by Orin Kerr) won't intrude on the virtual world of the Internet seems impossible. (Did they really not believe that the best AND worst parts of us would be present?) The role of the Internet in our everyday social lives has, of course, increased exponentially since 1996, so it only makes sense that who we are and how we behave in the physical world will translate to equivalent behavior on the Internet. The ways in which behavior on the Internet effects people in the physical reality of their lives (particularly when it comes to harassment, threatening behavior, etc.) lends a great sense of urgency to figuring out how we should think about the Internet and the law.
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:18, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:Both boyd and Hargittai use a lot of pre-Internet scholarship in their writings for this course - a nice reminder that new technology does not necessarily mean new approaches to scholarship. But as Benkler notes, it is not that we are simply repeating the 20th century with shinier objects. There is something different about the way that information travels today that changes the ecology of information and cultural production. We can either adopt that change or legislate/architect it away. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:36, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I agree with Ichu's remarks about the need to somehow maintain order and to do so utilizing a talented and scholarly task force. My question would then be how this team would be selected/elected? Another potential issue would be how to ensure justice in a system where internet code is controlled by one's government or sole government official/king/president? In our reading by Orin Kerr, he highlights how these conflicting external and internal perspectives on the internet add fuel to the problem of internet law. The internet has two personalities in its vast internal cyberspace and also in acting as a physical network; striking a balance between the two and incorporating both identities into a legal system continues to evade and frustrate authorities.

In response to Megan Garber's reading on Wikipedia, I find that Wikipedia often does not get the credit or praise it deserves. Admittedly, no online community-built encyclopedia can be fool-proof, but the reason why Wikipedia has prevailed is its relative reliability. I have used the site extensively and it has provided me with a quick summary of events on a particular debate or issue. Garber's reasons for Wikipedia's success are logical in that familiarity is the cornerstone for many website's success rates. The ease of navigating the site and the non-committal method of editing or adding to the work encourages more users to contribute. I would also argue that, beyond the cultural/socio-economic/racial influences that cause users to migrate from site to site (such as from myspace to facebook), the constantly changing platform of facebook has led many to stray from the site. This is difficult to prove, of course, but when I had a Facebook account I recall many complaints from my peers about all of the changes that kept happening occurring on the site. It seemed that every week we had to ajust to a new feature or re-learn how to navigate. Accordingly with Garber's theory, the "familiarity" factor was diminishing for users and people tend to resist change especially on a site that they have grown accustomed to.

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 04:08, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I was also interested in Megan Garber's point that the authorless structure of Wikipedia lowers the pressure of contributing. It certainly makes sense to me (and, I'm sure, to anyone who has read the comment section of any news article or blog post ever written...) that anonymity can encourage participation. When there's lower pressure to perform and you aren't faced with high stakes when you get involved, it's easier to bring yourself to contribute. This seems to tie in to Zittrain's point about the success of Wikipedia: it developed somewhat un-self-consciously and organically, rather than as a top-down "knowledge project" initiated by large universities. Oversight of the development of new technologies would presumably put a damper on this type of growth at any and all levels. I think this is nicely addressed by Zittrain's point that we're not looking at choosing between technology and non-technology, but a hierarchy and polyarchy.

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 12:48, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Lawrence Lessig’s article focuses on liberty in Cyberspace and how various modes of regulation effect that liberty. He focuses on four different ways that the web can be regulated,1)the Law, 2)social norms, 3) the market, and 4)architecture. Lessing tries to get us to think differently, more critically, about different mechanisms that can lead to restriction of freedom on the Web.

For instance, with the architecture of the Web, Lessing asserts that the written code of programs inherently can either provide more freedom, or restrict freedom, and access.
And when it comes to the law, Lessing points out that “The efficient answer may well be unjust.” He gives an example of the law requiring life sentences for stealing car radios.

We all would probably agree that that is overboard and excessive. And, with that absurdity planted in our minds, Lessing then shows how a coder could easily put a restriction in the radios code that would make stealing the radio less desirable for thieves. Which would in turn make it unnecessary for such a draconian law of life sentences for car radio thieves.
This example makes me think about Aaron Swartz, a friend of Lessigs, whom took his own life in 2013. Aaron was prodigy kid who helped create RSS feed, and Reddit at a young age. He later became what you might call an internet activist, and made enemies in the federal government for some hacking activities. He was eventually charged with multiple felonies by the Federal government for hacking MIT’s JSTOR server.
Lessing talks about how law and code can either liberate or restrict the Internet.
I believe Swartz’s case shows how the MIT/JSTOR rules of access, restricted information on the Web, and how federal laws were excessive and restricted innovation and liberty for Web users. And lastly, Swartz’s case shows how one coder tried to use hacktivism, to liberate information on the web.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:58, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I found the essay I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" both interesting and reflective of what I have witnessed. In particular, I thought the comment that “Subculturally identified teens appeared more frequently draw to MySapce while more mainstream teens tended towards Facebook,” was especially true. We may pride ourselves on a strong sense of individualism, but remnants of the herd mentality are always present. MySpace simply offers a way to share interests that are different and more “specialized” than Facebook. I could not help but wonder if the trend is continuing with an exodus from Facebook. From a personal observation, I’ve noticed that usage among many 16-22 year olds on Facebook is dropping. The pages may still be up with random notices but the real communication and new communities are being centered on Twitter. I’m not sure if this is a spike, a trend or a progression to escape a Mainstream Facebook with parental oversight. What may be of more concern is that Twitter allows the segregation of subcultures and races more easily than previous options. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 14:09, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have been following the most recent work of Lawrence Lessig for about a year, so it’s exciting to read “Code 2.0” and make connections between that and his work on copyright law, amateur creativity, Creative Commons, etc.
By providing some background on the US government’s inclination towards “indirect” regulation, Lessig paints a frightening picture of the extent to which the state can control entities for its own benefit. The case of New York v. US focuses on the question of indirection and the states, which disallows the federal government from co-opting the states for its own ends. In effect, this case establishes that the government must take responsibility for its actions and remain transparent in its interactions with the states. My question is, however, why isn’t there such precedent for indirection and the American people?
Rust v. Sullivan is a prime example of the government’s indirect regulation of its citizens. By ordering doctors, who work in government-funded clinics, to discourage the use of abortion as a family planning method, the Reagan administration furthered its aim to reduce the incidence of abortion. The lack of transparency of the government, in using doctors to discourage their patients from obtaining abortions, is most disturbing. A patient has no way to discern the state’s motives, which masquerade behind the advice of a medical professional.
A somewhat similar issue occurred (and continues to occur) in the deeding of land prior to 1948. Such deeds prevented the property covered by that deed from being sold to people of a particular race. While this law is no more, its remnants are still very much alive in the US today. As Lessig explained, communities remained segregated by “a thousand tiny inconveniences of architecture and zoning… highways without easy crossings were placed between communities… railroad tracks were used to divide.” Despite the fact that integration is made difficult by these subtle methods of control, the most troubling part of this it is so very challenging to see the link between the regulation and its consequence. The government’s lack of transparency, while being a rather genius way to accomplish their own goals, is what is so threatening to our liberty. Lessig ends by suggesting that cyberspace is a new terrain in which the government can wield power inconspicuously and endanger our freedom.

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 14:50, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

IMPROVING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ACCELERATING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Traditionally, colleges and universities limit the number of students admitted into their institutions primarily due to resource constraints. But with the internet, everyone can have access to higher education, regardless of their prior academic failures.

And higher education can even be made almost free! This brings liberty and freedom to the weak and poor. Economic progress can be accelerated. Is this possible? Is this desirable?

WHY THE GOVERNMENT MUST OWN THE COUNTRY'S INTERNET BACKBONE

In the Philippines, the internet backbone is mainly owned and operated by profit-oriented private corporations. Hence, the poor has no access to the internet. With over 40% of the population, or 40 million Filipinos in poverty, and internet infrastructure in most schools are grossly inadequate or absent, only the government can remedy the situation by owning a substantial part of the country's internet backbone. Profit opportunities can still exist for corporations if there are two separate internet backbone: one solely for government administration and education, and the other for private entertainment and commerce.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:32, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Wikipedia is offered in other languages, which is a feature offered almost from it's inception. How does wikipedia get around the challenge where (i.e.) both an English and a German wikipedia page on the same subject feature different articles, or where one page has more depth than the other? This would make a great deal of knowledge inaccessible to people who don't speak the language. Does monolingualism emerge as a barrier for Wikipedia?

[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 15:43, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I could not agree more with Ichua. Your point of colleges and universities being somewhat limited due to resource constraints makes me think of tech and educational revolutionaries such as Salman Khan and his YouTube channel. Although his efforts are not mainstream yet, it is a good example of how the internet could bring about freedom, social justice, economic improvement, and access to higher education to the weak and poor. The same goes with "edX" and other disruptive technologies that could very well contribute to knowledge economies now and in the future.

[[User:cheikhmbacke|cheikhmbacke]] 15:42, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Paradigms for Studying the Internet

2014-02-04T20:43:40Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}

'''February 4'''

Before we can even begin exploring the who's, what's, and why's – we need to answer the critical question of how. Indeed, the phrase "studying the web" could embrace a staggering world of possible routes to explore, even before beginning to examine its relationship with society and culture. We need something to guide us through this massive field of (very interesting!) foxholes, and link the ideas we encounter into a consistent piece. We need some kind of structure to allow us to understand what we are looking at, the same way a chemist thinks of things in terms of atoms and molecules, or a philosopher can think about things in terms of schools of thought.

This class will explore different frameworks for studying the web, which will structure both the discussion and topic matter covered in the course, as well as the methodology that you should apply to your assignments. The second hour of the class will focus on applying these concepts to Wikipedia, and teeing up the [[Final Project|final project]] for the class, where we will discuss the research prompt, talk about some successful projects from prior years, and plot out the deadlines for the rest of the semester.

<onlyinclude>
== Readings ==

; Mechanisms of control

* [https://www.socialtext.net/codev2/what_things_regulate Lawrence Lessig, ''Code 2.0,'' Chapter 7] (read intro, "A Dot's Life," and "On Governments and Ways to Regulate")

* [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457 Rob Faris and Rebekah Heacock, Measuring Internet Activity: a (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics] (read 1-3 and 9-22)

* [http://www.danah.org/papers/2011/WhiteFlight.pdf danah boyd, White Flight in Networked Publics? How Race and Class Shaped American Teen Engagement with MySpace and Facebook] (read 1-11, skim 12-18, read 19-end)

; The effects of control

* [http://arstechnica.com/features/2008/06/book-review-2008-06-2-admin/ Nate Anderson, Book Review: Jonathan Zittrain's "The Future of the Internet And How to Stop It" (from ''Ars Technica'')]

* [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It] (Chapter 1, "The Battle of the Boxes," and Chapter 4, "The Generative Pattern," only)

* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks_Chapter_11.pdf Yochai Benkler, The Wealth of Networks] (pp. 379-396 only; stop at "The Physical Layer")

== Optional Readings ==

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbYQ0AVVBGU Jeffrey Lin, Play Nice: the Science and Behavior of Online Games] (Focus on 0:00-27:17. It's a long video, but an interesting exploration of how one company uses game design to regulate griefing and other online bad behavior. Some of the discussed language is NSFW.)

* [http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/10/the-contribution-conundrum-why-did-wikipedia-succeed-while-other-encyclopedias-failed/ Megan Garber, The contribution conundrum: Why did Wikipedia succeed while other encyclopedias failed?, Nieman Journalism Lab]

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=310020 Orin Kerr, The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law] (Focus on sections I and II)

</onlyinclude>

== Assignment 1 ==

Assignment 1 is due before next week's class (February 11th). Details of the assignment will be discussed in today's class; see [[Assignment 1 Details and Reporting|this page]] for further information. You can submit the assignment [[Assignment 1 Submissions|here]].

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links ==

== Class Discussion ==
<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">'''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 11:49, 8 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

Therefore, to maintain order, ensure efficient government, and improve social justice, kings, presidents, and prime ministers must be the chief architect of their country's internet code. They must be multi-skilled or have the support of a talented and scholarly team.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 13:39, 31 January 2014 (EST)

----

It seems lots more fun to watch than just read: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7UlYTFKFqY

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 03:30, 2 February 2014 (EST)

:Zittrain's talks are always a lot of fun! But we chose the two chapters in order to focus on a few of the specific things we'd like to dive into for this class. His book talk is much more general. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 08:46, 2 February 2014 (EST)

----

The Zittrain chapters give a good overview of how the Internet had been developed up to circa 2008, but there have been some significant changes--and possible reversals of the "generative" model since that time. The increasing role of SaaS platforms, centralized APIs, and operating platforms with a much more pervasive level of control relative to older operating systems (e.g., IOS, Android, and social networking platforms like the Facebook developer platform) have reintroduced an aspect of large, single-point-of-failure, commercially controlled systems. Whereas Cluetrain envisioned a future of "small pieces loosely joined," the Internet of today might be better described as "lots of small pieces largely dependent on a few large, commercially-controlled pieces." These few large pieces raise concerns in terms of limiting the potential for innovation, negotiation with gatekeepers (which, as rightly discussed in the Zittrain chapters, was one of the things that killed innovation on earlier mobile platforms) and the shifting of business opportunities across the market from creators to platform owners. Will there be another wave of generative platforms that will wear down the the current trend to centralization, and if not, how can we best ensure continuous innovation on the Internet?
[[User:Jradoff|Jradoff]] 20:27, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:At an [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/events/2014/02/defending_an_unowned_internet event last night] Prof. Zittrain mentioned another possible enclosure movement for generativity I hadn't thought of before: many web services are finding themselves at the receiving end of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDoS#Distributed_attack DDoS Attacks] for one reason or another. As a result, services are moving from their own servers capable of withstanding such attacks - primarily [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Web_Services Amazon Web Services], but there are a few others as well. If all of the Internet moves to just one of three or four web servers, that gives those servers tremendous power to cut off something they may not like. That's a form of "contingent generativity" that could cut off a lot of the social good that both Zittrain and Benkler flag in their articles. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 09:28, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Coming off of last week's reading (specifically John Perry Barlow's "A Declaration of Independence of the Internet"), I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" particularly interesting. Even before reading boyd's piece, Barlow's "Declaration" seems hilariously naive in 2014, though I can certainly appreciate the utopian vision it's based on. The idea that the world that we exist in (the physical reality described by Orin Kerr) won't intrude on the virtual world of the Internet seems impossible. (Did they really not believe that the best AND worst parts of us would be present?) The role of the Internet in our everyday social lives has, of course, increased exponentially since 1996, so it only makes sense that who we are and how we behave in the physical world will translate to equivalent behavior on the Internet. The ways in which behavior on the Internet effects people in the physical reality of their lives (particularly when it comes to harassment, threatening behavior, etc.) lends a great sense of urgency to figuring out how we should think about the Internet and the law.
[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 23:18, 3 February 2014 (EST)

:Both boyd and Hargittai use a lot of pre-Internet scholarship in their writings for this course - a nice reminder that new technology does not necessarily mean new approaches to scholarship. But as Benkler notes, it is not that we are simply repeating the 20th century with shinier objects. There is something different about the way that information travels today that changes the ecology of information and cultural production. We can either adopt that change or legislate/architect it away. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 10:36, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I agree with Ichu's remarks about the need to somehow maintain order and to do so utilizing a talented and scholarly task force. My question would then be how this team would be selected/elected? Another potential issue would be how to ensure justice in a system where internet code is controlled by one's government or sole government official/king/president? In our reading by Orin Kerr, he highlights how these conflicting external and internal perspectives on the internet add fuel to the problem of internet law. The internet has two personalities in its vast internal cyberspace and also in acting as a physical network; striking a balance between the two and incorporating both identities into a legal system continues to evade and frustrate authorities.

In response to Megan Garber's reading on Wikipedia, I find that Wikipedia often does not get the credit or praise it deserves. Admittedly, no online community-built encyclopedia can be fool-proof, but the reason why Wikipedia has prevailed is its relative reliability. I have used the site extensively and it has provided me with a quick summary of events on a particular debate or issue. Garber's reasons for Wikipedia's success are logical in that familiarity is the cornerstone for many website's success rates. The ease of navigating the site and the non-committal method of editing or adding to the work encourages more users to contribute. I would also argue that, beyond the cultural/socio-economic/racial influences that cause users to migrate from site to site (such as from myspace to facebook), the constantly changing platform of facebook has led many to stray from the site. This is difficult to prove, of course, but when I had a Facebook account I recall many complaints from my peers about all of the changes that kept happening occurring on the site. It seemed that every week we had to ajust to a new feature or re-learn how to navigate. Accordingly with Garber's theory, the "familiarity" factor was diminishing for users and people tend to resist change especially on a site that they have grown accustomed to.

--[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 04:08, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I was also interested in Megan Garber's point that the authorless structure of Wikipedia lowers the pressure of contributing. It certainly makes sense to me (and, I'm sure, to anyone who has read the comment section of any news article or blog post ever written...) that anonymity can encourage participation. When there's lower pressure to perform and you aren't faced with high stakes when you get involved, it's easier to bring yourself to contribute. This seems to tie in to Zittrain's point about the success of Wikipedia: it developed somewhat un-self-consciously and organically, rather than as a top-down "knowledge project" initiated by large universities. Oversight of the development of new technologies would presumably put a damper on this type of growth at any and all levels. I think this is nicely addressed by Zittrain's point that we're not looking at choosing between technology and non-technology, but a hierarchy and polyarchy.

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 12:48, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

Lawrence Lessig’s article focuses on liberty in Cyberspace and how various modes of regulation effect that liberty. He focuses on four different ways that the web can be regulated,1)the Law, 2)social norms, 3) the market, and 4)architecture. Lessing tries to get us to think differently, more critically, about different mechanisms that can lead to restriction of freedom on the Web.

For instance, with the architecture of the Web, Lessing asserts that the written code of programs inherently can either provide more freedom, or restrict freedom, and access.
And when it comes to the law, Lessing points out that “The efficient answer may well be unjust.” He gives an example of the law requiring life sentences for stealing car radios.

We all would probably agree that that is overboard and excessive. And, with that absurdity planted in our minds, Lessing then shows how a coder could easily put a restriction in the radios code that would make stealing the radio less desirable for thieves. Which would in turn make it unnecessary for such a draconian law of life sentences for car radio thieves.
This example makes me think about Aaron Swartz, a friend of Lessigs, whom took his own life in 2013. Aaron was prodigy kid who helped create RSS feed, and Reddit at a young age. He later became what you might call an internet activist, and made enemies in the federal government for some hacking activities. He was eventually charged with multiple felonies by the Federal government for hacking MIT’s JSTOR server.
Lessing talks about how law and code can either liberate or restrict the Internet.
I believe Swartz’s case shows how the MIT/JSTOR rules of access, restricted information on the Web, and how federal laws were excessive and restricted innovation and liberty for Web users. And lastly, Swartz’s case shows how one coder tried to use hacktivism, to liberate information on the web.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 12:58, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I found the essay I found danah boyd's essay "White Flight in Networked Publics?" both interesting and reflective of what I have witnessed. In particular, I thought the comment that “Subculturally identified teens appeared more frequently draw to MySapce while more mainstream teens tended towards Facebook,” was especially true. We may pride ourselves on a strong sense of individualism, but remnants of the herd mentality are always present. MySpace simply offers a way to share interests that are different and more “specialized” than Facebook. I could not help but wonder if the trend is continuing with an exodus from Facebook. From a personal observation, I’ve noticed that usage among many 16-22 year olds on Facebook is dropping. The pages may still be up with random notices but the real communication and new communities are being centered on Twitter. I’m not sure if this is a spike, a trend or a progression to escape a Mainstream Facebook with parental oversight. What may be of more concern is that Twitter allows the segregation of subcultures and races more easily than previous options. [[User:VACYBER|VACYBER]] 14:09, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

I have been following the most recent work of Lawrence Lessig for about a year, so it’s exciting to read “Code 2.0” and make connections between that and his work on copyright law, amateur creativity, Creative Commons, etc.
By providing some background on the US government’s inclination towards “indirect” regulation, Lessig paints a frightening picture of the extent to which the state can control entities for its own benefit. The case of New York v. US focuses on the question of indirection and the states, which disallows the federal government from co-opting the states for its own ends. In effect, this case establishes that the government must take responsibility for its actions and remain transparent in its interactions with the states. My question is, however, why isn’t there such precedent for indirection and the American people?
Rust v. Sullivan is a prime example of the government’s indirect regulation of its citizens. By ordering doctors, who work in government-funded clinics, to discourage the use of abortion as a family planning method, the Reagan administration furthered its aim to reduce the incidence of abortion. The lack of transparency of the government, in using doctors to discourage their patients from obtaining abortions, is most disturbing. A patient has no way to discern the state’s motives, which masquerade behind the advice of a medical professional.
A somewhat similar issue occurred (and continues to occur) in the deeding of land prior to 1948. Such deeds prevented the property covered by that deed from being sold to people of a particular race. While this law is no more, its remnants are still very much alive in the US today. As Lessig explained, communities remained segregated by “a thousand tiny inconveniences of architecture and zoning… highways without easy crossings were placed between communities… railroad tracks were used to divide.” Despite the fact that integration is made difficult by these subtle methods of control, the most troubling part of this it is so very challenging to see the link between the regulation and its consequence. The government’s lack of transparency, while being a rather genius way to accomplish their own goals, is what is so threatening to our liberty. Lessig ends by suggesting that cyberspace is a new terrain in which the government can wield power inconspicuously and endanger our freedom.

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 14:50, 4 February 2014 (EST)

----

IMPROVING SOCIAL JUSTICE AND ACCELERATING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Traditionally, colleges and universities limit the number of students admitted into their institutions primarily due to resource constraints. But with the internet, everyone can have access to higher education, regardless of their prior academic failures.

And higher education can even be made almost free! This brings liberty and freedom to the weak and poor. Economic progress can be accelerated. Is this possible? Is this desirable?

WHY THE GOVERNMENT MUST OWN THE COUNTRY'S INTERNET BACKBONE

In the Philippines, the internet backbone is mainly owned and operated by profit-oriented private corporations. Hence, the poor has no access to the internet. With over 40% of the population, or 40 million Filipinos in poverty, and internet infrastructure in most schools are grossly inadequate or absent, only the government can remedy the situation by owning a substantial part of the country's internet backbone. Profit opportunities can still exist for corporations if there are two separate internet backbone: one solely for government administration and education, and the other for private entertainment and commerce.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:32, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Wikipedia is offered in other languages, which was a feature offered almost from inception. How does wikipedia get around the challenge where (i.e.) both an English and a German wikipedia page on the same subject features different articles, or where one page has more depth than the other? This would make a great deal of knowledge inaccessible to people who don't speak the language. Does monolingualism emerge as a barrier for Wikipedia?

[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 15:43, 4 February 2014 (EST)

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-30T04:52:39Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Links From Adobe Connect Session ==

Some more info on traceroute: http://www.exit109.com/~jeremy/news/providers/traceroute.html

Tim Wu on Colbert: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/432449/january-23-2014/end-of-net-neutrality---tim-wu

Sealand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

An example of surreptitiously activating webcams: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/12/18/research-shows-how-macbook-webcams-can-spy-on-their-users-without-warning/

SOPA/PIPA Background: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Chatham House Rules: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatham_House_Rule

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeymen.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----

It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. The ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia is a wonderful result of the internet. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can potentially move us farther away from globalization at the same time. These technological developments haven't increased the volume of international migration.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but make it harder for you to get a visa and come here, which would mean paying Australian wages. Jobs are mobile but people are not. This shows us that the same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have the practicing power to move us further away from it.

A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.

By: Marissa Barkey
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST) [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 08:51, 29 January 2014 (EST)

----

List of User Profiles

2014-01-29T14:24:37Z

Marissa1989: /* H-M */

This is a list of user profiles on this wiki. If we wish, you may use a pseudonym. If you are using a pseudonym, contact us off-list so that we know who you are.

This page differs from the [[Special:ListUsers|User List]] page in that this page contains only active profiles of individuals who wish to contribute to this wiki. Please add yourself by clicking on the appropriate edit button next to the letter range that corresponds to your user name.

==Users==

===A-G===

=====Andy (Andy Sellars)=====
I'm a staff attorney at the [http://www.dmlp.org/ Digital Media Law Project] and the Dunham First Amendment Fellow at the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/ Berkman Center]. My areas of interest include online free expression, intellectual property, media law, and cybercrime.

===H-M===
'''Marissa Barkey''' (Marissa1989)

I live in Sydney, Australia; where I work as an administrative assistant for an IT firm.

===N-S===

Amy Storer (AmyAnn)

I am an investigator and analyst for the Department of Homeland Security in Washington D.C. My interests in terms of this course include: cybercrime, cyber terrorism, privacy issues, and governance/law enforcement issues related to cyberspace.

===T-Z===

User:Marissa1989

2014-01-29T13:57:53Z

Marissa1989: Blanked the page

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T13:51:48Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----

It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. The ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia is a wonderful result of the internet. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can potentially move us farther away from globalization at the same time. These technological developments haven't increased the volume if international migration.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but make it harder for you to get a visa and come here, which would mean paying Australian wages. Jobs are mobile but people are not. This shows us that the same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have the practicing power to move us further away from it.

A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.
== By: Marissa Barkey
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST) [[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 08:51, 29 January 2014 (EST)

----
==

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T05:54:16Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. The ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia is a wonderful product of the internet. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can potentially move us farther away from globalization at the same time.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. This shows us that the same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have the practicing power to move us further away from it.
A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all. By: Marissa Barkey
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST)

User:Marissa1989

2014-01-29T05:53:52Z

Marissa1989: Created page with " It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. I am thankful for the ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or..."

It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. I am thankful for the ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but is moving us farther away from globalization at the same time.

Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. The same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have a strong power to move us further away from it.

A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T05:51:16Z

Marissa1989: Marissa Barkey

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----
It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected. The ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia is a wonderful product of the internet. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can potentially move us farther away from globalization at the same time.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. This shows us that the same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have the practicing power to move us further away from it.
A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all. By: Marissa Barkey
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST)
----

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T05:46:45Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----
It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected in a wonderful way. I am thankful for the ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can move us farther away from globalization at the same time.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. The same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have a strong power to move us further away from it.
A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST)
----

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T05:45:06Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----
It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected in a wonderful way. I am thankful for the ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but can move us farther away from globalization at the same time.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. The same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have a strong power to move us further away from it.

A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST)
----

Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction

2014-01-29T05:42:56Z

Marissa1989:

{{ClassCalendar}}
'''January 28'''

The Internet at its core is simply an expression of a technological protocol that allows for a particular way of sharing information. But its role has never been this understated. The Net has great potential for “good” (e.g. innovation, economic growth, education, and access to information), and likewise is a great platform for the bawdy, tawdry and illegal. So is this platform about fundamental social, political and economic change, or about access to solipsistic blogging, pornography, cheap pharmaceuticals, free music, and poker at home? This question leads us to a host of interesting issues that weave their way through the course related to openness, access, regulatory control, free speech, anonymity, intellectual property rights, democracy, transparency, norms and values, economic and cultural change, and cyber-terrorism, as well as scamsters and thieves.

'''[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:IS2014_Class_1.pdf Download slides from this week's class.]'''

'''There is a small assignment to do before class. See [[#Preparation (Assignment "Zero")|Assignment Zero]] below.

== Preparation (Assignment "Zero") ==

* Reflect on what you believe are the most significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies. In a few sentences, please offer 2-3 examples in the [[#Class Discussion|Class Discussion]] section below and be prepared to discuss them during class.

<onlyinclude>

== Readings/Watchings ==

'''What is the Internet?'''

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2QdEj8UjBc Ethan Zuckerman, History of the Internet] (approx. 7 mins., watch all)

* [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whmMNRHktX8 Jonathan Zittrain, How the Internet Works] (approx. 4 mins., watch all)

'''How does the Internet change governance?'''

* [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace]

* [http://www.legalaffairs.org/printerfriendly.msp?id=961 Jack Goldsmith & Tim Wu, Digital Borders (Legal Affairs)]

* [http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/03/the_third_wave.htm Eric Goldman, The Third Wave of Internet Exceptionalism]

* [http://www.ted.com/talks/rebecca_mackinnon_let_s_take_back_the_internet.html Rebecca MacKinnon, Let’s Take Back the Internet! (TED.com)] (approx. 15 mins., watch all)

'''Who governs the Internet?'''

* [http://www.icann.org/sites/default/files/assets/governance-2500x1664-13jan14-en.png ICANN, Who Runs the Internet?] (infographic)

* [http://ubiquity.acm.org/article.cfm?id=1071915 Alex Simonelis, A Concise Guide to the Major Internet Bodies] (skim, but focus on ICANN, IETF, IANA, and W3C)

'''Who is the Internet? Who is it not? What can we do about it?'''

* [http://www.webuse.org/pdf/Hargittai-DigitalDivideWhatToDo2007.pdf Eszter Hargittai, The Digital Divide and What to Do About It (New Economy Handbook)] (focus on Sections I-III)

:* Hargittai’s data is from 2003. For more recent data, see [http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2013/PIP_Offline%20adults_092513_PDF.pdf Pew Internet & American Life Project, Who's Not Online and Why] (read the summary, skim the sections).

* [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNHkG7w2IA8 Ethan Zuckerman, Why Our Webs Are Rarely Worldwide, And What We Can Do About It] (approx. 14 mins., watch all)

== Optional Readings ==

* [http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2013/12/04/video-who-controls-the-internet/ Ellery Biddle, Who Controls the Internet? (''Global Voices'')] (video in Spanish with English subtitles, 10 mins., watch all)

* [http://www.cluetrain.com Chris Locke, Doc Searls & David Weinberger, Cluetrain Manifesto] (just the manifesto)

* [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1752415 Tim Wu, Is Internet Exceptionalism Dead?]

* [http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2012/12/05/good-and-bad-reasons-to-be-worried-about-wcit/ Ethan Zuckerman, Good and Bad Reasons to be Worried About WCIT]

</onlyinclude>

== Videos Watched in Class ==

== Class Discussion ==

<div style="background-color:#CCCCCC;">Welcome to Internet and Society: Technologies and Politics of Control! This is the section of the page where you should add your comments to complete "assignment zero." Once you have registered an account, just click the "[edit]" button at the upper right hand corner of this section to add text! '''Please remember to sign your postings by adding four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post, like so: [[User:Andy|Andy]] 15:12, 7 November 2013 (EST)</div>

----

The most significant changes associated with the spread of digital technologies would be the speed of information exchange and increased opportunity for information sharing.

With the help of social networking websites, it takes only one click to inform your friends and family about the birthday party that will be held next week in downtown, and you will be able to do a head count by looking at how many people click the “Going” button. It saves time and effort to exchange information nowadays. Although this attributed to the fact that people have been less careful when sharing information, we could not deny that digital technologies has contributed a lot in a positive way such as improving efficiency.

Another good example of showing how rapid the information sharing process could be via digital technologies is Edward Snowden. He would like to warn the public “as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them” by releasing classified material to The Guardian. It only took a day for the news to travel around the world.
[[User:Jolietheone|Jolietheone]] 16:41, 28 January 2014 (EST)
----

The spread of digital technology and the influence of the Internet have changed our society immeasurably. I am particularly interested in exploring the social, cultural, and political influence of digital technology on our society and in developing countries. From this perspective, one of the most significant moments of change on the Internet was the Arab Spring of 2010. As a grassroots movement facilitated by Twitter, this was a defining moment in demonstrating the power of online communities. The Arab Spring proved that individuals were able to cultivate communities online and more importantly, were able to organize themselves within the community to become a force of change. The democratization of information, ability to communicate, and the freedom to communicate gave the promise of justice for the voiceless and oppressed. Today, citizen advocacy has brought once quieted issues to the mainstream, like the NSA leaks, the 2012 Delhi gang rape, or the Boston Marathon Bombing.

However, the Internet and digital technology has influenced many other areas besides society and government. A critical step in progress for modern technology is the mapping of the human genome. The ability to store and access this information has ushered in unprecedented changes in medical fields. Furthermore, the Internet has increased access to medical tools like WebMD or the development of medical mobile applications, which will be an important development as technology becomes more globalized.
[[User:Julie|Julie]] 16:14, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Access and participation afforded by the spread of digital technologies have had a significant impact socially, culturally, politically, and economically. Socially, access to networking platforms, social media, internet calling services and instant messaging have changed the quantity of individual connections- and quality of relationships- regardless of location throughout the world. Culturally, stratification of identity or orientation has shifted significantly; the emphasis on national, religious, ethnic, and other cultural differences has been diluted by the rise of interconnectivity, access to information and the ability to participate across cultures. Politically and economically, the impact is largely similar- access to non-traditional and real-time news sources fostered by the spread of digital technology empowers the consumer as well as the constituent. The ability to inform oneself and advocate for individual and collective interests has changed the landscape of economic and political participation; unfortunately this has been coupled with increased concerns about rights to information disseminated on the internet and the protection of privacy at the individual and organizational level. [[User:Akk22|Akk22]] 11:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The explosion of digital technology has dramatically impacted society in all facets of life. It has evolved us as a species and will continue to change the way in which we interact with each other, the way we think, and eventually the human body itself will gradually transform. In terms of inventions, the birth of the internet has far surpassed any other invention known to mankind with respect to the magnitude of change occurring within the relatively short lifespan of its existence. As a child, I recall when robots were once considered something so distant in the future, but now we have a form of a robot with the internet. It contains more "knowledge" and holds more information than any human being.

Digital technology has altered society in several ways that I have observed and experienced:

Socially & Culturally - Digital technology has changed the way humans make plans and interact with one another. It appears that encounters and relationships have somehow become more casual and less personal via the advancement and widespread use of social media. Formalities and formal interactions are becoming less common. A simple text message now is the norm for setting up a date with a potential mate rather than a phone call or knocking on the lady's door to ask her parents' permission for a proper date.

Along these lines, for better or worse, it appears that even the cultural style of dress for those in the younger generations has evolved into a more casual trend. People are generally more accepting with an "anything goes" type of attitude. The iconic CEO Facebook creator, Mark Zuckerburg, is often seen wearing his T-Shirt even when meeting with other high profile CEOs and officials.

The so-called "dot-com" generation has also been known to feel the need for "instant gratification" and appear to have less patience than the elder members of society. This makes sense given digital technology's ease of immediate information sharing and overall access to information at the click of a button. Only a few years ago it seemed normal if someone did not respond within a day or two. Now if someone does not answer after one or two days, 911 is serious consideration.

General reliability between friends is also another changing element of human interaction because with the click of a button someone can cancel plans or easily evade previously planned obligations. A few decades ago, if I told someone we were to meet at the train station, I had better show up because I had no way of letting my comrade know I could not make it. It used to be considered nearly impossible to ask someone to "hang out" on the same day because planning with such short notice was simply not possible. With cell phones and text messaging, "meeting up" is now the norm and planning events out is becoming less common (or so has been true in my experience).

Governance & Governing: As Jack Goldsmith and Timothy Wu illustrate in their example about Yahoo in "Digital Borders", the internet has and I believe will continue to erode the general power of government. The internet has no borders and trying to determine the convoluted doctrine of privacy is a grapple for any expert to endure. The internet also enhances the power of the individual (for better or worse) as it affords all members of the world with a platform for anyone to view. With an unlimited audience propaganda becomes all the more powerful and any thought can be expressed and followed by the masses. Culturally, this can also enhance narcissism to the extent that one's own thoughts, photos, and individual power/image can be continually broadcasted for the world to see.

The internet has obviously changed the way laws are enforced and the modus operandi in which criminals operate. While the internet has arguably made it easier for law enforcement to catch certain types of criminals, other types of threats (namely, cyber crime) are more difficult and sometimes nearly impossible to detect.

Economy: While the internet has worked wonders for many economic gains such as providing general efficiency; the downside is the threat that if the internet crashes or otherwise becomes inoperable, business suddenly takes a back seat and can become totally paralyzed acting as a prime target for adversaries (as the recent Target credit card hacking events have shown). In other words, the benefits of efficiency are only truly beneficial to the extent that internet platforms are operating smoothly. The overdependence on the internet is perhaps the most frightening thing our society faces. I will never forget the first time I was at a store and the "servers" were down at the checkout counter. After two hours of shopping and loads of groceries, I was turned away even after offering cash! The computer system required all transactions to be logged. The damage to the economy if this were to happen on a grand scale would be damming.

The internet has actually changed the very definition of success and perception of success in my opinion. In one minute, you can become rich off the internet. One youtube video posted can start Justin Bieber's Hollywood career; the advent of a social media website can make someone one of the richest in the world. Striking it rich has become much easier for some who thrive off the popularity contest the internet provides. How this has impacted the traditional view of the American dream remains to be seen.

[[User:AmyAnn0644|AmyAnn0644]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

The spread of digital technologies has sparked an ubiquitous world. Communication is instantaneous, global, and self-published. As a result, the public has chosen which social and political interactions to reject and trust, causing a potentially biased perception of their contemporary world. The irony of this bias is that the ability to access information from a variety of sources is unprecedented; sorting through the inundation of un- and published materials - fact or opinion - becomes a challenge for even the most educated. For the youth, privacy becomes re-defined as being alone physically, yet open to sharing the most insignificant or significant details of their lives digitally (how will these tendencies shape the future?). The combinational effects of these changes establish a gateway for future technologies to be adapted (or rejected) by the public; however, improving awareness and education of the general public is of utmost importance in order for society to fully embrace the power and impact of these future tools.

[[User:Margorm|Margorm]] 20:48, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

“Change” holds neither a positive, nor negative connotation, so I will provide an example of each:

The negative: The ubiquity of camera-equipped, internet-connected smartphones allows millions of Americans to digitally upload and share photographs with ease. Sometimes, though, these photos are compromising and end up in the hands of nefarious purveyors of “revenge porn.” The proliferation of revenge porn can and does compromise the privacy (and oftentimes safety) of private citizens who become unwitting victims of sexual harassment. And in most cases, law enforcement is unable to prosecute offenders. Many U.S. states punish “cyberstalking,” but only as a misdemeanor, which means that law enforcement cannot obtain warrants that are necessary to collect evidence needed to prosecute. Recourse in civil court proves equally futile due in large part to antiquated copyright law. I believe that revenge porn serves as an example of the social and political problems that can arise when technology moves faster than the law.

The positive: Digital technology continues to reinvent the culture of higher learning. For instance, I am currently participating in this discussion, and will attend this Cambridge-based class remotely, from my home in Manhattan, NYC. Moreover, MOOCs offered by EdX and similar providers allow interested parties to engage in courses out of genuine interest.

[[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 00:33, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

significant social, cultural, political or economic changes associated with the spread of digital technologies:

1) culturally and politically, spin control held by governments and regional authorities ( religious, corporate, ethnic ) loses traction in the minds of individual internet users; digital tech results in a macro shift of the rhetoric of belief from formerly established originators of spin to the web itself as provider of deconstructed information that individuals more typically use to form their own beliefs and to question the validity of formerly established paradigms.

2)economically, web commerce fast outdates the economics of traditional physically-based logistics. Serious privacy issues among users of new technologies stand as barriers to user confidence, even as new tech info systems tend to present prospective users with no viable lesser-cost alternatives.

[[User:Mbouscaren|Mbouscaren]] 14:55, 25 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The ability to communicate instantly has changed social interactions and relationships on a personal level (i.e. the instant feedback available on social media and communication via email, text, etc.) and in wider communities (i.e. forums, comments on news articles and blogs, etc.). The access to and engagement with new communication technologies can be empowering for those who may have otherwise felt voiceless, while a sense of anonymity can lead to harassment with minimal consequences.

2. Fast and easy access to information that allows individuals to educate themselves (though that has to be balanced against the challenges of finding reliable sources) and have more control as consumers (compare products, read reviews, etc.).

[[User:Jkelly|Jkelly]] 16:25, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

*'''Significant social change -''' People with traits of autism, Asperger's, ADD, dyslexia, social anxiety are becoming over-represented among successful CEOs and entrepreneurs, relative to the population at large. The current economy has been rewarding companies run by people who have mental characteristics adapted to software programming, engineering, and creativity (for example) much more than in the past.

*'''Economic change -''' ''(To be honest, both of my answers could fit into social, political and economic...)'' Markets are shifting from broadcast, one-size fits all models of communication towards narrowcast, peer-to-peer conversations. On the Internet, consumer-driven input, quality products/content and sometimes even user-generated content are valued more highly than tightly-controlled corporate 'spin'. Of course this may change substantially with the fall of net neutrality.

[[User:Deluxegourmet|Erin Saucke-Lacelle]] 20:15, 26 January 2014 (EST)

----

Significant social change: The way in which news spreads has changed drastically with the advent of the internet. Social networking sites, such as Facebook and particularly Twitter, have become news outlets that have, in some cases, proved to be quicker at providing up-to-the-minute current event info than traditional news providers.

Cultural/legal change: The spread of digital technologies has impacted the music industry and amateur artists in a profound way. A great example is the issue of mash-ups, the cutting and pasting of previously-recorded songs to make a brand new tune. Mash-ups have proven to be an outlet for amateur creativity, as the average person can take different songs (often times of different genres and beats) off the internet and make something entirely new. That amateur can then share her music with others. The music industry is not a fan of mash-ups, claiming that the infringe upon copy-right law. Current copy-right laws in the US are far behind the internet and do not provide guidelines on how to maintain a balance between what mash-up artists consider their 1st Amendment rights and what the music industry consider copy-right infringement.( There's a lot more I could say about this, as I wrote a paper on it, but in the interest of keeping it short, I'll end here.)

[[User:Lrsanchez|Lrsanchez]] 10:25, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Technology and the internet have changed the face of communication in all of its various subjects-- political, social, cultural, etc.-- which is to say that it has mostly replaced actual faces and voices with a computer screen. This is not to say that there aren't benefits, as there certainly are a plethora of benefits, ranging from the accessibility of information and quick dissemination of news. With a mere device, one is capable of staying connected to their family, friends, and the community at large no matter where they travel. Like never before, people are being brought together from drastically different backgrounds and geographical locations. We are being exposed to stories about the cultural traditions of the smallest microcosms and have access to nearly every facet of companies, governments, et cetera. While there is certainly power in this digital age of communication, as demonstrated clearly in the political realm with the recent revolution in Egypt, the internet and technology have paradoxically separated us from one another. There is less and less human-to-human contact, with people preferring to sit at home behind their computer or telephone screens instead of discussing events in person. Individuals may now be able to see everything with Google Maps, for instance, but is this a satisfactory substitute for actually experiencing these places and incidents with every sense? And aside from sensory deprivation, we are creating an emotional barrier which spans the gamut from creating social awkwardness in person to allowing thoughtless online bullying to run rampant. However, even with plenty of negatives, can we condemn the very same internet and technologies which have advanced medicine and businesses the world over? The world economy has benefitted greatly, with global commerce being as easy as clicking a button or filling out a billing form. Individuals anywhere can start a business with minimal effort and are able to participate in global trade. As with most good things, there are certainly positives and negatives that go along with the internet and technological advances.
[[User:Castille|Castille]] 12:46, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital technology helps us to automate repetitive, time-consuming, and error-prone tasks, enabling humans to spend more time doing what only humans can do: generate ideas. To use a timely example, TurboTax.com analyzes data and runs calculations for a consumer, saving them time and money by avoiding interaction with an accountant. However, sometimes replacing humans with a machine does not work so well. I personally dislike the self-checkout machines at CVS. They are too loud, and somehow always make some sort of mistake, requiring an attendant to come over and punch in a code, wasting time and failing to fulfill their basic function.

Although digital technology makes our lives easier in countless ways, many of which I might not even appreciate or understand, I think the ease and gratification of digital technologies can take a toll when humans become alienated from basic life tasks that might have their benefits. As "Castille" mentions - the constant use of and reliance on GoogleMaps might prevent people from actually gaining a sense of their environment and making observations that could help them memorize directions or landmarks, and allow them to be more self-reliant. Although digital technology allows developers, artists, educators, etc. to be really creative and productive, it also allows a lot of people to get away with being complacent.

[[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 18:20, 27 January 2014 (EST)

EDIT: I don't mean to say that TurboTax and self-checkout are examples of great social change, but they are signs of greater change like automation which will in turn affect standards for human interaction, self-reliance, etc. [[User:Sballister|Sballister]] 07:29, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

There are several important factors to consider with the rise and spread of digital technologies. From a human interactive tactile context the PC has to be the front runner that covers many sociological concerns that I consider important.

Prior to the smart phone, the personal computer (PC) has to be (and still is) one of the most important aspects of all digital technologies to be thrust upon mankind, because of the potential power it endows upon its owner, knowingly or unknowingly; as it allows one to cross state lines, oceans and continents in mere seconds without much effort by its user. This, coupled with the widespread use of the internet provides an important context to the discussion from a sociological framework. To have so much computing power at ones finger tips, yet it is often relegated by its user to social networking, video games and entertainment, that human contact is subconsciously negated by the user. Having to get out of the house is becoming more of a chore due to what can be done online. Hiking out in the woods for field trips or class projects is becoming more and more a novelty for students and teachers alike. We can't wait to get laptops in the hands of students in third world countries, for what, so that they too can watch life on a screen, rather then be poor and kick a soccer ball around a field somewhere.

At the end of the day, from both a global and sociological standpoint, the widespread use of digital technologies has just as many concerns as it does rewards.[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 23:08, 27 January 2014 (EST)

----

1. The launch of Sputnik changed many things — scientific, technological, military, and political — and the cold war of course spurred the beginnings of the internet in its earliest forms amongst the military, scientists, and researchers who used ARPAnet to transfer information, which fed American interest in the sciences and provided a foundation for the very digital technologies that now aid in the spread of our current digital technologies.

2. This leads into a second point, which is that intensified globalization of cultural elements — arguably beginning with WWII and intensifying in the '90s — promoted commercialization of the internet in the early '90s and put digital technology propagation into fast-forward. Suddenly we are able to access information on the other end of the world, rapidly, from the comfort of our own homes, and this allowed for ideas and digital technologies to spread over (again) the very digital technologies that made them possible. [[User:Twood|Twood]] 11:23, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Free speech ideals are one of the political, social/cultural, and even economic challenges of the spread of digital technologies. Some people want to be able to say or produce whatever they want on the World Wide Web. And some people think like the author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace", that the internet community can police themselves. But how would the internet prevent child pornography, or financial fraud from occurring without the help of government agencies? These are real questions that are worth debate. No one has all the answers yet.

Socially and culturally the challenges presented by the spread of digital technologies, revolves around how we use these technologies to communicate. We are still deciding what is acceptable, and what is not acceptable, socially and culturally. This social/cultural debate about the Internet is often about privacy-how much are we willing to share online. Each person is different and each culture/country feels different about how much should be revealed or restricted online. This leads us to economic results related to the spread of internet technologies.

One of the reasons that privacy is a concern with digital tech, is that companies want Internet user information. They want to know where you live, where you work, what are your favorite TV shows, and your food preferences, so that they can better sell to you. Economics also plays a role in how you will receive your Internet content/speed. Verizon and the FCC were recently in federal court arguing about whether Verizon could add additional charges to content providers, i.e. in theory, Verizon could charge these providers to reach their customers.

Politically, we have seen that digital technologies can be used to spy on citizens, and they also can be used by whistleblowers to shed light on secret activities by governments, as in the Edward Snowden incident.[[User:Mikewitwicki|Mikewitwicki]] 13:04, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

(Apologies in advance for the length)
Seems there is quite often a direct and indirect "significant change" that can be associated with each of these areas and advances in digital technologies.

The evolution of popular social networks such as Facebook or match.com are prime examples of where the technology has prompted significant change in our social behaviors. These and similar services have shifted the dynamic in our relationships with others. The ability to discover, connect and continually communicate with "friends” without geographical limitations, and without significant costs, has allowed communities, groups and couples to form tightly knit units. This has lead to countless new marriages, allowed us an ability to sustain long-distance relationships via Skype and FaceTime technologies. Such relationships were economically and technically impossible during the days of the Bell Telephone monopoly, which seem not too long ago. Yet, plenty of indirect "significant changes" related to this same area are also becoming more frequent... As a quick example, plenty of divorces have been linked to the "discovery" of online affairs, and the same social technologies have been exploited by predatory sex offenders who can easily pose as a "friend" on Facebook to unsuspecting children.

Politically, the expansion of the digital technologies has certainly allowed for many to enter into politics and effect public policy. A standard strategy now, but web-savvy politicians have been able to exploit the new technologies as a means of reaching their followers for not only "connecting" with potential constituents, but also it has allowed those who may never have considered running for public office, a means of "discovering" their political base, building support and financial contributions through the internet to drive their campaign. Not only for "career politicians", but also for the grassroots network that can help bolster a campaign for political outsiders the likes of Jessie "the Body" Ventura, and help launch a foray into politics. Conversely, political careers have certainly been destroyed by improprieties that the advances in digital technologies have made all too quick & easy. Best exemplified recently by a US Congressman (who needs no introduction) uploading certain digital photographs to an online "friend"...which indirectly has ramifications for his entire political party's platform which cannot afford to lose that 1 seat in the House of Representatives.

Culturally - the spread of digital technologies have allowed us to collaborate and learn from communities around the world as never before... The instantaneous ability to share news, images, sound and video has brought us a greater understanding into the lives and conditions of many different cultures around the world. We learn how they must thrive, struggle and persevere within unfamiliar regions worldwide. The world's news can become as "local" as the reports we hear everyday on our city's local TV news station. The consumer need only choose from where they wish to receive a daily RSS feed, or return daily to a "Bookmark" linking to their country's leading news service. Indirectly, this same ability to glance into another culture via online technologies can trigger an all-too-limited view of what a particular culture's values may or may not be. The predominant exposure of anti-American videos and rhetoric promoting atrocities against westerners by radical Islamic militant groups using the internet to build and recruit an international army of terrorists, has certainly skewed the non-Islamic world's understanding of the culture of Islam and the very large majority of Muslims around the world who are as peaceful, humane, and caring as we all strive to be.

Economically, the significant changes that have been prompted by advances in digital technologies are numerous. The entire economic model in many industries has needed to adapt to the new opportunities that digital technologies allowed (and expected) or risk their corporation’s demise. Photography, Music and Publishing have all seen major shifts in their production, marketing, distribution and sales models. Amazon was an early player in adapting to the new online economy, and many brick-and-mortar shops fell victim to the competition. In the publishing world, and ever more frequently within the music world, we are now leasing our content at the same (and sometimes much larger) costs than what consumers formerly paid to physically own the content. In addition to the content itself, providers are also able to charge for delivery mechanisms (propriety interfaces to interact with the content) or require “subscriber fees” to access cloud storage of your personal collection of digital assets (Music, e-books, library archiving projects, etc) How we read, listen, and enjoy the many arts are all indirectly changed because of the advances in digital technology and our reliance on the internet combined with smart devices to deliver content to us. [[User:Psl|Psl]] 13:17, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The recent technological advances, and the development of the internet in particular, have brought about many changes to every part of our lives as individuals, as well as to the functioning of the society as a whole.

One of the most far-reaching effects of the development of the internet is the ease of mobilizing thousands and millions of people behind shared goals, for good, or for bad. From a satellite launch crowdfunded on Kickstarter, through the decline of “pink slime” following a change.org petition, to oppressing governments using online media to remain in power, the last few years in particular have hinted at the things to come. Indeed, what we're starting to see is that contrary to predictions of centuries past, the future of computing is turning out to center not on improved artificial intelligence through ever increasing computational power, but on real people empowered by technology.

A concept seemingly opposite to the idea of crowdsourcing is decentralization, another keyword for this decade. Governments across the world are beginning to wrap their heads around the internet and are becoming increasingly good at policing it. Internet giants such as Google and Facebook are also constantly tightening their grip on the large sections of the internet within their reach and control. The recent developments in federated social networks, decentralized authentication methods and currencies, and independent mesh networking however suggest that internet might in fact grow more uncontrollable than ever in the years to come.
[[User:Seifip|Seifip]] 13:51, 28 January 2014 (EST)

:Thanks for the comments, and for the formatting update as well! If people would like to treat each of these as the start of a thread and reply feel free to do so - just insert a colon before your reply. [[User:Andy|Andy]] 13:57, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Digital techniologies have created the promise of instant access to answers and information. They have removed the middle men and connected information producers and consumers, for example, with the advent of digital publishing authors, musicians, etc have more access to their readers and as such produce content with seemingly more artistic control. This in turn may have created microcosms of demand and increased the polarization of the conversation and reduced our experience with consensus building and effective dialog.

Additionally, the advent of digital technologies has increased the transparency of individuals and governments as they engage and as such has both benefited and hampered the international political dialog. Individual actions and the actions of individuals within governments and institutions are open for scrutiny often by entities who are not familiar with the context. [[User:Rstempfley|Rstempfley]] 15:00, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The birth of digital technology changed the landscape of how equities, futures, options, and currencies are traded globally. From an economic perspective, exchanges worldwide were once left with limited ways to conduct transactions, to include the telephone (the ones hanging on a wall attached by an annoying cord) and face-to face communication, primarily through large financial institutions and advisors.

Technology has allowed the general public, who are now users of large public exchanges such as the NYSE, Nikkei, & NASDAQ ,open availability to markets that were once only offered to the elite and wealthy. Political constructs changed, as the general public were allowed into a market place that was once driven strictly by large financial institutions. Market entry for the general consumer changed the social environment of the stock market, and a more level playing field developed through the adoption of online brokerage firms such as AB Watley, E-Trade, and Ameritrade. Trading securities across not only state lines, but also entire countries, provided unlimited opportunity for those who wanted the option to trade securities without the use of a personal stockbroker. This type of transaction was unheard of in the early 90’s-today purchasing ones own stock online without the advise of a broker is the norm.--[[User:Melissaluke|Melissaluke]] 15:19, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The digital universe has revolutionized access to information. Today, anyone can find anything by simply asking their phone! This overabundance of information is connected to a number of global issues including terror, freedom, energy and political polarization. Anyone can look up how to make a bomb online, but does that make it ok for the federal government to spy on all of us? These new technologies have increased our consumption of energy, yet we are inching toward renewable energy slower than the polar caps are melting. And to cap it all off, political parties now have access to so much information that there is data to support any claim, increasing the frequency of gridlock. [[User:Art.Mescon|Art.Mescon]] 15:32, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Culturally: Digital technologies have given us instantaneous access to current events around the world. They have also given us an incredibly cheap way to communicate with anyone, anywhere, at any time. Initially, these technologies resulted in a sort of digital melting pot of beliefs, ideas, and knowledge. As we have matured as Internet users, and grown more proficient in harnessing this newfound ability, these technologies have begun to birth such innovations as Crowd Sourcing – changing the way we fund everything from aid relief to feature films.

Politically: We are only just beginning to see what is possible, politically, as a result of the digital landscape. By 2011, the increased adoption of smartphone technology, intersected with the rise of social media, helped launch a political protest in Tahrir Square that resulted in the resignation of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak – proving that this development in communication has far reaching implications for Democracy around the globe.

Economically: Despite many governments insistence to the contrary, via tariffs, trade is freer than ever. This is especially so on the consumer goods level, filling our grocers with foreign fruits and vegetables, and retail stores with products manufactured anywhere. The individual consumer, if so inclined, may hunt down the rarest of items on the other side of the world, and in days have them delivered to their doorsteps.

[[User:MikeJohnson|MikeJohnson]] 15:35, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

EXAMPLE 1: ONLINE MATH LEARNING IN SINGAPORE

Background: I founded ACE-Learning Systems Pte Ltd in Jan 2001 to develop an
online math program for secondary schools. Obtained $60,000 funding from the
Infocomm Development Authority and started with 6 pilot schools from the
Ministry of Education. Now, we are the largest online math vendor in Singapore
with almost all secondary schools using the program.

Social: In the past, student success depended primarily on family's economic
background. Parents found it necessary to engage private tutors to ensure
their children get high grades to enable them to progress to better schools
from primary school through university. Students from poor families tend to be
left behind. Now, with online learning, access to quality education is now a
level playing field.

Economic: Very poor students under government subsidy schemes are given free
access to the program, free computer, and free internet access. Revenues from
the school subscription contracts enable the company to further develop and
improve the learning resources to its current state-of-the-art.

Technological: Problems in traditional chalkboard teaching: (1) Students
cannot remember what was taught in class (2) Pace of the classroom instruction
was too fast (3) Unable to multitask in copying chalkboard information and
trying to listen to the teacher at the same time (4) Poor visibility of
writing/drawing on the chalkboard depending on sitting location of the student
(5) Teacher erases chalkboard information before students could finish
copying. (6) Questions from students may require erased chalkboard data and
teacher has to rewrite/redraw the information. The introduction of the use of
Powerpoint amplify the problem, especially in cases where teachers refuse to
distribute their Powerpoint slides to the class. The scantily written notes
and lack of audio with Powerpoint sometimes make learning difficult. With
online learning, all these problems are resolved. Furthermore, teachers now
have effective interactive teaching resources which were impossible and
inoperable with chalkboard or Powerpoint instruction. These can also solicit
co-operative class participation. Students can now learn more effectively and
at an accelerated pace. Students can also view the online videos as many times
as they need at their own convenience at home or on mobile iOS or Android
devices.

Political: Grades for homework or quizzes no longer need to be "cast in
stone". Teachers can now encourage their students to re-do their homework
assignments or quizzes with new questions generated by the online system to
improve their performance with immediate feedback thus giving them the
opportunity to improve their grades. With the online multi-criteria performance monitoring tools, teachers can now quickly track their students' progress. Now, they can better manage their time and help the
weaker students. Teachers are now better empowered in their role as teachers
and facilitators of learning.

EXAMPLE 2: PROPOSAL FOR BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, PHILIPPINES
.....will be continued in my next email, in case I run out of time.

[[User:Ichua|Ichua]] 15:38, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----
The Internet has changed the way people interact socially and has impacted the economic realm in a tremendous way.

Before major technological developments, for one to interact with someone personally they would have to physically have access to that individual. But with the modern innovations of email, video chat, and social sites like Facebook and Twitter, one can access a whole world that was previously unknown to them.

Internet has changed the way in which commerce works; economically speaking industries are not the same. If someone wished to buy or sell commodities they would need to travel to a store, but with internet an individual from New York can make a purchase from a store in China and then sell that same item to someone in California and never even touch the product. The world has been drawn together since the advent of the Internet, and because of the changes society has benefited as a whole. It’s a powerful tool that all should learn about!

[[User:Emmanuelsurillo|Emmanuelsurillo]] 15:52, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

The internet and digital technology has changed the way we live. The power to have access to the collective information of the world cannot be understated. A person can take out there phone and "google" the answer to any question that pops up. Books and libraries are now all in one location online. The internet is a massive, evolving resource that everyone has access to.

The internet has changed the way people interact socially. Social media has created ways for people to broadcast their lives online. People upload events and pictures from their lives instantly, updating friends and family as things happen. There is the question too whether our digital lives online distract us or remove us from our relationships in the real world.

The internet and digital technology has permeated every aspect of our lives. It is impossible to walk down the street and not see someone engrossed in their phone. Companies all over the world rely on the internet to do business. The world is more connected than ever, and the internet's impact is reshaping the world very quickly.

[[User:Patcorrigan|Patcorrigan]]

----

Geolocation: It is now possible to locate nearly anyone anywhere, including 6'4" bogeyman.

Manipulation of Media: Photoshop your face into a self-portrait of/by Vincent van Gogh. Conduct an interview and edit the outcome to suit your favor. Watch protests, view "Tank Man" from Tiananmen Square, and watch his real-life counterparts in near real-time be shot in the streets of Egypt by Egyptian soldiers and tanks, brought to you in part by the U.S. Government.

Navigation: Deciphering actionable intellignece v. information glut will be the only way to "break on through" to the otherside of the revolution. Alas, it is not being televised.[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST) --[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:26, 28 January 2014 (EST)[[User:A. Tom Anteus|A. Tom Anteus]] 16:37, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

Internet and digital technology has changed every aspect of our life. I can provide the following examples:
1.Socially. Internet brought a lot of information into people's life and made people more conscious about surrounding world. Whatever you wish in terms of information (of course generally speaking) can be found immediately via the internet. Education sphere has also benefited from the internet opportunities, for example these courses are possible because of Internet. Even online music courses are offered to those who wishes to play musical instrument or just learn to sing.
2. Government. Internet maybe will turn into one of the major tool of governance. A lot of electronic state structures such as e-notary, e-state Registry exist in many countries. Internet provides the opportunity to for using e-singature which means that even official documents will be signed electronically.
3. Economy. Internet has changed economy dramatically. Practically everyone can establish its own minor e-enterprise by offering goods, services and etc.
4. Legal environment. Internet created absolutely new type of social relations which require the scrutinized legal approach which will lead to establishment of new branhces of law..maybe Internet Code in future [[User:Aysel|Aysel]] 16:42, 28 January 2014 (EST)

----

My three examples of significant change are 1. Economically and Socially; Music and the way it is shared, valued by consumers and created by artists has been forever changed worldwide. 2. Cultural change has created a large divide between generations that understand and "live within" technology and the older generations who do not understand it or have not made it a daily part of their lives. The lack of understanding and communication, or effective communication between these generations is startling. 3. From a political perspective; the current challenge that politicians have with elections to reach the generation gaps is why (I believe) that the costs of campaigning has gone up so dramatically. There is no longer a universal way to reach your target demographic. Texting services, versus radio, versus TV commercials versus print ads or online ads with or without social media is a boggling world to create effective ad campaigns. By: TriciaBy

----
It’s overstated that digital technologies have helped us become more connected in a wonderful way. I am thankful for the ability to Skype my sister while she is in traveling in Kenya, or take this Cambridge based course while living in Sydney, Australia. This ‘digital cosmopolitanism’ is making us more virtually connected, but is moving us farther away from globalization at the same time.
An example of this is how Australian companies will virtually outsource jobs to skilled workers in India, while reaping the cost-efficient benefits of paying them Indian wages, which are significantly lower. (Similar outsourcing practices of the United States). Australia has since increased the difficulty for these skilled Indian workers to live here. In other words, we want your in-demand skills, virtually, but now don’t want to make it easy for you to migrate here, which would mean paying you in Australian wages. The same technologies that make us more connected and seemingly more globalized, have a strong power to move us further away from it.

A second significant social change associated with the spread of digital technologies is how online introductions have become one of the most common way to meet a partner. However, technologies that can foster relationships will also play a role in what ends them. Social media evidence has dominated the divorce courtroom, where about three out of four cases now contain it. Text messages have become the “Digital lipstick on the collar,” as Tiger Woods and Anthony Weiner have demonstrated to us all.
[[User:Marissa1989|Marissa1989]] 00:42, 29 January 2014 (EST)