10, Extra Credit: Microsoft Kinect Surveillance

-->
from week of 11/5 using the article: http://www.geekwire.com/2012/microsoft-diskinect-freeloading-tv-viewers/

Large companies seem to be now be putting out all of their surveillance technology towards monitoring the public in order to put forth advertisements catered towards the user. While this data is generally harmless to most people, as the monitoring reaches new heights a person’s freedom starts to come into question. Many users are downloading and watching movies for free illegally which can be seen as harmful to the economy and the entire social structure, I don’t this is the case any longer. As society evolves to become more open and free with these sharing technology new social norms have to be adopted. The surveillance technology released by these companies, the same that has cased an open technology revolution, is now starting to be used to watch and restrict the people. One of the main culprits recently is Microsoft and the possibility of using their kinect peripheral in order to identify media consumers. The purpose of this recognition technology is to monitor movie-viewing rights and to limit movie viewing for restricted material. The second purpose can be seen as a major plus for parents who let their children view their movies through an Xbox. The price seems to be though that Microsoft knows exactly who is viewing media at any given time through an Xbox. This is an enormous invasion of privacy. People are barely okay with companies using data about them that they input into a computer themselves. This could also evolve into someone always knowing exactly what you’re doing and where you are doing it. Companies will have a complete surveillance of your person. The government will of course want this information and suddenly the government has complete control of every person who uses any type of technology and the people have lost power. This seems like a problem that is far in the future, but why should we let anything that could so easily help achieve this vision come into existence.   

9. extra credit: me & my shadow

-->

From Me & My Shadow from week of 10/29

https://myshadow.org/#

We live in an era where everyone is tracked all the time and his or her information is constantly being recorded despite whether or not that person wants anything about him on the Internet. The only way to avoid this of course is to never use the Internet, use a cell phone or any other device that accesses the Internet or uses any outward communication in any way. Many people nowadays are asking if we should allow these companies to harvest this information and sell it without our permission. Technically they do have our permission, but most people do not know the extent at which the information is being used since they do not read the small print in the agreements. I want to ask if we should care. As long as this information is secure and not given to those who would use that information to steal from us then why would be care? Yes the occasional annoying ad at the side your screen will appear with an item that you looked at the day before, but are any of these ads hurting us. Our information being sold to ad companies seems like a small price to pay for the use of an information and connection source that gives us access to anything we can dream of. The Internet has become an incredibly powerful resource, but one with a price. This price is something that fights against what humans have thought is only their right since the beginning of time. A person’s privacy being invaded goes against everything we know, but what if we didn’t ever know a time of privacy, then the internet would seem like a power without a cost. The other part of this privacy is that the information that is being used only goes to people who are trying to sell us things, this information is not going to the people we know so again why should we care that this information is being utilized?

8. Extra Credit: biomodd

From Biomodd from week of 10/22

http://www.biomodd.net/overview/artist-statement

The structure of technology and living organisms has always been vastly different and no real connection between the two has been really seen. The only real comparison between the two is that both use electrical currents to function. This difference has been because the technology up to this point has not been available and the need for a combination of the two has been nonexistent. We have finally reached an age where the combination of the two seems to be possible and desirable. Culture has evolved to find saving the environment a top priority and design has become seemingly more important as of late as a sort of counter to the hardness and coldness of machines. Even some houses have become organic in that they use trees and vegetation for the structure and power of the house. It seems ironic then that recent technologies have moved to a more organic style. Flexible displays and fiber optic cables are just a few visual examples of this transition. This transition may be the effect of move towards technology becoming part of the person. Wearable displays and electronics will become everyday. The hybrid between the organic and the technologic is not only as part of a movement for a future in technology but also as a movement for art. A group known as biomodd uses technology and plants to create art projects as a way to reuse old computer parts and show how plants can be used a power source. One example of a project that was created was a secondhand computer that was made of scrap parts that was powered by vegetation and played modded open-source multiplayer games. The entirety of the project was to show the potential of using nontraditional objects to build fully functional computers as not only art, but also as a way to become part of a natural creative environment to create and establish new ways to build.

7. Extra Credit: Street Ghost and Privacy

-->

From: Street Ghost from the week of 10/15

Google street view has always been a part of one of the greatest parts in the fight of invasion of privacy. The rules about invasion of privacy though are changing. New technologies are said to be an invasion of privacy because they are unexpected and because of very specific aspects of what is seen through the cameras on Google’s cars. In order for a large number of technologies to move forward the rules of invasion of property need to be changed. The current view is from a time where people did not have any of their information out on the internet and they were essentially anonymous all the time. This view is now a barrier to technology because new technologies will not function in a way that is quick enough and convenient enough for the common person without their personal information stored beforehand. Most people nowadays are changing their view on privacy to be accepting of storing their information. The problem then becomes why is the information being used in ways that the user did not intent? Why are pictures being stored on servers thousands of miles away just because that person uses a certain site? Why can a person have their information shared or their pictures used without their consent? This is the crux of the privacy vs. technology war. Sites such as streetghosts are using pictures without consent because they feel that the artistic perspective behind their works is more important than that person’s privacy. This is another issue of convenience. The project itself is not bad or particularly damaging to the people whose pictures are posted, but why is the only way to complete this project to use pictures taken without consent? The project is banking on the people whose pictures they are using not to know of the project of that their pictures are being used. Invasions of privacy are now possible if the user does not know that their information is being used. This wrap around is why the privacy war has started.

6. Extra Credit: Augmented reality

From article: Improving Our Depth Perception in Augmented Reality from the week of 10/8

-->

The biggest question that we must ask ourselves about augmented reality is how will this affect the general public when this technology becomes widespread. Will the constant companion of virtual objects become so commonplace that people will begin to no longer discern the difference between real objects and virtual ones? Augmented reality will become the real reality. So far augmented reality has been used mostly for enhancement of sporting event and the uses in medicine and war can been seen as indispensable. The extra precision for doctors and the heads up information for soldiers provides a new era in accuracy and will prevent needless loss of life. This is an area where augmented reality should become the norm and will aid in nearly all situations. Should we stop here and only use augmented reality for these purposes rather than give headgear to the general public? Google is planning on releasing augmented reality glasses in the near future with the hope that they become everyday objects. As of now the thought that everyone would be wearing these glasses seems silly to most and in no way seems feasible. What if they do become as popular if Google hopes and everyone starts to where these glasses? I believe that these glasses will become a source of distraction more so than the cell phone. The attention span of humans is dwindling and is soon to be almost completely gone. With augmented reality glasses a quick notification in the peripheral view may completely deter the attention of someone during a conversation. Normal conversation will no longer be possible if all “engaged parties” are only paying attention the augmented reality glasses that all of them are wearing. This is a shift that humanity is already heading towards, but augmented reality for the common people could be the final nail in the coffin. Augmented reality is a danger to the human race, which we cannot afford if we don’t want productivity and human relationships to no longer become part of a social norm.

5. Extra Credit: Stuxnet

From Stuxnet: Anatomy of A computer virus from week of 10/1

The power of cyber warfare doesn’t come from the complexity or the target even though these are important factors. The power comes from the misunderstanding and abstractness that viruses and most software has from the average person. An average may not be particularly complex or dangerous, but if someone who does not have experience with computers is confronted with a possibility of infecting himself or herself with the virus then they are most likely going to become infected. How is someone who doesn’t have experience with computers going to deal with a virus. Nearly everyone on the planet does not have enough experience to deal with or pick apart a virus. This realization that is coming with extremely powerful and complex viruses is that there aren’t nearly enough people who have the knowledge to deal with and combat the viruses. Cyber warfare has become so prevalent that training to become knowledgeable about computers has become a top priority. Is this training enough? Training more children to be able to program and fight viruses is what the infrastructure needs in order for any country to survive in this new era of computers. With computers becoming the ultimate source or information, communication and now warfare the need for all people to be proficient with computers has never been higher. Groups such as anonymous are also becoming more important because they are showing companies how vulnerable they are to cyber attacks. Stuxnet has shown the world that viruses are no longer just for people to make money off of stealing identities or for recreation in destroying other peoples’ computers. Nuclear interference and power outages are now the greatest threats. How soon until people are dying directly from the effects of computer viruses? Cyber violence is so much more dangerous because of the anonymousness. We have reached a new era where everyone must be proficient on a computer if they want to survive.

4. Extra Credit: Crow Sourcing

From Crow sourcing from week of 9/24

The Internet has become not just a collective knowledge base, but also a collective base for jokes, idioms and general human observation interactions. I am referring to the explosion of the usage and popularity of the meme. The meme has become a tool to point out an observation to everyone around him or her. These observations can be anything from the general lateness of a bus at a college bus stop or an observation of the tendencies of a prominent political figure. These memes have opened a doorway to a more casual Internet usage and a feeling of closeness with people with whom you encounter on the Internet. This closeness resides in the fact that memes provide a common ground of perspective and hilarity between people. This recent development has opened an avenue for people to converse and build a knowledge base concerning topics that really do not matter in the scope of everyday life, but may provide a mutual interest. An example of this is crow sourcing. This name is a play on words from crowd sourcing, this site has people exploring and inventing idioms based on common animals. The content of this site is not the most important part of its existence despite exploring a topic that is not usually explored. The important idea is that people are coming together to build knowledge bases (crowd sourcing) about any topic even if it is very extract. The idea of collaboration is important in the fact that knowledge bases can be expanded quickly and include large amounts of information without bias, but also because this this idea is likely to spread to scholarly ideas and really any type of work. This is exciting because the volume and accuracy of works will increase. As this idea evolves many problems arise however. Who moderates to make sure that the information is accurate and genuine? This problem has already arisen with wikis. Who should have the power to edit and add information? Will collaborative works ever become possible let alone popular if these problems cannot be solved?

3. Extra Credit: Google and its power

Article: U.S. Government Requests For Google Users' Private Data Jump 37% In One Year, from the week of 10/1

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/06/17/u-s-government-requests-for-google-users-private-data-spike-37-in-one-year/

-->

Google has become more than just a software and search engine company. With the data sets based on users of their content Google has become one of the most powerful entities in the world. With the United States government now requesting information for undisclosed reasons and Google having the ability to deny this information shows a power shift. Google now has control over information that the government has no way of retrieving and is increasingly worried about getting. This power shift does not only apply to Google, many of the large companies (most of them making or distributing technology) have a certain disposition and control over the common people that the government cannot hope to have. This control is fueled by a more modern knowledge of the working of current day situations and people as well as an obvious expertise on current technology and a loyal following of people. All of this power the government wants access to, but as Google has shown with its denial of access to private information, the companies actually hold an incredible amount of power. These companies also have access to large sums of money. The combined power of these companies is similar to Rockefeller and the power his empire held in the early 1900’s. The government is currently in a huge amount of debt and these companies could hold the key too a door out.

            The data that Google hold is also invaluable because of data sets and holds on user posted content because other countries want access to this information. Users can post political ideals and comments on Google without fear of these being taken down because that would violate free speech in America. Therefore people can post political comments and spread ideas without fear of their own government. The data sets on other countries are powerful agents against enemy states and this information is collected at a civilian level without regard to that country’s government. The article mentioned a case such as this when Google used information of China in an investigation.  

2. Extra Credit: The transition of Social Interactions

Article: Are You A Psychopath If You Don't Have A Facebook Account? We Don't Think So, from week of 9/17

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/07/facebook-psychopath_n_1752993.html?view=print&comm_ref=false

-->

Humans are evolving because of protocols that they create, but the control structure of categorization has fallen behind. So many people are fighting the change that new alternatives to past activities are seen as unhealthy. For example a statement in the article says that face-to-face meeting is actual socialization is actual socialization while meeting and talking through social sites is considerate a passive unhealthy relationship. While I personally believe that face-to-face interaction are much more healthy, the idea that new ways of interactions are instantly regarded as unhealthy shows that people are not willing to accept change. Many people are meeting and socializing physically with just as many if not more people on a daily basis then their ancestors ever did because of new transportation and different types of work. On top of this physical interaction these people also interact with more people on the Internet. I think that a major problem isn’t that they aren’t socializing with people face-to-face, it is that each interaction is short and the relationship is not well defined. There is too much of an illusion that the people we interact with online are more important than the physical interactions. A simple chat on Facebook could be regarded as a successful social interaction and a true connection with that person so we no longer feel the need to physically interact any longer. Humans haven’t become completely used to the idea that a simple text message isn’t the same as a physical hello and shake of hands. As time goes on and everyone is connected through phones and the internet I think that people will start to realize that more is gotten out of physical interaction that from messaging. We are currently in a transition time and we haven’t had time to properly become used to the new interaction tools that technology has given us.

words: 309

1. Extra Credit: Advertising and Automation

Article: Newspapers getting outsmarted on mobile from week of 9/10
http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/09/newspapers-getting-outsmarted-on-mobile.html

-->

As the race for complete control of media consumption begins the fight for privacy begins to look unwinnable. Smartphones now catalogue so much about their owner’s lives that they know more about the person and their habits then that person’s friends or family. The pros of having a device that offers almost anything you want within seconds seems outweighs any cons of having your information processed and given to people who just want your money. The world is no longer private and hasn’t been since the technology revolution. Children born into this age will not care about their privacy and won’t have the same worries that their parents did that someone somewhere is always watching and logging all of their activities. Was the ideology that people should have private lives ever necessary for human life to continue “normally”? Should we as people ask ourselves if privacy would matter to us if we had never known what privacy was? Is this the world that we want all future generations to know? There are still some positives with personal information being available to everyone. As the article said companies already know your preferences so buying nearly anything becomes quick and painless. Matches for potential employment could be found based on preferences and past tendencies/experience without actually looking and then “resumes,” submitted at the click of a button. The employers could also see your past experience and easily find the best people to be possibly hired at their company. This automation seems scary to current generations, but this automation will be normal in the future. The time freed by computers doing all of the mindless tasks will be enormous. Of course what happens if the systems fails? Someone who actually understands the system has power over the normal people to an incredible degree. Warfare between the people who understand the system will take place above any normal everyday life, this is already happening of course but as computers control everything the entire control scheme becomes exaggerated. When will the consequences of an automated world surpass the luxury of having everyday life automated?

  words: 349

extra credit - twitterland

Twitter has always seemed to be a joke. Telling an assortment of people who also supposedly care about what you are doing or thinking at any given time would have seemed ridiculous a couple of years ago, in fact it seems ridiculous now. The basic use of twitter still seems completely useless, but tweeting about meeting or for spreading ideas could be an incredibly powerful tool. Harris talks about using twitter to not just tell people about events, but also how to manipulate people using twitter. He spread a rumor across the Internet in order to rally people to his cause. Just imagine how quickly a rumor could spread through a school. Here is where twitter’s true power lies. Lies quickly spread to influence the decisions of a huge number of people. The other pillar of power comes from the fact that such tweets could come from accounts that don’t have obvious owners. There is no way to decipher whether or not the information is valid, yet people will believe anything. Rumors could even be spread multiple times by the same person. Harris admitted to change what name he tweeted from in order to dodge legal action pointed at his older twitter account. Also, multiple accounts could be used to not only spread rumors more rapidly, but also to attack certain ideas. Harris’s use of @Anti_Racism_Dog allowed him to easily and quickly deem an idea wrong by his standards and throw the first punch in a fight against anyone that he wanted, even if he himself didn’t want to personally fight the person. The biggest aspect of starting a fight such as this is that everyone who follows any of the people who are participating in the fight is watching. Such an enormous audience can ruin any person’s reputation with almost no effort. Twitter can become an incredibly dangerous tool.