Reflection Blog 2

Reflection Blog 2

Weeks 5-8 for me have seemed to be a little bit less enlightening than weeks 1-4 from a “learning” perspective. In weeks 1-4 we learned the framework of ethics and how it applies to ICT, played with Prezi, and got “down and dirty” with regards to real ethical issues. I expected more questions about moral dilemmas in weeks 5-8 but the conversation didn’t seem to go that way. I also expected more integration of the ethical framework that we learned in weeks 1-4. For example, instead of just discussing free speech and our opinions on the matter, I think we should be looking at free speech from a utilitarian approach, a relativist approach (or whatever other ethical approach), etc. I think it’s the only way to get the concepts down completely.
My take so far from the class is that moral decisions are totally a moving target and there is no standard to making ethical decisions. I’m the type of person that likes to use logic to my advantage, and I think logic fits right into ethics, but it just hasn’t seemed to pan out that way in the discussions. I think that part of the reason for that is human nature and the instinctual avoidance of confrontation. Maybe it’s just really difficult to put a stake in the sand and say “this is my opinion and I’m willing to defend it” and it’s a lot easier to dance around by asking rhetorical questions and not really draw a line.
As far as leading the discussion as a group – admittedly, our group was a little late to get the ball rolling but I think our questions were pretty good. Frankly, I was a little surprised when none of our questions were used for the actual discussion.
I was able to find a good personal connection with the content of week 6 as I’ve participated in some of the non-nefarious aspects of hacking and I think it’s good to discuss.
Last, not to complain, as I’m sure everyone has a lot on their plate and it would just be another thing, but I’m surprised how few lectures there have been. The lectures we’ve had have been really good and I would not mind seeing more of them.

Info Technology Ethics on the International Level

These past few weeks have presented a new variety of interesting topics in the realm of information technology ethics. Firstly, the readings that discussed the history and function of Anonymous were particularly interesting to me. The group is very unique in its organizational structure, but that individuality also made it hard to understand how it functions. Being able to break down the operational nuances of the group through the readings helped me to understand how the group works that much better.

Learning about this topic also caused me to think about what online communities may look like in the future. Will they move towards more anonymity, or will a desire for accountability necessitate maintaining consistent online identities? This debate is already occurring on the social network sphere, for instance, with Google+ deciding to mandate a real name policy. I have a feeling that I will be consistently be encountering this questions as I continue to utilize the Internet.

Some of the other readings that I found interesting were in the whistle-blowing section. While this idea has been around since the beginning of the private sector, it’s very apparent that information technology revolutionizes (or complicates) the whole concept. Since the technology makes information about a company much more easier to access, I think the chances of employees finding out about dubious information without anyone else knowing is much more likely. In addition, it has become easier for them to share that information with the media, i.e. blow the whistle, anonymously. This also doesn’t just involve the private sector, however, as Wikileaks has taught us.

Speaking of governmental involvement in information technology, another provocative topic area was the influence of social media in certain countries. Since these new forms of media are breaking down the barriers to information that might have been put up by governmental entities (e.g. Chinese internet censorship), I wonder how long those governments will be able to curtail information access. I think the constitutional right of freedom of speech and freedom of information causes us to take the power of free information for granted. For instance, the events of the Arab Spring were made that much more successful due to the ability to make information widely available. This makes me wonder: how long until governments will no longer be able to censor information because of their citizens’ push for freedom of information? What effects will that have on global political dynamics? My feeling is that the rapid communication afforded by social media will show people the power of free information, and that will instigate more political movements.

So, the past couple weeks have definitely had an elements concerning on international issues. Given the wide-impact nature of information technology, it isn’t surprising that the concepts have implications on an international scope. Gaining this perspective is not only interesting by also essential in analyzing and understanding how information technology affects ethics on a global scale.

Blog 2

It’s been very exciting and but also nerve wrecking for me to express my opinion in the discussion board. I know I am very opinionated person therefore I should not express my opinion too much in public. That was how I taught when I grew up in Japan and it is hard to lose the shell that I’ve been covered for many years. There were many great discussions we had in last couple of weeks. It is very exciting to see how my classmates are engaging heated discussion about the topic. Slowly but surely, I am start to enjoy expressing my opinion in the discussion board.

A topic that I enjoyed the most was freedom of speech on Internet. I am very impressed that many of you are very concerned and wonderful parent. It is true that many things on Internet are not for children’s eyes. I believe as user, we should be free to use Internet with little restriction possible for ourselves. But for children, I believe some contents on Internet should be restricted by parental discretion. On the other hand, there are many children who had no supervision by parent or guardian at all. I strongly believe that if children were taught ethical and healthy behaviors by parent in early age, they will likely to keep it throughout their lives. So it is very important for parent to make good ethical decision not only for themselves, but also for their children.

Other aspect of freedom of speech is first amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As a legal permanent resident of the U.S. (I am not U.S. citizen), I am too, granted the freedom of speech. But I don’t consider my freedom is free from restriction. My ability of freedom of speech should not use for harm others. I respect other people’s opinion and religion, but I expect others to respect my opinion and belief as well. For example, Michael Stalk used a teacher from New Jersey as a bad example of freedom of speech. I think a teacher who put anti-gay comment on Facebook should not be teaching children. Indeed she expressed her opinion under freedom of speech, but her comment is very hateful, and her students should be free from her opinion. Her opinion about gays and religion should be kept to herself, and she should have respected people of different sexual orientation and religion.

Last topic that I want to mention is the Arab Spring. I did not know the term until this discussion. I knew something is going on in the Middle East and I was not paying attention because usually such protest against the government ends up in disappointment. It is hard to measure how much Internet and social media affected the movement. Information on Internet and social media could have used for both positively and negatively in the Arab Spring. Either way, the movement spread around the Middle East and the Northern Africa. I think it is good thing that people are taking control of their countries from oppressive regimes. There are lots of works to be done in those countries and I wish them very best wishes for their future. It is impossible for me to live under oppressive government. I had visited such countries few times. That experience keep reminded me that how lucky I am to live the country that I have choices in my life.

Blog Post 2

The week that was the most interesting was when we discussed hackivism, internet vigilantism, and the anonymous group. I feel within that topic there was a lot of good discussion and debates on how hacking and cracking were used in the ethically right or wrong context. Beginning with that week I didn’t even know that there were two meanings to the term hacking and that hacking was potentially harmless in nature. The denotation of hacking can be labeled as white hat and the other word for hacking would be labeled as cracking or black hat. I still feel that Tavani gave an excellent example of cracking vs. hacking in his breaking and entering scenario he wrote in his book. I have actually been able to discuss this section with friends telling them to read the excerpt from Tavani and then talking about the differences between the two. We talked about how hacking mainly has a negative connotation synonymous with the word yet it really isn’t that bad. Cracking, however, which is almost never used in any context of technological breaking and entering is pretty much useless to the layperson. I also spoke with my Grandparents on a Sunday before the Packer game and asked them what they specifically thought of when they heard the words “hacking” and “cracking.” They figured that hacking had to do with illegal computer activities whilst cracking had to deal with breaking information. They were surprised to learn that the word hacking doesn’t encompass complete negative aspects of criminal activity yet cracking is far worse. I can’t really say that this certain topic would change my technological behavior because I honestly don’t hack or even come close to cracking. I suppose in my future career in I.T. however this concept may become present in some situations. I can imagine that certain professions need to have security clearance for specific types of files and that could get into a legitimate case of hacking and cracking. If I were tempted to peek inside folder that I wasn’t supposed to I would probably think twice about doing so. I wouldn’t want to be fired for abusing my security clearance or have others in the company not trust me. This section helped to form a safe boundary of what would be and would not be acceptable in a work setting. Onto this week’s class the main point that was carried over was how social media is a hindrance or an advantage to developing nations. Political unrest is usually stirring as nations develop and the nations people decide on what they really want from their government. Many people have different opinions and the use of social media sites allow them to express their opinions in many ways. However with this many governmental authorities in charge may find the person and prosecute them as they see fit. Other ways that social media sites help is in the case of Egypt and Mubarak they were able to gather a protest against the leader of Egypt. Many positive and negative things can coexist with social media network sites in developing nations: it just depends on how everyone decides to interact.

Blog 2

In the past few weeks I have learned,engaged and found a couple of things interesting. While I read and watched documentaries required in the last few weeks. What had engaged me the most about the readings was the talk about the readings was the talk and concern about hacking. While we discussed hacking whether harmless but intense curiosity to a criminal act.

What made this the most engaging subject to me in the past few weeks was the fact it is hard to decide when the one switches over to the other. Hacking is wrong and usually used for terrible things such as budding up a modem or simply constant virus pop ups. The thing is if someone is hacking and invading your privacy or maybe stealing your files in the end it does not so much harm you in any way. The only way a hacker could use any of that against you is financial gain or embarrassment otherwise your life would be fine and you would not even know of it.

Now I believe hacking to be a criminal act when it is done for pure enjoyment to ruin companies files or changing data bases and screwing up master codes for serious business and bureaus across the Unites States. If someone deals in hacking in these types of conditions it is know doubt it is a criminal act and the individual should be using their knowledge for the better of the world instead of trying to ruin it. The material in the past weeks I was not very much engaged in would include some ideas and quotes from Tavani in the earlier weeks including media material.

What surprised me this week was the discussion about certain speech behind censored on the internet. This had surprised me because their most definitely should be censored topics on the internet. This had surprised me because their most definitely should be censored topics online but a child should not be online without a parent. Websites that younger viewers should not participate in should not be seen. Things in my opinion do not need to be censored because if there is a child on the computer the parent should always be there so why would the child ever see anything they should not be online.

I had many different things in the past weeks that I have talked about but the thing that stood out the most is how I learned about how many different types of things the internet is used for and how ridiculous it is to think we did not always have it. The internet proves to make our lives easier and better. The world would be fine without the internet but I feel as if people would go crazy. When people go crazy there is always disaster and tragedy. In my everyday life I will take what I learned in the past dew weeks and use them in positive ways. When it comes to hacking,personal opinion and censoring online I know much more on the subject and believe it to be very interesting.

I had talked to some friends of mine about hacking and one of my friends is actually really skilled in the trade. My buddy can go on a site call someone make it look like it is a different contact shows up and the person receiving the call has no idea. The person will believe you are who you said to be especially because this option of using a voice over is available. These things in the future that have been created online are scary and may be the problem with the world in decades to come.

A code of ethics?

So I was thinking about the idea of a universal code of ethics—it’s not too likely or practical that such a thing would be codified or agreed upon, but there are small scale versions, like professional codes of ethics. Interestingly, Wikileaks—that is Assange and his core group—seem to a very strong ethical code. Conversely, many media portrayals of Wikileaks are of some kind of nihilist/terrorist collective brainwashed by Assange. Anonymous, is certainly less cohesive than Wikileaks by its nature, but certainly individuals associated with Anonymous have strong personal ideas of ethics and there seem to be certain “laws” to Anonymous’ behavior.

Also, the Luciano Floridi quote has really stuck with me; ““My” in “my information” is not the same as “my” in “my car” but rather the same as in “my body” or “my feelings:” it expresses a sense of constitutive belonging, not of external ownership, a sense in which my body, my feelings and my information are part of me but are not my (legal) possessions.” This quote made me think of the Hippocratic oath and the medical profession—would something similar be useful or effective for the information professions? Does a code of ethics actually impact the behavior of its inductees?
So as an example of an information profession, the American Library Association (ALA) has abided by a code of ethics since 1939, and has routinely updates the contents of the code; the most recent version is from 2008. (http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/proethics/history/index.cfm)

The ALA’s code of ethics addresses such issues as providing equitable access to information (which I understand as providing information in a form that disabled, non-English speakers, and even illiterate people can access), privacy for users, access to unbiased, uncensored information, and to not “advance private interests at the expense” in way that would compromise the sentiments of the above values.

I believe that any sort of ethical code can be ignored and is very difficult to enforce, but at the same time they are a necessary guide for an information (or any) profession. There is some evidence that similar documents, like honor codes for colleges reduce unethical behavior by increasing a feeling of community (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-callahan/why-honor-codes-reduce-st_b_795898.html), and I would think they stir up one’s conscience, making that “Jiminy Cricket” voice just a bit louder.

To answer the question of how can we try to ensure information professionals act ethically, I would look at the medical profession. While certainly not a perfect example—(it is hard, and perhaps futile to strive for perfection in ethical issues)—there is a colloquial code, the Hippocratic oath which serves as the main mission statement for doctors, to “do no harm.” But there are also HIPAA laws to protect privacy, and EMTALA to guarantee treatment, along with the ability to sue for malpractice and plenty of regulations at the national, state, and hospital levels. Perhaps the institution of legal consequences would motivate ethical behavior in information professions. That sounds so dreary though, maybe there could also be positive incentives such as subsidies each year for creating a system that does the best job of ensuring privacy, or accessibility, etc.

Blog 2 - Matt Pavelchik

Over the past few weeks, the topic that has been most fascinating to me has been social media. I think this topic appeals to me because MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter are all social media outlets that have blown up during my late teen years, and into my 20’s. It is amazing to look back and see how far along these social media outlets have come, and to see how much of an effect they have on people’s everyday lives. I am definitely guilty of checking my Facebook on my IPhone several times throughout the day. I think the most fascinating part about these social media applications is the ability to keep up with the lives of people you may not necessarily have any contact with if it wasn’t for the sites. These social media outlets have also made it easy to send invitations out to large groups of people, or to send private messages to just a select group of people. The concept of being able to see where people have “checked in” sometimes make me worry about the security of our world. It seems to easy to think that someone can basically track you down based on a GPS location service activated through your social media outlet.

Another topic that interested me was hacking. I truly find it hard to believe that someone who is trying to hack a company is not out to try and harm the company in some way. Hackers follow their own code of ethics and believe that what they are doing is not illegal, however; the outcome almost always affects a company in a negative manner. In the hacker’s world, I believe Anonymous holds a lot of power, because people are intrigued on finding out who exactly would openly attack major corporations like that. Companies pay a high price for security nowadays, because of the increasing chances that their website may be hacked, or important employee information may get leaked outside of the company.

Blog 2

The class has come up with some very interesting questions that I have since then learned from them and has made me more knowledgable of situations that before I was ignorant too. These last few weeks have brought more debatable topics about making the class very interesting to be a part of.

I enjoyed the sections in the book and discussions where we talked about hacking. I personally never realized that there was a difference between the kinds of hacking. I just saw hacking as being hacking and never seen it as being someone’s job and that they could make a living doing it. I just seen it as being against the law. I think that there is a privilege in doing this and it should not be taken advantage of. I think that there is a fine line between what is being referenced to as being hacking and what other’s call cracking. I still see a person as a hacker if they just look into a computer system that they are not supposed to be in and they do not destruct or take anything from the system. I think that there should be different consequences that are considered for hackers that just look in and those that actually cause damage to a system. The video of the secret history of hacking brought new light on a situation that I just viewed as a definite legal act before and it brought things into prospective and showed me that hackers do actually do some good rather than just bad.

I also enjoyed the sections that talked about social media sites like Twitter and Facebook. The positives I see with social media sites is the way you can improve your business and help advertise that business because there are so many people that are on them. It is also nice to be able to reconnect with old friends from the past but I think that there are more negatives in social media than positives. The negatives outweigh the positives I think thus the reason I do not like to join or be apart of social media types. I just have a hard time some things that are spewed over social media sites. I just think that they are too time consuming for some people and take up way too much of their lives. They could be doing more important things and spending time with their friend and family. I would personally rather hear someone’s voice in person or it be on the phone than talk to them through social media. I know that it is hard to always meet up with people especially if they are far away that making social medias convenient.

I really have enjoyed the topics the last few weeks and has had me think critically about things that go on in the world that revolve around technology.

Blog 2 - Julian, Twitter, Hacking, and some ramblings.

This time around we got to talk about some of my favorite topics. Hacking and social networking.

The video that we watched about the secret history of hacking is something that I watched a couple times. I have been a big fan of the Woz for years and I knew quite a bit about Captain Crunch already. I had built several different “boxes” in my day. I knew some of the tricks they were talking about. The 2600 whistle was long gone and we had to find other ways of having fun with a telecommunication system. It's knowing those things that have helped me place safeguards on my systems (both computer and phone) so that I'm the one that knows what's going on with them.

Kevin Mitnick was also someone I had previously done reading on in the past. I knew about his fun with Sun Microsystems and Motorola. Was he trying to do devious things with the information like sell if off to competition? I don't believe he was. He is just a curious guy that happened to go a bit to far. A lot of people just don't know when to stop. Information collection can become quite addictive.

All of our talk about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, and anonymous... I am not sure they all went about putting information out to the masses the right way. Some of the information that they had (like anonymous having the names of police officers) were posted and should not have been. Not only were the lives of the officers at stake, but possibly the families of the officers as well. It's one thing to disagree with the tactics a law enforcement agency users, but it is another to put innocent people in harms way because you disagree with those tactics.

This last week's discussion has also been one that I have enjoyed. While I got to it late, I always thought about the whole Social Media and Twitter with the Middle East. Personally, I never really imagined or saw places like Iran or Egypt as being a hot bed for the internet and a social media revolution. You go to places like New York or LA and you see all these people with phones all the time, taking pictures of traffic accidents or sending text messages out while they are walking and not really paying attention to what is going on in the world. That's not how I picture the Middle East at all. I still see them as being an area that is a bit behind when it comes to technology. Kind of like in the 80's when it was big news that you had a VCR and it was a huge top loading device, but top of the line for the time!

On a side note about of of our readings for the week, I find it kind of odd that we read an article from what is a well known satire site. While the information that is in there is interesting to read and does have several citations in it, it seemed off. I didn't expect to see that in the readings. To me it's almost like having the NBC Nightly News cite an article from The Onion as a news source.

Blog 2- Sami Atari

I think this class is very influential in encouraging intellectual debates. We have covered a lot of topics that get brought up in many of my IT classes, but I never had a chance to give put more thought into them until now.

One subject I enjoyed discussing dealt with the social media affecting the Arab Spring. In my Global Information Systems class, we constantly were looking at the ICT rating of many countries. We would compare old rankings with new ones to see which countries are developing their ICT. When we came to the Middle East the rankings were scattered, with some countries having rating on the high end and other on the low end of the spectrum. A big topic that we focused on was how the social media became the faceless leaders of the revolution taking place. I strongly believe that social media made a big impact on the revolution, due to the fact that the government shut down the internet.

Another subject I enjoyed was about hackers and hactivism. I personally believe there are good hackers and bad. Hackers seemingly have a bad reputation, but to me there are more true hackers that actually help us than hurt us. What I mean by “true hackers” is that true hackers don’t hack to hurt people, but instead to discover new capabilities and share them with others. Everything we use when it comes to technology has been affected by hackers. They take what we have and improve it. The video “The Secret History of Hacking” did a good job of showing how hacking got started and showed how some hackers can be our best inventors, for example, Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of apple. I watched an interesting documentary on hackers call “Hackers are People Too”, and they bring up a good point that even Thomas Edison could be considered a hacker, since he took ideas that were already out there and improved them.

Having said that, I still think that there are definitely some hackers that don’t have justified means for their actions. For example, the group Anonymous is now what people think of when hackers are mentioned. These are the hackers that take part in cybercrimes, and are the ones giving “hackers” their bad reputation. These are the type of people who interfered with my PlayStation Network in the spring, along with the people who hacked UW-Milwaukee database.

It was great getting feedback from others on the discussion board. It helps give me another perspective that I would have never thought of on my own. After taking a step back and thinking about our topics, I almost feel that one of the first forms of social media was phone phreaking.

Blog 2 - Erik Fillner

Weeks 5-8 met my expectations of good content and discussions while I was looking ahead at the material to be covered. Being a Management Information Systems major and working in the IT field, I have read many articles that pertain to what we have covered these past 4 weeks. The week of material that captured my attention most was Week 6, about hackitivism and the group Anonymous.

The reason I find this particular topic so appealing is because I see the potential effectiveness hacking could eventually have. It provides an interesting separation of viewpoints. This class being an ethics class, it is interesting to see how many people view this type of "ethical" hacking as being ethical in the sense that it is being done for the good of the common citizen, and those who view it being bad all together. The discussions make one question their own views as they read about other people's views. As Anonymous get more media attention, I think Anonymous will become more and more active in executing hacks. It will be interesting to see how Anonymous will evolve over time. I believe future wars will have an increasing cyber presence. The next breed of soldiers may very well be cyber soldiers!

Another topic I found very interesting and relavent for this class was the impact social media has. We saw uprisings and an overthrown government in Egypt happen due to the use of social media. These uprisings in northern Africa and the Middle East are all a chain reaction that can be derived from social media. We can see how powerful social media can be, as Mubarak of Egypt actually made the huge effort to shut down the Internet in Egypt, isolating them from the rest of the world.

The past four weeks of class provided interesting and exciting content and discussions. Everything we have covered has been good to think about. Tavani and Ess provide some good insight on discussed topics. We can think about things that have recently happened, things that are happening, and things that could very well happen in the future. With the extent we currently use technology and covering these topics that technology exposes us to, it is both exciting and potentially frightening to think about what could happen in the future.

Blog Post 2 Marc

In the past few weeks we had many good discussion topic questions that have started many good debates. The one topic I really enjoyed talking about was Lessig’s architecture freedom or control.  There were many different thoughts about Lessig’s theory. Another topic I enjoyed was talking about when does technological curiosity turn into a criminal action.  I have learned a lot not just from reading the book but also from all the discussion that takes place during the week.

            Going back to the topic about Lessig’s architecture freedom and control. Lessig suggested that the best way is to have control over the Internet. But I argued that both would be ideal for our lifestyles. We like having the freedom of the Internet but we also want some control so the freedom of the Internet doesn’t get out of hang.  I believe in today’s world we take our freedom for granted and don’t realize how much freedom we have. If the Internet did become a more controlled area by the government we would not like the change at all. We have adapted to the freedom of the Internet and even though some control is good, having complete control would be too much.  Lessig’s states, “As such, the code at Chicago favored freedom, or free speech” (Tavani 270). We as American’s favor freedom and is an important part to our country and there are many places were freedom can be displayed.

            My next topic I enjoyed was when does technological curiosity turn into criminal actions.  My answer to this question is when information starts to get taken. Information that a person should have that they got from the Internet turns into a criminal action. It is okay to have curiosity but when stuff that shouldn’t be looked at is taken then it turns into an illegal action. This ties into the freedom and control aspect of Lessig. Freedom is great until information is stolen. It seems we always take more action after something happens. For important information there should be more security on it to begin with so we all don’t have to worry about hackers being able to take something.

            I have learned a lot from all these topics and they will allow me to look at technology differently. When a good topic comes up that I really enjoyed I will always share something that I didn’t know with my friends because we all enjoy talking about technology. I didn’t have a huge knowledge base about technology ethics but my knowledge is growing and it is good to start learning more about the ethics side.

            I am looking forward to the next few weeks with the topics about digital divide and identity and experience online coming up. I think those are good topics to talk about and I will be able to learn a lot about them through the readings and all the discussion with the class.

            

Blog 2-Greg Renard

One thing that surprised me the most recently would have to be the idea of privacy and security. However, it is not the idea that surprises me but rather how Facebook thinks that their new way of "security" will help benefit people whom have lost their password. What does this new level of security entail might you ask? In short, if you want to set up this level of security you will need a few GOOD friends to confide in in-case of the dreaded time that you may lose your password. So, lets say you lose your password, the people whom you have chosen to help you with the recovery will then receive an email with your password. In return, then they can finally let you know what that password was you were looking for.

An article that I was reading yesterday on the Facebook issue had brought up the idea that "friends are not always friends forever." This statement is dead on. Think of someone whom you were really good friends with and never thought you two would end up despising each other and not talking to each other again. It is hard to imagine when you are their friend at the time, but chances are most people have run into this predicament. So, then this brings up the idea if this new level of security is really a good alternative to those not remembering their passwords. In the end, this password recovery system could end up haunting the user. The reason I say this is that if you ended on bad terms with a friend whom you had chosen to be a so called guardian of your password, what is to say that they are not going to log onto your account when they get that email with your password.

Facebook is trying to make things more secure for people and I praise them on that. However, they definitely need to think things over before coming out with a feature like this. What is so wrong with the “forgot my password” feature that sends it to your own email and not others. If you do not know either your user name or password, you can always email Facebook with your credentials you had on the account. In other words, there are much better alternatives so choose wisely.

Blog Entry 2 (Andrew Pape)

In week five I was introduced to both positive and negative freedoms through the video entitled: The Trap part 3: We Will Force You to be Free. The video emphasizes that freedom is not easily defined for a large group of individuals who all want or need different things in life. The way that government tries to impose freedom sometimes only leads to the exact opposite of freedom. While this video didn’t necessarily cover the topic of the information world, I could put it into context as to how freedom exists over the internet. I think as internet users we must be aware of our responsibilities and freedoms that we hold through the internet. We must be careful as to not abuse this power as it can, and most likely will be stripped away. Equally, however, we must also be diligent in stopping injustices to our freedoms such as security breaches, or regulations that seem to benefit only one particular group.

Week 6 covered areas such as Hackivism, Internet Vigilantism, & the Anonymous group. I always knew that the term hacker was never supposed to have a negative connotation, but it’s unfortunate that it has become somewhat of a negative term. If someone thinks about ‘hacking’ they immediately think of someone breaking into a computer and doing unlawful things. The guys in the video: The Secret History of Hacking seemed as if they wouldn’t hurt a fly. I do think though that Kevin Mitnick took hacking to a different level. He was punished numerous times for his hacking into computer systems and he refused to stop. It wasn’t until after 5 years in prison, and 1 year in solitary confinement that he finally changed his anti-social behavior to use his hacking skills to better society. He says in the Colbert Report video that he is a consultant that hacks into computer systems to show companies the vulnerabilities of the systems.

I’ll have to admit that week 7 didn’t seem too interesting because there will always be varying opinions on whistleblowing and if Wiki Leaks is motivated by true journalism. I did happen to come across an article this past Wednesday about Wiki Leaks in the Wall Street Journal (http://tinyurl.com/3qmy425). The article says that funding for WikiLeaks is pretty mush being blocked by major financial companies such as Paypal and Visa. Wiki Leaks will be shutting down all publishing in order to fight the blocks of these companies. In a way it doesn’t seem right that the financial companies can do this, but in another sense, Wiki Leaks is an entity that has a very powerful potential and it was almost naïve for the people of Wiki Leaks to think that it would survive independently.

That last thing that was covered within the weeks was the subject of the digital divide and social media revolution in developing countries. I thought that the three articles that were posted were all good in showing the different sides of this “social media revolution.” The first article was good in showing that there can be a need in closing the digital divide between countries with different economic backgrounds. The good thing about the article was that it did not put emphasis only on social media and how it can potentially overthrow a government. The second article was about social media and how it doesn’t really bring anything new to the table. Social media can be used just as equally by opposing forces of a revolt to fight it. Social media is not something that governments are unaware of, and regardless of what media says, it’s not the main reason behind the success of toppling governments. The last article showed a humorous side of how the media works. It was from Cracked.com which I always remember as being Mad Magazine’s ugly step sister when I was a child. Even though it was funny, there was still some truth to it. Sometimes the media uses Twitter like it’s a reliable news source, when in fact it’s more like something as the article stated: “Every kernel of real information out there is floating somewhere on an ocean of bullsh*t.(http://tinyurl.com/3jvo3eg)” That made me laugh really hard.

Works Cited:

The Trap (Part 3) – ―We Will Force You to Be Free‖ http://tinyurl.com/288fak

The Secret History of Hacking http://tinyurl.com/3p7oyzl

Stephen Colbert interview with Kevin Mitnick http://tinyurl.com/3rajmdv

WikiLeaks Says It Could Close (WSJ.com) http://tinyurl.com/3qmy425

The Power of Social Media in Developing Nations: New Tools for Closing the Global Digital Divide and Beyond (harvardhrj.com)

In The 'Net Delusion,' Internet Serves Oppressors http://tinyurl.com/2bbxkc7

5 Reasons Twitter Isn't Actually Overthrowing Governments http://tinyurl.com/3jvo3eg

Blog 2 - Hogden

A theme that has continually resonated to me during the past four weeks of discussion relates to the definition and interpretation of freedom. How one may intrinsically define freedom verses how a collective group may prefer to interpret it on a more macro level. The post Civil War United States has been fashioned from an ideal of freedom that is unique when compared to many more oppressive counties. Freedom has been engrained in the very fabric of our being, the United States Constitution.

The internet has provided an immense platform to deliver modes of communication once unimaginable. For the sake of perspective, could any legislator directly involved with the passage of the first amendment every comprehend that in just two centuries they could peer upon a colored box and see and speak to a person from across the globe in real time? Can the freedoms defined 220 years ago apply today to an era of technology that intertwines nearly every corner of the globe? How, if at all does this definition of freedom translate to a globally interconnected communication system?

These controversial questions continue complicate the largely unregulated cyberworld. The degree of connectivity that the internet provides affords a level of instantaneous and effortless access to information that has never before been seen. Additionally, this technology has introduced an ever dwindling level privacy and security of information as commerce has become ever more reliant upon technology. The later phenomenon has created significant concerns relating to cybersecurity, especially with the emergence of crackers, cyberterrorists and free speech inspired vigilantes that use the structure of freedom of speech to dispense malicious, defamatory or questionable content at times. These apparent insults on privacy, along with numerous other areas on contention, have resulted in an increased desire from many for internet regulation.

Reflecting back to Tavani’s introduction of the Lessig modalities relating to architecture (270), one may very well interpret US roots and values to support an architecture of freedom. However, the recent concerns identified above clearly indicate that a level of control is being advocated for. Do we want to be controlled or do we want total freedom? Is it possible to have both? This theme has again and again resurfaced in class discussion. I have been intrigued by the contrasting and seemingly incompatible ideologies that seem to exist. We are appalled when considering that “big brother” may be monitoring usage or restricting our content, but are equally irate when we learn that our private financial data has been breached or an unauthorized video has been leaked. I am perplexed by this true enigma. From a micro level analysis a concerned parent may long for aggressive filters that omit foul language and pornographic images, while a struggling artist or film maker may detest such means of control as they are a detriment to their art from. In contrast, from a macro level analysis, one may long for a greater level of security and privacy, while another, say Julian Assange or residents of a country dictated by an oppressive regime, may desire total freedom and ownership of liability. I am left contemplating where the true responsibility lies.

Works Cited

Tavani, H. T. (2011). Ethics and Technology - Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Blog #2 - Michael Starks

As I anticipated, this class is evolving into a fantastic learning experience. Each week is opening new perspectives for me in terms of ethical understanding. Of particular meaning to me were our discussions on hacking / hactivism. This topic is particularly sensitive to me. I used to be a member of an elite group in Germany. To make a long story short, I was ostracized from that group in a very painful manner. Week 6 brought back those pains. My ethical beliefs regarding hacking were tainted through a series of unfortunate events in my past.
After reading the material, I began to question my own moral issues pertaining to hacking / hactivism. The readings in Tavani, specifically the analysis' from Manion, Goodrum, and Dennig in chapter 6 gave support to my beliefs, but they were missing something. As I viewed the interviews with Woz and Captain Crunch, a light went off in my brain. Anonymous and their ilk were being confused with true hackers. Hacking and Phreaking are pure forms of information assimilation and as such, they should be embraced and accepted. We have our own ethics that have apparently been forgotten by groups such as Anonymous. I still do not condone what Anonymous does, even if it is for a "good cause" due to the destructive nature of their actions. They are in violation of one of the most important rules of true hackers; "Do no harm."
"Do no harm", these three words mean quite a bit to most of us. They mean much for Julian Assange as well. I have long been a fan of Mr. Assange because of what he does; he provides information on the injustices of governments and companies against the common people. Most people do not want to hear about these things as it does not pertain to them. I see this as selfish ignorance. If there is wrong in the world and we know about it, it is our responsibility to expose that wrong in an effort to prevent it from happening again. I understand what Mr. Assange means with his seemingly contradictive collateral damage assertion; the damage is directed towards the aggressor. Their original actions are the root cause of any subsequent damage that may be incurred. The simple resolution for this; do not try and hide your actions and above all, do not break your own laws. The actions of the various world governments against WikiLeaks seems to validate the fact the they are hiding much more from us than we know.
Earlier this year, revolts in Tunisia, Egypt, and more recently Libya were fueled in part through the extensive use of social media. I am not sure if I believe all of what has happened or why it has happened. I view social media as being quite similar to a childhood game where you all sit in a circle and whisper something to the person next to you. By the time the information gets back to you, it is quite different from what you had originally said. As our current discussion transpires, I am beginning to question the validity of the uprisings. Were they fabricated by a small group in an effort to gain control over their respective governments? Did all of this start to get attention? I once believed that these uprisings were legitimate; now I am not sure anymore.

Blog 2 McGlasson-Maynard

These last couple weeks have been so engaging and interesting, I can’t wait to get home from work every day to read the discussion boards. Now that the class has moved into the arena of applying the ethical theories to everyday situations, I feel we are all a little more involved. It appears as though we are starting to determine if we want to apply an ethical theory to a situation, or develop a hybrid of our own morals to “solve” these new dilemmas.

In week 5, during the discussions regarding Freedom vs. Privacy, I was struck by “architecture of freedom” vs. “architecture of control.” (Tavani, 270) I really enjoy the freedom of the Internet and all of the Wild West allusions that it entails. However, I am not completely naïve and understand there are always malcontents that will abuse any free system. Also, I have obviously taken my privacy and right to it, for granted. To view it as a “negative right” or as a “positive right” took some time for me to comprehend (Curtis).

This led nicely into the next week’s discussions regarding Hacktivism and Anonymous. I realize I may be more of an anarchist than I suspected, because I admire Anonymous to a certain extent. The idea that an unrelated and unknown group of people band together and create chaos, hopefully in the name of good, is slightly romantic to me. I understand property gets damaged; and that what they are doing can be illegal, and that people’s feelings get hurt. But I also understand an animal abuser was caught, a cult was made fun of and exposed, and they have attacked oppressive regimes. As a newbie part-time political activist myself, I believe that the freedom to congregate, even on the Internet, is a basic freedom that needs defending.

The freedom to expose, as Julian Assange has dedicated his adult life to, was a hot topic for our class during week 7. Freedom of Information, Whistleblowing, Freedom of Speech and Wikileaks are always contentious debates. Our discussion board was enlightening and surprising. I was confused by Assange’s assertion that he was exposing the US military’s involvement in the horrible massacre of unarmed persons in Afghanistan due to their use of the cover claim of collateral damage; but then later he admitted that persons hurt by his exposes are collateral damage in the war for total freedom of information (Khatchadourian). This irony is showing the underlying flaw in completely transparent information. There are some things I do not want to know. And there are some things I believe I do not need to know. However, I do know there is a lot more I would like to know.

During week 8, we have been discussing the Internet and Social Revolution, as well as the Digital Divide. Social media is providing a new avenue of discourse as well as allowing the world to get a real-time view of political upheavals as they happen. This is dynamic and unheard of. We are having trouble assessing the importance of it all because it is happening as we speak. Some people claim that twitter isn’t as important as the media is claiming it to be. Some people say its use is responsible for the overthrow of governments. The truth lies in the middle. People can connect faster and in ways unknown even five years ago. Governments can also track revolutionaries and common citizens in new and horrible ways. There is no doubt that what happened in Tunisia and Egypt would have happened eventually. The speed with which the movements grew, and progressed and were advertised around the world was unprecedented though.

Khatchadourian, Raffi. "NO SECRETSJulian Assange’s mission for total transparency." New Yorker. 07 Jun 2010: n. page. Web. 28 Oct. 2011. hadourian?currentPage=all>.

Tavani, Herman T. Ethics and Technology: Controversies, Questions, and Strategies for Ethical Computing. 3rd. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2011. Print.

"The Trap-3-We Will Force You 2 B Free." Video. Google Videos. Adam Curtis. BBC, 2008. Web. 28 Oct 2011. 7581348588228662817>.

blog2, weeks 5-8

In weeks 5-8 we covered the topics of Freedom vs. Privacy and Security; Hacktivism, Internet Vigilantism, & Anonymous; Freedom of Information, speech, Whistle-blowing and Wikileaks; The Internet and Social Revolution and the Digital Divide. During these weeks it became pretty obvious to me the reason that a class on Digital Media Ethics is touching on these particular subjects. The reason is every one of the subjects tests our ethical standards that we have been creating over the years. By testing I mean I came into each subject matter with a predetermined mindset on how I felt about each. After going through the discussion process with the class I was able to understand other classmate’s ethical views. By being able to understand the thinking behind others ethical views on what it or is not ethical has allowed me to go into gray areas that I was previously black and white on.
For example the week six topic of Hacktivism, Internet Vigilantism, & Anonymous, I had a very black and white view that I could not see anything good ethically out of hacking. I thought that anyone caught hacking should be prosecuted by law even if data was not stolen or damaged. After much discussion throughout the week I was able to enter the gray area a little bit in some instances. The problem for me was the conflicting ethical views that I felt it was ok to give up some freedom for privacy and security as discussed in week five, but I also felt hacking should not be allowed. For me it was difficult not to allow ethically the use of hacking when the lives of many could be affected from the gathered information. My mindset did change on the subject of hacking; now I view hacking with eyes of intent. The intent of the act of hacking should be looked at to determine whether this is crossing the line ethically or not. Was the intention of the hacker for good or harm? This question set up the scene for week seven and eight’s discussion on Wikileaks and whistle-blowing. Although some Wikileaks information leaks and whistle-blowing efforts have done some good, it is still hard for me to go against the loyalty to my country or company that I work for. So the discussion in week 6 on hacking has allowed me to see some gray area in these discussions as long as the intent was for the good of the many instead of for profit or individual accolades.

Blog 2

In the last four weeks, we have gone over several different topics.  In weeks 5 and 6, we evaluated Freedom vs. Privacy concerns, and in week 6, hacktivism and groups like anonymous.  Weeks 7 and 8 looked at Freedom of information and speech, with focus on wikileaks, and how the internet has created a social revolution in some people's opinions.   I believe that weeks 5 and 7 interested me the most, as I have a lot of feelings towards  privacy on the internet.

               

Prior to the readings and video regarding wikileaks, I was absolutely against what Assange was doing.  I felt that he had no right to post classified information, no matter what the reason behind it.  Leaking video of the raid in Iraq was bad enough, but leaking diplomatic cables could start other conflicts.  World politics, for better or for worse, depends on secrecy and privacy.  Destroying that curtain of privacy may seem like a good idea, but do we really want countries that aren't benevolent (N. Korea) to know what we are doing?

               

After the weeks readings, I am still against Assange and what he is doing, with some misgivings.  I understand the government covers things up, and he feels the people have a right to know about it.  I also understand that wikileaks has exposed a lot of human rights issues in other countries and massacres, etc. that were not covered under normal news.  But while Assange sees himself as a someone exposing wrongs and making a big pretense of collateral damage, he is willing to risk collateral damage to people involved in the videos and leaks, and that is acceptable.

             

This relates back to week five's readings, in regards to freedom, and privacy/security.  I attempt to not let any information about me be on the internet, as I think there is enough out there for people to find, without giving them more information.  But in today's world, there is so much privacy that is taken away from us.  The Freedom of information Act and Wisconsin opens records laws, allow almost anyone to get information about you.  This disturbs me, because I know I can go to my local county office, pay a fee, and get tax records on all my neighbors.  I can see what they pay, their full names, whether they paid last year's taxes all at once or in two installments. Now, Assange would say this is probably a good thing, because it allows me to make sure I am not being unfairly targeted for taxes and that all my neighbors are paying similar rates, based on their houses.  However, I can use this information in a malevolent way also.  If I am interested in stealing peoples identities, I can drive through a nice neighborhood, write down house addresses that look expensive, get the owners information, including their names.  Then I can use social networking, social engineer them, and use all this information to steal their identity. 

               

Granted, this could have been done without all the information via public records law, but it makes it more accessible.  Assange seems to ignore this, and in a way, seems to be oblivious, or unwilling to admit, that his work could cause harm, even as it unmasks lies. 

               

I don't believe that anything I read will make me change my online behavior, unless it makes me become more careful about what information is out there.  I don't believe that all information should be open to anyone who wants it, and I will continue to try and keep mine as private as possible.