Wednesday, November 19, 2008

week 13 notes

Let me start by saying that this link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hS8ywG5M_NQ) no longer works because Viacom has requested that youtube remove the video.

Also, noplacetohide.net didn't load, so I used the wayback machine. And to be honest, even with that I'm not quite sure what this place is. It seems to have been turned into a book whatever it was, but to me it just seems like a lot of people being nervous/paranoid about government powers to collect information on citizens. Yes, it is horrible that that 70 year old woman was detained because her name was similar to one on the terrorist watch list. But honestly - I'm not bothered by government powers. Also, please be nice. I know my feelings are very very different from those of most people, but I won't tell you you're crazy for being paranoid and I would appreciate it if you wouldn't tell me I'm a right wing nutjob for wanting the government to watch us and collect all sorts of personal information. :-)

EPIC
- This website doesn't seem to have been updated for quite some time (the most recent news story took place when I was in my freshman year of college...and I'm in grad school now). But basically it seems to have been created to protest the something called total information awareness which seems to have been a program that would allow the government to collect and store for easy access/use, information about people who were considered a threat to the safety of the united states. As demonstrated by my previous answer, I think we know where I stand on this issues. I'm pro-information collection and I trust our government to use it wisely/correctly.

Jeffrey Rosen (Is Privacy Dead?)
- I found this interesting if a little slow. Rosen describes one case in which the need for privacy was balanced with the need for information (a scanning tool that instead of showing us naked shows just things hidden under clothes with a blob instead of a body), and then goes on to show us one case in which he isn't so optimistic (the use of surveillance cameras). That being said - his worries about NYC are unfounded. As someone who lived there I can say that you are basically on camera 80% of the time in NYC as it is (ATM/bank cameras, stores, people's vacation photos, etc.). The point that I most liked though was the assertion that people don't want privacy, they want control over how/when they're exposed.

Facebook video
- Eh. This is old news. Facebook isn't the greatest thing in the world in terms of information safety. But we all use it anyway. Companies also use it to check up on employees. I would like to point out though that Facebook started as something very different than it is now - when I joined in 2004 it was a closed system (only available to the ivy league students), now it's just a giant advertising website. But you still choose to open an account, use that account, and fill in all those fun bits and pieces.

Jonathan Zittrain (future of the internet)
-The author of "The Future of the Internet: and how to stop it" starts talking about the history of computers/the internet and then to the current situation (wikipedia). Also, I have never heard anyone actually articulate "pwnd", it was completely correct, but also super dorky. And I also enjoyed the mention of old school "phreaking" (and showed how much of a geek I am...for those of you who aren't giant dorks like me phreaking refers to hacking the phone lines - no longer possible but used a lot in the 70s and 80s).

3 comments:

Lauren A. said...

I don't know why anyone would think anything like myspace or facebook are safe. I also don't get why people don't use the privacy tools!

Corrine W said...

I agree with you thinking that a certain amount of data mining is o.k. when it comes to national security and I am not right wing at all. I want to be safe and I want my kids to be safe (as well as everyone else's). Also, my husband is Security Forces in the Air Force so I am probably a bit biased. I can't help but think that if it could save lives then it would be o.k. unless it is used incorrectly.

Kirsten Bell said...

When it comes to security cameras in major cities, I'm all for it. London has been extremely successful in lowering crime rates because of surveillance, and since they are in public, it is not an infringement on a person's right to privacy. How many crimes are committed and never rectified because nobody saw them happen, or witnesses are too terrified to come forward?