Stalkers by Christine Miller

Facebook has taken over society. Looking around, everyone has one. Brothers, sister, parents, cousins both older and younger, Aunts and Uncles, friends…everyone has one. It’s crazy how this internet tool now is taking up so much of young teens lives. How many times have you heard a teenager express their lack of homework completion due to their Facebook addiction? Or heard a friend talk to you about something you posted a week ago on the site and never talked to them about before? People are spending too much of their time on Facebook, and while many will admit to that, rarely do the cease to access their account as often. It blows my mind when a friend tells me to change my profile picture or status. Apparently they have checked my profile often enough to know that my involvement on the site is scarce. Why are they checking on me so often? Call me if you want to know what I’m up to. Just weird. Many people use Facebook to try to appear to other Facebook obsessed users that they are popular and having so much more fun. I wonder, if they are really as busy as they make themselves out to be with parties and events, because they are on Facebook continuously. status’ changed multiple times a day and pictures added and changed…it’s just interesting how Facebook allows people to come across something other then what they are and that they try endlessly to uphold the facade.

You’re Everywhere on the Internet by Taylor Buxton

 Since we’ve been discussing online identities and other things that have to do with social networking in class this quarter, I found an article by Carolyn Johnson that has to do with yet again, online identities. The article first grabbed my attention because it talked about an “online identity crisis,” where as usually you would just hear about a regular identity crisis. The article posed the question, “Who am I on this website?” which I thought was a valid question to ask. I know that I have multiple passwords and usernames just to fulfill my duties as a UC student, not even counting any other websites I choose to access on my own for pure enjoyment.

      The article found on The Boston Globe’s website discussed the efforts by many big companies to synthesize, in a way, multiple log-ons into one universal log-on. Also, many instant messaging accounts can be linked together so that you can talk to someone on a different network. There are digital address books, and sites where you could find out someone’s trustworthiness on craigslist, Ebay, or even dating sites. Everything in the internet age is just scattered everywhere and people just throw out their information to create an account and to fill out a survey.

      One term was used throughout the article that I had not heard before: walled gardens. I had to do some online research to see that walled gardens had to do with media content, and it almost means that a company is a monopoly with the way that one company can provide a service. This new idea of tying all digital usernames and passwords into one universal log-on will help break the walls of the so called walled gardens. The article finishes with an analogy; Just as it was mandated that phone customers could take their phone numbers with them to a new provider, because the number was the customers and not the company’s, the personal data belongs to the user, not the service or the website. Like the article says, in the future, “who you know becomes valuable to you and meaningful and accessible to you across any website, application, or device.”

      In my opinion, I think that this would save a lot of time and hassle. As I sit down every day to log on to multiple sites and services, I know that atleast once or twice a day, I find myself typing in the wrong password for one of the sites because I have so many different ones and so many different sites to log in to. If what they are aiming to do happened in the near future, it would be a great time saver. The possibilities would be endless if everyone I knew was tied into all one service. Imagine the time you’d save looking for everyone and logging in to a million things 6 times a day!

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2008/05/05/identity_crisis/?page=2

Facebook and Alter Egos by Alexander Davis

Have you ever noticed how people talk over Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, or even text messaging? Is it different from how they usually converse with the public? Many people can be more aggressive or out-going than they ever would be in person. It gives some the ability to speak their minds and say things that they usually wouldn’t. I don’t think any of these mediums are good to converse on. They may be a good way to communicate with and stay connected to friends and family, but I think it’s always better to have a conversation over the phone or in person.

      In a conversation on Facebook or any non face-to-face medium of communication, people tend to have an alter ego. They may use these ways of communication to confront people that they may not be able to confront in person. Over Facebook Chat or text messaging, normally docile people may have a whole different side. It may be hard to express feelings in person, or bring up an awkward subject, so all of these emotions come out through the web. Some may take on a mean or aggressive persona, where in a face-to-face conversation they would actually be scared to act in such a way.

      While these findings may not be true in everyone, there are many other ways in which one can change their personality on the web or through texts. Online social networks may give some people the courage to express their emotions or feelings. Some people enjoy writing regular posts, notes, or blogs expressing how they feel, whether happy or sad. It is a way for many to get out their feelings and get responses that they would usually be too shy or self-conscious to talk about in a different environment.

      So I guess there are both benefits and drawbacks of having an alter ego on the web. It allows some to open up and share how they feel, while for others it empowers them to act out and talk in a way that would not be appropriate in face-to-face conversations. This will most likely be a problem for eternity when dealing with online social networks, and it doesn’t seem like there’s anything that could stop it.

Facebook and its Discontents by Julia Laubenthal

When I was young, I remember watching Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise race on horseback through western territory fighting to claim the perfect plot of land at the climax of the film “Far and Away”.  At the time I was extraordinarily disturbed because I was under the impression that the romantically involved characters were brother and sister due to what I like to call new-age-attention-deficit-disorder.  So, my short attention span some how missed the fact that the two characters were only pretending to be brother and sister in order to save money by rooming together.  However, that is another subject for another day.  In actuality the two actors were playing the parts of Irish immigrants searching for land and fortune in America.  In the end of the movie they finally find free land in the west.  The only problem (besides the looming love triangle that overshadows their non-incestual love) is that they must beat out others to claim the land.  All of the potential land owners had to race on horseback to the plot of land they desired and claim it as their own by thrusting their own flag triumphantly as the camera circled them dramatically.

As I never fully understood that the things I learned about American Indians and Boston Tea Parties were more important than, and in fact quite different than, the Disney tales of Pocahantas and Alice in Wonderland, until it was far too late to establish the common knowledge my History buff brother constantly bewilders me with, I must pathetically site this movie to convey what I think was referred to in eighth grade history as manifest destiny or the great land rush. Regardless, the question remains: where am I going with this?
These days it seems as though this tale in no way relates to the planet we live on.  Today, people seem to be packing and picking every corner of mother earth.  We’re running out of space and resources and approaching “maximum capacity”.  I could not tell you if this means we will be packed like sardines or pickles, but I am relatively sure we’ll at least be sharing bunk beds and bathrooms rather than running with Tom Cruise through open spaces contemplating just where we should build or dream house.  However, I know of a place where such a race does exist.  Well, minus the tom cruise part.  No, not on Mars, not even on the poor non-planet Pluto but right where you sit, yes right there, right now as you read this fabulous blog.  Yes, I know you, your parents, or your landowner have claim over the physical space, but we’re talking about something much bigger here, potentially infinite.  No, not Fantasia.  Gosh, with that kind of thinking you’ll have no trouble finding a free place to live; you’ll even have a self-hugging jacket to keep you warm within the rubber walls.  We’re talking about the World Wide Web, and more specifically, a site my generation has come to know, love and obsess over, Facebook.

In June of 2009, Facebook began giving out customized web addresses.  In other words, rather than Facebook.com/random_code, people are able to get web addresses that contain their names: Facebook.com/name.  When this application premiered a mad rush began.  People did not want to miss out on claiming their online territory.  As people grabbed for their web addresses complication after complication arose. The creation of online territory by Facebook’s personalized web addresses creates complications and limitations within the seemingly limitless, free internet.  Problems concerning limited identity offers, identity theft, constant evolution of social networking sites, and determination of who has authority over these issues all serve as examples of some of these complications.
The most common problem these personalized web addresses create occurs when two people truly desire to use the same web address (most often because they both share similar names).  The New York Times tells the story of Chris Hardwick, a comedian who was too busy to register for his web address in time and so lost it to a high school kid in England.  By adding personalized web addresses Facebook makes the once infinite internet space seem even more crampt than the world.  The number of personal web addresses available is limited by the number of names that exist.  As a result, there is now a competition between any people who share names.   Just imagine if everyone on Facebook wanted his own web address.  There would be no way of deciding which person would claim their exact name and which person would have to compromise.   “Facebook has invited trademark holders and celebrities who find their names are taken to fill out a complaint form on the site. It says it will resolve disputes on a case-by-case basis.” (June, New York Times 2009) Is it really fair that facebook gets to dictate all this?  What about people with names similar to those of celebrities; are they being snubbed?  Our space is now limited by the number of names we have, it seems as though we’d need an infinite number of names to accommodate everyone fairly.  If this keeps up we may have to revert back to the old system of naming people i.e. Julia Laubenthal of Cleveland, OH.  Which would actually be quite interesting as it would give the online world a greater dependency on the physical nature of the real world.

While many celebrities, businesses, and companies all had no trouble registering for their precious web addresses others were not so lucky.  The New York Times also tells the story of Larry Winget, a personal finance author who lost his address to another person.  What’s notable about Larry’s case is that the person who beat him to his claim did not share his name.  Instead, one of his own fans stole his identity.  This fan planned to exchange the web address for a face-to-face meal with Winget.  What’s interesting about this is not just that a personal finance author has devoted fans, but that the use of personalized web addresses has introduced problems outside people of similar names.  One would think the main fight over cyber space would occur when people with similar names desire to have the same address like in the Chris Hardwick case.  However, people are beginning to realize the value of these online spaces.  For example, Jeremy Fancher registered for facebook.com/dellcomputer and planned to sell it.  What if Facebook had demanded pay like Fancher?  Would people have paid the price?  What if Fancher had tried to set up a sight mimicking dell’s computer service?  Who would have stopped him?

Another problem that arises when people try to define their own space online involves the ever evolving nature of the web.  What I didn’t mention before about the Hardwick case, is that Hardwick (the comedian) had already had to fight to secure his name on gmail and myspce.  What will happen when new Online Social Networks develop?  Will this fight for space and identity occur over and over?  Will it become more complex and important?  Right now most regular people seem unaffected by this search for identity and space.  What will happen if these online spaces become more and more important?
Lastly, problems are beginning to rise all over the internet concerning it’s regulation.  When it comes to Facebook and personalized web addresses Facebook seems to be in ultimate control.  When future online social networks evolve, will this still be the case?

As the Internet becomes more and more integrated in our society it evolves more and more.  As it explores different grounds it faces different problems and complications.  The problems that have arisen with Facebook’s personalized web addresses are just one example of this.  Whether or not this problem will evolve into something greater cannot be determined.  However, if systems like this one continue to develop on the World Wide Web they will have to overcome find a way to fix their complications and limitations or the internet will become quite the opposite of a free, infinite space.

Freedom From the Internet by Kristina Cho

The Internet can be the most helpful tool out there, but it can also be the most harmful tool towards productivity. It has an infinite amount of knowledge and sometimes that amount of information can overwhelm you. How can you prevent that from happening? Every time you get on your computer the Internet is just one click away. There is one solution and its called Freedom. It is an application only available to Mac users. Freedom blocks the Internet for up to eight hours and the only way to get use of the Internet again is by rebooting your computer. Fred Stutzman created it when his technique of avoiding the Internet by writing in a coffee shop failed when the coffee shop went wireless. This application is downloaded over 4,000 times a month. People all around the world love the freedom they get when there is no Internet to distract them.

This blog post took approximately 3 hours to write. That sounds a little ridiculous for a short blog post right? Well, it took me 3 hours to write not because I’m a slow or horrible writer, its just because I have Internet. What happened to me has probably happened you numerous times. You sit down at your computer and start to write an essay for class. You get off to a good start; the introduction and thesis are down. Then you come across a topic that you are not so sure about so you have to Google it really fast. There are so many links to go to and then one click turns into two clicks, three clicks, four clicks, and then you realize you’re not even on a site that has anything to do with your topic anymore. You force yourself to focus and start writing again. A few minutes later you have this urge to check something. You know you shouldn’t and that you don’t have any time, but you do it anyway. Now you’re on Facebook. You’re updating your status, looking on friends’ profiles, and creeping on people’s photo albums. You got your fix, but then you check the clock and it’s been 3 hours since you started your paper and all you have are two paragraphs!

I’m not saying that the Internet is a bad thing. It’s actually pretty amazing and has definitely helped me a lot. I think that it’s our own fault that we get so distracted. That’s why Freedom is a great tool for people out there that are not ready to willingly let go of their Internet. The Internet has so many portals and possibilities that people naturally want to explore them, but there is a time and place for that. When you have free time or actually have the need to research things on the Internet, then that’s perfectly acceptable. But when you have to get something important done then your priorities have to be to get it done in a timely manor and without any distractions. You can’t blame the fact you never finished your English essay on Facebook.

Online Censorship: Where to draw the line by Jenny Salipante

Can there be a line drawn determining what forms of censorship should be available on the Internet? Is it possible to have a clear cut-off without having any discrepancies or minor exclusions?  The government doesn’t censor other types of information services like mail, what if all ground mail had to be read for appropriateness?  If so, then what would be the means of appropriateness for each piece of mail? What would be suitable for different viewers? How do you determine the suitability of the context as it is related to the viewer?

The fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches, however the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), has been researching a proposal set before them stating that Internet services would be provided to all Americans, however the content would be censored of any images or other content that could potentially be harmful to teens under 18 years of age.

For this proposal to be enforced, where would the line of censorship be drawn? What if a high school senior was assigned a research paper for an anatomy class and needed to find images? Or what if a human genetic student needed medical illustrations to help with   case study work?  Or what about history students researching disease and cultural practices in Africa? To properly enforce the FCC’s proposal while maintaining the safest standards for Internet use, the censors would need to leave out what could be deemed as useful content.

A highly debated topic within the argument centers around who has the right and therefore should be able to draw the line.  On one hand, to ensure a level of fairness regarding censorship laws, some believe the government is the most fit for establishing a clear cut off point.  In opposition, some believe parents should have the right to judge the content their children are freely viewing on the Internet.

Studies have shown that a higher number of sexual suggestions have come from teen’s peers rather than adult predators.  Moreover, cases regarding teens and sexual predators have decreased significantly over the last ten years.

It is believed that in agreement with democratic ideology, information that is released in an unfiltered form increases public knowledge and with the Internet being the largest public information medium to date, the content within it should not be censored to such an extent that its truths couldn’t be revealed.

Got Milk? by Molly Tepe

Did you know cows are the number one contributors of air pollution? Did you know of all the mammals, humans are the only ones who continue to drink milk beyond childhood? Recent studies have shown that milk may not be as healthy as we thought or even necessary to drink. Considering it is originally intended for young calves to drink and help them gain weight. Studies have shown that it can clog arteries, reduce your iron intake, increase your chance of obesity and a recent Harvard study of seventy-eight thousand women found that women who consumed the most dairy products over a twelve-year period broke more bones then those who consumed fewer dairy products. Which just happens to be the opposite message of the million dollar dairy industry. Now doctors are stressing that you try and switch to soy or rice products. As this will not only help the environment but improve your health as well.

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/aug/13/opinion/oe-dawn13

Multiple Personality Disorder is an illness. But Don’t We All Have Multiple Personalities? By Ali Zwiesler

Think about the role you play within your group of friends.  Is it the same role you play in English class?  How about when you are with your family?  Do you act the same when you are at work or meeting a group of people for the first time?  Most likely, you act and play a different role in each group.  What does this mean about our personalities and our need to be accepted into diverse groups?

People always want to feel accepted and will go as far as changing their personalities to fit into these groups.  As a whole, people are very insecure about who they are and adapt their personalities to where they feel they fit into a group.  For example, if you are with a group of friends you have known for a long time, you may feel more comfortable to take on a leading position.  In contrast, if you are meeting a group of people who met for the first time, you may turn into a follower.

In this article on social identity, they conducted an experiment where a group of boys were separated into two different groups based on which painting they liked better and where distributed money.  They did not know who belonged to which group and were told to hand out the money to different people.  The ending result showed that people were more likely to distribute money to other members in the same group even though they didn’t know who was in their group.  We all have our own identities and this experiment showed that we tend to bond with people who are similar to us.

However, sometimes we are thrown into situations that our out of our control.   For instance, we do not choose our own families or the people we work with.  We still want to feel like we are a part of these groups and that is why we morph who we really are to fit in.  Being a part of a group makes us feel safe and makes us feel like we belong; how much are we willing to change the person we really are to “fit” in.  Shouldn’t we be accepted for who we are and not what people want us to be?  How much of yourself are you willing to change to please others?  Is it worth it?

http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/11/why-groups-and-prejudices-form-so.php

Google vs. Bing by Diego Cadena

http://whydontyougoogle.us/off-topic/chandler-crosby-and-microsoft-one-of-these-bings-just-doesnt-belong/

This article talks about how Microsoft wants to compete with Google’s search engine with “Bing”, and how it promotes it with loads of commercial and marketing campaigns, especially with its “Decision-making engine” but most users are sticking to Google’s easiness and reliability because people searching for something online want that and nothing else, and that “else” is what Microsoft is promoting.

Personally, when I have a quick question I want answered, or I’m looking for something in particular, I don’t need anything but the information I wanted. Also, once I use something, for example Google, and I see that it works, I continue using it. I think most people will stick to it, than move on to Bing.

Religion, Identity, and Dress Codes by Nhung Hoang

Do you always follow the school’s dress code?  Or better yet, have you ever been sent home for not following the dress code?  Well, what if you got sent home for your religion?  For Shabina Begum, she was sent home from school for wearing a jilbab.  A jilbab is a traditional Muslim dress that covers everything except for one’s hands and face.  The school thought that the jilbab prose a “health and safety risk” and can cause a division among the students. Begum, feeling like her basic human rights were restricted, took her school, Denbigh High School in Luton, Britain to court.  She had first won the Court of Appeal ruling in 2005 and was granted permission to wear the traditional Muslim dress. However, the Law Lords, Britain’s highest court overturned the appeal.  Lord Justice Bingham says Denbigh “had taken immense pains to devise a uniform policy which respected Muslim beliefs but did so in a inclusive, unthreatening and uncompetitive way.”  About eighty percent of the students attending Denbigh are Muslim and the administrators worry that if Shabina Begum wore the jilbab then it will make her appear superior to the other Muslims.  The school feels that the dress code is flexible for it appeals to all beliefs and customs.  Students at Denbigh High School are permitted to wear trousers, skirts, or a traditional shalwar kameez, consisting of trousers and a tunic.  As of now, Shabina Begum transferred to a school that allows her to wear the traditional jilbab.
As someone coming from a different ethnic background, I do not agree with the school’s decision to forbid Shabina Begum from wearing the jilbab.  Although I do agree with the school when it comes to students abiding by the dress code, I feel like the school took the dress code to the extreme.  If the school claims that the dress code appeals to all faiths and cultures then they should have allowed Begum to wear the traditional Muslim dress.  Other students who are of Muslim faith should also have the option to choose whether or not to wear the jilbab.  This way, it will be fair for the other Muslim students and will not create the possibility of students feeling like Shabina Begum is better than them.  Overall, I feel like Begum or anyone else with a different religion should be able to express themselves and not feel restricted by the dress code to an extent.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/03/22/muslim.court/index.html

HAPPY HALLOWEEN! Be safe and beware of the dangers of strangers.