An example of a “imagined future” takes place in George Orwell’s novel 1984. Although, we are way passed the 1900’s Orwell’s novel is interesting in many ways. First of all he published this book in 1948 and imagined his own vision of what the world would look like in 36 years. Orwell imagined this dystopian society where everything seems at ease and organized but is that really the case? The novel’s only prominent protagonist, Winston Smith realizes that society is not normal at all. Everything is controlled by a force termed, ‘big brother’. Big brother is never seen but is the party leader. The most famous line from the books is “big brother is watching you”. Winston realizes that he is trapped in a surveillance society where everything is recorded and seen and there is no privacy.
Now this is interesting because what Orwell imagined is very common with today’s society. With all the social media and technology that we have today as compared to 1984 or 1948 is tremendous. Our entire lives are almost spent on social media and this can be a tricky thing. Anyone can see what we do, we may think that our private browsing is kept “private” but that is not the case. In terms of surveillance, we have cameras on almost every street corner, in schools, in offices…etc. You can go on google maps and search and address and actually see it on your screen. It’s amazing how accurate Orwell was in terms of what he imagined to be our future. It may just be me but I do believe the government is big brother and the government can see everything that we do.
Vaidhyanathan argues that people trust google blindly and have immense faith in google. People trust google with personal information and this is a cause for worry. He is not totally against google in fact he says, “Google consequently is far more than just the most interesting and successful Internet company of all time. As it catalogs our individual INTRODUCTION 3 and collective judgments, opinions, and (most important) desires, it has grown to be one of the most important global institutions as well” . I agree with this 100% Google is quite beneficial. It is amazing to have access to answers to all our questions something that probably was not possible twenty years ago.
At the same time when trust is concerned, I am not sure if i trust Google completely. While Google is the answer to everything it is quite scary. The other day I googled my mother’s full name and clicked on a link on Google that had her address and telephone number and that is scary. Also there is access to everything including bad sites with viruses and malware that can be linked through google. Still, I do strongly agree that Google is beneficial to everyone, I am not sure if I would put my immense trust in it.
The Freedom of Information Act or the FOIA was developed and effect since 1966, What the FOIA does is it provides the public the right to request access to records from any federal agency. It provides the public with information about their government. Citizens, foreign nationals, as well as university students have access to request declassified documents, records, court papers, etc.
The American agency that Administers the work proposed in the FOIA are the Archives. The Archives are responsible to collect and publish declassified documents obtained through the FOIA. The Archive staff track U.S Governemnt agencies and federal records for documents that have never been released before to the public.
The FOIA is beneficial to the public some what. The public are able to benefit through access of documents and information that sometimes are hidden or kept away from the public eye. I say some what because the FOIA is not entirely out there with no limitations. The FOIA has exemptions such as, protecting personal privacy, national security, law enforcement and others. It may just be my opinion, but I strongly argue that there is so much out there that the government does not want the public to know, and the information that are free to us is just sugarcoated to protect the government.
Brian Martin’s book chapter is available to read as a PDF online because this makes it easier to reach a larger number of readers this way. It is much easier to find a PDF version online and read from it, then compared to looking for the book and having to purchase it. Martin mentions in the chapter that acquiring a lot of knowledge is sometimes limited. With the chapter being online for everyone on the web to read, Martin wants to make sure that there are no limitations to what people are entitled to know. Making the information of this chapter available, Martin reinforces the idea rhat sholarship should be liberated. There should not be limitations on how to obtain information and knowledge. I strongly agree with this as I feel that college textbooks should be free because the prices are just to expensive to obtain these books.
In his book, Too Big to Know, David Weinberger describes the concept of knowledge and how we view and understand it. By knowledge infrastructure, Weinberger means the organization and structure of knowledge. He believes that knowledge is bases on “credentials” such as degrees and publications and not simple opinions. In chapter one of his book, he talks about the evolution of knowledge, how it can be shaped through technology. This can be a bad thing, as there is just too much information out there and it becomes difficult to credit information as credible sometimes. He states, ” there way too much bad stuff. We can now see every idiotic idea put forward seriously and every serious idea treated idiotically” (12). We see this going on with the debate right now, instead of looking at the debate and realizing the importance of the election, there are people on the internet who make memes out of both candidates and this goes viral. However, Weinberger does reinforce that knowledge makes us better researchers as we are should be aware of credible information. When we have credible information and we know it is credible, the reaearching process becomes much easier. Yes, there is an information “overload” as Weinberger puts it, but we have filters. These filters ” increase information and reveal the whole deep sea” ( 13). There is so much information out there and there is no “running away from knowledge” we just need to know how to require information without overloading our brains.
Classification is important because we need a sense of organization and identification. Imagine going to a library and looking for a book on science and there are no aisles that are classified by subject, it would be extremely difficult and frustrating to find what you’re looking for. Classification is how we identify subjects, information, materials and basically anything. I classify myself based on how I identify myself. In biology when you’re asked to classify bones and muscles, you are asked to identify those bones.
Badke explains the following in chapter 4 of his book, “If you search a libary catalog, on the other hand , you will find that there is an available author search, title search, a subject heading search etc. that can help you jail down” (77) . Badke uses the libary catalog example to show how better suited it is compared to a meta base. This connects with what I said about going to a libary that has no classification or organization, it is much easier and less time consuming to simply classify subjects, material, and information.
In in the article, Folksonomy: A Game of High-tech (and High- stakes) Tag, writer Jessica Dye explains that major search engines cover a vast amount of material and simply searching for a simple thing will be a difficult task as there is just so much information. However, implementing tags like how we do on open lab can make the search much easier. This form or classification with the use of tags and hashtags is a far greater and helpful way to search the web.
In in his book, Alex Wright believes that classification allows us to think more in a cognitive way and practice thinking this way is better. We are ably to distinguish and differentiate between different subjects and how to classify these subjects amicably. As a student it is far easier for me to write an essay when I know exactly how to classify the information that I need. If I cannot apply the information to my paper, then there’s no way that I will be writing a good paper.
I think that people to have the right to keep certain things private. We live in a technological age where everything and anything is online. I recently googled my mother’s entire name and her phone number popped up as well. Phone numbers and addresses are things that people should have the right to keep private. A simple phone number can give others access to so much information about yourself, and unfortunately it is very easy to find online and that is a problem.
I don’t believe that the 1st amendment plays a huge role in terms of the right to be forgotten. Yes, the public should be allowed to express opinions and have their own opinions. However, the public should not have exclusive information about others who wish to keep certain things private.
Digital identity is what a person is on the Internet. What kind of information is out there on us. The word identity is what represents you. When we’re talking about “digital identity” what identifies you on the web. Our digital identities might be based on our social media like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc… So it is critical that people understand and are aware of everything that they post on the Internet.
I strongly believe that the government controls everyone’s digital identity. As much as we think that our social media is entirely ours and we can post whatever content we want. That is not true, if the government sees content as a threat they will remove it and take it down. Sometimes it doesn’t even have to be a threat, if it goes against the government things will get taken down.
Newman article questions
1. According to the article, What the “right to be forgotten” means for privacy in a digital age is privacy dead?
2. In contrast to the European system, what is America’s approach to privacy regulation?
3. In what aspect is data protection international?
Seaman article questions
1.According to Gawker Media’s staff, who’s decision was it to remove the first story and why was the story that was published removed?
2. Removing or un publishing stories has what affect on the public?
3. According to FiveThirtyEight.com’s Mona Chalabi on NPR, how many people in total in Europe asked Google to remove information about them from search results?
Corporate interests have a major influence on our lives. We may not realize this, however a majority of the information or “news” that we receive on a daily basisis controlled by big corporate news outlets. Some major names include CBS, Fox5, CNN etc. Most people get their news from watching these news channels, and are given information in a way that may be tweaked or mis conceived in a way to make people think a certain way. For example. Fox 5 is highly criticized for portraying African Americans in a bad light, or any person of color in a bad view. If a young black make commits a crime Fox 5 calls it violence, if an Arab or Indian male commits a crime its automatically an act of terrorism. But, if a white male has committed the same if not worse crime he is troubled or comes from a troubled up brining. This is unfair to the public and not ethical in my opinion.
There is an article posted on an independent news site (naturalnews.com). The article is titled, The 13 most evil U.S. government experiments on humans. I chose this particular article because I know that the government has an enormous control over what gets sent out into the news and what people can and should not hear about. I know that a big corporate outlet like CNN would not publish an article about the many ways the government has tortured humans. CNN would probably publish an article on why the government chooses to go about torture and how torture can prevent further attacks on the USA. But, CNN would not punish an in depth article on the horrors of government torture on people. I have actually googled CNN and government torture article, and the second thing that pops up is an article of Donald Trump explaining why torture may have prevented attacks on Brussels. (http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/22/politics/donald-trump-torture-brussels-abdeslam/)