QotW6: Privacy........What?

Is it the feeling of loneliness that makes us portray our personal details to the rest of the world via blogs and social networks on the Internet, or can it simply be argued that we actually do benefit from this act?

In real life, if a stranger were to come up to us and ask us for our personal details like telephone numbers, e- mail addresses, etc, other than running away from them, some people may even call the police. However, as double standard as it may seem, we unconditionally leave information about ourselves on the Internet, available for anyone’s viewing pleasure.

With the rapid progression of services that the Internet brings to us, we have begun to rely on it heavily. Be it to find friends or conquer boredom, social networking sites such as Facebook, Hi5 and Friendster are at the top of the list in terms of audience popularity. Although entrance and membership are free on these sites, people are required to provide information like their e-mail addresses and locations, in addition to the personal traits that would be displayed on their profiles.
Yet, when our bulk mail folder displays over a hundred spam mail, we wonder how they located our addresses!

In order to send spam, spammers need to obtain the e-mail addresses of the intended recipients. Toward this end, spammers gather huge lists of potential e-mail addresses. Since spam is, by definition, unsolicited, address harvesting is done without the consent (and sometimes against the expressed will) of the address owners (E-mail spam, 2007).

The situation we face could be almost a “give and take” trend. We trade in our privacy, in order for a slice of the expanding virtual reality and its limitless services.
As Rosen says in “The Naked Crowd,” a world where individuals have to prove their trustworthiness and value every day before the crowd, choosing among an infinite range of lifestyles, behaviors, clothes, and values, is inevitably a world that creates great anxiety about identity. Rather than conforming to pre-existing social roles, individuals are expected to find their true selves and constantly market themselves to a skeptical world (2004).

In today’s world, many people simply do not care or are not affected by the fact that “privacy” is on its way to extinction. Fortunately, I still value privacy and the sense of individualism it gives to us. I make it a point not to give out personal details about my self in social sites. It is also advisable to refrain from using real names and sticking to pseudonyms. Self Identity should be something personal. Thus, I only disclose information to good friends and relatives.
There have been numerous occasions where unwanted, unknown people have messaged and tried to contact me through sites like Hi5 and Friendster. However, by being ignorant and disregarding such messages, the problem would cease, at least temporarily.

As Sullivan says, everybody has secrets that they don’t want everyone else to know. Hence, it is our responsibility to be more aware and protect our privacy and our secrets. It is a “give and take” world. But humans always have and always will find means to give less and take more. Maybe we could find a way to trade just a miniscule of our privacy for the infinity of the Internet.

Reference:

Rosen, J. (2004). "The Naked Crowd" Retrieved March 10, 2007 from

http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000CA5FF.htm

Sullivan, B. (2006). “Privacy Lost: Does anybody care?” Retrieved March 10, 2007 from
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15221095/print/1/displaymode/1098/

E-mail Spam, (2007) Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved March 10, 2007 from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-mail_spam

Mid Term Exam Message

QotW5: You don't really know me

Since the time Michael started school he was never known to be a “very handsome” boy. He could never get a date and always ended up eating alone in the cafeteria. Michael used to despise the other guys who had everything, which in school consisted of popularity and of course, the girls.
“Friendster” had made its way to the high schools at this time and Michael was on top of it. He created a fool proof online identity, picking the best traits all the popular guys had and adding it to his profile. Using someone else’s picture and a whole lot of false attractive attributes he was able to become popular online and made a lot of friends in no time.

As you move around the internet, most of the people you encounter can't easily tell who you are. System operators and some technologically savvy, motivated users may be able to detect your e-mail or internet address, but for the most part people only know what you tell them about yourself. If you wish, you can keep your identity hidden. You can have no name - at least not your real name. Whatever you say or do can't be directly linked to the rest of your life. We don't have to own to our behavior by acknowledging it within the full context of who we "really" are (Suller, 2004).

Like my example of Michael many people choose to use a different identity altogether online. The anonymity that the Internet brings to us can be almost like a double edged sword. This may allow some people to share very personal things about themselves. They may reveal secret emotions, fears, wishes. Or they may show unusual acts of kindness and generosity. On the other hand, out spills rude language and harsh criticisms, anger, hatred and even threats. People are able explore the dark underworld of the internet, places of pornography and violence, places they would never visit in the real world, acknowledging their real identity (Suller, 2004).

An online identity is a social identity that network users establish in online communities. Although some people prefer to use their real names online, most Internet users prefer to identify themselves by means of pseudonyms, which reveal varying amounts of personally identifiable information (Online Identity, 2007).

When I was younger and new to the Internet, the game of harassing innocent victims online seemed exciting and the “in” thing to do. I recall many of my friends had created different online identities that were very diverse from their real life identities. Assuming the identity of a girl and finally having the last laugh at some poor guy was one of the all time favorites.

Since I don’t enjoy the trivial pleasures of harassing people anymore and mostly use the Internet for education or legal transactions and communication, I use my real name on my e-mail, IM’s and other virtual communities that I am a part of. “Hi5” and “Friendster” have helped me track down most of my old friends. Since the community usually consists of people that are acquainted to each other the use of fake identities are futile.

In these communities it is almost effortless for someone else to steal another’s identity; real or otherwise. The information that is portrayed on your profile is not secure and can be copied or stolen. Impersonation and concealing information are some of the many types of deception that occur with online identities (Donath, 1996).

While we contentedly display our pictures and information online, it is not precise to say that it is in safe hands. As we spend more time online, we are indirectly putting ourselves in danger of being robbed of our identity. Identity theft is the crime of the information age (Schneier, 2005). Although the law is gaining in on the pace of the development of technology, it is our identity that is out there and available for those online felons.

As mentioned in my first paragraph, Michael made many friends after joining “Friendster.” His profile may seem impressive, but that is not who he really is. His online identity is a collaboration of others peoples’ identities. It is always safe to stay vary of such people. After all, you don’t really know them!

References:

Donath, J. S. (1996). Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. Retrieved February 23, 2007 from

http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/Judith/Identity/IdentityDeception.html

Schneier, B. (2005, April 15). Schneier on Security. Retrieved February 23, 2007 from http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/04/mitigating_iden.html

Online identity (2007, February 15). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved February 23, 2007, from

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Online_identity&oldid=108207999

Suller, J. (2004, June). The Online Disinhibition Effect. Journal of CyberPsychology and Behavior. 7 (3): 321-326. Retrieved February 23, 2007 from

http://www.rider.edu/~suler/psycyber/disinhibit.html

Bog fact

Did you know that the World Toilet Organization has set up a World Toilet College in Singapore ???

(Bog Standard)

QotW4:Missing out!!!!

I believe that the ideology of Marxism has not been utilized to its full potential by people like me. “Survival of the Fittest” can apply to any aspect of life. Technology has advanced to such a level that it brings many goods and services to us. If we move with the pace of the development of technology and hence be “fit” enough to be able to take advantage of the gifts that it brings to us, we would greatly benefit from it. Unfortunately, unlike most of my friends who use this to their advantage, I have been ignorant of this great innovation and am pretty much missing out.

A gift economy is an economic system in which the prevalent mode of exchange is for goods and services to be given without explicit agreement upon a quid pro quo (the Latin term for the concept of "a favor for a favor"). Typically, this occurs in a cultural context where there is an expectation either of reciprocation—in the form of goods or services of comparable value, or of political support, general loyalty, honor to the giver, etc.—or of the gift being passed on in some other manner. The concept of a gift economy stands in contrast to a planned economy or a commodity-based economy. In a planned economy, goods and services are distributed by explicit command and control rather than informal custom; in commodity-based economies, an explicit quid pro quo is established before the transaction takes place. In practice, most human societies blend elements of all of these, in varying degrees (Gift Economy, 2007).

Some believe the Gift Economy to be a replacement for the Market Economy. Where the Market Economy tends to concentrate wealth, rewards distortion and abuse by the rich and powerful, is predicated on self-interest and scarcity, and is amoral, the Gift Economy distributes wealth, provides no significant incentive for abuse, is predicated on collective interest and abundance, and is profoundly moral (Pollard, 2005).

Gift economy is when help and information is offered without the expectation of any direct, immediate quid-pro-quo. Even in more anonymous settings, such as Usenet discussion groups, there is a surprising amount of free help and information given out, often to complete strangers whom one may never meet again (Kollack, 1999).

Be it fashion, Free and open software, gaming forums or even cooking communities, the Internet opens the doors for people to share their views and help each other in their respective fields. As mentioned above since I have not yet ventured into this wide horizon of information I can only relate to Gift Economies through the experiences of my friends.

The passion of a gamer can only be described by a gamer. The tension levels and euphoria experienced whilst playing dismisses all humanely urges and keeps gamers at their game for hours and even days at an end. The “World of Warcraft” or “WoW” is a massive multiplayer online game that enables thousands of players to come together online and battle against the world and each other. This is one of the hundreds of online games that have behind it a huge and passionate community. They have their own forums which enable each of them to communicate with other players and help each other out in their quests to kill and destroy. Such exchanging of information (I was told by my gamer friends) are vital to succeed in this field. They are secure that if they ever encounter a problem, their “gamer buddies” would help them out. In turn they did disclose to me that they would most certainly give out information on that particular game to another gamer if the need arises. One of my friends even proudly brands himself as a “known and popular” gamer in the forum.

Gift Economy is primarily due to a combination of human creativity and innovation, applied to create enabling and sharing technologies (Pollard, 2005). Online gaming and the forums which they bring about, as one of the gift economies many examples does just this.

There are many of those who are so ideologically obsessed with privatizing everything, making everything property, and undermining public belief in public institutions, government and self-regulation. There are also those who are trying to destroy and undermine Open Source, the Creative Commons, the Internet and the electronic freedoms, 'price-less' sharing of assets and information, self-sufficient individuals and communities, collective effort and collaborative innovation. If Gift Economy is going to make a stand it would have to fight against doctrinaire corporatism, against lawyers who are trying to patent and copyright everything forever, and against ignorance that there are workable alternatives to an untrammeled Market Economy (Pollard, 2005).

By doing a lot more discussion, research and education about what the Gift Economy is, and what it could be, I believe that this could indeed give new heights to the concept of sharing and exchanging information. I, for starters am going to finally venture into this sea of information sharing and use it to its full potential and contribute to others in the process.

References:

Kollock, P. (1999). The Economies of Online Cooperation: Gifts and Public Goods in Cyberspace. Retrieved February 10, 2007, from
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/kollock/papers/eco

Pollard, D. (2005) How to save the world: How can we make the gift economy work? Retrieved February 10, 2007, from
http://blogs.salon.com/0002007/2005/07/31.html

Gift Economy, (2007) Wikipedia: The Free Enclycopedia.
Retrieved on February 10, 2007, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy

Steinkuehler, C. (2005). Cognition and Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games: A Critical Approach. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Acknowledgements:

Special thanks to my friends who helped me understand the vast amount of information buried within.

Alex Liu (Gamer)
Ruchit Kalra (Gamer)
Yang Landen Woo (Gamer)
Arvind Mohan (Gamer)

Bog fact

Did you know that only 30% of people in the world use toilet paper!!! (Bog standard)

QotW3: Copyright vs Copyleft

I do not believe in spending a colossal amount of money in buying original records or movies when the cheaper version is available, most of the time for ‘free.’ Unfortunately, for the artists that produce goods and fortunately for the existence of file sharing and high speed internet connections, many people shamelessly share my ‘free-bie’ attitude.
While creator’s feel that without copyright laws their ‘creations’ are not been protected, the public feel that copyright laws restrict their access to such materials. Hence, it is a ‘tug-of-war’ between the context creators and the public.

Copyright is a set of exclusive rights regulating the use of a particular expression of an idea or information. At its most general, it is literally "the right to copy" an original creation (Wikipedia, 2007). The purpose of this law is to advance the progress of science and the useful arts to benefit the public (Russell, 2003). Not all work is protected by copyright and this falls into the public domain. Here we would not need permission to use the material in any manner. However, if a person reproduces or publicly displays a piece of work that is exclusively owned by an author/creator, that person would be infringing on the author’s copyright (Ovalle, 2005). If the author were to sue the person this would result in a copyright infringement lawsuit.

If one were to argue from a copyright holder’s perspective, it seems unjust to have to share material one has created and owns the rights to, with the public, without getting any income. It is believed that, regardless of contemporary advances in technology, copyright remains the fundamental way by which authors, sculptors, artists, musicians and others can fund the creation of new works, and that without legal protection of their future income, many valuable books and artworks would not be created. Thus, it is practical and fair that copyright laws exist and are so stringent. On the other hand, critics say that the concepts of the public domain and the freedom of information are necessary precepts for creators to be able to build on published expression. But they say that these are gradually being eroded, as copyright terms are repeatedly extended to last beyond the lifetime of the audience which experienced and knows of the original work (Wikipedia, 2007).

In recent times, with more people adapting to the ‘virtual world’, copyright holders are less keen on making their copyrighted material available to the public in digital formats unless the law is revised and access to material is controlled. Due to file sharing, which is the practice of making files available to other users over the internet or smaller networks, copyrighted works copied into digital media are easily and exactly copied. Producers of copyrighted material blame this for the decline of their sales, although they generally continue to produce material and make profits. Some artists are even known to support file sharing saying that this expands their popularity and audience. Since many users use file sharing to download copyrighted materials without permission (piracy), copyright owners have begun to attack file sharing in general. Ironically however, studies have shown that album sales have increased in this most recent past while the growth of file sharing has continued abated (Oberholzer-Gee & Strumpf, 2005).

To satisfy both the context creators and publics’ interests relative to copyrighting, a compromise has to be reached. Unlike copyright, copyleft is the practice of using copyright law to remove restrictions on distributing copies and modified versions of a work for others and requiring that the same freedoms be preserved in modified versions.
Authors use copy left to allow anyone to use, share and improve the work as a continuing process, disallowing people from sharing derived works with any new restrictions (Stallman, 2006).

Technologically the world has advanced to an extent that anything possible. Although the debate between the copyright holders and general public is hot at the moment, it would be accurate to say that people will find some means of satisfying both groups and subsiding the issue. Even though we see that firm measures have been taken to punish “breakers of the law”, “piracy” is at its best form and artists have not stopped producing quality goods. Would it be a battle between “All rights reserved” and “All rights reversed” or would technology win over and make peace between the parties?

Reference:

Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Strumpf, Koleman. (2005). The Effect of File Sharing on Record Sales, An Empirical Analysis. Retrieved February 2, 2007, from
http://www.unc.edu/~cigar/papers/FileSharing_June2005_final.pdf

Ovalle, C. (2005). “What is copyright?” University of Texas at Austin, Course INF 312. Information in Cyberspace. Retrieved on February 2, 2007, from
http://sentra.ischool.utexas.edu/~i312co/3.php

Stallman, Richard. (2006). “What is copyleft?”. Free Software Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin St, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301, USA. Retrieved on February 2, 2007 from
http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/copyleft.html

Russell, Carrie. (2003). Libraries in Today's Digital Age: The Copyright Controversy. Retrieved on February 3, 2007, from
http://www.michaellorenzen.com/eric/copyright.html

File sharing: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Wikipedia foundation Inc. (2007). Retrieved on February 2, 2007, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File_sharing#Copyright_issues