Trolling is a Art

The internet has given us a plethora of tools that make regular life and society more convenient for everyone.  With the way in which people interact, it is mostly anonymous.  People are hidden behind screens, firewalls, proxies, and fake names.  When the internet first started out as black and white text, people used it for good.  It was just a simple message board of people posting recipes, asking advice, etc.  Once it became more widespread and proper user-friendly browser tools were invented, all common courtesy went out the window.  People realized that they could flame any user they wanted without any repercussions.  As a result, we have such communities as 4chan that take humanity down a level.

This is where the internet troll comes into play.  The term was coined on Urban Dictionary in 2002 as “One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.”  Basically they intentionally say something just to stir up an argument.  It’s essentially a virtual equivalent of a kid saying “made you look.”  This gives them pleasure, as some men just want to watch the world burn.

Some websites require personal details when posting or viewing anything, and others don’t.  As such, careful considerations must be taken when dealing with a large user base.  These websites do have options to report harassment, stalking, and general misconduct.  But that’s really all that can be done.  It’s too hard to scrutinize and data mine the actions of millions of users to figure out misconduct automatically.  Facebook constantly amends their terms of service to comply with user safety and privacy.  This is a moral obligation that these companies need to have; when millions of users trust you with hosting their private information, they should protect that information as much as possible.

Anonymity on the internet is both a good thing and a bad thing.  On one hand, it enables for users to not be afraid of judgment when posting anything.  However, there are always people who are only there to exploit the system.  Many sites tried to move to a “real name” system, but it didn’t really work, namely because you can input any name you want.  I can’t tell you how many commenters on YouTube use the name “Barack Obama”.  It’s a step in the right direction to deter trolls, except there still is anonymity if you choose.  Unless there is a constant webcam feed of the person at all times, there is no way for somebody to not be anonymous in this way.  The “real name” system is the only solution we can think of.

Trolls are a big problem on the internet to those who are unfamiliar with them.  It is pretty easy to recognize a troll based on their comment’s place and time.  If you feel the need to argue with them, just remember not to take things too seriously.  If they seem way out of line, it’s probably too stupid to be true.  However, an average person on Facebook probably doesn’t know how to recognize or handle trolls.  There really is no way to get rid of them, but they will always be there.  Just remember to not take anything too seriously.

Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality is a heated topic from Washington today, and I’ve never really paid attention to it.  Since I do not identify with being very political, I haven’t properly researched or formed an opinion on the matter.  However, it seems that this assignment will force me to do just that.  To me, it seems that net neutrality is common sense; Internet Service Providers shouldn’t be allowed to inhibit upload/download speeds purely based on content or location.  No matter what content providers they partner with, they should not restrict their customers from using competing services.

Whether or not politicians support this issue is a matter of opinion.  However, the fact of the matter is that a large majority of them do not understand net neutrality.  I would even go as far as to say that many don’t understand the internet and other recent technological advances.  There’s a funny and interesting comic from The Oatmeal that details Ted Cruz’s understanding of the matter.  I believe that all data should be treated the same, regardless of origin or destination.  Imagine you’re driving on a four lane highway in a car.  If you have a Japanese car, you can use the left two lanes, but all other types of cars have to go through the one right lane.  Why is it fair for a Japanese car to go through with a free pass, while the speeds of the other cars are being held up?  It makes no sense on a physical highway, so why should it matter on a virtual internet highway?

The big issue here are the ISPs.  They seem to have monopolies in the regions that they operate and therefore can change the prices and inhibit the speeds however they like.  This hurts every one of their customers, and they do nothing to change it.  In their eyes, they are providing a service that works (sometimes), and since they have no competition, there is no reason to change anything.  But once some sort of competition threatens to set up shop, improvement is always found.  I get emails every so often about Comcast (magically) “finding” a higher internet download speed.  Comcast offers about 40 mb/s, but Google Fiber offers up to 1000 mb/s.  I can’t wait for the day where everybody has it.

I believe that the government really needs to take a step back and learn how the internet works in order to get acts and laws passed around it.  It was a big deal that President Obama recently classified internet access as a utility, much like power and water, and we need to treat it as such.  So much is done over the internet nowadays that I believe it should be a basic right.  So many companies conduct business over the internet that it would be immoral to leave anybody out in the dark.  Once society moved to electricity, it was only right to supply every home with it.  It’s just another link in the chain of technological evolution.

So what do I really think of net neutrality? Well, I believe it is a part of a bigger problem that lawmakers, lobbyists, and the general public are ignoring right now.  While it is a big issue, it really shouldn’t be once you realize what it means.  The bigger issue is the regulation of the ISPs and how they handle their clients.

The Cloud!

Link To Project

With the increasing number of devices that people own this day in age, it is only necessary to be able to share your files/settings/everything across every single device easily.  This is where the concept of “The Cloud” emerges.  To the consumer (and my mom), “The Cloud” seems like a magical place that will hold your personal items and will never betray you.  However, cloud services are just that: services offered by companies.  When you sign up to use them, you agree to trust a company with your personal information in their hands.  Unfortunately, security is not always guaranteed.  Not only do some companies take control of your information, but it usually can be easily hacked and widely distributed.  This has happened in the past with the famous iCloud celebrity hacks.  Where it happens once, it will happen again.

I do use services like Dropbox, OneDrive, etc. but I am cautious.  My motto is to never give somebody that you don’t want anybody but yourself to see, even if it seems secure.  Anything that I host online usually is meant to be seen by somebody.  I have never personally hosted anything with a private cloud service, but I am intrigued to.  It might be worth it if I want to host anything personal to the cloud.  As a programmer, it is a possibility to maybe someday use completely self-hosted cloud services.  With the general public, however, I don’t believe it will ever happen.  Already existing cloud services are useful in that they are very easy to set up: You create an account, download a mobile application, and drag and drop your files.  Unless the general public becomes computer-literate enough to manage a small server, these applications will be used forever.

In the world of increased paranoia of spying and seizure of personal information (thanks Edward Snowden), people are looking for someone to blame.  They keep pointing fingers at the government, even though they signed up to have a company host their private information on a foreign server.  Nobody reads the terms and conditions.  They are intentionally long and monotonous so people ignore it and click “agree”.  It’s too bad, because there could have been some random clause thrown in there that if you agree, you may become a part of the next revolutionary Apple product.

All jokes aside, people just need to be careful with what they trust somebody else with.  You wouldn’t tell a random stranger on the street, “Here, hold my private pictures, mail, and conversations.  I’ll be back in a few months.”  A normal person can point out vulnerabilities there, but when it comes to cloud and internet storage, it seems invulnerable.  The internet still has thieves and sleazy people browsing it every day, except they can become even more anonymous.  Which is why when the whole NSA scandal came to light, I was indifferent.  With the amount of data passed through the internet and handled by other people, are we really surprised that personal information is being both willingly and unwillingly seized?

Where’s the Fair Use?

Copyright.  It’s been a big issue for many decades, and is especially prevalent in our day of digital media.  The internet has made it easier for anybody to find, download, and share copyrighted material.  The DMCA was enacted to ensure punishment for infringement on copyrighted works, especially ones hosted on the web.  DVDs, CDs, and all other digital media were affected by this.  While it has good intentions, it often inconveniences consumers.  I know a lot of people that have pirated movies simply because of the un-skippable FBI logos and anti-piracy messages that show up every time you try to watch a movie.

Napster was a little bit before my time, but Metallica was very mad about it.  This was the first big foray into the world of downloading mp3 files for free.  I remember the days of LimeWire, and everybody was using it to download music.  I always felt dirty from using it, but everybody seemed to be doing it.  Even after LimeWire we had a multitude of websites to choose from.  Streaming services like Spotify are great tools for building up a library without actually paying for music directly, or better yet, pirating music.  Though notable artists have taken their work off the platform or avoided it, it also serves as a great way for independent artists to share their work.  The fact of the matter is, thanks to a great South Park episode, people don’t want to pay for music anymore.  I can even go to my local library, check out about ten CDs, and rip them all to my computer completely free of charge.  How is this any different from torrenting 10 CDs off of Pirate Bay? Where is the line drawn?

The problem with digital media is the ease of transferability between devices.  I could easily take a DVD and rip it to my computer, then host it somewhere to stream/download.  However, I believe it is unethical to do so.  Here lies the problem.  There are millions of people on this Earth that either believe it is ethical, either because they are anti-establishment or they just do not care.

I’ll admit: yes, I have pirated copyrighted material in the past.  But show me a person who has not, and I will show you a liar.  Things are easier to pirate now than ever before.  While sites like pirate bay have their domains seized regularly, sites that actually host content are still online.  Five years ago it was tough to find any websites that could stream movies for free.  Now, websites like that are common knowledge within my peers.

Within the legal realm of digital media, innocent content creators are being punished.  YouTube’s complaint system has disabled monetization for many users due to copyright strikes against their accounts, when everything they upload cites fair use.  This has affected thousands of users, and nothing has been done to solve this problem.  If innocent people are being charged with allegations, maybe it is time that we revisit the DMCA and revise it.  It was passed in 1998, back in the time where common internet entertainment did not exist.  Technology has evolved so far in the last 18 years.  We need a bill of rights for this: one that companies can follow without enraging its user base.

Patents

In today’s world of laws, rules, and regulations, companies and people are being sued left and right.  Violation of copyright and patent laws happen every day, especially in the realm of technology.  With each eventual iteration of the devices we use today, each company learns from others and tries to “one-up” the competition.  Since all these companies are effectively copying off of each other, one can assume that violation of copyright will occur.  The problem is how companies will react to this.

When a patent or copyright is filed, it is assumed that it shall not be used or mimicked without accreditation to the creator.  In other words, it is unethical to take credit for someone else’s work.  We are taught early on in school to not plagiarize in any case.  This applies to writing, ideas, and more.  However, many companies only exist purely to create as many patents possible and sue people who try to use something similar.  Such is the case of VirnetX, which purely exists for patent litigation.  They recently sued apple for infringement of VPN and FaceTime patents.  These trolls exploit the patent laws, but it really is no different from how companies like Apple are handling patents.  For once, Apple is on the other side of a stupid patent lawsuit.

Apple has been notorious for taking existing technology and introducing it in their products as “new, revolutionary” and other meaningless buzzwords.  Of course, the fanatics rejoice and apple prints money.  But they want a monopoly, and sue everybody for the littlest things.  It’s amazing how much they can get away with. The most outrageous case is about the curved edges on a phone.

While companies are permitted to create patents and sue for misuse, Tesla has released all of their patents.  This is a groundbreaking step in patent law and many companies will probably follow suit.  The spectrum here is amazing.  On one hand, Apple tries to make as much money as they can (and enslave the human race).  On the other hand, Tesla wants people to use their ideas.  They want their technology to be easily adapted and used worldwide.  This is the most ethical of all decisions regarding patents, as it aims not to be greedy and make money, but rather, to benefit the human race entirely.  We learn best by example and mimic those examples perfectly.  This is the way for the future.  We can no longer stand by and watch other companies kill each other over, basically, “who created what”.

Companies like Apple have foreseen loopholes that they can jump through in order to exploit a service.  We honor patents and copyright law, as America is a land of free speech and ideas.  They are necessary to keep the public in line and steer away from easily faked products, much like what can be seen being sold on backstreets in foreign countries.  These are great reasons for patents to be in place on physical products.  However, we end up in a society of constant legal battles.  It is a price to pay for free speech and ideas.

Truth in Advertising?

Online advertising has taken over the World Wide Web.  Once an attractive audience was built who regularly browsed the web, companies figured out ways to profit off of simple clicks and page views.  From the information they collect, to the dirty ways they drag you in, I can say that online advertising is a disgusting and manipulative platform.

The early days of the web saw the introduction to pop-up advertisements, which were a mild annoyance.  Thankfully, pop-up blockers were invented and the world was safer.  Then, companies began placing banner ads on the sides of web pages.  People didn’t mind these, since they did not inconvenience the viewer at all.  After then, companies got even cleverer with promoting sponsored links tailored to the user’s browsing tendencies and clickstream data.  In an interesting story from 2012, Target knew that a man’s teenage daughter was pregnant before he even did, due to the online items she browsed.  Our automated systems have become so intelligent that they effectively mine data and effectively predict.

Is it ethical to keep this data? It’s hard to say.  When using an online retailer, it is very easy to keep track of a user’s clickstream data.  This is the equivalent to monitoring a customer’s path in a physical store.  A company should reserve the right to know what their customers are buying or viewing.  However, I do not believe that data should come from outside services.  It only makes sense to keep a company’s data private within the company.  Once you share a user’s data with the outside world, it is a breach of privacy.

That doesn’t stop companies like Google and Facebook from soliciting ads to users based on their browsing history.  Every so often you can see an advertisement completely unrelated to your interests, yet based on a single search you may have done months ago.  It’s amazing how deep and far this data goes.  Multiply it by the millions of users, and we have more data than we know what to do with.  So what do companies do with it?  Sell it to others!  Well….It seems to be working, for the wallets of the corporations at least.

As far back as I can remember, I don’t think I have ever purposefully clicked on a banner advertisement.  They sit there in the space of the webpage that I ignore and don’t care about.  Since high school, I have been using AdBlock and all my troubles were fixed.  But it still doesn’t excuse the greedy ways that companies try to generate advertising revenue.  I can’t believe how many of my Facebook friends are sucked into the mechanical soul-crusher that is Buzzfeed and other clickbait websites.  These so called “social news and entertainment companies” that draw unsuspecting viewers in with titles such as “23 Most YOLO Pastas of 2013” and quizzes like “Which Letter From the Title of Frozen Are You?”.  I think I’ve ended up dumber from visiting that website.  But it works, and they generate so much ad revenue from drawing people in to “articles” that took an intern 5 minutes to write.  And that’s the sad state of online advertising in 2016.  There has to be a better way to generate revenue.

Snowden

Ever since the leaks from Edward Snowden in 2013, the citizens of the United States have become cautious around the matter of security and privacy.  The fourth amendment states that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated.”  The documents leaked by Snowden go against this clause, but are followed by the description of the Patriot Act.  Flash back to September 11, 2001. In 102 minutes, the country was at war and would never be the same way again.  As such, Americans banded together to defeat terrorism.  The Patriot Act was a result of this, in the hopes to provide solid counter-terrorism tactics; there is nothing to fear if you have nothing to hide.  As a result, when the NSA documents first came to light, I was not surprised at all by the findings.  We live in an age where cameras and microphones are superfluous in any given location.  In addition, we have so many devices with network connectivity that makes metadata, phone tracking, and much more possible.  I really was not surprised to hear of the government “spying” on its people.

I’m all for fighting evil and terrorism, but I’m conflicted about this whole matter.  While some of this data collected could be useful, too much of it has been collected to be considered useful.  It would take centuries to view, unless you knew exactly where to look.  In addition, people have the right to privacy.  The fourth amendment should not be thrown out without probable cause.  In this case, probable cause does not mean to spy on hundreds of millions of people.

Edward Snowden is considered a hero by many, but a traitor to some.  The way I see it, he leaked the documents because he felt the NSA’s practices were immoral, and he couldn’t stand by and watch.  Instead of leaving and being silent, he chose to as he felt was morally right, and let the country know what was truly going on.  People who are “spied on” without any reasonable cause should have the right to know that they are.  It’s the reason why you see so many signs labeling security cameras in public places like parking lots and department stores.  But, the government has many secrets that, if they became public knowledge, would destroy the goal they were trying to achieve.

Maybe that’s how things should be.  Technology has impacted our lives so much that certain loopholes are taken for granted.  And many claim that Snowden, while acting on his conscience, chose to leak to the press for his own agenda.  Rather than attracting the interest of politicians who back the bills possible for the surveillance, he leaked it to the public and fled the country.  He “threw the secrets he knew up in the air—and trusted somehow that good would come of it”.

The waters between hero and traitor is murky.  As such, we will never truly know the effects of Snowden for many years until surveillance is reconsidered in this country.  He may have been acting on his own ego rather than his conscience, but people are thankful for the information he provided.  It all comes down to a simple question: Would you rather be unknowingly spied on, or aware that you are being spied on?

Project 2 Response

Link to PDF

For this project, my group and I created a guide to the job search and interview process.  In the guide, we detailed how and when to start preparing for interviews, what resources to consider, extracurricular activities to put on a resume, networking, contract negotiations, and general advice on the process.  I feel that one of the most important parts of this guide is the interview preparation.  Students can find a lot of resources on how to nail a technical interview.  While I certainly am not the best at technical interviews, I learned a lot by studying questions and thinking of complex answers on my own.  I also used GlassDoor a lot to research companies I was interviewing for and look at previous interview questions they have asked.  We also noted that you should not put a skill, project, or past experience on your resume if you are not prepared to talk about it.  Often my resume was scrutinized by many different interviewers on every skill I listed (they always wanted to know about LabVIEW, MatLab, and Scheme/lisp).

If there was anything I wish I had known earlier, it would be to start the process as early as possible and keep following up.  Most of the time I would get caught up in schoolwork and band (especially in the fall) so much that I would fall behind in my job search process.  I missed out on many opportunities this way.  The best advice I’ve received is to keep following up on everything.  It doesn’t hurt to send an email, and your tenacity to track somebody down through email comes off well on recruiters.  Even if you think a company may have filled positions, keep following up to get closure.  Otherwise, you may never know what could have been.

Job hunting certainly seems like it is a job on its own.  Researching, applying, and preparing for interviews can take up the majority of one’s time. This is especially relevant during junior year, when the hardest classes are being taken.  In addition, these are classes that are for sure to be relevant to technical interviews.  I think the bulk of tough courses should be taken earlier in college.  At Notre Dame we take Data Structures fall semester junior year, which is way too late.  It should be learned sophomore year, when most people are beginning to apply for smaller internships.  That way by the next year they can get a bigger internship.  I know a lot of my peers have said that they had to teach themselves data structures to prepare for technical interviews. I also think that there should be a fundamentals of computing course offered freshman year for CSE students.  While this doesn’t fit in with the first year engineering program, it offers a way for students interested in computer science to test the waters and get ahead.  I also think that there should be a focus on interview questions in a course, probably spring semester sophomore year, to keep the mind sharp going into the fall semester and career finding season.

The job market has changed dramatically over the last 15 years and employers want to focus on hiring only the best of the best.  We just need to focus on preparing for the interview process to prove that Notre Dame’s students truly are the best of the best.

Challenging Decisions

The Challenger Space Shuttle disaster is a vivid memory for anyone alive at the time.  Though I was not born just yet, I have heard personal accounts from many people exhibiting their flashbulb memory on the subject.  It’s one of the events in American history where people remember exactly what they were doing at the time of the disaster.  The space shuttle program was still young and people were watching every rocket launch that they could.  As a result, the world watched as the shuttle unexpectedly disintegrated 73 seconds into the launch.  We all know that the catastrophic failure resulted from an O-ring malfunction after multiple launch delays in the January weather.  However, this could have been prevented.

The “whistleblower” in this case is Roger Boisjoly, who had warned NASA previously of possible catastrophic failure due to a combination of the O-ring and freezing temperatures.  Of course, NASA seemed to ignore any and all warnings that could delay the future of space travel. Their solution to this potential problem seemed to be “strap another O-ring on there as a backup and we will deal with this later”. Unfortunately, it already was too late and this ignorance is what led to the disaster.  Once the causes became public, NASA was looking at someone to point their finger at and blame for the loss of human life.  On the other hand, Boisjoly came out to the public and revealed that he had warned them about this.

I feel that Boisjoly was right in revealing his information to the public.  He felt that NASA was wronging everyone including themselves, so he told his story.  NASA is also a publicly funded organization, which may be another reason to do this.  Instead of them pointing their finger at him, he explained to the world how he indirectly predicted the disaster and it was the fault of his higher-ups.  In doing so, he was very brave and knew the consequences.  However, I don’t think he fully understood that it would destroy his career.  He’s not a hero, but rather a person cast out from NASA for “tattling”.  If he didn’t come out with this information, he would have lived with guilt his entire life.  Honestly it was a tough situation and one that he would have to live with for the rest of his life.  Above all, he was noticed by a community as their own hero.  He wasn’t thrown down in the flame of blame after the disaster; he stood up for himself and people commended him for it, just not the right people, for the sake of his career.

I can understand why NASA would be frustrated with him, since loss of human life is something that nobody wants to take credit for.  They felt as if he betrayed them by blaming the higher-ups of the company and not the engineers.  However, it is unethical to be frustrated in this way.  Even though it was an accident, the person who should take full responsibility is the one that give the order to launch after the sub-zero temperatures.  According to Boisjoly, he or she knew the consequences and did not want to delay their schedule.  Ironically, the space program was grounded for over two years after the incident.

Disasters like Challenger are very tragic, yet they teach us what not to do at the same time.  In the same vein as the Titanic disaster, we learn from our mistakes and figure out new safety techniques for everybody involved.  It’s hard to think about how the space program might have been different if Challenger had not exploded.  While the disaster would be avoided, it may have merely been delayed.  We will never know for sure.  If there is a positive from this situation, it would be the extra safety precautions that are taken with spaceflight to ensure a disaster like this never happens again.

“Code” of Conduct

A code of conduct.  Every business, organization, and profession seems to have one.  While some are enforced by law, others are enforced on one’s honor code.  In the realm of software development, codes of conduct are in place for a reason: to avoid ruthless mistakes with others’ best interests in mind.  Especially within physical technology companies, codes of conduct need to be specific.  With increasing diversity in the workplace, it is easy to mistakenly offend the wrong party.  That’s why the codes of conduct are in place: to make people responsible for their actions and to think before they do anything stupid.

That’s not to say that people aren’t easily offended these days.  They are.  It’s impossible to crawl news websites, blogs, and social media without running into a vocal presence of somebody being offended by what a celebrity said yesterday.  While some of these claims seem overly radical, most are justified.  As Shawn M said, being offended is a choice.  While this is true, the world has become so politically correct that people feel they have to voice their concerns over disagreeing opinions, and become offended.  However, speaking out against gender, race, diversity, etc. in a negative way warrants backlash.  Those are sensitive subjects that are not chosen by a person, but given to them at birth.  Because this is not a choice, there is perfectly valid reason to be offended by one’s comments or actions directed towards this matter.  It’s a very complex argument that is affected by perception, which will be different for each person involved.  The best way to avoid this is to not say anything at all.  Or at least think before speaking, which is what a code of conduct will try to evoke.

It’s amazing that we even have codes of conduct that need to explain, essentially, “don’t be an asshole towards others.”  By the year 2016 we were supposed to destroy racism, sexism, and intolerance in general.  The fact that we haven’t yet shows that the world is a long ways away from establishing this goal.  The advent of the internet brought about being able to hide behind a computer screen as offensive jargon is sputtered.  It shows a faceless victim and a faceless perpetrator, which escalates the situation, making it easier and more widespread.

After examining the example codes of conduct, I see many recurring themes: be respectful, be considerate, and take responsibility for your words and actions.  This should go without saying, but for every rule, there is a reason for it being in place.  All it takes is one person to screw it up for everybody.  In addition, I see many details about giving credit, working as a team, and openly collaborating with others.  Of course, whenever you are working as a team each person should do equal work that doesn’t overlap too much. This, in turn, creates the best group dynamic, and as long as people reserve judgement, great things will happen.

In short, codes of conduct are necessary to show the expected guidelines to follow on a technical project.  It shows what will and won’t be tolerated when working with people.  Without it, people will be more negligent and careless.  It’s as my old high school band director always said: “It takes years to build a reputation, but only seconds to destroy it.”