Blog # | EOTO #2 response post

The Five Eyes is an intelligence-sharing alliance between the U.S., U.K., Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. Initially, the alliance was dedicated to discovering threats, whether they be national or global. Today, they're a security powerhouse for the world in detecting security terrors. This alliance is productive because it helps track terrorists worldwide and promotes good relations between national superpowers. A major aspect of the group is the online detection of threats and following them when they appear. The major concern regarding this alliance is its ability to invade privacy and enact government overreach.

Total information awareness involves collecting and analyzing data to predict trends in human behavior and identify threats based on those trends. It originated after the 9/11 attacks, and its key components are data integration, surveillance, and predictive analysis.  It is a major online organization, utilizing technology and algorithms to protect life. The benefits involve security and efficiency, whereas the negatives could be a disregard for privacy and the potential mistake in predicting a threat. 

Disinformation is spreading false information to influence public opinion or obscure the truth. It originated in the 16th/17th century in a play meant to make fun of people's gullible characteristics. Disinformation helps people feel better, can give an easy explanation to events that cannot be explained, and gives a feeling of confirmation. However, it takes away trust, creates emotion, and promotes confusion. It is mostly on social media, utilized by trolls, AI, exploiters, and recommendation engines. People can combat disinformation by consulting multiple sources, considering the author, being aware of why the news was posted, etc. 

False flags are deceiving missions or campaigns designed to pit blame for an action against an unrelated party. For example, a military group flying false colors to deceive an enemy into believing an unrelated group is attacking them. The benefits involve gaining a tactical advantage in war or assisting corporations in gaining public opinion by making the public think negatively of a competitor. It is awful because it is lying to the public and it is an unethical practice. By flying false flags, innocent people may be affected negatively because they are the unfortunate victims of the false flags. It changes society because it is a practice that can benefit a party at little expense to them but can severely hurt a group of people to who the blame is shifted. 

Cord cutting is canceling cable or satellite services in favor of streaming services. People prefer streaming services because they allow them to do what they want with the shows and news they want to watch, plus it can come at a cheaper price. Internet connection and hidden costs are huge cons for cord-cutting though. It affects different generations differently, younger generations prefer to cord-cut because it is simpler, though older generations prefer traditional cable news. 

The Sherman Anti-Trust Act was passed in 1890 in response to monopolies and trusts during the Industrial Revolution. The Act was designed to prevent contracts and conspiracies that withhold the economy, and it made it a felony to form monopolies. It still affects corporations today, like AT&T and Microsoft, who have faced charges in violation of this act. The Act helps consumers and everyday citizens not have to spend entire paychecks to enjoy life's luxuries.

Final post | The Complicated Relationship with Technology

I believe that it is difficult to look at controversial topics at face value. For instance, look at automobiles. They get us around from place to place, encouraging us to explore the world and stay connected to family and friends no matter how far apart. While they do so many great things for us, they also generate greenhouse gases like carbon that contribute to global climate change. It's difficult to say automobiles are a good thing while they produce greenhouse gases, and are a bad thing because they keep mankind connected. 

This is the same situation for technology. It has brought about the internet, texting, calling, video games, and platforms to spread information about yourself, your community, and even a mission. Within those great advancements, we've seen cyberbullying, ghosting, online footprints, and incredibly easy ways to spread misinformation. It's impossible to look at technology and say it is just good or bad because of what can be done with it.

Let's focus on the good for a moment. Without technology, our lives would not be as simple as they are now. To stay connected with my family in California, I would have to write letters and have them delivered by horse, which could take up to a few weeks. I have the luxury of texting them with my phone instead, and that message would be delivered within a few seconds. Plus, I can connect with communities anywhere with my phone or computer. Social media has been helpful too, being a platform to continue to connect with people you may have met briefly and would like to continue to get to know.

The issues that could fall into the cool stuff above are the environmental effects and platforms to harshly judge others. Power plants that produce energy are known for mercury emissions and ozone-related premature deaths. The media platform I use the most, Instagram, is known for cyberbullying issues, pressure to stay informed about everyone's lives, and unrealistic standards for beauty. It takes a lot to not be affected by at least one negative appeal of having a social media app on any device you have. 

My relationship with technology, especially electronic, is complicated. I use my laptop and phone to play games and stay connected with my friends who go to other universities. As of this moment, using my electronics for that is the best way I can stay connected to them and be a part of their lives. Within that comes an issue where I am on my phone and laptop during the day for hours at a time, trying to stay connected with them. Additionally, I use Instagram to kill time and stay connected to other friends. While I kill time, I often find out about things going on in the world and can be exposed to fake news. I think in a way, I waste my time by scrolling on Instagram because my time could be better used doing something else. I looked into my online footprint, and I could not find much about myself besides the fact that I was nominated for an award during my senior year. This makes some sense because whenever I create online accounts, I never include my last name, so it's more difficult to find me unless you have mutual friends or something along those lines. 

I do not believe my relationship with technology is in good health, but it is not in bad health either. Yes, I spend more time on my phone and laptop than I should. No, I am not addicted to them. I still find time in my day to get outside and enjoy using my ripstick to get around my campus and stay connected with my friends in a face-to-face manner. This reinforces my point that it is difficult to take complex subjects at face value, saying it is healthy or unhealthy, because it isn't exactly either or. I think the only way to look at the relationship people have with technology is that it has just as much potential to be good/healthy as it is to be bad/unhealthy. It all comes down to who is working that relationship and what they are trying to get out of it.

Blog post #8 | The Diffusion Theory

The Diffusion Theory explores the rate and implications of a technology and how it becomes an integral part of society. The innovation I would like to focus on is the iPhone. Produced by Apple, it was the product of mobilizing the functions of a computer. I believe it was a brilliant innovation because it was able to do so much while being so mobile. If you wanted to call someone before having the iPhone, you needed a phone booth, pagers, Blackberry, or mail. If you wanted to play a game, you needed some kind of device with a computing system to run it. Wanted to listen to music? You need a SONY Walkman or some kind of device which could play audio off of an audio track. Did you need to find any kind of information? Get out your trusty Encyclopedia book and flip the pages continuously until you found the information you needed. 

The iPhone compacted all those needs into a small rectangle which could fit into your pocket. Just the idea of that is crazy and that was the reason early adopters were so eager to obtain the iPhone. The caveats to the iPhone were that the BlackBerry was still very popular at the time, so the iPhone had to overtake them. Plus, iPhone when it released still had functions it had yet to develop, so it would be a few years before it became the societal necessity it is now. Otherwise, the battery life was not amazing, the keyboard was inconvenient, and it was expensive. Those were the biggest reasons not to take the gamble and get the iPhone at the time, though those who saw the possibilities became early adopters who helped popularize and integrate the iPhone into the society we live in today.

With every new version of the iPhone, a critique would be fixed and a new, quality-of-life improvement would be made, which made early adopters happier and encouraged more people to cave and buy the iPhone. People who purchased had so many recreational and informational capabilities at their fingertips, and they would have made that purchase because it made life so much easier. Innovations are innovations because they make the quality of life better at a small price in terms of work. Sure, you might have to spend a few hundred bucks to get the iPhone, but that return in advanced capabilities was worth the cash. The positives outweighed the negatives, especially considering how quickly the iPhone developed in two decades. Plus, the cost-benefit is still pretty good, considering how Apple has generated an amazing level of brand loyalty, making it so a good chunk of their buyers buy the newest version of the iPhone immediately. 

Blog post #9 | Mainstream media

Mainstream media (MSM) has existed for a long time through many different forms of communication. It has existed from the first form of mass media, Johannes Guttenberg’s printing press, to FOX News on evening television. Mainstream media are social channels where a large population gets most of their news. In the U.S., MSM would be entities like the New York Times, FOX News, CNN, ABC News, etc. These corporations will go out and get information about things occurring on local and/or global levels and then convert it into a form of media to be shown to their consumers. The big three MSM sources in the U.S. are ABC News, CNN, and the New York Times as of a survey done by the PEW Research Center in 2021. 

Mainstream media gets tons of attention because they have large followings, which generates positives and negatives. The overarching positive is that these companies are so large that they can use their resources to obtain all sorts of news from everywhere. For example, the New York Times posts articles online about news going on in the world on that specific day. On March 24, 2024, they shared news on events such as the Russo-Ukraine War, actors contributing to video games, Supreme Court cases, etc. 

Having mainstream media makes it incredibly convenient for people to find news on everything and anything all in the same place. The other benefit to mainstream media is that it is tailored to a large group of people who share a similar, broad opinion, which usually applies to multiple, if not all, topics they consider. So by finding a mainstream media that appeals to you, you find a large follower base who shares a similar opinion about the subject at hand.

By “increasing access to information”, these corporations allow people to develop connections and perceive things that normally would not be perceived. If someone sees an interesting article from an author at a mainstream media source, they can connect to that person regarding the article. For instance, Kalhan Rosenblatt published an article regarding the term “Rizz” in 2023 on behalf of NBC News. If I had a question about it or had a commentary that could be important to that article, I could connect to Rosenblatt and discuss it with them. 

The overarching negative would be the human factor in publishing or receiving mainstream media news. Regarding publishing news, authors and newscasters like to share their opinions on news and what they believe it means for their audience. This leads to no longer objective news, and people will gloss over important details if it helps their opinion on the matter seem more important. Mainstream media can be such a big appeal to people because it draws people sharing similar opinions. However, that can be a pitfall because those people are not exposed to objective, potentially 100% true news. Biased news does help with developing endorsement in people, with accepting someone’s opinion may not be the same as theirs, but lately it seems like the development of that acceptance has not been a common occurrence.

Otherwise, mainstream media having biased news generates a sense of loyalty and trust to that media. This is good for that media’s business, but it can be bad for the person’s ability to process news objectively without that media’s perception on a topic. If I handed a CNN news article to someone who's been reading FOX media news for years, they would immediately be mistrusting and not very accepting of that differentiated perspective on a topic.

    Mainstream media for me means a large publisher which collects information and displays it to me. It may or may not have a bias, but it is up to me on whether I should let that bias affect how I perceive that topic and develop my opinion. My family and friends should be aware of how it affects them and shapes their way of perceiving events and topics circulating the world today. I think if they let mainstream media further develop their independent opinion of a topic, then yes, kudos to them. If they just take the opinion of that media and act as a vessel of it without letting their personal ideas factor in, then no, that is not healthy. My generation is more focused on social media news than mainstream media, but that can be one-hundred times worse depending on how little they fact check the information. Overall, I think mainstream media can be a blessing and a curse, but it all comes down to how people let it affect them.

Blog post #7 | Antiwar & obscure websites

I have to search obscure websites for strong antiwar voices because having wars helps economies, even if they are not directly affiliated with the war. Take World War Two, for instance, when economies boomed because all countries worked hard to win the war. There was a huge increase in federal and defense spending, with an increase in nominal GDP. 

This concept still applies today. Businesses in the resource industry have profited greatly from the Russo-Ukraine war. I believe it is difficult for an average person to make an argument against war when important people profit from it. Those important people have the leverage in society to suppress entire voices which offer contrasting opinions on controversial global events, which shine a poor light on what makes the important people money. 

Since those important people have the leverage to suppress voices, they have to go to more obscure publishers to have their articles put on the internet and be seen, like the ANTIWAR.com website. The other thing is that the obscure websites are not very user-friendly. When I first opened the ANTIWAR website, I was overloaded with the amount of text compressed into an area which tests the drive of a person to find the news which goes against what is put on mainstream media. The American Conservative is more user-friendly, but still, it does not show all their articles on the home page, which I feel does not help them convey their articles and news.

Additionally, I believe that the concept of the big stick policy still applies today. The big stick policy was coined by Theodore Roosevelt, and it refers to a country's ability to have a strong military power while pursuing peaceful negotiations. You may argue heavily and heatedly with a normal kid, but would you argue and criticize someone without care so much if they had a bigger stick, aka military, than you? People want to be in the country that has the biggest stick, and the only way to test that is with war. If you win the war, that belief is confirmed and you have patriotic pride. I believe this mindset goes along with why antiwar voices are suppressed. People who believe that violently ending war is wrong can be seen as unpatriotic citizens because they do not side with their government's decision to contribute to the conflict. 

Also, I feel like antiwar voices go against political agendas. I do not have an example or references to source, but if I were a greedy politician who profits in some fashion from warfare, I would want to call any favors I could to keep antiwar voices off of mainstream media. Additionally, those antiwar voices would be calling greedy politician me out for being a greedy politician who wants the war to continue to stay rich, so I would want to suppress them because those voices would call for me to be taken out of office or not be re-elected. Overall, antiwar voices do put pressure on politicians and governmental authorities, so I can imagine they would want to suppress voices which shine a negative light on them. 

Blog post #5 | Privacy

Privacy in technology has become a concern over the last two to three decades. As technology advances, so does personalization and tracking. Your iPhone has been tailored to track data from scrolling or looking at products. For example, if I was looking up Star Wars helmets on Safari one day, the very next day I could be scrolling through Instagram and find advertisements trying to sell me Star Wars helmets or other Star Wars products. Until recently, that was the case across the board with handheld devices. Apple recently released an update to their Apple products which requires apps to ask if they can track your data. This is a big win in terms of individuals protecting themselves from being profiled and put in databases of information. 

The issue of technology progressing enough to violate my privacy has become my concern as I have gotten older. As a kid, I did not have to worry about this stuff because I did not have a phone, or at least my mom's phone wasn't really my phone. Anyhow, as I got older, I was given access to technology, like an iPhone in my name & a laptop for college which I could utilize to download games, create an account on Instagram, connect with people across the world, and surf the web to find things that might make my day-to-day a little easier. What's concerning about this is that for most of these activities, they take my data and store it somewhere to be more personal to me; to make it easier to sell or appeal to me. For instance, Instagram determines the watch time of every reel I watch and if I watch one reel longer than the rest, it throws me more reels that may have the same captions or the same semantics as the reel I watched longer before. 

The government should help corporations when they try to protect our privacy. Recently the FBI encouraged iPhone & Android users to stop using their traditional texting apps and move to encrypted texting platforms, like WhatsApp. The FBI doing this is a good example of what the government should be doing but should be doing, and what they do doesn't exactly line up all the time. Federal employees aren't even safe from this, with the Trump Administration wanting to set up an email system that is designed to send emails to all Federal employees' inboxes. At the forefront, this seems innocent, but if it is hacked then that hacker has the name and more information of every Federal government employee. It is seeing backlash thankfully, but if it were to follow through that could be a serious potential breach of privacy for all employees in the government. 

Data collection is something my family should be concerned about, my friends should be concerned about, and I should be concerned about. We should not be fond of the fact an entity, which could turn against any human at any point, that knows exactly who we are and what we would do. While I do understand this is for security's sake, this is not how you ensure people remain safe. Who I am & what I do should not be anyone's business unless I opt for it to be. When I post on Instagram, I am opting for the world & Instagram to know what I have been up to lately, and that's fine. If Instagram were to take my interests and try to market them though, that would be a breach of my trust and security. 

Something we can do about protecting ourselves from entities that collect our data can be simple or just a little harder than simple. Simple is deleting the account and opting to have that data not be tracked one hundred percent anymore. This is not ideal, so I recommend going with the second option, which is utilizing the "Limit Data Settings" functions on the apps you use that could track data. By taking the time to limit the data an app or internet thing could collect, you make your life more private and make it harder for an entity to figure out how to exploit you. 

Blog Post #6 | EOTO reaction post

No one knows when pigeons or birds were trained to deliver mail. Seems to go back to the Egyptians or the Romans. It was utilized for the wealthy during those times though if they wanted something to get somewhere faster than the horseback mail system. In modern times, pigeon racing became a phenomenon and they were used during World War One and World War Two. 

The first electronic television system was showcased in 1927. The public introduction came with BBC's regular broadcast in 1936, also featured in the 1939 New York World Fair on behalf of RCA. Television became a mainstream form of receiving media and revolutionized the entertainment industry allowing people to watch things without being present. 

Bluetooth was invented in 1994 by Dr. Jaap Haartsen while working on short-range radio connections. The first version was realized in 1999, focusing on wireless data connection. It is an innovation made for the benefit of convenience and accessories. 

The idea of the telegraph was first claimed in 1798. Samuel Morse created his version of a working electrical telegraph by 1832. The first message ever sent was "What hath God wrought?". It was a growing industry leading into the 20th century. By 1934, it had gained enough attention to have governments pass legislation to monitor it. It was an amazing innovation because messages would travel quickly (same day) whereas the mail system would take multiple days, if not weeks.

Paper was invented in ancient China by Cai Lun. By mixing fibers and plants, the paper could be made and written on. It was spread throughout the world via the Silk Road. It was revolutionary in the sense of communicating with people across distances and preserving it. It is the primary form of communication used to teach the masses about religion, natural sciences, liberal arts, etc. 

The email was invented in 1971 by Ray Tomlinson. He came about it during his spare time while figuring out how to transfer files from one computer to the next. Tomlinson figured it would be a "neat thing to do" and it wouldn't become popular until 1988. There are 7.9 billion email accounts worldwide, and 5.6 billion are active. Gmail is the largest email provider, having 1.8 billion active user accounts. 

The VCR was invented in the 1950s but wasn't popular until the 1970s-2000s. VHS and Betamax were tracks put into VCRs to play videos. Using magnetic tapes, you could playback videos. It allowed for technological advancements with television and led to the rise of direct-to-video films convenient for home-watching. 

Cloud computing is the delivery of storage and software over the internet, allowing people to access and manage their data remotely instead of relying on physical technology, like the USB drive. The first version was created in 1969, but the computing system wouldn't gain traction until 2006 with the Amazon Web Service or Google Docs/Services. It faces challenges with cybersecurity and cost management. Sixty percent of the world's corporate data is stored in the cloud.

Compact Discs were patented in 1970. The prototype was revealed in 1979 and had a commercial release in 1982-1983. Sony & Phillips licensed the CD for recording in 1988. From 1988 to 2007, over 200 billion CDs were bought worldwide. CD's descent in popularity occurred in 2008 when Spotify launched. If all the CDs in the world were piled up, they would circle the Earth six times. The best-selling CD of all time sold over 38 million copies.