The evolution of the internet has changed the way we do business, learn, shop and entertain ourselves. Web 1.0 was very static in nature, with no way for users to interact with the content. Today the content has evolved from read only content, to one of user generated content. Web 2.0 makes the internet more user friendly with more up to date content. Really Simple Syndication (RSS) makes it possible for users to subscribe to a webpage and receive updates almost instantly as they are made.
“The central principle behind the success of the giants born in the Web 1.0 era who have survived to lead the Web 2.0 era appears to be this, that they have embraced the power of the web to harness collective intelligence.” (O'Reilly, 2005)
With Web 2.0, blogging is a way to get information out to readers fast. Gone are the days of creating a personal website. People read blogs and see things that interest them, and in turn write about it on their own blog. With the creation of social applications such as Pinterest – blogs have become an excellent way to share information to a large audience. Websites such as Word Press and Blogger, make it easy for just about anyone to create their own blog.
Another key characteristic of Web 2.0 is the incorporation of non-computer devices to the internet. Today, the internet is right at our fingertips whenever we need it. With the availability of WIFI, it enables us to be connected just about wherever and whenever we need to be. Long gone are the days of needing a cable and dial up connection to access the internet.
Some key characteristics of today’s web include:
• Web-based applications
• Data can be readily shared and accessed anywhere
• Social tools encourage people to create, collaborate, edit, categorize, exchange, and promote information (Wolcott, 2008)
The internet has impacted my life significantly. There are some positive impacts as well as some negative. Since I have always been a very social person, naturally I love social media. Facebook allows me to keep in contact with people such as old high school classmates, college friends, and family members out of state. I am friends with a lot of people on Facebook that if it didn’t exist, I probably would not keep in touch with. Facebook has become a great communication tool. This past Spring I had a high risk pregnancy and ended up delivering my daughter early. With one simple status and photo – I was able to update most of my family and friends. I didn’t need to spend precious time calling people to let them know the news.
The negative impact that the internet and social media has had on my life is that I probably spend more time doing it than I should. Instead of picking up the phone and actually talking to someone these days, I will write on their wall or send them a message. I will be the first to admit that because of Facebook and the internet, even though we are communicating – we are losing out on interpersonal communication skills.
Another negative impact it had on me is that it takes time away from my family. It is so easy to check Facebook, read a news story online, or play games – when you have constant access to it on your phone. So instead of taking five minutes to read a story out loud to my kids, I’ll take those five minutes to check Facebook. I know it’s wrong. I recognize that.
I think the internet is like an information highway. Our highway systems have been instrumental in connecting us and making it easy to get from one place to another. The internet has done that as well. Web 2.0 has connected us through collaboration, social media, and interactive sites. It allows us to surf anywhere and anytime we want.
Sources:
O'Reilly, T. (2005, September 30). What Is Web 2.0. Retrieved September 19, 2014, from http://oreilly.com/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
Wolcott, M. (2008, May 1). What Is Web 2.0? Retrieved September 19, 2014, from http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-web-20/
Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Gamification
I think one of the ethical issues of gamification is the addiction and compulsion of these games. I know several people truly almost addicted to games such as Farmville or Candy Crush. I even had a friend that would text me several times a day asking me to send her more lives in Candy Crush. On-line gaming has now taken on another dimension for people that have a gambling addiction. No longer do they need to go to a casino, or even leave their house to gamble.
A virtual world such as Second Life has its good points. Some companies use it as a virtual meeting place for employees. I also think it can be a positive thing for people that are isolated from people or are very shy. A virtual world allows them to meet and talk freely with other people. One ethical and scary downside to these virtual worlds is the fact that you are meeting and talking to strangers. If a teenager is playing this game – they can be preyed upon by sexual predators very easily. Sex is often encountered in Second Life. It is supposed to be monitored – however, there is always the chance that teenagers are participating in it.
I think virtual worlds can be very dangerous, especially to the younger generation. They are more susceptible to becoming obsessed with a game and will have a harder time distinguishing reality. The article Virtual Reality and Computer Simulation pointed out the issue of the distinction between the virtual and the real. The article states that “computer generated realities is working to erase the distinction between simulation and reality, and therefore between truth and fiction.” I think younger users should be monitored closely by parents while playing these games. So parents can limit the time they are spending, as well as helping them identify what is real and what is not.
When I read this, a recent case that was in the news came to mind. Two 12-year old girls in Waukesha tried to kill their friend by stabbing her 19 times. Their motive was that they wanted to prove themselves worthy of Slender Man, an evil character who lives only on the internet. “They believed he was real. In early 2014, Geyser and Weier decided to become what they called “proxies” of Slender Man, thereby proving their dedication to him and his existence to skeptics. To do so, they’d have to kill someone.” (http://www.newsweek.com/2014/08/22/girls-who-tried-kill-slender-man-264218.html)
A virtual world such as Second Life has its good points. Some companies use it as a virtual meeting place for employees. I also think it can be a positive thing for people that are isolated from people or are very shy. A virtual world allows them to meet and talk freely with other people. One ethical and scary downside to these virtual worlds is the fact that you are meeting and talking to strangers. If a teenager is playing this game – they can be preyed upon by sexual predators very easily. Sex is often encountered in Second Life. It is supposed to be monitored – however, there is always the chance that teenagers are participating in it.
I think virtual worlds can be very dangerous, especially to the younger generation. They are more susceptible to becoming obsessed with a game and will have a harder time distinguishing reality. The article Virtual Reality and Computer Simulation pointed out the issue of the distinction between the virtual and the real. The article states that “computer generated realities is working to erase the distinction between simulation and reality, and therefore between truth and fiction.” I think younger users should be monitored closely by parents while playing these games. So parents can limit the time they are spending, as well as helping them identify what is real and what is not.
When I read this, a recent case that was in the news came to mind. Two 12-year old girls in Waukesha tried to kill their friend by stabbing her 19 times. Their motive was that they wanted to prove themselves worthy of Slender Man, an evil character who lives only on the internet. “They believed he was real. In early 2014, Geyser and Weier decided to become what they called “proxies” of Slender Man, thereby proving their dedication to him and his existence to skeptics. To do so, they’d have to kill someone.” (http://www.newsweek.com/2014/08/22/girls-who-tried-kill-slender-man-264218.html)
Popularity on the internet
One advantage of user ratings is the effect it has on ecommerce. As a consumer that shops on-line often, the customer ratings on a product are very useful. I no longer buy something new without checking out the reviews of the product. A lot of the websites I shop on (Amazon, Ulta, Walmart) will let you sort products by high rating. So you can compare products very fast.
One disadvantage of these reviews and ratings is that you have to be very careful about where the reviews are coming from. I write for a blog that reviews products. This summer I was given a $200 stroller and was prompted to right a review of it on Walmart.com. I was pretty honest about my review, but the truth of the matter is – there are companies out there that pay people to post great reviews of their products.
A while back, Facebook changed its algorithm so that top news stories would appear at the top of user’s pages. This has an advantage as a user because you can see the most popular stories first in your feed. It comes in handy when someone you know gets engaged, has a baby, starts a new job – or other life changing event. Since it is at the top of your feed, you are sure to see it and not miss it among the hundreds of other posts.
The disadvantage to this is that we need to rely on what Facebook thinks is a top story. I find their algorithm rather annoying. I don’t want to see a post from two days ago, just because other people are liking it and commenting on it. Also – just because some of my friends are liking a story on pink elephants, who’s to say I care anything about pink elephants? Perhaps I like purple elephants better. Furthermore, the algorithms can be tricked.
One article that I found very interesting and funny on the topic is – Tricking Facebook’s Algorithm (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/08/tricking-facebooks-algorithm/375801/. )
One disadvantage of these reviews and ratings is that you have to be very careful about where the reviews are coming from. I write for a blog that reviews products. This summer I was given a $200 stroller and was prompted to right a review of it on Walmart.com. I was pretty honest about my review, but the truth of the matter is – there are companies out there that pay people to post great reviews of their products.
A while back, Facebook changed its algorithm so that top news stories would appear at the top of user’s pages. This has an advantage as a user because you can see the most popular stories first in your feed. It comes in handy when someone you know gets engaged, has a baby, starts a new job – or other life changing event. Since it is at the top of your feed, you are sure to see it and not miss it among the hundreds of other posts.
The disadvantage to this is that we need to rely on what Facebook thinks is a top story. I find their algorithm rather annoying. I don’t want to see a post from two days ago, just because other people are liking it and commenting on it. Also – just because some of my friends are liking a story on pink elephants, who’s to say I care anything about pink elephants? Perhaps I like purple elephants better. Furthermore, the algorithms can be tricked.
One article that I found very interesting and funny on the topic is – Tricking Facebook’s Algorithm (http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/08/tricking-facebooks-algorithm/375801/. )
Credibility on the internet
One thing you can do to verify the credibility of an article is to check out the source of the information. If the source is a scholarly, the information is more apt to be accurate. A scholarly is someone who is an expert in the subject matter, such as: professors, doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc. A good idea is to try to find three different ways to test a source’s credibility. If there is no author listed, you can use easywhois.com to find out who owns the site.
If the author provides a way to communicate, add comments, or ask questions – it is more credible. When verifying credibility online, a person should notice where they are finding the information. If the site is a .gov or .edu, it is a more credible source. Just because it is a professional looking website, does not make it reliable. Checking for cited sources, reference list, or footnotes is also a good idea. The format of what you are reading can also be a good indicator.
Articles that include technical terms, terminology and jargon from the industry can be a good indication. If the format includes a lot of charts and graphs, and is text heavy – it can also be viewed as more reliable.
If the author provides a way to communicate, add comments, or ask questions – it is more credible. When verifying credibility online, a person should notice where they are finding the information. If the site is a .gov or .edu, it is a more credible source. Just because it is a professional looking website, does not make it reliable. Checking for cited sources, reference list, or footnotes is also a good idea. The format of what you are reading can also be a good indicator.
Articles that include technical terms, terminology and jargon from the industry can be a good indication. If the format includes a lot of charts and graphs, and is text heavy – it can also be viewed as more reliable.
Internet Data Collection
Almost everything we do now days leaves an electronic trail. We provide a large amount of data whether we are aware of it or not. Every time you perform an internet search it’s tracked. Not all web surfers are aware that their online searches are being recorded and tracked.
From a utilitarian theory perspective, one would argue that collecting data from internet searches isn’t hurting anyone. If someone is conducting a search using a free search engine, the search engine should have the right to collect the data. If a person doesn’t have anything to hide, why should they mind if data is being collected on them? However, this theory has blurry lines. What if the information collected gets in the wrong hands – or hackers get it. Identity theft is a huge issue today. Our social security numbers, credit card numbers, address, birthdates, and other personal information are entered into so many places online. If there is a breach of security – our information can easily get into the wrong hands and end up causing financial and other damage.
From a universal perspective, one could argue about where the line starts and stops for ethical data collection. What if everyone and everything we did collected data? What if every time you made an unhealthy decision about food, the data was collected and then sent to insurance companies? Can you imagine how rates would rise if they knew consumer’s every move when it came to diet, exercise, or unhealthy lifestyle decisions?
From a relativist point of view, companies that are collecting data think its ok and right in their own mind. They feel that collecting this information is okay because it is actually helping companies market to consumers by being able to predict their future behaviors and buying. Furthermore, there are no clear online privacy rules that exist in the United States.
Sources: Gross, G. (2012, December 8). We're all clueless about privacy, FTC is told at hearing. PC World. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2018961/were-all-clueless-about-privacy-ftc-is-told-at-hearing.html?tk=rel_news
From a utilitarian theory perspective, one would argue that collecting data from internet searches isn’t hurting anyone. If someone is conducting a search using a free search engine, the search engine should have the right to collect the data. If a person doesn’t have anything to hide, why should they mind if data is being collected on them? However, this theory has blurry lines. What if the information collected gets in the wrong hands – or hackers get it. Identity theft is a huge issue today. Our social security numbers, credit card numbers, address, birthdates, and other personal information are entered into so many places online. If there is a breach of security – our information can easily get into the wrong hands and end up causing financial and other damage.
From a universal perspective, one could argue about where the line starts and stops for ethical data collection. What if everyone and everything we did collected data? What if every time you made an unhealthy decision about food, the data was collected and then sent to insurance companies? Can you imagine how rates would rise if they knew consumer’s every move when it came to diet, exercise, or unhealthy lifestyle decisions?
From a relativist point of view, companies that are collecting data think its ok and right in their own mind. They feel that collecting this information is okay because it is actually helping companies market to consumers by being able to predict their future behaviors and buying. Furthermore, there are no clear online privacy rules that exist in the United States.
Sources: Gross, G. (2012, December 8). We're all clueless about privacy, FTC is told at hearing. PC World. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2018961/were-all-clueless-about-privacy-ftc-is-told-at-hearing.html?tk=rel_news
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)