Hiding in Plain Sight

The increasing quantity of personal information given up freely by individuals has highlighted the potential privacy issues of social web since, at the very least, the beginning of the new millenium; but some people are finding security and anonymity hiding in this overwhelming swell of information.

With over 800 million active users Facebook, by some measures, would be the third biggest nation in the world, a nation that some might argue are playing happily into the hands of an Orwellian future. Personal information is traded freely for services, such as email and calendaring, and this data is sold en-mass to advertisers in an open market where the user is sold as the product.

It is this very openness which allows governments to track it's individuals, what would previously require a warrant can now be routine analysis of a targeted individual. During the London riots earlier this year the use of social media was specifically cited by the police as assisting in preventing further outbreaks of violence as people freely discussed intended targets in the open forums of Facebook and Twitter. Had these users elected to use a private network, as many did in the case of BlackBerry messenger, the police would have been forced to take legal means to capture such information.

However, some individuals find solace in the knowledge that everything they do is traced, tracked and recorded. Take Hasan M. Elahi, an associate professor at Maryland University, for example. Hasan has recorded his location, food choices, travel plans, financial data and more religiously for almost a decade when he was erroneously picked up in relation to the investigation of the September 11th terrorist attack. Posting the information for all to see online, and in many cases directly handing it over to the FBI, has given Hasan a sense of anonymity and privacy in his everyday life.

While superficially paradoxical to his goal the idea that by providing untold quantities of information to those tracking you, they get lost in the detail and are unable to filter the important from not. While, for an innocent man this may well keep the otherwise curious investigative agencies away, or at least directly meddling in your daily life, for those with secrets the gaps tell a story and the clear and present danger is quite obvious.

Hasan refers back to the rise of Facebook as an example of how millions of people are now doing the same. Every connection, every location, every thought, feeling and more posted for a global audience. And it is this, the overwhelming volume, which truly makes such analysis more difficult. You might think spotting someone in a red and white striped top would be easy, but how do you do it if everyone looks like they are wearing one?

Cross-posted from cs08jjj on social media

Does the social web + online gaming = the sedentary Lifestyle in young adolescents?

There’s no doubt about it, online gaming and gaming social networking sites, have definitely been around for a very long time and have affected us in a so many different ways (The history of online gaming). But, I wonder, are the affects of online gaming and the social gaming websites making the young adolescents of this generation obesity/overweight?

Let's dig a little deeper, Massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPG) like ‘second Life’, ‘World of Warcraft’ and gaming social websites like ‘HABBO’ and ‘Zynga, have caused some young adolescents, to spend hours online and often lose track of the world around them, for anything other than basic needs: Eat, sleep, game and repeat. I feel that this is one of the major elements, which has caused obesity in young adolescents to rise. The fact that there is a lack of activity for extremely long periods of time, has caused young adolescents to become somewhat of a “couch potato”.

A number of studies have been carried out linking the effects of online gaming and obesity in young adolescents. “According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), obesity rates in children under 12 rose from about 15 percent in 1999, to nearly 19 percent in 2004, with a projected 20 percent rate in 2010”. I think this is down to the addictive nature of these social web aspects and the ever increasing displays of new technologies involved with them e.g. This is showed in the usage of ‘HABBO’ where you can literately spend hours of even days creating your own world, interacting with people, sell or buy goods, furnish and customize your own hotel room, visit the rooms of friends and strangers, create mini-games or turn their rooms into themed role-playing areas.

Times have really changed, when I was younger you would enjoy going out with your friends to play football, basketball of any other physical sport that you were into. Nowadays, if you were to ask a young adolescent to participate in a game of football his response would be “I’m going home to play ‘Fifa online’” or “I playing Fifa Online” (which I have experienced firsthand with my younger brother!). 

I feel that the seriousness of this link between online gaming, the social web and obesity has effected today’s modern society so much, that companies like Nintendo and Microsoft have responded with attempted solutions, such as the ‘Nintendo Wii’ and the ‘Xbox Kinect’. I guess this is their endeavour to bring activity to young adolescents through online gaming and the social web.

So what do you think about the link between weight gain, obesity and the affects of online gaming and the social web in young adolescents today? Why do you think today’s young adolescents are so addicted to the online gaming/social web world? Are you a victim of the online gaming/social web sedentary lifestyle? What do you think could be employed to raise the awareness even further, or do you think enough is being done within the interactive online gaming/social web industry? 

Read more:

http://www.livestrong.com/article/110283-child-obesity-due-popularity-game/#ixzz1cJKg69SX

http://www.livestrong.com/article/110283-child-obesity-due-popularity-game/

http://www.cyh.com/HealthTopics/HealthTopicDetails.aspx?p=243&np=295&id=2375

Work relationships and social networking

Social networking has changed completely the way we relate to each other. We no longer ask for things like the cell phone number or even the email address, we might just look up someone's name in Facebook and ask him to be your friend. Barely everyone we know is linked to us through Facebook (or another social network). The question is: do we want everybody to be able to see our profile? should they be able?

If we look at the way we behave in real life, we never treat in the same way all of the people that we know. For example, our friends may know a lot about our life but our parents not so much. The most reasonable thing, would be to have different kinds of relationships depending on the people that we relate to. Amazingly, people get really upset when we "hide" some of our details to them (just concrete groups of people). For me that's just been hypocrite; we have to assume and understand that there are different kinds of relationships. If someone wants you to know less about him (or simply different things), it probably is because you have a different kind of relationship with him (and not a usual friendship).

When it comes to work, this turns into a pretty interesting topic. Should we link our profiles to our co-workers/bosses? and if so, should we change the kind of relationship that we have with them so they can't see as much of us as our friends do? or should we simply create another profile to relate to people from work?

In my opinion, it could be a bit dangerous to have your co-workers/bosses linked to your profile. On the other hand, they might take it personal (or think that you are a liar) if you don't want to add them or you change the kind of relationship you have with them, but why should I create another profile just to be able to relate to them? so I can put on my profile the only information I want them to know about me, so they can think that, that's who I am?

What do you think? Should we accept that we relate in different ways to different people, or should we just treat them in different ways without them knowing it?

In the end, it's just a matter of concepts: http://www.hpl.hp.com/research/idl/papers/essembly/

use of social networking: good or bad?

The use of social networking: good or bad in today's world?

Social web services are becoming very popular, with popular social network sites such as Facebook having 250 million users. Skype has proved to be a valuable social web tool when speaking to users outside the UK. Skype has an estimated 124 million users currently connected to its services. However, this is causing some users to become addicted to using social networking services, with a South Korean person dying at his computer screen for an astonishing 50 hours with little breaks. This is one example of an extreme case which happened in 2005. The person also was fired from his job due to his addiction. Described in the paragraphs below are the pros and cons of the ‘social web’ in more depth.

Although the case described above is an extremely rare case, the frequency of people playing online games between 10 and 15 hours is increasing. However, taking online gaming to one side, research has suggested withdrawal symptoms when not using social networks on a regular basis. This was highlighted in research where not having access to Facebook for just one day caused 200 students to have withdrawal symptoms such as frantic cravings, anxiety and jitters, similar to giving up alcohol for example. Isolation can become a pressing concern if you just chat to your friends through social networking tools, with cyber-bullying certainly a threat when using social networking sites. A study by the American Public Health Association, also noted that depression, fighting, poor academic and poor sleep were higher with children who used social networking for more than 3 hours a day. BBC describes some more possible damaging effects of using the social web; the external link is http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7898510.stm. Also, the riots seen earlier on this year were spread via social networking; mainly through the blackberry messaging system.

Let’s move this thought to the good points of the social web. Long-distance barriers are certainly less of an obstacle. You can meet new friends via online social networks and though virtual worlds such as ‘second life’. Relationships can be enhanced, as well as setting up meetings with your friends over the social networks. However, a benefit which now is slowly being explored within organisations is using social networking tools within the e-learning sector; Wiki’s and Blogs are now being used to enhance e-learning. Furthermore shy people may feel happier joining an on-going conversation through Facebook, then through conventional means. Skype and Facebook certainly show the advantages that can be seen from the use of such social networking systems. However in certain cases, people and children can certainly become ‘addicted’ to social networks and the 'online' world.

But these are just some of my thoughts as well as studies about social web from the internet. What does everyone else think? If Facebook suddenly charged users, would you be willing to pay? Could you survive without social networking for one week? How would you class people being addicted to services such as twitter, Skype and Facebook? Could you add anything more to the good and bad effects (health related) of using social networking? Do you agree or disagree with the negative effects which could be caused by social networking?

Friends Forever - How Young Adolescents Use Social-Networking Site

On BBL, under the Readings section you will find the paper 'Friends Forever - How Young Adolescents Use Social-Networking Site'. Have a quick read of this paper, and building on the lecture session today, what do you think about friendship in the Web 2.0 world?

A Web of Memories

The near ubiquitous web, even in it's basic form, provides a vast interconnected mesh of facts, thoughts and ideas such that there is almost never a question where the answer is not at our finger tips, but can our education system, and the world, keep up with such a radical new way of thinking and learning?

With the ever increasing ubiquity of the internet, carried wherever you might want it on your laptop, tablet or smart phone means that you now have constant access to a stream of information about almost anything. Who's that actor? What's that song? What is the speed of light? When was Mozart born? Two or three taps on your device of choice and you have the answer, anywhere, any time.

If you can have the answer to anything at your fingertips, instantly, where is the value of memorising untold quantities of facts, figures, formula and processes? More and more the human condition is being stored in a digital enclave, thoughts and feelings, facts and figures, all safely stored for later retrieval away from our fragile collection of flesh and bone.

Those in accademia have long accepted that learning to do things repeatably and accurately by rote has become less and less valuable, this is highlighted no better than manufacturing. Once the great engine of the British industrial age, manufacturing has withered away as such tasks have been moved to areas with suplus labour, and hence lower wages, such as China. Even the precision or artistry of an engineer or craftsman has been largely replaced by mechanised alternatives who work tirelessly without mistakes. So what of our studies?

One might argue that even at the university level much of what is required is nothing more than creative plagiarism and rote regurgitation. Take Brunel University's CS3010 where the students are tasked with filling a wiki with social web concepts. Here much of the work required is simply ripping off the appropriate articles from Wikipedia and not getting caught. A task that could no doubt be accomplished algorithmically with a little thought, replacing the students with nothing more than a small shell script.

And here in lies the answer. It is the creation of such an algorithm, such a script, which requires thought, understanding and presence of mind. It could be argued that universities already assess understanding of concepts and ability to apply concepts in their testing, but ever so frequently this is entirely dependant on rote learning of an underlying thought. For example, imagine a question like so: "Apply a WBS to the following case study." Here we are undeniably testing the ability to apply concepts, but without the rote learning of how to do such a process, or even what WBS is, you have little hope of attaining any grade.

The fragile existence of human beings lends itself to offloading as much as possible into this backing store, a cloud brain, that can be accessed at will without burdening our main cognitive processing abilities, but at what point do we stop such progression and how do we determine fact from fiction and who has what abilities as we move on from the Information Age, where information is currency, to an era where information is ubiquitous and truly free?

Cross-posted from cs08jjj on social media

Are social networks making us 'dumber' or are they helping?

Following on from the lecture yesterday, and the Tapscott view in Grown-up Digital, vs the view in The Dumbest Generation, an article published yesterday here <http://mashable.com/2011/10/11/facebook-gpa/> has the headline "No Facebook is Not Ruining Your Grades".

But what do you think?

Remembering Steve

Steve Jobs has been much eulogised in the last week since his death, but few people truly recognise the profound effects he had on the way we live our lives today.

Steve Jobs, along with his partner in crime Steve Wozniak, undoubtably helped kick start the computer revolution, in fact, along with IBM stand as the sole survivors of this hodgepodge revolution of computing. In 1976 the Apple I provided a computer that you would recognise as such today, available both as a kit and fully assembled, the computer had a keyboard input, video output and a storage interface card was also avaliable allowing you to save your data onto tape. Later, a completely assembled successor, the Apple II series, brought computing to the masses throughout the United States.

In 1984 Steve and the team at Apple went on to create the Macintosh, the computer which brought the graphical user interface and mouse to the forefront and without which the interfaces we are all so familiar with may never have become mainstream and turned the already recognisable hardware into a computer system not that distant from what you might buy to this day.

Shortly after the release of the Macintosh, Steve Jobs was unceremoniously ousted from the company he created by the very CEO he convinced to join the firm. But this was not the end of Steve's incredible contributions to technology. With time to spare and a new outlook on life Steve founded NeXT computer in 1985, an innovative company providing high specification workstation class machines to institutions like CERN. It was the NeXT cube that was to become the platform for the very first world wide web server, sat on the desk on none other than Tim Berners-Lee. The web radically changed the way we use the Internet, transforming it from a collection of numerous services into the now unified web that we have come to know to the point that the Internet itself is now a synonym for web.

Not content to reinvent just the technology sector, Steve turned his sights to media. Purchasing a division of Lucasfilm Steve created the now familiar company Pixar which has pushed the boundaries of computer generated imagery with every release, from the humble beginnings of the ageing Toy Story to new releases such as Up, Steve pushed boundaries. The enormous success of these movies resulted in Disney's decision to purchase Pixar in 2006, leaving Steve the largest single shareholder of the Disney company, where he retained his position on the board until his death.

In 1996 Apple was looking for a new operating system for it's now ageing Mac OS and after extensive search decided to buy their own founders new firm, NeXT and became the basis for Mac OS X. Steve was elevated to the position of interim CEO in 1997 and finally officially retook the reigns in 2000 where he reinvigorated the company he had founded with iconic products such as the iMac, available in a range of then outrageous colours, and later the now ubiquitous iPod and iPhone and most recently reinvented the tablet market with the iPad.

The loss of Steve Jobs is not only brings sadness to his family, the people he worked with and the people who were touched by his creations, but to the whole world. The loss of such a innovative and driving force who in many ways sculpted the way we both work and play is truly saddening and such a man will not easily be replaced.

Cross-posted from cs08jjj on social media

Is the Social Web killing our family relations?

Here I start the first discussion on the effects of social web on our family relations. I reckon it is an interesting topic for all of us and am hoping to have you all deeply engaged in the discussion. Next would be your turn :-)

===============

How the social web affects the family relationships has been a hot topic in the last few years and people have very different opinions on the matter. Some families are concerned about the amount of time their family members, especially the younger ones, spend on the internet and believe that the social web is killing their family unit. Some others however, believe that it has actually had quite some positive effects on their family relationships.

What do you think?

Does the social web really strengthen the family relations, weakens it or perhaps is it killing the family unit? Are we more, or less often, interacting with members of our families, mother, father and siblings? What about the depth of our relationships?  Would it be better to sit and have a face to face chat with your sister for a quarter or half an hour or share a meal with your family around the table, or is it better to email your sister, comment on her pictures on Facebook and talk to her on Skype? How often do you comment on your siblings’ Facebook posts and pictures? Did you use to do the same thing in the past by sitting with your brother and having a look at the pictures he had taken with his friends during his latest trip or gathering? Have you ever had a video chat with your grandmother? How did she feel about it? Does your mum follow your Twitter of Facebook? Does she know more about you now or in the past when you had face to face chats?

What about those of us who live far away from home? Would we have the met our family more or less often without having access to internet and the social web? How important was a hug or a kiss from your mother or sister? Would you prefer not being able to talk to them so easily over the internet and seeing them in real every now and then or you think you are closer together when connected virtually? What if you are not geographically far away from the family? Is the social web still as beneficial for you family relations?

The following is a list of positive and negative effects of internet and social media, which I have taken  from a presentation by Yvonne Gora from RMIT University in Australia (http://www.networkinsight.org/verve/_resources/Gora.pdf)

Positive impacts are:

-        Social relationships enhanced

-        Freedom from time and place

-        Alternative modes of communication between family members

-        Enables coordination of activities, such as having a group video call for the new year or your grandmother’s birthday

-        Develop greater information network

Negative impacts are:

-        Displace time spent with the family, perhaps by spending too much time on your Facebook or playing online games

-        Reduce communication between family members

-        Negative impact on health and wellbeing

-        Isolating and encourages individualised behaviours

Which ones apply to you and your family the most and which ones do you agree or disagree with? Have you got any personal experience? Can you add any more pros and cons to the list?