A Change of Heart

Last month I wrote about how internet filters are not the best safeguard against internet smut, but I've since had a small change of heart. Filters can be good training wheels for younger people as they learn to navigate the internet and control themselves. Dr. Knutsen's lecture on the chemical soup that regulates our sex drive helped me see internet safety in a different light. I still maintain that our individual moral fiber is ultimately what keeps us from falling into the funnel of sexual arousal at inappropriate times, but youngsters, especially teenagers, are more vulnerable to their these hormones. Filters can provide a small barrier against making poor decisions while they mature. Even better, a combination of filters and having open conversation with your children will prepare them to make good decisions later in life once on their own.

Taking a Position

Imagine, if you will, a stranger following you around, recording what you read, where you frequent, and who your friends are. Creepy, right? Many technology-based companies follow our online lives in similar fashion, and are becoming ever more intrusive; this must stop.  Such companies make money by selling our personal data they collect to advertisers. Since some of these companies offer their services for free, I don't begrudge them collecting data about use of their products, but they've gone too far when they go beyond that and track all our online activity. Just within the last month or so I've learned Twitter wants to track what apps you download to your mobile device, both Verizon and AT&T have been secretly including trackers on cellphones subscribed to their networks, and Google is able to compile disturbingly detailed user profiles on its users. I propose that there needs to be more limits on how much information companies can gather about individuals so we can protect our privacy.

The Best Safeguard

I just read an article from The Ensign titled "Keeping Safe and Balanced in a Google-YouTube-Twitter-Facebook-iEverything World" and had some thoughts on it. The article suggested some methods, including filters and parental oversights, to keep young children safe from salacious material on the internet. While these methods aren't bad things I feel they aren't the best solutions. I contend the best filter is yourself and the article later expresses the same view. The reason for this is if someone, even children, want to view something they can find a way; filters can be bypassed and family rules about technology broken. It is only your moral code that will stop you doing something. A line drawn in the sand by yourself which you've promised not to cross is thicker than meters of reinforced concrete. This is why we need to teach our children correct principles so they can govern themselves at all times and in all circumstances.

Surviving the Tides of Change

"[I]t's not a revolution if nobody loses," Clay Shirky observes on page 209 of his book Here Comes Everybody. The revolution he refers to is the sudden drop in the cost of communication and thus organizing. There have already been losers in this revolution. The media industry for example has been slow to recognize that their organizational role is becoming irrelevant. Shirky points out that the line between media producers and consumers has blurred when just about anyone with a smartphone or computer can fill both roles. The revolution is here and can't be stopped so Big Media and other losers will have to reinvent themselves if they hope to survive in any form.

But there are other losers to which Shirky referred. Ubiquitous and cheap communication tools help criminal organizations and terrorist cells just as much as anyone else. Society at large does not approve of these groups but they reap the benefit of the revolution just the same. I recall hearing of the militant group the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) using Twitter to spread their message, until Twitter pulled the plug on them. The truth is that these kind of things are going to happen and we all will have to figure out a way to deal with it.  But what is it?

I contend that the only way to really solve society's problems lies within ourselves. We can't force people to do good, but we can be good ourselves and encourage others to be the same. When the bad outweighs the good many problems will be fixed. I say these things from a religious standpoint. A quote from President Ezra Taft Benson I read in the missionary manual Preach My Gospel years ago has stuck with me: "Only the gospel will save the world from the calamity of its own self-destruction. Only the gospel will unite men of all races and nationalities in peace." Whether or not you agree with my religious convictions, the essential message is that which I've already laid out. We can weather the bad of societal revolution by each of us becoming the best we can and helping others to do the same.

Who Pays the Bills?

I'll be honest, I wasn't in class the day they watched Revolution OS.  But I do have some thoughts to share on the open-source movement.  I love the open-source mentality that pervades the programming community.  It's one of the things that has impressed me the most during my short time as a programmer.  Fellow programers put up code and solutions for free on places like GitHub and Stack Overflow.  Being a programmer makes you a part of a vast network of compatriots each willing to help one another.  But can such a system stand on its own?  Is a purely open-source community sustainable?  You can't eat or take shelter in shared code.  I personally see open-source projects as something I would do in my spare time while making a living writing code for another entity.  I'm aware, without knowing specifics, that there are ways to monetize open-source projects but doesn't that go against the point of open-source?  I suppose open-source and commercial software must exist together.

Don't Put All Your Eggs In One Basket

Last week David Clare, the director of Information and Communication Systems for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, came to our class to speak about how the Church is using technology. One thing David said that stuck out to me was that cloud computing is the now and the future. I don't think this is a bad thing altogether, but I do have reservations concerning cloud storage of sensitive information. I'm interested in cyber security so the idea of putting loads of private data into one place seems dangerous to me. There's always a way to break into things, as recent high-profile hacking incidents have proved, and we're putting all our eggs in one locked basket. I don't deny the usefulness and even the necessity of doing so but I hope that the risks are properly taken into account and measures taken to prevent hacking.

The Next Big Thing

Today in class we watched more videos about the computer industry's beginnings.  While watching I thought about how many companies found success in those days by developing technologies no one yet had.  I thought further that if so much has already been discovered how can another Microsoft or Novell take off?  Then, as if reading my thoughts, Professor Dougal mentioned that the post office long ago had decided to close because everything that could be invented had been.  It wasn't the case then and I don't believe that will ever be the case.  I do however believe that the computer industry has become established enough that the low-hanging fruit has already been picked.  For this reason the next big thing in computing will have to come from an area no one's looked at before.  It will seem to come completely out of left field.  How interesting it will be to see the next big thing when that day comes.

The Evolution of Privacy

Desire for privacy and the effort behind obtaining it have changed over the course of time.  The events chronicled by Cliff Stoll in his book The Cuckoo's Egg took place in a much different time than ours.  The internet was in its infancy as was the mentality for keeping networks secure. The hacker Stoll hunted successfully entered networks largely because administrators figuratively left their back door unlocked.  As Stoll tried to stop the hacker he was bounced back and forth between federal agencies, none of which though the threat serious enough to take charge.

Times have changed since then.  There was an uproar when Edward Snowden revealed that the government was spying not just on foreigners but on US citizens.  Similar headlines were made when a breach in Apples' iCloud service lead to leaked celebrity photos.  Since then it seems not a week goes by without a new company being hacked.  Interest in protecting privacy has reached the point that Apple and Google encrypt users' data by default much to the Federal Government's chagrin.

But the more things change the more things stay the same.  People may want privacy but they have to sacrifice convenience for it.  Stoll's hacker got in because people were lazy with passwords.  Have people improved at choosing safe ones?  I doubt it.  The average computer user probably uses one or a handful of the same passwords for the ever-increasing number of logins required today.  If true privacy and protection are desired then there must be effort expended to match.

History Repeats Itself

Everything is a remix.  There's nothing new under the sun.  Steve Jobs once said that Apple has been shameless about stealing great ideas.  Of course, he didn't like it when others copied his ideas.  Apple sued Microsoft when they saw features of Windows they believed were copied from them.  Yesterday Microsoft announced Windows 10, the newest version of Windows.  I've linked to a story about it below.  I noticed it includes multiple desktops, a feature that has been part of Mac OS X for a while.  Once again Microsoft may be borrowing ideas from Apple.  But Apple shouldn't complain; they stole their GUI-based operating system idea from Xerox.  Additionally, OS X is based on UNIX.  The ongoing story of Apple and Microsoft is just one example that everyone borrows others'  ideas and works them into their own.

http://money.cnn.com/2014/09/30/technology/windows-10/index.html?hpt=te_t1

FamilySearch's March of Progress (Rewrite)

Family history research was a difficult and slow process in the past.  I haven't done much myself, but my mother has for as long as I can remember.  In my younger years, I observed her using microfilm, CDs, and ancient-looking programs.  Those days are over from what I've seen of FamilySearch's current version.  I've recently read several articles about the Church's progress in making genealogical research easier through technology.  As a web developer, it was interesting to see FamilySearch's progress.  For some time it seemed the Church's technology department had second or even third level order of ignorance about taking full advantage of available technologies.  It's only recently they have improved and made websites which are easy to use.  I hope to see this trend continue.

Come to the Nerd Side, we have pi (Rewrite)

It's funny to compare the early days of nerds working on computers in garages with today where those skills are fairly common. I've felt for sometime that people from all walks of life will learn to program as computers become more ubiquitous. I believe I'm an example of this trend. While I have interests that would be considered nerdy (who doesn't anymore?), I don't consider myself one. Computer science wasn't on my radar until I took an introductory course and found I enjoyed it. With websites such as Code Academy, Code School, and the one in this article, many people without formal training may find themselves in the same position I did. All this came about because a handful of nerds turned their passions into something that can be used and enjoyed by everyone.

http://www.wired.com/2014/09/exercism/

Paypal Pounces on Apple Pay (Rewrite)

It seems PayPal is unhappy having a major contender in the online payment field. It reminds me of the discussions we've had in class about technological revolution. Technology industries must adapt or fade away when better technologies are developed. Since Apple is entering PayPal's industry with something only marginally different, the situation is not exactly the same, but the effects are. The linked article points out that Apple has a better public reputation than PayPal, which means the public should be more likely to use Apple's service. Not only that, but Apple's service is accepted at brick-and-mortar retailers while, to my knowledge, PayPal is not. I believe that PayPal will become irrelevant unless they find a way to outdo Apple Pay or figure out a way to exist alongside Apple's new service.

The Silver Lining of Technological Advancement (Rewrite)

Hello and thanks for checking out this blog.  Here I'll be sharing my thoughts and observations on topics we cover in my Ethics and Computers in Society class.

Technology can be a double-edged sword, as Neil Postman details here. I agree with much that Postman said, but I believe there is a silver lining to technology: it furthers the work of the Lord. I believe that the lack of technologies we enjoy today, particularly communication and transportation technologies, contributed to the onset of the Great Apostasy.  Present technology allows everyone to receive the same messages from the prophets and apostles which keeps doctrine pure.  Computers are giving us easier access to scriptures, better genealogical research tools, and more ways to share the gospel.   While new technology can be harmful when improperly used, it also gives us better tools in the service of the Lord.