418 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2020
    1. Container and Packaging Recycling Law

      Japan has more laws that have to do with recycling different materials.

    1. The newest hotspots for handling US plastic recycling are some of the world’s poorest countries, including Bangladesh, Laos, Ethiopia and Senegal, offering cheap labor and limited environmental regulation.

      As the United States sends our recyclables to other countries to handle our overflow, Cheap labor is used.

    1. The value of plastic, glass and aluminum has decreased, forcing many redemption centers to shut their doors, despite a state subsidy program designed to help them weather market downturns.

      Here are some of the challenges the Bay Area are facing due to lack of funding.

    1. I'm so glad you shared this and I'm so, so, so glad that you're doing okay. I'm sure it's strange to read it - but I was worried about you. I'm sure a lot of us nameless, faceless people out here were.I cried reading this. I've been there. I'll probably be there again. Thank you for being brave enough to share more of your journey with us.

      I noticed a connection between this blog and the Jonny Sun piece. Both people created something and then put it out there on the internet. They both developed a virtual participatory culture communities from the art that was created.

    1. And in these dangerous and unsure times, in the midst of it all, I think the thing that we have to hold on to is other people. And I know that is a small thing made up of small moments, but I think it is one tiny, tiny sliver of light in all the darkness. 

      Sometimes a little acknowledgement is all that is needed to be able to ground yourself and to step back from the end to a new beginning.

    2. t can feel like you are writing in this personal, intimate diary that's completely private, yet at the same time you want everyone in the world to read it. And I think part of that, the joy of that is that we get to experience things from perspectives from people who are completely different from ourselves, and sometimes that's a nice thing. 

      I have had this feeling before

    1. “For us, it slows things down. We try to integrate people back to humanity,” Mr. McAleer said. “If isolation and shame is the driver for people joining these types of groups, doxxing certainly isn’t the answer.”

      There's probably a commentary here about incel groups too but I just cant think of it.

    2. Now the online hunt to reveal extremists has raised concerns about unintended consequences, or even collateral damage. A few individuals have been misidentified in recent weeks, including a professor from Arkansas who was wrongly accused of participating in the neo-Nazi march.

      This in particular reminds me of the Boston Bombing, and how reddit users took it among themselves to find out who did it and instead doxxed the wrong person, who eventually ended up killing himself I believe since the false accusation. Everyone think in these scenarios they're doing it for the cause, and that they're in the right, until someone uninvolved gets accused and ruins their lives. I do think it's tricky though because I do think for like, the people going to Nazi rallies and promoting hateful and toxic content need to recognize there are probably consequences for creating hostility, but where is that line drawn?

    3. But doxxing has emerged from subculture websites like 4Chan and Reddit to become something of a mainstream phenomenon since a white supremacist march on Charlottesville,

      I know it says that it's been happening for a while, but doxxing has been a huge part of toxic internet culture for the last 12+ years. Definitely longer than the march in Charlottesville, anyways.

    4. The next year, doxxing became a tool by in the “GamerGate” controversy, an online dispute purportedly about ethics in video game journalism that became a foundational moment for some of today’s fringe far right. Mostly male video-game players began to publish personal information — including home address and phone numbers — for women in their community, typically journalists and game designers who they said were unfairly politicizing gaming culture.

      Posting someone's information is unbelievable. It's unbelievable someone would do that. Those people should be held liable for their actions. Just because someone had an opinion about gaming culture, doesn't mean someone should attack them and exploit the person's information online. Everyone has a right to their opinion, and doxing is not a good way to get your point across.

    5. This article looks at the consequences of doxxing and how it's become a mainstream answer to exposing white supremacists. It supports both pros and cons of "outing" by using quotes from counter-protestors to a Nazi march in San Francisco and a Nazi reformer. There are references to a Charlottesville, VA march, mistaken identity with doxxing, the death of Cecil the lion, and the mob mentality behind doxxing.

    6. It is not as though they are hiding their identities.

      Does this mean when I am out supporting a Black Lives Matter event, that someone who doesn't agree with me, can doxx me? It is not I appreciate your transparent.

    7. Reminiscent of the literal uncovering of a Klan hood.

    8. Now the online hunt to reveal extremists has raised concerns about unintended consequences, or even collateral damage. A few individuals have been misidentified in recent weeks, including a professor from Arkansas who was wrongly accused of participating in the neo-Nazi march.

      People who are doxxed could be good or bad people, but it doesn't justify its the right thing to do.

    9. Now the online hunt to reveal extremists has raised concerns about unintended consequences, or even collateral damage. A few individuals have been misidentified in recent weeks, including a professor from Arkansas who was wrongly accused of participating in the neo-Nazi march. And some worry that the stigma of being outed as a political extremist can only reinforce that behavior in people who could still be talked out of it.

      Doxxing can misidentify people wrongly. For example, the Arkansas professor was misidentified and accused of participating in a neo-Nazi march. This is very harmful for the peace loving people. Once someone is labelled in a certain negative way on the internet it is hard for the suffering person to reclaim their lost reputation and peace.

    10. “For us, it slows things down. We try to integrate people back to humanity,” Mr. McAleer said. “If isolation and shame is the driver for people joining these types of groups, doxxing certainly isn’t the answer.”

      Doxxing is called passive aggressive violence. Mr. Tony McAleer who runs Life After Hate states that doxxing can provide some level of comfort for people who are outraged by people like neo-Nazis. But doxxing makes the job of people like Mr. McAleer who tries to integrate people like neo-Nazis to humanity. People should understand the consequences of labeling someone as an extremist on the internet because once someone is labeled as an extremist it stays as it is on the internet and it reaches millions of people. I think people should be mindful and they need to think about their reputation before joining any extremist groups because their activities can be exposed on the internet and it makes a negative impact on them.

    11. The next year, doxxing became a tool by in the “GamerGate” controversy, an online dispute purportedly about ethics in video game journalism that became a foundational moment for some of today’s fringe far right. Mostly male video-game players began to publish personal information — including home address and phone numbers — for women in their community, typically journalists and game designers who they said were unfairly politicizing gaming culture.

      I saw a play about game gate, really well done and really illustrated the personal impacts of being "doxx"'d. Reflecting back on that story, doxx'ing seems like it might be a poor way to actually influence someone's thinking or behavior.

    12. But Tony McAleer, a former white supremacist leader who now runs Life After Hate, a rehabilitation program for neo-Nazis, called doxxing a “ passive aggressive violence.” He said publicizing the names and workplaces of neo-Nazis may offer some level of solace to people outraged by them, but it makes his job more difficult.“For us, it slows things down. We try to integrate people back to humanity,” Mr. McAleer said. “If isolation and shame is the driver for people joining these types of groups, doxxing certainly isn’t the answer.”In short, once someone is labeled a Nazi on the internet, that person stays a Nazi on the internet.

      Tony McAleer makes a strong point. Once something is posted on the internet, it is difficult to undo it, impacting both the near and far future of a person's life. I honestly don't know a lot about doxxing, but if someone (such as a white supremacist leader like McAleer) is rehablitiated and reintergrated into humanity, then they shouldn't be judged for the mistakes of the past, not when they are trying to be their better selves.

    13. In short, once someone is labeled a Nazi on the internet, that person stays a Nazi on the internet.

      This reminds me of the power of social media. It's like once you got tagged or defined into a group, it's close to the point where you can never go back. E.g. Once you are labeled as Nazi, you are Nazi for the rest of your life.

    14. Online vigilantism has been around since the early days of the internet. So has “doxxing” — originally a slang term among hackers for obtaining and posting private documents about an individual, usually a rival or enemy. To hackers, who prized their anonymity, it was considered a cruel attack.

      My first time hearing the term "doxxing"

    15. But the two young men pictured were not the bombers. At one point, Reddit sleuths even set their sights on a student from Brown University, about 60 miles away in Providence, R.I., who was missing. He had nothing to do with the bombing; he had committed suicide.

      I think it's really important to note that people can really interfere with police investigations and cause chaos in the lives of the people they point the finger at.

    16. “People went berserk,” Ms. Coleman said. “That, to me, was this interesting turning point where it showed the general public would be willing to jump into the fray.”

      I think when people are angry, that makes them willing to commit more extreme acts than they might otherwise not do.

    17. White supremacists marched with torches during a rally in Charlottesville, Va.Credit...Edu Bayer for The New York Times

      Fire has historically been used in battle, and as a fear tactic. Take the Great Fire of London in 1666, which destroyed thousands upon thousands of homes, churches, and businesses. While that fire may have been an accident, it's a testament to the destructive power of fire.

      There are many things, passive and active, that white supremacists could accomplish with such tiki torches, including burning people of color in direct combat. Considering the nature of white supremacy, I'm surprised I have not seen such accounts of violence on the news.

    18. SAN FRANCISCO — Riding a motorized pony and strumming a cigar box ukulele, Dana Cory led a singalong to the tune of “If you’re happy and you know it clap your hands.”“You’re a Nazi and you’re fired, it’s your fault,” she sang. “You were spotted in a mob, now you lost your freaking job. You’re a Nazi and you’re fired, it’s your fault.”“All together now!” Ms. Cory, 48, shouted to a cheering crowd in San Francisco’s Castro neighborhood on Saturday. They were protesting a rally planned by far-right organizers about a mile away.“Dox a Nazi all day, every day,” she said.

      Well, that's a heck of a way to start off an article.

      Honestly, there's a certain sort of camaraderie within protests. Not all of them are jovial, as what seems to be going on here, but by their nature, they're very passionate. At the BLM protest in Walnut Creek I attended, we were blowing out our lungs chanting in support of the fallen, and I ended up getting swept away on a wave of justified anger by the time we flooded onto the freeway. A large source of anger amongst the protestors is that the cops overseeing the protests, for the most part, covered their badge numbers and other identifying teachers, meaning that by the time tear gas and rubber bullets were on the table, there was no enemy more specific than the Walnut Creek Police Department. You can't exactly doxx a whole police department and expect it to have as severe of a consequence as if the individual police officers were prosecuted individually.

      P.S.: I note the bias in my annotation, but the difficulty in diffuse consequences stands.

    19. The next year, doxxing became a tool by in the “GamerGate” controversy, an online dispute purportedly about ethics in video game journalism that became a foundational moment for some of today’s fringe far right. Mostly male video-game players began to publish personal information — including home address and phone numbers — for women in their community, typically journalists and game designers who they said were unfairly politicizing gaming culture.

      It is sad to see this kind of behavior. Glad to see equality in the gaming community is starting to appear.

    20. But the two young men pictured were not the bombers. At one point, Reddit sleuths even set their sights on a student from Brown University, about 60 miles away in Providence, R.I., who was missing. He had nothing to do with the bombing; he had committed suicide.

      This can be very dangerous and potentially ruin someones life. When information is displayed online, it must be checked and then triple checked to ensure the information being presented is truthful and accurate.

    21. Marla Wilson, 35, of San Francisco, said she was appalled when she saw white supremacists marching so brazenly in Charlottesville. Doxxing, she believed, was an effective way to make people think twice about being so bold with their racism.

      Another problem with doxxing worth considering is that people may have an emotional response to a picture without contextualizing it. They might respond strongly and repost the picture or video, but their indignation might be premature and unjustified.

    22. Now the online hunt to reveal extremists has raised concerns about unintended consequences, or even collateral damage. A few individuals have been misidentified in recent weeks, including a professor from Arkansas who was wrongly accused of participating in the neo-Nazi march. And some worry that the stigma of being outed as a political extremist can only reinforce that behavior in people who could still be talked out of it.

      Nellie Bowles, a journalist covering technology for the New York Times in the San Francisco Bay Area, examines how doxxing, even with the best intentions in mind, can become problematic and have unintended ethical ramifications. One of the problems arising from “doxxing” is a probability of error and misidentification. Another serious potential ethical problem is labeling people for the rest of their lives without any hope for redemption.

    1. he problem, of course, was that she was telling a story about two people who had no idea they’d been cast as leads in a riveting story for thousands of strangers.

      This kind of reminds me about the movie Jim Carey did called "The Truman Show" and it's disturbing to know that it's still happening, years later, as if we didn't learn anything from it

    2. Then I realized that was precisely how I was treating these very real people. My stomach turned as I considered how I’d feel if every twitch of my arm, half of my conversation, and even my bathroom usage were all narrated, without my knowledge, for a swelling audience of several hundred thousand people online.

      I think that's the horrifyingly interesting thing about using the internet like this, is that it makes it really easy to forget that these are real people that are being documents without permission for the sake of "the feels", as if them living their lives in a way that is appealing to others is permissible to record them.

    3. It's true that the charming "romcom" nature of the story, which is more about the viewers than it is about the unwitting participants, sort of blurs the lines and gets past our immediate defenses against privacy invasion. It's as though the targets were being perceived as fictional characters.

    4. There are also sobering lessons here about the limits and ethics of “sousveillance,” the use of our handheld devices to record from “below.” (This is in contrast to surveillance from on-high, a la CCTV or drones.) In some cases, our use of cellphone cameras has the potential to liberate us when directed at the state, subjecting the powerful and privileged to forms of accountability that they’re not used to. That’s been made plain by the significant role of cellphone video in the movement against police brutality. The brutality isn’t new, but the widespread availability of high-definition pocket video cameras is. It’s also led to significant pushback against ordinary people who try to marshal the power of the state against ethnic minorities. Think of the sagas of Barbecue Becky and Permit Patty, who tried to call the police on innocent black citizens (including an eight-year-old girl) and were publicly shamed for their cruelty.

      I found this story very interesting as it talks about how the cellphone cameras have the potential to liberate the people when there is a need. For example, police brutality is very much talked about around the world. As people have good quality cameras in their cell phone nowadays they can take videos and show those as a proof when they are in a problematic situation with the police.

    5. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways. To some, the story from that flight to Dallas already has a happy ending. The mystery man revealed himself on Twitter as former soccer player Euan Holden and gave Blair permission to share his Instagram and reveal his name. He has eagerly taken a liking to his newfound social media fandom and embraced the moniker of “Plane Bae,” even appearing on NBC’s Today to bask in the attention. Surely, this is the ultimate consent and the final proof that people like me are just being buzzkills about a fundamentally innocent story. But look closer. What about the mystery woman? She’s clearly been far more reticent, declining an interview for the Today segment and asking that her full name not be revealed. It’s hard to avoid the impression that she’s being dragged into the public eye nonetheless.

      I found this article interesting and it points about how vulnerable the people are when they are used as content by others in social media platforms like Twitter. In this story, Actress Rosey Blair tweeted about two strangers that she met in the airplane. The man "Plane Bae" associated with this incident revealed himself on Twitter and participated in NBC's today to bask in the attention. But the woman associated with this incident did not want to reveal herself in the public. So, I believe people should be very sensitive when they post about strangers in social media because that will have a very big impact on their life and some people want to keep their anonymity and they may not want to be content in social media. So, respecting others' privacy is very important and people should be mindful of others feelings and freedom.

    6. In the case of that woman from Blair’s flight, her legions of “fans” are digging day and night to find more information, to meet the female lead of this summer’s hottest rom-com. They want to know what happens next. They want to make her finish the story. Go on a date; now kiss; now get engaged; tell us what it was like. We need to know more. More. More.

      In many ways that is one of the most unfortunate things about the "commercialization of the internet", social media, reality television, etc. it's the whole idea of pleasure versus enjoyment. When we aren't working for anything and just passively letting it come to us, we discard it as soon as it's "used up"

    7. Seemingly innocent cases, like that of “Plane Bae,” are small warning signs on the road to our even more networked future. We are all watching each other, mining each other’s lives for “content” that we give for free to large corporations who then monetize it. “Plane Bae” didn’t just benefit Twitter, a company badly in need of good PR, but also T-Mobile, whose savvy CEO swooped in to offer Blair a reimbursement on the Wi-Fi she purchased to write her thread.

      That's the really tragic part is that people are selling other people's lives so they can get "internet famous" for just a moment. Not for doing anything meaningful with their lives, simply by harvesting private moments of other people.

    8. Of course, the sexual implication is something he’d be praised for, while the woman is attacked.

      Another unavoidable consequence of viral stories on the web: slut-shaming and other endless misogyny.

    9. There’s another unfortunate dimension to this whole saga that mimics the coercive effect of public marriage proposals: everyone innocently cheers on the romance because it tells a good story, but it places the woman in the invidious position of being the “bad guy” if she says no.

      It reminds me of watching a video of public marriage proposal on Facebook. Most comments I noticed was talking bad about the lady because she said no to the guy. But first, I wonder why do these strangers think they can make a decision for this lady or anyone they don't even know already?

    10. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      I can't agree more with this! This explains why some people would set their account in private.

    11. The problem, of course, was that she was telling a story about two people who had no idea they’d been cast as leads in a riveting story for thousands of strangers.

      If you don't take precautions in protecting people's identity, then you can inadvertently turn them into celebrities. This is not fair to the people involved.

    12. It was, after all, the digital equivalent of must-see TV. “Have not been this riveted since the final episode of Lost, and this *didn’t* piss me off! Amazing!” wrote one Twitter user in reply to Blair’s thread. “Please @TheEllenShow have a look on it! We need to know more about this happy end,” wrote another. Blair should be credited, if nothing else, with spinning the relatively unremarkable behavior of two strangers into such a simple but compelling story.

      This is a remarkable insight. While I can definitely empathize with the entertainment value of such a livestream type of entertainment, having watched people make fools of themselves online or play video games, the involuntary aspect of it is unsettling. Saying that these happenings didn't piss them off means that the Twitter user came in with an expectation that this unfolding story should be consumable and intriguing while not breaking off or taking a drastic turn for the worse, as many "first-date" type scenarios do. And I wouldn't even consider this a real first date! Then again, I'm not one to speak for the duo involved.

    13. This is the Faustian alchemy of social media: we are all given the opportunity to become celebrities in an instant, sometimes for nonsensical reasons, with or without our input. But we gain virtually none of the benefits of that fame, none of the glamor or the institutional support to help deal with the invasiveness of celebrity and how it can eat away at every boundary you ever took for granted.

      We don't get to control our own coverage online. Sure, with lawyers and copyright strikes, you can control the spread to the extent, but without an overruling power, such as in the Democratic Peoples' Republic of Korea (AKA: North Korea), people are free to access, interpret, and share information mostly at their own discretion. This is a great thing in the context of freedom, but this also can lead the the spread of misinformation, confusion, and untoward feelings.

    1. Experts say that we would need to implement changes across the board. Legislators may need to pass laws requiring manufacturers to use more recyclable materials, companies would need to build much-needed recycling infrastructure and people would need to recycle properly.

      More changes need to be made to help ensure recycling is done properly. More funding is needed to assist in this process.

    1. Given the immense harm inflicted on individuals and groups of color via prejudice and discrimination, it becomes imperative for our nation to begin the process of disarming, disrupting, and dismantling the constant onslaught of micro- and macroaggressions.

      A

    2. n the United States, the omnipresence of racial bias and bigotry has led many to question the reasons for their persistence in light of widespread public condemnation. Social scientists have proposed a number of reasons for people’s failure to act: (a) the invisibility of modern forms of bias, (b) trivializing an incident as innocuous, (c) diffusion of responsibility, (d) fear of repercussions or retaliation, and (e) the paralysis of not knowing what to do (Goodman, 2011; Kawakami, Dunn, Karmali, & Dovidio, 2009; Latané & Darley, 1968; Scully & Rowe, 2009; Shelton, Richeson, Salvtore, & Hill, 2006; Sue, 2003).

      Supports my question

    1. I have received numerous texts and emails from white friends recently — checking in, asking whether I’m okay. I appreciate the concern, and I want everyone to know I’m fine. Well, I’m as fine as I’ve been since 1982. That’s when, after my family moved to a new neighborhood in Chicago, a group of white kids tried to blow up our car by sticking a rag in the gas tank and lighting it on fire.

      This reminds me of the ending of Invisible Man and I Am Not Your Negro.

    2. Of course, white people, like everyone else, face genuine hardships, but these hardships do not negate white privilege. Consider the difference in responses to the suffering of black people during the crack cocaine epidemic and that of rural whites during the opioid epidemic. O

      Good example of similar stories with vastly different consequences

    3. This will not be easy. The price of justice — the loss of privilege — will be a painful shock.

      Straight forward and true.

    4. As Frederick Douglass said, without struggle, there is no progress. Let’s struggle together for our collective soul.

      Welcoming conclusion.

    1. Meanwhile, I hope college students will go forth, outside the campus bubble, and help people. The relationships they form will generate orders of magnitude more wisdom and understanding about people unlike themselves than any social-justice dogma.

      It seems that the guide offered a one size fits all way to be an ally only by looking inward without being specific as to how to do this.

    2. The high school volunteers mentioned above and the special-needs community with whom they allied are both better off for the fact that service to others through outward action was emphasized, rather than inward reflection on privilege.

      Is being an ally offering a service, creating a bond, and then that leads to increased advocacy? Our connection to other people changes our ability to see the world.

    1. This is this really kind of a generational upheaval. We can either make some serious structural changes, redistribute power and wealth in a way that we haven't been willing to consider in the past.

      It's well past time to reconsider the changes and reparations we need to make.

    2. I think at the time of the Rodney King beating it was easier to view it as an isolated incident or as a few bad apples. But now, over time, we see a persistent and pervasive pattern. Over years and years.

      I think the pervasiveness of the incidents being recored make a difference. It is difficult to unsee a murder. It makes me wonder about all of the incidents that occurred and were not able to be documented.

    3. I think a lot of people, when they saw that video of George Floyd, who weren't in the black community, felt agony.

      It was murder.

    4. The protests and marches today you see are multiethnic, multicultural, even multigenerational. And the allyship is something that is more pronounced now than it perhaps once was.

      That's what I have seen at protests here.

    1. In a 2014 report by the Sentencing Project, a national nonprofit, 68% of Black respondents said the U.S. justice system is biased against Black people compared with 25% of whites. The report went on to say that white perceptions of overall fairness led to greater levels of punitive sentencing for people of color.

      whites have a high perception of overall fairness in sentencing

    1. n the early 2010s, as grassroots Black demonstrations emerged after the killings of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and Eric Garner in New York City, both state and federal government were again there to watch. Protest and advocacy organizations such as Black Lives Matter and government-labeled “Black Identity Extremists” are being monitored and infiltrated.[15]

      infiltration by city, state, and federal govts. monitored movements such as Black Lives Matter as "Black Identity Extremists."

    2. ervasive government surveillance in America is not a new phenomenon. Government monitoring and suppression of Black speech and conduct has been an essential feature of American society far before the public at large realized the potential dangers of widespread surveillance. Although privacy is a national value, it has been an elusive concept for Black people in America.

      Privacy is an elusive concept for Black people in America

    1. Many people know that during World War II, innocent Americans of Japanese descent were surveilled and detained in internment camps. Fewer people know that in the wake of World War I, President Woodrow Wilson openly feared that black servicemen returning from Europe would become “the greatest medium in conveying Bolshevism to America.” Around the same time, the Military Intelligence Division created a special “Negro Subversion” section devoted to spying on black Americans. Near the top of its list was W.E.B. DuBois, a “rank Socialist” whom they tracked in Paris for fear he would “attempt to introduce socialist tendencies at the Peace Conference.”

      Woodrow Wilson's Military Intelligence Division created a "Negro Subversion" section..WEB DuBois at top of list.

    2. We now find ourselves in a new surveillance debate—and the lessons of the King scandal should weigh heavy on our minds. A few months after the first Edward Snowden revelation, the National Security Agency disclosed that it had itself wiretapped King in the late 1960s. Yet what happened to King is almost entirely absent from our current conversation. In NSA reform debates in the House of Representatives, King was mentioned only a handful of times, usually in passing. And notwithstanding a few brave speeches by senators such as Patrick Leahy and Rand Paul outside of the Senate, the available Senate record suggests that in two years of actual hearings and floor debates, no one ever spoke his name.  

      NSA had wiretapped Dr. MLK

    1. However, within copyright law exists the doctrine of fair use, which allows for use of a copyrighted work in the creation of new work without permission, as long as the use fits within certain parameters.

      Fair use is nice that we have that, it gives people leeway to express themselves.

    2. Image-based memes are easy to create and easy to spread, though whether they will go viral is never a given. If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether.

      If your a librarian and want to make a Meme, this would be good information to know about.

    3. Image-based memes are easy to create and easy to spread, though whether they will go viral is never a given. If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether. Google Images search tools provides such a filter,

      At my last job at the gym, we would create informational posters to display throughout the building with images used from Google. The filter we would apply was the for reuse and would allow us to use images without experiencing copyright issues.

    4. There is no official definitive answer for whether a use can be considered fair, as every case must be judged on its own merits, but there are some types of use generally allowed under fair use, including criticism and commentary, parody, journalism, education, and research.

      It seems as if the whole policy on fair use is vague and each scenario needs to be looked at specifically, as each situation could be different from another.

    1. The loss of anonymity online has created a significant cultural shift. It now takes some degree of literacy and precision to move through the digital world without leaving any clue as to one’s identity. Commonly used services are interconnected, importing names, profile pictures, and other personal information among one another, sometimes without even asking. Anyone in an even gently public-facing role has reams of Google image search results for themselves, their faces: images independent of their control or consent.

      Again, the culture of transparency will contribute to enforcing new norms of ethics and accountability.

    1. Algorithms are taking over – and woe betide anyone they class as a 'deadbeat' This article is more than 1 year old Zoe Williams

      title of article in The Guardian July 12, 2018

    1. The more difficult question concerns whether scoring systems’ source code, algorithmic predictions, and modeling should be transparent to affected individuals and ultimately the public at large. Neil Richards and Jonathan King astutely explain that “there are legitimate arguments for some level of big data secrecy,” including concerns “connected to highly sensitive intellectual property and national security assets.”146 But these concerns are more than outweighed by the threats to human dignity posed by pervasive, secret, and automated scoring systems

      while this article treats credit scores predicted by algorithms, the effect of the secret scoring systems on jobs, housing, and opportunities are widespread and often unable to be challenged...reminds me of what happens with too much faith in ai surveillance without due process for those affected

    2. 05 - Citron & Pasquale Article.docx (Do Not Delete)3/26/2014 2:47 PM14 WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW[Vol. 89:1 and data behind them.73 Software engineers construct the datasets mined by scoring systems; they define the parameters of data-mining analyses; they create the clusters, links, and decision trees applied;74 they generate the predictive models applied.75 The biases and values of system developers and software programmers are embedded into each and every step of development

      Biases of system developers and software programmers

    3. 05 - Citron & Pasquale Article.docx (Do Not Delete)3/26/2014 2:47 PMTHE SCORED SOCIETY: DUE PROCESS FOR AUTOMATED PREDICTIONSDanielle Keats Citron* & Frank Pasquale**Abstract: Big Data is increasingly mined to rank and rate individuals. Predictive algorithms assess whether we are good credit risks, desirable employees, reliable tenants, valuable customers—or deadbeats, shirkers, menaces, and “wastes of time.

    Tags

    Annotators

  2. Jun 2020
    1. But as we surveil each other in profoundly coercive ways, we also risk — as is often the case with informal forms of power — replicating the coercive power of the state itself. Surveillance disciplines our behavior, as any minority who’s passed through a security checkpoint in America can tell you in detail. It creates certain behaviors by design, most notably compliance, the willingness to do anything to avoid being hurt.

      By exercising the informal power of sousveillance and public harassment, there is a danger of creating a disciplinary regime regulated by a mob mentality.

    2. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      The author implies that Rosey Blair’s behaviour is not a single case of a misjudged behaviour but rather a symptom of the paradox of our society. On one hand, we are supposed to respect other people’s privacy. On the other hand, the very structure of existing social media platforms encourages their users to exploit any opportunity to increase the number of their followers or/and increase their visibility.

    3. In some cases, our use of cellphone cameras has the potential to liberate us when directed at the state, subjecting the powerful and privileged to forms of accountability that they’re not used to. That’s been made plain by the significant role of cellphone video in the movement against police brutality.

      This is very different from publicly speculating about strangers getting up to use the bathroom on an airplane, insinuating a sexual encounter for entertainment. Who in their right mind would want that to happen to them. Do unto others people.

    4. Last night on a flight home, my boyfriend and I asked a woman to switch seats with me so we could sit together. We made a joke that maybe her new seat partner would be the love of her life and well, now I present you with this thread.

      I have not read or seen the entire thread, I have only read about it, but there is so much wrong here it is difficult to know where to start. It is such a huge invasion for entertainment and self promotion. Perhaps if no pictures were involved it would have been less intrusive, but its value as entertainment would have been significantly diminished.

    5. There are parents who will not have their children's faces appear anywhere on the internet, including sending emails of photos...I cannot imagine how the parents of that small child peering over her seat reacted if they were made aware of this inadvertent web appearance

    6. In some cases, our use of cellphone cameras has the potential to liberate us when directed at the state, subjecting the powerful and privileged to forms of accountability that they’re not used to. That’s been made plain by the significant role of cellphone video in the movement against police brutality.

      The cell phone has come to be seen as doing more for civil rights than anything in many years--especially in the recent killing of George Floyd and the awareness (finally) of many Americans about the blatant injustices that have gone unchecked.

    7. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      A story that serves as momentary entertainment for many can wreak havoc on those it is about. In this case, a young woman who values her privacy has to hire an attorney and remove herself from the internet...while others enjoy their fifteen minutes of fame.

    1. On Saturday May 30th filmmaker and photographer David Jones of David Jones Media felt compelled to go out and serve the community in some way. He decided to use his art to try and explain the events that were currently impacting our lives. On day two, Sunday the 31st, he activated his dear friend author Kimberly Jones to tag along and conduct interviews. During a moment of downtime he captured these powerful words from her and felt the world couldn’t wait for the full length documentary, they needed to hear them now. Show less Show more

      This is a powerful video where this young woman wonders why people are focusing on the what instead of focusing on the why

    2. The Most Intense Heartfelt Description Of Racism I Ever Filmed225,347 views225K views•Jun 17, 2020 15K 284 Share Save 15,382 / 284 David Hoffman David Hoffman Verified 395K subscribers Subscribe As my subscribers know, I have done thousands of interviews in my life. This interview with journalist, civil rights advocate, lawyer Roger Wilkins was one that I never forgot. I asked him to be straight and honest with me and to speak to his grandchildren in the future, of his experiences. That is exactly what he did, with such intensity and clarity. During this challenging time with the black lives matter movement and police unfairness and the coronavirus pandemic, I thought that I would present Roger's comments again. I always felt that every student (at any age) should hear Roger to better understand what was experienced by so many Americans during slavery, in the 1940s, the 1950s, the 1960s, and, to some extent, today. I want to take the time in this description to thank Roger Wilkins for the effort and energy he put into his responses to my questions. Show less Show more

      This was filmed in 1989 with Roger Wilkins explaining his experiences of racism in the 1950s and 60s, released by David Hoffman ..gently describing the horrendous https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXUFiXeNZV4 Excellent background for those recently aware

    3. ohn Oliver takes a look at facial recognition technology, how it’s used by private companies and law enforcement, and why it can be dangerous.

      Baltimore police in the Freddy Gray marches used facial recognition to identify and target different people--there is no framework used...a man in England who blocks his face is then photographed by police...the Capability is the Austrailian new launch of this technology..

    4. Facial Recognition: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

      June 15, 2020 the expansion of applications brings a host of privacy and civil liberty issues

    1. One of the most shocking things that many of us learned when the Covid-19 pandemic was first landing on our shores, and we were weighing the pros and cons of closing the schools, was that for tens of millions of American kids, going to school represents the only guarantee of a decent meal on any given day. I’m pretty confident that most of the kids we’re talking about here aren’t white. And whatever you think about the opportunities in this country and whatever individual success stories you can call to mind, there is no question that some of us start on third base, or second base. Everyone has a lot to deal with, of course. Life is hard. But not everyone is a single mom, or single grandparent, struggling to raise kids in the inner city, all the while trying to keep them from getting murdered. The disparities in our society are absolutely heartbreaking and unacceptable. And we need to have a rational discussion about their actual causes and solutions. We have to pull back from the brink here. And all we have with which to do that is conversation. And the only thing that makes conversation possible is an openness to evidence and arguments—a willingness to update one’s view of the world when better reasons are given.

      The bulk of this podcast questions many recent assumptions...about policing, about anti-racism too, though I'm not sure he sees this as I do..and I am not on board with some of his perspective...but he got me thinking

    2. How much of this is inequality due to the legacy of slavery? And how much of it is due to an ensuing century of racist policies? I’m prepared to believe quite a lot. And it strikes me as totally legitimate to think about paying reparations as a possible remedy here.

      The NYTimes magazine of Sunday, June 28 has an extraordinary essay about reparations “What is owed”

    3. with social media, we’ve all been enrolled in a psychological experiment for which no one gave consent, and it’s not at all clear how it will turn out. And it’s still not clear how it will turn out, but it’s not looking good. It’s fairly disorienting out there. All information is becoming weaponized. All communication is becoming performative. And on the most important topics, it now seems to be fury and sanctimony and bad faith almost all the time.

      I learned about Sam Harris from Marina, and I listened to his recent podcast

    1. mage-based memes are easy to create and easy to spread, though whether they will go viral is never a given. If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether. Google Images search tools provides such a filter, or try the Creative Commons search for work licensed for reuse via Creative Commons licenses.

      Using images that are labeled for reuse or are already in the public domain is sound etiquette. While it is impossible to control how others perceive images, the original creator should have some say in how it is used.

    1. unintended consequences

      This is exactly the situation in the Plane Bae situation

    2. Online vigilantism has been around since the early days of the internet. So has “doxxing” — originally a slang term among hackers for obtaining and posting private documents about an individual, usually a rival or enemy.

      Origin of term doxxing

    1. This article introduces a new strategic framework developed for addressing micro-aggressions that moves beyond coping and survival to concrete action steps and dialogues that targets, allies, and bystanders can perform (micro-interventions).

    2. APA Reference

    1. ’m talking with professor Ibram X. Kendi, New York Times bestselling author of How to Be an Antiracist and the Director of the Antiracist Research and Policy Center at American University. We talk about racial disparities, policy, and equality, but we really focus on How to Be an Antiracist, which is a groundbreaking approach to understanding uprooting racism and inequality in our society and in
    1. Why are so many unarmed black people being killed by police while armed white people are simply arrested? Why are officials addressing violent crime in poorer neighborhoods by adding more police instead of more jobs?
    1. Ms. Williams, a real estate marketing director and food blogger, also tweeted at the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, which took an immediate interest.

      smart wife

    2. The Friday that Mr. Williams sat in a Detroit police interrogation room was the day before his 42nd birthday. That morning, his wife emailed his boss to say he would miss work because of a family emergency; it broke his four-year record of perfect attendance.In Mr. Williams’s recollection, after he held the surveillance video still next to his face, the two detectives leaned back in their chairs and looked at one another. One detective, seeming chagrined, said to his partner: “I guess the computer got it wrong.”

      Apologies??

    1. The stakes are too high in criminal investigations to rely on unreliable—or wrong—inputs. It is one thing for a company to build a face recognition system designed to help individuals find their celebrity doppelgänger6 or painting lookalike7 for entertainment purposes. It's quite another to use these techniques to identify criminal suspects, who may be deprived of their liberty and ultimately prosecuted based on the match. Unfortunately, police departments' reliance on questionable probe photos appears all too common.

      linked to the article on Mr. Williams's wrongful arrest

    1. Some of the students are at BHS. One who spoke at the protest on 6/20/20, was very moving.

    1. This List Of Books, Films And Podcasts About Racism Is A Start, Not A Panacea

      Code Switch is a podcast I already subscribe to and it's a good source of information.

    2. And it will be a multipart process.

      This is something that will be revisited again and again.

    1. The designation no longer exists?” Pressley asked.“It hasn’t existed since I’ve been here for 17 months,” McGarrity replied. “We are not using ‘black identity extremists’ as a term or for a group.”Advertisement

      Why didn't they have someone who could answer Pressley questions.

    2. there’s no domestic terrorism charge.”To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “

      I was shocked by this. As a nation we've been burdened with domestic terrorism for far too long to not have laws in place that address this problem directly.

    3. The subcommittee noted that there was a 17 percent increase in reported hate crimes in 2017 from the previous year and a 31 percent increase since 2014. And in spite of the ADL’s report that white supremacists were responsible for 78 percent of extremist murders in 2018, the FBI still dedicates most of its time, money and manpower to investigating and stopping international terrorism. According to the Daily Beast, the Trump administration even disbanded a unit in the Department of Homeland Security dedicated to domestic terrorism and right-wing extremists, upsetting many intelligence and law enforcement officials. cnxps.cmd.push(function () { cnxps({ playerId: '4e065883-27be-43c1-b568-898f10d3390b' }).render('f10c6314028348d6baed500a30d59066'); }); G/O Media may get a commissionSave Your Floors From Dirt and Grime With $130 off a Dyson V10 Cordless Vacuum From NeweggDyson V10 Cordless Vacuum (Refurbished)Buy for $270 from Newegg“The FBI has testified the bureau allocates its resources almost exactly backwards than the problem would suggest,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said. “Devoting 80 percent of field agents to stopping international terrorism including Islamic extremism and only 20 percent to stopping domestic terrorism including far right and white supremacist extremism.”

      This is sad and shocking, but not really.

    4. According to the Daily Beast, the Trump administration even disbanded a unit in the Department of Homeland Security dedicated to domestic terrorism and right-wing extremists, upsetting many intelligence and law enforcement officials.

      Unbelievable!

    5. Pressley: How many extremist murders has the FBI linked to Black Lives Matter or similar black activist groups? McGarrity: We don’t work Black Lives Matter it’s a movement. It’s an ideology. We don’t work that. Pressley: So the answer is none. Can you just say that for the record? There has been no killing that the FBI can link to black Lives Matter or similar black activist groups, to your knowledge.McGarrity: To my knowledge—I’d have to go back—but to my knowledge, right now, no.

      This is a surprisingly clear look into the motives & actions of the FBI. If we take was McGarrity is saying to be truthful, then although black extremist-adjacent topics may have been linked to murders, Black Lives Matter is not a focus for the FBI. This is positive, as there is no evidence linking Black Lives Matter to the types of hate crimes historically committed by white supremacist groups.

    6. McGarrity explained that right-wing extremists like the Tree of Life Synagogue shooter in Pittsburgh were charged with hate crimes instead of domestic terrorism simply because “there’s no domestic terrorism charge.”To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      I believe that there should be a "domestic terrorism" charge, to more accurately represent the crimes that are being committed. While hate crimes are also a good representation of the crimes being committed, these are not purely crimes of hate. They are crimes associated with mass destruction of property or life.

    7. But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      This statement did not seem probable to me so I search for "domestic terrorism in the US" on the web. I was surprised to find out that it was true, and that this topic has been debating ever since The Patriot Act was signed. Wikipedia provided a link to the NPR article about it.

    8. On Tuesday, June 4, the House Oversight subcommittee on civil rights and civil liberties held the second session in a series of hearings titled: “Confronting White Supremacy.” Among those testifying before the subcommittee was Michael C. McGarrity, the director of the FBI’s Counterterrorism Division. McGarrity explained that right-wing extremists like the Tree of Life Synagogue shooter in Pittsburgh were charged with hate crimes instead of domestic terrorism simply because “there’s no domestic terrorism charge.”To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges.

      This could use some clarification. While we have a law that defines domestic terrorism, we don't actually have a federal law that can be used to prosecute people for domestic terrorism? Congress wants answers from the FBI and the FBI counters with Congress needs to pass legislation. It is long pass time to get this right.

    1. Gregory McMichael “stated he was in his front yard and saw the suspect from the break-ins ‘hauling ass’” down the road, according to the police report. McMichael “stated there have been several Break-ins in the neighborhood and further the suspect was caught on surveillance video,” the report said. But where is the surveillance video linking Arbery to a recent burglary? And McMichael’s neighborhood had gone seven weeks without a reported burglary, a local police lieutenant recently told CNN. The last reported burglary was on January 1, when a 9-mm pistol was stolen from an unlocked truck outside the McMichaels’ home.

      Claiming a robbery caught on a non-existent surveillance video

    1. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do.

      This is a useful tip. Wikipedia is a very trustworthy website. I use alexa.com to check out websites.

    2. There are some hard problems with misinformation on the web. But for the average user, a lot of what goes wrong comes down to failure to follow simple and quick processes of verification and contextualization. Not after you start thinking, but before you do.

      This is a good reminder to always check because of misinformation.

    3. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      That jumped out at me, I often check things that I am suspicious of, but I don't check everything. Good reminder to check everything.

    4. Your methods of checking have to be really quick. They have to be habitual, automatic. They can’t be cognitively expensive.

      I agree

    5. This is an easy to technique to check the information source.

    6. I appreciated his idea of a quick and habitual check.

    7. There are some hard problems with misinformation on the web. But for the average user, a lot of what goes wrong comes down to failure to follow simple and quick processes of verification and contextualization. Not after you start thinking, but before you do.

      This is very true! To prevent more misinformation on the web, we should always check.

    8. What do I mean by that? Let’s use an analogy: which technique do you think would prevent more car accidents? A three-second check every time you switch lanes

      I found the three-second rule check similar to changing lanes using the mirror-and-head-check very useful and interesting. As the blog states it is very important to check all the articles for the facts before we share something on the social media or with friends, family and colleagues. As it is a habit for drivers to check the rearview mirror, people should start making the fact check as a habit before they share something online which will help in controlling and reducing the fake news and it also helps to maintain their online reputation with their family and friends.

    9. If you’re a human being reading this on the internet and if you’re not a time traveler from some future, better world, there is less than a one in a hundred chance you do the sort of checks we’re showing regularly. And if you do do this regularly — and not just for the stuff that feels fishy — then my guesstimate is you’re about two to three standard devs out from the mean. Now imagine a world where checking your mirrors before switching lanes was rare, three standard-deviations-out behavior. What would the roads look like? Well, it’d probably look like the Mad Max-like smoking heap of collisions, car fires, and carnage that is our modern web.

      I find this to be a very striking visual of what happens when we, as sharers of content, do not independently verify our sources, and blindly share them along. There's a stereotype about grandparents sharing along links to less-than-reputable news articles. By participating in this behaviour, grandparents end up digging themselves into filter bubbles and pockets of misinformation, no matter their good intentions.

      I admit, that although I try to be web-literate, I'm certainly not the perfect example of web/information/digital literacy. Sometimes, I forget to check sources, or I end up using a source I thought was a different source. (Darn you, fake websites that switch out .edu/.net with .com) By implementing Mike Caulfield's steps to check one's sources, I can make sure that I am disseminating useful and reliable information sources in the future.

    10. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      This seems to be so obvious: check your sources before reading to avoid confirmation bias, yet I never do that. I usually check the source only when I don't agree with the article or the content does not seem trustworthy.

    11. More people than you would think believe that the blue checkmark = trustworthy. But all the blue checkmark really does is say that the person is who they say they are, that they are the person of that name and not an imposter. Your two-second “mirror and head-check” here is going to be to always, always hover, and see what they are verified for.

      Important information on validating a source to see if the information provided can be trustworthy.

    12. In this case, the URL does match. What does this look like if the site is fake?

      I think this is one of the most important verification tools. It is so easy to think you are on a legitimate website because counterfeiters are so sophisticated theses days.

    13. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do.

      I have never heard of a way to check the legitimacy of a website before, and I am glad that it is possible. I will definitely try to remember these steps for future searches.

    14. digital literacy needs to start with the mirror and head-checks before it gets to automotive repair or controlled skids. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      I love his analogy and can understand his mission-like zeal. He provides such a clear explanation on how to make his suggestions into habits.

    1. This story is true. The violence white supremacist bring to our country is a terrorist threat. This was admitted in a Congressional hearing.

    1. ut never before have the cries carried this kind of muscle. Among American voters, support for the Black Lives Matter movement grew in the first two weeks of protests almost as much as it did in the preceding two years.

      This is an entire section of today's news...in the morning of Memorial Day Chris Cooper is in the Ramble birdwatching...and then threatened...and that night George Floyd is killed...both incidents recorded on cell phones. Black Lives Matter--begun six years ago--has taken flight...four articles in the WSJ in one day...it seems as if we finally have reached a turning point, at least in awareness

    1. supplement protests with other actions, such as supporting black-owned businesses and donating to bail funds and advocacy groups.

      what to do now

    1. The killing of Mr. Floyd, Mr. Boyer said, brought a shift in perceptions of what Mr. Kaepernick was trying to achieve. “Whereas kneeling was received as such a divisive gesture, it’s sort of become a uniting gesture,” he said. “But it takes a lot more to actually change” the system that athletes like Mr. Kaepernick are protesting against.

      shift in attitudes--four years later

    1. The ACLU of Southern California has fought for decades against police abuse and for policing that is equitable, transparent and democratic. In the courts, in city halls, in the legislature, the ACLU SoCal has challenged excessive force, racial profiling, broken-windows policing and dragnet surveillance.

      racial profiling, policing, surveillance

    1. The FBI came under heavy criticism in 2017 for creating the designation ”Black Identity Extremist” as a discriminatory measure to target racial-justice advocates for surveillance and prosecution. Similarly, the DHS memo appears to wrongly characterize peaceful, anti-racist groups carrying out protests as worthy of invasive and persistent surveillance. “We are concerned that biases and inaccuracies reflected in the ‘Race Paper’ could result in unconstitutional law enforcement activities throughout the country that disproportionately impact activists, protesters, and communities of color,” reads the letter. The signers include 18 Million Rising, the American Civil Liberties Union, the Brennan Center for Justice, the Center for Media Justice, Color Of Change, Free Press, the Muslim Justice League, the NAACP, the National Lawyers Guild, Project Censored, the Center on Privacy and Technology at Georgetown Law and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

      Reading about the race paper mentioned in Harriot's article--and DHS's sending a pdf of nine black sheets of paper--led me to see where this later led and to the website of rightsanddissent.org. What an insult--to make policy based on information that is not shared with those it most affects.

    1. So here it is. And here is what it expresses — my utter shock that when talking to some otherwise intelligent adults about the fact that we are not educating our students to be critical consumers of web content, or to use networks to solve problems, etc — my utter shock that often as not the response to this problem is “Well, if students would just stop getting information from the web and go back to books, this whole problem would go away.”

      This perspective is something I have never encountered among instructors at DVC...though there has always been concern about students tracking down legitimate sources rather than accepting something just because they see it on the web.

  3. Dec 2019
    1. . If you create or post one, remember to pay attention to the source of the image. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether. Google Images search tools provides such a filter, or try the Creative Commons search for work licensed for reuse via Creative Commons licenses. When you see a meme going around, give a thought to the subject of that meme image, whose life may forever be

      Not something I ever gave much thought to before, but will definitely keep in mind after reading.

    2. This poor kid. Consent is a must have its not right to do this to anyone. The poor kid was humiliated.

    3. This is crazy. I m not really into looking at memes but I have seen them all over. I never thought of them as invasions of privacy but it makes sense.

    4. Your best bet is to start with an image or clip that is already labeled for reuse or is in the public domain, meaning out of copyright protection altogether.

      This is a good way to prevent infringement.

    5. Why memes are used again, and what is memes.

    6. Wow, I had no idea it was such a problem. and I can't believe a kids parents sued some kids over a video.

    7. I had no idea that film makers have the right to file a law suit over creators of meme

    8. Meme creators and posters have been sued for using people’s images without permission, especially those who were not already public figures.

      The importance of consent, especially on the Internet and in memes, cannot be overstated. #PlaneBae is one example, and I have read countless other stories by the people whose images are featured in memes, with varying responses. Some think it's funny and enjoy the exposure, while others (like #PlaneBae) have experienced serious harassment and dangerous levels of unwanted attention. One aspect that hasn't been touched on in our reading so far is the consent of children whose images are used in memes- such as Success Kid or Disaster Girl. What's complicated for adults to navigate may be equally or more complicated for children.

    9. However, within copyright law exists the doctrine of fair use, which allows for use of a copyrighted work in the creation of new work without permission, as long as the use fits within certain parameters. A legal finding of fair use takes into account the following factors: The purpose of the use, The amount of the work to be used, The effect of the use on the market for or value of the original work, and The nature of the copyrighted work.

      How can a meme have copyrights when it is shared all over the web and there is no control to who shares it? If it were something that was published in a magazine, then I would understand about copyrights.

    10. Merriam-Webster defines “meme” (pronounced “meem”) as “an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture,” originating in the same root as “imitation.” Richard Dawkins is credited as having coined the term in The Selfish Gene (1976).

      I did not know that the definition was this old. I thought it was something that was more recent.

    11. Sometimes the meme creator is also the image creator, but often, when involving movie stills or images of celebrities, the image’s copyright is owned by someone else.

      I learned about lots of "memes" on social media platforms, like on twitter where other users would bring a response of their "meme" image and refer it to someone else's tweets.

    12. Memes are the units that transmit ideas, behaviors, styles and usage within a culture through a variety of media, like nursery rhymes passed down from parent to child.

      Wow... I never knew that kind of idea about "memes." I thought they could refer to something else within one meaning of its term. Also, I think "memes" existed thru social medias for which I seen some of those on different platforms.

    13. Merriam-Webster defines “meme” (pronounced “meem”) as “an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture,” originating in the same root as “imitation.” Richard Dawkins is credited as having coined the term in The Selfish Gene (1976). Memes are the units that transmit ideas, behaviors, styles and usage within a culture through a variety of media, like nursery rhymes passed down from parent to child. Says Dawkins,

      Whoa- I had no idea that the definition of meme dates so far back. I thought that the term meme and its meaning were more recent products of the Internet, and I didn't know that the term meme has a broader meaning outside of what we commonly refer to as memes today.

    1. But look closer. What about the mystery woman? She’s clearly been far more reticent, declining an interview for the Today segment and asking that her full name not be revealed. It’s hard to avoid the impression that she’s being dragged into the public eye nonetheless.

      Makes me super uncomfortable to think what she might be going through. Even with her attempts to step away from all the attention, being "dragged" into it is the perfect way to put it.

    2. This is sickening. Poor girl.. what is wrong with our society. The men get praised for things as such and women most of the time gets shamed. I feel bad for her.

    3. I would be annoyed if this happened to me. My love life is my own and a story that should be shared by me if online. This is a violation of privacy even if no harm was intended what if they didn't want the attention.

    4. The story’s charm disguises the invasion of privacy at its heart: the way technology is both eroding our personal boundaries and coercing us in deleterious ways.

      Cross realizes that the author of the Twitter feed, #PlaneBae, while appearing to act in "good faith" is actually unwittingly acting in "bad faith" outside of the code of information ethics. This realization displays the second element of REP in Ribble's blog post, "Digital citizenship is more important than ever: "Access: Not everyone has the same opportunities with technology, whether the issue is physical, socio-economic or location." (Ribble, 2016). Since #PlaneBae did not have physical access to social media or perhaps the socio-economic means "to buy plane Wi-Fi and share the conversations of strangers with other strangers on the Internet." this put her in a disadvantageous position of information privilege. (Friedman & Sow, 2018).

    5. Then I realized that was precisely how I was treating these very real people. My stomach turned as I considered how I’d feel if every twitch of my arm, half of my conversation, and even my bathroom usage were all narrated, without my knowledge, for a swelling audience of several hundred thousand people online

      Cross's comment aptly highlight's Aminatou's admonition in "Call Your Girlfriend," to "take a beat" (Friedman & Sow, 2018) and reflect on whether this Twitter feed adheres to the first element of REP in Ribble's blog post, "Digital citizenship is more important than ever: "Etiquette. Students need to understand how their technology use affects others." (Ribble, 2016).

    6. That's crazy, just one day being a regular person and next day your being flooded with people asking questions because your a viral star

    7. receiving some harassing comments, at least one of which was related to Blair’s speculation

      Speculation, that's all it is. And this speculated piece of information has greatly impacted a real person's life. Speculations, if made public, should be clearly stated as such, not as facts. Once the information (true or false) is out there, people have received it and it can't be taken back. Sharing one's speculations with the world doesn't seem like a responsible thing to do.

    8. the medium’s dissociative effects prevent us from centering the humanity of the people involved

      I think the internet doesn't do it to us, we decide to be involved and behave the way we do.

    9. invasiveness of celebrity and how it can eat away at every boundary you ever took for granted.

      With the internet and now-available communication technologies, I think many privacy-related boundaries that we considered existed and took for granted are now gone or have changed. Unfortunately it is no longer a personal decision to become publicized, now anyone can publicize others, unfortunately, without their consent. This lack of consent is what makes it invasive.

    10. informal forms of power

      Informal > unregulated > unaccountable > potentially dangerous and abusive

    11. Respondents to the original thread, in thrall to the “love story” and eager to thwart Blair’s half-hearted attempts at anonymizing the pair, soon found and shared the woman’s Instagram.

      I think this situation shows that it isn't only the original publisher of this story, Rosey Blair, responsible for this invasion of privacy/anonymity, but also all those who put an effort into finding out who the woman (involuntarily) involved was and publishing her personal information, specially after she had denied consent to do so.

    12. letting myself get caught up in what felt like a made-for-TV drama. Then I realized that was precisely how I was treating these very real people.

      I applaud the author for being honest about at first getting caught by it, and mentioning it here because it can make us all increase our awareness of how easy it is to unintentionally get involved in things we are against of.

    13. charm disguises the invasion of privacy

      Important statement that reminds everyone how important it is to be careful and aware.

    14. Thrusting random people into viral fame can be a messed-up thing to do

      Concise and clear statement to which I agree.

    15. We should be thinking more seriously about the ethics of live-tweeting: when is it appropriate? When it is, what should and shouldn’t you do? In Blair’s case, she seemed to think that lightly obscuring the faces of the two people she surveilled was enough to be ethical. (One face, that of a small child looking over her seat two rows ahead, was not obscured at all.)

      In the CYG podcast, "Internet Outrage: Part One," Aminatou Sow suggests that a good rule of thumb is to wait until a situation is over to tweet about it. For example, in this case, the woman could have waited until she was off of the plane and back home to tweet about what happened on the plane. I think that's a pretty good rule, although I think it's best to just avoid posting about strangers at all. When in doubt, don't post it.

    16. We are all watching each other, mining each other’s lives for “content” that we give for free to large corporations who then monetize it. “Plane Bae” didn’t just benefit Twitter, a company badly in need of good PR, but also T-Mobile, whose savvy CEO swooped in to offer Blair a reimbursement on the Wi-Fi she purchased to write her thread.

      This is a part of the story that I hadn't heard before. I remember when the whole #PlaneBae story happened, and the subsequent backlash, but I don't remember there being corporations involved. This is interesting in the context of what we've been reading about consent (and sort of about copyright)- the woman posting the Twitter thread, and the man involved in the "plane couple" both stood to gain financially from the situation, at the cost of the other woman's privacy and consent. If the image of the other woman was used for corporate purposes/financial gain, could she sue the companies for using her image without consent?

    17. What had been private is now uncontrollably crowdsourced. Your consent becomes a trifling detail in a story about you that suddenly belongs to everyone else. It doesn’t matter otherwise.

      Knowing that anyone could be writing things about your life and the things your doing is sometimes to be scary.

    18. Then I realized that was precisely how I was treating these very real people. My stomach turned as I considered how I’d feel if every twitch of my arm, half of my conversation, and even my bathroom usage were all narrated, without my knowledge, for a swelling audience of several hundred thousand people online.

      I would feel upset if I seen someone do this to me. I would feel violated having hundreds or thousands of people reading about me.

    1. "To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.” But someone who sends pipe bombs to Democrats; plows through a crowd of anti-racism protesters in Charlottesville, Va.; or shoots up a church in Charleston, S.C., will not face domestic terrorism charges."

    2. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do. #weblit #LS121FA

    1. The subcommittee noted that there was a 17 percent increase in reported hate crimes in 2017 from the previous year and a 31 percent increase since 2014

      Whether this is an accurate statistic or not, it feels like hate crimes are widely talked about and get a lot of media coverage. However, it feels like article such as this one, that goes one step further in exploring hate crimes, get much less attention

    2. I knew that BLM was never a threat and its crazy to see that the FBI once had said so. But I didn't know white supremacists were the highest threat, don't get me wrong, they are defiantly horrible people and are a threat, just didn't know they were the highest

    3. This is crazy. Any act such as the one he committed should be considered and act of terrorism.

    4. Investigation admitted that prejudiced assumptions against the Black Lives Matter movement, Muslim Americans and black identity extremists was all a lie. Intelligence officials sat in front of lawmakers and openly admitted that white supremacists and right-wing violence are the biggest domestic terror threat but also admitted that federal agencies aren’t really doing anything about it.

      This was an interesting statement. I feel that all should be treated as equals. Its all about how the movements are demonstrated. All types of groups if not organized or peaceful can be considered a threat. What is seen as threats when it comes to movements shouldn't be based on race, gender, and so fourth it should souly be based on how it is ran and how everyone acts.

    1. Go up to the “omnibar” Strip off everything after the domain name, type wikipedia and press enter This generates a Google search for that URL with the Wikipedia page at the top Click that link, then check in the sidebar that the URL matches. Forty-nine out of fifty times it will. The fiftieth time you may have some work to do.

      interesting...I will admit that its something I hadn't thought before because usually investigating sources seems like "too much work", but this could take less than two minutes

    2. This is nice, I did not know you were able to right click a text and Google could look up the information for you. That is nice. I will have to check it out...

    3. This is very interesting as I didn't know websites could be impersonated. Especially big name websites, you would think they have ways to prevent that.

    4. This make sense it is good to make technology users more aware of what they are getting into instead of going in blind getting incredible sources of information.

    1. Now the online hunt to reveal extremists has raised concerns about unintended consequences, or even collateral damage.

      This comment exemplifies the important theme within participatory culture that is addressed in the Module 5 lecture about information ethics: "We’re in this space where in theory, we are all benefiting from each other's participation but there can be unintended consequences from that participation." (Moss, 2019).

    2. Online vigilantism has been around since the early days of the internet. So has “doxxing” — originally a slang term among hackers for obtaining and posting private documents about an individual, usually a rival or enemy. To hackers, who prized their anonymity, it was considered a cruel attack.

      Bowles's explanation and definition of doxxing as a form of online vigilante justice recalls Jenkins statement in “Defining Participatory Culture" that, “Over time, the term “resistance” came to refer to symbolic gestures that questioned or challenged the values of the status quo.” (Jenkins, 15).

    3. In short, once someone is labeled a Nazi on the internet, that person stays a Nazi on the internet.

      This is the beginning of cyber violence. Once defined as someone, You will start to be attacked.

    4. So has “doxxing” — originally a slang term among hackers for obtaining and posting private documents about an individual, usually a rival or enemy. To hackers, who prized their anonymity, it was considered a cruel attack.

      I never heard about dooxing. This sentence gives me the definition.

    5. she believed, was an effective way to make people think twice about being so bold with their racism.Editors’ PicksReal Estate Thought It Was Invincible in New York. It Wasn’t.Here’s What’s Happening in the American Teenage BedroomBeloved Berlin Currywurst Stand Delivers a Bite of HistoryAdvertisementContinue reading the main story“Some of what is happening now will make these white supremacists realize why their grandparents wore hoods,” Ms. Wilson said. “At least then there was shame.”

      I disagree with this thought, because I think that if someone stands for something, it is better for them to say it than to hide it. If it's something harmful to others, then this transparency would allow others to be prepared and careful, or the authorities to control it, if necessary.

    6. are you really doxxing a person if he or she is marching on a public street, face revealed and apparently proud? It is not as though they are hiding their identities.

      I agree with this idea. If doxxing in this case means making the name of people who openly go out in public supporting a cause available, then I think it isn't wrong.

      When protesters take the streets, they want to be heard and seen, which consequently makes them identifiable. Nowadays that also includes being recorded and the spread of those media records.

    7. aggressive

      I agree with this man. In this case, doxxing seems to me like a negatively-intentioned response to a negative action.

      I think everyone is responsible for their actions and must be held accountable for them; whether it is being a neo-Nazi, uncovering one or shaming one.

    8. “There was this idea that you were veiled and then uncovered.”

      I find it interesting that being veiled is an idea instead of a fact. Also, I think this sentences exposes the vulnerability of being "veiled".

    9. A few individuals have been misidentified

      This is a big problem when we rely so much on technology. We should trust technology (eg, facial recognition), but always verify before making claims that could harm others.

    10. Doxxing was on the minds of a number of protesters on the streets of San Francisco on Saturday.

      It has been a nightmare for these protesters to experience the threat of a group of hackers.

    11. So has “doxxing” — originally a slang term among hackers for obtaining and posting private documents about an individual, usually a rival or enemy. To hackers, who prized their anonymity, it was considered a cruel attack.

      I never knew "doxxing" meant as retrieving personal files of an individual by hackers. I found this surprising that it's an ongoing problem on the internet.

  4. Nov 2019
    1. A legal finding of fair use takes into account the following factors: The purpose of the use, The amount of the work to be used, The effect of the use on the market for or value of the original work, and The nature of the copyrighted work. There is no official definitive answer for whether a use can be considered fair, as every case must be judged on its own merits, but there are some types of use generally allowed under fair use, including criticism and commentary, parody, journalism, education, and research.

      This quote is straight forward resource to use in order to figure out if a meme is generally following basic legal protocol. Although, it is also important to look at each individually and consider various circumstances that may rise regarding it specifically.

    2. Merriam-Webster defines “meme” (pronounced “meem”) as “an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture,” originating in the same root as “imitation.” Richard Dawkins is credited as having coined the term in The Selfish Gene (1976)

      I never actually knew what the definition of a "meme" was until I read this article. I just had it explained to me by my friends, and sort of guessed what is was based on seeing them via my social media posts.

    3. Merriam-Webster defines “meme” (pronounced “meem”) as “an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture,” originating in the same root as “imitation.”

      This shows how memes are difficult to translate in fair use, because they are an imitation.

    4. When you see a meme going around, give a thought to the subject of that meme image, whose life may forever be changed.  

      This is important to think about considering there are a lot of blurred lines when it comes to fair use laws. It's important to use your best judgement, and consider how it will affect others.

    1. There’s another unfortunate dimension to this whole saga that mimics the coercive effect of public marriage proposals: everyone innocently cheers on the romance because it tells a good story, but it places the woman in the invidious position of being the “bad guy” if she says no.

      This is an interesting comparison using marriage proposals. It is unfortunate that she is considered the "bad guy" because she doesn't want to be involved. In reality it should ultimately be her choice.

    2. What had been private is now uncontrollably crowdsourced. Your consent becomes a trifling detail in a story about you that suddenly belongs to everyone else. It doesn’t matter otherwise.

      This is a powerful quote. It shows how powerful the consequences are when you share information online. It can greatly affect someone else.

    1. To be clear, there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America. People who conspire with international terrorists—even if they aren’t materially involved in an act of violence—are charged with “acts of terrorism transcending international boundaries.”

      Although I have previously heard this fact on television news programs, I was surprised to read about it in such detail in the link sourced in the story, as I have never read the United States Code of Laws. In reviewing it in detail and putting in the context of this blog post, it is my opinion that this particular code needs to be revised to allow more severe charges to be filed in future cases.

    2. Investigation admitted that prejudiced assumptions against the Black Lives Matter movement, Muslim Americans and black identity extremists was all a lie. Intelligence officials sat in front of lawmakers and openly admitted that white supremacists and right-wing violence are the biggest domestic terror threat but also admitted that federal agencies aren’t really doing anything about it.

      I have not heard of them using the word terror ever to describe this.If this is all true its quite upsetting.

    3. there is a law that defines domestic terrorism but not one that charges people who commit acts of terrorism in America.

      This is a very interesting fact and legal loophole... I wonder why does it still exist if those in power are aware of it? Whose interests is it serving/protecting?

    4. “Devoting 80 percent of field agents to stopping international terrorism including Islamic extremism and only 20 percent to stopping domestic terrorism including far right and white supremacist extremism.”

      I found this statistic surprising. The article by the Daily Beast, cited in the preceding paragraph, goes into more detail about this aspect of the FBI and the changes made in the Department of Homeland Security. I would be interested in researching how the changes that have been implemented have played out in terms of preventing domestic terrorism. The head of the Intelligence and Analysis Office of the DHS claims that the Office has increased its engagement in preventing domestic terrorism and become more effective than before, but other DHS sources cited in the article disagree.

    1. But I end up coming back to this simple stuff because I can’t shake the feeling that digital literacy needs to start with the mirror and head-checks before it gets to automotive repair or controlled skids. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      I find it interesting that despite having coined the phrase “abstinence-only web education” in 2009 to describe scholars’ response to solely rely on library materials rather than the Internet to avoid misinformation --- and despite having worked with Ward Cunningham, the American programmer who developed the first wiki in 1994 – Caulfield instead chose to develop a grassroots response that challenged the abstinence-only web education mainstream belief by creating the Digital Polarization Initiative to improve web literacy skills for college age undergraduates, i.e. the next generation of scholars and members of mainstream culture who could then be well versed fact checking online information before disseminating it across the web.

    2. Well, it’d probably look like the Mad Max-like smoking heap of collisions, car fires, and carnage that is our modern web.

      This sentence is a bit too pessimistic, making me feel that the worldseems to be nothing.

    3. If you’re a human being reading this on the internet and if you’re not a time traveler from some future, better world, there is less than a one in a hundred chance you do the sort of checks we’re showing regularly. And if you do do this regularly — and not just for the stuff that feels fishy — then my guesstimate is you’re about two to three standard devs out from the mean.

      It just puts things into perspective about what we do in the world.

    4. all the blue checkmark really does is say that the person is who they say they are, that they are the person of that name and not an imposter.

      Evidence is what makes information reliable, not a source. Even the top experts are human and can make mistakes or present information from a particular perspective, without being neutral or impartial; but evidence presents undeniable facts.

    5. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      This made me reflection on biases. If our research methodology is biased from the very beginning, then everything that comes after will also be biased.

    6. One of the things I’ve been trying to convince people for the past year and a half is that the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable. It’s not enough to check the stuff that is suspicious: if you apply your investigations selectively, you’ve already lost the battle.

      This is a good reminder. I think it's easy to just assume that sources are reliable and then, as a result, accidentally use a bad source. I think it's especially helpful that Caulfield uses the phrase "emotion-producing" here, because that's probably a very frequent reason that people use bad sources- emotions can cloud people's judgment and distract people from checking the source before sharing something.

    7. One of the things I’ve been trying to convince people for the past year and a half is that the only viable literacy solution to web misinformation involves always checking any information in your stream that you find interesting, emotion-producing, or shareable.

      I believe this is very common to other students when it comes down to searching for reliable sources on the open web. Especially when a student finds sources to add on his/her essay during the process of research, so it's important to carefully check your sources if already verified before copying and pasting the link.

    8. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      I like that process of checking information on the internet can and should really become a habit. I want to be able to develop this habit. I feel that through this habit, I will also have a better and deeper understanding of the information that not everyone will have.

    9. Because it is these simple behaviors, applied as habits and enforced as norms, that have the power to change the web as we know it, to break our cycle of reaction and recognition, and ultimately to get even our deeper investigations off to a better start.

      This is an incredibly interesting article. Caulfield does a great job explaining why the "Always check" approach to online literacy is important to avoid misinformation on the web. Instating how these small checks can change the web, and can help provide literal information.

    1. President Trump said in a Monday morning tweet that he would consider testifying—in writing—for the inquiry as to whether he abused his power when he witheld military aid to Ukraine unless they launched an investigation into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter.

      At the beginning, the news said that it was necessary to impeach the president. I think it should be fake. Now, even the president himself is ready to respond?

    1. Reed supporters pleaded for a much deeper investigation into the murder—and possible corruption—asking Governor Greg Abbott to spare his life.

      Recently, Kim Kardashian visits Reed to work on his case at prison in Texas and it's really not worth setting an execution date for Reed to be punished which he is innocent. In fact, every one of his supports and especially Kim Kardashian working on the case to stop the execution of Reed which I absolutely believe this needs to be taken down that will end the governor's decision. Therefore, I suggest Governor Abbott to prevent Reed's execution date that will eventually become removed in the system.