This is a parenting source that discusses how shame is a helpful resource in teaching your child the difference between "right" and "wrong" however this tool is only effective if you consul the child for what they did and notify them that the action is wrong not them as a person. Then shame turns into guilt which makes it even more helpful in teaching right and wrong.

I think the most important factors in making an instance of public shaming bad is shaming that person's other characteristics. For example, if the individual is being publicly shamed for saying something inappropriate and then making fun of the way they talk or look or dress, then that can really affect the person in a harmful way.

This is an example of a tweet of harassment. The poser of the tweet looked into Cole Whites (an individual who used to work at top dog company) personal life and found that he attended some kind of racist rally, thus sending it to his job and getting him fired.

I don't think that crowd harassment is ever justified. If we cannot tolerate one kind of harassment (individual or crowd) then we shouldn't tolerate harassment at all. It seems very hypocritical to have the weighing of "good' and "bad" harassment.

This is a source that uses crowdsourcing for disabled people, primarily wheelchair users. The crowd surveys maps or sidewalks and rates them to be disability friendly or not, providing a helpful resource to those that are disabled.

I think there are ways that social media platforms can encourage good crowdsourcing. They could add some kind of individual credibility like a user's personal information before accessing the cite. They could discourage negative crowdsourcing by having moderators to ensure the information provided is plausible or factual.

This source written by David Gilbert speaks about how a moderator at Facebook (Ms. Plunkitt) is very stressed, has bad anxiety, and doesn't agree with the working conditions of Facebooks moderation team. She states that it is a very stressful job to look at this graphic content every day and it's taking a toll on her as a person, she cannot keep doing this.

I think the ethical tradeoff for not paying the moderators is that they will create some form of payment, like power tripping. I think that reddit moderators or moderators in general should be paid and hired by the company. It would not only offer jobs to people, but it would also make the platform they are moderating a better and safer space for the users.

This is X's removal policy of tweets/ posts, and it is filled with biases. The policy explains how politicians' posts may not be removed because of the position they hold (in their work) and how other posts may not be removed just ethically observed and possibly a "sensitive" media label will be applied. This seems very loosely applied and not really protecting their platform.

I have never reported a post or comment for violating social media platform rules. I have however seen many different posts that deserved to be removed (racist or sexist comments/ posts), I thought my actions would pointless and have no actual result in the changing of said comment section (it was filled with these hate comments).

This tweet from Ethan Jacobs makes a joke, acknowledging how doomscrolling IS bad however have you seen how good the content is this week? Which is pretty funny considering that's exactly what makes doom scrolling bad, the "doom" is almost always appealing, if it wasn't there wouldn't be an issue.

It appears to me that there is a lot of emotional charged actions on the internet. Whether its dopamine surged doom scrolling, negative video consumption, toxic comments about other people, or other emotions, they all seem to have an impact on why someone is doing what they're doing on the internet.

This is an emoji reply from Monica Lewinski about the "worst thing she's ever done". It is a great example of how the internet adds onto each other still going with the thought of how it evolves.

I think the way the book compares all of these different examples of evolution and loops back around to how its related in social media is really well done. I believe it leaves me feeling engaged and intrigued to read more.

This source is criticizing how Elon musk is trying to control X by trashing specific accounts that he hates, but the X algorithm is just recommending more things that he hates. Thus, creating a hate filled trash fest of a recommendation that he helped create.

Some strategies I think social media platforms could do to improve recommendations could be an optional section where you could include some of your interests. A different strategy could be consensually analyzing the user and their data to better prescribe things they could be interested in.

This is a fascinating disability discussed by the mayo clinic. Myalgic encephalomyelitis or otherwise known as chronic fatigue can be a genetic condition that leaves people feeling exhausted after doing small or large tasks. Sometimes doing nothing at all can leave them feeling so tired that they need a wheelchair to move around for that day or possibly longer.

I think that it is shocking that this soap dispenser only works for people of a certain skin tone, this also leaves me with a lot of questions. Is this design intentional? If so, why would the creator do this?

Catch me if you can is a Stephan Spielberg movie about a man who makes fraudulent checks and cashes them in for money. More specifically he is often stealing people's identities or badges to help with providing information for these checks. Displaying a great example of the privacy of information of the internet.

I think that after reading this chapter there really is no "privacy" on the internet. Elon musk for example accessed all of the direct messages and hackers can truly access whatever they what whenever they want, it doesn't feel very private to me.

This tweet is explaining that a candle doesn't have a scent but in all reality that person most likely has covid. Making the review false and misinformative, almost acting as an unintentional case of data poisoning.

I think that it's fascinating that the term used is poison. Almost implying that it will affect or poison others, like the internet is connected and that we can work together just like in real life.

I partially agree with this tweet's contents regarding mental health and relationships towards jobs. I also disagree with how large of a generalization this is of a huge group of people.

I personally wouldn't say that I am in any parasocial relationships with media figures or people in my life currently. I was however in a lot of parasocial relationships as a child with characters like SpongeBob, Finn from adventure time, and various other shows and cartoons.

I think that some social media platforms allow certain bots to operate for example a robot that produces positive reaffirmations in an Orc like dialect. On the contrary a spam bot will most likely be banned from a platform because it offers no creativity and doesn't get a lot of likes therefor not offering profit for the social media platform.

Sarah Jeong speaks about her interviews with multiple different people speaking about how difficult it is to make an ethical ai bot. Then Jeong speaks about how you can make an ethical bot with monitoring and censorship which I think should be mandatory for all platform/ bot creators.

I think this example of the gender selection form not only shows how much they care about their users but also how much time they have put into their website. Overall, it is very bad for the company and encourages users to take their time elsewhere.

The source by Joshua Habgood-Cootedescribes how a lot of the racial and sexual injustice produced by search engines is a product of white ignorance. He provides the idea that search engines should be used as information classification systems.

I believe that this is an incredibly annoying and aggressive feature that has been added to ads. The marketing industry would be a lot better without it and I feel as though it makes users more frustrated than interested in purchasing whatever the ad is selling.

The Tom Knowles source describes how he helped create the online feature known as the "infinite scroll" and how he heavily regrets creating it based on the effect it has had on society. The "infinite scroll" has increased depression rates in teens and has created even more issues beyond what he is describing i.e. doomscrolling.

What is the "most" commonly used form of ethics? Is there a way to find this information out? Do all people use a large variety of ethics?

I think the "Nothing matters" mentality of Nihilism is very redundant. Also, to what extent does the "nothing" go to? Do Nihilists value their lives or at least the aspects of their lives to the extent of creating an ethical system?