I appreciate the idea of express the fear of overused and underregulated technologies in films by impactful scenes. At the time Jurassic Park first came out, it's such a great hit that people are truly fearing genetic and fossil research projects. However, while more and more films of similar rogue technology gists like AI rebel and virus leakage came out, the seriousness consideration lies behind the gist was diluted and deconstructed. As a result, the catastrophic plots caused by rogue technology turned into a film genre instead of an allegory.

While we always want scientists to think about ethics first when developing new things, it's also true that the most groundbreaking technologies came out inevitably and are out of the control of any scientists who discovered or developed them. Even if Einstein didn't talked about nuclear weapons, it would be mentioned by others.

Even nowadays this kind of narratives are prevaling in the world and especially on all kinds of media, although already weakened substantially. Many groups and organizations post contents that imply the idea of white supremacy and savior narrative, which can affect the cognition of viewers in a slow and subtle way. Traditional media is also a major place of these narratives.

In other words, meta is trying to achieve monoply in the market of social media, and I'm glad it didn't make it! If it does reach this goal, it'll make it much easier to control public opnions and spread frauds and lies.

It's kind of one of the basic emotion that we hang on to daily, like when we prand our friends and laugh. While it hides after anonimity and lack of management, it could lead to weird and unacceptable behaviors like trolling and dogpiling.

Retractable features on social media are super useful, and I often wonder why it's not been a standard feature for all social media. As stated in the article, it provides users with right to fully control their posts. But If everything’s retractable, people might use it to hide stuff or avoid accountability, and the media would kind of more be like 4chan. It's a balance we need to make.

This page is talking about the nature of the anonymus forum 4chan and the basic operating logics of the forum. Due to its strict anonimity and ephemerality, the /pol/ board became a grow bed for coordinated raids and attacks, and keeps making it notoriously famous. There are definitely not only one dark corner like 4chan on the Internet, and that's just a reflection of some darkest things on the Internet.

Never, no matter how justified is the cause of the harassement. It's the same as using violence in real life, no matter what happened to someone, the usage of violence should always not be encouraged, let alone justified, even if the cause is perfectly justified. Otherwise, the use of violence would be out of control in no time, like the time at when lynch is prevailing in Texas. If that's the case, then the "justice" lynch is pursuing would start to hurt innocent people.

This is a great platform to support good ideas that has not come true yet. I've seen a lot of really useful gadgets and games on it, and some of it has came true thanks to the support from users on kickstarter. It sometimes feels like the only way out for small ideas to come true.

This is what happens now on a regular basis when something contradictory comes up. Since pathos are almost always easier to resonance with than logos and ethos, any piece of well-made emotional message could catch attention of a large crowd of people, and the reactions of the crowd can then be manipulated. And unfortunately, bad things like doxxing and continuous harassment also runs on this mechanism.

I think the initial point is a sound point and I read through some of the opinions under it, that made me to think about the nature of declaredly non-profit forums like reddit. If they are non-profit, then it's reasonable to not paying the moderators since everyone else is also working by passion. But for a big forum comany big like reddit, and they are hiring employees themself, it's questionable if they are really non-profit, and the responsibility to moderate the subreddits might goes to the core employees, who might consider hiring or encouraging current moderators by prizes or stipends, etc.

I was aware about the protests at that time as a Chinese citizern also under lockdown, but I never heard of this "spam wall" happened on twitter. Now that I think about it, it's interesting to think about how are these spams organized and by what methods they are released onto Twitter. Censorship in domestic Chinese media is known to be a common practice, but this is the first time I see systematic censorship on media platform that has no basis in China.

it's always been an issue that the "trends" on media is affecting real life. Media images and trends are established with multiple layers of algorithm manipulations and photo editing, yet they are believed to be the actual standards and projected back to real bodies. If we think it through, there isn's na single reason that drived the changing of so-called trends, it floats in the air without a solid basis, yet making more and more people believe that it's the standard. It's toxic and keeps harming people by destroying their confidence in natural body and introducing endless comparing and anxiety, which are then utilized for cosmetics and clothes industries.

This kind of opinions always ring a bell for me since that's exactly how I feel sometimes. Social media allows us to connect to almost anything around the world with no more than a few clicks, but we tend to build up walls of information cocoon and anonymity. With anonymous masks, I often feel free to share my views online and interact with other users effortlessly, but I know from heart that I might never meet these users in person ever, and I know they think the same too. Sometime I would also feel lazy and commuinicate with my friends online instead of face to face, and I can feel that online comunications slowly alienates the appearance of friends in my mind into ambiguous figures. The nature of social media determines that presumptions of online communications are based on convenient labels, but labels are never what we are.

I'm surprised to find ecological concepts that can address a internet phenomenon really well, it feels like nearly all interesting behaviors we are observing in society and on the Internet can be attributed to some sorts of nature behaviors, does that means the Internet is just a more hi-tech "relationship web" that also fosters similar behaviors in traditional society?

I like memes a lot since I use them regularly during chats with my friend. Apart from the continuation of viral contents, memes have evolved into a way to communicate other than bare phrases and sentences due to its large quantity and easy-to-make nature. Opinions in memes are often "being said" by some character else, so it conveys messages in an indirect and humorous way that fits the increasingly unserious and deconstructed Internet environment.

I've seen similar stories that talks about Apple's album features that automatically generates "moments" and show them on the main page as well as in the album. Although it comes handy at times since it woulod automatically aggregate pieces of photos that might are forgotten and present them out, the feature is hard to manage or turn off before. Therefore is has no cognition of potentially traumatic memories like divorce and breaking up and might show these moments to users without warning. After being criticized time to time, Apple said that the feature is improved and let users to contril the settings, but it also reflects that how easily features could harm users even under management.

One algorithm that I really enjoy is the daily music recommendations on Netease music, and I knew its development trajectory really well. The recommendation algorithm was first introduced into the music app about 6-7 years ago, and only have a feature of "daily recommendation" that contains 30 songs based on the songs the users listen and added to playlists before. It wasn't a big feature and was not so advanced back then, but the algorithm was rapidly evolved and start to hit more and more people's sweet spot by assesing both short term data (like the songs the user listened to the day before) and long term data (like the song genres the user is interested in this month), and adding more accurate and precise labels to songs. Sometimes the labels are so precise that the algorithms can deduce the game the songs I'm listening to come from and recommend other pieces from the same game. About 2 years ago, the algorithm experiences another great upgrade and start to have sub-category recommendations. For example, there are classic and J-pop recommendations that only provides these kinds of pieces based on my interest, yet the effectiveness of the recommendation is still top-tier. It's not an exagerration to say that the recommendation algorithm of Netease music perfectly addresses the pain of finding new songs that fit my taste. I also really appreciate the data privacy of the algorithm, since it does not ask for privacy information like location, contacts, etc. Even a newly established account with no info can use the algorithm.

I realized that like believes, cultures and genders, neuro types is also a inherent and normal identity of people. Many traits that are not welcomed in mainstream society are likely normal in their neuro types, and we ought to be more caring and accepting for these neurotypes.

Nowadays brain-compuiter interface has experienced a rapid growth and is starting to be applied in more and more treatments, so I believe this is the next generation solution of many complex and difficult disabilities like ALS patients, high paraplegia patients, and even deaf and blind people. There are exciting examples in which intrusive and/or non-intrusive interfaces are planted and let the patients communicate with the environment and use the Internet much easier.

This is the way that companies are bypassing the regulations and agreements. Most users won’t read the agreements word by word, so they could put in ambiguous agreements into rules and use them as a buffer when conflicts arise. When someone thinks that a feature doesn’t meet their expectations, the unclear rules can be used to protect the service provider.

Although a general regulation like this is not likely to protect the usage of data well in action, since the data holders can use a variety of processes to bypass the regulations (like oversea companies), it’s much better than no systematic regulation, since it provides a framework of law that can be cited. Also, I really appreciate the idea of “right to be forgotten”, since it guarantees the prescence of a “digital shredder” for sensitive but short-term data. It also grants users the right to actively erase data according to their will.

It's another vivid example of "reasonable" data leakage, by which a person's privacy can be leaked by assesing public and not sensitive data associated with the person. Many people might think that if no direct private information is leaked, then their identities could not be acquired without authorization, but that's not the case with large data assesment tools and ML models. It brings us a kind of eerie reality: if a individual is on the Internet and is leaving any personal data, the individual is immediately susceptible to identity leakage.

It's generally accurate with details inaccurate. For example, the age and education categories are accurate, and the girlfriend category is inaccurate. It actually makes me reassured seeing google's user portrait of me since I'm aware of the data collected by Google and I have some ideas about what information is collected and how they are used, and the portrait matches my assumption. From my search histories it's easy to deduce that I'm constanty learning college-grade stuff, and since I searched a lot about outdoor backpacks, photgraphy accessories, and drones, it's reasonable to assume that I have medium-high income and outdoor hobbies.

This is such a classic trolling, I've seen it for at least 3 times in different videos about Internet history and news history. SInce it's performed by an official TV media, it's often been uses as an open-ended topic about trolling and public knowledge, media responsibility, respect, etc. But let alone all of these serious topic, it really was a hilarious and extraodinarily successful trolling that's ever been done.

I've seen a lot examples of both bad and good aplication of trolling. It was used to challenge discriminations and deliver encourages, like the ice bucket challenge and the "we are all XXX" protests, but what we have deeper impressions are the bad and chaotic trollings that doesn't make sense or is offensive, such as the reddit and forum trolling that targets less vigilant individuals and even tries to control them in real life. Also, there are weird and funny trollings that are so well known and classic that they become a cultural icon, like the Rick Astely trolling that appears everywhere with a superlink, QR code or any kinds of id or website.

The contrasts between hate & love of Anne Hathaway and Jennifer Lawrence and between Jennifer Lawrence at 2013 Oscar and later at activities reminds us of how fragile the standards of "authenticity" is, and how weak the connection is between authenticity and real life. It's easy to see that what public thinks is authentic is just things that appeals to public's cognition of authentic, like tripping over and saying informal expressions, while being real and true doesn't necessarily include these behaviors. In short, the longing for authenticity is another distorted longing disguised as "being real", just like the cliche longings for beauty, fashion and strongness.

Now with the rising of AI generated contents getting more and more popular and sponsored, the meaning behind authenticity has dropped once more. As long as I know, people start to consider contents authentic if it's not made by AI, regardless of the content itself. There is a popular thought that AIGC contents are one grade lower than human created contents, no matter what the human created content is. This currently shifting meaning of autheticity gives me mixed feelings of acknowledgement and sigh.

I've heard of and learned about 4chan and related forums for a few years, and I always refer to it as a representative of the dark and chaotic side of the Internet. As proposed here, it has hardly any rules and organization, and posts and topics here don't follow a certain pattern. Many most terrible and shocking incidents that youtubers would make videos about happened in or because of 4chan. But I don't think banning or censoring 4chan is a good idea, since it's one of the rendezvous point and containing place for the darkest thoughts on the Internet. It's just a gray spot between daily Internet and dark web.

It feels special to browse through the history of a technology that we are using so widely today everywhere. When I learn about the technology developments of the Internet, I always can't help wondering about how the predecessors figured out the ways to solve weird and complicated problems and finally forged the Internet into something we are familiar with today.

It’s actually a bit scary to think about it, since I realize that I’m practicing pernicious ignorance all the time. From turning the stereo up for my own convenience to crossing the wide crossroads on University Way, I’m selectively sieve out data that’s not convenient to me, like my roommate’s reaction (even if he might won’t care) and the possibility of getting hit by a car (even if it’s not likely). But on the other hand, every single moral standard omits at least one aspect of “moral data”. For example, the Aztec standards emphasized the importance of helping each others while doesn’t care so much about individual feeling, while the natural rights standard emphasized personal rights but omits the impact to larger groups and society.

I’ve first learned about this kind of number in high school, and gave me the expression of abstract and difficult. It’s a surprise to see it get applied in coding and storing data. I cannot fully understand the concept of complex numbers, but from the idea that it can be solutions to equations that don’t have real number solutions, it’s clear that complex numbers can broaden computers’ capability of handling data.

For the Bluesky bots we are using, the bots can complete the action of creating a post and sending it to the public in no time and no cooldown, which a normal person definitely could not do. When running this bot, the majority of responsibilities should be on the content creators, which is myself and other students in this class's content; and a smaller portion of the responsibility goes to its creators and maintainers, which is the professor and TAs.

I've watched news featuring similar click farms, but these direct images give me a really direct and close view of a real click farm. The opinions from the click farm workers make me realized that instead of an underdeveloped gray industry, click farms has become a mature line of industry with upper stream parts providers and downstream customers. This means that it's impossible to eradicate this kind of behaviors and nothing we view online is 100% certified authentic, especially for main platform content, which is scary when thinking.

Someone holding an Aztec virtue might think that the developers are responsible in adding features that make adding alt-textsx easier, since people needs to support each others according to Aztex virtues, and providing more convenience towards blind people is also a kind of supporting. While people holding natural rights belief might think that developers should add alt-text features so that blind people can "see" the same things normal people can see, since they are all born equal and have the same rights.

To me, this is closer to the prevailing ethic standards now. We act in accordance to the virtues we believe in and gain positive feelings from doing so, and the feeling also reinforce back our believe in the virtues.

Although the Confucianism emphasized the importance of good moral standards, politeness, and the will to serve the society well for a person, it also includes lots of constrictive standards, like the absolute obeyance of children to father and officers to emperor. It also has many standards that are not applicable today, like the apparent differentiation of men and women in social roles. (man should go out and change the world, and women should stay home and raise the kids) Although it encourages many positive qualities, Confucianism is nothing more than a highly effective ethic standard that allows solid governance of emperors and segregation of societies.