Albert Einstein's very limited involvement with the creation of the atomic bomb was due to a letter sent to President Franklin Roosevelt, warning him of the Germans' research into the weapon. This led to Americans creating it first. He says he regrets saying anything because if he had known the Germans would fail, he would've done nothing.

Users should be the priority rather than the money that could be extracted through methods like ad revenue and selling user data. Giving a user the best possible experience should always have been the priority.

I think the most important factor in making public shaming bad is the ferocity of the people participating in the shaming. I could see it being useful to discourage behaviors that aren't suitable for a situation, but it shouldn't be used to relentlessly mock someone intensely and for a long period of time.

The article talks about how Jimmy Kimmel asked parents to prank their children by saying they ate all their candy while recording, so the video could be sent to him and then shown on the show. It's recommended to not do this to children under the age of ten due to how humor can be perceived differently by the massive age gap between the parent and child. It may be a somewhat harmful prank, but generally it's not so bad and the negative outcomes shouldn't be exaggerated.

The article discusses how 4chans /pol/ board has become a nest for alt-right users to freely use hate speech and other derogatory language in an anonymous space. /pol/ is also known as a place where 4chan users can plan raids on other platforms, which usually means to harass the users and disrupt the community. The users of /pol/ would use hate speech or other abusive language in an effort to cyber-bully other users.

During the covid lockdown, I saw quite a few online celebrities getting canceled, mostly for some past tweets, art, or actions they did. That era brought cancel culture under the spotlight because most people had nothing to do, and I think most people crave some kind of violence which led to it ballooning in popularity. Although violence is shunned in most situations, as long as the target is evil enough, any violence is seen as appropriate and justified. Cancel culture did allow the harassment of people because they were bad people. No one should be harassed but instead be forced to deal with the consequences of their actions in the most correct way possible.

The use of a robot like this for the office has not seem to caught and I feel it is mostly due to the awkwardness of it and potential lack of respect it may show. While it might be effective to use a robot like this for some people, overall I think if you can physically go into your workplace you should.

I have helped with being an editor on a few different fandom wikis and also with creating guides for some video games.

This game is very interesting and gives an insight into what content moderation might be. The time limit kept me stressed while trying to quickly read through the card prompts and waiting a few seconds to find out more info. Seeing how many requests were coming in also gave me more stress and forced me to be even more sloppy with my job. I can see why it would be stressful to be a content moderator aside from the NSFW/NSFL material that they may have to come across. The speed and accuracy that is needed is stressful and not something that can be perfected.

Governments should provide content moderators with mental therapy to help deal with the horrors that they might see while doing their job. Their mental help shouldn't come second to their job. Also, better pay should be given, especially if the workers are being exploited and forced to work despite the mental discomfort they may feel from their job.

Many people are changing their faces to look like an edited image or photo to look better. However, some of them don't realize the distortion that affects how a person may perceive themselves and their facial features. The unrealistic standards that many are trying to emulate cause causing many to experience self-doubt and anxiety about how they look, especially if they are trying to achieve stardom.

Social media can be bad for a person's mental health because of the negativity that can easily spread, leading to some users being attacked/bullied. Also, viral news is usually bad because of the negativity bias, leading to us seeking out bad news more than good news which can lead to a dark worldview and poor mental health due to the stress of how bad the world is perceived to be.

This link leads to a blog filled with many pictures of animals from numerous classifications and past eras. It also includes some bacteria and plants, although those are scattered and sparse. The number of creatures is mind-blowing and all contain a short description which gives their name, systematics, size, location, type horizon, and type specimen.

I think most forms of content should have some credit given to the original person. However, I think it is the original person's responsibility to make sure to watermark their content in some form if they want to ensure they are credited. Memes fall into the category of very rarely needing credit due to them causing a trend which people may be using the same idea but changing it in their own vision that it constitutes an original piece. If a notice is needed, putting it in the description or even in the corner of a video/photo should be more than enough as long as the credit goes to the right person.

Facebook had users use their phone numbers to do 2FA. However, that linked their account to their phone number and allowed others to search their profile using it. This is a gross invasion of privacy in my opinion, as a phone number is one of the most important pieces of information that needs to be hidden.

I can get some recommendations for items I am interested in when I get an ad for the TikTok shop. Usually it shows at least one item I am interested in and I will check it out, but that still isn't enough of a push to get me to spend. It makes me think if it goes off of just my TikTok activity or does it also use data based on my email and seeing which accounts are linked to it to get an even better understanding of what to recommend me.

Myalgic encephalomyelitis also known aschronic fatigue syndrome, is a disorder that causes extreme fatigue that lasts at least six months and the cause is generally understood to be unknown. The symptoms fluctuate and are different from person to person but are generally issues with memory and thinking skills, non-freshening sleep, muscle and joint pain, and dizziness from lying down or standing too much. Although the cause is still not defined, one theory suggests that it runs within a family's genetics, leading to a person with a family history having a higher likelihood of developing it. Other theories include emotional or physical trauma, issues with conversion of energy within the body, and infections. A combination of all the previously mentioned factors may also cause the development of the disorder.

While I think universal design is needed, I would be worried about adding too many features to accommodate all types of disabilities so that it becomes confusing for the general user. However, it is the job of the designer to create a user-friendly interface that can be easy to understand despite the disabilities that may exist and putting my trust into them is key.

Facebook had a data leak which affected 533 million users and decided not to alert users since they wouldn't know whose data would have been stolen, therefore not knowing which specific users to alert. Their reasoning was that the information was public, so they didn't need to do so.

My biggest concerns with security on social media is how far some companies might go with their security or what they might do under the guise of security. They already have lots of data that most don't even know they are collecting so I can imagine it could only be worse if they started to push their agenda towards collecting even more and being invasive. The security might also be very tight and require ID which is something I am vehemently against.

The article explains that through your social connections a lot more of your information could be exposed, like sexuality. Social media sites can see the social network a person is in and predict many characteristics that can be accurately attributed to them which they can then use to build a better profile for whatever reason they may have.

Data poisoning reminds me of what happened to the Tay chatbot that has been previously mentioned. Since Microsoft allowed Tay to use Twitter as its learning ground, many users used slurs and other profanities in response to the chatbot with malicious intent. It was intentional data poisoning meant to push the bot to have a more racist viewpoint while also spouting some horrendous phrases.

The article quickly goes over how Jaboukie Young-White, a comedian, changed his account to look like the FBI and then tweeted “Just because we killed MLK doesn’t mean we can’t miss him." The comedian had also done it in the past with other US officials but was banned very quickly after the MLK tweet. I personally find it funny due to the major involvement the FBI and CIA did have in trying to get rid of MLK jr. while he was alive, which makes the simple tweet very funny despite it's dark undertones.

Depending on how severe the trolling is, the best way to deal with it most of the time is to ignore the person/people as that will upset them and make them choose a new target or completely stop. If the trolling is something more severe, then banning or reporting will be the next best strategy.

The article by Twitter, now known as X, explains that Trump's Twitter account was banned due to him violating their rules, specifically the Glorification of Violence policy. He broke this policy through two tweets which Twitter claimed could be taken as a way to incite violence against the US government, especially during the 2021 inauguration, which he said he would not be attending.

I think hearing about the authentic takes from the president himself is much better than hearing some tweet made by his team. It helps with creating a more human image of who he is, which voters can connect with and allows the people to see how he acts without much supervision from his team telling him what he should and shouldn't post. Voters will then feel better about their choose whether its more or against him.

Social media allows for people to usually post images, text, and videos in a combination of the three or by themselves. Commenting on the previously mentioned posts is usually a common occurrence as that allows others to share their thoughts or opinions. It may also allow users to share posts they find interesting to friends through a in app messaging system. You can also follow others you like for various reasons and possibly donate to them through links in their bios.

The FTC goes after Facebook for implementing itself as a monopoly by buying its major competitors which limits users from having a competitive option to go to. Facebook's mobile interface was lack luster in comparison to other social connection apps and by buying its competitors they stayed the most connected at the cost of a crappy mobile interface that felt terrible to users. Facebook stifled innovation and competition which allowed it to become a monopoly.

Trying to assure all people are represented can be difficult when using a drop down menu since that by itself can be very limiting. Open ended data entry would ensure more representation, but would be more work and annoying to the average person who usually fits the description of the majority. Open ended data entry would also be more costly since more demographics would enter their own unique identification or similar information.

I found this interesting as I wouldn't see much of an issue allowing users to enter however long of a name they want without any limits. Otherwise, they can add a note on the digital form that explains that only the first few letters are looked at as long as they match with the given SSN. This seems like lazy design or not seeing it as much of an issue, because it doesn't affect a large portion of their users.

The website mostly talks about deleting tweets so that its out of archival data and because it is very time consuming to do sousing a bot is much faster. It also allows you to look at deleted tweets and unlike tweets.

Social media may allow bots to operate because some serve a purpose depending on the site, like making it a quote Twitter bot. Bots would also boost how many users appear to exist because of the mass number that can exist on popular social media sites. This would be enticing to advertisers and make them pay more than what they originally would if bots were heavily restricted.

While tech workers do take some responsibility for making products that do not violate the ethics of humanity, I think more of the responsibility falls onto managers and any higher ups, since they have a bigger say in what is made. The common tech worker will most likely be following orders and not have much of a say unless either public outcry or a protest from within prevents a product from being made.

I think nihilism is a popular belief because of its perceived 'coolness'. Its deeper than the surface level understanding most have. Philosophy can be very complicated so shortening what a philosophy is into a few sentences may allow for the general public to understand it better but that introduces misunderstanding. The philosophy they are looking for is most likely akin to something else but the closest and easiest to understand option is nihilism for many.