I think often people get caught up in ideas by their ability to be great and expanded on. However, as discussed in this book, how it is helpful to society as a whole? What does a great idea actually prompt and what are the consequences? When I watched Jurassic park funny enough I thought about my own current projects in augmented reality and the consequences of utilizing those head sets but also considering the potential good. There are so many nuances.

Aza Raskin's experience always leaves me wary about the future as an interaction designer. Maybe that is a good thing because now I'm cautious. When he designed the infinite scroll he was supported in his ideas by his company due to its ability to obtain greater profit and engagement for that company, not that it was a great, human centered design.

I believe this is the ideal situation for the hospitality industry where employees are prioritized and granted the power to change the means of production of the business. However, I don't think this model works for all companies. For example. it does make sense for a tech company to be consumer co-operative since these are the people that invest their time and sometimes income into these applications such as instagram. In this scenario people should have more of a say. However I don't think this model completely works either since I believe if it is too consumer decision heavy, then a site will not change. An example of this may be that AI would not be implemented as quickly since people do not like change and don't understand how AI may benefit them.

I never considered fiduciary duty since I did not know it existed. It now makes more sense why CEO's make unethical decisions even if it is wrong since they are tied to their stakeholders. However, I wonder what are the nuances in fiduciary duty and when this duty can be broken to create ethical decisions. Having a tie to someone else, especially with the fate of a company, can lead to many negative consequences if those individuals are just money driven. It is also important to consider the nuances within money as well and why stakeholders demand more for their profits.

I think there is no way to go back after creating a tweet that is controversial especially if you have a large twitter account with a lot of followers. Creating a retract button may cause my nuance but also people can easily read through such notions and think "oh so that was an easy way out of actually apologizing for what you said and owning up to what you did."

I think as a young adult this is a hard thing to figure out for yourself as an individual. We sometimes make mistakes that require a "level" of this repentance process. As children this repentance was less nuanced. Meaning that we usually just sat in a corner till we "figured ourselves out" and said sorry in the supervision of an adult. Now its a matter of taking the time to figure things out for youself and give a proper apology on your own.

I know there there is a level of laws starting to be legitimized within the court system. However, who knows how long it will take for them to be approved. It is interesting how with our current court system it is hard to legitimize issues like these because of their nuances and level of nuance as well as stereotypes surrounding the subject. Some may say the easiest way to avoid harassment is simply to delete your account and start a new one instead of taking it to court.

I've noticed that with internet harassment etc these wrongdoings that hurt others is less protected by the law because they are less understood and are more nuanced. There is also less identification related to accounts so it is harder to track who committed the wrong deed. Also, in some ways unless brought to an extreme, harassment is less legitimized online because people consider it as just "the internet being the internet" than in person.

A crowdsourcing website I worked on last spring was for a telescope. A NASA run lab needed help identifying different types of stars since their telescope was producing thousands of pictures every night, so they created a site where people can identify stars for them. The website started with a brief introduction to the project, and then a tutorial on how to identify stars. At points during the identification process it was difficult to identify what type of star it was, so I knew mine and other people's results weren't always accurate. I think for scientific purposes crowd sourcing can be handy (especially if you are gathering tons and tons of data and need thousands of people to look through it) but it can also lead to inaccurate data findings.

The kind of "crowd sourcing" I have partaken in personally are petitions that have been advertised through social media. The past petition I signed, advertised by a climate activist in the Seattle area, was about saving a group of indigenous trees in a nearby park the state was planning to sell off to a company without public consent. I think these are the most powerful kinds of crowd sourcing because if it weren't for the instagram reel of thos loval activist, the trees would have been cut down.

I have witnessed friends who play games online report harassment from strangers on the web. I remember also watching this youtube video about different "levels" of the dark web that exist in video games where characters (people) will talk to each other about illegal things because they are less likely to leave an apparent data trail of their discussion compared to other online communication forms. I'm not sure how necessarily true all of this information is. But I think this is an extreme example of witnessing a conversation that may be deemed inappropriate.

This can be observed with Tumblr, a site that has a history of mistreating certain groups of color for the past few years especially in the midst of its ban policies that overall do make sense. There is a lot of inappropriate content on tumblr. But because of the bans, this did disproportionately affect certain groups of color and there are many videos on youtube and articles that can be read to look into this further.

A great current example of this trauma dumping is the elmo trauma dumping. On twitter (or X) elmo asked how everyone was doing and he was then flooded with thousands of replies that consisted of trauma dumping. Elmo's response to this was in an interview where he mentions he wishes all of his friends to be happy and he can't read that well

I think this is a really important point. For example, I tend to be pretty strict with myself about my own app usage (except for instagram cough cough). For example, I use my computer only for school work and I use my phone just for personal. So having slack and the canvas app on my phone has always been annoying to me

There are definitely discrepancies within this. For example, when TikTok just became popular in the united states there was an uproar about the banning logic or "natural selection" of posts for those with disabilities and minorities. Users noticed that posts that related to minority / disability topics were more likely to be banned for unruly reasons.

I just watched an instagram reel the other day that discussed sourdough starters. Interestingly, in the comments people discussed the culture behind these starters. Some families will keep yeast alive for generations to create beautiful sourdough creations. They may bring yeast on planes so they can take care of it while on vacations etc. And sourdough starters can be heirlooms to a few. Very interesting reel.

Another example of this is when they mention that they will spend a large period of time on a subject and end up spending very little time on that subject. Something somewhat related is when I run across instagram reels where women will mention the period cycle and then right after starting the subject look at the camera and say "hi, I know you aren't likely a man watching this anymore." and move on to an entirely different subject.

I think recommendations should be positive and not negative for users. Also, it shouldn't reveal identity of the user explicitly. I notice that I get advertisements about my own demographic identity that I would rather keep private to myself and not be advertised to. If a user is struggling with mental health they can be recommended therapy and not be recommended posts or content in general that may steer tem in a bad direction.

I think glasses, especially in this era, are considered more typical than other disabilities and the way those with eye problems are treated should be more standardized for others. When a person who does not wear glasses finds out about someone who does wear glasses, they usually don't mind or even care. However if someone were to meet someone who is color blind or uses a cane, they are more likely to be disrespectful.

As someone with disabilities and also an interaction designer, I completely agree with this point. A disability is defined by a group of people and what they consider "standard abilities" within their own group. By considering disabilities in this way, the bias and discrimination towards those that are not standardly abled diminished because this view is less biased. In reality our goal is to adopt societal standards that are more open to ability differences instead of being exclusive.

My biggest concerns relate to how my data is being used and how companies are profiting off of my data. I wish I was gaining some of that profit as well since it's my data in the first place, even if it was collected by a larger scale company. I also worry about my identity being stolen. That is one of the greater risks when being active online.

This method would likely be implemented into the heuristic evaluation phase of the design process which often occurs during prototyping / user testing. As an interaction designer this method would be most helpful during that phase instead of other phases since in design you can't really critique the application of the product and how it influences that body of users till after research and ideation of what the product will be.

I think the most problematic of these are the scams and addiction. Because that means uers may be advertized to to buy cigarettes etc and that isn't good. Tbh where it draws the line most for me is when data is sold to other people and this information is spread across the internet. I know that google as a company isn't transparent about how they sell user's data.

I don't like that adds can track users. This reminds me of "funnels" which enforce the idea of clicking on an add and using the person's data to sell to another company. I actually met someone once who made a living off of sellling people's data through funnels and it was disturbing how much money he made from it (a ton).

I was thinking about what category trolling may fall under. Since it is disruptive to peace, it could be a weapon. But what also disrupts peace are fireworks and fireworks aren't really weapons but loud sounds that brighten and shake the sky and cause attention. It is so difficult to pin point trolling that trolling should be it's own category of disruption.

To discuss this further, there are many elements of our identity that have strings of data attached. If that is the clothing line we commonly buy from and where that trend is currently popular, or the background of our profile photo, there are many revealing components of our identity we don't often consider unless recognized by someone else. In some ways this can be creepy if there are volatile actions involved, or this can be casual. Either way there are many nuances to our history and how that history is revealed in our present identity.

I know this label of "code switching" means an extreme of code switching, But it does come from the need to inherit the same attributes and beliefs of those around you to fit in. This can be related to a certain work environment "etc" where it is easier to agree to your boss than to contribute your own opinion. This can be an issue however when you are in a position with some power where your acts have possible influences compared to a boss employee scenario where the employee has very little to no power in their situation.

It is also important to consider how long these sites with a lack of authenticity are "tolerated" for before reaching mass public attention as problematic. For example, it took a long time for Omegle to be taken down and that was a website that was around for years for strangers to meet strangers. There are now deep fakes and deep fake apps that are similar to social media for people to pretend they are others. But since this technology is somewhat new to the public, I wonder how long it will take for these products to be canceled to the point of possible non-existence unless the non-authenticity is accepted as a norm.

As an interaction designer we consider these things as well as others. We are always thinking about the whole picture of what we call a "user flow" and what needs friction and what doesn't need friction. It can be a tedious process in terms of storytelling and creating a user centered design.

I remember listening to my cousins talk about having to input codes to talk to friends and that it was normal to learn multiple different coding languages to operate a computer. I grateful that in the 2000s we were not required to learn code as a gen z but this will always intrigue me as an individual

This is especially important once you begin to compile your data onto a single sheet. I remember in java how we had to simplify our work down to debug each strand of code under each variable. This apple metaphor makes sense to me because of this experience.

People use bots for many different reasons. There are even apps such as tweetbot that is an external application the user can access through their phone to check on twitter status. This brings up the question how much the public favors certain bots.

I absolutely love bots that are used to help communities and advocate for others. I wish more bots on the internet were developed for these reasons. But then again I am not really a twitter user so I don't witness this kind of activity

As a web user and once in a while buyer (although I try to avoid buying from amazon and prefer to support local small businesses) I've heard and noticed fake posts while sifting the web for reliable products. It makes it a lot harder to find products that actually work. I tend to always check the photos when browsing reviews since photos tend to be more realistic and therefore "safe" to trust. Although now with AI I'm not sure how long this method I have been using will last for.

I researched into the Tao of Taoism which means "road, path, way" in english. The Tao is also an experience over a definition. Lao-Tzu wrote the Tao-te Ching, the philosophical document that discuss Taoism for an audience of Chinese rulers in hopes to make a better government.

Delving further into virtue ethics it can be known that this form of ethics is of three major approaches to ethics; deontology and consequentialism. Interestingly, virtue ethics was especially popular in the 1950s United States with Anglo-American philosophy. There are other key figures such as Martineau, Hume, and Nietzsche.