The wikipedia definition for a group of men in England who protested the replacement of skilled workers with machines. The machines could mass produce at less quality, saving the factories money but putting workers out. This term is also now used to describe people who reject technology, as these men did.

The more I learn about history the more I believe the phrase "history repeats itself", but even down to day to day systems, not just large events or beliefs. So many examples like this can be seen as parallel to events today, but as history advances the technologies people are being killed for shift and get more advanced.

This is the definition for wage labor from Wikipedia. It is defined as paid work or labor through formal or informal contract between a laborer and an employer. The general rule with wage labor is that the employer owns whatever is produced by the laborer under their contract.

This along with the sewer system example are why I am always so confused why people in America are so anti-socialism, and will use socialist as a derogatory term. We have so many social services that the public benefit from and are widely used and loved. I generally think people don’t understand this concept and how we have a mixture of socialist practices already in our current government.

This is an article from the satirical news site "The Onion". It is commenting on how celebrities are absorbed as commodities, their own tragedies "feeding" the bloodthirsty masses. It is from the perspective of the horde, looking for fresh celebrities who they can parasocially pry into, chew up and spit out every tragedy in their lives, and then move onto the next "juicy celebrity".

It is interesting how a lot of family content is reliant on airing out children's private moments. There are now laws being created to protect kids in this (now not so new, but once unprecedented) landscape of phones and family content. Kids who themselves are likely not on the internet, don't have an understanding of how wide reaching the videos of them will be, and cannot consent fully because they don't have a grasp on these ideas. Any content involving children should be restricted because of these things.

This is a wikipedia definition of the term "stochastic terrorism", which is a form of incitement of violence. It is done by a public figure, like a politician or someone with a large following. It is an incitement of violence against the target, but using coded language so as to shift any blame off the original poster who is inciting the violence.

It is interesting to see an example of pre-internet doxxing. Like in the examples under this, this seems to be one of the most effective ways to fight back against people who generally would not be held accountable. It makes me wonder how effective this would be in the newspaper, as generally online doxxing can be very quick and effective in having real life consequence (getting fired, etc.) Was it as effective then? I would imagine it was definitely helpful in some ways but not as rapid, and not as easy to verify that it had consequences. But either way, very cool to see that this type of quick community justice has existed for a long time.

This is the homepage for Wikipedia. It has a search bar for any topic, the option of 10 different languages, all with over a million articles. There are options for a free media collection, free textbooks, free learning resources, and more free options and types of knowledge and tools to explore.

I find it interesting that at one point Wikipedia was absolutely not allowed to be used for school assignments (at least in my schools) because of its crowdsourced nature and its possibility of misinformation. However I feel like the general view of it has turned with AI in particular. AI is like its own crowdsourced source, but the people giving information are unwilling, and the compilation of information can be misleading of incorrect.

This is the definition of the internet term "copypasta" which is a length of text that has been copy and "pasted" all over the internet over and over again. The term is a play off of copy and paste, and there is no for sure origin of the term. Copypastas are text blocks that are shared often enough that they can be known and seen repeatedly.

This makes me think about the proposed change to Twitter (x) that may be in effect now, but I'm not totally sure. The proposed change was to make blocking not completely a block, but to make it so users can't interact with the person, but they can still see all of their posts. This is a massive safety issue because obviously people block people because they don't want them to view their posts, often for safety reasons. This is definitely one place where moderation should stay in place.

This is the know your meme definition of "unalive" which is a word used in place of words related to death to avoid moderation, as words related to death are generally removed from online sites. This is a common piece of internet lingo, along with other words to replace other highly moderated terms.

This section made me think about my experiences seeing and experiencing these types of communities. I was of the perfect age to be on peak tumblr during the classic sad girl era. It was wild how glorified toxic self harming was, and how the cultural norm for a minute was girls openly participating in these mindsets and communities.

This is the know your meme article for the "Twitter's main character" tweet. This tweet is about how everyday there is one person on twitter who is the "main character" and goes viral, usually for having a bad take on something, and everyone dog piles on them.

This is so interesting, I remember "back in the day" receiving chain emails like this. I remember being a kid and being so scared that I would die if I didn't forward it and my parents had to explain what they were. I would never have imagined that they started that early. That is so crazy and so funny that humans really do stay the same in a lot of ways even when so much is changing. This format still exists, but I would say that it is no longer email. Sometimes people send them over text, but usually in a parody of this style. The only place I see stuff like this in recent history is on Facebook, particularly with older people.

I actually used the story from this article in a comment earlier in this textbook! I heard about it years ago and it always stuck with me. This article is about how targeted ads figured out that a girl was pregnant because of her purchase history and trends of previous purchases made by pregnant people. The father of this teen girl was angry and went into target to complain, but it turned out that she was in fact pregnant.

The systemic vs individual analysis reminds me of harm reduction vs punitive action. My first job was working in substance abuse prevention for my local county, where we focused on harm reduction. Instead of a focus on fear tactics and punitive attitudes (like the individual analysis) we talked to young people about ways to enrich their lives (systemic). Focusing on the root of the problem rather than cracking down on the individual is show to be more effective, and people naturally make safer decisions. I actively got to witness how effective focusing on systemic issues vs the individual is at a young age, which I am grateful for as it has helped me to see almost every aspect of life more holistically, and how effective systemic thinking is.

This is the Wikipedia article on "neurodiversity". This is the idea that is is normal for human brains to have diversity, and some mental disorders are differences or disabilities should not be perceived in as a disorder or disability, but simply a difference in cognition. People any of these factors are called "neurotypical"

In another class I'm taking we are coding in Java, and we had a portion of the class where we were doing a little visual art coding with ASCII art. We talked about how this design is not accessible. We also saw a video from a blind programmer who uses text reading software and is working on accessibility in programming. This is definitely not the norm but I hope it changes in the future.

My other comment in this chapter was about personal security after Musk took over Twitter, and this article did nothing to comfort me. They also believe that while it wouldn't make sense for Musk to look at individuals accounts, he does things that doesn't make sense. The only bright spot they could offer is that he would maybe make DMs end-to-end encrypted, which he hasn't done. Also, that is also not a great solution as it would prevent the company from being able to protect users who would like to report harmful messages. This article pretty much confirmed that all of my concerns and thoughts on the matter are shared, and if anything gave me new concerns. Yay!

I feel like there is an attitude of "oh he wouldn't do that!" with the current system we have today. This thought that Elon has access to so many private conversations completely legally is scary. Particularly because there are a lot of people that are against him on that platform and he can tap into their information with no issue. Even if Twitter had any safety measures to prevent this before he purchased it, him accessing any information he wants is as simple as changing the terms and conditions, which is completely within his bounds. This also goes for meta too, and any social media company owned by anyone with political interests. There is an illusion of privacy, of "oh he wouldn't look at MY account" but it's scary that there is no way to know.

This article talks about information coming to light during Facebook's congressional hearing, in regard to data stored, including the data of non-users. It talks about how for some non-users, enough data is even collected to have a "shadow profile" of all of the information collected about them. It also made the point that when sharing contact books with FB, those contacts might have a lot more information than just name and phone number, which people are willingly giving over. This also means that many non-users personal information is being given over, even when they don't wish to engage with FB.

I always remember this one story a teacher told in high school (that might've been an urban legend) but it sounds like it could've happened, knowing what we know about data mining. The story was that a girls accounts knew she was pregnant before she did. She started getting targeted ads for all of the things that women need when pregnant, foods, supplements, unscented lotions, etc. Her father became so angry that these advertisements were being targeted towards her when she "wasn't pregnant" and was trying to get in touch with the hosts of the advertisements. But, turns out, she actually was. It would make sense if she was looking up her symptoms, or cravings, or anything like that, then it could be possible. I don't know if it is, but this section reminded me of that.

This article talks about Jaboukie Young-White's tweet impersonating the FBI account for MLK day. It also shows some of his other tweets, like when he did the same thing to the far right gun activist Kaitlin Bennet. A lot of the tweets weren't loading in the article, but I followed him on Twitter at the time and he did this a fair amount, and his account only got deleted when he criticized the FBI. This article also made me wonder how many of the wave of accounts impersonating big accounts when the blue check system switched was inspired by Jaboukie. Likely a lot of them, as his tweet and removal from Twitter went very viral at the time.

This is really interesting, I never thought of trolls as a community, but they definitely are as they often act communally. It is so interesting that their goal according to this is to disrupt someone being too comfortable on the internet and using it to supplement that which they lack irl. Yet according to this troll the trolling community member may also be using the internet to supplement that which they lack irl. However I read this as them feeling like they are more justified because they aren't seeing the internet in a "rosy" light, as in they aren't stupid enough to be comfortable because they know it can be horrible. Even though there are probably a lot of people in their own online communities existing without issue, and the trolls are the only ones disrupting that.

This source is a wikipedia page for the comedian/director, Jordan Peele. He is one half of the comedy duo Key & Peele, a few of their skit videos are in the bibliography, and display comedic examples of code-switching. Peele is also an accomplished psychological horror director, and has released many successful films.

I found this so interesting. I've had the thought before as someone who works in the service industry (usually restaurants) and has to come face to face with people constantly, that the world is much less trusting than it used to be. Even in this example, the person buying food likely doesn't have to interact with anyone to get their food, with things like self checkout. People can now get so many goods and services without speaking to a single person. Before the internet, everyone relied on other people for these things, and so everyone had to trust each other. I've observed people getting annoyed with older people for calling places instead of looking things up online. But that action is a touch of humanity that is now becoming unfortunately obsolete in places like the USA.

This article is about how the inventor of the infinite scroll regrets it and did not foresee the consequences. He was trying to create a more seamless online experience that would keep people online longer. Which was successful, but also contributed to the endless amounts of time users can spend online without thinking about it. The comparison to the study where users ate from an infinite soup bowl is a very good comparison, and very applicable.

This whole piece made me feel really uneasy. I've heard of a lot of these groups but didn't know where they originated from. I have heard of 4Chan as well, but wasn't aware of the disturbing content it was formed from. It does make sense from what I've heard about it. I am also disturbed by people not feeling like 4Chan was enough, and creating even more openly hateful sites.

I found this so interesting, as an online person/Star Wars fan I always thought the level of backlash against The Last Jedi was a little insane. Even if people didn't like the movie, it seemed excessive. The connection of fandom discord being stirred up by bots as a political scheme actually does make sense but was very shocking to read. It did in fact stir up a lot of press and discord, and became almost mythical in conversation, with people becoming more polarized irl, even though it seems it started with 50% fake opinions in the first place.

I am simultaneously learning Java, so a lot of this makes me compare the methods and commands. It seems like a lot of the commands in Python are much more straightforward, and more simplistic in how they are written.

As a humanities student who knows a lot of people in tech, and is online a lot, this is absolutely something that I've noticed that concerns me. Someone in class brought up the idea that any tech degree should require ethics and humanities classes to be taken as well. This is also an argument I've seen online a lot. I agree with this, I think often people are very excited with progress and the amazing capabilities of advancing technology, but they fail in their safety design, and don't think of the unintended consequences. I've known people who have had to directly deal with the harmful use of things like AI photo generation, and with the world and automation moving so fast it is impossible to keep up. I think in the coming years there will have to be a focus on how to protect people and to monitor things like automation, because it feels like many platforms could become hostile/unusable.

Reading this section reminded me of another group that was likely shaped by virtue ethics, knights of the middle ages. Aristotle’s works had a resurgence in the 11th/12th centuries, and his thoughts reshaped culture/education. One piece of this being major changes in the way university education worked, with these changes reflected in the way we learn in universities today. At the same time, knights were operating under a chivalric virtue code - kind of a “bro code” for how they interacted with each other. These virtues were: honor, prowess, loyalty, and largesse (generosity). I hadn’t made the connection to how Aristotle’s ethics likely influenced this code, but I don’t think it would be a stretch to make that connection considering his influence at that time and the similar group virtues listed in this section.