Eric Hobsbawm's work on the Luddites, particularly his concept of "collective bargaining by riot," offers a nuanced perspective on their actions. He argues that their machine-breaking wasn't simply anti-technology but a strategic attempt to pressure employers and raise awareness of workers' struggles. This challenges the common portrayal of Luddites as solely opposed to progress, highlighting instead their socio-economic motivations and the limitations of traditional bargaining methods. Hobsbawm's insights encourage us to consider the broader context of labor movements and address contemporary technological disruptions with empathy and inclusivity.

The ethical concerns raised by Kumail Nanjiani and Plato's "Phaedrus" show a timeless skepticism towards new technologies. Both suggest that advancements can undermine human qualities—ethics in Nanjiani’s view, memory, and wisdom in Socrates’ story. The Luddites in the 1800s shared similar fears about job loss due to machinery. Modern AI debates echo these concerns, with fears of job displacement and ethical dilemmas. Yet, historical advancements like writing have shown that despite initial resistance, they can ultimately benefit society. AI, too, has potential for positive impact if guided ethically. A question I have is: How can we balance new technologies with ethical standards and human values? This balance is crucial as we advance further into the digital age.

One of the sources mentioned is Hughes, D. A. (2007). "Attachment-Focused Family Therapy". This book provides a detailed look at how attachment theory can be applied in family therapy, particularly for children who have experienced trauma and abuse. Hughes emphasizes the importance of creating a safe and empathetic environment for children to express their emotions and experiences. In the context of trauma and shame, Hughes' work highlights the transformative power of empathy in repairing relationships and reducing feelings of shame. This aligns with the chapter’s assertion that when shame is exposed and responded to with empathy, it can lead to a positive and transformative intersubjective experience. Hughes’ focus on creating an attuned and empathetic therapeutic environment underscores the critical role of caregivers and therapists in helping children navigate and heal from traumatic experiences. This source provides a foundational understanding of how attachment-based interventions can be effective in addressing the deep-seated shame that often accompanies trauma.

The distinction between shame and guilt in childhood development is a crucial one, and it reminds me of my own experiences growing up. I distinctly remember instances where I felt deep shame, believing I was inherently bad because of a mistake or wrongdoing. These moments often led to feelings of isolation and a desire to hide from others, which aligns with the idea that shame causes a person to want to hide or be ostracized. On the other hand, when I understood that my actions, not my identity, were the problem, I felt guilt and a strong urge to make amends. This distinction in emotional responses highlights the importance of how parents and caregivers address children’s misbehavior. By focusing on the action rather than the child's identity, parents can help foster a healthier development of guilt over shame. This can lead to children growing up with a better capacity for empathy and responsibility, as they learn to rectify their mistakes rather than internalize them as flaws in their character. I wonder how different parenting styles across cultures impact the balance between teaching shame and guilt, and what long-term effects this might have on children's development into adulthood.

One particularly striking detail from the article is its exploration of the historical context and evolution of doxing. Originally a tactic used within hacker communities to expose rival hackers, doxing has since evolved into a widespread tool for harassment and intimidation, often with devastating consequences for its victims. The article also delves into notable cases of doxing, illustrating the real-world impacts and the diverse motivations behind these attacks, from personal vendettas to political activism. This historical and case-study approach provides a well-rounded view of the phenomenon, complementing the chapter's discussion on the public forms of individual harassment and reinforcing the need for a multi-faceted approach to combating online harassment that includes legal, technical, and educational strategies.

The exploration of individual harassment via social media vividly highlights the diverse and pernicious ways in which technology can be exploited to harm others. It strikes me how the anonymity and reach of social media platforms can amplify the impact of traditional forms of harassment, making them more pervasive and harder to escape. I am particularly alarmed by the concept of cyberstalking, as it illustrates a relentless invasion of privacy that can extend beyond the digital realm to the physical world, heightening the victim's sense of vulnerability. This chapter resonates with the broader discussion about digital ethics in our course, emphasizing the urgent need for robust legal frameworks and ethical guidelines to combat online harassment effectively. One question that arises for me is: What are the most effective strategies that social media platforms can implement to prevent such harassment while balancing the need for free expression?

This is a very new concept, but the development in this area may increase in the future. For example, during times of pandemic, people can only work and open accounts online. If some people cannot be present for some reason, then robot coworkers will facilitate the progress of many work matters. However, people also need to learn how to interact with robot coworkers, which is also very interesting.

Reading about crowdsourcing and crowdfunding in this chapter reminds me of how technology has truly revolutionized collaboration. It's fascinating to see how platforms like Patreon, Kickstarter, and GoFundMe have democratized funding for creative projects and charitable causes, allowing individuals to directly support initiatives they believe in. However, I wonder about the potential drawbacks of relying too heavily on these platforms. While they offer unprecedented access to resources and support, there's also the risk of oversaturation and the challenge of standing out among countless other projects vying for attention. How can creators navigate this landscape effectively to ensure their endeavors are successful?

I am very interested in this event and tried to search for more relevant information. Eventually, I found the follow-up information on this event at https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/21/23803632/elon-musk-spam-twitter-blue-dms. Even though Twitter failed to provide more evidence in a timely manner regarding this less than 5% verification, the acquisition still proceeded. After the acquisition, Elon Musk focused on addressing the issue of spam. The newly added DM feature directs messages from unverified users to a separate inbox. However, this setting is only applicable to Twitter Blue subscribers, further incentivizing users to opt for the paid service. In fact, I understand this behavior very well. Combating spam while promoting subscriptions is a great marketing tactic. Similarly, some video websites offer an option to remove ads after subscription, which I think is a similar approach.

My understanding of metadata has been limited, but in this chapter, I've gained insight into its fundamental definition and operational mechanisms. I've begun exploring its practical applications, such as its role in digital libraries and archives where it's used for cataloging and indexing documents, facilitating retrieval and preservation. Additionally, in web development, metadata embedded within web pages enhances search engine visibility and promotes content discovery.

Regarding this phenomenon, I'm actually not surprised at all. Nowadays, the authenticity of many things on the internet cannot be verified. The purchase volume and positive reviews on shopping websites can be deceptive, as well as various rankings, which can all be manipulated. I previously learned about a method called "chart manipulation" in the entertainment industry, where fans create multiple accounts to artificially boost the data for their favorite celebrities, keeping them at the top of various charts, sometimes surpassing genuinely talented stars. I believe such behavior is difficult to prevent. Even if official platforms like Apple attempt to prevent it, people will always find loopholes. It's good to take preventive measures, but individuals also need to be vigilant and carefully discern information on the internet.

This shocked me quite a bit because I thought bots were mainly used to assist people in various tasks, such as generating text outputs, and so on. But I never thought they could also be used as tools for fraud and harming others. Regarding tweet bombardment, I know there's a specific profession called "water army”（This term just directly translated from Chinese, but it means ghostwriters) where you pay them to post tweets on the internet, spreading misinformation and influencing public opinion, even resorting to cyberbullying others. However, I always considered this a human-driven behavior, never realizing that bots could also be involved.

The teachings of Confucius have had a profound impact on China, directly forming some of the traditional virtues and mainstream thoughts in Chinese society today. Many of Confucius' sayings are included in our textbooks, and most people receive Confucian education from a young age. Although the core of Confucianism guides people towards benevolence, propriety, wisdom, and integrity, there are also some flaws, after all, it is a thought from thousands of years ago. With the development and changes in society, some of its content is no longer applicable to today's society. We should take the essence, discard the dross, and apply it to our lives accordingly.

Regarding this issue, it reminds me of another app, Weibo, which is a social media platform similar to Twitter. People can post here to express their opinions, but unlike Twitter, its censorship system is stricter. Some content that is offensive or harmful cannot be published, and even if someone manages to post it due to a loophole, it will quickly be noticed and removed by the authorities because of its rising popularity. I think if Twitter adopts a similar censorship system, it might have prevented this post from gaining traction in the first place, and none of this would have happened. But Weibo's censorship system actually to some extent affects freedom of speech. Behind this, the censorship system has gradually evolved into a means that can be controlled with money, gradually becoming a part of this company's revenue, which is very ironic.