Speaking along this line, I think the banning of tin too in the united states encompasses so many reasons of why social media might not be good. Tim too stores an unnecessary excess of data contributing to privacy risk for people everywhere in the country, and its design and algorithms can easily spread missinformation, and polarize different groups.

I have a ,much better understanding of different types of interactions on social media, and which ones might be harmful and those that might be beneficial. I am not sure how much agency I have to intervene or what I can really do if I see something going viral for the wrong reasons, but now I am informed enough to not promote its vitality and negative trends overall.

I agree that not having many other languages as programming languages is a problem, but having english as the most widely used one does make logical sense. Most coding was beginning in the US and t=dominant companies that made technological leaps worked in english. Making more languages accessible might hinder growth and discovery, because resources are spent making it accessible that could be used for randd

They could use more fixed advertising, maybe something more similar to billboards and ads on tv channels and radio channels. These are not targeted or based off personal data, but are still used strategically. For example ads for hiking gear can be on national geographic channel. This will reduce hold over users and still allow companies to make money.

I think this goes along with the problem of public shaming individuals. Normal individual people who post something and it goes viral and get publicly shamed. If someone were to make this comment in a normal setting there might be some arguing and maybe a resolution or some banter, but nothing to the level of getting shamed. I think the repair made is very unnecessary.

I think this is along a very similar line as trolling. Public shaming so that enjoyment is obtained from the troubles of others is a lot like why many trolls troll people. To see others struggle or laugh at their misfortune or even getting pranked is a similarity between these.

I think this is a big problem in the world, namely the hate and disrespect to billionaires. Sure some of them have old money and bad moral beliefs and do not help much, but many are the opposite. Elon Musk and Bill gates for example, made the majority of their fortune in their lifetime, and donate huge sums of resources and funds to charity and foster growth. Elon musk with space x and tesla are benefiting the human race, or at least supporting what we define as important as a "green society" and the gates foundation helps millions of people globally. Just cause they are rich does not mean that they are bad people and can be bullied.

I think this is a big thing that is often overlooked. Bots are very common in comment sections and social forums promoting accounts and such, but occasionally they will be bringing down other people, ideals, or groups. With a large amount of bots this can be very extreme defamation and/or harassment, and can be very harmful.

I think this example of crowdsourcing is really cool. I gives people an opportunity to explore and try at complex problems that cutting edge science is working with, and it gives the chance for new outlooks on the problem to be used because it is tough after working with something to see it in a different way. This benefits science and pushes discovery

A cool type of crowd sourcing which is less based on the internet and more in the real world is real estate crowd sourcing. People can put small amount of money into a group fund for their neighborhood and if everyone m makes a contribution the sum will be enough to make positive contributions to the neighborhood, whether improving storefronts or hiring security. This also makes people care more about it because they put stake in it.

I think the whole idea that reddit runs on volunteer moderators is very cool, but it has some advantages as well as disadvantages. If they were to pay moderators, sure some might care more and put more time and effort into their subreddits, but it also attract people who do not care at all and just want to be paid, so this might cause a worse job to be done. Having as volunteer only might mean some people would do a better job if they are being paid because they have time to care.

I think one of the biggest problems and hiccups with ethics is the definitions. Who gets to decide what is right or wrong, passive or active, reasonable or unreasonable? The person making this decision, especially in the context of moderators, is not making a very based decision, because people have different views. While in some cases there is a clear good or bad, in many it is ambiguous.

I really have no understanding of this. I get looking in the mirror and not liking your appearance sometimes or not feeling right in your own shoes. But going onto digital platforms and putting these insecurities onto your own posts is the least rational thing I can think about. It is essentially putting your citicisims out of your own head and onto a public place.

I always thought that doom scrolling wasn't necessarily surfing through bad news/posts, but just any in general. I felt the doom came from wasting so much time on your device looking at information that is often irrelevant to you or just trying to grab your intention, not from the content itself.

I think this is similar to the statement of celebrities saying they wish they weren't famous. There is always a price that comes with something, in this instance going viral. The experience is how you make it. If you let it become you then that's unfortunate or good depending on the person.

I have never compared virility in the internet and social media to evolution mechanisms or biological ones. I think thew comparison is very good and holds true, and when it comes to information the fact of adapting and natural selection also comes to life.

I think the polarization and negativity that is getting amplified is a horrible thing in society. It makes people spend more time on thew web or social media sites because their own beliefs are getting reinforced, and then they are more narrow minded and less open to considering, much less accepting others viewpoints.

I don't think there is a simple fix for this problem. People changing their behavior is a lot easier to change than figuring out a new algorithm that works in all circumstances.

I think this is a very difficult problem to solve, but easy to address and emphasize. Designers really do try to take into account the people who will be using the service to maximize its efficiency, because making it accessible or easy for all groups usually does reduce its efficiency unless better technology is introduced. This is an unfortunate effect for many people who are disadvantaged by this.

I think assistive technology is a better alternative than universal design. It seems like a lot more work and effort to change something for everyone like a buildings layout, when you could create a technology to allow someone with a disability to access everywhere in the building accordingly.

This is something that I believe is very overlooked when it comes to Elon musks acquisition of twitter. Its goodwill and huge user base is one thing, but the data and messages that come with the app have so much worth too. They can be used for science, to analyze trends, to improve or create a new platform, or for bad uses.

I think this and the case of instagram and facebook storing passwords in plain text goes to show that these companies don't really care about data security. They actually prefer open data so they can profit off of the data and the trends it gives them.

I think this is a really cool and important form of data punishment. A random programmer saw the issue of striking workers attempting to improve their working conditions getting a raise, and set out to make the bot to disrupt the hiring efforts. I think this is also bad though, because there might have been real people looking for jobs who would have worked for the price Kellogg was asking and now won't get hired.

I do think a lot of these methods are biased and untrue, but I also think that analyzing facial features can make pretty good assumptions of peoples character and descent which may lead to religion and preferences. For example facial features have a lot to do with genetics so it is no where as accurate as Ana testing, but attempting to do the same, not strictly pseudo science.

This is an example of when trolling escapes well out of the virtual space and affects people in real life. It is one thing to get trolled on a message board or forum, but when messing with feelings of love and making people go to random places is a horrible thing to do, but the trolls have no life.

I think this is a huge, very often undercooked problem in today's world. Of course there are very many cases of women being harassed by men, but some men are falsely accused and their lives ruined. The accusations are tossed around lightly, while they have big effects.

I think this is the most important aspect of trust and authenticity. It is a two way street that benefits both parties when genuine. When broken or inauthentic it puts both at risk or maybe just one.

Why is it that these sites do not use infinite scroll. Is it because they don't want to introduce the problem with social media infinite scroll into their site? or is it because they store more info and want to prioritize certain products or results.

I think it interesting that hone people talk about the big social media platforms controlling the news we see the history is never talked about. All the information you had access to before modern social media was from a few stations and written and written sources like letters and the newspaper.

I have always wondered about this. I always believed it made more sense to order the countries in alphabetical order but have a list of 5-10 most populated countries at the top. It seems more practical or even having a search bar.

This is an interesting argument when it comes to simplification because there are countless arguments for different truths. For example: does the country you were born in actually matter more than where you were raised if you moved just after being born. It is an endless debate.

The idea of this is so interesting. It doesn't make so much sense and seems sorta useless. The deepfake tech is super cool though but seems dangerous

Friendly bots are so essential and helpful to the way many programs run. They also can get rid of fake bots on many social m media platforms too.

I think that taoism is a very interesting ethical framework, but there are faults to it. Unforced actions in harmony with natural cycles are a great way to live life and believe, but I think this encourages passiveness and people will not accomplish as much as they could if they try to make something happen that wouldn't happen to them otherwise.

This is an interesting comparison because ethics often comes into play when using these medical technologies. For example: whether or not to abort a fetus or which treatment plan is best or most ethical for the patient.