I think the Jurassic Park movies/franchise is a good representation/glamorization of the consequences that comes with putting things like scientific discovers/inventions over doing what is ethically correct. The entire franchise began with the consequences of not thinking of the ethicality/morality of bringing back long extinct creatures to a world that is not one they know and using such an insane situation to turn a profit.

This belief/way of thinking is often used to justify behavior and/or decisions that negatively impact those around you. I find that this mindset/reasoning is rarely true and only really applies to making someone's personal life better/easier. Which I guess would make this statement true under the egoism.

The white savior or the white savor complex can unfortunately be found in a lot of media. For example in Disney's Pocahontas, the colonizer John Smith seems to 'save' Pocahontas from her 'savage' life. These pieces of media often depict a white person stepping in to 'tame' and/or help people of color (often by fighting against other white people) and as a result centers the conflict around themselves rather than making an effort to ensure that the POC they intend to help are being heard/listened to.

What's sad to see is that we are still seeing this type of justification/mindset to this day. Within places like the middle east, africa, and parts of asia, it is common to see people regurgitate the colonial mindset/beliefs to justify their hatred.

I find this article incredibly ironic now considering how now most people not only despise him, but twitter as a whole (I refuse to call it X). That this deal he believed would benefit him in the long term is likely going to end up costing him money since his company stocks that he put up as collateral in this deal are rapidly failing due to his actions an unelected government entity that only served to make people's lives harder.

How might the system of capitalism contribute to the current oligarchical dynamic we see within the current administration? how does this distribution of wealth impact how people are able to advocate for themselves and their desires?

This source details famous comedian Bo Burnham's reasons/inspirations for writing and directing the A24 film "eight grade." Burnham states that most of his motivation behind the project was the anxiety he felt with his life having become a constant performance to be watched and criticized. Something that made him think about the fact that children now adays are feeling that on a daily basis due to their exposure to the internet/social media in which their lives are constantly being evaluated based on what they did or did not post.

How might parasocial relationships help further contribute/perpetuate public shaming? Since parasocial relationships involve feeling as if you have a close/intimate relationship with the celebrity, how might this alter the way they respond to someone else's criticism/dislike for their favorite celebrity/streamer? would it be a more intense or less intense response?

This source details the difficultly Meghan Markle faced from the British press after getting married to Prince Harry. Noting that most of the sources publishing racially stereotypical pieces about Meghan largely lacked diversity within their staff. They draw attention to the fact that none of the top ten British outlets had ever employed a black editor in chief and that black newscasters as a whole rarely appeared on broadcasts.

how might the creation of new social media apps and/or technology (ex. VR headsets, meta glasses, etc.) worsen/increase cases of cyberstalking? is this something that is considered in the creation of such things?

This sources provides an example of how crowdsourcing, while sometimes producing negative outcomes, can be used to help those in need of assistance. The article how a photo snapped by a hiker named Rene Compean helped save his life after getting lost in the woods on his hike. By snapping the photo and sending it to his friend, the LA police department was able to post the photo which resulted in a radio operator named Benjamin Kuo being able to create a detailed map/3D rendering of the surrounding area and send emergency services the coordinates of the area.

How has the surge of disinformation campaigns in recent years contributed to current societal issues? (ex. inflation, human rights violations, etc.) Is it possible to stop or limit the damage these campaigns can cause? or would it be pointless due to sheer community size?

While the premise of the AI being used to predict mental state could be helpful should a user begin having thoughts of harming themselves or others, how likely is it people are going to be okay about this? would this feel like an invasion of privacy to some? or something to ignore?

What impact could the pandemic have on parasocial relationships? How might sudden isolation spur the desire/creation of a parasocial relationship? is it possible for parasocial relationships occur towards regular people? (e.g. not celebrities)

I find this wording to be very accurate, especially since the internet/social media tends to skew/showcase experiences and emotions towards the extreme as to cultivate more of an audience/get views.

This quote tweet from Monica Lewinsky, a former staffer for former President Clinton, is likely making light of her and the former President's affair that occurred while he was in office. Which is something I'm honestly glad she did given the horrific treatment she received from both the media and the nation as a whole when this information first came to light.

The use of viral videos is something that has definitely become more prominent following the murder of George Floyd. I think that this has forced for people to be held accountable for their racist/offensive remarks whereas they were more likely to be able to get away with such actions. For example, recently a guy was recorded giving the Nazi salute while yelling slurs and antagonizing protestors. Due to the video taken from him, people were able to recognize him and contact his place of work which led him to be fired due to such actions going against company policy.

This source depicts a tweet from the user "@AthertonKD" in which they state "Oh, you're experiencing a structural problem? have you ever considered trying different personal choices instead?" This tweet makes light of the strange expectations/beliefs that people are not struggling due to systematic issues caused by a fundamentally flawed system, but because of a personal failing. This can be seen in simple things like the worsening of the environment being blamed on civilians when large corporations are the ones causing the most damage. It can also be viewed in larger things like the systematic oppression of black and brown people by law enforcement.

Since the bias of users can play a part in what the algorithm pushes out/recommends to people, how might this worsen if there is already bias present in the code? How might marginalized groups struggle further because of this bias?

I like how this source went into how societal beliefs/attitudes directly impact views surrounding disabled people. Since these societal attitudes are prone to change, especially after extended periods of time, its interesting (and sad) to see that disability used to be viewed as a moral failing, something that the disabled person should be blamed for.

This exclusionary behavior when it comes to the creation of different things (either within programming or real life) perpetuates inaccessibility for disabled people by disregarding their lived experience because they aren't perceived to have the proper qualifications.

This article breaks down the negligible level of security Facebook had with the password data of millions of its users. This negligence put millions of its users at risk of being hacked due to the lack of proper encryption for such sensitive data. Additionally, the lackadaisical attitude for such security failures is frustrating because it shows how little these social media companies care for their users beyond turning a profit.

How might these privacy failures impact public perception of social media companies? If these companies become seen as untrustworthy/unreliable in terms of maintaining customer security, what is the likelihood of these companies losing current users and/or discouraging new users from joining their platforms?

This source discusses the troubling connection that facial recognition algorithms have to eugenics and the pseudoscientific beliefs of phrenology. One thing to note is the phrenology was used to justify colonialism and slavery, so having it be connected to algorithms meant to identify 'criminals' based off of looks alone is incredibly concerning.

I personally think that trolling large companies/government entities, especially if its to help others/advocating against unfairness. Seeing people band together to fight against kellogg's unfair treatment of their workers by using their own application against them is a great demonstration of how people can take back power from large business entities.

While trolling can be annoying, it can also be used for good. In response to Dallas PD requesting videos of George Floyd protesters in order to make arrests, K-pop stans flooded the iWatch Dallas app with fancam edits of their favs and repeatedly review bombed the app on the app store. In this digital age, I think this is an excellent form of protest as it both sends a clear message that the public doesn't approve of such actions/behavior presented by Dallas PD while also limiting any incriminating information that might have been submitted to the tip line.

With these two reasonings, I'm curious if it possible to find an emotional/psychological connection between trolling and possible feelings of inferiority/powerlessness in real life. Since trolling takes place online, where consequences are less likely to occur, could this sense of anonymity and lack of consequences embolden trolling behavior?

This article discusses catfishing/making up an online identity of a scientist during COVID. I noticed that Mclaughlin, the person who created the fake profile, utilized marginalized identities (queer and indigenous) to make the account more 'credible' when discussing issues connected to those identities. Mclaughlin is a white women who used these identities to insert herself into these conversations that didn't involve her. How might this negatively impact these issues

With authenticity being very important to humanity, especially back when ones honor/reputation meant everything, how did the technological revolution change our feelings towards being lied to /duped? have our reactions toward such things grown more or less intense?

This source describes the creation of 'black twitter' and its resulting impact on twitter and the internet as a whole. From memes to social justice issues, black twitter continues to maintain it importance and relevancy as time goes on. Something that I am curious about is the likelihood of such impact being replicated in other minority groups (ex. lgbtqia+). could it reach the same levels of success as 'black twitter'?

I have noticed that the evolution from 2chan -> 4chan -> 8kun maintains the consistent desire to have more "free speech." however, I can't help but notice that the free speech these groups desired was rooted in a desire to be rude/hateful towards others and/or minority groups without any true consequences. What is the likely hood that this cycle continues with the creation of more social media platforms under the guise of 'free speech'?

This transcript addresses twitter's lawsuit against Elon Musk when he attempted to break off the ~$44 billion dollar contract because he got cold feet. A quote I find interesting from this transcript, and very relevant to current issues, is about Musk thinking he could "change his mind, trash the company, disrupt its operations, destroy stockholder value and walk away." Which is basically what Musk is unlawfully doing to the country right now with DOGE.

In a capitalist society that is rapidly placing profits in higher priority than doing what is right, how might ethics fall to the side? what self or public justifications would be used for such ethical failings?

This citation is of the "Gender Pay Gap" bot on twitter and its quote tweet calling attention to the fact that Loughborough University's hourly pay for women was 31.1% lower than the men. Which is much more impactful since the original tweet was about the university's support for international women's day, meaning that the university wouldn't be able to use that tweet for good pr since they're being called out for their inadequacies. I think this really sums up the point of the bot well, aka. not allowing companies to use things like international women's day or pride month to get them points with the public when they actually don't support such issues at all.

I think when most people expect for bots to be very one note/direct due to their coding instructing them to do only very specific tasks (ex. tweet cute pictures of red pandas, trolling, etc.) which largely makes it easier for people to accept/brush off bot posts when they come off as uninterested to current/significant events. Whereas people expect "normal" users to have some level of empathy or acknowledgement of these issues.

Despite having this belief that people have rights entitled to them by birth, it is clear that the scope of who that applied to was very limited (aka. only to white men). Additionally, I feel like this framework, was utilized to justify colonization (the property aspect of "life, liberty, and property) by painting it as 'manifest destiny' aka, the 'god given right' to displace indigenous people under the guise of progress. I agree that everyone has entitled to them at birth, and the framework definitely helped out with later human rights issues, but i feel that it was created with a bias against anyone not white or male.

Could some of this apathy towards serious issues such as death threats/fake news be due to more generations having grown up with/on the internet? Constant exposure to such things could leave people desensitized to the situation's serious nature, or does it connect back to the mindset that 'nothing on the internet is real'?