What makes it worse is that whatever you did never really dies because oftentimes you become known for that one instance, and people will not forget it. It's no longer just you and what you did; now everyone is involved and becomes a part

What makes it so difficult to regulate harassment on the internet is that the internet is a place for everyone, and almost anyone can find their community, regardless of what kind of community it is.

This section, like much of what we have learned, explains that harassment has taken a new form. Although I think what can make this worse is that the internet offers a sense of anonymity, so bullies feel safe hiding behind screens, and that could make them bolder.

Scrolling through other people's highlight reels can make your own life feel underwhelming by comparison. like everyone else is doing more, living more, looking better. That constant over-comparison can build into real anxiety and a sense that you're falling behind somehow.

Learning about things like doomscrolling, trauma dumping, Munchausen by Internet, and digital self-harm was genuinely eye-opening. These point to something deeper about how these platforms affect people psychologically in ways that aren't always obvious.

Having a system with no moderators puts all the responsibility on the person running the site, which sounds like freedom until you realize what that actually means. You control everything, but you're also accountable for everything. Spam, illegal content, anything that ends up there is on you. That's manageable when a site is small, but as it grows and gets more attention, it becomes a real problem fast.

There are cases where that makes sense for the government to be in control, to block illegal content, hate speech, or misinformation. But it can just as easily become a tool to silence people, suppress different points of view, and limit freedom of expression. And that's where it gets complicated.

I find cultural appropriation to be a uniquely American phenomenon. I thinnk its more of an issue here because the United States has been like a melting pot of so many different cultures from all around the world, so it makes sense that cultural boundaries will become blurred and therefore lead to more conflict.

To think that if someone wanted to learn something, they would sometimes need to travel the world just to find the book or person with that knowledge in an age where practically everything is quite literally at the click of a button is fascinating.

The example of the soap dispenser reminds me of how AI today often makes mistakes when it comes to recognizing people of color, and often confuses them with animals, because people of color are a minority in the fields of computer science and programming.

Would illiteracy be considered a disability? It's somewhat strange to think of it as such, but given this definition, I think it fits well. It also reminds me of someone that I knew who was infact illiterate, which was why he would always send voice messages instead of text.

I think this is important because this would be the only tool that even users would have to stand up for their rights. to have a public specialist that to regulate the privacy rules and makes sure it makes sense to the average person.

I don't believe that privacy exists online, because even if there are laws that do not allow these companies to violate our privacy. The governments that make these laws are not as technologically advanced to actually enforce them.

The first thing that I thought of was how I can do this. I think this is a tool we could use to protect ourselves from exploitation, or at least make it harder to extract useful information.

Even though I always knew there was data being gathered constantly, I never realized the extent to which value is extracted from information that I would have considered useless before this chapter.

We keep blaming technology when it's our own misuse of these tools that has led to everything we hate it for. Just a simple reflection can show us that we have always been this way.

I don't think there is one good way to deal with trolls, because, like we mentioned, there are different reasons for trolling. But I especially love it when the tables are turned, and it's the trolls who get ragebaited.

I think authenticity is an important value in the West. Authenticity seems to be an individual-centered value. I think that eastern cultures value the collective more than the individual, so it's not a matter of am I being authentic; rather, the question is, is what I am doing socially acceptable or beneficial to the collective.

This makes me wonder what Web 3.0 will look like and what its implications would be. While I am aware that Web 3.0 refers mainly to the blockchain and the concept of decentralization of social platforms, unlike youtube I don't see its effect in our day-to-day lives, so would it even be fair to consider that Web 3.0?

Looking at these examples, realize the importance of UI/UX design and the amount of work that goes into making the interface look appealing. No wonder why we are addicted to our phones; everything has been made so easy to look at and consume. There is so much visual friction that it makes it harder to read the content.

While this example is not on social media, I think that something similar is our use of plastic in our everyday lives. On the surface, it's just a bottle of water or a bag of chips, but the reality is that plastic has now permeated into our lives at a microscopic scale.

This breakdown of coding into its smallest pieces is helpful because it explains how algorithms make decisions. While this is a fraction of code compared to the algorithms that are used on social media, it makes you question what the code looks like and what the decisions in these algorithms are based on.

I like how TikToker Curt Skelton displayed how bots can be used to manipulate us. His video helps us understand that we can't even trust our eyes on social media and makes us more critical of what we see online.

I think this rule fails to take into account how diverse humans are, while it does make sense in a community you know and are a part of, because you will most likely have similar ideas of what is good and bad. In today's world, we are traveling more than we ever have and are being exposed to places and people who love what we hate and hate what we love. So what is good to me is not what is good to someone else. While I do see this as a valuable framework to have, I think it is fluid and changes based on the circumstances.

I think that tech giants are not invested in ethical changes because there is no real risk for them. At the end of the day, the goal is to make more money for shareholders, and if the well-being of users is not going to make them money, then it is not worth investing in. I believe that technology can be regulated at the same speed as its advancement. It's just, regulation will put up barriers to profit, so instead surface-level ethics are presented to us as a bandaid to ethical issues that are growing like a cancer at the same rate technology is advancing.