If I could change how people behaved on social media I would make people less snow-flakey. Many examples of people being toxic online used in this class I would not necessarily say are that bad. A prime example is the guy that tweeted about people bringing a book to a bar. Negative attention is still attention and calling out every joke you seen and looking for things to get offended about just promotes what people are trying to "cancel". Lots of social media sites nowadays are just cesspools of negativity because of how sensitive everyone is. It really has ruined many platforms and is one of the many reasons why I do not use social media.

I came into this class with a mostly negative view on social media. After seeing all the unethical things that go on behind the scenes and actually using sites like Reddit for this class it reinforced that idea.

If social media sites were run this way they would not be able to function. This is because everyone has different opinions, feelings and backgrounds. Nothing would be agreed on and it would end up becoming a mess. Having a few qualified people create social media sites allows for more structured collaboration and planning.

America is completely based on making money yourself. They offer very little help in terms of education, insecurity in anyway and jobs. Contrary to popular belief it is very hard to be born poor in America and become rich.

I think this is waste of time and energy to get mad over. We are getting to a point where jokes are seen as socialy unacceptable. It is unfortunate that people actively search for things as simple as this to get mad over.

Most instances of public shaming are over insignificant controversies that will blow over in a week. Lots of people look for things to get annoyed about just to post about it and "cancel" someone. If the person did not commit a crime or discriminate against a person or group of people it is likely not worth the time of making that "cancelation" post.

When people make fun of corrupt rich people as opposed to the average person it feels better. This is because the sheer amount of power rich people have protects them from any harassment. They definitely hear about things but it is not the same as "regular harassment".

I believe that crowd harassment can be justified towards evil people. Nowadays social credit is very important in someones life. If someone commits a terrible act there are both social and real life consequences. These are justified because it prevents similar acts from being preformed. Generally I am against cancel culture but in certain situations I can see its benefit.

I have not participated in crowdsourcing as I think it usually does more harm than good. Blindly following peoples call to action or information can be dangerous and discourages individuality.

If social media websites see a crowdsourcing event is getting out of hand they could ban the hashtag, community, etc. that is related to it. if they believe a crowdsourcing event could be useful they could promote it or initiate it themselves.

Social media cites should clearly state what a moderater might see on their cite and give them access to resources like therapists. Another way of reducing moderator stress is by utilizing bots. These bots could go through the more inflammatory posts while human moderators could go through the more tame posts.

I am not sure how much work goes into being a Reddit mod but it does not seem like a full time job. It seems more like something someone does in their spare time. Therefore they likely have enough money and time where they would not benefit much from being paid. If they need money they should probably not be a Reddit mod as they do not get paid and it wastes there time. Reddit does not force to people to be mods so I think it is ok they do not pay them. The people that are mods know this and still continue to do it.

I like the idea of a "veil of ignorance". People are always thinking in their own self interest relative to their postion in life. If once in a while people would consider everyone and see themselves as a neutral observer I believe decisions would be made more fairly. However this concept is unfortunately impossible to achieve but is interesting to conceptualize.

In an unmoderated online space the owners of the site and people with the biggest amount of followers would have the most power. People who are new to the site or disliked by the community for whatever reason would have the least power.

I think social media platforms should limit hate speech and bullying. What social media apps allow to be posted has a direct affect on peoples mental health. They could put things in their settings like being able to turn on and off mature content, limiting screen time and being able to block certain people/ content. It is on them to make their platforms as safe as possible for everyone that uses them.

I have tried to stay away from most social medias. I don't have apps like Instagram or TikTok. I had Instagram for a little but it made me sad. I was comparing myself to other people too much and I also saw how certain people were excluded and seen as weird or different. I do use YouTube which I considered a "lighter" social media. You do not really have to interact with other people and there are some very interesting and creative videos on the platform.as Overall I have had a positive experience with YouTube. I like the longer form videos. My only complaint is that it wastes my time.

I think a source should be cited if you are sharing something to a wide audience. If you have a larger audience stealing work from a small creator has a big impact on them. For the most part I think it is OK for the average person to repost a meme or video without credit. The bigger you get the more complicated things become. A simple way to cite the source is just writing on the post itself or mentioning the original creator.

I would not want something I create to go viral if that one specific thing is all I'm known for. I would rather be consistent and have a lot of work that people enjoy. I also would not want to go "viral" on something like a TikTok video. I would want it to be something more important, meaningful and creative.

Echo chambers are interesting as I think they are one of many factors that form someones opinion. I think it is mainly based on the people you grow up around (family, friends, etc..). Now that we are becoming more online echo chambers may become more prevalent in how people think. This is scary due to all the misinformation and untrustworthy people online.

I think social media platforms should censor violent and discriminatory content/ trends. It is up to the large media companies to prevent the real world consequences that come with online hate. They could change their algorithms in order to prevent this, as right now they are creating the problems.

I also mask my disability. It does not feel good to be seen as different from others.

I'm not sure I would consider this a disability necessarily. It makes the the term "disabled" seem very loose. It's like anyone could say they have a disability in any moment when they feel uncomfortable. I think being tall has a lot more advantages than disadvantages. This is more of an inconvenience than anything else.

Usually this would be done for an economic incentive (selling data to other companies, cutting costs on privacy agreements etc..). Data protection can be expensive and complicated to uphold so if social media sites can cut corners they will.

When personal information gets leaked on social media platforms people become more worried about using that site. It creates a distrust with its users and the platform receives negative attention.

I am not surprised with anything listed in this book. Today your online footprint is more prevalent than ever. Detecting things based on what you do online is becoming easier and easier.

With data mining in my opion a lot of things are fair game. If you decide to download a social media app that is made to waste your time of course they are going to target content towards your interest. Without data mining social media apps would not be as successful and the user experience would be worse. One way or another your data is out there somewhere whether you like it or not. I think there should be a line of where that date is used. For example someone doxing or impersonating you. Ultimately it is the responsibility of the companies to keep that data safe.

I personally have not changed my accent to fit in, but I know many people who have. I think this comes from a place of insecurity (at least when it comes to white people). People think it is cooler to talk and use different slang around strangers or friends. It seems that they are not happy with the way they behave or are perceived. In turn they cover up their true selves by masking their voice and personality. It can be frustrating to talk to these people as they always seem fake. You never really know if they are being authentic as you know they do not actually talk like that.

I'm not going to discuss any moral frameworks but I do believe this form of trolling is morally expectable. For one this does not really harm anyone as all it did was take down an app made by the police department. Also sometimes people need to stand up for wrongs in the world. This could include trolling something or someone in order to stop the injustice said thing is doing. It is also kinda funny and entertaining to see mean people get exposed online. Trolling is really an essential part of internet culture. Sometimes people take it too far but overall I would not say it is inherently a bad thing.

I see this happen all the time. As a a fan of someone it is very easy to find out lots of information on a celebrity. This creates a one sided relationship where one person feels like they know everything about someone while the other person has no idea they even exist. I sometimes fall into this trap. I can feel connected by people through certain experiences or opinions they have. I look up to them and find joy in seeing them succeed.

I am definitely not as social at school as I am with my friends or family. This is simply because there are certain people in my life who I feel more comfortable opening up than others. I do not really post on social media at all and try to avoid it. People are very inauthentic on social media sites. They tend to be confident in their opinions (positive or negative). Not having to directly talk to someone makes it a lot easier to say whatever you want.

This "no rules" idea of social media has been around for a long time and is still trying to be created today. Elon Musk vowed that Twitter will become a place where anyone can speak their piece. Yet he is charging people $8 a month for Twitter Blue which promotes tweets. People paying for their views to be seen does not sound like freedom of speech to me. There is a reason why "no rules" social media platforms are unpopular and usually buried deep within the web.

Infinite scrolling has caused childrens attention spans to decrease considerably in the past few years. Kids are getting phones earlier and earlier and seeing much more misinformation. This will likely also cause them to rely too much on the internet for information.

I see this all the time where people only do charitable acts to get attention and praise online. Sometimes "influencers" even pretend to help out just to get one photo and then leave. It really ruins the idea of charity as many people only do it for their own self interest.

I actually really like the idea of utilitarianism. I think of it more as a guiding philosophy than anything else. Simply put for the most part I try to act in way that satisfies the most people. I try to take other peoples opinions into consideration when I make decisions. It's like looking at things in the third person. I believe this text book really discounts this philosophy and says it's too complicated or biased. You do not have to follow it exactly in order to use it.

It is much more efficient to have a bot do simple yet annoying tasks like moderation or advertising. This also saves companies lots of money as it's one less employee they have to pay. It can also boost attraction to websites as bots can generate lots of activity in a short period of time.

I think a bot doing something as opposed to a human makes a huge difference in my mind. Like the donkey example at the beginning of this page bots do not really have a conscious as to what they are doing so you can not really blame them. When there is a person directly doing the actions it is easy to assume responsibility on them.

I believe this is a very outdated philosophy that is still highly prevalent today. Parents expecting respect from their children puts a lot of pressure on kids today. Many of these parents have unrealistic expectations for them to meet. This can cause disruption in families when said exceptions are not met. I believe giving kids the ability to think for themselves and come to opinions on there own is a very important part of parenting. This philosophy severely limits that opportunity.

I thought the idea of taoism was quite interesting. As someone who cares deeply about our planet I think this is a good rule of thumb. While this might have some religious undertones I do believe not messing with the flow of nature is a good idea. We are seeing how destructive humans can be to the environment with global warming and endangerment of many animals. If everyone followed this philosophy we would likely have a cleaner planet.