This article discusses how hackers hacked Facebooks database and posted 530 million users' information including their names and phone numbers on a public server. Facebook responded by stating that they had no intention to let users know individually that their data was breached, and instead made a blog post discussing the hack. This is an example of a social media company using unethical means to retain users that they know they would lose had they notified them.

Social media companies' incentives to protect user privacy include user satisfaction and security. By ensuring users' data is safe and sound, more people are likely to store their information on that social media platform by using it more often, posting to it more often, and saving things on it more often. Social media companies also have incentives to violate privacy; for example, if social media companies have access to users likes, dislikes, interests, etc, then they can advertise products or show content that to that user that is catered specifically to their interests. This increases user engagement on that platform.

This article reveals that scientific studies and reports are difficult to perform accurately. It explains that despite doing experiments or studies as you are supposed to, data can be misleading with many confounding variables to consider. This article also mentions the misuse of p-values and other statistics reporting methods. The main point is that although science is messy and can be a little clouded in some areas, it is ever expanding and growing , making it more human than it seems.

This reminds me of the insane occurrence when you're talking about a product or brand with your friend that you've never heard of, looked up, or engaged with before and then later that day you'll see an ad for that exact product/brand on snapchat or instagram and wonder if social media is listening to you. I'd really like to understand how and why this happens. Are they really recording our conversations? Are there certain buzzwords that you can say to trigger this instance? Is it just a big coincidence and a case of confirmation bias?

This source is very telling of the state the president is in when he is sharing messages to the entire world. The source describes the difference of tone in Trump tweets and claims that the angrier ones are when Trump is tweeting himself while the calmer and more rational ones are written and released by his staff.

This makes me wonder what one has to do to be the most beloved figure possible. If people love authenticity but struggle to accept it when it is finally recognized, can one truly come to be loved just by being themselves? Or is it best to create a persona of a balancing act between being authentic and yet private. Zendaya is a good example I can think of as she is someone who is extremely private and hides a lot of her personal life or inner thoughts but she also comes across as extremely down to Earth and authentic in interviews, fan interactions, and blooper reels. I can imagine that it must be difficult to keep up this balance.

This article is a hilarious satirical piece that mocks many individuals who go on mission trips to countries they believe are third world to help under privileged children. This article makes fun of the fact that these individuals often snap pictures with these kids and post it on their social medias to gain clout and praise from others, without asking or caring for the consent of the kids that are in the photos - in turn indirectly stating that their feelings don't matter in the face of her own image.

It's surprising to me that companies would be so incoherent when it comes to NECESSARY forms that one must fill out to use their services. It would honestly be better PR for them to just put male and female rather than additional options that are completely irrelevant or insensitive, such as "unknown" or "tax entity". I wonder how their websites sort this data and how this information better helps them assist users (in my head it likely changes nothing besides serving as a general demographic poll).

This source is a twitter bot account that posts frequent updates on the percentage of people that have received the covid-19 vaccine. It is interesting to see how bots can be used to report quantitative data that updates the general public on issues like public health. It is also interesting how quickly the numbers increase per post, which I didn't expect.

People's expectations vary from those of a bot because a person has consciousness, decision making capabilities, and experiences empathy and foresight. Bots, on the other hand, run on a program created by people who allowed it the operations it holds. A normal user is assumed to have responsibility over what is posted to their page, as well as ownership of the content associated with their name. Bots are created with the intention of a person but that person is unknown in most cases and doesn't visibly have ownership of the content one views.

I think it's important to include variations of Aztec Virtue ethics and other fundamentals such as Hindu and Buddhist ethics which are individually more distinct than Confucianism, Taoism, and Aztec Virtue ethics and also date back to more ancient times than most of these ideologies. Hindu Ethics includes the belief of dharma which is the duty to fulfill your role on this Earth and achieve your fullest potential as that role. Certain stories in the Bhagavad Gita such as the Mahabharata are extremely thought provoking ethical dilemmas based off this belief. Buddhist Ethics mainly cover Ahisma which is the belief in no violence under any circumstances. Both of these ethical philosophies discuss the concept of Karma with an emphasis on the intentions behind each individual action rather than the action itself. (i.e. Is a good deed truly good if it is done for self pleasure? Is a bad deed truly bad if it is done for a greater good/ to fulfill one's dharma?)

There is definitely a heavy responsibility for tech developers to protect users from rapidly developing tech. Consumers don't understand the full depth of the technology they are using and without proper guidelines and parameters, they could put their safety at risk as the consequences of ill-used tech are severe. Experts who are in charge of these safety parameters know much better what the extents of technology's capability should be.