| Extra credit blog |
[May. 23rd, 2005|10:50 am] |
|
Something that really concerns me is the effort made by the new FCC chairman to stifle diversification of VoIP companies by forcing fledgling companies to add E911 service through their connection within such a short time (120 days). This would require a huge amount of capital to be dumped into these networks in the next few days and smaller new companies just don't have that kind of money yet. The reason why this is a concern is because this will hurt competition, and thus drive up prices of this service for customers everywhere. It is scary how the phone companies have merged together so much in the last few decades. It seems, however, that with the new FCC chairman, this trend will not reverse anytime soon. |
|
|
| posts for May 18 readings |
[May. 23rd, 2005|10:24 am] |
|
My first comment is on how great this technology is, and how sad it will be if the major phone monopolies buy it and make it really expensive. What I didn't realize before these articles was how wide spread this technology is already. I had heard of it before, but have thought of it more as a novelty up until now. I think that VoIP cannot be killed, but it can fall under the control of telecom companies. I forget that bandwith, like traditional telephone lines, is owned, and even though the internet is free, connection to it is not. |
|
|
| Extra Credit May 16th articles |
[May. 18th, 2005|09:23 am] |
|
The act congress passed regarding accessibility for people with disabilities is a positive step forward to providing web access to all groups of people. People talk about web access to undeveloped nations, to the poorer populations within developed countries, and to children in schools,buy many don't touch on web access to those who can't see. I think this act is crucial because of the message congress is sending, which is- yeah, it's expensive and time consuming, but we should make the web accessable to everyone because disabled people are citizens and have rights, and it is the right thing to do. The fact that the government is starting to change things so that some services are only available online is a factor also. One example is that of my roommate, who is in the process of applying for her greencard. The immigration office in our state recently changed the system so that the only way to make an appointment with an immigration adviser is through the washington immigration web site. If you happen to be disabled and dealing with immigration, you would need to rely on other people to help you navigate the web. |
|
|
| may 16th readings |
[May. 18th, 2005|09:15 am] |
|
These articles brought up many issues that I've never even thought of before. It is true that we have become accustom to certain web page standards that make browsing a web page more efficient. We know how to identify hyperlinks, where hyperlinks are generally located, and what kind of tools for site navigation one can generally count on. I think this standardization is good for many reasons. First it helps web designers know what works and what doesn't work. They don't have to reinvent the wheel every time they begin a new layout. Second it allows easy usability testing because it's easy to spot whats missing, and what could improve the site. The only negative impact I can think of is that it takes away from creativity during the development process by taking away options from the designer. Because people are so use to a general format, users can get confused of frustrated when a website attempts to deviate from the accepted norm. |
|
|
| may 9 readings |
[May. 15th, 2005|08:24 pm] |
|
It looks like we are back to the subject of electronic voting, and if it helps or hinders democracy. Personally I think these readings made me now more than ever a fan of paper ballots. It seems that computer programs can be made user friendly and easy to use, but the code behind these programs could easily be manipulated or written to serve another agenda. The biggest problem seems to be the lack of visibility of these mistakes, and the inability to go back and track problems while still being able decipher the original intentions of voters. With paper ballots, mistakes can easily be identified and corrected, like the problems that occurred with the butterfly ballots in Florida. The scariest part of these readings were the findings that voting information can easily be altered by anyone who knows what they're doing and also has access to a voting post at a voting station. States do not have the time, money, and resources to protect electronic voting programs from all possible threats. Besides relationships between political parties and companies responsible for electronic voting software seem like a recipe for disaster. |
|
|
| May 4 readings, extra credit |
[May. 8th, 2005|10:30 pm] |
|
With this blog I want to address the issue of hactivisim being used to combat firewalls in suppressive countries. I think that hactivisim is one of the most powerful forms of activism due to the fact that it is so aggressive. So powerful in fact that governments make huge efforts to consistently fight against hackers. The internet is interesting in that suppressive countries cannot ban the internet due to economic reasons. Therefore the outside world has small window of possible influence on cultures where every other form of media is tightly controlled and censured. This is huge because a country's system of government can usually only be changed by the people who live there. The governments of suppressive countries know that there most dangerous threat to their power isn't the opinions of other countries, but the ideas inside those who live within their own country. Therefore ignorance is one of their biggest weapons used to control the actions of their own people. This makes sense if you think about the fact that most people don't desire what they don't have until they know it is out there. |
|
|
| readings for may 4 |
[May. 8th, 2005|10:06 pm] |
|
I feel that the public space of the internet should be strongly protected, especially after reading about the firewall set up in Iran and China. I think that if advertisers feel they have the right to advertise where ever, whenever,that access to the internet should not be denied to those who simply want to get a message out. I am amazed by how much can be controlled by firewalls put up by the government, and it scares me to think of what could happen if eventually firewalls were put up here. The wonderful thing about the internet is that no one person can "own" such a decentralized network. Still its funny to think back to the beginning days of radio and TV when amateur broadcasters thought that nobody could "own" the airwaves. |
|
|
| May 2, readings |
[May. 4th, 2005|09:00 am] |
|
I think that theses readings and those on open source software have many similarities. It seems to me that open source software and its adaption by society is a sigh that we have become more comfortable with computers and digital technology. People no longer have to have their hand held by "all-knowing" powerful software companies. We feel comfortable taking this technology and making it our own by building it to our needs. Rather than turning to professionals for software queries, there is now a big enough base of computer savvy users that we can rely on each other to improve our knowledge. So it seems that social software is a natural evolution in computer software development by companies trying to stay technology compatible with the changing uses and needs of computer users. |
|
|
| April 27, readings |
[May. 1st, 2005|10:53 pm] |
|
My first surprise form these readings came from "From Tom Paine to Blogs and Beyond" when it discusses how media mogul William Randolph Hearst was blamed as being partly responsible for starting the Spanish-American civil war by inflaming public opinion with his newspaper. This is a great example of how those who own media have great abilities to affect public thought, and reveals how dangerous this can be at times. I think it is important to keep in mind that media, above all, is a business, and as a business it is most worried about protecting it's own interests above public interest. Public news outlets haven't always been known for objectivity, and so we should be aware that objectivity from the media isn't a right of the public, but something we continually have to enforce by voicing opinions economically (for example boycotts) or through communications to the business (like a letter). Big businesses sell and deal in many more things, and because of that they have more interests to protect. Newspapers owned by a family or small businesses are mainly worried about maintaining circulation and advertisers. Big businesses who own many newspapers, as well as sell commodities and deal in foreign trade, could use their newspapers as a public influence tool that benefits their other areas of business as well. For example, their newspapers could be encouraged to promote a certain presidential candidate who's stance on foreign trade would mean more profits for the parent company. I think this is seriously dangerous, and because the idea of the media as "honest, objective, and relentless" is so deeply ingrained in American society, the current shift from this position is undetectable by most people. |
|
|
| Wi-Fi in rural areas |
[Apr. 27th, 2005|09:13 am] |
|
I think this reading helped me understand better how wi-fi actually works. Also It helped me understand exactly how wi-fi connections in rural, underdeveloped areas can help improve the community. I learned that internet connections help medical and educational facilities operate better and also that the internet can help people communicate in areas where phone communication is rather expensive. I Think this would be one of the greatest benefits. underdeveloped areas can feel isolated from the rest of the world and thus keep the community static instead of moving forward with the pace of society. Wi-Fi can break through this barrier and provide clear, real time windows into what is going on elsewhere in the world. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
myaleeann's journal