Group items tagged

This looks at the new atmosphere of sharing all the mundane details about our lives, facilitated by sites such as Blippy, which broadcasts details about shopping habits, and Foursquare, that uses GPS to alert contacts to your location. A fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union said, "People are not necessarily thinking about how long this information will stick around, or how it could be used and exploited by marketers." Concerns are also raised about potential identity theft and whether accessing every scrap of data left behind by users is actually valuable.

In the aftermath of the recent death of 18-year-old Nona Belomesoff, following a "Facebook meeting" comes an outcry from parent and teacher groups to prevent teens from accessing Facebook at school. According to Laurel Papworth, banning access is not the answer. Education is.

This article discusses how banning Facebook is not the answer for prevention of tragedies of deaths like Sydney teen who had met a "friend" on Facebook. Though it may seem commonly obvious, I do not believe simply warning and educating children/teenagers about the potential dangers of social networking and strangers is enough; but perhaps going a step further and accepting that meeting "friends" through social networks has become a social norm. Therefore conversations amongst children/teenagers/friends/parents alike must be initiated so that there is some sort of support system to ensure safety. As the online social networks expand the definition of "friends", one must consider the social construction of how people now view the world based on these norms.

Rather than suggesting that social networking sites should be "banned" to protect the safety of children, people should ensure they understand how to be safe online.  This also includes understanding the changes to a sites privacy policies and the impacts these changes can have to your privacy settings.

This is an interesting article about the presence of a digital divide in the recent political unrest in Thailand.\n\nI used this article as the basis for my fourth blog entry in terms of the importance of access to media when it comes to the efficacy of political action - it is hard to gain popular support for a movement when the use of twitter is more pervasive than broadcasts through old media like the radio.

The internet is running out of web addresses. And here another article: http://news.techworld.com/networking/3218712/google-microsoft-and-yahoo-talk-about-ipv6-whitelist/ Google, Microsoft and Yahoo talk about IPv6 whitelist and plan to create a shared list of customers who can access their websites via IPv6

Ahhhh location applications....the possibilities, the privacy issues. Why wouldn't everyone want their GPS location displayed as public record? A good explanation of why only 7% of Americans are currently using location aps. The important things for consumers to know would be who could access their data and for what purposes. Not only who and for what purpose but another question for consideration is who would have policing authority over the data.

Privacy addressed by Zukerberg. Shall we believe him? Article goes hand in hand with this week's readings. 

I thought that freedom of expressions, access to information and political and social participation are universal rights, but, maybe, it is just fantasy for some conturies

Article although from earlier this year is an interesting comment from Lessig in which he praises Google for the Book Settlement allowing the public more access than fair use, but which he speaks out against in the level of control control the settlement which allows different types of licensing on word/quote/page basis. Potentially it could be a permissions nightmare for people who would like to use excerpts from the books.

PIR = parallel importation restriction. Basically, every country around the world (except a choice few like Hong Kong and New Zealand who did away with it) is a 'territory' so far as publishing is concerned. If you publish a book in Australia, you can't just ship it over to the US and sell it wholesale to the bookstores over there. No, you have to find a publisher over there who will by the licence to reproduce the book for that market. India looks to be thinking about doing away with that. On the plus side for consumers, they'll have access to the entire Amazon e-book range - Hooray! Publishers won't be so happy, as they will lose out on royalties from selling 'local' e-books (hardcopy books will also be affected, but that's not at issue here). Of course, it doesn't work both ways - India will still have to go through the usual channels to publish overseas. the US protects its own. Australia debated this last year, you may remember. Woolworths and Coles were all for PIR abolition, but not really anyone else was ...

The Government's plan for censorship would allegedly mean the majority of the population wouldn't be able to access this game. But those who were tech-savvy enough, and wanted to enough would be able to.

We tend to think of the digital divide in geographical terms (developed vs developing nations). But what does it mean for citizens of developed nations to be on the wrong side of this divide? This article gives a brief insight into the subject in Britain.

With technology making it easier to for computer novices to steal user ids and data, now anyone can become a cybercriminal. This article showcases how easy it is to buy Zeus online, malware software which is used to steal information including online banking user ids and passwords and even security plans of US airports. Does accessibility turn you into a criminal? I still think if you're going to be a criminal you will find a way. Technology is certainly making it easier but you will only search for ways to hack into user info if you intend to steal in the first place.

Four US senators express concern about Facebook's recent changes which enable a user's friends to follow them to websites they've visited and know how they rated them. This is also enabling third parties to gain access to user data which was once private.

The news discusses about Google's caching (cache) system. Internet users can retrace archived contents over no longer accessible sites. This system has resulted website owners in distress. This issue if not tended well could result in lawsuits.

Facebook has apologised for the "Draw Mohammed Day" group and blocked the offending content from being accessed in Pakistan, rather than removing the content. I find it interesting that a company has taken responsibility for content published by users, but since they are a publisher of content they should probably be treated in the same way that a news publisher may be treated when publishing content, regardless of whether that content was developed by them or not. Brings up the issue of content moderation also.