Describe, step by step, how the IT system works. An example of a face recognition and detection technology is the iPhone app that can snap a photo of a person and within seconds display their name, date of birth and social security number. 1. A good quality, well-lit photograph of the person is taken. 2. The image is sent to a server where a database of images is located. 3. The images in the database are downloaded from publicly available sources (any database containing faces and names), such as facebook, twitter or LinkedIn profiles. 4. According to the information available in that profile, such as date and location of higher education stydy, other data can be inferred (date and state of birth). 5. This data is inserted into an algorithm developed to predict the social security number. All of this still within the database. 6. The biometric features of the iPhone photograph is compared to those of the image in the database 7. If they match, the information about that person is returned from the server to the iPhone: name, date of birth, state, social security nr. What are the flaws within this system? Explain the relationship between the IT system (facial recognition iPhone app) and the social/ethical (privacy and anonymity) "The technology to analyse faces in improving so quickly that unpredictable (...) inferrences from that information have become possible." - Alessandro Acquisti, professor of IT and public policy at Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College The app is a proof-of-concept of how our privacy can be easily breached on a widespread basis (as one walks into a store or protests in a convention)

This article raises the issue of privacy and anonymity. This article shows how there is a possibility that in the near future, as long as the technology continues to develop at this rate, all of our personal data will be stored on a database along with an image of our faces. The fact that a person can be recognized at any moment anywhere means that people will start to be monitored and everything they do will be recorded. This completely strips people from their privacy, much like the Big Brother situation that is described in George Orwell's "1984". This technology can, however, bring certain advantages as through the constant monitoring of people, people involved in criminal acts will be identified with much more ease and therefore crime levels are sure to decrease. However, this can also raise an issue of reliability, as although it is a very small percentage of it happening, there can be the case where the camera misidentifies someone, and in a case of crime, that could lead to an innocent person being conviected for a crime they did not commit. And although at the end of the article "Wear a mask," is said by John Verdi, senior counsel of the Electronic Privacy Information Center as a joke, if the tecnhology continues to develop, we might find ourselves in the ridiculous situation where the only way to ever remain anonymous is to in fact wear a mask.

In my opinion, the main objective is purely to protect the entertainment industry by blocking infringing domain names however, as stated in the video these industries do not contribute so much to the US economy. Furthermore, theses bills will put the stability of new search engines at risk as the US government will be able to sue them if they advertise any infringing website.

If you're looking to understand the debate from the perspective of copyright holders, then watch Follow the Money: Who Profits from Piracy?,( http://vimeo.com/22541902 ) a video that tracks the theft of one movie, making it a microcosm of a larger problem.

Although protecting the entertainment industry from piracy and blocking certain websites containing disturbing and innappropriate material (paedophilia) is a good idea, the way SOPA and PIPA have been written/proposed makes it very easy for people enforcing both acts to abuse their power. Once we censor one thing, other will decide that other things must also be censored, therefore destroying any sembelence of free-speech Internet users have. I also find it worrying how the American Senate decided by itself that these two acts should be made law, in the process crippling the Internet, a resource used by billions of people all around the world and not just the population of the US.

Criterion B . Describe, step by step, how the IT system works. How unauthorised sites outside usa jurisdiction is censored within american borders: A little bit like the great firewall of China, this kind of censorship takes place at a router level. 1. The American ISPs enter the domain names of the unauthorised sites and directories, blogs and forums that contain related links into the Internet routers. These enable data to flow back and forth between ISPs in the USA and Internet servers around the world. 2. The user types in the domain name of an unauthorised website. 3. The request is sent to the web server at the ISP, and the domain name is looked up on the database of addresses in the router 4. The router denies the request from the web server 5. An error message appears in the user's browser how chinese censorship works - http://embargo.gn.apc.org/3.htm#_ftn5 how internet works - http://www.explainthatstuff.com/internet.html

One of the problems here is the authenticity of data being released. ""This is a lot of data, but there are already some names where it's clear the people are not right-wing extremists." Some people identified in the data had merely been contacted by right-wing publications seeking interviews, she added." Some of the people on the list are not Nazis. What could be a solution to this?

Here is a list of all Google's philosophy, http://www.google.com/about/corporate/company/tenthings.html

Good story this and nice link to Google's philosophy Jorge. This article is a good one for commenting on the relationship between the stakeholder and the IT system. Anyone want to step up and "Describe the relationship of one primary stakeholder to the IT system"?

This article raises a huge reliability issue as people are being tricked to buying tickets from fake websites, which are advertised by Google. Due to its increasing reputation over the years, the average internet user will use and think of Google as the most reliable website to navigate, and therefore would trust most of the llinks that would appear when they search for something. The secure and reliable reputation Google has is what makes the fact that these illegal websites being sponsored ads such a large issue. It affects many web users and as they are likely to visit these websites, their personal information such as bank account details and personal details are made public. So security could also be seen as an issue as these people are put at risk as they have given their bank account data to fake websites, who could use the data gain access to bank accounts and steal money.

Scary! After this video I surely don't want to order another pizza. The social and ethical issue here is surely privacy. With only one phone call, people can "wire into the system" and be able to view this type of personal information. Plus, if this is in 2005, nowadays not only we can figure out this information, but also more! Privacy is becoming a great issue as we are seeing that as technology is increasing, the less privacy we have, more people are starting to be able to access people's personal information. Relating to this videos, solutions that could apply could be: 1. When ordering a pizza, instead of calling from your mobile phone or home phone, call from the nearest phone booth to your house an order to somewhere near your house. Yet, don't give any personal information such as home address or mobile phone number. 2. Don't order! Go to the pizzaria and buy your pizza straight from the restaurant. In this way, you surely don't have to give any personal information so that you'll have more privacy than if you called from your phone.