StJulians_ITGS

The FBI's idea sounds like a good one, as it could lead to early warnings for law enforecement all around the world on any local or global threats, One good example of how a piece of software like this could have been used is the Norweigan massacre, as it was reported by the media that terrorist Anders Breivik had mentioned put forward extremist ideology and terrorist tendency while using the internet, going so far as to write a manifesto. On the other hand it would be vital for this application to fall under the Data Protection Act meaning data on individuals would have to be kept safe and up-to-date, it would only be kept for the necessary amount of time, and that all information would be deleted once a suspect was deemed innocent.

The main stakeholder here is the google, youtube, gmail, etc. user. The change in privacy policy settings in the system affects the stakeholder in these ways, as outlined in the article: In "suggesting search queries, or tailoring search results, based on the interests expressed in Google+, Gmail and YouTube" (mining data to provide "ever more targeted adverts"), the results become limited: "something I am interested in this week, I might not be interested in next week. I use Google's facilities as both a private individual and in my professional life. Which bit are they going to give back to me?" There is no opt-out alternative to the changes in the system. "Google has become a way of life for some people. They can't do without it even if they don't like the direction it is going in". The simplification of policies could lead to graver problems. http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/27/tech/web/google-privacy-clarified/index.html

Google has enabled encrypted searching using SSL (Secure Sockets Layer) which it says will prevent "employers and internet service providers" from reading what is sent. The possibility that employers and ISPs might be watching peoples' search traffic clearly concerns Google, and it has often concerned employees.

Essentially what Google is trying to do is to offer people a way of securely navigating their website, using SSL, so that people don't have to worry about being monitored. People can see if they are using the secure version of the google search engine if the web adress cointains "https" rather than just "http". SSL works as follows: 1- The web browser being used checks the websites' certificate to make sure that the client is connecting to the real site and not someone intercepting 2- The encryption types that the browser and the web site server can both use to understand each other are determined 3- Browser and Server each send each other unique codes to use when encrypting the data that will be sent 4- The browser and server start communicating using encryption, leaving the web pages secured. For more information on how SSL works ckeck the following website: http://www.ourshop.com/resources/ssl.html

The following article shows how the asymmetric encryption inherent to SSL (Secure sockets layer) and TLS (Transport Layer Security) have been rendered useless by a tool called BEAST (Browser Exploit Against SSL/TLS). It attacks the "AES encryption algorithm" used in the cryptographic protocols. "BEAST is able to grab and decrypt HTTPS cookies once installed on an end user's browser." "While other attacks focus on the authenticity property of SSL, BEAST attacks the confidentiality of the protocol. As far as we know, BEAST implements the first attack that actually decrypts HTTPS requests". "Transaction confidentiality based on the SSL TLS V1.0 protocol (the most used still today) is dead." "The only true defense from fraudulent transactions is to sign the (...) transaction data so that the attacker cannot inject bogus material. This means effectively using a token with a pin pad." "Fixing the vulnerability that BEAST exploits may require a major change to the protocol itself." http://www.itpro.co.uk/636304/ssl-under-threat-as-flaw-exploited

The concern is privacy.Apparently the FBI was able to acquire Kim DotCom's messages with other MegaUpload employers by means of spyware, which could access skype conversations stored on a local host. Even though the FBI had a warrant to search for information, this is still rather disconcerting. This software can easily be misused. The software is called CIPAV and it stands for Computer and Internet Protocol Address Verifier. This software is able to send "network-level messages" containing the target computer's IP address, Ethernet MAC address, environment variables, the last-visited Web site, and other registry-type information including the name of the registered owner of the computer and the operating system's serial number. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10222294-38.html

I agree with you Morten. The social and ethical issue here is privacy. In the article they specify when saying "Sources told CNET yesterday that Skype, the Internet phone service now owned by Microsoft, was not asked by the feds to turn over information and was not served with legal process" that Skype did not give permission to the FBI to access this information. Even though the Data Protection Act states that "Personal data shall be obtained only for one or more specified and lawful purposes, and shall not be further processed in any manner incompatible with that purpose or those purposes." it is still not appropriate to "hack" into Kim DotCom's messages. Here is a link with the rules for Data Protection Act. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1 Privacy is coming to bits, the only way we can talk to people knowing that knowing is going to get hold o f that information is by face-to-face communication, and even by that way people can be hearing the conversation secretly. Where has privacy gone?

(CNN) -- FaceTime, the Apple video-chat application, is not a replacement for real human interaction, especially for children, according to a new study. Tween girls who spend much of their waking hours switching frantically between YouTube, Facebook, television and text messaging are more likely to develop social problems, says a Stanford University study published in a scientific journal on Wednesday.

Employees of Silicon Valley giants like Google, Apple, Yahoo and Hewlett-Packard opt to send their children to computer-free Waldorf schools. These subscribe to a teaching philosophy focused on physical activity and learning through creative, hands-on tasks. They affirm that computers inhibit creative thinking, movement, human interaction and attention spans. Computers are not allowed in classrooms and "their use at home" is frowned upon. "Teaching is a human experience," says an associate professor of education at Furman University, "Technology is a distraction when we need literacy, numeracy and critical thinking." "And where advocates for stocking classrooms with technology say children need computer time to compete in the modern world, Waldorf parents counter: what's the rush, given how easy it is to pick up those skills?" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html?_r=4&pagewanted=all

It's true that computers can give a person bad habits, I do not doubt that. But the article is not offering any numbers nor web page reference of any kind; so we cannot verify this easily. However, my point is that perhaps computers have not made anyone more antisocial, than what they would have been without computers. The articles says that "Young girls who spend the most time multitasking between various digital devices, communicating online or watching video are the least likely to develop normal social tendencies", but what is "normal social tendencies"? There will be some of these young girls without "normal social tendencies", but I doubt that the difference between these young girls, and the ones who does not multitask - is about the same amount of girls without these normal tendencies. Not all mice are gray, some are brown. Not all users of IT are antisocial, some who aren't will be antisocial as well.

Year 13 please suggest tags

Apple is my first choice for Mp3 players, laptops etc therefore it is good to see that they are concerned with the environment and has put in a lot of effort to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions especially now that Global warming is a major issue in society. However, it would also be nice to see Apple produce their products in a way which did not affect workers rights. I found a story which claims various Chinese workers are exploited, http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/apr/30/apple-chinese-factory-workers-suicides-humiliation

Interesting link Jorge.

An entertaining video on copyright laws. It covers these topics: Chapter 1: Copyright definition - 0.52 Chapter 2: What things can be copyrighted? - 2.52 Chapter 3: Copyright Duration and the Public Domain - 3.52 Chapter 4: Fair Use - 6.22 Chapter 5: Why use Disney cartoons? - 8.14 Credits - 8.52 Public domain

The blurring of reality and the virtual world has come full circle. Just over twenty years ago I can remember watching the first stirrings of the Gulf War, arguably the first television war, and one where the images of missile strikes were commonplace.

"With streaming services now established and a number of web-first companies investing heavily in bespoke and exclusive content, is it time we started speaking of YouTube or Netflix in the same breath as the BBC or Sky?"

As technology is increasing, robots are becoming more and more used in our society. This has impacted our world in many ways such as more machinery is being used in order to produce goods. This can lead to unemployment since less people are required to work in this industries as machines have taken the role. "The latest version of Honda's Asimo robot is reported to be able to distinguish between the voices of three different people spoken at once by using a combination of face recognition and sound analysis" By this quote taken from this article, we can see that robots are starting to resemble more to humans such that they can now distinguish between voices of three different people spoken at once. This is a social and ethical issue since machines such as robots are taking the role of human beings. The question is, for how long more is technology going to continue to increase? Are human beings on their way to extinction?

As the article states, there are numerous robots that could perform tasks such as serving drinks (Asimo), teaching psychology (Nao), and replacing infantry (Petman). There is a danger of becoming overly dependent on technology. As we have discussed in class, the inherent characteristics of computers are that they will only do what they programmed to, regardless of the identity and intentions of the user. Also, both the computer and the user (if not equipped with appropriate technical know-how) become very vulnerable if the system malfunctions in a way that was not predicted. In tasks too dangerous to be directly undertaken by human beings, such as operating valves at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, robotics become essential. Companies need to strike a balance between commercialisation and what is truly necessary for the benfit of humanity.

In the field of medicine, robotic surgery is becoming increasingly popular: http://futureoftech.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/13/10150612-robot-surgeons-may-get-upgraded

Nice video explaining the current issues

The SOPA is mainly adresses the protection of intellectual property of content creators. Obviously this is the one of the biggest advantages being proposed by the act as artists and entertainers will be able to profit more from the content they make. Nowadays much of their content is illegally downloaded from the internet, such as music. However SOPA will have a severe impact on online freedom of speech as numerous websites would be affected by the act and blacklisted as a result. The internet is makes frequent use of copyrighted material not necessarily in a legal way. Doing streaming of such content after the act could lead to a maximum penalty of five years in prison. However the US congress states that protecting intellectual property is not the same as censorship http://agbeat.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/sopa-infographic1.png The image above provides more detail about SOPA including how it will take effect and the impact it would have on businesses. It shows the major supporters of SOPA as well as the major opposers, one of them being Google.

Apparently there are multiple ways of circumventing the SOPA: 1. Using a VPN Service 2. Using Your HOSTs File 3. Using TOR 4. Using a Web DNS Tool 5. Changing Your DNS Server 6. Using Command Prompt 7. Using Foxy Proxy 8. Using MAFIAAFire Source: http://www.zeropaid.com/news/95013/8-technical-methods-that-make-the-protect-ip-act-useless/

1.11_people_machines 1.12_digital_citizenship 2.2_edu_training 2.2_hw_networks_classroom

1.11_people_machines 1.6_digital_div_equ_access 2.2_IT_teach_learn 3.2 _software

Stakeholders: Students Advantages for students Productivity applications and textbooks are available to download online - easy global Access. the files are digital, so they can be transfered easily The online texbooks are safe from physical dangers, such as fires Convenience - being able to access iTunes U (university level resources) and the internet Saving time - files in an electronic format can be edited, searched and backed up easily. Disadvantages for students Although the files are safe, the iBook itself is still susceptible to physical damage The files may be corrupt Battery power failures and technical problems (they don't happen with physical notebooks) Access to internet and resources may depend on whether the space has wireless Access to games and rich interactive productivity applications can become the norm. Thence users' attention span may decrease The cost of product, of electronic textbooks and applications is the major issue From an evaluative point of view, I think that using a portable electronic device in place of a physical textbook would not benefit the students very much. The values a teacher is looking for are the ability to focus and listen, and the iBook could encourage the student to run parallel tasks at inappropriate times. The device would not be suitable for younger audiences, and in my opinion, it would contribute to a child being spoiled. Rather more mature users would benefit from this product, because they are more conscious of its function and, most importantly, the price they had to pay for it. Other stakeholders may include Apple, educators and digital course material publishers.

Criterion B . Describe, step by step, how the IT system works. 1. Surgically implanted nerves are connected to electrodes placed on the chest area. 2.The nerves prompt electrical signals from the brain to the electrodes. 3. The electrical signals are then interpreted by a micro-processor, into natural movements. More information on how bionic arms work: http://thetartan.org/2008/9/22/scitech/howthingswork

Outline how this IT system works: Essentially, this system consists of hardware (electrodes) that replace the nerves going to and from the brain. Electrodes are connected to the chest muscles which control 6 motors that move the prosthetic joints. When the mind sends a message through the nerves to move a muscle in the arm, the signal causes a muscle in the chest to contract, which activates a certain electrode to tell a motor to move a part of the bionic arm. A more detailed account of how mind-controlled bionics works is here: http://science.howstuffworks.com/bionic-arm.htm This story is a prime example of how IT is being used to radically develop medical research and treatments.

The main social and ethical issue in this article is People and Machines. This new bionic arm which is controlled by the mind is an important development, in this technology, now allowing people who have had to have limbs amputated to have new arms/legs that they can control as they would their original arms/legs. However, due to the fact that it is very new and expensive technology to develop, although it points to the future, at the moment almost no one that would need a bioninc arm would be able to afford it. This means that although it is an essential step forward, at the moment it will not be something that can help the majority of people who most need it. As well as this, the bionic arm, although it is controlled by the mind, it will never be as fluid and will never work as intuitively as your arm.

25 January 2012 Last updated at 12:23 ET O2 has apologised for a technical problem which caused users' phone numbers to be disclosed when using its mobile data. The company said it normally only passed numbers to "trusted partners". A problem during routine maintenance meant that from 10 January numbers could have been seen by other websites.

As mentioned above the the issue concerned about in this article is privacy as peoples information (mobile phone numbers) are displayed on websites without their consent. Obviously the fact of having others know personal information may leave people concerned, however they must be aware that their personal information is spread all over the internet. From pictures on facebook to a gmail/youtube accounts peoples names, adresses and surnames are most likely known by some companies. Google and Facebook holds personal information that belongs to each one of us. What companies like such do to profit from this is sell a list of names, adresses and emails to third party which will then have means of communication with us to advertise their products and this is responsible for some of the spam we receive. The solution for this specific scenario of mobile phones isn't very clear, although it has been fixed no way of how it could of been prevented was suggested. Perhaps a the server could be shut down while it was under maintenance and another one should've been running in the meanwhile. Clearly the issue here had nothing to do with the mobile phone users and there was nothing they could have done as they were unnaware of the situation. I personally believe that privacy does not exist on the internet. It someone wishes to have privacy then the safest way to go do so is to not use/be connected to the internet. http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/30/when-it-comes-to-cell-phone-privacy-youre-an-open-book/ Shows how mobile phones can cause privacy issues and how police officers now have gadgets that allows then to see everything that a person has done in their mobile phone, this clearly violates peoples privacy.

I would just like to mention that I posted this, not fiche galinha -.- diigo is trolling me.

The arrest of Megaupload's founders has led to other file storage sites taking action in an apparent attempt to protect themselves from legal action. The following is a link to a news story describing the disciplinary action taken against the founder of Megaupload: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-16711416

How online storage works Online storage in websites such as Megaupload, upload.to and Rapidshare work using cloud storage. This is similar to the storage used in Gmail, Youtube and Facebook Essentially this is how it works: 1. User accesses websites and selects file he/she wants to upload 2. File is uploaded to the cloud storage server, which is located in the house cloud storage systems called data centers. 3. Usually the files are then copied to other servers around the world in case one of them goes down or needs repairing, this is known as redundancy. Without redundancy cloud storage cannot guarantee that the user will be ble to access his files. Servers are also powered by multiple power supplies in case one of them fails. 4. When the user wants to access the files he uploaded he may do so through a web-based interface. For more information on how cloud storage systems work http://computer.howstuffworks.com/cloud-computing/cloud-storage1.htm

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120121/16551717500/jonathan-coulton-destroys-rationale-behind-megaupload-seizure-with-single-tweet-follows-up-with-epic-blog-post.shtml In the article above Jonathon Coultron makes a good point. Although there might be a lot of illegal activity on MegaUpload such as: sharing DVDs and CDs, there are also a large group of people that use MegaUpload as a tool to legally upload data that they wish to share with others or keep a backup for themselves. Furthermore, I think his tweet says it all in regards to the millions of dollars the music and film industry will gain from the death of MegaUpload.

Some of the points are: 3. information falsitication The intention to cause errors in juridical relations by introducing, modifying, deleting or suppressing data or by producing non-genuine documents can lead to a fine of 120 to 600 days, or 5 years of jail. 4. Damage relative to programs or data Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent to delete, alter and impossibilitate utilisation of programs or data, will be punished with up to 3 years in jail or a fine. 5. electronic sabotage Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent to obstruct, interrupt of gravely disrupt the functioning of an information system through introduction of, alteration of, damaging of, or suppression of programs and data will be punished with up to 5 years in jail or a 600-day fine. 6. Ilegitimate access Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent and tries to access an IT system will be punished with up to 1 year in jail or a 120-day fine. Punishments also true for users who produce, sell or distribute a set of executable instructions destined to cause the aforementioned unauthorised actions. 7.Ilegitimate interception Whoever does not have legal permission or the administrator's consent and tries to intercept the transmission of data  will be punished with 3 years of jail.

add those tags Benjon!