The Cooks Source Scandal

Special Thanks for this video goes to Sarah Jacobson Purewal. I love your writing style. It is informative yet a bit sassy. It made for a great project in Web Technologies.

Cybersecurity Expert On China Net Hijacking

"A new security report says China hijacked 15 percent of global Internet traffic this past April — for 18 minutes. Melissa Block talks with Dmitri Alperovitch, a cybersecurity expert with McAfee Inc., about the implications of such a high profile router hijacking case. The report, released this week by the U.S.-China and Security Review Commission, claims China hijacked U.S. government and military sites, as well as commercial web sites. China denies the claims."

For the whole story, visit http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131423973

This story ensures me that the Internet is not nearly as secure as it should be. The Internet does what it is told to do no matter who gives the commands. China may not have intentially routed traffic through its servers, but it did. It could have been innocent, but it could have been done with malicious intent to impede progress of commercial organizations such as Microsoft and IBM or maybe even the government. This reminds me a question posed in Web Technologies on multiple occasions, "Should the government be allowed to intervene is internet usage?" Usually, I would say no. We have freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. Why shouldn't we have freedom of internet usage? We shouldn't because at times our internet usage may compromise our safety. The civil agreement between the government and the people is that we follo their laws and they protect our life, liberty, and property. For all we know, during those eighteen minutes, our life, liberty, and property were all stake. It is the government's job to protect us. It is the government's job to do something about it. For safety purposes, the internet should have been shut down, put to a complete halt for those eighteen minuted. The Simultania Project has revealed to us that a lot of things can happen in one minute. Think about what could happen in eighteen of them.

The Simultania Project: One World Wide Minute of Life

This podcast featured the results of the Simultania Project, an attempt to capture one minute played back from as many prespectives as possible. The audio version was played in real time. It is going to take the creator of the project months to edit so the video version will not be ready until April.

For the whole story, visit http://www.npr.org/blogs/pictureshow/2010/11/18/131424416/simultania

I love the concept of the project. There are so many things going on in one minute. There is constant action, constant motion, all over the world. To have one minute recorded from different places is cool. The time, dedication and commitment it takes to edit a project such as the Simultania Project is absurd. In Web Technologies, we created our own podcast and are working on videocasts. The collecting data and the recording are compartively easy when you begin to think about editing. I struggled through about one hour of editing daily over a span of about three days. I would be in tears if I had to edit for months.To complete the editing, one must have a passion for their project. I admire her for doing this. The short time that the public will enjoy viewing the video will come from months of hard work. Its weird in a sense to think of how everything evolves from a simple idea. Technology evolves from a simple idea.

NPR: 11-17-2010: Facebook Takes On E-mail, Messaging

Facebook has its own e-mail service. It is made to help Facebook users help people connect more easily with their friends. You can have one full history of all your communication to one friend. Everything is together therefore easier to manage. Facebook is improving how people communicate on-line (or at leat trying to). By doing so, Facebook is putting itself in direct competition with Google.

For the whole story http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131338144

How does Facebook make money outside of the adds? How does Google make money? What is the significance of the competition, if any? Unfortanetly, the podcast didn't give that information, but it aroused my curiosity.

As an avid Facebook user, I appreciate the new feature. I can attest to the all-over-the-place-edness of Facebook's communication system. When the IM is down, people send regular messages. If that's down, they'll write on my wall and the cycle will begin all over again. Essentially, I have many disconnected conversations on conversation. The new feature would elliviate that problem for the most part. I believe creating it was a good idea.

Their are positives and negatives to everything. Would the new feature be some kind of advantage to hackers? Who would the history be accessible to? How does Facebook plan on explaining everything to the users (and doing it in Terms & Agreements or making a long drawn-out statement is not adequate because the majority of Facebook Users wouldn't read them)? Will Facebook try to do anything to prevent phising from occuring on its email database? I'm not trying to sound paranoid, by Web Technologies has caused me to be alert and ask questions about these things. We've learned about extreme hacking cases where hackers steal millions of dollars out of a bank without going anywhere near the bank physically and viruses that can spread through e-mail attachments. If Facebook wants to compete with Google, it has to be able to answer these questions.

NPR: 11-10-2010:It's Time: The Wristwatch Makes A Comeback

All Things Considered
All Tech Considered

The century's old time telling tool is making a comeback. We now invent time into every machine. There is a clock on the microwave, the stove, my cellular device, and some people strap them to their wrist. The old wristwatch has been given a modern edge with the addition of solar power batteries and goas capabilities. Now, it can compete with things such as my cellular device that may make them seem irrelevant.

Technology is constantly evolving. In Web Technologies, we have talked about the evolution of the World Wide Web, the laptop and the cell phone. Things are constantly changing in this ever-changing society. We want to figure out how to make things more affordable, more comfortable, more portable and more conducive to our everyday lives. The wristwatch is not excluded. I wouldn't buy a wristwatch. I prefer telling time on a digital clock on my cell phone. If my battery goes dead, then the wrist watch may be helpful or maybe I could just ask someone else who has a cell phone. I've asked people with fancy wristwatches on the time and they pull out their cell phone. More than anything now, I believe they are worn for fashion. Either way, wristwatch companies aren't yet hurting from the production of new technologies. I have a feeling that soon enough, they will. Sorry Rolex.

NPR: 11-10-2010: Digital Life: The Queen of England is on Facebook

"You can like her, but you can't be her friend. She would be the Queen of England. This morning, the British monarchy officially joined Facebook. Fans won't be able to personally friend-request the queen or poke her. But you can follow her daily engagements, see pictures of her and maybe her corgis - the usual stuff people like to post. Except, of course, other people's photos don't feature the crown jewels."

For the whole story, visit http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131157447

Even in the digital world, the Queen has limited access. I wonder why she chose to join Facebook. Was it her decision? Was she bored? Will she join Twitter, Myspace or get an Oovoo account next? Is the Queen trying to say that she wants to be like "a normal person"? I don't know what message she's trying to send or if she's trying to send a message at all, but I think it's kind of cool. I mean, just this week, my great-grandmother got a Facebook account as well. Although it was a bit strange, I like it. Facebook is a place where people can just be people. I've learned things about people I've known for the majority of my life on Facebook that I don't think I would have discovered in a face-to-face encounter. Maybe I'll learn something new about the Queen! In Web Technologies, we talk a lot about internet users and digital learners, but I never thought the Queen of England would be included in either of those categories. I could teach her a few things about internet safety and the start of the World Wide Web.

NPR: 11-03-2010: Wikipedia Teams Up With Academia

As of now, college students says wikipedia is unreliable because anyone can write articles and the information is always changing. Wikipedia is a starting off point. The purpose of the project where public policy students put their information from research on Wikipedia  and find errors in existing articles is not to make Wikipedia a sitable source. The project is about making complex information accessible to ordinary people. The effort is not expected to give the site more credability.

For the whole story visit http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131018359

Many times, I have used Wikipedia as a starting point to get a general overview of the information that I will research but I have never considered using Wikipedia as a reliable source. Wikipedia is a huge wiki. In my Web Technologies class, we used a wiki to do a collaborative project on copyright law. We could change each other's work and edit as we pleased. We had the leisure of setting up who did what. Each person did independent research as needed and our plan was executed smoothly. If we had more people let's say the world editing the Wiki, people who didn't do proper research on the topic, it would have been disasterous. Some people are wrong. Who knows why they chose to make inaccurate statements on wiki-articles, but they do. For that reason, Wikipedia is not a sitable source.

The project that students of public policy from Georgetown and eight other universities are doing is great practice for them to perfect making their research easier to interpret for the general public. From experience in Web Technologies, I know how nice it is to be able to relate what you've been studying back to everyday life. It may seem like a waste of time when internet users begin to make inaccurate edits just moments after they finish their article, but it's not. People are going to refute their findings. They have to be confident in their work and persistent in presenting their information. Personally, I would comment on the edits every now and then, but I wouldn't continuously update the article. I would probably get frustrated after a while. Wikipedia teaming up with Academia is a good deal for the students. Wikipedia doesn't get affected much by the process.

Can Social Media Break Up a Marriage?

Social media cannot break up a marriage, only people can. According to the podcast, "People communicating online often fall for each other in about a week, two or three times as fast on average as those courting face to face." Why? The constant attention is addictive. Your cellular device can be in your hand all day while your spouse has to go to work and do other things. Maybe, just maybe people let go of their boundaries when they communicate with other people through social media. Instead of waiting and withholding information about themselves, they allow the person into their lives a lot sooner than they should. Another reason courting through social media may happen a lot faster than courting face to face is because when people connect through social media, they are already done with the relationship they had with their spouse. They could be looking for an outlet like social media. Mike Green's ex-wife knew that having an affair was wrong. Social media didn't force her to have the affair; it merely provided the opportunity for the affair to happen and flourish. Social media provided a way for her to get constant attention from another man but the man was the source of the constant attention and she welcomed it. She got too comfortable. In my Web Tech class we talk about being safe digital learners, protecting yourself on the Internet and the World Wide Web. My instructor stressed that we should not allow our personal information (i.e., home address, phone numbers, etc.) to be on the Internet.  I never thought that I would have to learn how to protect my relationships. The Internet provides us many new opportunities, some good and in this case some bad ones. We have to be very selective with the opportunities we choose to take advantage of because some can change our life in a very negative way. When new web technologies are introduced to a society, it is imperative that the individuals in that society yield to their morals and values instead of allowing the wow-factor of the technology blind their judgment. Social media did not break up that marriage. Social media cannot break up any marriage, only people can.


Tell Jay.Tee.Heart what  you think. Click the link below then comment here on Cranium Cram. 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130897679

Welcome to Cranium Cram!

Cranium Cram is just that, a cram session on sports, religion, entertainment, politics and technology. If you missed it somewhere else, you can definitely find it here. I not only give facts, but my personal opinion on several different parts of today's culture. I may be young, but this day and time, what it think counts! :) Seriously, Cranium Cram is just my way of letting it all out. My comments may be thought-provoking, they may be emotion-triggering. Please, take nothing personally and feel free to give your opinion because I surely give mine.