CST Week 5 Scrapbook

CST 373 Week 5 Scrapbook

HP quietly installs sytem-slowing spyware on its PCs

Link: https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/28/hp-quietly-installs-system-slowing-spyware-on-its-pcs/

PDF: https://drive.google.com/a/csumb.edu/file/d/1uJ3Z4WVa5zZ4t3vkYh1EwAg26y9Y_U-3/view?usp=sharing

Article Summary

The article explains how many consumers have been complaining that Hewlett Packard has installed software on their system without them knowing. The software in question is called HP Touchpoint Analytics. The article explains that the program appears to replace previous software called HP Touchpoint Manager. It seems that this may have gone unnoticed had it not been for the new software creating slowdown in customer's systems. HP responded to Engadget's article with the following statment.

HP Touchpoint Analytics is a service we have offered since 2014 as part of HP Support Assistant. It anonymously collects diagnostic information about hardware performance. No data is shared with HP unless access is expressly granted. Customers can opt-out or uninstall the service at any time.

HP Touchpoint Analytics was recently updated and there were no changes to privacy settings as part of this update. We take customer privacy very seriously and act in accordance with a strict policy, available here.

Why It was Chosen:

This article was chosen because I take privacy with regards to computer software seriously. The article claims that the software collects user's data without their permission. It is even more disturbing when a company distributes software without the user's knowledge.

Ethical Implications

The ethical implications are that software is potentially being distributed by a company without a user knowing that it is being put on their system and breach of privacy. Obviously it is illegal for a company to install software on a user's system without their consent. A disturbing way around this is that companies may put in their licensing agreement which may consist of numerous pages of legal jargon that allow them to do this. A company may have it's software default to automatic updates or bundle other software in a software suite where the user may not fully understand what they are getting. I do not like such practices as many users unknowingly just click through the defaults when installing software. Companies should find a way to make it very clear that a customer may be getting additional software. I feel that companies get away with this when they make their installation software in small print. 

Credibility of Source

Engadget has been around since 2004 as a source for technology news and reviews. The company operates on a global scale.

CST Week 4 Scrapbook

CST Week 4 Scrapbook

Link: https://thinkprogress.org/the-fcc-just-decided-to-repeal-net-neutrality-heres-why-thats-really-really-bad-64e376ea04d3/

PDF: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1RUETXXhgSMuufkM4t14fe0tPry_2H_G4

Article Summary:

This article discusses the new proposal for the FCC to repeal net neutrality regulations and the negative impacts it may have on the country. The current regulation prohibits internet service providers from slowing down or blocking websites to its users. Ajit Pai, the current FCC Chairman, claims that repealing the regulations will help rural America and lead to better, faster, and cheaper internet access. The author believes that Mr. Pai is wrong. It is argued that startup internet companies will have a harder time competing with big corporations such as Verizon and ATT as the repeal in regulations will favor the larger corporations. This could stifle innovation as much innovation comes from small startup companies, ie the beginnings of Google and Facebook. The free access of speech would also be hindered as the internet service providers could essentially filter what they deem acceptable for their customer's to view.

Why it was Chosen:

I chose this article as I feel am passionate with regards to this subject. I feel that limiting the internet is inherently bad. This could lead to a country where only those with enough money will be able to have their website accessible to the masses. I believe the thoughts of every individual should have an equal opportunity to reach those on the internet. 

Ethical Implications

The ethical implication is that should people be entitled to open access to the internet. I believe we should. The article references the situation in Portugal where similar legislation has taken place. In Portugal, people choose their level of access to the internet based on the fee they pay. Imagine a public library having to offer a lower access internet due to fees placed on them. Students and adults with no internet access would only be able to access minimal content in their research. Favoritism in access to knowledge would only be given to those who could afford it. This is wrong and could further create a division in the lower and upper class in the country.

Credibility of Source

ThinkProgress is an online news site founded in 2005 that reports from a Progressive point of view. Being from a certain point of view, it is important to note the the site would lean towards the left on most of it's analysis. 

CST Week 3 Scrapbook

CST Week 3 Scrapbook

Link: https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2016-12-07

PDF: https://drive.google.com/a/csumb.edu/file/d/147ORAMckQeAHNQMj2gyWZ-VKQxv8Zc79/view?usp=sharing

Briefing PDF: https://drive.google.com/a/csumb.edu/file/d/1GioiOL9k8wcWsWHSOgC3d247T28IH2hR/view?usp=sharing

Summary

The article this week comes from the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, or DARPA. I have also attached the official briefing associated with this article. DARPA is a government agency that has been known to providing leading technical advancements for the U.S. military. It was published 12/7/2016. DARPA has been responsible for stealth technology and other advancements to the U.S. military. This article outlines a new initiative for DARPA called OFFSET. OFFSET stands for Offensive Swarm-Enabled Tactics.  From the article,

"OFFensive Swarm-Enabled Tactics program seeks to empower dismounted troops with technology to control scores of unmanned air and ground vehicles at a time."

The article then goes on to say what the department is looking to achieve in the project. It would like to create an interface where users can monitor potentially 100s of unmanned vehicles in warfare acting autonomously and cohesively as a swarming unit. Essentially this would mean that a ground based soldier would act as a coach to this AI controlled swarm unit on a battlefield or urban warfare setting. The article then goes on to explain how the organization will utilize live testing every 6 months to demonstrate and challenge this new technology. The end of the article states that there will be an event where potential companies can submit their proposal to act as a contractor in developing this technology for DARPA.

Why it was Chosen

I chose this article because it has to do with the military using artificial intelligence to conduct warfare missions. I find Artificial Intelligence to be very fascinating and it is interesting to know that the U.S. government is openly publicising that they plan to use it for warfare implications in the future. I wonder if there have been any groups outspoken against the research in such technology. I know Elon Musk, CEO for Tesla, has openly warned of the dangers of artificial intelligence.

Ethical Implications

This new technology may take the ethical implications of drone warfare to a new level. There are those that argue that drones may be unethical as they make killing too easy and may lead to more civilian casualties. Without actual eyes on a target mistakes can be made. The idea of 100's of drones acting autonomously sounds like something you would see in a popular videogame known as Starcraft. Proponents for the U.S government would argue that this would make our country safer from our enemies and allow for an exponential edge over others. Others may argue that such a capability could be immensely dangerous. If the technology were to be somehow hacked or bugged, 100s of autonomous drones acting cohesively could do immense damage to an urban landscape. It does bring nightmares to think of such a scenario.

Credibility of Source

This source is 100% credible as it comes straight from darpa.mil. This is the official military website for DARPA. I am quite surprised that this was published openly on the internet. 

CST Week 2 Scrapbook

CST Week 2 Scrapbook

Link: http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/11/08/twitter-apologizes-for-bisexual-technical-glitch.html

Pdf: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1aFr-f1khdUcGz2Xv8_nlqMKNOl8j6eGQ

Article Summary

This article details how Twitter had barred the word "bisexual" from it's users tweets. This would be the equivalent of them barring the words "gay", "lesbian", or "straight". Twitter sent out an apology regarding this and notified the public that they would no longer bar this word. The company issues this statement:

“Searches for certain words related to sexuality did not populate complete results. We apologize for anyone negatively impacted by this bug,” said a message from Twitter’s Support account.  “It is not consistent with our values as a company.”

The article then goes on to explain how last week an disgruntled employee at Twitter managed to temporarily deactivate President Donald Trump's account.

Why it was Chosen

I chose this article because I feel that censorship in social media is very important. I do not believe that twitter in no way should bar a certain word. I feel it should be up to the user to put any sort of filter on the searches that they do on twitter. Also to bar the word "bisexual" is just demeaning to anyone who may be "bisexual". It is not the right of Twitter to say what form of sexual orientation is not valued enough to be a searchable word in their context.

Ethical Implications

The ethical implication here is that Twitter essentially was saying that "bisexual" is a bad word. This is wrong in that the word is the same as "straight", "gay", or "lesbian". It was right of Twitter to admit their fault in this and provide a fix as soon as possible. The other ethical implication is that of censorship in social media. I don't think that Twitter should censor any words from it's search database unless explicitly asked to do so. It should be up to the user to let Twitter know that they would like a filter put into their search engine just as google does in theirs. In viewing the responses, there are people who view the opposite. That being "bisexual" is immoral and Twitter is right to ban such a word. Again I feel that if a person does believe this then they should be able to set their own filter to not have to view this if they so wish but it should not be up to Twitter on if they say a word is immoral or inappropriate. 

It was interesting to see the article also mentioned that Donald Trump's Twitter account was deactivated by a disgruntled employee. To me this is very serious. I wonder as to the level of access that employees have to Trump's Twitter account. Very dangerous things could have resulted in this. We live in an age where Twitter has become a public forum. Imagine if a disgruntled employee could write Tweets on behalf of the President that could spark the next major war. Literally lives could be lost as a result. I personally feel that due to the magnitude of the office of Presidency on international affairs that the President should not be allowed to Tweet.

Credibility of Source

This article came from FoxNews.com which is a major news organization. I accept it's credibility.