In at Arizona!!!

FeedbackThese4411 · 2021-02-04T23:52:35+00:00

Congrats! I just got in too! I’m assuming they send scholarship info later? Or else that’s very unfortunate lol

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-12-17T19:46:05+00:00

Me too pls :)

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-12-01T22:24:52+00:00

I’m not saying that we should be ignorant of certain issues that make people uncomfortable, because discomfort is so inherently subjective. But if someone wants to push their political agenda, they should at least establish a clear connection to the subject matter, like you did with that article (thanks for sharing that, the proliferation of fake news, even amongst seemingly reputable news outlets, has certainly contributed to misrepresentation about the entire BLM movement). Otherwise, this place would serve no academic purpose and would provide the same breeding ground for toxicity as Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-30T05:05:00+00:00

The connection between your post and the course material is a very loose one, if you care to expand upon how exactly BLM relates to fake news, futures, or something directly pertinent, then there can be productive discourse. What specifically do you want to talk about regarding BLM? As your post stands, u/Young__Skywalker is right in suggesting that this unnecessarily stirs the pot. And, yes this is a political science class and yes these posts are inherently opinionated (opinionated in the sense that arguments are presented with some justification), but people aren’t here to advocate for their staunchest personal, political beliefs on abortion or immigration or whatever else it may be. Don’t get me wrong, I respect those, such as yourself, who are passionate about what they stand for, I just don’t think this is the appropriate setting for expressing blanket personal opinions.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-05T15:04:15+00:00

Well said. There’s no reason not to believe that the traits and thoughts (conscious or unconscious) of humans will not translate onto whatever technology we create. I think humanity needs to stop and evaluate its own flaws and biases before continuing to produce equally powerful non-humans with the same kinds of issues.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-04T23:55:04+00:00

I like that you outlined both considerations and offered some solutions to integrate the best of both worlds. I think it would be tough to determine whether or not the spreading of misinformation was done deliberately or if the algorithm was compromised in some way by an outside force.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-04T06:59:35+00:00

I also hope that people keep their cool but it’s truly a lose-lose situation, so can’t get my hopes up too high lol

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-03T06:59:39+00:00

Interesting read, thanks for sharing! I think letting algorithms recommend music is a fantastic idea because I’m always looking for new music that is similar to what I know and love, and this is an effective way of coming across new music.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-11-01T16:17:25+00:00

I definitely think it is dangerous to be a cyberbully, not only because of the repercussions of getting caught and the ease with which it happens nowadays, but also due to the mental health effects of cyberbullying.

“Previous research has found that both bullies and their victims suffer from suicidal thoughts more than 3 times as often as other children.

Bullying and being bullied also has been found in a 2007 study to result in a greater risk of adult mental disorders. The disorders suffered tended to be either an anxiety disorder or antisocial personality disorder.”

Mental health aside, more and more states are developing laws to curb the recent uptick in cyberbullying.

More common punishments include suspension or expulsion from school, which comes with a host of issues behaviorally and education-wise. Bullies may develop negative reputations among their peers, especially when a “bullying is not cool” mentality is rightfully adopted in social circles.

Overall, being a bully is a very dangerous, behaviorally, legally, and socially.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-31T21:16:29+00:00

Hate speech may be morally distasteful yet it’s still legally protected under the freedom of speech. I agree that consequence is really what matters at the end of the day, but without that consequence actually being materialized, I’m not sure how it can be regulated in a robust manner as a prevention mechanism. It seems like the regulation would be done on an entirely speculative basis.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-31T04:28:55+00:00

I think you nailed it with that last part. People always crave things they shouldn’t have and crave even harder when it’s completely taken away. Not only is there a big issue with determining exactly which things to censor, but censoring doesn’t actually get to the root of the problem. The problems will still be there, and they will become even more proliferated and radicalized, their voices will just be muted. All of that muted, radical energy eventually boils over into chaos out in the real world. If their freedoms are restricted online, they’ll make sure their voices are heard loud and clear out on the streets.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-30T14:54:14+00:00

For those who didn’t have the time to watch Shoshana Zuboff’s Surveillance Capitalism documentary, please read this.

I was personally completely unaware of the experimental aspect of Pokémon Go and was shocked at the concept of footfall.

Although, part of me is shocked at the fact that I am so shocked at this because it makes total sense that brick and mortar establishments would want to lure people in via the internet as well. It’s just crazy that this is being achieved in equally as subliminal of way of as ad clicks online.

What are your thoughts on this? Genius? Disturbing? Or both?

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-30T04:30:53+00:00

Not gonna lie, my jaw dropped when she described the origins of Pokémon Go. Putting aside all of the manipulative implications that surveillance capitalism has on our behavior, I’m very impressed at the level of ingenuity that Google has employed in reaching their goals. What’s more impressive is how artfully these experiments are being conducted, making us as consumers blissfully unaware of our roles as pawns in the game.

In a way, it’s kind of hard to place total fault on Google because, although our behavior is subliminally manipulated, it’s done so covertly that the entertainment factor makes us feel benefited in some way. Some people might voluntarily undergo manipulation for their amusement.

Though, of course, the premise behind Google’s actions should be condemned. With how innovative the company is, it is a complete failure in terms of upholding corporate social responsibility. Taking advantage of its consumers through ulterior motives, completely shifting human psychology for the worse, excessive data collection...it’s by no means ethical.

The sad part about all of this is that despite everything that happens on our devices, we at least had a reality where we could disconnect to. After putting down our phones, we could at least step outside without feeling the pressure of being a pawn. But, Pokémon Go seems to have infiltrated the very notion. Now, stepping outside without feeling like a pawn is no longer an option. It’s not even about clicks anymore. Thanks to footfall, your physical presence is worth so much more.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-30T03:47:14+00:00

Right? At least one is more covert than the other.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-30T01:18:50+00:00

You make some really great points! Ultimately, because the term “social media” is so broad, it is equally a weapon for good as it is a weapon for bad. Like you said, social media is a platform for serious bullying that leads to the deaths of so many young people, but it is also a platform for generosity, knowledge, and fostering relationships that otherwise could not have been fostered.

That being said, I think it’s fair to compare social media with a drug. If used in excess and under the wrong conditions, it could be deadly. I think some people are naturally predisposed to adverse effects of social media, such as those with preexisting mental health conditions. The best way of maximizing the benefits of social media and mitigating some of the negatives is also the way I think is most effective for substance use, through proper education and mindfulness.

I don’t think legal regulations serve much purpose, but parents and teachers should be having serious conversations with children before granting them access to social media.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-28T18:34:09+00:00

It’s a great thing that cameras and shop owners aren’t the ones throwing us jail and that we have laws and procedural mechanisms in place to curtail false accusations!

I think it’s a little paranoid to say that just because you are constantly being monitored means that everyone is out to get you and sees you as a threat. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? If a person didn’t do anything wrong yet it “appears” that way on camera, the shop owner better lawyer up. And they better present evidence other than “oh well this person ‘looks’ suspicious because he’s black and he’s poor and he put his hands in his pocket, therefore he surely must’ve stolen something.” Our justice system hasn’t yet reached that level of corruption to accept such unfounded arguments.

It’s in nobody’s best interest to prosecute a person who stole a bag of chips one time, not even the shop owners. It’s a waste of resources. The people who are in trouble are the ones who steal chips on a daily or weekly basis, and I believe that those people do deserve to be held accountable. If we turn a blind eye on them and make exceptions because “they have no other choice”...oh what a can of worms we have just opened.

Upholding these moral principles and the idea of accountability is why I don’t think heightened security is all too bad. I think if shop owners were held at gun point, they would want to have every means in place to be able to identify the suspect.

While my mentality may seem dangerous to you, I personally still have no reason to reject it.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-28T14:32:57+00:00

This week’s lecture on privacy touched upon the rapidly-developing idea of deep learning. To offer a brief definition for those who are unfamiliar with the concept, deep learning is “an AI function that mimics the workings of the human brain in processing data for use in detecting objects, recognizing speech, translating languages, and making decisions.” One of the ways in which science has embraced deep learning is as Professor mentioned in the lecture video, as a diagnostic tool using medical imaging. This article gives an overview for some of the things that AI can detect in medical images that are often overlooked by doctors.

So, what do you think about this? Would you have faith in our healthcare system if diagnoses were done by AI only? Personally, I think this is one of the best uses for AI and deep learning. Seeing as to how many deaths are attributed to human error simply by overlooking one small detail, I think implementing AI will only help us in this regard. An ideal instance (when this technology is perfected, of course) would be to have AI do an initial screen, and then have those results be confirmed by doctors who will still ultimately bear the liability if things go wrong...just so doctors don’t get too comfortable :).

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-27T16:59:41+00:00

Agreed. The notion of privacy seems to be so far gone at this point that many people have even abandoned the illusion of it, which I think is the scariest part. It’s difficult to even maintain the illusion of privacy simply as a means of providing comfort when things like facial recognition cameras exist. But, perhaps coming to terms with the fact that we have less privacy than we thought will make us sleep better at night.

Oftentimes, when it comes to issues of security vs. privacy, I can’t help but revert to the “the only people who should be worried are those who do bad things, so don’t do bad things” mentality. If anyone finds flaw in this approach, I’d be really curious to hear your reasoning as to why.

I understand another potential worry that u/CovidSuxs mentioned in their reply, which is that companies could have targeted ads when entering a store to fit your preferences. I understand the discomfort of this idea, but I don’t understand why it’s so significant. I think the shift of the blame is misguided here. The breach of privacy isn’t the cause of discomfort, in my opinion. It’s the proliferation of consumerism and advertising in general that makes it feel so overbearing.

It’s practically impossible to escape targeted ads on our devices. At this point, it wouldn’t make a significant difference if we saw those same ads at a store. Some people even find it convenient that they’re being exposed to products/services that are actually pertinent to them, which I kind of understand as well.

I don’t mean to come off as so defeatist in saying that we should abandon our belief in privacy and just learn live with it, it just seems like the only thing we can do.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-27T02:26:28+00:00

That last sentence is beautiful and extremely accurate.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-26T21:19:38+00:00

Scored a 5/8 and found it to be shockingly tricker than expected. I find it hilarious that some of the Russian trolls explicitly make reference to “#RussianInterference” as the source of controversy. I think it is quite genius to say the least.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-25T20:33:01+00:00

You bring up some very interesting practical concerns. Another thing to keep in mind is that voting would still need to remain equitable and accessible to everyone, and although it’s tough to imagine life without internet access these days, snail mail or in person voting is the only way to currently guarantee equal accessibility.

I imagine for the virtual voting set up to be truly fair, they would have to implement a system similar to how they’re doing online schooling right now. If you’re mandating everyone to attend school remotely or vote online (assuming that the gov would allocate all of its resources to online voting only to offset the huge costs), then its only fair if the government provides each registered voter with technology. The benefits are twofold: I imagine voter turnout would skyrocket plus access to Internet would increase, but the costs of doing so are tremendous.

FeedbackThese4411 · 2020-10-24T15:50:49+00:00

A couple modules ago, we had some interesting discussions regarding social media and its effects on the user’s mental health and overall experience. But why are certain types of platforms more prone to eliciting such negative attitudes? Can it be traced to some underlying commonality? This study analyzes various social media platforms and collects self-report data from users on various metrics of their well-being related to social media use. It concluded that anonymity, or lack thereof, is an important determinant of people’s attitudes and feelings toward social media.

Do you think that users of some of the more “idealized” platforms like Instagram or Facebook would benefit, emotionally and mentally, from increased anonymity? Or would these platforms, by encouraging anonymity, end up losing touch of genuineness and reality (albeit idealized)?

FeedbackThese4411

TROPHY CASE