Kim's Study Notes Notes from my studies.

NET303 M1 – A Right To Privacy?

READINGS

Lessig, L. (1998). The Architecture of Privacy.
Available: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/works/lessig/architecture_priv.pdf.

"[...] we are entering an age when privacy in any sense of that term will be fundamentally altered: An age when the extent of the monitored, and the reach of searchable, is far greater than any we have known. We can choose to let this change occur. Or we can choose to do something in response".

Lawrence Lessig argues that not only is monitoring of the individual becoming cheaper and more widespread, but that governments are increasingly taking advantage of surviellance technology and data collection to monitor the actions of their citizens.
Introna, L. D. (1997). Privacy and the computer: why we need privacy in the information society. Metaphilosophy, 28(3), 259-275.
Available from the Curtin Library Database

"It is for the ultimate good of society as a whole that privacy is preserved, even at the expense of legitimate social control. Without some preserved private spaces, society would lose its most valuable asset: the true individual."

Although we instinctively feel that we have a right to privacy, it is harder to point to why we feel that should be the case. In this paper, the author draws on legal and philosophical arguments to explain why privacy is "the essential context and foundation of human autonomy in social relationships".
Lyon, D. (2002) “Everyday Surveillance: Personal Data and Social Classification,” Information, Communication, and Society, 5(1).
Available: http://pacific.commerce.ubc.ca/kbe/lyon_surveillance.pdf

"Conspiratorial and paranoid responses are probably counter-productive, not least because negative aspects of surveillance often arise as unintended consequences or by-products of other acceptable or unquestionable processes of risk management or marketing."

David Lyon argues here that popular critical reactions to the idea of pervasive surveillance are unfounded, and that surveillance is a result of increased privacy in our society. Indeed, Lyon claims, the networked society is, by definition, one of surveillance.

Muhl, C. (2003). Workplace e-mail and Internet use: employees and employers beware. Monthly Labor Review, February.
Available: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2003/02/art3full.pdf

"A substantial percentage of employees appears to believe that employers should not have the right to monitor workplace e-mail and Internet use. The law, however, has answered differently to this point."

This article examines some of the myths surrounding workplace use of the Internet and the rights of employers and employees. Interestingly, it highlights from the employer's perspective the potential liability of an employee using the Internet innapropriately.

Zittrain, J. Meeting the Risks of Generativity: Privacy 2.0.
Available: http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/20.

"[t]he Net enables individuals in many cases to compromise privacy more thoroughly than the government and commercial institutions traditionally targeted for scrutiny and regulation. The standard approaches that have been developed to analyze and limit institutional actors do not work well for this new breed of problem, which goes far beyond the compromise of sensitive information."

In this chapter from his book, Zittrain argues that the ubiquitous surviellance and distribution opportunities offered by Web 2.0 platforms are ushering in an era where everyone will need to police their own behaviour for fear of being exposed to the world.

Armstrong, H., & Forde, P. (2003). Internet anonymity practices in computer crime. Information Management & Computer Security, 11(5).
Available from the Curtin Library Database

"Both paedophiles and hackers have established organised communities via the Internet to support communications and dissemination of information, tools and techniques via Web sites, e-mail, chat rooms, FTP sites, Usenet newsgroups, encryption tools, remailers and anonymous server facilities".

Of course there are some people who seek anonymity and privacy due to behaviours and activities that are considered unnaceptable. The authors of this article propose a direct link between Internet crime and anonymity.

• Lessig argues that personal privacy is qualitatively different in online interactions.  Do you agree?  How is privacy different?  (What does is mean to be ‘searchable’?)

Yes.

• Is, as Lyon argues, the networked society necessarily a highly surveyed and monitored society?

Yes.

• How conscious are you of your privacy online?  What is and isn’t an acceptable level of privacy for you in your everyday internet use?

I like to separate my personal and professional personas. I don't like my personal life to be accessible over the internet.

NET303 M1 – Privacy and “Terms of Use”

READINGS

Barbaro, M., & Zeller, T. (2006, August 9th). A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749. New York Times.
Available: http://w2.eff.org/Privacy/AOL/exhibit_d.pdf

"[...]the unintended consequences of all that data being compiled, stored and cross-linked are what Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a privacy rights group in Washington, called “a ticking privacy time bomb.”

A short article that highlights some of the issues raised by companies storing data. AOL user Thelma Arnold was tracked to her home after the company accidentally revealed her "anonymous" search queries. This article raises serious questions about perceived anonymity on the Web and the ethics of retaining personal data.

Goettke, R., & Christiana, J. (2007). Privacy and Online Social Networking Websites. Computer Science 199r: Special Topics in Computer Science Computation and Society: Privacy and Technology.
Available: http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/cs199r/fp/RichJoe.pdf

"As millions of new users sign up for Facebook, Myspace, and a multitude of other social networking websites this year and in the future, the amount of personally identifiable information will only increase drastically. The largest challenge both now and in the future in terms of users protecting themselves and their information will be to find out and understand how to effectively access and change the privacy settings offered by these popular social networking websites."

Privacy on social networking websites is becoming an increasingly contentious issue. In this paper, the authors analyse four such websites in an attempt to determine to what degree they protect users' privacy.
(2008). Privacy and the Internet: Travelling in Cyberspace Safely.
Available: http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs18-cyb.htm

"When traveling in cyberspace, you provide information to others at almost every step of the way. Often this information is like a puzzle that needs to be connected before your picture is revealed. Information you provide to one person or company may not make sense unless it is combined with information you provide to another person or company."

An expansive and informative guide to managing your own privacy and safety on the Internet.

• How much data about you, your searches, or other information should companies be able to collect?  Is storing such data in an anonymised form enough to protect your privacy (as discussed by Barabaro and Zeller)?

companies can collect whatever they want. It is scary but the law allows them to do it.

• Following Goettke & Christiana, how much privacy control do users have on social networking sites?  (And how aware of these controls are users?)

Most users aren't that aware.

• How closely did you read the last TOS (Terms of Service) or EULA (End User License Agreement) you agreed to?  How closely do you think most people read these policies?

I skim the details but rarely read in great deal. I think I read more than the average person.

NET303 M1 – Moral Censorship vs. Freedom of Speech

Readings:

Marwick, A. (2008). To Catch a Predator? The MySpace Moral Panic. First Monday, 13(6).
Available: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2152/1966

"Technopanics have the following characteristics. First, they focus on new media forms, which currently take the form of computer–mediated technologies. Second, technopanics generally pathologize young people’s use of this media, like hacking, file–sharing, or playing violent video games. Third, this cultural anxiety manifests itself in an attempt to modify or regulate young people’s behavior, either by controlling young people or the creators or producers of media products."

In this article, Alice Marwick examines the way in which a climate of fear is encouraged my media coverage of new technolgies, which in turn leads to publically supported censorship.

Bambauer, D. (2008). Filtering in Oz: Australia's Foray into Internet Censorship. Brooklyn Law School, Legal Studies Paper, No. 125.
Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1319466

"Australia’s information regulation begins from an unusual point: the country’s constitution contains no express guarantee of freedom of speech or expression.. Information restrictions, or protections, thus derive primarily from the democratic political process rather than being constrained by ex ante structural rules. This gives Australia’s government greater leeway to censor Internet materials than would be possible in countries such as the United States, with its First Amendment, or Canada."

As you will doubtless be aware, the current Australian government plans to implement an Internet censorship program. This paper from the Brooklyn Law School, provides an outsider's perspective on what the author terms "a fascinating natural experiment in Internet censorship by Western democracies."

Depken, C. (2006). Who Supports Internet Censorship? First Monday, 11(9).
Available: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1390/1308

"It is found that those with kids, who are married, who are older, who use the internet for religious content, who work in the public sector, and who think pornography or privacy are the predominant issue concerning the Internet tend to favor Internet censorship."

While it is perhaps easy to understand the reasons that a government feels they need to limit access to the Internet, we should consider the many citizens who support the notion. Although the details of the surveying techniques can safely be skipped, the conclusion of this article provides an interesting insight into why people favour censorship. In doing so, it can be contrasted with last week's optional reading about Chinese support for Internet regulation.

Myers, K. (2006). Wikimmunity: Fitting the Communications Decency Act to Wikipedia. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 163.
Available: http://ssrn.com/abstract=916529

"There is a reason why no one has sued Wikipedia yet: it is amazingly responsive to claims of injury. Wikipedia’s institutional flexibility and the lack of dogmatic adherence to “free speech” might be just enough to keep it on the right side of the cutting edge."

Although a bit heavy on legal jargon, this fascinating paper examines the ways in which the founders of Wikipedia are able to defend themselves when articles contain potentially defamatory content.

Questions:

• How are broader social concerns and moral panics linked with the popularity of internet filtering?

Child pornography is used as excuse for government to filter. Publicity generates panic and is used as a tool to force political agendas.

• Is there material which definitely should be censored online?

National security documents I guess.

• Should freedom of speech be enshrined online, or are there acceptable limits?

I believe in freedom of speech, but also understand the arguments for censorship to avoid defamation, national security, etc.

• What are the moral, social and ethical implications of the Australian Government’s recent plans to filter the internet?

They are taking the freedom of choice away from Australians.

NET303 M1 – Who wants control?

Readings:

• http://www.juliandibbell.com/articles/a-rape-in-cyberspace/
• http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/20/opinion/20zittrain.html?_r=3&tntemail1=y&emc=tnt&pagewanted=all

Does Dibbell’s (quite old) story of LamdaMOO suggest that regulations and control are inevitable in all online interactions?

No. It suggests that they are inevitable in MUD and online communities.
How are the concerns raised by Dibbell’s story reflected in more contemporary online gaming and social networking platforms?

Moderators? Facebook/Myspace use panic buttons for minors. Not sure about online gaming as I don't have a lot of experience with it.

Does the shift to cloud computing inevitably mean a loss of personal control and privacy, as Zittrain suggests?  (In light of this reading, how powerful is Google today?)

If you use a free service you're bound to their terms and conditions. If you use a paid service you're subject to their terms and conditions.... Google has enormous power, it could be argued that if Google ceased to exist it would irrevocably change the internet and billions of dollars of SEO/SEA businesses.

NET303 – Introduction

How relevant is Barlow’s declaration to your experience online?
http://homes.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html <- link doesn't load for me today.

“I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.”

My personal view is that it is high unlikely that civilized society can exist without some form of moderation. Whether that moderation should be from traditional power sources (government, law enforcement) I don't really know, because I haven't done enough research to understand all the issues both for and against.

The internet is not owned by a single country, so it's regulation becomes complex when laws from different countries contradict one another.

Following Johnson & Post, what are the boundaries of the internet, and following from there, what are the appropriate legal framework(s) within those boundaries?

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is02/readings/johnson-post.html

Working for a domain registration & web-hosting company, we often receive take-down notices for domain names registered with us (for things like copyright infringement). We have no authority to take a domain down at DNS level, but if the site is hosted with us we have to make a decision on whether to take the site down or keep it up. It can be a grey area, and while our T&C are written in a way that allows us to take down a site if we want to, we generally require a court-order before acting. We have to balance the needs of our customer and the law against the complainant, without leaving ourselves open to liability - which can be difficult because I feel that there are a lot of loopholes and undefined boundaries from which we have to work within.

Are Zittrain’s concerns warranted?  Is the level of control over the internet increasing today?
I think the concerns are warranted. While we are heading towards more control now, if it goes too far the market should dictate when they have had enough control and push for more balance and freedom (ie - backlash over internet filter). It's not really possible to tell whether the back-lash will come too late.

NET205 – Online Collaboration

iemens, L. (2009). 'It's a team if you use "reply all" ': An exploration of research teams in digital humanities environments. Lit Linguist Computing, fqp009. doi: 10.1093/llc/fqp009. Available: http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/long/fqp009v1 (full text link from this page).
This article reports research on Digital Humanities teams and comes up with some exemplary practices. Rather than read the entire article, you might find the Results section onwards more relevant and useful.

Walling, S. (2009) The Four Essential Apps for Distributed Teams. ReadWriteEnterprise. July 13. Available: http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2009/07/four-essential-apps-for-distributed-teams.php
We're not sure if even these four ARE essential, however, this article is probably useful to your team when deciding on how you're going to operate and what tools you're using. Certainly, both asynchronous and synchronous methods of communicating, some form of document sharing/collaboration, and tasks management (although this could be as simple as an excel table in a document collaboration site like Google Docs) will be useful. There's plenty of advice on the Internet, so it probably pays to be quite clear on what you actually do need and whether there's sufficient pay-off in terms of time invested in getting access, learning, and using the application against time, and headaches, saved.

Activities
1. What do you think of online collaboration in general, that is, what are the potential benefits, what are the possible pitfalls? How would your team best exploit the possibilities while avoiding problems from escalating?
2. What are the most useful tips for online collaboration that you feel are most relevant for your team? Discuss with your team.
3. What technologies and applications do you think would be useful? What potential problems do you see in taking up some of these? Discuss these with your team.

NET205 – Internet Business Basics

Flew, T. (2008). Introduction to New Media. In New Media: An Introduction (3rd ed., pp.1-37). New York: Oxford. In e-Reserve.

• I purchased the original edition of this textbook in 2003 when studying at UC. Weird.
• Global knowledge economy

Rappa, M. (2009). Managing the Digital Enterprise: Business Models.

• A business model is a way a company can generate revenue.
• E-Commerce is changing the traditional landscape.
• Brokerage: brings together buyers and sellers in single platform/marketplace.
• Advertising Model: high traffic volume websites attractive to advertisers.
• Infomediary Model: data warehousing and consultative services
• Merchant Model: Selling goods and services online
• Manufacturer (direct) Model: Cuts out middleman/distributor wholesale->public
• Affiliate Model: Sell someone's else's product/service for kickback
• Community Model: time/emotional connection to customers, ie - volunteer time, social networking
• Subscription Model: pay for time to access service/content/etc
• Utility Model: Metered usage/pay as you go

How has the Internet drawn upon and reshaped previous ways of creating revenue for a business?

Has opened global economy and remove geographical boundaries.

Anderson, C. (2009). The Long Tail. Wired, 12(10). October.

• This article by Chris Anderson celebrates the profitability of offering 'non-hits' (the long tail).
• Anderson's claims have come under fire (see Further Reading) but there is no doubt that his ideas have been highly influential in the world of e-commerce and beyond.

Anderson, C. (2007). The Beginner's Guide to Critiquing the Long Tail. The Long Tail: Chris Anderson's Blog. January 30.

• Chris Anderson's rebuttal of some of his critics includes comments by others, useful as a starting point to examine his position.

Activities

1. Choose a favourite site or web application of yours and try to identify, through searching articles and web sites, its business model.

answer.

2. To what extent do you think that 'hits' matter or don't matter in economic terms?

They matter, are like walk in traffic to a retail store. The bigger the traffic hits, the more attention.

3. What is the 'innovator's dilemma'? Identify a disruptive technology of today and discuss who are the 'first movers,' 'second movers' (if any) and any possible advantages and disadvantages they may have.

answer