Project 4: Net Neutrality: Letter to Government Rep

 

Dear Senator Todd Young,

I write this letter today as a concerned citizen over the current trend toward deregulation in the quest for economic growth, specifically the current threat to net neutrality. As a member of society and as an individual who values the services and conveniences of information and digital access, I truly do believe and support in the investment in services providers and the facilitation of competition in the industry. However, the current regulations that enforce net neutrality are put in place because of the potential in the abuse and customer/market manipulation that the industry is susceptible to. The current regulations give a voice to the public and individual customers that at times have been systematically put at a disadvantage by these companies. The cultivation of the industry should come about through innovative means and not through the dialing of already existing services that strong arm the public for capital gain.

The statements made by the Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai, about the elimination of current regulations and replacing them with “voluntary pledges” by broad band providers still uphold net neutrality is an absolutely ridiculous suggestion. Good faith, being used as a standard of regulation, is unrealistic and frankly an insult to a public that expects these regulators to be the firm voice of justice and fairness. Ethical business practices in an industry so large and profit driven is a complete fantasy and it is naive to assume, resources will not be diverted into bypassing these lax regulations in the pursuit of either eliminating competition, pressuring customers into unfair spending, or simply profit maximization. The very unfortunate fact that the public is not aware and up in arms about this impending violation, is not reason enough to not fight against it.

It is up to you, in office, those elected to advocate for the masses in a manner that protects us from discriminatory and abusive practices that these bigger than life and powerful companies are capable of. Net neutrality might not be a voter pressing issue, and it might not be of immediate interest to those in office but it is a cause worthy of evaluation and worthy of a fight. Therefore, I as a voter and an advocate of fairness, plead with you to consider this issue and take all actions necessary to ensure the public is protected by the institutions put in place to do so.

Kindly,

Betel Ali

Project 3: The Privacy Paradox Reflection

This project and the challenges included in these podcasts were very interesting and eye opening to the negligence and unawareness I have to how much information I am potentially sharing and how much privacy I truly have. The growth of technology and the maximization of efficiency and convenience in every aspect of human life is impressive and hope invoking but these advances have created limitations to freedom, to the freedom of aloneness, that is highly alarming. I discussed in the podcast that I tend to be weary of social networking sites, not sheerly because of privacy concerns but from the mere evaluation of how negatively my productivity and my focus were impacted because of my online social life. It was an incredibly touch habit to break and a habit that I am glad I do not have, when reading and learning about the unseen effects these sites can have on my life. The first challenge, suggesting for listener to evaluate which apps have access to certain data (metadata) was very instrumental in exposing how any app, regardless of its function or deemed necessity can easily have ulterior motives, when it comes to information access. We as a society have an erroneous belief that our information (especially metadata) is irrelevant and that such transparency brings about no alterations to our life, and this project and challenge was revealing of that. The other challenges forced me to evaluate and articulate what my values are in terms of how much access I want other entities to have, was I ok with my computer having a “nearly unique data fingerprint”? am I ok with the fact that any link I click and any text I transmit, can be used to perform a phycological analysis scientifically narrowing down who I am and what I believe? Am I ok with this information being used to “customize” my online experience or discriminate against me as it sees fit? and the answer was a clear and decisive ‘absolutely not’ to all of the above. And these values and terms being solidified was an important step in improving or changing my habits. I have now installed a supplementary ad blocker and I have modified almost all of my apps in a manner that does not give an app any additional access than necessary.
Technological convenience is great but the amount of convenience we are provided is so minute and not burden relieving enough to trade our privacy for. This choice was a very simple one for me and I do not think there will be a technological convenience savvy enough to persuade me otherwise. Until law makers and regulations can catch up to the times fast enough to provide people with the privacy they inherently deserve, privacy will be a thing of old news. Privacy is worth fighting for and it is a cause that no one is exempt from or unaffected by.

Project 2: Hidden Figures reflection

Hidden Figures was a well executed movie, showcasing the very many issues associated with the pursuit to greatness, and the pursuit to greatness as a minority individual. STEM fields are known to require a great level of dedication, devotion, and the right resources. STEM fields are automatically associated with intellectually driven careers that have proven to be lucrative means of living. The fact that STEM fields are male dominated should come as no surprise, for well paying carriers and general intellectual pursuit have historically belonged to men. The infiltration of women and minorities into these careers and fields, as depicted in the movie, was very strongly objected and fought against. Minorities have to overcome historical and economic set backs, that systematically prevent them from improving their current condition, be it through education or employment opportunities. Hidden Figures depicts a time that was greatly different from our current times, but succeeds in illuminating the deeply rooted effects of racial discrimination and its crippling effects on every facet of individuals’ lives. Women, historically having very little involvement in fields that did not involve child rearing or housekeeping, have had (and continue to have) a difficult journey in lamenting themselves as capable and legitimate workers with equal capabilities as men. Women and minorities, especially minority women, have many obstacles in order to succeed in any field, and these obstacles are further intensified in fields that are characterized by peer criticism and competitive superiority struggles. The men in these fields (and the men at NASA headquarters in Hidden figures) were threatened and made uncomfortable by the presence of women and minorities in their fields and workplace. This discomfort and insecurity manifested itself in their treatment of individuals and in the malicious attempts to sabotage any progress and hinder any potential success of their new co-workers.
Hidden Figures is a demonstration of how, for a minority woman, intellectual capabilities and education were not sufficient enough to establish one’s self as a credible and worthy coworker or contributor. The hidden figures had to surpass impossible standards and exceed basic expectations all the while politely existing in a workplace, a world, that neither valued them nor desired them. Composure, productivity, and obedience were frivolously required and non compliance was not an option. The women in this film, had  great influence in human scientific history but a more impactful imprint on the children that they raised and in communities in which they lived. They were living examples of the possibility of greatness through relentless devotion and unwavering belief in one’s self. Role models are influential and irreplaceable figures in a child’s/person’s life. They are projections of the many things one can achieve or become. They provide an unpolluted visualization of a person’s realization of dreams. Growing up, I was not surrounded by women in STEM fields, I would say I have had several role models that influenced other parts of my life, but not my career path. The lack of women in STEM fields was more my motivation to succeed in a field that was exclusive and seemingly unsurmountable.

Project 1: Code of Conduct reflection

When formulating these codes of ethics, it was important to slightly stray from the straight forward academic laws and regulations and customize each code to fit the demands of catholic teachings that are highly valued in an institution like Notre Dame. It was important to emphasize to the student, that basic virtuous academic practices are not the only requirements, and that a well rounded motivation for service and philanthropy are key as well. Another concern with the formulation of these codes was the need for the avoidance of redundancy. As a Notre Dame student, it can be assumed that one knows and understands fundamental expectations of conduct, so it was necessary to include aspects to the codes, that are thought inspiring and new. These ten commandments can be summarized as guidelines that emphasize the need for honesty, service to the Notre Dame community and communities beyond, integrity and to one’s self and one’s potential, and pursuit of a positive impact on every scale. These codes are highly ambitious and are unique in the sense that they highlight the need for discipline, self awareness, and self service along that are a necessity to a successful journey at Notre dame. The code’s strengths include its conciseness and clarity, it declares rules and regulations in a manner that also leaves some room for interpretation. There could be several other codes that can be added to the ones listed (with the sacrifice of the ten commandment title) and the short length of the codes may not be able to address several scenarios and circumstances that can arise through out one’s years at the university. This can only be mitigated by the gradual modification of the codes as different ethical circumstances arise. Clauses and amendments can also be added to each code as necessary. A code of conduct or ethics is not only useful but is necessary. It is important that, however educated and evolved individuals are, it is important to have a document officially legitimizing what is acceptable and what is not. It provides protection to individuals from being negatively treated and unrightfully offended. A code of ethics also comes with the concept of ramifications to improper conduct there by incentivizing the adherence to the rules. This was a great exercise that allowed me to put my values in writing and also create a how-to document, from my experiences, that would hopefully prove beneficial to any incoming students.

Blog assignment 13: Computer Science Education

Computer Science is a highly interesting and lucrative field of study with guaranteed longevity and growth potential. The need for experts in the field is evident in the hiring efforts by companies as well as the compensation ranges for employees in such a field. Besides those studying the field or employed in the field, the products and softwares being developed have had and will continue to have altering impacts on individuals in all industries. So if computing/coding is so impactful, should everyone be well versed in it? Declaring that coding is the new literacy is a bit premature but coding has become a highly advantageous supplement to any individual in any field. The basic knowledge of computer science can come in handy and improve the efficiency of anyone, it can be the difference between achieving a task within weeks or with in a few hours. Making computer science a requirement in secondary or primary school education could pave way to creating efficient, highly technical, productive individuals. But allowing all individuals to access such limitless power can be detrimental to several ethical issues. A computer science education should be supplemented with strong ethical and regulation education. The amount of information one can be able to access and the potential to how such information can be utilized poses a threat to public and coder safety. Another argument against a computer science educated youth, is the potential for more and more programers to stray from the path of higher education. Computer science is an open resource field, where anyone willing can access all skills and templates needed to develop desired programs, so why ‘waste’ time, energy and resources, to further one’s education rather than seek profit or employment? This could potentially create a new generation without a well rounded education. If computer science is expanded to lower levels of education, it could mean that the talent over saturation of the market, lowering the wages of such a lucrative field. To successfully implement a successful computer science program in a typical K-12 curriculum, there should be preliminary steps to facilitate interest in computer science and a well rooted ethical/code of conduct supplement. In a basic CS4All curriculum, computer literacy and should be emphasized with a gradual expansion on programming and computational thinking. This ensures all students are well versed in different facets of computing before being able to program.
Everyone can learn to program, specialized books, bootcamps, and seminars allow people from all backgrounds to learn how to program. These individuals are usually seeking to diversify their skills or improve their productivity in their fields. Learning to program should not as easily accessed by everyone, teaching individuals to program without their understanding of the responsibility and power that comes with this knowledge is dangerous and irresponsible. It is impossible to vet all individuals and understand their intentions and goals but an effort should be make to limit access to information that could possibly cause public harm in the wrong hands.

Blog Assignment 12: Patents

Patents are defined as “an exclusive right granted for an invention, a product or process that provides a new way of doing something or that offers a new technical solution to a problem”. Patents then give inventors or intellectual property holders a right to their invention and product that allows for material proliferation and any potential gain made through the improvement of their invention. Intellectual property spans a great deal of areas, from technological inventions to literature and other forms of art. Patents “provide incentives” and “encourage and [reward] innovation”. The protection of intellectual property is a necessity, in order to facilitate a society where innovation and profit is not exclusive to already existing companies with capital. The existence of such laws prevents the abuse of inventors and ensures some form reward for their creativity. Patents are beneficial for a society for they facilitate completion and reduce the monopolization of industries. If intellectual property protections did not exist, the motivation for innovation would greatly be reduced for any invention with potential would be adopted, sold or made use of by entities with greater marketing powers or influence, thereby robbing the inventor of material gain, acknowledgment for, or association with the product.

Traditionally, patents were designed to tangible products/artifacts that perform a new function, it has taken a long time for the law making process to catch-up to the fast evolving field of programing. Several court cases through out the past two decades have tried to define and form regulations that would make it possible for software to be considered patentable intellectual property. The software design community has a very collaborative nature where the works of several programmers are modified or redesigned to be applied to a new function. So how would patenting programs change this? It would allow for programers to benefit from their contribution to different projects and would reduce information sharing. Restricting patents to tangible artifacts only would be a developmentally impeding error, considering the pace of the industries growth. Patent trolls are existing proof to how anything can be turned into a profitable industry. Patent trolls abuse and nullify patent regulations set to protect intellectual property, by disrupting the direct inventor-profit flow. Patent trolls seek to benefit solely from patents, for they don’t provide the innovation nor the good production service. Patent trolls are not evidence of a broken patent system but evidence that the patent system still has noticeable holes in its regulations. With the continuing rise in patent troll related lawsuits, corrections and perhaps further regulations should be made to ensure the integrity of the patent system.

Blog Assignment 11: Self-Driving Cars

What is the testament to reaching the zenith of human transportation technology? Science-fiction literature and cinema, thought and imagined the 21st century to bring about epic human technology, be it flying cars or teleportation. The motivation for developing and building self-driving cars is not just for the science and technology of it, it is about maximizing efficiency and gradually eliminating human error. There is a great market and demand for highly technological vehicles and companies are under constant pressure to produce a unique and advanced option to the masses amidst the heavy competition, and competition is probably the most pressing motivation for the urgent development of self driving cars. There are several arguments that can be made for the production of self driving cars, most important of them being, improving traffic safety. By replacing human drivers with automated ones, it can be assumed that accidents caused by human negligence would be dramatically reduced. Self-driving cars also in contention to replace the manual labor needed to operate transportation services provided companies such as Uber and Lyft. The arguments against self-driving cars include the issue of liability and their treat to an industry that is employing or supplementing the incomes of millions of individuals. Eliminating negligence would be a great way to improve the safety of our roads but the sensory and decision making capabilities of these machines does not come close to that of a human being’s. The number of scenarios and circumstances that can arise on the road are nearly incalculable, and until the technology of self-driving cars nears that threshold it is very hard to conclude that our roads would be safer as a result of them. As a programmer of such Artificial intelligence, one should consider the gravity of the failure or malfunctioning of such a machine. A programmer should exhaust all possible cases in which a driver’s life can be endangered and account for every case. Accidents occur in various ways, if a self-driving car is involved in an accident due to an error or miscalculation or misjudgment of a situation, car making companies should be held accountable for the damage made, this will also aide in their efforts and focus to improve their technology. The future of self-driving cars is as bright as can be, companies are investing a great deal of resources in their development, and even traditional car companies like Ford, are realizing the potential of this industry. With the mass production and dispersion of self-driving cars, the transportation industry will once again be transformed. The already diminishing taxi service will probably disappear, Uber and Lyft will no longer have human drivers and will reap the profits of the service exclusively and so on. With such a transformation, several individuals will have to find other means of income, possibly affecting unemployment rates. The role of the government when it comes to the possible boom of self-driving cars is to modify (as seen fit) traffic laws and regulations to maximize safety. There should be also be a great push by the government to create new standards of quality and safety to account for the risk of such a concerning way of life shift. With higher standards of quality should also come strict corporate regulation through laws that protect drivers and hold car companies accountable. I personally would love a self-driving car, but I don’t believe I would yet be comfortable with such a complete transfer of control, the likeliness of my usage of the self-driving feature would be occasional and with great caution.

Blog assignment 10: Artificial Intelligence

There are several definitions to what artificial intelligence is, but in general terms it is subfield of computer science that deals with the construction of “systems that are informed or inspired by human reasoning” and perform a function accordingly. The concept of artificial intelligence is different from human intelligence in the sense that artificial intelligence is usually solely guided upon the principles of reasoning while there are a multitude of factors that influence human intelligence and reasoning. Human intelligence is affected and influenced by several physiological and environmental factors that artificial intelligence is exempt from (at least for now). An argument can be made that artificial intelligence is the human intelligence in its purest form, free from the clouding and error potential that plagues human intelligence. But the direction AI development is taking is to perfect or at least accurately mimic human like capabilities. Alpha Go, Deep blue and Watson are excellent examples of the attempt and progress being made by developers to expand the capabilities of AI to a whole magnificent level. These examples are very much far from smoke and mirrors, the abilities of these models is further than any program has ever come to capturing human abilities and intricacies. The next step is measuring or creating an indicator to set standard for when AI becomes more than that, the Turing Test was designed to define human intelligence and to “decide whether a machine can be considered to think in a manner indistinguishable to from a human”. This test was a great step in defining intelligence and attempting to give criterion that can be applied to compare and contrast AI with human intelligence. The list of questions that are used to determine this, are not entirely exhausting and cannot nearly encompass the development in technology that has been made since 1951, when the test was published. The standards for AI has risen so high to the point, where mimicking human intelligence is not the goal, but the total and most genuine replication of the human form is. So can this be achieved? The Chinese room argument refutes such an idea or ambition. It states that no program designed with every necessary input and output that enables it to pass the Turing test can still not be considered a mind because it will always lack understanding and intentionality. This argument attacks the premise that a programs ability to convincingly simulate human behavior or ability still lacks the spark of understanding that is inherent in human intelligence. Artificial intelligence is not only intriguing but extremely exciting, as a person who completely advocates for the limitless development of science and technology, I believe that it is our responsibility as human being to pursue the creation and uncovering of every possible avenue of discovery. It is an unkind truth that technology and AI are slowly enveloping industries and that the livelihoods of people around the world is threatened by these advances, but human history and biology has proven that human beings evolve and adapt to our environments anytime we are pushed to discomfort or adversity. The idea that we should fear technology or the unknown will only stall human evolution and progress. Artificial intelligence is and will continue to be part of our reality and we should assimilate accordingly.
A computer system can be considered a mind, the definition of mind can and should be expanded to include artificial intelligence. The human mind is not necessarily a human computer because it does not solely operate on the basis of action-reaction and input-out put, the human mind is designed with motivation; be it survival, evolution, reproduction etc… the wave of information the mind processes is different from computation. Considering those two to be identical can present certain ethical problems, such as, whether AI’s be granted certain rights and privileges? And how human beings can coexist with these programs and to what extent their interactions can go. And that would constitute the redefinition of what it means to be human as well.

Blog assignment 9: Online censorship

According to the various reason, online censorship is a means of limiting and decanting information in order to influence the thinking and belief systems of governed people. The problem with such organized information exchange is how and who decides what information is consumable and what is not. The Chinese government and its overwhelming presence on the web is a great example of how online censorship is successfully utilized. The Chinese government values and understands the economic asset the web is and is growing to become, but at the same time is cautionary about the influence and ideas that can be accessed through it as well. The government controls the influx of news and is free to distribute propaganda as it pleases. Those who disobey within and outside of the country are severely punished and made examples of, by that effectively silencing any form of protest or opposition. Regarding the question of whether governments should be able to suppress certain forms of speech, the answer is a definitive no. A government, especially a democratic government with a written constitution highlighting the freedom of speech, should not in any way tamper with the expression of speech. Opening the door to any form of suppression allows for the expansion and misuse of such a great and dangerous power. The argument that harmful and dissenting opinions should not be given a platform because they offend or disenfranchise individuals is not productive nor will it completely squash the existence of such opinions. Reaping the benefits of a country that values and uphold the freedom of speech comes at the price of responsibility, a responsibility to one’s self to seek accurate information, to analyze and digest information and form the best opinion based on data accuracy and values. The removal of information broadcasted by malicious organizations (i.e. terrorist organizations), even though well intentioned, is unethical. It is very true that these organizations should not be granted a platform to spread a message that could potential put the lives of people at risk but the censorship and the silencing of one organization allows for spark of the silencing of another organization, an organization or message that might necessarily be malicious. When it comes to political censorship and what companies allow or not allow to be broadcasted through their venues, it is a practice that is influential and potentially harmful. In our current political climate it is a very common practice for organizations to be known supporters of parties and candidates, they not only show their support through their influential donations but use their public capital to influence elections and public opinions. When it comes to a site like Facebook, where users are numerous and come from every possible background, it is highly unethical to censor political information because the site not only serves as a social network but a source of news and current events as well. Purposefully flooding such sites with raised information is a disservice and an insult to customers.
Online censorship is a very concerning topic in my opinion because it undermines basic fundamental rights of citizens. It is a practice that is very rampant yet very much well concealed. Individuals are unaware of the influences around them and they are making choices, forming opinions and taking actions that are ill informed and misguided. It is a problem that needs to be exposed and rooted out.

Blog assignment 8: Corporate Personhood

Corporate personhood is the expansion of certain human rights and liberties to apply to corporations. The term corporation is defined as “a number of persons united in one body for a purpose.” This definition highlights the presence of individuals in the entity and smoothes out any issues against granting corporations rights, for it is individuals that are being protected by these rights. This definition is very well disguised, for it omits the what the core purpose of a such an organization is,  which in most cases is profit and capital gain. The extension of most human and constitutional rights to corporations allows the significant untethered growth as well as protection of these companies. The legal, capital, and labor resources corporations have, allows them to wield a great deal of advantage over individuals and the addition of these protections intensifies individual disadvantage. Corporate personhood allows corporations human protections without human ramifications. An individual can face a great deal of punishments for a crime, while a corporation can only (in worst case scenarios) possibly suffer sanctions and fees. There are several ethical blurred lines that should be considered when it comes to corporate personhood for the individuals making decisions are curtained by the organization and suffer very little consequences for their actions, therefore demanding the ethical and moral accountability from corporations is mute task, for there is no particular base or individual that can be referenced.
The role of IBM in the “collaboration with the Nazis in creative ways to help them design and execute the systematic destruction of the Jewish people” is a great case study in the examination of how corporate personhood vindicates corporations from actions that an individual person would have been severely punished for. Documents revealing that, “IBM didn’t just provide technology to Hitler’s Germany — it helped implement and maintain it for whatever purposes the Nazis required” were revealed in Edwin Black’s IBM and the Holocaust. Individuals associated with Nazi Germany during WWII, have been hunted and brought to justice and held accountable for the horrific deeds during the war. Soldiers, politicians, doctors, and so on have all been condemned for their participation in the holocaust, but IBM still stands, reputation unblemished and its role not tried. If corporations demand personhood, they should be capable of the showing human traits and emotions and should be held to the same standard as people. And since, such an expectation is not possible to fulfill, such dramatic considerations for corporations should not be fulfilled either. Individuals with in the corporations they represent should be held accountable for the actions of the institution. IBM played a role in one of the worst human atrocities in history and our judicial system contributed to their protection and failed to hold it accountable for its crimes.