Beyhum,+Hiba


 * Hello cct205 =)**

__LAB #1: Change Camp__


 * Topic Focus: Net Neutrality***

If I were to host a ChangeCamp event, I would talk about the issue behind net neutrality. We live in a digital era in which the World Wide Web is accessible to society’s needs and has become a ‘basic utility’. It has led society to converge into an open space that connects individuals while sharing a broad range of ideas. Net neutrality deals with circulating the usage of this ‘basic utility’ to allow equal distribution to all citizens. The internet is an open platform in which it connects society, but the fact is, network owners are competing to gain from its profitability. This competition is therefore inducing some providers to block some content that should be viewed by users. The main concern of net neutrality is that bigger companies might force users to use one web service over another. The importance of net neutrality is to adopt regulations that will ensure the net usage remains open to all individuals. Users should have the right to benefit from the network without having restrictions to some content or applications.

Abolishing net neutrality does not help the accessibility of the Internet. By getting rid of net neutrality it hinders the future of the equal access of websites. Soon enough we will see larger corporations buying a certain amount of bandwidth that delivers better loading speeds for their website; this will give users slower access to other sites. This creates a digital divide where users are trying to access the Internet but are unable to access what they wish to access. The openness of the internet has widely created innovative content that drives the success of many businesses that rely on the internet. The web has opened up a lot of opportunities for the future development of our nation. Net neutrality is allowing for freedom of speech on the web, blocking the rights will become a disadvantage for individuals who have taken their usage for granted. New regulations would also discourage all the innovative content that is evolving on the web.


 * LAB# 2: "One laptop per child is a neo-colonial trojan horse"***

olpc website www.laptop.org

This statement is referring to the fact that developed countries are exploiting the developing countries by appearing to be the saviors who want to give but not take. In fact, this is their way of having power and control over the weak. This is exactly what is meant by Neo liberalism; the idea of concurring another countries resources and having the main control. The idea behind the trojan horse which creates a positive image, is in fact, the opposite. A trojan horse creates unauthorized access which creates complications. When these developed countries are providing the one laptop per child case, they are therefore creating a beneficial outcome for themselves. Developing countries may benefit from this laptop but I think what they really need is the basic needs for survival. It is definitely important to educate this nation but spending the money on a laptop is not the right way to go. Developed countries are creating a market share to increase their profit and to portray their act of kindness to the rest of the world. They ultimately have control over what this nation is accessing on the laptop, which may lead to controlling the way they think and live. All they are doing is exploiting the cheap resources to maximize their wealth and monitoring their access.


 * LAB #3: IS THE IPAD REVELUTIONARY?***

I definitely disagree with that question. I believe that Apple is only using its brand power to diversify its products. I do not think the Ipad fills a new category of products. What I see when I look at the Ipad is just a bigger version of the itouch or the iphone. It's ultimately a start for Apple, so this product might be an experiment to create a revolutionary product in about two years or so. The ipad's disadvantage is it only allows one app at a time to be opened. We live in a society that is run by multitasking, so therefore, the ipad would not replace a personal laptop. The whole new App of the ibook does not interest me because I personally like holding a book than reading off of a screen. I find when I read off a screen I usually skim rather than submerge myself into the reading. With the advertising hype that Apple has created it may find a target market for this product.

 I think that regardless of how Facebook approaches the issue of Privacy, there will always be inherent concerns lingering around regarding privacy issues. Being able to use Facebook as a tool to gather personal information about users can be a priceless and valuable opportunity for marketers. My main concern with Facebook regarding privacy is actually not being able to exert sufficient control over what information is posted about me. I'm sure many users are familiar with coming across old pictures of yourself that is posted by someone else, but which you have no control over as to removing the picture. Also, just the mere notion of the vast amounts of personal information that people store on Facebook has "privacy" written all over it. Anything from age, sex, address, likes, dislikes and favourite pass times can aid companies in constructing profiles on people and target them individually. This information would be a goldmine for advertisers as access to all this information can be utilized extensively. Enter Facebook. This social networking platform has grown over the past four to five years to an epicenter of personal information. While many individuals are aware of the consequences to forfeiting their information to marketers, it seems as though Facebook has built a far more trustworthy relationship with its’ clients. This bond has become so strong, that users willingly fill in boxes of information that ask for location (which city one lives in), school (which institution one attends), age, hometown, siblings, favorite movies, music and television shows everything from full name to favourite quotes.
 * LAB #5: "if you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Google, CEO****

# 6: a Good Tactic is one that your people enjoy “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.” Rule 6, by Saul Alinsky, I find particularly inspiring because it hits reality to the fullest. Most of us don’t admit it, but we tend to be lazy. A lot of people might care about a particular situation that they would have a lot to say about it and inspire people but they do not act upon the issue. To influence a change, one needs to put effort into making society aware of this issue and contributing baby steps to fix this issue. If that tactic is enjoyable, most likely, people would tend to participate. If this tactic is just plain boring, people will tend to ignore it and not care to follow through. The basic premise of this issue is there are individuals who strongly contribute to make a change but they need to really believe in this issue and make it enjoyable for other people, so other people actually aspire to join the ‘change’ relief. Social media has increased individual engagement, yet I still feel as if this engagement is not being acted upon. People join different groups but don’t always participate to the fullest. The best way is to hype up an issue and make people interested. Targeting different individuals to participate will definitely make an impact in the end. When that particular target finds this issue interesting to join they will engage in it much more significantly.
 * LAB #6: RULES FOR RADICAL****

**Identify something that you think best demonstrates web 2.0, and explain why?**
I think youtube best demonstrates the web 2.0 era. The web 2.0 generation is all about interactivity and allowing collaboration to be

produced. Youtube allows users to post/watch videos, comment/subscribe to other users videos, and interact with different people

around the world. The means of a participatory website builds upon the web 2.0 generation that has unfolded between different

media outlets. These media outlets are allowing users to have the freedom to share content of interest which allows the sense of

community building. The Youtube community is dramatically growing