OTM- cell phone-Guantanamo north-Meth lab

     In listening to the On the media this week they brought up the phone again and to me it finally clicked at what they were trying to accomplish. The levels of concern need to be at an extreme high! Why are they trying to get into this particular phone? The meta data already suggests that their were no communications internationally from this phone. So why if that is the case is the government still trying to get into this phone and also why is apple standing their ground so strong when they have turned over phones in the past? Is apple trying to step outside of the box and become part of the people? Are they telling us that our privacy and security actually does matter and that we need to be more proud of that? Or are they simply telling the Government and NSA to get bent? They know that if the government wants into that phone they can find a way to do it, they are just looking for someone to be able to place the blame on in the future when this system gets hacked by someone who shouldn't have this much power. "This is about the future" very interesting comment made and then supported in the following comments by the two speakers. Patriot act 3 the revenge, if this is taken to court and they win and are now able to put a law on large companies that states you have to put this back door into all phones what is left with our privacy? If there is a code than it can be hacked by anyone and everyone who is willing to take the time and put forth the effort. I believe this could be a very dangerous decision if it is made and could lead to a lot of trouble. (Fred)
     Closing Guantanamo? Why would we want to close Guantanamo and bring all the prisoners to the mainland? Still have on going pre trial hearings from September 11th incident. There would still be a virtual Guantanamo but they will bring them to military detention inside the US. No charges for these criminals that are being held captive but they have no chance of getting out of custody while we are still at war. They are war prisoners basically. Some men will be held for up to 35 years and never have even been charged. Well yeah you don't want to make a mistake and free someone who can bring forth another terrorist act but at the same time, what if you are holding innocent people captive for 35 years. Guantanamo North is what they are calling the name if they do end up closing down the site in Cuba. Interesting but what is the point? Are we trying to turn the page on this, slide the curtain? I am still unsure about the holding of all these people who we can't even put on trial because we have nothing on them. (Carol) MiamiHerald.com
    It is counter productive because terrorists use Guantanamo as propaganda to recruit even more terrorists. (Insert from Obama)
    Will closing Guantanamo change the recruitment... most likely not going to change much at all. Either way the prisoner will still be held captive whether north or south no difference to me.
    Vigil anteee dude that was filming sounds like he had the most epic job ever! It would be so awesome to be with them but at the same time it would be so sketchy to be there with them. Went from shooting a film about health care to now shooting a mobile meth lab. What an awesome opportunity and how crazy would that be. He worked for 7 months to gain trust and then received the footage he was chasing for so long. AWESOME!!  

Democracy 2.0

What is Democracy?

http://www.whatisdemocracy.net/

There seems to be a lot of confusion about what the word Democracy means. In spite of the fact that at least in some parts of the world one can hear it from the media every day.

Democracy by definition means the government by people. That means that all the people should be able to have their say in one way or another in everything that affects their lives. Dictionaries usually say that this right can either be exercised directly (by all members of a community having the possibility to enter personally, without mediators, their position on a particular issue into the decision making process - modern technology is able to provide this possibility for increasingly larger and larger communities), or through representatives (members of legislative bodies). This second arrangement is then called Representative Democracy.

Representative democracy would be fine if the representatives would really make alltheir decisions only after consulting their constituencies. In the least, after having a clear idea about the views of their constituents on a particular issue, and trying to accommodate these views as best as possible (or postpone the decisions until an overwhelming majority of the constituents would be happy with them).

Unfortunately, a vast majority of countries that call themselves Representative Democracies are not true democracies according to the above definition. Most of them are actually just Elected Dictatorships. People can vote usually only once every four or five years. They do not vote on any issues. They just elect their so called representatives who then until the next elections have no obligations by law and little incentives to base their decisions on individual issues on the wishes on their electorate. They hardly ever bother to consult them on their stands on various issues. Therefore, legislative bodies composed of such "representatives" act in a very dictatorial manner between the elections. The only country that is quite close to the definition of Democracy is Switzerland (more or less since 1291).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuY-DVsU4BY What is democracy explained in a very simple manner.

     In response to the Pia Mancini video I am on board with the idea of democracyos.org. I think that with todays generation if the option was allowed to vote on their phones and not have to take 15 minutes out of their day to go and vote they would do it. I see no reason why more people wouldn’t vote if given the chance to take 5 minutes from the comfort of their own car, classroom, bed room, ect. I also think that by finding candidates that actually vote by the majority of the people then we the people will all have more desire to be involved. How many times do you here someone in Utah say “oh my vote doesn’t matter in Utah because…” every time there is an election that is what you hear. But lets be honest most the people who don’t vote, they don’t vote because they don’t want to take the 15-30 minutes to drive vote and drive home. If we can make it possible through the internet I think we would see a huge leap in amount of votes received each year.

     On the other hand you have to put yourself in the shoes of someone who has dedicated their whole life to this trade and now you are telling them that no matter what they believe is best for society they have to go by the majority vote… Majority vote will most likely be a fair share of uninformed voters as well as those who are informed… I think this has a lot of positives but can also be found to be fairly negative when you get around to it.

    I believe the best way to keep a leader in check is to make sure you are in a democracy where the citizens can and do vote on all issues. If you give one man/woman all the power you are basically throwing in your own white towel and submitting your fate into that persons hands. Is that really a wise decision? NOOO clearly that is a terrible idea.

Religion 3.0

Religion

            Talk about an absolutely broad topic. In the US alone there are over 310 different religions or denominations. Just 55 shy of being able to be part of a different denomination or religious group every day of the year.  (Stat found here) http://undergod.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000068

            Lets be honest though, the only time people ever want to bring up religion is when a presidential candidate tells us what religion he or she is or when something controversial is taking place in a religion and people have to suddenly make it their business. First things first, if you aren’t part of the religion does it matter what they are doing inside of their rules or guidelines for members?  No they don’t matter, yet often times we find ourselves so concerned with what each religion is doing that we involve ourselves just to feel involved. One that really jumps out to me because we are from Utah was when the LDS Church came out with their standards on marriage after not allowing gay marriage in their temples. The organization that we all refer to as Mormons have never allowed gay marriage in their temples, but people only became irate about it after gay marriage was passed in a few of the states. Once again I say to all  of the people why do we begin to care what a certain religion says or does if it doesn’t pertain to us? If you are a member of the church I am sure they teach that marriage is or should be between a man and a woman no wavering. I am just amused that people get so worked up over things that don’t change anything about them.
      On the other hand i see why so many people get worked up about this topic. Both sides of the story obviously exist and want to have their voice heard. I do not think that any religion should push their beliefs upon others to the extent where it becomes no longer a choice and they basically have to do these things just to get you off of their back. Religion should never push anyone to make personal decisions that they aren't ready to make.

            One thing I found very interesting as well were the amount of articles or journal entries one could find that would try to disprove each religion. Rarely did you find articles trying to portray the truth of each religion. Instead what you get again were people who spent more time trying to prove each religion wrong rather than finding out if any of them were or are true.

            Does religion effect schooling and or chances of being recruited or given a scholarship? “Many religious organizations are well-known for their active place in giving back to their community and helping those in need. Religion is also a big part of many students’ lives — whether they’re Christian, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, or Buddhist. So, it’s no surprise that many churches, religious groups, and colleges offer scholarships based on religious affiliation or spirituality.” https://www.unigo.com/scholarships/by-type/religious-scholarships

I find it to be very interesting at the scholarships that some religions are willing to award. I think it is a great thing of any religion, business, or person for that matter to offer kids the chance to further their education by helping them pay for it. To all of those religious groups I applaud you for your efforts in helping students stay in school and achieve great things.

            In conclusion on the topic of religion I just want to make it clear where I stand when it comes to religions. I do not nor will I judge someone who is of another faith. I will not un-friend someone because they do not believe the same things I do. I will not harm someone because my beliefs are different from theirs. Yes I agree that people do these kinds of things all the time and honestly it is sad. Who are we to judge other human beings? Are you perfect?

Don’t judge me because I sin differently than you.

On the Media Ebola again...?

Psychologically after hearing the recent news about Zika, I have finally found out that it is actually happening. Psychologically people are now going to be more concerned and start to worry about every single mosquito bite. I am not a person who is a big worrier, but people who worry about multiple things may be super concerned. I am going to have to agree with the first man interviewed (Jonathon) when he said the average American should not freak out about it, but we need to prepare for it. Even if it doesn’t happen to you at least you were prepared.

Socially you don’t need to hide from people who may have the virus, after all it is very unlikely that you will be bit by a mosquito that bites the infected person and then sucks the virus and then flies over to you and bites you is almost impossible. Malaria is one of those cultural things as well when they discussed why nobody was overly concerned with the number of mosquitos that exist they said it was because malaria usually takes place where there isn’t power and in third world countries. That is why people don’t usually make a big deal about it.

Once again I do not think that zika is going to bother me at all. I don’t imagine I will have any run ins with it and I am not going to go out of my way to do anything different than I normally would do when I am anywhere that mosquitos are. I will still wear my repellant and cover up but I am not going to be stressing every single bug bite. They said it could affect 4 MILLION people… whoa scary… it is a big hype and I think it is going to do the exact same thing Ebola did. We will probably make such a big deal about it and at the same time the government will pass something important under the rug and we will all go on living in fear of mosquitos. That is just my take on it.

Well informed 2.0 Privacy

What is Privacy?

Does privacy even exist in the world today? I find it hard to agree with someone who claims we have lots of privacy even when we are on the internet. I mean sure you can have your privacy out in nature when you hike into the mountains 50 miles away from the nearest town. But does that privacy exist online or in social media? i suggest that it does not exist but I will take a look at a few new ideas and try to figure out where i really stand on the subject of privacy.

I want to start out with this URL and i want you to click into it and look through the different scenarios that it brings up. Then i will choose a few scenarios and disect them with what i agree with and also disagree with.

http://www.pewinternet.org/interactives/privacy-scenarios/


Office surveillance cameras

The first one that appears on the list is this example of surveillance cameras in the office.

54 percent say this is acceptable while 24 percent of people say it is unacceptable and 21 percent say it depends. Now me personally I hate the category "IT DEPENDS" no shit it depends! If you aren't asking yourself what if about every question in life you are simply floating along. Quit being a floater and take control. So what i am going to do is every it depends vote will go half to acceptable and the other half to non acceptable. Office cams now sit at 65 say yes and 35 say no to the idea. What ideas do i agree with and disagree with from both sides. Well first of all on the yes to cameras being placed in the office i am going to side with this comment, (“[It is OK with me] as long it involves all departments and employees, not just a particular group.”) This one to me is a no brainer, and it is super simple to share. If you want to film one part of the business you should want to film everyone involved. No reason someone should have to go to work worrying about being filmed every second of the day and have others who aren't being filmed in the same building. EQUALITY
As for some arguments against the case, “Because some employers are very abusive of their power to check on you.” This could cause more drama then good when someone in power wants to pick on someone who is disliked they could---->“Because the company could save a lot of different feeds and then use them all at once to make a person look bad so they could just terminate them.” use all of the video compiled over a month to make a person look lazy and irresponsible and get them fired. We have to be very careful when it comes to who has the power and just how far we are going with the power.



Smart Thermostats



Smart thermostat The next topic that really drew my attention was that of the smart thermostat. When you ask someone where they feel the most security/privacy i think we could all agree that at home we feel the most secure and private. But this new thermostat is in a way taking that privacy from you and making your home a little less private. Imagine with me if you will waking up each morning and walking down into the kitchen but before entering the kitchen going over to the thermostat and bumping it up a few degrees. Now it doesn't take long to walk over and turn the heat on but now imagine your thermostat gaining information over the first weeks of installing it in your house. Now wake up walk down stairs and as you walk into the kitchen you notice that it is already at the desired temperature for your morning coffee or cereal. convienent or creepy? For me i find this to be more along the lines of creepy. What happens if this information gets into the wrong hands. They begin to notice all of your habits and they no longer have to worry about you mixing it up because you and your house have now told them exactly when you wake up, what rooms you go to and even how warm you want all of these rooms. It will even turn off all the heat and air conditioning while you are away at work. Wont that be so convienent and save you so much money?? Oh yeah but that info could also get into the wrong hands and that is basically a readers digest version of "hey we are gone from 8:30-4:30 everyday so come and take what ever you want. Are you still stoked about your house recording all of this info? I didn't think so. Here is what some of the commenters had to say on the subject,

“It would depend more precisely on the details of the company’s privacy statement. What can they use the collected information for? And do they share it with third parties? If they can use the information for anything but controlling my house’s HVAC [heating, ventilation and air conditioning], I would be very hesitant to participate.” Can you blame them? I agree 100 percent, no I do not want my house to be monitored clear down to every room and everything i do inside of my house. That is one place i hope to keep private. Why would anyone want their information shared with third parties? Hey everyone here is my house and all the information you need to break in and do it while we aren't home. In fact if you break in quick enough after we leave you will probably be in the warmth because my smart thermostat hasn't shut off just yet....Please people wake up!
Multiple people agreed to use the Thermostat only if they were being paid monthly for having it in their house holds. I think the main argument comes down to who are the third parties that will receive this data and what data will be passed along. “All of this stuff is way too invasive of my personal space! It’s like they all want to be in control of everyone at all times. Know what we are doing etc. No thank you.” This was one of my favorite quotes from the section just because it is finally someone standing up for themselves. Don't let someone else control what you do, just do you in the most private way possible... What ever that may be.

If you think you have privacy just go to google and enter your name into the search bar and hit go. Then you will be awakened to just how private your information actually isn't.

Learning 2.0
    My main thoughts today come on the teaching side of the learning spectrum. Does America under pay their teachers? According to my mother yes they do, that is all i have heard for the last 22 years of my life. Growing up in a household where your mom is a teacher, your uncle is a teacher and your grandpa was a teacher and principal you hear a lot about faculty meetings, grading, parents yelling at teachers ect.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-jennings/teacher-pay-us-ranks-22nd_b_940814.html
    in this article it explains that the US ranks 22 out of 27 countries when it comes to paying their teachers. One thing i really enjoyed about this web page was the quote from U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan which said, "Money is never the reason why people enter teaching, but it is the reason some people do not enter teaching, or leave as they start to think about beginning a family or buying a home. Today, too often the heart-breaking reality is that a good teacher witha decade of classroom experience is hard-pressed to raise a family on a teacher's salary." 

This is from 2012 but i don't imagine we have climbe to much on the scale mainly because i feel that education is so greatly over looked in our country because the people who are making the most money are the ones playing sports or recording albums. So everyone is aspiring to be either an athlete or the next rap artist.

This is the problem with the learning system now days. Kids have been given everything and they don't have to work for anything anymore. If we want the learning system to start to climb back up and get to the level of other countries we need to change a few things. The first thing we need to change is the way we pay teachers. I am not saying all teachers deserve more money but i am saying all teachers deserve a chance to earn more money by letting them prove their teaching abilities with state or even nation wide tests in each subject they teach. At the end of the year make the kids take these tests and actually make it count towards their grades so they are expected to try hard on these tests and lets see how the teachers begin to teach and put forth more effort. The second thing is explained in the picture above. Parents need to understand the problem is coming from inside their own homes not anywhere else. Parents encourage your children to excel don't blame the teachers for your child's behavior if you don't teach them at home they probably don't pay attention or give respect in the classroom any ways.
I close this rant on teachers not being paid enough and students being to highly praised and babied now days. Grow up and take responsibility for your actions. Mom and dad wont be going in to work and yelling at your boss when he fires you for being lazy. Don't start bad habits in school because they wont go away.
    Some of the top reasons families choose to home school is simply because they have the control. I have compiled a list that is copied from the website
http://www.nheri.org/research/research-facts-on-homeschooling.html

·         customize or individualize the curriculum and learning environment for each child,

·         accomplish more academically than in schools,

·         use pedagogical approaches other than those typical in institutional schools,

·         enhance family relationships between children and parents and among siblings,

·         provide guided and reasoned social interactions with youthful peers and adults,

·         provide a safer environment for children and youth, because of physical violence, drugs and alcohol, psychological abuse, racism, and improper and unhealthy sexuality associated with institutional schools, and

·         teach and impart a particular set of values, beliefs, and worldview to children and youth.

 When looking at the test results, homeschool students on average do much better than kids in public schools. They score in the 15-30 percentile higher than those kids in the public schools. The website also says that the home-educated students score higher on ACT and the SAT on average.

Stats don't lie! Public schools stick to the system to much and homeschool and private schools are more committed to sending kids towards success rather than getting them out of school and on to the next kids.

This to me is why public school systems don't work! They don't focus on each individual and they don't adjust their teachings. For example, I graduated from High School in 2008, yes a public high school, now 6 years later my sister is taking the same class as a Junior in high school from the same teacher and nothing has changed in the class right down to the same exact syllabus. Times have changed and teachers have to except and adapt their teachings.

ON the MEDIA

On the media

            Detecting Terrorism Online Raises Legal Questions.

What if tech companies were able to create something that could crawl along the public lines of the Internet with key words and try to figure out what is the company allowed to collect? What warrants these intents and how can it be used against the person who was caught with these codes.

            One opinion in this segment was very optimistic and jumped to the users side and said it is kind of an innocent until proven guilty type of thing. And the other side claims that the government is already doing this type of thing and we aren’t waiting for someone to create this program but that it already exists. They will do everything they can to try and protect their country and I don’t feel like it is a bad thing. The technologies and companies were very open to this idea and were willing to work with the government if they so chose to do so.

            How do we make things radical, and worth enough to raise attention for someone to take action? The Many Facets of Radicalization says that there is nothing wrong with thinking radically or acting radical. Many people may support the idea of ISIS but that is where they stop, they don’t act upon it or anything about it but they are not considered terrorists according to the speaker on the subject. He also claims that many people find themselves involved in the terrorist’s movements solely because of their surroundings, friends, or family. He claims we explore more than we research… When asked about the terrorism detector. He says it would be extraordinarily valuable especially because of the deep online use of the jihads. Assumptions are not bought that people are highly influenced by what they watch or play.

            I am kind of torn by this discussion that took place on the media this week mainly because I am probably over thinking it. Here is a brief explanation of my thoughts on why or why not it would be successful, and I would love to hear what you think. Successful reasoning first: the web is so broad these days that you can learn how to do anything you want just by typing it into a search engine and pressing enter. One reason I believe it would be successful is because with this program you can see exactly what someone is looking up on the daily basis. If people start searching how to build bombs, or how to hot wire certain cars and how much of this explosive is needed to knock down a building it becomes very radical that maybe this person is planning some sort of terrorist attack. I think it would be wise to take them in for questioning absolutely. The down falls however of this program would be all the wild goose hunts you go on searching and trying to find the people who supposedly are searching these things. More often than not I believe you would come up empty. But even if you only saved one life or one building, would it not be worth it?

            I believe that it would be very helpful even if it only stopped one or two people who had terroristic mannerisms. Interesting points of view from both sides of the story.