Final Post: How COM125 Helped Me

My final blog post! I've learnt a lot of things from COM125. I'll just share three of them, because I've had long lists before and I don't think reading them was any more enjoyable for you that it was for me to write them...:

1. I have a deeper understanding of the basic concepts and technology behind the Internet.

I now know that the Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use a standard protocol to serve billions of users worldwide. The interface that makes it all visible is the Web, invented by Tim Berners-Lee. it is a system of interlinked hypertext documents contained on the Internet. One can view text, images, videos and other forms of multimedia using a tool known as a web browser. People connect to the Web via the use of hardware such as cables and routers, devices that link two incompatible networks together. 

2. I have gained insights into the power of the Internet as a communication medium and its impacts on commerce, society, education and our personal lives.

The Internet is ubiquitous. It is everywhere in our lives. This has become especially so since the inception of Web 2.0, which allowed content to be generated by everyone. This gave rise to social media, the means of interactions among people in which they create, share, and exchange information and ideas in virtual communities and networks. With social media, especially video sharing, concepts in education can now be explained in the form of a YouTube video, with the relevant diagrams and concept maps thrown in to aid understanding. In the areas of business and commerce, too, the Web has changed the way we conduct business affairs. In the words of Michael Dell, chairman and CEO of Dell, Inc.: [The Internet has] definitely changed our business in the way we communicate with customers, the way they communicate with us, the way we learn from those communications. You know, billions of communications per year, conversations with customers per year -- the way we share and collaborate internally inside the organization. So one of our teams in France will have a great success with something, and they'll share that online in our internal social network, and that information will propagate much more rapidly through the organization in kind of a horizontal flow. We sort of think about it in a context of if we knew everything that the collective "we" really know across the organization, we'd be much more capable of serving our customers in a better way.

Finally, the Internet has changed our daily lives in an extremely profound way. In the words of Mindi Orth, the way we communicate, shop, learn and even entertain ourselves have incorporated the use of the Internet in an almost indispensable way. 

3. I now understand and am able to use a range of Internet tools for effective communication, resource management and sharing.

Whether it is in my video sharing, my blogging, or the cloud computing I was able to do for my COM125 project, I can safely say that I have learnt the importance and convenience of the Internet and its tools. What was once a shortcut to me has now become a necessity - something that I will now find very difficult to do without. 
Also, I can say that the need to maintain this blog has made me refresh myself in the use of HMTL, as sometimes, there were some things I could not do without code (the use of tables for instance). It was a useful skill that I learnt when working (CSS too), but I had somehow become rusty in its usage. I am grateful for the opportunity to refresh myself. 

So finally, I close my blog. It's been a fruitful semester for me, and I can honestly say that I've learnt quite a bit about the Internet and its tools. All the best in your exams, future self, and I hope you can retain what you've learnt here to help you in your exams and in your future studies and career later on in life. 

A Global Song

Let me introduce a musician who's taken full advantage of the power of the Internet: Eric Whitacre. Originally a Grammy Award-winning composer and conductor, he is known for his Virtual Choir projects that bring together voices from around the world, forming an online choir. This is one of his more well-known pieces, Lux Arumque:



How does he do it? How does he get the different people from all around the world to sing in such harmony? Here's an example:



As you can see, he standardises several things about the piece: The key, the attire the students wear and the ideal recording conditions. Lux featured 185 voices from 12 different countries, but his latest piece, Water Night, released in 2012, received more than 3,500 videos from 73 countries, showing the popularity and traction this project is gaining. Here it is (Caution: More that 11 mins):



Nice, huh?
Though I am personally not a fan of chorale music, I feel that this project has enormous potential to unite people around the world through the use of music and the Internet. This showcases the inherent altruism of people, when they demonstrate that they are in a project that can take months for the love of music, and nothing but passion and enjoyment driving them. It is a choir as big as the Internet itself, and all it needs are very simple tools: A webcam, a microphone (though the computer's speaker can be used as well) and of course, a computer with connection to the Web.
Would you like to try it?

Social Networking: What is NOT Mentioned

I believe we all know what social networking is. It is essentially a social structure made of two actors and the set of ties between them. Once a sociological term, this definition has now been expanded online, where networking sites like Facebook help to make networking a more transparent and efficient task. Users can now see who knows whom, rather than painstakingly and time-consumingly creating networks of people by themselves, on top of which would know nothing of each others' lives until necessary. This video explains it:

Cool, right? But there is a problem. There are some problems. There are 14 that I can think of, in fact. 

1. Life Envy and Self-esteem Issues

What are you going to do when someone posts a picture of him/herself living the good life? This might seem innocuous for students and young people, but for an adult in the working world, there is the implication that his former classmate or someone around his age is earning twice (or much more!) his salary, or who has more social engagements in a day than he has in a month. This could lead to envy and jealousy, but more importantly, it could lead to a sense of helplessness or self-esteem issues because one perceives oneself as not being successful or popular enough in life, and not being able to do anything about it. 

2. Reduced Value in Friendships

It's nice to share one's life with friends. But sometimes, social networking sites (SNS) reduce this aspect of friendship. Instead of checking who liked one's photo album or status update, one now checks to see how many people liked it. This may lead to one becoming more populist in one's online footprint, catering only to the lowest common denominator, leading to an appearance of immaturity and superficiality online. 

3. False Information Spreads Quickly

In my previous post, I mistakenly posted on a report that was more than 10 years old being branded as current news. This is a rather common example of false information being spread online. Others include the death of famous personalities or freebies such as iPhones or MacBooks being given away gratis. The spread of information can occur anywhere, but the speed at which it is transferred on SNS makes it particularly useful, or dangerous, depending on the type. 

4. Emotional Impact

People are generally braver and less sensitive to others when behind a computer screen. This leads one to say things that they would not normally say face-to-face, or even in phone conversations. As this happens, there is a risk of alienation from one's friends and potential employers, as one is perceived to be obnoxious.

5. Too Much Information

Oversharing can have its consequences. This article, for example, shows how a combination of too much transparency and too little discretion can cause one to lose one's job, while this shows that the things one says and posts about online can have an impact on potential employers. Public scandals have been known to start over such posts. SNS users know only too well how posting remarks online at home gives the illusion of anonymity, but it is not the case. 

6. Real Life Takes a Back Seat to Online Life

One sees a lot of this these days: People going out with each other but spending more time on their mobile devices than with each other, even on dates. They seem more interested in their friends on Facebook, miles away, than with the person next to them, in real life.

7. Unable to Avoid People

Previously, people could avoid each other by simply not going to the places where the person in question went, or by refusing to answer phone calls or enquiries by that person. Now, however, that option is not available online as the person in question's activities may still show up on one's newsfeed through a mutual friend. 

8. Easier to Stalk

This sounds scary, but if one wants to know more about another person, all he has to do is do a Facebook search. At the same time, who knows how many other people are watching us online? Thanks to SNS, boundaries have blurred, and it is getting increasingly more difficult to know where public life ends and where private life begins, or vice versa.

9. Harder to Diet

People often post photographs of food online, especially on Instagram. The result is that one's friends find it hard to maintain food discipline after a visual feast of an actual feast. These photos may provide an example:

How does one keep up one's diet after this? 

10. Loneliness

Another unexpected downside of SNS, loneliness can result from being too engrossed in the online world, to the point where one is alienated by friends in the real world. 

11. Productivity

A great deal of time is spent in updating profiles and sites throughout the day. This can be distracting and may actually cause one to lose valuable time and not perform at the fullest potential. People like to think they can multitask, but as this article shows, this is not the case. As time is lost on SNS, there is also time lost on getting back up to speed on the original task, which will consume both time and energy. 

12. Viruses and Malware

This problem is often overlooked. Hackers often use SNS as a ground to commit fraud and launch malware attacks. As a case in point, the Koobface Worm was extremely active in the years 2009-2012, targeting Facebook users to collect login information. Hackers also target Facebook games and applications to collect sensitive data such as credit card information, posing as "add-ons" for the app that people download. Their data is then stolen.

13. Social Engineering

Social engineering is the act of manipulating people into performing actions or divulging confidential information, usually online. Where hackers steal data, social engineers (or confidence tricksters) coax people into revealing their sensitive information. People have a habit of posting in their online profiles. While they would never disclose some kinds of information upon meeting someone for the first time (the fact that they just fought with their spouse or significant other, for instance), they have no problem in posting that for all to see on their Facebook profiles or blogs. This data can be mined by cybercriminals. 

14. Reputation and Legal Issues

There have been major lawsuits and issues involving evidence from SNS. In several cases, people have come under fire (or have been fired)  for using SNS to post inappropriate material or make disparaging comments. Yet, there should be a balance in doing so. How much is too much? There have been cases of people receiving their marching orders simply because of a single post that went along the lines of "just another day in the office". There have also been cases of others who have posted sensitive information to the point that it had to be highlighted to the authorities, who were completely unaware or blase about it. 

Conclusion

I won't warn against using this because I know it's not really possible. But be careful when using SNS. Most importantly, be discreet and know what is at stake. A job is not really worth losing over a few misplaced comments. Neither is losing friends. Essentially, that's how to get the best of online life in general: By finding a balance so that one can fully utilise its advantages while mitigating the effects of its disadvantages. 

Journalism on the Internet

The Internet has transformed many, if not all, aspects of our lives, since its invention. It has not remained static, however, but has evolved, taking us along with it. With the inception of Web 2.0 and social media, content could now flow between large corporations and individuals, rather than the previous top-down approach of Web 1.0, where the production of content was in the hands of a few select corporations.

One major industry that was greatly affected by this was the journalism industry. Here, different journalists and columnists come together and give their two pence worth (it's a British newspaper after all) on how the Internet would affect journalism. Here, too, college professors share their opinions. But what do I think? I'll talk about a couple of pros and cons first before giving my opinion. Which will probably another one in an ocean of comments. 
To begin with, the tragedy at the Boston Marathon showed, again, how quickly news can spread around the world via social media. It also demonstrated how matter-of-fact and straightforward citizen journalism could be. Quoting OJR: "While reporters tried to sort out whether reported explosions at Boston’s JFK library had any connection to the marathon explosions, a flood of tweets and Vine clips were posted with video and on-scene impressions as three people were reportedly killed and almost a hundred wounded." Yet, what exactly does citizen journalism (or journalism via social media) have over traditional journalism? And what does the latter have over it? The table below shows a few:

Why Citizen Journalism is Better	Why Traditional Journalism is Better
News received a lot faster by readers; lead time much less	Credibility (large numbers of people posting “news”)
Journalist(s) receive/s instant feedback	Comment boxes grounds for argument
Not subject to censorship (unlike traditional media, which can be state-controlled and therefore doctored)	Not as in-depth and analytical as traditional news (“quick fix” vs “immersion”)
Rich media (full colour, videos, social media)	No precondition of Internet availability
Free-Of-Charge / No variable costs once a news article is put on the Web	Requires equipment (hardware with Internet connection)
Interactive; therefore more news can be shared	Ethical issues (TRS and TOC showing pictures of the Tampines incident)

You can read more opinions by giants in the news business here. 

To be entirely fair, however, efforts are now under way to train citizen journalists in journalism, so that in the true sense of the word, they can be journalists. Traditional journalism has always been stifled by those in power: Be it the government or the head honchos of news corporations, such that the news as we know it is censored, ignored entirely or simply biased according to the views of the powers-that-be. This has caused many journalists to become disillusioned and leave the field. In this day and age, some join the blogosphere, using their old contacts and networks to stay up-to-date on the latest happenings, and reporting news on blogs and social media platforms such as Twitter. Indeed, Twitter has been instrumental in passing news along, almost in real time, from ordinary people who were at the scene. 

The point is this: Journalists have been leaving news companies in the last decade. Online journalism fills this gap. Citizen journalism reanimates journalism by placing the power of spreading information in the hands of ordinary people. No longer are blogs exclusively for keeping web journals or ranting about the inequality of life. Increasing numbers of former journalists have begun to join newly set up news blogs, using their names and reputations to boost the blog's, as well as covering stories that the newsrooms choose to ignore, or from a different perspective from that of traditional journalists. For instance:

A bit biased, but you get the point, I think.

By decentralising the news business, quality coverage of important stories will be given their due, thanks to concerned citizens. Yet, care must be taken that people do not go overboard. Offering a cash reward for news stories is a surefire way of that. This can be seen in Singapore's STOMP, where $50 was offered for a story that made breaking news on the online news portal. As a result, many stories that were exaggerated or outright fraudulent were submitted, most notably that of the MRT door. There needs to be a balance between searching for news and soliciting it, which, I think, Singapore has yet to find. That said, the traditional newspapers such as The Straits' Times and TODAY have done a good job in bringing their content online, so as to attract more subscribers. 

Update: I have just read this news article that shows the picture above wasn't being entirely honest, either. However, this reinforces my point on news on social media being spread extremely quickly. The article in question just came out 8 hours ago and it's already making its rounds on Facebook. Contrast this to normal newspapers, who can only run their printing presses once or twice a day, and you can see the difference in efficiency. Also, it illustrates that though social media is good for on-the-spot coverage, it loses out to traditional media in terms of credibility and in-depth analysis.

Macs vs Microsoft

As mentioned in the title

As mentioned, Microsoft (formerly run by Bill Gates) and Apple (formerly under Steve Jobs) share a sort of rivalry. But instead of saying which of them is better, I thought I'd just give a brief history of the two companies, and state what they do. As to which is better, I'll let better men than me decide.
To begin with, here is a brief history:

Clearly, Apple's stock is doing much better than Microsoft's. Yet, though the specific numbers themselves are unclear, sources state that Windows has a much higher market share than Apple's OS X (91.8% vs 7.3% in 2008). By the numbers, however, Wall Street investors see Apple as having a much higher potential for growth and better overall prospects than Microsoft. But what is the difference between them? There are several factors listed:

1. Design- Apple

Steve Jobs' unwavering commitment to put design first was a novel, if not alien concept at the time, but it's paid off handsomely since 1998, when the coloured iMac first made its appearance. Apple products are generally much sleeker-looking in terms of design than its counterparts from other companies that use Microsoft Windows. 

2. Choice- Windows

Strictly speaking, unlike Apple, Microsoft does not make its own PCs, but rather leases its software out to various large corporations. This allows for far greater choice for the consumer, and also lets them find a computer that suits their exact needs. On the other hand, Apple offers just five computer lines: the MacBook Air, the MacBook Pro, the Mac mini, the iMac and the Mac Pro. 

3. Technical Specifications- Depends on the consumer

Generally, Apple products have faster processors than their Windows counterparts. The latter, however, have more RAM, hard disk space and USB ports. Both of them, however, offer CD/DVD readers and writers, video output and allow for external speakers. 

4. Price- No clear winner

I know this sounds illogical, but the reason why Apple products are so expensive is generally because it made the decision to build its line of products around the higher end of the line. This holds particularly true for computers. In general, therefore, an Apple computer would cost around the same as a Windows one with similar specifications (comparison: Samsung Series 7 Notebook 700Z3A at $1688 costs around the same as a 13-inch Macbook Pro with Retina Display at $1499). That said, Windows products have a much greater price range (from $599), which reaches out to different income groups. 

5. Availability- Windows

Windows is more available. As mentioned previously, this was because Microsoft licensed out Windows to other companies while Apple is far more selective. 

6. Security- Apple

However, this leads to a problem: That of security. In a previous post, I mentioned that of all the computer viruses out today, the overwhelming majority of them are directed at Windows, rather than at Apple software. However, as the popularity of Apple products increase, so, too, will the malware aimed at it. For now though, Apple users tend to be less at risk of malware than their Windows counterparts.

Conclusion

At the end of the day, the popularity of Apple seems to be on the rise, while Windows seems to be on the decline. With Google's Android being thrown into this mix now, the future of these two software giants seems to be a bit more uncertain. At this point though, they are in flux and not particularly stable, but, to me, in time, they will eventually settle into a fixed part of the market share, each brand having its own loyal following and bringing different things to the table. 

Puerile Pert Politicians on the World Wide Web

The Internet and politics share a rather curious relationship. Though it can be seen today that many, many politicians use the Web for a significant portion of their political platform, this was not always the case. Politicians tend to follow the people, and so as a result, moved onto the Internet comparatively later. According to MediaShift, the earliest known political site was the political forum FreeRepublic, established in 1997. Despite the late start, incumbent and opposition parties the world over have quickly utilised the Web for their own purposes: Mostly to reach out to their supporters and disseminate information (or to make promises to gain support), but in many cases, to promote political activism in what has been termed "Internet Activism". This was most prominently noted in the Arab Springs, where  social media websites, such as Facebook and Twitter, helped people organize the political revolutions in Egypt where it helped certain classes of protesters organize protests, communicate grievances and disseminate information. As with all things, there are definitely pros and cons. I will talk about some of them below.

Pros

1. Wide Audience

The first and probably most obvious good point about the Internet is that it has the potential to reach a large number of people. In Singapore alone, for example, statistics in 2011 show that 75% of its population used the Internet, with a steadily increasing trend. What about the global trend? World Internet usage has grown by 566% between 2000-2012, with the greatest proportion of this growth hailing from Africa, Latin America and the Middle East. However, continents with the greatest population of Internet users are also continents where politicians have routinely utilised social media to boost their reach. These places are North America, Europe and Australia. It makes sense, therefore, for politicians to set up websites promoting their message and garnering votes or even to use social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, because they will be able to reach a significant proportion of their voters, especially if they are reaching out to a younger population. 

2. Free and Easy to Operate

Another feature to take into account is cost-effectivity. Where once political parties had to spend huge amounts of money on printing flyers and newsletters to distribute among their voters, they can now pay much less to have their message put online on a .com site. Starting from US$4.99/year, it is not free, but nonetheless saves candidates the cost of printing the old-fashioned way, and freeing up the budget for other things: Advertising, for one. 

With the advent of Facebook Pages, costs have gone down even more because setting up and maintaining a page is completely free. Furthermore, because an increasing number of people are now on Facebook, there is greater coverage. 

3. Interactive

With the advent of Web 2.0, generating content could now rest in the hands of anyone with a  computer, rather than simply a few huge corporations. Because of that, the Web became much more intaractive, which was an advantage for politicians and voters alike. Voters could now express their views, and politicians (from either the ruling or opposition party) could see what the general public felt about them, and modify their stance accordingly. 

4. Supplements Traditional Campaigning

Many political parties take the middle approach and supplement their old methods with social media. This is so they can have the best of both worlds: The easy access to large numbers of people via social media, and the personal touch of old media.

Cons

1. Unfiltered Content

The Web is generally unregulated. This leads to different kinds of people posting and commenting on all kinds of activities (including politics). Because people can generally say what they want on their blogs or post anything they want on social media platforms, they can cause quite a lot of harm to the political campaign if the sites are not regulated by moderators from time to time. This is a time-consuming and laborious process that may cost more than simply printing flyers, depending on the regularity. Alternatively, one may also use automated moderators, but there is a risk that they will be either too strict or too lenient with what is kept out.

2. "Liking" ≠ support

Everyone on Facebook will have come across this from time to time: "Like" a certain page/post, share it with other friends and/or leave a comment for a chance to win (insert wonderful object here). A recent example was the recent MacBook Giveaway scam. The point here is that for someone owning a Facebook page (politician or no), it is erroneous to assume that the number of "Likes" one gets on Facebook is a sign of one's popularity. Furthermore, followup is rather difficult to do if not taken offline. In this sense, having a person "Like" one's Facebook page is only the first step to one's political campaign gaining traction. 

3. Little Loyalty Fostered- Especially if Not Followed Up

This is especially true if politicians only reach out to their voters online. No matter what, what people value is face-to-face conversation or seeing one in person, rather than simply online. 

4. Risk of Backfiring

Attempts at adding a personal or informal touch to one's political posts can often backfire rather spectacularly. Perhaps none can explain this better than Tin Pei Ling of the PAP, when she came under intense fire because of some aspects of her lifestyle, as well as some others:

Another way social media can backfire on the politician is if what he says/does is taken out of context and used against them, sometimes disastrously so. The video above is an example of that, but a more common example is that of Singaporean political blogs such as The Real Singapore and The Online Citizen. 

Evaluation

At the end of the day, is the Internet and Social Media going to help or hurt politicians? My answer is both. There are people on both sides of the political fence who will work on supporting or criticising the political parties involved. It is because of this that very often, political analysts do not take what is said by politicians to determine election results, but rather on the number of hits that show up on a google search, or more recently, by simply checking how many people are talking about him on social media. 

Hackers and Internet Security

The idea that there are now so many viruses on the Internet that can be unwittingly downloaded is slightly disturbing, to say the least. With all the malware floating around on the Web, it is perhaps safe to say that there millions of these programmes currently in existence today. Experts also estimate that in a single day, 1200 unique viruses are made for Windows and PC, and 7 for Mac. But the point of this article isn't on the viruses, but rather, the people who make them. 
Why do people make viruses? There can be several reasons why:

• To control a computer and/or to make it perform a task
• For money (this can include lifting one's personal information like one's ID, credit card numbers and passwords, etc.)
• To prove a point (either that it can be done, for personal glory or for revenge)

Hackers: Different Types

Yup. The coolest ever.

Generally, the people who make them are called hackers. This term, however, is slightly ambiguous. According to Wikipedia, there are several interpretations of the term:

• The first of these, as well as the most common, is a person committed to finding ways to get around Internet Security. This may include people who create viruses and Trojan Horses, as mentioned above, but may also include those who maintain the integrity of the Web. 
• There is also a group of computer enthusiasts who name themselves "Hackers". This is a group that had its inception in MIT in the 1960's. It is notable for launching the Free Software Movement.
• Finally, there is a home computing community of hobbyists. It focused on hardware in the 1970s and software from the 1980s onwards. 

However, it is the first type of hackers I wish to talk about today. 

Generally, a hacker may be defined as a person who seeks and exploits weaknesses in a computer system or network (Sterling, 1993). While previously operating underground, hackers have now started to come under the public spotlight, and can generally be classified into three groups: Black Hats, White Hats and Grey Hats.

Black Hats

Black hat hackers are hackers who violate computer security simply for malice or personal gain (Moore, 2005). These are the people most often portrayed in the media as potential if not actual criminals and are mainly the ones behind malware and virus creation. They often break into and cripple a network for no reason other than to destroy data for personal glory. 

White Hats

Close enough

White Hat hackers are not exactly the antithesis of Black Hats. They break security, but for non-malicious reasons. Some reasons for doing so include security checks, vulnerability assessments and penetration tests. Sometimes known as Ethical Hackers, these people often work for mainstream firms in performing online security or Web maintenance. Indeed, it is not uncommon for a Black Hat to change his ways (usually after getting caught) and become a White Hat, or vice versa. 

Grey Hats

What else, right?

The final broad category of hacker is the Grey Hat hacker. This is the most morally ambiguous group of hackers. They may sometimes act illegally, though not for personal gain or malice. They may, for example, hack into a company's security system, then proceed to inform the company of a weakness in their systems - along with the entire hacking community. They will then sit back and enjoy the developments. The term may also refer to a hacker who grapples with questions of law and/or ethics in his/her line of work. 

Conclusion

These are only the three broadest groups of hackers. There are many others, like Elite Hackers, Script Kiddies, Neophytes, Blue Hats, Hactivists and Bots, though their motivations and intent may be classified under either White, Grey or Black Hat. A couple of points I'd like to make are that firstly, hacking is not necessarily a criminal activity or carried out of malice. Many hackers are gainfully employed for maintaining web security and maintenance, and even police the Web for signs of malicious hacking. Secondly, with the Web becoming increasingly necessary for carrying out daily tasks, it is perhaps sadly inevitable that attacks and malware of this nature would increase. It therefore becomes necessary that we know, at least, what kind of tools are out there, and what kind of people are able to use those tools.