D Ladies decided to do their project on qualitative analysis of media coverage of events in Russia during ten days – from 13th to 23rd November 2008. Than they compared particular media, amount of articles and their content and spin. For their project D Ladies used RRS feeds.
The amount of articles is really amazing, it is obvious that it must have taken a lot of work to go through them and write to each important issue relevant abstract. Another thing, which should be mentioned, is new technology being managed by girls. Moreover, it was quite hard to do the project in the number of two people, as was obvious from discussion – I have to appreciate it.
However, there are some things which I miss. At first, in the beginning I wasn’t able to catch the topic which the wiki covered. I would recommend to write some introduction and to explain the aims and goals, which the team wants to get. On the other hand, I liked the introduction of the team and other personal features, which made the wiki not anonymous.
Another thing, which should be mentioned, is an absence of deeper method description. If some research is done, there should be explained, why I choose particular sources, ask some target group etc. Also I missed better conclusion and results of the research. After so many used sources and articles is necessary, in my opinion, to have some final statements.
All in all, with some introduction and conclusion it would be very good wiki, with interesting content and also quite creatively made. Good job
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Anglo-American vs. Continental approach to IP
There are two main reasons for intellectual property law. Firstly, the IT should protect the interest of authors/creators of work by giving them property rights over their creations. The second reason should think on society – Intellectual property should encourage inventors to open their ideas for the society, which can gather from it.
Basically, there are two school of intellectual property law – Continental and Anglo-American. Both have some both similar features and also differences. The Anglo-American approach focuses mostly on the work and profit. As Kiado quoted Samuels - We don’t have to pay all authors in advance in order to get them to create their works. Instead, we pay them in rights - rights in the very works that they create. This sentence nicely describes Anglo-American school and may be some American character as well. In his school are authors given all rights to their work art for their whole life of author plus seventy years. Notice of copyright and publication aren’t required, because there is a presumption of protection.
There are two major exceptions to presumption of copyright. The first of them is a public domain, which is applied after the expiration of author’s rights and also US Government documents are under the public domain – anybody can copy and print them without permission. Fair use exception is need for maximization social wealth in the field of information. According to this law is possible to use for instance parts of text and images on the internet, if you quote or link them back to the source. In my opinion, you can´t earn money on it – Fair use doesn’t include this condition.
Both European continental and Anglo-American schools of IP protects expressions of ideas, but not ideas as such, in several ways: Inventions (patent) writings (copyright), trademarks, trade secrets, and most recently designs and models, using similar legal mechanisms.1 In the contrary, continental civil law considers intellectual property from a perspective of the author’s moral rights, so rather than social wealth the focus in Europe is on the integrity of the person.
I am not sure, which of these systems is better working, so I hope that the international law took from both their better parts.
1 Engle, Eric. When is Fair Use Fair? Online: http://lexnet.bravepages.com/IPMASTER.htm#A.
Basically, there are two school of intellectual property law – Continental and Anglo-American. Both have some both similar features and also differences. The Anglo-American approach focuses mostly on the work and profit. As Kiado quoted Samuels - We don’t have to pay all authors in advance in order to get them to create their works. Instead, we pay them in rights - rights in the very works that they create. This sentence nicely describes Anglo-American school and may be some American character as well. In his school are authors given all rights to their work art for their whole life of author plus seventy years. Notice of copyright and publication aren’t required, because there is a presumption of protection.
There are two major exceptions to presumption of copyright. The first of them is a public domain, which is applied after the expiration of author’s rights and also US Government documents are under the public domain – anybody can copy and print them without permission. Fair use exception is need for maximization social wealth in the field of information. According to this law is possible to use for instance parts of text and images on the internet, if you quote or link them back to the source. In my opinion, you can´t earn money on it – Fair use doesn’t include this condition.
Both European continental and Anglo-American schools of IP protects expressions of ideas, but not ideas as such, in several ways: Inventions (patent) writings (copyright), trademarks, trade secrets, and most recently designs and models, using similar legal mechanisms.1 In the contrary, continental civil law considers intellectual property from a perspective of the author’s moral rights, so rather than social wealth the focus in Europe is on the integrity of the person.
I am not sure, which of these systems is better working, so I hope that the international law took from both their better parts.
1 Engle, Eric. When is Fair Use Fair? Online: http://lexnet.bravepages.com/IPMASTER.htm#A.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Against intellectual property
This essay written by Brian Martin offers very strong view on intellectual property and sets many though-provoking ideas, which I have never thought through before. Martin´s aim is quite simple: No intellectual products should be owned by individuals, corporations, governments or any communities as a common property.
His reasons are basically three: Intellectual property retards innovation, exploits Third World countries and makes profit to only a few huge corporations and strongest governments. All in all, intellectual property doesn’t fulfill its purpose and should be replaced by free use and sharing. For instance, alternative to copyright could be shareright. You may reproduce this material if your recipients may also reproduce it.
Scientists, freelancers’ writers and similar professions should be paid not by royalties, but rather from some foundation or other sources, because royalties and patents don’t offer them big amount of money anyway – most of all money goes to corporations who own rights. Moreover, similar to Himanen and his Hacker Ethic concept, Martin suppose the biggest
Satisfaction for these people is their work itself and recognition by their peers.
Even if this is true (or true for most of cases), I can´t imagine reorganization of the economic system. I agree that the system is nowadays set up unequal and advantages the powerful and weaken the poor. But according to this, I can´t see any power, which can defeat this enormous lobby. More I believe in gradational shortening of patent and royalties duration or giving more money to creators. Unfortunately, even I like this brave idea very much, the general trend is not going in this way. May be, there are scissors: many people, especially web community, are fighting against the intellectual property and behave in opposite way, but the corporations are striking hard – for example the case with genetic information. I am very curious, how this big bang will finally happen.
Btw, there is another question in my mind – the amount of passionate inventors, would it be bigger than researchers and scholar, freelance writers and artist, who will change their job, because they are doing it for money? Would this intellectual property canceling really start boom of creativity and innovation? Who knows, may be Brian.
His reasons are basically three: Intellectual property retards innovation, exploits Third World countries and makes profit to only a few huge corporations and strongest governments. All in all, intellectual property doesn’t fulfill its purpose and should be replaced by free use and sharing. For instance, alternative to copyright could be shareright. You may reproduce this material if your recipients may also reproduce it.
Scientists, freelancers’ writers and similar professions should be paid not by royalties, but rather from some foundation or other sources, because royalties and patents don’t offer them big amount of money anyway – most of all money goes to corporations who own rights. Moreover, similar to Himanen and his Hacker Ethic concept, Martin suppose the biggest
Satisfaction for these people is their work itself and recognition by their peers.
Even if this is true (or true for most of cases), I can´t imagine reorganization of the economic system. I agree that the system is nowadays set up unequal and advantages the powerful and weaken the poor. But according to this, I can´t see any power, which can defeat this enormous lobby. More I believe in gradational shortening of patent and royalties duration or giving more money to creators. Unfortunately, even I like this brave idea very much, the general trend is not going in this way. May be, there are scissors: many people, especially web community, are fighting against the intellectual property and behave in opposite way, but the corporations are striking hard – for example the case with genetic information. I am very curious, how this big bang will finally happen.
Btw, there is another question in my mind – the amount of passionate inventors, would it be bigger than researchers and scholar, freelance writers and artist, who will change their job, because they are doing it for money? Would this intellectual property canceling really start boom of creativity and innovation? Who knows, may be Brian.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Hackers approach in daily life (by Martin Šesták)
The way the world is going is said to be faster than ever before, due to changes in technical development, social life or human thinking. Especially in developed or fast developing countries have people to face these changes in their everyday life. In the response, they have to change their daily routines, habits, working stereotypes and their ways of life at all. There are several authors, who consider present changes to be dramatic and paradigmatic. Robert Theobald (1987) calls it mind-quake, formed as a parallel to earthquake. Charles Handy formulates his paradoxes on modern society and Manuel Castells (1996) comes with his book vision of new networked society. All those authors present in common, that there are in apparently huge changes in the society, not only storm in a teacup.
In the core of most of changes are information technology; above all computing, internet and networks. This new phenomenon has brought turbulences in simply all areas of human doing. Beside all technological progress, it caused also changes in people´s behaving, thinking, working, entertaining and even ethic. In connection with it, information becomes the most important good.
Hacker: The introduction
In the core of this new digital society are people calling themselves Hackers. People, who program enthusiastically and who believe that information sharing is a powerful positive good, and that it is an ethical duty of hackers to share their experience by writing free software and facilitating access to information and to computing resources wherever possible (Himanen, 2001, Preface) A major source of historical terminology of the field, The Jargon File, offers probably the most exhaustive definition. In its meaning, except of hackers of programming and computing field can be hacker any expert or enthusiast of any kind. One might be mathematical hacker, one surgery hacker, for instance. Crucial is to enjoy the intellectual challenge of creatively overcoming or circumventing limitations (The Jargon File definition of hacker, points 6 and 7).
Very important feature of the hackers’ way of work is their passion, which describes the general tenor of their activity, though its fulfillment may not be sheer joyful play in all its aspects. (Himanen, 2001, p 18). Also fore gurus of hacker culture consider the passion to be the most important aspect of any work. Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux describes his approach in his prologue to Pekka Himanen's Hacker Ethic as follows: All of our motivations fall into three basic categories. More important, progress is about going through those very same things as “phases” in a process of evolution, a matter of passing from one category to the next. The categories, in order, are “survival”, “social life”, and “entertainment” (Himanen, 2001, XIII). Also Steve Wozniak, who built the first real personal computer in the mid-70s (Apple I and Apple II), has similar opinion on passion. His life formula is H=F3, means Happiness = Food, fun and friends. Both Wozniak´s and Torvalds´s mottos reference to Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory, which consists of five basic levels: Physiological needs, Safety needs, Social needs, Esteem needs and Self-actualization.
People in developed countries spend most of their working age at work. Nevertheless, many of them state that their job is very or extremely stressful. The point and goal of both hackers´ formulas is to refer, that the work should be more enjoyable, if the society wants to be more effective and satisfied and right developing. People are already overloaded by work in despite of continual innovations and new technologies - they usually can make the process of production easier, but doesn’t respite the people.
Protestant and hacker ethic
The passion seems to be the general term, which differs previous and upcoming ethic of work. In most of professions and jobs is still promoted the protestant work ethic, which dictates the work must be done because of its purpose, going on the schedule, sometimes to extreme and often the work is being done just to be done. On the contrary, the hacker work ethic says he work should be done, because we want to do it. As hackers´ success stories show, they can make with hacker work ethic together even better job than with the protestant one, and, moreover, enjoy it (Himanen, 2001, Part Work Ethic).
Another part of hacker work ethic is based on time flexibility. The idea is that for creativity, innovation and any job where it is possible is necessary to have the right mood and proper time. Himanen claims: “Protestant ethic means also means the work-centered organization of life. The Protestant ethic introduced the idea of regular working time as the center of life. Self-organization was lost and relegated to a region of work’s leftover: the evenings as what’s left of the day, the weekend as the reminder of the week, and retirement – the leftovers of life (Himanen, 2001, p 29).
In such a schedule there isn’t a lot of space for personal setting of life. “Is our purpose at work to do time or to do something?” asks Himanen (Himanen, 2001, p 38) and recommends evaluating people not on how much time they waste, but how much they accomplish in longer time period. In my own experience, this idea I like very much, but in my personal experience, many companies go exactly against this hacker ethic’s logic. For instance, using particular “sniffing software” creates absolute ambivalent environment. In contrast, there is for example a company, where employees participate in decisions about their working hours.
Hacker ethic in practice
Time flexibility, passion, community and sharing knowledge, sources, ideas and final products are the building stones of hacker ethic. The work is done not for money at the first place, but for the highest levels of Maslow’s pyramid of needs – self- actualization, entertainment or recognition in the community. As Raymond says in his essay Homesteading the Noosphere about the social workings of open source software development, those hackers are motivated by the force of peer recognition. Recognition within a community that shares their passion is more important and more deeply satisfying than money, just as it is for scholars in academe. All of this in terms of Netiquette, moral guide advising how to behave on the net and collaborate with other users.
Field of very successful project using hacker ethic is very wide. When creating them, hackers keep some core values, which Pekka Himanen and calls as The Seven Values of the Hacker Ethic: Passion, freedom, hacker work ethic, hacker money ethic, hacker network ethic, caring and creativity (Himanen, 2001, p 139-141). We can name several successful projects, which are built up with hacker ethic ideas: Linux, Wikipedia, P2P networks or Second Life, which is commercial, but build up with contribution of community.
Hacker ethic in society
In Himanen’s other paper, Challenges to the Global Information Society (2004), he suggests applying the hacker ethic on the whole society. Summarizing both it and the Hacker Ethic, the hacker ethic should become the spirit and important part of ideology of information society, social development and creative economy.
His view on implementation hacker into everyday work is quite optimistic, but he describes most of processes and trends in general and not indeed enough. Practical implementation will need many years of tuff work on all levels of society. Some theoretical and practical inspiration I can see in Anthony Giddens´s “third way” practically used in British Labour Party policies, which could be valuable source of experience. And I have to agree with Himanen’s opinion that combining a dynamic information society with the creative welfare state could have an important role to play in more sustainable development (and even more sustainable globalization) (Himanen, 2004, p 23).
However, in my opinion, the most too far gone vision is to implement this hacker ethic and information society features to all professions. I can´t imagine applying it in routine jobs or at the desks. Another thing is, how to force (or rather persuade) the formally free companies and all the whole powerful commercialized system to accept it? Why they haven’t done it before, when it is better for them and their employees as well? If it would threaten their money, there is a huge obstacle (Janussen, 2005).
Moreover, some people needs to have an order and can´t simply make their time on their consideration, plan their timetable ad be successful herewith. By the way, most of hackers are quite eccentric, I guess. For instance, Richard Stallman, the bearded and longhaired hacker guru, attends computer gathering in a robe, and he exorcises commercial programs from the machines bought to him by his followers (Himanen, 2004, p 5). Another question is whose justice will prevail - will it be easier for young and bright students to live in this new hacker-ethical society than it is for grandmother and grandfathers (Janussen, 2005)
Nevertheless, for many jobs and professions is hacker ethic very challenging and though-provoking. Especially, for companies oriented on creativity, continuous development and innovation it will be close future. At least, to get any original ideas you need to have original (personal) environment, which hacker work ethic offers.
To be honest, if more hacker ethic’s features were implemented at my work and may be in my live at all, I would be happy.
References:
- Theobald, R. The Rapids of Change. Online: http://www.indra.com/transform/dlc/rapids/rapids.html
- Richard Stallman personal website http://www.stallman.org/
- Freman, Hadley. Time off for good behaviour. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jan/03/gender.uk
- Eric S. Raymond's Home Page. http://www.catb.org/~esr/
- Raymond, Eric S. Homesteading the Noosphere. http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/homesteading/. Page 100.
- Time spent at work in
- Janussen, Aputsiaq. Adding Rationality to Himanen`s Hacker Ethic.
- http://third.oekonux-conference.org/documentation/texts/Janussen.html
- Manuel Castells on the Network Society. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_society
- Himanen, Pekka. Challenges to the Global Information Society. 2004. Online: http://www.eduskunta.fi/efakta/vk/tuv/challenges_of_the_globalinformationsociety.pdf
- Himanen, Pekka. Hacker Ethic.
- Network society http://books.google.com/books?id=hngg4aFtJVcC&dq=manuel+castells+network+society&pg=PP1&ots=N83cznWst4&sig=mBhRZtRgPT4Bh9XNvM0-OsHjBwc&prev=http://www.google.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dmanuel%2Bcastells%2Bnetwork%2Bsociety%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=one-book-with-thumbnail#PPA493,M1
- Charles Handy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Handy
- Fisher, Lawrenc M. The paradox of Charles Handy. Online: http://www.strategy-business.com/press/16635507/03309
- Manuel Castells personal web page. Online: http://sociology.berkeley.edu/faculty/castells/
- Ethic. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
- The Jargon File. Online: http://www.catb.org/%7Eesr/jargon
- Linus Torvalds. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus_Torvalds
- Linux official site. Online: http://www.linux.org/
- Steve Wozniak. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Wozniak
- Apple computer history. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_I
- Hierarchy of needs pyramid. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs
- History of work Ethic. Online: http://www.coe.uga.edu/~rhill/workethic/hist.htm
- Personal inspector web page. Online: http://www.personal-inspector.com/
- Software development. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_development
- Anthony Giddens. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Giddens
- Workinfo.com. The Third Way. Online: http://www.workinfo.com/EconHist/thirdway.htm
- Second Life. Online: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life
- P2P Networks. Online: http://ntrg.cs.tcd.ie/undergrad/4ba2.02-03/Intro.html
Web 2.0 – from professional mass media to the citizenship media (by Kristaps Brūveris)
Fast development of new technologies and switching from using TV, radio and newspapers to Internet in our everyday lives also lead down to changes of ways of receiving, creating and posting the news. The biggest difference is – everyone who wants can be journalist or media nowadays. In this essay I will discuss the changes on society and flow of information because of the appearance of the new media.
The technical potentialities offered by the Internet provide limitless opportunities for spreading information by anybody who wants to say something. As David Gillmor, journalist and author of the book “We the media” indicates, if everybody (he mainly concentrates on society of US) got the latest news about World War II from few national radio channels, and later TV replaced the importance of radio, September 11 was the first large accident where the latest and hottest information like photos of crash was received and forwarded thru Internet as well (Gillmor, 2006, XIX). Earlier
Although it may seem that grassroots journalism started in the beginning of the XX century, there were at the end of 90-ties mail lists and forums as well which the first time introduced many-to-many information streams while the weblogs – main many-to-many media at this moment had not appeared yet (Gillmor, 2006, 27). The first well-known germ of grassroots citizenship could be observed already on 1994 when Pentium company touched with the users of Usenet who forwarded the information about discovered Pentium bug.
Gillmor mainly looks at web media mainly as an alternative for what he calls Big Media – censored national mass media which mainly belongs to some large corporations and are working only for profit or interests of the particular media’s owner but for the sake of their audience (Gillmor, 2006, XXVI). It means that one of the main advantages and goodness for the new media is impossibility for the censorship. For example, Gillmor describes the protest bombing in
On the other hand, there are several discussions, can one mention blogging when speaking about journalism and media if there is no editor between the author and reader. (Lasica, 2003). Still, if the bloggers broadcast news or information about latest events, no strict rules can be drawn for the borders of journalism.
Not only weblogs are the proof for the changes from one-to-many to many-to-many information channels. Gillmor gives an example how simple SMS bypassed the censorship of government of
Forwarding of SMS allows comprehend them as many-to-many media as well nowadays not only one-to-one media. Just by the help of short message service tens of thousands of Filipinos brought down a corrupt
Moreover, SMS services joined with blogging open up new opportunities for transforming latest information with help of such services as Twitter. Just sending SMS with one word ‘arrested’ helped student from US to inform all his acquaintances that he was putted illegally in Egyptian jail (Simon, 2008).
Twitter as a service even comes to light as the fastest media at this moment – it is recognized as the first media where one could get known about earthquake in
Internet as a medium between people now allows creating most unimaginable forms of protest. One of the examples Gillmor draws is the campaign “Bush in 30 Seconds” where everyone on portal MoveOn.org in the spring of 2004 could create and post his own made anti-Bush commercials and compete for the best commercial’s title (Gillmor, 2006, 100).
As Gillmor points, biggest mistake of old media and advantage of new media is listening to audience (Gillmor, 2006, 237). For example, some popular internet portals like portal for women wowowow.com have been created just as an answer for magazines which didn’t satisfied the demands of its main audience (The Guardian, 2008). And the Internet with its feedback options is the first democratic not top-down hierarchy media (Gillmor, 2006, 236). There is now another option than to read the news selected by some news editors. As blogger David Weinberger points, why should Americans hear the news about
The professional media have yet realized that they can’t prevail over the new citizenship media, so their only possibility is to use advantages of new media for their own sake. Gillmor tell that in last times before writing a new article, he asks his blog readers for their additional ideas as he realize that his audience in total is smarter than he alone (Gillmor, 2006, 113). The New York Times also has started similar practice – by publishing some articles at first on web, and after taking into account readers’ comments and supplementing the article with new viewpoints they publish improved article in the newspaper (Landman, 2008). Even the media giant BBC has chosen similar approach by asking their audience to send pictures from hot spots like
On the other hand, some ways of controlling the latest technologies as a media should be taken as there have been already situations when new media are used not only for spreading latest news but just some private and sensitive data like hidden videotapes from the gyms (Searing, 2003).
The old media like newspapers have even no choice as to convert to new media. Even editor of one of the biggest US newspaper The New York Times admit that their online audience is much larger than the one of printed newspaper – he moreover specifies that almost all readers of their newspaper visit also their web page, but not the all web page’s visitors read the newspaper as well (Landman, 2008).
Spreading of possibility for each citizen to inform everybody about his opinion has also changed other fields of the common communication channels like public relations as well. In the golden era of radio and TV the communication between producer and costumer was also one way – thru commercials. Now, if the costumer is dissatisfied or catch the producer in the act, he can tell it to much wider audience as ever before. Gillmor mention how simple citizen found in the pictures’ archive photo which was used for Microsoft’s advertising campaign with the description that person in the photo have recently switched from Mac to PC. The particular citizen when realized that the ad is fake, published the information forward till the Microsoft took down the ad (Gillmor, 2006, 50). Nowadays even one can find many testimonials on the web about any good or services he is going to buy. Every big company now follows or at least try to follow any discussion on the web about themselves (Gillmor, 2006, 57). Only so big companies as MySpace can allow to not paying attention for such kind of activities as “International Delete Your MySpace Account Day” (Hopkins, 2008).
But the marketing specialists have also discovered the power of the new media and now they just take into account that it is more productive to reach one blogger with large audience who is specialized in particular theme than to spend thousands for the TV ads (Gillmor, 2006, 69). Any good or bad reference by well known blogger will even appear in the first page when searching for the product in Google as Google ranking system evaluates blogs higher than any other sites. Some companies have realized that contacting personally the blogger who have posted bad reference about their product and correcting any possible mistakes in the communication with the blogger may convert the bad reference for the good one (Gillmor, 2006, 86). To reach the costumers, some companies have created also their cooperative blogs which helps also to inform their regular clients and any interests about any news they would like for clients to know (Gillmor, 2006, 74). Some public relation people go farther on using Internet for their own goals – creating RRS feeds of releases helps to distinguish the information from just over spammed email boxes (Gillmor, 2006, 81).
The changes of everyday using of media which have been brought by the new technologies most probably will disappear in the future but should lead as closer to the complete democracy if no censorship by governments appears in the closest time. Moreover there should be some noticeable improvement on the average quality of news as the Internet allows to edit them later and include suggested updates from the audience as well. So the largest difference between old and new media should appear that now story does not belong to the journalist alone anymore but to the audience as it must be able to change or edit it freely (Bowman & Willis, 2003).
List of references
· BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/
· Bowman, S. & Willis, C. We Media: How Audiences are Shaping the Future of News and Information. The Media Center at the American Press Institute, 2003. http://www.hypergene.net/wemedia/weblog.php
· “Bush in 30 seconds” http://www.moveon.org/bushin30seconds/
· CNET. Intel exec on the future of Net, computing. 1999 http://news.cnet.com/2009-1001_3-224567.html
· Dan Gillmor’s home page http://www.dangillmor.com/
· Gillmor Davis. We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. O’Reilly Media, 2006. pp301 (Available also on the internet: http://wethemedia.oreilly.com/)
· Hopkin Marks.
· Hopkin Marks. Journalism and PR in the New Media. 2008 http://mashable.com/2008/01/24/journalism-and-pr-in-the-new-media/
· How Google ranks pages http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=34432
· Kaus Mickey. Bonus Onus, 2002. http://slate.msn.com/id/2075444&#darkmatter
· Landman Jonathan. Talk to the Newsroom: Deputy Managing Editor Jonathan Landman. The New Your Times; 2008. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/27/business/media/27askthetimes.html?hp=&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1212041024-CwLix/Lodhqou1Lqvf4xCg
· Lasica J.D. What is Participatory Journalism? 2003 http://www.ojr.org/ojr/workplace/1060217106.php
· Mallory Simon. Student 'Twitters' his way out of Egyptian jail. CNN; 2008. http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/04/25/twitter.buck/index.html
· New Media. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_media
· Pentium FDIV bug http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_FDIV_bug
· Searing Linda. Some Gyms Ban Camera Phones.
· Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SARS
· The Guardian. The wow factor. 2008. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/mar/21/pressandpublishing.internet
· The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/
· The Woman on the Web http://www.wowowow.com/
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Social engineering
As any other trick, social engineering is successful only if the attacker is smarter than his victim. The most important are information and some knowledge about dangers and traps on the net. A lot of people don’t recognize mail from spam, more to recognize serious attempts to gain their identity and passwords. In my opinion, there should be some security tutorial for new users installing internet browser – some guide “How to avoid problems”.
Very dangerous is to Trojan horse or virus which activates pop-up window which requests retyping your username and password because of, for example” lost connection. The password could be even written by dots, so you can very easily reveal your personal data.
Very dangerous is to Trojan horse or virus which activates pop-up window which requests retyping your username and password because of, for example” lost connection. The password could be even written by dots, so you can very easily reveal your personal data.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Case of hacktivism
The term hacktivism hadn´t been very well known and usual in my country, so the situation before last elections in 2006 was for many people surprising. The election campaign spread also on internet and among hackers. For example personal sites of a few popular politicians have been hacked and somebody on their homepages rude words or tried to stultify them. Because negativity was one of the most important features of those elections, this hacking could influence final results – not only by stultifying, but also politicians´ failure to oppose new situation effectively and rise above.
Very funny were also “Google bombs” – if you write some rude word (as “namyšlenej idiot” – bigheaded idiot), the first result in Google search will be personnel site of former Czech Prime Minister Jiří Paroubek. It became very famous and Paroubek asked Google for prohibiting this relation, but didn’t succeed.
Very funny were also “Google bombs” – if you write some rude word (as “namyšlenej idiot” – bigheaded idiot), the first result in Google search will be personnel site of former Czech Prime Minister Jiří Paroubek. It became very famous and Paroubek asked Google for prohibiting this relation, but didn’t succeed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
