Laura Ingles

Hate speech on the Internet should be restricted.
I agree that hate speech on the Internet should be restricted, or at least controlled at a reasonable level. Hate speech, especially over the Internet due to its ability to spread rapidly, has the potential to ruin one’s reputation. The question is who will restrict it? If the Internet is not owned by any one person or organization – which it should not be – then who will regulate such things? All slander over the Internet ought to be controlled, but, as is the problem with other aspects of the Internet, the question of who will take on that responsibility remains unanswered.

Children under the age of 18 should not be allowed to create a social networking account.
Children under the age of 18 should not be allowed to create accounts for mature social networking accounts, such as Facebook. While they do not need to be exposed to pictures and information that is so easily accessible on Facebook, I understand their desire to be in the loop. Sites for younger kids, such as Webkinz, are carefully administered and monitored, and are perfectly acceptable for pre-teens. Young girls who, for example, meet at summer camp and want to keep in touch, are able to do so through websites such as this without getting involved with MySpace, Facebook or Instant Messenger until they get older.

Businesses/companies should not access potential employees' blogs and/or social networking page.
Bloggers and users of social networking sites ought to know better than to include incriminating information. While it is unfair for potential employers to judge a candidate based on his or her blog or Facebook page, those competing for jobs should be more conscious of what they put online. Decisions should not be based solely on information found on the Internet, but if an employer has it narrowed down to two, and finds unappealing information/pictures of one candidate, giving the job to the other person is not unreasonable.

Privacy settings, company regulations and other information regarding email ought to be simple and easily accessible for users.
Too often, users of email – particularly older ones – overlook the fine print when registering for an account. Users of company email are often unaware of any restrictions and the fact that company executives have access to every email sent and received, and they use it for personal reasons that may be considered work inappropriate. Younger users may be unaware of the harmful effects of forwarded messages and other forms of spam, or may fall for hoaxes that involve them sharing their passwords and other personal information. Clear, plain guidelines ought to be included in email registration, but they should be short and sweet – not Internet jargon in fine print at the bottom of the page.

All forum and chat room-based websites must require users to provide valid registration information.
Who will regulate and confirm the “validity” of registration information? While the idea is an excellent one, with intentions of preventing predators from going after vulnerable Internet users, it is not entirely practical. Lying about registration information such as age and contact information is simple, and detecting untruthful information amongst the truthful would surely prove to be virtually impossible. Already users must provide a name and some sort of contact information, and often age when registering for forum and chat room-based websites; predators get around it.

The Internet should encourage responsible government participation.
The government has entirely too much control over and access to certain aspects of the Internet. The fact that a government official has the capability of reading all of my emails and going through everything on my laptop makes me nervous. While I have nothing to hide and know that no incriminating information would be found, it is still unnerving. On the other hand, if someone is constantly visiting websites related to terrorism or the making of weapons or something along those lines, most would agree that the government has every right to step in, in the interest of the nation’s safety.

The Internet should not be owned or controlled by any one person or organization.
The appeal of the Internet is the fact that it is, for the most part, a completely open forum. Anyone and everyone can access an infinite amount of information, and in turn add to and create countless sites and pages. People in general desire a sense of freedom, and often resent certain forms of control. If the Internet were to suddenly be owned by one person or one organization, the popularity of the technology would likely decrease. How would the owner(s) be designated? Who decides who gets to have ownership or control over such a vast technology?

Society should not become one with the computer.
Unfortunately this has essentially already happened. Society as a whole is so frighteningly dependent on technology, particularly the Internet; people do not know what to do with themselves without constant access to it. Face-to-face interaction has diminished, as text messaging and instant messaging is far more convenient and less personal. A great deal of concern has been expressed that society has become too dependent on technology, but because it has been developing so rapidly, it may be too late. We may be more in touch with our computers than with ourselves in a few years.

All websites ought to be available in multiple languages (or website-translating software ought to be readily available)
While I understand the precautions of keeping certain information and websites private from other nations, the majority of websites ought to be available in multiple languages, or translation should be a simple process. My brother, who lives in Japan, sent me the link to a website that he wanted me to look at; due to my location and Internet provider, the website did not translate, and came up as a long string of random numbers, letters and symbols. This is inconvenient and unnecessary.


Password-protected sites ought to automatically log user off after navigating away from the page
On more than one occasion, I have sat down at a computer in Torgerson Bridge and had to log out of another student’s Blackboard or Facebook account. VT Webmail has a feature that logs the user out after a certain period of idle time, and when the user navigates away from the page. Other password-protected sites, however, keep the user logged in even after the window has been closed. Students are often in a hurry when leaving Torgerson Bridge and do not think to log out, and may suffer severe consequences if someone else is able to access their personal accounts. All password-protected sites, including email, social networking sites and those requiring credit card numbers, such as Amazon.com, ought to have the same features as VT Webmail.

Advertisements ought to be appropriate for website users
Google is able to control its advertisements and appeal to users; other websites, particularly social networking sites ought to do the same. While fourteen-year-olds should not have Facebook to begin with, if they do, Facebook should make an effort to gear its advertisements towards them. Freshmen in high school do not need to see ads on the side bars for condoms, nor do they need information on selling their books back at the end of the semester. Facebook and other social networking sites ought to base advertisements on the users’ ages and networks.


Users of social networking sites should not have the option to alter the site Facebook has changed drastically over the past year and a half; the format is constantly changing, and users add new unnecessary applications that clutter up the pages on a regular basis. Social networking sites should not be like Wikipedia; any and everyone should not have the ability to alter the site, because it affects millions of people. If users of social networking sites do agree to allow users to alter the sites, users ought to have the option of accepting these changes or using the original layout of the site.