Sign in or 

jhcollier3 |
Latest page update: made by jhcollier3
, Nov 6 2008, 11:53 AM EST
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by jhcollier3
37 words added view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
None
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| kmak1 | Komal - Question Formation 6 | 0 | Nov 13 2008, 9:02 AM EST by kmak1 | ||
|
Thread started: Nov 13 2008, 9:02 AM EST
Watch
Zittrain suggests "banning the creation and distribution of harmful code" to increase overall security of online mediums. This method is admittedly over-inclusive and under-inclusive. Who can police the development of codes, or regulate methods by which it is transported? Would such a law be too easy to break to ever be implemented? (Zittrain 150).
Zittrain describes a sense of individual responsibility that could be enforced in, for instance, office technologies, with the development of virtual machines. How do "virtual PCs" differ from traditional PCs? Are they physical devices, or a medium of software that can enable multiple PCs to run on a single machine, with customized settings and unique user abilities? (Zittrain, 152). "Network Neutrality" is a much-debated faction of Internet Law, by which ISPs are relieved of the responsibility of online actions of their subscribers. Zittrain points out that, if allowed regulation of or involvement with their users online activity, ISPs could charge them for access to certain web sites, or ban certain software for them. Does the future for ISPs appear consistent with today, or with the sensitive state of our economy, will ISPs start to charge and regulate their users to up their business? If so, then will these actions ultimately hurt ISPs' business, and will people just find a way around paying/regulations? (Zittrain, 178). |
|||||
| bhatrack | brittney hatrack question formation | 2 | Nov 13 2008, 6:38 AM EST by captnjak | ||
|
Thread started: Nov 10 2008, 5:14 PM EST
Watch
1. With advances being made in virus protection on bandwidth framework like Harvard’s Herdict, will hackers start to change the way they make viruses? Since the structure will change, will viruses attack that mainframe in order to bring down the infrastructure rather than the software?
Source: Zittrain, pgs. 157-58 2. Do example’s like chuckroast.com show a lapse in problem-solving by big companies like Google and StopBadware? Should Google take the initiative and solve these problems rather than just warn users? Is this the basis for the problems hackers cause, because no two internet entities will work together on providing a solution? Source: Zittrain, pg. 171 3. Why is the joining of cable and internet through the TV given in such a limited scope? If the internet takes a single channel, wouldn’t that bring more income to both the TV and the internet rather then create conflicting pressures? The direction of the internet is basically going to make cable obsolete, so why not join forces early to create a mass medium between the two? Source: Zittrain, pg. 182 |
|||||
| apammen | Questions - Round 6 | 1 | Nov 13 2008, 2:17 AM EST by sematthe | ||
|
Thread started: Nov 12 2008, 10:07 PM EST
Watch
1. Zittrain talks about using legal interventions to help solve the generative problems but admits that this would be rather difficult due to reasons such as the extension of sovereignty and amateur technology producers are unlikely to respond in any way (168). Do you think this is a plausible solution, or would you agree that there are too many loopholes?
2. Multiple solutions are considered, but Zittrain seems to think that there could be simpler solutions to the problems with the internet (174). What could these solutions be? Would it be modeled after something on an individual basis, or would larger organizations be in charge of finding and fixing problems? 3. Privacy is obviously a very important issue that is discussed regarding the internet, especially since people have started putting more and more "private" information on their computers. Chapter 8 also talks about privacy and how anything on the internet could potentially be seen by someone else without you knowing. Should the government specifically be allowed to look at what they want? With legislature such as the Patriot Act they can now get around certain parts of the Constitution without punishment. Is this a good idea or should it be regulated more? |
|||||