How reliable are computer models?

We live in a time with so much technological services to our expense that we don't know what to do with it all. There are new advances in technology every day, and I think that we have gotten to the point that we take it for granted. Even computers themselves are completely amazing. We have a little box that can do so many things that would be unimaginable otherwise. The fact that the internet exists is extraordinary - we can communicate in a many to many fashion, and there is a link between people all over the world! But still, we complain that our internet is too slow, the video quality is too poor, and all sorts of other things that we would not be even within the realm of possibility a few years previous. I think comedian Louis C.K. sums it up pretty well in the viral YouTube clip:

So, things such as computer models which are currently used to predict trends such as stock market prices, weather forecasts, earth plate shifts, these are all made possible by such technological advances previously mentioned. While they are not completely accurate, we have no right to complain about their efficacy, because the mere fact that they exist is a blessing, and by depending on these services 100% just shows our own dependence on technology.We should learn to appreciate these services and understand their limitations, rather then become angered that they are not "good enough." We must consider the fact that these computer models are able to predict certain trends to a certain precision and realize that even if they are not perfect, they are better then nothing - which is what we had before!

Violence in Video Games?

A topic that is often discussed in this class is the "side effects" of new technology. While our technologies are developed to serve a purpose, there are often other ramifications that were not previously anticipated. Video games were created for entertainment purposes. While they were originally oriented towards children, now a days video games serve many purposes and are catered to all groups of people. There are learning games for children, there are simulation games for professional trainees, and of course, there are multiple genres for entertainment purposes. However, within each of these categories there are games which are oriented to different demographics. For example, within educational games, there may be games to help children learn how to count, but for older people there are also games to aid in learning a new language, and at high levels of learning, there are games made to simulate real life experiences such as flight simulation.


A topic that was raised during class was that children are playing violent video games, such as Grand Theft Auto, and are being influenced by these video games to behave belligerent. Also, the fact that video game graphics are becoming more realistic and graphic may be serving to desensitize children to such violence. However, are these concerns warranted? While these video games DO portray violence and the graphics are more and more realistic, we must realize who these games are catered to. The game makers label their games as violent, or graphic, or "Mature Content" because these games are not made for children. Children are easily impressioned, and may indeed be influenced by the depiction of violence, however in healthy adults, by playing video games with such content may serve as a safe outlet of such behaviour and rather then being influenced by it, they are getting rid of their violent tendencies through an electronic game. The fact that children are playing these games do no show flaws in the games themselves, but rather the distribution of the games. We need to have safer ways of selling videogames, and denying access to children under the age of 18 to access these games. The law is not very firm in these respects, and if it is such a concern to the general public, then we need to make these changes rather then changing the content of videogames themselves.

Difficulties finding a job in CS?

The last few days in class, we have discussed the difficulties in finding jobs in computer science nowadays, and how IT personnel are low in demand. Many people found that after investing both time and money into an education in computer science, they were left working low paying, entry level jobs because the quota for more profitable positions were already filled. This may be caused by many factors such as: The recession, the outsourcing of IT positions, and possibly a burst of the IT bubble. Whatever the reasons, this job shortage is affecting everybody studying computer science. However, as a computer science student, so far I have not have any trouble finding any relevant and well paying jobs. Even though I am merely a student, I have been offered IT jobs, entry level programming jobs, and even research opportunities. Based on this, I personally do not feel the effects of the low amount of IT jobs being offered. I realize that the jobs which I have considered were all student jobs or entry level jobs, and that these are not the jobs which are being sought after by most graduates. And also, the selection process of candidates of these jobs are often based on academics, and this may be a problem for some.

However, perhaps the problem is that the upper level jobs are actually being taken by those working the entry-level jobs, by promotion. So perhaps the way that people can get these jobs is by applying for the entry-level jobs as students, and continue to work towards higher positions in the job.

Scammers

Internet scamming has been around ever since the time that online transactions were made possible. As discussed in class, many internet crimes are the same general idea as their real-life counterparts. For example, many scammers go door-to-door and solicit for, say, a charity, and take the money for themselves. Online, there are these types of scams all the time. Online theft is not as common, but it can still happen. This is usually done through either identity theft or hacking. Stealing from an online store can be tricky, but it is definitely common enough that online stores take many precautions. For example, an online store that I recently ordered shoes off of required that I pay extra shipping insurance, provide credit card information AND both a scanned version of my credit card and a photo identification card. These are extreme security measures which are implemented in order to discourage the practice of identity theft, and also to ensure the user of the credit card is indeed the one who is purchasing the items. These security measures are a big hassle, and prolong the transaction process by a long time: the communication between buyer and seller is done through e-mails, and the store rarely replies e-mails within the same day. Such measures are put in place because the store has been scammed by a customer before, and thus to prevent it from happening again, the buyer must perform these actions in order to buy the shoes he wants.

As we see in the example of this online store, the ones who suffer from the acts of scammers are not only the seller who lost their products without proper payment, but also those who want to buy from this store in the future! The store is now aware that scammers are rampant in the online community, and is cautious of all online buyers. The online stores are now skeptical of who is a scammer and who is not. The result, for us non-scammers, is that transactions are delayed, we must make extra efforts to prove that we are not scamming, and the price of products and services must be increased in order to balance the money lost through scams.

"Free" Software

Today in class, we discussed the implications of using software without paying for it. This can be done by downloading it illegally, stealing registration keys, or other means. So why do people use software that they did not pay for? The main train of thought is that if I can get a software without paying for it, then why wouldn't I? Or, another popular argument is "I don't think the software is worth that much." Basically, people want a service, and since it is "available" for free, it is hard to justify spending money on it. The reason I say available in quotations is because the means for attaining such software for free is generally illegal (finding websites that cater for this are very easy to find). I think that a better question to ask is: "If the software was not available for free, would you buy it?" If the answer is yes, then that would suggest that you think the software is worth the price. If the software's services are worth the price, then why wouldn't you purchase it to support the company? Software companies make money by selling their software to the customers. If people who would've bought the software choose, rather, to illegally download it, they are losing paying customers. In order to compensate for the lost sales, the company may have to increase the price of their services in order to keep the company up and running.


While this may seem like a way that would convince people to purchase the software they enjoy using, the temptation of getting it for free is just too great. This temptation is not only limited to software, but all sorts of copyright material such as music, movies, e-books, etc. In fact, a study done in 2008 showed that 95% of music downloaded was done so illegally. And now, with the convenience and speed of Bit Torrent applications, it doesn't seem like this percentage will decrease any time soon. Is this simply a paradigm shift in the way copyright material is distributed? Or do corporations and companies simply have to do a better job of protecting their content from pirates?

Spending on the Internet

When you are young, how do you buy things that you want? In my case, I would show what I wanted to my parents, and they would decide whether they would buy it for me or not. As I grew older, my parents started giving me an allowance - they gave me cash every week and I decided how to spend it. Once I ran out of cash, I couldn't buy any more stuff and I'd have to wait until next week. But every time I bought something, I would lose cash - physically. When we are young we have a loose understanding of money, but as we grow older we develop a stronger understanding. By the time I was in highschool, I had gotten a part time job, and then money was given to me by means of direct deposit into my bank account. Now, the money started to become a bit more complex of a concept. I never actually saw the money I made, only a pay stub with the amount I made written on it, and a bank account balance that showed my income. So now, rather than being limited by the amount of cash I carried, I was limited by the number that appeared on my bank account balance. When I turned 18, I got a credit card... At this point, my bank account's balance was no longer the limiting factor in how much I could spend, but rather my monthly credit limit. But still, every purchase I made, I read a price tag and scanned the item at the cashier's till - I could still conceptualize the loss of money for every purchase I made.


But now, most of my credit card transactions occur on online stores and listings websites. No longer are there price tags, and an exchange of cash - only numbers. I see the price - just a number underneath the product. I pay for it, I just enter my credit card number. The charge appears on my monthly bill. All numbers. It honestly feels like I am not spending money, but the reality is that I am spending much more money than I would have if I were buying these products in real life. When I buy a candy at the convenience store, I give the cashier my $5 bill, and I get the candy and some change back. I can see the transaction, and everything is very clear. But when shopping online, the way money is spent is more abstract, and so you lose the sense of spending actual money.

Larry, on the internet

Earlier in the week we spoke of anonymity on the internet, and also what happens when you search your own name on a search engine. When you want to find information about something or somebody, the first thing people would do nowadays would be to "google" it or "wiki" it. That is, search for the information online through Google's search engine, or to search the information on WikiPedia's online database. While this may be a good way to find websites containing information on relatively well-known people or information, we see that there is information which repeats the exact same information. For example, I was looking for details regarding a specific t-shirt released in 2007, I read the exact same articles on Freshness, Format, and Hypebeast, none of which contained the information I was looking for. But when I searched my own name on Google, no results pertaining to myself appeared (although I only looked through the first 10-15 search results pages). So why is it that there is so much duplicity of relatively well known information, but no information on someone or something that is less recognized world wide?


You may think that because there are no search results for somebody's name that perhaps they just do not use internet services as much as, say, somebody who writes a blog. However, I have alot of online activity, and I have several accounts on many websites and I also contribute to blogs, but still there are no search results on me. The reason why is because I almost all of my online activity is done anonymously. None of my accounts online are associated with "Larry Yang" (except those that involve credit cards i.e. PayPal). I often buy/sell/trade various things online between people I have never met before, and most of the time I will never even find out their name, and vice versa. So I actually have alot of websites and activity on several chat boards, but nobody would ever know by googling my name. So while I am doing things anonymously, I am doing no harm to people and the reason I choose anonymity is for security, but there are many people who abuse anonymity on the internet. For example, on many message boards, there are users who spam offensive material, and thus their accounts are closed. However, there is no way to prevent those same people to create a new account, and this scenario is very common.