Week Six Writing Assignment

The unintended consequence of the development of ubiquitous technology has been the environmental impact of cell phones, iPods, printers, monitors, computers, calculators etc. that we discard throughout the years. Modern electronics have such a short shelf life, and with new technology developing, more people are upgrading and discarding old electronics. Although their has been a rapid improvement technology over the years, the downside results in the rapid proliferation of electronic waste.

   Inside these electronics are a wide variety of materials that contain some reusable components like transistors and integrated circuits, but also toxic materials such as mercury, lead, cadmium, and fire-retardant insulation, along with cancer-causing PCBs. The problem is that most of the electronic waste cannot be economically recycled in the first world. The waste is stripped for salvageable components, and the remaining components are shipped to Nigeria, India, and China for inexpensive, labor intensive recycling and disposal. In regards to the environmental issues, the materials such as lead and mercury can leach into the ground water, and the burning components can give off toxic fumes. The exposure to heavy metals are cancer causing and also result in birth defects.

Although there is a large worldwide industry for scrap equipment, it is not well-regulated or located in one specific place. The equipment ends up getting shipped to an overseas recycler where is has already been stripped of all its value, and the obsolete equipment ends up as toxic waste, with hazardous components exposed, burned or allowed to degrade in landfills. The laws of the United States do not connect with those of other countries which is why different corporations can get away with what they are doing without consequences. It is difficult to control the entire world so enforcing international policies on countries is made difficult.    

There are many things that can be done about this problem. Right now the Basel convention governs the shipment of hazardous waste to the developing world and the state of California controls the Electronic Waste Recycling Act. Individually, we can cut down the purchase of electronics, and when one is selecting new electronics, it would be wise to chose one that can be upgraded or are modular, also to consider selecting manufacturers who follow the green standards. When a computer breaks, it is a good idea to make sure it is really broken before purchasing a new one because there are many companies that can repair computers or upgrade them for you. If one is purely just sick of the computer they could donate it to a place like the goodwill or even give it to a relative or friend.

Week Five Writing Assignment

1. Converting from base 2 to base 10

1. 1011, 1+2+8 = 11

2. 101010, 2+8+32 = 42

3. 11111, 1+2+4+8+16 = 31

4.10010, 2+16

2. Converting from base 10 to base 2

1. 31, (31-16=15-8=7-4=3-2=1-1=0) = 11111  

2. 51, (51-32=19-16=3-2=1-1=0) = 110011

3. 7,  ( 7-4=3-2=1-1=0 = 111

4. 103, (103-64=39-32=7-4=3-2=1-1=0) 1100111

3. 

A. modem downloading @ 56 kilobits/sec  

(100MB/1)*(1,048,576B/1MB)=104,857,600Bytes

*(8bits/1bytes)=838,860,800bits*(1kilobit/1000bits)=838860.8kilobits*(1sec/56kilobits)=

ANSWER: 14979.657seconds 

B. DSL downloading @ 5megabits/sec 838,860,800bits*(1megabit/1,000,000bits)=838.8608megabits*(1sec/5mega)=ANSWER:167seconds

C.Highspeed downloading @ 10megabits/sec

838,860,800bits*(1megabit/1,000,000bits)=838.8608megabits*(1sec/10mega)=ANSWER:83seconds

4. 60megabytes*(8megabits/1megabytes)=480megabits(MP3)*(1sec/3mb)=160=2.667min

60/2.667=ANSWER: 22.5/hour

Week Four Writing Assignment

1. The fundamental issue underlying the net neutrality debate regards how far an internet service provider may go, as there is a lack of legislature preventing ISPs from restricting accessible content as well as the pricing of internet, more specifically high speed internet. This is an issue that could have a wide-ranging impact on our ability to use the internet, going against our constitutional right of freedom of speech.

2. Websites like Google, Yahoo! along with many democrats, are in favor of net neutrality as they assume that the the internet is working well as it is now, and there is protection of small sites and consumer protection. These are the companies that profit from the fact that any user can currently find almost anything through their service. The democrats believe that the people know what is best for themselves, and refuse to allow a dictatorship over their internet. The issue also exists over the high price of an internet speed that most of us take for granted. The cost of high speed cable internet approaches sixty dollars per month and many households are struggling to put food on the table let alone afford an appropriately fast internet service. Computers have become more and more affordable but the internet available for ten dollars a month is not agreeable with today's complex websites and thirst to upload large files like pictures and videos. It is a limit of self expression determined by social class. Libraries simply need more computers for free internet for those who cannot afford the monthly fee. Lastly, although technically against the law, download of copyrighted material could very well be a victim of net neutrality. Those who are for net neutrality believe that they can determine what is right an wrong.

3. Libertarian groups and pro-free market groups are opposed to net neutrality. They believe they know what is best for the people. Arguments against this are the needless regulation of the market and the stifling of innovation and investment. 

4. I promote net neutrality, as I feel it is important for our society to have unlimited access to whatever information they want. The world would operate very differently if we had limited access, as communication would be restricted and it would be difficult to do research. Our society's access to the internet should remain versatile so everyone can have equal rights. If I wanted a restricted internet I would move to the People's Republic of China. 

Week Three Writing Assignment

Wikipedia defines cybersquatting as registering, trafficking in, or using a domain name with bad faith intent to profit from the goodwill of a trademark belonging to someone else. This is said to be an issue that keeps coming up regarding host-names. My opinion about cybersquatting is that the attempt to diminish ones company towards convincing the intended consumers to look at a false website should be illegal, because it is wrong, and in most cases, this is what happens, where someone will register a name that is very similar to a known site so they can "steal traffic" and consumers will be tricked into visiting these false sites.I feel that the "coincidences" where people have come up with names that are similarly close to these well known sites has evolved into what is considered cybersquatting, which is wrong. The First Amendment to the US constitution is supposed to guarantee that government cannot interfere with any citizen's right to speak or to publish his/her opinions. This can relate to another type of cybersquatting we learned, where people will register a domain in order to make a political point. I feel this is completely opposite from the type I have previously discussed. We have rights to our own opinion, and people in our society should have rights to publish these opinions on the web. I believe that it is okay for political or non-profit speech, but not to make money. I do feel that the government needs to be more strict regarding this issue as I have come up with a set of guidelines  for handling this problem. The first thing is that the website that allows one to make a host-name has to be way more strict, perhaps not even exist online, but rather at specific locations and those individuals who wish to create a site have to physically go to one of these locations and register in person. This process could be  like getting your license, except instead of taking a test they have to show and explain what this website is and for and what it will consist of. I feel people will be less likely to slip through the cracks and create a false website if this process is done one on one in person. The next principle that should be thought over is creating some sort of detective device that can detect if a website is in fact cybersquatting and shut it down. I previously saw the movie "Untraceable" and the FBI was able to shut down certain websites if something was wrong with them. I'm not too sure what this is like in real life however if possible that should get put into play. In the first article, ICANN was mentioned, stating that they have sought to hire a Compliance Program Specialist, however the role has been unfilled for over a year. - These are the things that people need to put more effort into doing, so that this whole cybersquatting craziness could possibly come to an end.