Week 1 ReDo: Does Technology Make Life Better

This is a question that has come up in my education a lot in recent years. Its the understanding that in today's day and age we are in the middle of a evolutionary shift which is taking us out of the "dark ages" and into the future via advancing technology. In class we listened to a lecture about technology how it is bettering the lives of those people in developing countries. We listened to stories about education centers being put in rural parts of the world and how the Internet has helped a man save his family by learning about sunflowers. All stories that are both inspiring and filled with hope. I am going to focus on cell phones in Africa and how the mobile economic revolution is bettering the lives of those who are using them.

In an article written by Killian Fox of Mail & Guardian online, Africa has experienced an incredible boom in cellphone use over the past decade. In 1998 there were fewer than four million cellphones on the continent. Today there are more than 500 million. In Uganda alone, 10-million people own a cellphone, and that number is growing rapidly every year. For Ugandans, these ubiquitous devices are more than just a handy way to communicate on the fly: they are a way of life. It may seem unlikely, given its track record in technological development, but Africa is at the centre of a mobile revolution. In the west, we have been adapting cellphones to be more like our computers: the smartphone could be described as a PC for your pocket.  In Africa where a billion people use only 4% of the world's electricity, many cannot even afford to charge a computer, let alone buy one. This has led phone users and developers to be more resourceful, and African cellphones are being used to do things that the developed world is only  now beginning to pick up on.

Cellphones hold a huge economic potential in undeveloped parts of Africa. A 2005 London Business School Study found that for every additional 10 cellphones per 100 people in a developing country, GDP rises by 0.5%. This as well as enabling communication and the movement of money, mobile networks can also be used to spread vital information about farming and health care to isolated rural areas vulnerable to the effects of drought and disease. These days just about every tradesman, shopkeeper, and farmer in town has a phone --or at least access to one.

Mobile phones are changing developing markets faster than anyone imagined. Today there are some 3 billion mobile subscriptions worldwide, and that will grow to 5 billion by 2015, when two-thirds of the people on earth will have phones, predicts Finnish handset maker Nokia Corp. Nowhere is the effect more dramatic than in Africa, where mobile technology often represents the first modern infrastructure of any kind. The 134 million citizens of Nigeria had just 500,000 telephone lines in 2001 when the government began encouraging competition in telecommunications. Now Nigeria has more than 30 million cellular subscribers.

This growth in mobile phone usage in the developing world is helping to combat hunger and poverty. This increased ability to communicate with people has opened so many doors and lead to great economic growth and stability. It was only a matter of time before developing countries were able to receive the type of help they needed to grow. Now with the increased use of cell phones the possible gains of these places are seemingly infinite!

Bank of iPhone or Bank of Android?!?!

The growth in the sales of smartphones around the world has expanded the horizons of what people can do with their "phones." Andrew Steadman, director of product management, bank solutions, Fiserv, argues that putting mobile banking at the top of the agenda needs to be a priority for every retail bank. The past few years have been challenging for banks with budgetary constraints and negative views have caused banks to have to think smarter and work even harde to retain their customers. This is where mobile banking comes into the mix. Juniper Research predicts mobile banking is set to exceed 150m users globally this year. Smartphones are gaining mass market appeal and as a result customers are demanding, and expecting to be able to access mobile banking services. Mobile banking is at a tipping point as consumers are now considering their mobile phones as multifunction mobile communication and computing devices; as a result of this banks around the world need to make it a priority to instilling a strategy to make mobile-banking successful.

Lets speak a little more on what Mobile Banking is. Mobile banking is not just online banking on a mobile device. In just this year alone, it has grown to new ways of transferring money and peer-to-peer payments are becoming more and more accepted. The greatness of mobile is that it offers the opportunity to target and hit new customers without access to, or who have turned away from, tradition banks. Its innovation and simplicity in engaging with the financial institution at anytime - be it paying bills or checking current account balances. On the other side the bank can reach the customers through different alerts. They can be alerted of low balances or potentially fraudulent activity. Mobile also offers the ability to provide location based services or use of the camera for banking such as QR codes or deposit capture- these are distinct services that are not found through any other channel.

Mobile Banking: Will Smartphones Replace Your Wallet

So the question is asked, why is it taking so long for this to be adapted to many banks? According to Sara Palmbush of Backbase to figure out why adoption is happening so slowly you need to step away from the issue of whether or not banks are allowing mobile access and ask other questions. When you do this it appears, the real problem for banks is not deciding if, or, why they should offer mobile services but rather what kind of mobile 'customer experience' they need to provide. This is then coupled with the question of how banks will prepare their systems to connect in the future with the tech savvy under 35s. Its this performance anxiety which is dragging the mobile banking service offerings down.

According to Justine Ealy of Analysis security remains a legitimate concern. Less than half of mobile users believe that mobile banking process to be secure according to CNET NEWS. Many users have expressed concern that their usernames, passwords, and account information available to hackers. ALthough hacking has ben detected in isolated situations, many problems around the transport and storage of user identification data have been addressed with the addition of required codes such as SafePass. In fact, the more you investigate mobile banking security, the more its clear that it is no less secure than other methods of banking. True, phones are small and easy to lose or be stole; but laptops are nearly as portable and make good targets for theft, as well. As Elinor Mills points out in her article "Mobile Banking: Safe, At Least for Now," checks can be forged and credit cards, easily stole. Any financial transaction brings with it some inherent risk. If anything, one could argue that mobile banking via a smart-phone is a more secure option, because it allows users to have immediate alerts and access when anything appears amiss.

Technology for the retail, consumer baking industry has come a long way since the first ATMs were rolled out in the late 1960s. As information becomes more available, smart, mobile devices more affordable, and security more reliable, I believe that mobile banking will be the way of the future.

Where's the Crime in Cybercrime?!

In class this past week we had a guest speaker come in and ask us a lot of questions about politics and social media. Although he was looking to have a specific dialogue he soon realized a lot of the people in class were not doing internships in the government and policy sectors. So the conversation was more of a Hodge Podge of different ideas and the one that stood out to me the most is the growth of social networks and overall usage of the internet as a whole. In thinking about this i decided I should do a blog showing whats going on to manage this influx of internet usage and how people are not all that safe online in terms of hackers. I am focusing a little on what is in the works to stop hackers and what will happen to them if they do decide to steal information from people (such as how Anthony Wiener was hacked lol)

In recent months there has been a rise in cybercrimes and thus the Department of Defense created a policy focused on it. There are dedicated hacking groups such as Anonymous and LulzSec have hacked or stolen important information from high-level companies including Sony, PBS, the CIA, Bank of America and Viacom, to name a few. The result of these "thefts" is that the U.S. government has been under pressure to come up with a way of dealing with these cyberattacks, especially when the target is national security.

William Lynn, deputy secretary of defense, announced a comprehensive program called Defense Industrial Base Cyber Pilot in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security. The program will share classified information with defense contractors and commercial Internet service providers. According to a CNET report Lynn said during a speech at the National Defense University in Washington, D.C. "Our assessment is that cyberattacks will be a significant component of any future conflict, whether it involves major nations, rogue states or terrorist groups." According to this article, the Pentagon has recently announced that cyberattacks may qualify as acts of war.

Now how do I feel about all this you ask well let me just say...ABOUT TIME! Really about d@$% time. Come on, cyberattacks are nothing new they have been occurring since the birth of this here world wide web and people who are doing the hacking are only getting better at it and weren't really having to deal with the consequences of their actions.

If we look back to 1983 where one of the first arrest of hackers occurred  The FBI busted six teen-age hackers from Milwaukee, known as the "414s."they were accused of some 60 computer break-ins, including form the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center to Los Alamos National Laboratory. One of the hackers get immunity for his testimony and the other five got probation o_O. Really 60 computer break-ins get you probation. I don't know about you but my most sensitive information and possessions lie on my hard drives and to have some one "break-in" and steal them and not be put in prison makes me lose faith in the justice system.

Lets look at a case that involved one of our own Cornellians. Graduate Rober Morris, launched a "worm" program onto the Internet that he wrote to exploit security holes on UNIX systems. The worm, programmed to penetrate other computers on the network and replicate itself, quickly it spread to about 1/10 of the Internet at the time and shut down networks by hogging system resources. Morris caused somewhere between 15-100 million dollars in damage and faced a maximum of 5 years in prison aand 250,000 dollars in fines. He instead got three years of probation, 400 hours of community service, and 10,000 dollar fine. Again another case of "Justice Gone Wrong." This man destoyed so much property that didn't belong to him, yet he was allowed to not have to spend a night in jail and to pay back 10,000 in fines.

I personally believe that these mistakes have paved the way for hacking to get to the point it is now being this big thing where national security is at a risk. These new policies should of been in place. I feel like now we are putting a Band-Ade on an artery wound when in hindsight we should of been put a metal plate over the area of the artery years ago. The floodgates are now open and hacking is growing at the same rate as Google+ (see what I did there). The growth of users on the internet is at an all time high and sensitive and valuable information is flying around us at all times. So now groups like Anonymous and LulzSec are now being created daily in an attempt to access this information for not necessarily for the "good" of the people. If you are reading this I urge you to make sure you are browsing the web on safe sites hopefully with secure connections (https) and that you stay off sites that seem sketch. If you are not sure leave immediately. Never leave your logins open on any computer that is not yours and if you do leave them open on your computer make sure to always lock your screen when away from your computer. Cyberattacks are at an all time high ladies and gentlemen and if you are not careful you could be the next victim of Cybercrime.

Healthcare 2.0

This week we had the chance to hear some great information in relation to the growing of technology in the health care industry and how these changes are helping us in more ways than one. Health care advances such as pharmaceuticals that can regrow bones, exoskeletons that help stroke victims walk again, and robotics that allow infants to socialize, etc. These current research experiments are making the impossible possible. Helping those, who at once were told were in situations that would not allow them to do things they once love, do those things again. I am going to focus a little on these new researches and explain why they are important to our ever evolving world.

The first drug designed to stimulate the growth of new bone won Food and Drug Administration approval back in February 2009 to treat osteoporosis, the brittle bone disease that affects 10 million Americans. The drug Teriparatide works by increasing the action of osteoblasts, bone-building cells. The allows the bones to become denser and in all more resistant to fractures. Given by injection daily the drug has not caused cancer in the 2000 people who tested the drug in the clinical trials. In the test patients there were significant increases in their bone's density at the hip and the spine as compared to other patients who took pills made of vitamin D and calcium. There was  a reduction in bone fractures among patients taking teriparatide when compared to a placebo. The importance of this drug goes further than just old people who are becoming weaker and more frail. This drug can help those children who are born with weak bones and who are not able to live an active "normal" life like their peers. In This advancement in medical technology is giving hope to the hopeless.

Another advancement in some medical technology is the exoskeletons that are helping people to walk again. It was developed by scientists at the University of Twente, the LOPES is a robot exoskeleton which help people who are partially paralyzed and stroke survivors patients regain their mobility. LOPES stands for "Lower-extremity Powered Exoskeleton. Designed to provide gait training and assessment of motor function  There has been many grants given by the Dutch government that has awarded large grants to fast-track the implementation of LOPES in practice by the end of 2011. This device will allow for so much research that will soon help those who no longer have full control of their legs are those who never had control of them ever.

Over at the University of Delaware, professor Sunil K. Agrawal, is working in the department of Mechanical Engineering co-authoring a paper that explores how infants can be trained to avoid obstacles using mobile robots with force feedback joysticks. A group of infants were trained to drive mobile robots within an environment simulating clutter within the workspace. The technology and algorithms were developed in her laboratory and tested at University Delaware early learning center, with the results displaying overwhelming support that this "assist-as-needed approach" yields faster learning than a conventional joystick. During the study, ten typically developing toddlers with an average age of 30 months were trained to drive a robot within an obstacle course. A toddler unable to walk independently due to spina bifida was also taught. The group study results showed that the force field algorithm had helped the very young children learn to navigate and avoid obstacles faster, more accurately and with greater safety. Again, another promising research that can help those children with special needs explore and acquire other functional skills using power mobility devices in real environments such as home or the classroom.

These three different but very helpful experiments are apart of this health care technology evolution we are currently experiencing. It is a pretty amazing thing to witness and is something that will hep change the lives of so many people! This growing interest in health care technology and this growing sense of accomplishment is revitalizing an industry that for a ling while seemed like it wasn't growing or changing. But now, with the recent developments that have been taking place, I am sure that the health care industry will continue to grow.

One Laptop per Child...For What?!

This week in class the lecture on ICTs was, to me, by far the best one yet. The reason behind this is because I have a Technology background and have always wanted to put a computer in the homes of low income families. We got on the subject of the One Laptop per Child in different countries and how getting a laptop in the hands of each child in the country was the main priority. This intrigued me to say the least. I could understand how that may look like a positive thing from the outside looking in but it is difficult for me to understand how this could be a plus for ALL countries.

Let me give some history on the OLPC program.  OLPC is a project of the Miami-based One Laptop per Child Association, INC., which is a non-profit organization set up to oversee the creation of an affordable educational device for use in the developing world. The organization was originally funded by member organizations such as AMD, eBay, Google, New Corporation, Red Hat, and Marvell. The current focus is on the development, construction and the deployment of the X0-1 laptop and its successors. At the 2006 World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, The United Nations Development Program announced it would back the laptop. UNDP said in a statement that they would work with OLPC to deliver "technology and resources to targeted schools in the least developed countries". The aim of the program was for the computers to cost 100 dollars.

Here is where my problems lay. If a country is struggling to have a stable government, food for the vast majority of it inhabitants, jobs for its inhabitants, and just plain old necessities for their inhabitants. How is it important for these countries to put a computer in each child's hands when in retrospect they can't put a piece of bread in each child's mouth?! It seems as though OLPC is a noble humanitarian effort for the betterment of education. I do not, however, see the benefit of it when the kids who are supposed to operate the computers can not eat daily or have access to modern medicine.

Besides the fact that a lot of the countries that are to implement the OLPC  program are struggling with IMO bigger issues, there are other more notable problems with the program it self:

• Issues wit the actual cost (the $100 laptop is no longer called that, because it costs $200)
• Political and governmental resistance from countries to whom OLPC seeks to send the laptops. (IN two cases, Nigeria and Brazil had been seeking local laptops, not imported, but other countries have presented other kinds of resistance.)
• Businesses, such as Intel , who would like to make their own inexpensive laptop
• Grumblings from consumers of wealthy nations ("we want a cheap laptop too!")
• Education ( what value laptops when you don't have pencils? or a teacher?)

There are a number of participating countries and one of which, Uruguay, has successfully ordered enough computers to put one in the hands of all school children between 6 and 12 years old. This fact shocked me when I read about it. When I first heard it i thougth to my self "Wow that is a place I would love to live in. Think about it if they could afford to put a laptop in the hands of every child in the primary schools then there must not be any crime, poverty, homeless, etc." I felt this way because I couldn't understand how so much emphasis could be put on putting a computer in the hands of each child when in retrospect there is no data that shows that by doing so it will have a positive affect on the country.

Another concern of mine is addressed in the cartoon above. What are the benefits of the OLPC computers and how will they affect these countries in which they are being advertised too. You see the kids are no longer playing outside any more, there is no monitoring of the children's online activity, more interest has been taken into games and socializing online then the actual "education" which is being proposed.

In conclusion I must say I just don't understand how we can want to put computers in children's hands before we put food in their mouths and a bandade on their wounds. It seems like a great initiative that should come after some BASIC needs are met first or at least improved. It really hard for me to understand why this could be a positive thing and not something that is really for economic gains!

"I don't care if you understand or not!"

In class this week the topic ofthe scientist came up and we as a class debated on whether or not it was important forthe said scientist to "dumb-down" their research so that "normal" people could understand what the research was actually about. Here I am going tobe elaborate on my point that it is not necessary for scientist to stupefy their research fore us "regular" folk don't need to know what's going on . Let me explain, when it comes to scientific research the people who "need" to be impressed is not the everyday person, but people in the scientific community. Let's think for a minute, in high school when you wanted to be seen as cool you wanted to impress the people that "being cool" meant something. You weren't trying to impress the Emo kids or the geeks you wanted to impress the "cool-kids." That same idealology holds true for the scientific community. If you are not apart of that community then these scientist are not going to go out of their way to enlighten you on their research.

I also believe there is a sense of elite-ness that comes with being only one of the few that understands what's going on. When everyone knows something it loses its exclusivity. With having a community in which u can share ur findings vs. Having the entire world know your new found information. These scientist take pride in their research and they want clout for their discoveries. This is not out of the norm but a natural human want.

Lupe Fiasco - Dumb It Down (Speaks on how the music industry wants him to dumb down his lyrics to appeal to a larger audience...but he refuses and explains why!)

So to sum up this post I just want you all to take away that no it is not necessary for scientist to dumb down their work to appeal to the common person. It is however important for them to appease those in their community.

Blogging: Journalism 2.0

After the highly profane educational lecture by David Johnson I got to thinking about the impact of blogging on my generation. I have always been a fan of self-expression and have been very quick to ask, "Why do you care what people think of you?" I have always believed that I had the right to say what I was feeling and those others had the right to or not to listen. Blogging I feel gives "every-day" people a platform to exercise that freedom. To clarify here when I say "Blogging" I mean everything that shows your self-expression in a way that people can follow you and your feelings, thoughts, art, etc. I believe people are blogging when they upload a song to Soundcloud and send it out to friends and others to see what they think. I see blogging as someone who designs a piece of art and shares it online. Blogging to me is just sharing ones self-expression online.

Journalism is under a lot of pressure nowadays because of the ease that it is to acquire information. Back in the day the majority of the people who wanted information about what was going on in the world would watch the "news" or before that wait for the morning paper. Journalism was/is a crucial part of the everyday life for the average human. Traditionally people would have to acquire information, have the information published, to then have it either read or watched via TV or newspapers. Nowadays the information that is being sought after is being found, at any moment, via the Internet. When Snookie has a wardrobe malfunction on a Friday night at 10:00pm the entire world can have that information and an accompanying photograph at 10:05pm! Information is now so readily available that it is easy for a lot of people in the world to just click on an Internet icon and go to their favorite news sources to have 24/7 access to what’s happening in the world in which they live. The difference between back when information took time to be given to the masses and now is that back then we had "certain" people being the journalist, nowadays any preteen with a internet equipped smartphone can be giving you the "what’s happening" at any moment of the day. The old school way of journalism is not dying its evolving. It’s turning into something that has become more of an informal group effort.

My generation or should I say the "connected" generation, are growing up in an age where technology has enabled us to speak to someone on the opposite side of the world at the drop of a dime. Blogging is just the "now" of Journalism. It is the information we seek its just that now we get it from a large pool of sources. In this day in age you can find blogs based on anything! If you like fashion there are blogs that focus on the latest style trends. If you like sports, there are blogs that focus on training routines of your favorite athletes. Blogs are the official voices of the people. It is now that people have a platform. Gone are the days where you would have to be published to get heard, or to have to land on TV. Now if someone doesn't like what they see on TV they can do more than just change the channel, they can create their own channels! Blogging is relatively new and is something that makes the "unimportant" "important." Blogging is what was needed to take journalism, not to its demise, but to its next step. We blog to inform, to humor, to engage, and to inspire (some to just freak you out o. O) but that important part is that it doesn't matter what we are blogging about, but the fact that we can blog and can do so on our own accords. Journalism isn't dead and blogging isn't killing it. Blogging is Journalism reborn. It is Journalism 2.0!