###### tags: `CDA`
# Reading Response (Set 2)
### Oct 25 Tue - Shaped
*How does digital communication affect our ability to be mindful? How does it affect self-esteem; is it making us narcissistic?*
The use of digital communication has opened up a can of worms that was lying dormant in our psyche for generations. People are now wired to keep their online presence alive, something that is not necessary but rather something many feel a need for. The digital world provides an avenue for accessing forums that affect the way we perceive ourselves. People’s comments build up or destroy esteem, and the valuation of these engagements (likes, shares, comments) determine just by how much. Digital communication now affects where a person falls on the spectrum of esteem, and the nature of their digital interactions determines their degree of avoidance or coping to digital interactions. Also, digital platforms have become hubs for comparison with friends and strangers believing that they are better off in life than them. Oddly, positive emotions are linked to not observing other people’s solitary moments.
The constant comparison to others and people’s own vanity in a digital world has created a narcissistic society, children included. Such people bear a vulnerable self-perception that relies on “continuous external self-affirmation”. Narcissism presents a paradox as people seeking out acceptance end up being insensitive to others and incomprehensible in their attempts to build themselves up on digital platforms. Worse still, the quantification of interactions and engagements has become widely accepted, but it has a skewed manner of determining self-worth. However, digital interactions are misleadingly about quantity rather than quality.
There is a significant disconnect within modern society that has negatively affected the quality of life for individuals in social spaces. People’s perceptions of themselves are being influenced by their digital interactions. Technology has done so much good in society; however, will we ever figure out how to use digital interactions in a healthy way? Is this idea feasible or even possible?
Instagram, for example, has tried to tackle this issue by giving users the opportunity to hide the amount of "likes" they receive or even turn off comments for certain or all posts however, many people still use Instagram for validation even if it's just comparing to others. There are also other platforms such as Reddit (although I love Reddit) that are heavily based on post karma and comment karma which basically measures how much people like your posts or comments or not. Engagement feels like a fundamental base for many or perhaps even most platforms, so, in a sense since this will always be a part of social media, the idea of healthy digital interactions is improbable.
![A Need for Validation](https://c.pxhere.com/photos/35/d5/font_wall_woman_eyes_facebook_like_social_network_social_media-923229.jpg!d)
---------
### Nov 01 Tue - Finding someone & living alone
In Derek Thompson's reading, *Why Online Dating Can Feel Like Such an Existential Nightmare*, he explains how picking a spouse is a decision that requires some element of soberness and a little guidance. Matchmaking has long been the result of person-to-person networks, but now technology has provided an alternative way to go around matchmaking without the suggestion of family or friends for a spouse. The twenty percent (and rising) population of straight people who meet online have broken tradition unlike any other families from the mid-90s all the way back to the beginning of humankind. The 70 percent proportion of same-sex couples who meet online is even more telling of the freedom that technology gives people to choose who they want. It seems that technology is satisfying a need that traditional forms of matchmaking could not imagine, or, in some cases (like same-sex coupling), accommodate. However, the impersonal nature of online matchmaking robs the coupling parties of historical connections that protect the cultural, social, and economic values of their ancestries. In fact, many people even still consider it dysfunctional.
This trend of online matchmaking, however, is only going upward, and one can only wonder what it means for where we're headed as a society. This change is without a doubt significant, but change has always been a part of life, and this is one of those big changes that is not going anywhere. Hopefully, the future of technology does not negatively affect the human connections that gave us the evolutionary advantage of dominating the world over centuries. So, the question remains, can technology outdo traditional matchmaking in curating healthy relationships between future generations of humans?
![Online Matchmaking](https://www.publicdomainpictures.net/pictures/400000/velka/kommunikation.jpg)
---------
### Nov 04 Fri - Ads & social graph background
Should you allow all cookies? In 1994, Lou Montolli invented cookies and having these cookies became an essential tool for internet users. Without them, users would run into the Dory Analogy. The Dory Analogy refers to how without cookies, every site you visited would forget any information you had previously given. Some of the information that cookies store, as mentioned in Vox's video *How ads follow you around the internet*, include your location, things you click on, time spent, among other information. This information is stored and will be remembered the next time you visit a site.
Having cookies remember things for you may seem like a great idea, until you encounter third-party cookies. Third-party cookies have sites that store your information for a third party. These cookies are used to track things like what you click on or what you spend time on in order for companies to show you ads that are more relevant. Online ads bring in billions to trillions of dollars to big companies, therefore, having these cookies is crucial for these companies.
Privacy is a big concern with tracking cookies. Big tech companies will do anything for ad revenue and many times this comes at the cost of one's own privacy. Sites may be tracking your every move without you even noticing and there is one particular thing that comes up a lot when talking about this. Although concerning or even frightening, many people believe phones or devices listen to you in order to show you ads that might lead to a purchase.
A simple google search shows a variety of answers to whether or not your phone listens to you. For example, Apple has explicitly stated that your phone does not listen to outside conversations stating that "privacy is a fundamental human right", while other sources say that they undoubtedly do listen to your conversations. There have been many instances where I am having a conversation and mention something I would like and moments later an ad for that same product is a couple of scrolls away on my Instagram feed. Once or twice may seem like an uncorrelated coincidence, but when these instances occur constantly, a coincidence seems less plausible. I reckon that most people have experienced or know someone that has experienced conversations turn into ads. Do you think your phone listens to your conversations?
![Online Ads](https://www.seobility.net/en/wiki/images/e/ed/Interstitial-ads.png)
---------
### Nov 08 Tue - Manipulated
In an age of user-generated content, many elements of modern lifestyle are independently published on digital platforms in ways that can influence potential buyers’ decisions in a significant way. Third-party reviews have become a strong currency in the world of e-commerce and even in brick-and-mortar establishments. Consumers want information to bridge the uncertainty involved in every purchase, and business entities have realized the importance of these online appraisals in meeting their bottom lines. Therefore, we are witnessing a complex scheme that gives partial assessments of these entities by manipulating what is supposed to be real, unadulterated feedback.
In some cases, feedback on one site is reposted to another to try and distribute the social capital gained in one review site to another. Besides, several merchants have been found to be engaging in the self-aggrandizing habit of posting favorable comments about their businesses anonymously to sway public opinion. These and other false reviews make up about thirty percent of reviews available online. Alternating positive and negative reviews, tokenization of positive reviews, and rewards against negative reviews make for the manipulation of the information available to the public. The capital gained from these reviews is obtained not only from the number of reviews, but also from qualities of the reviewer. For example, people with a huge following on social media enjoy a degree of trust unlike those who do not. However, these followers can be bought easily nowadays, with many pseudo-celebrities enjoying “ghost” audiences on their profiles; in essence, giving them unearned trust among consumers. Currently, people are engrossed in managing reputations in this uncontrolled environment of user-generated content, and seemingly impartial platforms for posting reviews are taking ‘bribes’ to custom-build reputations for various entities. Now, the recommendations that could inspire me to partake in something have to undergo a rigorous due diligence process that ironically still involves cross-platform research of reviews, let alone the recommendations of known acquaintances. The world we live in has become largely deceptive and knowing the truth under such perverse circumstances has become a personal responsibility now more than ever. Will there ever be a trustworthy system for obtaining information on anything online?
![Fake Reviews](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/ii8K7lAhW8GkqNmiXvbtrQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTUzMg--/https://s.yimg.com/uu/api/res/1.2/c9QXsjAiLFmL1hwcX7kSKw--~B/aD03NDg7dz05MDA7YXBwaWQ9eXRhY2h5b24-/http://media.zenfs.com/en/homerun/feed_manager_auto_publish_494/00b479e99632493528e29200a3f0d1ca)
---------
### November 18 - Algorithmic Discrimination
*Why and how do algorithms exhibit biases (intentional or otherwise)?*
The scramble to make sense of our reality has forced our thinking into boxes that do not quite fit what is out there. In this scramble, a lot has been left uncovered about what elements should be considered when making an algorithm. However, some algorithms have weak foundational principles that allow for biases to creep into their models. Since it is a growing field, there are bound to be mistakes every now and then that create biases in algorithms. However, O'Neil noted that the secrecy involved in creating some algorithms is the main cause of the biases that persist. People who create algorithms comprised of secrecy may have inherent biases that prevail in their models and that may never be corrected because of the opacity involved.
In some cases, the work that goes behind these obscure algorithms has incredible commercial value to their owners and sometimes this close-door policy makes the model unintentionally biased based on one factor or another. This problem becomes even larger if such algorithms find widespread use (scalable algorithms). The scalable algorithms that carry these biases have a real capacity for damage and the trust that society places in such algorithms only makes them grow exponentially alongside the bias. These models have to be open to criticism for them to mature organically in a way that recognizes and corrects biases. However, some cases involve the intentional protection of biases that have become beliefs. In such cases, the owners of such algorithms rarely want to discuss what goes into an algorithm or if there is a possibility for changing it. Algorithms, like any other artificial convenience, are bound to have mistakes and they can only be corrected if they are open to criticism and adaptable to fair social perspectives.
This reading made me wonder, could algorithmic bias solely be an extension of what is happening today in society? For example, if Google is racist, it's because society has been wired with racist assumptions. So, these biases creep into algorithms subconsciously.
![Bias Online](https://museeholocauste.ca/app/uploads/2019/04/media-998990_1920_1920x880_acf_cropped-1.jpg)