---
# System prepended metadata

title: Matt's Reading Responses (Set 1)

---

# Matt's Reading Responses (Set 1)

## 5 Reading Responses

### January 29

[*How the Web Works*](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Learn/Getting_started_with_the_web/How_the_Web_works) offered a simplistic metaphorical explanation of the relationship between clients and servers that was difficult to grasp and felt like it was hiding something when I would have preferred a more in depth explanation. While I was able to mostly follow their metaphor that compared the parts involved in accessing a webpage to parts involved in a person getting an item at a store, I have trouble truly understanding the process even at a surface level without a **literal depiction** of what is happening. I had similar issues understanding [Hartley Brody's article](https://blog.hartleybrody.com/https-certificates/) explaining HTTPS. This second article did offer better explanations of the parts in the system it described, and the [color-mixing graphic](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Diffie-Hellman_Key_Exchange.svg/800px-Diffie-Hellman_Key_Exchange.svg.png) was useful in illustrating the mathematical concepts. However, I still think I need to see it **functionally explained** with pictures or examples of the true process in action in addition to merely reading about it.   

In both articles, there are many unfamiliar terms talked about in relation to each other and, even with their description and metaphorical comparison, I have trouble understanding how the system operates without understanding what each part literally or physically is. For instance, I do not know what is meant by describing Transmission Control Protocols as **"communication protocols,"** and I do not know what is meant by describing HTTP as **"an application protocol that defines a language."** I would like to better understand what *each part* literally is so that I can understand how they interact *as a system*. Similarly, I have trouble understanding how the parts **physically interact**. How does a one wireless device communicate with a server and download information from it on a physical level without being connected to it?


### February 8

[*Make It Stick*](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18770267-make-it-stick) offers an idealistic method of learning that, while mostly convincing of its superiority, is an unrealistic expectation for the majority of learning. The text sets up **"rereading"** as the most common method of studying and argues that empirical evidence has shown no signficant learning benefit to repetetive rereading. It proposes instead that learners adopt more effortful, challenging, engaging methods of study such as **retrieval practice**, in which learners are required to recall and/or apply concepts to answer  quiz questions, and **interleaving**, in which learners switch among studying various topics to provide space between practicing each subject.

While these suggestions are possible, they make the assumption that learners always have an **internal motivation** to learn the material they are required to learn when in my experience this is often not the case. I found myself frustrated reading the book's suggestions as it condemned the practice of cramming for a test as only bringing short term benefits rather than longterm mastery; most people don't care about mastering *every* subject, but we are still expected to get good grades on every test. The text includes multiple praises of **flashcards** over rereading notes, arguing that rereading is more time consuming than it is worth (10). However, notes are often taken during classtime and can easily be reread, while the flashcards method proposed as an alternative requires the additional effort of the learner to create flashcards on their own time and plan to use them often and spaced out over time. This is often unlikely for students who juggle about 8 subjects in high school and maybe 16-19 credits in college with tests and assignments occurring in too rapid a succession to be able to study far ahead of time for all of them, especially on top of extracurriculars, jobs, volunteer work, etc. that are also expected of students. For those who know they can grasp the material well enough in the short term for tomorrow's test by rereading their notes the night before, mastery may not be a concern. Similarly, the concept of **reflection** is emphasized as a form of retrieval important to learning (66), when common education formats often provide no motivation or opportunity for such reflection after the test has occurred since its grade is already final. 

It was not until later that my frustrations were indirectly addressed in the reading: "*Be the one in charge...* [Mastery] is not a grade on a test, something bestowed by a coach..." (159). I realized while reading this passage that the text made the **underlying assumption that learners always had an internal motivation** to master the content. I was reading from the perspective of someone who endured years of middle and high school with required courses in every subject while only being genuinely interested in a few and "learning" for the external motivation of a grade in most. Realizing that the text assumes genuine interest or internal motivation for the learning it describes, I then wondered if the book was even intended to be applied in situations of required learning. If so, the text **assumes that learners can choose to be internally motivated to master material they are required to be graded on without being concerned about the grade while being forced to learn within a system centered on grades**. It brought to mind the idealistic teacher who encourages students to focus on mastering the material rather than earning a grade when in reality a) the students are required to be there and don't care about mastering the material and b) the teacher must give them a grade that will affect their transcript and GPA, and once the grade is final and the course ends the teacher will stop teaching regardless of whether the students have mastered the material. 

Ultimately, the text convinced me of the merits of its methods for internally motivated learning, which is unfortunately the minority of learning I have done and observed others do. The methods in *Make It Stick* are therefore best suited for personal endeavors, hobbies, and courses learners are particularly passionate about.


### February 19

Rather than the all too common laundry list of the ways social media and the Internet hinder socialization and damage mental health, Rheingold offers a **welcomely optimistic** stance on the possibilities of social media given a certain understanding of the medium. Warnings of the dangers of the Internet are rendered tired and futile in an age where the Internet and social media are clearly here to stay indefinitely. Instead of following this pattern, Rheingold acknowledges the possible flaws and downsides of social media while **embracing the online transformation** of human interaction and explaining how new technology can be used for the benefit rather than the detriment of the user. As Rheingold states, knowledge makes the "difference between being...alienated by your use of social media, and enriching your life and community by your use of the same media" (211). After outlining the way that our online network systems have shifted human interaction from centering on membership in tightly knit groups to centering on our positioning as ***"networked individuals"*** within a broad web of connections, or degrees, Rheingold explains how this transformation can be used to our benefit, usefully building upon and furthering the discourse on social media rather than adding to the pile of unheeded warnings about why we should avoid social media. For example, Rheingold writes at length about how we can use social media as a means of acquiring social capital, or resources resulting from maintaining social relationships (218). Rheingold emphasizes the importance of **reciprocity** in maitaining these relationships as well as our **reputations**, reflecting some of the motivations for human cooperation that we discussed in class. From Rheingold's perspective, diverse network building through these means of cooperation is key to making to most out of what social media has to offer in terms of human interaction. 

Rheingold's optimistic ideal for social media does not include the **homophilic filter bubbles** we read about previously. Rather than social media friend networks and algorithms subjecting users to an insulated bubble of agreement and likemindedness, Rheingold believes the progress of online communication technology serves to break us out of tight knit homphilic groups and into a more open network of diverse opinions (206-207). However, as demonstrated in prior readings and lectures, this is often not the case since many users end up seeing posts from likeminded friends, articles from the same few sources that align with their political affiliation, and common inner-bubble disdain for alternative opinions. Rheingold's conception of social media remains an ideal far from realized. 

Lastly, I noticed that some of the concepts Rheingold began with are especially prevalent on people's minds today during the COVID-19 pandemic. The **small-world phenomenon**, in which we are loosely linked often through only a few degrees of separation to many more people than they may personally know (192), is something that anyone who is COVID-conscious has on their mind right now. The idea that we may think we have close knit inner circles when really each member has other connections (has other connections has other connections) is an important consideration for those who intend to prevent the spread of COVID-19. With currently commonplace concepts like contact tracing and social bubbles, people are made more conscious of who they interact with and who those people interact with, and many are realizing they belong to a broader network of people than they previously may have considered. 


### February 26

##### Multiple Choice:
1. According to our lecture and Wikipedia, which of the following is true of Tragedy of the Commons problems but NOT of Public Goods dilemmas:
    * goods are non-excludable
    * consumption is non-rivalrous
    * overconsumption is a main concern
    * free riders are a main concern

2. According to danah boyd in "Did Media Literacy Backfire?," which of the following is MOST true regarding current media literacy education in schools?
    * students are equipped with tools to determine the objective truth
    * it creates a culture of doubt and distrust that can lead to multiple competing versions of "truth"
    * it creates a culture of confidence in the information reported by reliable media sources
    * students are taught to value experience over expertise

##### Short Essays:

3. Describe a mnemonic for the concept of **reputation silos**. Explain the concept and how the mnemonic is relevant. 

4. Identify two study tactics productive for **learning**. According to *Make it Stick*, what about these tactics make them more effective than cramming tactics such as rereading? Write your answer using **Markdown** language to include at least one use each of the following: bold text, italicized text, a heading.

###### Answers & Explanations:

1. Correct Answer: **overconsumption is a main concern**. This question tests the student's understanding of the specific differences between Public Goods dilemmas and the Tragedy of the Commons. The first option is incorrect because it applies to both situations. The second and fourth are incorrect because they are true for Public Goods but not TOC.
2. Correct Answer: **it creates a culture of doubt and distrust that can lead to multiple competing versions of "truth"**. This is a claim that boyd makes in her article. The first option is incorrect because boyd claims schools encourage students to conduct their own research which leads to some seeking confirming evidence for their predetermined beliefs. The third is inaccurate because boyd argues that current media literacy education encourages students to seek out their own information when they are skeptical of sources, and students may not agree on what sources are reliable due to personal biases. The last concept (that skeptics of mainstream media often value experience over expertise) is mentioned later in the article and is less directly related to media literacy education in schools. 
3. This question tests a student's understanding of a reputation silo and their ability to use the skills taught in class (utilizing mnemonic). A possible answer could be: Picture every person has a barn silo filling with tiny grains and a personally tailor farmstand next to it. The silo represents the reputation silos that the Internet creates for us based on the "grains" of information it collects such as what we click on and how we interact with it. The personalized farmstands represent the way in which our individual set of collected data, or our reputation silo, are used for commercial interests such as personalized advertising. 
4. This question tests a students understanding of *Make it Stick*'s arguments on learning while also asking them to apply some simple elements of the markup language we've learned. The student must recall at least two study tactics, both their names and how they work, as well as how they functionally differ from less productive tactics. A possible answer could be: 
###### Interleaved Practice
Interleaved practice is when you switch the skills or information being practiced throughout the practice session. This could be achieved by shuffling flashcards so that you are studying different topics/skills in one session. This creates a form of **spaced practice** where, rather than fully mastering one skill and moving to the next, you alternate among skills. This is more effective for learning than cramming or repeated rereading because it is more active and engaging. The time passed between practices of any one skill allows essentially allows some of the mastery to be lost and in need of recall or relearning in a more effortful way, and more effortful studying produces longer lasting mastery. 

###### Elaboration
Elaboration involves connecting the information or skills you are trying to learn to existing knowledge or concepts you already understand. Creating these mental connections requires active effort and, by linking already understood ideas to newly introduces ideas, ensures that someone has an understanding of a concept in terms of what they know. This is more effective for learning than rereading because it promotes a fuller *understanding* while rereading is a cramming tactic that promotes *memorization* of specific wording of text rather than mastery of its concepts.


### March 9

While I have encountered many obviously fake 5 star reviews praising products as "A++" with outstanding shipping, I was not aware of the many more extensive manipulation tactics discussed in [Chapter 3](https://https://readingthecomments.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/1cubrkat/release/2) of Reagle's *Reading the Comments*. Anecdotes of individual's creating a sockpuppet or two to defend their own works were entertaining yet unsurprising, but the existance of manipulation services and extensive sockpuppet networks for astroturfing, especially as employed by governments as propaganda tactics, were quite disturbing to learn about. I would like to believe that I could discern useful, trustworthy reviews from fradulent ones, but the chapter demonstrates that not only is that potentially harder than I thought, but also those discerning skills are not enough to counter the systematic manipulation of review and comment sections by algorithms and sockpuppet networks. 

As indicated by the chapter, there are many ways that online reviews, ratings, and comment sections, all apparently meant to empower individual owners and potential consumers, can actually be manipulated by companies and competitors. While the chapter emphasizes that not **all** manipulation is driven by commercial interests, many of the examples involved monetarily driven manipulation, such as **pay to play schemes**, companies and competitors crafting **fake reviews**, **Craigslist agreements** for reviewers to write fake comments, etc. While I believe there are many poorly crafted fake reviews online that are easy to spot, someone who spends less time online may believe that these brief, vague praises are standard or authentic responses. Even the **least effortful manipulations can be dangerous** to these types of consumers. Personally, rather than reading all reviews or some reviews at random, I will scourge the comments for specific information answering a question not clearly answered by the product description itself. Also, I'll look more at ***negative reviews*** to determine if the product's detriments even matter to my personal use. I also typically feel as though less positive reviews are more honest and trustworthy, but this train of thought made me consider that manipulators can also imitate this effect. Since profit is apparently often more important than reputation/praise, I would expect manipulative companies that realize the trustworthy effect created by varied or negative reviews to include fakes of this variety among their fake praises. The chapter's account of ads asking for fake reviewers confirmed this belief, providing an example of one ad which required that **"reviewers write a range of reviews (to avoid appearing overly positive)"** (Reagle, 2019, p. 11). This is merely one example of manipulators coming to understand and exploit an attribute of trustworthiness. Manipulators imitating trustworthy mixed reviews, solving CAPTCHAs, and putting up paywalls to access and post reviews all demonstrate that this manipulation is an ongoing, adaptive process and therefore our detection skills must also be ***continually adapting***. 