# Reading Responses (Set 2)

## Mar 12 Tue - TikTok, fakes, and appropriation

“What does “Black-fishing” and “Asian-fishing” mean?” I remember perfectly well when I was scrolling through comments of a video on TikTok, and I saw these words come up. As someone from Spain, where these words do not exist, I was incredibly confused as to what they meant, and honestly, I first thought people in the United States were too sensitive. However, after reading these articles, I do not think that at all.

Black-fishing and Asian-fishing come from the concept of catfishing, and it is when an individual in social media portrays themselves as being a Black or Asian person when in reality, they are usually White. They do this by changing their hairstyles, outfits, and makeup, and/or editing their photos/videos to look more “Asian” or “Black.” Normally, they do this to profit financially and socially. An example of how a person would attempt to seem Asian would be by doing the “fox eye trend,” where with make-up, you would draw a wing on your eyes making it look like East Asian eyes (Jennings, 2021). Similarly, to these terms, these people also tend to partake in “cultural appropriation” which is when people take on cultural aspects of another culture and claim it as their own, without acknowledging, understanding, or respecting it.

People doing these things perpetuate and reinforce negative stereotypes and prejudices such as “the Asian/Asian American as robotic, as machine-like,” and the African American as “primitive, as too human” (Kim, 2021). Additionally, not only is the white creator benefitting economically from this, but also it takes away the chance for a creator who is actually Asian or Black to receive those financial benefits. Lastly, and most importantly, as Cherid said, “By “wearing” Black womanhood, White women can extract from its position in the North American cultural imagination the marketable and palatable parts of Black identity, without having to endure the systemic oppression that shapes it” (Cherid, 2021). So, people who take part in Asian-fishing, Black-fishing, or cultural appropriation, experience benefits that other women who are part of that community would experience, and also still get their White privilege, which is unfair and wrong.

## Apr 02 Tue - Artificial intelligence

“¿Oye, Natalia, has visto a Aitana, la influencer que se ha vuelto viral sin ser de verdad?”- “OMG, Natalia, have you seen Aitana, the influencer that has gone viral without even being a real person?” my best friend said. I remember she showed me the videos, and I was shocked. I could not believe artificial intelligence has come so far that it can now create a person that is not real.

The way AI functions is with machine learning, it teaches and trains AI how to execute tasks by exposing it to as much data as possible. Ai then learns how to imitate it. An example of AI is ChatGPT, which was trained on a ton of text from the internet, and “scripts of dialogue” in order for it to produce human-like texts (Heilweil, 2023). The only reason why Generative AI, like ChatGPT, is available at no cost to everyone is so that the companies who are creating them, are able to train AI with the more data there is, so by having the public use it, we are unconsciously training it and helping build a better model.

Stable Diffusion is another generative AI model that creates images that look real. It recently came out with a new version that caused controversy. One of the criticisms they received was from artists, such as Rutkowski, due to Stable Diffusion being trained on artwork. This meant it could recreate their styles of art. Another thing they got both criticisms and compliments was the removal of NSFW (Not Safe For Work) content which included “non-consensual pornography and images of child abuse” (Vincent, 2022). This makes me wonder how is it possible that people are mad about these types of images being removed.

## Apr 05 Fri - Algorithmic bias

“ ‘Three white teenagers’ showed results of mainly stock images of white teenagers looking happy, whereas a search for ‘three black teenagers’ showed mugshots” (Rutherford & White, 2016). This quote, and the whole article in general, was incredibly disappointing. It reminded me of last semester when I took the Digital Feminism class. We had to google the word “Homemaker,” and 99% of the images were of women, particularly white. This resembles the white “hand,” “beauty,” “unprofessional hairstyles,” or even the “beautiful dreadlocks,” which clearly portray the biases, “norms,” and stereotypes our society is still, in 2024, experiencing (Rutherford & White, 2016).

The chapters of the “Weapons of Math Destruction” book were incredibly infuriating and saddening. The case of Duane Buck, and so many others, shows how unfair and discriminatory the justice system is in the United States. As a Spaniard, reading about how they determined someone’s sentence due to their “race,” which is just a social construct, not a biological one, to determine the sentence of someone is mind blowing. However, they turned to recidivism models in hopes of reducing prejudices. While it has helped in some aspects such as getting judges to become more consistent in their sentences and reducing costs, it has not eliminated systemic inequalities. One of the reasons why is that some models such as the Level of Service Inventory-Revised, send out questionnaires to prisoners, where they ask questions about their background, past convictions, and if any friends or family have criminal records. Since people of color tend to be convicted more and have a less privileged upbringing, these models do not help eliminate biases. Additionally, it has contributed to the disparity of social, economic, and educational opportunities for marginalized communities.
So, while everyone thought algorithms were the solution to eliminating this society’s social injustices and stereotypes, it is clearly seen that this is not the case, since algorithms learn from human data.

## Apr 12 Fri - Digital language and generations

“Daddy please stop texting me so professionally. I am NOT one of your clients! Do not add a period at the end of your sentences and add more emojis and exclamation marks because if not I think you are mad at me.” I remember texting this to my dad when I was 16 years old. He did not really understand what I meant however, he tried, which made me happy.

After reading the article, “Our Language Is Evolving, 'Because Internet', it made me think about how I, unconsciously, depending on how old the person I am texting is, I alter what I write, how I write it, and what emojis/stickers I use. For example, I never text “Ok” to my friends because if I do, they will think I am mad at them, however, I always send that to my parents and other older adults.

“Old Internet People” are the population who went online first. They are the group that has “the highest level of average technological skill, generally knowing a decent inventory of keyboard shortcuts, the basics in a programming language or two, and how to look at the inner workings of a computer behind its graphical user interface.” (McCulloch, p. 70) Because of this, many people who were part of this first wave created the “Jargon File,” which was an index with slang, “hacker cultural,” and other technical program words and their definitions (McCulloch, p. 72). Then, in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the second wave of people using the internet hit, called the “Semi Internet People”. They use the internet mainly as a tool to research things they do not know. While they do not focus on the social aspects as much as the “Internet People” do, they like to stay connected with those friendships and relationships they had already formed in real life. They tend to be less aware of the modern norms of online communication and instead text more professionally (like my dad). Lastly, the third wave of “Internet People” had two categories: the “Post Internet People,” who are those who grew up using the Internet, and primarily use it to socialize and form new friendships and relationships, and the “Pre Internet People,” who are those that gave in to using the Internet because they knew they were not going to be able to escape it anymore (McCulloch, p.99).

## Apr 16 Tue - Pushback
My father regales me with stories of when he was a kid, and while I think he makes most of it up, it does make me realise how differently he has grown up versus how I have grown up due to technology. When he was a kid, his mother would tell him to turn off the TV and go outside and play, and how all the kids in the neighborhood would meet outside at the same time ready to play games. He talks about a time before there was the internet, and that is difficult for me to even conceive. How did he get anything done? I used to feel sorry for him, that he and his generation had to grow up without all the technology that makes my life “easier” and “better”, but I have increasingly been asking myself if it is really easier and better for my generation. Both articles make me think that maybe I'm not alone in having those doubts.

“Pushback” is a research study done in 2013 where they analyzed the pushback in being connected permanently to technology, “everytime” or simply all of the time. This is a rejection of the idea that everyone needs to always be available and how technology has made this a reality. The study found that people resisted this push to always be available and connected in a variety of ways and for a variety of reasons. This pushback not only came from older generations but also the younger generation that has always been exposed to technology. The two common elements across the pushing back were “a) dissatisfaction or disillusionment with one or more types of technology and/or social media, and b) the users’ desire to pull away from technology usage in some way” (Morrison & Gomez, 2014).

Luddite discusses the emergence of a club made up of New York high schoolers who actively embraced the idea of avoiding technology and social media. They would meet in a park with no phone or only a flip phone and would spend their time together reading, painting, carving, drawing, or simply just listening to the wind. While it was difficult to get kids to join the club, many joined because of how social media made them feel. One said that during the lockdown, “I became completely consumed… I couldn’t not post a good picture if I had one. And I had this online personality of, ‘I don’t care,’ but I actually did.” (Vadukul, 2022). The interesting thing is that some parents, while admiring the change, actually required their kids to at least have a flip phone because of the need to remain in contact, but parents are now used to tracking their kids, “So when she got rid of the iPhone, that presented a problem for us, initially” (Vadukul, 2022). While the kids enjoyed interacting directly face-to-face with other kids, the lack of connection made it difficult for them to remain in touch.