Privacy vs. Commerce: Lawmakers Debate Wisdom of 'Do Not Track' Laws

Brenda

Current Even Posting 2

Topic:Law

By: Sherisse Pham

Published December 2nd

Abc News

Length: One page

Main Idea

Something very disturbing to all internet users are they're still being secretly tracked by companies from all over. Research shows they are more invasive than we thought. For example, when telemarketers got out of hand, the government responded with the 'Do Not Call' list, and now, Lawmakers debate the 'Do Not Track' list. There were very powerful responses from both lawmakers and witnesses on regulating online tracking. Susan Grant, the director of consumer protections at the Consumer Federation of America said, “companies already track consumers' every online move, often without their consent. If someone were following you around...tailing you and making note of everywhere you go, what you read, who you talk to, what you eat, the music that you listen to, what you buy, what you watch, you might find this disturbing.” Daniel Castro, a senior analyst with the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, said, “'Do not Track,' of course, doesn't actually stop online advertising, it only limits the ability of ad networks to deliver ads the user might actually want. Users who opt out of tracking would receive more – not less – unwanted advertising.”

Conclusion

The 'Do Not Track' list is actually extremely different from the 'Do Not Call' list. It's not like the companies like Sears can listen to all your phone calls and just interrupt with a Sears ad. The 'Do Not Call' list is a lot simpler and straightforward. The 'Do Not Track' list is more complex, there are good and bad sides to it because either way, there will always be ads on whichever site you visit, the only difference is if the ad actually fits the consumers need. I think the 'Do Not Track' list should not pass because you will always have ads, the only difference is it only limits the ability of ad makers to deliver ads the user might actually watch rather than having a completely irrelevant ad.

Groups Make Late Push to Salvage Bill Aiding Illegal Immigrant Students

Samantha

Current Event Posting #2

Topic: Education

By JULIA PRESTON

Published: November 30, 2010

New York Times

Length: 1 page

Main idea:

Illegal migration has always been a controversial topic in United States, especially when it is about undocumented immigrants that are under 18 years old. In this case, I will focus in the issue of educating undocumented young students.

One of the sources of this hot debate is that the American constitution of the United States made education a "fundamental right" ,  stating that  all students under 18 years old must go to school.

In the past weeks, several immigration advocacy groups have done mayor efforts to convince Congress to pass a bill to legalized thousands of illegal immigrant students.  

Democrats, like Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, are supporting this position and put forward legislation to grant legal status to some students who are illegal immigrants.  On the other hand, many Republican senators who are seeking to reduce the immigrant population are totally against this bill.

The article published on November 2010 in the New York Times, describes a increased nationwide mobilizations to give an opportunity to these children. For example, in California and in Washington state several groups of students, immigrant activists and farm immigrant workers made protests and caravans. Furthermore, education sectors from the American society are also supporting the cause, for instance,  leaders of several prestigious universities, like Brown, Harvard and MIT, have signed supporting letters.

Although these are huge advocates to this cause, opponents like Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, who wrote a detailed 10-point critique to the bill, in which one of his points was that this bill “would give safe harbor to some immigrants with criminal records and could benefit illegal immigrants who were no longer youths.”

Conclusions:

I think that Congress should pass this bill for several reasons.  One is that despite undocumented children are able to go to public schools up to secondary education; most of them are not able to pursue higher education.  Their “illegal status” might create several barriers between students and school personnel that could affect negatively these students.

 Secondly, for those students work really hard in school and are really respectful of the law, and it’s just really unfair that despite all that effort they can be deported.

Third, giving them the chance to study being legal citizens facilitates work opportunities, which could reduce unemployment rates and criminality that might beneficiate their society in general.

Drugs common in fatal car crashes

Joseph Alexander

Current Event Posting: # 1
Topic: Health
Title: Drugs common in fatal car crashes
Writer: David Martin
Publication Name: CNN, the chart
Date of Publication: Nov 30, 2010
Length: 439 words


David Martin, the Senior medical producer at CNN, researched the link between car accidents and drug use. This was the first ever drug analysis of drivers performed in 2009, as reported by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
These studies have shown that 1/3 of every person killed in an accident in America, had been under the influence of drugs. This article sheds light on the fact that driving under the influence of drugs can be just as, if not more dangerous than driving under the influence of alcohol. This study has shown that illegal drugs are not the only type of drugs that can impair you enough to cause an accident that could have been prevented. Prescription drugs have also been known to cause impairment in drivers, causing accidents.
Although drug companies deny taking any responsibility for the accidents caused by consumer drug consumption, this study has linked the cause-effect relationship between over-the-counter and prescription drugs to car accidents.

Gil Kerlikowse, director of the national drug control policy said that the percentage should serve as a wakeup call for people who drive under the influence of drugs. For example the 10.5 million people age 12 or older reported driving under the influence illicit drugs during the past year. Or the about 4 percent of the population. Hopefully people will wake up and stop driving under the influence of drugs.

Topic: Technology/Civil Rights

Title: Amazon Bows To US Censorship Pressure: Refuses To Host Wikileaks

Publication Name: Amazon takes action against Wikileaks. Writer: Mike Masnick

Date of Publiction: 12/1/10 Words: 1000

• Main Ideas: Amazon has officially denied hosting the WikiLeaks website. The site, “WikiLeaks” has been a hot topic in the media because the site has allegedly been releasing “secret information” which could affect “national security”. In reality the site is realizing articles that are well within public domain. WikiLeaks shares articles, which discuss government and military mishaps, which is not illegal. Many officials however, feel that this is a threat to national security, and are looking for a way to extend the espionage act, to ban WikiLeaks off of the web. In the meantime, more traditional ways of censorship are being used to block the site. Senator Bill Lieberman is the main voice in the expansion of the espionage act in order to ban WikiLeaks. Senator Lieberman was quoted saying “…this site is a definite threat to both the white house, and the military. They are releasing misguiding and often false information about the U.S. government, which should be deemed unconstitutional. As of now the WikiLeaks site is public domain and is protected by the 1^st Amendment, but officials say that until a ban can pass through congress and the senate, the only way to combat this site is to put pressure on those sites which support it. Amazon dumped WikiLeaks after much pressure from the government, and it seems many other search engines are soon to follow.
  
• Conclusion: WikiLeaks is not violating any laws. Although they do provide articles, which are often misleading and may not portray the U.S. government and military in good light, they still have a right to express their opinion under freedom of speech. However, the espionage act, if amended to deal with WikiLeaks, does have a right to censor what the country deems as a threat to national security. The government sees WikiLeaks as a fountain of doubt and mistrust, which would affect the minds of many American citizens. In these hard times, officials don’t want Americans to lost any more trust in the government, and therefore banning WikiLeaks seems essential.

state board of education changes kindergarten age

Paul Blanchette

C.E. posting #2

Topic: education

Title: state board of education makes change to starting age for kindergarten

Writer: Eileen FitzGerald

Publisher: newstimes.com

Date of publication: 12-3-2010

Length: 341 words

The State Board of Education in Connecticut and three other states have changed there starting age from five years old in January to 5 years old in October. This change will take a total of four years to complete because they want to do it gradually. By next year the dead line to be five will not by January but it will be December first, by 2013 the day will become November first, and in 2014 it will make it to its final spot of October first. There are a few reasons for this change one of them being that some kids need to experience more pre-school activities to develop. Another reason to change the age for kindergarten is that it will lesson the gap between age within the classroom, which will allow the kids to develop better and faster. Also this will become a more efficient kindergarten system after the transformation is finished. For all these positives there are also some negatives for example some of the underprivileged children and there familys will have to, in some cases pay for anther year of child care. This will not effect some familys because the State Board of Education in these four states will provide 27.5 million dollars for the year of care. The new age of this change will effect about 7,500 kids who are in the age group that are going to have to another year of pre-school.

Conclusion: These changes to me seem to be pointless and that it is a waist of mony for the schools and the parents of the kids who are affected. Although this change is supposed to help develop kids faster and better I believe that it is not worth 27.5 million dollars for something that might work. This bill will help the development of the kids but with a dent in the schools wallets.

Obama Reverses oil drill expansion after BP spill

Name: Alex

Blog Posting #2

Topic: Science/environment

Title: Obama reverses oil drill expansion after BP spill

Writer: Karin Zeitvogel

Publication name: Yahoo.com

Date of publication: Dec 2, 2010

length:~650 words

Main Idea:
On Wednesday, President Obama reversed a decision to expand off shore oil drilling to the Atlantic ocean and eastern gulf of Mexico. However he still allowed deep sea drilling in the gulf where the oil spill happened. the move banned oil drilling in new areas until 2017. there were mixed reaction among the states hit by the oil spill. Florida said the decision would safeguard the areas tourism and fishing industry. Louisiana, on the other hand disagreed saying it is a major step backwards for energy security. Texas Congressman John Culberson gave it the thumbs down saying that it would harm the economy by raising energy prices. Also the Natural Resources defence council says that the move did not go far enough because it left the door open for drilling in the arctic and allowed seismic testing in the Atlantic, both of which are harmful to the environment.

Conclusion:
President Obama reversed a decision to expand offshore oil drilling in new areas until 2017. states hit by the oil had mixed feelings about the decision. some say it was a good decision, while others say that it could harm the economy. One group said it did not go far enough because it left too many doors open for drilling elsewhere.

Caffeine and Alcohol Drink is Potent Mix for Young

Conor Kennedy

Current Event Posting #2

Topic: Health

Title: Caffeine and Alcohol Drink is Potent Mix for Young

Writer: Abby GoodNough

Publication Name: NY Times

Date of Publication: October 26 2010

Length: 1069 words

Summary:

New beverages called Four Loko that mix alcohol and caffeine into an intense fruity flavor, have blown up in popularity among teenagers. These drinks are not only illegal for people under the age of 21, but they are also very dangerous for the human body. Normally when someone takes in alcohol, their body, at some point will stop communicating with the brain and they will either pass out, or regurgitate the substance. But with the caffeine now added to the mix, it tricks the body by keeping the body in a "normal state" so the person will keep on consuming alcohol till they become seriously ill. In a small school called Ramapo College in New Jersey, a number of students had been hospitalized due to the affects of the four loko drink. The president of the college has banned the drink and is encouraging others to do the same. The Food and Drug Administration is investigating whether the mixing of alcohol and caffeine is safe for the human body. This drink is very cheap, so it is very affordable for college students and teenagers. Yes, the law does state the you must be under the age of 21 to consume alcohol, but many kids and young adults ignore this law. Thus being said, people are questioning the owner of four loko and are asking him if they are trying to target a younger group. Even the cans look like the energy drinks/ice tea drinks that kids drink, parents said that they didnt even notice that the drink that their child was drinking was illegal.The owner, Michael Michail says that the company has no intention to sell to minors and that on the can, it states multiple times that the drink has alcohol in it.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the malt beverage four loko is being investigated by the Food and Drug administration on whether the mixing of alcohol and caffeine is safe for the human body. Many kids have been hospitalized because of the affect that the drink plays on the body. The caffeine makes the mind think that they are in a "normal state" which leads to serious health problems. The drink is obviously supposed to be drunken by people over 21, but the majority of people who drink it are under that age. In my opinion, I think that the idea is smart, because people love energy drinks now a days, but the health risks and problems are too much.