Ted Talk: Jennifer Golbeck: The curly fry conundrum: Why social media “likes” say more than you think

A company has sent an advertisement based on baby bottles to a 15 year old girl and this was a week before she told her parents that she was pregnant. It was possible for the company to figure out that she was going to have a baby beforehand due to the record of items she had bought online.

This is an example of how the online media keeps a record of every single click you make online. Such data is used for corporate groups to promote their products more efficiently. They may know who you are and what you do not by looking at your profile, but the movements you make online. The unfortunate fact is that you will never have control over this information.

Not many are aware of this situation, yet Jennifer Goldbeck’s main aim is for users to take back their control over the information they input in websites.

The most useful way companies learn about their users on social networking websites is through the theory of homophile. This is defined as the ones nearby you having the similar attributes and hobbies as you. A homophile would guess that the friends of a smart and young being would have nearly the same characteristics. Thus, if a smart man creates a page on curly fries via Facebook, it is most likely that the friends who have liked the page will be smart as well. If this theory is correct, the page would end up having a host of smart people. It is not the content that makes you smart, but the act of liking the page that proves homophile accurate.

The problem is the information companies collect are not under the permission from the users. There are luckily three ways that can help these companies realize that users must be the customers, not a form of resource they can abuse. There is a political law route, which is going through all the political process and action to earn the right of using the users information, but this would be extremely time consuming. The other way is the bann any profit-seeking companies, meaning that no one would be able to access your information. This is beneficial to the users, but companies would no longer have a way to create statistics needed for efficient marketing. Nonetheless, the third and most efficient way is to aware users about how they would use their SNS. Liking and sharing certain pages may unconsciously expose their identity and personal information.

Companies would want to collect as vague information as possible, but if users do not want their information to be used in any form of way, then companies must respect their users belief. It is about time to give them not only the rights they need but also an advanced technology needed in the online world.

Jennifer Goldbecks overall reason with giving the users rights online in reasonable, but there can be so many conflict with the companies. The only reason why they collect information is purely because of improvement, not for any hacking or deceivement. It will prevent any abuse online, such as threats of inappropriate content. There will not be enough statistics if users don’t be honest online and begin to unlike certain things. These companies alas do not share any of the information they collect to the public, but only use it for the customer’s good.  According to politics, users must be over the age of 13 in order to access any social networking website because it is believed for them to be responsible and aware of the information companies collect.

Users are who create the face and attributes of a social networking website. There are only a few rules and limitations they must keep online, which is relatively nothing compared to what companies must do in order to keep your information safe. Therefore, if users are freely allowed to post, like or share anything, then companies must at least have a minor proportion of information they collect.

Such problem requires careful thought and discussion.

Ted Talk: Sheryl Sandberg: Why We Have Too Few Women Leaders Final

Only 13% of the parliament consists of women and the numbers have not been increasing since 2002. They tend to feel less confident and have a lower self esteem than men. The United States had proved that there are women has less freedom when it comes to your career. ⅔ of the male workers had children, while only ⅓ of the female workers did. The world is unconsciously discriminating against women, especially in the labor market. To prove this, a professor had two two groups of students who received the exact same research paper with one single difference—the sex of the author. Results showed that more students wanted to work with the male author than the female author, for no particular reason. There is a false idea that men are considered as better working partners than women.

Women tend to make decisions to early. In most family cultures, women are the one who are mainly in charge of their child, while men are the ones to have to earn the money. Women have to face a decisions between persevering towards their career, or either quitting their current job for the sake of their children. Having to make such life changing decision at a relatively early age causes them to become too precautious, if not, passive. This is an obstruction to the women’s career development, which is another reason to why such a low percentage of women are in the working field than men. It is recommended for women to not make such decisions too early in advance. This does not mean that all women must walk their career path and put their children first, but rather decide when your job becomes stable.

In all honesty, this talk had not surprised me at all. Job inequality have been a problem for a long time and there progress to fix this is yet too slow. Men still have more social and political power than women. There is still a “glass ceiling” for women in terms of their career. Ways of improvements are being suggested, but not many has been accomplished for the previous years. Women in countries that are less developed are more vulnerable to harm, such as physical abuse and teenage pregnancy than men. I believe that public must first recognize the sexism our society faces in order to distribute the job equality between men and women.

This House Would Not Legalize Prositution

Prostitution is defined as the practice or occupation of engaging in paid sexual activity. The topic on whether or not we should legalize prostitution has been debated for many years. In this essay, our house disagrees with legal prostitution. The act itself is socially undesirable and immoral and it will have a negative impact on society. The interest in this job will also increase once the government legalizes it.

There are many non-profit organizations that support people in a similar situation as prostitutes, such as people in abject poverty. We need to question why prostitutes are denied the same support and help. The only reason they join prostitution is that there is no other option to make a living. These women are not educated and have extremely low wages like those who are supported by thousands of organizations. Rather than legalizing prostitution, we need to first find a way to rescue them from unhealthy working conditions.

We need to predict how it will affect the public when prostitution becomes legal. Although these women will be safe in terms of reliable insurances and wages, if the crowd disapproves the "new career," not only will it cause a petition, resulting in social division, but also seclude prostitutes from society . The way we change our viewpoint on prostitutes will take many years. Adding on, the stereotypes of sex workers are hard to change, thus making a slight, perhaps harsher, difference in the lives of these women.

More women will consider to be a prostitute once it becomes legal. Those who are especially in desperate need of money will not think twice. This industry will grow faster than ever as the interest will raise. This will have negative side effects. For example, young women not mature enough to have the right concept on sex can be easily seduced by this high paying industry, regretting their "job" in the future. Legalizing will only boost up the industry, producing greater number of sex workers.

In conclusion, prostitution shall remain illegal (if not abolished). If not, it will affect the perspectives of the public, causing social conflicts. The industry will grow even faster than it is today. In fact, the background story of these prostitutes are necessary to be heard and solved before it gets more serious.

Sex Workers Are Victims

In the article “Sex Workers are Victims,” Jane Wells and John-Keith Wasson argued that by legalizing prostitution, there would be more conflicts than there were at the first place.

As a modern form of slavery, sex workers have more disadvantages than advantages and are considered. Women who work under pimps suffer from numerous amounts of problems both physically and mentally. The FBI estimated that around 85% of sex workers experience abuse while serving their customer. Less than one-tenth of 1% of them use a safe health insurance system.

In sex industries, the majority of pimps force their prostitutes to hand over their payment. Adding on, most women are in an unhealthy condition, often suffering from traumas involving beating, knifings, and rape. PTSH, a chronic pelvic disease is also a crucial problem they have today.

Even by legalizing the fastest growing “criminal” industry, Jane and John affirmed that the first thing the public should do is to recognize the harm and help these sex victims overcome their traumas.

Voluntary sex workers should not be the first priority over those who are forced to work as salves.as a modern form of slavery.