- Downloading a song you don't own from a major label artist.
- Downloading a song you don't own from a struggling independent artist.
I think downloading a song is either acceptable or not, regardless of whether the artist is from a major label or if the artist is a struggling independent one. While many people today like to bash major mainstream artists, they forget that at one time they were also struggling and independent. Why should people hate on artists who have spent their lives working hard to rise about? It’s not fair to say that its better to download from a major artist than from an indie artist because even though they can afford to have people download their music for free they still worked very hard to become who they are today. Although I personally believe that downloading music isn’t too wrong, I have also never been an artist who’s lost money from downloading. I think downloading is bad but I still do it because it’s very easy and free. I don’t think it’s any different to download from a major or independent artist. Also independent artists can benefit from downloading because it’s like free advertising.

- Downloading another copy of a song you already own.
I think it is pretty acceptable to download another copy of a song you own because today technology is changing and evolving really fast and it’s not fair to pay an artist many times over for one song that you’ve wanted. They produced one song, and we should be able to personally have and listen to that song no matter how much technology changes. Also, sometimes the quality of disks tapes cassettes etc can degenerate and we should not have to pay 20 dollars again for another hunk of plastic that might break again. I like to copy music to my computer after I buy the cd, I’m not trying to share it etc, it’s just so I can have it with me and I can put it into a play list etc. I’m not trying to cheat the artist so I believe it’s acceptable for me to download another copy. Also, if I’m not at home and I’ve forgotten my cd, I should be able to listen to it.

- Shoplifting a CD from a store.
I think it’s wrong to shoplift a CD from a store. First off, many people suffer from shoplifting. People who work at the store, the store, etc, people lose money from people stealing. Also, a CD is a tangible object. It’s just like an orange from a grocery store or a book from a book store, it’s wrong to steal from a store where people are supposed to pay money in exchange for goods.

- Downloading a song to "try it out" - if you like it enough, you'll buy the CD.
This is perfectly fine, it’s just like the music clips on itunes and amazon.com that lets you sample before you buy, only if you download a song you hear the whole thing and not just one part of it that may nor may not correctly represent the entire song. How can an artist bitch about this scenario if you end of buying their damned CD?

- Copying a CD from a friend.
I think copying a CD from a friend is less acceptable but still ok-ish. For example, if I buy a copy of a CD for my girlfriend, I shouldn’t have to buy another copy just for myself. I’m almost always with her and it’s not fair if I have to pay double the price just to have a copy with me just in case I want to listen to it when I’m alone.

- Making your music available online to share with a couple of friends.
I think it’s ok to share music with your friends, because it’s not like you’re supplying the nation with free music. Sharing music with friends like almost like you’re sharing expressions with people close to you. For example I always tell friends about new songs I like and vice versa, if they’re going to go sample or download it anyways I might as well make my music available to them online.

- Making your music publically available on the Internet, such as through KazAa or Limewire.
I have very undecided feelings about publicly sharing music on the internet. It seems wrong to give many people free music, but at the same time I download music so it’s hard to judge the people who supply me. I think artists themselves should make their music downloadable for a certain, reasonable price. Of course the music files should be cheaper than CD’s seeing as they are not on a solid, tangible object, and it would cost must less to have downloadable music than to produce CD’s.

MASHUPS!


http://map.pequenopolis.com/

This site shows you where you end up if you dig a hole through the earth...it's usually not china. I just thought this was cute and interesting. It uses google maps.


http://www.hnlhousing.com/

This site shows housing from craigslist in honolulu. I didn't know that there were site that would cover property in Hawaii, but there are. The ability for the google maps software that allows people to zoom in on the island reminds me of home.

http://www.gophernow.com/

This site also uses google maps. Gophernow shows you the restaurants closests to a zip code you enter and it also shows whether the restaurant is open, when it closes and whether or not they have delivery or pickup available. I love food, so that's pretty much why I chose this site.

The fundamental issue underlying the net neutrality debate revolves around the fact that if net neutrality is taken away or altered, large companies will be given the power to control the internet based on the price they’re willing to pay. Net neutrality prohibits discrimination against smaller websites or organizations.
Google and Ebay are two major companies against net neutrality. Since both Google and Ebay started out as small companies, they understand how net neutrality can affect individual companies. The possible blocking or “degrading” of certain websites would completely change the way the internet works now. “"The telephone and cable companies in control of Internet access are trying to use their enormous political muscle to dramatically change the Internet," Whitman wrote. "It might be hard to believe, but lawmakers in Washington are seriously debating whether consumers should be free to use the Internet as they want in the future." Says Whitman of Ebay.
AT&T and Verizon both support Net Neutrality. What you pay for is what you get pretty much sums up the attitude these companies have on Net Neutrality. They believe that customers should be able to receive videos and content faster if they wish to pay for it.
Truthfully, I’ve read most of the anti-net neutrality arguments and it seems like they don’t have any real reasons or defense. Although the companies are sugar coating their words, they still sound like they want net neutrality to go away because they want the opportunity to reel in more customers. The pro-net neutrality organizations make many more solid points. Companies could put smaller site in “the slow lane” or make their search results turn up further down on a list. Businesses could slow down the traffic on certain sites to “herd” customers to their own services. With net neutrality, the choice and freedom is in the hands of the people using the internet, without net neutrality, it is the companies who are given the power to jerk people around until everyone is going exactly where they want to. I am 100% pro net neutrality.

RFID is basically a tiny tracking device. RFID stands for radio frequency identification. Today, as RFID becomes more and more common, many different people are using it for a variety of tasks. From automatic toll booths, anti-shoplifting devices, to tracking devices embedded in pets, RFIDs are quickly spreading through the world without people even noticing. On one hand, many benefits are coming from RFIDs, and the other hand there are many privacy concerns. Let’s take a look shall we?

Pro’s

Right now in Hong Kong, a card called the Octopus card is widely circulated. After its appearance in 1997, now, in 2006, more than 10 million cards are circulating in the 7 million population of Hong Kong. The Octopus card is contains an RFID and it works as a debit card. MTR (Hong Kong’s subway), busses, parking meters, gas stations, and even certain convenience stores accept the card. One merely has to wave the card over a receptor pad and the appropriate funds are deducted. The range of the cards even work through clothing and bags. One can place one’s purse or wallet over the pad and the correct funds will be deducted. I have visited Hong Kong every year since I was a baby, and one summer, these octopus cards suddenly appeared out of nowhere. Everyone had one, old or young, and they worked very very well. In Hong Kong, many apartment building keys are cards that one touches to pad. All over the United States, clothing stores have begun using RFID tags to discourage shoplifters. From large tags around guitars or jeans, to tiny slips hidden in books and magazines, RFID’s have provided businesses with more security. RFID’s can help our lives become much more efficient. Time spent in line waiting to pay would decrease, time spent boarding or entering different means of transit would decrease. So if RFID’s can provide so much good for the world, why are there concerns?

Con’s

Today, the issue of security has become a great issue. Spying over the internet, identity fraud, phone tapping and many other issues have raised concern over the speed at which technology is growing. If RFIDs capable of surviving a washing machine are now available, then perhaps everyone is in danger of being stalked, or kidnapped. If all products have RFIDs in them, the issue of whether they’ve been deactivated permanently will surely come up. If RFIDs existed in everything, someone with a reader could basically see everything private in one’s home. Thefts, identity thefts, kidnappings, spying and other breaches of security would become a big issue. Most people, including myself, would feel uncomfortable if someone could track where I was going at what time with who etc etc. Sure, people can say that the surveillance would keep us safer, but if the surveillance was abused, then we would all be in danger. Specific people could easily be targeted, rare cars could be tracked and stolen, etc. People could potentially lose almost all freedom as they are slowly being tricked into a false sense of technological advancement. Even now with I-pods, and cells phones and laptops people think they are more free as they can go anywhere and be connected to everything. What they fail to notices is that they are slaves to the technology. If we become dependant on the marvels of RFIDs, then soon enough we’ll become slaves to them. Mothers with RFIDs imbedded in their children will always know where they are, but that information could also be passed on to kidnappers. So in taking a precaution to prevent something, they may have made it easier for it to occur.