About Electronic Balloting...

Among several concerns about the Diebold electronic voting machines, the primary distress stems from lax security protocols within the machines’ software as well as the privatized implementation of these machines. Foremost, these machines are not considered secure because anyone who comes into contact with them can easily upload a malicious protocol into the system. As if this weren’t bad enough, if the infected memory card comes into contact with another machine, the virus/protocol is easily passed. Because there is no paper trail with this system, such an interaction is virtually unnoticeable and untraceable. In addition, many states have provided Diebold and other electronic voting companies free reign to implement these systems bypassing standard laws that require state and county approval throughout the process. Essentially, the privatization of elections is the greatest risk to electoral integrity.

If I were monitoring elections in California, I would primarily ensure that elections be conducted by public or not-for-profit entities to ensure just and unbiased election polling. The fact that the US is one of the only major world democracies that privatizes their elections is cause for alarm. High-level policy and organizational reform is necessary for the United States to attempt for elections. In addition, as archaic and environmentally unfriendly as it sounds, I think traditional paper ballots (you know, the kind that can be recounted and leave a trail), should be used until a more efficient form of electronic balloting is made. Citizens should have faith in their electoral reliability, something not guaranteed with electronic ballots.

Outsourcing and me...

The mass outsourcing of IT jobs to other countries is explained less by economic rationality (which is one way to explain outsourcing), but more to do with a lack of interest in the US IT job market. There are less qualified students coming out of American schools, and the working IT Professionals are being spread even thinner by a rapidly expanding job market. Drew Robb in Computerworld: Careers notes that "according to the Computing Research Association, the percentage of college freshmen listing computer science as their probable major fell 70% between 2000 and 2004." Furthermore, the appetite for skilled IT Professionals is only growing. Mark Hanny, vice president of IBM's Academic Initiative outreach program notes that "according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, one out of every four new jobs between now and 2012 will be IT-related." This illogicality between supply and demand is encouraging American corporations to look toward other countries to supply skilled specialists, and with good reason.

I don't think that it's a matter of foreign workers being more or less skilled than American students. Companies need staff to meet increasing technology needs, whoever meets the need should be the first one with the job. According to Lezlee Westine and Scott McNealy in USA TODAY, "By 2012, it's projected that the demand for technical jobs in science and engineering will increase by more than 25%, and 39% in math and computer science. Factor in the tech rebound, and the need will be even greater." Many American students are not encouraged academically or culturally to pursue education and subsequently careers in math or computer science, presumably because these skills are not encouraged by the American school system in addition to the decreased social stature associated with these fields. On the contrary, many other cultures are encouraged to practice a strong foundation curriculum that strongly enforces math and science in addition to rewarding academic discipline and hard work. Simple investigation of the general values of different cultures explains technology outsourcing, and importation of foreign professionals.

As for me, I think there is a very low probability that my career will be drastically affected by outsourcing in the future. I want to be a Television Producer, working in Programming or Development for a major network or production company. My observation (and logic) has proven that creative positions are difficult to outsource as they are regional, require a working knowledge of culture and vernacular, in addition to requiring a certain degree of experience/skill. While I see many aspects of the entertainment/media industry being outsourced, creative professionals will remain regional because of what their job requires. The same goes for creative professionals throughout the world, if you want to act, produce, design, or direct for a project in India, you need to have significant amount of experience with Indian culture.

E-Waste, Government Export Policy, and the Dumping of the Developing World

Disclaimer: I apologize that this is late. I forgot that these were due by Saturday night/Sunday morning. I will accept a lower score if necessary.

Dumping our e-waste on rural areas in developing countries is a practice that is controversial and challenging to reverse. The primary reason that the issue is not more widely discussed is because not many people really know about what's going on. When was the last time you heard someone talking about US Export Policy to China, India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Eastern Europe and Africa? If you ask the average American, they could tell you very little about the so-called 'third-world,' and probably even less about what happens to their electronic equipment after they dispose of it. Jim Puckett, director of Basel Action Network, an environmental advocacy organization that tracks hazardous waste noted in a salon.com article, "exploiting low-wage countries as a dumping ground is winning the day" (qtd. by Elizabeth Grossman on salon.com). In addition to constituent ignorance to the problem, it is far too easy for American, Western European, and Japanese governments to ignore the problem.

While most of the EU supposedly has fairly strict electronic recycling and exporting policies, the United States leaves most of the electronic recycling to independent organizations that despite best efforts (in many but not all cases) sell to buyers who intentionally plan on stockpiling electronics in the developing world. Essentially, another major factor is lax national/international policy. If the US, EU, and Japan had better defined policies on what to do with their e-waste, the drastic environmental and health issues affecting the ecosystems of the 'dumpees' would not be as dramatic a problem.

I think the only thing I can and will actively due as a responsible consumer is dispose of electronics with organizations I know do their best to correctly recycle or reuse used electronics. One of the seemingly more legitimate organizations I would pursue is the Recycling Electronics and Asset Disposition (READ) Services, a US government-run portion of the Environmental Protection Agency. There are several other independent companies that sell or recycle used electronic equipment. Many of these companies are regional and sell to different parts of the world. My suggestion would be to look into what you're trying to get rid of and what condition it's in. Could some of it's components be reconfigured to be used by a school or non-profit? Also, notice the manufacturer, many companies offer responsible reuse/resell/recycle programs. I know Apple and Alltel engage in these programs, while Dell and several other computer manufacturers do not. Until these governments enact more strict policies, the most you can do is independent research into what you're buying, who you're buying from, and what will you do with this electronic when you're done with it? One of the safest things we can do currently is donate gently used equipment to people who need it most: schools, non-profits, prisons, etc.

The ICANN Controversy

ICANN is an acronym that stands for Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, and one of their primary objectives is to determine what countries and corporate entities are licensed certain domain names. The non-profit (American-based) organization is also somewhat responsible for shaping internet standards and practices. According to Paul Twomey, President and CEO of ICANN, ICANN is:

a public-private partnership that has representation from the technical community, the business community, governments, and representatives from the users of the Internet. It is tasked to help manage the coordination of the Internet's system of unique identifiers-in particular, Internet domain names, IP address numbers, protocol parameters, and port numbers-which are essential for the Internet to function. It also helps coordinate the stable operation of the Internet's root server system (Mark Frauenfelder as qtd. in Technology Review).

In other words, ICANN has in the past and continues to be the first place the global community looks in regards to internet policy and etiquette. While ICANN’s effectiveness has been satisfactory in the past, there is substantial concern as of late that the influence of American and Westerfn European countries and companies reflects an unfair advantage for the more economically powerful nations. This concern mirrors past cultural and political debates on orientalism and colonization.

In regards to the global community’s concern that ICANN reflects too much the interests of the Western World, Twomey asserts “Undoubtedly, part of the reaction of some of the developing countries is an anti-American sentiment and a broader desire to wrest the levers of international economic power from the North. The irony is that ICANN has been established to internationalize and privatize the functions that were previously being performed by the U.S. government in the original founding of the Internet” (Mark Frauenfelder as qtd. in Technology Review) Regardless of who founded the internet, the objectives of ICANN could not be more apparent. However, the concern of the international community is worth acknowledging and not entirely unfounded.

The reality that ICANN is still run by the U.S. Department of Commerce reflects not only the sluggishness of internet reform, but the American paradigm of ‘cowboy colonialism’ (most famous by the Bush and first Roosevelt Administrations). The solution proposed by several academics is less than ideal for quelling concerns of Western e-domination. Several American and British corporations are at the top of the list of successors if ICANN is stripped of internet regulation privileges at the end of September 2006. According to Gene J. Koprowski in eweek.com, “there are serious business, technological and political consequences that may emerge if the U.N. takes command of the Internet.” In addition, although there are several arguments for the ‘decolonization’ of the internet, Koprowski notes that “experts say that ICANN has actually empowered small ISPs to start up, on a shoestring budget, in small villages in Africa, Asia and the Middle East, and the current system has served those nations well.” Only time will tell if the world’s best internet interests are served by ICANN.

e-freedom today...

One of my favorite films released in the last year was a film by the Wachowski Brothers (known for The Matrix series) called V for Vendetta. In Vendetta, we are exposed to a totalitarian government that actively monitors and enforces a system of routines and rules on the oblivious British population. The film is shown from the perspective of a fanatical political terrorist and a seemingly naive young woman who works for the country's only media source, which is coincidentally enough controlled by the government. Although there are many social and political parallels I made between the film and our current state, one of the strongest (and eeriest) predictions is in regards to the government's access to and control of media and information. While not a contemporary reality, I undeniably would consider this a probability.

I have always been skeptical releasing information to third parties, even when the school paper came to interview me I couldn't help but feel a few minute pangs of anxiety. Alas The Foghorn's staff was not attempting to steal my identity or catalogue my information for storage or for sale to the highest bidder, but the existence of entities that will is a reality, and it freaks me out. Even though I try to exercise responsibility and restrain when disclosing personal information such as my social security or credit card numbers, I cannot help but feel like there is more I should be doing to keep my information private.

While I may give out this information for the occasional job application, it worries me that various companies have access to a whole lot of me. Internet companies accessing my click stream is perhaps the most frightening concept of e-access, next only to identity theft. The fact that myspace.com (recently acquired by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.) now has advertising targeted exclusively for each user's friend list, interests, and even comments is distressing. Similar phenomena can be experienced by google.com, and just about any other search engine in the web. I'm all for consumerism, but I believe there is a point where demographic information should be only so individualized. Though the concept is frightful, I do feel as though there is a certain level of truth to our government's declaration of protection against terrorism. The internet is too effective a medium of communication and research to not be used by terrorist or offensive interests, however, does that give the government, or corporate entities for that matter, the privilege to monitor my e-activity in the interest of my 'benefit?' Where do my rights as an American citizen grant me privacy above protection? I agree with the call to action to monitor the internet, but when does the concern for terrorist prevention end and the execution of totalitarianism begin? Perhaps the stark reality proposed by V for Vendetta is not so foreign after all.