For me, I believe the most relevant information form is speech. I think that this form of information can become the basis of all other forms. For instance, If you use the speech in the conversation, the basis of this form can be changed into other forms rather easily such as via text or phone. Regardless, all these forms I've spoken of also showcase the view of Barlow of information being an activity. It is moving, person to person, using different mediums to achieve that. To be totally honest, the idea to try to choose just one out of a basically infinite number of forms of information and speech seem impossible. Information forms today are so tangled together by one another that they form even more different types of information in their own right.
A knowledge society falters when false information becomes permeated into a society in which the population does not have the training to ascertain the validity of the information. A lot of the false information that circulates has nothing to do with the society having the distinction of being a knowledge/information society, but instead, they focus on false facts regarding specific societal groups themselves. If as a society we are not able to first solve the inequity and unfairness of society, is there really a way to create a fair and equitable Knowledge society? I believe that the answer is rather complicated in this respect. If we are strictly talking about what we currently have as solutions, bots are already in place on multiple platforms that may give more information on a topic. For example, the way in which platforms have dealt with COVID-19 misinformation have seen bots being used to pick up on covid keywords, then provided a link to a location with factual information regarding the issue. However, I believe the only way to truly solve this issue is to severely ramp up combating false information, but the question is how far can this go without being deemed a civil liberties threat?
When I'm in school, I have sometimes had the data/information, but I did not have the knowledge to fully understand and complete what was asked of me. A lot of the time, I have had this problem previously in math classes. For instance, although I had previous college calc experience (the same class multiple times due to COVID), I had all the data available to me, but I was not able to actually work through the knowledge required (and was somewhat provided even though it happened multiple times.
I believe that the main competency I currently have the least knowledge in is Information Ethics. This can generally be solved relatively easily via the classes offered at UWM. Although the basics of ethics in any field are generally the same, the technology involved in IST complicates the matter. While studying in classes, I can think of places in which ethics could apply. Some examples could be data storage and what exactly I am storing.
Honestly, I don't believe that there was ever a time in which I have had a socio-cultural barrier, but the other two happen very often. The times I most remember I didn't have access to information were the times I was at my summer camp. They ran as a camp with minimal screens, meaning people had generally no access to phones, computers, etc. The only screen I personally had was my camera, and the only time I used a computer was for photoshop. This main one is a physical barrier to access, as no access in that sense was available. When I was at camp, you were submerged in this camp bubble, but when you came back home, it was a mildly overwhelming experience, as you are just now able to access a month's worth of information that was previously inaccessible. The challenge at that point was to sift through all that information for the points that actually mattered.
I do not believe that an augmentation system specifically from the view of a human DIK system is a good idea. If a connection is that close to innate life systems, is it possible for people with malevolent actions to gain control of these systems for harm? We already have countless computer viruses, hacks, and scams already, so would it be that hard to change focus to systems that could have a much more drastic effect in our life? I believe that if there is a system that is unable to be controlled by an outside party, it is possible that having something like a compass could be helpful. Something like cochlear implants make sense, and I don't believe are a good example of a ADIK.
Here are the greatest hits. Cameras, thermometers, Apple Watch, Body Senses, Computer Keyboard, Gas pedal, Echos. Obviously, some of these systems could be considered concerning. Amazon data storage of Echo voice recordings is notoriously bad. The main issue is how much data is currently being stored.
Information organization instills great value in a system. Ease of use exponentially increases when there is already a organization scheme. As well, organization can help shorten time spent sorting. Metadata is able to show much more information which can help with sorting. For example, metadata included in most (if not all) files is time. With time, it is very easy to sort and figure out what the last thing you edited was.
Quantum computing will revolutionaize the current computing field. With its capabilities being leaps and bounds over the current offerings, offering computing powers that will change what is currently possible. The problem that comes with quantum computing is security. Current computer security is obviously based off a binary system, which for binary computers is fine, but binary security is not able to be used with a quantum computer. We must first develop quantum computing security techniques before any real quantum computing penetration of the industry occurs.
It's time to explain the BEAUTIES of sotware as a service! So you want to buy a house? You don't get to anymore. Instead, you pay month to month, year to year, or at some timeframe. However, with your payments, you get small new additions every month. One day, you might get new lights. The next, a new bed, and maybe the next new flooring. You begin to really like that flooring, but it becomes to expensive for upkeep. So without asking, they take away the floor, and leave you with only the scaffolding below. yay.
The politics of Twitter. On the Twitter platform, everything can be stated in a finite character limit of 280. Because of this, headlines can be read in a snap. But, this allows other problems to abound, sometimes leaving detail out of the equation. The platform assumes that everything can be boiled down to a short message. You are able to shape others by sharng your quick thoughts, ideas, and news. I think that just like any other platform, content moderation must be improved. Curretly, disinformation is spread way too easily on current platforms. However, also like other platforms, the amount of time and resources it would take to adequately moderate their platform is unobtainable.
When it comes to algorithms that have the possibility to affect peoples lives, it is important that we moderate them as much as possible. Given the fact that everyone will have some sort of bias, we must be aware of those biases and take them into account in the algorithm. Although I do not believe that it is feasible, if it would be at all possible, I would like to have an independent organization that tests algorithms to make sure that they are fair and equitable. As well, I believe that algorithms dictating something that will change our lives should have some required transparency. I am not sure how exactly this would work, as companies will fight hard to keep their proprietary algorithms private.
In the aviation industry, AI will revolutionize the current practices. AI will first be used primarily in corportations making major business decisions. Soon after, we should begin to see autonomous aircraft. Some issues could arise from autonomous aircraft, just as autonomous vehicles do. For example, who is responsible for a crash? This is a problem with all vehicles. With aviation, incident investigations are currently done in the United States by the NTSB, and they are the ones who assign blame. Who is to blame when a crash occurs that kills all on board? Is it the airline? The aircraft manufacturer? The AI? Who knows?