Week 6: Invention of the VCR

The VCR was once a staple in American homes, but thanks to the leaps that have been made in technology in the past few years, the VCR has become nearly obsolete. The VCR has a long history from its conception to its demise, and the beginning of this technology dates farther back than one may think. 

The birth of the technology that allowed for the conception of this device dates all the way back to Denmark in 1898. According to a book titled Social and Cultural Aspects of VCR Use, a physicist by the name of Valdemer Poulsen. He proposed the idea that by using magnetic recording, sound could be captured on wire. This idea then inspired Boris Rtcheouloff in 1927 to suggest that magnetized strips could record tv signals. He patented this idea, though never was able to produce such technology. I.G. Farben, a german company was the first to be able to put this theory to practice in 1931. These magnetic recording devices had the benefit of being able to record audio with much clearer sound, and the technology was used by the Germans in WWII. After the war was over, John T. Mullins, an Army technician brought units of the device back to the United States. Mullin was later invited by singer Bing Crosby to tape his show with the device so it could be played again on radio at a later time. This is especially significant, as it was the first time that magnetic tape had been used in the United States to play a program at a later time. The Ampex Electric Corporation capitalized on this success and began the production of better magnetic tape recorders. Ampex spent several years using what they had learned through producing tape recorders and was able to unveil the first ever video tape recorder in 1951. 

With the birth of the video tape recorder, other companies wanted in on the action as this was an emerging market. RCA also produced an industrial tape recorder, but thanks to Ampex, it was not seen as practical as what Ampex had produced. Ampex became the staple company for manufacturing Tape recorders for the television industry. 

This did not mean that Ampex had the market cornered, though. The SONY company in Japan realized that Ampex was making the equipment for professionals, but not capitalizing on the potential the technology had for use in people’s homes. SONY didn’t use the two inch wide magnetic tape that Ampex used, and instead opted for tape that could store more information. These VCRs hit the American market in the 1960’s. With SONY’s initial success, other European and Japanese companies began producing and selling home video recorder, and Ampex was left behind in this market, as they tried to compete but other companies had more affordable and superior products for the home. SONY released one of the most well-known VCRs in the 1970’s: the Betamax. It capitalized on the fact that it could not only be used to play tapes but record television shows. This feature was included in previous VCRs, but nonetheless this selling point caused the Betamax to be a massive success. Sources: https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=kK934crW140C&oi=fnd&pg=PA9&dq=history+of+the+vcr&ots=hK3TVfSZKx&sig=C4nCybFKmQbi1reMtOwk165JXQQ#v=onepage&q=history%20of%20the%20vcr&f=false https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=17SRAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA91&dq=history+of+the+vcr&ots=1EzcBGnAKO&sig=9HA5Lrt6dc8ss2VHCR7CSGiuUaU#v=onepage&q=history%20of%20the%20vcr&f=false

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=17SRAgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA91&dq=history+of+the+vcr&ots=1EzcBGnAKO&sig=9HA5Lrt6dc8ss2VHCR7CSGiuUaU#v=onepage&q=history%20of%20the%20vcr&f=false

Week 5: Antiwar Voices

While reading these antiwar sites, I was impressed with the number of people who are antiwar, but also willing to criticize not only  America’s government, but also many other governments  so harshly. I think that this is a good thing, though. A country should be held accountable for engaging in pointless or unnecessary conflicts. There were so many articles on Antiwar.com that I did not get through all of them, but I kept being reminded of the Sedition Act of 1918, had this site existed back then, it would have been illegal. This act was an extension of the Espionage Act, which made it illegal to criticize the government or cause others to view America in a negative light. This was during World War I, so it was a wartime law that the U.S. tried to justify at the time. While the act is no longer in place, it does seem that mainstream media does not want to take a completely antiwar perspective, as many viewers of mainstream news channels sometimes equate being antiwar as being anti-America. 

I believe that sites like this are important, as the public should be informed of both sides of armed conflicts in the world, in order to form their own opinions. Every country that is in a conflict is going to be told by their government that it is justified, and sites like this are a good foil to that perspective. 

Sources: https://www.antiwar.com/

Week 4: Facebook Has Issues Fighting Fake News

Facebook, the tech giant and magnet for controversy, has recently been outspoken about its efforts to combat fake news. After complaints that it was not doing enough, Facebook has implemented new policies that appear to be working. But one previous feature seems to have a glaring loophole. Nearly two years ago Facebook removed the ability of its users to edit the previews to links that they shared. This essentially means that when someone shared a link, they were able to edit the title and image, which could promote false information, if a user saw it on their timeline and didn’t actually click the url to the real article. It now appears that if a link is shared from another Facebook page, then it can still be edited. 

This appears to be a strange loophole that Facebook did not foresee, but will most likely fix this in the near future. Facebook has had several scandals involving fake news over the past few years, but has been taking more action as of late. For example, the site recently shut down several Iran-based accounts that were attempting to create foreign interference; posting in groups, sharing propaganda, and persuade potential voters. 

This problem is nothing new though, the site is constantly purging accounts created by Iranians or Russians spreading fake news. This can be tough to control, as anybody can create an account and share whatever they like, so it would appear that Facebook may continue having trouble with these accounts in the future. 

Sources:

https://mashable.com/article/facebook-loophole-fake-news-link-preview/
https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-shuts-down-iran-based-misinformation-campaign-targeting-us/

Week 3: The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is one of the three branches of the U.S. government, the others being the legislative and executive. Nine justices sit on the court and hear cases that have made it up to their level. The court reserves the right to decide whether or not to hear a case.

The Supreme Court also decides if actions taken by the federal and state governments are constitutional or not. The court seemed to lose some authority after the Dredd Scott decision. The ruling was that it was not in the powers of the Supreme Court to outlaw slavery. After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment was added to the constitution, to give everyone equal protection under the law including former slaves.

The Supreme Court gets about 7000 requests per year, but they only hear about one hundred. Many of the cases the court hears are from those that want their case heard after they felt that the ruling of a lesser court was incorrect.

What I believe is most interesting about the Supreme Court is how the video mentioned that the justices do not go into work trying to push an agenda like congress, but they wait for a case to come to their door and must preside over the evidence and make a decision. This does not mean that the justices are unbiased, though. Everybody has their personal views whether it be liberal, conservative, or somewhere in between. I believe that perhaps adding more justices to the court could potentially allow for a broader spectrum of insights and opinions to the cases that are brought to them.

Sources:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca8qSuWxcG8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWRoXYRsaeo&feature=youtu.be

Week 2: Do Companies Have a Right to Your Photos?

It is interesting to think that we live in a world where technology that has the ability to recognize your face exists, and what is perhaps even stranger is the fact that your face can now be used for the profit of corporations.

Clearview AI, a facial recognition company has been in a heated battle with Twitter over its right to mine and use photos that are posted to the social media platform. Twitter along with Google, have filed cease and desist orders against the company to stop mining user's data.

A cease and desist order is essentially a legal document that can be filed to tell a person or company to stop engaging in a specific act.

Clearview AI intends to fight this, as they say that they are protected by the first amendment and will continue to mine this data. They claim that the users publicly posted these images, and now it has the right to collect them. This also brings up the concern that some social media users post photos privately, make their entire account private, or set their accounts to only show photos to friends and family. These users are still most likely not safe from companies like this.

Clearview has collected three billion photos and, more concerningly, licensed them to law enforcement agencies, which can use them to track suspected criminals.

Source:

 https://mashable.com/article/clearview-ai-ceo-first-amendment-right-facial-recognition-data-scraping/