Babbage located intelligence in the mind not the attentive crafting mind. Discussion to this with reference to the articles made by Schafer and Zimmerman

Babbage located intelligence in the mind not the attentive crafting mind. Discussion to this with reference to the articles made by Schafer and Zimmerman

.In 18^th century so many inventions made and they are developing till now .life is becoming more mechanical. The understanding of life was more mechanistic by which mind was viewed separated from the body. intelligence is defined by the “mind” because the bodily  labour  can be done by a “machine” and Charles Babbage was one among then who wanted to “substitute” “mind” using a machine. Charles Babbage difference engine has become a water mark in the history of automata. The difference engine is given significance because In other cases, mechanical devices have substituted machines for simpler tools or for bodily labour. But difference engine substitutes mechanical performance for an intellectual process.

In this environment Charles Babbage an English mathematician, philosopher, inventor, and mechanical engineer , popularly known as the 'father of computers', came with a 'calculating engine' which he advertised as 'Mechanized Intelligence'. His second engine the 'Analytical engine' was also an attempt to simulate intelligence. He thought that the introduction of machine would increase accuracy. Babbage's high estimation of the potential intelligence of machines rested on his idea of a mechanical universe. Referring to Zimmerman's article we understand that Babbage had a mechanistic idea of the whole universe, according to him everything is governed by some set of “laws assigned by the Almighty for the government of matter and of mind".

Babbage’s definition of intelligence is the combination of memory and foresight. According  to Babbage the owner of an article is the person who designs rather than a person who crafts it. It can be seen when Babbage laid claims to owning the means of production, while his engineer thought he could make more calculating engines if they went into production. In Babbage own words on the 'Calculating engine':

'My right to dispose, as I will, of such inventions cannot be contested; it is more sacred in its nature than any hereditary or acquired property, for they are the absolute creations of my own mind'

Babbage understood intelligence is of the mind , not in the body, in other words owner is he mind of the inventor and not craftspeople. This was extended to the way he understood 'factory', systematize the unintelligent work to make the product of the intelligent.

Babbage gave importance to the result rather than the process by which it is done. The end result was identical if it was a machine or a human who does the work. He equalized the machine and the power needed to the skilled labour. This made the skilled labour to be seen as a equivalent to the machine handled by an unskilled labour(to be given less wage).As I have mentioned above the shift from the multiple “small” scale enterprises to “capitalist” “large” enterprise has forced the “supervising” term to check the discipline made the labour to do work in a “programmed ” fashion without using his “own knowledge”, by this we can say intelligence exists in mind rather than the skillful artisan,because there is no use of his skill as “all the thinking” is done by the inventor or the supervisor and the “skillful” does a work of low significance. According to babbage the owner of a article is who designs it rather than a person who crafts it.

Babbage understandings on intelligence is reflected to all of his works. finally  according to babbage the intelligence is limited to mind of the inventor rather than body’s craftsman.

By

J.santosh kumar

EE09b085.

PERSONALIZED SEARCH-- A RISK!

The "invisible algorithmic editing of the web" via personalized search results, news feeds and other customized content is threatening to limit our exposure to new information and narrow our outlook.
Google is also guilty of tweaking what it shows users based on past online behavior. Two users can receive drastically different Google search results after querying the same term because the search engine monitors 57 signals to tweak and personalize results. In fact, there is no standard Google anymore. This moves us very quickly towards a world in which the Internet is showing us what it thinks we want to see, but not necessarily what we need to see. Because of algorithms that determine what we see online, based on our browsing, reading, and clicking history, we risk being exposed to fewer viewpoints and a limited array of opinions, content sources, and viewpoints.
If we take all of these filters together, all of these algorithms we get can be called a filter bubble. Our filter bubble is our own personal unique universe of information that we live in online. The contents of our filter bubble depend on who we are and what we do. Unfortunately, we don't decide what gets in, and more importantly, we don't actually see what gets edited out.
We really need you to make sure that these algorithms have encoded in them a sense of the public life, a sense of civic responsibility. The thing is that the algorithms do not yet have the kind of embedded ethics. So if algorithms are going to curate the world for us, then we need to make sure that they're not just keyed to relevance. We need to make sure that they also show us things that are uncomfortable, challenging or important.
Smarter, more "concerned" algorithms are necessary to ensure we have a balanced information diet. The best editing gives us a bit of both. It gives us some information vegetables and some information dessert as well. Otherwise, we risk consuming too much "fast food" content. Instead of a balanced information diet, we may end up surrounded by information junk food!


MANEKA
BT09B009

Difference between automating and informating

Automating and informating

Automating:

Information systems can be used for automating processes and bussiness functions to enable the organization in executing specific tasks more quickly and accurately with a consistent quality and reduced cost

For example:

In my workplace at Citigroup Global Services ,previously when a new employee would join .We would have to fill various forms and submit to different departments for creating User Ids to provide access to computers,shared drives and other systems.this was a very time consuming and tedious manual job,which was later replaced by an automated online system-Virtual resource.Using this system we could raise a request for ID creation and with just one request all the concerned departments would be automatically notified about the access request.Once the Ids were created the manager of the new employee would be electronically notified,thus completely eliminating the need to fill various documents and personally submitting them to all the departments and then personally collecting the Ids and password from the respective departments.

Informating:

The process of using Information system to not just specific operations ,but also use to learn and improve the day-yo-day activities within that operation is termed as Informating.informating does not limit the use of Information System to just automating a process but also extends the use of Information system in understanding trends,patterns,performance of the operations and hence further improve the processes.Informating helps in unearthing flawed bussiness processes which might have been blindly automated using Information Systems.

Example:

At citigroup Global Services Ltd.,previously whenever we had a technical issue with the computers ,network or softwares ,we used to call a helpline number and as and when any technical engineer would be available he would come and resolve the problem.This was later replaced by a completely automated system-Virtual tech. Employees used to access this system to register the problem that they were facing and this system would automatically assign the issue to a technical engineer depending on his availability.Not only did the system reduce the time takem to register and resolve issues,but also proved beneficial in substantially improving the process.This system helped immensely to comprehend the amount of time an associate took to resolve the issue ,identify recurring issues,categorize the time periods when maximum issues were registered ,decide whether additional engineers were required,etc.Thus ,the system not only helped in automating the process,but also helped in improving it and making it more effective and efficient.

-
Sunaina D
EE09B037

Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.

Hackers. We’ve heard a lot of things about them – some say they are a danger to the computing society and others see them as potentially useful citizens with bright minds. Hackers do what they do either for personal gain or to find and repair flaws in a system. Hackers, themselves, follow what they call the Hacker Ethic. Based on whether the hack is considered legal or illegal, hackers are dubbed “White Hat Hackers” and “Black Hat Hackers” respectively. Adrian Lamo, a present-day hacker, helps us understand better the terms Hacker and Hacker Ethic.
According to Levy's account, sharing was the norm and expected within the non-corporate hacker culture. The principle of sharing stemmed from the atmosphere and resources at MIT. During the early days of computers and programming, the hackers at MIT would develop a program and share it.

If the hack was particularly good, then the program might be posted on a board somewhere near one of the computers. Other programs that could be built upon and improved were saved to tapes and added to a drawer of programs—readily accessible to all the other hackers. At any time, a fellow hacker might reach into the drawer, pick out the program, and begin adding to it or "bumming" it to make it better (bumming refers to the process of making the code more concise so that more can be done in fewer instructions).

In the second generation of hackers, sharing was about sharing with the general public in addition to sharing with other hackers. A particular organization of hackers that was concerned with sharing computers with the general public was a group called Community Memory. This group of hackers and idealists put computers in public places for anyone to use. The first community computer was placed outside of Leopold's Records in Berkeley, California.

Another sharing of resources occurred when Bob Albrecht provided considerable resources for a non-profit organization called People's Computer Company (PCC). PCC opened a computer center where anyone could use the computers there for fifty cents per hour.

This second generation's sharing contributed to the battles of free and open software. In fact, when Bill Gates' version of BASIC for the Altair was shared among the hacker community, Gates claimed to have lost a considerable sum of money because few users paid for the software. As a result, Gates wrote an Open Letter to Hobbyists. This letter was published by several computer magazines and newsletters—most notably that of the Homebrew Computer Club where much of the sharing occurred.

Free and open source software is the descendant of the hacker ethics that Levy described. The hackers who hold true to this hacker ethics—especially the Hands-On Imperative—are usually supporters of free software and/or open source software. This is because free and open source software allows hackers to access the code used to create the software to improve or reuse it. In effect the free and open source software movements embody all of the hacker ethics.[citation needed] However, Levy's hacker ethic also has often been quoted out of context and misunderstood to refer to hacking as in breaking into computers, and so many sources incorrectly imply that it is describing the ideals of white-hat hackers. What Levy is talking about, however, does not have anything to do with computer security.


-
Sunaina D
EE09B037

The development and further research on Computers was associated with the perceived need of national security during the Cold War period. Discuss, with contemporary examples some of the risks and responsibilities involved with such justifications.

Cold war intensified the research in sophisticated computer technology and its pervasion into the modern life.

Computerization has entered all the fields of life: science, commerce, consumer goods, weapon system (national security) and has made them inseparable from it.

After the cold war, the US defense system, intelligence agencies and the other national security beureacracies continued the US government support to computer projects like ENIAC which was developed WII. Its main operation was to automate the calculation of ballistic table, which was need for high accuracy of aircraft and artillery system.

On the other hand USSR and UK encouraged computer expertise. By 1950s the USSR computer scientists came up with MEMS, the then fastest computer.

The US Manhattan project and OSRD (Office of Science Research and Development) took many steps to come up with high power computers. MIT was handed over the project to develop a computer thaat could handle SAGE. (IT was part of Windermill project).

Both space and military team came together for advancing computation as both space vehicle and missiles  needed powerful computers to launch, track and control them.

The priorities given to computer technologuy during the cold war continues to have its impact on society and economies of the world.

In the western, private enterprises made advancements in computer. By 1960s Jaapan, Europe, boasted robust domestic computers. Innovations like invisible aircraft were successfully handled by the US government. But with these initiatives came risks also.

One of the risk is , as the the whole system is computerised a hacker sittini in some corner can plant an information bomb or computer virus and destroy the computer network linked to control of weaponry financial transactions and communications. The heart of the military system can be completely destroyed. Through cyber warfare, the terrorists and foreign contries can get hold of politics of a country.

Our responsibilities:
1. Devise a system that is fae away from these threats
2. Develop corrections to the existing system to make secure the from vulneberality to these threats.

Duplicate the system. there shpuld one system ready at time of others failure.

-
Sunaina D
EE09B037

Who is a HACKER???

“…who finds soul in the machine…”

…"trapped" in a quest for control and mastery with the computer as their medium…

“…who have found within the computer a world which they can mould to their desires, a world far less threatening and more rewarding to them than the world of conventional social relations…”

In hacker definition controversy, the term hacker is reclaimed by computer programmers who argue that someone breaking into computers is better called cracker, not making a difference between computer criminals ("black hats") and computer security experts ("white hats"). Some white hat hackers claim that they also deserve the title hacker, and that only black hats should be called crackers.

“The term was developed on the basis of a practical joke and feeling of excitement because the team member would “hack away” at the keyboard hours at a time.”

The combination of motives to seize the system for oneself, to appropriate its power without its permission, to experience a feeling of technically-induced ecstasy, and yet to wish to improve the system and thereby gain its acknowledgment and approval--was common among this curious subculture- hackers.

Their objective, therefore, was not merely to win access to immensely valuable centralised computer systems for themselves, but to make them available to a wider public who were being kept away from  them by corporate greed and government power-grabbing.

Hacker ethic is the generic phrase which describes the values and philosophy that are standard in the hacker community. The Hacker Ethic was a “new way of life, with a philosophy, an ethic and a dream”. The general principles of hacker ethic include:

• Sharing
• Openness
• Decentralization
• Free access to computers
• World Improvement

Noticeably missing from this ethic is respect for personal property, security, and privacy. Hackers let no one and no thing come between them and their pursuit of computing. This leads to conflict between those who follow the hacker ethic and the larger community of users.

A hacker gains status by demonstrating mastery of the system. This was traditionally done by writing clever programs ("hacks") but there is a growing temptation to attract attention by penetrating ("cracking") a system's security, crashing it, infecting it with a computer virus, or accessing supposedly secure information.

Municipal Election - Ontario 2006

Sometimes hacking is done for financial gain, sometimes for political purposes to advance some cause, and sometimes it is done just for good 'ol fashioned mudslinging in a local circumstance.

Toronto Star reporters Peter Edwards and Richard Brennan wrote a story October 24th saying that "York Region police Chief Arnand La Barge is recommending an outside police force investigate how leaked emails were left on the doorstep of Vaughan Mayor Michael Di Biase".

Apparently in the municipal election there is a tough contest between the incumbent mayor, Michael DiBiase and challenger Linda Jackson. It is suggested by journalists Edwards and Brennan that someone hacked the computer of Councillor Linda Jackson and printed out emails between her and a York Region police officer. It is suggested that these emails contain private personal communication between Jackson and this police officer. Someone appears to be trying to give Mayor Di Biase an advantage by providing him with lurid details about some activity being done by his competitor. Jackson went on record as saying "it's an inside job" which suggests that sometimes external controls and carefully monitored security cannot be effective if it is undermined by people that have internal access to a network.   

According to Pfaffenberger, Technology leads a double life, one which conforms to the intentions of designers and interests of power and another which contradicts them — proceeding behind the backs of their architects to yield unintended consequences and unintended possibilities… technologies rarely fulfil the fantasies of their creators.

But, as Pfaffenberger points out, hackers’ ‘outlaw’  or ‘electronic terrorist’ status may be overdrawn; hackers are often hired by the very companies they have sought to electronically break into; many if not most of them are already on a university-paved road to computer science success (though this ethnic and gender profile is slowly changing, along with the penalties for hacking).

MANEKA    

BT09B009

"What do you understand by the distinction between “automate” and “informate”? How is it helpful in understanding its contemporary role in our work lives?"

Computer based technologies are not neutral; they embody essential characteristics within our factories and offices, and among workers, professionals, and managers.

As information technology is used to reproduce, extend, and improve upon the process of substituting machines for human agency, it simultaneously accomplishes something quite different. The devices that automate by translating information into action also register data about those automated activities, thus generating new streams of information.

For example, scanner devices in supermarkets automate the checkout process and simultaneously generate data that can be used for inventory control, warehousing, scheduling of deliveries, and market analysis. The same systems that make it possible to automate office transactions also create a vast overview of an organization’s operations, with many levels of data coordinated and accessible for a variety of analytical efforts.
Thus, information technology not only produces action but also produces a voice that symbolically renders events, objects, and processes so that they become visible, knowable, and shareable in a new way.
Hence, information technology is characterized by a fundamental duality that has not yet been fully appreciated. On the one hand, the technology can be applied to automating operations – replace human body with technology that enables the same processes to be performed with more continuity and control. On the other, the same technology generates information about the underlying productive and administrative processes though which an organization accomplishes work.

"Activities, events, and objexts are translated into and made visible by information when a technology informates as well as automates."  - Shoshana Zuboff

The informating power of intelligent technology can be seen in the manufacturing environment when robots or sensors are used to translate the three-dimensional production space, typically on the screen of a video display terminal or on a computer printout, in the form of electronic symbols, numbers, letters, and graphics.
In the office environment, the combination of online transaction systems, information systems, and communication systems creates a vast information presence that now includes data formerly stored in people’s heads, in face-to-face conversations, in metal file drawers, and on widely dispersed pieces of paper.
These dual capacities are not oppisites; they are hierarchically integrated. Informating derives from and builds upon automation. Automation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for informating. It is quite possible to proceed with automation without reference to how it will contribute to the technology’s informating potential. When this occurs, informating is experiencing as an unintended consequence of automation.


MANEKA
BT09B009

What is the information panopticon? Discussion with reference to the use of ICT in organization of work

Introduction
information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. It has originated from the term Panopticon, a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham.The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the incarcerated being able to tell whether they are being watched. Within The Information Panopticon, Zuboff uses the architectural strategies of the panopticon as a metaphor to describe how information systems translate, record, and display human behavior. The information panopticon critiques how technological systems use transparency to assert power, control, and authority over us
The information panopticon
Many ICT systems function as transparent architectures. The technological knowledge needed to understand how one is being surveyed is not as apparent as in Benthams prison. The techniques of control within informational and networked systems often appear pragmatic, immediate, and technical. This places the employees in a position of passive and obedient, where they no longer know or understand exactly how panoptic power is being enforced. Consequently, the administrative actions within the workplace can appear paranoid and non-specified approaches to security. Thus by introducing information panopticon at workplaces, employees are discovering the hierarchical risks within information authority.

information panopticon in use
The responsibility of this technical authority does begin to question what ethical, social, and professional surveillance is acceptable in response to ICT technology in the workplace. Surveillance in the work place is not necessarily new; it has long been around in the form of corporate policy, collective behavior and social traditions. Zuboff describes how maintaining faith that undergirds imperative control is hard work psychologically demanding, time-consuming, and inevitably prone to ambiguity. The capacity of these surveillance systems will accomplish some goals, and create entirely new unresolved problems: what to do with all of this personal data? Similar to the Panoptic prison, the information panopticon does focus on creating a vulnerable, defenseless user. However, the employees are not prisoners, they are not without some sense of control, and certainly should question the business practices. The fight remains within the users, the employees, to not passively participate in surveillance but rather to actively place responsibility on management and administration to effectively organize. As ICTs continue to act as control mechanisms within the workplace, management should tirelessly redevelop systems that respond not only to power but also the emotional, the personal, and complexity of human behaviors.
Conclusion
the notion of information panopticon has a great role to play in the moders information centric society. But this brings forth the question of integrity of those who are in power, the "observers" of the panopticon. The question "how much is too much?" must be addressed as the internet is being overpowered with services like google and facebook who are the bare essentials, information panopticons with vested, commercial interests.
praveen kumar
na09b019

Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example

A community of enthusiast computer programmers and systems designers who delights in having an intimate understanding of the internal workings of a system, computers and computer networks.People committed to circumvention of computer security. This primarily concerns unauthorized remote computer break-ins via a communication networks such as the Internet, includes those who debug or fix security problems


Today, mainstream usage of “hacker” mostly refers to computer criminals, due to the mass media usage of the word.This includes what hacker slang calls “script kiddies,” people breaking into computers using programs written by others, with very little knowledge about the way they work. This usage has become so predominant that the general public is unaware that different meanings exist

hacker ethic
Principles of hacker ethic include Sharing, Openness, Decentralization, Free access to computers, World Improvement.Although hackers freely acknowledge that their activities may be occasionally illegal, considerable emphasis is placed on limiting violations only to those required to obtain access and learn a system, and they display hostility toward those who transgress beyond beyond these limits.
In sum, the hacker style reflects well-defined goals, communication networks, values, and an ethos of resistance to authority

Lamo gained widespread notoriety after breaking into the internal computer network of The New York Times, adding his name to the internal database of known sources and conducting research on its high profile subjects. Two years and a lawsuit later, he was convicted and sentenced to two years of probation along with a large amount of money in damages. Within this time, he had already gained popularity in hacker circles for gaining access to restricted areas in the Microsoft, Yahoo and WorldCom servers. Dubbed the 'homeless hacker', he used Internet connections at hotels, coffee shops and libraries to perform his intrusions. Lamo is a typical example of a hacker, someone who tries to stretch the limits and explore the capabilites of a computer system. He would fall into the black hat category - someone who uses his knowledge for nefarious and destrucive purposes. Nowadays, hackers tend to disassociate themselves from these people, instead referring to them as 'crackers
He says that hackers experience a feeling of technically induced ecstasy. Such a feeling can only be experienced an expert programmer and someone who has complete mastery of the system they are working on, as Sherry Turkle maintains after her experiences with the game of 'Adventure'. Hackers try to improve the system in order to gain its acknowledgement and approval.Another aspect of hackers is their desire to be in control.

hackers find soul in the machine. Many of the hackers are those who are aware of their bodily defects and have failed at establishing meaningful relationships. However, this is not always the case. In my opinion, hackers still lead content and fulfilled lives - both in their own world and those who even return to a normal life, wiser from their experiences. In my opinion, Steve Wozniak - phone phreaker, hacker and co-founder of Apple is a prime example that hackers are not so different from the rest of us and can find acceptance in our society.

references
1)Hacker programmer subculture
praveen kumar
na09b019

The development and further research on Computers was associated with the perceived need of national security during the Cold War period. Discuss, with contemporary examples some of the risks and responsibilities involved with such justifications

Introduction
science of control and communications” articulated a new worldview of self-regulated systems sustained through the flow of information and corrective feedback loops.The Cold War was a period of military tension, mistrust and general paranoia in both the USA and the USSR. An arms race resulted in the stocking up of nuclear warheads and the threat of "mutually assured destruction" was guaranteed by both sides. As a result, the American Government funded Project Whirlwind in the MIT and created the SAGE perimeter defense system. According to Paul Edwards in his essay on 'Computers and Society', the value of the SAGE project was almost entirely imaginary and ideological. Though its military potential was minimal, it helped create a sense of active defense to assuage some of the helpless passivity of nuclear fear. Such justifications were also common during this period in collaborations between scientists at various educational institutions and the military. In a process of 'mutual orientation', engineers constructed visions of military uses of computers they wanted to build in order to justify grant applications

Responsibilities and Professional Ethics
If there is a risk associated with the usage of a particular technology, there is a corresponding responsiblity associated with its engineer or manufacturer.National security is a necessity and it was especially important during the Cold War period when espionage ran rampant. There was risk in using this technology as it violated the international rules which restricted any body to research hacking or intercepting cables. The NSA(National Security Agency of America) during the cold war time had probably the world’s largest reservoir of expertise in codes and communications security. In an effort to increase national security during the Cold War, had control of non-governmental research of advanced encryption techniques

Conclusion:
The process for computerized warfare developed in result of a perceived threat to security during the Cold War period. Several new technologies emerged such as digital computers, hydrogen bombs, and automated defense systems. With great power however, comes great responsibility and the creators of such technology have responsibilities to its users. A professional must have his or her own self enforced code of ethics which they will follow at all times. As a thumb rule, we may use some of the tests suggested in class - to not do anything that makes us uncomfortable or 'smells'

References:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National security
[2] http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/risks
[3] Article by Paul Edwards titled 'Computers and Society
praveen
na09b019

Information panopticon-explaing this using ICt

Information  panopticon –  Explaing this using ICT.

Panopticon:-

                     A Panopticon  refers to a circular building with a observation tower in the center of an open space surrounded by an outer wall made up of cells for inmates. The purpose of a panopticon is to increase the security through the effectiveness of surveillance. The inmates cannot observe the actions of the other fellow inmates, but everyone's actions can be surveyed from the panopticon.  Although this style of architecture could be used for various institutions such as schools, factories and the like, Bentham specifically uses a prison as an example. The inside of the tower, though, cannot be seen. It individualizes and leaves them constantly visible; never knowing when they are being observed. The occupant is always “the object of information, never a subject in communication.”  This type of design can be used for any population that needs to be kept under observation, such as: prisoners, schoolchildren, medical patients or workers.

Information and communications technology or information and communication technology, usually called ICT, is often used as an extended synonym for information technology (IT) but is usually a more general term that stresses the role of unified communications and the integration of telecommunications (telephone lines and wireless signals), intelligent building management systems and audio-visual systems in modern information technology. ICT consists of all technical means used to handle information and aid communication, including computer and network hardware, communication middleware as well as necessary software. As these ICTs are introduced into the workplace, managers and employees are discovering the hierarchical risks within information authority. Zuboff explains that these information centers help managers in a workplace to revamp their methods of communication, invite feedback, listen, coach, facilitate, manage many objectives, encourage autonomy, provide vision .The engagements a manager previously dealt with in a face-to-face setting can now be administered through a system that operates in a ubiquitous way. In other words, technology can be used as a form of power that displays itself automatically and continuously.

Contemporary social critics often assert that technology has allowed for the deployment of panoptic structures invisibly throughout society. Surveillance by closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras in public spaces is an example of a technology that brings the gaze of a superior into the daily lives of the populace. Furthermore, a number of cities in the United Kingdom, including Middlesbrough, Bristol, Brighton and London have recently added loudspeakers to a number of their existing CCTV cameras. They can transmit the voice of a camera supervisor to issue audible messages to the public.

The pupose of CCTV camers is to observe more no peoples in some places so that polices can know easily what  is happening and they can punish, which was the priniciple or Jeremy Bentham’s architecture of prison to view more no.of prisoners by one observer and help police to “DOMINATE ” by knowing what everyone is doing.

By

J.santosh kumar

EE09b085

who is Hacker??Explain what is meant by “The Hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example

Who is a Hacker ??Explain what is meant by “The Hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.
A hacker is a person who breaks into computers and computer networks, either for profit or motivated by the challenge. The subculture that has evolved around hackers is often referred to as the computer underground but is now an open community.
Hacker ethic :
The Hacker Ethic The hacker's obsession with computing leads to impatience and intolerance with anything that stands in the way.I want to express about “Hacker’s Ethics” by taking the example of
“The face behind the facebook ” MARK ZUCKERBERG
As the film tells it, during the winter of 2004, Zuckerberg, a curmudgeonly(bad tempered), craven genius, bristling against authority and embittered by the culture of wealth and privilege that excludes him, creates a social network to impress vapid women and the callow preppies of Harvard’s exclusive, all-male final clubs. He took a certain amount of enjoyment out of not necessarily breaking rules, but just pointing out that people who have responsibility for things are kind of stupid. Mark never looked like a person who created a website which can impress many people.

Mark gained campus notoriety in November 2003, when he created Facemash. The idea behind Facemash was simple: a website on which you could compare the attractiveness of two Harvard students, voting with the click of a mouse. The site, which was open to the world and which used official Harvard headshots, went viral over email lists, nabbing 22,000 votes from over 450 people. Clicking through Facemash filled one with that particular kind of Internet-induced sickness, combining the titillation of an anonymous chat room with the meanness of an old-fashioned slam book. It was callow, it was distasteful, and it was a lot of fun. Facemash managed to offend a lot of people, including Harvard University, seeing as Facemash violated all sorts of usage, privacy, and property codes. Mark was hauled before the Ad Board, Harvard College’s administrative board. While asking a question why and how Facebook is different from other social networking website Mark himself shrugged off his own site. “[Thefacebook.com] is basically the same thing on a different scale. It’s not very novel.” Zuckerberg exhibited a typically cavalier, insurgent attitude—and recklessness with words: “I think it’s kind of silly that it would take the university a couple of years to get around to [building a facebook],” he said. “I can do it better than they can, and I can do it in a week.” This shows his recklessness and insurgent attitude.
Conclusion:- The hackers are in the middle of an inner conflict that of two worlds the virtual and the real and its not that they are anti social elements its just that they derive an immense amount of joy in beating the system and would go to any lengths to beat it again and again and at the end of the day beating the system is not a means ot an end it is an end I itself.
By
J.santosh kumar
EE09b085

Vision of Science & War in 1930's

 In the 1930s, the relationship between science and war was quite different from what it is today. Since then Science and Technology has made substantial impact in the field of wars. In the period around 1930’s, major advancement in technology of warfare has been seen.

                  Every nation has been involved in war at some time or other.As time passed all these nations have become more powerful and advanced.These days all nations have sophisticated weapons,advance defence mechanisms.

 During 1930, publishing of newspapers was banned. The three closely related sciences which engaged in calculating the enemy were: Operational research, game theory, and cybernetics. Weiner divided the enemies into two categories, and regarded them as devils. One was the "Manichean devil" "who is determined on victory and will use any trick of craftiness or dissimulation to obtain this victory." The other, the "Augustinian devil" was characterized by the "evil" of chance and disorder but could not change the rules unlike the “Manichean devil”.

In the First World War science had certainly played a huge part in chemical synthesis for explosives, poison gas, aeronautics and much more. In World War Two the scientific community was thoroughly mobilized to serve the state for military ends, and this led to the continuing close connection between science and the state in the following decades. As time passes with the advancement of technology new graduates were allocated to all the important areas of defense research. By twentieth century science has become the language of war. Mutual interest in winning the war, reinforced by financial support, permanently linked the military and science in a web of cross-fertilization that continues today.

                     Norbert Wiener, regarded by many as the father of cybernetics, introduced the idea of Cybernetics, or, the “science of control and regulation,” during the time he worked for the US defence in developing the radar-guided AA (anti-aircraft) gun. He studied the predictable behaviour of the human mind in stressed situations to help predict the path of the enemy aircraft, so that it could be gunned down efficiently. The most important aspect of this was the feedback loop running between the enemy pilot, the aircraft, the AA predictor and the AA operator. The actions of each member of the loop regulated the actions of the subsequent member of the loop. This allowed the replacement of man by machine and machine by man. The actions of the pilot, for example, could be predicted by a machine; hence the pilot was being viewed not as a human being with emotions and senses, but as a machine whose actions were predictable and somewhat pre-determined.

Thus, the use of cybernetics in warfare had one important result that would determine the vision for war in decades to come: scientific research would extensively be used in warfare and technology would become the single most crucial factor in determining victory in war. This was realised early on by Vannevar Bush, a visionary who united six thousand leading American scientists and coordinated their research in warfare. As the head of the Manhattan Project that developed the atomic bomb, he knew the importance of technology in warfare and this was what made him seek government funding in scientific research for warfare, which, when also adopted by nations worldwide, changed the war scenario. A battle between skilled human soldiers (1930’s) changed to a battle between intelligent machines.

Therefore, the change in warfare that we see from the 1930’s to now, most importantly, is the advent of technology in the warfare realm and the criterion for victory changing from skill, strength and size to technological advancement.

BY: D.Chaitanya kumar( EE09B084)

hacking & ethics !!!

WHST IS HACKING ?????

Hacking is unauthorized use of computer and network resources. (The term "hacker" originally meant a very gifted programmer. In recent years though, with easier access to multiple systems, it now has negative implications.)

Hacking is a felony in the United States and most other countries. When it is done by request and under a contract between an ethical hacker and an organization, it's OK. The key difference is that the ethical hacker has authorization to probe the target.

We work with IBM Consulting and its customers to design and execute thorough evaluations of their computer and network security. Depending on the evaluation they request (ranging from Web server probes to all-out attacks), we gather as much information as we can about the target from publicly available sources. As we learn more about the target, its subsidiaries and network connectivity, we begin to probe for weaknesses.

Examples of weaknesses include poor configuration of Web servers, old or unpatched software, disabled security controls, and poorly chosen or default passwords. As we find and exploit vulnerabilities, we document if and how we gained access, as well as if anyone at the organization noticed. (In nearly all the cases, the Information Syhstems department is not informed of these planned attacks.) Then we work with the customer to address the issues we've discovered.

The number of really gifted hackers in the world is very small, but there are lots of wannabes.... When we do an ethical hack, we could be holding the keys to that company once we gain access. It's too great a risk for our customers to be put in a compromising position. With access to so many systems and so much information, the temptation for a former hacker could be too great -- like a kid in an unattended candy store.

THE ETHICAL HACKER!!

An Ethical Hacker is one name given to a Penetration Tester. An ethical hacker is usually employed by an organization who trusts him or her to attempt to penetrate networks and/or computer systems, using the same methods as a hacker, for the purpose of finding and fixing computer security vulnerabilities. Illegal hacking (i.e.; gaining unauthorized access to computer systems) is a crime in most countries, but penetration testing done by request of the owner of the targeted system(s) or network(s) is not.

A Certified Ethical Hacker has obtained a certification in how to look for the weaknesses and vulnerabilities in target systems and uses the same knowledge and tools as a hacker.

The exam code for C|EH is 312-50. The certification is in Version 7 as of 14th March 2011.

The EC-Council offers another certification, known as Certified Network Defense Architect (C|NDA). This certification is designed for United States Government Agencies, and is available only to members of selected agencies. Other than the name, the content of the course is exactly the same.
While some tenets of hacker ethic were described in other texts like Computer Lib/Dream Machines (1974) by Theodor Nelson, Levy appears to have been the first to document and historicize both the philosophy and the founders of the philosophy.

Levy explains that MIT housed an early IBM 704 computer inside the Electronic Accounting Machinery (EAM) room in 1959. This room became the staging grounds for early hackers as MIT students from the Tech Model Railroad Club stole inside the EAM room after hours to attempt programming the 30 tonne, 9-foot-tall (2.7 m) computer.

The boys defined a hack as a project undertaken or a product built not solely to fulfil some constructive goal, but with some wild pleasure taken in mere involvement.[1] The term “hack” arose from MIT lingo as the word had long been used to describe college pranks that MIT students would regularly devise.

The Hacker Ethic was a “new way of life, with a philosophy, an ethic and a dream”. However, the elements of the Hacker Ethic were not openly debated and discussed, rather they were accepted and silently agreed upon.[2]

Free and open source software is the descendant of the hacker ethics that Levy described. The hackers who hold true to this hacker ethics—especially the Hands-On Imperative—are usually supporters of free software and/or open source software. This is because free and open source software allows hackers to access the code used to create the software to improve or reuse it. In effect the free and open source software movements embody all of the hacker ethics.[citation needed] However, Levy's hacker ethic also has often been quoted out of context and misunderstood to refer to hacking as in breaking into computers, and so many sources incorrectly imply that it is describing the ideals of white-hat hackers. What Levy is talking about, however, does not have anything to do with computer security.

BY : D.Chaitanya kumar (ee09b084)

Who is a hacker? Explain what is meant by “the hacker ethic” with the help of a contemporary example.

Who is a Hacker?

A hacker is a person who breaks into computers and computer networks, either for profit or motivated by the challenge. The subculture that has evolved around hackers is often referred to as the computer underground but is now an open community. The word 'hacker' originated in the computer labs of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the late 1950s amongst a group of programmers who believed that all information should be free and that access to computers should be unlimited and total. Hackers now define themselves as an expert or enthusiast of any kind. Equally important, though, is the hacker's attitude. Computer programming must be a hobby, something done for fun, not out of a sense of duty or for the money. It is okay to make money, but that can't be the reason for hacking.

A hacker gains status by demonstrating mastery of the system. This was traditionally done by writing clever programs (hacks) but there is a growing temptation to attract attention by penetrating (cracking) a system's security, crashing it, infecting it with a computer virus, or accessing supposedly secure information.

The Hacker Ethic

Hacker ethic is the generic phrase which describes the values and philosophy that are standard in the hacker community. The term 'hacker ethic' is attributed to journalist Steven Levy as described in his book titled ‘Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution’, written in 1984. According to Pekka Himanen, a philosopher and public intellectual, it is a recent trend in business philosophy that values creativity, openness, and passion. In his book he explains this new approach to work and contrasts it to other work ethics.

The guidelines of the hacker ethic make it easy to see how computers have evolved into the personal devices we know and rely upon today. The key points within this ethic are access, free information, and improvement to quality of life. While some tenets of hacker ethic were described in other texts like Computer Lib/Dream Machines by Theodor Nelson, Levy appears to have been the first to document and historicize both the philosophy and the founders of the philosophy. The Hacker Ethic was a new way of life, with a philosophy, an ethic and a dream. However, the elements of the Hacker Ethic were not openly debated and discussed; rather they were accepted and silently agreed upon.

According to Andrew Ross, the hacker ethic, which has remained the preserve of youth culture for the most part, asserts the basic right of users to free access to all information. He demonstrates the metaphorical conflation of hackers with the computer viruses they write and with ‘foreign invaders’ of the national body. Difference between computer and biological viruses is intentionality.

Ethical hacking vs. Non-Ethical hacking

Ethical hacking, often performed by white hats or skilled computer experts, is the use of programming skills to determine vulnerabilities in computer systems. While the non-ethical hacker or black hat exploits these vulnerabilities for mischief, personal gain or other reasons, the ethical hacker evaluates them, points them out, and may suggest changes to systems that make them less likely to be penetrated by black hats. White hats can work in a variety of ways. Many companies utilize ethical hacking services from consultants or full-time employees to keep their systems and information as secure as possible.

The work of ethical hacking is still considered hacking because it uses knowledge of computer systems in an attempt to in some way penetrate them or crash them. This work is ethical because it is performed to increase the safety of the computer systems. It’s reasoned that if a white hat can somehow break the security protocols of a system, so can a black hat. Thus, the goal of ethical hacking is to determine how to break in or create mischief with the present programs running, but only at the request of the company that owns the system and specifically to prevent others from attacking it.

Saptarshi Prakash,

EE09B076 

Information Panopticon & The Development and Convergence of ICTs in The Organization of Work

Information Panopticon & The Development and Convergence of ICTs in The Organization of WorK

Panopticon blueprint by Jeremy Bentham, 1791

The Panopticon is a type of prison building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in 1785. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) prisoners without the incarcerated being able to tell whether they are being watched, thereby conveying what one architect has called the "sentiment of an invisible
   Bentham himself described the Panopticon as "a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a  quantity hitherto without example
Bentham may have derived the idea from the plan of a military school in Paris designed for easy supervision, but more probably from a circular building designed by his brother Samuel who arrived at it as a solution to the complexities involved in the handling of large numbers of men.^[4] Bentham supplemented this principle with the idea of contract management; that is, an administration by contract as opposed to trust, where the director would have a pecuniary interest in lowering the average rate of mortality.
.

Business as Usual: The Information Panopticon and the Workplace

.
 Tango is a practice already ready for struggle. It knows about taking sides, positions, risks. It has the experience of domination/resistance from within. Tango, stretching the colonized stereotypes of the latino-macho-Catholic fatalism, is a language of decolonization. So, pick and choose. Improvise. Hide away. Run after them. Stay still. Move at an astonishing speed. Shut up. Scream a rumor. Turn around. Go back without returning. Upside down. Let your feet do the thinking. Be comfortable in your restlessness. Tango. - Marta E. Savigliano "Tango and the Political Economy of Passion"

   The information panopticon represents a form of centralized power that uses information and communication technology (ICT) as observational tools and control mechanisms. English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham developed the original architecture of the panopitcon as a prison. The structure consisted of a centralized tower surrounded by a circular building divided into prison cells. Benthams concept was to maximize the number of prisoners that can be observed by one individual within the tower. Within The Information Panopticon, Zuboff uses the architectural strategies of the panopticon as a metaphor to describe how information systems translate, record, and display human behaviorwith a degree of illumation that would have exceeded even Benthams most outlandish fantasies (Zuboff 322). The information panopticon critiques how technological systems use transparency to assert power, control, and authority over users.

 

            Inherent within many new technological and informational devices is the ability to network. Whether it is a personal computer or database systems, these applications often promote forms of interconnectivity that require a centralized control center (Zuboff 328). In early telecommunication experiments by inventors like Alexander Bell and Samuel Morse, the idea of transmission was essentially linear. A message was sent from one location to another, traveling down a wire. As innovation progressed, communication began to operate through various access nodes within a network. The physical locations of the switching and control centers began to operate in very similar ways to the central surveillance tower of the panopticon.

            As these ICTs are introduced into the workplace, managers and employees are discovering the hierarchical risks within information authority. Zuboff explains that these information centers help managers in a workplace to revamp their methods of communication, invite feedback, listen, coach, facilitate, manage many objectives, encourage autonomy, provide vision (Zuboff 232). The engagements a manager previously dealt with in a face-to-face setting can now be administered through a system that operates in a ubiquitous way. In other words, technology can be used as a form of power that displays itself automatically and continuously

            In a work setting, this method of control is different to that of the original panopticon because many ICT systems function as transparent architectures. The technological knowledge needed to understand how one is being surveyed is not as apparent as in Benthams prison. The techniques of control within informational and networked systems often appear pragmatic, immediate, and technical (Zuboff 324). This places the employees in a position of passive and obedient, where they no longer know or understand exactly how panoptic power is being enforced. Consequently, the administrative actions within the workplace can appear paranoid and non-specified approaches to security.

            The responsibility of this technical authority does begin to question what ethical, social, and professional surveillance is acceptable in response to ICT technology in the workplace. Surveillance in the work place is not necessarily new; it has long been around in the form of corporate policy, collective behavior and social traditions. Zuboff describes how maintaining faith that undergirds imperative control is hard work psychologically demanding, time-consuming, and inevitably prone to ambiguity (Zuboff 360). The capacity of these surveillance systems will accomplish some goals, and create entirely new unresolved problems: what to do with all of this personal data? Similar to the Panoptic prison, the information panopticon does focus on creating a vulnerable, defenseless user. However, the employees are not prisoners, they are not without some sense of control, and certainly should question the business practices. The fight remains within the users, the employees, to not passively participate in surveillance but rather to actively place responsibility on management and administration to effectively organize. As ICTs continue to act as control mechanisms within the workplace, management should tirelessly redevelop systems that respond not only to power but also the emotional, the personal, and complexity of human behaviors.

                                                                                                           by: D . Chaitanya kumar
                                                                                                                EE09B084

What do you understand by the distinction between “automate” and “informate”? How is it helpful in understanding its contemporary role in our work lives?

Computers began to be widely used in non-military industry and business in the late 1950s. The reason for the rush to computerize is the belief that computers enhance productivity (defined as the ratio of output to hours worked), and indeed computerization is frequently urged as the key to productivity growth.

Automation: The process of using iformation systems can be used for automating processes and business functions to enable the organization in executing specific tasks more quickly and accurately with a consistent quality and reduced cost. For example, In British banking the traditional mode of training prior to computerization was based on a master-apprentice model. Employment began at age 15 or 16, and one then rose level by level through a pyramidal hierarchy. Ultimately, with luck and aptitude, any employee could hope to become manager of a branch or even a general manager at corporate headquarters. Along with this career structure went an ethos of employee flexibility. Clerks had a relatively wide range of skills, allowing them to shift from task to task during the banking day. British bankers installed computers as part of a general plan to move away from the craft apprenticeship model toward a rationalized industrial production model. Computers facilitated, for example, progressive specialization of tasks and automation of a great deal of work once done by hand.

Information: The process of using Information Systems to not just automate specific operations, but also use to learn and improve the day-to-day activities within that operation is termed as Informating. Informating does not limit the use of Information System to just automating a process but also extends the use of Information System in understanding trends, patterns, performance of the operations and hence further improve the processes. Informating helps in unearthing flawed business processes which might have been blindly automated using Information Systems. For example, using automated systems to register any problem faced, would automatically assign the issue to a technical engineer depending on his availability. Not only did the system reduce the time taken to register and resolve issues, but also proved beneficial in substantially improving the process. This system helped immensely to comprehend the amount of time an associate took to resolve the issue, identify recurring issues, categorize the time periods when maximum issues were registered, decide whether additional engineers were required, etc. Thus, the system not only helped in automating the process, but also helped in improving it and making it more effective and efficient.

According to Shoshana Zuboff, the two resulting potential faces of technology is to automate, leading to dull jobs with lack of meaning, or infomate, leading to higher participation, more stimulating, challenging jobs, and greater satisfaction.

Saptarshi Prakash,

EE09B076

Risks

The "invisible algorithmic editing of the web" via personalized search results, news feeds and other customized content is threatening to limit our exposure to new information and narrow our outlook.

Google is also guilty of tweaking what it shows users based on past online behavior. Two users can receive drastically different Google search results after querying the same term because the search engine monitors 57 signals to tweak and personalize results. In fact, there is no standard Google anymore. This moves us very quickly towards a world in which the Internet is showing us what it thinks we want to see, but not necessarily what we need to see. Because of algorithms that determine what we see online, based on our browsing, reading, and clicking history, we risk being exposed to fewer viewpoints and a limited array of opinions, content sources, and viewpoints.

If we take all of these filters together, all of these algorithms we get can be called a filter bubble. Our filter bubble is our own personal unique universe of information that we live in online. The contents of our filter bubble depend on who we are and what we do. Unfortunately, we don't decide what gets in, and more importantly, we don't actually see what gets edited out.

We really need you to make sure that these algorithms have encoded in them a sense of the public life, a sense of civic responsibility. The thing is that the algorithms do not yet have the kind of embedded ethics. So if algorithms are going to curate the world for us, then we need to make sure that they're not just keyed to relevance. We need to make sure that they also show us things that are uncomfortable, challenging or important.

Smarter, more "concerned" algorithms are necessary to ensure we have a balanced information diet. The best editing gives us a bit of both. It gives us some information vegetables and some information dessert as well. Otherwise, we risk consuming too much "fast food" content. Instead of a balanced information diet, we may end up surrounded by information junk food!