After having watched the video showed in class on cookies and its potential harmful effects I had blocked sites on google chrome from collecting my data. Since I do purchase a lot of things online I wouldn’t like it if a company was gathering information on me. Now I know how ads pop up products I had been viewing the other day. I have also went ahead and deleted any personal information off of my Facebook. I have even taken the extreme as to using an alias name like “John Smith”, so that it would be very hard for employers or colleges to look me up. I’m also going to start using search engines where they do no track my searches. I understand it is helping the company gather information on what users are searching most but i believe its my right to keep that information between me and my laptop.

Recently a Mississippi mother posted a photo of her 3 year old daughter on Facebook after she had just gotten a new haircut; like any other mother would. What happened after that was nothing short of a miracle. A few friends realized that there was a ‘glow’ in one of the girls eyes. Concerned friends commented on the post and explained how it might not be anything serious but to check her eye out with a doctor to see if there are any medical reason as to why her eye was glowing. Soon enough through various tests a retina specialist diagnosed her with Coats disease, a rare condition that can lead to blindness. The doctor explained how if this had not been detected as soon it had been she, “probably would have ended up having a total retinal detachment, with total vision loss.” This is another way how unintentional daily interactions through social media can have beneficial consequences. For if this mother never posted a photo on Facebook for all her friends to see, her daughter might not have been as lucky as she is today.

http://http://www.today.com/health/facebook-post-saves-girls-vision-glow-eye-raises-alarm-2D79484677

While browsing the social media site Facebook today i had come across an interesting site that had been shared by a few of my friends. The UNICEF Tap Project, which has been striving to increase access to clean water for children worldwide since 2007, have created a mobile website app that can tell when your phone is not being used. For every 10 minutes you leave your phone alone, Armani will provide a day of clean drinking water to a child in need. Personally this feels like killing two birds with ones\ stone. You now are more motivated to not check your phone every 10 minutes because the longer you go without touching your phone the more you give to charity. I honestly cannot think of a better reason why i shouldn’t touch my phone. The app works by detecting movement using your phones internal sensor. So far i have donated $5 by just not using my phone. I urge all my fellow classmates to help spread the word about this amazing app because for every minute your NOT on your phone, you are consequently saving a life.

Contribute by clicking and sharing this site here: http://tap.unicefusa.org/

This past sunday Ellen Degeneres’ tweet of a few of the most famous celebrities at the Oscars broke the record for the most retweeted of all time tweets. It currently holds the record of 3.1 million retweets and beat the original record that Obama held of a photo of him hugging his wife Michelle with the comment “four more years” after he had won his re-election. I find it comical that more people were somewhat more tuned in to the winning of an oscars trophy than the winning of a presidency. Does this tell us something? Does this tell us that more people are infatuated with celebrities and oscars then the outcome of a political presidency? How do social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook influence what is relevant and what needs to be shared? Certainly people thought that the oscars were more exciting then Obama winning his re-election right? OR is it the photo that people are more inclined to share rather then the words? This brings up the debate of the saying that pictures say a thousand words or vice versa?

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/mar/03/ellen-degeneres-selfie-retweet-obama

New York City, one of the most diverse regions in America. How fitting it was for this first openly gay basketball player to be signed to the Brooklyn Nets 2 days ago. Before being signed Jason Collins’ career was at a standstill because no NBA team was ready to have an openly gay basketball player in their locker room. His career was in jeopardy. He has been praised by numerous athletes and celebrities for coming out to the world. His mission is to make other athletes feel more comfortable with coming out. Times are different and if this has happened 10 years ago maybe the killings of Matthew Shepard and other hate crimes against homosexuals would have never occurred. Which is why to this day Jason Collins wears the number 98, to remember the horrible and senseless killing of Matthew Shepard that occurred 1998. Below is a link of the types of questions he received in his first game as an openly gay professional basketball player. A lot of celebrities artists and teammates have backed up Jason Collins through Twitter and Facebook. Going back to the discussion of if this were 10 years ago, it would be very difficult to see how many people and celebrities that everyone idolizes actually support gay rights. Through platforms such as Twitter and Facebook this can be accomplished instantaneously. Especially because some papers have a bias view and wont even cover such news. This way a lot more people are involved and  can be many others influenced others to change their minds about gay rights and coming out in this day and age. Do you think that these types of social media platforms have a negative or positive effect or both on the way news is covered and spread throughout the internet?

Collins first post game interview with nets

An interesting video that has been surfacing around the internet lately is the debate that was streamed live on youtube between Ken Ham and Bill Nye. Bill Nye takes the naturalism/darwinistic approach to how the world came to be and still is and Ken ham takes a creationist approach. Personally when i watched this debate I tried to understand the creationist approach and seeing if any of their arguments had any merit. Growing up in the Jewish religion I can understand why many of his followers believe that the world was created by some supernatural power. But now that I am an educated student and a more wiser one for that matter, theres absolutely no scientific evidence to support Ken Hams claims that our world was created within the last 6000 years. To me its absurd but at the same time understanding because when you are raised in a religious setting your trained to believe that not everything is explainable, that god is the only one with such power. On the other hand science takes the approach that many things can be explained, through observational and experimental methods. After listening to both points of view i have a better understanding of each sides position on the matter. Weather either side is correct or not i don’t believe is important. I would like to ask the class one thing. Do you believe that as a student your beliefs have shifted into a more liberal view that questions your existence and questions your religious beliefs? or that education has not affected your views at all. Because personally Im on Bills side on this debate. And i feel like if i had never educated myself and actually learned about these phenomena, both religious and scientific, i would probably be stuck more in the middle then on just one side.

Bill Nye Ken Ham Debate