Navigating the Technological Tightrope Between Connection and Control

    Technology has become an inseparable part of our lives, shaping how we communicate, work, and understand the world around us. From the promise of a techno-utopia at the 1964 World's Fair to the unsettling techno-dystopia in the video “Are You Lost In The World Like Me,” the evolution of technology has brought both immense benefits and profound challenges. Are we in control of technology or is technology in control of us? It is a relationship that demands intentionality, balance, and awareness of the fine line between utility and exploitation.

Personal Data as a Commodity

    The ad-tech industry has turned personal data into its most valuable commodity, often without informed consent. This shift was made evident in a personal anecdote from Richard Stokes, a former advertising executive, who witnessed firsthand how companies extract deeply personal details (such as income, political preferences, and location) from unsuspecting users. With every post, click, and search, we have become the product.

    

    This commodification doesn’t stop with advertising. Platforms track our every move, manipulate what we see, and influence how we feel. I’ve watched the documentary The Social Dilemma numerous times and find it interesting how they illustrate that algorithms are designed to maximize engagement, often at the expense of mental health and autonomy. It paints a chilling picture of how social media platforms use our data to manipulate behavior, often leading to feelings of inadequacy, loneliness, or division. Watching it was both enlightening and unsettling, as it made me question whether we are using technology or if technology is using us.

A Personal Relationship With Technology

    My journey with technology has been one of cautious engagement. I refrained from getting Instagram until my sophomore year of high school, resisting the pressure from friends to join platforms like Snapchat or TikTok. Even now, despite my roles in organizations that may necessitate using TikTok, I’ve made an agreement with myself to restrict its use. This intentionality helps me maintain control over my relationship with technology.

    Social media has been both a source of inspiration and a source of distraction in my life. I’ve seen its power to motivate and teach. Some videos have provided life-changing insights at just the right moment, helping me make positive changes when I needed them most. Other times, it’s been a tool for procrastination. Yet, even in those moments, I’ve wondered: Is this simply procrastination, or is it a way to relieve stress? Maybe the key lies in reframing these interactions as a “secondary productivity,” not directly tackling my to-do list, but still benefiting my mental well-being.

    My digital footprint is relatively small because I’m cautious about what I share online. While I use Instagram to post some achievements or events, and LinkedIn to showcase academic and professional milestones, I avoid sharing personal details like my phone number and only share my email with trusted sites. Recently, I Googled myself and found some articles about me from high school. Although all positive, it reminded me to regularly check privacy settings. Even indirect information, like tagged photos or shared interests, can shape how I’m perceived, so I strive to keep my online presence aligned with my values.

Social Media’s Dual Impact

    The emotional impact of social media is undeniable. It can provoke thought, spark joy, or deepen sadness. A close friend of mine, during a difficult time, found solace in Instagram reels that resonated with his feelings. However, the platform’s algorithm continued feeding him similar content, keeping him in that depressive loop longer than he might have been otherwise. This is the paradox of social media: while it connects us to relatable experiences, it often amplifies the emotions we’re already feeling. This idea can also be seen in echo chambers that increase political polarization by reinforcing ones own beliefs.

    For me and many others, technology is also a lifeline. Calling my parents from college helps me stay connected, something that would have been far more challenging in a pre-digital age when letters were the primary form of communication. This ability to instantly connect is one of technology’s greatest gifts and one that I strive not to take for granted.

The Need for Intentionality

    Reflecting on my relationship with technology has led me to adopt a more intentional approach. Social media, when used thoughtfully, can be a tool for growth and connection. However, it requires setting boundaries and ensuring that time spent online is productive in some way, whether by learning something new, finding inspiration, or maintaining relationships.

    For example, during a pivotal moment in my life, I found motivation through social media to make meaningful changes. The content I consumed during that time encouraged me to act, and those moments of engagement were time well spent. This intentional use of technology can help us “wean off the addiction,” shifting our relationship with it from passive consumption to purposeful interaction.

The Plight of Man

    The YouTube video "MAN" by Steve Cutts offers a satirical yet thought-provoking perspective on humanity’s relationship with technology and progress. While its exaggerated characteristics initially seem laughable, watching it seriously left me reflecting on the nature of the world we’ve built. Are we using technology to enhance our lives, or are we harming the environment and heading towards a dystopia? The line between these two realities often feels blurred, and "MAN" serves as a reminder of the consequences of unchecked consumption.

Moving Forward

    As a society, we need to reevaluate our relationship with technology. This begins with demanding stronger privacy protections and transparency from tech companies. People should have the right to opt out of data collection without losing access to essential services. Governments must implement policies to protect users from invasive practices like shadow profiles or unnecessary location tracking (from businesses and in some cases from the government itself).

    Individually, we must strive for intentionality in how we engage with technology. This doesn’t mean abandoning it altogether, but rather using it in ways that add value to our lives. Whether through productive procrastination, staying connected with loved ones, or finding inspiration at just the right time, technology can be a force for good. That is if we choose to make it so.

    The future of our relationship with technology is still being written. By approaching it with awareness and intentionality, we can ensure it remains a tool for progress rather than a force of control.

Anti-War Voices? Never heard of them.

    I’ve always been fascinated by the way history repeats itself, especially when it comes to the struggle for free speech and dissent. The Progressive Era, fueled by World War I, was a time when antiwar voices faced intense persecution. It’s hard to imagine living in a country where simply speaking out against a war could land you in jail, but that was the reality for hundreds of Americans back then. These individuals were punished not for acts of violence or subversion, but simply for voicing their opinions. It makes me wonder: are we any better at protecting dissent today?

    Exploring websites like Antiwar.com and The American Conservative opened my eyes to the vibrant antiwar voices that exist today but are largely absent from mainstream media. I hadn’t even heard of these sites until recently. Why is that? Why do I, and many others, have to dig through obscure corners of the internet to hear perspectives that challenge U.S. military actions? These aren’t fringe ideas; they’re part of a critical conversation about the human, economic, and moral costs of war.

    The First Amendment is supposed to protect our right to dissent. It’s not just about letting people speak; it’s about ensuring that unpopular or minority opinions have a platform. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. famously described the “marketplace of ideas,” where truth emerges from the competition of ideas. But how can that marketplace function if certain voices are effectively silenced by algorithms, media gatekeeping, or societal pressure to conform?

    I spent some time on Antiwar.com, reading articles that challenged not just the “how” but the “why” of U.S. foreign interventions. The writers there don’t pull punches. They highlight the costs of war (human, economic, and moral) in ways that you rarely see on TV or social media. Similarly, The American Conservative takes a more right-leaning approach but still pushes back against the idea of endless wars. It’s striking to see such diverse voices aligned on the same issue.

Criticism of Russo-Ukrainian War on Social Media

    So why aren’t these voices amplified in mainstream spaces? Part of the problem may be indirect government influence. Historically, governments have suppressed dissenting voices during wartime, citing reasons like national security or public unity. For example, in Russia, the government has gone to great lengths to silence antiwar protests and voices opposing its actions in Ukraine. Independent media outlets have been shut down, protesters arrested, and social media platforms heavily monitored to ensure the state’s narrative dominates. While outright censorship like this is less common in democratic countries, similar dynamics can occur in subtler ways. 

    Close relationships between governments and major media outlets can shape coverage, while public relations campaigns drown out dissenting narratives. Also, social media algorithms (sometimes shaped by government input) tend to prioritize mainstream perspectives, making it harder to find alternative viewpoints. Surveillance and the fear of scrutiny can also create a chilling effect, leading individuals and organizations to self-censor. 

    Another part of the problem may be that dissent makes people uncomfortable. It challenges the narratives we’ve been taught to accept, especially when it comes to something as emotionally charged as war. But I believe dissent is necessary. It’s how we hold power accountable and ensure we’re making informed decisions. If we don’t hear these voices, how can we even question whether our government’s actions align with our values?

    The experience of seeking out these antiwar platforms has made me more aware of my own responsibility as a citizen. The First Amendment gives us the right to speak, but it also gives us the right to listen and to seek out perspectives that challenge us. It’s not always easy, and sometimes it’s uncomfortable, but it’s essential. If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that dissent isn’t just a right; it’s a duty. And if we want to live in a truly democratic society, we have to fight for a space where all voices, especially the unpopular ones, can be heard.

Whistleblowers

    Whistleblowers are often government employees or contractors who reveal classified information about misconduct, corruption, or illegal activities within their organizations. Their actions can spark global debates because they highlight tensions between transparency and national security. Whether celebrated as protectors of democracy or criticized for compromising security, whistleblowers play a complex and controversial role in society.

    One of the earliest and most famous whistleblowers was Mark Felt, also known as "Deep Throat" in the Watergate Scandal. Felt provided critical information that exposed corruption within the Nixon administration, ultimately leading to Nixon’s resignation. His actions show the power of whistleblowers to hold those in power accountable, highlighting the importance of their role in protecting democracy.

    Another pivotal figure was Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War. These documents revealed that the U.S. government had misled the public about the war's progress and objectives. I and many others believe Ellsberg’s revelations were a brave act of conscience, earning him recognition as a pioneer among whistleblowers. Unlike Felt, who worked in the shadows, Ellsberg faced public scrutiny and legal consequences but ultimately contributed to changing public perceptions of governmental transparency.

    In the digital age, whistleblowing has taken on new dimensions. One of the most debated figures is Edward Snowden, who leaked classified documents exposing mass surveillance programs conducted by the NSA and the Five Eyes Alliance. I think Snowden’s revelations sparked necessary debates about privacy, security, and the ethical limits of government surveillance. Unlike some whistleblowers, Snowden carefully evaluated the documents he leaked to minimize harm, focusing on transparency over chaos. However, his actions forced him into exile, and he now resides in Russia under asylum.

    A more recent case involves Jack Teixeira, who leaked classified information about the Russia-Ukraine war on a Discord chat. Unlike Snowden, Teixeira’s motivation was not rooted in ethics but rather in impressing his friends. Despite his intentions, the consequences of his actions were severe, raising concerns about how sensitive information is handled and accessed by government employees.

    The actions of whistleblowers raise fundamental questions: Do they protect democracy by exposing wrongdoing or do they endanger national security? Figures like Ellsberg and Felt are often celebrated for their courage, while individuals like Teixeira are criticized for their recklessness. Snowden occupies a middle ground, praised by some for his principled approach to transparency and condemned by others for compromising state secrets.

    What makes whistleblowing so controversial is its potential for unintended consequences. While whistleblowers can reveal corruption or abuse of power, their actions can also disrupt international relations, jeopardize military operations, or expose sensitive data. The line between heroism and recklessness often depends on public opinion, the motivations of the whistleblower, and the consequences of their revelations. How do we decide who deserves to be celebrated and who should be condemned?

The Five Eyes Alliance

    What if I told you that the governments of 5 countries have the ability to monitor almost every digital footprint you leave behind, right now? Sounds like something out of a dystopian novel, right? Well, it’s real. The Five Eyes Alliance is an intelligence-sharing network between the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Established during World War II, it has evolved into one of the most sophisticated surveillance collaborations in the world. While it has played a crucial role in addressing terrorism, cyberattacks, and other threats, it has also sparked debates about privacy, ethics, and accountability.

    The origins of the Five Eyes Alliance date back to the UKUSA Agreement, signed in 1946. Building on intelligence-sharing efforts during World War II, particularly in decrypting enemy communications, the agreement formalized a long-term partnership between the U.S. and the U.K. The success of wartime collaborations, such as the Allied efforts to crack the Enigma code, cemented the importance of pooling resources and expertise. Over time, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand joined the alliance, creating a comprehensive network designed to detect and respond to global threats.

Positive Impacts

    One of the most significant benefits of the Five Eyes Alliance is its ability to enhance global security. By sharing intelligence in real time, member nations have successfully prevented terrorist attacks and other large-scale threats. A notable example is the disruption of a 2010 plot to smuggle bombs onto cargo planes headed to the United States. Through collaborative efforts, the alliance intercepted the threat before it could escalate, saving countless lives. 

    Another critical contribution of the Five Eyes is its role in technological advancements. Programs like ECHELON, a global communications interception system, showcase how the alliance has innovated to address evolving threats. These technologies are not only used to combat terrorism and cybercrime but also have broader applications in protecting businesses and individuals from ransomware and data breaches. For example, shared breakthroughs in encryption and cybersecurity have trickled down to benefit private users, improving global digital security.

    Also, the Five Eyes strengthens diplomatic ties among its members. Beyond intelligence sharing, the alliance fosters cooperation in areas like trade, defense, and education. By uniting these nations under shared security objectives, the Five Eyes creates a framework for mutual support in addressing global challenges. This trust has extended to joint military exercises and collaborative strategies for combating emerging threats, further solidifying international relationships.

Negative Impacts

    Despite its achievements, the Five Eyes is not without controversy. One of the most significant criticisms involves its potential for privacy violations. Edward Snowden’s 2013 revelations exposed programs like PRISM, which allowed the NSA to collect data from major tech companies without users’ knowledge. These disclosures highlighted how ordinary citizens could be swept into surveillance efforts, sparking debates about government overreach and the erosion of civil liberties.

    The alliance also faces criticism for power imbalances and ethical dilemmas. Non-member nations, particularly in the developing world, often find themselves surveilled without access to the same security benefits. Even allies outside the alliance have been targets of espionage. For example, the NSA was reported to have monitored communications of European Union officials, leading to strained diplomatic relationships. Also, accusations of industrial espionage, such as the alleged monitoring of Airbus communications in the 1990s, raise questions about whether intelligence is used for economic advantage rather than strictly for security purposes.

Societal Impacts and Ethical Questions

    The Five Eyes Alliance affects different segments of society in varied ways. For minority communities, surveillance practices have disproportionately targeted specific groups under the guise of national security. For example, leaked documents revealed that prominent Muslim leaders in the U.S. were monitored without evidence of wrongdoing. How is that justifiable? That’s not security. It’s profiling.

    Generational differences also influence perceptions of the alliance. While older generations may view surveillance as a necessary trade-off for security, younger, more tech-savvy individuals in my generation often prioritize privacy and advocate for greater transparency. This divide reflects broader societal debates about the role of government in the digital era.

Balancing Security and Privacy

    For individuals, the impact of the Five Eyes Alliance is often invisible but significant. The collection of data from phones, emails, and social media raises questions about personal freedom in an increasingly connected world. Younger generations, who rely heavily on digital platforms, are particularly concerned about how surveillance affects their privacy and freedom of expression.

    At the same time, the alliance provides a measure of security, ensuring that potential threats are mitigated before they escalate. This duality balances national security with individual rights and defines the complex legacy of the Five Eyes Alliance.

Conclusion

    The Five Eyes Alliance stands as both a symbol of international cooperation and source of debates about privacy and ethics. Its origins in wartime necessity highlight its effectiveness in addressing global threats, but its evolution into a modern surveillance network demands transparency and accountability. I believe that moving forward, the challenge lies in ensuring that intelligence-sharing efforts align with democratic values to find a balance between safety and freedom. By understanding the Five Eyes, we can better navigate the complexities of global security in the 21st century.

The Transformative yet Troubling Power of A.I.

   "Data is the new oil," fueling a revolution as transformative as the Industrial Age. The documentary In the Age of AI provides a fascinating and thought-provoking exploration of how artificial intelligence is reshaping our world. It captures both the awe-inspiring potential and the daunting risks of this rapidly advancing technology. While A.I. offers unprecedented possibilities for innovation and progress, its impact on society raises questions that cannot be ignored.

    One key moment in the video was Google’s AlphaGo defeating Go champion Lee Sedol in 2016. This wasn’t just a game; it was a turning point because the A.I. AlphaGo didn’t just follow instructions. It created moves no human had thought of in thousands of years. This breakthrough showed how A.I. could surpass human thinking in specific areas, which is both exciting and unsettling. It made me wonder: if A.I. can think in ways we don’t understand, how do we make sure it’s used responsibly?

    The documentary highlighted how A.I. is transforming industries. In China, innovations like facial recognition payments, self-driving cars, and the social credit system are becoming part of everyday life. For example, the company Momenta is creating autonomous vehicles, backed by government funding. While these technologies could improve efficiency and safety, they also threaten jobs. In the U.S., truck drivers are already struggling, and with driverless trucks on the horizon, many could lose their livelihoods. This made me realize how important it is to prepare for these changes before they happen.

    Privacy was another major theme. In China, the social credit system uses A.I. to track behavior and reward or punish citizens. For example, jaywalkers are identified by facial recognition and fined instantly. While this might reduce crime, it feels invasive and controlling. It made me think about how much privacy we’re willing to trade for safety and convenience. Even outside of government systems, A.I. can raise fairness concerns. One example was an algorithm that approves loans based on unusual data points, like how often someone charges their phone. This made me question whether A.I. systems can ever be truly fair if their decision-making isn’t transparent.

    On the positive side, A.I. is driving progress in healthcare. One inspiring example was a deep learning algorithm that can detect early signs of breast cancer. By analyzing thousands of images, it finds patterns even expert doctors might miss, potentially saving lives. This showed me how A.I. can work alongside humans to solve problems we couldn’t tackle alone.

    National security and global competition also came up in the film. With China and the U.S. racing to dominate A.I., the stakes are high. While A.I. can improve defenses, it also introduces new risks, like cyberattacks and surveillance abuse.

Kai-Fu Lee

    The economic impacts of A.I. were another major takeaway. In places like Saginaw, Michigan, automation has replaced thousands of factory jobs, leaving communities struggling. Kai-Fu Lee’s prediction that A.I. could threaten 50% of jobs in the next 15 years feels realistic, especially since A.I. isn’t just replacing physical labor—it’s taking over cognitive tasks too.

    The documentary left me with mixed emotions. A.I. has the potential to improve lives, solve big problems, and create new opportunities. But without fairness, ethics, and transparency, it could deepen inequality and invade our privacy. We must act now to ensure A.I. is a tool for good, not harm.

Carrier Pigeons

    The carrier pigeon: an unexpected method of communication, but also one of history's most intriguing (and my personal favorite). They have had significant roles from ancient civilizations to modern times. This journey through the years has not only shown the ingenuity of human communication methods but also the evolving relationship between technology and societal needs.

    Carrier pigeons, also known as homing pigeons, have been utilized since as early as 2000 BCE, with their use documented across various prominent civilizations, including Mesopotamia, Egypt, Greece, and Rome. These pigeons were not just birds but important communication tools that conveyed critical information. In ancient times, they broadcasted the outcomes of Olympic games and significant battles, serving as the fastest messengers in an era without electronic communication.

    The strategic importance of carrier pigeons continued through the centuries, reaching a peak during World War I. These birds were integrated into military operations, with army tanks even designed with special holes to allow the pigeons to land and take off safely. Their ability to fly at speeds over 60 mph and navigate through challenging weather conditions and enemy terrain made them invaluable. They could deliver messages across hostile areas where no human messenger could tread without significant risk.

    Research has shown that carrier pigeons possess an internal compass and are sensitive to the Earth’s magnetic field, which helps them discern their geographical location. Also, they utilize visual markers to navigate routes they have previously flown. A strong homing instinct ensures they can find their way back to their home cages, a trait that was crucial for their use in communication networks.

    However, the invention of the telegraph marked the decline of carrier pigeons as a mainstream communication method. Even so, their legacy as a turning point in the evolution of communication technology remains undisputed. Despite their obsolescence in official communication realms, carrier pigeons have found a niche in more secret and illegal operations, such as smuggling contraband into prisons and across borders.

    Carrier pigeons not only highlight the historical significance of early communication methods but also demonstrate the nature of technological advancement. These birds exemplify how new inventions build upon the legacies of what came before, but at the same time can make them obsolete. I find it fascinating and somewhat inspiring that what may appear at first to be a simple creature played a pivotal role in shaping how we communicate across distances. Carrier pigeons truly stand as a testament to human ingenuity.

Privacy

    In an age where sharing has become second nature, the insights from Juan Enriquez, Catherine Crump, Christopher Soghoian, and Darieth Chisolm in their TED Talks highlight a stark reality: our digital activities and pervasive surveillance create lasting records that pose significant privacy risks.

How These Issues Affect Us and Our Loved Ones

Facial Recognition Technology

    Juan Enriquez’s concept of digital activities as "electronic tattoos" highlights the permanence and visibility of our online actions. Every social media post, location check-in, and online transaction can be traced and potentially used against us or those we associate with. For example, the use of facial recognition technology can misidentify or correctly identify someone at a protest, affecting their employment or personal relationships due to perceived activities.

Automated License Plate Reader

    Catherine Crump discusses the depth of surveillance, such as Automatic License Plate Readers, which collect data indiscriminately. This means that your routine visits to sensitive locations, like a therapist or a political meeting, can become part of a permanent record, potentially exposing not just your activities but also those of accompanying family members.

Government's Role in Addressing Privacy Concerns

    I believe the government must play a pivotal role in safeguarding privacy. First, there is a dire need for updated privacy legislation that matches the pace of technological advances. Governments should ensure strict regulations on data collection and usage, ensuring transparency and accountability from both public and private entities. For example, legislation could limit the retention period of data collected by tools like license plate readers, as suggested by Catherine Crump, to protect citizens from unwarranted long-term surveillance. While regulations like the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the EU and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) in the U.S. (which I remember becoming particularly significant when changes to it affected the content I watched on platforms like YouTube) are great frameworks, they show the need for continual re-examinations to keep pace with evolving digital landscapes and better protect internet users.

Self-Protection Measures

   While we await stronger government action, there are immediate steps we can take to protect our privacy. Christopher Soghoian points out the importance of encryption technologies. Using communication tools that provide end-to-end encryption, such as WhatsApp or Signal, can secure our messages from prying eyes. Also, being selective about what we share on social media and regularly reviewing the privacy settings on our digital accounts can prevent unintentional data leaks.

    Darieth Chisolm's harrowing experience with “revenge porn” underscores the necessity of being cautious about sharing intimate images and details online, even with trusted individuals. Her advocacy highlights the need for a double-sided approach: tightening legal frameworks to punish perpetrators and educating the public about the risks and protections against digital abuse.

Conclusion

    As we navigate our interconnected lives, it’s important to remember that our digital actions have real-world consequences. These consequences are not just for us but for our friends and family as well. By understanding the risks, adjusting our digital behaviors, and advocating for legal protections, we can protect ourselves from the intrusive eyes of surveillance and exploitation. As time goes on, I see more and more videos that expose countless privacy problems. This issue is just about as widespread as one can get, but will we be able to solve it for good?