It’s wild how much tech can fail when the people building it don't represent the people using it, like that soap dispenser that literally couldn't see dark skin. It really drives home the point that design justice isn't just about the final product, but about making sure disabled and marginalized people are actually the ones in the room making the decisions.

This section highlights how managing disability accessibility is shifting from putting the burden on individuals to "mask" or fix themselves toward designers creating flexible tools that actually adapt to the person. It’s a move from just making someone act "normal" with assistive tech to using ability-based design where programs change their own behavior to match what a user can do.

Companies may be careless because prioritizing rapid product growth and innovation often takes precedence over the slow, costly process of implementing rigorous security protocols. When the cost of a potential data breach settlement is lower than the profit gained from aggressive data collection, companies may view privacy risks simply as a manageable "cost of doing business."

My primary concern involves the creation of invasive behavioral profiles that track my interests and location without explicit, ongoing consent. I worry that this data could be leaked or sold to third parties, leading to identity theft or the subtle manipulation of my personal decisions through targeted algorithms.

Social media platforms use our data to keep us hooked and maximize their profits, showing that 'free' services often come at the cost of our time and attention. While targeted ads can be helpful, they also give platforms the power to manipulate users or even influence major events like elections.

It's fascinating how data mining can reveal stories from simple numbers, like the connection between COVID-19 surges and candle reviews. However, the section on spurious correlations is a great reminder that just because two trends line up—like margarine consumption and divorce rates—it doesn't mean one actually causes the other.

I think the best move is to just stop giving them a reaction, since their whole goal is to disrupt the space or get someone to snap for the lulz. Engaging just feeds their need to feel smart or powerful, so it’s way more effective to ignore the bait and keep the conversation moving.

It is interesting realizing that trolling is way more than just people being mean for "the lulz"—it can actually be a weird form of social protest or a way to make a point by exposing how gullible people are. It's basically using fake posts to mess with people's heads, whether that's to feel powerful or just to gate keep a community from "normies"

I express differently in different situations. In real life, I often listen to another's opinion, while online communication, such as commenting on RedNote were often more sharp and acute, because people will worry less of the relationships with strangers.

This could be paradoxical, as anonymity can discourage authenticity by providing a shield that allows individuals to bypass social accountability and engage in deceptive or uncharacteristic behaviors. Conversely, it can also foster a unique form of "true" authenticity by enabling people to share vulnerable thoughts and identities without the fear of real-world judgment or consequences.

I learned that affordances make apps feel natural to use, while friction is a design choice used to intentionally slow users down, like making an ad hard to close. It was surprising to find out that the creator of infinite scroll now regrets it because it removed the friction that normally helps people stop scrolling.

The late 1900s marked the rise of "Web 1.0," where social interaction was often limited to personal webpages or separate text-based platforms like IRC and BBS. It is interesting to see how early communication evolved from simple email to real-time chat systems like AIM, which allowed users to manage friend lists and view online status.


I learned that dictionaries are perfect for storing labeled data, like a user's "handle" or "profile picture," because they map specific keys to values. By nesting these dictionaries inside a list, researchers can organize information for thousands of different social media users in one structured format.

I find the discussion about the ambiguity of yesterday particularly insightful because it highlights how objective data like a timestamp is actually dependent on the observer's context, if a social media platform's automated system flags behavior based on a specific day, but that day starts and ends at different times for the user and the server. This creates a data friction that can lead to unfair outcomes, which indicates that information systems aren't neutral tools, they are specific temporal assumptions, and things might change quickly and might not reflect the lived experience of global users.

The use of loops and conditionals in social media bots highlights a major ethical challenge regarding scale and context. While a human can manually block a few trolls, a bot using a loop can automatically block hundreds of users in seconds based on a simple conditional like an iphone or android tag. This demonstrates how automation doesn't just make tasks easier but changes the power dynamics of online interaction by allowing a single user to exert massive influence without manual effort.

It is striking how specific design features like the location tag ('Hillingdon, London') transformed a digital post into a real-world manhunt. This case proves that platform features are never neutral; by automatically attaching metadata, Twitter provided the tools necessary for users to track Sacco’s flight in real-time, blurring the line between online discourse and physical safety.

I would like to add the framework of Utilitarianism (Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill) to this section. Utilitarianism focuses on the outcomes of actions, aiming for 'the greatest good for the greatest number.' This is particularly relevant to social media algorithms that prioritize overall engagement and user satisfaction metrics, though it often raises ethical concerns when the 'minority' users' experiences are sacrificed for the majority's data trends.