email 1-2 page paper to cfk@cs.swarthmore.edu by noon Monday, Sept 22
The rest of the reading and thinking should be completed by seminar time
on Weds 24 Sep.
Describe parts of the movie you watched that relate to the impact of computers and software on privacy and trust. What parts did you find unbelievable (or at least very unlikely)? What parts did you find plausible (or at least possible)?
Finally suggest one or two topics that you would like to see addressed in seminar this week.
The intelligence that came from breaking the enigma was code-named ultra. The British government kept it secret until 1974. In fact, the British regarded the information provided by ultra to be so important that most commanders did not know its true source. One of the consequences of this is that any book on World War II written before 1974 could not tell the whole story.
H259-261 discusses Allied sloppiness in communications (eventually corrected) and some of its consequences. H244 ("But the head of the German naval intelligence service at the Naval High Command adhered to the opinion that it would be impossible for the enemy to have deciphered the signals.") gives an example of what I like to call cryptographic arrogance. In order to promote this kind of arrogance many stratagems are employed. Some of these are discussed on H237-238; many more ae fictionalized in Cryptonomicon.
Difficult moral decisions are required in order to maintain the sources of secret (i.e. private) government information during warfare. E.g. If using it to save X gives away the source, then that source will not be usuable to potentially save Y, Z, W. The more people you share the intelligence with, the less likely it and its source are to remain secret. This makes legislative oversight and transparent (to the public) government problematic in some circumstances. On the other hand, most administrations have sought to keep secret more than some legislators and the press think they should.
It seems to me that there are lots of interesting things you to discuss about the need for government privacy (in war or peace) versus the publics need for knowledge. Pick one or two issues to discuss this week.
Start thinking about your first 5-7 page paper.
Pick one interesting and significant topic that we have discussed or read about in seminar so far (you may include material for 1 Oct.).
If you are uncomfortable picking a topic or cannot think of one, you may write in support of or in opposition to the following statement: "the world will be a better place in 2018 due to the greater transparency of people and institutions afforded by computers and the internet".
I would prefer for you to pick a topic related to Privacy and Trust in Cyberspace that interests you.
Do some additional research and/or reading about your topic. Write a 5-7 page paper about it assuming the audience for your paper has participated in our seminar. Give your paper a title. Use the introduction of your paper to engage our interest in the issue you choose to address. What makes your topic interesting and significant? The body of your paper may be a reporting of others' thoughts on the topic (appropriately referenced). But preferably, it will be your own response to the issue (possibly synthesizing the ideas of others). In any case, you should make your work as convincing as possible by means of appropriate analysis, argumentation, and the use of evidence.
Provide a Reference list at the end of your paper following the CBE name-year reference list standard. Use CBE name-year in-text citations.
Email your draft to me at cfk@cs.swarthmore.edu by noon Friday, Oct. 3.
You will meet with our WA (Anne-Marie Frassica)
starting Oct. 4. A sign-up
sheet will be available in seminar on Sep 24.