Tutorials: html

Topic Description:

I decided to research the topic of html, because I feel this is an important aspect of web design, and it is something I am interested in. I know a little bit about the topic and have worked with some html within the past few years, but it is something I definitely wish to learn more about.


Available Tutorials:

I found tons of different tutorials available on the web. Some had videos that you had to pay for, but there were many available free ones.

1.) http://www.w3schools.com/ - This tutorial had a ton of different aspects of web design on it, all free. This was definitely one of the best ones I researched. The homepage made it easy to find exactly where you wanted to go and what you wanted to learn, as well if you wanted to learn from a beginning or advanced standpoint.

2.) http://www.htmlcenter.com/tutorials/index.cfm/main/ - This tutorial had many different aspects of web design on it as well as tutorals for programs such as Photoshop. You clicked on what you wanted to learn, and what part of it you want to learn. It was set up in an easy to locate manner as well.

3.) http://www.htmlgoodies.com/ - I did not like the setup of this page as much as the other pages. It seemed like it was trying to be too technical. However, I did like at the bottom of the page there was a discussion forum for people who had problems with something that they were learning on the site. It also seemed like it was updated often.


Evaluation:

I decided to do the first tutorial I listed. I liked the way it was set up. First I learned the reasoning for html, and what it is used for. There were examples that I could copy and paste to understand with. It answered many questions I had as I went along with the tutorial with a FAQ section. If the examples were not enough, there were links to even more examples. It divided the different parts up of html so it was very simple and easy for me to use. There were charts with different codes as well. I learned many different parts, and I focused on the basic sections because there really was a ton of information to learn. Something I concentrated on andI learned more about scripts, which was something that I did not know too much about. Overall, I found it to be pretty easy and I enjoyed learning more about a topic I was interested about.

Security Issues With Free WLAN's

I feel that free WLAN's can be a great asset to the individual on the go. However, I feel a great concern about having access to a free WLAN is the security issues. People that are within the wireless range have the possibility to access sources that they would not regularly have access to with another network. This can result in doing wrongful actions with someone's IP address or sending illegal spam.


After researching security aspects of a wireless network, I found out that some are secured and others are not. If a network is security-enabled, then the Wireless Network Connection dialog box shows a gold lock, which means you need something such as a password to connect to it. If the wireless network is not security-enabled, you do not need a special password or whatnot to connect. Therefore, when you go someplace to access the Internet such as a hotel or coffee shop, this is what is used. I feel that this is a risk in itself. If I were to decide to go online with one of these none security enabled wireless networks, I would make sure I was doing something that is not important, such as going into my bank account. I do not trust these free WLAN's. There are different wireless networks in the dorms because some students have their own router. I do not connect to these, and turn off my wireless networking if I am in anyplace other then my house.


If someone was to connect to a wireless network that is not security-enabled and check his/her e-mail, someone else that is connected to the same network has the potential to read your user name and password. They could read anything you type and any website that you go to.


Some companies are trying to prevent these security risks. Windows Service Pack 2 has a Windows Firewall that when enabled, the computer is more unlikely to be attacked from viruses running on the computers of other people. This is a good idea when someone is in a computer network with people that they do not know. I have experienced being attacked from viruses through a wireless network, but it was accidental. My house has a router and wireless network set up just for my family. However, one of our computers got infected with a virus somehow. This caused all of our computers on the network to get the affect from the virus, and we could not use the Internet until it was cleared. This is an example of one of the risks that people have to take to be connected via wireless. This is definitely not a foolproof network yet.


People are stating that these risks are lower than the ones with other connections. Since the wireless network is based on a small geographical range, only clients within that range can exploit an open wireless access point.


Another interesting fact I found while researched WLAN was the effect that it has had socially. People that used to go into coffee shops and talk and socialize are not doing so as much anymore. One of the purposes for having a place such as a coffee shop is the socialization that occurs. Instead, people are going into places such as Starbucks and going on their computers for hours on a regular basis, and some do not even purchase anything. I read that one coffee shop in Seattle shut down the wireless network on weekends so that the socialization that was meant to happen can occur, and it has had a good effect. I thought this was interesting, and definitely true. It is another example of how people are being socially isolated even out in the public!


Resources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_LAN http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/expert/netwimprovements.mspx http://www.wifinetnews.com/archives/005325.html

Software Protection

The first program I researched was the Bitdefender 9 Standard, which won an award for being the best anti-virus program. There were many features I researched that were appealing. You can drag and drop the individual file to have it scanned immediately, instead of having to perform a full system scan. It is very simple to use and has a nice interface, and updates itself automatically. It has peer to peer application protection, and protects against viruses via instant messenger and file sharing. Bitfender also offers full e-mail protection, as well as keeping systems safe from unknown viruses.

After reading multiple reviews, this anti-virus program seems to be the most effective.

“Very well layed out program. Relatively fast scanning,very stable,modest system resource usage and you can tell very well written. Additionally Bitdefender is rated very high in all anti-virus tests. This software would rate five stars except for the fact that Bitdefender says that there is no real time protection.”

“I recommend this program due to it's easy of use and effectiveness. It can be scheduled to update on it's own and does so with out a hitch. It's lean with a sleek GUI that makes it easy to work with and set up.”



The next product I reviewed was Kaspersky. The new Kaspersky has a completely redesigned interface that is easy to use. This software also has e-mail protection, and has new updates every hour. It detects files in over 1200 compressed formats, and cures them. It also has mobile user support.



I also read some great reviews of this anti-virus program. The major con I feel is the price, because Bitdefender has the same great features but at half the price.

"I got the trial of this program, and when that ran out I bought it. This is the first and only antivirus program I have ever bought after trying (which is saying something :P). Here are some features that I like and I bet you will too if you try it! 1.) Live protection - In my experience and opinion, live protection is really more important than actual virus scans. When you get something bad on your computer, kaspersky will IMMEDIATELY prompt you to delete it, don't do anything to it, or even sometimes just keep it out! With this kind of live protection, it will be rare that you get viruses.
2.) Updates - Updates are obviously crucial to having a good antivirus program. Most people don't like to spend an hour tediously getting updates and then restarting their computer for them to work (see norton :P). With Kaspersky, you just click a little blue link looking thing that says "Update Now" and everything is done for you in seconds. So far I haven't had to restart at all. 3.) Scanning - I'll admit, scanning with kaspersky can sometimes take awhile, but it's worth it. If anything happens to get past live protection, I can almost 100% guarantee you a thorough scan will catch it and automatically delete or quarantine it. You can also choose to just scan certain files, or folders instead of scanning entire drives (which is how it should be). 4.) Size - According to my "add or remove programs", kaspersky A.V. takes up only 10.56 mb on your hard drive. That's a fraction of what some (see norton :P) takes up.
5.) Good programmers? Me thinks so. Kris Kaspersky himself wrote a book called Hacker Disassembling Uncovered. I have a feeling you should trust him :) 6.) Easy to use - infact.. the easiest. No complicated interfaces. Just click a few clearly labeled buttons, and everything is done for you. excellent excellent product kaspersky.”

“It is one of the best solutions on the market, a real good investment.”



The last anti-virus program I researched was Norman Virus Control. You can choose to get your updates automatically with this program, however there is no time estimation when a scan is complete. Attachments can be blocked based on file name or extension. This program offers e-mail protection as well as postings from newsgroups. It has an on-demand scanner and automatic updates as well.

However, I found this program isn't as user friendly as the other two programs. It can be a little complicated at times and does not have as easy of an interface. I also found this program does not completely uninstall. This program can falsely report viruses and has stability issues.

“I cannot uninstall this ***** shit. I have almost all antiviruses but this is the worst.” "It is my best after CA e trust antivirus 2005, but Norman dont fully protect because when I uninstalled my PC still said * your computer might be in danger* because Norman does not monitor Windows Virus protection. so it made me ask my self why i have to uninstall it? so i don't understand for which user it was designed.”


According to a neutral test of some large anti-virus software programs:

Kaspersky Personal Pro version 5.0.20 found 99.28%,
McAfee version 9.0.10 found 89.75% of the viruses,
Avast version 4.6.623 found 79.65% of the viruses
and AVG version 7.0.308 found 54.07% of the viruses.

Computer Hackers

“Computer crimes are no different from other crimes, and computer criminals should be held responsible for the damage they cause.”


This statement is completely true, and to have anyone disagree with this is absurd. A crime is a crime whether it is in the computer world or the real world. Damage is caused, people are affected negatively, and to have someone honestly feel what they are doing is harmless is wrong. People who think a hacking crime is justifiable is basically stating any crime is justifiable, such as rape or murder.


What people do not realize is the damage computer hackers can cause. It can cause businesses to lose money, or their reputation. For example, in 2001 there was a hacker that broke into the Burger King UK site implying that everyone should eat McDonald's instead. No deaths were caused, and no one was physically hurt. However, this hurt the company's reputation and made them look unprofessional. This was wrong and illegal to break into the site, and proper punishment should have been given.


The SirCam worm was a virus that infected thousands of online companies, and embarrassed many. The FBI had to embarrassingly admit that their machines were infected as well, which allowed the bug to show confidential files to outsiders. The SirCam virus did around $1.035 billion worth of damage and infected around 2,300,000 computers. This example shows the damage that could be done with viruses.


Another issue that I feel needs to be looked at more is white-hat hackers. These are hackers that do not have a bad intent such as placing porn on sites or stealing information. White-hat hackers look for the holes and show their discoveries so viruses and such can be prevented. Hacking is hacking, therefore it is not right. However, I feel this issue should be looked into in the sense that some people get special permission from companies to access certain sites in order to help them out. This will not be illegal because permission would be granted to these individuals.


However, I feel that the proper punishment should be given to the hackers, and this includes it not being too harsh. For example, a Chinese court sentenced two brothers to death for hacking into a bank's system and electronically stealing $86,900. The brothers connected a home-made modem to the bank's computer and transferred the funds into 16 accounts with false names. The judge believed that the sentence was necessary to deal with the emerging high-tech crime. I believe the death punishment is extreme, and should not have occurred. I do feel the brothers should have definitely gotten years in jail to serve their time.


Hackers commit a crime when they access information and websites that is not theirs. It is undeniable that they should be punished. They are trespassing on what is not theirs. The punishment of hacking should be based on the severity of damage caused, age, and intent.




Sources:


http://www.cs.usask.ca/undergrads/maw106/490/Summary9.htm

http://www.akamarketing.com/effects-of-hacking-on-business.html

http://content.techweb.com/tech/security/20020515_security?ls=TW_081402_fea

Internet Addiction Disorder

"It's a socially connecting device that's socially isolating at the same time."

New York psychiatrist Ivan Goldberg announced in 1995 a new addiction formed on the analysis of people staring into their computer monitor and abandoning previous obligations: Internet Addiction Disorder.

Internet Addiction Disorder is a condition that is presently hard to define because the abnormality has not been sufficiently researched yet. Computer Addiction and Cyberaddiction are additional names for this condition. There are many different beliefs about the origination and processes behind this disorder, however much research still has to be completed.

This addiction can be compared to ones such as compulsive shopping or pathological gambling. This inability to resist impulses leads to consequences that these instances can relate. Like other disorders, the person can feel their addiction will solve all their problems. Internet Addiction Disorder affects more then just the individual dependent on the computer. Friends, family, and coworkers can be affected because it can lead to a neglect of the normalcy the individual once contained.

It is estimated that out of the 189 million Internet users in this country, 6-10 percent have a potentially destructive addiction. However the skepticism remains in some of whether or not an Internet addiction justifies as a true addiction.

Different psychological symptoms have been targeted to the Internet Addiction Disorder. The person feels a sense of euphoria while on the computer, and does not have the desire to stop being online. The individual craves the computer, and neglects other people in the process. People could also use this as an outlet to their other problems. This addiction could lead to feelings of emptiness, depression, and irritability. There can be physical symptoms as well with the disorder. This included carpal tunnel syndrome, dry eyes, back aches, and migraine headaches. The person may also not maintain a balanced diet, and neglect their sleep and personal hygiene.

There are different suggestions as to why the Internet is so addictive. A popular opinion is the idea of socialization in forms such as discussion forums, e-mail, chat, or games. Another hypotheses is that the addictive behaviors of the Internet are newcomers. Like other new activities, people can be drawn to something for extended periods of time because the experience is new for them. This is the first stage of the new environment, and this is the stage where most feel they are “addicted” at. Researchers feel that once the obsession is through, a healthy balance is reached. However, some people may need help to reach the stage of balance.

David Greenfield, founder of the Center for Internet Studies executed a survey on Internet addiction in 1998. He analyzed 18,000 Internet users who logged onto the ABC News Web site and found that 5.7 percent fit the criteria for compulsive Internet use, which was adapted from compulsive gamblers. These participants were found to spend a great deal of time on chat rooms, pornography, e-mail, and online shopping. Around 33 percent were found to use the Internet on a regular basis to lift their mood or escape their problems. There are other interesting studies being conducted relating to Internet addiction, one including depression. Depression is one aspect that is said to make teens more preoccupied going online. It is thought that depressed children find a small reward by going on the Internet. All the time alone makes the teen isolated which contributes further to their depression. Different studies that are being done are helping researchers gain further knowledge about Internet addiction.

Just because the addiction does not have concrete research does not mean one cannot seek help for it. Professional treatment is available for any addiction, including the computer. Professionals have helped people with other compulsive behaviors to become healthy, and can treat Internet addiction the same way.

Other researchers feel quite differently about an obsession to the Internet, and some feel that it does not exist. It is argued that addicted Internet users do not measure up to the same consequences on family life or health as other recognized additions. Professor Sara Kiesler at Carnegie Mellon University is one of these skeptics. She feels that while the Internet can be satisfying, it is no different then an addiction from bowling or playing the violin. She states that “there is absolutely no evidence that spending time online, exchanging e-mail with family and friend, is the least bit harmful. We know that people who are depressed or anxious are likely to go online for escape and that doing so helps them.” Professor Kiesler and other researchers call the addiction to the Internet a fad illness. She proclaimed she was doing a study of her own of heavy Internet users, and it showed the majority had greatly reduced their time online over the course of year which can show the problem is self-corrective.

There are still many discrepancies about Internet Addiction Disorder. Many question whether is it a disorder, and how one can generate the proper criteria to qualify it as one. It is suggested the further research should look not just as the person with the problem, but healthy Internet users as well. There is also the need for more theory and research as to the reason why the Internet is so fascinating to some people compared with other outlets. Internet Addiction Disorder is a new study, but one that will be greatly researched to find answers that will hopefully leave many questions today answered.




References

“Hooked on the Web: Help Is on the Way”
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/01/fashion/thursdaystyles/01addict.html?ei=5090&en=1a8916920717f083&ex=1291093200&pagewanted=print

“Internet Addiction Guide”
http://www.psychcentral.com/netaddiction/

“Internet Addiction Test”
www.netaddiction.com/resources/internet_addiction_test.htm

“Computer Addiction Services”
http://www.computeraddiction.com/

“Medical Encyclopedia”
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001520.htm

“Internet Addiction”
http://www.nurseweek.com/features/97-8/iadct.html

“Is Internet Addiction Real?”
http://www.apa.org/monitor/apr00/addiction.html

“Internet Addiction May Mask Depression”
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,157555,00.html