Taxes - Internet makes it a little easier

Beginning in 1986, a pilot program was established in 3 cities with 5 preparers that allowed for simple returns expecting refunds.  That first year, 25,000 people electronically filed for tax returns.  Currently, several methods exist including using software to prepare the returns and send them to a intermediary who then forwards them to the IRS or having a authorized preparer compete the taxes and transmit them.  The IRS program is called Federal/State E-File and allows taxpayers to submit their state and federal returns at the same time to the IRS.  In 2001, 40 million federal income tax returns were completed online.

Filing online is known to cause faster refunds, be more accurate as it allows for double checking, and can confirm that the return was submitted successfully.  The increase of online tax filing is similar to the growth in the accessibility and use of the Internet  In 2010, E-Filing receipts totaled over 98 million.  79% of all taxes filed were completed online in 2011.  This is a huge increase from the 30% in 2001. 

The ability to file taxes online also allows for a tremendous amount of paper and time saving.  E-Filing has saved billions of sheets of paper over its lifetime.

Below is a chart showing the returns filed electronically by state for 2010.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/IRS-E-File:-A-History
http://www.learnvest.com/knowledge-center/how-many-trees-are-saved-each-year-by-e-filing-taxes/
http://ecommerce.hostip.info/pages/392/Electronic-Income-Tax-Filing.html

Government Websites You May Not Be Informed About

So, on a more boring note of a blog, while there is so much excitement that goes along with the government and how they use the internet, such as spying, they also utilize the internet in many ways that can be useful to us. Take for instance using website such as ncdot.gov, North Carolina’s official DMV website or fasfa.ed.gov, the Federal Student Aid website.

                Lifehacker.com lists several websites that are out there for our use, some of which I had never heard of. Many of these websites are helpful because, along with allowing is to renew our drivers licenses and file for financial aid, they also give us the ability to do our jobs as citizens, and keep up with congress, locate historical documents, among many other things.

                This website outlines several different government websites among hundreds that are out there. USA.gov is one which provides access to many online services such as shopping government auctions and contracting elected officials. GPO Access offers us the ability to access official information from all the branched of the federal government. And CIA World Factbook provides us with information about various countries and territories all around the world.

                While this may not be as exciting as reading about how the government is destroying our lives by using our information without us knowing, I did find this very interesting. I was unaware there were so many government websites designed to provide us with information. It makes me think about our jobs as citizens of this country to keep us educated about our government and what is going on. To find out we are given it by them, I feel we have no room to be complaining when there is information available to us out there that we seem to be doing nothing with.

How many government websites are you all aware of? Any that you use regularly? How does knowing these are out there and the information we have access to make you feel about how informed the majority of the citizens are about what is going on politically?

Citations:

Boswell, Wendy. "U.S. Government Web Sites You Didn't Know You Could Use." Lifehacker. N.p., 16 July 2007. Web. 19 Nov. 2013. <http://lifehacker.com/277405/us-government-web-sites-you-didnt-know-you-could-use>.

2013 Update of Internet Freedom Around the World

As you have experienced, the internet in the United States is easily accessible and unrestricted, a place of free speech and exploration, whether it's important, or stupid hashtags. It's not that way everywhere though, and according to the Freedom House, (A global Assessment of Internet and Digital Media) a map has been posted to present the internet across the globe.

This map is the latest update as of Oct. 3, 2013.

Freedom House comes out with a updated map once a year, and in the 2013 edition, it shows that a lot of censored, un-free internet is still out there. For a more detailed look at all of the countries, Freedom House has graphed each country's internet freedom from most free to least free.

Freedom House also indexes the little changes too. Another graph below demonstrates how each country's freedom has declined, and the US has taken a hit mainly due to the NSA, but still remain classified as "free."

The next time you're frustrated because your connection is out, or if its just slow, remember it could be way worse. 

Resources:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/resources/FOTN%202013%20Summary%20of%20Findings.pdf

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/internet-censorship-what-does-it-look-like-around-the-world/2012/01/18/gIQAdvMq8P_blog.html

 

Way More Than You Ever Wanted to Know about International Politics

By Tim Mulligan

Intellectuals like to establish a number of fancy terms to describe concepts. The world of international politics is no exception. During our presentation, I spent a good amount of time describing the difference inbetween NETPOLITIK and REALPOLITIK (all caps used for emphasis). If you were thoroughly confused, consider this my apology, and my attempt to clear the differences up. I will also discuss other influential understandings of how governments interact internationally. (real quick, "politik" is the German work for politics)

So, let's begin with a couple of the less common views. 

MEDIAPOLITIK:

Bascially, mediapolitik puts the media as the central player in international politics. The relationship between governments and the media creates an ever shifting balance of power that drives public opinion in foreign policy making. In all honesty, do we want the media to be able to drive policy making?

CYBERPOLITIK:

Cyberpolitik puts the emphasis on information power. It postulates that international politics is no longer a matter of states, but that raw power is fortified by information. 

NOOPOLITIK:

The "noosphere" is the sphere of ideas. Noopolitik takes that idea and applies it to international politcs. It is more a matter of ideas and values (by state and non-state) actors than of raw power. It is a collection of mass and cyber media that drives "soft power" and thought leadership in policy making. 

Though those three are helpful in our understanding of intergovernmental politics, the two most important views are REALPOLITIK and NETPOLITIK. 

REALPOLITIK:

The great historical luminaries (Richelieu, Metternich, Bismark, and Kissinger) all used Realpolitik to understand international politics. As I mentioned in class, think of policy making as a massive, world-wide chess match between nation-states. Alliances, treaties, wars, and conflicts all greatly affect the balance of politiks, and the goal becomes to be the one who comes out on top of what is essentially a political brawl. 

NETPOLITIK: 

Netpolitik, on the other hand, accounts for the change brought by modern technology. The rules have changed. More than anything, politics are controlled by the narratives and participation of individuals in broad networks. The presence of online networks have totally changed the ability of a citizen of a single country have a international impact through their networks. They have become the organizing principle in the conduct of world affairs.

So think about it, how do you organize your world? Those same principles dominate on an international scale.

Check out this document for reference: http://pendientedemigracion.ucm.es/info/sdrelint/ficheros_materiales/materiales0415.pdf

Stuxnet: A Computer Worm Started by a Country?

What would you think if your country was responsible for a computer worm? It appears that could be the case with a worm discovered in 2010 that is believed to be connected to the United States and Israel.

Stuxnet, a computer worm discovered in Iranian industrial sites, is a worm created specifically to seek Siemens software. Siemens Step7 is a program designed to program industrial control systems that operate equipment. Once the worm is installed, it can spy on the systems and even affect the equipment the Siemens software is controlling.

The effects of this could be devastating. The virus was found in 14 Iranian sites, one of which being a uranium-enrichment plant. If the worm was able to control the systems in place, a major nuclear accident could occur.

The Stuxnet worm is incredibly complex. It is designed to be transmitted via USB flash drives, meaning a person could transmit the virus simply by using a flash drive on two separate computers. It is also able to spread to computers via networks with shared printers, a common practice with internet connection sharing networks. Stuxnet also makes itself appear credible to antivirus software, being signed with a digital certificate. This feature shocked the antivirus community since their automated-detection programs are not able to identify a fake digital certificate.

But why would someone want to spy on and control Iranian industrial systems? Sure, information gathered from this sort of spying could be sold to an interested party. However this is not likely. Kaspersky Lab, a leading antivirus company, was responsible for finding the virus. After analyzing the code, it was clear to Kaspersky that "...Stuxnet had been specifically designed to subvert Siemens systems running centrifuges in Iran’s nuclear-enrichment program. The Kaspersky analysts then realized that financial gain had not been the objective. It was a politically motivated attack. 'At that point there was no doubt that this was nation-state sponsored.'"

Experts believe that the size and sophistication of the worm indicates a nation-state sponsor. The authors have not officially been identified, however "...leaks to the press from officials in the United States and Israel strongly suggest that those two countries did the deed."

Although it is not confirmed that the U.S. was involved in the creation of Stuxnet, the speculation brings up an interesting debate. What do you think about a government being involved in the creation of a computer virus?

Personally, I think it depends on the circumstances. If a country was able to use the information gathered from this virus for good then it seems okay. By good, I do not mean good for one country. By good I mean for the world as a whole. If there is a threat of a country creating nuclear weapons with the intent of using them and this virus could somehow prevent that threat, then it would benefit the whole world by preventing a major nuclear war. On the other hand, if a country is using this to causing another country's nuclear facilities to malfunction and cause a nuclear disaster, then it is absolutely not okay.

Source:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/the-real-story-of-stuxnet

Web 2.0 vs. Control 2.0

          Is Web 2.0 becoming Control 2.0? Whether, we like it or not... Government uses internet as a tool of control. TG daily has states that countries like, China has "increased its efforts to monitor internet use, control, content, restrict information, block access to foreign and domestic websites, encourage self-censorship, and punish those who violated regulations."

                                                                     

 
            I know we don' t live in China but how long until we reach that point in our country?
            How do we keep this from happening?

Reporter without borders reported that "a growing number of countries are attempting to tighten their  control of the Net, but at the same time, increasingly inventive netizens demonstrate mutual solidarity by mobilizing when necessary."

 Do we open ourselves up and expose too much information online? Are we setting ourselves up for trouble? Or is the government just taking advantage? 

Which countries are for Control 2.0? Saudi Arabia, Burma, China, North Korea, Cuba, Egypt, Iran, Uzbekistan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkmenistan, and Vietnam.

            

           "Among the countries “under surveillance” are several democracies: Australia, because of the upcoming implementation of a highly developed Internet filtering system, and South Korea, where draconian laws are creating too many specific restrictions on Web users by challenging their anonymity and promoting self censorship." -Reporters without Borders

 Since the creation of internet, close to 120 bloggers have been imprisoned. In one particular case, "In Azerbaidjan, the regime is holding Adnan Hadjizade and Emin Milli – two bloggers who had exposed the corruption of certain officials and had ridiculed them in a video circulated on YouTube. Four online journalists are also behind bars in Yemen. It is too soon to tell if these arrests may herald a new media takeover."- Reporters without Borders

     

Bloggers are being arrested for reporting the story? How long until we reach this point?

            New Blog COMING SOON: Ways to KEEP your Privacy ;)

Woollacott, Emma. "Governments Use Internet as Tool of Control | TG Daily." TG Daily. Velum Media, 12 Mar. 2010. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.

Morillon, Lucy. "Web 2.0 versus Control 2.0 - Reporters Without Borders." Web 2.0 versus Control 2.0 - Reporters Without Borders. N.p., 18 Mar. 2010. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.

Healthcare.gov – First impressions are hard to get back

by Brock Bailey

A huge source of controversy over the past few years has been the rollout of Healthcare.gov, the insurance web site at the center of the Affordable Care Act.  October 1 was the initial rollout date for the site and since then it has been plagued by technical issues.  Even after completion of pre-launch testing, government contractors suggested the system still had serious issues that needed to be addressed.  The website went ahead with its scheduled premier anyways.  Head of CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), Marily Tavenner, attributed the problems to the system being overwhelmed form all the online traffic.  If this were the true problem, poor planning is at fault because those at the top of the program should have expected the massive amounts of people that were to be visiting the site.  IT experts who have examined the site determined that bad software code was the cause.  This cause seems to be more realistic as the site constantly undergoes adjustments. 

Currently (11/3/2013), the Healthcare.gov website reads:

“The Health Insurance Marketplace online application won’t be available from around 9pm Saturday, November 2 to 9am Sunday, November 3 while we make improvements”

In my opinion, the underlying problem is the administration being in control of both passing the legislation and trying to implement it themselves.  They failed to realize the enormity of what was trying to be accomplished and did not delegate vital tasks to the absolute best outside experts who would have been more suited for the technical aspects of the job.  Part of the strategy that was keeping as much of the project out of public eye and under administration control came from the constant sabotage attempts by Republicans.  Although many politicians, including Obama, have apologized for the problem-riddled web site, there has yet to be anyone to step up and actually take responsibility. 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/challenges-have-dogged-obamas-health-plan-since-2010/2013/11/02/453fba42-426b-11e3-a624-41d661b0bb78_story_2.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/25/opinion/getting-to-the-bottom-of-healthcaregovs-flop.html?_r=0

http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/29/obama-administration-offers-official-apology-over-broken-obamacare-website/

https://www.healthcare.gov/

How Effective is the NSA’s Fight Against Terrorism?

We are all aware of the NSA’s use of tools such as XKeyscore and Prism to gain access to all of our information and internet activities and, in a nutshell, spy on us. The claim is that it is to protect us. But how effective are these methods in preventing acts of terrorism?

               

According to the training materials for XKeyscore that Edward Snowden leaked to The Guardian, by 2008, 300 terrorist had been captured (Wills). When asking yourself how many groups of individuals would have the guts to attempt to terrorize a country or wage war on it, this number seems extreme and it does in fact sound as if these methods are indeed effective. However, this summer, after the leak from Snowden, the NSA disclosed that by using these methods of spying, 52 “terrorist events” had been interrupted (“NSA”). This number contradicts the 300 given in the training materials for just XKeyscore, let alone the whole NSA. The chief of the NSA later said that those numbers had been dramatically exaggerated, and that only one or two terrorist plots had been foiled. This information was followed by the deputy director stating that only one terrorist plot had been foiled. As it turns out, the plot was a taxi driver who had been sending monetary funds to a group of individuals who, were in fact, labeled as a terrorist group in 2008. The FBI declared, however, that the individual sending the funds was in no way associated with the group, and his acts of support were more about loyalty and politics (“NSA”).

               

So that brings me back to my main question. How effective is the NSA’s methods of collecting data in keeping us safe from terrorist? Dozens of websites I visited talked about the NSA being in an uproar against Snowden because of his leak and how terrorist now have the information of how we have been tracking them, which will make these methods useless. It seems to me, however, that they were already useless, which brings me to a second question. What is the real reason for the government using programs such as XKeyscore and Prism? I’m not a radical who thinks that the government is out to take our freedom and use our information against us, but I do have to question their motives as of late. If this information is indeed being used only to spy on us, what exactly are they looking for? What good can billions of new data being sent to their databases do if it’s not being used to track terrorist or terrorist plots? These are the questions that I ponder when I read articles about the reality of these programs and how inefficient they seem to be, and it makes me wonder, what else are they doing that we do not yet know about?

Citations:

"NSA Spying Did Not Result In a SINGLE Foiled Terrorist Plot." Web log post. Washingtons Blog. N.p., 15 Oct. 2013. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. <http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/10/nsa-spying-did-not-result-in-one-stopped-terrorist-plot-and-the-government-actually-did-spy-on-the-bad-guys-before-911.html>.

Wills, Amanda. "New Snowden Leak: NSA Program Taps All You Do Online." Web. CNN. Cable News Network, 01 Aug. 2013. Web. 28 Oct. 2013. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/31/tech/web/snowden-leak-xkeyscore/index.html?iref=allsearch>.

Net Neutrality

What is Net Neutrality? In a nutshell, it is about choice. Who controls what you can see and use on the internet? You do right now, you can open up your browser and choose what search engine you want to use, whether its Google, Yahoo or Bing you have the freedom. But what if one day you  tried to use Google's search engine and it was so painfully slow that you could not even use it or worse yet, Google would completely be restricted to use, forcing you to use another search engine instead.?

Without Net Neutrality that scenario would most likely happen. Your internet service provider(ISP) would degrade your access or block certain websites such as Google. They will do this  mainly because a contract agreement with another search engine company or perhaps your ISP will  have their own search engine. It would only make sense for them to degrade or block other search engines to bring more business to theirs.

Here is another scenario, lets say one day your current phone service appears to performing horribly. The signal is seems to be weak and calls are filled with static. Then a few months later your ISP starts to offer their own phone service. The question now is, was your phone service really that bad or did your ISP have something to do with it?

Voice calls are only one of the applications that run over the internet. ISP are now getting into the video content business, so they will be competing with other companies such as Youtube now. If your ISP has a financial interest in a certain video provider, then you ISP will have the incentive to degrade your access to any other video content provider.

Scenarios like these are not only possible but has already happened and will continue to happen if Net Neutrality is not enforced. The internet is a huge and open place and should be kept free.











http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=1234951

IT, Edward Snowden, and International Politics

By Timothy Mulligan

In a world with rapidly shifting international powers, tense political relationships, new technologies, and general uncertainty about the future of the internet, Edward Snowden stands apart. Uniquely, one man has shaken the foundations of government-to-government interaction. His actions (treachery in the minds of some) have ignited a massive power struggle between the world’s greatest nations. How specifically, has Snowden affected the United States? What is the impact of his actions? Let’s look at several of the Unites States internationally relevant relationships.

USA to Snowden

Why is the American Government hunting Edward Snowden down and demanding his return to be tried for treason? His actions clearly violated the charge he had to protect the confidential information he had access to. Moreover, his actions have greatly embarrassed the United States internationally, hurting their international reputation. Snowden’s impact is much greater than is immediately evident, and he is perhaps one of the single most influential individuals in the world today. He has the ear of nations and the public as Americans and beyond wonder what his motivation possibly could be.

USA to China

As the mega-powers of the world clash in a diplomatic battle, The Chinese and American governments have faced a challenge. The Chinese government has been quick to use the leaked information, even in light of the US-China summit. Though the US requested that Snowden be held at the airport in Hong-Kong, the Chinese government allowed him through. Both of these things have most certainly challenged the relationship of trust between the two entities.

USA to Russia

Similarly to China, Russia has taken advantage of Snowden’s asylum. It seems clear that the Russian government has little use for the information that Snowden has with him. Vladmir Putin, however, is eager to do anything to remind the United States of the historical tensions between the two nations. Russia harboring Snowden isn’t directly hurtful to the US, it is an annoyance that recalls Cold War memories.

USA to the World

Perhaps the most concerning relational damage that came as a result of Snowden’s whistleblowing is to the United States’ relationship with the World. Previously, the US was a champion of internet freedom, a white knight is a world strongly controlled by government influence. Snowden revealed how much of a hand the US government actually had in the day-to-day internet activities of its citizens, greatly hurting that image. Now, in the face of international talks about internet freedom, the United states can no longer negotiate from a place of strength.

So what do you think? Considering the effects of Snowden’s actions, should he be crowned champion or labeled traitor? Should we even take his actions into consideration when passing judgment?

Citation: 
Logan, Sarah. "Snowden, International Relations and the Transit Lounge…." Circuit International Relations and Information Technology. East Asia Forum, 1 Aug. 2013. Web. 21 Oct. 2013.

The Silk Road: Should the Internet be more Controlled?

There has been a topic arousing a lot of attention lately: The Silk Road. The Silk Road was a site that allowed users to buy and sell anything, from art and apparel, to illegal drugs and weapons.  The site, started by Ross William Ulbricht, was founded in January 2011 and operated until earlier this month when Ulbricht was arrested.  The Silk Road was able to operate for so long because it relied on a program which allows users to visit the page anonymously, and a new form a currency known as bitcoin. Therefore, a person could access the site and purchase an item (legal or illegal) with their identity completely protected.

The L.A. Time published an article about The Silk Road on the day of Ulbricht's arrest:
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/oct/02/business/la-fi-silk-road-bitcoin-20131003

The fall of this site brings up an interesting topic: Should the internet be more controlled?

Currently, there is a program known as The Onion Router (TOR), which The Silk Road relied on. TOR's site announces the programs purpose openly on the main page:
"Tor is free software and an open network that helps you defend against traffic analysis, a form of network surveillance that threatens personal freedom and privacy, confidential business activities and relationships, and state security."

This program allowed The Silk Road users to anonymously buy a large number of illegal items, even going as far as having drugs delivered through the mail.

Should programs like this be allowed for free download? I think not. While in theory this program is a good thing, to help law-abiding citizens protect their identities, it has ended up in the hands of criminals. This program, combined with the online currency of Bitcoins, allowed The Silk Road to develop into a site with sales totaling $1.2 billion over 3 years. Clearly there needs to be a certain level of restriction on the internet; there is something wrong when anyone can go online to purchase narcotics and illegal weapons.  Personally, I do not think internet-censorship is bad. Unfortunately it has been given a bad name by countries such as China, where the internet is restricted extensively. The government should be able to better control what is posted to the internet so criminals cannot act freely behind a wall of anonymity. 

What is your opinion on internet censorship? Should anyone be able to post anything? Or should the government be able to restrict what is online?

What are ways that the government uses internet that we agree or disagree with?

I agree and disagree with how the Government uses internet to spy on "citizens" of America. I found an article of the "4 ways government is spying on americans everyday." The article actually makes it seem like the Government is being to inconspicuous and intrusive. When really, the government is using these ways to look for suspects of terrorism while keeping us safe. The government uses "fusion centers", which is how the DHS would work between the federal intelligence agencies and local law enforcement. The current government does not seem to support this center but in all reality, I think it's good to have a center devoted to just spying. One way I might not completely agree on is the Cell phone GPS accessed by the government. Cellular networks have GPS on all cell phones because that is how phones are connected to the service towers. Now, the government is asking for permission to that. If they get the access to everyone's cellphone, they will know where you are going and when, at all times. I understand they are mainly using this to catch suspects but that truly feels like an outright invasion of privacy. I would argue that is crossing their boundaries.

Wyss, James. "PolicyMic." PolicyMic. N.p., 09 Oct. 2013. Web. 09 Oct. 2013.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/43773/4-ways-the-government-is-spying-on-americans-every-day