Beyond web logs

As far as the scams out of Nigeria go, I think they are unethical and in no way could be considered as the Robin Hood sort of ethic. Yes, it’s true that Nigeria is a country that is stricken with poverty; however, that does not make what they are doing ok. In fact, it can be looked on the same as if Nigeria were to become one of the biggest and best countries at smuggling drugs into the United States. like these current scams, they would be gaining funds from wealthier countries.

At least in that scenario, the person giving funds would actually be receiving a product in return. (I know, I know, not a nice product). But I do feel that a number of the blame is on a number of the people who are stupid to become involved in such scams. Everyone on the web should be aware of spam, and the kind of troubles it can get you in. they should know that their email is NOT secure. However, i've seen reports on people targeting older online users, and telling them that it was their grandchild, and they were in trouble and needed money. it is things such as these that need to be deemed as very illegal, and should be prosecuted against. It’s a problem of getting the other countries to cooperate and agree.

On a personal level, I haven’t had any experience with web crime what-so-ever. No crime has ever been committed against me that I know of. However, even though the news story, “Why Phishing Works? by Dhamija, Tygar, and Hearst’s studies showed that the amount of experience on the net, education, sex, and total time spent on the web did not affect their results at all, I had a hard time believing that.

I spend a decent amount of time on the net, and because so, i've always been weary of my personal information. I only give it out to web-sites that I knew I could trust. But then I realized while reading that the little things that people were not looking for, I was guilty of as well. I seldom knew the difference, until now, between http and https. i've known about the secure lock picture within the frame of my browser, but then I thought about it, and I’ve seldom utilized it in times when I should have. After reading that news story, I was actually surprised that I had not already been a victim of online phishing. The only standard I’ve used in the past as whether or not it seemed to be a credible site by its layout, quality, and sometimes when it had last been updated. I’ll try and work on that from now on! I do not think that what Stephen Colbert did should be seeing as illegal. I was merely trying to make a point that the method Wikipedia operates under is not necessary 100% factual. In this specific situation, I think that Wikipedia is the one to blame for making this information changeable in the first place.