Support change without discarding yours morals

Poor copyright laws are not an excuse for amoral behavior. Piracy is the result of a copyright system that doesn't promote creativity or benefit creators. But morally upright people cannot disregard laws. Piracy is not morally ambiguous ground. Stop rationalizing piracy and instead try to enact positive changes.  Start by supporting alternative but still legal practices. Become active in organizations that work to make changes. Refrain from distributing or purchasing illegal copies of creative works. Certainly the current system hurts creativity and creators as well as the consumers who benefit from creation. But if your true motivation is more about your wallet than your society, maybe it's time to reconsider what you support. Piracy is not the only way to support change. Keep the moral high ground and do more to enact change that benefits society and  not just your wallet.

Computers are not for building your ego

With cheap cycles and core, terseness should not be an end in itself. Nowadays it's more important for a language to be convenient for humans than to be cheap for the computer.

New computer science majors are in constant competition. Students constantly assert that their code is better than all the rest: "I compressed my code to fewer lines. I created faster running code. I wrote my code in less time." These naive students take pride in being better than their peers, but are blind to see their own flaws. In their communion with the computer, new programmers neglect other humans.
The first neglected group is their fellow programmers. Programmers need to read, understand and maintain each others code. Code that is fast or sparse may be unreadable for these fellow programmers.
The second neglected group is their fellow classmates. In the constant battle of egos, students undermine each other by pitting success against failure when they ought to support and encourage each other.
The third neglected group is the end user. The goal of software is to serve humanity and not to build the programmer's ego. Computers are not for building your ego; computers are for building others.

Build up a computer savvy girl by showing her she’s capable

"There was the expectation that they could do whatever they wanted."

I am a computer scientist because my family encouraged me. My father buoyed my confidence by introducing me to basic computer skills. When my sisters failed to install a program or locate a file, I helped because my father had taught me how. As I grew older, my father supplied me with complicated software along with expensive scanners and pen tablets. His actions showed me that I was a competent and intelligent computer user. My brother solidified my decision to become a computer scientist. I enrolled in my first computer science class because my brother expressed confidence in my abilities. When I become discouraged, he shared his own experiences and difficulties. My family showed me that I was capable before I recognized my own abilities. Build up a computer savvy girl by showing her she’s capable.

Keep Out Some Ones, Not Everyone

As a teenager, I never locked anyone out of my room with skull and cross bones. I did, however, guard my privacy zealously; my space was a haven that would not be polluted. Though I never intended to isolate myself, my attitude did more than isolate my space: I kept everyone out. Hackers prompt an attitude like mine: keep everyone out. In The Cuckoo’s Egg, Cliff Stoll speaks of computer networks and the hackers who pollute them: “[Networks are] a fragile community of people, bonded together by trust and cooperation. If that trust is broken, the community will vanish forever.” Hackers break trust and prevent valuable social interactions.

Stoll personally watched trust leave a community as a hacker infiltrated his system, a system miniscule when compared to our world of connectivity. Stoll’s idea of computer networks as communities of people applies more to our world than his. The internet is a platform for spreading ideas and interacting as never before. The internet is also a platform for destroying trust and invading privacy. Predators and hackers seek to take advantage of the world’s vast connections. Their threat is serious. We cannot parade our private information around in perfect trust. However, we cannot allow the possibility of intruders keep us from participating.

Private is Public

Google me. You will discover that I won an essay contest, got a 30+ on my ACT, ran slowly in all my 5k races, and made All-State Academic in cross country. I never posted this information. I’ve never met the people who did. Strangers have the power to make private information public without permission. Most information is dormant like mine: unheard, unseen and completely harmless. But for those in the public eye, private is public. Google 47 percent. You will discover that Mitt Romney made some incriminating remarks about Obama’s supporters. Surely Romney never posted this information nor met the person who did. But months after these remarks were posted, Romney’s campaign was impacted. Privacy is near unattainable in the information age. Choose a public life only with full knowledge of the risk.

Wield Social Media Well.

No tool is inherently good or bad. A few months ago, a handful of people created a film promoting an anti-Islamic viewpoint and posted a trailer to YouTube. As a result, violent radical minorities in the Middle East and Africa protest against the United States. All fifty states are held at fault for a film very few were involved in. Whether or not that is fair, we cannot undo another’s wrong. As a few use the internet as a platform for hate, the majority must work on a higher plane. Our responsibility is to refrain from hateful speech and promotes positive messages. While others may ‘project their experience’ on others, we must be a voice of understanding. We wield the power of the Internet. Social media impacts our world. Actively work to make that impact positive.

“Teachers unions are having a harder time getting what they want,” according to NPR. Unions are a product of the industrial revolution, a way of uniting workers to benefit from organization. Today unions retain the high costs of traditional organization against the possibility of more opposition. Unions represent the interests of a few against the public. As the public gains power against union interests, unions lose power. Pockets of opposition can organize themselves more easily than ever before, through social media sites and other online venues. These pockets of opposition are not as tightly knit or as large as a union. But their opinions are more easily heard and harder to defeat. They bond in comment sections under newspaper articles, videos, and blogs. They become more than just neighborhood gossips as they reach larger audiences. If unions don’t find ways to incorporate these new voices, the costs of staying organized will be too high to remain organized.

In case you missed the link I'm responding to:

http://www.npr.org/2012/09/10/160891750/chicago-strike-emblematic-of-union-struggle