Question and Answer Name Institution Date   Question and Answer Qn # 1(300 words) I believe that Cryptocurrencies will not redistribute wealth because over 99 percent of the people perceive that the online wallets are mere gambling masked as an investment (Youyou Kosinski & Stillwell, 2015). Cryptocurrencies are comparable to casinos only that they are slightly slower and safer. For example, an individual takes $100, puts it on a number, and expects that the hits. The person may pull his or her funds while only a few 3’s or 7’s can wipe out the individual’s investment. The trend is particularly true if the individual buys Bit-coins at the wrong time. As described in (chapter 3, 44), the volatility of Cryptocurrencies is exceptionally high because the system is associated with various scandals and incidents that involve crucial players within the Bitcoin ecosystem. Many people and agencies have adopted Cryptocurrencies and claim that it has a wealth accumulation potential. Despite the argument, in Cryptocurrencies, one can only pick and hold currencies hoping that it goes up (Klous & Wielaard, 2016). Chapter 3 of the book “We are Big Data- the future of information society” states, “You are perhaps not going to get rich off of it anymore without being rich in the first place.” The argument supports my viewpoint that Cryptocurrencies will not redistribute wealth. An individual can only get rich through the system if he or she is rich in the first place. One must have the capital to purchase absolute shit-ton or capable of buying adequate mining rigs to survive the difficult years created by other mining people. In the article entitled “Hackers Steal $59 Million in Cryptocurrencies from Japanese Exchange” published by npr.org, it is evident that the system is an insecure investment and cannot guarantee the redistribution of wealth. Based on the article, hackers have attempted to steal virtual currencies five times in 2018 alone. Despite the absolute risk of investment in Cryptocurrencies and the reported scandals, most individuals continue to invest in the system, hoping to multiply wealth. Conclusively, the only rich become wealthier in Cryptocurrencies that promote income inequality rather than redistribution of wealth. Qn # 2 (200 words) The 2010 Flash Crash refers to the market crash that happened on May 6, 2010. During the crush, thriving U.S stock indices that comprised S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index, fell and faced partial rebound in less than one hour. Volatility in the trading of all kinds of securities that involve futures, stocks, and options identified the day. Even though the indices of market partially rebounded in the same day, the flashcard crush erased nearly $ 1 trillion in the value of the market. Based on the event, I perceive that information overload is a terrible thing. The article “Strategic Agent-Based Modeling of Financial Market, written by Wellman and Wah, supports my viewpoint. In the article, algorithms overloaded with information control sources of market liquidity pose a critical threat to the system’s stability. In the 2010 flash crush, the sellers aggressively and subsequently sold orders based on an expert report. High-frequency algorithms executed the processes and overwhelmed by the information and caused a massive drop in market prices. The market recovered about one hour after the plunge and did not cause substantial damage to the traders and investors caught by the crush (Wellman & Wah, 2017). However, information overload is not a good thing, as many traders lost confidence in the markets. Qn # 3 (300 words) In the social media presentation, twitter assisted the journalist in telling the story of the Boston Bombing. Once the disaster happened, most employees of the Boston Globe covered the story using Twitter. Live-tweeting was an alternative to report the event from the ground. The Globe newsroom dedicated some employees to monitor the incoming tweets from the TweetDeck. The staff fed the tweets into the live blog of the paper concerning the event- it was the most visit page on their website as the chase continued (“Social Media and communication Presentation,” n.d). Once the home page failed temporarily, the staff used Twitter to communicate with the readers. The Globe staff played the role of harvesting the tweets while the news editors verified and reported the information. The information flowed in fast that included a user who tweeted about the Boston explosion on a few seconds after the event. Agreeably, Twitter had a positive influence on the reporting of the Boston attack, and we cannot underestimate the role of social media in communication. Nevertheless, social media may have a negative influence on communication. In (Chapter 8, pg. 119) of the book, “We are Big Data- the future of information society,” social media may violate individuals’ privacy rights. A discussion about “the right to be forgotten” forming a component of a lawsuit at the European in 2014 prevail. It raised concerns about privacy rights and the internet (Klous & Wielaard, 2016). In the event, a Spanish lawyer demanded Google should not return results on searches that mentioned his name Mario Costeja González. The discussion and searches about the issue infringed on his rights to privacy. The judge instructed the removal of any information González and in the event “the right to be forgotten overpowered the freedom of expression on the internet, particularly social media. Qn # 4 (300 words) Moneyball is a movie produced in 2011 concerning sports, Bennett Miller directed it and while Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian wrote the movie script. In the film, the theme of humans versus technology is well developed. Beane encounters Peter Brand, a youngster Yale graduate in economics, during the scouting visit to Cleveland Indians. Brand had fundamental knowledge on how to evaluate the value of a player using sabermetrics. Beane tried the theory proposed by Brand by enquiring whether he would have drafted Beane out of school. Brand clarifies that he would have drafted Beane out of school until the ninth round. Beane is pleased with Brand and hires him to serve as his assistant GM. Instead of evaluating the players based on the scout’s experience, Brand applied sabermetrics to estimate the value of players (Moneyball 4:10). The leaning is proof that we are losing humanity to data. Brand used the system to select the players according to their on-base percentage (OBP) and ignored the players’ probable weak points. The procedure resulted in the recruitment of undervalued players that consist of submarine pitcher Chad Bradford, injured goalkeeper Scott Hatteberg, and David Justice was already aging. The use of data processing systems in the selection of players led to a conflict of interest in the group. The data system’s failure is comparable to the 2010 flashcard card crush that made investors and traders lose trust in the financial markets. The Oakland scouts oppose the approach of choosing players, and Beane fires Grad Fason after he accuses him of destroying the team. The tensions regarding the contract’s use of sabermetrics to player selection escalate, and Howe disregards the method used by Brand and Beane to select players. Howe uses a traditional approach to select player lineup. We are losing humanity to data due to various experiments to replace the roles of human beings with systems. References “Social Media and communication Presentation.” Klous, S., & Wielaard, N. (2016). We are big data: future of information society. Springer. Pisano, J. (2011). Moneyball. https://youtu.be/-4QPVo0UIzc Wellman, M. P., & Wah, E. (2017). Strategic agent-based modeling of financial markets. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation. Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 104-119. Youyou, W., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Computer-based personality judgments are more precise than human-made. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(4), 1036-1040.