Blog Post #7

 Anti-War

Seeing so much information out there on the internet about how the USA gets involved in other conflicts around the world tends to cloud our judgement on whether or not doing this is just as Americans. We're getting fed a narrative that we are the American saviors, that other countries rely on us to help them fight, that we go abroad to fight for democracy, etc. In reality we are being deceived by our government, who is fighting and funding these wars for their own economical benefit. 

Lesser known  media outlets such as Antiwar.com, really highlight the voices against us as a country involving ourselves in situations we don't necessarily belong in. Looking at it today, majority of the articles talk about the Israel/Gaza Conflict, and updates on what's going on in middle eastern countries such as Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. There's also a lot about Russia/Ukraine, South Korea, Africa, and Wars at Home. 

What I found particularly interesting was that they had two separate sections on Israel/Gaza and Israel/Palestine. It's all very one sided, only talking about what's going on in the West Bank, instead of the full picture. This honestly makes me question the validity of this blog to be so completely honest. I understand the stance of being anti-war, no one is pro-war besides weapons manufacturers and the government. But, war is something that happens across the globe, and to paint it as a genocide is absolutely absurd to me. This isn't just specific to this site either, this is a narrative drawn all over the liberal media. There is a stark difference between war and genocide and I think people are forgetting the definition of a genocide. 

Looking at another news source like The American Conservative, the news reported on is very broad, it's articles on Mexico and the impact of Trump, The USA's impact on Ukraine, Diplomacy vs. Invasion within Iran, Syria Collapsing, and the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. It's definitely a major difference from Antiwar.com as it looked a lot more professional, the pieces were still very opinionated but obviously leaning more conservative. But they didn't seem to have as much written, it was kind of bare, I also noticed that all of their writers were men, and that only one woman served on their entire project. I think this closes off an entirely different perspective on any variety of topics. I also saw that Tucker Carlson sits on the advisory board which does give the blog a little more credibility in my eyes. 

I think you have to seek out these obscure sites to find these antiwar voices for multiple reasons, one it's against the government's agenda to have these people speak out against what they do. Obviously, they can't silence the press as per the first amendment, but they definitely can make it more difficult for larger media outlets to report on it. Personally, though I wouldn't look into these sites again for my news, because I don't necessarily trust that the information I'm getting it properly fact checked, and don't care to hear random people's opinions on whether or not a war is just or our involvement is needed. I rather learn my information from multiple, reputable sources from both sides of the aisle and form my own opinion.

Final Post

Final Post

My relationship with technology has always been, and probably will always be a little complicated. We grew up in a society relatively reliant on technology, even though it wasn't at it's prime during our early development. We still were able to grow up where going outside and playing on the playground was our recess, or toys were our stimulation, when the most amount of screen time we were exposed to was during barney reruns. Now, kids the same age are exposed to the online world almost straight out the womb with iPads for entertainment, and toddlers know how to surf Youtube to find their favorite creators. It's an absolutely crazy world where 2-4 year olds have youtube content creators. 

My relationship with technology has always been one of major awareness, my parents worked in the technology field so my knowledge on the subject was always a little more advanced than others my age. I knew all about the dangers online, how companies track my online activity, and the dangers of being too open with strangers online. This being said I still had my own phone by age seven, I was taught early on how to navigate this world responsibly, which has definitely shaped my relationship with technology and the internet now. 

My relationship with technology and my relationship with media kind of coincide, similarly to technology I was extremely educated on what goes on in the social media world before ever entering it. As opposed to my peers at the time, I first joined instagram in the eighth grade, much later than everyone else. I signed a mini contract with my parents on what was acceptable to post, my privacy settings, etc. I was never allowed to get a snapchat as kid, that was one of their biggest things. Now, I do have one after starting college I decided I preferred having a snapchat instead of giving my number out to people in classes / new people in general. Not the entire world needs to have my cell, you know? 

I'm very intentional with what I post, repost, like, comment, chat, because everything lives on the internet, nothing goes away no matter what people believe. When looking at my personal digital footprint, I started with looking myself up. My instagram pops up, my linkedin, the SGA website, and a couple articles written about me from both during my time here at HPU and prior; after that things get a little random. I also asked chatgpt who I was, obviously some of the information was learned from me using it for speeches / applications and such; but some of the information was pulled off of this blog which I found funny.  

I think my relationship with technology is relatively healthy, I don't use it irresponsibly or rely on platforms to get my assignments done, I don't use it to entirely take up my free time; but most things I do in a day rely on technology to get done. Doing my homework needs to be done online for the most part now, communicating with my family has become a daily activity I do over facetime, calls, and texts, I rely on technology like gps and my vehicle (an electric car) to get on and off campus, or even when I'm winding down late at night by watching Grey's Anatomy on Netflix or watching TikToks before I go to bed. It's everywhere, but it's not everything to me. I prefer the days where I'm on my phone less, when I'm having such a good time on a walk or spending time with someone that I don't even think to check my phone. I've recently also been tempted to try observing Shabbat while at home turning down my electronics for a full 24 hours. It's all about moderation, like anything in life. 

Blog Post #8

 EOTO Reaction #2

The second round of EOTO presentations, I got to hear a very informative presentation on the spiral of silence. I thought it was incredibly interesting and challenged me to think about a new concept I hadn't heard of before but could instantly put into practice. 

To start, the Spiral of Silence was created by Elizabeth Noel Newman, the theory outlines how "people's willingness to express their opinions on controversial public issues is affected by their largely unconscious perception of those opinions as being either popular or unpopular." It's a highly prevalent issue, especially in today's political climate. We saw it with the election this past November, the republican party won with huge margins while it was not an entirely projected win. Most polling and media coverage was in favor of the democratic candidate, conversations among peers and communities were overwhelmingly in favor of Harris, but that was because of the spiral of silence.

When people feel judged for their opinions, when they are made to feel stupid, or uneducated about a topic because they disagree with the louder group they tend to keep their mouths shut. The election of 2024 was the American people's way of saying we are tired of being quiet and we are tired of being shut down.

This is just one example of the spiral of silence in action, there's also much smaller scale examples like being the odd one out in a friend group when it comes to liking something. I know that right now, I hate Wicked, and like everything to do with it; but I haven't said anything about it, or when it's brought up I just nod my head because I just don't feel like dealing with people pressuring me to like it. 

The spiral of silence is a reality whether or not we want to admit it, but people are much less likely to actually voice their opinions now due to fear of isolation, having their opinions not get recognized as valid, inability to handle criticism, and fear of judgement or embarrassment. We are silencing ourselves to conform to the norm, and we must stop. 

EOTO Post #2

Five Eyes

    The Five Eyes is a coalition of countries that came together to be proactive in matters of protecting from foreign threats. Another name for the organization is the Five Eyes Law Enforcement Group. Essentially, it's an intelligence alliance between the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK that was established post WWII in the UKUSA agreement of 1946. These countries collectively work together in pooling resources and sharing sensitive information to keep each other up to date on what's going on around the world. 

    Later on the Five Eyes became the Nine Eyes when they added in Denmark, France, the Netherlands, and Norway. After that they continued to open their group up to become the Fourteen Eyes expanded now with the addition of countries: Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, and Sweden. The rules for these additions to the original Five Eyes are not entirely clear, but from what is understood, surveillance is not entirely out of the question. 

The group is a non-political intelligence team that provides oversight, review, and security for the countries involved. The council members exchange their views on subjects of mutual interest or concern, as well as comparing the best practices for review and oversight methodology. They explore their different vantages of mutual interest, and encourage transparency to the largest extent possible with each other. 

    This has sparked a global debate on privacy of citizens and the boundaries of which national security should abide by. The main purpose of this organization is to provide a framework for the sharing of intelligence data among the core countries. 

    It's important for citizens to understand exactly what it is that they're gathering under the term "signals intelligence." The goal is to collect two different things one being communications intelligence, so intercepting voice communications and text communications; the other being electronic intelligence, signals from radars or surface-to-air missile systems. 

    This surveillance is mainly aimed at protecting against geopolitical adversaries such as China, Russia, and Iran, etc. but this doesn't mean other countries are excluded from this overhead watch. In a documentary by Eric Snowden, it was actually proven that the US is paying the UK's GCHQ to spy on citizens and then sharing the information with NSA because the UKUSA Agreement offers a work around to the otherwise illegal action of wiretapping citizens.

    The entire idea of the Five Eyes is a double-edged sword because it represents the power to uphold national security and tackle global threats (great for our security), yet puts our privacy and individual rights at risk at the same time. It's extremely worrying that our digital footprints could be accessed and read / listened to without our knowledge and consent at any point. The argument the government has for this is that if you are a law-abiding citizen, then you should have nothing to worry about and the government looking in on what you're up to shouldn't be too big of a deal. 

    It's important to note though, that phone-line tapping became legal after 9/11 in the US under the Patriot Act, there's been many attempts at striking down this invasion of privacy, but Congress has allowed for this surveillance to continue. Different ways citizens can protect themselves from the Five Eyes lurking on their personal devices is using VPNs, and being mindful about what websites your visiting while online. 

Blog Post #6

Diffusion Theory of Innovation: Instant Messaging

    Instant Messaging through the lens of the Diffusion Theory of Innovation is extremely interesting, has instant messaging had a slow start to getting created, but once it was up and running the whole world get in on the action. 

    I think Instant Messaging caught on so quick, simply because it was a new and exciting way to communicate with people that didn't involve calls. I know email was obviously around prior, and helped to progress the creation of Instant Messaging but it wasn't a preferred way for people to communicate about casual business. Now, users had a way of communicating that was for one instant, two relatively easy to do, and had means of sticking around. 

    Some people might've been late adopters because of lack of knowledge, mistrust in the technology (privacy wise), age, and access. Nowadays, I don't really think there's anyone living in the modern world that doesn't use instant messaging. Not only through the basic applications, but also through all the app variations. It's such a wide spread, everyday used method of communication that unless you have no cell-service or don't believe in technology as a whole, you are most likely using IM to talk to your friends, family, co-workers, etc on a daily basis. 

    I would say the downsides to IM are that people are having less face-to-face interactions to talk about the little things, users are becoming too comfortable behind screens, and overall communication has become less personal. On some applications, such as Snapchat, I know there are definitely some downsides as people are under a false sense of comfort that their messages delete after 24 hours. This might seem true as they disappear from your device, but all messages are always backed up onto company servers, nothing on the internet ever truly disappears.  

    A lot of people, especially parents urge their children to not partake in IM applications unless they are the normal iMessage app. I remember when I was in elementary school I would talk to my best friend via emails, then as I got older I was able to text my friends, eighth grade I got instagram (my first ever form of social media), somewhere in high school I got a tiktok, senior year I got on facebook, then only my freshmen year of college did I get on Snapchat; and honestly, I think it saved me from a whirlwind of internet trauma. 

    I think using IM intentionally and learning the dangers of the internet prior to getting on these platforms is what changes the experience for people using them. My parents were both heavily involved in cybersecurity so my entire life I've been very educated ad aware of whats going on online. But that doesn't mean I didn't partake in those outlets, quite the opposite because I was exposed to technology at such a young age and understood the difference between what's really private and what's fake private I can enjoy my time on the internet and sleep soundly at night that there won't be anything online to come to the surface in 20 years. 

Blog Post #5

EOTO Reaction #1

    On our first EOTO presentation day, a classmate gave a very informative presentation on the radio and how it impacted different sects of society. I thought it was very well-done and made me think about the radio in a way I hadn't quite done so before. 

    The basic history he went over was that in 1899 Guglielmo Marconi created the first version of the radio. He began his research and experimentation in 1894, following the work of James Clerk Maxwell and Heinrich Hertz. His beginning transmissions had the range of about 1.5 miles, which was enough for Marconi to announce the potential of this new communication method.

    Then in 1906 Reginald Fessenden discovered the first long distance broadcast. He was a pioneer in the radio world when he achieved the first ever music and voice long distance broadcast on Christmas Eve in 1906. He was interested in transmitting continuous sound (specifically human voice) versus Marconi who just wanted to send messages out. His idea was to superimpose an electrical signal, which oscillates at the frequencies of sound waves, upon a radio wave of constant frequency, which modulates the amplitude of the radio wave into the shape of the sound wave. Today this is what we call AM radio or Amplitude Modulation. 

    This was all followed by what brought us to our version of the radio in 1933 with the first FM broadcast by Edwin Armstrong. After securing four different patents on advanced circuit systems, Armstrong was able to solve the last basic problems with the radio, bringing us from transmitters to receivers. His new system changed how radios work because instead of varying the amplitude, or power of radio his method varied the waves' frequency. This became known as Frequency Modulation, or how we call it today FM Radio. 

    I think what made this presentation especially interesting to me though was learning about how the invention of the radio impacted politics in the US. For example post World War II, Winston Churchill's famous speech being broadcasted across radio stations, or FDR's fireside chats. I was shocked to learn that the first presidential debate on radio was in 1948, and that it was the republican primary of all things. The impact the radio has had on not only communication is clear, as it's been able to grow the news, sporting events, music, and political communications to new levels. 

Blog Post #4

Privacy

    Privacy is a growing issue when it comes both the online and offline world. Online we are willingly sharing our personal information under a false sense of security when anyone can access it with the right skillset. 

    Offline, we are growing to be less in control of who knows what about us, an example would be through the second TedTalk watched talking about how police departments use the information from automatic license plate readers to keep records of private citizens' movements. The technology was not originally intended to spy on everyday Americans but to catch the plate numbers of cars going to fast on the roads. Now, you could go to the police station and ask about yourself, and they can pull up images of you driving through your day, in your driveway, and see who sits in the vehicle with you. What I think is most problematic about this is that all the unrelated case data isn't deleted at the end of the day, but kept on file "just in case." 

    I liked the analogy made in the first video, comparing your digital footprint to a tattoo, an electronic tattoo if you will. My parents were both involved in the tech world my entire life, I was always taught about how nothing never really gets deleted off the internet, and has created a different set of habits within me compared to my peers. I'm not paranoid about what the government knows about me, because I'm necessarily scared of what they might know. I'm aware of my online and offline history, and make sure that in 20, 30, or 40 years nothing questionable will pop up when I'm running for office. 

    Something about the government in regards to the privacy issue that does bug me is, the surveillance listening systems put into our phones. I understand why this might be helpful to our government, in case there's a foreign or domestic threat to our country's safety they need to be able to know, and at the end of the day the person carrying out that threat could be virtually anyone. Prior to the technology embedded in our phones from the start, the government had to jump through a lot more hoops and be a lot more intentional in who they wire tap. With this new system it's made us not only vulnerable to our own government listening in, but also vulnerable to foreign countries spying on us. 

    But, the government being upset to the apps that help protect our privacy is weird to me. Apps with encryption software like WhatsApp are built to help connect people through instant message, cellphone conversations, and story updates; but the nice thing about this app is that it's end-to-end encrypted making all conversations private (unlike iMessage) Which just makes me wonder, why do they make it known that they want to listen in? 

     I feel like people always think no one is after their information because they are not high profile, they're average why would anyone come after their information? What use is it to them? But, this could not be more wrong, companies are interested in your information so they know how best to sell to you, hackers so that they can get into your credit card information, etc. Everyone must always be on high alert when it comes to online activity and a few ways we can do that is through sharing less online, using more unique and longer passwords, deleting data from search engines, using VPNs, and disabling data tracking (rejecting cookies!).

Blog Post #3

Age of AI

    In the film "In The Age of AI" I learned a lot about how AI has impacted our society in both positive and negative senses. Personally, I find the innovation of AI to be very interesting but also a little bit of a cheat system. I'm a very by the book person, and using AI to help in anything I have to do feels like a cheat, even if its not for an assignment. Say I have my AI read over my essay as a grammar check, I hate it because I feel as if it changes everything to sound robot-like and not in my voice. Same thing, if it's reading over my resume, it doesn't have the knowledge to understand what is what and which item should be placed first and my experience with each. 

    There's obviously more uses with AI besides chatgpt as this documentary pointed out, like helping with breast cancer research, and starting the business of driverless trucks for quicker and more efficient deliveries. 

    For the cancer research part, it was headed by a woman named Regina Barzilay, an Israeli computer scientist from MIT. Her job is to use develop "targeted screening strategies to improve breast cancer risk prediction" and has proven to be affected with the short amount of time the project's been active. Since the summer of 2023, MIRAI has had a 33% cancer detection rate, compared to the prior method of cancer detection (breast density) at 6.4%. 

    The driverless truck business, EMBARK TRUCKS INC, was at first a massive success with companies excited to pay less for their necessary deliveries. This company used an AI software to program trucks to drive nonstop, across country for more efficient, delivery services. This was great for corporations because it made everything cheaper, but not great for people because it started to take those in the trucking business out. Sadly for EMBARK, in March of 2023 production started to slow down, employees were laid off, and the company now ceases to exist. It was a great idea, and good execution but it just wasn't something our world was quite ready for yet. 

    Overall, I found this film to be eye-opening to what AI can achieve and how far it can bring our civilization into the future, but it also highlighted how it can be dangerous to our labor forces which is in-turn bad for our economy. 

EOTO #1

 Instant Messages (IM)

    Instant Messaging has been around since 1990s, and establishes a direct connection between people, so they can telecommunicate in real time. Prior to this people communicated through landlines and pagers. Generally, IM is now referred to by the different apps a person could use to communicate with others. Popular ones could be Slack in the workplace, iMessage for day to day use, WhatsApp for messages abroad, and SnapChat among the younger generations. 

    Prior to Instant Messaging there was CTSS or Compatible Time Sharing System. The CTSS was created in 1961 at MIT. It was housed in a large mainframe that helped users connect via sending messages back and forth through remote dial-up terminals. This was first really only used by programmers, emergency communications, and computer chat rooms. 

    Aside from CTSS, another stride towards IM was made in 1969 at UCLA by Charley Kilne. He had attempted to send a text to the Stanford Research Institute over the ARPANET (internet before the internet).  He attempted to send the word "LOGIN" and after the "L" and the "O" went through the entire system crashed, making the internet's first ever message "LO". The second ever message was "LOGIN" about an hour later. 

    Chat rooms were also a part of the first interactions online, one of the programs people were able to use was created in 1971 by Murray Turoff and was called the Emergency Management Information Systems and Reference Index or otherwise known as Party Line. This was primarily used by the US Government to help manage crisis situations up until 1986. After that, another common program was Talkomatic of 1973 on PLATO. This was based at the University of Illinois, and allowed several channels were multiple users could access the same chat in real time and see characters appear in real time - in other words, the first real group chat. 

    IM really became something in 1997 when AOL Instant Messenger launched, this platform allowed registered users communicate in real time. After AIM took off, others companies created their own versions to compete. Two of these were in 1998, Yahoo! created the Yahoo! Pager as a messenger system, and Pidign started a similar one called Gaim. Microsoft launched MSN Messenger in 1999 which was later discontinued and replaced by what we know today as Skype. 

    In 2002 Apple got involved in the game with their first version of iMessage. The earliest ways of chatting online via Apple products was on the iChat for Mac OS X operating system, this was later followed by iMessage in 2011.

    Along the way there were many others that integrated this technology into their features which is what led to IM being the main form of communication among users. One app that really changed the game was WhatsApp (2009) because it put all of the different communication tools in one place, on a secure network, and a way you can communicate with people from different countries essentially for free. On WhatsApp you have the option to text, cal, facetime, update your status, post stories, etc. It's a huge platform with over 2 billion monthly users worldwide, with 596.6 million messages sent daily.  

    SnapChat was an app that entirely changed how we think of instant messaging, it's a platform for users to send photos with captions as their text message, of course with the option of regular chat settings as well. It was originally founded in July of 2011 as the app Picaboo by three Stanford students, Evan Spiegel, Reggie Brown, and Bobby Murphy and relaunched in September of that same year as SnapChat. 

    They created an app where everything was "temporary" and lasted 24 hours unless saved by the users, which created an entirely new dynamic online. People were now able to not only say what they want but theoretically not have it come back in a few years time. Now it's one of the most used form of social media worldwide, with 360 million users monthly and 3 billion snaps sent daily. The numbers vary from WhatsApp because this is much more popular with the younger generations, the age range typically between 13 - 24 year olds. 

    The overall impact of IM has been exponential, and transformed how we as humans interact with each other daily. It solved our problems of inefficient and slow correspondence and has allowed us to make connections and real relationships with people in different cities, states, countries, and continents. It changed our daily form of communication from being reliant on a short message through a pager or waiting by the landline to make a call that costs money by the minute to an easier and cheaper way to connect. The only real negative effects of this I think are, how it gives people a false sense of confidence and anonymity behind a screen which allows the internet to not be the nicest place at times.

Key Post #1

The Eight Values of Free Expression

    So far in the course we’ve had a lot of focus on the First Amendment, within that we’ve talked about the Eight Values of Free Expression. I found three that I wanted to write about more in depth.

    Out of all eight, I most resonated with number 4, Individual Self-Fulfillment or Self-Actualization. I felt like this one really captured what the beauty of our governmental system aims to achieve. We want a society full of free thinkers, different identities for every individual, an ability to express ourselves freely and without judgment or punishment. We are a country built upon these ideals and what makes us inherently unique when compared to other global superpowers. 

    The one that feels most important, especially in today’s political climate is number 8, or Protect Dissent. I find it extremely important that our government doesn’t support a one-mob rule or try to silence minority opinions in any way. For us to have the country that we do, for us to be free and be able to live our lives the way we want, it is essential for us to speak up against the government when we disagree. I think it also goes hand in hand with our civic duty to vote, it is our responsibility to get in those booths and vote people or laws or ideas in and out of government / power. 

    It is an essential American duty to express one’s self, criticize the government when needed, and voice your thoughts through elections. I think the two ideas, Individual Self-Fulfillment and Protect Dissent, actually go together as well because if you are not a free thinker, and an individual in your experience you aren’t going to have your own opinion and stay away from mob-rule.

    I would definitely say that number 6, Promoting Tolerance, is the value that feels most personal to me right now. As the world, and our country is growing more antisemitic by the minute I find it really difficult to find tolerance in my heart for people’s intolerance for my mere existence as a jewish person. Every single day I am confronted by people who hate me simply for my religion, for where my family comes from and lives, and the language that I speak. But I’ve learned how to brush it off, how to be the bigger person, how to educate those who behave this way so that someone else wouldn’t have to feel like I do. I think our country has a lot more work to do to get back to where we were with our tolerance levels, because right now it feels like a very intolerant place to live.

    Lastly, I think the concept that wraps all these up together, while also being the most in action today is the very first one, Marketplace of Ideas. Today, there is a constant stream of ideas and voices being broadcast all over the country, the world at all hours of the day. This is unique to our generation as we have a different means of getting our voices out there. Platforms like TikTok, Youtube, and Instagram have opened up our worlds from our communities to our states, our countries, and worldwide. Amidst all this sharing of ideas, there’s also what we like to call “fake news”, and the value of marketplace of ideas is that we are allowed to freely review all content, but in the end the truth will win out.

Blog Post #2

The Supreme Court

    Living in the United States, especially as citizens of age to vote, places a immense amount of responsibility to understand how our government functions. One of those key branches to study is the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the highest court in our country and plays a significant role in leading the judicial branch and upholding our laws. This timeline studied helped me better understand how key points in history lead to what we call our justice system today. 

    There were two main things I learned about the Supreme Court that I didn't already know. One being the most surprising is that the power of the court to review all actions by all departments of government and them constitutional or not was only really a thing after the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. I thought this was something implemented in our justice system from the very beginning and found it interesting that this wasn't always the case. Also makes me wonder what / if there was any unconstitutional behavior by governmental departments that went unpunished.  

    The second thing I learned was the process of how cases get to the Supreme Court and their ability to not take cases through certiorari. I found it interesting how it was mandatory for the Appellate Court to take appeals from the District Court cases, but not for the Supreme Court. I always assumed that it was difficult to take cases to the Supreme Court but if they got there they must be taken on. I do have to say though, learning about how the Appellate Court is there to ensure due process and make sure it was a fair trial and the outcome was correct makes me feel a lot better with how our justice system is being run. 

    The most important takeaway about the Supreme Court I think are the Three BedRock Principles you went over. I think it's extremely important to know that the First Amendment is definitely something built to protect us, but is not absolute, and cannot be used as a shield against laws of general applicability. I think it's an important distinction to make because a lot of people have a misconception about that and believe it is their right to do or say whatever they want because the "First Amendment says so" but the First Amendment really just protects our ability to practice or not practice religion, the ability to speak up against the government if we see fit, to publish our opinions in ways we can reach wider audiences with no governmental interference, and the right to gather together and petition against a decision the government has made. This does not include recklessness and hiding behind the first Amendment, in no world can someone break a speed limit and blame it on their religion. It just wouldn't happen!

    I think this video really just helped me better understand the purpose of the judicial branch and how exactly I, as a citizen, am protected in this country. I think this should be common knowledge for Americans as we all live in this country and abide by these rules, knowing them is the most basic way to prevent yourself from getting into trouble - especially if you are an advocate type.