Research Paper Titled: How Have The Negative Effects Of Computers Changed American Society? looking for comments about this paper

[Saint_Michael 3]

This is my research paper for my English class and so I am looking for comments mostly based on the structure of the essay and the flow of this research paper as well. But you can leave comments about the overall research paper as well. I am looking for serious comments so anything not related to this topic will be reported Thank you. Also this Research paper is copyrighted to Michael Anderson (that me).

 

For reference this is a MLA styled research paper.

 

UPDATES: after a couple of runthourgh through a couple of instructors and of course peoples comment here on trap

 

Computer Technology: Criminal Underground

I

Computer Technology: Criminal Underground

 

Isaac Asimov said it best about computer technology: “Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest” (Isaac Asimov Quotes). In a manner of speaking, he would be correct in that computers can be honest because computers don’t lie when a person leaves personal information, assets, and banking information on their machine. People need computers to be able to function in the world because of the need to pass and store information to each other and the need for power to control information. Therefore, with the right talents an expert computer user could find out everything about a person and leave no trace that they were there. Unfortunately, some people who know a lot about computer technology deliberately break the law because they believe they can get away with it. The laws dealing with the legal use of computer technology have been improving, and tracking criminals is becoming somewhat easier to do. Nonetheless, cyber criminals are still finding effective ways to hide themselves from the law through the use of computer technology. Because some computer users have abused computer technology to commit crimes, such as computer hacking, cyber stalking and identity theft more resources should be allocated to combat these types of crimes.

Computer hacking began in the early 1950’s and 1960’s by students of Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) who were fascinated with exploring MIT computers and seeing what they could accomplish (Brunvand). Three generations of hackers later, Joris Evers wrote an article for zdnet.co.uk that in 2006 the Federal Bureau of Investigation stated that computer attacks have cost U.S businesses $67.2 billion dollars a year in terms of defending against computer viruses, spy ware, pc theft, and data loss. This dollar amount was produced from a survey that was conducted by the F.B.I in 2005 that asked [2,066] organizations about security incidents that happen to them. Out of the 2,066 who responded, 1,324 or 64% of those organizations reported a loss in a one-year period. But it was believed that this number could be skewed due to how people responded to the survey, so the FBI reduced the 64% to 20% of organizations that reported a loss. When the calculations made by the FBI were completed, the results stated that, "2.8 million US organizations [were] experiencing at least one computer security incident… [and were] incurring a $24,000 average loss [on that one attack]” (Evers). Evers then briefly mentions about the total amount being spent which totals about $20.7 million. But these figures only cover parts of the costs, and don’t include the staff and time being spent to work on these problems that they go through.

Although that is the business side of the money being lost, the money that is being spent by the government is a bit more due to the fact that the U.S government is not only defending against computer attacks in the states but computer attacks internationally. In 2000, the Justice Department reportedly spent over $100 million to combat the cyber criminals that have more sophisticated technology (Thomas and Frieden). One can assume that these dollars amount will only increase as technology advances and hackers find quicker and easier methods to access someone’s information. But to truly define what kind of person a computer hacker is, the average computer user will have to forget what the media says about them and look at how the computer world defines a hacker.

Hackers are differentiated from crackers, though the definitions often vary slightly. On the website Jargon Lexicon, Stephan and Charles Jazdzewski define a hacker as “a person who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities” and a cracker as someone, “who breaks [into the] security on a [computer] system.” On the other hand, Marcia Wilson, in her Computer World article “Is Hacking Ethical?” defines hackers as people who look for flaws, while crackers are people who attack computers after finding a flaw in the computer system. Wilson continued in her article about hacking being ethical is that some do it for business security, some do it for the thrill of not getting caught, and others hack computers to steal and destroy information and also to sell or use the information for their own personal use.

“Security Researchers Create Ipod Virus” by Elizabeth Millard and “T.J. Max Hack Exposes Consumer Data” by Joris Evers address how hacking could be ethical. Elizabeth Millard’s article talks about how researchers from Kaspersky Lab, which is located out of Moscow, Russia were able to develop a computer virus that affects Ipod users who run them off the Linux operating systems. The most likely reason why they developed this virus was to reinforce the fact that anything using computer technology like the Ipod that was tested could be used by computer criminals to commit a crime(Millard). While Evers article discussed a computer attack, in which a group of individuals were able to hack into TJX (parent company of T.J. Max) computers and stole about forty-five million credit and debit cards worth of information spanning several continents and covered about two and half years worth of stored information (2003-2006). Avivah Litan, an analyst with Gartner mentioned in the article that, “It is pretty obvious that it was a very well orchestrated, targeted attack” (Evers) Which could mean that more then one individual could have planned and carried out this attack to help steal TJX information that could be used later on. Therefore, these two examples showing both sides of how people can hack into computers could answer the question of “is hacking ethical?” because they answer both the definitions from the Jargon Lexicon and Marcia Wilson and they clearly show the ethics of why someone would be a computer hacker/cracker. So in order for companies like T.J Max to prevent major computers attacks like they suffered, they need to have better security software and security experts to help monitor their computers.

Even though a person could gain valuable computer skills by hacking into software or a computer to see how things work, when it comes to more serious crimes like cyber stalking, ethics are thrown out the window and the law needs to be rigorously enforced for these type of crime. According to thinkquest.org, stalkers have picked up on cyber stalking through the use of a computer since the late 1990s because of the anonymous presence the internet creates. Yet, cyber stalking started to become a problem as more children and women were being affected by this type of computer crime. This is because children and women are the most common groups of people that are new to the internet, so they are inexperienced about how to safely surf web and protect their personal information from other users. Though cyber stalkers may have difference characteristics with each other and to their victims, like being the opposite sex or even living in a different part of the world, they can also have the commonalities with their victims as well. For instance thinkquest.org mentions that there are three types of cyber stalkers obsessive, delusional and vengeful, even though different these three types can overlap each other depending on the situation the cyber stalker started from (“Cyberstalking”).

Katie Dean, author of “The Epidemic of Cyber Stalking,” states that a 1999 report by the Department of Justice “estimates that there could be hundreds of thousands affected, and the numbers are growing.” Linda Fairstein, who is the chief of the sex crimes prosecution for the Manhattan district attorney, reinforced the Dean’s position by stated that, "the rate of cyber stalking has escalated enormously in the past few years with the spread of the Internet". Whereas three years later Roy Mark, mentions that cyber stalking in America is increasing “again”. However, the report Roy Mark talks about in his article is more diverse then Dean’s because her article talks about the “anonymous” presence the internet creates for cyber stalkers, while Mark’s article talks about the break down of those being targeted: men, women, children, ethnic groups and who is doing the targeting: men, women, and children. The reason Mark mentions ethnic groups is that his article is coming from a post 9/11 awareness, in which many people of Middle Eastern descent are being targeted by cyber stalkers because of those who were involved in World Trade Center attacks (Mark). Even though federal and state laws about cyber stalking are strictly enforced, Dean does make a point about the “anonymous” presence of the internet and that it gets harder to trace someone because of sophisticated methods of masking someone’s identity. Another problem Dean states is that local law enforcement are under resourced in trying to fight cyber stalking, due to lack of training and equipment to be used (Dean).

For the last few years cyber stalkers have been targeting websites like Myspace.com and friendster.com, because of their huge social network of teens, and to try to solicit sex from them. Numerous stalkers have been successful in getting that solicitation, which has force the government and many law enforcement agencies to go undercover and catch them in the act of soliciting sex from these teenagers. Even though websites like MySpace and have tightened their security measures in order to prevent this from happening, they can’t control the fact that many people are altering their data in order to bypass these security measures. In addition most cyber stalkers are not caught until they committed the crime are caught in the act by local authorities (Clemmitt). From this research it is obvious that small town police departments need more money from the federal government in order to purchase advanced computer technology and the proper training for police officers on how to catch a cyber stalker.

Although cyber stalking has turned out to be another popular way for people to commit a computer crime, identification theft has seen its greatest advancement since the days of stealing wallets and credit cards.Identity theft is defined as, “somebody steals your name and other personal information for fraudulent purposes” (“Identity Theft”, CyberQuoll) and is considered one of the fastest forms of criminal activity in the United States. In 2003 it was the number two crime just that to drug trafficking (Hamilton). In just two years, identity theft would exceed drug trafficking as the number one crime in America (Facts & Statistics). But what is truly unique about identity theft is that the rules are different in the cyber world then in the real world; this is due to the fact that since the internet makes an individual anonymous when they log on to the internet. Except when cyber criminals use the right tools to camouflage their identity, then they can make themselves completely invisible from anyone in the world (“Identity Theft”).

The above example illustrates just how shocking identity theft has become. Of course there is the financial aspect of committing identity theft; in 2005 it was reported that Americans lost over $2.4 billion dollars from criminals obtaining personal account information (Germain). This account information typically includes passwords, bank account numbers, credit card numbers and social security numbers. Germain who is a columnist for technewsworld.com, mentions the fact that once a person becomes a victim of identity theft it could take up to five years to recover from this crime. Though credit card companies and credit report institutions have plans for when someone loses their wallet or credit cards, Kim Zetter in “ID Theft: What You Need to Know” makes it abundantly clear that “there isn’t really anything you can do to prevent identity theft.”

But what makes identity theft a bigger crime is the physiological effects a person might receive from being a victim. When people find out they are a victim of identity theft, they come to the realization rather quickly that their name was just used to partake in illegal activity. They deal with the humiliation of having to explain to people that their identity was stolen and was used by another individual, as well as the fact they have to deal with the time frame it takes to understand what happen and then clear their name of any illegal behavior. This usually takes weeks to years depending on how bad a person’s name was used for that illegal activity (Howard). To combat identity theft we would need to allocate better resources that would consist of a combination of sophisticated software and proper training on how to appropriately secure private information on every computer. Even though these two laws, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1984 (18 U.S.C sec.1030) and the Computer Security Act of 1987 (Public Law No. 100-235 (H.R. 145), where put into place to initially battle against computer hackers, law makers wouldn’t realize that they would begin the process of constantly updating these laws once new cyber crimes started appearing. However, it is the lack of resources and proper training for local law enforcement that makes these crimes more difficult to prevent from happening. If proper training and the installation of laws that are upheld, theses crimes may end up going into rapid decline.

Despite the fact that their have been several great advancements in computer technology in the 20th century and that people have learned to harness the power of the computer, it can be dangerous in the hands of the criminally minded user. If average computer users cannot learn to use there tools properly then they will they have deal to with the consequences when a cyber criminal commits a crime on a computer because then they have realize the methods they are using no longer work. The security and laws for computer usage are improving as more computer attacks happen; however, it won’t prevent those who can get away with carrying out these crimes and repeating the process over again. Then when other computer users see this happening and find out criminals are not getting caught, it could drive them to commit the same crime in the privacy of their own home.

How would Isaac Asimov words of wisdom fit in the scheme of things when it comes to computer technology? Simple, the honesty comes the from fact that a person’s computer holds information that they thought was either deleted or secured and can still be used against them and they won’t know about it until it’s to late. People have to realize that we been given a great tool to use and if these criminals want to commit these cyber crimes, they have to be responsible for the consequences that will come to them once they are caught by either local or federal authorities. But it is also everyone else’s responsibility to report these crimes, regardless of the temporary embarrassment one might go through when an individual finds out what happen. Then as more cyber crimes get reported by the victims, the quicker the solutions can be found to fix the problems and of course more money for local authorities to help them to deal with these cyber crimes.

Computers make it easier to do a lot of things, but most of the things they make it easier to do don’t need to be done.

~ Andy Rooney

 

Works Cited

 

"Andy Rooney Quotes." Quotations Page. 20 Apr. 2007 <http://quotationspage.com/quotes/Andy_Rooney/>.

Brunvand, Erik. "A Little Bit of Hacker History." University of Utah. 15 Oct. 1996.

School of Computing, University of Utah. 10 Mar. 2007

<http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Clemmitt, Marcia. "Cyber Socializing." CQ Researcher 16.27 (2006): 625-648.

CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Hartness Library, Brattleboro, VT.

18 Mar. 2007 <http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre2006072800&PHPSESSID=maapbac3dk7rlga20477r7d4e0;.

Computer Security Act of 1987. Pub. L no. 100-235. H.R. 145. 1988

 

“Cyberstalking." thinkquest. 2 Apr. 2007

< https://gitso-outage.oracle.com/thinkquest >.

 

Dean, Katie. "The Epidemic of Cyber stalking." Wired. 01 May 2000. 16 Feb 2007

<http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Evers, Joris. "FBI: Computer crime costs US firms $67bn." ZDnet. 20 Jan 2006. 16 Feb 2007

<http://www.zdnet.com/topic/;.

 

Evers, Joris. "T.J. Maxx Hack Exposes Consumer Data." Cnet News. 18 Jan. 2007. 13 Apr. 2007 < http://news.a.com.com/- 6151017.html >.

 

"Facts and Statistics." Id Theft Center. Oct. 2006. 19 Mar. 2007. <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Germain, Jack M. "Combating ID Theft on the Internet." Tech News World.

18 June 2005. 27 Mar. 2007 <http://www.technewsworld.com/story/43774.html>.

 

Hamilton, Richard. "Identity Theft." University of Oklahoma. 3 Dec. 2006. 19 Mar. 2007 <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Howard, Karen. "The Damaging Effects of Identity Theft." Ezine Articles

14 March 2007. 02 April 2007

<http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

"Identity Theft." CyberQuoll Glossary. 2 Apr. 2007

<http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

“Identity Theft." thinkquest. 2 Apr. 2007 <https://gitso-outage.oracle.com/thinkquest;.

 

"Isaac Asimov Quotes." Quotations Page. 18 Mar. 2007 <http://quotationspage.com/quotes/Isaac_Asimov/>.

 

Jazdzewski, Stephen, and Charles Jazdzewski. "Cracker." Def. 1. Jargon Lexicon. 2 Apr. 2007 <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Jazdzewski, Stephen, and Charles Jazdzewski. "Hacker." Def. 1. Jargon Lexicon. 2 Apr. 2007 <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Koch, Kathy. "High-Tech Labor Shortage." CQ Researcher 8.16 (1998): 361-384. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Hartness Library, Brattleboro, VT. 9 Mar. 2007 <http://library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/document.php?id=cqresrre1998042400&PHPSESSID=6qqtjnr5lm4g0rqa1s1p6acr45;.

 

Mark, Roy. "Cyber Stalking Is Increasing." Internet. 18 Apr 2003. 16 Feb 2007

<http://internet.com/;.

 

Millard, Elizabeth. "Security Researchers Create IPod Virus." Yahoo. 6 Apr. 2007. 13 Apr. 2007 <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ BAF>.

 

McElroy, Wendy. "Does New Cyber stalking Law Criminalize Free Expression?"

Fox News. 17 Jan 2006. 16 Feb 2007 <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,181958,00.html>.

 

Thomas, Pierre, Terry Frieden. "Justice Department wants more funds to fight cyber crime." CNN. 09 Feb 2000. 16 Feb 2007 <http://www.cnn.com/;.

 

Wilson, Marcia J. "Is hacking ethical?" Computerworld. 24 Mar. 2004. 16 Feb 2007

<http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

 

Zetter, Kim. "ID Theft: What You Need to Know." Wired. 29 June 2005. 27 Mar. 2007 <http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/;.

Edited May 6, 2007 by Saint_Michael (see edit history)

[BordaForx 0]

I thought this was a well written research paper. I like your writing style - simple and "quick-to-the-point." In fact, in my later years, I have found this to be the best and most efficient way to write a paper. Although your paper was well written, it contains a few minor problems, and I hope this constructive criticism will help you write your final draft. One of the major errors you commited was that you put in more commas than necessary. You should re-read your research paper and delete those unnecessary commas.

I'm just giving you suggestions and ideas. You don't have to necessarily take all my sentences as my sentences aren't all perfect either.

Isaac Asimov said it best about computer technology.

This sentence is unclear. The starting sentence needs to be clear to the reader. I believe it could be written this way: Isaac Asimov has a great quote about computer technology.

In a way he would be correct in that computers can be honest in more ways than one, because with the right computer talents someone could find out your whole life without you even knowing that they were there on your computer.

You have used the word "way" twice in one sentence which makes it sound repetitive. I think it would also be better if you seperate this into two different sentences. It could be changed into something like this: He is correct in more than one way. With sufficient computer knowledge, anyone could find out about your whole life without you even knowing they were on your computer.

Unfortunately, some people who know a lot about computer technology deliberately break the law, because they believe they can get away with it and still lead that double life of using the same computer technology for good reasons.

Re-write this sentence so that it is a bit more understandable. What do you mean: Lead a double of using the same computer technology for good reasons while thinking he can get away with it?

Though the laws have been improving, tracking criminals is becoming somewhat easier to do.

Remember in high school when you learned the sentence "While walking into the room, the room was messy." It is incorrect because the room did not walk into the room. You made the same error here. It should be something like: Because computer laws have been improving, ......etc.

Nonetheless, people are still finding effective ways to hide themselves from the law and sometimes catch themselves using chat room slang in their twelve page research papers or job applications.

Hiding themselves from the law has nothing to do with them catching themselves using chat-room clang on research papers. Explain or otherwise seperate into two sentences.

Some Americans have abused computer technology and not with a sledge hammer, but by using computers as a way to commit crimes such as computer hacking, cyber stalking and identity theft, and thus there should be more resources to combat these crimes.

Just make this simpler by saying: Some Americans have abused computer technology by using computers as a way to commit crimes such as computer hacking, cyber-stalking, and identity theft. Because of these horrible acts, these criminals should be combated with more resources.
This is all the time I have left. I will continue later where I left off.
Edited April 9, 2007 by BordaForx (see edit history)

[Watermonkey 0]

Sociological implications of modern computer and internet sub-cultureIsaac Asimov said it best about computer technology. ?Part of the inhumanity of the computer is that, once it is competently programmed and working smoothly, it is completely honest.?(1) I?m just making notes here as I read along. First, restructure the first real sentence after the Asimov quote. Simplify, shorten, lose the unnecessary verbiage. Get to the point already. Second, no Spiderman quotes. Look back much further and you?ll find that?s a real quote from a real person. Spiderman turns me off. I don?t want to read it anymore after seeing that. I feel dirty, illegitimate. Like the whole paper is going to throw real quotes from fictional characters at me. I need a shower now? I don?t like the last sentence in that first paragraph either. Don?t repeat the same word twice in a sentence unless absolutely necessary.(The new paragraphs here mirror the paragraph I?m critiquing, in case you were wondering) I don?t see what using chat room slang has to do with the price of rice in China. I don?t get the ?sledge hammer? reference either. Loose them. ?Some Americans have abused computer technology and not with a sledge hammer, but by using computers as a way to commit crimes such as computer hacking, cyber stalking and identity theft, and thus there should be more resources to combat these crimes.? Should look something like this: ?Criminals using hacking skills and other nefarious means such as cyber-stalking and/or ID theft have been able to exploit open doors in computer mainframes at public institutions such as banks to commit cyber-crime. Over the past ten years fill in the blank resources have been dedicated to providing law enforcement the means with which to combat this type of crime. More resources are needed.??The history of computer hacking is nearly as old as the computer itself starting in?.?(2) (Elaborate more on the fascinating history instead of just skipping ahead to today, jump ten years, and another ten and so on.) There?s way too much fluff and way too little substance in this paper. I?m starving here and all you?re feeding me is water!The distinction between a hacker and a cracker (not to be confused by the racist slang) is this: A hacker is a person? (4) Yes, throw in some humor. Don?t take yourself too seriously; make the paper at least a little bit fun to read. ?Some points she makes about hacking being ethical is that?? Is there a single necessary word in that part of the sentence? It?s cumbersome to read and says nothing. Again, I?m starving! I want to learn more about hackers and crackers but I?m getting an awful lot of fluff. It?s starting to give me cotton-mouth? Say it this way, ?An alternate point of view from Marcia Wilson (5), asserts hackers as? ?computer system. Some, however, argue that hacking is the ethical, beneficial endeavor and should be embraced as the hacker is the person who finds flaws in the security and code while a cracker?(you really don?t give me a good picture here on what exactly a cracker does) Go into the whole hacker=good, cracker=bad thing so I get a sense of why one group of people is good and the other should be locked away somewhere. You may be beating the whole ?law needs to be enforced? drum a little often? ending a couple paragraphs in a row with it now?I don?t like the stalking paragraph at all. First sentence should read, ?Traditionally, stalking has referred to a person who ?? now add the definition of a cyber-stalker, ?a person who picks up where his pop left off and hangs out in chat rooms and creates entirely new personas to lure the unsuspecting young or inexperienced target into his web?? ?Obsessional? should be obsessive. Skip the ?a? in front of 1999. Last sentence, ?where? should be ?were?. The entire sentence should be tightened up, though, for grammatical reasons. You?re writing like you?re talking. Don?t talk. Talk is full of fluff, words like ?that? and ?is? and ?the? etc. I can fill in the blanks, just get to the heart of the matter. If you were a Sophomore in a four-year college class, I wouldn?t let this pass. It needs much more work. It needs ten times more substance, and ten times less fluff.?Even though there are fed?? The use of the words ?their?, ?there?, and ?they?re? are often confused. Loose the confusion fast. You?re in college now, not the sixth grade. (Hey, you told me to be brutal!) I doubt ?Katie? would approve of your sudden need to be on a first-name basis with her. Is this a research paper or a love letter? Loose the familiarity and call her, properly, Ms. Dean every time you refer to her after the first introduction. Same goes for the others. Mr. This and Ms. That. If you wish, it?s just fine to refer to them by their last names only as well.I think the paragraph that begins, ?Identity theft is defined?? should actually begin a sentence earlier with, ?Though cyber-stalking has turned out to be another way for people to commit computer crime, id theft has seen its greatest advancement since?? All one sentence. Mind your details. In that last sentence I caught four grammatical errors, all of which I corrected in my version. I can see you?ve done the research, I?m not convinced you?ve actually digested it yet. Read much more on the subject then you need to include in the paper. Don?t just research the facts, get in to the heart and soul of the whole matter at hand. I remain unconvinced that the laws that are already on the books don?t accommodate this new generation of cyber-crime after reading your paper. I?m thinking you need to give the whole thing a thorough shake-down. Take each sentence and determine if it contributes to the paragraph and see if it?s too full of fluff or if it could be whittled down a bit more. Let me see your third draft and we?ll go from there?Another thing, I feel like the paper isn?t focused as well as it should be. Re-reading my critique, I think the third paragraph is the theme of the paper, but I can?t be sure. You?re very caught up in the anonymity of cyberspace and mention it in the first sentence inferred in that Asimov quote, but I?m not seeing a reason to keep hammering on it. Are you suggestion that something be done to prevent people from having the ability to remain anonymous? While that would be cool, how far are you willing to go to get there? Don?t people have some reasonable expectation of privacy and freedom of speech? Perhaps you?re suggesting a band-aid instead of advocating some common sense or even formal training be used for those about to dive into the cold deep waters of the internet without a life preserver. The make you train to some level of proficiency to become eligible to handle firearms, perhaps it?s time to train people to take some personal responsibility and educate them before ?allowing? them to access the internet? Just a thought.

Edited April 14, 2007 by Watermonkey (see edit history)

[Saint_Michael 3]

Thanks for the comments BF and WM, my english teach pretty much aggreed in some points about my paper, hoepfully the wordiness is kicked out, but I have a feeling it's not but still have some time to make any changes to it.Attached is the original vor better reading.

[Watermonkey 0]

This may look a little silly because there?s no paper above to refer to regarding this response. In lieu of this fact, this is a critique of the second draft presented here which was written partially as a response to the comments posted above. Again, follow by paragraph, the first beginning here: Underlining is a non-conventional method of highlighting a word or phrase. I?d advise you to either italicize or embolden, not underline. At least give the audience some kind of context for the Spidy quote?

 

Students at Mass? Technology (MIT), who? Really, in the 50?s and early 60?s were Baby Boomers, Gen ?X?, and now the current crop of felons. That?s only three generations total. How do you define generations here? Use of the acronym for the Federal Bureau of Investigation is not consistent. Pick an acronym and stick with it. There?s still a noticeably high incidence of useless words, i.e. fluff, in this paper. ?With the calculations made by the FBI, they reported that ?2.9 million US organizations experiencing at least one computer security incident?incurring a $24,000 average loss? would total the $67.2 loss.? This sentence, I think, should read? No, I?m not going to do your work for you. Re-write that sentence. It?s wrong in nearly every way. Pay attention to detail, then read it out loud exactly as written to see if it?s actually written right.

 

First sentence has flaws. ?loss? should be ?lost?. Total used twice. ?mentions about? isn?t good English. Fluff fluff fluff? Don?t start a sentence with ?But? unless you?re a professional writer. What are the odds of that happening? US oro U.S., take your pick. It?s most definitely NOT U.S government. Details are everything! ?even? is 100% fluff here: ?even spending more money to not only??

 

Too many ?that?s. One shouldn?t assume in a ?research paper?. One should do something to show a cause and effect statistical correlation when presuming trends in such a paper.

 

How about just directly quoting Ms. Wilson in that article? She probably articulates it better then you do anyway!

 

?Wilson suggests hacking is ethical because hackers are employed by companies to test their defenses against real attacks from the outside.? Both sentences need to be re-constructed here. When you begin with ?While?, you?re making an argument. ?While something is something, something else isn?t.? What you?re saying here is ?While some do it for this and others do it for that.? That?s a statement and ?While? has no place in it.

 

One ?answer? is enough, thank you. I don?t see the need for the semi-colon after the second ?answered?. You?ve used their first names in your introduction, now when you do it, it?s just fluff. ?located near Moscow?? Tense problems in the sentence (many sentences in the paper) beginning, ?The most likely?? ?article talks? DETAILS!

 

Has it occurred to you that only ?Ethical hacking? is ethical? All other hacking is either criminal or ?mischievous?. Anyway, that?s neither here nor there? I?m still unclear on what a cracker is. I think you only mention one person?s definition of it once. Instead of quoting every alleged expert, why not just come out and tell me what the distinctions are between the three: Ethical hackers, mischievous or criminal hackers, and crackers. Simple paragraph and you could probably get away with creatively hiding some fluff there too which could go unnoticed.

 

It?s either ?these types of crimes? or it?s ?this type of criminal? I prefer the later. ?Stalkers have?? This sentence needs help, and the computer creates nothing. It?s the medium that is defined partially by anonymity. The criminal isn?t created there, he?s emboldened there because he can do everything he?s always wanted to do in real life: Convince someone he?s something he?s not. He can lure, stalk, and ultimately victimize many unsuspecting na?ve young people with relative impunity. I?d put a comma behind ?teens?. Better yet use parenthesis: ??more children (especially teens) and women?? Ask your tutor, but I?m thinking the credit in parenthesis should be outside the sentence. (Like this) ?This is because?? shouldn?t even exist in this sentence. Try it without: ?Teens and women are the most common victim groups due to their inexperience interacting with on-line personalities safely without ever exposing their whole identities?? (Something like that) See how that flows better? ?difference? should be ?different characteristics?? Lots of fluff in that sentence. ?Three types of stalkers: obsessive, delusional, and vengeful? (I use an additional comma before ?and? in a list which is acceptable, but needs to be consistent throughout.) The paragraph needs work beyond what I?ve highlighted here.

 

Comma use: ?Katie Dean, author of? stalking?, states?? I believe ?estimates? is present tense with a hard ?a? so the sentence shouldn?t include that word and it?ll read much better. The quote should be ?there could be hundreds of?? ?And? isn?t the beginning of a sentence unless your name is Stephen King. Should be, ?Linda Fairstein, Chief of the Sex Crimes Prosecution, Manhattan District Atty., adds, ?the rate of cyber?? Again, ?whereas? is the beginning of an argument that never materializes? kind of like seeing strawberry cheesecake on the menu, but the restaurant is out. Know what I mean? There is no other hand, it?s all fluff. Start that sentence, ?The report Roy Mark talks about in his article? ethnic groups as well as the criminals: Men, women, and children.? ??is coming from a post 9/11 perspective when the reality is that people of middle east descent are targets due to their alleged involvement in the event that ended with the destruction of the three buildings in the World Trade Center complex in Manhattan, September 11, 2001.?

 

Should be, ?Though state and federal laws regarding cyber?? Fluff= ?to be used.?

 

Give me at least one more example of a popular target. I?m tired of hearing about ?myspace.com? already. Should be, ?Recently cyber-stalkers have been targeting websites like myspace.com and ?..com for their large population of teens; soliciting sex and pictures of a sexual nature from them.? Or you could probably use a comma there. ?There have been countless successful solicitations forcing law enforcement officers to pose on these sites hoping to get bites from careless pervs so they can reel them in and arrest them.? ?Further, many cyber-stalkers aren?t caught until after they?ve victimized their prey.?

 

?turn? should be ?turned?. Should be, ?commit computer crime? I think maybe you should just say, ?Identity theft is when someone steals your name??

 

Correct the sentence, ?In 2003?? Don?t start a sentence with ?But? unless your income exceeds mine by several million per year. ?This is due to the fact that since?? Doesn?t work. ?Since? is another argument or something like that, it?s looking for resolution that never materializes. If you loose that one word, the sentence works except you?ve used the word, ?internet? twice in the same sentence. More fluff! Don?t start the last sentence with ?except? because it seems as though it?s a part of the former sentence. You can start a sentence with ?Except?, just don?t to it to continue from the last sentence.

 

I don?t need the first sentence here at all. ?Of course? is conversational. Are you writing a nice story, or are you stating the facts? Loose that phrase. ?Another aspect of the shocking impact of identity theft is the financial costs: In 2005 Americans lost over?? Should be, ?Germain, who is a ?? I know it?s a crime. End the sentence with ?Recover?. Again, another unfulfilled argument, should read, ?When a credit card is lost of stolen, there?s a number (on the back of the stolen card you no longer have in your possession!) to call and the company will immediately cancel the card, but in an article by Kim Zetter, ?ID Theft: What you need to know?, it?s made abundantly clear ?there isn?t??

 

?Yet another, often overlooked, aspect of the crime of ID theft is the psychological effects the victim will likely endure when they realize, rather quickly, their name was just used to achieve an illegal activity such as a violent crime. The humiliation of having to explain to people their identity was stolen and used by a criminal on top of the excessive length of time it takes to recover from the theft (weeks to years depending how long it takes to stop) adds enormous stress on a person?s life.

 

?where? should be ?were?. Should be, ?were initially put into place to battle against?? ?It is the lack of resources and proper? ?happening? You already stated that once in the paper. Remove the first instance.

 

Fluff fluff fluff?Research_Paper_2nd_draft.rtf

Edited April 16, 2007 by Watermonkey (see edit history)