Design a poster for our presentation and show on the 16th and 17th May

1
Design a poster for our presentation and show on
the 16th and 17th May

• Needs to include IMD, MMDT and CGD

• Presentation
• Thursday 15th May 11am-4pm in WB G.02
• Student Show
• In Moving Image Studio
• Friday 16th May
• Private Show 10am-4pm
• Cyberduck Awards and Party 4-9pm

2
Last Year
3
Critical Tools for MS3307 Thesis
4
Crisis in Education
5
Last Week

• Arguments have reasons (one or many)
• They are supposed to persuade
• They will always conclude

6
Simple exercise

• (A)The use of antivirus software is increasingly
  necessary on a computer network. (B) Viruses and
  worms are widespread. (C) They are also becoming
  more devious. (D) Simply being careful and
  looking for suspicious programs is not enough.
• A is the conclusion
• B, C D supporting reasons

7
This Session

• Using critical thinking tools to analyse
  literature and think through your own thesis

8
Reasoning

• All reasoning has a purpose
• All reasoning is an attempt to figure something
  out, to settle some question, to solve some
  problem
• All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped
  by, concepts and ideas
• All reasoning is based on assumptions
• All reasoning is done from some point of view
• All reasoning should be based on data,
  information, and/or evidence
• All reasoning contains inferences by which we
  draw conclusions and give meaning to data
• All reasoning leads somewhere, has implications
  and consequences

http//www.criticalthinking.org (see the irony)
9
A check list for reasoning

1. Purpose
2. Questions, problems solutions
3. Concepts and ideas
4. Assumptions
5. Points of view
6. Data, information and evidence
7. Interpretation, inference and conclusions
8. Implication

From The Art of Close Reading by Dr. Richard Paul
and Dr. Linda Elder (The Foundation for Critical
Thinking).
10
Adapted from The Art of Close Reading by Dr.
Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder (The Foundation
for Critical Thinking).
11
Dr Aycock's Bad Idea Is the Good Use of Computer
Viruses Still a Bad Idea? Tony Sampson Featured
article in M/C Volume 8, Issue 1 Feb. 2005
12
1. Purpose

• How is the purpose stated?
• Are the purposes significant/realistic?
• Is the work targeted to one specific purpose?

• Can you distinguish a central purpose from
  related purposes?
• How is the purpose relevant to your thesis
  question?

13
Purpose should be apparent very early on After a
bit of preamble

• Following the deep-seated analogy between
  biological and computer parasites, it is surely
  inconceivable that anyone would want to
  deliberately infect a computer. Its a bad idea,
  right? Well, not necessarily. It seems that the
  University of Calgary (UoC) want to challenge the
  received wisdom of security expertsa judgment,
  which determines that there is no such thing as a
  good virus. The UoC wants to encourage their
  students to write and test malevolent viruses.
  Still following the biological analogy, Dr John
  Aycock, the academic who runs the program at UoC,
  likens the approach to what medical researchers
  do to combat the latest biological viruses such
  as Sars. He argues that before you can develop
  a cure, you have to understand what the virus is
  and how it spreads and what motivates those who
  write malicious software (Fried). The reaction
  from security experts is not surprisingly one of
  dismayfor them, all viruses are bad.
• Nonetheless, it is Dr. Aycocks provocation that
  may provide a much-needed alternative solution to
  one of the biggest problems facing the network
  society. As many affiliates of this composite
  society are increasingly discovering, the network
  is a present day communication paradox. It is a
  vast, fast, and efficient logic machine, but
  simultaneously it provides the perfect medium for
  viral contagion. Moreover, despite the efforts of
  a billion dollar anti-virus industry, current
  reactive solutions are clearly not working
  Viruses, it seems, are progressively more capable
  of bypassing traditional anti-virus software and
  targeting vulnerabilities. However, Dr Aycock
  argues that academics should not bury their heads
  in the sand. They should openly recognise that
  reacting to the virus is simply not working and
  instead support pro-active research into the
  creation of computer viruses. Within the bad idea
  itself there maybe a good solution.

14
Purpose should be apparent very early on After a
bit of preamble

• Following the deep-seated analogy between
  biological and computer parasites, it is surely
  inconceivable that anyone would want to
  deliberately infect a computer. Its a bad idea,
  right? Well, not necessarily. It seems that the
  University of Calgary (UoC) want to challenge the
  received wisdom of security expertsa judgment,
  which determines that there is no such thing as a
  good virus. The UoC wants to encourage their
  students to write and test malevolent viruses.
  Still following the biological analogy, Dr John
  Aycock, the academic who runs the program at UoC,
  likens the approach to what medical researchers
  do to combat the latest biological viruses such
  as Sars. He argues that before you can develop
  a cure, you have to understand what the virus is
  and how it spreads and what motivates those who
  write malicious software (Fried). The reaction
  from security experts is not surprisingly one of
  dismayfor them, all viruses are bad.
• Nonetheless, it is Dr. Aycocks provocation that
  may provide a much-needed alternative solution to
  one of the biggest problems facing the network
  society. As many affiliates of this composite
  society are increasingly discovering, the network
  is a present day communication paradox. It is a
  vast, fast, and efficient logic machine, but
  simultaneously it provides the perfect medium for
  viral contagion. Moreover, despite the efforts of
  a billion dollar anti-virus industry, current
  reactive solutions are clearly not working
  Viruses, it seems, are progressively more capable
  of bypassing traditional anti-virus software and
  targeting vulnerabilities. However, Dr Aycock
  argues that academics should not bury their heads
  in the sand. They should openly recognise that
  reacting to the virus is simply not working and
  instead support pro-active research into the
  creation of computer viruses. Within the bad idea
  itself there maybe a good solution.

15
Purpose should be apparent very early on After a
bit of preamble
Following the deep-seated analogy between
biological and computer parasites, it is surely
inconceivable that anyone would want to
deliberately infect a computer. Its a bad idea,
right? Well, not necessarily. It seems that the
University of Calgary (UoC) want to challenge the
received wisdom of security expertsa judgment,
which determines that there is no such thing as a
good virus. The UoC wants to encourage their
students to write and test malevolent viruses.
Still following the biological analogy, Dr John
Aycock, the academic who runs the program at UoC,
likens the approach to what medical researchers
do to combat the latest biological viruses such
as Sars. He argues that before you can develop
a cure, you have to understand what the virus is
and how it spreads and what motivates those who
write malicious software (Fried). The reaction
from security experts is not surprisingly one of
dismayfor them, all viruses are
bad. Nonetheless, it is Dr. Aycocks provocation
that may provide a much-needed alternative
solution to one of the biggest problems facing
the network society. As many affiliates of this
composite society are increasingly discovering,
the network is a present day communication
paradox. It is a vast, fast, and efficient logic
machine, but simultaneously it provides the
perfect medium for viral contagion. Moreover,
despite the efforts of a billion dollar
anti-virus industry, current reactive solutions
are clearly not working Viruses, it seems, are
progressively more capable of bypassing
traditional anti-virus software and targeting
vulnerabilities. However, Dr Aycock argues that
academics should not bury their heads in the
sand. They should openly recognise that reacting
to the virus is simply not working and instead
support pro-active research into the creation of
computer viruses. Within the bad idea itself
there maybe a good solution.
16
Questions, problems, solutions

• Can you state the question?
• Can the question stated be expressed in different
  ways?
• Can the question be broken down?

• Is the question answered by a
• Right answer
• Opinion
• Reasoning from more than one point of view

17
Questions are often stated in the introduction
and relate to the purpose.

• Is the Good Use of Computer Viruses Still a Bad
  Idea? explicit in the title
• Following the deep-seated analogy between
  biological and computer parasites, it is surely
  inconceivable that anyone would want to
  deliberately infect a computer. Its a bad idea,
  right?
• Within this heated climate, it was highly
  probable that Dr Aycock would stand accused of
  peddling a bad idea.
• However Within the bad idea itself there maybe
  a good solution.

18
Concepts and ideas

• Can you identify a key concept?
• Are there alternative ideas presented?
• Are the concepts precisely used?

19
Concepts and ideas

• Useful to look at introduction to book
• Editorial comments in journal or edited
  collections
• In the given example
• Kylie Cardell and Jason Emmetts Editorial to
  Bad issue of M/C
• The work of any researcher in the
  ever-broadening field of that nebulous thing, the
  Humanities, is to think about received ideas in
  surprising and unfamiliar ways, to challenge what
  is simply thought of as bad or good, to
  complicate essentialist categories, and to
  question passively-accepted thinking. Things that
  may have seemed indissolubly bad may in fact be
  revealed as good precisely because they are
  dissolute, troubling, and inevitably disruptive
  to accepted norms, including your own. The
  reverse is also true. Anything is possible
• Sampson examines to what extent paranoia and
  fear of the computer virus as unequivocally bad
  has constrained research in the field, research
  that may actually prove to have positive
  consequences in the fight against the malevolent
  affects of viruses. The perceived incursion of
  ethical norms short circuits innovation as it
  feeds moral outrage.

20
Assumptions
21
Question Assumption

• Almost half of Shakespeares plays are set in
  Italy
• Does that make him an Italian?
• Almost all of Isaac Asimovs novels are set in
  outer space
• Does that make him an alien?

22
Assumptions

• Have you identified assumptions?
• Are assumptions justifiable?

• How are the assumptions shaping the line of
  reasoning?

23
Assumptions

• the network is a present day communication
  paradox. It is a vast, fast, and efficient logic
  machine, but simultaneously it provides the
  perfect medium for viral contagion. Moreover,
  despite the efforts of a billion dollar
  anti-virus industry, current reactive solutions
  are clearly not working.
• So lets give bad viruses a chance????

24
Points of view
25
Points of view

• Is there a clear point of view?
• Can you evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of
  the point of view?
• Are the points of view fair-minded?
• How does this point of view relate to other
  perspectives?

26
http//www.pbs.org/wnet/brain/illusions/form1_flas
h.html
27
Versus security viewpoint

• Give bad viruses a chance?
• The reaction from security experts is not
  surprisingly one of dismayfor them, all viruses
  are bad.
• Graham Cluley, a consultant for Sophos,
  rhetorically questions UoCs ethics by asking,
  should we teach kids how to break into cars if
  theyre interested in becoming a policeman one
  day? (Kelly). The anti-virus experts argue that
  by teaching how to attack and destroy rather
  than prevention, protection, and cure, UoC will
  simply encourage the widespread contagion of the
  bad idea.
• However, UoC questions the naivety of this
  expert opinion. They argue that any reasonably
  intelligent individual can access this
  information without attending university for four
  years. They claim it is dangerous to think that
  virus writers can be stopped without a better
  understanding of how they operate.

28
Data, information and evidence

• What data has been used to support claims made?
• Do you know of opposing information?
• Is the data clear, accurate and relevant to the
  question?

29
Data, information and evidence

• Reports, stats
• A report in the UK (DTI) concludes that despite
  the considerable uptake of anti-virus
  software93 of UK companies have anti-virus
  software70 of all security breaches are from
  viral-like programs
• 1991 Gallup survey in Louw and Duffy showed
  that of 500 of the UKs largest businesses 24
  had experienced a viral attack
• Expert opinion
• Viruses, it seems, are progressively more capable
  of bypassing traditional anti-virus software and
  targeting vulnerabilities

30
Interpretation, inference and conclusions
Does the evidence support the conclusion?

• Are the conclusions consistent?
• What new assumptions have been made?

31

• Conclusions
• Maybe UoC are doing what academia does best. They
  are considering the virus in a new and unfamiliar
  light, clearing away ethical baggage, and
  crossing the moral boundaries of the network
  society. Deep-seated as it is, the analogy only
  goes so far. The network and the virus writer
  have developed their own biology, which is both
  technologically and culturally shaped. The search
  for a viral cure has to move away from the
  reactionary dissection of existing viral
  anatomies. Researchers need to look towards a
  pro-active engineering model that incorporates
  the complex human-computer assemblage. As one
  maverick expert suggests
• Tomorrows experts need to learn to think beyond
  and develop better applications and operating
  systems that proactively block potential attack
  vectors rather than waiting to be attacked and
  then responding.
• While many other types of furtive program, like
  bots, crawlers, and spiders legitimately
  creep behind our screens, the virus is seen as a
  digital pariah. Whether or not the viral
  algorithm is benevolent or malevolent doesnt
  seem to matter any more. The vast majority of the
  network society regards it as a bad idea.
  Nevertheless, Dr Aycocks experiment with both
  the cultural and technological elements could
  produce a pro-active immunisation program.
  Whatever the conclusion, he should be applauded
  for attempting to carry out this experiment while
  beleaguered by so many experts who decide to
  judge innovation in terms of rigid moral
  outcomes.

32

• Conclusions
• Maybe UoC are doing what academia does best. They
  are considering the virus in a new and unfamiliar
  light, clearing away ethical baggage, and
  crossing the moral boundaries of the network
  society. Deep-seated as it is, the analogy only
  goes so far. The network and the virus writer
  have developed their own biology, which is both
  technologically and culturally shaped. The search
  for a viral cure has to move away from the
  reactionary dissection of existing viral
  anatomies. Researchers need to look towards a
  pro-active engineering model that incorporates
  the complex human-computer assemblage. As one
  maverick expert suggests
• Tomorrows experts need to learn to think beyond
  and develop better applications and operating
  systems that proactively block potential attack
  vectors rather than waiting to be attacked and
  then responding.
• While many other types of furtive program, like
  bots, crawlers, and spiders legitimately
  creep behind our screens, the virus is seen as a
  digital pariah. Whether or not the viral
  algorithm is benevolent or malevolent doesnt
  seem to matter any more. The vast majority of the
  network society regards it as a bad idea.
  Nevertheless, Dr Aycocks experiment with both
  the cultural and technological elements could
  produce a pro-active immunisation program.
  Whatever the conclusion, he should be applauded
  for attempting to carry out this experiment while
  beleaguered by so many experts who decide to
  judge innovation in terms of rigid moral
  outcomes.

33
Implication

• Can the implications be regarded as negative,
  positive or constructive?
• Have all implications been considered?
• Are there obvious implications following from the
  reasoning?

34
Homework ?

• Reread an article you included in your annotated
  biblio and apply critical thinking to it
• Draft your introduction and apply critical
  thinking to it

1. Purpose
2. Questions, problems solutions
3. Concepts and ideas
4. Assumptions
5. Points of view
6. Data, information and evidence
7. Interpretation, inference and conclusions
8. Implication

35
Use this list to think about your own thesis

• What is my purpose?
• What question am I trying to answer?
• What data or information do I need?
• What conclusions or inferences can I make (based
  on this information)?
• If I come to these conclusions, what will the
  implications and consequences be?
• What is the key concept (theory) I am working
  with?
• What assumptions am I making?
• What is my point of view?