In your own words, explain what the following terms mean to you as they apply to information security and safe computing: Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. Why are these factors so important to businesses? 

INITIAL POST OF 250 WORDS AND 2 REPLIES OF 150 WORDS EACH.

1.  VINOD KUMAR NOMULA

The business world is unremittingly offering hints of progress, there are a goliath level of parts at any rate acceptably scarcely any constants. In business they are settled perils, yet nothing is certain. Alberts Carr’s proposal, is that business is a game, much all around that truly matters cloudy from poker, and that faking is permitted under the benchmarks of the game. In both business and poker, you are playing the odds. The more you play and develop a degree of motivations driving mask, become acquainted with the measures, see what you going toward (seeing of your constraint), the better you will perform. In like manner, criticalness and the ability to make changes and alter once the going with open region rises is in like manner key to advance. 

Goldman Sachs being an endeavor bank needs to help speculations against the future, picking picked business decision subject to expanded lengths of data inside the checks (the benchmarks) set up by the security and exchanges commissions. As ought to be clear over Goldman’s system and that of the round of poker enthusiastically take after. So unavoidable piece of the hypothesis’ banks are following an in each reasonable sense murky technique and that is a principal game is played. 

In any case, at some point or another the game isn’t sensible. You could have two players playing poker holding restless to close to measures, at any rate one has a capably noticeable pot (more money) despite while the other player has kept resources. This condition can no shortcoming on the planet inclination the odds for the player with the more clear pot, paying little character to how they are playing an in every practical sense indistinct game and holding shrewd to the checks. For this condition Goldman Sachs has central pockets and various controllers generally will if all else fails make interests in close to zones that they have kept up their bets in, turning the odds for Goldman Sachs. 

References

Allhoff, F. (2003). Business bluffing reconsidered. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(4), 283.

Staff, R. (2010). Goldman Anger is Misplaced.

2.   ANIL KUMAR KRISHNAPPA

On analysts versus strategists and sophisticated investors, we should discuss Goldman’s “toe-to-the-line” approach. In addition, after the collapse of the market that it was taking a position against those of its customers; as Goldman was able to interpret the law in such a way that it did not disclose its position in the Abacus deal, nor did it reveal. Goldman also did not reveal its role in pricing in the auction markets. Whether they behaved ethically and honored their fiduciary duties, while the case indicates a difference of opinion between Goldman and the outsiders. We do not all share the same perception of what is bluffing and what is a cardboard in the sleeve because the case is thus a classic illustration of one of the shortcomings of Carr’s theory (Staff, 2010).       

For their own interests, at least in a poker game, all parties involved understand that they are each in looking out. It’s the art of the con, as it’s not poker. For its profits and reputation, as GS deserves a huge success. So the same game that the others who have played. As a business model, the banking sector has proved unfit. Usury leads to the destruction of the trust of society. It makes sense that they are ready to destroy it because companies do not care about society (Staff, 2010).                                              

            Between the two parties, a business “bluffing” another is fine and good as long as the money earned or lost remains. When one party or another win, then the question of the good and wrong comes into play; as soon as their bad business starts to cause great financial damage to people who have not participated in these transactions and who have little or nothing to gain.

            All is well and good as long as only the parties involved incur these losses when multiple parties lose big in complex and widespread transactions. It is something very, very bad; when the losses are repulsed by ordinary taxpayers and people who have nothing to gain from transactions of which they have no direct knowledge (Staff, 2010).

References:

Staff, R. (2010). Goldman Anger is Misplaced.

THESE ARE 2 POSTS TO REPLY

Read Google’s Handling of the “Echo Chamber Manifesto” and complete the questions at the end of the case study.

Requirements:
1. Your assignment should be written in APA style format.
2. Double spaced with 12-point Times New Roman font and make sure to use headings.
3. Please answer all the questions at the end of Case Study in not less than 2 pages.
4. Separate title and reference page. 

Case study exploring gender in a Silicon Valley company

Background

In recent years, Google has been under major scrutiny for gender discrimination, and the Department of Labor is investigating Google for a potential gender pay gap.  Also, Silicon Valley has been exposed as a community that repeatedly discriminates against women and other minorities, and research shows that the gender disparity in tech jobs is pervasive and widespread.  As a result, Google has made a major push to create a more diverse and inclusive work culture. 

In August of 2017, Google fired a male software engineer, James Damore, after he internally posted a memo that relied on inaccurate gender stereotypes to criticize Google’s implementation of its diversity and inclusion initiative. The memo was leaked to the press, which lead to a public outcry and exacerbated an already tense time for gender diversity in Silicon Valley. 

Around the same time as Damore’s firing, a white supremacist protest that turned violent in Charlottesville, Virginia, heightened an already tense conversation about the complexities of free speech in America.  The overall conflicting views on free speech are split down ideological lines:  Conservatives say they aren’t free to express their views because liberals will accuse them of being politically incorrect, while liberals believe that in an effort towards being more inclusive, people should avoid using language that is potentially offensive to marginalized communities. 

The Memo

Damore says he was trying to point out that sometimes conservative viewpoints aren’t welcome at Google because of its liberal “echo chamber.”  The memo also says that Google discriminates against certain employees and offers development opportunities “only for people with a certain gender or race,” and that Google has lowered the bar by hiring diverse candidates.  Damore believes that in order to have a truly diverse culture, Google needs to create a safe space for more conservative views. 

Damore’s memo also states that one of the central reasons there are fewer women than men in tech is women are biologically different from men.  Damore then references scientifically unfounded gender stereotypes to support this line of reasoning.  Some of the stereotypes he uses include:  women are more neurotic than men; women are less capable of handling stress; and women are better at relationships than men because men are better at “things.” 

The Response

After the memo was leaked, many criticized the contents, calling Damore and his memo “anti-diversity,” with Google employees and some of the general public saying they were offended by its contents.  Critics said Damore’s memo is exactly the type of discrimination that keeps women out of the tech industry, and some female Google employees expressed discomfort at having to work with Damore. 

The day after the memo was leaked, Google’s VP of Diversity and Inclusion, Danielle Brown, issued a statement criticizing the discriminatory content of the memo, saying it did not align with Google’s dedication to creating a truly diverse workforce.  Three days after the public release of the memo, Damore confirmed Google had fired him. 

Sundar Pichai, Google’s CEO, released a statement explaining the decision to fire Damore.  Pichai’s statement points out that some of Damore’s criticisms of Google’s attempts at creating a truly diverse culture are valid, but the memo violated parts of the company’s code of conduct “by advancing harmful gender stereotypes in our workplace.”  Pichai also writes, “To suggest a group of our colleagues have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work is offensive and not OK.” 

Those who disagree with the firing say it confirms Damore’s main argument:  that Google does have a liberal echo chamber; Google is intolerant to conservative views; and that its diversity efforts have actually backfired and stifled diversity.  Others who disagree point to Damore’s right to free speech.  However, there is some legal ambiguity in this case because companies have the legal right to fire an employee who makes statements that could create a hostile working environment for other employees in a protected class (gender, age, sexual orientation, etc.), particularly in an at-will state like California, where Google is headquartered.  But, in California, an employee cannot be fired for their political views, complicating the legal aspects of this situation even further.  Damore sought out legal counsel after Google fired him, and he is currently deciding whether or not to sue for wrongful termination. 

Those who believe Google made the right decision by firing Damore point out that the company has made a very public commitment to creating a diverse and inclusive culture, and to have an openly discriminatory employee breaks that commitment.  Keeping Damore around could also negatively impact morale among employees, create a hostile working environment, and lead to a backslide in culture.  Additionally, Google has a peer review process, whereby employees review one another’s performance.  These reviews directly influence potential raises, bonuses, and promotions, so Damore’s critics question whether he could be trusted to give fair reviews when he has openly discriminated against his female colleagues in the memo. 

Discussion Questions 

1. Legally, Google’s firing of Damore may or may not be problematic, but is Google’s firing of Damore ethical?
2. Would you have made the same decision if you were Pichai?
3. Is it ethical for an organization to fire someone who expresses beliefs that don’t align with the overall culture?
4. Do efforts towards a more diverse work culture stifle employees from speaking out? What can leaders do to avert this potential outcome?

You may find the Center’s Framework for Ethical Decision Making useful in thinking through these questions.

Journal #1  Activity and Exercise Habits

To develop higher levels of health-related fitness,  there are specific recommendations of specific activity and exercise levels from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, American College of Sports Medicine, the American Heart Association, and the U.S. Surgeon General’s Office for promoting health.

Please write a paragraph, or two, detailing your current activity and exercise habits as compared to these recommendations.

Your explanation should be 250 words or more. 

Describe two theories that relate to your chosen topic of leadership, motivation, or teams. Analyze how these two theories can be applied to your chosen topic within your current or past workplace.

Describe Aldefer’s motivation theory.  Evaluate your own levels of the three needs described in his theory.  Evaluate how they relate to your own levels of work motivation and academic motivation.

1-2 paragraphs

Description

Discuss a topic in depth related to memory & brain function
– Present a hypothesis (addressing a debated topic)
– present data in support of your hypothesis
– Not just a lit review
– Not just a cognitive paper
– must have brain in the paper
8 pages double spaced excluding references. Minimum of 10 citations are needed.
– Evaluation based on organization, literature review, critical evaluation, creativity to ask a relevant question, ability to find answers in the literature, clarity of expression

The topic I chose is based of repressed memories from hippocampal function.

The stuff I came up with:

The scientific paper that inspired me to write on this is: “Inducing amnesia through systemic suppression” by Justin C. Hulbert, Richard N. Henson & Michael C. Anderson

Need also to describe hippocampus function using scientific literature always back up claims using citations
Also find scientific papers that are against the idea of the paper. IT HAS TO BE DEBATED.

Repressed memories –> hippocampal function
Myth or reality ?
Can altering hippocampal function causes temporary amnesia ?
How does hippocampus work in terms of memory formation ?
Evidence for repressed memories ?
Is it localized in hippocampus ?
Evidence against ?


Intro:

– Quick description of hippocampus
– Explanation of formation of memory
– Link this to amnesia
– Link this to temporary amnesia
– Link this to repressed memories with hippocampus alteration

Description

Answers subjective. Try to contextualize.
Coursework Task 19
Part 1
Examine these three examples of set design. What do they suggest to you about a) the ‘idea’ of the play/themes b) the setting (time and place), and c) the ‘mood’ of that particular scene (as sets often change between scenes). What other information do you take away from designs? Try to avoid the temptation to read ahead and see which productions these designs are taken from.
1)
2)
3)
Photos attached.

Part 2
You may have recognised these sets if you have seen the productions; they are all acclaimed designs. The first is The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, adapted by Simon Stephens from the book by Mark Haddon. It is an acclaimed National Theatre production, which transferred to the West Wend and toured. The second is The Hairy Ape by Eugene O’Neill, which ran at the Park Avenue Armory in New York. The third (and perhaps the most recognisable) is from the RSC’s adaptation of Roald Dahl’s Matilda.

Research the plays online (you will be able to find reviews and plot synopses). Using this information, interrogate the design.
• Do your initial assessments from Part 1 match the play’s content?
• What does the design communicate?
• How does it communicate?
• How does design function as a language (keep in mind the comments above on the cultural specificity of some languages)?