Martian Chronicles Essays - Fiction, Science Fiction,

Martian Chronicles Ray Bradbury's the Martian Chronicles is a futuristic story about space travel, invasion and planet colonization. Analyzing characters in this twenty-eight-chapter novel is extremely difficult because every chapter includes different characters, which are oriented to form the plot. Each chapter's characters are used to show the founding of the planet Mars, the colonization of it, the destruction of Earth and almost the whole human race, and finally the rebuilding of the human civilization on Mars. The story starts off in the year of 1999 and ends twenty-seven years later in 2026. Ray Bradbury doesn't just tell his story from the point of view of the space travelers and the colonizers, but from angry Martians who were trying to kill the humans or Martians later on who were just having a conversation with a human about Mars, also people seeing the great colonial change happen. Captain Wilder was the captain of the fourth expedition to Mars from Earth. The three expeditions before had failed because either the Martians tricked and killed the earthlings or the earth people were thought of as mentally ill and sent to a hospital on Mars. Later on in the story when there are towns on Mars, the very few Martians are not discriminated against because the people on Mars were kind people who were in search of new things and seeing Martians was rare. Luckily the minor human sickness, chicken pox, had killed off most of the Martians accidentally. Captain Wilder and his crew explored the planet and responded to Earth to say that the missions were successful, and with only a few complications. Captain Wilder with his Crew of Jeff Spender, Hathaway, Sam Parkhill, Cheroke, Gibbs and a few other men help begin to portray the theme of the story, by finding Mars and seeing that it was safe (this was in the beginning of the story, but in the last several chapters they are brought back as veterans of Mars when it is deserted). The theme is that humans are not a great race of colonizers, but they are really just destructive. All that was left for Earth to do was send the settlers to colonize Mars. Jeff Spender was a very quiet fellow; the crew called him, "the Lonely One." When Jeff reached Mars, he was outraged on how humans had killed this Martian race by a measly child irritation to some children. He left the group and learned as much as he could about their language and culture. Eventually Jeff became angry with humans because he knew what they would do to what was left of the alien culture when they colonize Mars. He said that unlike humans this race did not ask why we are here, they just enjoyed and basked in the rays of life. The Martian culture was magnificent and Jeff did not want it to be destroyed. Therefore his goal was not to let anyone colonize Mars. Jeff went back to Wilder's camp and shot Gibbs whom he greatly disliked because of his immature enmity towards the Martian culture. He then shot four more men who were eating lunch peacefully. Captain Wilder was a very serious and staid figure and also a good friend of Jeff Spender. Jeff thought that Wilder would understand his reasoning, but he was wrong. Wilder did not like that Jeff had killed his buddies and coworkers. Eventually after a long chase through the thin air of Mars, Wilder talked it over with Spender, but obviously they did not agree over this matter. This external conflict was solved and finished when Jeff was finally shot before he could stop the colonization of Mars by killing all space travelers. Captain Wilder's expedition was successful. After this mission was complete, Captain Wilder was sent with his crew to Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune for exploring. "I heard they had kicked you upstairs so you wouldn't interfere with colonial policy here on Mars," exclaimed Mr. Hathaway in 2026 after meeting up again with Captain Wilder. Captain Wilder had not changed since that fourth expedition to Mars; he was still the same serious and adventurous character, except a little older of course. Captain Wilder and his crew, Mr. Hathaway and his family, two other people left who did not go back to Earth and another family were the only people left on Mars. They were in charge of rebuilding the human race on Mars because the Earth was being destroyed in a twenty-year world war. Human civilization was starting all over again. This book is

Gerrymandering - Definition and Examples in Politics

Gerrymandering s in Politics Gerrymandering is the act of drawing congressional, state legislative or other political boundaries to favor a political party or one particular candidate for elected office. The purpose of gerrymandering is to grant one party power over another by creating districts that hold dense concentrations of voters who are favorable to their policies. Impact The physical impact of gerrymandering can be seen on any map of congressional districts. Many boundaries zig and zag east and west, north and south across city, township and county lines as if for no reason at all. But the political impact is much more significant. Gerrymandering reduces the number of competitive congressional races across the United States by segregating like-minded voters from each other. Gerrymandering has become common in American politics and is often blamed for the gridlock in Congress, polarization of the electorate and disenfranchisement among voters. President Barack Obama, speaking in his final State of the Union address in 2016, called on both the Republican and Democratic parties to end the practice. â€Å"If we want a better politics, it’s not enough just to change a congressman or change a senator or even change a president. We have to change the system to reflect our better selves. I think weve got to end the practice of drawing our congressional districts so that politicians can pick their voters, and not the other way around. Let a bipartisan group do it.† In the end, though, most cases of gerrymandering are legal.   Harmful Effects Gerrymandering  often leads to disproportionate politicians from one party being elected to office. And it creates districts of voters who are socioeconomically, racially or politically alike so that members of Congress are safe from potential challengers and, as a result, have little reason to compromise with their colleagues from the other party.   The process is marked by secrecy, self-dealing and backroom logrolling among elected officials. The public is largely shut out of the process, wrote  Erika L. Wood, the director of the Redistricting Representation Project at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. In the 2012 congressional elections, for example, Republicans won 53 percent of the popular vote but carried three out of four House seats in states where they oversaw redistricting. The same was true for Democrats. In states where they controlled the process of drawing congressional district boundaries, they captured seven out of 10 seats with only 56 percent of the popular vote. Any Laws Against It? The U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in 1964, called for a fair and equitable distribution of voters among congressional districts, but its ruling dealt mostly with the actual number of voters in each and whether they were rural or urban, not the partisan or racial makeup of each: Since the achieving of fair and effective representation for all citizens  is concededly the basic aim of legislative apportionment, we conclude that the Equal Protection Clause guarantees the opportunity for equal participation by all voters in the election of state legislators. Diluting the weight of votes because of place of residence impairs basic constitutional rights under the Fourteenth Amendment just as much as invidious discriminations based upon factors such as race  or economic status. The federal Voting Rights Act of 1965  took on the issue of using race as a factor in drawing congressional districts, saying it is illegal to deny minorities their constitutional right  Ã¢â‚¬Å"to participate in the political process and to elect representatives of their choice.† The law  was designed to end discrimination against black Americans, particularly those in the South after the Civil War. A state may take race into account as one of several factors when drawing district lines- but without a compelling reason, race cannot be the predominant reason for a district’s shape, according to the Brennan Center for Justice. The Supreme Court followed up in 2015 by saying states could form independent, nonpartisan commissions to redraw legislative and congressional boundaries. How It Happens Attempts to gerrymander happen only once a decade and soon after years ending in a zero. That’s because states are required by law to redraw all 435 congressional and legislative boundaries based on the decennial census every 10 years. The redistricting process begins soon after the U.S. Census Bureau completes its work and begins sending data back to the states. Redistricting must be completed in time for the 2012 elections. Redistricting is one of the most important processes in American politics. The way congressional and legislative boundaries are drawn determines who wins federal and state elections, and ultimately which political party holds the power in making crucial policy decisions. Gerrymandering is not hard,  Sam Wang, the founder of Princeton Universitys Election Consortium, wrote in 2012. He continued: The core technique is to jam voters likely to favor your opponents into a few throwaway districts where the other side will win lopsided victories, a strategy known as packing. Arrange other boundaries to win close victories, cracking opposition groups into many districts. Examples The most concerted effort to redraw political boundaries to benefit a political party in modern history happened after the 2010 census. The project, orchestrated by Republicans using sophisticated software and about $30 million, was called  REDMAP, for Redistricting Majority Project. The program began with successful efforts to regain majorities in key states including  Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, North Carolina, Florida, and Wisconsin. Republican strategist Karl Rove wrote in The Wall Street Journal before the midterm elections in 2010: The political world is fixated on whether this years elections will deliver an epic rebuke of President Barack Obama and his party. If that happens, it could end up costing Democrats congressional seats for a decade to come. He was right. The Republican victories in statehouses across the country allowed the GOP in those states to then control the redistricting process taking effect in 2012 and shape congressional races, and ultimately policy, until the next census in 2020.   Who is Responsible? Both major political parties are responsible for the misshapen legislative and congressional districts in the United States. In most cases, the process of drawing congressional and legislative boundaries is left to state legislatures. Some states impanel special commissions. Some redistricting commissions are expected to resist political influence and act independently from the parties and the elected officials in that state. But not all. Here’s a breakdown of who is responsible for redistricting in each state: State legislatures: In 30 states, the elected state lawmakers are responsible for drawing their own legislative districts and in 31 states the boundaries for the congressional districts in their states, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. The governors in most of those states have the authority to veto the plans. The states that allow their legislatures to perform the redistricting are: AlabamaDelaware (Legislative districts only)FloridaGeorgiaIllinoisIndianaKansasKentuckyLouisianaMaine (Congressional districts only)MarylandMassachusettsMinnesotaMissouri (Congressional districts only)North CarolinaNorth Dakota (Legislative districts only)NebraskaNew HampshireNew MexicoNevadaOklahomaOregonRhode IslandSouth CarolinaSouth Dakota (Legislative districts only)TennesseeTexasUtahVirginiaWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming (Legislative districts only) Independent commissions: These apolitical panels are used in four states to redraw legislative districts. To keep politics and the potential for gerrymandering out of the process, state lawmakers and public officials are prohibited from serving on the commissions. Some states also prohibit legislative staffers and lobbyists, as well. The four states that employ independent commissions are: ArizonaCaliforniaColoradoMichigan Advisory commissions: Four states use and advisory commission consisting of a mix of legislators and non-legislators to draw up congressional maps that are then presented to the legislature for a vote. Six states use advisory commissions to draw state legislative districts. The states that use advisory commissions are: ConnecticutIowaMaine (Legislative districts only)New YorkUtahVermont (Legislative districts only) Politician commissions: Ten states create panels made up of state lawmakers and other elected officials to redraw their own legislative boundaries. While these states take redistricting out of the hands of the entire legislature, the process is highly political, or partisan, and often results in gerrymandering districts. The 10 states that use politician commissions are: Alaska (Legislative districts only)Arkansas (Legislative districts only)HawaiiIdahoMissouriMontana (Legislative districts only)New JerseyOhio (Legislative districts only)Pennsylvania (Legislative districts only)Washington Why Is It Called Gerrymandering? The term gerrymander is derived from the name of a Massachusetts governor in the early 1800s, Elbridge Gerry. Charles Ledyard Norton, writing in the 1890 book  Political Americanisms, blamed Gerry for signing into a law a bill in 1811 readjusting the representative districts so as to favor the Democrats and weaken the Federalists, although the last named party polled nearly two-thirds of the votes cast. Norton explained the emergence of the epithet gerrymander this way: A fancied resemblance of a map of the districts thus treated led [Gilbert] Stuart, the painter, to add a few lines with his pencil, and to say to Mr. [Benjamin] Russell, editor of the Boston Centinel, That will do for a salamander. Russell glanced at it: Salamander! said he, Call it a Gerrymander! The epithet took at once and became a Federalist war-cry, the map caricature being published as a campaign document. The late William Safire, a political columnist and linguist for  The New York Times, made note of the words pronunciation in his 1968 book  Safires New Political Dictionary: Gerrys name was pronounced with a hard  g; but because of the similarity of the word with jerrybuilt (meaning rickety, no connection with gerrymander) the letter  g  is pronounced as  j.

E-commerce security and fraud protection Term Paper

E-commerce security and fraud protection - Term Paper Example E-commerce refers to the buying and selling of goods and services by via electronic platforms such as the Internet and other computer-based networks (Schneider, 2011). It has grown to be a necessary tool for efficiency in business. However, this platform has been faced with a myriad of challenges with Moftah, Abdullah and Hawedi (2012) indicating that the problems relate to consumers’ protection in their transactions which call for trust and privacy across the different geographical locations. Mohapatra (2013) argues that e-commerce transactions have been constrained by security, with consumers wary of the privacy of their personal information and the use of credit cards to make online purchases. The increased use of mobile devices has even further complicated security provision in e-commerce. Thus, a secured system would be needed to enhance e-commerce growth. E-commerce is online, thus accessible to the general public. The increase in cyber crime has also seen an increase in security threats in e-commerce. According to Mohapatra (2013), amounts reported globally, largely from frauds and hacking in e-commerce, stand at over $ 388 billion per year. As such, e-commerce has suffered the resultant liabilities, loss of trust and additional cost for clean-up. This calls for an effective security systems that would protect consumers and merchants from such losses. According to Schneider (2011), such a system would be pegged on a complex interaction of several database management systems, applications development platforms, network infrastructure and systems software. This encompasses preservation of integrity, confidentiality and availability of computer and data resources, referred to as the security triad. Further to this, there would be need for non-repudiation, access control and privacy. Access Control Approaches The first way in which e-com merce has been secured and protected against fraud is through access control. Physically, access control would involve the restriction of an unauthorized person into a building, property or room. In a similar manner, e-commerce has applied several technologies that control access to Internet resources, including authorization, authentication and audit (Farshchi, Gharib and Ziyaee, 2011). The model in this case entails the subjects, these being entities that could perform an action on the system, and objects, these being entities to which access needs to be controlled. Both of these should be taken as software entities as opposed to human users since a human user would only have an impact on the system through software entities on which they have control. First, user IDs, passwords, biometrics and tokens have been used to authenticate an individual. As observed by Mohapatra (2013), authentication involves what the user knows such as a password, what a user possesses such as a token o r what the user is, such as biometric characteristic. The user ID/password approach verifies a user against a set of ID and password. This has however been noted to be the least secure technique in e-commerce because of the threat of guessing, eavesdropping, external disclosure, host compromise and replay attacks (Schneider, 2011). Thus, user IDs and passwords could be combined with physical tokens, creating a multiple factor authentication so as to