That may be but I teach at a college in the US midwest and this semester I brought up Battlestar as an example of something we were talking about and the majority of them had never even HEARD of the show, let alone seen it. I have a feeling that most of my students are doing what I was doing as an undergrad: drinking and hanging out with friends and not watching much tv except for ESPN. (OK, so I didn't watch ESPN but most of my male friends did.)
Sakai has made a lot of improvements in the past year. When IU switched over to it nearly 2 years ago it was horrible. Full of bugs and stupid things that didn't make sense. It isn't perfect (for example if I have students turn something in online, then have the system automatically put those grades in the gradebook, if a student gives you a late copy or a hardcopy, there's no way to enter the grade into the gradebook) but it has gotten a lot better.
I'm glad someone online has a memory. "A Rape in Cyberspace" is nearly 15 years old and pretty much on the syllabus for every class that mentions the internet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_in_Cyberspace
Whether or not this event was legally a rape, the person may feel victimized just the same.
I rather than ask whether or not this is a crime perhaps we should ask what kind of person would think it would be fun to harass someone online.
The article is NOT balanced. All of the sources that it mentions are from Craig Anderson who has never met a medium that he didn't think caused "agression." The problem with Anderson is, at least in the Anderson studies I've read, he never defines what "aggression" is. In one study he gives the example of saying something mean as being aggressive. So for Anderson aggression can mean anything from killing someone to saying, "You suck!" Regardless of the type of media he has studies Anderson has consistently found what he says is a correlation between media and violence. He uses his own techniques and standards as if they were seen as common, valid, and reliable within the field and yet I've not been able to find anyone else that uses them. Now I'm not an expert in psychology by any means so maybe there are people using his techniques and maybe in some article he defines his terms, but I've read a few articles co-authored by him and I've searched for people using his techniques and came up empty.
Without citing studies by people not associated with Anderson the article isn't much more than a step above Jack Thompson (and it does include the notion that Lee Malvo played Halo which was started by Thompson and I've never been able to find any solid evidence that it was true.).
The number one problem isn't really the submitters but the users. I can't tell you how often I go to one of the stories that was dugg up (particularly in the videogame section) and it is only someone quoting from another website. Then you go look in the submitter's history and all the stories that person has submitter are just stories they have reposted on their crappy blog.
Now I hate the people that only submit their own crappy websites, but the fact is that if people take a second to look and realize that this "story" is only a cut and paste from another site and not digg it then those crappy spammers would go away.
If people stop digging crappy websites that steal content from other sites then the quality of digg would go up.
I'm no expert, but I don't think this is accurate. When you use stuffit on a jpeg you get a stuffit file (.sitx) not a jpeg. They are using their own algorythm to compress the jpeg not simply changing it to another form of jpeg. A small project like PAQ8 has similar (but not as good) jpeg compression but I seriously doubt that they paid a patent fee. Both are compressing the data with their own algorithms and then decompressing them and converting them back to the original file.
Again, I'm no expert, so if I'm wrong please let me know.
While I prefer.7z it is true that zip's ubiquitousness is a great advantage. However, even within the zip format there is a pretty decent variation on how well various programs will compress. With the exception of the new non-standard versions of zip files that winzip has started using (and few if any other programs can open) the smallest and yet still totally compatible zip files I've been able to make have been with 7zip and pass=4 as the parameters. Beats winzip every time.
Jack wife is also a lawyer and she works for what is aparently a pretty well known firm in Miami. In is book Jack wrote that when his son was born he gave up actively practicing law to take care of his son because he was making less money. Now that his son is getting older Jack has more time to pursue his enemies. He is basically a house husband with a lot of free time on his hands.
Actually no they weren't different. You wrote, "This one just implements the same rules regarding buying a ticket to an R movie." That is the problem. There are no laws preventing minors from buying a ticket to an R rated movie. Those other laws tried to codify videogame ratings into law as well. And because no other medium in the USA has government enforced ratings they were struck down. This new law is exactly the same.
In the USA there are no laws preventing minors from buying a ticket to an R rated movie.
Every time this comes up people seem to think there are. But there aren't.
Yes they do check ages, but again, that isn't because of laws. It is the same reason why some CDs from Wal-Mart are censored. Corporate pressure and wanting to avoid the government stepping int.
The same thing happens when you buy an M-rated game but it isn't because of any law.
I"m pretty sure it was the Louisiana supreme court and not the US supreme court. However, courts from Indiana, Oaklahoma, the 9th circuit of appeals, and numerous other courts have ruled such laws unconstitutional.
This is one of the most common misconceptions and quite likely the one that Spitzer also holds. The theater may check ids but that is not because of a law. It is because of the MPAA - an organization made by the film industry itself and not run by the government. I am under the impression that the MPAA will fine or withhold films from theaters if they get caught admiting unaccompanied minors to R-rated films. This is the industry regulating itself and not the government regulating it.
There is no law requiring films be rated. Go to Wal-Mart and half of the films there are "unrated" editions. If there were some law regulating the sale of movies to minors then how are all those movies being sold?
Yes it is. The films are rated by the MPAA which is an organization created by the movie industry. It is not a government organization. It is an organization that was created by the movie industry to prevent the creation of a government ratings board. I beleive, but may be wrong, that the theaters could be fined by the MPAA if they get caught letting minors into an R-rated film.
There is also nothing preventing a kid from buying an R-Rated film from Wal-Mart or what is much more common, the special "unrated" edition of a PG-13 movie which is, obviously, unrated.
So when "Spitzer said he wants to restrict access to these videos and games by children, similar to motion picture regulations which prohibit youths under 17 from being admitted to R-rated movies without a parent or adult guardian." Either Spitzer is ignorant about the law, he is lying just to get headlines, or just possibly he knows there aren't any such laws and so it would be technically correct to say that there will be regulations "similar" to film regulations.
Either way he is an ass.
There are no laws in the USA regulating the sale of any entertainment medium. There are regulations on things like porn, but those are a genre and they are notoriously vague in that at least once a year a comic book store gets busted for selling comic books with drawings of boobs.
If videogames were to be singled out there would have to be a mountain of evidence that shows that they are dangerous to children. No such mountain exists. Therefore, it is just singling out videogames because it is an easy way to look like you are "looking out for families."
These damn kids these days! Why back in my day...!
Wait 20 years and someone will write this same article but instead of talking about old dos games they will be takling about GTA3 and how much better games in the 2000s were than games in the 2020s
If I get one of these from a store like Wal-Mart and they won't give me my money back me and the manager are going to walk back to electronics and put the disk into every dvd player they have on display and show how the vast majority of them won't play it.
Complaining to Wal-Mart is exactly the right thing. Piss off a few consumers and they will just ignore it. Piss off Wal-Mart and the movie companies will listen.
Oh, and it should be noted that one of the professors alleged to have misappropriated the article is a member of the faculty of IU-Kokomo, a small satellite campus, and not the main IU campus at Bloomington.
Since I go to IU and I'm interested in intellectual property, I was surprised I didn't hear about this. Well I did a little digging and according to the article I found it seems like the professors named him as co-author on an article without telling him and he feels like they misrepresented his findings. Certainly it is a problem if the professors distorted his findings, but they did seem to give him proper credit. I'm not sure what that would be called, but it doesn't sound like plagiarism to me.
I don't know about all the "cool" schools but it has been used for a few years here at IU (one of the "most wired colleges" and once labled the "most wireless campus" even though my department's building is apparently not on campus since our wireless is named, "unavailable..."). It has gotten a lot better in the last year, but it still has a lot of quirks and bugs. That being said, it still beats the abomination that is Blackboard.
Safest is of course relative. In the county I was born in the only murder that happened there in years was some guy who happened to be driving through when he decided to kill his wife. That was 5 years ago. I doubt the "safest" city in the USA can say the same thing.
No they are getting the illusion that they are no longer competing against cheaters. If someone for example were to have someone who was an expert in the field write the paper for them there would be no way of catching that person. The system may catch a plagiarist, but not a cheater.
Also, I've taught college for a few years and catching people who plagiarize is typically easy. Plagiarists typically plagiarize because they are lazy. I've caught more than one plagiarist by putting the title of the paper into Google. I've also caught a few others because the paper has little or nothing to do with the assignment.
If anything catching all these types of plagiarists would make the class average higher and not lower.
Finally, while I can't speak for all teachers, my classes aren't competitions. They aren't competing against anyone. It isn't as if I or any of my fellow teachers say "only 10% of the class can get an A" or anything.
First off, there have been a lot of legal rumblings about google's book search. Google has modified it so that they no longer have the whole book online unless the publisher allows it or it is out of print. If you want your book out of it, there is a way to do so http://books.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answ er=43756&topic=9011 Turnitin has no such opt out process. Secondly Google offers this as a free service. Although it has ads, there are also links to several book sellers which would allow the person who wrote the book and the publisher to get a sale from it. Turnitin is not a free service. They are directly profiting from the work of college students who do not and cannot see any monetary reward from their work being forcefully included in the turnitin database. It doesn't sound the same at all to me.
On the other hand, how silly would it be for them to be visiting and dealing with advanced space-traveling civilizations for 10 years and not have anything to show for it? I for one would like to see them try to use even more tech. Everyone they fight seems to have energy weapons and they still use guns? They have at least once tried to explain that guns are better for killing than zappers, but why don't they routinely carry zappers to stun people who they want to make peace with?
Slashdot Mirror
That may be but I teach at a college in the US midwest and this semester I brought up Battlestar as an example of something we were talking about and the majority of them had never even HEARD of the show, let alone seen it. I have a feeling that most of my students are doing what I was doing as an undergrad: drinking and hanging out with friends and not watching much tv except for ESPN. (OK, so I didn't watch ESPN but most of my male friends did.)
Sakai has made a lot of improvements in the past year. When IU switched over to it nearly 2 years ago it was horrible. Full of bugs and stupid things that didn't make sense. It isn't perfect (for example if I have students turn something in online, then have the system automatically put those grades in the gradebook, if a student gives you a late copy or a hardcopy, there's no way to enter the grade into the gradebook) but it has gotten a lot better.
I'm glad someone online has a memory. "A Rape in Cyberspace" is nearly 15 years old and pretty much on the syllabus for every class that mentions the internet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_in_Cyberspace
Whether or not this event was legally a rape, the person may feel victimized just the same.
I rather than ask whether or not this is a crime perhaps we should ask what kind of person would think it would be fun to harass someone online.
The article is NOT balanced. All of the sources that it mentions are from Craig Anderson who has never met a medium that he didn't think caused "agression." The problem with Anderson is, at least in the Anderson studies I've read, he never defines what "aggression" is. In one study he gives the example of saying something mean as being aggressive. So for Anderson aggression can mean anything from killing someone to saying, "You suck!" Regardless of the type of media he has studies Anderson has consistently found what he says is a correlation between media and violence. He uses his own techniques and standards as if they were seen as common, valid, and reliable within the field and yet I've not been able to find anyone else that uses them. Now I'm not an expert in psychology by any means so maybe there are people using his techniques and maybe in some article he defines his terms, but I've read a few articles co-authored by him and I've searched for people using his techniques and came up empty.
Without citing studies by people not associated with Anderson the article isn't much more than a step above Jack Thompson (and it does include the notion that Lee Malvo played Halo which was started by Thompson and I've never been able to find any solid evidence that it was true.).
The number one problem isn't really the submitters but the users. I can't tell you how often I go to one of the stories that was dugg up (particularly in the videogame section) and it is only someone quoting from another website. Then you go look in the submitter's history and all the stories that person has submitter are just stories they have reposted on their crappy blog.
Now I hate the people that only submit their own crappy websites, but the fact is that if people take a second to look and realize that this "story" is only a cut and paste from another site and not digg it then those crappy spammers would go away.
If people stop digging crappy websites that steal content from other sites then the quality of digg would go up.
I'm no expert, but I don't think this is accurate. When you use stuffit on a jpeg you get a stuffit file (.sitx) not a jpeg. They are using their own algorythm to compress the jpeg not simply changing it to another form of jpeg. A small project like PAQ8 has similar (but not as good) jpeg compression but I seriously doubt that they paid a patent fee. Both are compressing the data with their own algorithms and then decompressing them and converting them back to the original file.
Again, I'm no expert, so if I'm wrong please let me know.
While I prefer .7z it is true that zip's ubiquitousness is a great advantage. However, even within the zip format there is a pretty decent variation on how well various programs will compress. With the exception of the new non-standard versions of zip files that winzip has started using (and few if any other programs can open) the smallest and yet still totally compatible zip files I've been able to make have been with 7zip and pass=4 as the parameters. Beats winzip every time.
Jack wife is also a lawyer and she works for what is aparently a pretty well known firm in Miami. In is book Jack wrote that when his son was born he gave up actively practicing law to take care of his son because he was making less money. Now that his son is getting older Jack has more time to pursue his enemies. He is basically a house husband with a lot of free time on his hands.
Actually no they weren't different. You wrote, "This one just implements the same rules regarding buying a ticket to an R movie." That is the problem. There are no laws preventing minors from buying a ticket to an R rated movie. Those other laws tried to codify videogame ratings into law as well. And because no other medium in the USA has government enforced ratings they were struck down. This new law is exactly the same.
In the USA there are no laws preventing minors from buying a ticket to an R rated movie.
Every time this comes up people seem to think there are. But there aren't.
Yes they do check ages, but again, that isn't because of laws. It is the same reason why some CDs from Wal-Mart are censored. Corporate pressure and wanting to avoid the government stepping int.
The same thing happens when you buy an M-rated game but it isn't because of any law.
I"m pretty sure it was the Louisiana supreme court and not the US supreme court. However, courts from Indiana, Oaklahoma, the 9th circuit of appeals, and numerous other courts have ruled such laws unconstitutional.
This is one of the most common misconceptions and quite likely the one that Spitzer also holds. The theater may check ids but that is not because of a law. It is because of the MPAA - an organization made by the film industry itself and not run by the government. I am under the impression that the MPAA will fine or withhold films from theaters if they get caught admiting unaccompanied minors to R-rated films. This is the industry regulating itself and not the government regulating it.
There is no law requiring films be rated. Go to Wal-Mart and half of the films there are "unrated" editions. If there were some law regulating the sale of movies to minors then how are all those movies being sold?
Yes it is. The films are rated by the MPAA which is an organization created by the movie industry. It is not a government organization. It is an organization that was created by the movie industry to prevent the creation of a government ratings board. I beleive, but may be wrong, that the theaters could be fined by the MPAA if they get caught letting minors into an R-rated film.
There is also nothing preventing a kid from buying an R-Rated film from Wal-Mart or what is much more common, the special "unrated" edition of a PG-13 movie which is, obviously, unrated.
So when "Spitzer said he wants to restrict access to these videos and games by children, similar to motion picture regulations which prohibit youths under 17 from being admitted to R-rated movies without a parent or adult guardian." Either Spitzer is ignorant about the law, he is lying just to get headlines, or just possibly he knows there aren't any such laws and so it would be technically correct to say that there will be regulations "similar" to film regulations.
Either way he is an ass.
There are no laws in the USA regulating the sale of any entertainment medium. There are regulations on things like porn, but those are a genre and they are notoriously vague in that at least once a year a comic book store gets busted for selling comic books with drawings of boobs.
If videogames were to be singled out there would have to be a mountain of evidence that shows that they are dangerous to children. No such mountain exists. Therefore, it is just singling out videogames because it is an easy way to look like you are "looking out for families."
These damn kids these days! Why back in my day...!
Wait 20 years and someone will write this same article but instead of talking about old dos games they will be takling about GTA3 and how much better games in the 2000s were than games in the 2020s
If I get one of these from a store like Wal-Mart and they won't give me my money back me and the manager are going to walk back to electronics and put the disk into every dvd player they have on display and show how the vast majority of them won't play it.
Complaining to Wal-Mart is exactly the right thing. Piss off a few consumers and they will just ignore it. Piss off Wal-Mart and the movie companies will listen.
Oh, and it should be noted that one of the professors alleged to have misappropriated the article is a member of the faculty of IU-Kokomo, a small satellite campus, and not the main IU campus at Bloomington.
Since I go to IU and I'm interested in intellectual property, I was surprised I didn't hear about this. Well I did a little digging and according to the article I found it seems like the professors named him as co-author on an article without telling him and he feels like they misrepresented his findings. Certainly it is a problem if the professors distorted his findings, but they did seem to give him proper credit. I'm not sure what that would be called, but it doesn't sound like plagiarism to me.
which is my point. "safest" is relative.
I don't know about all the "cool" schools but it has been used for a few years here at IU (one of the "most wired colleges" and once labled the "most wireless campus" even though my department's building is apparently not on campus since our wireless is named, "unavailable..."). It has gotten a lot better in the last year, but it still has a lot of quirks and bugs. That being said, it still beats the abomination that is Blackboard.
Safest is of course relative. In the county I was born in the only murder that happened there in years was some guy who happened to be driving through when he decided to kill his wife. That was 5 years ago.
I doubt the "safest" city in the USA can say the same thing.
No they are getting the illusion that they are no longer competing against cheaters. If someone for example were to have someone who was an expert in the field write the paper for them there would be no way of catching that person. The system may catch a plagiarist, but not a cheater.
Also, I've taught college for a few years and catching people who plagiarize is typically easy. Plagiarists typically plagiarize because they are lazy. I've caught more than one plagiarist by putting the title of the paper into Google. I've also caught a few others because the paper has little or nothing to do with the assignment.
If anything catching all these types of plagiarists would make the class average higher and not lower.
Finally, while I can't speak for all teachers, my classes aren't competitions. They aren't competing against anyone. It isn't as if I or any of my fellow teachers say "only 10% of the class can get an A" or anything.
First off, there have been a lot of legal rumblings about google's book search. Google has modified it so that they no longer have the whole book online unless the publisher allows it or it is out of print. If you want your book out of it, there is a way to do so http://books.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answ er=43756&topic=9011 Turnitin has no such opt out process.
Secondly Google offers this as a free service. Although it has ads, there are also links to several book sellers which would allow the person who wrote the book and the publisher to get a sale from it. Turnitin is not a free service. They are directly profiting from the work of college students who do not and cannot see any monetary reward from their work being forcefully included in the turnitin database.
It doesn't sound the same at all to me.
On the other hand, how silly would it be for them to be visiting and dealing with advanced space-traveling civilizations for 10 years and not have anything to show for it?
I for one would like to see them try to use even more tech. Everyone they fight seems to have energy weapons and they still use guns? They have at least once tried to explain that guns are better for killing than zappers, but why don't they routinely carry zappers to stun people who they want to make peace with?