Pregnancy can be a habit. Since women can't be terminated for having children I've noticed one or two that just keep having one right after the other while technically still keeping their "job".
If companies truly want to control our lives in every aspect I'm sure a creative lawyer could come up with a way of getting around the legal protection for bearing children.
Perhaps it violates the companies policy of employees protecting themselves from bodily fluids or some such.
TiVo may be a dead duck soon. DirecTV did not renew their contract with them. Their chairman and president just bolted. His example does support his thesis.
What if General Mills said you must eat only General Mills and verified your conformance during your periodic "random" drug test? Assuming there's something they can test for unique to their products of course.
In the mega-corporate America this could be quite a troubling trend for workers. Don't utter any opinion on anything and consult hr on any personal purchase as you may be crossing your employer.
That's very odd. I have a Dell 2001FP 20" LCD, I watch DVD's on it and I've never noticed anything unusual. I play FPS's with it as well. I guess I'm one of those people.. I never understood people's obsession with refresh rates beyond making a clear image.
Another thing the article didn't seem to address: connectivity. I have a 15" analog LCD and the 20" DVI equipped LCD. To me connecting the monitor with DVI makes a noticable difference. To be fair my 15" may just be horrible at reading the analog signal but the difference between the two screens is huge.
I have used the analog connection on the 20" briefly but not long enough to make an opinion on its quality.
nd a very large part of that problem is people who drive in the left hand lane. If you move slowly and refuse to move to one of the travel lanes, other cars tend to try to pass you on the right, which creates a dangerous situation for other drivers, who may not themselves be doing anything illegal.
The driver who is going too slow is the one creating the traffic hazard and the dangerous situation. If you're going slower than other traffic in the passing lane you're supposed to move right. It's that courtesy thing you mentioned.
The loudness is no more. I own a fullsize pickup with one of the last "loud" engines, sounds exactly like a UPS truck.
This type of engine has been replaced with an engine that delivers the fuel at much higher pressures which somehow reduces that rattle. I'm not much of an engine person so I may be stating that a bit wrong. To me, the newer diesels in fullsize pickups sound exactly like their gas powered equivalents.
As for stinky, I have no idea. The stench from my truck has destroyed my sense of smell.
Visible exhaust? Not a good a thing to compare. Diesels should only emit visible exhaust when they're under very heavy load, a load which the equivalent gas engine would be unlikely to handle.
An advantage that comes to mind besides mileage and torque, diesel isn't as flammable as gas. Theoretically you can toss a lit match into a tank full of diesel and not meet your maker.
>>If the American government or media has such a >>well endowed conscience (which is a good thing, >>btw, if applied correctly), then WHERE the F**K is >>the conscience when entire nations have a very >>real crisis at hand?
The US government has already offered its assistance. You see, that's what sucks about people.. they assume that because CNN isn't running 24h coverage of an event that it means that the US is completely uninvolved.
If you hate America then just say so, you don't have to spout lies and rhetoric.
Heck, the mere fact that this event brings up a debate involving 9/11 shows how messed up people are in the head.
So that means technology should never attempt to solve the problem?
I believe the days of people piloting their own vehicle are winding down. It's simply not scalable. You can only add so many lanes to a thoroughfare before it becomes undrivable. You'll always have idiots in lane one that want the exit ramp on lane eight.
Much of the problem, at least in the US, is that people drive like morons. People don't have the mental capacity to consider the flow of traffic beyond their own vehicle. Traffic swells at the oddest locations often because people won't yield.. causing some to brake, couple that with people that don't leave enough following distance braking harder.. followed by people now panic braking.. five miles back it's now bumper to bumper.
I think this is one area technology could greatly improve the quality of life for people. Perhaps if there's ever a reform or sanity measure to govern liability we might benefit from such innovations. Thinking big picture, how many die each year because we don't have this technology?
They should, that article was horrible. While there may have been some technical facts hidden in there I couldn't see them.. my eyes were rolling from the awful attempt at comedy.
I doubt anyone goes into an interview and announces to the hiring manager that the company is a "second choice". I also doubt that their resume says as much. Yes, anyone who makes it obvious they don't wish to be employed by a company deserves not to get hired. I don't disagree with that but I doubt that happens very often unless there's a group of people that are comfortable living off the laughable money that unemployment security usually provides.
I don't think you can easily guage "real interest in working in company x". It's a matter of a choice between hiring an American Engineer who has a strong resume but not the exact skillset or considering international candidates who need to b e relocated but perhaps have the desired skillset. If the American can be brought up to speed quick enough then yes, I believe they deserve the job first. I don't wish to see my neighbors living on the streets and I don't understand what's wrong with that.
My own view on this is that it takes far longer to find someone who is "perfectly qualified" than to mold such a person from a qualified Engineer. For Cisco to know these candidates don't exist domestically they had to have the positions open for some time, right? How much has it cost them to leave the position open that long before hiring from overseas?
I'd bet for less money they could've hired a person with sound Engineering skills that could've picked up the material in the time they wasted looking for Mr/Ms Perfect who may or may not exist.
I never understood this insistance on "perfectly qualified".
Of those 80,000 Americans I'd bet a good number of them cared less where they'd work after endless months of unemployment and cared more about having a job in the field, period. As for Cisco certs.. which makes more sense: bringing an Engineer in from overseas or training one that's already living here?
I think both of you raise some valid points but I think the truth of the matter is somewhere in the middle.
Yes, bandwidth isn't free so lets force some huge graphic advertisements in everyones' faces. What I want to know is how they got M$ to take out the option to not automatically download graphics.
I wonder about advertising. Does anyone ever click on the banners? Do they ever buy anything? I'd bet the figure is 1%. Is online advertising really paying for anything or is it just eating up more bandwidth and pissing people off?
That code wasn't written to circumvent anything, it was made to rip audio tracks. DECSS was specifically written to bypass the imature encryption on a DVD. There's a big difference, otherwise you're saying that all track rippers are illegal. I don't think Sony or any of the portable MP3 device makers would agree.
You forgot to add that through the miracle of the Internet they contacted your auto insurance company and had them jack up your rates. If you treat a rental car like that you'll probably do it with your own vehicle making you quite a liability.
Your health and life insurance premiums will also go up because being in a bad neighborhood increases the liklihood that you were there buying drugs. The banner ad companies were also contacted so that they can fine tune their advertisements to better fit your apparent lifestyle.
Like Amtrak, this information was turned over to the authorities just on the off chance that your actions were criminal. If you're arrested the rental company will get a kick-back.
Did you forget to use and ? If you really feel that way you're the absolute moron.
By your standards these would be rules to live by:
1) Always agree with your parents. Don't ever argue your point of view, never ask to stay out late and NEVER get involved in any after school activities that may require their occasional attention.
2) Never speak up in grade school. Don't try to excel but don't try to fail either. Try to pass yourself off as one person in the school, not as an individual.
3) When in college don't ever rock the boat, see rule 2.
4) When in the work place never disagree with your employer. Work long hours without complaint. Never point a finger at the responsible party. If someone blames something on you accept that blame. Don't take a risk by trying to improve a process, although many innovations are born this way your employer won't like it. Never ask for a raise because you're not worth it.
5) Die quietly. The young kids don't like retirees who live of social security. Politicians don't care for them either, especially since they retain the right to vote. If no one likes you then you have no place existing in society. Damn you.
Just my $0.02, but you have the right to try to make your current situation better. A free speech forum is such an attempt. You have the right to be an individual with an opinion. You have the right to create things of your own and retain ownership of them.
Hopefully you were just being sarcastic and I missed it:)
What if you wanted to view two documents at once and their mappings conflicted? Granted present day HTML restricts a document to one character set that may not be the case forever (or maybe it's not even the case now, what version HTML are they up to now?).
..and then after reading the original article and not the snippet..
Are they trying to say they got 250GB off the sniffer or off the guy's computer? And if it was off the guys computer did they get a search warrant for the password or just the data the password allowed them to access?
What kind of Internet connection did they have if they didn't notice the feds downloading hundreds of gig?
Anyone know of a better write-up than the ZD article?
I don't like the decision but look at it another way: you shouldn't have any expectation of privacy on the Internet. It's a public transportation system for data. If you're insane enough to send sensitive info unencrypted or weakly encrypted use deserve to be snooped.
Now if they said it was legit to break through a firewall or hack into a system.. that's where you have an expectation of privacy. That's kicking down someone's door.
You couldn't be more on with your post. That is exactly the type of thinking with our society. It's never the parent's responsibility. Look at Columbine, they'll blame the cops, the school faculty, they'll go so far as to blame computer games and television. It's NEVER the parents.
What happens when someone else does something about their little shits? "Don't yell at my child!", "My child has rights!", "that's easy for you to say, you don't have kids!".
We need a state with no kids. We'll call it the freedom state. No tax penalties for single people, the f word on the radio, free p0rn for all, no hourly education crisis, no school shootings, infinite violence on TV, beer for all, no ratings systems on anything. Who's with me?
> If you think that colleges come down on
> plagiarism because they need more money, you
> really did miss out on the important part
> of your education. If your good name is worth
> that little to you, I feel pity for you, and
> anyone who associates with you.
Of the colleges I've attended I would doubt that ANYTHING that administration does isn't directly related to money.
You missed my point though, well actually, I think you missed all of them.
> So why didn't you simply delete the notes
> before the test? If you truly learned it,
> you wouldn't need them, would you?
True, but then why would I have bothered to enter them in the first place if I knew I was just going to delete them anyway? Duh.
> You cannot justify the 5% by saying you
> learned the 95%
Perhaps not, but do you know what? Had I not "cheated" I would've learned little. The material would have been dry and boring and I wouldn't have bothered studying it. If I actually learned more by cheating than I would have otherwise I think it was justified. Impossible to prove perhaps, but justified. School isn't about being more moral than thou. If I cheated but learned more than you (if in fact I had remembered any of it) then didn't I get more out of the experience?
> The point of the class is to teach you how
> to quote correctly and such.
Yea, but my point was colleges busting students while they're supposed to still be learning that. After the successfully complete the class, so be it.. not during.
Beyond that, I can see if someone blatantly rips off entire paragraphs or more. Getting all antsy over a sentance is a bit much. I've actually seen professors stoop to that. That to me is an honest mistake, I can't see someone intentionally trying to rip off a single sentance in the scope of an entire document.
That may be true in most math courses but it isn't in Calculus. I took Calc2 one, maybe two years ago. The professor invited us to use computers and/or graphing calculators. The calculators (like my 48GX) were too damn slow. It'd take several minutes to enter the problem and forever for it to compute an answer (even if it could).
As for computers.. The professor made available to the class all the latest in software. The programs I recall were Macsyma, MathCad, Mathmatica, and so forth. Our professor had alot of experience with these types of programs and knew how to foul them up. On his assignments generally half the problems were computable by these programs, show some work too and you got credit. The other half would result in either an error or an insanely complex answer. Write one of those down and you got no credit. If you understood the problem you could solve it yourself or feed it peicemeal or in another form to the program.
That class was a pain in the butt but I not only learned alot about calc but about programming as well. I found it a pity that I didn't meet up with that proficient a professor until one of my last math classes in college.
If educators would take the time to incorporate technology into their classes THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO FEAR IT. Instead they're still copying their forty year old textbook onto the chalkboard and having kids solve fifty of the same problem again and again. Or even worse.. using PowerPoint.
Reminds me of a probability & statistics class I took once. I couldn't find a mathematical solution for a problem on the final so I wrote a Pascal program to find a solution. (Our school only did Pascal so I used what they were familiar with). Despite the fact that I couldn't run it to find the answer (no computers in that class) I got credit for it.
I admit, I was one of the first geeks in my HS to get a graphing calculator. I had a Casio something or other, then a TI-85, the somewhere along the lines I picked up an HP48GX. I always used to program in my math notes before a test. ALWAYS. If I was in the real world and had to solve problems like that I'd have those resources. No one does that crap from memory, and if they do it's because it's relevant to their occupation and they've done it a million times.
But by the mere routine of punching in those notes on those ridiculously small keypads I found I almost never needed to refer to them during the test. Typing them in and checking that I could actually understand the typed in version had made me memorize the information.
Did I ever get caught? Hell no. I wrote a program that looked like the screens you'd see if you reset the TI-81 which was what the school used. I'd show the teach it was reset and off I went. Do I feel I cheated? No. I took the time to learn the information so that I could understand it and enter it in a compressed form in the tiny memory of those calculators. The fact that 95% of the time I didn't need to refer to it proved to me that I was "learning", and that's the whole point.
How does this relate to this University scandal? "Cheating" takes a wide variety of forms. How many times have people in an English related class been busted for not properly quoting something? Ever been acused of plaugerism? I know someone that happened to and it's BS. The point of the English classes is to teach you to quote things and what not. Do it wrong and we'll threaten to throw you out of college. Nice.
Now how about these students that already graduated? College need more revenue? Simple, revoke some diplomas already granted and make past students come back at their expense. QED.
If ya downloaded it and didn't pay for it (and you know you're 'sposed to pay for it), ya stole it. Although I did say "stole" and not the generally accepted stole without quotes. It's virtual theft. As in, I'm too virtuous to believe that I'm doing anything wrong. Or e-theft perhaps. "E" as in entertaining so it's ok.
We don't really need big fancy words to describe an age-old sin.
Slashdot Mirror
Pregnancy can be a habit. Since women can't be terminated for having children I've noticed one or two that just keep having one right after the other while technically still keeping their "job".
If companies truly want to control our lives in every aspect I'm sure a creative lawyer could come up with a way of getting around the legal protection for bearing children.
Perhaps it violates the companies policy of employees protecting themselves from bodily fluids or some such.
TiVo may be a dead duck soon. DirecTV did not renew their contract with them. Their chairman and president just bolted. His example does support his thesis.
Even worse take it a bit further..
What if General Mills said you must eat only General Mills and verified your conformance during your periodic "random" drug test? Assuming there's something they can test for unique to their products of course.
In the mega-corporate America this could be quite a troubling trend for workers. Don't utter any opinion on anything and consult hr on any personal purchase as you may be crossing your employer.
Very interesting.
Thank you for posting that, I've not heard of the 18 bit color fudging before or of the different panel types.
That's very odd. I have a Dell 2001FP 20" LCD, I watch DVD's on it and I've never noticed anything unusual. I play FPS's with it as well. I guess I'm one of those people.. I never understood people's obsession with refresh rates beyond making a clear image.
Another thing the article didn't seem to address: connectivity. I have a 15" analog LCD and the 20" DVI equipped LCD. To me connecting the monitor with DVI makes a noticable difference. To be fair my 15" may just be horrible at reading the analog signal but the difference between the two screens is huge.
I have used the analog connection on the 20" briefly but not long enough to make an opinion on its quality.
The driver who is going too slow is the one creating the traffic hazard and the dangerous situation. If you're going slower than other traffic in the passing lane you're supposed to move right. It's that courtesy thing you mentioned.
The loudness is no more. I own a fullsize pickup with one of the last "loud" engines, sounds exactly like a UPS truck.
This type of engine has been replaced with an engine that delivers the fuel at much higher pressures which somehow reduces that rattle. I'm not much of an engine person so I may be stating that a bit wrong. To me, the newer diesels in fullsize pickups sound exactly like their gas powered equivalents.
As for stinky, I have no idea. The stench from my truck has destroyed my sense of smell.
Visible exhaust? Not a good a thing to compare. Diesels should only emit visible exhaust when they're under very heavy load, a load which the equivalent gas engine would be unlikely to handle.
An advantage that comes to mind besides mileage and torque, diesel isn't as flammable as gas. Theoretically you can toss a lit match into a tank full of diesel and not meet your maker.
>>If the American government or media has such a >>well endowed conscience (which is a good thing, >>btw, if applied correctly), then WHERE the F**K is >>the conscience when entire nations have a very >>real crisis at hand?
The US government has already offered its assistance. You see, that's what sucks about people.. they assume that because CNN isn't running 24h coverage of an event that it means that the US is completely uninvolved.
If you hate America then just say so, you don't have to spout lies and rhetoric.
Heck, the mere fact that this event brings up a debate involving 9/11 shows how messed up people are in the head.
So that means technology should never attempt to solve the problem?
I believe the days of people piloting their own vehicle are winding down. It's simply not scalable. You can only add so many lanes to a thoroughfare before it becomes undrivable. You'll always have idiots in lane one that want the exit ramp on lane eight.
Much of the problem, at least in the US, is that people drive like morons. People don't have the mental capacity to consider the flow of traffic beyond their own vehicle. Traffic swells at the oddest locations often because people won't yield.. causing some to brake, couple that with people that don't leave enough following distance braking harder.. followed by people now panic braking.. five miles back it's now bumper to bumper.
I think this is one area technology could greatly improve the quality of life for people. Perhaps if there's ever a reform or sanity measure to govern liability we might benefit from such innovations. Thinking big picture, how many die each year because we don't have this technology?
They should, that article was horrible. While there may have been some technical facts hidden in there I couldn't see them.. my eyes were rolling from the awful attempt at comedy.
Heck, I'm amazed PC Rag is still around.
I doubt anyone goes into an interview and announces to the hiring manager that the company is a "second choice". I also doubt that their resume says as much. Yes, anyone who makes it obvious they don't wish to be employed by a company deserves not to get hired. I don't disagree with that but I doubt that happens very often unless there's a group of people that are comfortable living off the laughable money that unemployment security usually provides.
I don't think you can easily guage "real interest in working in company x". It's a matter of a choice between hiring an American Engineer who has a strong resume but not the exact skillset or considering international candidates who need to b e relocated but perhaps have the desired skillset. If the American can be brought up to speed quick enough then yes, I believe they deserve the job first. I don't wish to see my neighbors living on the streets and I don't understand what's wrong with that.
My own view on this is that it takes far longer to find someone who is "perfectly qualified" than to mold such a person from a qualified Engineer. For Cisco to know these candidates don't exist domestically they had to have the positions open for some time, right? How much has it cost them to leave the position open that long before hiring from overseas?
I'd bet for less money they could've hired a person with sound Engineering skills that could've picked up the material in the time they wasted looking for Mr/Ms Perfect who may or may not exist.
I never understood this insistance on "perfectly qualified".
Of those 80,000 Americans I'd bet a good number of them cared less where they'd work after endless months of unemployment and cared more about having a job in the field, period. As for Cisco certs.. which makes more sense: bringing an Engineer in from overseas or training one that's already living here?
I think both of you raise some valid points but I think the truth of the matter is somewhere in the middle.
Yes, bandwidth isn't free so lets force some huge graphic advertisements in everyones' faces. What I want to know is how they got M$ to take out the option to not automatically download graphics.
I wonder about advertising. Does anyone ever click on the banners? Do they ever buy anything? I'd bet the figure is 1%. Is online advertising really paying for anything or is it just eating up more bandwidth and pissing people off?
That code wasn't written to circumvent anything, it was made to rip audio tracks. DECSS was specifically written to bypass the imature encryption on a DVD. There's a big difference, otherwise you're saying that all track rippers are illegal. I don't think Sony or any of the portable MP3 device makers would agree.
You forgot to add that through the miracle of the Internet they contacted your auto insurance company and had them jack up your rates. If you treat a rental car like that you'll probably do it with your own vehicle making you quite a liability.
:)
Your health and life insurance premiums will also go up because being in a bad neighborhood increases the liklihood that you were there buying drugs. The banner ad companies were also contacted so that they can fine tune their advertisements to better fit your apparent lifestyle.
Like Amtrak, this information was turned over to the authorities just on the off chance that your actions were criminal. If you're arrested the rental company will get a kick-back.
Etc.. Etc.. Could be a good movie
Did you forget to use and ? If you really feel that way you're the absolute moron.
:)
By your standards these would be rules to live by:
1) Always agree with your parents. Don't ever argue your point of view, never ask to stay out late and NEVER get involved in any after school activities that may require their occasional attention.
2) Never speak up in grade school. Don't try to excel but don't try to fail either. Try to pass yourself off as one person in the school, not as an individual.
3) When in college don't ever rock the boat, see rule 2.
4) When in the work place never disagree with your employer. Work long hours without complaint. Never point a finger at the responsible party. If someone blames something on you accept that blame. Don't take a risk by trying to improve a process, although many innovations are born this way your employer won't like it. Never ask for a raise because you're not worth it.
5) Die quietly. The young kids don't like retirees who live of social security. Politicians don't care for them either, especially since they retain the right to vote. If no one likes you then you have no place existing in society. Damn you.
Just my $0.02, but you have the right to try to make your current situation better. A free speech forum is such an attempt. You have the right to be an individual with an opinion. You have the right to create things of your own and retain ownership of them.
Hopefully you were just being sarcastic and I missed it
What if you wanted to view two documents at once and their mappings conflicted? Granted present day HTML restricts a document to one character set that may not be the case forever (or maybe it's not even the case now, what version HTML are they up to now?).
..and then after reading the original article and not the snippet..
Are they trying to say they got 250GB off the sniffer or off the guy's computer? And if it was off the guys computer did they get a search warrant for the password or just the data the password allowed them to access?
What kind of Internet connection did they have if they didn't notice the feds downloading hundreds of gig?
Anyone know of a better write-up than the ZD article?
I don't like the decision but look at it another way: you shouldn't have any expectation of privacy on the Internet. It's a public transportation system for data. If you're insane enough to send sensitive info unencrypted or weakly encrypted use deserve to be snooped.
Now if they said it was legit to break through a firewall or hack into a system.. that's where you have an expectation of privacy. That's kicking down someone's door.
You couldn't be more on with your post. That is exactly the type of thinking with our society. It's never the parent's responsibility. Look at Columbine, they'll blame the cops, the school faculty, they'll go so far as to blame computer games and television. It's NEVER the parents.
What happens when someone else does something about their little shits? "Don't yell at my child!", "My child has rights!", "that's easy for you to say, you don't have kids!".
We need a state with no kids. We'll call it the freedom state. No tax penalties for single people, the f word on the radio, free p0rn for all, no hourly education crisis, no school shootings, infinite violence on TV, beer for all, no ratings systems on anything. Who's with me?
> If you think that colleges come down on
> plagiarism because they need more money, you
> really did miss out on the important part
> of your education. If your good name is worth
> that little to you, I feel pity for you, and
> anyone who associates with you.
Of the colleges I've attended I would doubt that ANYTHING that administration does isn't directly related to money.
You missed my point though, well actually, I think you missed all of them.
> So why didn't you simply delete the notes
> before the test? If you truly learned it,
> you wouldn't need them, would you?
True, but then why would I have bothered to enter them in the first place if I knew I was just going to delete them anyway? Duh.
> You cannot justify the 5% by saying you
> learned the 95%
Perhaps not, but do you know what? Had I not "cheated" I would've learned little. The material would have been dry and boring and I wouldn't have bothered studying it. If I actually learned more by cheating than I would have otherwise I think it was justified. Impossible to prove perhaps, but justified. School isn't about being more moral than thou. If I cheated but learned more than you (if in fact I had remembered any of it) then didn't I get more out of the experience?
> The point of the class is to teach you how
> to quote correctly and such.
Yea, but my point was colleges busting students while they're supposed to still be learning that. After the successfully complete the class, so be it.. not during.
Beyond that, I can see if someone blatantly rips off entire paragraphs or more. Getting all antsy over a sentance is a bit much. I've actually seen professors stoop to that. That to me is an honest mistake, I can't see someone intentionally trying to rip off a single sentance in the scope of an entire document.
Anyhoo, don't pity me. No one else does.
That may be true in most math courses but it isn't in Calculus. I took Calc2 one, maybe two years ago. The professor invited us to use computers and/or graphing calculators. The calculators (like my 48GX) were too damn slow. It'd take several minutes to enter the problem and forever for it to compute an answer (even if it could).
As for computers.. The professor made available to the class all the latest in software. The programs I recall were Macsyma, MathCad, Mathmatica, and so forth. Our professor had alot of experience with these types of programs and knew how to foul them up. On his assignments generally half the problems were computable by these programs, show some work too and you got credit. The other half would result in either an error or an insanely complex answer. Write one of those down and you got no credit. If you understood the problem you could solve it yourself or feed it peicemeal or in another form to the program.
That class was a pain in the butt but I not only learned alot about calc but about programming as well. I found it a pity that I didn't meet up with that proficient a professor until one of my last math classes in college.
If educators would take the time to incorporate technology into their classes THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO FEAR IT. Instead they're still copying their forty year old textbook onto the chalkboard and having kids solve fifty of the same problem again and again. Or even worse.. using PowerPoint.
Reminds me of a probability & statistics class I took once. I couldn't find a mathematical solution for a problem on the final so I wrote a Pascal program to find a solution. (Our school only did Pascal so I used what they were familiar with). Despite the fact that I couldn't run it to find the answer (no computers in that class) I got credit for it.
I admit, I was one of the first geeks in my HS to get a graphing calculator. I had a Casio something or other, then a TI-85, the somewhere along the lines I picked up an HP48GX. I always used to program in my math notes before a test. ALWAYS. If I was in the real world and had to solve problems like that I'd have those resources. No one does that crap from memory, and if they do it's because it's relevant to their occupation and they've done it a million times.
But by the mere routine of punching in those notes on those ridiculously small keypads I found I almost never needed to refer to them during the test. Typing them in and checking that I could actually understand the typed in version had made me memorize the information.
Did I ever get caught? Hell no. I wrote a program that looked like the screens you'd see if you reset the TI-81 which was what the school used. I'd show the teach it was reset and off I went. Do I feel I cheated? No. I took the time to learn the information so that I could understand it and enter it in a compressed form in the tiny memory of those calculators. The fact that 95% of the time I didn't need to refer to it proved to me that I was "learning", and that's the whole point.
How does this relate to this University scandal? "Cheating" takes a wide variety of forms. How many times have people in an English related class been busted for not properly quoting something? Ever been acused of plaugerism? I know someone that happened to and it's BS. The point of the English classes is to teach you to quote things and what not. Do it wrong and we'll threaten to throw you out of college. Nice.
Now how about these students that already graduated? College need more revenue? Simple, revoke some diplomas already granted and make past students come back at their expense. QED.
If ya downloaded it and didn't pay for it (and you know you're 'sposed to pay for it), ya stole it. Although I did say "stole" and not the generally accepted stole without quotes. It's virtual theft. As in, I'm too virtuous to believe that I'm doing anything wrong. Or e-theft perhaps. "E" as in entertaining so it's ok.
We don't really need big fancy words to describe an age-old sin.