That doesn't mean that governments should just give up and not make these laws. Enough of these laws get passed around the world, those who intentionally wish to violate these laws will have no place to hide.
After the laws are passed, even if a few second or third world countries allow spyware / spam creators to work in their countries, the countries with spyware/spam laws can form a "coalition of the willing" and blackhole violating countries altogether until they comply and pass similar laws. (Wow, even Bush can serve as an educational example.)
Regardless of the politics of tossing entire countries into a blackhole filter, the point is that inaction allows spammers and spyware creators to breed.
Not entirely. Here's another link to the story (from the Toronto Star's business section):
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?p ag ename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1 086559808952&call_pageid=968350072197&col=96904886 3851
The most interesting quote is this:
"My guess is that rather than an injunction, NTP would rather have ongoing royalties," said Marc Kaufman, a patent lawyer with Nixon Peabody in Washington. "The time you really want an injunction is when you have a competing business.''
That means you not only keep your Blackberry, but RIM's gonna charge your company more for it to pay royalties to NTP... Which is going to increase your company's demand for a "Return On Investment" on these products... Which means you'll be called more often!
Feel free. Borrow, steal. I want as many schools adopting those guidelines as possible. If you feel the urge to use a citation, the name's Ken Lau.
I came up with those guidelines in 1999. That's why whenever I read current bellyaching about the misuse of technology in the classroom, I want to scream "I warned ye! I warned ye all" at the top of my lungs. The current state of information and communication technology in the classroom didn't have to be so bleak.
I've read Jane Healy's book. While I generally agree with the sentiments, I found her book far too pessimistic and her statements far too sweeping. I'm an IT Curriculum Specialist for a K-12 school. My job is to critically assess technology and assist teachers in integrating the more useful technologies into our curriculum.
We've established a laptop program that has been quite successful. The girls (it's a girls' school) learn the traditional curriculum, enhanced with laptops, a knowledge management system, and other technological tools.
The main tricks are not to let technology dictate the curriculum and not to simply layer technology on top of existing curriculum. When you see an example of poor technology use in a classroom, it's often because some administrator decided that a given technology is cool looking and dumped it into a school for photo ops. When you see technology actually impeding learning, it's because a new technology was deemed "important" and it was dumped into the lap of an untrained teacher using a lesson plan he or she wrote years ago. If that teacher tries teaching the same lesson with extra doodads, the instructional time increases, effective learning time decreases, and technical problems totally draw attention away from the point of the lesson.
Here's a little one page Statement of Philosophy I give to teachers who are new to our school:
EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT A SCHOOL LAPTOP PROGRAM
Basic Assumption:
1. Laptops facilitate in two areas, processing information & sharing information
Paradigm Assumptions:
1. Laptops need to be approached as a "participatory" (Marshall McLuhan) or "cool" (Don Tapscott) medium, not a technological one
2. Collaboration & group work is highly valued - otherwise, why use networked computers?
3. The laptop project should encourage presentation & sharing. Otherwise, why use laptops instead of desktop computers or even paper & pen?
4. "Math thoughts do not occur just in math class". Integrated learning is important and needs to be reflected in how technology is used
5. Laptops should be used only when appropriate
6. A laptop program should allow laptops to be used not only for academic activities, but also for social activities. The Internet was built on the former premise, but innovation came from the latter
7. It's difficult to predict the future. Fortunately, shaping the future is much easier
Implementation Considerations:
1. Portable laptops, in theory, will allow anytime, anywhere style of investigation - not only within the school but outside as well
2. Information (raw input & finished output) must be easily accessible & feedback must be immediate
3. The needs of students & teachers drive software implementation design - the technology must be invisible (at least, for the initial laptop grade)
4. Within the same software program, teacher needs and student needs are different
5. Complexity increases with each additional piece of hardware or software beyond what is "standard" in a laptop. Every modification or addition can crash a computer.
6. There are novice users and expert users and each approaches technology differently
If every individual in a school follows the spirit of this guide, and they have a handy-dandy jack-of-all-trades like me to assist, any technology use can't help but be at least a neutral, if not entirely positive, experience in that school.
Slashdot Mirror
That doesn't mean that governments should just give up and not make these laws. Enough of these laws get passed around the world, those who intentionally wish to violate these laws will have no place to hide.
After the laws are passed, even if a few second or third world countries allow spyware / spam creators to work in their countries, the countries with spyware/spam laws can form a "coalition of the willing" and blackhole violating countries altogether until they comply and pass similar laws. (Wow, even Bush can serve as an educational example.)
Regardless of the politics of tossing entire countries into a blackhole filter, the point is that inaction allows spammers and spyware creators to breed.
Not entirely. Here's another link to the story (from the Toronto Star's business section):
p ag ename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1 086559808952&call_pageid=968350072197&col=96904886 3851
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?
The most interesting quote is this:
"My guess is that rather than an injunction, NTP would rather have ongoing royalties," said Marc Kaufman, a patent lawyer with Nixon Peabody in Washington. "The time you really want an injunction is when you have a competing business.''
That means you not only keep your Blackberry, but RIM's gonna charge your company more for it to pay royalties to NTP... Which is going to increase your company's demand for a "Return On Investment" on these products... Which means you'll be called more often!
Feel free. Borrow, steal. I want as many schools adopting those guidelines as possible. If you feel the urge to use a citation, the name's Ken Lau.
I came up with those guidelines in 1999. That's why whenever I read current bellyaching about the misuse of technology in the classroom, I want to scream "I warned ye! I warned ye all" at the top of my lungs. The current state of information and communication technology in the classroom didn't have to be so bleak.
I've read Jane Healy's book. While I generally agree with the sentiments, I found her book far too pessimistic and her statements far too sweeping. I'm an IT Curriculum Specialist for a K-12 school. My job is to critically assess technology and assist teachers in integrating the more useful technologies into our curriculum.
We've established a laptop program that has been quite successful. The girls (it's a girls' school) learn the traditional curriculum, enhanced with laptops, a knowledge management system, and other technological tools.
The main tricks are not to let technology dictate the curriculum and not to simply layer technology on top of existing curriculum. When you see an example of poor technology use in a classroom, it's often because some administrator decided that a given technology is cool looking and dumped it into a school for photo ops. When you see technology actually impeding learning, it's because a new technology was deemed "important" and it was dumped into the lap of an untrained teacher using a lesson plan he or she wrote years ago. If that teacher tries teaching the same lesson with extra doodads, the instructional time increases, effective learning time decreases, and technical problems totally draw attention away from the point of the lesson.
Here's a little one page Statement of Philosophy I give to teachers who are new to our school:
EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT A SCHOOL LAPTOP PROGRAM
Basic Assumption:
1. Laptops facilitate in two areas, processing information & sharing information
Paradigm Assumptions:
1. Laptops need to be approached as a "participatory" (Marshall McLuhan) or "cool" (Don Tapscott) medium, not a technological one
2. Collaboration & group work is highly valued - otherwise, why use networked computers?
3. The laptop project should encourage presentation & sharing. Otherwise, why use laptops instead of desktop computers or even paper & pen?
4. "Math thoughts do not occur just in math class". Integrated learning is important and needs to be reflected in how technology is used
5. Laptops should be used only when appropriate
6. A laptop program should allow laptops to be used not only for academic activities, but also for social activities. The Internet was built on the former premise, but innovation came from the latter
7. It's difficult to predict the future. Fortunately, shaping the future is much easier
Implementation Considerations:
1. Portable laptops, in theory, will allow anytime, anywhere style of investigation - not only within the school but outside as well
2. Information (raw input & finished output) must be easily accessible & feedback must be immediate
3. The needs of students & teachers drive software implementation design - the technology must be invisible (at least, for the initial laptop grade)
4. Within the same software program, teacher needs and student needs are different
5. Complexity increases with each additional piece of hardware or software beyond what is "standard" in a laptop. Every modification or addition can crash a computer.
6. There are novice users and expert users and each approaches technology differently
If every individual in a school follows the spirit of this guide, and they have a handy-dandy jack-of-all-trades like me to assist, any technology use can't help but be at least a neutral, if not entirely positive, experience in that school.