I tried out the yahoo mail beta last week, and I promptly dumped it in favor of the regular yahoo mail. I tried to attach some files to the email while using firefox, but the popup window to select the attachments was so small that I couldn't click on the browse button to find the attachment, I had to use the tab key to get to it. And there wasn't an 'ok' or 'attach' button in sight anywhere. Screw that.
I call Bullshit on this fallacy that I keep on hearing time and time again. Handguns and rifles are not easy to operate. Pick up a loaded handgun or rifle and try to pull the trigger without any training. It is more difficult than it seems. Most people forget to disengage the safety. Aiming and firing a handgun or rifle is also difficult and takes lots of practice to hit a target consistantly.
The skills needed to operate a weapon in real life and moving a mouse in a game to aim a gun do not intersect. However, the strategy behind the game, and the simulation of certain skils critical to 'completing the mission' could translate into skills needed to perpetrate a robbery or a kidnapping. But so does playing cowboys and indians!
" movies and TV also show you exactly how to hold and fire a gun "
hahahahaha...i'd like to see you hold a handgun sideways or with hand held too high up on the grip and see what happens.
Try actually firing a weapon (or watch real people fire real weapons) before making insipid observations.
...according to real world market prices for weapons! I'm not talking about imaginary world or server prices in an isolated ecosystem...I am talking about Valve linking the price of a AK-47 in the game to the market price of an AK-47 in Oakland, CA. Or in Iraq. Or whereever. For example, on http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/ a California legal AK-47 is $749. Of course, an actual economic model to help preserve the correct market price for weapons in the game should be implemented, to provide realism for when the game diverges from the current "peaceful" real world economy, to a WWII like economy. And why limit market dynamics to weapons! Why not do the same for food and uniforms! Nothing like a bunch of naked soldiers...
I was wondering about this too. Having attended law school a long time ago, cheating during exams wasn't possible. No materials were allowed into the exam rooms. Even during open note and open book exams, you still needed to know the material. However, "cheating" on written assignments, including hiding books in the library, using lexis-nexis without authorization, using hornbooks and looseleafs, finding old exams and answers, etc was rampant.
I'm still new enough here to hate when the/. story says "a NY Times Article" but doesn't reference or link to the article. I wonder if thats supposed to be so that karma whores like me can post a link to the actual story?
Oh, and enjoy the link to the print version of the article without ads:-) And try http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/technology/18hp. html?hp&ex=1158638400&en=0af37191eea65e08&ei=5094& partner=homepage if ya wanna see the scarey pictures of the HP execs.
A default judgement is still a judgement. I think the point of Spamhaus is that traditional English notions of fairplay and justice are not met by the lack of procedures afforded by a default judgement in the US, and violate an important English public policy. That argument, has very little merit, since they were given an opportunity to appear and failed to defend their case!
The reason why phishing attacks work is that people are fooled into giving credit card information to what appears to be a legitimate website. This could have been avoided if the customer was more careful, but then again, we all get tricked from time to time.
Now, why aren't flags raised when $30,000 is taken out of a bank account electronically from an unusual location? A phone call to the account holder would be nice.
By analogy, if someone forges a check, and signs my name, and the bank cashes that check, the bank is on the hook for the cash. Also, if someone lies about their identity, and the bank doesn't verify their identity, they are also on the hook for the check. The same should be true with online transactions.
If European banks and governments wont protect customers from fraud, online purchases will be doomed.
First of all, it is not that difficult to enforce a US judgment in England especially since a 1983 decision, Israel Discount Bank v. Hadjipateras, allowed the enforcement of a US $10 million judgment.
Secondly, it must be established that the US Court had jurisdiction under not just U.S., but English law. Jurisdiction can be established if the defendant was physically present in the foreign country or carrying on business in the country "at a definite and reasonably permanent place". I think that English Courts should take the position that a url is a definite and reasonably permanent place.
Thirdly, England might not recognize a US judgement if it is against it's Public Policy. For example, multiple and punitive damages are considered to be contrary to public policy. So, if an English law says "no spam allowed" and an American law says "allow spam", English law trumps.
So, Spamhaus really has nothing to worry about. But the rationale it gave...was slightly confused.
It is not illegal in the United States. Political speech, even false political speech, is protected speech. Of course the line between slanderous speech and political speech is hard to draw...but it can be.
A "Do Not Call" law that prohibited political speech would probably be unconstitutional...
Oh, and IMHO, I haven't gotten a telemarketing call in ages. However, I just got a new number, and get TONS of debt collection calls from the previous deadbeat who had my number. Now, that is annoying shit!
Most people with experience with the application of force believe that the phrase 'non-lethal' is inaccurate and is a misnomer. The correct phrase is "Less than Lethal".
From Wikipedia: As different parts of the body differ in vulnerability, and because people vary in weight and fitness, any weapon powerful enough to incapacitate is likely to be capable of killing under certain circumstances. Thus "non-lethal force" may have some risk of causing death: in this context "non-lethal" only means "not intended to kill". For this reason, two new terms, "less than lethal" and particularly "less-lethal", were coined and are now being used in place of "non-lethal" by many weapons manufacturers and law enforcement agencies (and even those who oppose their common use in riot control). This meaning emphasizes that they tend to kill or injure far fewer targets than traditional weapons, whose primary purpose is to kill and maim.
The entire concept of less-than-lethal weapons is to minimize civilian casualties. Although rioters are occasionally accidentally killed by these weapons, fatalities are rare and usually accidental. Typical causes of death from non-lethal weapons include misplaced or ricocheting shots, as well as insufficient training on the part of the user.
No no no. They do understand what they think is going to happen. Of course, they do not know exactly what will happen. They are trying to validate their work with you know, the scientific method. You know, the method where they make observations, hypothesis, and then test them in an experiment. If there was any real danger, the scientists wouldn't conduct the experiment. We've been smashing particles together in accelerators for a while now, and our planet hasn't been swallowed by a wormhole.
Scientists not fully understanding a phenomenon =! Scientists don't understand the phenomenon =! Scientists don't understand the risk of their experiment =! something bizarre happens that kills everyone in your fantasy land.
I agree...a slight misspelling isn't going to turn me off either. But I would never buy a product if the product name was spelled wrong...or if there were multiple horrendous misspellings...
I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion here. If you see a misspelling, it is a sign that it might be a bad deal, or that you have a disinterested or misinformed seller, or that the seller might be trying to rip you off. Thus, misspellings signal a risky transaction! But, as part of assuming that risk, there will be a lower price.
Not to mention that there is a common law (civil) right to privacy that would be violated if a private company you worked for video taped you in the bathroom. I think everyone believes that there is a reasonable right to privacy in the bathroom. Of course, there is no right to privacy in your desk or other parts of the office...
A secret ballot is more necessary than the possibility of vote tampering.
From http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/13070res20040 921.html : Q. Why a secret ballot? A. Voting is a fundamental right, and the right to cast a secret ballot is part of that right (a right recognized and guaranteed by state law). A secret ballot protects against two things: undue influence and manipulation in casting a vote, and retaliation because of how one voted. No one should ever be asked to waive the fundamental right to a secret ballot. The government has no legitimate interest in compromising the secret nature of the ballot.
I'm reminded of the time in American history during the aftermath of Reconstruction following the Civil War when blacks who were given the right to vote by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were made to vote in public under the watchful eyes of their former masters. If the freedmen didn't vote the right way, they were often kicked off the land or they were visited by the Ku Klux Klan.
If I write a program that I have written and released under the GPL and then add in code released under the CDDL, and I keep releasing it under the GPL, this mixing would be prohibited. If I take my GPL code, mix in some CDDL code, and release under the CDDL (and not the GPL), that would be allowed. Then there is a huge fuzzy grey area where Jorg linked to a library/make program. GPL dropped him, because they like bright line rules that go along with their general philosophy...simple as that. That doesn't mean that he has done anything illegal though, or broke the GPL. Put 5 lawyers in a room, and you'll get 100 opinions...
Of course, not all laws are written in English...Canadian laws are written in both French and English. I would go as far to say that most countries write their laws in their own official languages, keeping in mind that most countries have more than one official language...
As far as law and ambiguity goes, you would think a simple statement like, "Thou shall not murder" is clear and precise. It is not. It leaves open to question for killing in self defense, killing for necessity, killing accidently, and killing in behalf of your country or when a diety commands it.
Laws are like computer code...on paper. Execute code on a machine, and the machine reacts precisely. Proclaim a law on people...and people should follow it exactly...except that people react and behave wildly and differently and come up with a myriad of exceptions, explanations, situations and rationalizations not to follow the letter of the law. There is no such thing as "fairness" and "equity" in computer machine code. It is all 1s and 0s...true and false...no grey in-between...at the end of the day.
According to http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html :
"I would like to release a program I wrote under the GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in non-free programs.
"To release a non-free program is always ethically tainted, but legally there is no obstacle to your doing this. If you are the copyright holder for the code, you can release it under various different non-exclusive licenses at various times."
Jörg Schilling is perfectly within his rights to take a program that he wrote and holds the copyright to, and release it under the SDDL and not the GPL. Assuming, of course, that he has approval for the relicensing from every copyright holder and has rewritten the code where the approval wasn't granted...
However, it is a shitty move...but, what can ya do besides fork?
Just because an exception 'looks silly', doesn't make the exception any less valid. A more precise definition is, as you say, all the better. But why?
One of the questions that hasn't been discussed in the media is why the characterization of Pluto and other objects in the solar system is important. Well, most importantly, characterization of data is of prime importance to the scientific method.
Word Processing Papers and Book Reports Word Processing Notes that they have taken in class Preparing Presentations for a Class Using the computer as a graphing calculator in math class Using the computer in a computer programing class Using the internet to "wikipedia" or "google" an answer to a teacher's question during an inclass discussion Posting assignments to the class blog or white board Using the computer in class to read assigned text.
Problems and how to deal with them: Pornography - the same way as with paper porn: detention or suspension. Use your own computer if you wanna wack off. IM Chat - same way as passing notes: intercept them (view unencrypted messages using ethereal.) Or Block ports and IM clients. MySpace & Social Networking - same way as other socializing...not during class time. Do it at home or study hall. Other problems - computer inspections by trained IT staff for illicit or unapproved material and programs. Abuse of computer privileges - specially designed restricted/locked down laptop with linux as the OS and detention.
This is the reason why letting someone go via e-mail is such a horrid idea. How do you know that someone in the IT department isn't playing an evil joke on you?
I agree with hAckz0r's post that if you do get one of these emails, you should immediately call your boss (or HR department) to confirm that it is true.
Then, go to your office place immediately to collect your things and wipe your computer of all of your personal stuff.
The last time I was laid off we were cryptically told to "take a few days of vacation". We were told the next day, via e-mail, that 95% of the group had been laid off, including myself. The e-mail was nice and understanding. Meh.
An average student takes 5 classes each semester. Usually 2 to 5 books are required per class. One of these books is expensive, between $70 to $100 and the other 4 are between $10 to $25. It usually averages out about $125 per class, setting the student back about $625...although in my experience, it usually works out to around $500 for the semester.
At a public university, such as Rutgers, tuition and fees comes to $9,958 (about $10,000). So, you have to spend a 10% premium to get your books. Shitty, but not so unreasonable. Considering that at a good private school, such as Washington University in St. Louis, tuition and fees comes to $34,294 (about $35,000), thats only about a 3% premium.
If you can't afford the books, you can share a copy with a fellow student, or use the library copy, if there is one. Or buy an older used copy and cope with not knowing which assignment to do. Used copies often go for $5 on Amazon, depending on the title.
Of course, some of my best professors in undergrad and grad school did not use textbooks at all. Most, but not all textbooks are crutches for both the student and the professor. If the professor is willing to do a little bit of legwork to assemble and procure permissions to use copy righted material, he can assemble a very nice looseleaf binder with appropriate journal articles and related reading materials. These little gems usually only cost about $30 to $40 a pop and contain the greatest and latest research. And it is customized. In an electronic format, they are probably cheaper.
College Professors need to get out of the stone age. Most good material is available free online to a university. 'Nuff said.
Slashdot Mirror
I tried out the yahoo mail beta last week, and I promptly dumped it in favor of the regular yahoo mail. I tried to attach some files to the email while using firefox, but the popup window to select the attachments was so small that I couldn't click on the browse button to find the attachment, I had to use the tab key to get to it. And there wasn't an 'ok' or 'attach' button in sight anywhere. Screw that.
...Bose-Einstein Condensate all over her face. Boy, was she cold after!
"Guns aren't difficult to use..."
I call Bullshit on this fallacy that I keep on hearing time and time again. Handguns and rifles are not easy to operate. Pick up a loaded handgun or rifle and try to pull the trigger without any training. It is more difficult than it seems. Most people forget to disengage the safety. Aiming and firing a handgun or rifle is also difficult and takes lots of practice to hit a target consistantly.
The skills needed to operate a weapon in real life and moving a mouse in a game to aim a gun do not intersect. However, the strategy behind the game, and the simulation of certain skils critical to 'completing the mission' could translate into skills needed to perpetrate a robbery or a kidnapping. But so does playing cowboys and indians!
" movies and TV also show you exactly how to hold and fire a gun "
hahahahaha...i'd like to see you hold a handgun sideways or with hand held too high up on the grip and see what happens.
Try actually firing a weapon (or watch real people fire real weapons) before making insipid observations.
...according to real world market prices for weapons! I'm not talking about imaginary world or server prices in an isolated ecosystem...I am talking about Valve linking the price of a AK-47 in the game to the market price of an AK-47 in Oakland, CA. Or in Iraq. Or whereever. For example, on http://www.atlanticfirearms.com/ a California legal AK-47 is $749. Of course, an actual economic model to help preserve the correct market price for weapons in the game should be implemented, to provide realism for when the game diverges from the current "peaceful" real world economy, to a WWII like economy. And why limit market dynamics to weapons! Why not do the same for food and uniforms! Nothing like a bunch of naked soldiers...
I was wondering about this too. Having attended law school a long time ago, cheating during exams wasn't possible. No materials were allowed into the exam rooms. Even during open note and open book exams, you still needed to know the material. However, "cheating" on written assignments, including hiding books in the library, using lexis-nexis without authorization, using hornbooks and looseleafs, finding old exams and answers, etc was rampant.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/technology/18hp. html?ei=5094&en=0af37191eea65e08&hp=&ex=1158638400 &partner=homepage&pagewanted=print
/. story says "a NY Times Article" but doesn't reference or link to the article. I wonder if thats supposed to be so that karma whores like me can post a link to the actual story?
:-) And try http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/technology/18hp. html?hp&ex=1158638400&en=0af37191eea65e08&ei=5094& partner=homepage if ya wanna see the scarey pictures of the HP execs.
I'm still new enough here to hate when the
Oh, and enjoy the link to the print version of the article without ads
A default judgement is still a judgement. I think the point of Spamhaus is that traditional English notions of fairplay and justice are not met by the lack of procedures afforded by a default judgement in the US, and violate an important English public policy. That argument, has very little merit, since they were given an opportunity to appear and failed to defend their case!
The reason why phishing attacks work is that people are fooled into giving credit card information to what appears to be a legitimate website. This could have been avoided if the customer was more careful, but then again, we all get tricked from time to time.
Now, why aren't flags raised when $30,000 is taken out of a bank account electronically from an unusual location? A phone call to the account holder would be nice.
By analogy, if someone forges a check, and signs my name, and the bank cashes that check, the bank is on the hook for the cash. Also, if someone lies about their identity, and the bank doesn't verify their identity, they are also on the hook for the check. The same should be true with online transactions.
If European banks and governments wont protect customers from fraud, online purchases will be doomed.
First of all, it is not that difficult to enforce a US judgment in England especially since a 1983 decision, Israel Discount Bank v. Hadjipateras, allowed the enforcement of a US $10 million judgment.
Secondly, it must be established that the US Court had jurisdiction under not just U.S., but English law. Jurisdiction can be established if the defendant was physically present in the foreign country or carrying on business in the country "at a definite and reasonably permanent place". I think that English Courts should take the position that a url is a definite and reasonably permanent place.
Thirdly, England might not recognize a US judgement if it is against it's Public Policy. For example, multiple and punitive damages are considered to be contrary to public policy. So, if an English law says "no spam allowed" and an American law says "allow spam", English law trumps.
So, Spamhaus really has nothing to worry about. But the rationale it gave...was slightly confused.
It is not illegal in the United States. Political speech, even false political speech, is protected speech. Of course the line between slanderous speech and political speech is hard to draw...but it can be.
A "Do Not Call" law that prohibited political speech would probably be unconstitutional...
Oh, and IMHO, I haven't gotten a telemarketing call in ages. However, I just got a new number, and get TONS of debt collection calls from the previous deadbeat who had my number. Now, that is annoying shit!
Most people with experience with the application of force believe that the phrase 'non-lethal' is inaccurate and is a misnomer. The correct phrase is "Less than Lethal".
From Wikipedia:
As different parts of the body differ in vulnerability, and because people vary in weight and fitness, any weapon powerful enough to incapacitate is likely to be capable of killing under certain circumstances. Thus "non-lethal force" may have some risk of causing death: in this context "non-lethal" only means "not intended to kill". For this reason, two new terms, "less than lethal" and particularly "less-lethal", were coined and are now being used in place of "non-lethal" by many weapons manufacturers and law enforcement agencies (and even those who oppose their common use in riot control). This meaning emphasizes that they tend to kill or injure far fewer targets than traditional weapons, whose primary purpose is to kill and maim.
The entire concept of less-than-lethal weapons is to minimize civilian casualties. Although rioters are occasionally accidentally killed by these weapons, fatalities are rare and usually accidental. Typical causes of death from non-lethal weapons include misplaced or ricocheting shots, as well as insufficient training on the part of the user.
No no no. They do understand what they think is going to happen. Of course, they do not know exactly what will happen. They are trying to validate their work with you know, the scientific method. You know, the method where they make observations, hypothesis, and then test them in an experiment. If there was any real danger, the scientists wouldn't conduct the experiment. We've been smashing particles together in accelerators for a while now, and our planet hasn't been swallowed by a wormhole.
Scientists not fully understanding a phenomenon =! Scientists don't understand the phenomenon =! Scientists don't understand the risk of their experiment =! something bizarre happens that kills everyone in your fantasy land.
I agree...a slight misspelling isn't going to turn me off either. But I would never buy a product if the product name was spelled wrong...or if there were multiple horrendous misspellings...
I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion here. If you see a misspelling, it is a sign that it might be a bad deal, or that you have a disinterested or misinformed seller, or that the seller might be trying to rip you off. Thus, misspellings signal a risky transaction! But, as part of assuming that risk, there will be a lower price.
:-)
My 2 cents + 6 dollar shipping
...and fast.
Not to mention that there is a common law (civil) right to privacy that would be violated if a private company you worked for video taped you in the bathroom. I think everyone believes that there is a reasonable right to privacy in the bathroom. Of course, there is no right to privacy in your desk or other parts of the office...
A secret ballot is more necessary than the possibility of vote tampering.
0 921.html :
From http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/13070res2004
Q. Why a secret ballot?
A. Voting is a fundamental right, and the right to cast a secret ballot is part of that right (a right recognized and guaranteed by state law). A secret ballot protects against two things: undue influence and manipulation in casting a vote, and retaliation because of how one voted. No one should ever be asked to waive the fundamental right to a secret ballot. The government has no legitimate interest in compromising the secret nature of the ballot.
I'm reminded of the time in American history during the aftermath of Reconstruction following the Civil War when blacks who were given the right to vote by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments were made to vote in public under the watchful eyes of their former masters. If the freedmen didn't vote the right way, they were often kicked off the land or they were visited by the Ku Klux Klan.
If I write a program that I have written and released under the GPL and then add in code released under the CDDL, and I keep releasing it under the GPL, this mixing would be prohibited. If I take my GPL code, mix in some CDDL code, and release under the CDDL (and not the GPL), that would be allowed. Then there is a huge fuzzy grey area where Jorg linked to a library/make program. GPL dropped him, because they like bright line rules that go along with their general philosophy...simple as that. That doesn't mean that he has done anything illegal though, or broke the GPL. Put 5 lawyers in a room, and you'll get 100 opinions...
Of course, not all laws are written in English...Canadian laws are written in both French and English. I would go as far to say that most countries write their laws in their own official languages, keeping in mind that most countries have more than one official language...
As far as law and ambiguity goes, you would think a simple statement like, "Thou shall not murder" is clear and precise. It is not. It leaves open to question for killing in self defense, killing for necessity, killing accidently, and killing in behalf of your country or when a diety commands it.
Laws are like computer code...on paper. Execute code on a machine, and the machine reacts precisely. Proclaim a law on people...and people should follow it exactly...except that people react and behave wildly and differently and come up with a myriad of exceptions, explanations, situations and rationalizations not to follow the letter of the law. There is no such thing as "fairness" and "equity" in computer machine code. It is all 1s and 0s...true and false...no grey in-between...at the end of the day.
According to http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl-faq.html :
"I would like to release a program I wrote under the GNU GPL, but I would like to use the same code in non-free programs.
"To release a non-free program is always ethically tainted, but legally there is no obstacle to your doing this. If you are the copyright holder for the code, you can release it under various different non-exclusive licenses at various times."
Jörg Schilling is perfectly within his rights to take a program that he wrote and holds the copyright to, and release it under the SDDL and not the GPL. Assuming, of course, that he has approval for the relicensing from every copyright holder and has rewritten the code where the approval wasn't granted...
However, it is a shitty move...but, what can ya do besides fork?
Just because an exception 'looks silly', doesn't make the exception any less valid. A more precise definition is, as you say, all the better. But why?
One of the questions that hasn't been discussed in the media is why the characterization of Pluto and other objects in the solar system is important. Well, most importantly, characterization of data is of prime importance to the scientific method.
What students should use computers for:
Word Processing Papers and Book Reports
Word Processing Notes that they have taken in class
Preparing Presentations for a Class
Using the computer as a graphing calculator in math class
Using the computer in a computer programing class
Using the internet to "wikipedia" or "google" an answer to a teacher's question during an inclass discussion
Posting assignments to the class blog or white board
Using the computer in class to read assigned text.
Problems and how to deal with them:
Pornography - the same way as with paper porn: detention or suspension. Use your own computer if you wanna wack off.
IM Chat - same way as passing notes: intercept them (view unencrypted messages using ethereal.) Or Block ports and IM clients.
MySpace & Social Networking - same way as other socializing...not during class time. Do it at home or study hall.
Other problems - computer inspections by trained IT staff for illicit or unapproved material and programs.
Abuse of computer privileges - specially designed restricted/locked down laptop with linux as the OS and detention.
This is the reason why letting someone go via e-mail is such a horrid idea. How do you know that someone in the IT department isn't playing an evil joke on you?
I agree with hAckz0r's post that if you do get one of these emails, you should immediately call your boss (or HR department) to confirm that it is true.
Then, go to your office place immediately to collect your things and wipe your computer of all of your personal stuff.
The last time I was laid off we were cryptically told to "take a few days of vacation". We were told the next day, via e-mail, that 95% of the group had been laid off, including myself. The e-mail was nice and understanding. Meh.
Firefox Portable
Thunderbird Portable
OpenOffice Portable
Gaim Instant Messenger Portable
Virus scanners: McAfee Stinger, ClamWin, and Avast!
Foxit PDF Reader
TrueCrypt Encryption System! Plausable Deniability!
CyberShedder File Shreder
VLC Media Player
uTorrent File Sharing
Damn Small Linux embedded
An average student takes 5 classes each semester. Usually 2 to 5 books are required per class. One of these books is expensive, between $70 to $100 and the other 4 are between $10 to $25. It usually averages out about $125 per class, setting the student back about $625...although in my experience, it usually works out to around $500 for the semester.
At a public university, such as Rutgers, tuition and fees comes to $9,958 (about $10,000). So, you have to spend a 10% premium to get your books. Shitty, but not so unreasonable. Considering that at a good private school, such as Washington University in St. Louis, tuition and fees comes to $34,294 (about $35,000), thats only about a 3% premium.
If you can't afford the books, you can share a copy with a fellow student, or use the library copy, if there is one. Or buy an older used copy and cope with not knowing which assignment to do. Used copies often go for $5 on Amazon, depending on the title.
Of course, some of my best professors in undergrad and grad school did not use textbooks at all. Most, but not all textbooks are crutches for both the student and the professor. If the professor is willing to do a little bit of legwork to assemble and procure permissions to use copy righted material, he can assemble a very nice looseleaf binder with appropriate journal articles and related reading materials. These little gems usually only cost about $30 to $40 a pop and contain the greatest and latest research. And it is customized. In an electronic format, they are probably cheaper.
College Professors need to get out of the stone age. Most good material is available free online to a university. 'Nuff said.