Group items tagged

An "experiment" which involved using homeless people as mobile wi-fi hotspots has attracted criticism, forcing the advertising agency behind it to defend itself.

1.11_people_machines 1.12_digital_citizenship 2.2_edu_training 2.2_hw_networks_classroom

1.11_people_machines 1.6_digital_div_equ_access 2.2_IT_teach_learn 3.2 _software

Stakeholders: Students Advantages for students Productivity applications and textbooks are available to download online - easy global Access. the files are digital, so they can be transfered easily The online texbooks are safe from physical dangers, such as fires Convenience - being able to access iTunes U (university level resources) and the internet Saving time - files in an electronic format can be edited, searched and backed up easily. Disadvantages for students Although the files are safe, the iBook itself is still susceptible to physical damage The files may be corrupt Battery power failures and technical problems (they don't happen with physical notebooks) Access to internet and resources may depend on whether the space has wireless Access to games and rich interactive productivity applications can become the norm. Thence users' attention span may decrease The cost of product, of electronic textbooks and applications is the major issue From an evaluative point of view, I think that using a portable electronic device in place of a physical textbook would not benefit the students very much. The values a teacher is looking for are the ability to focus and listen, and the iBook could encourage the student to run parallel tasks at inappropriate times. The device would not be suitable for younger audiences, and in my opinion, it would contribute to a child being spoiled. Rather more mature users would benefit from this product, because they are more conscious of its function and, most importantly, the price they had to pay for it. Other stakeholders may include Apple, educators and digital course material publishers.

For details on the Wikipedia blackout that is planned for January 18, 2012 see Wikipedia:SOPA initiative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

I find, in this scenario, Facebook's behaviour immoral. They have known of this problem for three years, and they have yet to produce any progress. Facebook does not seem to respect one's stance on these things. If you wish the picture deleted, then it should be deleted.

The apparent deletion of photos takes place by the elimination "all of the metadata for the photo as well as any and all tagging and linking information. For all practical purposes, the photo no longer exists. However, technically, the bits that make up the photo persist somewhere. It's possible that someone who previously had access to a photo and saved the direct URL from the CDN (...) could still access the photo." http://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/2493/how-long-does-facebook-keep-data-of-a-deleted-account In the article, "Wolens claims that Facebook is on the verge of fixing up its content systems so that "deleted" photos are really, truly deleted from the CDN within 45 days." However, the reliability of this claim is compromised by Facebook's Terms of Service, which every user must comply prior to creating an account. Summing up, it grants Facebook the right to do whatever they like with old content. They can even sublicense it: "You hereby grant Facebook an irrevocable, perpetual, non-exclusive, transferable, fully paid, worldwide license (with the right to sublicense) to (a) use, copy, publish, stream, store, retain, publicly perform or display, transmit, scan, reformat, modify, edit, frame, translate, excerpt, adapt, create derivative works and DISTRIBUTE (through multiple tiers), any User Content." http://consumerist.com/2009/02/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever.html Note the contradictions with the principles of the Data Protection Act 1998: "If you collect data about people for one reason, you can not use it for another; You can not give people's data to other people or

...organizations unless they agree;" http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Protection_Act I get the impression that through blurring the ownership of intellectual property and personal records, social networks have some ulterior motives. The following passage in the article suggests the photos could, in fact, be instantly deleted from the CDN databases: "(Amusingly, after publishing the 2010 followup, Facebook appeared to delete my photos from its CDN that I had linked in the piece. (...) Other "deleted" photos that I had saved links to-ones that weren't from my account and were deleted even earlier than mine-remained online.)" Zuckerberg counterargues: "trust us, we're not doing this to profit from you, it's so we are legally protected as we enable you to share content with other users and services." http://consumerist.com/2009/02/facebooks-new-terms-of-service-we-can-do-anything-we-want-with-your-content-forever.html In the end, it is in the hands of the user to control what is shared and given up ownership of.

This could be good for those boring lessons!

hmm nice!

very nice!