Technology
More RIAA College Shenanigans.
The RIAA is at it again:
Under the new scheme, the RIAA sends out what it calls ‘pre-litigation’ settlement letters. Actually, they’re self-incrimination documents and they’re designed to extort preset amounts of around $3,000 from students with the empty promise that by paying up, they’ll remove the threat of being hauled into court on charges of copyright infringement.
In reality, all the students are doing is providing the RIAA with personal and private information which can conceivably be used against them at some point in the future when the Big 4 agency ramps up to a new level of intimidation.
In the sixth wave of blackmail, the RIAA is targetting 23 universities nationwide with 408 ’settlement’ letters. – [p2pnet.net]
Yet again, the RIAA has resorted to mass mailing “pre-litigation” letters to specific colleges in an attempt to intimidate students into settling. I have, in a previous post, pointed out some of the legal pitfalls of this methodology, and why the RIAAs proposed case should never hold up in any but the most technologically ignorant court.
But the article above brings up even more reasons why such a case would be hard to prove, such as the possibility of spoofed IP packet addresses, where the IP address present in an IP package is not necessarily that of the computer that sent it. This and other factors, make identification by IP address, especially in a communal environment, with technologically savvy participants, a near worthless form of identification.
And it would appear that the RIAA knows fully well that this is the case, as it appears that many of the more prestigious, (and presumably more technology/law happy/savvy) colleges, such as Harvard, Yale, etc are conspicuously absent from the list, in spite of the fact that they would almost certainly have had a large number of file sharers among their populace.
It would appear that these “pre-litigation” letters amount to little more than blatant attempts to make suspected file sharers engage in self incrimination. If I were a student, staff, faculty or member of the administration at any of these 23 universities, I would consider this a great insult to my intelligence, and would refuse to cooperate with the RIAA simply on principle. But then again, that could just be my antisocial tendencies rising to the fore…
RIAA student victimisation campaign – [p2pnet.net]
The Internet is for Porn…
Nigerian schoolchildren who received laptops from a U.S. aid organization have used them to explore pornographic sites on the Internet, the official News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported Thursday. – [Yahoo/Reuters]
Well at least no one can say they don’t learn pretty freakin’ fast…
Pupils browse porn on donated laptops – [Yahoo/Reuters]
EU Debates 101Mph Speed limit…
The European Union is considering imposing a 101Mph speed limit on all European manufactured cars in an attempt to reduce emissions and increase efficiency:
Chris Davies, a Liberal Democrat Member of European Parliament (MEP) has tabled a set of proposals to the EU Environment Committee that include harsh cuts to CO2 emissions, and a top speed limit of 162km/h for Euro-approved cars.
Mr Davies said: “Cars designed to go at stupid speeds have to be built to withstand the effects of a crash at those speeds. They are heavier than necessary, less fuel efficient and produce too many emissions. At a time when Europe is worried about its energy security it is sheer lunacy to approve the sale of gas guzzling cars designed to travel at dangerous speeds that the law does not permit.” – [GizMag]
Notwithstanding my admitted love of high horsepower engines and breakneck speeds, legislation like these generally seem to me to be the knee-jerk reaction of ignorant and narrow minded thinkers. The relationship between an engines efficiency and a cars top speed is never that simple. The same is doubly so for emissions. It is possible to make highly efficient high speed vehicles, as it is to make low emission, high horsepower engines. It’s all about the technology. Better solutions are found by fostering an environment of innovation, not prohibition.
Capping off arbitrary characteristics like top speed is meaningless, because you can have low speed vehicles that are still inefficient and produce high emissions. They might as well outlaw SUVs in Europe. I’m all about saving the environment, but lets hope people don’t cross the line into prohibition while they’re at it. Just a little bit of objective, scientific thought would go a long way here…
If they are worried about emissions and efficiency, they should just specify what they consider to be an acceptable emissions goal and efficiency rating, and let the manufacturers worry about it. That’s their job. They want to sell cars people like and they are pretty good at it. And I guarantee you they will come up with the technology to deliver that, and high horsepower, all at the same time. That’s how they make their money. And that, my friends, is how innovation works.
One Laptop Per Child… But No Juice… Or Help…
Now I am all for the penetration of technology into developing countries and whatnot, but I have to be honest. I think the whole OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) thing is one of the most presumptuous and misguided efforts I have ever come across. Unless it’s goal is to make money. Which is possible. But would be very sad. And this article only confirms my initial assessment:
LAGOS (AFP) – A Nigerian school has received a gift of 300 laptops — one per pupil — but has no electricity to power them up, the official News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported Friday. – [Yahoo/AFP]
I have watched the whole OLPC ordeal with both interest and irritation. My interest was piqued because I’ve always believed that the technology to create low-cost, Internet ready mobile computing devices has been available for years, and could never understand why no one had taken advantage of it. However it was a major source of irritation to see that these devices were intended for markets that were not ready for them, and might, in fact do more harm than good.
Let me explain a little bit. Having spent a great deal of my youth in a developing country, I believe that my knowledge of the needs of students in a third world country is better than most. I believe that while his intentions are good, Mr. Negropontes proposed solution fails to take into account some of the fundamental problems that developing countries face on a daily basis, and has also overlooked many of the underlying problems that need to be solved in order for real progress to occur.
As demonstrated by the article, many developing countries still do not have the infrastructure to generate consistent supplies of good clean electricity. Power outages were par for the course, when I was growing up. In fact, in some places, they occurred with scheduled regularity. This situation has improved immensely over the years, but adding more electronic devices to the grid would still only aggravate a tenuous situation.
And then there’s the whole Internet thing. While telecommunications networks in developing countries have improved by leaps and bounds over the past decade, they are nowhere near the reliability, capacity and sophistication of their western counterparts. Adding more Internet enabled devices can, and will, tax the current communications infrastructure. I can only guess what the added cost to the electricity and telecommunications infrastructure will be when these laptops begin wide circulation.
And then there is the cost issue. It would appear that Mr. Negroponte, and indeed most westerners, do not seem to realize that $100, which may seem inexpensive to western eyes, can do for 10 students what he is trying to do for one. Throw in the added expenses of maintenance and repairs for laptops in countries with little experience with such technologies, and the total cost of ownership of these laptops will equal a small fortune that could have been much more effectively utilized. The truth is, I think these laptops are little more than high-tech baubles that will really won’t add much to the development of third world countries as a whole.
My message is this. Students in developing countries don’t need laptops. They need more/better access to education. More schools, better schools, better books, better teachers, better training. You cannot effectively use technology to solve a problem unless you fully understand the problem. And technology itself is worthless without training and understanding. Until then these technological devices are little more than really expensive toys.
And if you absolutely have to throw technology at the problem, there are many cheaper, simpler, and much more more effective ways of helping developing countries advance. Like ODPC (One Desktop Per Class). Or OELPC (One Electronic Library Per School). In fact, you don’t even need technology. How about OSPV (One School Per Village). Or OTCTFIEMC (One Tech Career Training Facility in every Major City). 
A little long but you get the idea. I can almost guarantee you’d get technological penetration much faster that way, without the trail of busted laptops to boot…
Nigerian school without power receives 300 laptops – [Yahoo/AFP]
Log In
My Thoughts…
Blogroll
General Info
Phyreblades Blogs
Famous Last Words
The Time Machine
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Feb | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||
Issues
Pick your Poison:
Easy Eavesdropping.
- Phyreblade on Objective vs Subjective Reporting
- dreadrocksean on Objective vs Subjective Reporting
- phyreblade on Giving relevance to the irrelevant…
- phyreblade on Giving relevance to the irrelevant…
- shamelesslyatheist on Giving relevance to the irrelevant…