Pretty good, of course this guy is also a professional. I'm just glad that people can finally create content on phones, and not just consume it.
Apple of My Eye- an iPhone 4 film on Vimeo
Monday, June 28, 2010
Monday, June 21, 2010
Online defamation and Murray State
I’ve spent the last few weeks staring at back issues of the Murray State News, (not for fun, honestly, I need them for my master’s project so I can graduate). In the more recent issues, particularly the one from April 16, 2010, there is an article “Online defamation of professors questioned” which raises some very good points that students may not realize, including the fact that posts on facebook and twitter, if public, are considered publishing.
I got rather uneasy when I first read the article back in April and I’m still uneasy when I read it. I got downright queasy when I read the News staff editorial that week, “Carelessness of student body can cripple University's reputation”. It seems to be more than anything trying to drum up support for a new university policy concerning online defamation, which is (a.) not needed and (b.) has a high potential for abuse.
The university does not need a policy regarding defamation because we already have laws protecting people from defamatory remarks. Professors (and in fact, students) are protected from slander by law. If anyone says something defamatory about anyone, they have legal recourse. Likewise, students (and, also, professors) can then use the truth as a defense in court and against SLAPP suites.
SLAPP suites bring me to my next concern, which is that, since the university will be circumventing the courts in this matter, due process may be lost in the move. Depending on how this new policy is written (and at this point I’m sure it’s going to be written sooner rather than later) it may demand that any professor can demand any post be taken down until it’s reviewed.
Will first amendment protections be included in the policy? Will Murray State just go ahead and block RateMyProfessor.Com?
There was a third, smaller rumbling in my gullet while I was reading the words of professors interviewed for the story, one I couldn’t quite place until later. After reading through it again I realized that these were not men cowering in fear of the power these faceless students have over their online popularity, these were the words of men sharpening their swords, bracing for the coming battle. But whom would they be fighting? Hopefully not the very students that take their classes! Oh, well, then... good luck with that.
I got rather uneasy when I first read the article back in April and I’m still uneasy when I read it. I got downright queasy when I read the News staff editorial that week, “Carelessness of student body can cripple University's reputation”. It seems to be more than anything trying to drum up support for a new university policy concerning online defamation, which is (a.) not needed and (b.) has a high potential for abuse.
The university does not need a policy regarding defamation because we already have laws protecting people from defamatory remarks. Professors (and in fact, students) are protected from slander by law. If anyone says something defamatory about anyone, they have legal recourse. Likewise, students (and, also, professors) can then use the truth as a defense in court and against SLAPP suites.
SLAPP suites bring me to my next concern, which is that, since the university will be circumventing the courts in this matter, due process may be lost in the move. Depending on how this new policy is written (and at this point I’m sure it’s going to be written sooner rather than later) it may demand that any professor can demand any post be taken down until it’s reviewed.
Will first amendment protections be included in the policy? Will Murray State just go ahead and block RateMyProfessor.Com?
There was a third, smaller rumbling in my gullet while I was reading the words of professors interviewed for the story, one I couldn’t quite place until later. After reading through it again I realized that these were not men cowering in fear of the power these faceless students have over their online popularity, these were the words of men sharpening their swords, bracing for the coming battle. But whom would they be fighting? Hopefully not the very students that take their classes! Oh, well, then... good luck with that.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Thoughts on USA/England match
I wonder how many news stories will lead off with "It's not easy being Green"?
Also, Howard should get a statue made of him. Not a giant statue, something more life sized. Maybe one of those butter statues they have at the Iowa state fair.
Also, Howard should get a statue made of him. Not a giant statue, something more life sized. Maybe one of those butter statues they have at the Iowa state fair.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Wonder if apple approves....
Concerning ATT's new data plans:
When Apple introduced the iPad 3G it promoted a "breakthrough deal with ATT". $15 for 250MB and $30 for unlimited on a month-to-month basis.
Now, six months after it was announced, and one month after the iPad 3G shipped, ATT seems to be reneging on the deal. They've jacked up the price per GB (Old: $30 for 5GB. New: $25 for 2GB).
This has got to be another thorn in the foot of Apple. ATT, something Apple can't control, is taking away from the user exerience. They've had a year to implement tethering (something the iPhone, to great applause, learned to do last year) and now are wanting to charge users another $20 a month to use the same 2GB they get for $30.
Let me explain that a different way: for $30 an ATT user gets 2GB of data from their device. For another $20 they can hook that phone to a computer and surf the internet through their phone. If they do this, they use that same 2GB. When that 2GB is exhausted, they have to pay $10 more for another GB.
Meanwhile, in Ireland (on Meteor), you can get 10GB for €15. Coupled with a cheap voice/text plan, you get it for €25 ($30) total. I hate American cell phone plans.
When Apple introduced the iPad 3G it promoted a "breakthrough deal with ATT". $15 for 250MB and $30 for unlimited on a month-to-month basis.
Now, six months after it was announced, and one month after the iPad 3G shipped, ATT seems to be reneging on the deal. They've jacked up the price per GB (Old: $30 for 5GB. New: $25 for 2GB).
This has got to be another thorn in the foot of Apple. ATT, something Apple can't control, is taking away from the user exerience. They've had a year to implement tethering (something the iPhone, to great applause, learned to do last year) and now are wanting to charge users another $20 a month to use the same 2GB they get for $30.
Let me explain that a different way: for $30 an ATT user gets 2GB of data from their device. For another $20 they can hook that phone to a computer and surf the internet through their phone. If they do this, they use that same 2GB. When that 2GB is exhausted, they have to pay $10 more for another GB.
Meanwhile, in Ireland (on Meteor), you can get 10GB for €15. Coupled with a cheap voice/text plan, you get it for €25 ($30) total. I hate American cell phone plans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)