Archive for the ‘Technology’ Category

If you think it’s bad, it’s worse.

Monday, April 7th, 2008

So it’s been a few weeks now since RIT has started following their new DMCA policy, and it’s everything I knew it would be. Instead of a generic rant on this, I will share an adventure of a co-worker of mine. We’ll call him… Dan.

Dan got up one morning to check his email and was confused when he couldn’t connect to the server. He couldn’t check his news. He was disabled. Dan had been hit with a notice for sharing an episode of Arrested Development. One he didn’t have. He was accused, and had no internet access. He was forced to go through a limited proxy to get to an internal RIT site which had a big long shpiel about filesharing and why it’s bad and what it means that he got accused, and he had to click some “I Agree” button saying he was a bad man to get his internet connection back to full power.

Yeah, it only ate a day of his life, it doesn’t have any lasting effects, it was too early in the quarter to really mess him up. But he got hit for sharing a file he didn’t even have. This is as close as it comes to case & point. The innocent should not be punished. Irresponsible entities should not run amok…
Why can’t RIT get it right?

McCarthyism part 2.

Tuesday, February 5th, 2008

RIT’s Fearless Cleader has not felt it in him to respond to my most recent letter. Now rather than use my RIT access to place my concerns directly into his mail inbox I will stay in the shoes of the “average” student, which is to say I will pay exorbitant sums of money so that administration can ignore me. So since The Banjo-Man doesn’t care about what I have to say, I’ll tell the Internet. So this has become another open letter to the RIT President.

Dr. Destler,

I am responding to the post you made following the flood of email concerning the new RIT DMCA policy. I am sure you’ve gotten even more messages following that response of students who are supremely disappointed by the way RIT has decided to handle this. Our new policy looks like it was written by Joseph McCarthy. How can you possibly believe that the revocation of network access is not a consequence? At an institute like RIT, where professors are often giving their midterm examinations before students have memorized what rooms their classes are in, even a week without access to the network could spell disaster if a class requires online interaction or coursework submission. And why is it suddenly acceptable to do something like this to someone without ANY real investigation or evidence? Are we suddenly guilty until proven innocent? And while it’s true that being forced to denounce an act you may or may not have committed to have the punishment rescinded is NOT an admission of guilt, it is very distasteful.

The RIAA and the MPAA are well-known at this point for blanket or shotgun style threats, hitting people almost at random with threats of legal action and accusations of IP infringement. Are you really going to let these people make RIT an instrument of their witch hunt by taking action against students without proof?

Can ANYONE tell me who thinks this is a good idea?

CUE: RIAA Inquisitor enters, upstage right.

Tuesday, January 15th, 2008

Today, the 14th of January in the year 2008 RIT has taken the first step in caving to the RIAA/MPAA witchhunt. An e-mail has been sent to the students and staff concerning the “rampant disregard for intellectual property rights”. RIT has outlined a 3 step escelation system for dealing with accusations lodged against RIT students and faculty. The wording in this e-mail is troubling and important. The first bullet point in the e-mail is this:

“An initial reported copyright violation”

(Emphasis has been added).

Now while it is true that the consequence at this level is merely temporary disconnection, the actions taken quickly get serious and at an institute which is so fast paced even a temporary revocation of network access can pose major setbacks to those in courses of study where it is vital. Especially since all that is required to enter this particular track is a REPORTED violation. And that is VERY disconcerting.

The message does mention the accused will have an “opportunity” to defend themselves after such an accusation…presumably once their connectivity has been restored. Of course the message doesn’t say how to do this, it doesn’t say where it is. So do they send it to you after your get accused? So you can try to assemble your defense after your “probation” is up? I’d think something like this would be useful to tell everyone, guilty or innocent, before they even need to worry about it.

If I’m wrong with my interpration I will fully redact the insinuations of this post and apologize to those involved at RIT. In closing I am also including a letter I have written to President Destler. Feel free to resend this or add your names to it.

Dr. Destler,
I have just received the mass media message sent out to the student body regarding the actions being taken by RIT to curb IP infringement. And this message seems to indicate that immediate action will be taken upon receipt of an accusation. The evidence lies in the phrasing: “An initial reported copyright violation”. This says a REPORTED violation, not necessarily an actual confirmed violation. The message then links to the legal download information page and makes a down-played reference to the idea that the accused still technically have some rights and can contest the action…but again this is the action and not the accusation. However I have read the RIT Computer Code of Conduct and Acceptable Use Policy, and I can’t find the exact procedure for defending oneself. My question is…
What is this procedure, where is it, and when was RIT intending to put it out in clear text for those who are looking?

Improved Laundry Facilities: A Group Effort

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2007

Many RIT students are familiar with the situation of RIT’s laundry facilities.  In fact, when I hear people complain about dorm life here, the laundry rooms are usually the subject.  While it’s reasonable to say that most of the machines work, several do not.  Some washers don’t agitate.  Some take your money and don’t even do anything at all.  Some dryers don’t actually produce any heat.  And of course, all the machines that work fine are usually taken, depending on when you do your laundry.

I was faced with some of these problems a couple weeks ago when I went to do laundry under Saul.  A lot of the machines were in use, and several were also in a state of disrepair.  In some cases, this was obvious.  I mean, I didn’t really think that the one dryer that was missing its door would do a very effective job of driing my clothes.  In many cases, the state of the machines is ambiguous, indicated only by graffiti written in permanent marker on the side.  I’ve found that sometimes you can trust this, sometimes you can’t.  And then there are the ones with no indication of their problems whatsoever.

After washing my clothes, I struggled to find a dryer that was working and not in use.  After a while, I decided to take a wild guess on one.   After swiping my card, I pushed the button to start the machine.  Nothing happened.  Luckily, another dryer had just become free, so I moved over.  However, even this one did not dry my clothes completely.

Many people complain about situations like this.  And I will be among them:  The situation is horrendous.  It is sad that this institute does not take the laundry problems very seriously.  Luckily, there is a solution.   A simple one, in fact.  When you find a broken machine, report it.  After that dryer ate my $1.25, I was pissed.  I know it’s not much, but is another annoyance.  On the wall of the laundry room was a sign with a number to call to report issues.  When I had the chance a few days later, I called the number and detailed my problems.  I had no trouble getting a reimbursement for my lost money.  I also took the opportunity to report several of the broken machines.  And the next week when I went there again, progress was made.  The dryer with no door now had a new door.  Some of the other machines had been fixed too.

The situation is really quite simple.  When you write “broke” or something like that on the side of the washing machines, it is hard to remove.  If I recall correctly from talking to housing, there is a company the call in to remove the graffiti.  And on top of that, noone can tell if the problem with the machine was fixed or not.  As I mentioned, I’ve found graffitied machines that work fine.

When you call, you get the chance to actually make your voice heard.  I know people have asked Simone and such, but we really need people to actually report the washers and dryers that need maintenance.  If everyone did this, I’m not sure it would solve all our laundry issues.  But things would improve.  And it doesn’t take much time.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License.