Posts tagged google
Facebook = A shitload of people posting shit they give a shit about for people that couldn’t give a shit about it…
CISPA Is the New SOPA
CISPA is the new SOPA. Today marks the opening of a week of action in opposition to the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, which would obliterate any semblance of online privacy in the United States. It’s up for a vote later this month.
CISPA demolishes existing barriers between the government and the private sector — and between government agencies, including the military — that restrict casual data sharing. It would effectively allow information about Americans’ use of the Internet to slosh back and forth uninhibited.
The Center for Democracy and Technology says, “CISPA has a very broad, almost unlimited definition of the information that can be shared with government agencies and it supersedes all other privacy laws.”
Corporations like Facebook could share information about their users with other corporations and the government, so long as it’s justified by a concern fitting the overly broad conception of cybersecurity threats: alleged piracy or the “degradation’ of a company’s network, for instance. That data could then be used towards nearly any end, from surveillance to hocking products to Internet users.
And according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, CISPA would accomplish much of the job that Hollywood and other content owners couldn’t get done off via SOPA earlier this year:
An ISP could even interpret this bill as allowing them to block accounts believed to be infringing, block access to websites like The Pirate Bay believed to carry infringing content, or take other measures provided they claimed it was motivated by cybersecurity concerns.
You can join nearly 90,000 other Internet users by using Demand Progress’s action page to urge your lawmakers to oppose CISPA.
Does Facebook really care about Internet users’ rights?
.
CISPA represents the first notable rift within the coalition of organizations and businesses that helped lead the charge against Stop Online Piracy Act. SOPA’s opponents came together in a kumbaya moment, with almost anybody who cares about the Internet — as user, activist, or profiteer — lining up against the bill.
Facebook struck an aggressive posture in opposition to SOPA, and at the time Mark Zuckerberg asserted:
The internet is the most powerful tool we have for creating a more open and connected world. We can’t let poorly thought out laws get in the way of the internet’s development. Facebook opposes SOPA and PIPA, and we will continue to oppose any laws that will hurt the internet.
He was right, but it wasn’t hard for Facebook to oppose SOPA: Its passage would have hurt Facebook’s bottom line — and probably forced it to alter basic business practices — by forcing it to aggressively to police alleged piracy.
And now the profit motive is causing Facebook to support CISPA, at the expense of its users, because it would relieve certain regulatory burdens and provide attractive immunities for the company.
Internet users were able to push GoDaddy to withdraw its support of SOPA. Now it’s time to make sure Facebook knows we’re furious:
Courtesy of David Segal RI State Representative, Former Congressional Candidate, Demand Progress Exec Director for The Huffington Post
Big Brother Is Watching Your Tweets…
It started with businesses concerned about their brands. Intelligence agencies have moved into it, raising alarms among privacy advocates. And many other government agencies are just beginning to explore its potential. It is social media analytics.
Companies and government agencies alike are using tools to sweep the Internet — blogs, websites, and social media such as Facebook and Twitter feeds — to find out what people are saying about, well, just about anything. The companies are generally interested in complaints about products or looking for sales leads. Intelligence agencies are looking for, among other things, warnings about potential terrorist threats.
The US Federal Bureau of Investigation posted a Request for Information last month calling on IT companies to demonstrate their ability to design software for monitoring, mapping and analyzing social media.
The RFI, posted to the government’s Federal Business Opportunities website in January, reveals the FBI’s desire for software capable of monitoring social media websites like Facebook and Twitter to provide alerts and analysis for publicly posted information. The software would require the ability to:
- “Geo-spatially locate bad actors or groups and analyze their movements, vulnerabilities, limitations and possible adverse actions”
- “Detect instances of deception in intent or action by bad actors”
and
- “Develop pattern-of-life matrices to support law enforcement planning and enforcement operations.”
In fact, the FBI is not the only US government agency currently working to monitor online social media;
- In October 2010 the Electronic Frontier Foundationobtained documentson social network surveillance under the Freedom of Information Act showing that the Department of Homeland Security has established a “Social Networking Monitoring Center” for the collection and analysis of online public communications.
- Last year, the Electronic Privacy Information Center obtainedmore FOIA documentsregarding the DHS social media surveillance, showing that the department has contracted General Dynamics to monitor social networks and even the comment sections of various news websites for “media reports that reflect adversely on the US Government [or] DHS.”
- Also last year, the Federal Reserve Bank of New Yorkissued a Request for Proposalfor “Sentiment Analysis and Social Media Monitoring” software. The request called on companies to develop software to monitor social media such as tweets, Facebook posts and YouTube comments to analyze what people are thinking and saying about the United States’ privately-owned central bank.
- In February of last yearit was revealedthat the US Air Force had solicited “persona management software” from contractors through an FBO request. The contract called for vendors to develop software which could allow up to 50 users to manage 500 online personas, which would be created “with background , history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographacilly consistent.” The request also called for virtual private servers in specific geographic locations that could allow the social media persona to appear to be from a different part of the globe. When news of the proposal broke and several large websites began to draw attention to it, it was quickly taken offline.
- Last July, DARPA, the Pentagon’s research project wing, announced a “Social Media in Strategic Communication” program. The announcement included language specifically calling for the ability to “influence operations” in “the environment in which [the Pentagon] operates,” meaning that it will be used to launch “countermessaging” campaigns online, supposedly to combat the spread of information harmful to the Pentagon’s interests.
- Last month’s FBI request for information, too, crosses the line from passive monitoring into active operations. One of the desired attributes of the software that the FBI wants to develop is the ability to “predict likely developments in the situation or future actions taken by bad actors” by analyzing patterns and associations in the target’s online communications.
- Once envisioned as ascience-fiction scenario, America’s top law enforcement agency is now attempting to integrate pre-crime detection into their social media analysis.
Currently, according to the law, government agents can sneak onto your property in the middle of the night, put a GPS device on the bottom of your car and keep track of everywhere you go. This doesn’t violate your Fourth Amendment rights, because you do not have any reasonable expectation of privacy in your own driveway — and no reasonable expectation that the government isn’t tracking your movements. And now, our government is planning to monitor your speech and track your activities using social media analytics.
.
This is the bizarre — and scary — fact that now applies to the world in which we live. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, recently decided the government can monitor you virtually anytime it wants — with no need for a search warrant. And the same may very well apply to government’s monitoring your activities via social media. Certainly, it is obvious that our government will soon have (if not already) the ability to track everything you do on Facebook, Google, Twitter, Foursquare and the like.
.
It is clear, that when government is provided with a tool that allows it to spy on it’s citizens, that tool is abused to the detriment of the people 100% of the time.
.
So, the next time you feel like posting information to your Facebook page or your Twitter feed, know that Big Brother is will be watching.
Is Facebook Turning Us Into Psychotics?
- Who takes a photo of every meal they eat to show to everyone they meet?
- Who offers up their newborn babies to strangers they’ve never met?
- Who drags their cats and their dogs around with them everywhere they go?
Well, a person afflicted with psychosis (a psychotic) certainly does…
And, thanks to Facebook, so do you….
In fact, thanks to the wonderful world of social media and networking sites, (the primary culprit being the omnipresent social gorilla known as Facebook), we’re only paying attention to the things we want to pay attention to. And that leaves us increasingly disconnected from our friends, family and co-workers as we simply turn to our devices when a conversation no longer interests us.
And that, apparently can be the cause of psychosis which, according to the American Heritage Science dictionary, is “a mental state characterized by the loss of contact with reality and the ability to think rationally.”
This mental state (a psychotic person often behaves inappropriately and is incapable of normal social functioning) has been attributed to frequent Facebook usage.
Case in point. Dr. Larry Rosen, a professor of psychology at California State University, distributed surveys to 1,000 urban adolescents and his own 15-minute observations of 300 teenagers that were studying.
Among his findings were;
- Teenagers who use Facebook more often show narcissistic tendencies while young adults who have a strong Facebook presence show more signs of other psychological disorders, including antisocial behaviors, mania, and aggressive tendencies.
- Daily overuse of media and technology has a negative effect on the health of all children, preteens, and teenagers by making them more prone to anxiety, depression, and other psychological disorders, as well as by making them more susceptible to future health problems.
- Facebook can be distracting and can negatively impact learning. Studies found that middle school, high school, and college students who checked Facebook at least once during a 15-minute study period achieved lower grades.
There’s certainly plenty of data that supports Dr. Rosen’s findings. Surveys showing that we’re increasingly suffering from a variety of psychiatric ilnesses directly linked to the use and over-use of social media have become commonplace.
So, what’s to be done about it? Well, obviously it’s long overdue for us to actively pursue a more self-aware and well-adjusted relationship with technology, the internet and social media.
Or, you could just go on adding more photos to your collection of idiotic cat pictures on Facebook…
On December 1, 2011 a group of ASU students started the petition titled “Arizona State University: Reduce The Costs Of Education For Arizona State University Students.” at the Change.org petition site.
This petition requested signatures to support the reduction in the cost of education for ASU students.
On the morning of December 7, 2011, Arizona State University BLOCKED ALL ACCESS to Change.org for ALL of it’s over 70,000 students and over 5,000 faculty and employees.
As of this date, approximately TWO MONTHS later, Arizona State University continues it’s BLOCKADE of the Change.org petition website, in a blatant attempt to prevent it’s current ernollment of more than 70,000 students from viewing and/or signing the petition to reduce college costs.
Clearly, ASU does not want it’s students, faculty, or employees signing this petition and has resorted to BLATANT and UNLAWFUL Censorship in order to block the freedom of expression of it’s students and faculty.
As such, students living on ASU campus, using ASU computers or accessing the internet through ASU’s school WIFI are unable to access Change.org.
As a result, Not only can’t ASU students sign the above petition but they are unable to sign ANY PETITION on the Change.org website.
In addition, emails sent from any “change.org” email address to any student or faculty email address ending in “asu.edu” are also being blocked by Arizona State University. That means that ASU refuses to allow Change.org or anyone using Change.org to send Arizona State University students or faculty emails regarding petitions facilitated by Change.org.
Not only is this outrageous, but it is a violation of the 1st Amendment rights of both ASU students as well the rights of Change.org and those with petitions hosted by Change.org to freely express itself.
Last time I checked this was America, not China, or Iran, or North Korea…..
What can be done about this?
Well. If you are an ASU Student, Professor, Instructor, or Employee you CAN sign the petition….You just can’t use any ASU computer or WIFI network to do so….
Just go to the petition at the Change.org site from your computer using ANY WIFI connection that is NOT associated with ASU…..That’s it…..Easy.
.
Support Arizona State University Students.
Support Freedom Of Expression.
Support The 99%.
Sign The Petition.
.
http://www.change.org/petitions/arizona-state-board-of-regents-reduce-the-costs-of-education-for-arizona-state-university-students
.
This article is the first in a two-part series tracing the development of the amorphous online community known as Anonymous, pranksters who have become a force in global affairs.
Late in the afternoon of Jan. 19, the U.S. Department of Justice website vanished from the Internet. Anyone attempting to visit it to report a crime or submit a complaint received a message saying the site was unable to load. More websites disappeared in rapid succession. The Recording Industry Association of America. The Motion Picture Association of America. Universal Music. Warner Brothers. The FBI.
By nightfall, most of the sites had come back online, but the people responsible for the outages had made their point. They’d landed what they hailed as the biggest blow yet in an escalating war for control of the Internet, and in one of their online command centers, “Phoenix” and his associates were celebrating.
Phoenix, a college student, is a member of Anonymous, the loose coalition of hackers, pranksters and other creatures of the Internet who have made headlines over the last 13 months for attacks on the computer systems of a wide range of targets: MasterCard, Visa and PayPal; the San Francisco public transit system; a Texas think tank; Sony; a host of computer-security companies; authoritarian governments in Tunisia and Egypt.
Phoenix wouldn’t call himself a “member,” of course. Much like Occupy Wall Street, a movement with which it has many ties, Anonymous technically has no official membership, hierarchy or specific agenda. Some “anons” do wield more influence than others and the resulting resentments have led to bitter internecine feuds, but its overall lack of an official power structure is essential to its identity and perhaps its survival. As Anonymous put it in a taunting statement to NATO, another recent object of its unfriendly attentions, “You can’t cut off the head of a headless snake.”
The snake seems to have a certain sense of direction, however, as the Jan. 19 attacks suggested. The inciting incident took place earlier that day in the hills outside Auckland, New Zealand, when local police landed two helicopters on the lawn of a man who calls himself Kim Dotcom and owns Megaupload, a hugely popular online service that enables people to share and store movies and other media for free.
Authorities shut down the site and arrested Dotcom and six colleagues, accusing them in a 72-page indictment of engaging in acts of “massive worldwide online piracy” that inflicted $500 million in damages on copyright holders while bringing in more than $175 million in profits.
The news spread quickly. A message went out on Anonymous Twitter accounts exhorting people to attack the Justice Department and several piracy-fighting trade groups. By clicking on a link, they could launch a page that asked them to identify a target. Thousands typed in the address of the Justice Department site and clicked enter, bombarding it with a fusillade of meaningless commands. Overwhelmed, the site froze and dropped offline.
In the chat network where Anonymous coordinated the attacks, the virtual warriors declared victory with a military phrase: “TANGO DOWN.”
Part war, part game. Given the culture of the Internet, it’s reasonable to assume that many of those who responded to Anonymous’ call were teenagers. The software used to fire these Internet missiles was the Low Orbit Ion Cannon, a name lifted from the video game “Command & Conquer.” Yet the consequences of firing it were real — a major law enforcement agency’s web site was temporarily crippled, leaving the agency to observe that there had been a “degradation in service.”
Last year, 14 anons were arrested in the United States for using the Ion Cannon to attack PayPal. Some now face the possibility of 15-year prison sentences.
Phoenix wasn’t around when the Jan. 19 attack went down, but later that night, I found him in an Anonymous chat room and asked him to explain the motivations behind it.
“You’ve heard Anons say before that this is a war,” he said. “A full scale information war. That’s not mere propaganda, many regard that as a perfectly accurate description. And the stake at play is, simply, ‘Who will control access to information? Everyone or a small subset?’”
In case it wasn’t clear, he then labeled that subset: “The government.”
THE WAR
This struggle for control of the Internet goes back years, but it reached a crescendo just the day before the attack on the Justice Department, when Wikipedia went dark in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect Intellectual Property Act, the controversial anti-piracy bills that were working their way through Congress. Google collected 4.5 million signatures on a petition against the bills. Mozilla redirected traffic from its sites. And thousands of other protesters, from Tumblr and WordPress to Some Guy with a Blog, blacked out their sites, took to the streets and posted messages opposing the legislation, saying it would hurt their business and amounted to censorship.
Across the battle lines stood film studios, music labels, pharmaceutical companies and other businesses intent on defending their copyrighted property from illegal sharing at a time when the Internet has made it possible for, say, a digital copy of “V For Vendetta” — an anon fave and the source of their iconic grinning Guy Fawkes masks — to travel from an iPad in the United States to a piracy site in Brazil to another viewer’s laptop in Korea.
These companies have faced a tricky problem: How do you sue a piracy site when it’s based in another country, especially one with looser intellectual-property laws? The bills’ answer: You don’t. You go after their enablers — websites that drive traffic to the piracy sites by posting links to them, even if they only do so inadvertently. Critics argued that the cost of getting rid of these links would drive smaller sites out of business.
Two days after the protests, in the face of public outrage and lobbying efforts from the tech sector, Congress shelved SOPA indefinitely. But that doesn’t mean the war is over. As one Anonymous tweet warned about SOPA: “It can be brought back anytime. The bill must be KILLED.”
Like the web companies involved in the protests, anons tend to argue that anti-piracy legislation could send the Internet down an ever-tightening spiral of government control. Many anons go further, portraying such bills as deliberate assaults on the right to free speech. They say they oppose anti-piracy efforts on idealistic grounds, not that they don’t enjoy a bit of pirated entertainment from time to time. In general, obeying the law isn’t their priority. “The Internet is the Wild West,” Phoenix said on the night of the attacks, “and Anonymous will fight against any attempt to tame it.”
That conversation with Phoenix was not my first. All of our communications took place online, mostly in the networks of chat rooms where anons plan their attacks, and I had come to think of him a messenger from the Internet underworld: He had one foot in the world of “hax0rs” — hacker-speak for hackers — and one in the world of capital letters and correct spelling.
He was like a hacker Hermes, moving freely between the realms of the living and the dead, except that in this case the realm of the dead was a dominion of cyberspace in which the dead possessed an unusual degree of expertise in massively multiplayer online video games and porn.
Altogether, I spoke with more than 30 anons, and in some respects, their attitudes couldn’t have been more different, but one thing seemed to hold them together. They saw the Internet as their homeland, their home. Among them were Phoenix, Xyzzy and Gregg Housh. Together, their stories roughly trace the rise of Anonymous and the battles leading up to what Phoenix calls the war……..
.
Click Here to Continue Reading…….
.
Courtesy of Saki Knafo of the Huffington Post
How Cats Have Conquered The Internet….
The Day The LOLcats Died
SOPA and PIPA are two examples of recent legislation that is lethal to the internet as we know it. The internet rose up and is on its way to successfully fighting them off, but we need to stay vigilant.
WASHINGTON — Google will join thousands of tech activists, entrepreneurs and corporations on Wednesday in protesting the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act, a controversial bill that has generated national outrage among Internet experts.
On Wednesday, more than 7,000 websites are expected to voluntarily “go dark,” by blocking access to their content to protest the bill, according to organizers of SOPAStrike.com. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid plans to bring the measure to a vote next week. Some of the biggest names on the Internet plan to participate in the blackout, including Wikipedia, Mozilla, Reddit and WordPress. On Tuesday, Google stopped short of vowing to take down its popular search engine, but said it would change its home page to show solidarity with protesters.
“Like many businesses, entrepreneurs and web users, we oppose these bills because there are smart, targeted ways to shut down foreign rogue websites without asking American companies to censor the Internet,” said a Google spokeswoman in a written statement provided to HuffPost. “So tomorrow we will be joining many other tech companies to highlight this issue on our U.S. home page.”
While Hollywood movie studios and major record labels have lauded the bill as a robust effort to crack down on online copyright violations, Internet experts maintain that the tools proposed for the legislation would hamper efforts to improve online security and threaten the basic functioning of the Internet.
Tech companies have been raising objections to the bill since the Senate version, Protect IP, was introduced last spring. Free speech experts also argue that the measure’s basic anti-piracy tool would risk seriously violating the First Amendment in allowing the government and private companies to shut down entire websites accused of piracy without a trial or even a traditional court hearing.
In addition to the Web protests, thousands of New York City tech activists and entrepreneurs are preparing for a Wednesday protest outside the Manhattan offices of Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kristin Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). Both Schumer and Gillibrand formally support Protect IP. Increasingly in recent years the Big Apple has become an active hub for tech firms, with many new companies and their venture capital supporters locating there rather than Silicon Valley.
The anti-SOPA event is being organized NY Tech Meetup, a trade group representing all aspects of the New York technology community. The group is expecting more than 1,500 members and speakers from leading tech companies to show up at the Wednesday protest, from 12:30 p.m. to 2 p.m, at the senators’ Manhattan offices, at 780 Third Ave.
“We’re gonna have people get on a soapbox with a bullhorn,” NY Tech Meetup Chairman Andrew Rasiej told HuffPost. “We’re not in a theater; we’re in the street protesting.”
The White House announced on Saturday its formal opposition to SOPA and Protect IP, setting off a legislative scramble on Capitol Hill as lawmakers on both sides of the issue sought to shore up support ahead of the Senate vote.
Courtesy Of Zach Carter Of HuffPost
Apple is slated to announce the fruits of its labor on improving the use of technology in education at its special media event on Thursday, January 19. While speculation has so far centered on digital textbooks, sources close to the matter have confirmed that Apple will announce tools to help create interactive e-books—the “GarageBand for e-books,” so to speak—and expand its current platform to distribute them to iPhone and iPad users.
Along with the details we were able to gather from our sources, we also spoke to two experts in the field of digital publishing to get a clearer picture of the significance of what Apple is planning to announce.
So far, Apple has largely embraced the ePub 2 standard for its iBooks platform, though it has added a number of HTML5-based extensions to enable the inclusion of video and audio for some limited interaction. The recently-updated ePub 3 standard obviates the need for these proprietary extensions, which in some cases make iBook-formatted e-books incompatible with other e-reader platforms. Apple is expected to announce support for the ePub 3 standard for iBooks going forward.
GarageBand for e-books
At the same time, however, authoring standards-compliant e-books (despite some promises to the contrary) is not as simple as running a Word document of a manuscript through a filter. The current state of software tools continues to frustrate authors and publishers alike, with several authors saying that they wish Apple or some other vendor would make a simple app that makes the process as easy as creating a song in GarageBand.
Our sources say Apple will announce such a tool on Thursday.
And Inkling CEO Matt MacInnis agrees that such a move would be very likely. MacInnis previously worked on education projects at Apple before leaving the company in 2009 to pursue his own ideas about creating interactive digital books. Inkling currently offers a variety of digital textbooks with interactive features, including the ability to share notes with classmates and instructors, via an iPad app.
“When you think about what Apple is doing… they are selling tens of thousands of iPads into K-12 institutions,” MacInnis said. “What are they doing with those iPads? They don’t really replace textbooks, because there’s not very much content on offer,” he said.
Don’t expect that content to come directly from Apple, however. “Practically speaking, Apple does not want to get into the content publishing business,” MacInnis said. Like the music and movie industries, Apple has instead built a distribution platform as well as hardware to consume it—but Apple isn’t a record label or production studio.
But what Apple does provide is industry-leading tools for content production, such as Logic or Final Cut Pro, to help create content. The company also produces tools like GarageBand or iMovie that make such production accessible to a much wider audience.
Will Apple launch a sort of GarageBand for e-books? “That’s what we believe you’re about to see,” MacInnis said (and our other sources agree). “Publishing something to ePub is very similar to publishing web content. Remember iWeb? That iWeb code didn’t just get flushed down the toilet—I think you’ll see some of [that code] repurposed.”
Mobile, social learning
Technology-in-education expert Dr. William Rankin also believes digital books will expand with tools that will enable social interactions among textbook users. Rankin, who serves as Director of Educational Innovation of Abilene Christian University and has extensively researched the use of mobile devices in the classroom, was one of three authors of a white paper on the effects of digital convergence on learning titled “Code/X,” published in 2009.
In that document, Rankin and his colleagues laid out their vision for the future of learning, which included an always-on, always-networked digital device called a “Talos.” That device turned out to be very similar to the iPad that Apple announced just six months later.
“What we saw coming was a change in the kinds of places that learning would happen,” Rankin said. Since the device would always be with the student, it would give her access to information anytime and anywhere. “For that, you need a different kind of book.”
Such digital texts would let students interact with information in visual ways, such as 3D models, graphs, and videos. They would also allow students to create links to additional texts, audio, and other supporting materials. Furthermore, students could share those connections with classmates and colleagues.
“What we really believe is important is the role of social networking in a converged learning environment,” said Rankin. “We’re already seeing that in Inkling’s platform, and Kno’s journaling feature. Future digital texts should allow students to layer all kind of other data, such as pictures, and notes, and then share that with the class or, ideally, anyone.”
Exactly how what Apple announces on Thursday will impact digital publishing isn’t certain, however.
“Think about how meaningful simply authoring and publishing to an iPad will be for K-12,” MacInnis said. “However, it might not be great for molecular biology.”
MacInnis sees Apple as possibly up-ending the traditional print publishing model for the low-end, where basic information has for many years remained locked behind high textbook prices. Apple can “kick up dust with the education market,” which could then create visibility for platforms like Inkling. This could then serve as a sort of professional Logic-type tool for interactive textbook creation complement to Apple’s “GarageBand for e-books.”
“There will be a spectrum of tools and consumers, and we will continue to fit on that spectrum,” MacInnis opined. “I don’t know if the publishing industry will react to it with fear or enthusiasm.”
Steve Jobs’ pet project
We know that former Apple CEO Steve Jobs was working on addressing learning and digital textbooks for some time, according to Walter Issacson’s biography. Jobs believed that textbook publishing was an “$8 billion a year industry ripe for digital destruction.”
According to our sources close to his efforts, however, Jobs’ personal involvement was perhaps more significant that even his biography purports. Jobs worked on this project for several years, and our understanding is that the final outcome was slated to be announced in October 2011 in conjunction with the iPhone 4S. Those plans were postponed at the last minute, perhaps due to Jobs’ imminent death.
Despite the delay, however, ACU’s Rankin believes the time is right for a change to happen in the field. “We’re headed toward a completely digital future at ACU,” he said. “A recent study showed that 82 percent of all higher education students nationwide will come to campus with a smartphone. We need to have resources and tools ready for these mobile, connected students.”
Courtesy of Chris Foresman for arstechnica.com
