Cynthia Dunbar, who didn't even send her kids to public school but was on the SBOE, continues her extremist viewpoints. At least she's out in the open with them.
Electric Car and battery news!
This cracked me up.
On Bill Ayers and free speech. Noticed this.
Thomas Rice, the university's attorney, said the decision to not allow Ayers to speak was about safety and wasn't a "viewpoint-oriented decision."
Ayers testified by videophone that he has received threats before speeches at other schools, but nothing has ever happened.
During Buchanan's testimony, the judge asked the UW president whether he knew that threats of violence alone were not enough to curtail free speech. Buchanan responded: "No sir, I was not aware of that."
This absolutely reminds of two other recent stories. One is the Supreme Court hearing a case in which the question of whether someone MIGHT BE THREATENED if their signature on a petititon is made public. The other is where Tarleton University cancelled Corpus Christi because of threat issues. But, as you read above, in the case of Bill Ayers, the judge clearly came down on the side of threats not enough to cancel free speech. Let's hope the SCOTUS upholds that as well.
Um. No more playing games on your laptop, you pilots!
Heh. Now Congress stepping in about Facebook's obnoxious, intrusive privacy (lack of, that is) measures. One of those problems would be solved if they would let poeple OPT IN, with privacy and lack of letting other companies have and keep your data as OPT IN choices. Nope.
Dear Mr. Zuckerberg,
The following three changes have raised concerns:
1. Publicly available data. Facebook’s expansion of publicly available data to include a user’s current city, hometown, education, work, likes, interests, and friends has raised concerns for users who would like to have an opt-in option to share this profile information. Through the expanded use of “connections,” Facebook now obligates users to make publicly available certain parts of their profile that were previously private. If the user does not want to connect to a page with other users from their current town or university, the user will have that information deleted altogether from their profile. We appreciate that Facebook allows users to type this information into the “Bio” section of their profiles, and privatize it, but we believe that users should have more control over these very personal and very common data points. These personal details should remain private unless a user decides that he/she would like to make a connection and share this information with a community.
2. Third party data storage. Previously, Facebook allowed third-party advertisers to store profile data for 24 hours. We are concerned that recent changes allow that data to be stored indefinitely. We believe that Facebook should reverse this policy, or at a minimum require users to opt in to allowing third parties to store data for more than 24 hours.
3. Instant personalization. We appreciate that Facebook is attempting to integrate the functionality of several popular websites, and that Facebook has carefully selected its initial partners for its new “instant personalization” feature. We are concerned, however, that this feature will now allow certain third party partners to have access not only to a user’s publicly available profile information, but also to the user’s friend list and the publicly available information about those friends. As a result of the other changes noted above, this class of information now includes significant and personal data points that should be kept private unless the user chooses to share them. Although we are pleased that Facebook allows users to opt-out of sharing private data, many users are unaware of this option and, moreover, find it complicated and confusing to navigate. Facebook should offer users the ability to opt-in to sharing such information, instead of opting out, and should make the process for doing so more clear and coherent.
We hope that Facebook will stand by its goal of creating open and transparent communities by working to ensure that its policies protect the sensitive personal biographical data of its users and provide them with full control over their personal information. We look forward to the FTC examining this issue, but in the meantime we believe Facebook can take swift and productive steps to alleviate the concerns of its users. Providing opt-in mechanisms for information sharing instead of expecting users to go through long and complicated opt-out processes is a critical step towards maintaining clarity and transparency.
What do you think? Should government be in the business of telling private enterprise what to do or just Caveat Emptor?