Online Colleges Could Spy On Students – By Law 307
skeazer writes "Tucked away in a 1,200-page bill now in Congress is a small paragraph that could lead distance-education institutions to require spy cameras in their students' homes. It sounds Orwellian, but the paragraph — part of legislation renewing the Higher Education Act — is all but assured of becoming law by the fall. No one in Congress objects to it."
I tend to masturbate at home during work breaks (Score:5, Funny)
Will they watch that too?
Re:I tend to masturbate at home during work breaks (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, you can either buy back the footage for a minimal cost or cease activity when watched by administrators.
In all seriousness, isn't this why we have proctors, so that someone can watch you while you perform tasks required for your grade?
Re:I tend to masturbate at home during work breaks (Score:5, Interesting)
In all seriousness, isn't this why we have proctors, so that someone can watch you while you perform tasks required for your grade?
Simple answer: cost. I work at a community college, and although we do have an academic testing centre -- the priority is to provide an alternate testing environment for students with disabilities. The secondary priority is students who miss tests for legitimate reasons (medical, weather, etc.).
There simply isn't capacity to allow every student in every online course to come onto campus to complete their assessments. It isn't built into the costing/tuition.
Re:I tend to masturbate at home during work breaks (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why students need to pay for their own proctoring. They already pay for textbooks, transportation, internet, etc. This is just something else to be not subsidized.
Disclaimer: I no longer work in Distance Ed.
Re:I tend to masturbate at home during work breaks (Score:5, Informative)
I did a whole master's degree through a distance program. When I had to take tests, I did need a proctor. Basically, you have someone who meets certain requirements fill out some paperwork, and then they manage the test administration stuff for the school.
For most of that, I used the testing center at the local community college, which did charge. Of course it could have been free, if I found some other impartial person willing to do it, but I liked the isolated independent environment.
public libraries end up proctoring (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, my public library ends up proctoring two to three distance education students per week. For free, of course. A reference librarian goes through the rigamarole with the student and sticks him/her at a table and the reference staff keeps an eye on him/her as we all wander around. If it's a computer-based test, we reserve a computer in the Computer Center for the student and the Computer Center staff watches him/her. Either way, you end up with multiple proctors at the same time (harder to cheat)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, there are several laws, (or i guess rules would be a better word). Many federal exams, like one you fill out during the process of getting hired at Homeland Security require a "proctored test" with so many requirements on the room, quietness, the people watching and the stuff on the computers, that its almost silly. When they last asked our community college to be a proctor site for TSA exams, we looked at the requirements that stated that we had to use MS Java, which is no longer available or s
And to think. . . (Score:4, Funny)
I thought school was for learning things rather than getting a fancy piece of paper.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly? I'll make you pay for watching me in my computer room.
You will rue the day this law goes into effect. You will rue it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And to think. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should the government create a law that requires that schools enforce no-cheating?
It's so some politician can brag, "I worked with congress to pass a law that eliminated cheating in American universities!"
Real problem (Score:3, Insightful)
School is for learning things...and that is the problem.
The increasing availability of higher education (through convenient and affordable online colleges, as just one example) is resulting in an increasingly high percentage of highly educated people in the work force.
Unfortunately, the number of jobs that actually require that kind of education is not increasing at the same rate.
What happens when supply increases faster than demand? The price drops.
That means that more employers are requiring higher educa
Re:Real problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't believe me? Look at the economy in India.
Yes, I'd hate to have the second largest rate of economic growth since 1980 (behind China). Sounds awful.
Re:And to think. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
rather than getting a fancy piece of paper
While it may be true for you that school is for learning things, it really depends upon which school and program you mean. The majority of the training/education industry (as far as the government is concerned) is about meeting industry's HR needs, and has nothing to do with the lofty goals of education for the benefit of the individual.
Re:And to think. . . (Score:5, Funny)
Bah, speak for yourself. I majored in Anthroplogy with a concentration in Feminist studies. I would comment more on this but I have to get back to waiting tables.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I majored in English and minored in Fine Art at a state University.
My current business card reads "Lead Systems Engineer" -- and yes, it's a real business card from a real company that has very large very real clients. I have a lovely office, with a door and windows and everything.
Every interview I've ever had (3 in the 8 years since I graduated), I've mentioned that I went to a university to learn things I couldn't learn anywhere else. It probably helps that I've been a technology junkie since I was a ki
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
My current business card reads "Lead Systems Engineer" -- and yes, it's a real business card from a real company that has very large very real clients. I have a lovely office, with a door and windows and everything.
So... you work for a printer?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry to disappoint you with reality. Higher education stopped being about learning things and bettering oneself about the same time that having a higher education became something necessary for the purpose of being able to support an average family with a 'normal' lifestyle.
Of coarse it started when the norm of morality shifted from one in which 'professionals' doctors, nurses, educated people ,became people who expected to be highly paid for their skills as opposed to acting altruistically, which happened
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not necessarily talking about courses, but a specific culture and experience. Since I attended North Dakota State University I'll use it's history as an example, I understand it to be fairly typical of state schools.
In the 50's this state run school had a required dress code ( for the stated purpose of promoting unity of community).
All under classmen, were required to live in the dorms. All meals were required to be taken in common at the Dorm and strict curfews were enforced.
There were codes of ethic
Re: (Score:2)
You can learn from books. School is for getting the piece of paper that attests to the fact that you've learned, otherwise why would they need tests?
Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
I haven't read TFA, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that by "spy cameras in their homes" they mean a camera attached to the computer while school work (or at least tests) is being done in an effort to make sure the degree goes to the person doing the work?
As long as it isn't required to be on except while the student is doing work that would take place under the eyes of a professor or TA in a "real" college and as long as enrollment is voluntary I can't imagine it's really that objectionable.
Re:Right. (Score:4, Interesting)
For any "online" institution I've known, the tests need to be done at an approved institute under supervision, and after presenting proper ID, etc.
You might be able to fob off assignments on somebody else, but in a real school institution you could do this anyhow after classes.
Re:Right. (Score:5, Interesting)
For any "online" institution I've known, the tests need to be done at an approved institute under supervision, and after presenting proper ID, etc.
Well, that's the thing... they're trying to break that restriction.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Certainly this is not universally true; Concord Law School, for instance (part of Kaplan University) does not do this; pretty much everything in most classes can be done online through a secure web site. J.D. (bar track) students have to comply with CA Bar requirements for non-ABA schools, which include a proctored First Year Law Students exam and must, of course
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And you would be right. Was the summary that obvious?
Re:Right. (Score:4, Insightful)
And you would be right. Was the summary that obvious?
Well, the article does discuss both the test-taking aspect in addition to other concerns, and what the legislation actually says isn't made clear, other than a a description of it that reads "an institution that offers an online program must prove that an enrolled student is the same person who does the work."
Without knowing how "work" is defined, my guess is that the intent of the legislation is reasonable. That's not to say the technologies or workarounds being put into effect are.
I imagine that if this is mostly about test taking, then video cameras are hardly onerous. If every computer sold today came with a camera, and video confering was a routine affair, I imagine all on-line educating would be handled that way, as it's little different than being there in person. Granted, being able to "attend" remotely while just wearing your underwear won't be possible, but that doesn't strike me as a significant disadvantage. Or desirable.
Re:Right. (Score:4, Insightful)
Engineers like to solve problems. If there are no problems handily available, they will create their own problems.
Normal people don't understand this concept; they believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.
Second, and more importantly, why are we so focused on putting systems in place to prevent cheating?
Spending time and resources on a system to FORCE obedience to the rule is inherently wrong, and is DEFINITELY Orwellian.
Lets start focusing on teaching our kids to NOT CHEAT instead of expending so much time and so many resources in an effort to force them to comply.
For those who still do cheat, life will ultimately expose them for the stupid jackass they are.
And if it doesn't? Then the educational requirements were probably unnecessary for the profession they chose and perhaps the requirements should be rethought.
You can sit a person down in a chair and force them to stay, but you can't force them to learn.
Learning is a choice. Not learning is also a choice.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Spending time and resources on a system to FORCE obedience to the rule is inherently wrong, and is DEFINITELY Orwellian. Lets start focusing on teaching our kids to NOT CHEAT instead of expending so much time and so many resources in an effort to force them to comply. For those who still do cheat, life will ultimately expose them for the stupid jackass they are.
So would you consider cops enforcing legal compliance with your local legal code to be Orwellian? BTW, as far as we can tell, being a jackass is no barrier to living. Movies have been made with just that [imdb.com] as a title, and it did SO well, there was a sequel... [imdb.com]
Some people don't give a rat's kazoo what others think as long as they get "theirs". Exposing folks like that as a jackass does very little to change their behavior; they think they're in the right. Penalizing them for said jackassery, however, might get
Re:Right. (Score:4, Insightful)
Spending time and resources on a system to FORCE obedience to the rule is inherently wrong, and is DEFINITELY Orwellian. Lets start focusing on teaching our kids to NOT CHEAT instead of expending so much time and so many resources in an effort to force them to comply. For those who still do cheat, life will ultimately expose them for the stupid jackass they are.
So would you consider cops enforcing legal compliance with your local legal code to be Orwellian?
Laws generally only work correctly when everyone buys into the system. Do you drive with flat tires? Do you drive at night with your lights off? Do you burn other people's houses down for fun? No? Why? Because it is illegal? Probably not. Rather, it is bad for the car, dangerous, and ethically wrong, respectively. On the other hand, have you driven above the speed limit? Have you ever bought a candy bar from a kid without paying sales tax? Have you ever thrown away a (battery-powered) watch into the trash? Probably, even though they are all illegal. And putting in measures to always enforce these restrictions, or worse, only enforcing them for capricious reasons, is Orwellian. I actually am of the opinion that some of our local legal code and some of the enforcement thereof to be Orwellian. If there is a legal system that it is not possible to avoid offending, even with the best of intentions, you give power to the police force that they should not have. Sorry, not the best example.
That said, I do not know if I would consider legally requiring anti-cheating measures for online courses to be Orwellian. But I would say requiring cameras as the implementing method (which I did not get out of the article) would be.
Re:Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're right - If you read TFA it says:
Tucked away in a 1,200-page bill now in Congress is a small paragraph that could lead distance-education institutions to require spy cameras in their students' homes.
It sounds Orwellian, but the paragraph â" part of legislation renewing the Higher Education Act â" is all but assured of becoming law by the fall. No one in Congress objects to it.
The paragraph is actually about clamping down on cheating. It says that an institution that offers an online program must prove that an enrolled student is the same person who does the work.
In other words the law says distance learning institutions must make an effort to verify work is done by the right person - and one technology those institutions are experimenting with is webcams.
It's typical slashdot to quote just enough of the article to give completely the wrong impression.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Presumablly if you were paying someone to sit your exam for you then you would give them your key.
Thumb readers don't seem like they would help much either.
To be honest I think having students sit exams on thier own computers in thier own homes is unreasonablly risky even with a camera. How do you know that the camera is next to the keyboard that is being used to do the test. A monitor splitter and a dummy keyboard should fool someone looking through the camera especially if the resoloution is crappy.
It is entirely objectionable and wrong (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Can't employers simply choose to reject someone who graduates from an institution that makes no effort to verify who is taking their students' tests?
Sure they can. Just as soon as someone gets around to inventing that perfect lie detector.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Right. (Score:5, Insightful)
What guarantee is there that the camera can't be used for other purposes?
Because you've unplugged it?
Re: (Score:2)
I'll assume you're new here, asking in ernest, and answer this for you.
TFA = The F****** Article
RTFA = Read The F****** Article
Yeah, it's /.
Re: (Score:2)
TFA = The F****** Article
How many *s does it take to obscure the word 'Fine'?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm gonna assume you're not a troll, or trying to be funny, because I've yet to each lunch. I suppose it may be informative for others as well.
RTFA = Read the Fucking Article. RTFM = Read the Fucking Manual. This "Fine" stuff is a latter day, dead-tree cleaning up of the original phrase.
Re:Right. (Score:4, Funny)
I always thought it stood for "full", as in "complete".
As in "read the full manual" or "read the full article".
They can't stop it in person (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They can't stop the cheating in person...what makes them think they can stop it over the internet?
Exactly. Get a webcam, point it at yourself while sitting at a decoy computer. Have someone log in as you at the same time. Have them do the test while you play a round of Wow.
DNRTFA but I'm assuming they've though of this.
Re:They can't stop it in person (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They don't need to stop it entirely. They just need to bring it to the same level playing field. They want accreditation to stand for it's merits as a whole.
I haven't read the entire bill, but I'm betting that this requirement is only if they pay for the education with federal moneys through a loan or a grant too.
So.... (Score:5, Interesting)
At what cost? (Score:2)
First of all that is entirely hackable. How many movies have we seen where someone brakes into a building by switching video feed of a security camera?
Beyond that, I can't imagine this being cheap. It would take more than a $25 web cam to generate quality enough images, then substantial bandwidth to send that much video data back home. And if you're talking about tens of thousands of students, that's a LOT of bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:At what cost? (Score:5, Funny)
So how will all that bandwidth hurt my p2p downloads?
Extra points if your ethics exam is what's killing your download rate.
FUD spreads better than butter (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:FUD spreads better than butter (Score:5, Informative)
Well I did read the article, and it is a clear cut case of FUD. The law says only that these schools must be able to prove that the person enrolled is the person doing the work.
All that crap about requiring them to put cameras in students homes is just some disingenuous person trying to claim that that is what it would take, because they don't think colleges have that verification responsibility.
What this really comes down to is that most distance learning institutions require students to take their exams at a testing center, where they provide identification and are under the observation of a proctor. And those that don't are raising a fuss because they would prefer not to pay for that.
FUD is exactly what it is -- the are proposing the most ridiculous solution that they can think of to bring them into compliance with such a law, because they would prefer not to have to comply at all.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Some schools might want the most stringent controls to ensure students do not cheat. Others might not care. Some schools may provide the option and charge accordingly (and probably have different certificates).
Why should this be the business of anyone but the school & the student?
Re: (Score:2)
Did you go to Hollywood Upstairs Medical College, too?
Re: (Score:2)
OK, went ahead and RTFA. And it still doesn't seem that bad. Yeah, that dangling sphere with the fingerprint taker is pretty damn scary. But the law isn't going to require that. All it's going to do is require that online universities do a better job of authenticating students taking tests that will give them degrees.
It's either have a proctor watch you, or be required to travel to a branch of the university (at student expense) and take the test locally. If it were up to me, I'd rather have somebody watchi
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, its not even that bad. My college requires that I find some proctor to take the exams with. The requirements for the proctor are fairly lose. You local library would do in many cases, or you can choose one of the many community colleges, which all offer proctor services for $10-$20.
Definitely FUD (Score:2)
The article says that the law would require institutions to verify that the person who did the work is the person who gets the degree. It does NOT in fact say that the law would require cameras in people's homes. That is merely one potential method which is presented, along with fingerprints and other techniques.
Having the person show up live to do their work and tests at a local institution would also presumably count.
I call shenanigans on this article.
Well, I guess no more online education (Score:3, Funny)
Oh come on. (Score:3, Funny)
More needless government intervention (Score:4, Insightful)
First of all, I don't see a problem with an online school implementing this on their own, exclusively for exams, as long as the device can be disconnected and software removed afterwards. Don't like that? Try another school. Capitalism wins.
The real issue, I believe, is that the government seems to think it has the right to require that these devices be used. This will keep the price of these devices high and the slope nice and slippery.
Re:More needless government intervention (Score:5, Insightful)
The real issue, I believe, is that the government seems to think it has the right to require that these devices be used.
So long as the government continues to pay out tuition subsidies, it should have the authority to specify the requirements for academic credibility. No doubt some "elite" institutions could forego government funding and avoid the regulation.
This is pretty similar to drunk driving laws vs. federal highway subsidies, and AT&T vs. wiring subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
Mod parent down! Oops, it's the story! (Score:5, Informative)
Spy camera? Not quite. They're basically just posing a "Hold up a picture of yourself with today's local newspaper so we know you are where you say you are." type challenge to prove that when you sit down for a high-stakes college exam, you are who you say you are.
It's not like they're requiring your iSight camera be on 24/7. So this sensational headline doesn't match the story. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Verify who is doing the work (Score:5, Informative)
How will they work it for Dialup and sat internet. (Score:2)
How will they work it for Dialup and sat internet where they don't have the bandwidth / ping times for this to work good?
Re:How will they work it for Dialup and sat intern (Score:4, Interesting)
They won't.
Students with dialup will either have to upgrade the connection or come to the college to do the exam if better connection is unavailable in their area.
That is one of the reasons my college [www.fit.ba] is still against implementing some kind of a video link during a test.
It is not connection heavy just on the student - imagine maintaining couple of thousands of simultaneous video links with resolution high enough to spot possible cheat sheets?
Like... 4pt text printed cheat sheets stickers on your monitor.
There is a MUCH simpler solution that they implement.
Online tests that can be done from home constitute only a part of the grade. For those to be valid - you have to pass the final exam AT the college.
Many exams require you to write a seminary work and later "defend it" in person in front of the professor.
Here - students are the ones demanding something like that since some of us (like me) have to travel for 6 hours to get to an exam.
Which can be quite ironic when some of your tests take around 20-30 minutes.
Get up at 3 to catch a 5 AM bus, 6 hours one way, do a test, wait for the next bus home, 6 hours back.
Roads here suck. No highway. We might get one in about 10 years or so...
There is also a simple solution to that problem too.
Since most of the tests are done by logging into the college's system with your ID and password - it could be also done over the internet.
Like I said... we do it for the "lesser" tests. Only reason we are not allowed to do that for the final tests is cheating.
Now... my town has a university as well... A good one... only not with such a study program.
Why my college can't or won't contact the faculty of the university here and arrange for us to take the exam from the facilities of the university here (despite students suggesting and demanding that for years now), under the supervision of the local staff - well... I'd rather think its the old incompetence again instead of malice and money.
Re: (Score:2)
well you could have two computer, have the camera point at the second computer while you browse the internet with the camera on you, your PHD friend goes and writes your test on the other side with the camera hooked up(i mean it can stay attached to the existing computer and point at another one.
So, just what was your room number in college? (Score:2)
Identity-proving trivia questions have been around for a while. Ever try to access your credit report online? It's just a matter of time before other websites that really want to know your identity (and you have a reason to want the site to know it's you) jump on to this technology.
Re:So, just what was your room number in college? (Score:5, Interesting)
>Everyone and his uncle demands to know my mother's maiden name.
This is culturally insensitive also. It is quite common for one's name and one's mother's maiden name to be the same name.
It's taken for granted as an assumption in the question, that you had married parents, and that your mother changed her name to your father's name, and that your parents gave you your father's name.
Not everybody does that.
This is how telecommuting will be, too (Score:2, Interesting)
Employers generally don't trust their employees working at home. They think that without a tyrant-boss to keep an eye on them, most people will slack off. If these cameras were a regular part of telecommuting, more companies would support it.
Eventually you get to the point where the government asks nicely if they can watch. Then they tell the companies that they WILL watch. Then they insist cameras be put in place if telecommuting is even a remote possibility for an employee. Then they eventually get a
Re: (Score:2)
In the past year, I've started to see laptops loaded with Cisco's Unified Personal Communicator , with headsets and webcams get distributed to our employees who telecommute. Right now, the video portion is only required for conferencing into meetings but who knows how l
So many holes (Score:2, Insightful)
Hyperbole in slashdot summary (Score:2)
For those of you not reading TFA (Score:3, Informative)
Proof? (Score:3, Interesting)
From TFA: "The paragraph is actually about clamping down on cheating. It says that an institution that offers an online program must prove that an enrolled student is the same person who does the work."
And how is a camera in my home proof? If I have access to the hardware, I can send any video footage I want. And as for proof, there's no proof that I do any assignment that takes place out of class at traditional universities either. It sound more like it will create a market for test taking centers that contract out to universities that offer distance learning. Fuck those who live out in the boonies.
They can already do this. (Score:2)
I'm not sure a law is needed in this case... can't colleges basically require you to do anything they want under threat that they won't admit / will expell you if you don't comply?
Teleconferences (Score:4, Interesting)
Called Securexam Remote Proctor, it's about the size of a large paperweight and plugs into a standard port on a home computer. The pedestal includes a groove for scanning fingerprints, a tiny microphone, and a camera. The sphere reflects a 360-degree view around the test taker, which the camera picks up.
Nevermind proctoring, how about using this for round-table podcasts? Instead of a multi-camera shoot, put this on the table in front of everyone and do your cuts to who is talking all in post.
Students pay $150 for the device.
Losing the fingerprint scanner would drop the price a bit, and audio for each panelist could still be recorded using a multi-track recorder. But you may need HD resolution for capture in order to get SD-quality shots for editing, which you don't need for simple monitoring.
I am looking for a long wire: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
All you need is an active USB extension cable. Shouldn't be worth more than 15-20$.
Mwo? (Score:2, Informative)
"World Campus, the online arm of the Pennsylvania State University system, is testing another system called Webassessor. It uses proctors, Web cameras, and software that recognizes students' typing styles, such as their speed and whether they pause between certain letters. Students purchase the cameras for $50 to $80 apiece. They allow proctors to view a student's face, keyboard, and workspace.
The Phoenix-based provider of the system, Kryterion Inc., employs proctors who remotely observe and listen to as ma
its simple protectionism (Score:2)
everyone has a lobby in washington. the brick and mortar institutions of higher learning don't want to see potential students go online instead. it is the same reason the usa has such strong laws against online gaming. its not for moral reasons, even though it is worded and implied that way. in reality, the gambling concerns like real world casinos in las vegas and atlantic city, they don't want potential customers sitting at home instead
these laws are caged in indirect requirements, but the message is the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can guarantee you that real institutions of higher learning don't give a shit about online "distance" learning, or cheating. My alma mater is among the top in terms of number of graduates who go on to get doctorates in their fields, but does not proctor exams. All exams are take-home, with the obvious exception of your oral thesis defense (if you can call that an exam).
Any institution providing a real education won't care if you cheat on tests because the faculty have more important things to do and it
It's simpler than that... (Score:2, Insightful)
It's more like the government wants its slice of the pie (ie, tax revenue). Online/overseas gambling is harder to collect taxes on... so they ban it instead.
Why do you think making your own liquor (moonshine) is generally illegal? It's certainly not morality concerns...
I... know someone... (Score:2)
...who was going to take distance classes at Troy.
Fuck that.
Easily Defeated (Score:5, Funny)
Bad Title (Score:2)
Online Colleges Could Spy On Students - By Law
Bad title, Spying implies that you have no knowledge that it's happening. In this case, it would seem you have full knowledge you are being "spied" on.
Bad article, no treat (Score:2)
The law does not allow or require spy cameras.
The law requires that the on-line schools validate that the student is the one actually doing the work. The law does not specify any means of doing so.
The person who wrote the article should be fired for using an outrageous misleading headline and first paragraph to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
This is so dishonest that it doesn't qualify as journalism.
Bah (Score:2)
Having universities do the teaching and the certification sucks anyway, it's not such a natural bundle.
You should go to school because you want to learn something, exams telling you how well you're doing.
Getting a diploma is about proving to other people that you know something, it should be handled entirely separately. It also means autodidacts don't have to pay for useless lessons just to get the certification.
Cameras aren't the same as people (Score:3, Insightful)
These designers need to get a clue. Cameras will not replace human proctors any time soon.
Instant distance learning cheat:
1) Plug magic 360-degree anti-cheating fingerprint camera into laptop.
2) Sit down at desk with other laptop.
3) Bring your buddy the anthropology-whiz-for-hire into the room. Hand him the laptop from step 1.
4) Buddy gets under desk and takes test. You spend an hour on IRC basking in the epic lulz.
It is not a spy camera. (Score:2)
If you want the course credit, you have to agree to let the proctor watch you take the test.
That isn't spying. It's school.
Honour system (Score:2)
If real this violates the honour system [wikipedia.org] and makes it impossible for a university to enact a honour system.
Here's how to end it (Score:5, Funny)
1. Be under 18 years old
2. Perform a sex act on the camera.
3. Compel discovery against the university for possession of child pornography.
4. ???
5. Profit!!!
No, not Orwellian Just the fundamentals of the (Score:3, Interesting)
John Gatto has said it all already http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/prologue2.htm [johntaylorgatto.com]
The whole idea is horseshit. (Score:4, Insightful)
The Internet doesn't change anything there at all. So where were their Orwellian rules before?
This nonsense is just another example of blaming the internet for something that has always existed, and using that as an excuse to further intrude.
What a crock.
What are universities for, again? (Score:3, Insightful)
Funny--I went to a pretty expensive university, and we never had a single proctor at any exam, ever. Something called an "honor code" or something...
What's really going on here, though, is that universities no longer exist to educate, but rather to certify. It does not seem unreasonable to me that a corporation should be responsible for evaluating a prospective employee. However (perhaps unsurprisingly), corporations would love to be able to offload that little business expense onto someone else.
Re: (Score:2)
"It looks like it will make some money for the companies that are peddling the systems"
I will bet you dollars to donuts that these people paid "the best representatives money can buy" to put this into the bill.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
item 2 on bill : give 10 trillion dollars to the military and surrender your right to vote.
Why would you vote against a omnibus bill that wants to stop puppy torture?! Are you some kind of sicko!!