university – Techdirt (original) (raw)

College Kids Are Easily Bypassing Stupid University TikTok Bans

from the congratulations-you-accomplished-absolutely-nothing dept

We’ve noted a few times how the political push to ban TikTok is a dumb performance largely designed to distract people from our failure to pass even a basic internet privacy law or regulate data brokers. We’ve also noted how college bans of TikTok are a dumb extension of that dumb performance, and don’t accomplish anything of meaningful significance.

When the college bans first emerged we noted they’d be trivial to bypass, given the bans only apply to the actual college network. They obviously don’t apply to personal student use over cellular networks. And, not surprisingly, students are finding it extremely easy to bypass the bans, either by simply turning off Wi-Fi when they want to access the social network, or using a VPN:

“The student body, quietly, in unison, added Wi-Fi toggling to their daily routine. “Everyone was so nonchalant about it,” Pablo says. “They really just did not care.”

“There wasn’t a whole lot of pushback, aside from a lot of grumbling and groans,” says Ana Renfroe, a sophomore at Texas A&M. Some of her professors are still showing TikToks in class. They’ll just ask students to download the videos at home she explains, or will upload them to another platform like Instagram Reels.”

The folks who spent several years hyperventilating about how TikTok was some unique threat to the public (on an internet where countless international companies, ISPs, app makers, and data brokers over-collect and fail to secure consumer data) are, of course, nowhere to be found.

Their superficial “solution” for a problem they overstated (often for xenophobic or anticompetitive reasons) didn’t actually do anything useful, but it provided the superficial illusion of solution-oriented thinking, which is good enough for the kind of facts-optional partisan media echo chambers the most vocal TikTok critics often inhabit.

Here in reality, folks like The Knight First Amendment Institute have continued to challenge the college bans, noting they imperil research into an important modern information-exchange platform. But we still haven’t passed a privacy law or regulated data brokers as part of any sort of coherent plan to rein in all bad actors on privacy, not just the Chinese-owned ones Mark Zuckerberg doesn’t want eating his lunch.

Filed Under: bans, college campus, dumb idea, privacy, security, social media, tiktok hysteria, university
Companies: tiktok

Boston University Applies For Trademark On Offensive COVID-19 Awareness Slogan For Some Reason

from the stop-it dept

Anyone who knows anything about me knows how much I both love and rely on profanity. Love, because profane language is precisely the sort of color the world needs more of. Rely on, because I use certain profane words the way most people use commas. So, when the courts decided that even the most profane words could be used in trademarks, I applauded. Fucks were literally given.

But not every piece of profanity deserves a trademark. And, while I again applaud Boston University’s decision to create a profane slogan around COVID-19 safety awareness for its student body, why in the actual fuck did the slogan have to be trademarked?

First, the context:

Boston University asked a group of communications students for help encouraging their peers to follow the school’s strict COVID-19 safety guidelines when they return to campus for the upcoming semester.

What it got back was a slogan that did not mince words.

Last week, BU officials filed a trademark application for the slogan “F*ck It Won’t Cut It” in order to promote “public awareness of safe and smart actions and behaviors for college and university students in a COVID-19 environment.” The filing first garnered attention after a trademark lawyer flagged it Tuesday morning on Twitter.

On the slogan, fuck yeah! In fact, pretty good for a Methodist school! But on the trademark application, what the fuck? I have serious questions as to whether the application even meets the criteria for a valid mark to begin with. How, precisely, is this being used in commerce? What good or service is this trademark supposed to identify a source for? Schooling? Not really. Healthcare? Nah. What precisely are we doing here?

“Our slogan is a powerful phrase that sparks a reminder for students to make safe choices at decision points each day, because saying ‘F-it’ to responsible protocols won’t keep us on campus,” Hailey McKee, a BU graduate student and public relations manager for the campaign, told the Boston Business Journal.

Well, sure, but why hell does this need to be siloed to Boston U via trademark? The school really doesn’t want its sister universities to be able to raise effective awareness using the slogan as well? Why not?

This feels ultimately like another long-tail outcome of permission culture and expansive IP enforcement, where an entity just defaults to wanting to claim IP on all the things. But the world would be better if leading institutions like BU… you know… did better.

Filed Under: covid-19, fuck it won't cut it, safety awareness, slogans, trademark, university
Companies: boston university

DailyDirt: College Tuition Is Expensive

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Paying for college has never exactly been easy, but it’s been getting increasingly difficult over time. On top of that, it’s getting more difficult to get into some of the more selective schools. CA Gov. Jerry Brown remarked that “normal” people can’t get accepted to Berkeley anymore (hold the jokes on how normal the students at Berkeley have ever been, okay?). Proposals for free community college tuition (with fine print attached) might make higher education more accessible and certain colleges more socio-economically diverse, but what’s going on with the costs of tuition?

After you’ve finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

Filed Under: college, diversity, education, higher education, ivy league, jerry brown, moocs, tuition, university

DailyDirt: Higher Education, Not So High-Minded Anymore?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Going to college used to be a reliable education path to a well-paying career — as well as a way to create a society of engaged and informed citizens. The workforce has changed a bit over the last few decades, and college degrees aren’t necessarily the best indicators of employee performance anymore. Sure, everyone still needs an education, but being able to learn on your own and pick up skills years after you’ve been handed a diploma are far more important than where that diploma was printed. Considering that student loans are rarely ever forgiven, people might want to choose their institution of higher learning with a bit more deliberation.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: college, degrees, education, mooc, teaching, university, wisconsin idea
Companies: osu

University Of Chicago's New Free Speech Policy Actually Protects Free Speech

from the other-universities-encouraged-to-copy-and-paste-liberally dept

Free speech and higher education seem to be at odds. The notion of expanding minds, exposing prejudices and encouraging critical thinking has taken a backseat to a bizarre “offense-free” ideal in recent years, something that can partially be traced back to our own government’s insertion into the (stunted) conversation. Tying federal funding to sexual harassment policies is definitely part of the problem. The other part appears to be a misguided thought process that equates inclusion with the elimination of any speech that might negatively affect someone. Rather than actually deal with speech issues on a case-by-case basis, universities have instead enacted broadly-written bans on campus speech.

The University of Chicago, however, isn’t jumping on this particular bandwagon. Its new speech policy is more of manifesto than a policy. It’s assertive and it’s comprehensive — not in its restrictions, but in its liberties. It’s the outgrowth of a study performed by the school and the conclusions it reaches are decidedly contrary to the prevailing collegiate winds.

The committee behind the report and policy is chaired by Geoffrey Stone, a professor specializing in constitutional law (and member of the administration’s intelligence review task force). Stone is a fierce defender of civil liberties, previously having taken Arizona legislators to task for their First Amendment-steamrolling cyberbullying/harassment bill.

The statement [pdf link] makes it clear from the outset that the University has many duties to its students, but ensuring them an offense-free environment isn’t one of them.

Of course, the ideas of different members of the University community will often and quite naturally conflict. But it is not the proper role of the University to attempt to shield individuals from ideas and opinions they find unwelcome, disagreeable, or even deeply offensive. Although the University greatly values civility, and although all members of the University community share in the responsibility for maintaining a climate of mutual respect, concerns about civility and mutual respect can never be used as a justification for closing off discussion of ideas, however offensive or disagreeable those ideas may be to some members of our community.

There are exceptions, of course, but they are narrow and specific.

The freedom to debate and discuss the merits of competing ideas does not, of course, mean that individuals may say whatever they wish, wherever they wish. The University may restrict expression that violates the law, that falsely defames a specific individual, that constitutes a genuine threat or harassment, that unjustifiably invades substantial privacy or confidentiality interests, or that is otherwise directly incompatible with the functioning of the University. In addition, the University may reasonably regulate the time, place, and manner of expression to ensure that it does not disrupt the ordinary activities of the University.

After making the few exceptions clear, the committee’s statement returns to championing the freedom of speech, reminding students that the correct response to controversial speech will always be more speech, rather than less.

[T[he University’s fundamental commitment is to the principle that debate or deliberation may not be suppressed because the ideas put forth are thought by some or even by most members of the University community to be offensive, unwise, immoral, or wrong-headed. It is for the individual members of the University community, not for the University as an institution, to make those judgments for themselves, and to act on those judgments not by seeking to suppress speech, but by openly and vigorously contesting the ideas that they oppose. Indeed, fostering the ability of members of the University community to engage in such debate and deliberation in an effective and responsible manner is an essential part of the University’s educational mission.

In other words, the hecklers among the student body have just been stripped of their veto power. Don’t like what’s being said? Use your own voice and say why. Attempts to shut down or shout down opposing views won’t be tolerated.

Although members of the University community are free to criticize and contest the views expressed on campus, and to criticize and contest speakers who are invited to express their views on campus, they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe.

TL; DR:

[T]he University has a solemn responsibility not only to promote a lively and fearless freedom of debate and deliberation, but also to protect that freedom when others attempt to restrict it.

If there’s still any doubt as to the free speech protections contained in this statement, it can be dispelled by the fact that none other than FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) has offered its whole-hearted support of the University’s new free speech policy. When you’ve made FIRE happy, you’ve done “free speech policy” correctly. None of this “free speech zone” crap or “free speech EXCEPT” followed by exceptions that neuter or completely obliterate the rule.

It’s a rare thing to see a university tells it students that it won’t protect them from others — and that it will treat them adults. Life often isn’t pretty and the best thing an institute of higher education can do is prepare its students for this inevitability. The over-protective parent route taken by so many others harms everyone involved by stunting their growth as humans and by punishing speech that is protected the First Amendment.

Filed Under: free speech, free speech policy, university
Companies: university of chicago

DailyDirt: Are College Degrees Useless Now?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The education industry seems to be ripe for disruption. Although it’s undeniable that higher education and advanced technical skills are correlated with higher salaries, more and more parents and students are questioning the real value of college. If college is merely another step in the process towards applying for a job, some folks think colleges should be a bit better about actually being able to match employers with recent graduates. On the other hand, if college is more about making social connections and laying the foundations for a rewarding life, perhaps acquiring hefty student loans to do so isn’t the way to go for that. Here are just a few links on getting a college education.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: academia, college, degree, education, hackademics, tuition, university, vocational degree

DailyDirt: The Coming Education Revolution

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Providing digitally-distributed educations isn’t as scalable as it might seem. Some topics, like math, might be a bit easier to teach with YouTube-esque videos, but some subjects may need a bit more of a human touch. Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are still in the development phase, so they may one day overtake traditional classes (but not right now..). Here are a few online courses to keep an eye on to see if they rate better than “needs improvement” someday.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: big data, college, education, massively open online course, minerva, mit, mooc, online classes, sebastian thrun, students, teaching, udacity, university

DailyDirt: No More Classes, No More Books…

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The field of education is looking ripe for disruption as “distance learning” becomes more and more practical with internet connections and algorithmic grading systems. There are still plenty of bugs to be worked out for digital education, but it’s coming. (And famous dropouts from Steve Jobs to Mark Zuckerberg seem to suggest some flaws in the traditional university system.) Here are just a few links on how schools are changing and developing new kinds of classes.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: certification, college, degree, distance learning, education, massively open online courses, mooc, university
Companies: coursera, edx, khan academy, udacity

DailyDirt: Who Cares if You Went To A Good School?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The field of education seems ripe for disruption — with Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and other forms of online classes. However, it’s difficult to judge the quality of these online programs and compare them to the traditional classroom experience. The conventional wisdom has ranked prestigious universities in roughly the same order for decades, so it’ll be interesting to see how online courses and degrees might factor into these lists. Here are just a few interesting links on the quality of higher education.

If you’d like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: certification, class, college, degree, education, high school, mooc, ranking, school, university

University Sues Student For Graduating Too Fast

from the don't-expect-an-alumni-gift dept

Here’s an odd one. The School of Economics and Management in Essen, Germany is suing former student, Marcel Pohl, for graduating too quickly. You see, he finished all of the necessary exams for both a bachelor’s and master’s degree in 20 months — representing three semesters. Normally, it takes students 11 semesters, and the school feels ripped off. The complaint is that, even though they charge per semester, what they’re really charging for is the degree, and Pohl didn’t pay enough for his. So they want another €3,000.

Of course, in the details, we learn that part of the reason he was able to take so many exams is that he teamed up with two friends and they all traded notes on classes they didn’t actually attend. You can question whether or not that meets academic ethics requirements, but the fact is that Pohl still did pass the required exams, and met all of the qualifications to graduate — and the University apparently let him graduate before it realized what happened. It’s hard to see what the legal issue is here. Perhaps instead of suing, they should look at their own setup and question why they force students to spend 11 semesters on material when at least some can get through it all in about a quarter of the time…

In the meantime, was there really no one at the school who didn’t think that the cost of legal fees and negative publicity combined is very likely to exceed the money they’re seeking?

Filed Under: essen, germany, marcel pohl, university