Category: Technology

We live online

The Times is reporting a recent Pew study that has some revealing findings about the amount of time kids spend online.

Those ages 8 to 18 spend more than seven and a half hours a day with such devices, compared with less than six and a half hours five years ago, when the study was last conducted. And that does not count the hour and a half that youths spend texting, or the half-hour they talk on their cellphones.

Even academics in communication are shocked:

“This is a stunner,” said Donald F. Roberts, a Stanford communications professor emeritus who is one of the authors of the study. “In the second report, I remember writing a paragraph saying we’ve hit a ceiling on media use, since there just aren’t enough hours in the day to increase the time children spend on media. But now it’s up an hour.”

What I find interesting about this report is how integrated the Internet has become in the daily lives of youth. It almost seems silly to call internet use “being online,” because there’s really not much of an “on” anymore–it’s as though we’re always there.

My feeling is that this may also have implications on how much we will be able to regulate internet use (ie: laws on downloading, etc). At a minimum, these laws may meet some resistance, and attempts to regulate structurally (packet inspection) won’t go unnoticed.

via If Your Kids Are Awake, They’re Probably Online – NYTimes.com.

FCC jurisdiction over the Internet

Ars gives an excellent rundown of recent proceedings which may hold grave implications for FCC jurisdiction over the Internet. Essentially Comcast is arguing that the FCC took charge of the Net through a policy statement. If you’re interested in the issues, I would recommend reading the article in full (note there are 2 pages), but here are a few highlights:

For the next ten minutes the judges and Comcast talked cases and precedents. Then [Justice] Randolph cut to the chase. “In looking this over I found a good many situations in which Congress has instructed the FCC to study the Internet,” he opined, “and taxation of transit sales transactions on the Internet, and this, and that, and the other thing. But what I don’t find is any congressional directive to the FCC to regulate the Internet.” It wasn’t hard for [Comcast attorney] Walker to summon a response to this observation. “That’s right,” she declared.

[After arguing that a Congressional order to the FCC to bear the responsibility for rolling out broadband access…] By the end of the discussion [FCC attorney] Schlick was bargaining with the judges. “If I’m going to lose I would like to lose more narrowly,” he confided. “But above all, we want guidance from this Court so that when we do this rule-making, if we decide rules are appropriate we’d like to know what we need to do to establish jurisdiction.”

What’s next if DC Court says FCC has no power over ISPs (Ars Technica)

Border technology searches

The ACLU has posted an analysis (and easier data access) to recent Customs and Border Protection data.

In a span of just nine months, CBP officials searched over 1,500 electronic devices belonging to travelers. Under the current policy, they were not required to justify a single one of these searches. …

Between July 2008 and June 2009, CBP transferred electronic files found on travelers’ devices to third-party agencies almost 300 times. Over half the time, these unknown agencies asserted independent bases for retaining or seizing the transferred files. More than 80 percent of the transfers involved the CBP making copies of travelers’ files.

It’s not clear whether the majority of these searches were done for reasons of security or copyright. In cases of the latter, the lack of a warrant for these searches seems oddly reminiscent of the power granted to England’s Stationers’ company (circa 16c!).

Thanks to the ACLU for giving this at least some transparency.

via Customs and Border Protection (CBP) First Production Documents | American Civil Liberties Union.

To Google or not to Google, that is a Juror’s question

Social networking among jurors is trying judges’ patience

The Washington Post had an interesting article about the problem of jurors using the internet to communicate and research outside of the confines of the courtroom and deliberations.

Judges and legal experts are particularly concerned about how technology and culture are affecting jurors and a defendant’s right to a fair trial. The Internet has provided easy and instant access to newspaper archives, criminal records, detailed maps, legal opinions and social-networking sites, such as Facebook, all at the anonymous click of a mouse in jurors’ homes or on the tiny keyboards of their cellular phones.

While the article naturally discusses that judges might warn jurors not to use the internet during a trial, I wonder if other forces might work to combat the effects of this phenomenon.

It has been argued that lawyers have changed their strategies of argumentation in court to fit storylines familiar in public relations and popular culture (perhaps at the sacrifice of linear or logical argumentation).  If jurors use the Internet when they go home for the evening, perhaps there will be a push towards shorter one or two day trials. Perhaps lawyers will begin presenting arguments that are relevant to what is going on outside the courtroom (ie: arguing against media reports).  While the greater impact of these on the justice system isn’t immediately clear, many would embrace the idea of shorter trials.