The Chronicle of Higher Education has a regular feature called Profhacker. A rotating group of faculty write about various technology-related issues in Higher Ed.
Recently Lincoln Mullen, a history of religion PhD candidate wrote about making reasonable choices about which electronic tools to use in our work. I have a colleague, for example, who still uses a DOS-based program because it does what he needs. I myself continue to use a word processor that first came out in the eighties (Notabene) because I think it’s still the best one around (it’s compatible with current Windows installations).
So here are some interesting thoughts–feel free to add to the conversation by commenting below…
PS I’d be glad to talk about Notabene and why I continue to use it off-list, as this is not supposed to be a forum for commercial applications.
After Aaron Swartz committed suicide a few months ago the uproar led MIT to commission an internal inquiry. It released its findings a couple of days ago (in and around the controversy swirling around the NSA and its various programs). While they conclude that MIT didn’t actually do anything wrong, they suggest that they might have acted differently:
Larry Lessig suggests that MIT is ducking its actual responsibilities:
JSTOR (the source of the data that Swartz was downloading and ‘freeing’ also had a statement:
A couple of months ago Techdirt discovered that the prosecution of Swartz was likely politically motivated, incidentally: