Nearly 70 million Americans are still watching TV via an analogue signal and the GAO estimates that 35 million of them will be out of luck, and television programs, come winter. After an extensive survey, the GAO has discovered that an alarming amount of Americans have no clue when it comes to the conversion of the old analogue signal to a digital one that is scheduled to occur this February. Despite commercials briefly explaining the process, and coupon offers to lower the cost of conversion boxes, half of the group surveyed say they still do not know how to ensure they will be able to watch television when the switch occurs. Several members of Congress are proposing that the FCC take action now to prevent possible crises that could occur once the switch is complete. In addition, these representatives are proposing more funding toward the creation of coupons for the boxes. The only options for viewers with analogue will be to buy a conversion box or switch to cable or satellite services, none of which are considered cheap. Concerns include whether or not some Americans will lose their access to instantaneous news coverage and entertainment, if the conversion boxes will provide efficient service and whether consumers will find them before the big rush. Several areas to cover in just a matter of months raise the question of whether this new service will really be ready by winter.

Researchers at Northeastern University overstepped their experimental boundaries, or they would have had their project taken place in the United States. Over the past six months, the University has been collecting data regarding the movement of cell phone users in relation to their homes. What they found was that most did not wander outside a radius of 20 miles from their home within the study period, surprising, but ultimately not the focus of this experiment. Northeastern is receiving criticism now for their Big Brother behavior and many point out that an experiment similar to this would never be allowed in the US. Despite the strict policies followed to keep the anonymity of their subjects, Institutional Review Boards would most likely not let such action pass without severely amending the experiment.
On the other side, scientists focused on discovering more about the habits, patterns and practices of humans argue their case for continuing such practices. According to this group, tracking humans by way of cell phones, or other devices, has nothing to do with invading privacy and everything to do with improving the quality of life as we know it. Researchers are attesting to the positive aspects of such a project that would allow for predicting and planning for traffic patterns as well as other problems arising from travel including the spread of contagious diseases. The battle of privacy versus advancement will continue to be fought so long as there are new frontiers and this particular one will have people torn over which side is more appropriate.

Joi Hyatte, a paralegal in the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights division, has filed suit against the DOJ, alleging that she has been passed over for promotions because she is African-American. Hyatte claims that although she enjoyed excellent reviews and served the department for 13 years, the department, in violation of typical hiring procedures, chose instead to hire whites and Hispanics from the outside for higher-paying positions. The suit accuses section chiefs John Tanner and Yvette Rivera of “numerous forms of discrimination and harassment,” including the intentional denial of bonuses and promotions solely on the basis of race and tolerance of racist and sexist behavior. In one incident, three attorneys “mocked (a) Caucasian analyst for displaying pictures of prominent African-American civil rights activists and leaders on the walls of her office.” According to Hyatte’s lawyers, six of her co-workers have complained of similar treatment and have logged complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Office. Hyatte hopes to win a promotion and back pay for the last two years, arguing that she since 2006 she has been assigned extra work without a pay increase.

That’s right. Last Wednesday, Sandra Day O’Connor unveiled a video game she is helping to design at a conference dubbed Games for Change, which promotes “social issue” gaming. O’Connor conceived of the free game, to be released in 2009, for the Our Courts project, an initiative to encourage civic education and engagement. The beginning “level” of the game will introduce the player to First Amendment issues using a scenario in which freedom of expression is challenged by a school trying to ban t-shirts with a certain logo. Justice O’Connor hopes that young people will identify with the dillema, one many face in their own lives. The game will probably simulate a court room, and will sharpen kids’ problem solving skills while familiarizing them with important civic ideas.

O’Connor did chuckle in front of the conference about her new career path, joking:

Source: New York Times