I am already excited about the upcoming 2010 automated elections. Personally, I think this a good opportunity for the COMELEC to prove that our country can have clean and honest elections. Not to mention that a lot of time, a non-renewable resource, will be saved, to the delight of our public school teachers, election volunteers and COMELEC officials.
However, I have some concerns about this modernization scheme. I hope these will be addressed by the COMELEC's issuance of the upcoming elections' terms of reference. First, what will be the guidelines in determining the number of machines to be designated for each precinct? Second, what will be the procedure followed in the assistance of our 'technology-challenged' voters? Given this procedure, how will the sanctity of thier ballots be protected? Third, what contingency measures will be implemented in cases of power outages, technology lapses and the like? Lastly, how will recounts be conducted, considering that everything will be 'digitized'?
In any event, I think having clean and honest elections hinges on a 'manual' procedure, that is, cleaning up our voters' list.
Still, even with its inevitable 'growth pains', this is a welcome change and undeniably a red-letter day in our nation's history.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Re:Service by E-mail Under New Rules on Corpo Rehab
I noticed that one of our classmates pondered the possibility of doing service of pleadings, notices and other documents through e-mail. Well, the Supreme Court just issued new rules on corporate rehabilitation and the Rules specifically recognize service by e-mail as a possible mode of service if so allowed by the RTC where the petition for rehabilitation is pending. Sec. 3 states that"... any pleading or document required by these Rules may be filed with the Court and/or served upon the other parties by facsimile transmission or electronic mail (e-mail). In such cases, the date of transmission shall be deemed to be the date of service." I find this intriguing for a number of reasons.
1) I just do not know if our courts is sufficiently equipped and funded to handle service by electronic mail. Some RTCs (Marikina and Antipolo, I think) do not even have working phone lines due to non-payment of bills.
2) I am not sure if all commercial courts here in the Philippines can access the Internet.
3) This particular mode of service of pleadings definitely needs an online notarization system, in case the pleadings needs to be verified.
4) Lawyers engaged in corporate rehab practice will now have to obtain electronic signatures.
* As a person who is seriously considering corporate practice, I am looking forward to sending petitions via e-mail because the amount of time and money that clients and lawyers have to spend in filing alone can be enormously reduced.
Judith Ann C. Alejo
2001-01820
1) I just do not know if our courts is sufficiently equipped and funded to handle service by electronic mail. Some RTCs (Marikina and Antipolo, I think) do not even have working phone lines due to non-payment of bills.
2) I am not sure if all commercial courts here in the Philippines can access the Internet.
3) This particular mode of service of pleadings definitely needs an online notarization system, in case the pleadings needs to be verified.
4) Lawyers engaged in corporate rehab practice will now have to obtain electronic signatures.
* As a person who is seriously considering corporate practice, I am looking forward to sending petitions via e-mail because the amount of time and money that clients and lawyers have to spend in filing alone can be enormously reduced.
Judith Ann C. Alejo
2001-01820
Kindle2
Technology has opened doors for development through information exchange. Various means of sharing information are now available. Similarly, various copyright battles have been caused by these developments. Among the newer issues include Amazon.com's Kindle 2.
In November 2007, Amazon.com released an e-book reader called Kindle. This was such a big hit that in no time, the supplies were out-of-stock; and they were out-of stock for months. The e-books are downloadable through Whispernet through the Sprint EVDO network.
Just last February 2009, Kindle 2 was released. Among its new features include the text-to-speech option to read the text aloud. Although the e-books were covered by intellectual property rights, the audio produced by the text-to-speech option does not pay the authors any royalties.
This will be interesting. Another issue on intellectual property rights.
Giulia Pineda
2001-64304
In November 2007, Amazon.com released an e-book reader called Kindle. This was such a big hit that in no time, the supplies were out-of-stock; and they were out-of stock for months. The e-books are downloadable through Whispernet through the Sprint EVDO network.
Just last February 2009, Kindle 2 was released. Among its new features include the text-to-speech option to read the text aloud. Although the e-books were covered by intellectual property rights, the audio produced by the text-to-speech option does not pay the authors any royalties.
This will be interesting. Another issue on intellectual property rights.
Giulia Pineda
2001-64304
The Effect of Poverty on the Use of Technology (Part 3)
The rise of technology and its integration into our everyday lives changes our way of life and thinking. It opens countless possibilities, as well as risks. This change may seem radical at first but when we get used to the rapid pace of the development of technology (this rapid pace need not be experienced first hand, via actual access, to be able to have an idea of how it works, just like with the concept of an “internet”), we learn to cope and live our lives with such idea at the back of our heads. Despite poverty, and possibly the lack or infrequency of access to the internet, this idea helps in my belief that once the infrastructure is furnished, people will quite easily learn to use technology for their own individual needs and wants.
It seems to me now that the effect of poverty on technology may be described in two different ways. And these two ways are on the opposite ends of the spectrum when placed side by side. Primarily because the first deals with people actually living in poverty while the second deals with people who see poverty as an opportunity.
The first is that poverty prevents technology from assimilating into remote areas because of lack of required knowledge of the majority of the inhabitants of such areas for the use of the technology involved to be able to access the internet. But today, as mentioned in our previous class, it seems even the disadvantaged knows, or at least has his or her own concept of an “internet”. This, at the very least, gives me the impression that even though poverty prevents actual access to be granted to the less privileged, it does not prevent the idea of such technology from getting to the remote places in the country.
---
Rivera, Jan Michael A.
02-16779
It seems to me now that the effect of poverty on technology may be described in two different ways. And these two ways are on the opposite ends of the spectrum when placed side by side. Primarily because the first deals with people actually living in poverty while the second deals with people who see poverty as an opportunity.
The first is that poverty prevents technology from assimilating into remote areas because of lack of required knowledge of the majority of the inhabitants of such areas for the use of the technology involved to be able to access the internet. But today, as mentioned in our previous class, it seems even the disadvantaged knows, or at least has his or her own concept of an “internet”. This, at the very least, gives me the impression that even though poverty prevents actual access to be granted to the less privileged, it does not prevent the idea of such technology from getting to the remote places in the country.
---
Rivera, Jan Michael A.
02-16779
Of Dolphins, Turtles and Freedom
States enter into treaties with each other on certain conditions which aim to address a myriad of concerns such as human and intellectual property rights, carbon dioxide emission, protection of turtles and dolphins, etc. Trade is often held in ransom to compel another country to enact a desired policy. Some may cry encroachment to sovereignty but that is the way in which international relations works. A certain state may bother with what another state does to its turtles and the latter should be able to adapt. Why? They may do it to merely impose their values on us but in the spirit of pacta sunt servanda, we can deduce that it's because turtles are migrating animals and their extinction can place the balance of ecology at stake.
The same analogy can be used for internet regulation. Individuals may claim that they are entitled to freedom of expression and regulating the internet would violate that right. What must be understood however is the fact that freedom does not merely mean "freedom to" but also "freedom from". It's not just the freedom to do whatever is desired but also the freedom from undesirable things that threaten the quality of life. In the same way that a state's sovereignty is realized thru its treaty-making capability and with it the act of entering into concessions, an individual's freedom is realized not thru total absence of restraint but thru agreeing to participate in making sure that freedom is enjoyed by all. It is in our best interests to give up a certain part of our individual freedoms in order to fully realize freedom of the community, of which we are a part.
The same analogy can be used for internet regulation. Individuals may claim that they are entitled to freedom of expression and regulating the internet would violate that right. What must be understood however is the fact that freedom does not merely mean "freedom to" but also "freedom from". It's not just the freedom to do whatever is desired but also the freedom from undesirable things that threaten the quality of life. In the same way that a state's sovereignty is realized thru its treaty-making capability and with it the act of entering into concessions, an individual's freedom is realized not thru total absence of restraint but thru agreeing to participate in making sure that freedom is enjoyed by all. It is in our best interests to give up a certain part of our individual freedoms in order to fully realize freedom of the community, of which we are a part.
Love is so expensive. In an era when affection is measured by how many text messages you’ve sent, love can be very costly.
At this age, if you have any hope of starting a relationship, you have to have a cellphone. If you’re at a party and have just finished flirting it up with somebody, the last question for the night is probably, “Can I have your number?” (At this point, it must be noted that when a somebody asks “What’s your facebook address?”, it does not necessarily mean that s/he likes you.)
After which, you’d be expected to trade nonsense messages with this person, and with it its corresponding peso per text. For those more kiti-kitext, there are indeed unlimited text offers, and still this costs money.
And if you’re really unlucky, you could end up in a long distance relationship, and depending on whether this distance crosses borders, you might also be slapped with overseas communications tax, which, on top of VAT is also very, very expensive.
It’s useless to be nostalgic since we cannot go back to the past but I can’t help but miss those days when handwritten letters were enough (with the rest of the shenanigans of course) to win a girl’s heart. But I digress. At least now, with text, it’s easier to know what the fruits of your electronic efforts are (even if it means it’s easier to get rejected).
At this age, if you have any hope of starting a relationship, you have to have a cellphone. If you’re at a party and have just finished flirting it up with somebody, the last question for the night is probably, “Can I have your number?” (At this point, it must be noted that when a somebody asks “What’s your facebook address?”, it does not necessarily mean that s/he likes you.)
After which, you’d be expected to trade nonsense messages with this person, and with it its corresponding peso per text. For those more kiti-kitext, there are indeed unlimited text offers, and still this costs money.
And if you’re really unlucky, you could end up in a long distance relationship, and depending on whether this distance crosses borders, you might also be slapped with overseas communications tax, which, on top of VAT is also very, very expensive.
It’s useless to be nostalgic since we cannot go back to the past but I can’t help but miss those days when handwritten letters were enough (with the rest of the shenanigans of course) to win a girl’s heart. But I digress. At least now, with text, it’s easier to know what the fruits of your electronic efforts are (even if it means it’s easier to get rejected).
Steal This Film!!!
The trial against ThePirateBay.org (TPB) has ended but this marks only the beginning of the entertainment industry’s fight against file sharing which they perceive is the heart of piracy in this internet age. The arguments of the prosecution centered on TPB’s participation in the proliferation of unprotected copyrighted content and how they earned money through the file sharing platform while ignoring the copyright holders. Just reading the arguments of the counsel for the movie companies confirms that this is a monetary battle more than anything else. Maybe the old adage that money makes the world go round is true. Well, at least for the entertainment industry.
I’ve come across this film that mapped out the history of the transfer of information. It traced the beginnings of content sharing way back to the time when the printing technology was still burgeoning. It featured the opinions of historians, lawyers, musicians, film makers and members of existing file sharing sites. One of the statements made in the film that struck me was: “in fighting file sharing, the entertainment industry is fighting the fundamental structure of the internet.” This fundamental structure being the serving of content and the subsequent consumption of the same. It’s a nice film/documentary to watch so go on and STEAL THIS FILM!!!
I’ve come across this film that mapped out the history of the transfer of information. It traced the beginnings of content sharing way back to the time when the printing technology was still burgeoning. It featured the opinions of historians, lawyers, musicians, film makers and members of existing file sharing sites. One of the statements made in the film that struck me was: “in fighting file sharing, the entertainment industry is fighting the fundamental structure of the internet.” This fundamental structure being the serving of content and the subsequent consumption of the same. It’s a nice film/documentary to watch so go on and STEAL THIS FILM!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
