‘No’: Grad Students Analyze, Hack, and Remove Under-Desk Surveillance Devices
vice.com
vice.com
I think this is probably because I feel like the leadership and administration at most universities only seek to productize their students. It seems like most efforts these days aren’t even geared towards squeezing more money out of the student, but trying to figure out how they can turn the students into a form of uncompensated production. Whether it be benefiting off student research with patents, or their bodies through sports.
Does anyone immediately jump to similar conclusions when they see an article like this?
They've generally taken over running universities from the faculty, and as I recall they're where the vast bulk of increased expenditures have gone, not counting buildings which are often built with earmarked funds since alumni have steadily fewer reasons to trust these administrators.
The administration should be held to account simply for that lie alone.
That is a more egregious lie - I congratulate whoever pitched the "human resarch subject" argument and managed to walk the administration into a poorly thought out sequence of lies.
> Luzzi says that they submitted a proposal to the Institutional Review Board (IRB)—which ensures that human research subject's rights and welfare are protected—only to admit that this never happened when a faculty member reveals the IRB never received any submission.
The researchers may as well be chuck-e-cheese automatons to the administrators, just marketing materials housed in a fancy glass box to show off to visiting delegations of money-havers, to convince them to become money-givers.
As long as glossy appearances are kept, what the researchers actually do is of little to no consequence to the folks operating the money and influence infrastructure.