I have an uncharacteristically long posting backlog.
I’ll probably have to drop a bunch of intended posts, but I want to get through the following at least (over the next week or so):
Hopefully, I can then get back into my normal ranting – ahem, I mean posting – routine.
The Australian newspaper recently ran a story entitled “Apps and games to face censor, says ALP” which leads in with “THE Labor Party has flagged it will shut down a major loophole in the mobile phone industry.
I’ve very interested in this topic, and have spend the last few days forming (and refining) my opinion. I’ll run through my thought processes over the course of this post, but for now I’ll start with a couple of excerpts from the story.
On classification requirements before computer games can be sold in Australia:
It is a legal requirement that films, computer games and some publications be classified before sale, but a loophole, or lack of awareness, means apps are being sold for use on smartphones such as the Apple iPhone without any censorship or guidance for users and parents.
In regards the standard practice of releasing mobile phone games without submitting them for classification:
While a number of submissions to the ongoing inquiry into computer games classifications raised the potential issue of classification for mobile games and apps, Australia’s smartphone providers and games developers have blithely broken the law and dodged hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees.
After some discussion on twitter, I started a thread on the PIGMI mailing list (unfortunately, it looks like replies aren’t appearing on the online archive). I’ve also conducted some more online research, and I would like to share the results here.
I initially felt it was fairly clear that smartphone games need to be submitted for classification, and that Apple (and other smartphone app providers) was in breach of legislation by selling games that have not been classified. However, I now feel that Apple probably has a defensible case given:
There are good counter-arguments to each of the above points: The term “computer games” covers console and handheld games, so it should cover the iPod Touch and iPad at the very least; Inaction doesn’t imply tacit approval; Distribution and sale may be treated similarly in Australia; and no matter who is responsible for classification, retailers cannot sell unclassified material (regardless of indemnity clauses in developer agreements).
Another area of contention is jurisdiction. The Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) and the Australian Broadcasting Association (ABA) were wrapped up a few years ago, and media regulation is now left to the Classification Board (part of the Attorney-General’s office) and the Australia Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
The Classification Board is generally responsible for classification of media that will be sold in Australia (traditionally in brick-and-mortar stores): films, books, and video games. Works must be submitted to the Classification Board for review before they can be sold in Australia, and those items refused classification cannot be sold. The process is lengthy (20 days for each decision), costly (hundreds of dollars for each submission), and ill-suited to media with substantial dynamic content (which is impossible to exhaustively test).
The ACMA tends to be responsible for regulation of content that will be transmitted: music, online content, television and radio content. Presumably, part of the reason for this is because classification of high-volume and live content is infeasible. Moreover, industry codes of practice have shown to provide and adequate level of consumer protection. They allow content producers to quickly distribute content (with minimal overhead), and consumers are able to complain of any breaches to the codes of practice.
Given the high-volume and dynamic nature (patches, updates, and online play) of online and downloadable games, it’s probably more appropriate for the ACMA (rather than the Classification Board) to be responsible for regulating them. The ACMA registers industry codes of practice for commercial television and radio broadcasters, and the Internet Industry Association. However, I was unable to find any evidence that there is a similar code of practice from the games industry.
It’s important that these issues are resolved as Apple arguably has a commercial advantage over other publishers who do (possibly unnecessarily) submit their games for classification (eg. Nintendo DSiWare and Sony Playstation Network). I believe that the best outcome for all parties (the Classification Board, the games industry, consumers, and the general public) is for industry self-regulation via a code of practice.
What should be in the code of practice, and who it should apply to, are topics for further discussion and future blog posts.
It’s a rainy day, so I decided to post some photos rather than going for a swim. Here are some captions:
I recently bought Heidi a Nokia 2710 Navigation Edition mobile phone. It’s a basic feature phone with GPS and turn-by-turn (voiced) navigation.
Here are some promotional pictures:
It’s probably the best value phone we’ve ever had between us, and the perfect balance between features and price.
Everyone seems to be buying smartphones (such as the iPhone and Android handsets), but a feature phone still has many advantages:
Clearly smart phones have a lot of potential functionality (according to the iPhone catch phrase: “there’s an app for that”), but feature phones are more directed in their actual functionality.
The 2710 is a perfect example of directed functionality. It’s succinctly designed for maps and navigation on a low-cost phone. It doesn’t just include an under-utilised GPS sensor and a choice of (paid) navigation apps. Maps and navigation are well-integrated and purposeful features, and it’s clear that a lot of thought has gone into integrating the phone’s software and hardware with this focus.
Here are a few notable features:
This phone has been fantastic during our trip to Malaysia. I bought it outright in Australia, so it’s unlocked and readily accepted a local SIM card (so no roaming charges). Also, maps of Malaysia were preloaded so we could immediately use turn-by-turn navigation in our rental car (great for poorly marked roads).
Conclusion: Highly recommended.
Oh, and here is a promotional video:
Cats seem to find comfort in the most uncomfortable places. Here are a couple of examples from around the house.
Bruce in the tube on his cat tree (snug, but not long enough):
Lolly (Heidi’s parents’ cat) sleeping with her forehead on the seat:
At first, I just thought that she was looking at something.
It’s time to pack up and move back to Perth. That means packing my computer (and router, and everything else), and that means goodbye to you, Internet.
Keep in touch, Internet. I’ll see you on Sunday… or maybe not for a while. 🙁
Ah, we had some good times sharing our obsession with cats. (Although you can get pretty creepy sometimes, and you’re prone to borderline stalking.)
Upbeat or downbeat? I’m not sure.
Here are the lyrics.
It was a beautiful day, so I decided to take some photos. One more week to go…
This video was highly recommended by Dan on twitter:
Here’s the video description:
Professor Philip Zimbardo conveys how our individual perspectives of time affect our work, health and well-being. Time influences who we are as a person, how we view relationships and how we act in the world.
It’s an interesting speech that is well worth your time.
I was particularly interested in the assertions regarding education. Probably because both major political parties in Australia are advocating a “return to basics” approach to education, which Professor Zimbardo implies is destined for failure.
I’ve been reading a lot about transgender issues.
From Wikipedia:
Transgender is a general term applied to a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies to vary from the usual gender roles.
Transgender is the state of one’s “gender identity” (self-identification as woman, man, neither or both) not matching one’s “assigned sex” (identification by others as male, female or intersex based on physical/genetic sex).
Importantly, it has nothing to do with sexual orientation.
Gender transition is one of the most overt and visible aspects of transgenderism. The concept that people can change their gender is interesting, and seeing results of the process can be astonishing.
Photo series are intermittently posted to online forums; usually either by someone interested in gender transition themselves, or by someone fascinated by the results (hopefully without moral judgement).
Here are some that I have come across online:
These results may not be typical, but they do show that gender transition is achievable with medical treatments such as hormone replacement therapy. They demonstrate that there are options for people who want to change their physical and social gender. (Although they may lead to unrealistic expectations regarding results.)
Fortunately, there are more balanced transgender resources online. Lynn Conway has an informative site documenting her own experiences and including galleries with links to other personal stories (rather than spectacular photo series without no broader context) which often describe issues faced by transgender people.
It’s interesting to read about how transgenderism is viewed by different cultures.
Most western cultures traditionally treat transgenderism in much the same way as minority sexual orientations: as something of which to be ashamed. Although it does appear that most societies are becoming increasing progressive and accepting.
Some Asian cultures consider transsexualism to be rather novel and entertaining, which could be construed as better or worse depending on your perspective. Here’s a video of Thai “newhalf” Nong Poy appearing on a Japanese television program:
Transgender issues generally represent conflict between personal liberty and social expectations. People have a right to live life as they want to, but most societies strongly define gender roles. As a result, there tends to be broad social stigma associated with transgenderism (which is disappointing).
Popular culture seems to be consistently intrigued by transgenderism.
Artists and writers have utilised it as an interesting theme for exploration or documentation (eg. Ranma 1/2, Transamerica, The Iron Ladies). However, there’s a fine line between interesting media coverage and derogatory exploitation in popular culture (eg. There’s Something About Miriam, tabloid coverage of Lana Wachowski).
While intriguing, many people also seem to find it rather confronting.
Fortunately, the Internet allows anyone to engage with transgendered people (eg. via personal online videos) without intermediary mainstream media. This is particularly beneficial in improving understanding within the general population, and in providing information and solidarity for other transgendered people.
This video (while professional produced) tells a personal story:
Ruth eloquently explains that:
It’s immensely uncomfortable to have people perceive you as male, when you feel that you’re female.
That’s a plain and straightforward assessment which is very difficult to argue with in any objective way.
At some point, most people will feel that their body doesn’t match up with who they are inside. Rather than gender, these feelings may result from relative weight, height, age or any number of other factors. Although relatively minor, these experiences may facilitate greater empathy with transgendered people.
Anyhow, I’ll end this post with one of my more interesting findings:
The Australian Sports Commission overtly discredits the assumption that “males will change gender in order to reap rewards in women’s sport which they are unable to obtain by competing in men’s sport”. Wow. It’s amazing that they even have to discuss such ridiculous assertions.