Free Essays on Microsoft Legal Audit

Microsoft’s Legal Audit Microsoft, manufactures, licenses, and supports a host of software products for a number of computing devices. Their software includes operating systems for â€Å"intelligent devices, personal computers and servers; server applications for client/server environments; knowledge worker productivity applications; and software development tools. They also license consumer software programs; sell PC input devices; train and certify system integrators; and research and develop advanced technologies for future software products.† Should there be a reference here? Microsoft's ambitions are anything but small. The world's #1 software company provides a variety of products and services, including its Windows operating systems and Office Suite software. The company has expanded into markets such as video game consoles, interactive television, and Internet access. With its core markets maturing, Microsoft is targeting services for growth, looking to transform its software applications into Web-based services for enterprises and consumers. Microsoft has reached a tentative settlement to end an ongoing antitrust investigation, agreeing to uniformly license its operating systems and allow manufacturers to include competing software with Windows (Company Information). The following issues involving Microsoft were researched and analyzed in preparation for the production of this audit report. The three issues that were picked involve Microsoft’s employment discrimination troubles, anti-trust/monopoly problems, and revenue reporting investigations by the SEC. Following the legal audits, the appendix contains basic financial statements, a 5-year stock chart, and the 20 most recent insider trades as of March 2003. Employment Discrimination When it rains, it pours. The Associated Press headline and story lead-in of January 2001, announcing Jackson v. Microsoft, must have caused the hearts of anti-trust-weary Microsoft su... Free Essays on Microsoft Legal Audit Free Essays on Microsoft Legal Audit Microsoft’s Legal Audit Microsoft, manufactures, licenses, and supports a host of software products for a number of computing devices. Their software includes operating systems for â€Å"intelligent devices, personal computers and servers; server applications for client/server environments; knowledge worker productivity applications; and software development tools. They also license consumer software programs; sell PC input devices; train and certify system integrators; and research and develop advanced technologies for future software products.† Should there be a reference here? Microsoft's ambitions are anything but small. The world's #1 software company provides a variety of products and services, including its Windows operating systems and Office Suite software. The company has expanded into markets such as video game consoles, interactive television, and Internet access. With its core markets maturing, Microsoft is targeting services for growth, looking to transform its software applications into Web-based services for enterprises and consumers. Microsoft has reached a tentative settlement to end an ongoing antitrust investigation, agreeing to uniformly license its operating systems and allow manufacturers to include competing software with Windows (Company Information). The following issues involving Microsoft were researched and analyzed in preparation for the production of this audit report. The three issues that were picked involve Microsoft’s employment discrimination troubles, anti-trust/monopoly problems, and revenue reporting investigations by the SEC. Following the legal audits, the appendix contains basic financial statements, a 5-year stock chart, and the 20 most recent insider trades as of March 2003. Employment Discrimination When it rains, it pours. The Associated Press headline and story lead-in of January 2001, announcing Jackson v. Microsoft, must have caused the hearts of anti-trust-weary Microsoft su...

Auditory, Visual and Kinesthetic Learning Styles

Auditory, Visual and Kinesthetic Learning Styles One way to be truly successful in the classroom is to wrap your head around the three different learning styles according to Flemings VAK (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) model. If you know how you learn best, you can use specific methods to retain what you learn in class. Different learning styles require varied methods to keep you motivated and successful in the classroom. Here is a bit more about each of the three learning styles.   Visual Fleming states that visual learners have a preference for seeing the material in order to learn it. Strengths of the visual learner:  Instinctively follows directionsCan easily visualize objectsHas a great sense of balance and alignmentIs an excellent organizerBest ways to learn:  Studying notes on overhead slides, whiteboards, Smartboards, PowerPoint presentations, etc.Reading diagrams and handoutsFollowing a distributed study guideReading from a textbookStudying alone Auditory With this  learning style, students have to hear information to truly absorb it. Strengths of the auditory learner:Understanding subtle changes in tone in a persons voiceWriting responses to lecturesOral examsStory-tellingSolving difficult problemsWorking in groupsBest ways to learn:Participating vocally in classMaking recordings of class notes and listening to themReading assignments out loudStudying with a partner or group Kinesthetic Kinesthetic learners tend to want to move while learning. Strengths of the kinesthetic learner:Great hand-eye coordinationQuick receptionExcellent experimentersGood at sports, art, and dramaHigh levels of energyBest ways to learn:Conducting experiments  Acting out a playStudying while standing or movingDoodling during lecturesStudying while performing an athletic activity like bouncing a ball or shooting hoops Generally, students tend to favor one learning style more than another, but most people are a mix of two or maybe even three different styles. So, teachers, make sure youre creating a classroom that can engage any type of learner. And students, use your strengths so you can be the most successful student you can be.

Technology in Literacy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Technology in Literacy - Essay Example f civilization, as an individual can only progress if he or she has the ability to read and write, thereby gaining knowledge and experience about the dynamics of life and the world in general (Kemp 3). The definition of literacy does not stop at the ability to read and write, but extends to include the capacity of an individual to exercise all the knowledge and skills that they gain through reading and writing to shape the course of their lives, or draw up their destinies. As such, literacy becomes a flexible collection of closely linked strategies and skills to the context and purpose of learning and progress. In such a manner, technology comes in a revolutionary way to define the manner or style by which these individual acquire the capacity to read or write. The effect of technology under these considerations is whether it enables many people to acquire literacy, or spoils the same effort of literacy acquisition by exposing these individuals to knowledge and skills far beyond their understanding. In such a case, technology ends up being a pitfall rather than a ladder to the advancement of literacy in the modern world (Felderman and Vasquez 45). The research to establish the effect of technology in literacy used both qualitative, as well as, quantitative methods to discern the degree of influence. The participants in the research involved both the old and the young, in different geographical settings. A group of old men and women, both from town and from the rural settlements took part in the research, and similarly to the young boys and girls of the same age group and from different backgrounds. This enabled the researcher to collect the honest opinions of each side of the market and determine the true effects of technology in the advancement of literacy. Analysis of data was particular in establishing the level of gains made by literacy due to incorporation of technology, as well as, the negative effects of the inclusion of technology in the advancement of

Identify and describe two significant U.S laws in international trade Essay

Identify and describe two significant U.S laws in international trade for the period of 2000-2008 - Essay Example This agreement immediately removes tariffs on more than eighty percent (80%) of U.S. exports comprising of products, which are consumer and industrial, the rest being phased out in 10 years (USTR, CAFTA-DR Final Text, 1). The Office of the United States Trade Representative also says that the DR-CAFTA would provide the same reciprocal access for the products and services of the US, just like most of the imports that enter the United States which are duty free, under the so-called â€Å"Generalized System of Preferences, Caribbean Basin Initiative and Most Favored Nation programs† (USTR, CAFTA-DR Final Text, 1). Hence, the goal of this agreement is to maintain a healthy competition and to create â€Å"a more efficient marketplace across international borders† (US Trade Representative, CAFTA Facts: Meeting the Needs of the Region’s Rural Poor, 1). This agreement is also provided with funding initiatives in order to enhance rural development and build trade capacity (USTR, CAFTA Facts: Financial Support for CAFTA-DR, 1). Thus, countries under this agreement was said to receive billions of dollars from various agencies in the next few years ((USTR, CAFTA Facts: Financial Support for CAFTA-DR, 1). Aside from this, the agreement contains the international labor rights with the capability to trade, providing thereby the procedures in case a party fails in its obligations under the labor provisions (Human Rights Watch, 1). However, according to Brandie Ballard Wade, although the provision of the DR-CAFTA provides that â€Å"members are committed to meet their obligations under the ILO declaration and ensure that both the rights of workers and the internationally recognized labor principles are protected and established in its laws,† there is however no requirement that they have to meet these obligations (645). Instead, the agreement only requires that countries strive to ensure that international principles and rights â€Å"are acknowledged and protected by

James Bond 007 Agent Under Fire :: Papers

James Bond 007 Agent Under Fire James Bond, has been represented in novels and films for over four decades and several computer games have been made from the films. Electronic Arts are creating a new Bond specifically for the console market, neither based on a film or a book. Previous Bond games have been hit and miss, GoldenEye on the Nintendo 64 is considered an all-time classic whereas Tomorrow Never Dies on the PlayStation was mediocre [IMAGE] James Bond films have several key components; girls, gadgets, guns, cars, locations and action. Agent Under Fire actually covers these aspects quite well with its multiple game types. Environments are built with lots of polygons and style. Even though you find plenty of offices and hallways, few of them are boring; arched ceilings, curved walls and picturesque window views are everywhere. all rooms are adorned with appropriate ambient objects, many of which are interactive (or at least, destructible). All of the expected touches are here; bullet holes spew plaster, potted plants shatter, and the explosions are easily some of the most legitimate you've ever seen. The main problem with 007:AUF is that most of the action is good, but very little of it is great. The arsenal of weapons is huge and impressively implemented, and enemies are positioned around every corner. One of the most commendable features of the FPS levels is the enemy artificial intelligence. They attack in packs, flush you out, hide behind boxes, bark instructions at each other, or simply just run away. While it's fun to gun them down, there are no unexpected challenges. This becomes especially apparent when you try to replay levels with less aggressive techniques. Your standard-issue P2K has an optional silencer attachment, but alas, there's little opportunity for stealth. You might be able to quietly snipe a few lookouts, but sooner or later the game will force you out of the shadows. From there you're no longer a spy, you're a gunner The sound effects are actually notable for their lack of impact.

Can Machines Think?

Can Machines Think ? This paper regards several points of view on the subject of, what is commonly referred to as Artificial Intelligence, or AI. AI is the attempt to make machines, specifically computers, perform intelligently through programming. Already, this definition has a problem in that the word intelligence can have many interpretations. This essay will attempt to put forward some ideas for how to approach this problem.It could be said that the human brain is nothing more than a machine, and as we know it to be capable of thought it would be fair to surmise that therefore machines can think and it is probably this, or a similar premise that inspired AI. However, within AI there are many schools of thought. Some believe that if a computer can be programmed correctly to emulate certain human processes, then it is to all intense and purposes thinking as we do.One of the early pioneers in the world of computers, Alan Turing, outlined a test in which participants are asked to int errogate a computer terminal in order to determine whether they are communicating with a human, or a computer program. Examples of programs which were put through the Turing test are ELIZA and SHRDLU both of which attempted to emulate one side of human conversation. But even if these programs did appear to be totally human, could they be said to actually be thinking ? John Searle(1984) puts forward a scenario in an attempt to devalue this idea.He refers to a program by Roger Schank at Yale university which, after being given a story will be able to answer questions regarding it. It would seem at the outset that this program would therefore be understanding the story. Searle then argues that despite not being able to understand Chinese, he would, under the correct circumstances, be able to answers Chinese questions in Chinese, relating to a story also written in Chinese. The scenario is summarised as follows; Sitting isolated in a room, Searle is given a wad of Chinese script, follow ed by another. In addition he is given a list of English rules, for correctly correlating the two.By simply following the English rules, he writes a third set of chinese words which he then returns to someone outside the room. If the first set of script was a story, the second a set of questions, he could be said to be answering the questions. In fact, from the point of view of someone standing outside the room, he would be correctly answering the questions, and thus would appear to be conversant in Chinese. This of course is not the case, as Searle would have no knowledge of what the story was about, and what the questions were asking – he would not be understanding the story.This argument is an attempt to demonstrate that although a computer program appears to be understanding a story, it is merely obeying simple instructions, and has no understanding at all. â€Å"In the linguistic jargon, they have only a syntax but no semantics† (Searle 1984) However, depending on hown one observes this problem, it can appear very differently. Regarding the entire room, the person in the room (to whom I shall refer for the sake of continuity of terms as a demon), the scripts and the person outside as a whole, we do have a system that is capable of reading and interpreting Chinese.Hofstadter extends this idea by modifying the scenario so as to shrink it to brain size, the scripts becoming neurons and so on. This effectively creates a system equivalent to the human brain. So what would be the difference between the two. Why would one be acceptable as a thinking system and one not ? Searle frequently refers to ‘causal properties' and ‘intentionality' stating that the artificial system proposed by Hofstadter would lack both of them, and that somehow the human brian has both.It is here where the subject of duality comes into the fore. Are the mind and the brain one and the same, or are they separate entities ? Many religions favour this dualist approa ch and refer to the mind, as it is in this instance, as a persons soul and regard it as being separate to the physical self. Whether the mind is separate or not, Searle's argument implies that the human brain has a mind, because of its natural causal properties, yet an artificial machine does not. But what are these natural causal properties, and from what do they derive ?Are they a result of the biological material from which the brain is made, are they a result of the brain's structure or are they a result of a breath of life from the lips of a god ? â€Å"Machines as simple as thermostats can be said to have beliefs, and having beliefs seems to be a characteristic of most machines capable of problem solving performance† (McCarthy 1979) At what point does a functioning machine gain intentionality ? Here Zenon Pylyshyn is cited from a reply made to Searle, to illustrate the complex connotations involved in the idea of the natural causal property of the brain. If more and mor e of the cells in your brain were to be replaced by integrated circuit chips, programmed in such a way as to keep the input-output function of each unit identical to that of the unit being replaced, you would in all likelihood just keep right on speaking exactly as you are doing now except that you would eventually stop meaning anything by it. What we outside observers might take to be words would become for you just certain noises that circuits caused you to make. Surely, the person in the above example would have conscious, intentional thought, despite being constructed from artificial parts. Or would this person simply be acting in the same role as the chinese room demon ? Another area rapidly developing in AI is Parallel Distributed Processing, or neural networks. These are complex structures that emulate the brains neural structure, and are usually modelled within a computer, although in theory there is nothing to stop them being constructed electronically, or even mechanically !The effect of a neural network is similar to that in Pylyshyn's example – an electronic replacement for a part of the brain. Functionally it operates almost identically to a brain and can be made to do tasks similar to those performed by Schank's story program. Could a neural network equivalent be said to have any more ‘causal properties' than just a computer program ? Searle acknowledges that since we are merely machines, it is possible that machines can think.However he finds the idea of a computer program thinking implausible. However, if we could model a brain, with atomic accuracy in a computers memory, for example in the form of a neural network, surely it would work in exactly the same way and would therefore be just as valid a thinker as a human. It seems that this whole debate rests its most basic principles on a belief; either one believes that our ‘intentionality' derives purely from our brain and its structure or one doesn't.Even if we ever do manage to construct an exact replica of a brain that appears to work identically to the real thing, how could we tell if it really is a conscious entity with true intentionality, or merely acting like the chinese room demon ? Indeed, how can we define conscious, and intentionality in that context. There must be a level of functioning or reasoning that we can use as a cut-off point for deciding whether or not something is alive and thinking. Descartes stated â€Å"I think. Therefore, I am†. But was he thinking, or merely following a mechanical pattern, with no real understanding of the words ? References Can Machines Think? Can Machines Think ? This paper regards several points of view on the subject of, what is commonly referred to as Artificial Intelligence, or AI. AI is the attempt to make machines, specifically computers, perform intelligently through programming. Already, this definition has a problem in that the word intelligence can have many interpretations. This essay will attempt to put forward some ideas for how to approach this problem.It could be said that the human brain is nothing more than a machine, and as we know it to be capable of thought it would be fair to surmise that therefore machines can think and it is probably this, or a similar premise that inspired AI. However, within AI there are many schools of thought. Some believe that if a computer can be programmed correctly to emulate certain human processes, then it is to all intense and purposes thinking as we do.One of the early pioneers in the world of computers, Alan Turing, outlined a test in which participants are asked to int errogate a computer terminal in order to determine whether they are communicating with a human, or a computer program. Examples of programs which were put through the Turing test are ELIZA and SHRDLU both of which attempted to emulate one side of human conversation. But even if these programs did appear to be totally human, could they be said to actually be thinking ? John Searle(1984) puts forward a scenario in an attempt to devalue this idea.He refers to a program by Roger Schank at Yale university which, after being given a story will be able to answer questions regarding it. It would seem at the outset that this program would therefore be understanding the story. Searle then argues that despite not being able to understand Chinese, he would, under the correct circumstances, be able to answers Chinese questions in Chinese, relating to a story also written in Chinese. The scenario is summarised as follows; Sitting isolated in a room, Searle is given a wad of Chinese script, follow ed by another. In addition he is given a list of English rules, for correctly correlating the two.By simply following the English rules, he writes a third set of chinese words which he then returns to someone outside the room. If the first set of script was a story, the second a set of questions, he could be said to be answering the questions. In fact, from the point of view of someone standing outside the room, he would be correctly answering the questions, and thus would appear to be conversant in Chinese. This of course is not the case, as Searle would have no knowledge of what the story was about, and what the questions were asking – he would not be understanding the story.This argument is an attempt to demonstrate that although a computer program appears to be understanding a story, it is merely obeying simple instructions, and has no understanding at all. â€Å"In the linguistic jargon, they have only a syntax but no semantics† (Searle 1984) However, depending on hown one observes this problem, it can appear very differently. Regarding the entire room, the person in the room (to whom I shall refer for the sake of continuity of terms as a demon), the scripts and the person outside as a whole, we do have a system that is capable of reading and interpreting Chinese.Hofstadter extends this idea by modifying the scenario so as to shrink it to brain size, the scripts becoming neurons and so on. This effectively creates a system equivalent to the human brain. So what would be the difference between the two. Why would one be acceptable as a thinking system and one not ? Searle frequently refers to ‘causal properties' and ‘intentionality' stating that the artificial system proposed by Hofstadter would lack both of them, and that somehow the human brian has both.It is here where the subject of duality comes into the fore. Are the mind and the brain one and the same, or are they separate entities ? Many religions favour this dualist approa ch and refer to the mind, as it is in this instance, as a persons soul and regard it as being separate to the physical self. Whether the mind is separate or not, Searle's argument implies that the human brain has a mind, because of its natural causal properties, yet an artificial machine does not. But what are these natural causal properties, and from what do they derive ?Are they a result of the biological material from which the brain is made, are they a result of the brain's structure or are they a result of a breath of life from the lips of a god ? â€Å"Machines as simple as thermostats can be said to have beliefs, and having beliefs seems to be a characteristic of most machines capable of problem solving performance† (McCarthy 1979) At what point does a functioning machine gain intentionality ? Here Zenon Pylyshyn is cited from a reply made to Searle, to illustrate the complex connotations involved in the idea of the natural causal property of the brain. If more and mor e of the cells in your brain were to be replaced by integrated circuit chips, programmed in such a way as to keep the input-output function of each unit identical to that of the unit being replaced, you would in all likelihood just keep right on speaking exactly as you are doing now except that you would eventually stop meaning anything by it. What we outside observers might take to be words would become for you just certain noises that circuits caused you to make. Surely, the person in the above example would have conscious, intentional thought, despite being constructed from artificial parts. Or would this person simply be acting in the same role as the chinese room demon ? Another area rapidly developing in AI is Parallel Distributed Processing, or neural networks. These are complex structures that emulate the brains neural structure, and are usually modelled within a computer, although in theory there is nothing to stop them being constructed electronically, or even mechanically !The effect of a neural network is similar to that in Pylyshyn's example – an electronic replacement for a part of the brain. Functionally it operates almost identically to a brain and can be made to do tasks similar to those performed by Schank's story program. Could a neural network equivalent be said to have any more ‘causal properties' than just a computer program ? Searle acknowledges that since we are merely machines, it is possible that machines can think.However he finds the idea of a computer program thinking implausible. However, if we could model a brain, with atomic accuracy in a computers memory, for example in the form of a neural network, surely it would work in exactly the same way and would therefore be just as valid a thinker as a human. It seems that this whole debate rests its most basic principles on a belief; either one believes that our ‘intentionality' derives purely from our brain and its structure or one doesn't.Even if we ever do manage to construct an exact replica of a brain that appears to work identically to the real thing, how could we tell if it really is a conscious entity with true intentionality, or merely acting like the chinese room demon ? Indeed, how can we define conscious, and intentionality in that context. There must be a level of functioning or reasoning that we can use as a cut-off point for deciding whether or not something is alive and thinking. Descartes stated â€Å"I think. Therefore, I am†. But was he thinking, or merely following a mechanical pattern, with no real understanding of the words ? References

American Homes Inspired by French Designs