If anything, that should be a decision left up to the professors. For the college itself to ban laptop use would be a bad call on all fronts. What it boils down to is what utility a laptop provides for a specific class. If it's a literature class where most of the learning is done through presentations and textbooks, then using a laptop in that specific class wouldn't be that important. If, on the other hand, you're taking a physics course and you have supplemental programs that aid you in doing whatever you need to do, then laptop use is a must if there is no other means to proficiently complete coursework at school. If a professor notices a lot of students are just browsing the internet and not doing class relevant work, then I think the professor should have the authority to restrict use.

It's a shame in the sense that this split screen gaming and local multiplayer could go the way of the dodo bird if current trends continue (and by current trends, I mean console manufacturers pushing online gaming, where you don't need actual friends to play multiplayer; a person in the USA can play a game of Halo: Reach or Street Fighter with a person over in Germany.) Then again, it's simply showing the evolution of gaming, whether it be for better or for worse. It could also be somewhat connected to the ever declining need for face-to-face interaction, when all of our communication needs or everyday activities can be satiated right from the convenience of our bedroom - or your mother's basement - therefore eliminating the need to have friends you can communicate with in real life.

Suite Life of Zack and Cody, here I come!

I still see these machines at some movie theatres around my area. I'm really disappointed about the soundtrack being nerfed. I kind of miss hearing that announcement, "Hey, hey, hey, come on over and play some Crazzzy Taxi." Good times.

Of all places for this to be implemented, it has to be McDonalds. How about implementing this system in places where it actually makes sense, like banks and retail stores? The fact the liquid is visible under UV light seems to be irrelevant because last time I checked, people could easily wash it off or change clothes, and if the evidence is gone, there's an infinite amount of explanations that would satiate a police officer's inquiries.

Whether the article was telling half-truths or not, the fact that Activision is behind it tells me all I need to know. This is simply more deception and tricks being pulled by Bobby Kotick to get more money from people. I'm not an avid PC gamer, but Bobby really does have it out for console gamers. I suggest others who are seriously fed up follow suit with Dice and write them a letter asking Bobby if he's happy. This is seriously a low blow from Activision.

I can't wait until I can start viewing more embarrassing photos because the only uses this has to normal people is pretending to be a spy and looking for people falling off of bicycles or doing other stupid stuff.

I agree. I suppose it would have been better to state Microsoft should try to fund some public awareness type of campaign to get people like grandma to not click links to websites simply because the subject says "Cute puppy pictures."

I'm kind of surprised Microsoft would say something like this, but at the same time, I'm really not. I guess they are looking at it through the eyes of George Washington and not the consumer, that's why they'll just sue people into compliance. But what's going to happen when they can't sue people because malware propagates itself far more quickly than Microsoft can detect its origin? Why not take the initiative and build more secure products instead of dealing with the problem after Conficker 2 is already globally widespread,

The reason more Americans are infected is because of the sheer amount of computers we have. As others have noted, it's really the percentage per 1000 that are infected that really count. I would bet that most people nowadays have more than one PC in their home, so the statistics are skewed if no one is playing by the same rules.

Studies also show that you are more likely to talk to said friends then strangers, even if you and the stranger have more in common. The study seems interesting, but I would have been able to guess this on my own.

When it came to how I grew up, it was very lax, to say the least. I could go where I wanted, do what I wanted, and I never ended up getting in trouble, ever. No drugs, no nothing. It's when parents try to start controlling every little thing their kids do that they want to start lying and doing the things their parents tell them to do. PROTIP: Let them have some freedom once in a while. If you notice your child starts to become evasive when you ask them questions or just evasive in general, then it's time to intervene and ask them what's going on. But if your child thinks they're going to be punished or you're going to be disappointed if they tell you something, they won't do it. Teach them what's acceptable and what isn't and let them find out what happens after that. Don't treat them like babies and have them wearing diapers when they are 32.

I wonder if this will lead to more broader implications once the Mafiaa can't DMCA ISPs into compliance.

How long until making photocopies of your butt becomes a thing of the past?

If you run on a certain date format, your future endeavors are put as risk as well!