Extending the IR Port
MAKOFSKY,STEVEN
couple of co-workers and I would like to try an experiment with the HP48sx,
and would like to achieve a transmit range of at least 6 feet. Has anyone
been successful in hooking a small radio transmitter to the serial port?
Im curious, so if anyone has accomplished this, please let me know..
Steve VanDevender
mako...@scsuc.ctstateu.edu (MAKOFSKY,STEVEN) writes:
The IR transmitter in the HP 48 can transmit at least 6 feet, at
least for the purposes of triggering a remote or printing on the
IR printer. It's the receiver that's hobbled. A repeater might
help the receiver.
--
Steve VanDevender ste...@greylady.uoregon.edu
"Bipedalism--an unrecognized disease affecting over 99% of the population.
Symptoms include lack of traffic sense, slow rate of travel, and the
classic, easily recognized behavior known as walking."
Hans de Vreught
Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
The range of the HP95LX is much larger. I can use it as a RC through my
entire room.
--
Hans de Vreught | John von Neumann:
hd...@dutiba.twi.tudelft.nl | Young man, in mathematics
Delft University of Technology (TWI-ThI) | you don't understand things,
The Netherlands | you just get used to them.
Sean M Burke
>Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
>your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
>with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>
>The range of the HP95LX is much larger. I can use it as a RC through my
>entire room.
I've used my 48 as a RC over distances of about 12 feet with no problems. .
Now if only the receiver was that good.
--
Sean M. Burke \ "Love is what goes on while you're NOT horny. . ."
Burk...@osu.edu \_________ "You live and learn. Or you don't live long."
bf...@cleveland.freenet.edu\______ "While we live, let us LIVE!"
IRC: Hanz (No, I won't pump U up.)\__________________________________________
sl...@cc.usu.edu
> Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
> your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
> with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>
I do not attend BYU, nor do I know electronics so don't ask me how
anything was done.
The rumor went something like this:
The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
This raises the question of whether this can really be done. If so I'm
afraid that all schools would have to ban the 48 during tests. Isn't
technology great?
--
Disclaimer: I don't care
********************************************************************************
Darrell Fuhriman * "Oh, just like an orange cloud of light,
SL...@CC.USU.EDU * that just blows right out of it. Wow!"
********************************************************************************
Joel Kolstad
>
> The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
>At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
>other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
>HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
Their 48's would look a little... vandalized... after being disassembled and
reassembled, you know. (But it just _might_ be plausible. I still have a
hard time believing it, though...)
> If so I'm
>afraid that all schools would have to ban the 48 during tests. Isn't
>technology great?
Don't be silly. Punishing everybody for the sins of a few is ridiculous.
This argument sounds suspiciously close to the gun banning argument that "Some
people use guns for killing people, therefore no one should be allowed to
have guns..."
If I were a professor, I'd nail those cheaters to the wall too, (not to
mention giving them 0's on their exams, if I could't kick them out of the
course), but I sure as heck wouldn't take it out on anybody else who used
their calculators legitimately!
---Joel Kolstad
Hans de Vreught
>In article <hdev.727606965@dutiai> hd...@dutiai.tudelft.nl (Hans de Vreught) writes:
>>Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
>>your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
>>with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>>
>>The range of the HP95LX is much larger. I can use it as a RC through my
>>entire room.
>I've used my 48 as a RC over distances of about 12 feet with no problems. .
>Now if only the receiver was that good.
The receiver of the HP95LX isn't bad either. I can receive the signal from my
RC through my entire room also. However, you need to aim the IR beam well to
the HP.
Mr S J Liddicott
>Their 48's would look a little... vandalized... after being disassembled and
>reassembled, you know. (But it just _might_ be plausible. I still have a
>hard time believing it, though...)
> ---Joel Kolstad
What!
How about the article referred to by the FAQ, the authors claim
to have took their 48's to pieces and put them back together and have
them still looking good
?
--
*----------*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| Sam Jam|"Never underestimate the importance of a cheap laugh"- |
| Liddicott| ph...@csv.warwick.ac.uk | I WAS IN IDAHO | Plucky Duck TTA |
*--------------IF NOT 1 AND NOT 2 AND NOT 3 THEN 4-----------------------*
Hans de Vreught
>In article <1993Jan21.1...@cc.usu.edu> sl...@cc.usu.edu writes:
>>
>> The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
>>At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
>>other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
>>HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
>Their 48's would look a little... vandalized... after being disassembled and
>reassembled, you know. (But it just _might_ be plausible. I still have a
>hard time believing it, though...)
>> If so I'm
>>afraid that all schools would have to ban the 48 during tests. Isn't
>>technology great?
>Don't be silly. Punishing everybody for the sins of a few is ridiculous.
>This argument sounds suspiciously close to the gun banning argument that "Some
>people use guns for killing people, therefore no one should be allowed to
>have guns..."
In Europe *that* works: no guns allowed. But to the banning of HPs: what's the
alternative? It is an extremely easy way to cheat. Over here in Europe those
HPs are costly, so not very many students own one. So now you can take
primitive actions like seperating these people during exams. But if a large
minority would own one, we're in trouble.
>If I were a professor, I'd nail those cheaters to the wall too, (not to
>mention giving them 0's on their exams, if I could't kick them out of the
>course), but I sure as heck wouldn't take it out on anybody else who used
>their calculators legitimately!
Sure, hang 'm high! But...
Do you know that if those students would sue you, they have an excellent case?
I guess in the States you only have one proctor during an exam. The word of
one man against another doesn't work in court. Even worse, since you accuse
him of cheating, you'll have to supply the evidence. If not, well, how much
money can you get from a slander law suit?
Of course, the students will never graduate (thesis on "mission impossible"),
but, heck, they don't have to with your money :-(.
Over here in the Netherlands the students wouldn't get much money, but for
them it is much easier to go to court and sue me. Fairy-tales? No, several
professors have been sued in here with succes (albeit not on cheating, but on
other minor irregularities). About a year ago a student sued a famous
professor that gave him an F (well, we use numerals over here). The judge
ordered the professor to give him a C, if not, he had to pay about $5000 a
day.
Luckily for us most cheaters reluctantly undergo their punishment, but some
day ... (I hope I'm not the one that is sued).
Douglas R. Cannon
>> Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
>> your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
>> with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>>
> This is just a rumor I heard, so maybe someone at BYU can confirm it.
> I do not attend BYU, nor do I know electronics so don't ask me how
>anything was done.
> The rumor went something like this:
>
> The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
>At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
>other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
>HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
This is just a rumor. I have no idea if 2 students actually did this or not,
but HP48 calculators are allowed in tests at BYU. In fact, Dr. Garner, a
math proffessor, uses an HP48 overhead in classes, and gives code to his
students for various math functions. He heavily encourages the use of
HP48 and HP28 calculators to enhance your learning.
The testing center does have some TI calculators available, so if some
prof doesn't allow HP's, then the student can get a TI for the test, however,
this is completely up to the prof. There has been no blanket rule for
the entire campus (or even one entire dept. that I know of) to ban HP48
calculators.
If I ever hear such a rumor here on campus about 2 students that successfully
hobbled the HP48 receiver, then I will certainally tell it here.
> This raises the question of whether this can really be done. If so I'm
>afraid that all schools would have to ban the 48 during tests. Isn't
>technology great?
Well, I guess the question still exists as to whether it can be done.
Later,
Doug Cannon
Phoenix
>RC through my entire room also. However, you need to aim the IR beam well to
>the HP.
by my brain....The evil finger grins:
Get a plier and assemble a Gun Cross from a 12 gauge on top of
your HP48SX. Now you can aim it toward the 95LX....
That might not be accurate enought though, (no offense here:)
especially for those who who wants to use the HP48SX as a FM cheating
machine on exam. How about put a laser sight on hp, and there you go,
just put the red dot to the 95lx's port......BOOM, the laser burned
the port up:)
Here goes the serious posts:
1) Thanks to all who responded my questions about the reset
button. (Well, 1st time I got 15 new mails in one day, all about
this topic, now I'll never forget where it is:) of course, getting
more info is always great, "better more than nothing". I was to
scared to any "brutal force" to my HP48SX, so take it apart didn't
occur in my mind at first. For those one who are still confused :)
If you turn your hp48 facing at your, LCD screen is at the top, turn
it over 180 degrees horizontally, you'll see 4 rubber foot, the foot
that's on top-left (your left side!) will be the door toward special
operation "S&D MEM". (People said it's on the right side of the calc
because they are talking about when the calc's LCD is facing you)
Be careful when you take those out by nails, one of my rubber foot
jumped out and it took me 3 anxious min to find it (my carpet is dark
blue:( ). Don't worry about dest your hp, you can stick them back in
as if they had super glue on them. Just make sure you got them
FIRMLY put back up.
2) Introduction to Dan Kirkland's USND program. It's a great
program, only 700+ bytes. It will send anything (include libraries)
to another hp48 via IR with 5-7 times fast as the HP's own I/O IR sysetem.
Takes like 15 sec to transfer a 9k prog. For those of you who are like
me lacking memories (Anyboy got a RAM card for sale? I am serious).
Get USND2 . It's only 177 bytes, while still send stuff 2-3 times faster
than hp's own IR system. (be aware that it's slower than usnd. but usnd
is like 5 times the size of tsnd2. So if you still want faster, I can
write a prog which send files at 384000 bps rate, it's gonna to cost you
though, size=1000+k:)
3) STringWriter (refered as STWR later)
and QED are great prog. I tried them both. some comments
follows.
The difference of those two prog are like the difference between
a PC and MAC. MAC is user-friendly, while PC is powerful, more features,
but require you to memorize something and just a little bit complex. The
biggest flaw of STWR is it only edit strings, just as the name suggests.
It's great since it can do cut/paste, replace, etc. It has almost everything
that a basic editor have except dictionary and gramma check :) (Yeah, now
it's the time to make some dict/gramma libarary for the use of those
text editing programs, I can't imagine my english teacher sees me use
my hp48SX to write a paper, and print it out on the IR printer:)
STWR and it's 4 fonts togther'll cost you about 20k, which is
the size of QED too. STWR has menu, easy to use, you can almost use it
instantly w/o reading docs (don't try this at home, kids:)
QED does editing objects other than string, I think (I haven't had time
tot ry it since Mr. Lutz makes his prog turn off after 3 min). As I said,
you can only edit a object for max 3 min on QED, then it'll auto-quit.
Don't worry, your objectin editing'll be saved. Believe me, it's worth
the price of $8-10 to get the licensed version. (the one on the FTP
is unlicensed, which means you'll either have to go w/ the 3 min limit,
or send some $ to author in Germany to get the licensed version.
The gooding about getting the licensed version is it will not
quit in 3 min:), while the author is gonna to keep updating every
registerd user. Now, I know not every author charges his user for
his program. But this guy obviously spend quite some time on QED.
The whole program is ML written, so it's very fast (which means it's
very very hard to program too). The $8 is partly used for mail
the licensed version to registed users . You know, Luft-Postmt is
very expensive, I can't belive it takes like 2.5 mark for my pen-pal
in germany to write me a letter (about $1.7 in US term). So, send
your money with your appreication and we'll all be happy) (No, I am
not his friend or what's so ever, I don't even know this guy. The only
reason I type this is to let people know about the program)
Since you can redefine
the keyboard, which makes the top 6 row of your hp48's keys to user-defined
keys. While every key can have 6 functions. So press Alpha F5 will let
you start selecting, and shift EVAL will let you save the object, etc.
BTW, the QED also have at least 4 fonts, and you can even create your
own fonts, it also seems to have more function/featuers then STWR.
That's about all so far.
I just have a questions. In STWR or QED, if you redefine the keys
(SWIFT in STWR and something called qedkey in QED), will it still exist
after you quit the program? I hope the program will auto resume the
standard key setting after I quit the program, cause it sucks if I want
to get the char $, and it doesn't work becuase QED's key settting changed
it.
Later! And thanks again for those one who helped me find the reset
button. Oh, BTW, I opened every rubber foot, and if you let the backside
facing you, and open the top-right one, you will find 2 holes instead of
one. one of the hole looks exact like the reset hole under the top
left rubber foot, since it has some small metal ring inside. Now, be careful,
if one of those key does a RESET, the other one could be "SELF-DESTROY".
Who knows, the HP seems so heavy it could have couple onces of TNT in there:)
*********the end***************************
Ming
PS: Mr. Lutz (author of QED) ever becomes a millioner(since we got
so much hp48 users and if everyone register QED, its' quite possible),
plase don't forgot about me who advertised your program:)
Richard Helps
>> your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
>> with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>>
> This is just a rumor I heard, so maybe someone at BYU can confirm it.
> I do not attend BYU, nor do I know electronics so don't ask me how
>anything was done.
> The rumor went something like this:
>
> The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
>At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
>other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
>HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
>
> This raises the question of whether this can really be done. If so I'm
>afraid that all schools would have to ban the 48 during tests. Isn't
>technology great?
>
>--
>Disclaimer: I don't care
>
>SL...@CC.USU.EDU * that just blows right out of it. Wow!"
Sounds unlikely, Based on previous comments published in this newsgroup
I believe the distance an IR connection can successfully
operate is limited by the power of the RECEIVER. That's why remote
control programs for the 48 can function across the room. (The TV has
got lots of power to spare). I have seen HP48s communicate long distances
(a few feet) under good conditions without modifications (good batteries,
no noise).
Certainly my students are still welcome to use calculators in tests. My
tests are set appropriately.
Please don't lets start the "cheating in tests" thread up again. Cheating
is not new and technology isn't the cause of it. This argument is
probably summarized in the FAQ.
Richard Helps, BYU, Provo, UT.
saf...@stsci.edu
> If you turn your hp48 facing at your, LCD screen is at the top, turn
> it over 180 degrees horizontally, you'll see 4 rubber foot, the foot
> that's on top-left (your left side!) will be the door toward special
> operation "S&D MEM". (People said it's on the right side of the calc
> because they are talking about when the calc's LCD is facing you)
This is almost right. Actually, the location of the reset switch has
changed at least once. When I had my version A, it was under the upper left
foot (with the lcd facing down). When I upgraded to a version E, the reset
switch was under the upper right foot with the calculator in the same
orientation. Its better not to go by what side people tell you, its better
to just pop off the feet and see which hole has the 'R' beside it.
> *********the end***************************
> Ming
>
William Safley
CSC/Space Telescope Science Institute
Joel Kolstad
>
>In Europe *that* works: no guns allowed.
I'm tempted to think that even if guns were allowed, Europe's crime rate
wouldn't go up much: I think a lot of Europeans have their heads screwed on
significantly straighter that a lot of people here in the U.S. (Of course,
this doesn't apply do anybody reading THIS message... :-) )
It probably was a poor analogy.
> But to the banning of HPs: what's the
>alternative? It is an extremely easy way to cheat.
Tearing apart a HP-48, un-hobbling the receiver, and putting it back
together is easy? I think not. Two way communication with a cheating
friend is better than just having "cheat notes" I guess though.
>But if a large
>minority would own one, we're in trouble.
How about if we suggest that HP encapsulates (in epoxy) the IR receiving
circuitry? And (although I don't like the idea that much), have them
superglue the cases shut. Hmm?
>Do you know that if those students would sue you, they have an excellent case?
Yes, this sucks.
>I guess in the States you only have one proctor during an exam.
Yes, often just the professor sits up at the front of the room doing some
work or reading or whatever and looks up from time to time. I've even had
professors who've left the room for several minutes to go get a drink or
something.
>The word of
>one man against another doesn't work in court. Even worse, since you accuse
>him of cheating, you'll have to supply the evidence. If not, well, how much
>money can you get from a slander law suit?
Hmm. Perhaps the professor should say nothing, but be allowed to require
the student to take another exam, covering the same material. This puts an
undue hardship on the professor, but at least gets rid of the legal
problems.
>[stuff about students in Netherlands suing teachers]
Yikes. Some people take their civil liberties a little too seriously. Or
perhaps some jurors have their heads screwed on backwards...
I hope that 50 years from now there aren't video cameras watching
classrooms 24 hours a day, providing evidence for the professor when
he/she's inevitably accused of slandering a cheating student. :-( (You
probably know that may police cards here in the U.S. already have dash
mounted video cameras, right? Supposedly to protect the cops and the
Rodney Kings of the nation...)
---Joel Kolstad
Hans de Vreught
>In article <hdev.727700672@dutiai> hd...@dutiai.tudelft.nl (Hans de Vreught) writes:
>>The word of
>>one man against another doesn't work in court. Even worse, since you accuse
>>him of cheating, you'll have to supply the evidence. If not, well, how much
>>money can you get from a slander law suit?
>Hmm. Perhaps the professor should say nothing, but be allowed to require
>the student to take another exam, covering the same material. This puts an
>undue hardship on the professor, but at least gets rid of the legal
>problems.
Not over here. States laws prohibits universities to make even such a rule.
>>[stuff about students in the Netherlands suing teachers]
>Yikes. Some people take their civil liberties a little too seriously. Or
>perhaps some jurors have their heads screwed on backwards...
Actually over here (and many other countries as well) we only have trial by
judge, not by jury. A jury is more likely to disbelieve the cheaters if they
say they didn't cheat regardless if they did or did not cheat. So the jury is
unlawfully biased against the cheaters. In a trial by judge the judge is
impartial (well in theory). He has no choice but to presume that the cheaters
are innocent (although he knows they are guilty as hell).
ochealth
:kol...@cae.wisc.edu (Joel Kolstad) writes:
:
:>In article <hdev.727700672@dutiai> hd...@dutiai.tudelft.nl (Hans de Vreught) writes:
:
:>>The word of
:>>one man against another doesn't work in court. Even worse, since you accuse
:>>him of cheating, you'll have to supply the evidence. If not, well, how much
:>>money can you get from a slander law suit?
:
:>Hmm. Perhaps the professor should say nothing, but be allowed to require
:>the student to take another exam, covering the same material. This puts an
:>undue hardship on the professor, but at least gets rid of the legal
:>problems.
:
:Not over here. States laws prohibits universities to make even such a rule.
:
:>>[stuff about students in the Netherlands suing teachers]
:
:>Yikes. Some people take their civil liberties a little too seriously. Or
:>perhaps some jurors have their heads screwed on backwards...
:
:Actually over here (and many other countries as well) we only have trial by
:judge, not by jury. A jury is more likely to disbelieve the cheaters if they
:say they didn't cheat regardless if they did or did not cheat. So the jury is
:unlawfully biased against the cheaters. In a trial by judge the judge is
:impartial (well in theory). He has no choice but to presume that the cheaters
:are innocent (although he knows they are guilty as hell).
Some research shows that jurors often don't pay much attention, (sleep, etc.)
or determine guilt or innocence by personal theories, whether the lawyer is
good looking etc. I've read some pretty frightening stuff about the juries
occaisionally get to their verdicts. But still, in the common law tradition,
you and your lawyer have some influence in the jury selection process,
and in theory, you are supposed to be judged by your peers, not by an agent
of the state (the judge). I suppose there is less threat today that the judge
is just another tool of the state, compared to when our procedures were
formed, hundreds of years ago.
:--
:Hans de Vreught | John von Neumann:
:hd...@dutiba.twi.tudelft.nl | Young man, in mathematics
:Delft University of Technology (TWI-ThI) | you don't understand things,
:The Netherlands | you just get used to them.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
oche...@unixg.ubc.ca
Joel Kolstad
>judge, not by jury. A jury is more likely to disbelieve the cheaters if they
>say they didn't cheat regardless if they did or did not cheat. So the jury is
>unlawfully biased against the cheaters. In a trial by judge the judge is
>impartial (well in theory). He has no choice but to presume that the cheaters
>are innocent (although he knows they are guilty as hell).
Assuming a standard professor/student relationship, a professor has
absolutely no motive to falsely accuse a student of cheating. Students have
obvious motives _to_ cheat. (If if there is a screwy professor/student
relationship, such as a male professor being dumped by a female student he
was dating, then this should come up in court.) Since people are innocent
until proven guilty in most civilized parts of the world, I guess I'd have
to agree that an impartial judge should find the accused student innocent.
Jurors in this country are legally supposed to be impartial, and either the
defendent or the plaintiff (or their attorneys, etc.) can kick out jurors
that they feel aren't. Given the nation-wide oh-so-biased news we get on
TV every night, getting truly impartial jurors is darn difficult.
I still think professor's should have the right to force students to re-take an
exam on the same material. (After all, if you did so well once, you can
pull it off again, right? And this time you might even study...) Too bad
it's illegal in your country. I wonder if it is here...?
---Joel Kolstad
ochealth
>
>I still think professor's should have the right to force students to re-take an
>exam on the same material. (After all, if you did so well once, you can
>pull it off again, right? And this time you might even study...) Too bad
>it's illegal in your country. I wonder if it is here...?
>
Even if the matter doesn't wind up in court, shouldnt the same standard of
justice and fairness apply to the university's conduct against the student?
Forcing a student to retake an exam, when the professor or university
can not otherwise *prove* the student's guilt, is arbitrary and unjust.
It is not up to the defendant to prove his innocence! Perhaps you need
to re-think some things here; I think you are losing sight of
some fundamentals, in the process of solving a problem you face as a teacher.
> ---Joel Kolstad
--
______________________________________________________________________________
oche...@unixg.ubc.ca
Joel Kolstad
>if the student is guilty of cheating, then you have to prove that.
I'm not suggesting that the student should ever be accused of cheating.
Just that professors should be able to issue exams on a per-individual
basis, if they see fit. (To take the extreme case, is it fair that I use
different homework and different exams than Joe Blow if we end up learning
the same things? Sure, why not?)
>Forcing a student to retake an exam, when the professor or university
>can not otherwise *prove* the student's guilt, is arbitrary and unjust.
Proof is difficult to find, which is exactly why we haven't accused the
student of anything. I was serious when I said that I think it's a really
sad day when we start having video cameras in classrooms...
But anyway, how is having a student re-take an exam any more arbitary and
unjust than having them take it in the first place? (Assuming they've been
informed of the possibility at the beginning of the class year.)
I'll grant you that giving this power to professors opens up the possibility
for abuse, and that you'd need an appeals board or something to handle
complaints. Such boards are already in place in colleges, so this wouldn't
be much of a problem. (Remember, professors really have no incentive
to take their own time to make up new exams if they don't have to.)
>I think you are losing sight of
>some fundamentals, in the process of solving a problem you face as a teacher.
I'm not a teacher, but I might be someday. :-)
WARNING WARNING WARNING
Loooooong philosophical espousition on education coming up. Hit 'n' now if
you're already sick of this topic. You won't see any more of _my_ posts of
this particular topic; this is the last one -- really!
Here we go:
I think that a function educational institute is largely based on a certain
amount of trust between the educators and the educatees. It's assumed that
students want to learn what is being taught to them (note that this kicks
out required classes for this argument). Professors are there because it's
part of their job, and they (hopefully) enjoy it as well. Students cheat
because they've misprioritized their lives, and didn't learn something that
they were supposed to before an exam. Cheating is unfair to the other
students in the class, although if very few people cheat (as one would
expect), it doesn't make a significant difference in the other student's
grades. Realizing this, professors are only prone to "recognize" cheating in
students who are cheating in a very obvious manner. In reality, catching
cheaters doesn't help the professor any, it just helps the rest of the
class, which the professor has (hopefully) felt some responsibility to.
Given the difficulty in _proving_ that someone has cheated, I think it's
entirely reasonable to let professors have people re-take exams on the same
material. In this case, the professor has lost something because he/she
had to make up another exam, the class lost a little bit because they
weren't allowed the extra time before the "re-take", and the cheater either
loses a little time if he/she wasn't really cheating, or has the ability to
gain something by studying if he/she was really cheating. Is it so much to
ask that an extremely small number of falsely accused students have to
spend a few hours re-taking an exam so that many true cheaters get to fall
flat on their faces? I think not. The option of always letting suspected
cheaters "go free" is sure to hurt many more students than those few
students who are slighlty inconvienced by the alternative approach. In the
end, then, I think the best approach is to allow professors to have
students re-take exams.
Dissenting views are welcome... in my _mailbox_: kol...@cae.wisc.edu.
Have a nice day.
---Joel Kolstad
Thomas Grant Edwards
about long-distance IR cheating...
>Well, I guess the question still exists as to whether it can be done.
What exactly is the format of the HP48 IR xmission? It seems like it
wouldn't be overly hard to design a good IR digital receiver (IR photo
transistor plus amplifier and logic and IR LED, mounted in a small
package ductapeable to your HP, though it might stand out in class).
-Thomas
Mr S J Liddicott
Build it in to a large eraser, and put it in front of your calculator,
give or take a few inches...
--
*----------*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| Sam Jam|"Never underestimate the importance of a cheap laugh"- |
| Liddicott| ph...@csv.warwick.ac.uk Plucky Duck TTA |
*------------------------------------------------------------------------*
M.D. (Mike) Wieda
>From: sl...@cc.usu.edu
>Date: 21 Jan 93 16:07:56 MDT
>>
>> Hm..., six feet? Is that the distance between you and your neighbour during
>> your next exam :-)? But more seriously: this will be the next *major* problem
>> with calcs like the HP48 during exams.
>>
> This is just a rumor I heard, so maybe someone at BYU can confirm it.
> I do not attend BYU, nor do I know electronics so don't ask me how
>anything was done.
> The rumor went something like this:
>
> The reciver on the HP is limited through hard wiring. So some students
>At BYU bypassed the wiring and were sending answers across the room to each
>other during a test. Somehow or other the professor caught them and the use of
>HP-48's has been banned for all tests at BYU.
Whoa, did you hear wrong!
First off I never heard anything about an HP 48 cheating conspiracy here at
BYU (but that doesn't mean it didn't happen)--and HP 48s are not banned
during university testing. Could you see an EE junky without an HP 48! :-)
On the subject of hot-rodding your IR port: I knew a friend that managed to
somehow get proprietary information on the HP hardware. He and another
friend found the various I/O power parameters and tried allocating more
power to the IR port. They almost succeeded, but instead of the IR getting
more juice, the display got the power and got fried! :-$
Maybe if you really knew what you were doing, you could....