I’ve said this many times now. Just to clarify, for the purpose of using this software (whether you agree to that purpose or not) it only needs those permissions.
Doesn’t that make it less intrusive or dangerous? What is wrong with stating this fact?
I mean, let’s face it… see the article Why it makes you less happy and why you (should) quickly get your intuition with this kind of software to enjoy it in a virtual machine for your own safety or, if that’s not allowed, a dedicated marble machine.
So, if you need to install software for exactly one purpose (checking that you’re not cheating during testing), your first intuition is “I’m installing this in such a way that it can’t do its job”? And then don’t expect that this nonsense will lead to…!? No sorry, you’re burying your head in the sand on purpose.
No, this is not my first impression; And that’s not what my post says, it’s just the opposite. My first hunch is ‘okay this goes to a virtual machine to protect my device’. The premise is not to thwart the operation / detect fraud, but simply to keep my system safe. No, if it is not explicitly stated that you are not allowed to run it in a virtual machine, I don’t understand why this should be such a hassle.
Additionally: during my training, for example, people were often asked to work with all kinds of tools / to perform tests with software (sometimes some questionable ones). This wasn’t a test, but that’s what we learned. (The training was in the security direction. ) It’s no wonder if this is your innate behavior imho. Well, of course it would probably be different with other schools, especially with non-technical schools that are less trained to be paranoid. But there are a lot of students who have a hobby in tech/tweaking/privacy whims, who find it interesting and also immediately think of a virtual machine for security reasons to protect their primary devices when they hear the laundry permissions list.
There is no bad intention here in choosing a virtual machine as a first hunch, especially if there is no clear and comprehensive warning.
You don’t even have to ask via mail, I’d be very surprised if that’s hidden behind a login.
You don’t want to know. Some of the courses seem really interested in everything but throw them in the junk like Sharepoint, each has their own cool “site” and subs are hard to navigate and I know a lot about everything.
The name of the document is “OER”: “Education” or “Training” / “Exam” / “Regulations”, “Regulations” or “Regulations”. If you google the name of your university (and possibly faculty) with the word ‘primitive’, you will be able to find it. I would expect the rules surrounding Proctorio to end up in an appendix to the OER (official versions; summaries will probably be sent everywhere but nowhere to make sure everyone has seen them).
Yes, that’s what I thought too haha. And I actually looked it up before I said I would. I looked at HU; No word on this in the OER, nor in the “Additional COVID Procedures,” except that they may deviate from “what is stated in the study guide, with advance notice.” In other words: if they change the format of the test, you will be notified; And there are likely to be some rules about Proctorio and the like. Haven’t looked at university yet, I will when I have time.
Well, I don’t know how good your legal knowledge is, but at the UvA they lost a lawsuit about it so it can’t be too bad cheese with holes in it.
This was a slightly different matter. They tried to block the program completely, but it didn’t work. This does not mean that there is automatic fraud when used in a VM.
To be clear, this was my default. I’m not aware that people have gotten caught up in this, so I can’t guarantee it will turn out this way. But regardless of whether they put it under “scam” or some other title, if you get caught, your education will have no choice but to try to punish you (somehow). If they don’t do anything, they actually allow it, and everyone uses that trick in the next test period, effectively eliminating Proctorio.
Oh don’t get me wrong, they can definitely attach consequences like nullifying the results, if they say beforehand that it should be done X and Y way. Doing nothing is not an option. Then you will have to do it again and it may cause studying delays etc. My point was that it seemed so strange and cruel to me that the exam board could immediately say that you are a fraudster who committed fraud, just because you put software in a virtual machine. Putting it into a VM doesn’t mean you cheated. It just means that the software may not be able to fully check whether you are cheating or not.
[Reactie gewijzigd door WhatsappHack op 15 december 2021 02:24]
“Coffee buff. Twitter fanatic. Tv practitioner. Social media advocate. Pop culture ninja.”