みなさんこんにちは！
９月１７日に開催された第２２回workshopと
E’s club結成１周年記念パーティーの報告を
させていただきますね。
**********************************
参加者：７３名
内新人の参加者：１１名
１周年記念パーティー参加者：５９名
**********************************
昨年９月４日の初開催からもう１年が経ち、
Workshopの回数も２２回を数えました。
Workshopのご参加者も毎回５０～８０人の
方々にお越しいただき、白熱した議論や楽しい
話題でますます盛り上がっています。
これもひとえに参加者のみなさん、スタッフ
のご協力のおかげです。
E’s clubが目指す３つの目標は
○コミュニケーション能力の向上
○論理的思考力の修得
○国際派人材の交流
ですが、これらすべては短期間で
身につくものではなく、また
何年やり続けたとしても完璧になる
類のものではありません。
この活動をみなさんと一緒に楽しく続けて
１０回目、２０回目の記念パーティーが
できるようなサークル作りを心がけて
いきたいと思います。
今後ともE’s clubをよろしくお願いいたします。
＜first half＞
通常のworkshopでは前半に比較的カジュアルで
取り組みやすい話題を選び、後半に社会問題を
扱っています。今回前半をご担当いただくはず
であったRさんの到着予定時間が１９時２０分になるため、
後半のディスカッションを前半に行いました。
今回「死刑制度を廃止すべきか」についての
マテリアルをご担当いただいたのは、
法律関係のお仕事をされておられるUさんです。
死刑制度の存廃について考えられるようになった
きっかけは、幼いときに聞いたアムネスティ
インターナショナルの講演だったそうです（スゴイ！）。
Uさんは
「色んな方々の意見を聞いて、
また自分の意見が変わるとすれば、
それも興味深いなあと思っています。」
とおっしゃっていました。
多様な意見を聞き、相手の立場に立って
物事を考える訓練ができること
それがディスカッションの大きな魅力の
一つです。
実際私が参加したテーブルでも、死刑制度存置・廃止の
２つに大きく割れていましたが、それぞれの
立場からの意見に納得できる点があり、
深く考えさせられました。
４０分のディスカッションが非常に短く感じられましたね。
Uさん、興味深いマテリアルをありがとうございました。
＜latter half＞
後半はRさんが
「次々世代スマートフォンのデザインや性能はどうあるべきか？」
についてのマテリアルを作成してくださいました。
私がいたテーブルでは５割ほどの方が
スマートフォンをお持ちで、数人の方が今後スマートフォン
への買い替えをお考えとのことでした。
アプリについてのQでは、メンバーが
よく利用するアプリを教えあっていました。
Rさんがよく利用されるスケジュール管理の
アプリはPCと同期できて、使いやすそうでしたね。
身近な話題で、我々の世代が興味を持ちやすい
マテリアルでした。
Rさんありがとうございました。
＜１周年記念パーティー＞
Workshop後、北新地のパーティー会場で
５９名のメンバーが集まり、みんなで１周年を
お祝いしました。また今回のパーティーは
１年間毎回のworkshopで
ご活躍いただいたスタッフへの感謝、また新たに
スタッフになっていただいた方々のご紹介の
場も兼ねておりました。
１１名の現スタッフは留任、そして新規スタッフとして
８名の方々にご協力いただけることになりました。
パーティーでは代表者の方々にご挨拶をしていただいたり
新人数人の方々から自己紹介をお願いしました。
あっという間に時間がすぎてしまいましたね～。
運営スタッフ・メンバーのみなさん、
今後ともよろしくお願いいたします。
それでは今回の案内メールをご覧ください。
******************************************
＜英語サークル E’s club 第２２回workshopのご案内＞
みなさまこんにちは、E’s club幹事のKです。第２２回workshopの詳細をお送りいたします。
E’s clubの第１回workshopが開催されたのは２０１０年の９月４日。
早いもので、もう１年が経ちました。
そこで今回はworkshop終了後、１周年記念パーティーを開催します。
パーティーのみの参加でもかまいませんので、ぜひご参加ください。
今回のマテリアルは前半をUさんに、後半をRさんに作成していただきました。
前半は死刑制度に関するディスカッション、後半はスマートフォンに関するディスカッションです。
[今週のマテリアル]
【first half（通常のlatter half）】
＜AGENDA＞
SHOULD THE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT BE ABOLISHED?
＊Please refer to ★（１） to discuss Q1~Q4.
Q1 : Do you agree or disagree with the capital punishment? And why?
Q2 : Is the capital punishment effective deterrent against atrocious crime?
Q3 : There are those who say we should replace the capital punishment with the life imprisonment without parole. What do you think about this opinion?
Q4 : Suppose a cruel and brutal act has been committed. Do you put the utmost importance on a perpetrator’s human right, or a victim’s ?
＊Please refer to ★（２） to discuss Q5.
Q5 : Do you think acts of “restorative justice(修復的司法)” should be introduced more in Japan? What do you think of the article below about the actual practice of restorative justice in Nagoya?
★（１）
Japanese Officials Reveal Execution Chambers
TOKYO ― The Japanese government opened up its execution chambers to the public for the first time on Friday, taking journalists on a tour of Tokyo’s main gallows. The insides were stark: a trapdoor, a Buddha statue and a ring for the noose.
The opening of the chambers was a bid by Japan’s justice minister, Keiko Chiba, to stir debate over a practice that is widely supported here.
Of the Group of Eight industrialized nations, only the United States and Japan use capital punishment. Japan currently has 107 inmates on death row, and no pardon is allowed. From 2000 to 2009, Japan sentenced 112 people to death and executed 46.
“I called for proper disclosure in the hope that it spurs debate over the death penalty and criminal sentencing,” Ms. Chiba, who opposes the death penalty, said at a news conference this month.
In July, Ms. Chiba approved ― and witnessed ― the hangings of two inmates convicted of murder, saying she was carrying out her duties as justice minister. Afterward, she said she still opposed capital punishment and ordered that journalists be given a tour of the facilities. She also promised to create a panel of experts to discuss the death penalty, including whether it should be stopped. The panel meets next month.
Japan has long been criticized by human rights activists for its capital punishment system. The United Nations Human Rights Committee, which monitors civil and political rights, has urged Japan to consider abolishing the death penalty, citing the large number of crimes that entail the death sentence, the lack of pardoning, the solitary confinement of inmates and executions at advanced ages and despite signs of mental illness.
Japan also has a 99 percent conviction rate, a figure critics attribute to widespread use of forced confessions. A series of false convictions have surfaced in recent months, including one of a 63-year-old man who had served 17 years of a life sentence for the murder of a 4-year-old girl. He was released after prosecutors admitted that his confession was a fabrication made under duress and DNA tests showed he was innocent. Critics say there is a high possibility that some of those on death row are innocent.
Inmates on death row are not told when they will be executed until the last minute ― a procedure Japanese officials say prevents panic among inmates ― and their family members and lawyers are informed only afterward, as are the news media.
Inmates can remain on death row as long as 40 years, though executions over the past decade have occurred on average after about 5 years and 11 months on death row, according to the public broadcast channel NHK. The Justice Ministry has refused to disclose how it makes decisions to go ahead with executions.
A large majority of Japan’s population supports capital punishment. A recent government survey showed that 86 percent of respondents are in favor of state executions for the worst crimes.
“Any debate should take into account the lifelong suffering that the victims’ families must bear,” said Isao Okamura, whose wife was murdered over a work dispute in 1997, in an interview with NHK.
All executions are carried out by hanging. Foreign news outlets, including The New York Times, were excluded from the visit, despite repeated requests to take part.
According to accounts in local news outlets, journalists were taken to the execution site in a bus with closed curtains, because its exact location is kept secret. There are seven such sites across Japan, the Justice Ministry said.
The journalists were led through the chambers, one by one: a chapel with a Buddhist altar where the condemned are read their last rites; a small room, also with a Buddha statue, where a prison warden officially orders the execution; the execution room, with a pulley and rings for the rope and a trapdoor where the condemned inmate stands; and the viewing room where officials witness the hanging.
The inmate is handcuffed and blindfolded before entering the execution room, officials said. Three prison wardens push separate buttons, only one of which releases the trapdoor ― but they never find out which one. Wardens are given a bonus of about $230 every time they attend an execution.
Satoshi Tomiyama, the Justice Ministry official who later briefed the foreign news outlets and others excluded from the tour, said that wardens take the utmost care to treat death row inmates fairly and humanely.
The Buddha statues can be switched with an altar of the indigenous Japanese Shinto religion for followers of that faith, he said. For Christians, the prison provides a wooden cross. Inmates are given fruit and snacks before their execution, and sentences are not carried out on weekends, national holidays and around the New Year.
Mr. Tomiyama read a statement from a warden who carries out executions but did not identify him by name. Executions “are carried out somberly, and the tension is enough to make my hand shake,” he quoted the warden as saying.
Human rights activists criticize the conditions in which the inmates are made to await their death. They are held in solitary confinement in a cell about 50 square feet, which they leave only to exercise and bathe, both alone. They can request Japanese chess sets, but they must play alone. They are able to purchase newspapers and books, though the prison censors some of the content; articles about last month’s executions were blacked out in newspapers given to death row inmates. Relatives can visit, but friends cannot.
Kanae Doi, a lawyer who heads Human Rights Watch Japan, said she welcomed Japan’s steps toward more transparency. But “the death penalty should not be enforced by a majority opinion,” she said.
“Apart from Japan and the United States, the other countries in the world that carry out capital punishment are those accused of other grave human rights violations,” Ms. Doi said. “Japan should be ashamed to be on that list.”
A version of this article appeared in print on August 28, 2010, on page A7 of the New York edition..
The NEW YORK TIMES
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/world/asia/28tokyo.html
★（２）
１）修復的司法（しゅうふくてきしほう、英：Restorative Justice）とは、当該犯罪に関係する全ての当事者が一堂に会し、犯罪の影響とその将来へのかかわりをいかに取り扱うかを集団的に解決するプロセス、又は犯罪によって生じた害を修復することによって司法の実現を指向する一切の活動を言う。
２） http://www.47news.jp/CN/200811/CN2008112901000138.html
≪娘殺した無期囚と文通 父親「許せぬが人として接す」≫
男性受刑者が１１月上旬、関係者に寄せた手紙。文面には近況のほか、被害者への謝罪の言葉が並んでいる
名古屋市緑区で１９８８年、仲間とデート中の男女２人を襲い殺害するなどして無期懲役が確定した男性受刑者（４０）＝事件当時（１９）＝と女性被害者の父親（７３）＝愛知県＝が３年以上にわたり、文通を続けていることが２９日、関係者の話で分かった。謝罪を繰り返す受刑者に対し、父は 「決して許さないが１人の人間として接している」と話している。
殺人事件の被害者と加害者の文通は極めて異例で、交流を通してそれぞれダメージ回復と更生を目指す「修復的司法」の試みといえそうだ。
受刑者は８９年の名古屋地裁判決で、事件当時少年としては永山則夫元死刑囚＝９７年執行＝以来の死刑を言い渡されたが、９６年の名古屋高裁判決は 「矯正可能性がある」として無期懲役に減刑し、確定した。
関係者によると、受刑者が被害者２人の遺族に謝罪の手紙を書き始めたのは、地裁判決の後。岡山刑務所に収監された９７年以降は、作業賞与金（刑務作業に支払う恩恵的な給与で時給１０―数十円程度）も添えて謝罪文を送り続けた。
女性被害者の父親が初めて返事を出したのは０５年３月で、作業賞与金送付への礼状だった。受刑者は当時の心境について「とても驚き、ありがたく思いました。命ある限り、おわびし続けたいと思います」と関係者への手紙に書いている。
2008/11/29 08:26 【共同通信】
３）
Death Penalty for Hikari City Mother-Child Murder Case
– Victim Relief by Restorative Justice –
Norio Takahashi
professor of Waseda Law School.(Doctor of Law, Waseda University)
The Hiroshima High Court reversed it’s decision and handed down the death sentence for the murder of a mother and her daughter in Hikari City (April 22, 2008 Hiroshima High Court) to the accused who was a minor at the time of the crime (18 years and one month old). This case has been attracting widespread public interest as a result of extensive coverage of the victims’ family by mass media.
This court of appeal deserves to be studied from various perspectives, but here, it shall be discussed from the perspective of restorative justice, especially from the standpoint of the victims involved.
Nagayama Standard and “Emotions of Victim’s Family”
In the “serial shooting murder case (Nagayama Incident) (Showa 58-7-8 Police Procedure 37-6 609 pages), the supreme court ruled that the death penalty may be imposed inevitably in consideration of the degree of criminal liability and balance of justice based on a nine-point set of criteria which includes; degree of viciousness of the crime, motive of the crime, how the crime was committed–especially the manner in which the victim was killed, outcome of the crime——especially the number of murdered victims, sentiments of the victim’s bereaved family members, impact of the crime on society, defendant’s age, defendant’s previous criminal record, and degree of remorse shown by the defendant.
First, the relation between this Nagayama Standard and this case should be questioned. Indeed, the Nagayama Standard is nothing but a set of abstract guidelines, and though it should be made more concrete in individual cases, it adopts the “exceptional capital punishment” standard. The reversed and remanded high court ruling (maximum sentence 18-6-20 1213 Edition 89 pages) this time, though premised on “exceptional capital punishment”, can be said to have adopted the criteria “in rule capital punishment”, demonstrating that if a crime is vicious, basically, the death sentence will be passed, but death sentence shall be avoided exceptionally under extenuating circumstances. However, it should be noted that this particular incident is a critical one in which such judgment of “reversal between general principle and exception” cannot be passed readily in consideration of the number of victims, defendant’s age, etc. Still, the fact that the high court handed down this ruling, which was carried out by the appeal court decision, shows that the focus in this trial was on “sentiment’s of bereaved family members of the victims” out of the nine criteria.
Criminal Justice System which has yet to Satisfy Sentiment’s of Victim’s Family
It comes perfectly natural for the families of crime victims to want the offenders to be penalized by death as these victims have lost their loved ones in brutal ways, their voices being the cry of those they have lost. When we read the diaries of victims, the emotions of avenging the perpetrators overflow uncontrollably. However, it is also obvious that these emotions are the retributory sentiments of the victim as an individual, and the national punitive authority is not rooted merely in this. There exists here a gap between personal level and public level, and important issues here are can this gap be closed, and what would be the appropriate means of doing so. This means that unless the national punitive authority is exercised only along such retributory sentiments of the victims, it is unlikely that victim sentiments will ever be completely fulfilled in criminal justice. Individual victim sentiments also tend to be categorized and generalized as objective victim sentiments—in the world of justice, this is wholly reasonable. On the contrary, the problem here lies in the fact that victims have no other means of expressing their sentiments to the public but through the justice system and mass media.
Bridge Served by the Restorative Justice System
Taking crime to be a violation of human relations, restorative justice is a system aiming at the restoration and recovery of the relations between the victim, perpetrator, and community through their involvement. It has the potential to play a complementary role in criminal justice. All concerned stakeholders participate voluntarily in the restorative justice system, and if progress is poor, they revert to the criminal justice system. Such a system however does not actually exist, and this is a problem. Through the restorative justice system, communication between the stakeholders is implemented assisted by experienced and trained mediators, enabling all parties to speak out their emotions. If direct dialogue is not possible due to the nature of the case, indirect communication by representatives is carried out. In other words, restorative justice is a system which provides the venue for the various stakeholders involved to communicate, serving as a bridge to them.
The criminal justice system is a so-called win or lose situation and the defense method applied in this case by the lawyers falls under this category. In the U.S., there is a system called Defense Initiated Victim Outreach (DIVO) whereby specialists who are neither the lawyer of the perpetrator nor the prosecutor serve to bridge the victim’s bereaved family members and the perpetrator’s lawyer in criminal cases. It deserves attention as a system of restorative justice.
From Retribution to Restoration and Recovery
It would be ideal if criminal problems could be solved through the joint efforts of a criminal justice system which serves as the venue for legal communication, and restorative justice which serves as the venue for fresh communication. The retributory sentiments of victims must be expressed in the restorative justice system. Though this may not alleviate these retributive emotions in some cases, what is important is that it lays down the path from retribution to restorative and recovery.
From the perspective of restorative justice, the perpetrator’ responsibility would be fulfilling actions that contribute to the restoration and regeneration of victims, instead of being subjected to punishment. The responsibilities of the community and those of the media lie in sharing and supporting the sufferings and distress of the victims, not demanding that the perpetrator be punished.
“Retribution is the attempt to restore balance by having the perpetrator fall to the same depths as the victim. The aim is to defeat the wrongdoer into abandoning all sense of superiority and reaffirming the victim’s dignity. On the other hand, restoration serves to lift the victims back to their original level”. (Howard Zehr “What is Restorative Justice?” Page 195 onwards). Whether to take these words as merely pretty words or taking them seriously and working towards them will serve as a touchstone as to how we want to build future society,
Daily YOMIURI ON LINE
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/adv/wol/dy/opinion/society_080514.htm
【latter half（通常のfirst half）】
「次々世代スマートフォンのデザインや性能はどうあるべきか？」
「What should the design and performance of the future smart phones be?」
最近iPhoneやAndroid端末に代表されるスマートフォンの話題が溢れています。「使ってみたい」・「思い切って機種変更した」もしくは「もうすでに活用している」という方も多いでしょう。多くの方は、スマートフォンがもたらすリスクよりも恩恵にばかり目を向けます。ところが現段階では、スマートフォンを安心して使うために必要なセキュリティ対策に関する情報が不足気味であります。以下の記事（Mobile phone security: What are the risks?）に記載されている通り、スマートフォンでは、従来の携帯電話では不要だった対策が必要になってきます。そこに潜むリスクは大きいものです。企業でスマートフォンを一括導入するならなおさら、深い知識が欠かせないでしょう。
そこで、今回のLatter halfのディスカッションでは、皆さんにそのリスクにも目を向けて頂きます。そして、セキュリティ対策を踏まえた「スマートフォンのあるべき将来像」について議論して頂こうと思います。（また、せっかくの機会なので、ビジネス・プライベートにおけるスマートフォンの活用法や、オススメの携帯端末・タブレット端末などがあれば、そちらもグループ内で共有してみても面白いかもしれません。）
Mobile phone security: What are the risks?
By Amy Gahran, Special to CNN
June 17, 2011 — Updated 1124 GMT (1924 HKT) | Filed under: Mobile
Reference: http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/mobile/06/17/mobile.security.gahran/index.html?iref=allsearch
Google has admitted that “more than 90 percent of Android users” have mobile software with security vulnerabilities.
Editor’s note: Amy Gahran writes about mobile tech for CNN.com. She is a San Francisco Bay Area writer and media consultant whose blog, Contentious.com, explores how people communicate in the online age.
(CNN) — The more people rely on cell phones and tablets, the more attractive these devices become as targets to thieves and other nefarious types.
Fortunately, protecting yourself against mobile security risks doesn’t require getting paranoid about your phone. Rather, it’s about maintaining good habits, watching for red flags and deciding whether you need mobile security tools or services.
At a recent mobile security conference in San Francisco, staffers from digital security provider Norton outlined some common current mobile threats:
【Malware】
This is an app contaminated with malicious code that makes your phone do things it shouldn’t — such as steal your personal data. While no smartphone platform is immune from malware, so far Android apps appear to present the greatest malware risk. This is because of the openness of this platform and Google’s Android market.
This week, The Register reported on the latest rash of Android malware and noted that Google has admitted that “more than 90 percent of Android users are running older versions of the mobile operating system that contain serious kernel vulnerabilities. That gives attackers an easy way to bypass Android’s security sandbox, which is supposed to limit the data and resources each app is allowed to access.”
At the Norton conference, a presenter demonstrated how quick and easy it is to “trojanize” an Android app. He downloaded an existing legitimate app from the Android Market, viewed the source code, copied in some malicious code, renamed the app and uploaded the now-malware to the market — all in about three minutes.
Mobile security tools such as Lookout or Norton Mobile Security (in beta) can help guard against Android malware by scanning apps and other programs and data on your phone.
However, the best way to protect yourself against malware is to read the list of permissions that an Android app requests before you install it. Does that list make sense? For instance, does a game really need to be able to send premium text messages or access your contact list?
It helps to understand what each of the available Android permissions mean and to check the apps already on your phone to spot excessive permission requests. TechPP published a good overview of Android permissions.
Also, if your Android phone is rooted (meaning you’ve modified the operating system to gain complete control over everything on the device), apps such as Permissions Denied might help you selectively deny these permissions. Just know this could interfere with how some apps function.
Remember that malware creators are constantly innovating to outwit security tools. Also, the security measures of closed-app ecosystems such as Apple’s App Store or BlackBerry AppWorld are not perfect. So stay alert for odd behavior from any kind of phone or app.
【Premium SMS billing】
Some text-messaging services can cost you money every time you interact with them. While there are many legitimate premium SMS services that people voluntarily use, sometimes mobile users unwittingly subscribe to them, not realizing the extra charges involved until their phone bill arrives.
This kind of mistake can happen on any type of phone, even simple feature phones. But smartphone users face an extra risk because malware can cause your phone to surreptitiously send texts to premium SMS services. This recently happened in China, and it could happen in the U.S. and elsewhere.
Cell phone carriers allow subscribers to block premium SMS messaging. If you’re certain you will never want to use premium SMS, it’s a good idea to block it.
Typically you have to log on to your account via your carrier’s Web site or app to implement this block although you might be able to set it up by calling your carrier or visiting their local office or store.
【E-mail and SMS phishing】
This is when you click a link that you received via e-mail or SMS, ostensibly from a legitimate source, and the resulting website tricks you into entering sensitive information such as your online banking password. As I wrote earlier, research indicates that mobile users may be especially likely to click on these links, since on a mobile device it’s often harder to discern a link’s legitimacy.
Here, the best mobile safety tool is skepticism. If you click a link you received via e-mail or SMS, and it takes you to a site that asks you to log in to your banking or any other account, don’t do it.
Instead, take a moment to manually enter the URL to access that site directly, like you would normally do. This way, you’ll be certain you’re accessing the genuine site. Then check whether there are any issues with your account that need attention.
Mobile security provider Lookout recently debuted its safe browsing service aimed at alerting mobile users when they’re about to access a likely or known phishing site. (So far this works only with the stock Android web browser.)
【Spyware】
People who want to snoop on a spouse, child, employee, rival, intended stalking/crime victim or crime suspect can purchase software that can turn a smartphone into a spy. (It may not be legal to use spyware in these ways, but you can purchase it legally.)
Packages such as FlexiSPY and MobileSpy, which are available for most smartphone platforms, have two parts: a mobile app and a Web interface. To make it work, the snooper obtains the target’s phone, installs the spyware app, activates it and returns the phone.
Spyware apps hide or disguise themselves, so they don’t obviously show up in lists of installed or running apps.
Once the spyware app is running, the snooper can log in to the spyware service’s Web interface to see, in real time, what the target is up to. This can get really creepy — these programs can use your phone’s GPS to track your precise location in real time, activate your phone’s camera or microphone, record phone calls, save and display your chats and text messages (even ones you erase) and more.
If you’re concerned about spyware, one way to avoid it is to never leave your phone unlocked. Always protect it with a passcode or pattern. If would-be snoopers cannot activate your phone, they can’t install anything on it.
【Malicious websites】
Like apps, websites can be contaminated with malicious code that exploits browser vulnerabilities. This threat mostly affects computer-based Web browsers.
At the Norton conference, experts did not seem to think that malicious websites pose much of a risk to mobile users yet. However, many of the most popular smartphone browsers (including mobile Safari on the iPhone) are based on WebKit, a popular open source Web browser engine that has security vulnerabilities.
So far, cybercriminals and hackers apparently haven’t found WebKit to be a very appealing target, but as people increasingly rely on phones for sensitive information and activities (such as making purchases), attacks mounted against mobile browsers might provide access to mobile platforms that are otherwise more closed.
The opinions expressed in this post are solely those of Amy Gahran.
Difficult words
□nefarious ： 極悪な
□getting paranoid about ： ～に熱狂すること
□red flags ： 〔危険・警戒・停止信号としての〕赤旗
□staffers ： スタッフ
□contaminated with ： ～で汚染されている
□malicious ： 悪意のある
□is immune from ： ～に免疫がある
□rash ： 頻発
□kernel vulnerabilities ： カーネルの脆弱性
□bypass ： ～を回避する
□security sandbox ： セキュリティーサンドボックス
□trojanize ： ？
□legitimate ： 合法の
□to spot excessive permission requests ： 過度の〔アクセス〕許可要求を見つける
□interfere with ： ～を妨げる
□outwit security tools ： セキュリティーツールの裏をかく
□voluntarily ： 自発的に
□unwittingly ： うっかりと
□surreptitiously ： ひそかに
□ostensibly ： 表向きは
□tricks you into entering ： あなたを〔悪意をもって〕～するように誘導する
□discern ： ～を理解する
□skepticism ： 懐疑
□the genuine site ： 本物のサイト
□debuted ： ～をお披露目する
□snoop on ： ～を探る
□spouse ： 配偶者
□stalking ： ストーキング
□disguise ： ～を隠す
□creepy ： ゾッとする
□exploits ： ～を生かす
□mounted ： 取り付けられた
Plus something extra
iPhone, iPad users: Watch out for malicious PDF files
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/mobile/07/11/gahran.ios.malware/index.html?iref=allsearch
As Android gets popular, so does Android malware
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/mobile/08/04/lookout.threat.report.gahran/index.html?iref=allsearch
[Agenda]
次々世代スマートフォンのデザインや性能はどうあるべきか？
What should the design and performance of the future smart phones be?
[Question]
Q１：
スマートフォンを購入したきっかけや、購入したい動機は？
または、購入しない理由は？
Why did you buy a smart phone? Why do you want to change your conventional mobile phone to a new smart phone?
Or why are you still using a smart phone?
Q２：
スマートフォンのメリットは？
ご自身の活用法をメンバーに教えて下さい。
他のメンバーはその活用法をどう思いますか？
What do you think the advantages of smart phones are?
Please tell other members in your group how you take advantages of smart phones.
How do you feel about the usage?
Q３：
スマートフォンのデメリットやリスクは？
この記事を参考にしながら、それらに対するご自身の解決策を提案して下さい。
What do you think the disadvantages or risks of smart phones are?
Please suggest your own solutions to the problems, referring to this article.
Q４：
今年の10月に次世代スマートフォンの一つiPhone 5が発売されるが、そのデザインや性能を想像してお答え下さい。
また、Q１~Q３を踏まえて、今回の議題である、これから先の「次々世代スマートフォンのデザインや性能はどうあるべきか？」についてご自身の意見をお答え下さい。
Apple Corps is scheduled to release one of the future smart phones iPhone 5 in this October. If you know something about the design and performance of iPhone 5, please share your information with the members.
Or in keeping with Q1~Q3, please tell your own opinion about this agenda “What should the design and performance of the future smart phones be?”
（時間があれば）
Q５：
英語学習、私生活、仕事、その他で、お勧めのアプリの活用法を（デモンストレーションを交えながら）教えて下さい。
そのあとにこういった機能があればもっと便利なのにという意見を皆さんで出し合って下さい。
Please demonstrate your own usage of the smart phone in the fields of English learning, private life, business etc.
After that, please discuss the topic “If there is an application like this, we would use smart phone more comfortably.” in your group.
| 01 | E's clubとは･ごあいさつ |
| 02 | サークルの８つのウリ |
| 03 | 学習会の流れ |
| 04 | レベルについて |
| 05 | スタッフ紹介・参加者の声 |
| 06 | 開催報告･過去の題材 |
| 07 | FAQ・会則 |
