While that may be part of it, it does seem to be more about the Australian MEAA union trying to use its power of international links to break into the New Zealand (note: separate country) film industry. The MEAA is not even currently operating in NZ, its NZ branch having folded up last year.
There were some forthright comments from New Zealand production people on Radio New Zealand this morning, some of which made it into this Sydney Morning Herald article
Cricket and baseball? I'm guessing that the OK Cupid categories are crudely lumping together the Indian subcontinent (India, Pakastan, Sri Lanka) with totally unrelated ethnic communities from countries occupied by the U.S. at the end of WW2 (Japan)
Not quite- In wave, when rapidly evolving a text based document, you could tell exactly where other people were working. This meant people could dive into any part of the document that needed work without any additional organization of who was doing what. While google docs synchronizing every few seconds and showing who is editing approaches this, that last step actually makes quite a big difference.
I'd like to see docs color code the paragraph by the active editor, then it would have the same functionality to me.
I used it. Specifically, I used it for hyper rapid content development among small groups of dispersed people. The advantages of simultaneous editing of single documents (along with the edit history) were huge for this particular niche.
The thing is, there aren't many small dispersed groups needing hyper rapid content development. If you weren't as dispersed, or had the time for consecutive (rather than concurrent) editing, other traditional tools were better. The interface, and its tendency to bog down once the wave sizes grew large, didn't help either.
But as I fell into the small niche it was really useful for, rather than just as a novelty, I will miss it.
It's actually the potential senate composition- The Greens could well wind up holding the balance of power, in which case the next government less likely to propose pro-multinational corporation legislation (and software patents definitely favour corporations who have lawyers more than small local software artisans).
Now, I think it more likely that either new government will harmonise with the U.S., but a Labour government dependent on the Greens in the Senate would be more likely to reconsider and go the New Zealand route. In general, the more interests a government has to address, the more likely it is to favour the entire country rather than one sector.
Because it prevents new cultural creations as it makes them totally dependent on the patent holders willingness to provide their particular patent. Effectively it creates blocks on economic activity, as people are not going to provide their patents for others who will disrupt their business models, or alternatively it imposes a patent troll tax on doing business (this depends on if the patent holder is an entrenched market player, or a leech). Given the economic costs, and the high rate of change of software, it is better for the economy as a whole (but not current individual patent holders) for the abolition of software patents.
It will be interesting to see if the Australian government leans towards the U.S. model (with the U.S./Australian Free Trade Agreement) or New Zealand no-software patents model (with the Closer Economic Relations agreements between the countries). I suspect that mainly hinges on who wins the upcoming Australian election.
That is the case for standard wage and salary earners in New Zealand. It is your employers legal responsibility to pay the basic estimate tax directly from your pay (Pay As You Earn). At the end of the fiscal year, Inland Revenue sends out your taxpayer statement with the final results (that may be a little under or over, depending on how tax rates and payments have changed during the year). One can pay, collect, or amend this.
That said, in New Zealand we have no state government, which simplifies the tax structure.
It won't be your 5 really good shots that people will want. Based on my experience, it will be the photos that are well annotated with keywords and have a rich description of the photo attached, because these are the photos that people will find, and they need to find it before they can want to use it. Those photos of mine that people have expressed an interest in using have either been photos of particular species of birds with accompanying text describing the scene, or photos of specific places with explanatory text (as a textual description, not just GPS data).
It is a bit sad, but artistic quality doesn't come into it.
Speaking as someone who:
a) has no intention of ever being a pro photographer
b) has most of my photos among the other 142 million Creative Commons photos on Flickr
Most of my requests for my photos are of the form of "I'd like to put your photo on my wall", where they didn't really need to ask permission. I'd hate for people like that to be put off by thinking they need a commercial agreement.
The flip side is those occasions when a company has used on of my photos for commercial purposes, it has been a real pain for me to chase up by myself. by the time you account for my time, the only satisfaction has been moral. So I would be happy with a service that managed commercial rights and only returned a pittance, as it is more than I would make otherwise.
However, in balancing it out, the Getty model doesn't work for me, as I want to share more than I want to become a stock photo supplier.
When you try to throw a ring over a peg at a carnival, there is the assumption that there is a very, very small chance you might win. But as this recent case (involving statistics, forensics, and side-show con artists) shows, in the U.K. at least the odds can't be too far in the houses favour.
There are informed consent ways of delivering placebos.
In the case of a study with patients with an anxiety disorder they were basically told "We would like to prescribe you this treatment with no medical benefit which has been found to be effective in cases like yours". It still worked.
It was cited in Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science (which I don't have immediately to hand for the full reference).
Well, if we use oil drillers to use nukes to stop an asteroid catastrophe, it only makes sense to bring in the nuclear scientists to deal with an out of control oil well.
And actually applying intercountry statistics, we find that the United States has an average (compared to other countries) proportion of its population as high achieving students, who do about the same as high achieving students in other countries. As many of those posting on slashdot would fall into the high achieving category- Guess what, your own educational outcome would be about the same under any system, so your personal experience sheds little light.
What does bring down the U.S. educational achievement levels compared to the rest of the world is the large and growing proportion (when compared to other countries) of students at the bottom of the achievement measurements.
Now, among those at the bottom of the education measures, the things that make the most difference are things like community stability, job stability, and aspirations of parents that education can be a reliable way to a better life (strong enough to overcome the profound and statistically obvious barriers involving race, class, and gender) but doing something about those kind of environmental effects sounds entirely too much like socialism for the U.S. to be comfortable with.
Or do you suggest 100 items sold at 50.- is better for the economy than 50 items at 100.-?
Well, 100 items sold suggests there are about double the number people active in the economy than 50 items sold. Participation in the economy is linked to economic health. So, in general, more trade is better for the economy than less trade.
The assumes that an economy is for connecting people and resources, and not just an extension of the modern financial markets. In a purely fiscal view 100 @ 50 vs. 50 @ 100 would make no difference.
Places that I have worked for that have had this kind of problem have had the power to design the form they were wanting to accept. The easy answer is to add non-symmetrical content - a logo in the top left with blank space in the top right, bottom left and bottom right, or having a black rectangle across the page two thirds of the way down. The computer looks for the significant markers and orientates the page into the correct alignment.
Basically, the idea is to make the form so that the job you want to do with it (figure out which way is up) is easy.
Or, if caught using phone while driving:
1) Cop gives you envelope to write your address on.
2) Put phone in envelope
3) Cop takes envelope with phone away to put in post at end of shift
Plus enough of a fine to cover postage, and youve got at salutary learning experience for anyone so attached to their phone they cant resist using it while driving.
And you would be exactly correct. To provide some added context, when the government was negotiating the 2007-2009 volume licence period, it was not economical to get a full New Zealand wide licence for schools for Microsoft Office for the Macintosh so that part of the licence was dropped. The recommendation was to substitute iWork (via an NZ wide licence negotiated via Apple) or Open Office (or buy individual MS for Mac licences). The Ministry of Education works out how many copies are in use, and if it is worth a nation-wide site licence.
Keep in mind that, in New Zealand, the software that is used in schools will ultimately be paid for by the Ministry of Education either through a general licences or as part of the budgets devolved to schools, so it is in the Ministries interest to minimise the overall cost.
And, as a semi-aside New Zealand has been the least corrupt country on Transparency International's index pretty much every year since 2003 (some years were ties with Denmark), and the volume licence was an example of the Government serving the needs of individual schools well (who were going to use MS stuff anyway), rather than a corrupt deal.
The quantitative test on the notability of unicycling clowns would be how many people twittered about it? None? Then it is not actually particularly remarkable for anyone to see a clown on a unicycle, so being asked 'did you see anything unusual?' is not going to get a very high response.
Indeed, I would argue that a man in a clown suit actually makes it a less unusual event than just the unicycle. Once you are seeing a unicycle, you are quite likely to see a clown on it. Now, if it had been a man in a nun's habit on a unicycle, I think the question 'did you see anything unusual' would get a higher response.
The writer could conceivably seen the story in the firehose, thought this one will make the front page, copied and pasted story into a text editor and composed their message, then had it ready to post. When the article with your reply came live, they posted within 8 seconds, with a more cogent response than your initial first post as they had time to work on a first reply. This is also suggested by the post referencing the story but not your post.
Alternatively they might have actually read the article, and thought This will make slashdot one day, then followed a similar plan, but Mr. Ocham might want a word over an explanation that involves that much forward planning and OCD monitoring of the front page.
Slashdot Mirror
While that may be part of it, it does seem to be more about the Australian MEAA union trying to use its power of international links to break into the New Zealand (note: separate country) film industry. The MEAA is not even currently operating in NZ, its NZ branch having folded up last year.
There were some forthright comments from New Zealand production people on Radio New Zealand this morning, some of which made it into this Sydney Morning Herald article
Oil prices != Oil stocks, particularly if governments nationalise oil for strategic purposes.
Cricket and baseball?
I'm guessing that the OK Cupid categories are crudely lumping together the Indian subcontinent (India, Pakastan, Sri Lanka) with totally unrelated ethnic communities from countries occupied by the U.S. at the end of WW2 (Japan)
My suggested tag- soitwasatrap
Doesn't Google Docs offer the same?
Not quite- In wave, when rapidly evolving a text based document, you could tell exactly where other people were working. This meant people could dive into any part of the document that needed work without any additional organization of who was doing what. While google docs synchronizing every few seconds and showing who is editing approaches this, that last step actually makes quite a big difference.
I'd like to see docs color code the paragraph by the active editor, then it would have the same functionality to me.
I used it. Specifically, I used it for hyper rapid content development among small groups of dispersed people. The advantages of simultaneous editing of single documents (along with the edit history) were huge for this particular niche.
The thing is, there aren't many small dispersed groups needing hyper rapid content development. If you weren't as dispersed, or had the time for consecutive (rather than concurrent) editing, other traditional tools were better. The interface, and its tendency to bog down once the wave sizes grew large, didn't help either.
But as I fell into the small niche it was really useful for, rather than just as a novelty, I will miss it.
It's actually the potential senate composition- The Greens could well wind up holding the balance of power, in which case the next government less likely to propose pro-multinational corporation legislation (and software patents definitely favour corporations who have lawyers more than small local software artisans).
Now, I think it more likely that either new government will harmonise with the U.S., but a Labour government dependent on the Greens in the Senate would be more likely to reconsider and go the New Zealand route. In general, the more interests a government has to address, the more likely it is to favour the entire country rather than one sector.
Because it prevents new cultural creations as it makes them totally dependent on the patent holders willingness to provide their particular patent. Effectively it creates blocks on economic activity, as people are not going to provide their patents for others who will disrupt their business models, or alternatively it imposes a patent troll tax on doing business (this depends on if the patent holder is an entrenched market player, or a leech). Given the economic costs, and the high rate of change of software, it is better for the economy as a whole (but not current individual patent holders) for the abolition of software patents.
It will be interesting to see if the Australian government leans towards the U.S. model (with the U.S./Australian Free Trade Agreement) or New Zealand no-software patents model (with the Closer Economic Relations agreements between the countries). I suspect that mainly hinges on who wins the upcoming Australian election.
That is the case for standard wage and salary earners in New Zealand. It is your employers legal responsibility to pay the basic estimate tax directly from your pay (Pay As You Earn). At the end of the fiscal year, Inland Revenue sends out your taxpayer statement with the final results (that may be a little under or over, depending on how tax rates and payments have changed during the year). One can pay, collect, or amend this.
That said, in New Zealand we have no state government, which simplifies the tax structure.
I use a Macintosh at work. I use a Macintosh at home. I used my mod points on the Juggalos article (being a science education fan-boi).
It won't be your 5 really good shots that people will want. Based on my experience, it will be the photos that are well annotated with keywords and have a rich description of the photo attached, because these are the photos that people will find, and they need to find it before they can want to use it. Those photos of mine that people have expressed an interest in using have either been photos of particular species of birds with accompanying text describing the scene, or photos of specific places with explanatory text (as a textual description, not just GPS data).
It is a bit sad, but artistic quality doesn't come into it.
Speaking as someone who:
a) has no intention of ever being a pro photographer
b) has most of my photos among the other 142 million Creative Commons photos on Flickr
Most of my requests for my photos are of the form of "I'd like to put your photo on my wall", where they didn't really need to ask permission. I'd hate for people like that to be put off by thinking they need a commercial agreement.
The flip side is those occasions when a company has used on of my photos for commercial purposes, it has been a real pain for me to chase up by myself. by the time you account for my time, the only satisfaction has been moral. So I would be happy with a service that managed commercial rights and only returned a pittance, as it is more than I would make otherwise.
However, in balancing it out, the Getty model doesn't work for me, as I want to share more than I want to become a stock photo supplier.
When you try to throw a ring over a peg at a carnival, there is the assumption that there is a very, very small chance you might win. But as this recent case (involving statistics, forensics, and side-show con artists) shows, in the U.K. at least the odds can't be too far in the houses favour.
There are informed consent ways of delivering placebos.
In the case of a study with patients with an anxiety disorder they were basically told "We would like to prescribe you this treatment with no medical benefit which has been found to be effective in cases like yours". It still worked.
It was cited in Ben Goldacre's book Bad Science (which I don't have immediately to hand for the full reference).
Well, if we use oil drillers to use nukes to stop an asteroid catastrophe, it only makes sense to bring in the nuclear scientists to deal with an out of control oil well.
ACTA is being negotiated, from the USA perspective, as a "Sole executive agreement". This does not need congressional approval. See the Lessig and Goldsmith article in the Washington post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032502403.html
And actually applying intercountry statistics, we find that the United States has an average (compared to other countries) proportion of its population as high achieving students, who do about the same as high achieving students in other countries. As many of those posting on slashdot would fall into the high achieving category- Guess what, your own educational outcome would be about the same under any system, so your personal experience sheds little light. What does bring down the U.S. educational achievement levels compared to the rest of the world is the large and growing proportion (when compared to other countries) of students at the bottom of the achievement measurements.
Now, among those at the bottom of the education measures, the things that make the most difference are things like community stability, job stability, and aspirations of parents that education can be a reliable way to a better life (strong enough to overcome the profound and statistically obvious barriers involving race, class, and gender) but doing something about those kind of environmental effects sounds entirely too much like socialism for the U.S. to be comfortable with.
Dont hand in a bible, hand in a copy of the illustrated Karma Sutra.
Or do you suggest 100 items sold at 50.- is better for the economy than 50 items at 100.-?
Well, 100 items sold suggests there are about double the number people active in the economy than 50 items sold. Participation in the economy is linked to economic health. So, in general, more trade is better for the economy than less trade.
The assumes that an economy is for connecting people and resources, and not just an extension of the modern financial markets. In a purely fiscal view 100 @ 50 vs. 50 @ 100 would make no difference.
Places that I have worked for that have had this kind of problem have had the power to design the form they were wanting to accept. The easy answer is to add non-symmetrical content - a logo in the top left with blank space in the top right, bottom left and bottom right, or having a black rectangle across the page two thirds of the way down. The computer looks for the significant markers and orientates the page into the correct alignment.
Basically, the idea is to make the form so that the job you want to do with it (figure out which way is up) is easy.
Or, if caught using phone while driving:
1) Cop gives you envelope to write your address on.
2) Put phone in envelope
3) Cop takes envelope with phone away to put in post at end of shift
Plus enough of a fine to cover postage, and youve got at salutary learning experience for anyone so attached to their phone they cant resist using it while driving.
And you would be exactly correct. To provide some added context, when the government was negotiating the 2007-2009 volume licence period, it was not economical to get a full New Zealand wide licence for schools for Microsoft Office for the Macintosh so that part of the licence was dropped. The recommendation was to substitute iWork (via an NZ wide licence negotiated via Apple) or Open Office (or buy individual MS for Mac licences). The Ministry of Education works out how many copies are in use, and if it is worth a nation-wide site licence.
Keep in mind that, in New Zealand, the software that is used in schools will ultimately be paid for by the Ministry of Education either through a general licences or as part of the budgets devolved to schools, so it is in the Ministries interest to minimise the overall cost.
And, as a semi-aside New Zealand has been the least corrupt country on Transparency International's index pretty much every year since 2003 (some years were ties with Denmark), and the volume licence was an example of the Government serving the needs of individual schools well (who were going to use MS stuff anyway), rather than a corrupt deal.
The quantitative test on the notability of unicycling clowns would be how many people twittered about it? None? Then it is not actually particularly remarkable for anyone to see a clown on a unicycle, so being asked 'did you see anything unusual?' is not going to get a very high response.
Indeed, I would argue that a man in a clown suit actually makes it a less unusual event than just the unicycle. Once you are seeing a unicycle, you are quite likely to see a clown on it. Now, if it had been a man in a nun's habit on a unicycle, I think the question 'did you see anything unusual' would get a higher response.
The writer could conceivably seen the story in the firehose, thought this one will make the front page, copied and pasted story into a text editor and composed their message, then had it ready to post. When the article with your reply came live, they posted within 8 seconds, with a more cogent response than your initial first post as they had time to work on a first reply. This is also suggested by the post referencing the story but not your post.
Alternatively they might have actually read the article, and thought This will make slashdot one day, then followed a similar plan, but Mr. Ocham might want a word over an explanation that involves that much forward planning and OCD monitoring of the front page.