Yes, the US has a screwed up view of who the copyright to photographs, engravings, portraits belong when those items are ordered for hire.
Canadian law makes so much more sense in this particular case:
Ownership of copyright 13. (1) Subject to this Act, the author of a work shall be the first owner of the copyright therein.
Engraving, photograph or portrait
(2) Where, in the case of an engraving, photograph or portrait, the plate or other original was ordered by some other person and was made for valuable consideration, and the consideration was paid, in pursuance of that order, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, the person by whom the plate or other original was ordered shall be the first owner of the copyright.
If I order someone to take my pictures, for any reason at all, and I pay them, I own the copyright to those pictures, and it is correct, I want to own the copyright to them, those are my pictures, I ordered them and all I want is service of taking them.
I had a case where I had a very unpleasant experience with a company in Ontario, they tried to get me to sign away my rights by stating in the original contract, that I will not be able to get the original files unless I sign some other document later on, which they did not even present to me at the moment of signing the original contract. Obviously this is an illegal move, you can't bind me by a contract, which contains a clause, that says I will be bound by another contract later on, without showing the details of that other contract to me before I sign everything. They made this mistake, I got the originals and the copyrights and I will never deal with them again. There are some slimy people out there.
You have medicare for older people, right, those are people with more health problems. That's government run insurance. However good luck with your corrupt government running this 'efficiently'. They had a surplus in your medicare but they spent it already and put into debt. So the real problem with government is not efficiency or lack of it, it is the corruption, and it looks completely unstoppable and will take the country down. You can do one thing only, organize and never again allow an establishment, or more precisely, a corporate sell-out whore politician in the office, but seriously, what are the chances of that? You could go Chinese style and execute 90% of your politicians who are complete corporate whores, the execute some corporate whore executives. This will provide some incentive against corruption, but what are the chances of that happening? You can try and create a perfect and incorruptible society with the aim at creating an incorruptible and honest and hardworking individual, well good luck with that.
I guess, maybe a robot run country, with the algorithm being Free Source and everyone is required to look and understand at least some of it during the education process. I guess I can dream.
Obviously you haven't dealt with the private healthcare industry. - I am dealing with the private health care industry in Germany, but without insurance. It seems very efficient, convenient, has good doctors and provides immediate access. There are private insurance companies here but also there is the public insurance system. The hospitals are mostly private. The system looks fine for now at least, well a million times better than Canadian I am too familiar with unfortunately, and much cheaper than that of the US. A mix like that, private/public health care and private/public insurance seems a much better solution than the extremes of either all private or all government run.
As a student of public administration, someone who lived through unionized state employment, and someone who tries to ensure the taxpayers are insulated from rising costs, I understand the desire for change to increase productivity and decrease time but the costs involved (human and otherwise) are much bigger than you'll ever care to think about.
- I would say that you should be one of the last people who we should listen to then, when it comes to such advices.
You are saying you want to ensure that the taxpayers are insulated from rising costs, and I say you do them no favor. First, by insulating anyone from reality, you are creating a false sense of stability in a system that is really not stable and any change to status quo will be much more violent an dramatic than if the change was gradual and somewhat constant. Second, by insulating anyone from reality, you are hiding the problems in the system. If people were not insulating from the rising costs, they would pay more attention to what is happening around them politically.
My point is valid, look at what just started happening at Berkeley and some other universities. People, when their money is at stake (and in this case it is obviously about money, as in education costs) will become politically active. If you want political activism resulting in violence, then go ahead, protect people so that they don't know what happens and by the time they even understand it, it's when everything is fucked.
From my perspective, as usual, the government is together with the corporations, they are working together to screw the middle class people and to take everyone's money. Everyone's. This is not about party affiliations, this is about governments printing money, ensuring huge monopolies by creating idea of preferred corporations, who get deals on money. Banks, traders, mutual funds, construction companies, manufacturers like weapons firms etc, energy firms, those who know that they must lobby the government to remain powerful and rich, they create a situation, which mixed with the fact that the news agencies also are now corporations ran by the same people, take over the entire system. The government is absolutely 100% corrupt and cannot be redeemed. Almost every individual in the government is corrupt to some degree, but in the totality, the system is completely corrupt and it will cause destruction of currencies, not just the US dollar, some others as well.
I am not blaming unions for this, they are just part of the entitlement problem, but they are not the cause. However unions should not be allowed anywhere near government jobs. What the hell is it, that allows government to be a monopoly on laws and regulations and timelines but at the same time allows government to strike so that people who pay taxes cannot even get the services they paid for by the taxes. Why should government have ability to prevent reduction in costs by enforcing artificial structures that prevent these reductions?
At this point though, these questions are irrelevant. The government has failed and in some not very long amount of time the people will be left with a failed country. The rich have already done the transfer of their wealth abroad, they already have the corporations, the bank accounts, the physical gold and other commodities, enough to live through currency and state collapse, they will be fine. The poor, (the middle class I mean, they are the poor), will not be able to stop this, most of them will not even know what hit them when it hits. Right now it is the rising unemployment, but wait a bit, it will be the devalued money, the impossible un-payable debt, the worthless property in places that have no production left.
This is what happens when you just provide them with bread and circuses and insulate them from reality for just enough time so that the cunning masters take everything away by devaluing the currency and making sure that they are again, the only ones with real wealth left.
Since dehydration is commonly regarded as the primary cause of a hangover (and is, in fact, the solvent which allows nutrients to be effective in the first place), I reject the results of their flawed study. They did not even attempt to test the effectiveness of re-hydration.
- that's your quote.
(just as a side note for various reasons I know something about re-hydration, and the most efficient way to do it is not with pure water, methodology also includes re-introducing electrolites. Yes, solutions of salts and sugars are used, not pure water, that's first.)
I don't see you understand that this study was comparison of many other studies done on the subject. If you think the water was not taken into consideration, you believe that everyone around you is so much dumber than you are, luckily, we will show how you are mistaken in this believe right now. The studies selected for comparison were the most significant, they were published, they had control groups
One of the included studies was published by Ylikahrij.
Pay attention: During the challenge the participants did not receive food but could drink water freely.
The other published by Kaivola. Pay attention: Challenge was done in small groups; restrictions on non-alcoholic beverages and food intake not reported
Bogin: No analgesics or water were allowed after alcohol challenge
Muhonen: Participants were patients in hospital for detoxification
Laas: After alcohol challenge soft drinks, water, and a low fat lunch were offered; no caffeine intake
Wiesse: A meal was taken before alcohol challenge
Pittler: A meal was taken before alcohol challenge
Moesgaard: Participants were recruited at a private party; no restrictions on food and drink reported
---
In any case, you have not conducted an independent research on this matter, you are in fact refuting the findings that are not only reported by this particular comparison study, but by the underlying 8 other medical studies.
Out the the 15 studies that were considered, the above 8 were chosen because they were conducted in a manner compatible with a real study, it is discussed in the 'Methods' section of the publication.
You can go ahead and dismiss all of this work, cited above, the methods, the approaches, but you cannot seriously suggest that it is either trolling or redundant.
But you will, because you are trolling. Cheers, I am gonzo.
I will show in a second, but first: you are trolling because you have no information to refute the study, you did not conduct your own and did not publish it in a peer reviewed medical journal, and you will not be able to quote one that refutes this study. With these facts at hand, stating that you have the truth and that the truth is that this study is wrong, that's trolling.
So for all of your blubbering about 'creating a straw man', you are the one who created one. The study is quite different from what you are making it out to be. You are not trolling? Well, if you think you are not, you are then deluded.
Are you kidding me? I... can't... My brain hurts! Please pull your brain out of the box beside your desk and insert in skull before opening your mouth again. I cannot believe that anyone that has an internet connection can be this out of touch with reality. Please, tell me your kidding.
Right, and you have evidence to the contrary of the medical study that I am quoting? That is the definition of trolling.
My comment was on topic, it was informative in that it is supported by an actual medical study conducted by actual medical professionals. As I said, the study on hangover finding that the best remedy against hangover is abstinence could be a redundant study, then my comment could be considered redundant.
However, we conduct various studies that sometimes refute 'common sense knowledge' and sometimes confirm it, in either case the study is INFORMATIVE and even if the results of it do confirm what used to be known as common sense, it is still a valid outcome of a study and it is not redundant and obviously it is not a troll. Saying that such a study is invalid without any actual evidence is trolling, so if you are feeding a troll, you are really just feeding yourself.
Interesting, so now you are shifting the target of your monologue to the contents of a study on hangover remedies as a way to prove that my original comment was redundant? I think at this point you are trolling. I am done here.
and as I said, your comment on something being a 'troll' that is moderated 'troll' is really redundant.
Now, I do have a point, I cited official medical research stating that the real remedy against a hangover is abstinence. I said the same thing and they said the same thing, it could be a redundant statement, but it is not a troll, it is statement of a fact. You can continue to leave you redundant commentary and since the story is long gone off the main screen of/. it will not be moderated as one, but it should be. Mine never should have been moderated a troll, it is informative, but it was. So that's the reality of/., what is your problem?
so we have conceded something now, you are saying it's not a troll but maybe redundant. I may agree that it could be redundant, but where one step was made towards understanding, more steps are possible.
Consider the following: British Medical Journal published a review on hangover remedies by Max Pittler of the Peninsula Medical School at Exeter University.
So let's see, a scientific review concludes that avoiding drinking is a good enough 'remedy against a hangover', but I, restating this in a story about discovering booze that supposedly does not lead to a hangover, am considered a troll or at best redundant?
Well then, many things in life could be considered just as redundant, for example your commentary on why my comment is a troll, after my comment is already moderated as one (and I did not ask for an explanation, we are on/., it is obvious that most moderators here are not really up to the job.)
Incorrect, there was no question. There was a statement: scientists discover booze that does not give you a hangover. There is no question in the headline, there is no question in the summary. So they discover booze and it does not give you a hangover. I say there is this other thing that will not give you a hangover. Not a troll, informative.
that is way out of your depth to decide, however we do see how much of an insignificant wrinkled up used up foreskin like little duche you are. (duche without the 'o', that's a bit too fancy for you).
well, WD knows a thing or two about micro-controllers, and since they do not actually produce the flash memory, it's Samsung's, the actual controller chip is probably JMicron's with WD firmware inside that was created by or for WD specifically. I expect WD to get their shit together and actually to apply some of that knowledge they are harboring of various controller optimization and massive storage techniques that they have learned over the years and come out with something that actually kicks ass in SSD space. Maybe they are working on it now, who knows?
but only if the average citizen understands the difference between "appeared on the police's books" and "guilty".
- on average, average citizens are able to differentiate between these concepts because on average they are smarter than the average. It's easy to see from an average example of an average guy, such as G.W.Bush for an average example.
If you shift to neutral while driving a car that is not a run-away Toy-Yoda (never liked them anyway), and you pushing the accelerator, then the engine itself will rev up to its maximum rotations, it's true, but as long as the clutch is not engaged your engine will be fine for a while, or completely fine if the rev limiter kicks-in (either the carburetor or the fuel injector, or the actual limiter device) and will reduce the amount of fuel flowing to the engine or will even shut down the ignition. Just be careful not to drop the clutch into a low gear when the engine is in red, then you may have engine trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, the US has a screwed up view of who the copyright to photographs, engravings, portraits belong when those items are ordered for hire.
Canadian law makes so much more sense in this particular case:
Ownership of copyright
13. (1) Subject to this Act, the author of a work shall be the first owner of the copyright therein.
Engraving, photograph or portrait
(2) Where, in the case of an engraving, photograph or portrait, the plate or other original was ordered by some other person and was made for valuable consideration, and the consideration was paid, in pursuance of that order, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, the person by whom the plate or other original was ordered shall be the first owner of the copyright.
If I order someone to take my pictures, for any reason at all, and I pay them, I own the copyright to those pictures, and it is correct, I want to own the copyright to them, those are my pictures, I ordered them and all I want is service of taking them.
I had a case where I had a very unpleasant experience with a company in Ontario, they tried to get me to sign away my rights by stating in the original contract, that I will not be able to get the original files unless I sign some other document later on, which they did not even present to me at the moment of signing the original contract. Obviously this is an illegal move, you can't bind me by a contract, which contains a clause, that says I will be bound by another contract later on, without showing the details of that other contract to me before I sign everything. They made this mistake, I got the originals and the copyrights and I will never deal with them again. There are some slimy people out there.
It's always a pleasure.
You have medicare for older people, right, those are people with more health problems. That's government run insurance. However good luck with your corrupt government running this 'efficiently'. They had a surplus in your medicare but they spent it already and put into debt. So the real problem with government is not efficiency or lack of it, it is the corruption, and it looks completely unstoppable and will take the country down. You can do one thing only, organize and never again allow an establishment, or more precisely, a corporate sell-out whore politician in the office, but seriously, what are the chances of that? You could go Chinese style and execute 90% of your politicians who are complete corporate whores, the execute some corporate whore executives. This will provide some incentive against corruption, but what are the chances of that happening? You can try and create a perfect and incorruptible society with the aim at creating an incorruptible and honest and hardworking individual, well good luck with that.
I guess, maybe a robot run country, with the algorithm being Free Source and everyone is required to look and understand at least some of it during the education process. I guess I can dream.
Obviously you haven't dealt with the private healthcare industry. - I am dealing with the private health care industry in Germany, but without insurance. It seems very efficient, convenient, has good doctors and provides immediate access. There are private insurance companies here but also there is the public insurance system. The hospitals are mostly private. The system looks fine for now at least, well a million times better than Canadian I am too familiar with unfortunately, and much cheaper than that of the US. A mix like that, private/public health care and private/public insurance seems a much better solution than the extremes of either all private or all government run.
As a student of public administration, someone who lived through unionized state employment, and someone who tries to ensure the taxpayers are insulated from rising costs, I understand the desire for change to increase productivity and decrease time but the costs involved (human and otherwise) are much bigger than you'll ever care to think about.
- I would say that you should be one of the last people who we should listen to then, when it comes to such advices.
You are saying you want to ensure that the taxpayers are insulated from rising costs, and I say you do them no favor. First, by insulating anyone from reality, you are creating a false sense of stability in a system that is really not stable and any change to status quo will be much more violent an dramatic than if the change was gradual and somewhat constant. Second, by insulating anyone from reality, you are hiding the problems in the system. If people were not insulating from the rising costs, they would pay more attention to what is happening around them politically.
My point is valid, look at what just started happening at Berkeley and some other universities. People, when their money is at stake (and in this case it is obviously about money, as in education costs) will become politically active. If you want political activism resulting in violence, then go ahead, protect people so that they don't know what happens and by the time they even understand it, it's when everything is fucked.
From my perspective, as usual, the government is together with the corporations, they are working together to screw the middle class people and to take everyone's money. Everyone's. This is not about party affiliations, this is about governments printing money, ensuring huge monopolies by creating idea of preferred corporations, who get deals on money. Banks, traders, mutual funds, construction companies, manufacturers like weapons firms etc, energy firms, those who know that they must lobby the government to remain powerful and rich, they create a situation, which mixed with the fact that the news agencies also are now corporations ran by the same people, take over the entire system. The government is absolutely 100% corrupt and cannot be redeemed. Almost every individual in the government is corrupt to some degree, but in the totality, the system is completely corrupt and it will cause destruction of currencies, not just the US dollar, some others as well.
I am not blaming unions for this, they are just part of the entitlement problem, but they are not the cause. However unions should not be allowed anywhere near government jobs. What the hell is it, that allows government to be a monopoly on laws and regulations and timelines but at the same time allows government to strike so that people who pay taxes cannot even get the services they paid for by the taxes. Why should government have ability to prevent reduction in costs by enforcing artificial structures that prevent these reductions?
At this point though, these questions are irrelevant. The government has failed and in some not very long amount of time the people will be left with a failed country. The rich have already done the transfer of their wealth abroad, they already have the corporations, the bank accounts, the physical gold and other commodities, enough to live through currency and state collapse, they will be fine. The poor, (the middle class I mean, they are the poor), will not be able to stop this, most of them will not even know what hit them when it hits. Right now it is the rising unemployment, but wait a bit, it will be the devalued money, the impossible un-payable debt, the worthless property in places that have no production left.
This is what happens when you just provide them with bread and circuses and insulate them from reality for just enough time so that the cunning masters take everything away by devaluing the currency and making sure that they are again, the only ones with real wealth left.
Or in more US friendly units, it's 22 your mommas.
Are you kidding me? I... can't... My brain hurts! Please pull your brain out of the box beside your desk and insert in skull before opening your mouth again. I cannot believe that anyone that has an internet connection can be this out of touch with reality. Please, tell me your kidding.
Since dehydration is commonly regarded as the primary cause of a hangover (and is, in fact, the solvent which allows nutrients to be effective in the first place), I reject the results of their flawed study. They did not even attempt to test the effectiveness of re-hydration.
- that's your quote.
(just as a side note for various reasons I know something about re-hydration, and the most efficient way to do it is not with pure water, methodology also includes re-introducing electrolites. Yes, solutions of salts and sugars are used, not pure water, that's first.)
I don't see you understand that this study was comparison of many other studies done on the subject. If you think the water was not taken into consideration, you believe that everyone around you is so much dumber than you are, luckily, we will show how you are mistaken in this believe right now. The studies selected for comparison were the most significant, they were published, they had control groups
From the published article:
Table of studies that were compared in this study.
One of the included studies was published by Ylikahrij.
Pay attention: During the challenge the participants did not receive food but could drink water freely.
The other published by Kaivola. Pay attention:
Challenge was done in small groups; restrictions on non-alcoholic beverages and food intake not reported
Bogin: No analgesics or water were allowed after alcohol challenge
Muhonen: Participants were patients in hospital for detoxification
Laas: After alcohol challenge soft drinks, water, and a low fat lunch were offered; no caffeine intake
Wiesse: A meal was taken before alcohol challenge
Pittler: A meal was taken before alcohol challenge
Moesgaard: Participants were recruited at a private party; no restrictions on food and drink reported
---
In any case, you have not conducted an independent research on this matter, you are in fact refuting the findings that are not only reported by this particular comparison study, but by the underlying 8 other medical studies.
Out the the 15 studies that were considered, the above 8 were chosen because they were conducted in a manner compatible with a real study, it is discussed in the 'Methods' section of the publication.
You can go ahead and dismiss all of this work, cited above, the methods, the approaches, but you cannot seriously suggest that it is either trolling or redundant.
But you will, because you are trolling. Cheers, I am gonzo.
I will show in a second, but first: you are trolling because you have no information to refute the study, you did not conduct your own and did not publish it in a peer reviewed medical journal, and you will not be able to quote one that refutes this study. With these facts at hand, stating that you have the truth and that the truth is that this study is wrong, that's trolling.
In the Introduction section:
Other symptoms in varying combinations may include lightheadedness, nausea, and concentration difficulties. The symptoms seem to be due to a combination of ethanol's main metabolic product acetaldehyde, congeners including methanol, endocrine and immune system disturbances, dehydration, and sleep disturbance.1
From wikipedia (just for kicks)
As to the first question: Hypoglycemia, dehydration, acetaldehyde intoxication, and vitamin B12 deficiency are all theorized causes of hangover symptoms.
So for all of your blubbering about 'creating a straw man', you are the one who created one. The study is quite different from what you are making it out to be. You are not trolling? Well, if you think you are not, you are then deluded.
Are you kidding me? I... can't... My brain hurts! Please pull your brain out of the box beside your desk and insert in skull before opening your mouth again. I cannot believe that anyone that has an internet connection can be this out of touch with reality. Please, tell me your kidding.
Right, and you have evidence to the contrary of the medical study that I am quoting? That is the definition of trolling.
My comment was on topic, it was informative in that it is supported by an actual medical study conducted by actual medical professionals. As I said, the study on hangover finding that the best remedy against hangover is abstinence could be a redundant study, then my comment could be considered redundant.
However, we conduct various studies that sometimes refute 'common sense knowledge' and sometimes confirm it, in either case the study is INFORMATIVE and even if the results of it do confirm what used to be known as common sense, it is still a valid outcome of a study and it is not redundant and obviously it is not a troll. Saying that such a study is invalid without any actual evidence is trolling, so if you are feeding a troll, you are really just feeding yourself.
Bon appetit.
Interesting, so now you are shifting the target of your monologue to the contents of a study on hangover remedies as a way to prove that my original comment was redundant? I think at this point you are trolling. I am done here.
So I guess you are the guy on the right then?
and as I said, your comment on something being a 'troll' that is moderated 'troll' is really redundant.
Now, I do have a point, I cited official medical research stating that the real remedy against a hangover is abstinence. I said the same thing and they said the same thing, it could be a redundant statement, but it is not a troll, it is statement of a fact. You can continue to leave you redundant commentary and since the story is long gone off the main screen of /. it will not be moderated as one, but it should be. Mine never should have been moderated a troll, it is informative, but it was. So that's the reality of /., what is your problem?
so we have conceded something now, you are saying it's not a troll but maybe redundant. I may agree that it could be redundant, but where one step was made towards understanding, more steps are possible.
Consider the following:
British Medical Journal published a review on hangover remedies by Max Pittler of the Peninsula Medical School at Exeter University.
It concludes No compelling evidence exists to suggest that any conventional or complementary intervention is effective for preventing or treating alcohol hangover. The most effective way to avoid the symptoms of alcohol induced hangover is to practice abstinence or moderation.
So let's see, a scientific review concludes that avoiding drinking is a good enough 'remedy against a hangover', but I, restating this in a story about discovering booze that supposedly does not lead to a hangover, am considered a troll or at best redundant?
Well then, many things in life could be considered just as redundant, for example your commentary on why my comment is a troll, after my comment is already moderated as one (and I did not ask for an explanation, we are on /., it is obvious that most moderators here are not really up to the job.)
Incorrect, there was no question. There was a statement: scientists discover booze that does not give you a hangover. There is no question in the headline, there is no question in the summary. So they discover booze and it does not give you a hangover. I say there is this other thing that will not give you a hangover. Not a troll, informative.
they are ecstatic about it, looks like you can't let go of it either.
No, it is not a suggestion not to drink, it is my way of avoiding hangovers. Not a troll, informative.
that is way out of your depth to decide, however we do see how much of an insignificant wrinkled up used up foreskin like little duche you are. (duche without the 'o', that's a bit too fancy for you).
yes, but in my defense the baby was an alcoholic.
well, WD knows a thing or two about micro-controllers, and since they do not actually produce the flash memory, it's Samsung's, the actual controller chip is probably JMicron's with WD firmware inside that was created by or for WD specifically. I expect WD to get their shit together and actually to apply some of that knowledge they are harboring of various controller optimization and massive storage techniques that they have learned over the years and come out with something that actually kicks ass in SSD space. Maybe they are working on it now, who knows?
Speaking of jokes, here is everything that we need to know about you.
well obviously you weren't, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
but only if the average citizen understands the difference between "appeared on the police's books" and "guilty".
- on average, average citizens are able to differentiate between these concepts because on average they are smarter than the average. It's easy to see from an average example of an average guy, such as G.W.Bush for an average example.
If you shift to neutral while driving a car that is not a run-away Toy-Yoda (never liked them anyway), and you pushing the accelerator, then the engine itself will rev up to its maximum rotations, it's true, but as long as the clutch is not engaged your engine will be fine for a while, or completely fine if the rev limiter kicks-in (either the carburetor or the fuel injector, or the actual limiter device) and will reduce the amount of fuel flowing to the engine or will even shut down the ignition. Just be careful not to drop the clutch into a low gear when the engine is in red, then you may have engine trouble.