I'm currently studying a masters on a distance learning basis, where the whole course is delivered online - lectures come in the form of podcasts, and all supplied reading material is for download. Assignments are submitted via email, and we have regular real-time (text) chats and forum-based discussions.
For me, it's been a great experience, since I can fit my studying in around my work, listen to my lectures when driving or doing the ironing and the like. However, on the other side of things, I miss the casual chatting and discussion which takes place in person at an institution which, in my experience, fosters the best ideas and thinking (at least, this was the case in my undergraduate experience). If I could come up with a solution to that, and to overcome the chicken-and-egg situation of needing a critical mass to try to use it to generate enough interest (nothing worth than a blank discussion board), that would tick the final box for me.
They won't understand digital signing, many of them come from a legal background, they understand signatures on bits of dead tree, what they know about digital copies they've probably learned from Hollywood
I was about to say that that's a bit harsh, but, on the whole, it's - sadly - probably true.
As soon as you want to mark and highlight, paper beats all other options by a large margin.
I'd be less certain - I mark up and highlight a considerable volume of documents on a weekly basis (personal study/interest, as well as for my job), and have switched to using an iPad running iAnnotate PDF. This was my use case for buying the iPad, along with reading books - for me, it has considerable advantage overall over paper, in that I can carry a lot of information with me without lugging box files around, that the information is backed up, and the information (including annotations and the like) are searchable both on the iPad, and when I'm using my laptop.
Previously, I'd had the advantage of digital over boxes of paper through a Sony eReader, but, whilst this was great for reading a novel, once one got used to the delayed page turn, it was not good for anything which required an annotation. Perhaps a Kindle would suit my needs, but I find the touchscreen of the iPad very easy to use. The two main problems are (a) it was expensive (although now a historic problem, since I bought it), and (b) a backlit screen is not ideal - I could read for longer from my eReader than I can through the iPad.
Overall, though, I find it a great tool for marking up and annotating - half way through studying my masters on my spare time, wherever I might be, without relying on paper...
as bare metal backup it is too complicated and too flakey
For me, it suffers from the problem that it's very simple and easy to use, until something goes wrong - and then it's been a pain to try and fix. I would not rely on it as my only backup solution, with Unison being my preferred tool for backing up documents - once I'd tracked down the lack of an ssh-askpass script in Lion...
Plenty of results out there - but when I came to restore from my Time Machine backup recently, it failed. I could not find a solution - not for lack of trying - and so resorted to a fresh installation, and restoring documents from the document backup (regular Unison backup). Faster than Time Machine over Wi-Fi, even with the additional time for re-downloading programs, reconfiguring settings etc.
If nothing else, vesting the copyright (bearing in mind that it is assigned, and so ownership is transferred, rather than merely being licensed) in an entity other than the company which has decided not to support and maintain the product, and which exists to hold and potentially make ongoing decisions about its codebase, might increase the chances of both (a) active management of the project, rather than just code floating around, and (b) an increased likelihood of compliace activities (although, in the case of BSD-licensed code, perhaps fewer enforcement actions would be necessary).
References to copyright protection in the original article were positively cringeworthy.
Or perhaps indicative that "IP law" is simply too complicated for most to understand, or that most people have more important things to think about than "IP law" - chances are that the interviewee was not providing legal advice to the project?
(I'm not aware of any specific issues relating to scientific journals- my reading is predominantly legal journal articles (usually in.pdf), PDF prints of web articles (converted via Readability), and legislation, cases and the like.)
I used a couple of eReaders (COOL-ER (no longer trading) and Sony), but, whilst these were great for reading novels, or for casual reading, I did not find them of use for reading academic materials - I wanted to make notes, to highlight sections and the like, which neither of the devices I used supported. I also found the delay in loading the next page disruptive, even with getting used to pressing the "next page" button earlier than I'd turn the page in a physical book / journal.
I saw no point in an iPad when I first tried one, but, having struggled along with eReaders (and not wanting to carry paperwork, nor struggle to organise it), I decided to try an iPad, running iAnnotate PDF - and I have not looked back. It is not perfect, particularly given the nature of the screen, and the edges, which make it somewhat uncomfortable to hold, but, in terms of productivity for reading, it has been brilliant - I have read many thousands of pages using it, predominantly via iAnnotate, but, increasingly, for text books, through iBooks.
As well as the ease of reading / annotating on the device, I particularly value the ease of synchronisation, via the PC/Mac server software - I wanted something which could simply expose my directory structure, and the documents within it, so that, if I make a change to a document, it gets synced back, overwriting the original (although this is a preference setting, default is to add a new version), which makes document management so much easier. It works nicely via VPN, so, even if I'm at a conference, I can annotate a paper, sync it back to the server back home, then sync back down onto my laptop. (Perhaps convoluted, but it works...)
I have not tried it myself, but friends have been using GoodReader, so that might be a viable alternative to iAnnotate PDF, if an iPad-based solution was acceptable.
I occasionally still read a paper book, but, since I can get most of what I want in pdf / electronic copy (even if that means buying the paper copy, and acquiring a pdf), that's increasingly rare - I've got through the first year of a masters, studying in my spare time, without any paperwork at all, which has made studying much easier. As long as I've got my iPad, I can study wherever I want, and packing a laptop for writing papers and the like is no chore either - brainstorming / mindmapping software is also useful, along with a simple "paper replacement" writing-on-the-screen application on the iPad, for randomly jotting thoughts down (PenUltimate). Paper no more...
doing things such as: reading books on relationships
Whilst some things can be learned from books (law being a reasonable example), and many things can be improved through learning from books, I'm not wholly convinced that one can become an expert on relationships by reading books about relationships - it strikes me as a field in which expertise would require actual, real world experience?
Because they want to follow the court order to the letter and make sure their users can't just change their DNS etc. and get around the filtering, obviously.
BT does not need to curb copyright infringement online. It needs to satisfy the requirements of the injunction, which will be determined as a result of the third hearing - I would expect BT to seek particular and clear technical requirements within the terms of the injunction, so that they can be demonstrably satisfied, rather than some vague wording about the effect which must be achieved.
Similarly, the injunction must be "fair and proportionate and must not be excessively costly", so the obligations on BT must be set at an appropriate threshold to fall within the requirements of directive 2004/48/EC - otherwise, BT can apply for the injunction to be set aside, on the grounds that the court did not have the power to grant the injunction.
They don't care how much it will cost. They are a business and will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Unless not all ISPs are injuncted, in which case those who are so injuncted are at a competitive disadvantage if they are forced to incur costs - passing costs on to the consumer only works if all competitors are in the same situation.
Similarly, for an injunction to be granted under s97A, it must be "fair and proportionate and must not be excessively costly"- see, for example, L'Oreal v. eBay, at paragraph 139, although see paragraphs 135 - 144 more generally.
(BAILII - British and Irish Legal Information Institute - is a very valuable resource indeed, for lawyers and those who simply want to understand the laws affecting their lives. legislation.gov.uk is another useful resource.)
1.) Went to court, and were granted a ruling that the actions of the site in question infringed copyright, once the judge had listened to the evidence on each side.
2.) Went to court again, seeking an order under s97A, CDPA 1988, that BT should block access to the site, and a judge granted it, having listened to the evidence on each side.
3.) Will go to court a third time, to discuss the measures in question with BT, to determine what is proportionate.
My instinctive reaction is against site blocking, but, as long as the laws on copyright stand - a debate in itself - this seems roughly the right procedure, giving multiple levels of legal scrutiny before imposing an order, rather things being done on a voluntary basis?
If that is "building your own", I guess I can say proudly that I built my own washing machine, in that I bought a washing machine, put it in place, plumbed it in and switched it on...
I appreciate that one could argue that using software you haven't written yourself shouldn't count, but putting something together with a Linux box running Apache, WebDAV and various other things seems more "building your own" than simply using an existing third party alternative, as the article recommends.
no one likes to talk about the weaknesses of the proprietary itunes tether
I must admit that, having moved from Linux to Mac, I have not yet noticed a particular problem - my music files are stored DRM free, even those which I purchase, and they are stored in a flat filesystem, and so can be easily moved around, or accessed by other programs.
I used to sync my iPod with Amarok1.4 / gtkpod, and had no problems with either - each synced the iPod perfectly.
of those 35% would put down money now - sight unseen - for it, as opposed to just saying that they "will" buy it.
Also, the article does not say where the survey took place - if it were on, and linked to by, a Mac user site, it's perhaps unsurprising that the result is what it is.
Mine neither - but, since it's running as a server, I need to find out more about the Lion server applications before committing to new hardware - whether it would offer any benefit at all.
If I paid to access version 1.5, then my local copy does not need to disappear when version 2.0 is available.
Same - and why need it? Having access to any version of a textbook - including previous and future editions... I enjoy reading old law texts, to see how the law was interpreted at the time.
Heck, this is my dream - it's easily modified as and when people contribute good ideas:)
Slashdot Mirror
I'm currently studying a masters on a distance learning basis, where the whole course is delivered online - lectures come in the form of podcasts, and all supplied reading material is for download. Assignments are submitted via email, and we have regular real-time (text) chats and forum-based discussions.
For me, it's been a great experience, since I can fit my studying in around my work, listen to my lectures when driving or doing the ironing and the like. However, on the other side of things, I miss the casual chatting and discussion which takes place in person at an institution which, in my experience, fosters the best ideas and thinking (at least, this was the case in my undergraduate experience). If I could come up with a solution to that, and to overcome the chicken-and-egg situation of needing a critical mass to try to use it to generate enough interest (nothing worth than a blank discussion board), that would tick the final box for me.
(For anyone interested: distance-learning masters in IT and telecommunications law.)
They won't understand digital signing, many of them come from a legal background, they understand signatures on bits of dead tree, what they know about digital copies they've probably learned from Hollywood
I was about to say that that's a bit harsh, but, on the whole, it's - sadly - probably true.
Posted again, after logging in...
As soon as you want to mark and highlight, paper beats all other options by a large margin.
I'd be less certain - I mark up and highlight a considerable volume of documents on a weekly basis (personal study/interest, as well as for my job), and have switched to using an iPad running iAnnotate PDF. This was my use case for buying the iPad, along with reading books - for me, it has considerable advantage overall over paper, in that I can carry a lot of information with me without lugging box files around, that the information is backed up, and the information (including annotations and the like) are searchable both on the iPad, and when I'm using my laptop.
Previously, I'd had the advantage of digital over boxes of paper through a Sony eReader, but, whilst this was great for reading a novel, once one got used to the delayed page turn, it was not good for anything which required an annotation. Perhaps a Kindle would suit my needs, but I find the touchscreen of the iPad very easy to use. The two main problems are (a) it was expensive (although now a historic problem, since I bought it), and (b) a backlit screen is not ideal - I could read for longer from my eReader than I can through the iPad.
Overall, though, I find it a great tool for marking up and annotating - half way through studying my masters on my spare time, wherever I might be, without relying on paper...
as bare metal backup it is too complicated and too flakey
For me, it suffers from the problem that it's very simple and easy to use, until something goes wrong - and then it's been a pain to try and fix. I would not rely on it as my only backup solution, with Unison being my preferred tool for backing up documents - once I'd tracked down the lack of an ssh-askpass script in Lion...
Another supporting post for Unison here - an excellent tool, which I've used for years.
Plenty of results out there - but when I came to restore from my Time Machine backup recently, it failed. I could not find a solution - not for lack of trying - and so resorted to a fresh installation, and restoring documents from the document backup (regular Unison backup). Faster than Time Machine over Wi-Fi, even with the additional time for re-downloading programs, reconfiguring settings etc.
On balance, what's the point?
If nothing else, vesting the copyright (bearing in mind that it is assigned, and so ownership is transferred, rather than merely being licensed) in an entity other than the company which has decided not to support and maintain the product, and which exists to hold and potentially make ongoing decisions about its codebase, might increase the chances of both (a) active management of the project, rather than just code floating around, and (b) an increased likelihood of compliace activities (although, in the case of BSD-licensed code, perhaps fewer enforcement actions would be necessary).
on Diginotar's servers
Is this uncommon? Do most (sane) administrators run anti-virus on each of their servers?
so it's available in branches everywhere.
References to copyright protection in the original article were positively cringeworthy.
Or perhaps indicative that "IP law" is simply too complicated for most to understand, or that most people have more important things to think about than "IP law" - chances are that the interviewee was not providing legal advice to the project?
(I'm not aware of any specific issues relating to scientific journals- my reading is predominantly legal journal articles (usually in .pdf), PDF prints of web articles (converted via Readability), and legislation, cases and the like.)
I used a couple of eReaders (COOL-ER (no longer trading) and Sony), but, whilst these were great for reading novels, or for casual reading, I did not find them of use for reading academic materials - I wanted to make notes, to highlight sections and the like, which neither of the devices I used supported. I also found the delay in loading the next page disruptive, even with getting used to pressing the "next page" button earlier than I'd turn the page in a physical book / journal.
I saw no point in an iPad when I first tried one, but, having struggled along with eReaders (and not wanting to carry paperwork, nor struggle to organise it), I decided to try an iPad, running iAnnotate PDF - and I have not looked back. It is not perfect, particularly given the nature of the screen, and the edges, which make it somewhat uncomfortable to hold, but, in terms of productivity for reading, it has been brilliant - I have read many thousands of pages using it, predominantly via iAnnotate, but, increasingly, for text books, through iBooks.
As well as the ease of reading / annotating on the device, I particularly value the ease of synchronisation, via the PC/Mac server software - I wanted something which could simply expose my directory structure, and the documents within it, so that, if I make a change to a document, it gets synced back, overwriting the original (although this is a preference setting, default is to add a new version), which makes document management so much easier. It works nicely via VPN, so, even if I'm at a conference, I can annotate a paper, sync it back to the server back home, then sync back down onto my laptop. (Perhaps convoluted, but it works...)
I have not tried it myself, but friends have been using GoodReader, so that might be a viable alternative to iAnnotate PDF, if an iPad-based solution was acceptable.
I occasionally still read a paper book, but, since I can get most of what I want in pdf / electronic copy (even if that means buying the paper copy, and acquiring a pdf), that's increasingly rare - I've got through the first year of a masters, studying in my spare time, without any paperwork at all, which has made studying much easier. As long as I've got my iPad, I can study wherever I want, and packing a laptop for writing papers and the like is no chore either - brainstorming / mindmapping software is also useful, along with a simple "paper replacement" writing-on-the-screen application on the iPad, for randomly jotting thoughts down (PenUltimate). Paper no more...
you house your garden gnomes better than most of us over here!
break into your car and destroy your garden gnome
doing things such as: reading books on relationships
Whilst some things can be learned from books (law being a reasonable example), and many things can be improved through learning from books, I'm not wholly convinced that one can become an expert on relationships by reading books about relationships - it strikes me as a field in which expertise would require actual, real world experience?
Because they want to follow the court order to the letter and make sure their users can't just change their DNS etc. and get around the filtering, obviously.
BT does not need to curb copyright infringement online. It needs to satisfy the requirements of the injunction, which will be determined as a result of the third hearing - I would expect BT to seek particular and clear technical requirements within the terms of the injunction, so that they can be demonstrably satisfied, rather than some vague wording about the effect which must be achieved.
Similarly, the injunction must be "fair and proportionate and must not be excessively costly", so the obligations on BT must be set at an appropriate threshold to fall within the requirements of directive 2004/48/EC - otherwise, BT can apply for the injunction to be set aside, on the grounds that the court did not have the power to grant the injunction.
They don't care how much it will cost. They are a business and will pass that cost onto the consumer.
Unless not all ISPs are injuncted, in which case those who are so injuncted are at a competitive disadvantage if they are forced to incur costs - passing costs on to the consumer only works if all competitors are in the same situation.
Similarly, for an injunction to be granted under s97A, it must be "fair and proportionate and must not be excessively costly"- see, for example, L'Oreal v. eBay , at paragraph 139, although see paragraphs 135 - 144 more generally.
is available on BAILII.
(BAILII - British and Irish Legal Information Institute - is a very valuable resource indeed, for lawyers and those who simply want to understand the laws affecting their lives. legislation.gov.uk is another useful resource.)
1.) Went to court, and were granted a ruling that the actions of the site in question infringed copyright, once the judge had listened to the evidence on each side.
2.) Went to court again, seeking an order under s97A, CDPA 1988, that BT should block access to the site, and a judge granted it, having listened to the evidence on each side.
3.) Will go to court a third time, to discuss the measures in question with BT, to determine what is proportionate.
My instinctive reaction is against site blocking, but, as long as the laws on copyright stand - a debate in itself - this seems roughly the right procedure, giving multiple levels of legal scrutiny before imposing an order, rather things being done on a voluntary basis?
If that is "building your own", I guess I can say proudly that I built my own washing machine, in that I bought a washing machine, put it in place, plumbed it in and switched it on...
really "building your own" solution?
I appreciate that one could argue that using software you haven't written yourself shouldn't count, but putting something together with a Linux box running Apache, WebDAV and various other things seems more "building your own" than simply using an existing third party alternative, as the article recommends.
have you tried syncing with something that's not 5 years old?
Under Linux, no - has support been broken in the newer products?
There seem to be guides available, but I have not tried them.
no one likes to talk about the weaknesses of the proprietary itunes tether
I must admit that, having moved from Linux to Mac, I have not yet noticed a particular problem - my music files are stored DRM free, even those which I purchase, and they are stored in a flat filesystem, and so can be easily moved around, or accessed by other programs.
I used to sync my iPod with Amarok1.4 / gtkpod, and had no problems with either - each synced the iPod perfectly.
of those 35% would put down money now - sight unseen - for it, as opposed to just saying that they "will" buy it.
Also, the article does not say where the survey took place - if it were on, and linked to by, a Mac user site, it's perhaps unsurprising that the result is what it is.
Sadly my poor old mini doesn't make the grade.
Mine neither - but, since it's running as a server, I need to find out more about the Lion server applications before committing to new hardware - whether it would offer any benefit at all.
to pick up an only-slightly-used MacBook Air or Mac Mini on eBay, as some inevitably rush to upgrade...
If I paid to access version 1.5, then my local copy does not need to disappear when version 2.0 is available.
Same - and why need it? Having access to any version of a textbook - including previous and future editions... I enjoy reading old law texts, to see how the law was interpreted at the time.
Heck, this is my dream - it's easily modified as and when people contribute good ideas :)