As the homeschooling parent of a 5 year old we have learned this first hand. We stumbled upon a set of books called Life of Fred that are "story books" that incorporate math. They were written by a math professor tired getting students that didn't know math and thought it was "hard". He incorporates basic algebra using x from almost the very beginning. They cover many topics that most think of as "advanced math" in simple, natural ways. As the story unfolds Fred has to use math in a variety of situations. It shows that math is practical and teaches it in an accessible way.
Even better, the stories are silly and ridiculous and fun for all ages.
My argument was that wearing Google Glass does not by default make it distracting. Here in Florida, the law is no texting except at a stop light, but GPS is still allowed. I think that's a reasonable middle ground. I understand that Google Glass would make it more difficult to know what someone is up to, but there are also non-distracting ways it could be used.
Mostly, though, I live on a planet where I prefer laws be implemented AFTER there is a clear and present danger. I don't like laws made from guesswork. Someone that causes an accident while using Google Glass can easily be prosecuted using existing laws. And once there are enough Google Glass wearers out there that our law enforcement can come back and say, "Look, we're seeing this particular problem that needs resolved," THEN the lawmakers can pass something.
Of course, a text message is only a distraction so long as it's turned on. Ideally there would be a "driving" mode, where you only get specifically selected alerts. For instance, I would only want GPS and emergency alerts while driving.
Okay. I watched the video. So you're right, it wouldn't be superimposed on the road. The question is, how much would your eyes actually have to move to see the content and how much can easily be seen with peripheral vision. It still seems like less of a distraction than external GPS.
From one of the previous conversations, I understand that Google Glass does not really have useful GPS navigation yet. However, I would think GPS built into Google Glass and superimposed on the actual road would be significantly safer than shifting your eyes to glance at the GPS regularly.
If you like Wordpress I strongly recommend The Events Calendar Pro http://tri.be/shop/wordpress-e.... It's both powerful and easy to use. It's not free but makes up for it in the time you'll save. There are plenty of plug-ins available to make it do exactly what you want it to do.
I'm a designer, not a programmer, so I'm always looking for the simplest and most cost-effective web solutions.
I've also just imported everything to diigo.com. I'm guessing a lot of people are doing that today because it took about 3 hours for everything to upload from my exported file (and still waiting on tags). So far I like it because I can choose "private" as the default setting.
That's been a rumor going around in design circles. That if Adobe pissed off Apple enough that they'd just make their own replacements. And as the odd designer that prefers a Windows machine and detests working on a Mac, I'd totally become an Apple fangirl if it came to that.
There have been discussions in the design world of Apple having the ability to replace the Adobe Creative Suite if Adobe pissed them off enough. If Microsoft was actually dumb/evil/malicious enough to screw over every single graphic designer in the entire world, then I think Apple would totally steal that entire market share in short order.
I'm a designer but hate working with Macs. We all think plenty about Adobe sucks, but their software is so much better than any other graphic design software available on the market they're still our heroes. But I would be come an Apple fangirl in a second if Microsoft tried to replace Adobe design software with their own stuff.
Also, keep in mind that the plan isn't to use it to clean up all the oil. They just want to use it to help protect the Walton County shore-line in Florida. That's a very small fraction of the oil.
Since when is $44,500 poor? That's firmly in the middle class (except for a few areas, and the issues there are mostly because of the cost of housing). I keep hearing all the time about all our "poor" teachers, but that's just a bunch of crap. According to Salary.com, the median pay for an elementary school teacher in the US is $49,384 and the 25th percentile is $40,453.
You can use "TM" without filing an application. All "TM" does is give others notice that you are using this as a trademark. "(R)", on the other hand, can only be used after you have been officially registered with the federal government (state registration isn't enough to be able to use "(R)") and you can get in big trouble if they catch you using it without being federally registered.
Actually, it's been established for decades that they do have the legal right. You own the drawings, but since they own the designs of the cars they have a legal right to dictate how/when the drawings are used. As much as it sucks having to worry about all that stuff, it's been that way for decades.
Imagine I painted a portrait of my uncle and included memorabilia from his youth: A TV guide with Marilyn Monroe, an Elvis record, a Louisville Slugger with the logo prominently displayed, all on the hood of his 1954 Corvette. If I wanted to sell the portrait, I'd technically need permission from TV Guide, the estate of Merilyn Monroe, the estate of Elvis, Elvis's record company, Louisville Slugger, and Ford. Yes, the law is just that complicated.
Actually, since they're making money off of the calendar, fair use doesn't apply. It's not for educational, personal, or news purposes.
This has been common practice for decades. Ford doesn't own the copyright to the actual photographs, but since they do own the copyright to the design of the cars, they can dictate how/when the photos are used.
These guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Ford may still have cracked down, but may have been willing to let it slide. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it's clear that they're using the Ford brand to make their money.
You're right that Ford doesn't claim they own the copyright to the photo. But they do own the copyright to the design of the car. As such, Ford is following decades of precedence.
Once you take a photograph you own the rights to the photograph, but not necessarily to anything in the photograph. The more well known the item and the closer it is to the center of focus (and key draw for sales) the more likely you are to get a cease & desist letter.
They may still have gotten one, but these guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it makes it much harder for them to defend their position.
Keep in mind that photography for news purposes is very different than other purposes. News, in general, falls under fair use. It's hard to report on news without showing pictures of stuff/people.
Traditional commercial undertakings, however, have to play by the rules. Yes, once you take a photograph you own the rights to the photograph, but not necessarily to anything in the photograph. Technically, you would even need permission from your dead grandfather's estate to use a photograph you took of him in some sort of commercial way (if you don't you'll be asking for a lawsuit from Uncle Joe when you make millions off of the photo by using it in some advertisement). Designers/publishers have to worry about this all the time. Sometimes they get permission, sometimes they don't; but the more well known the item and the closer it is to the center of focus (and key draw for sales) the more likely you are to get a cease & desist letter.
They may still have gotten one, but these guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it makes it much harder for them to defend their position.
Indeed. In fact, the big issue is really that the product is being used for commercial purposes. Using photos of your Ford for a money making calendar would be like using pictures of you with celebrities to make money. You own the picture, but they own the usage rights for the product/face.
Levenger lap boards are definitely nice.
But, if you really don't want to shell out the money for one of them, Staples is now selling a very similar board.
What do they have to gain? What every good editor wants, eyeballs. The more eyeballs the more they can charge for ads. To do that, editors post what people will read. The Slashdot readers hate Verizon, so they want to read articles giving them even more justification for hating Verizon.
Also, though, I think they keep posting articles about how crappy Verizon is because there's no such article about good things Verizon has done. The editors "motive" for hating Verizon is probably for the same reason as the rest of us, they've dealt with Verizon.
From personal experience I will say that Verizon is worse than the IRS. A couple years ago I had to deal with both the IRS and Verizon at the same time. I forgot to send in a worksheet with my taxes, so I had to spend time on the phone trying to get that worksheet to the right location so they could give me my credit. Don't get me wrong, the IRS is a pain and the left hand doesn't know what the right hand was doing. But everyone was nice and did everything they personally had power to do. We finally got my taxes straightened out.
At the same time, I was moving and signed up with Verizon for telephone and internet service. I signed up about a month ahead of time and asked them to activate my land line phone service and DSL the same day I moved in. That was a nightmare. First, the phone service connection was a couple days late. Then, when I went to hook up to the internet I discovered they had never actually set up the DSL. I found the email with the confirmation number and called about the problem. The service rep asked me for my phone number and then told me there was no record of ordering DSL. When I asked her about my confirmation number, can she try looking up my order through that, I was told that she couldn't look up anything with the confirmation number. Basically, the confirmation number does NOTHING except make me feel good, until I call and try to use it to prove confirmation. So I spoke to higher-ups about the problem and was told, "Oh, we're sorry, we'll have it set up in a couple days." A couple days go by and still no DSL. I call again and am told there was a communication problem and it will be just a few more days. Still no DSL! The last person I talk to says, "What? It's impossible to get DSL set up that fast. The last person you spoke with lied to you [yes, he really said "lied"]. It takes about two weeks to set up DSL." So, I finally got DSL about a month after the originally "confirmed" installation date.
Then, to finish it off, when I moved from my apartment after I year I had them disconnect the phone line. Well, the line got disconnected (I tried it, I couldn't make a phone call) but the next month I got a bill for DSL. For the month AFTER the phone line was disconnected! It actually took some time to convince the service rep that I couldn't have DSL after my phone line was disconnected, but FINALLY, they agreed to "refund" us. Yes, after all that, we still had to pay the stupid bill and wait for them to send us a reimbursement check!
I have sworn off Verizon for good. THAT is why people hate Verizon.
Slashdot Mirror
As the homeschooling parent of a 5 year old we have learned this first hand. We stumbled upon a set of books called Life of Fred that are "story books" that incorporate math. They were written by a math professor tired getting students that didn't know math and thought it was "hard". He incorporates basic algebra using x from almost the very beginning. They cover many topics that most think of as "advanced math" in simple, natural ways. As the story unfolds Fred has to use math in a variety of situations. It shows that math is practical and teaches it in an accessible way. Even better, the stories are silly and ridiculous and fun for all ages.
My argument was that wearing Google Glass does not by default make it distracting. Here in Florida, the law is no texting except at a stop light, but GPS is still allowed. I think that's a reasonable middle ground. I understand that Google Glass would make it more difficult to know what someone is up to, but there are also non-distracting ways it could be used. Mostly, though, I live on a planet where I prefer laws be implemented AFTER there is a clear and present danger. I don't like laws made from guesswork. Someone that causes an accident while using Google Glass can easily be prosecuted using existing laws. And once there are enough Google Glass wearers out there that our law enforcement can come back and say, "Look, we're seeing this particular problem that needs resolved," THEN the lawmakers can pass something.
Of course, a text message is only a distraction so long as it's turned on. Ideally there would be a "driving" mode, where you only get specifically selected alerts. For instance, I would only want GPS and emergency alerts while driving.
Doesn't work that way you have to look into the screen, it sits above your FOV. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
It *IS* distracted driving.
Okay. I watched the video. So you're right, it wouldn't be superimposed on the road. The question is, how much would your eyes actually have to move to see the content and how much can easily be seen with peripheral vision. It still seems like less of a distraction than external GPS.
From one of the previous conversations, I understand that Google Glass does not really have useful GPS navigation yet. However, I would think GPS built into Google Glass and superimposed on the actual road would be significantly safer than shifting your eyes to glance at the GPS regularly.
Why not offer incentives to bring American workers to the area?
If you like Wordpress I strongly recommend The Events Calendar Pro http://tri.be/shop/wordpress-e.... It's both powerful and easy to use. It's not free but makes up for it in the time you'll save. There are plenty of plug-ins available to make it do exactly what you want it to do. I'm a designer, not a programmer, so I'm always looking for the simplest and most cost-effective web solutions.
"At present, it is unknown who developed the hijacked version of Simurgh, or why they did so."
The obvious answer would be that it was created to spy on dissidents and the like.
I just switched to diigo.com. And you can import your Delicious bookmarks into it.
I've also just imported everything to diigo.com. I'm guessing a lot of people are doing that today because it took about 3 hours for everything to upload from my exported file (and still waiting on tags). So far I like it because I can choose "private" as the default setting.
That's been a rumor going around in design circles. That if Adobe pissed off Apple enough that they'd just make their own replacements. And as the odd designer that prefers a Windows machine and detests working on a Mac, I'd totally become an Apple fangirl if it came to that.
There have been discussions in the design world of Apple having the ability to replace the Adobe Creative Suite if Adobe pissed them off enough. If Microsoft was actually dumb/evil/malicious enough to screw over every single graphic designer in the entire world, then I think Apple would totally steal that entire market share in short order. I'm a designer but hate working with Macs. We all think plenty about Adobe sucks, but their software is so much better than any other graphic design software available on the market they're still our heroes. But I would be come an Apple fangirl in a second if Microsoft tried to replace Adobe design software with their own stuff.
Parent is correct. No matter if the comments are from the left or right of the political spectrum, they all seem to be on inane idiots on the fringes.
Also, keep in mind that the plan isn't to use it to clean up all the oil. They just want to use it to help protect the Walton County shore-line in Florida. That's a very small fraction of the oil.
And in 2007 it received the Euler Book Prize by the Mathematical Association of America.
Since when is $44,500 poor? That's firmly in the middle class (except for a few areas, and the issues there are mostly because of the cost of housing). I keep hearing all the time about all our "poor" teachers, but that's just a bunch of crap. According to Salary.com, the median pay for an elementary school teacher in the US is $49,384 and the 25th percentile is $40,453.
You can use "TM" without filing an application. All "TM" does is give others notice that you are using this as a trademark. "(R)", on the other hand, can only be used after you have been officially registered with the federal government (state registration isn't enough to be able to use "(R)") and you can get in big trouble if they catch you using it without being federally registered.
Actually, it's been established for decades that they do have the legal right. You own the drawings, but since they own the designs of the cars they have a legal right to dictate how/when the drawings are used. As much as it sucks having to worry about all that stuff, it's been that way for decades. Imagine I painted a portrait of my uncle and included memorabilia from his youth: A TV guide with Marilyn Monroe, an Elvis record, a Louisville Slugger with the logo prominently displayed, all on the hood of his 1954 Corvette. If I wanted to sell the portrait, I'd technically need permission from TV Guide, the estate of Merilyn Monroe, the estate of Elvis, Elvis's record company, Louisville Slugger, and Ford. Yes, the law is just that complicated.
Actually, since they're making money off of the calendar, fair use doesn't apply. It's not for educational, personal, or news purposes. This has been common practice for decades. Ford doesn't own the copyright to the actual photographs, but since they do own the copyright to the design of the cars, they can dictate how/when the photos are used. These guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Ford may still have cracked down, but may have been willing to let it slide. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it's clear that they're using the Ford brand to make their money.
You're right that Ford doesn't claim they own the copyright to the photo. But they do own the copyright to the design of the car. As such, Ford is following decades of precedence. Once you take a photograph you own the rights to the photograph, but not necessarily to anything in the photograph. The more well known the item and the closer it is to the center of focus (and key draw for sales) the more likely you are to get a cease & desist letter. They may still have gotten one, but these guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it makes it much harder for them to defend their position.
Keep in mind that photography for news purposes is very different than other purposes. News, in general, falls under fair use. It's hard to report on news without showing pictures of stuff/people. Traditional commercial undertakings, however, have to play by the rules. Yes, once you take a photograph you own the rights to the photograph, but not necessarily to anything in the photograph. Technically, you would even need permission from your dead grandfather's estate to use a photograph you took of him in some sort of commercial way (if you don't you'll be asking for a lawsuit from Uncle Joe when you make millions off of the photo by using it in some advertisement). Designers/publishers have to worry about this all the time. Sometimes they get permission, sometimes they don't; but the more well known the item and the closer it is to the center of focus (and key draw for sales) the more likely you are to get a cease & desist letter. They may still have gotten one, but these guys would have been much safer if they had been showcasing their hot girlfriends/wives with the cars in the background. Since the photographs are clearly focusing on the cars it makes it much harder for them to defend their position.
Indeed. In fact, the big issue is really that the product is being used for commercial purposes. Using photos of your Ford for a money making calendar would be like using pictures of you with celebrities to make money. You own the picture, but they own the usage rights for the product/face.
Levenger lap boards are definitely nice. But, if you really don't want to shell out the money for one of them, Staples is now selling a very similar board.
What do they have to gain? What every good editor wants, eyeballs. The more eyeballs the more they can charge for ads. To do that, editors post what people will read. The Slashdot readers hate Verizon, so they want to read articles giving them even more justification for hating Verizon.
Also, though, I think they keep posting articles about how crappy Verizon is because there's no such article about good things Verizon has done. The editors "motive" for hating Verizon is probably for the same reason as the rest of us, they've dealt with Verizon.
From personal experience I will say that Verizon is worse than the IRS. A couple years ago I had to deal with both the IRS and Verizon at the same time. I forgot to send in a worksheet with my taxes, so I had to spend time on the phone trying to get that worksheet to the right location so they could give me my credit. Don't get me wrong, the IRS is a pain and the left hand doesn't know what the right hand was doing. But everyone was nice and did everything they personally had power to do. We finally got my taxes straightened out.
At the same time, I was moving and signed up with Verizon for telephone and internet service. I signed up about a month ahead of time and asked them to activate my land line phone service and DSL the same day I moved in. That was a nightmare. First, the phone service connection was a couple days late. Then, when I went to hook up to the internet I discovered they had never actually set up the DSL. I found the email with the confirmation number and called about the problem. The service rep asked me for my phone number and then told me there was no record of ordering DSL. When I asked her about my confirmation number, can she try looking up my order through that, I was told that she couldn't look up anything with the confirmation number. Basically, the confirmation number does NOTHING except make me feel good, until I call and try to use it to prove confirmation. So I spoke to higher-ups about the problem and was told, "Oh, we're sorry, we'll have it set up in a couple days." A couple days go by and still no DSL. I call again and am told there was a communication problem and it will be just a few more days. Still no DSL! The last person I talk to says, "What? It's impossible to get DSL set up that fast. The last person you spoke with lied to you [yes, he really said "lied"]. It takes about two weeks to set up DSL." So, I finally got DSL about a month after the originally "confirmed" installation date.
Then, to finish it off, when I moved from my apartment after I year I had them disconnect the phone line. Well, the line got disconnected (I tried it, I couldn't make a phone call) but the next month I got a bill for DSL. For the month AFTER the phone line was disconnected! It actually took some time to convince the service rep that I couldn't have DSL after my phone line was disconnected, but FINALLY, they agreed to "refund" us. Yes, after all that, we still had to pay the stupid bill and wait for them to send us a reimbursement check!
I have sworn off Verizon for good. THAT is why people hate Verizon.
I'm sorry. I was actually coming back by today to mention it was only a $250,000 fine. I misread it the first time.