"Post 1913 we can clearly see what happens in a democracy with the effective restraint on spending removed."
You become the richest most powerful country in the history of the world? Seriously, I can't imagine the US economy being even remotely as diverse and large as it is without 100 years of massive government spending on everything from a national road network to the development of computers.
I hear morale in the Stasi was pretty low immediately after the wall came down and revelations about exactly how pervasive their surveillance had been began leaking out too..
I'm currently research faculty at a large public university in California, with about 90% of my work funded by the NIH. When I was hired I had to sign something saying the University holds some intellectual property rights to anything I *patent* which was developed using university resources. Likewise the NIH requires me to report any patents or income derived from projectes they've funded (I'm not sure what happens if I do patent something - the kind of research I do doesn't lead to patents or income). However I retain exclusive *copyright* on anything I author, regardless of funding source or which university I work for. So if a given research project led to a patent and two papers, I could not give or sell the rights to the patent without involving both the university and whichever agency funded the research, but I am free to give away or otherwise reassign copyright on the papers without needing to talk to anyone else first. As a minor sidenote, the US is also a signatory to the Bearne convention on copyright, which means no matter what I sign with respect to copyright, I retain the "moral right" to be identified as the author of the paper, just the same as the Beatles might have signed away copyright to all their songs but retain an inalienable right to be identified as the authors of that music.
One thing I've heard is that a lot of the contracts between professional societies and publishers tend to be long term - in the 25 year+ range - so the prestgious 'Journal of X', compeltely owned by the 'Society for the Study of X' is still tied into a contract with 'Asshole publisher Y' which was signed before the internet was a 'real' way of doing academic business. Hence we can expect to see a lot of journals abruptly becoming open access and web only as those contracts expire.
Looks like you're right. I had a paper accepted by an Elsevier Journal in October and did the copyright stuff about a week ago. The form I received had the following radio buttons, which was what made me think other governments had carved out similar agreements. But a few minutes googling says this is just about who owns the copyright, not whether elsevier has to open access it after x months.
We are all US Government employees and there is no copyright to transfer I am US Government employee but some of my co-authors are not I am not a US Government employee but some of my co-authors are The work was performed by contractors of the US Government under contract number: [textbox] We are all UK Government employees electing to transfer copyright We are all UK, Canadian or Australian Government employees and Crown Copyright is claimed I am claiming Crown Copyright but some of my co-authors are not employees of the UK, Canadian or Australian Government I am not claiming Crown Copyright but some of my co-authors are employees of the UK, Canadian or Australian Government
That's actually kind of what's happened. The US Government now requires all journals to make any paper funded by US tax dollars freely accessible to everyone within 12 months of publication. There's similar agreements in the EU, Britain, and Australia. When you do the copyright paperwork after a maunscript is accepted one of the things you incldue is the grant numbers that funded it so the journal knows whether they have to open-access it or not. The US agreement went into force in about 2007 from memory.
It's not about just 'getting your work out' - it's about the fact that the university who decides whether you get tenure or post-tenure promotions still does so partially on the basis of how many publications you have in peer-reviewed journals, and how high the impact factor of those journals is. My institution literally has a tenure requirements document that says "at least 3 papers published in journals from this list of high-impact journals, or at least 5 in this other list of lower-impact journals'. So it's publish in those journals or lose your job when you fail to get tenure. So you sign whatever the journal wants you to sign if you get a paper accepted there, no matter how stupid the terms. What needs to change is universities removing journals who abuse everyone from those magic lists, so we can all safely ignore them.
"There is nothing which so generally strikes the imagination, and engages the affections of mankind, as the right of property, or that sole and despotic dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in total exclusion of the right of any other individual in the universe." (Blackstone, 1766 Commentaries on the Laws of England: Volume II of the Rights of Things
In a lot of disciplines, the most prestegious journals are actually owned by scholarly societies, and are published under contract with publishers. 'Science' is the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 'Addiction' (the highest impact journal in my own field) is the journal of the British Society for the Study of Addiction., but is published under contract by Wiley. In other words, publishers *don't* actually "hold the prestige".
A lot of the contracts between scolarly societies and publishers are 25 year kind of things, and were signed long before open access was a thing. But for a lot of journals those contracts are coming towards their end, and I suspect in the next decade we'll see increasing numbers of high impact journals go open access as a consequence.
I stopped using chrome when google started getting *creepy* about trying to get you to link your youtube and other accounts to each other. Now I'm slowly migrating each thing I use google for to other providers or to my own servers (each service to a different provider, so if one of them turns out to be particularly inept or Evil I only have one thing to get out of their clutches). In 1997 I started using google for search; well before 2017 I'd like to be able to say that's the only thing I use them for.
I like how they describe SAPs customers as an industry (automobiles) which struggles, and a specifc company (HP) which outright sucks. If correlation was causation I'd say buying SAP is how you destroy a company.
I think the point of the PubMed Commons pilot is to experiment with providing a forum where "the kinds of mistakes my undergrads pickup in journal clubs" *do* get shared.
You could argue that the US introduced non-stop realtime war porn during the first gulf war. I'm kind of surprised that it's taken this long for other entities to catch up to the propaganda possibilities of doing the same, particularly given how cheap it's become.
The Northern Territory of Australia use to have no maximum speed limit. I remember hearing an interview on the radio with the chief of polcie which went something like "Yeah, we love it, you can get from Darwin to Tennant Creek (nearly 1000km, or 600 miles for the Liberians and Americans reading) in 5 hours.. but if we see you doing 160 (100 mph) in the rain at night in an area with a lot of water buffaloes out on the road we'll pull you over and bust you for dangerous driving for your own safety".
My point is, if you're driving down the highway playing with a painted block of wood instead of paying attention and driving, there's plenty of things the cops can bust you for other than texting. Videoing the entire process and subsequent encounter with the cops and being able to prove to the judge that you "weren't texting" isn't going to save you.
In fact, 30 seconds googling shows in New York state the maximum fine for texting is 'only' $150, whereas the maximum fine for reckless driving is $300.
"Then, how do I, as a poor inventor without the means to implement my invention, how would I be rewarded for revealing my invention to the world?"
You license the right to use the protected invention. My father patented an improvement to a piece of mining equipment in the 1970s in Australia; I remember my mother doing the drawings for the patent application on the kitchen table. A couple of years later a large Japanese firm who made said equipment contacted him about it, and their lawyers and a lawyer my father hired for the purpose hammered out a licensing-with-royalties agreement which lasted for the remaining life of the patent. He never 'sold' the patent, and the license he granted that particular company was not exclusive, so he could easily have entered into similar licensing deals with other manufacturers. ie he was most definitely financially rewarded for releasing his invention to the world, despite not having the resources to actually manufacture or otherwise directly exploit his invention, and none of this required him to sell the patent.
The only even semi-legitimate reason to buy a patent is if you want to make sure no competitor can ever use the patent while you're exploiting it (by refusing to license it to anyone else), and to make sure any possible extension to the life of the protection offered by the patent in your jurisdiction is taken up (which some backyard inventor like my father might slip up on).
And sorry, didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong with not having used GIS data before; it does take some time to really work it out. And quick-and-dirty apps like this one are indeed a good way to give people a way to play around (or even do something useful) without needing to know what a projection is or whatnot.
"but few people know how to integrate this data into their applications" they're *shapefiles* for crying out loud. You know, probably the single most widely used format for the exchange of static GIS data? Easily loaded into postgis or converted to whatever format you prefer? The only people who don't know how to integrate this data into their applications are people who have never looked into integrating any GIS data into their applications.
"This year [2008], the government-watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste named Grassley the fourth biggest GOP earmarker. The senator has proven himself a champion spender of other people’s money." http://spectator.org/archives/2008/06/10/chuck-grassley-king-of-pork
Slashdot Mirror
"Post 1913 we can clearly see what happens in a democracy with the effective restraint on spending removed."
You become the richest most powerful country in the history of the world? Seriously, I can't imagine the US economy being even remotely as diverse and large as it is without 100 years of massive government spending on everything from a national road network to the development of computers.
I hear morale in the Stasi was pretty low immediately after the wall came down and revelations about exactly how pervasive their surveillance had been began leaking out too..
I'm currently research faculty at a large public university in California, with about 90% of my work funded by the NIH. When I was hired I had to sign something saying the University holds some intellectual property rights to anything I *patent* which was developed using university resources. Likewise the NIH requires me to report any patents or income derived from projectes they've funded (I'm not sure what happens if I do patent something - the kind of research I do doesn't lead to patents or income). However I retain exclusive *copyright* on anything I author, regardless of funding source or which university I work for. So if a given research project led to a patent and two papers, I could not give or sell the rights to the patent without involving both the university and whichever agency funded the research, but I am free to give away or otherwise reassign copyright on the papers without needing to talk to anyone else first. As a minor sidenote, the US is also a signatory to the Bearne convention on copyright, which means no matter what I sign with respect to copyright, I retain the "moral right" to be identified as the author of the paper, just the same as the Beatles might have signed away copyright to all their songs but retain an inalienable right to be identified as the authors of that music.
One thing I've heard is that a lot of the contracts between professional societies and publishers tend to be long term - in the 25 year+ range - so the prestgious 'Journal of X', compeltely owned by the 'Society for the Study of X' is still tied into a contract with 'Asshole publisher Y' which was signed before the internet was a 'real' way of doing academic business. Hence we can expect to see a lot of journals abruptly becoming open access and web only as those contracts expire.
Looks like you're right. I had a paper accepted by an Elsevier Journal in October and did the copyright stuff about a week ago. The form I received had the following radio buttons, which was what made me think other governments had carved out similar agreements. But a few minutes googling says this is just about who owns the copyright, not whether elsevier has to open access it after x months.
We are all US Government employees and there is no copyright to transfer
I am US Government employee but some of my co-authors are not
I am not a US Government employee but some of my co-authors are
The work was performed by contractors of the US Government under contract number: [textbox]
We are all UK Government employees electing to transfer copyright
We are all UK, Canadian or Australian Government employees and Crown Copyright is claimed
I am claiming Crown Copyright but some of my co-authors are not employees of the UK, Canadian or Australian Government
I am not claiming Crown Copyright but some of my co-authors are employees of the UK, Canadian or Australian Government
That's actually kind of what's happened. The US Government now requires all journals to make any paper funded by US tax dollars freely accessible to everyone within 12 months of publication. There's similar agreements in the EU, Britain, and Australia. When you do the copyright paperwork after a maunscript is accepted one of the things you incldue is the grant numbers that funded it so the journal knows whether they have to open-access it or not. The US agreement went into force in about 2007 from memory.
It's not about just 'getting your work out' - it's about the fact that the university who decides whether you get tenure or post-tenure promotions still does so partially on the basis of how many publications you have in peer-reviewed journals, and how high the impact factor of those journals is. My institution literally has a tenure requirements document that says "at least 3 papers published in journals from this list of high-impact journals, or at least 5 in this other list of lower-impact journals'. So it's publish in those journals or lose your job when you fail to get tenure. So you sign whatever the journal wants you to sign if you get a paper accepted there, no matter how stupid the terms. What needs to change is universities removing journals who abuse everyone from those magic lists, so we can all safely ignore them.
Don't give the bastards ideas!
Phase I-III are needed for treatments. FDA regulation of tests is different and considerably milder.
"There is nothing which so generally strikes the imagination, and engages the affections of mankind, as the right of property, or that sole and despotic dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in total exclusion of the right of any other individual in the universe." (Blackstone, 1766 Commentaries on the Laws of England: Volume II of the Rights of Things
In a lot of disciplines, the most prestegious journals are actually owned by scholarly societies, and are published under contract with publishers. 'Science' is the journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 'Addiction' (the highest impact journal in my own field) is the journal of the British Society for the Study of Addiction., but is published under contract by Wiley. In other words, publishers *don't* actually "hold the prestige".
A lot of the contracts between scolarly societies and publishers are 25 year kind of things, and were signed long before open access was a thing. But for a lot of journals those contracts are coming towards their end, and I suspect in the next decade we'll see increasing numbers of high impact journals go open access as a consequence.
I stopped using chrome when google started getting *creepy* about trying to get you to link your youtube and other accounts to each other. Now I'm slowly migrating each thing I use google for to other providers or to my own servers (each service to a different provider, so if one of them turns out to be particularly inept or Evil I only have one thing to get out of their clutches). In 1997 I started using google for search; well before 2017 I'd like to be able to say that's the only thing I use them for.
I like how they describe SAPs customers as an industry (automobiles) which struggles, and a specifc company (HP) which outright sucks. If correlation was causation I'd say buying SAP is how you destroy a company.
I think the point of the PubMed Commons pilot is to experiment with providing a forum where "the kinds of mistakes my undergrads pickup in journal clubs" *do* get shared.
You could argue that the US introduced non-stop realtime war porn during the first gulf war. I'm kind of surprised that it's taken this long for other entities to catch up to the propaganda possibilities of doing the same, particularly given how cheap it's become.
The Northern Territory of Australia use to have no maximum speed limit. I remember hearing an interview on the radio with the chief of polcie which went something like "Yeah, we love it, you can get from Darwin to Tennant Creek (nearly 1000km, or 600 miles for the Liberians and Americans reading) in 5 hours .. but if we see you doing 160 (100 mph) in the rain at night in an area with a lot of water buffaloes out on the road we'll pull you over and bust you for dangerous driving for your own safety".
My point is, if you're driving down the highway playing with a painted block of wood instead of paying attention and driving, there's plenty of things the cops can bust you for other than texting. Videoing the entire process and subsequent encounter with the cops and being able to prove to the judge that you "weren't texting" isn't going to save you.
In fact, 30 seconds googling shows in New York state the maximum fine for texting is 'only' $150, whereas the maximum fine for reckless driving is $300.
Well that's my boss in a nutshell. So to speak.
That's a liability not an asset - disposing of ewaste is expensive.
"Then, how do I, as a poor inventor without the means to implement my invention, how would I be rewarded for revealing my invention to the world?"
You license the right to use the protected invention. My father patented an improvement to a piece of mining equipment in the 1970s in Australia; I remember my mother doing the drawings for the patent application on the kitchen table. A couple of years later a large Japanese firm who made said equipment contacted him about it, and their lawyers and a lawyer my father hired for the purpose hammered out a licensing-with-royalties agreement which lasted for the remaining life of the patent. He never 'sold' the patent, and the license he granted that particular company was not exclusive, so he could easily have entered into similar licensing deals with other manufacturers. ie he was most definitely financially rewarded for releasing his invention to the world, despite not having the resources to actually manufacture or otherwise directly exploit his invention, and none of this required him to sell the patent.
The only even semi-legitimate reason to buy a patent is if you want to make sure no competitor can ever use the patent while you're exploiting it (by refusing to license it to anyone else), and to make sure any possible extension to the life of the protection offered by the patent in your jurisdiction is taken up (which some backyard inventor like my father might slip up on).
And sorry, didn't mean to imply that there was anything wrong with not having used GIS data before; it does take some time to really work it out. And quick-and-dirty apps like this one are indeed a good way to give people a way to play around (or even do something useful) without needing to know what a projection is or whatnot.
"but few people know how to integrate this data into their applications" they're *shapefiles* for crying out loud. You know, probably the single most widely used format for the exchange of static GIS data? Easily loaded into postgis or converted to whatever format you prefer? The only people who don't know how to integrate this data into their applications are people who have never looked into integrating any GIS data into their applications.
"This year [2008], the government-watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste named Grassley the fourth biggest GOP earmarker. The senator has proven himself a champion spender of other people’s money." http://spectator.org/archives/2008/06/10/chuck-grassley-king-of-pork
Two words..Spray paint.
The first one, mate.
It does if someone who signed it wins a war against them. The losers get charged with whatever the winners want.