I just meant covered in the general sense. That the terms of the copyright law mention public performance. Sorry for the confusion. There are actually a labyrinthine set of rules covering public performance, like how many speakers can be in your business establishment if you're playing a CD, and how big the screen at your sports bar can be. My point is the same as yours. Mozart is "thoroughly dead," so we can perform his music to our hearts' content.:-)
I think you mean sociology, or (gasp) political "science." Psychology is as rigorous a science as I have seen, and I'm an engineer. I'm talking about true research-oriented, scientific-method-following psychology, not the crap that Freud and friends studied a century ago. That was philosophy, or just plain garbage. Today's psychologists run controlled experiments; they postulate a hypothesis, run a controlled experiment, gather and analyze data, draw conclusions, publish results, repeat experiments, and review their peers. There's not a definition of science around that would exclude psychology in that form. Yet so many colleges still only have BA programs for it, rather than BS. That's a crock. They end up knowing more about statistics and the scientific method than their engineer counterparts.
Well, in the US, Copyright law covers public performace of a work under copyright. You may not perform a work publicly without the permission of the copyright owner. But the "work" in question would be a musical composition by Mozart that has long since fallen into public domain, not the specific editions offered here. The only reason these publishers get to claim copyright on their publications of PD compositions are:
1) actual "editions," that is, changes to the music based on new manuscripts, musicological study, correcting obvious errors, or an editor's penchant for adding slurs and dynamics (ugh).
2) the typesetting of the work is a creative process that involves a certain amount of talent, and is not just a reproduction of the PD composition. So the actual look and feel of the notes and staves and page breaks is copyrightable.
3) arrangements/settings/orchestrations. That is beyond the scope of this discussion.
In case 1) a performance might be considered a "derivative work," but I can find no case law to support that. At any rate, it would be pushing the definition of "derivative work" since "public performance" is already covered separately. Besides, if the piece were memorized and performed from memory, how could you prove what edition was used to memorize from.
In case 2) I see no way that the copyright holder could demand that the work not be performed publicly from their typesetting. That is simply absurd, and I have never heard of a publisher making such stipulations (and I have performed in hundreds of concerts).
Anyway, I have been working for a while now to get the complete Mozart string quartets in Lilypond format and share them on Musipedia and other places, but I guess there's no point in continuing that work now, is there?:) oh well.
In true quantum cryptography, you cannot use a repeater. This is due to the Observer Effect. By measuring the quantum state of a particle, you change it. A professor explained it to me back in the 90s, but I can't remember all the details.
How else should our conflicting claims on our joint property be decided?
How about in a manner that respects the Bill of Rights? Very clearly, it states that the right of people to peacably assemble shall not be abridged. Last time I checked it doesn't say "as long as you're on private property." Of course you can assemble on private property. The Assembly Clause was written specifically to make sure that everybody understood that freedom was not to be restricted, not even by local governments. The Supreme Court has upheld that interpretation.
It's not just you. But we are definitely in the minority here in the good old United States of Whatever. People just don't care that their rights are being eroded, not even the civil rights advocates of yore. They don't care that the government is looking for ways to keep people from protesting. Most people can't even name 5 protections granted by the bill of rights, much less something as "obscure" as the right to peacably assemble.
Damned statist brain-washers and their sheep. "Baaaa, I guess we need permits to show up aaaaat City Hall," or "Baaaaa, I guess it's OK for the TSA to search people with no probaaaable cause," or "Baaaaa, I guess whoever our Fearless Leader says is a terrorist shouldn't haaaaave the right of habeas corpus."
Fuck that. Before you know it, you won't be able to get the "permit" unless you waive the right to sue if the cops happen to open fire on you with one of these "less than lethal" devices.
Re:Do other countries spy agencies do the same thi
on
Open Source Spying
·
· Score: 1
Parent must be an example of what happens when the "social software" is actually MySpace. Maybe it's called SpySpace.
ha ha. true enough. I posted AC for a long time before I owned up to my geekiness. I could have had a 5 digit UID... oh well. I pick on my bro, because he prefers Digg. *gasp*
makes me think of the Far Side cartoon where there's a switch next to the call attendant button that says "WINGS STAY ON/WINGS FALL OFF" or something like that.
At least in GE's implementation of Six Sigma. They found a way to take what is essentially the engineering version of the scientific process, wrap it in so much red tape that it is unworkable (a 12-step process that really had 15 steps) , and put it in the hands of every worker in the company. Originally they gave bonuses for doing it, but eventually they took those away and declared "Thou shalt not get a raise without a Six Sigma Project." What ended up happening is that people refused to make any process or product improvements unless they were part of somebody's (preferably their own) Six Sigma project.
It was ridiculous. You ended up with one person optimizing a part of a process, while the person in the next cubicle was eliminating the entire process in favor of a more unwieldy one. Then, six months later, somebody else would start a new project that essentially put the original process back in place. Of course the problem was that they were using a distinctly product-oriented procedure, and trying to use it to solve process problems.
Don't even get me started on the math. They would assume normal distributions for everything. Never mind that one of the steps was to prove normalcy. If that test proved it wasn't normal, you were instructed by your "Black Belt" to assume normalcy anyway -- even if a Weibull distribution was clearly the correct choice (like in timed exercises). Idiots, I say. And then they had PHB's (called "Black Belts" and "Master Black Belts") trying to tell engineers how to do math, when they didn't even know how to use a simple Q test. If they saw a data point that didn't support their theory, they just called it an outlier, and deleted it.
You'd think after nearly two years of not working at GE, I wouldn't get so wound up about it. I guess as an engineer, it really gets my goat when people use math improperly.
Excellent point. I wonder how different a place Greece and Rome would have been if their slaves were given even some fraction of a vote. but I digress.:)
My mom was a teacher for many years. I don't think of them as "them". I don't think anybody should have to sign a release to be filmed. How would news corps ever make exposés without the "hidden camera"? This is the same sort of situation. Look, the ubiquity of video is a good thing in the hands of the people. Rather than banning it, they should turn the tables and arm the teachers with video as well. Problem solved. Kid's who bait teachers will get in trouble for baiting. Teachers who yell unprovoked will get in trouble. And after a few rounds of that sort of thing, people will start acting civil. It's a pity that people don't act civil to begin with, but that's life.
I hope so... but this guy had come out of a long retirement, and continually went on rants like this in class. At first we thought he was joking, but when he forcibly removed our calculators, we began to suspect he was for real. If it was a put on, it was a great one! That being said, I learned a lot in that class. I would have gotten an A, except I was sneezing so bad during mid-terms that I couldn't tell my x's from my y's. Damned oak pollen!:(
I completely agree that people need to know the basics. I tutor from time to time. I had a special needs kid who didn't realize that 10 was smaller than 10000000. I never let her near a calculator. We had to get the basics down. Estimation. Order of magnitude. Number lines. Oddly, she was an ace with negative numbers. Go figure.
One thing that's funny is that in my career (engineering), the rote and mechanical actions also include figuring out the algebra and calculus. Sure I could do a shell integral to find a volume, but my calculator does it so much faster. Setting up the integral/equation/etc. is the human part.
Intruding privacy? What? Wasn't the episode in a school classroom? I must be missing something, because all over the article, they make it sound like it's somehow illegal for kids to take videos in their classrooms. From the article:
"'The teacher will be the master of his class -- a closed class and confidential,'"
"School officials called police after learning that students had posted a video of an enraged teacher from the school on YouTube."
"Kerry Houlahan said she is concerned about how easily images can be taken and manipulated without a person knowing."
They're clearly setting the kids up to be the devils in all this (they might be). In the US, though, the argument would be the other way around. The parents would be the ones calling the police for verbally abusing kids. I haven't seen the video in question, but it seems completely backwards that everybody is taking the teacher's side in this. What's next, are you going to tell me I can't take a picture of a cop giving me a ticket? I don't like where this is going. We've already brainwashed our children into giving away so many of their other rights... this just seems a little scary.
Yes, you're right of course. But people stuck in the cycle of minimum wage jobs probably lump all the employers together. I have been blessed not to be in that group, but I'd imagine they see it as a non-choice.
How different is Roman slave labor from minimum wage labor? Does our Republic really work that much better than theirs? We cannot know, because we weren't there.
I just read an interesting bit of the Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy, and it talks about eliminating poverty by eliminating the need for menial jobs. It mentions Aristotle's argument that once the loom can run itself, we do not need slaves. Until technology becomes sufficiently advanced, we will always need people to do the shit-work. One of the few differences in our society, is the laborers get to decide which shit-work to do.
It says the pastor lied when asked about the incident. I think the students should follow him around singing that ever-so-fun song (to the tune of Frère Jacques):
Revelations, Revelations twenty-one eight, twenty-one eight: "Liars go to hell, liars go to hell." BURN! BURN! BURN! BURN! BURN! BURN!
Does anybody else remember that song from Sunday school? It was always one of my favorites.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks. I wasn't 100% sure I was right. Like I said, it was a long time ago that I attended that lecture.
I just meant covered in the general sense. That the terms of the copyright law mention public performance. Sorry for the confusion. There are actually a labyrinthine set of rules covering public performance, like how many speakers can be in your business establishment if you're playing a CD, and how big the screen at your sports bar can be. :-)
My point is the same as yours. Mozart is "thoroughly dead," so we can perform his music to our hearts' content.
I think you mean sociology, or (gasp) political "science." Psychology is as rigorous a science as I have seen, and I'm an engineer. I'm talking about true research-oriented, scientific-method-following psychology, not the crap that Freud and friends studied a century ago. That was philosophy, or just plain garbage. Today's psychologists run controlled experiments; they postulate a hypothesis, run a controlled experiment, gather and analyze data, draw conclusions, publish results, repeat experiments, and review their peers. There's not a definition of science around that would exclude psychology in that form. Yet so many colleges still only have BA programs for it, rather than BS. That's a crock. They end up knowing more about statistics and the scientific method than their engineer counterparts.
Well, in the US, Copyright law covers public performace of a work under copyright. You may not perform a work publicly without the permission of the copyright owner. But the "work" in question would be a musical composition by Mozart that has long since fallen into public domain, not the specific editions offered here. The only reason these publishers get to claim copyright on their publications of PD compositions are:
:) oh well.
1) actual "editions," that is, changes to the music based on new manuscripts, musicological study, correcting obvious errors, or an editor's penchant for adding slurs and dynamics (ugh).
2) the typesetting of the work is a creative process that involves a certain amount of talent, and is not just a reproduction of the PD composition. So the actual look and feel of the notes and staves and page breaks is copyrightable.
3) arrangements/settings/orchestrations. That is beyond the scope of this discussion.
In case 1) a performance might be considered a "derivative work," but I can find no case law to support that. At any rate, it would be pushing the definition of "derivative work" since "public performance" is already covered separately. Besides, if the piece were memorized and performed from memory, how could you prove what edition was used to memorize from.
In case 2) I see no way that the copyright holder could demand that the work not be performed publicly from their typesetting. That is simply absurd, and I have never heard of a publisher making such stipulations (and I have performed in hundreds of concerts).
Anyway, I have been working for a while now to get the complete Mozart string quartets in Lilypond format and share them on Musipedia and other places, but I guess there's no point in continuing that work now, is there?
In true quantum cryptography, you cannot use a repeater. This is due to the Observer Effect. By measuring the quantum state of a particle, you change it. A professor explained it to me back in the 90s, but I can't remember all the details.
How about in a manner that respects the Bill of Rights? Very clearly, it states that the right of people to peacably assemble shall not be abridged. Last time I checked it doesn't say "as long as you're on private property." Of course you can assemble on private property. The Assembly Clause was written specifically to make sure that everybody understood that freedom was not to be restricted, not even by local governments. The Supreme Court has upheld that interpretation.
Damned statist brain-washers and their sheep. "Baaaa, I guess we need permits to show up aaaaat City Hall," or "Baaaaa, I guess it's OK for the TSA to search people with no probaaaable cause," or "Baaaaa, I guess whoever our Fearless Leader says is a terrorist shouldn't haaaaave the right of habeas corpus."
Fuck that. Before you know it, you won't be able to get the "permit" unless you waive the right to sue if the cops happen to open fire on you with one of these "less than lethal" devices.
Parent must be an example of what happens when the "social software" is actually MySpace. Maybe it's called SpySpace.
But I thought Canada just started censoring access. Isn't that what we learned last week?
ha ha. true enough. I posted AC for a long time before I owned up to my geekiness. I could have had a 5 digit UID... oh well. I pick on my bro, because he prefers Digg. *gasp*
I am your brother, silly. I'm so glad you finally got a log in name. :-)
makes me think of the Far Side cartoon where there's a switch next to the call attendant button that says "WINGS STAY ON/WINGS FALL OFF" or something like that.
Bureaucracy.
At least in GE's implementation of Six Sigma. They found a way to take what is essentially the engineering version of the scientific process, wrap it in so much red tape that it is unworkable (a 12-step process that really had 15 steps) , and put it in the hands of every worker in the company. Originally they gave bonuses for doing it, but eventually they took those away and declared "Thou shalt not get a raise without a Six Sigma Project." What ended up happening is that people refused to make any process or product improvements unless they were part of somebody's (preferably their own) Six Sigma project.
It was ridiculous. You ended up with one person optimizing a part of a process, while the person in the next cubicle was eliminating the entire process in favor of a more unwieldy one. Then, six months later, somebody else would start a new project that essentially put the original process back in place. Of course the problem was that they were using a distinctly product-oriented procedure, and trying to use it to solve process problems.
Don't even get me started on the math. They would assume normal distributions for everything. Never mind that one of the steps was to prove normalcy. If that test proved it wasn't normal, you were instructed by your "Black Belt" to assume normalcy anyway -- even if a Weibull distribution was clearly the correct choice (like in timed exercises). Idiots, I say. And then they had PHB's (called "Black Belts" and "Master Black Belts") trying to tell engineers how to do math, when they didn't even know how to use a simple Q test. If they saw a data point that didn't support their theory, they just called it an outlier, and deleted it.
You'd think after nearly two years of not working at GE, I wouldn't get so wound up about it. I guess as an engineer, it really gets my goat when people use math improperly.
You're obviously not from Houston.
Excellent point. I wonder how different a place Greece and Rome would have been if their slaves were given even some fraction of a vote. but I digress. :)
My mom was a teacher for many years. I don't think of them as "them". I don't think anybody should have to sign a release to be filmed. How would news corps ever make exposés without the "hidden camera"? This is the same sort of situation. Look, the ubiquity of video is a good thing in the hands of the people. Rather than banning it, they should turn the tables and arm the teachers with video as well. Problem solved. Kid's who bait teachers will get in trouble for baiting. Teachers who yell unprovoked will get in trouble. And after a few rounds of that sort of thing, people will start acting civil. It's a pity that people don't act civil to begin with, but that's life.
I hope so... but this guy had come out of a long retirement, and continually went on rants like this in class. At first we thought he was joking, but when he forcibly removed our calculators, we began to suspect he was for real. If it was a put on, it was a great one! That being said, I learned a lot in that class. I would have gotten an A, except I was sneezing so bad during mid-terms that I couldn't tell my x's from my y's. Damned oak pollen! :(
One thing that's funny is that in my career (engineering), the rote and mechanical actions also include figuring out the algebra and calculus. Sure I could do a shell integral to find a volume, but my calculator does it so much faster. Setting up the integral/equation/etc. is the human part.
"'The teacher will be the master of his class -- a closed class and confidential,'"
"School officials called police after learning that students had posted a video of an enraged teacher from the school on YouTube."
"Kerry Houlahan said she is concerned about how easily images can be taken and manipulated without a person knowing."
They're clearly setting the kids up to be the devils in all this (they might be). In the US, though, the argument would be the other way around. The parents would be the ones calling the police for verbally abusing kids. I haven't seen the video in question, but it seems completely backwards that everybody is taking the teacher's side in this. What's next, are you going to tell me I can't take a picture of a cop giving me a ticket? I don't like where this is going. We've already brainwashed our children into giving away so many of their other rights... this just seems a little scary.
Don't laugh. I had a calculus professor who thought calculators were a Commie plot to inhibit the minds of Americans.
+1, Prescient. Not surprised at all that your fear came true.
Yes, you're right of course. But people stuck in the cycle of minimum wage jobs probably lump all the employers together. I have been blessed not to be in that group, but I'd imagine they see it as a non-choice.
I just read an interesting bit of the Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy, and it talks about eliminating poverty by eliminating the need for menial jobs. It mentions Aristotle's argument that once the loom can run itself, we do not need slaves. Until technology becomes sufficiently advanced, we will always need people to do the shit-work. One of the few differences in our society, is the laborers get to decide which shit-work to do.