"Similarly, I recall the Sun running its usual "Find the paedos, spill their blood" stuff in the same issue where they ran a "Phwoar, Charlotte Church wins rear of the rear" wankpiece, using a photo taken when she was 15."
It was the Daily Star - there was a piece decrying the depravity of Chris Morris's Brass Eye paedophile special, and in the next column had the pic of Miss Church (15) with the heading of "She's a big girl now... chest swell!"
Of course, the Daily Mail themselves had a piece on the Brass Eye special... next to pictures of Princesses Beatrice and Euginie in bikinis (they were both under 14 at the time).
From the act (which is very long and detailed - and doesn't make any reference to "format shifting"):
"16 The acts restricted by copyright in a work. (1) The owner of the copyright in a work has, in accordance with the following provisions of this Chapter, the exclusive right to do the following acts in the United Kingdom— (a) to copy the work (see section 17); [...]
17 Infringement of copyright by copying. (1) The copying of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in every description of copyright work; and references in this Part to copying and copies shall be construed as follows. (2) Copying in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work means reproducing the work in any material form. This includes storing the work in any medium by electronic means.
[...]
(6) Copying in relation to any description of work includes the making of copies which are transient or are incidental to some other use of the work"
And, sadly, since moving a file to a different medium/device requires making a copy...
Notwithstanding your comment about PPE and the Civil Service (which I agree with)...
"Ironically, one of those, Margaret Thatcher, is not a graduate of the University of Oxford."
My understanding is that the Baroness Thatcher (back then just plain Miss Margaret Roberts) achieved second class honours in the Final Honour School of Natural Sciences in 1946, and supplicated for the MA in 1950.
Do you have some information that contradicts this?
Is your friend an undergraduate or graduate student? I'd lay a small wager that it is the former in your case.
The undergraduate degree I read over a decade ago (BA in Computation - anywhere else this would be a BSc in Computer Science) was indeed a very mediocre course (and there were only two lecturers that were any good, though most of my tutors - those who conducted tutorials consisting of two students at a time - were very good); but to be perfectly honest most undergraduate programmes in CS in existence are rather mediocre (I can't speak for other disciplines).
The key thing is the quality of research undertaken in the University - this is certainly world-class in most disciplines (which impacts those reading higher degrees by research). This probably won't impact you much if you were reading an undergraduate degree, though.
I can't agree that the "majority of students who go there are considered 'mediocre'," though. The vast majority of people I knew (which is significantly more than your one friend) were intelligent and articulate. This is what tends to happen when you have a selection system which requires applicants to hold extremely high academic grades (three A grades at UK A-level, or if you are from the US a score of 2,100/2,400 in the SAT reasoning test or an ACT score of 32/36), and then go through an interview-based selection.
In the context of the University of Oxford: Philosophy, Politics and Economics (originally known as "Modern Greats"), an undergraduate degree aimed towards those wishing to enter the civil service or politics.
Well, that's not how it works in e.g. the United Kingdom (where income tax is deducted at source for employees). Those items you mention are very rarely claimable expenses (you certainly can't claim your daily commute against tax), except for certain specialised trades. The truth is that the majority of people do not need to even submit a tax return each year, chiefly those that do are people who a) are self employed, b) are directors of a company, or c) earn significantly over the median wage so as to be liable for the highest rate of tax.
That is because it/isn't/ a new law (yet). The UK Government has announced plans to introduce such a law, but this is the start of a quite long process that needs to see it:
1. Written 2. Approved by the House of Commons 3. Approved by the House of Lords 4. Given Royal assent 5. ??? 6. Profit
Slashdot, quality journalism at its very best. The Sun would be proud of this calibre of news reporting.
But nowadays, it isn't just the term "video game." Lose the specific references to golf, poker etc. and it often has different connotations. Taking your statements and re-phrasing them:
"how about playing a game today?" "Then we can watch games on TV." "We still on for playing a game on Thursday night?"
All these have the same meaning as the sentances you posted, but have a very different connotation to Joe Public.
Consider the phrase used by someone who lists potentially "adult" games (such as Poker) as a hobby on a CV (yeah, yeah - bad idea to do that, but this is only an example): "I enjoy playing games to relax and unwind" versus "I enjoy playing social card games to relax and unwind"
Games do not carry a stigma. *Video* Games do, and the term "Game" seems to nowadays - people seem to often assume you are speaking of video games when you use talk about "playing games."
I routinely use very simple games in teaching (as small programming briefs etc.), and often get students informing me politely that they "don't play games" and so have difficulty understanding the brief.
When I enquire further, and ask if they play e.g. Chess, they will often respond with a very enthusiastic "yes." A simple follow-on conversation showing the similarities of the (simple) video game I am discussing with and all is well with them, typically.
Metadata: I live and work in London, UK and teach people at age 18+
Slashdot Mirror
"Similarly, I recall the Sun running its usual "Find the paedos, spill their blood" stuff in the same issue where they ran a "Phwoar, Charlotte Church wins rear of the rear" wankpiece, using a photo taken when she was 15."
... chest swell!"
It was the Daily Star - there was a piece decrying the depravity of Chris Morris's Brass Eye paedophile special, and in the next column had the pic of Miss Church (15) with the heading of "She's a big girl now
http://screenagers.me/2010/07/21/tabloid-hypocrisy-charlotte-church-looking-chest-swell/
Of course, the Daily Mail themselves had a piece on the Brass Eye special... next to pictures of Princesses Beatrice and Euginie in bikinis (they were both under 14 at the time).
From the act (which is very long and detailed - and doesn't make any reference to "format shifting"):
"16 The acts restricted by copyright in a work.
(1) The owner of the copyright in a work has, in accordance with the following provisions of this Chapter, the exclusive right to do the following acts in the United Kingdom—
(a) to copy the work (see section 17);
[...]
17 Infringement of copyright by copying.
(1) The copying of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in every description of copyright work; and references in this Part to copying and copies shall be construed as follows.
(2) Copying in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work means reproducing the work in any material form.
This includes storing the work in any medium by electronic means.
[...]
(6) Copying in relation to any description of work includes the making of copies which are transient or are incidental to some other use of the work"
And, sadly, since moving a file to a different medium/device requires making a copy...
Notwithstanding your comment about PPE and the Civil Service (which I agree with)...
"Ironically, one of those, Margaret Thatcher, is not a graduate of the University of Oxford."
My understanding is that the Baroness Thatcher (back then just plain Miss Margaret Roberts) achieved second class honours in the Final Honour School of Natural Sciences in 1946, and supplicated for the MA in 1950.
Do you have some information that contradicts this?
Is your friend an undergraduate or graduate student? I'd lay a small wager that it is the former in your case.
The undergraduate degree I read over a decade ago (BA in Computation - anywhere else this would be a BSc in Computer Science) was indeed a very mediocre course (and there were only two lecturers that were any good, though most of my tutors - those who conducted tutorials consisting of two students at a time - were very good); but to be perfectly honest most undergraduate programmes in CS in existence are rather mediocre (I can't speak for other disciplines).
The key thing is the quality of research undertaken in the University - this is certainly world-class in most disciplines (which impacts those reading higher degrees by research). This probably won't impact you much if you were reading an undergraduate degree, though.
I can't agree that the "majority of students who go there are considered 'mediocre'," though. The vast majority of people I knew (which is significantly more than your one friend) were intelligent and articulate. This is what tends to happen when you have a selection system which requires applicants to hold extremely high academic grades (three A grades at UK A-level, or if you are from the US a score of 2,100/2,400 in the SAT reasoning test or an ACT score of 32/36), and then go through an interview-based selection.
In the context of the University of Oxford: Philosophy, Politics and Economics (originally known as "Modern Greats"), an undergraduate degree aimed towards those wishing to enter the civil service or politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy,_Politics_and_Economics
Well, that's not how it works in e.g. the United Kingdom (where income tax is deducted at source for employees). Those items you mention are very rarely claimable expenses (you certainly can't claim your daily commute against tax), except for certain specialised trades. The truth is that the majority of people do not need to even submit a tax return each year, chiefly those that do are people who a) are self employed, b) are directors of a company, or c) earn significantly over the median wage so as to be liable for the highest rate of tax.
Some statistics: In the tax year 2008/2009 there were 30.9 million tax payers in the UK. By the deadline for submission, 7.84 million people submitted a tax return on time, and typically 10% of people missed the deadline (I CBA to find the actual data). That extrapolates to 8.8 million people, or 28% of the tax-paying population.
That is because it /isn't/ a new law (yet). The UK Government has announced plans to introduce such a law, but this is the start of a quite long process that needs to see it:
1. Written
2. Approved by the House of Commons
3. Approved by the House of Lords
4. Given Royal assent
5. ???
6. Profit
Slashdot, quality journalism at its very best. The Sun would be proud of this calibre of news reporting.
What, 129 comments on a story about the online actions of an al-qa'ida "hacker", and no use of the word digihad? Slashdot, you disappoint me!
But nowadays, it isn't just the term "video game." Lose the specific references to golf, poker etc. and it often has different connotations. Taking your statements and re-phrasing them:
"how about playing a game today?"
"Then we can watch games on TV."
"We still on for playing a game on Thursday night?"
All these have the same meaning as the sentances you posted, but have a very different connotation to Joe Public.
Consider the phrase used by someone who lists potentially "adult" games (such as Poker) as a hobby on a CV (yeah, yeah - bad idea to do that, but this is only an example):
"I enjoy playing games to relax and unwind" versus "I enjoy playing social card games to relax and unwind"
It is all in the presentation!
Games do not carry a stigma. *Video* Games do, and the term "Game" seems to nowadays - people seem to often assume you are speaking of video games when you use talk about "playing games."
I routinely use very simple games in teaching (as small programming briefs etc.), and often get students informing me politely that they "don't play games" and so have difficulty understanding the brief.
When I enquire further, and ask if they play e.g. Chess, they will often respond with a very enthusiastic "yes." A simple follow-on conversation showing the similarities of the (simple) video game I am discussing with and all is well with them, typically.
Metadata: I live and work in London, UK and teach people at age 18+