Daylight Saving and Australian Idol

Daylight saving. Does it make sense for you? I think it's a good idea, give us more sun, it's good for us. The only thing that's weird about it is that not the whole country is in synch anymore. The eastern states are not all in one timezone during this time of year. Is this such a problem? You wouldnt think so. C'mon, you just have to remember that Western Australia, Northern Territory and Queensland don't recognise daylight savings. Well, come to think of it, it might be a bit hard to follow if you're a business that has business in multiple states. So that made me think, who thought up of this idea anyway? Is there any scientific reasoning behind daylight saving? Why isn't the whole world intrested in getting some extra sun? I found this intresting website (cited after this post) that had some intresting information that answered alot of my questions. Apparently the founder of the idea of Daylight Saving came from Benjamin Franklin. Whilst staying in a hotel in Paris he was woken up by the sun earlier than he thought. Six O'clock to be exact. He found it really strange that the sun is up that early. He devloped the early stages of daylight saving for the Parisians. His proposed new changes were a bit weird though. Some "new" regulations To answer skeptics who cried that old habits are hard to change, and it would be difficult to induce the population of Paris to rise before noon, Franklin proposed the following regulations: A tax be laid on every window built with shutters to keep out the light of the sun. Candles rationed to one pound per family per week, and the regulation enforced by the constabulary. Guards posted to stop the passage of all coaches, etc. upon the streets after sunset except those of physicians, surgeons and midwives. Every morning as soon as the sun shall rise, church bells and, if necessary, cannon shall inform the citizenry of the advent of light and "awaken the sluggards effectually and make them open their eyes to see their true interests ... All the difficulty will be in the first two or three days; after which the reformation will be as natural and easy as the present irregularity. ... Oblige a man to rise at four in the morning, and it is probable he will go willingly to bed at eight in the evening. Sounds a bit extreme doesn't it? Franklin wrote those changes as a joke. The stupid French took it seriously and VOILA. The world saved some sun. Shops weren't closed in the middle of the day and the population didnt waste the day. By the way, the French did use cannons and bells to wake the population, it wasn't until 20 yeas after this act that the idea of changing the time on the clocks was invented. Currently there are 70 countries around the world that adopt Daylight Saving. Equatorial countries do not need to adopt Daylight Saving Time (DST) for daylight in these countries does not change all that much near the equator. However, the further we go from the equator, the more daylight changes with the seasons. thats why the north and south pole are in perpetual nightime for 24 hours during the winter months. Other northern European countries experience long nights as well. All what Daylight saving does is allow us to adapt to the varying degrees of sunlight through the seasons rather than finish the day when clearly the sun is still up. Daylight saving SAVES. It conserves fuels because we have more sun with us, therefore less lights being used compared to winter and that means less pressure on power plants. Generally it means that less fossil fuels is being used. In fact, it was used during both World Wars for this very fact in Australia. Because Queensland, the NT and the northern part of WA are close to the equator, the sunlight doesnt change that much. So the state governments haven't seen any need to change their time. However the non DST states/territories argue every year about this whole debate only to get nowhere. They want to be on par with the rest of Australia. But do they reall need to change? Do we sacrifice practicallity for convinience? The 21st Century motto, THERE HAS TO BE AN EASIER WAY... Meanwhile, whilst governments debate about DST, the popluation of Australia is SUFFERING! Dan from Australian Idol was VOTED OUT by just 27 votes! Beacuse, oh my God, he had like, the totally best voice. Whateverrrr. Dan was like totally cool and nice man. Yeah, 27 votes, that's all that it came down to. You probably heard about this, it made Queenslander and national headlines (how sad is that). Dan England, from Australian Idol, a Queenslander was apparently robbed because Queenslander's had one hour less to vote than the rest of the nation. This example was actually referenced by Liberal MLA Michael Caltabiano in Queensland State Parliament the next day. "This Government and their attitude towards not acknowledging the benefits of daylight savings - particularly for the south-east corner and completely ruling it out - has resulted in another casualty, that of dread-locked Dan England," he said. "If the Labor Government kept in sync and kept up with the rest of the country, this disappointing situation would very much not have occurred." Queensland Premier Peter Beattie is turning the heat on to the show's producers, calling for a recount. "Look, we were robbed. Dan was robbed," he said. "I'm asking Channel 10 to wake up to themselves, to turn back the clock to Monday and give him a fair go, they should reopen the voting in Queensland for an hour and it's time that Queensland had a winner on Australian Idol. Now if they do, I'm sure I can find 27 votes within an hour." Hear that? THEY WERE ROBBED! Politicans will use anything to pick apart the opposite side. Make Dan England the state agenda why don't you. Other strange DST events include: "In California, a Chevrolet Blazer packed with teenagers struck the median of a street and flipped over, tragically killing one teen and injuring several others. The teen driver, fighting charges of felony vehicular manslaughter, claimed that the street was dangerously wet and unsafe due a lawn sprinkler system. The landscaper responsible for the computerized sprinklers testified that the sprinklers were set to come on more than fifteen minutes after the fatal accident. The outcome hinged on whether the sprinklers' timer had been adjusted for a recent Daylight Saving Time change, for without the DST adjustment, the sprinklers had close to 45 minutes to make the road slick." "Patrons of bars that stay open past 2:00 a.m. lose one hour of drinking time on the day when Daylight Saving Time springs forward one hour. This has led to annual problems in numerous locations, and sometimes even to riots. For example, at a "time disturbance" in Athens, Ohio, site of Ohio University, over 1,000 students and other late night partiers chanted "Freedom," as they threw liquor bottles at the police attempting to control the riot." My favourite.... "In September 1999, the Palestinian West Bank was on daylight saving time while Israel had just switched back to standard time. West Bank Palestinians prepared time bombs and smuggled them to Arab Israelis, who misunderstood the time on the bombs. As the bombs were being planted, they exploded—one hour too early—killing three terrorists instead of the intended victims—two busloads of people." The idiots It's a sad sad world sometimes. Related Links Web Exhibits: Daylight Saving Info. about DST States deabte about DST Idol and DST

What's Wrong with Australian Copyright Law

What's Wrong with Australian Copyright Law? I made a very similar post to my old MSN Space. Since that post, I have made several minor alterations, but the body remains the same. I have decided to post it here because I should like to know what your feelings are on this issue. Today's implementation of copyright law has been taken so far away from its roots as a tool to help artists (creators of original works) that it's hard to see any relationship between the two. Copyright law benefits not the artists, but the big corporations. Copyright law no longer promotes originality and imagination; on the contrary, it stifles it. "If creativity is the field, copyright is the fence." John Oswald Oswald illustrates the negative function of copyright with which I am concerned--that copyright cannot promote creativity, it can only suffocate it. Copyright serves to limit access to copyrighted works based on the whims of the copyright holder and as such is a boundary we place on creativity (in the form of limiting access to creative materials) and therefore are not truly able to be creative. "If I have seen further [than certain other men] it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." Isaac Newton Letter to Robert Hooke, February 5, 1675 Sir Isaac Newton (British physicist and mathematician, 1642-1727) believed that he would not have been able to go as far as he did without the contributions of those who went before him. By limiting access to original works, we are not able to benefit from those who have gone before. If Newton was subjected to the same copyright laws as we are today, he may never have developed the calculus, his law of gravitation or his three laws of motion. The original intent of copyright law was to promote a public good, not a private one and no matter how valid the original intent of our nation's copyright laws may have been, they are now clearly being subverted. "DO WE REALLY HAVE TO SUE THE RIAA" http://www.negativland.com/riaa/dowesue.html Not only does excessive copyright legislation put a dampener on creativity, it also stalls the creation of new technology by regulating design or specification. Here is an example (which thankfully has not yet been put in place): In an attempt to build in copy-control technology or to make illegal any machine that might facilitate infringement, the Motion Picture Association of America recently asked Congress for radical new proposals that would put the U.S. Government in the business of dictating standards for computer electronics. Siva Vaidhyanathan "Celestial Jukebox: The Paradox of Intellectual Property" American Scholar, Spring 2005 Here is another example of our implementation of copyright serving a private rather than a public good. ... a situation now exists that is no longer about an individual record label or publisher going after an individual "copyright infringement" as has happened ... in the past. We are now faced with the very real situation that the entire corporate music industry ... is preventing an entire aesthetic, completely circumventing our legal system, and keeping the raging debate over the re-use of our common culture from ever reaching a public or legal forum. "DO WE REALLY HAVE TO SUE THE RIAA" http://www.negativland.com/riaa/dowesue.html What is Protected Under Australian Copyright Law? Australian copyright laws are some of the most comprehensive in the world: they provide the most complete protection and the least number of 'fair uses' (there is no undefined 'fair use' in Australian copyright law as in American copyright law). Copyright is a type of legal protection for people who express ideas and information in certain forms. The most common forms are: writing, visual images, music and moving images. ... You do not need to publish your work, to put a copyright protection notice on it, or to do anything else to be covered by copyright--the protection is free and automatic ... A work is protected automatically from the time it was first written down or recorded in some way, provided it has resulted from the creator's skill and effort and is not simply copied from another work. "Copyright Basics" Australian Copyright Council http://www.copyright.org/information/basics.htm There are, however, no provisions in the Act that give non-profit organisations a general exemption from having to comply with copyright obligations merely because they are non-profit, and there are no exemptions based simply on "personal use" of copyright material. "Information Sheet G10--An Introduction to Copyright in Australia" Australian Copyright Council, August 2004 Make People Pay for an Idea Our current implementation of copyright law is, in my opinion, all about the selfish nature of humanity. If I come up with an original idea, do I deserve to be compensated for my originality (I am not talking about the time taken to develop an idea)? Or should that idea benefit everybody freely? If we continue to restrict access to ideas, the only people who benefit are a select few with enough money to pay for access, and the owner of the copyright (who may or may not be the original author). "He who receives an idea from me receives it without lessening me, as he who lights a candle at mine receives light without darkening me." Thomas Jefferson Jefferson is talking about the basic tenets of a free society--the free exchange of thoughts and ideas. Copyright law can only reduce the amount of knowledge we have at our disposal. Intellectual "property" does not behave like material property. If I give you a physical object, I no longer have use or control of that thing, and may ask something in return--some payment or barter. But when I give you an idea, I lose nothing. I can still use that idea as I wish. I need ask nothing in return. The laws of exchange of matter being so very different from the laws of exchange of information, any attempts to trade ideas with material goods was destined for trouble sooner or later. http://www.anticopyright.com/ Propaganda Are You a Pirate? Have you ever heard of the term “software piracy” (before reading this essay, of course)? I doubt that there are many left in our society who could answer that question truthfully with a negative. Let’s look at the definition of piracy: The action or practice of a pirate. 1. a. The practice of crime or robbery and depredation on the sea or navigable rivers, etc., or by descent from the sea upon the coast, by persons not holding a commission from an established civilised state; with a and pl., a single act or crime of this kind. b. Physical Geogr. = CAPTURE n. 1b. 2. fig. The appropriation or reproduction of an invention or work of another for one's own profit, without authority; in infringement of the rights conferred by a patent or copyright. Oxford English Dictionary Noun: piracy 1. Robbery on the high seas; taking a ship away from the control of those who are legally entitled to it. 2. The act of plagiarising; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own. WordWeb Dictionary and Thesaurus http://www.wordweb.info/ What is commonly meant by software piracy is the unauthorised use of computer software--"the appropriation and reproduction of an invention or work of another for one's own profit, without authority; infringement of the rights conferred by a patent or copyright." However, why is the term piracy used? I believe it is to elicit an emotional response from the audience. Piracy (as robbery on the high seas, a much older use) is not the issue, copyright infringement is. I believe that the only reason the term 'piracy' is used is because of the impact it can have. Can Copyright Infringement be Theft? How about "software piracy is theft" (I am, of course, using the generally accepted meaning of piracy to be the infringement of copyright)? Advertisements of this nature have been shown on Australian free-to-air television networks and in Australian cinemas for the past few years.

The Brains Behind Writer's Block

Sometimes I go into a deep state of writer's block. It's a time where I fail to communicate what I want to say on any of my blogs. It doesn't necessarily mean that I don't have anymore ideas, it's just that writing them is really hard. For the past week and a bit, I have come up with almost 15 ideas for rants. I'm big on complaining or passionate about certain causes. I would start to write it out then NOTHING. It's like my brain was trying to tell me to "Stop, you are writing shit." Then I lose my motivation to write. When I first started out writing on this blog, it was quite easy to write. I could write pretty much what I was thinking at the time. If I wanted to rant about wogs, I would/could write about it instantly. Recently it has become more methodical where I have to plan it out a little. Not in the structure of the rant, but the research and whether the rant has enough substance in it. Whether or not my rants have any real substance or merit to them is another topic. What I'm trying to get at is that annoying feeling of not being able to express yourself. It's a hard thing to do, especially in this blogging environment. You needto have a point to everything! Recently I was discussing to Justin about my recent attack of the dreaded WRITERS BLOCK. He came up with an intresting idea, write a post about writers block. It is an intresting concept. Very ironic too. I hope that this post will help me get out of my little writing slump. So here it is, a post about Writers Block! It took me only a few minutes on google to get all the information I ever needed on Writers Block. After reading about 7 of these articles I realised that there were several theories as to the sypmtoms and causes of writers block. What I found most intresting while going through all the different theories was a condition called Hypergraphia. Hypergraphabia is the medical term for an overwhelming desire to write. "Hypergraphics produce vast amounts of text, much of it on personally meaningful philosophical or autobiographical subjects. "Unabomber" Theodore Kacyznski '62 offers one example, Flaherty says, and maudlin diarists another. But all hypergraphics are motivated by the same thing: "a strong, conscious, internal drive—say, pleasure—rather than an external influence [such as money]." Flaherty herself has experienced hypergraphic periods, triggered by postpartum mood disorder following the traumatic deaths of her premature twins. "For 10 days I was filled with sorrow," she writes. "Then suddenly, as if someone had thrown a switch, I was wildly agitated, full of ideas, all of them pressing to be written down. The world was flooded with meaning. I believed I had unique access to the secrets of the Kingdom of Sorrow." After reading this excerpt from a link to the Harvard Magazine Article on Authorial Synapses I thought to myself "Thats it! Thats the solution to my problem! I need to get me some Hypergraphic action!" Hypergraphics, how cool does that sound...Hyper, graphic...hyper and graphic. That would make a sweet computer game company name, HYPERGRAPHICS & co. Anyway, turns out that Hypergraphaia isn't necesarily a good thing. The condition just makes you write MORE. Doesn't mean that you are going to write lots of quality material. Therefore, with Hypergraphaia I could put in the hard yards of writing piles upon piles of crap, only for it to be...well, CRAP! You see, it's only useful for people that have the ability to turn out some good shit. So what causes this aforementioned kick-ass sounding condition? "Creative writers in general, she argues, are profoundly affected and presumably inspired by the artist's trademark albatross, suffering: bereavement, illness, exile, "narcissistic injury" to self-esteem, adolescence, war, and unhappy love. "Suffering triggers limbic system and temporal lobe activity through their roles in emotion," Flaherty writes, "and increases the desire to write and communicate." So I have to be pretty much in the gutter to make myself write a bit more eh? Does that mean every post on a blog have to be a whinge session? I'll keep that in mind if I want to rid myself of my current condition. I have to be sad, depressed or in a state of mourning to be able to write an excrutiating large amount of CRAP. Heh, yeah right. Ironically, this state of depression can be counter-productive, go figure. "But suffering can also prevent writing: writer's block, she says, is not really the opposite of hypergraphia. "Writers can be hypergraphic and blocked at the same time," she explains, mentioning the graduate student who crafts lengthy e-mails but just can't finish the dissertation. "Being unable to communicate can cause depression, which in turn can cause an inability to communicate." Now I'm confused. Suffering can either: a) Make me inspired to write lots b) Make me unable to communicate EVEN MORE, which causes greater suffering! AHHHH! That has totally confused the nuts out of me, which is probably going to reduce my ability to communicate even more. So I guess theres no such thing as an overall cure to Writer's Block. Everybody has their own form of treatment, and I sure hope as hell suffering isnt a stimulus for writing in my case or else im screwed. So what have I learned from this intrepid journey of discovery and conquest? ABSOLUTELY JACK SQUAT. I know the cause of writers block, to a certain extent. But I haven't found any solution to it except get depressed a bit. What a lovely world of good that does to me. In my attempt to find a treatment for writers block I have written one of the most useless posts ever created in mankind. This may be onset Hypergraphaia coming on. Related Links Support for authors with writers block The Harvard Magazine article on Writer's Block CNN report on multi-tasking