Since my blogging habit have become more erratic of late I have forgotten to write about stuff that happens. Sorry about this. One important event is the release of the final draft of the GPLv3.
What follows is a brief period for commenting then the draft will get the final and official form and go live.
More info at: FSF official page or Ciaran’s blog (FSFE).
Thanks to Personal Notes for the reminder…
With so many discussions on Free Culture, Open Access and the problems connected with making academic publishing available outside academia it is surprising how few good places there are to find thesis’ online.
This is why I was happy when Peter Murray-Rust pointed me towards the Harvard College Thesis Repository (a project of Harvard College Free Culture).
Here Harvard students make their senior theses accessible to the world, for the advancement of scholarship and the widening of open access to academic research.
Too many academics still permit publishers to restrict access to their work, needlessly limitingâ??cutting in half, or worseâ??readership, research impact, and research productivity. For more background, check out our op-ed article in The Harvard Crimson.
If you’ve written a thesis in Harvard College, you’re invited to take a step toward open access right here, by uploading your thesis for the world to read. (If you’re heading for an academic career, this can even be a purely selfish moveâ??a first taste of the greater readership and greater impact that comes with open access.)
If you’re interested in what the students at (ahem) the finest university in the world have to say at the culmination of their undergraduate careers, look around.
The FAQ explains much of the process. It is also good to see that they are applying Creative Commons Attribution License
Q. What permissions do I have to grant to free my thesis?
A. To make sure your thesis is always available for scholars to build on, we ask that you give everyone permission to do the things you’d want to be able to do with a scholarly work you liked: download the work, read it, keep copies, share it with other people, and adapt it into fresh works. The specific legal permission we ask for is the Creative Commons Attribution License, the same one required by the world’s leading biology journal PLoS Biology and the other journals of the Public Library of Science.
My only (small) complaint is that I wish the repository was clearer in showing the license terms for their content. I only found it in the faq. Normally I would not bother reading the faq. To increase the usability of the site the terms should be on the download page and preferably on the essay file.
Despite this I think this is an excellent initiative and I would hope that the fact that Harvard has taken a step such as this would work as an incentive for other universities to follow suite.
George Lucas is joining the Web 2.0 bandwagon and allowing fans to create mashups of Star Wars. Wow, what a guy? Impressed? Happy? Don’t be!!!
â??Star Warsâ?? fans can connect with the Force in ways theyâ??ve only imagined beginning May 25, when StarWars.com launches a completely redesigned website that empowers fans to â??mash-upâ?? their homemade videos with hundreds of scenes from â??Star Warsâ?? movies; watch hundreds of fan-made â??Star Warsâ?? videos; and interact with â??Star Warsâ?? enthusiasts from around the world like never before.
With an innovative, interactive site that allows users to navigate to multiple â??Star Warsâ?? worlds, a new video focus, and groundbreaking â??Web 2.0â?? features â?? including a unique online multi-media mixing platform from Eyespot â?? the new StarWars.com will unveil its redesigned website on May 25 to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the â??Star Warsâ?? Saga.
Among the most compelling features of the newly redesigned StarWars.com is the incorporation of an online video-editing tool provided by Eyespot. It allows users to add their own video shots to more than 250 scenes and music taken from all six â??Star Warsâ?? films and create their own â??Star Warsâ?? movies to share with others.
Unfortunately the material the creative fans will create will not belong to them but will remain in the hands of George Lucas. The fan-created videos will run along with commercials profits split between Lucasfilm and Eyespot.
The idea of users being drafted, fooled, enticed into doing the work for someone else has been called digital sharecropping by Lessig. This refers to the situation where the work is carried out by poor day laborers while the landowners sit and reap the rewards of another’s creativity.
Read more about this over at the Volokh Conspiracy
Paul Bloom and Deena Skolnick Weisberg have written a very nice article entitled “Why do some people resist science?” in which they put forward the interesting discrepency between the status of the scientist and the trustworthiness of the scientist in society. Despite the fact that scientists are proud of their objectivity and method they still have not managed to convince everyone that they are telling the truth.
In a 2005 Pew Trust poll, for instance, 42% of respondents said that they believed that humans and other animals have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.
This means that almost half of the people asked rejected the basic theory of evolution.
But this rejection of science would be mistaken in the end. The community of scientists has a legitimate claim to trustworthiness that other social institutions, such as religions and political movements, lack. The structure of scientific inquiry involves procedures, such as experiments and open debate, that are strikingly successful at revealing truths about the world.
But these results also show something else. They show that no matter how much increased communication is available in society, on a certain level, individuals will not find the truth themselves. They will reject it in favor of belief. Additionally the over-belief in democracy will lead to the situation where untrained people will “know” better than the trained scientists.
Some people seem not to be able to find anything to write about. Me on the other hand I am stuck with the problem of finding too many things fascinating. The topic of Robot Ethics is one which I would love to have time to engage in. I was reminded of this by the Humlab Blog
Peter Asaro will present a lecture on â??Robot Ethicsâ?? in the HUMlab.
This lecture will be an overview of his research at the HUMlab on Robot Ethics, particularly on the ethics of military robots. Peter is one of the new Postdoctoral Fellows at the HUMlab and the Department of Philosophy.
His film Love Machine will be shown in HUMlab at 15:30 on this Friday, June 1.
This is part of the â??Love, War & Robots Film Seriesâ??
Love Machine (2001), directed by Peter Asaro, 110 min,
My fascination with robot ethics is the border between man and machine. When does a machine become complex enough to be granted rights on its own? Some may argue that no matter how sophisticated the software the machine will always be a machine. Fair point. But what happens when we begin to mix tissue in the machine. What happens when we begin to put more foreign objects into the human body. At what stage will the limits between man and machine become blurred enough for us to seriously discuss the limits of the man/machine dichotomy.
I have used some of these questions in my computer ethics courses but I never seem to have the time to explore this more deeply.
Via the Resistance Studies blog:
The Alabama Legislature on Monday approved a bill that would pardon Rosa Parks, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other civil rights activists convicted of violating Jim Crow laws in the state. During the â??second Civil Warâ?? in the 1950s and 1960s against desegregation, thousands of African-Americans and white people were arrested while standing up for freedom.
The protesters were arrested on charges of disorderly conduct, criminal trespass, inciting riots, loitering and more, as they peacefully marched, staged sit-ins and protested to bring an end to the Southâ??s oppressive Jim Crow laws.
For exercising their rights as American citizens, they unjustly ended up with criminal records.
Recently, some Southern states, including Tennessee and Alabama, have moved to offer pardons to those convicted of acts of civil disobedience during the civil rights movement.
The House and Senate this week passed the Rosa Parks Act, named after the mother of the civil rights movement that would grant pardons to individuals who sought them.
The full text of the legislation is here:
http://alisdb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/searchableinstruments/2006rs/bills/hb592.htm
About time too…
Natalie Behring has a photo essay: Inside the Digital Dump on the remains of our technology in the recent issue of Foreign Policy. Behring’s pictures are good and the theme/topic is familiar. Third world nations risking environmental poisoning from the digital hardware we no longer desire or can use.
The images come from the world’s biggest digital dumping ground located in Guiyu, China. Locals work for $2 per day sorting, disassembling, and pulverizing hundreds of tons of digital hardware. The purpose of their work is to get at the valuable gold and copper. Computer waste contains 17 times more gold than gold ore, 40 times more copper than copper ore. But the detritus also leaches chemicals and metals into local water supplies.
Call me cynical but I believe that the profits will move out of Guiyu while the environmental damage will remain there.
Every now and then academics revive the discussion on the readability, dissemination and usefulness of research. Most researchers write for a small group of peers. Most of the peers are already aware of what is being done before they actually read the research article. Add to this the depressing thought that only about eight people (this is a commonly cited figure, probably an urban myth) ever read an academic work (research article or phd thesis) and that is counting the reviewers and editor.
All this makes the practice of academic writing seem rather pointless.
Part of the reason for this is that academics tend to become linguistically narcissistic (Oops, sorry – see what I mean). Instead of writing clearly and plainly they fill their pages with complex jargon from within their research field. They then have the arrogance to be annoyed when others have a difficulty reading their texts.
So, now that I have reached this insight (again!) I shall strive to be more clear in my writing (again!)
Teaching and presenting is an handicraft. It is, unfortunately, an underestimated craft. Most presenters are too boring and too disinterested in their own material. This becomes even more obvious when you see a great presenter in action.
Take a look at Hans Rosling debunking our impressions about the third-world myths on poverty, families, health and growth. Not only is he enthusiastic but he also uses some of the most exciting statistics rendering software I have ever seen in a presentation.
Youâ??ve never seen data presented like this. With the drama and urgency of a sportscaster, Hans Rosling debunks myths about the so-called â??developing worldâ?? using extraordinary animation software developed by his Gapminder Foundation. The Trendalyzer software (recently acquired by Google) turns complex global trends into lively animations, making decades of data pop. Asian countries, as colorful bubbles, float across the grid — toward better national health and wealth. Animated bell curves representing national income distribution squish and flatten. In Roslingâ??s hands, global trends â?? life expectancy, child mortality, poverty rates â?? become clear, intuitive and even playful.
Download this talk in full SD resolution.
Hans Rosling is very cool this is from his bio:
Rosling began his wide-ranging career as a physician, spending many years in rural Africa tracking a rare paralytic disease (which he named konzo) and discovering its cause: hunger and badly processed cassava. He co-founded Médecins sans Frontièrs (Doctors without Borders) Sweden, wrote a textbook on global health, and as a professor at the Karolinska Institut in Stockholm initiated key international research collaborations. Heâ??s also personally argued with many heads of state, including Fidel Castro.
As if all this werenâ??t enough, the irrepressible Rosling is also an accomplished sword-swallower â?? a skill he demonstrated at TED2007.
The Ethicomp conference has always had a relaxed and encouraging approach. So I was happy to see that they have added a doctoral consortium. Here is an excerpt from the call:
The consortium will comprise a series of master classes in which doctoral students will engage with experienced supervisors in the field to help them hone their research ideas and review their research strategies. Keynote addresses on relevant topics will complete the programme.
The cost of attendance will be confirmed but will be kept to a minimum. There is a limited number of places (probably 20-25) due to the interactive nature of the consortium. Students at any stage of their studies can apply. Places will be awarded on the basis of submitted proposals. Submission procedure
A proposal should be submitted using the following headings:
Personal Details
Full Name, Nationality
Country of residence
Email address
University of study, Name and title of first supervisor
Title of research, Year of study, Mode of study (pt/ft)
Details of Proposal
Part A – 500 words explaining the nature of the research being undertaken and the approach being adopted
Part B – 250 words explaining why a place at the consortium should be awarded.
Part C – a brief endorsement by the first supervisor
Personal Details, Part A and Part B embedded in an email should be submitted by the student.
Part C should be emailed by the first supervisor (the student should arrange this)
The language for the consortium is English, and all submitted proposals must be in English.
Proposals should be submitted to ccsr@dmu.ac.uk by 15 June 2007
For more information please visit http://www.ccsr.cse.dmu.ac.uk/conferences/ethicomp/ethicomp07/index1.html
