Translate

Sunday, January 14, 2018

Musing on copyright, work and appreciation

Often look for simple explanation from extremes, like in looking to understand copyright in the modern age, pondered the Mona Lisa. One of the most famous paintings in the world has one of the most shared images in the world--without diminishing its value.

And how often does Leonardo da Vinci get his attribution? Making sure to do so here, as his famous painting is definitely a great legacy to our world. And will use as a stepping stone into a simple explanation, with musings, on copyright in age of the web.

Valued effort should be rewarded. Great effort should be rewarded greatly, but isn't necessarily.

His painting destined to be considered the world's greatest in our times, or close if some wish to argue, was not so valued in Leonardo's life. In fact he carried the Mona Lisa around for years, fiddling with it. Which to me is a reason to not feel like I shouldn't have the right to endlessly change things I create, as to me he was the master who showed a way.

Of course if someone came to you with a picture of the Mona Lisa claiming credit, who would believe such a person? So proper attribution back to source is key. And in the web is easier. Creator can have a webpage with that information, or others can. Like Leonardo da Vinci can rest easy. No one will gain credit for his work. Some put up work trying to GIVE him credit instead, which can cause endless debate there.

We should want to reward effort. Yet even if someone slaps the Mona Lisa, say on a t-shirt, is it a problem? Image is in the public domain. Yet I don't know if that is enough to actually sell much, just having the Mona Lisa on a t-shirt. (Will ponder that angle further though.)

To me, short of it is: effort of the original should be recognized. Person who did the work should profit, or if cannot, or does not want, others should not as if they did the work.

But who would pay a premium to a person who did not do anything other than copy, if they knew?

Knowledge is key I think. And also copying is EASY in our times. In the past was not. So kind of think copying will have less and less value in the minds of most as we mature into the web age.

People in my experience DO tend to appreciate best efforts and feel like reward should go where is due.


James Harris

Thursday, January 11, 2018

Does this type of synthetic fuel exist?

FINALLY our species is showing some sense and focusing better and more on the vast amounts of energy our planet gets every minute from our Sun. Turns out is far greater than we could ever need, but for so much energy production like for electricity or to move us around, we have focused primarily on that stored by plants and animals which has over long periods turned into oil or coal. That silliness has destabilized our world.

In the past they did not know better. We do.

However, focus on actually using that solar energy rather than watching it just bounce off our planet like silly fools has focused on batteries for storage of excess.

But liquid fuels actually are a very good way to store energy long-term. Are there synthetic fuels producible for energy storage for months? So people, for example in places where is relevant, could store up during summer say, and have available in winter?

Then some of that solar energy captured could be converted to such a fuel.

Such a synthetic fuel would have to NOT release carbon dioxide or any greenhouse warming gas of course, nor anything else hazardous to our environment. Would need to be stable over months at least, and yet should be easily reconverted back into energy.

Was never good at chemistry. Readily admit. Got my degree in physics while really not good with the chemistry things. However, can wonder about the fundamentals of such a fuel with very general things without understanding the quantum chemistry things involved, if exists.

Regardless may as well leave SOME notes, without pretending really know subject area. Immediately thinking of course would look for elements of similar valence to carbon as key. And yup, there is silicon of course. Yet those other things are not reactive like carbon. Research needed. Could be fun to brush up on the chemistry of carbon.

Does NOT take much to get quick answers in age of the web. And guess am refreshing? Would like to think is true. From an article on Scientific American talking if silicon life could exist:

But when carbon oxidizes--or unites with oxygen say, during burning--it becomes the gas carbon dioxide; silicon oxidizes to the solid silicon dioxide, called silica. The fact that silicon oxidizes to a solid is one basic reason as to why it cannot support life. Silica, or sand is a solid because silicon likes oxygen all too well, and the silicon dioxide forms a lattice in which one silicon atom is surrounded by four oxygen atoms

Well that was a quick and easy explanation. Interesting.

And also, a CLOSED system could limit environmental hazards. But of course the HUGE problem is that photosynthesis did most of the work for our use of carbon-based fuels, along with time and pressure. Figuring out something that could do the same with electricity, to create a synthetic fuel, could be a very difficult problem indeed. Worthy of our greatest minds? If doable, of course.

If work has been already done to figure out a synthetic fuel as meta-mused here, then yeah would like to know.

Have been editing this one more, despite brainstorming label. Here that is more about the idea than how the post was generated. In past meant limited editing.

Wednesday, January 10, 2018

When truth reveals

Web allows so much to be behind the scenes. And will admit prefer it that way. But can cause problems with things like making a living. Where will admit have been forced to be more forthcoming by my financial distress.

Grew up with old views about money that were wrong. Figured out when came up with idea is a social IOU backed by society that it can be very inefficient. We're just learning how badly that can go in a world where some of the most incompetent people--are the richest.

They've relied on information we did not have, and now web is letting it flow.

So for instance we can see where underpaying people, which I say was learned after slavery ended in the US as a business practice, means that money simply flows to the people underpaying. And they became the top 1% by wealth which will go away as people learn.

They stole their way into that wealth on efforts of people they did not appreciate or properly value.

Also television hid much by not giving much room to explain. Today you can read in-depth on things, on the web, and watch people fall who in the past could have simply depended on television to protect their images and careers.

We have a world dominated by incompetents, including one who is now president of the United States. Foolish people who lead our world on the path to disastrous climate change. Too dumb to do better, or act smarter. And it is taking time to clear them out. (Sounds so harsh, but is reality I believe with more evidence daily. Is sad as well.)

Is amazing though how much truth has revealed thanks to information distributing widely.

Spend so much time consuming that information and find that answers are jumping out. Many of those answers though are SO disturbing.

The 20th century in which I grew up was so much about lies. While the 21st century is so much about unmasking, and revealing truth.

So many people who I thought were one thing, and now I know, were another.


James Harris

Tuesday, January 02, 2018

What discoverer rules?

When was a kid remember when was at first excited by biographies of major discoverers. Pored over them, usually reading ones written for kids. Until as a teenager remember was feeling more contrary, and reading something or being taught something about some person from long ago, was suddenly skeptical. How did these people claiming these things know really?

Maybe then was a certain curiosity, as yes, wanted to be one myself! Which told myself was an impossible dream. Which I like to dangle out there for those who claim you should just go for your dreams. But what if your dream is to be the next Albert Einstein? Or the next Sir Isaac Newton? Or Gauss? Or Euclid? Or Archimedes?

As I list out a lot of names fit with science and mathematics. What about your dreams then?

And what are the actual rules in that area? What even makes a discoverer and at what level, so how do you even evaluate such dreams?

Regardless, became more suspect of claims of people who would talk as if they knew them. As grew older of course started reading biographies written for adults, and my skepticism became more clear.

But what if DID become one? Would they notice me? Such an odd thing to consider as a test like no other in human history, if possible. But of course, so much to me an impossible dream for so long.

The 21st century cares not for human pretension. I took it for granted some major figure WOULD emerge. Someone always does. Something scholars should know.

The pretension around truth fascinates me. What is truth? How do we know it?

Who are these people who believe they know, the discoverers?

How might a 21st century discoverer be different?

Good questions. Those who know their history realize, there will be an answer. Humanity has a remarkable habit of finding new levels, constantly. Someone must be called.

Maybe such scholars lack faith, in human.

Is there such a thing as destiny? Or do we make it.


James Harris

Monday, January 01, 2018

First impressions and beyond mundane recognition

Am global by much where is lots ME saying which doesn't move things, and this year will be working on that, but also still will be doing my own recognition things, where yeah, matters more when others cheer you than when you do yourself. We humans operate that way for some reason.

The Beyond Mundane Social Awards are the first Sunday of March, and just checked, so is March 4th this year, and thus begins a period for me which is more difficult than I imagined would be, but manageable. And this year am looking at possible format changes, like last year.

The vague idea which started these things has not gone exactly as planned, and again this year will be just my opinion, with me wondering how that might change in the future.

With that said, and with a sense of moving even more away from individuals, with recognition that is more about the social media industry, thought might as a lark toss out some quick impression recognition for some folks. No clue if matters and if does, please don't bug me about it.

Actually mutter that much to myself, well as long as people do not bug me about things. So yeah, again, the BMSA awards involve NOTHING more than me putting up my opinion. There is nothing sent to anyone, and emphasize is about arbitrary opinion. If by some miracle, down the line there are actual physical awards given, they will be loaned, so can be recovered, so recipients couldn't sell them or otherwise disrespect them.

Ok, separate from the BMSA's am as a lark putting up a little bit of recognition for 2017 now, will see what flows.

Most pleasantly surprising fun social media on Instagram: Elizabeth Henstridge

Just an opinion folks, but for me Elizabeth Henstridge was the most surprisingly pleasant Instagram, and found continuing to look forward not just to her posts but also her work with the Instagram Story feature, which with me, is a minor miracle. And not sure why which convinces me is legit. Have been a fan of her show Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. but is completely separate.

Best new vlogger who is already a major celebrity: Romee Strijd

Watched her vlogs where her boyfriend Laurens is an impressive editor and helps her film, with increasing appreciation for what a difference it makes, to have skills. And she has those skills on top of her established ones as a top fashion model. And also does Laurens, where again, is my opinion folks. Will admit because of them and others, as they are not only ones have noticed, now am more curious about people from the Netherlands. Have learned is a very egalitarian country, and maybe should not be surprised at seeing more coming from folks there.

Um, do I have any more? Can I just do two? Can I think of any guys? Who cares. Gender should NOT matter. Ok, will do at least one organization which may end up also with other later.

Best Twitter feed where actually often click links: Variety

They follow me on Twitter too, though am not sure why. I actually worry that mentioning might change that like they may be like, why do we follow this guy? And do not hold that against them or for them in this situation or for recognition. But yeah, reality of Twitter is, is remarkable when you click links, and find myself not regretting so much from Variety than from others.

That will do, and last one may look like a suck up. Oh well. Is true though. Have a hard task ahead as begin in earnest to consider social media over all of 2017, to figure out some way to give my own OPINION for recognition.

The 2018 Beyond Mundane Social Awards to be announced on this blog, Sunday March 4th.


James Harris