Thursday, October 06, 2005
National Novel Writing Month
National Novel Writing month is open for registration HERE. The objective is to write a 50,000 word novel from scratch between 1st and 31st November. Plotting and character sketching beforehand is allowed but the witing must happen in the month. The quality of writing is of no matter - it is all about actually finishing a task against a deadline.
I'm planning to take part - though I don't yet know where ther time is going to come from. anyone else reading this who is tempted, please let me know and we can set up mutual support in the blogosphere.
From the site -
How many novels have been written through NaNoWriMo?
1999: 21 participants and six winners
2000: 140 participants and 29 winners
2001: 5000 particpants and more than 700 winners
2002: 13,500 participants and around 2100 winners
2003: 25,500 participants and about 3500 winners
2004: 42,000 participants and just shy of 6000 winners
Has anyone had their novel published?
Jon F. Merz was one of Team 2001's winners; his NaNo book The Destructor was published by Pinnacle Books in March 2003. Lani Diane Rich, sold her 2002 NaNo-penned manuscript, Time Off For Good Behavior to Warner Books, and it came out to great reviews in October 2004, and won the Romance Writers of America RITA award for Best Debut Novel eight months later. Her 2003 NaNoWriMo novel was published by Warner Books as Maybe Baby in 2005.
Got to be worth a go!
I'm planning to take part - though I don't yet know where ther time is going to come from. anyone else reading this who is tempted, please let me know and we can set up mutual support in the blogosphere.
From the site -
How many novels have been written through NaNoWriMo?
1999: 21 participants and six winners
2000: 140 participants and 29 winners
2001: 5000 particpants and more than 700 winners
2002: 13,500 participants and around 2100 winners
2003: 25,500 participants and about 3500 winners
2004: 42,000 participants and just shy of 6000 winners
Has anyone had their novel published?
Jon F. Merz was one of Team 2001's winners; his NaNo book The Destructor was published by Pinnacle Books in March 2003. Lani Diane Rich, sold her 2002 NaNo-penned manuscript, Time Off For Good Behavior to Warner Books, and it came out to great reviews in October 2004, and won the Romance Writers of America RITA award for Best Debut Novel eight months later. Her 2003 NaNoWriMo novel was published by Warner Books as Maybe Baby in 2005.
Got to be worth a go!
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
Europe's Broadcast Flag
Julian Bond, CTO of Ecademy has posted the following on Ecademy today. I make no apologies for repeating his words here because they represent a warning to us all. We can't leave this to someone else, if we see this as a problem, we all must raise our voices against it.
Cory Doctorow has written a tremendous piece (The Digital Video Broadcasting' Project Content Protection and Copy Management: a stealth attack on consumer rights and competition.) about the work being done in the EU behind closed doors to force you to accept less in the coming digital TV age and to take away basic rights you thought you had. It's a big long piece so I've extracted the main summary points. But even that is hard to get worked up about so here's the management summary.
For 20 years now we've grown used to being able to record an ITV program on Sunday night and watch it on Monday. While watching it, we'll fast forward through the adverts. If our mother missed it, we'll lend her the tape. And for those favourite programs like Black Adder we'll build our own library for a rainy day.
The big media corporations are using the EU to try and make sure we can never do this again and to make it a criminal offence to try. They want the VCR manufacturer to sell you a box that will record ER but not 24; that will stop you lending the result; that will force you to watch the adverts; and will expire your copy of all the Black Adder episodes after 6 months. And crucially, to be able to change the rules after you've bought the box. Last week 24 would record. This week it won't.
In order to do this, they have to lock down every device that might be able to receive or display the TV picture. That includes your computer, your computer monitor, your xbox, your mobile phone, your psp, your portable media player. And that means that every electronic device with a screen will have to be certified CPCM friendly. Even the ones you build yourself. And every operating system whether from MS, Apple, Linux or embedded from Palm or Phoenix will similarly have to prevent anyone from writing software that could circumvent it.
And this isn't just a computing standard, it's proposed to be the law, with criminal consequences if you break it. So bye, bye, general purpose computing.
Now it's pretty hard to know what a private consumer can do about this, but you might start by writing to your elected representative and making it clear that people who take away the right to watch TV how we like it, don't get re-elected.
Anyway here's the bullet points.
Overview:
* DVB creates digital television specifications for use in Europe, Asia, Latin America and Australia
* A DVB project called Content Protection and Copy Management (CPCM) goes beyond the customary work of setting television standards to set out specifications for restricting how television programmes are used after reception
* CPCM represents a grave danger to nations that mandate it as part of their digital television strategies
About DVB, digital television, and the broadcast flag
* CPCM is the DVB's answer to the failed American Broadcast Flag, an attempt to buy the studios' co-operation with the digital TV transition by offering them control over DTV devices
* The studios have no credible new threat from DTV, nor is there any reason to believe that they will avoid DTV in the absence of a CPCM regime
* It is crucial to keep CPCM from being mandated in national laws
CPCM overview
* CPCM's main areas of specification are Usage State Information (complex instructions for restricting use after reception), definitional elements such as "Authorised Domain" (a proxy for one household's worth of devices), and compliance (rules that all manufacturers are required to follow in implementing CPCM)
* CPCM is intended to form the basis of regulatory mandates in Europe, Australia and parts of Asia and Latin America
* CPCM exists to "enable business models" for rightsholders, even if doing so means destroying the business models of some manufacturers
CPCM and copyright
* Copyright has many limitations, exceptions and exemptions that allow the public to make "unauthorised" uses of copyrighted works
* CPCM does not respect copyright: it runs roughshod over the public's rights in the copyright bargain, allowing rightsholders to misappropriate any exemption they desire
* Coupled with a regulatory mandate, this amounts to permission to write private laws to underpin business-models, at the public's expense
CPCM and competition
* CPCM's interoperability with other technologies will be limited by contracts that ensure that no disruptive entrants to the market are permitted
* These licensing regimes limit implementers' freedom to contract with other technology vendors
* Historically, these licensing regimes limit innovation in the industries to which they are applied
CPCM and consumer rights
* It will be impossible to know, a priori, whether a CPCM device will allow you to use it in the way you intend on using it
* Even if a CPCM device does work "out of the box," its functionality can be constrained at a later date by disabling its features or activating USI in programming that limits a desired feature
CPCM and free/open source software
* CPCM's robustness requirement will make it impossible to implement CPCM in free and open source software (FOSS) and hence FOSS programmes will necessarily be precluded from the market if CPCM is mandated into national law
* The right of programmers to publish their work through FOSS regimes is often equivalent to other forms of scientific publishing and is often protected under free speech laws and traditions
* The CPCM robustness regime will therefore stifle free and open source software and the scientific inquiry that relies upon it
The Broadcast Flag, the Broadcasters' Treaty and CPCM
* CPCM is the latest salvo in a global campaign to restrict consumer rights that encompasses US initiatives like the Broadcast Flag and WIPO (UN) initiatives like the Broadcasters' Treaty
* CPCM encompasses many failed US regulatory initiatives and the move to encase it in international treaty obligations will likely be used as leverage to get these initiatives reintroduced in the USA
* CPCM compromises national self-determination by allowing US culture-exporting companies to dictate public policy
Cory Doctorow has written a tremendous piece (The Digital Video Broadcasting' Project Content Protection and Copy Management: a stealth attack on consumer rights and competition.) about the work being done in the EU behind closed doors to force you to accept less in the coming digital TV age and to take away basic rights you thought you had. It's a big long piece so I've extracted the main summary points. But even that is hard to get worked up about so here's the management summary.
For 20 years now we've grown used to being able to record an ITV program on Sunday night and watch it on Monday. While watching it, we'll fast forward through the adverts. If our mother missed it, we'll lend her the tape. And for those favourite programs like Black Adder we'll build our own library for a rainy day.
The big media corporations are using the EU to try and make sure we can never do this again and to make it a criminal offence to try. They want the VCR manufacturer to sell you a box that will record ER but not 24; that will stop you lending the result; that will force you to watch the adverts; and will expire your copy of all the Black Adder episodes after 6 months. And crucially, to be able to change the rules after you've bought the box. Last week 24 would record. This week it won't.
In order to do this, they have to lock down every device that might be able to receive or display the TV picture. That includes your computer, your computer monitor, your xbox, your mobile phone, your psp, your portable media player. And that means that every electronic device with a screen will have to be certified CPCM friendly. Even the ones you build yourself. And every operating system whether from MS, Apple, Linux or embedded from Palm or Phoenix will similarly have to prevent anyone from writing software that could circumvent it.
And this isn't just a computing standard, it's proposed to be the law, with criminal consequences if you break it. So bye, bye, general purpose computing.
Now it's pretty hard to know what a private consumer can do about this, but you might start by writing to your elected representative and making it clear that people who take away the right to watch TV how we like it, don't get re-elected.
Anyway here's the bullet points.
Overview:
* DVB creates digital television specifications for use in Europe, Asia, Latin America and Australia
* A DVB project called Content Protection and Copy Management (CPCM) goes beyond the customary work of setting television standards to set out specifications for restricting how television programmes are used after reception
* CPCM represents a grave danger to nations that mandate it as part of their digital television strategies
About DVB, digital television, and the broadcast flag
* CPCM is the DVB's answer to the failed American Broadcast Flag, an attempt to buy the studios' co-operation with the digital TV transition by offering them control over DTV devices
* The studios have no credible new threat from DTV, nor is there any reason to believe that they will avoid DTV in the absence of a CPCM regime
* It is crucial to keep CPCM from being mandated in national laws
CPCM overview
* CPCM's main areas of specification are Usage State Information (complex instructions for restricting use after reception), definitional elements such as "Authorised Domain" (a proxy for one household's worth of devices), and compliance (rules that all manufacturers are required to follow in implementing CPCM)
* CPCM is intended to form the basis of regulatory mandates in Europe, Australia and parts of Asia and Latin America
* CPCM exists to "enable business models" for rightsholders, even if doing so means destroying the business models of some manufacturers
CPCM and copyright
* Copyright has many limitations, exceptions and exemptions that allow the public to make "unauthorised" uses of copyrighted works
* CPCM does not respect copyright: it runs roughshod over the public's rights in the copyright bargain, allowing rightsholders to misappropriate any exemption they desire
* Coupled with a regulatory mandate, this amounts to permission to write private laws to underpin business-models, at the public's expense
CPCM and competition
* CPCM's interoperability with other technologies will be limited by contracts that ensure that no disruptive entrants to the market are permitted
* These licensing regimes limit implementers' freedom to contract with other technology vendors
* Historically, these licensing regimes limit innovation in the industries to which they are applied
CPCM and consumer rights
* It will be impossible to know, a priori, whether a CPCM device will allow you to use it in the way you intend on using it
* Even if a CPCM device does work "out of the box," its functionality can be constrained at a later date by disabling its features or activating USI in programming that limits a desired feature
CPCM and free/open source software
* CPCM's robustness requirement will make it impossible to implement CPCM in free and open source software (FOSS) and hence FOSS programmes will necessarily be precluded from the market if CPCM is mandated into national law
* The right of programmers to publish their work through FOSS regimes is often equivalent to other forms of scientific publishing and is often protected under free speech laws and traditions
* The CPCM robustness regime will therefore stifle free and open source software and the scientific inquiry that relies upon it
The Broadcast Flag, the Broadcasters' Treaty and CPCM
* CPCM is the latest salvo in a global campaign to restrict consumer rights that encompasses US initiatives like the Broadcast Flag and WIPO (UN) initiatives like the Broadcasters' Treaty
* CPCM encompasses many failed US regulatory initiatives and the move to encase it in international treaty obligations will likely be used as leverage to get these initiatives reintroduced in the USA
* CPCM compromises national self-determination by allowing US culture-exporting companies to dictate public policy
Monday, October 03, 2005
Bali - how could it happen again?
I've just spent a few days on the delightful island of Bali within sight of the Hindu temple of Tanah Lot (below at sunset). The whole place is laid back and very spiritual (apart from the traffic which is manic) and the people are gentle and helpful. I was there to work and spent no time outside of the hotel complex but didn't pick up any edginess or fear.
According to Baliguide.com, 'Bali, however, has learned from the incident, and security precautions in resorts and public places as well as – most important – on the village level are today much higher than ever before.
We believe also that Bali is currently much lower on the target list for international terrorists than countries such as Australia and the U.K. – which still refuse to lift the travel warnings for their nationals to visit this island.'
The 2002 bombing took a lot of Bali's tourist trade away. According to this BBC article "In the immediate aftermath of the October 2002 bombing, hotel bookings fell by 80%, flights arrived and left empty, and shop owners put their staff on half pay.
It has taken three years of hard work to convince tourists to come back to the island - hard work that was undone in an instant on Saturday night".
Would you go back to Bali in the aftermath of the bombing? My answer (given here on Ecademy) is a definite YES. I will go to London during this coming month and firmly believe that I cannot reduce my risk simply by avoiding KNOWN risks - it will be the unknown risks that get me!
What about you?
According to Baliguide.com, 'Bali, however, has learned from the incident, and security precautions in resorts and public places as well as – most important – on the village level are today much higher than ever before.
We believe also that Bali is currently much lower on the target list for international terrorists than countries such as Australia and the U.K. – which still refuse to lift the travel warnings for their nationals to visit this island.'
The 2002 bombing took a lot of Bali's tourist trade away. According to this BBC article "In the immediate aftermath of the October 2002 bombing, hotel bookings fell by 80%, flights arrived and left empty, and shop owners put their staff on half pay.
It has taken three years of hard work to convince tourists to come back to the island - hard work that was undone in an instant on Saturday night".
Would you go back to Bali in the aftermath of the bombing? My answer (given here on Ecademy) is a definite YES. I will go to London during this coming month and firmly believe that I cannot reduce my risk simply by avoiding KNOWN risks - it will be the unknown risks that get me!
What about you?
