i read an excellent article over the weekend in an old issue of the New York Times Magazine that concerned Creative Commons. it's an intriguing concept, but definately not one without debate.

Creative Commons is a rad alternative to copyright. I'd suggest you check it out if you're ever thinking of copy-protecting something. I for one would use it with my music (if I ever got off my lazy ass and produced any).

Speaking of music, right now I'm listening to this record I bought a few weeks back called "Everything you Ever Wanted to Hear on the Moog". Even though I picked it up for like a buck-fitty, it's possibly one of the best records I own. It's SOOO good. ENTIRE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRAS OF MOOOOOOOGS!!!!! AHHHHHH!!!!!! I LOVE IT!!!!! I could listen to this shit forever and ever.

Not to mention the sound quality on this album is stellar. I really feel like I'm watching a live orchestra while listening to it (except I'm in my room). INCREDIBLE.

Someone was asking me about copyrights in Canada recently (I think it was Peter, but I could be wrong.) The Copyright Board of Canada is a good place to start. For more pertinent information, including what happens to that digital media levy, the Canadian Private Copying Collective is another good place to go. These are the people responsible for collecting and distributing the levy on digital media.

A "private copy" is a copy of a track, or a substantial part of a track, of recorded music that is made by an individual for his or her own personal use. A compilation of favorite tracks is a good example of how people typically use private copies. In contrast, a copy made for someone else or for any purpose other than the copier's own use is not a private copy. Nor is a copy of anything other than recorded music.

Well got hammered by the hardest midterm I'll probally write this semester... Not feeling to good about the results right now. This isn't directed at anybody except the Mec E department...

Well what am I going to do?

Glossary of Mathematical Mistakes. They're not all really mistakes, but statistical tricks that people use to fool themselves or others.

What the Bleep was interesting, but I'd agree that taking advice from Ramtha on how quantum mechanics allows me to control the shape of the raindrops flying by my head as I fly to work is a bit far-fetched. The imdb comments are interesting, though. On the plus side, though, it's inspired a new title...

Oh, and an American dollar now costs less than $1.20. I remember the good old days, when you could make jokes about how an American dollar could buy you a Tim Hortons... now it can barely buy a coffee.

Okay, so there's actual physicists on the movie, but they make up less than half the people interviewed...
and I'm not sure I'd want to make a break-down of how much screen time physicists vs others got... would be interesting

he's one of them though... who'dve guessed with that hair and sweater, eh? ;)

See mag from a couple weeks back had a review of Bleep that said something interesting... that all this babble about quantum physics was coming from a pile of people who weren't even physicists first and foremost... that most of them were only starting to wet their feet in the stuff after having entire careers focused on medecine, or in the case of that R-lady... their own schools named after themselves.... still interesting, and definitely thought provoking.... and cool to see Marlee Matlin in something

I should probably be studying for my midterm tomorrow, but instead I decided that "snorkel" is probably the most retarded-sounding word in the English language. I feel like I'm losing an IQ point everytime I say the word.



"Snorkel".
Bejeezoos Cripes All Nighty!

EAT THIS:



HOT!