I backed Ghost on Kickstarter and I really like the idea of an ultra simple platform. I have had blogs for years on Tumblr and Blogger, but I'd certainly be open to using Nolan's work.
Same. Looking forward to getting beta access in a couple of weeks. I built a little solar powered raspberry pi node box that'd certainly benefit from a little node-based blog :-D
I second just telling the IT department about it so they can tell the vendor. I work for an EMR company and I'm pretty sure UCSF is one of our organizations. I don't know if the hospital will pay you extra for an interface solution that the EMR company is supposed to take care of. I'd check with your hospital first.
But she describes herself as blind to gender (what is known as gender neutral) and believes in equality between men and women, which is actually the definition of feminism.
So a woman who is not a feminist is actually a feminist.
Have fun with your redefinitions. Time for me to step out of this while I still can with my sanity.
Correct. You want the right writers, though, and Tumblr has attracted an interesting set. You don't want too much garbage/noise on Tumblr, and so far (at least for me) this is the case. FB and Twitter have a lot of noise.
I respect Adam Rifkin's opinions a lot, partially because he's a great person and partially because he's the best-networked person in the world. http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/tag/adam-rifkin/
I may be wrong, but I feel like the second title qualifies him to maybe see things that others don't.
Snow Fall (video/images) is protected by copyright, but ‘The NYT spent hundreads of hours hand-coding “Snow Fall.” We made a replica in an hour.' is nominative fair use. He might have to say something about not being affiliated with the NYT in any way, but he should be able to make that claim. Truth is a perfect defense.
It does not violate copyright, it is true, to say "The NYT spent hundreds of hours..." It is not 'fair use' though, because it is not a use of copyrighted material in the first place. 'Fair use' means fair use _of copyrighted material_, it is a defense against using copyrighted material without permission.
'Truth' is not in fact any kind of a defense against copyright. If you really _do_ copy someone's copyrighted work without permission, and it is not fair use, then it is completely irrelevant whether the text you copied was 'true' or not. But if did not copy someone's copyrighted work, then you can't possibly have violated their copyright.
For instance, if someone else had first written an article that began "The NYT spent hundreds of hours...", and went on, and you copied that entire article yourself without permission, and you did not have a fair use defense -- you would be violating their copyright, regardless of how true or false the article was.
'nominative fair use' is a legal theory of _trademark_, and what you say may actually be more applicable to trademark, aha, okay. Important to be clear though.
> 'nominative fair use' is a legal theory of _trademark_, and what you say may actually be more applicable to trademark, aha, okay. Important to be clear though.
This part is the only part that matters here: the second C&D about the use of New York Times mark is entirely about whether it's fair use to use it.
Yes, nominative fair use is about trademarks. I'm sorry that I didn't make that sufficiently clear, since the first part of that sentence was about copyright and the second was about trademarks.
And again, what I was talking about with truth was more about claims and less about copyright.
I use Google Voice for job hunting, but I had a random thought about Burner when it first came out. It can be used for the same purpose and you can get rid of the number if you no longer want to be in contact with the recruiter. I think that Burner was originally intended to be used in romantic situations, but I find that the employment context might be interesting as well. http://burnerapp.com/
Laurence Kotlikoff is really famous for his claim that plumbers actually lead pretty good lives. He says that a general practitioner would on average make only $423 more per year in discretionary income than a plumber. Here's a piece from him where he talks about the numbers involved. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-09/study-hard-to-find-...
I'd take Kotikoff's research with a grain of salt. His analysis was done during the midst of the housing boom, which latest from the late 90s through the late 00's, where new homes and new condos, and gut-rehabs demanded A LOT of plumbing.
Our housing starts are less crazy today. I imagine lower demand goes hand-in-hand with lower wages.
This is just conjecture on my part though. I'd be happy to be wrong.
Circa 2011, in a low population area, I had to call 4 or 5 plumbers to find one that thought dealing with a clogged toilet was worthwhile. One was busy, another thought it was too far a drive (~30 miles!), another said it didn't sound like a job he wanted and the fourth didn't get back to me before I had found someone else. Who knows if I got burned, but it was $350 when I did get it done, so maybe worth that extra 5 miles of driving.
(roots had (probably) grown into the line to the septic tank)
This is not a question. It's a statement. I knew about reverse racism in college admissions when I was 10 and starting to go to a college admissions counselor.
I would also like to add this to the conversation: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/27/education/a-grueling-admis.... When the criteria to get into elite schools is completely objective, Asians get in disproportionately (what is called overrepresentation) because their families put a higher emphasis on education and doing well on tests. Not every Asian family has a Tiger Mother, but a significant portion of the Asian family places a lot of emphasis on academic achievement. I found the discussion about Jews to be interesting, because Jews in some ways are close to Asians. Jewish culture also places emphasis on scholarly achievement, but to a lesser extent than, for example, Amy Chua. That's why her mother-in-law and husband, who are Jewish, objected sometimes to Chua's overly rigorous methods.
https://startupsanonymous.com/