| Thursday, December 11, 2003 |  |
| X-mas |
 It really feels more like pre-christmas here than it ever did in Southern California. Somehow blue sky, palm trees and t-shirts never quite went with getting into a christmas mood, despite plenty of lights and Santa Clauses. Well, it might not get to snow in Toulouse either, but it is cold, and people wear coats. You can walk around on the street, look at elaborate window displays, go into warm stores. Feels sort of nostalgic, like old times when we lived in Denmark. I wonder where one gets christmas trees from here, although it is probably too early.[ Diary | 2003-12-11 04:14 | 8 comments | PermaLink ] More > |
| Copyright and good mentions |
| When I need a picture for one of my blog postings, I normally find something suitable really quickly, simply by searching in Google Images. Lots of great stuff is available.
But then there's the problem of whether I mention where it comes from. Do I give credit to the source of the picture? It particularly becomes a problem in that some of the very best photography and art will often be found on a website of a professional photographer or artist. And the site will typically have some prominent Copyright statements, and often a whole page where the artist explains that they've put a lot of effort into their work, and they really should be paid for it. If I get to a site like that, I usually turn around right away and never come back. Not because I wouldn't love to use the pictures. And not because I wouldn't happily mention who created them and where one can find more. But exactly because that typically isn't what is acceptable to that artist. Most likely, if I mentioned them, it would just give them a better way of coming after me and asking that I pay them money or take the picture down. So, instead, I forget about them as quickly as possible. In my mind it represents an antiquated system of economics and it works against the interests of creative people. The oppressive concept of copyright, I mean. If I gave them a free mention and added exposure, I'd say that would help their business, not hurt it. So, I usually give a credit only when the creator is both known and apparently not unwilling to share. If it is from some commerical site with no credits, I don't mention anything. The answer could be that people used licenses from Creative Commons, and, generally, that there was a better understanding of how economics work nowadays. If you're an individual small-scale creative person, your personal economy will be supported by free mentions, and liberal permission to use for people who are never going to pay you anyway. Or, for that matter, if I could buy a picture for a suitably small amount of money, and do so easily, I might go for that. Like $1. [ Culture | 2003-12-11 07:25 | 10 comments | PermaLink ] More > |
| Viewing inside the Earth |
 Roland Piquepaille mentions that geoscientists have captured images of the inside of the earth, through a process somewhat analogous to ultrasound scanning of a humanbody.The scientists used tremors from earthquakes to probe the inside of the planet just as sound waves allow doctors to look inside a mother's. The technique, a greatly refined version of earlier efforts, produced a surprisingly sharp image and yielded the first direct measurements of giant spouts of heat, called mantle plumes, that emanate from deep within the planet.Hm, would be cool if it were live. [ Science | 2003-12-11 16:12 | 0 comments | PermaLink ] |