A thing that had struck me as remarkable was the completeness of Bowie's silence. The man had made a record every two years, pretty much constantly from 1967 to 2003... then a decade of silence. Given his mulling of mortality on Reality, and his brush with it on tour, I had thought that was really that.
Quite remarkably excited
Very curious to see whether he feels the need to get up on stage again...
Grey lines for me too :(
FF18.0.2, OSX 10.7.5
We walked the Waiheke sculpture trail. It seemed like half of Auckland were going to Waiheke, judging by the people density in the ferry terminal at either end, and the fact that Fullers seemed to give up on a timetable and ran the boats in a continuous shuttle. It was great! Personally, a day to reflect on what a fantastic city we live in.
But to me Paul Holmes was mostly about Paul Holmes.
As a relative new-comer to these shores, I have always felt that I was missing or had missed something when it came to Paul Holmes - some great feat he had performed back in the day that had allowed him to subsequently have a ubiquitous platform from which to broadcast whatever crossed his mind. But for a long time, I have felt that his primary concern was to maintain his own public profile. Unfair perhaps, but for me the man (or the persona?) had long since got in the way of any message he may have been trying to impart.
I look at the causeway raising, then to the temperatures in Australia and the lack of ice in the Arctic, and I wonder: Are they planning to raise it far enough?
The Guardian survived the conversion to the Berliner, for sure. But the Independent certainly seemed to lose depth when it became tabloid. In the digital age, though, such things should surely count for less and less over time? I find the NYT almost unreadable in person, but great on the iPad. (If only they had a better subscription model.) In principle, ever more digital delivery should enhance substance over style, right?
p.s. "AUT" is fine. "AUT University" is not. Or indeed (as I once heard on RNZ, no less) "AUT University in Auckland".
Well, I'll be convinced when I read it... shifting to tabloid was pretty much the end of the UK Independent as a serious contender.
But on another, unrelated point... Can we please not ALL go along with that dreadful phrase 'AUT University'... What exactly do we think the 'U' stands for?
Some of the problem here is indeed, as pointed out by HORansome, that the shift to 'Gold OA' represents a shift in $ from the library's subscriptions budget to the researcher's operating costs. Another key part is the copyright restrictions that have made 'Green OA' hard to achieve.
In some places (e.g. in the US for NIH grants and in the UK for Wellcome Trust grants) these costs are being explicitly covered in grants at the same time as a 'Gold OA' publication policy is being mandated by the funding body. This is far from universal though, and the cost of publication has to come from somewhere, most traditionally from subscription charges to the journal.
The Economist has had a series of interesting articles on this subject (links below) the first of which summaries this business model of academic publishing quite nicely:
Academic journals generally get their articles for nothing and may pay little to editors and peer reviewers. They sell to the very universities that provide that cheap labour. As other media falter, academic publishers have soared. Elsevier, the biggest publisher of journals with almost 2,000 titles, cruised through the recession. Last year it made £724m ($1.1 billion) on revenues of £2 billion—an operating-profit margin of 36%.
However, not all subscribers pay the same amount. Harvard may be publicly complaining about the costs (Harvard crying poor?!), but I am led to believe that the University of Auckland (for example) has cut a much better deal with Elsevier by shifting to an all-online package.
The thing is complicated, and one model will not fit all.
But don't even start on the cost of time spent writing and reviewing grant applications!
...the communication of such a historic discovery was being done via an almost illegible visual presentation.
And welcome to my life.
It's not just physicists who have this problem... I have sat through illegible presentations by two Nobel Laureates honoured for work in the most inherently visual of the biological sciences - structural biology.
I think that once you're operating at that level, font choice just isn't one of the questions you spend your working day grappling with...
It's not just in Education. It's flown a bit under the radar, but as of July 1 we will no longer have a ministry for Science, Research or Technology. Dark days.
And Russell, I hit disgust a while ago...