A report was recently published by a parliamentary committee chaired by Bronwyn Bishop. The topic was about balancing work and family life. In particular, this report focussed on making child care more accessible or affordable. One of the recommendations was to make child care expenses tax deductible, and retain and even extend the current child care rebates to nannies (currently only parents who send their kids to approved centres get the rebate).
I have a major concern about any kind of rebate, or tax deduction relating to child care. It is that this only addresses the demand side of child care. Don't forget, the government doesn't want to send kids to child care centres purely for the sake of socialising them and making them well adjusted individuals. The main reason is this: Australia is currently experiencing record lows in unemployment rates.
In fact, some may say we have reached or gone below our Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment (NAIRU). Sometimes colloquially referred to as the "natural rate of unemployment." That is, we have reached a point where businesses are having to pay the workers more to keep them and pay more to find new recruits. As one commentator has said "We're not running out of jobs, we're running out of workers". When businesses have to pay more wages, their increased costs are passed onto the consumer in the form of higher prices. Higher prices means more inflation, more inflation means interest rates will probably go up again.
So, where have all the workers gone? Well, at least for part of the workforce, they are at home, looking after their kids. Why? Because any money they make at work will be severely reduced by the cost of having to put their kids in a child care centre.
Why is child care so expensive? Why are there so many waiting lists? How on earth will tax deductions and rebates help? THEY DON'T in my opinion. The presence of high prices for child care and waiting lists is more a result of supply-side mismanagement. You bring down prices in 2 ways - reduce the demand for that service offered at that price or increase the supply of providers willing to supply childcare at that price. Tax rebates and deductions will only serve to fuel demand.
Why is there a shortage of child care centres? My theory is this: Child Care Centres need workers. Quite often, these workers have the qualifications to work in either a pre-school, infants section of a primary school or a child care centre.
If you got paid the same no matter what, and the school jobs offerred school holidays, which job would you go for? The fact of the matter is that child care centres cannot compete for workers on the basis of same pay and conditions. They really need to pay their workers more to keep them. These increases costs are reflected in fees.
So what's the answer? I have no idea.
Friday, December 15, 2006
TPM submission - slammed
As it turns out, the Attorny General published the original submissions, (including mine), and gives the public another 2 weeks to respond to those submissions. These are known as submissions-in-reply. It seems a fair few copyright owners don't agree with me. Can't say I blame them really. One of them talked about how I was confusing copy-control TPMs with access-control TPMs. Confused? You're telling me, I didn't even know I was supposed to make a distinction.
In any case, I'm an amateur in this area of law. But it was fun to participate in the legislative process of this country for once in my life. Hey, maybe I'll even vote one day. Can you believe that there are plenty of other countries out there where people don't get anywhere near the same right or opportunity to participate in the machinery of government?
Anyway - I want to write another post before I go to bed.
In any case, I'm an amateur in this area of law. But it was fun to participate in the legislative process of this country for once in my life. Hey, maybe I'll even vote one day. Can you believe that there are plenty of other countries out there where people don't get anywhere near the same right or opportunity to participate in the machinery of government?
Anyway - I want to write another post before I go to bed.
Friday, November 03, 2006
TPM submission online
I think this will be the closest I will ever get to being published.
I sent an email to the Attorney General's Department a while back, and all the submissions sent are available for viewing.
Click Here
A few things you might notice:
1. For some strange reason, I decided to include my mobile number in the submission, which is now online for all the world to see. Stupid. (maybe I'll get a call from someone asking me how I did the Coke and Mentos video)
2. My grammar is poor, despite the fact that I have a bad habit of correcting other people's grammar.
3. There is another site which hosts the "submissions in reply" to submissions like mine. Unfortunately, the link merely takes you back to the first link above. Once they fix it, it'll be interesting to see what other people have said about my submission (assuming that someone bothered of course)
It's often said that we all have one book inside us. For me, however, it's only 2 pages long, and its an email.
I sent an email to the Attorney General's Department a while back, and all the submissions sent are available for viewing.
Click Here
A few things you might notice:
1. For some strange reason, I decided to include my mobile number in the submission, which is now online for all the world to see. Stupid. (maybe I'll get a call from someone asking me how I did the Coke and Mentos video)
2. My grammar is poor, despite the fact that I have a bad habit of correcting other people's grammar.
3. There is another site which hosts the "submissions in reply" to submissions like mine. Unfortunately, the link merely takes you back to the first link above. Once they fix it, it'll be interesting to see what other people have said about my submission (assuming that someone bothered of course)
It's often said that we all have one book inside us. For me, however, it's only 2 pages long, and its an email.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
Sound Recording Effort
Gus and I have been working on ideas to record the 6:30pm church sermons so they can be podcast on the St Andy's website. From what I can see, it also appears that Kristen is also working on the website. I can't wait to see it.
Anyway - anyone have ideas about to record the sermons? These are the options that we have come up with so far:
Option 1: add LINE-IN capability to church laptop (the one used for Powerpoint) through the use of a USB sound card, and run Audacity. Found file would then be removed via USB flash drive and taken to the webmaster's computer.
Option 2: acquire a small mp3 player with a line-in recording capability. Preferably, it should also have a removeable media slot (e.g. SD card) so that the player can be permanently mounted somewhere in the sound desk.
Option 3: acquire a second hand Xbox, mod it to run Linux, get the same USB sound card device in Option 1, attach it, run Audacity for Linux, run Linux support for USB sound card, acquire USB keyboard and mouse, acquire small LCD screen, acquire composite video to VGA converter (so display from Xbox can be viewed on LCD screen). Permanently install Xbox in the sound desk somewhere.
We're trying out Option 1 this week, as we've already ordered (read: Ebay) the USB sound card, called the Griffin iMic. I went to EVERY computer/audio/electronics store in Sydney city the past few days, I swear, you can't get it except for online.
If Option 1 works, how sweet life will be. If it doesn't (i.e. computer can't handle recording audio and powerpoint at the same time) then Option 2 or 3 it is. I can't see why Option 1 wouldn't work. We're only recording the sermon, so the Powerpoint is pretty much inactive anyway. We'll see I guess.
Part of me wants Option 1 to fail, just so I can have a shot at Option 3. Which makes me wonder, selling mod chips may very well be illegal come 1 January 2007, but will using an already modded xbox be illegal then too?
That's a whole other topic - don't you worry, I'll post something about that soon.
Anyway - anyone have ideas about to record the sermons? These are the options that we have come up with so far:
Option 1: add LINE-IN capability to church laptop (the one used for Powerpoint) through the use of a USB sound card, and run Audacity. Found file would then be removed via USB flash drive and taken to the webmaster's computer.
Option 2: acquire a small mp3 player with a line-in recording capability. Preferably, it should also have a removeable media slot (e.g. SD card) so that the player can be permanently mounted somewhere in the sound desk.
Option 3: acquire a second hand Xbox, mod it to run Linux, get the same USB sound card device in Option 1, attach it, run Audacity for Linux, run Linux support for USB sound card, acquire USB keyboard and mouse, acquire small LCD screen, acquire composite video to VGA converter (so display from Xbox can be viewed on LCD screen). Permanently install Xbox in the sound desk somewhere.
We're trying out Option 1 this week, as we've already ordered (read: Ebay) the USB sound card, called the Griffin iMic. I went to EVERY computer/audio/electronics store in Sydney city the past few days, I swear, you can't get it except for online.
If Option 1 works, how sweet life will be. If it doesn't (i.e. computer can't handle recording audio and powerpoint at the same time) then Option 2 or 3 it is. I can't see why Option 1 wouldn't work. We're only recording the sermon, so the Powerpoint is pretty much inactive anyway. We'll see I guess.
Part of me wants Option 1 to fail, just so I can have a shot at Option 3. Which makes me wonder, selling mod chips may very well be illegal come 1 January 2007, but will using an already modded xbox be illegal then too?
That's a whole other topic - don't you worry, I'll post something about that soon.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Gadget Geek
I'm not just a nerd (with respect to copyright), but I'm also a geek (with respect to gadgets). I must give kudos to a blog run by an Australian Intellectual Property (that's IP, not Internet Protocol) academic. I've added their blog link, it's named Weatherall's Law - because Kimberlee Weatherall is the name of the academic. She has a good writing style. If you ever want to grab a small dose of 'current affairs' IP debate, read her blog.
ANYWAY - the fun thing about copyright law, is that its got so much to do with hi-tech stuff and gadgets. Allow me to demonstrate. If you have a TV, you may want to get a Digital Set Top Box (STB) in order to get clearer reception, and access to extra channels like ABC2. If you want to replace your VCR, and do away with video cassette tapes, you may wish to upgrade your STB to an Personal Video Recorder (PVR) aka Digital Video Recorder (DVR). PVR seems to be more common in households, while the term DVR appears to be used for commercial uses such as surveillance.
Anyway, a PVR records your TV show onto a built in hard drive. All decent PVRs have a timer function, just like your usual VCR. However, PVRs also have the capability to store and use an Electronic Program Guide (EPG). Its basically your TV, but used by your PVR and displayed on your TV. The beauty with this thing is that you can set your PVR to record all instances of a particular program, not matter when it shows. So, if you really like Futurama or The Simpsons, you just tell the PVR to record all broadcasts of those shows, even if they appear irregularly or erratically.
The big problem in Australia (and is regarded as something that is holding Australia back in the technology dark ages) is that EPGs are very difficult to come by. You see, you want your PVR to update its EPG regularly, automatically. That usually means that your PVR will need to connect to the internet or a computer, and upload an updated EPG file to its PVR programming hardware.
So, who compiles, makes and distributes these files? There is basically one main market leader in this area in Australia, IceTV. Presumably, the folks at IceTV spend most of their time either reading TV Week, typing up the week's program schedules for the various TV networks, converting them into EPG files, and putting them on their servers. The main PVR product that uses the IceTV EPG system is Topfield, also a market leader in the Australian PVR market.
If you have time, read this article.
In short, Channel Nine is suing IceTV because of this EPG file making/publishing. What's the official reason? COPYRIGHT!! Channel Nine are basically attempting to assert copyright over their weekly schedule (not the program's themselves, that's a given, but just the schedule), and that IceTV are infringing copyright by copying, compiling and publishing this schedule through their EPG system. IceTV are claiming that they are merely compiling already public information.
The first hearing will be in the Federal Court of Australia in NSW, Court Room 20C on Monday 16th October at 10:15am. If you're in town, you might want to stop by. By the way, the filing number is NSD935/2006.
So, why is this a huge caper? Well, one of the best features of a PVR is the "set and forget" feature of an EPG. The Topfield PVRs, are usually sold with a 12 month IceTV EPG subscription (yes, you gotta pay for the EPG service, at least in Australia). To manually enter in all the programs and times from all the networks every week would make a PVR even MORE work than your VCR. If IceTV lose this case, it would be a significant setback for the EPG system in Australia, and also a setback for the PVR industry. Nevertheless, the PVRs are steadily gaining ground in Australia, as the prospect of skipping your advertisements during your viewing of Futurama or Law & Order or whatever, combined with getting rid of VHS tapes, combined with being able to record someting in the range of 55 hours of TV, combined with crystal clear reception, will be so enticing that people will be willing to part with their $100's to $1000's of hard earned cash.
And I haven't even touched on the even bigger copyright issue on the horizon associated with PVRs, the new time-shifting laws that will come into force on 1 January 2006. If I ever get around to it (I really need to start on my European Tax Law assignment!), I'll write an article (no guarantees on brevity) about time-shifting.
Allow me to part with these questions:
Before reading this article, did you know what a PVR was?
How much would you be willing to pay for a PVR?
What kind of features would you want in your PVR?
ANYWAY - the fun thing about copyright law, is that its got so much to do with hi-tech stuff and gadgets. Allow me to demonstrate. If you have a TV, you may want to get a Digital Set Top Box (STB) in order to get clearer reception, and access to extra channels like ABC2. If you want to replace your VCR, and do away with video cassette tapes, you may wish to upgrade your STB to an Personal Video Recorder (PVR) aka Digital Video Recorder (DVR). PVR seems to be more common in households, while the term DVR appears to be used for commercial uses such as surveillance.
Anyway, a PVR records your TV show onto a built in hard drive. All decent PVRs have a timer function, just like your usual VCR. However, PVRs also have the capability to store and use an Electronic Program Guide (EPG). Its basically your TV, but used by your PVR and displayed on your TV. The beauty with this thing is that you can set your PVR to record all instances of a particular program, not matter when it shows. So, if you really like Futurama or The Simpsons, you just tell the PVR to record all broadcasts of those shows, even if they appear irregularly or erratically.
The big problem in Australia (and is regarded as something that is holding Australia back in the technology dark ages) is that EPGs are very difficult to come by. You see, you want your PVR to update its EPG regularly, automatically. That usually means that your PVR will need to connect to the internet or a computer, and upload an updated EPG file to its PVR programming hardware.
So, who compiles, makes and distributes these files? There is basically one main market leader in this area in Australia, IceTV. Presumably, the folks at IceTV spend most of their time either reading TV Week, typing up the week's program schedules for the various TV networks, converting them into EPG files, and putting them on their servers. The main PVR product that uses the IceTV EPG system is Topfield, also a market leader in the Australian PVR market.
If you have time, read this article.
In short, Channel Nine is suing IceTV because of this EPG file making/publishing. What's the official reason? COPYRIGHT!! Channel Nine are basically attempting to assert copyright over their weekly schedule (not the program's themselves, that's a given, but just the schedule), and that IceTV are infringing copyright by copying, compiling and publishing this schedule through their EPG system. IceTV are claiming that they are merely compiling already public information.
The first hearing will be in the Federal Court of Australia in NSW, Court Room 20C on Monday 16th October at 10:15am. If you're in town, you might want to stop by. By the way, the filing number is NSD935/2006.
So, why is this a huge caper? Well, one of the best features of a PVR is the "set and forget" feature of an EPG. The Topfield PVRs, are usually sold with a 12 month IceTV EPG subscription (yes, you gotta pay for the EPG service, at least in Australia). To manually enter in all the programs and times from all the networks every week would make a PVR even MORE work than your VCR. If IceTV lose this case, it would be a significant setback for the EPG system in Australia, and also a setback for the PVR industry. Nevertheless, the PVRs are steadily gaining ground in Australia, as the prospect of skipping your advertisements during your viewing of Futurama or Law & Order or whatever, combined with getting rid of VHS tapes, combined with being able to record someting in the range of 55 hours of TV, combined with crystal clear reception, will be so enticing that people will be willing to part with their $100's to $1000's of hard earned cash.
And I haven't even touched on the even bigger copyright issue on the horizon associated with PVRs, the new time-shifting laws that will come into force on 1 January 2006. If I ever get around to it (I really need to start on my European Tax Law assignment!), I'll write an article (no guarantees on brevity) about time-shifting.
Allow me to part with these questions:
Before reading this article, did you know what a PVR was?
How much would you be willing to pay for a PVR?
What kind of features would you want in your PVR?
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Sorry Glenoes
I just discovered, I left Glenoes' "blogholesun" off my links. Whoops. I've just added him on. He's now at the top to compensate.
What's new?
What's new?
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Jesus: Sin Cleaner
I was at Bible Study (aka Growth Group) on Monday night, and we did a study on Mark 1 and 2, and we attempted to come up with a symbolic/pictorial depiction of one of the stories about Jesus (i.e. narrative) and what it tells us about Jesus. Kate choose the one with the paralytic guy who got lowered through the roof. Here's the picture she drew. It is hauntingly accurate of the real thing if you ask me.
Ignore this one
I just wanted to change my photo from the fake Tim Yap to the real Tim Yap. And seeing as I have no idea how to get a real picture of me as the profile picture, I figure I could just upload one into a post, and cross reference it.
By the way, this is a photo of me on Dave and Kristen's wedding.
Bundanoon Bust Up
It's finally here! My first posting to You Tube. Diet Coke and Mentos rocket, as verified by myself, and Eddoes. Thanks to Teds for the great camera work.
Click Here
Enjoy
Click Here
Enjoy
Sunday, September 17, 2006
You Tube coming soon...
Hi there,
I have just recently filmed something that I think you might find amusing. Once I edit it properly, I'll upload it to YouTube, and post the link here.
See you soon,
Tim
I have just recently filmed something that I think you might find amusing. Once I edit it properly, I'll upload it to YouTube, and post the link here.
See you soon,
Tim
Friday, September 15, 2006
Submission... submitted!
That's right folks, I've just sent off a nice juicy email to the Federal Attorney General's Department seeking an exception to be created in the Copyright Regulations.
The exception sought is to allow folks making legitimate back-up copies of computer programs under section 47C of the Copyright Act 1968 to be protected from civil or criminal liability (by 'excepting' from being infringers), when they have to use a circumvention device to circumvent a technological protection measure (TPM).
That is, if I want to make a back-up copy (say, an ISO file) of Battlefield 2, I have to defeat EA's copy protection mechanism (the TPM) by using a special duplication/imaging program, for example Alcohol 120% or CloneCD. The programs are likely to be considered a circumvention device.
Therefore, in my opinion (it's always a matter of opinion until it goes to court) as the law now currently stands and as the law is proposed, the act of backing-up Battlefield 2 (although permitted under section 47C), is an infringement of copyright under Division 2A of the same Act.
So I'm merely asking the Attorney General to ensure that the protections afforded under section 47C are maintained, and shielded (i.e. 'excepted') from the liability provisions of Division 2A.
It's not written by a legal genius, it's simply written by a computer nerd. Eventually, they say all submissions will be published online. If they do that, I'll post the link on this blog.
The exception sought is to allow folks making legitimate back-up copies of computer programs under section 47C of the Copyright Act 1968 to be protected from civil or criminal liability (by 'excepting' from being infringers), when they have to use a circumvention device to circumvent a technological protection measure (TPM).
That is, if I want to make a back-up copy (say, an ISO file) of Battlefield 2, I have to defeat EA's copy protection mechanism (the TPM) by using a special duplication/imaging program, for example Alcohol 120% or CloneCD. The programs are likely to be considered a circumvention device.
Therefore, in my opinion (it's always a matter of opinion until it goes to court) as the law now currently stands and as the law is proposed, the act of backing-up Battlefield 2 (although permitted under section 47C), is an infringement of copyright under Division 2A of the same Act.
So I'm merely asking the Attorney General to ensure that the protections afforded under section 47C are maintained, and shielded (i.e. 'excepted') from the liability provisions of Division 2A.
It's not written by a legal genius, it's simply written by a computer nerd. Eventually, they say all submissions will be published online. If they do that, I'll post the link on this blog.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
The Iron Chef
I recently attended a 21st birthday party on the weekend. Besides being a terrific party with excellent food, speeches, punch, and music (and the company), the theme was to come dressed as a character from a movie or TV show.
I came dressed as a character from the SBS show, The Iron Chef. I was a "challenger" as they wear 'normal' uniforms while the Iron Chefs wear uniforms resembling silky pyjamss. Anyway - I carried a speaker around my neck, which was playing the theme song to the show.
It was observed that the song sounded rather military-esque, with the snare drum rapidly rolling, and grand orchestral notes of strings and horns. Upon further investigation, it seems that the Iron Chef theme is actually from the soundtrack to the 1991 motion picture BACKDRAFT. In fact, most of the music played during the Iron Chef episodes are Hans Zimmer creations from the soundtrack. The particular theme song I was playing is called "Fighting 17th".
I suppose the dilemma now is whether watching the Iron Chef now makes me think of fire hazards and accelerants, or whether watching Backdraft (which I haven't seen in a LONG time) makes me think of the Chairman abruptly biting into a capsicum, and celebrity judges giving their thoughts with an American accent.
By the way, Hans Zimmer makes some great film scores. Most of the Jerry Bruckheimer / Don Simpson movies I've seen had scores done by Hans.
I came dressed as a character from the SBS show, The Iron Chef. I was a "challenger" as they wear 'normal' uniforms while the Iron Chefs wear uniforms resembling silky pyjamss. Anyway - I carried a speaker around my neck, which was playing the theme song to the show.
It was observed that the song sounded rather military-esque, with the snare drum rapidly rolling, and grand orchestral notes of strings and horns. Upon further investigation, it seems that the Iron Chef theme is actually from the soundtrack to the 1991 motion picture BACKDRAFT. In fact, most of the music played during the Iron Chef episodes are Hans Zimmer creations from the soundtrack. The particular theme song I was playing is called "Fighting 17th".
I suppose the dilemma now is whether watching the Iron Chef now makes me think of fire hazards and accelerants, or whether watching Backdraft (which I haven't seen in a LONG time) makes me think of the Chairman abruptly biting into a capsicum, and celebrity judges giving their thoughts with an American accent.
By the way, Hans Zimmer makes some great film scores. Most of the Jerry Bruckheimer / Don Simpson movies I've seen had scores done by Hans.
Audioslave... again
I think its apparent that Audioslave is now my new favourite band. Anyway, if anyone is considering buying Audioslave's new album "Revelations", you can get it from:
Dirt Cheap CDs = $15 (album only) (damn!, I just bought it from JB)
JB HiFi = $18.99 (album only)
JB HiFi = $24.99 (album + Bonus DVD)
I also just bought the Live in Cuba DVD for $10 from Dirt Cheap CDs. You can check out their website. Or, if you want, I can stop by the Pitt St store and get it for you and you can pay me back.
Dirt Cheap CDs = $15 (album only) (damn!, I just bought it from JB)
JB HiFi = $18.99 (album only)
JB HiFi = $24.99 (album + Bonus DVD)
I also just bought the Live in Cuba DVD for $10 from Dirt Cheap CDs. You can check out their website. Or, if you want, I can stop by the Pitt St store and get it for you and you can pay me back.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Temple of the Dog - An Impulse Buy
Okay, so I bought the Pearl Jam Live at the Garden DVD for $10 at JB HiFi (hereafter known as 'JB', not to be confused with John the Baptist). I enjoyed the old Pearl Jam classics, and some of their newer stuff. Then I came across a song that I don't remember being on any albums. Eddie Vedder did a duet with a woman (whose name eludes me) and the song sounded familiar, but I couldn't put my finger on it.
So I decided to try to find out the name of the song by Googling some of the lyrics that I could make it. I can't remember what I searched, but I ended up at this site: www.reachdown.com which is a site decided to what is known as Temple of the Dog. This I thought was rather odd. I clicked on some links to finally get me to the lyrics page, so I could see the words to what I discovered was the song "Hunger Strike". Then I noticed who wrote it. It said: "Music/Lyrics: Cornell".
I thought to myself: Is this the Cornell of Chris Cornell? The former lead singer of Soundgarden now leader singer of the relatively recent Audioslave? Mind you, I didn't know much about Soundgarden or Audioslave, although I was thoroughly familiar with Rage Against The Machine.
Anyway, I read on to see that Temple of the Dog was a one-off tribute to a singer called Andy Wood. It was a collaboration between Chris Cornell (Andy's flatmate), Stone Gossard (Guitarist in Andy's band: Mother Love Bone), Jeff Ament (Bass Player in Mother Love Bone), Matt Cameron (Drummer from Cornell's Soundgarden) and Mike Cready (Lead Guitarist, high school friend of Stone Gossard) and a cameo in some songs by Eddie Vedder (some random guy that Stone and Jeff heard on a demo tape).
As you will note, all collaborators but Chris Cornell make up the band Pearl Jam.
As soon as I found out that fact - I bought the CD right away without listening to any of it. One of the best albums EVER.
By the way, the album came out in 1991, the same year as Soundgarden's Badmotorfinger and Pearl Jam's Ten.
You should listen to it sometime. And another thing, does it strike you as odd that Soundgarden is related to Pearl Jam through Temple of the Dog and that Soundgarden is related to Rage Against the Machine through Audioslave? Is there anything else about Chris Cornell that I should know besides being one of the best vocalists ever?
So I decided to try to find out the name of the song by Googling some of the lyrics that I could make it. I can't remember what I searched, but I ended up at this site: www.reachdown.com which is a site decided to what is known as Temple of the Dog. This I thought was rather odd. I clicked on some links to finally get me to the lyrics page, so I could see the words to what I discovered was the song "Hunger Strike". Then I noticed who wrote it. It said: "Music/Lyrics: Cornell".
I thought to myself: Is this the Cornell of Chris Cornell? The former lead singer of Soundgarden now leader singer of the relatively recent Audioslave? Mind you, I didn't know much about Soundgarden or Audioslave, although I was thoroughly familiar with Rage Against The Machine.
Anyway, I read on to see that Temple of the Dog was a one-off tribute to a singer called Andy Wood. It was a collaboration between Chris Cornell (Andy's flatmate), Stone Gossard (Guitarist in Andy's band: Mother Love Bone), Jeff Ament (Bass Player in Mother Love Bone), Matt Cameron (Drummer from Cornell's Soundgarden) and Mike Cready (Lead Guitarist, high school friend of Stone Gossard) and a cameo in some songs by Eddie Vedder (some random guy that Stone and Jeff heard on a demo tape).
As you will note, all collaborators but Chris Cornell make up the band Pearl Jam.
As soon as I found out that fact - I bought the CD right away without listening to any of it. One of the best albums EVER.
By the way, the album came out in 1991, the same year as Soundgarden's Badmotorfinger and Pearl Jam's Ten.
You should listen to it sometime. And another thing, does it strike you as odd that Soundgarden is related to Pearl Jam through Temple of the Dog and that Soundgarden is related to Rage Against the Machine through Audioslave? Is there anything else about Chris Cornell that I should know besides being one of the best vocalists ever?
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Unhealthy obsession with Copyright Law
It has come to my attention that the Exposure Draft of the Copyright Amendment (Technological Protection Measures) Bill 2006 has been released by the Attorney General's Department (excuse the passive voice). This is to give effect to obligations arising under the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement.
One of the key changes is that it will make the ACT OF CIRCUMVENTION ITSELF an offence under the Act, as currently - only the sale and marketing of such circumvention devices is an infringement under the Act.
Assume for a second that a "mod-chip" for an Xbox is a circumvention device (more on that later). As the law currently stands, the person who sells and makes them is breaking the law (i.e. infringing copyright), while the customer who uses the modchip and the modded xbox is not infringing. The amendment will make the customer liable.
I say ASSUME because the Sony v Stevens case (where a dude selling and installing modchips in the PS2 was sued by Sony, because the modchip overrode region coding and allowed pirated games to run on the PS2) confirms that the "Sony System" of preventing the running of pirated games (which, is practically identical in its functionality to the Xbox system) is NOT a technological protection measure (i.e. TPM), and therefore, the modchip was NOT a circumvention device.
The reasoning being, a circumvention device overrides a TPM. That means a TPM needs to be present before suing someone for supplying circumvention devices.
This is great news for uber nerds in Australia wanting to tinker with their PS2s and Xboxs. Unfortunately, this is bad news for intellectual property lawyers, as some of them are of the opinion (and I share this opinion) that the TPM provisions of the Copyright Act were too narrowly construed by the High Court judges.
Of particular note, the judges, in attempting to discover the purpose or intent of the provision, did not look to the extrinsic material of international treaties and its obligations. It seems that the judges took a rather literal and linguistic approach to the provision.
The Exposure Draft also changes the definition of a TPM. One wonders, if the case were to be litigated in 2007, whether the High Court would have come to the same conclusion in light of an amended definition of a TPM.
I'm not just interested in this because I am an uber nerd who's dying to tinker with my Xbox.
The issue of TPMs and circumvention devices also affects users of computer program who wish to make a back-up copy of a program they have bought (i.e. they are the licensee). Section 47C allows a licensee to make a copy of a computer program for back-up purposes. The purpose can be to allow the user to store the original media (i.e. CD or DVD ROM) and use the back up instead or vice-versa.
You may be familiar with the concept of "imaging" a disc. If not, I'll briefly explain it. If you buy a computer game, it comes on a disc, or CD. Quite often, after installing the game on your hard drive, the game will require you to have the CD in the CD drive in order to allow you to play the game.
The game itself remains on the hard drive, but the requirement for the CD is merely a means to authenticate you as a genuine licensee by detecting whether you are in possession of the original disc. Now, if one was paranoid about losing the disc, you should be, because once you lose that disc, the game on your hard drive becomes unplayable. Therefore, one might, and can under section 47C, make a back-up copy.
You may decide to make a back-up copy in the form of another disc. The other option is to create a file on your computer which looks like a disc. The file is usually an ISO file, and the process of reading the original disc and turning it into an ISO file is called "imaging".
Either way, both methods require your computer and CD drive to read the contents of the original disc. Computer game companies, in an attempt to prevent unauthorised copying, have incorporated a number of "unreadable" or "bad" sectors at the beginning of the disc. This means that when trying to copy the game, the bad sectors "throw off" the computer and the CD drive, thereby preventing copying. The games are often referred to as "copy protected games".
In my opinion, these "bas sectors" fall within the CURRENT meaning of a TPM under the Act. However, since licensees in Australia (i.e. customers who have bought the game legitimately) are allowed to make a back-up copy under section 47C, can they employ a method which CIRCUMVENTS this TPM in order to make that copy?
Examples of such "circumvention devices" are programs like Alcohol 120%, CloneCD, and GameJack. These programs are SPECIFICALLY designed to enable copying of copy protected games by forcing the computer to ignore those bad sectors (or read them in a certain way) and therefore not get thrown off by it.
The law is currently not clear as to whether we are currently allowed to use imaging software which incorporates a circumvention device.
However, the Attorney General's Department is currently reviewing the "exceptions" to the TPM provisions. One of them is to specifically allow the use of circumvention devices to enable the making of a back-up copy of a computer program (e.g. games).
They are currently taking submissions and will close on 22 September 2006. Since I am an uber nerd with an unhealthy obsession with copyright law, I will prepare a submission to the Attorney General's Department. Quite exciting really, as this will be my first contribution to the legislative process! And to think that the first contribution to law-making would be in the tax field, HA!
One of the key changes is that it will make the ACT OF CIRCUMVENTION ITSELF an offence under the Act, as currently - only the sale and marketing of such circumvention devices is an infringement under the Act.
Assume for a second that a "mod-chip" for an Xbox is a circumvention device (more on that later). As the law currently stands, the person who sells and makes them is breaking the law (i.e. infringing copyright), while the customer who uses the modchip and the modded xbox is not infringing. The amendment will make the customer liable.
I say ASSUME because the Sony v Stevens case (where a dude selling and installing modchips in the PS2 was sued by Sony, because the modchip overrode region coding and allowed pirated games to run on the PS2) confirms that the "Sony System" of preventing the running of pirated games (which, is practically identical in its functionality to the Xbox system) is NOT a technological protection measure (i.e. TPM), and therefore, the modchip was NOT a circumvention device.
The reasoning being, a circumvention device overrides a TPM. That means a TPM needs to be present before suing someone for supplying circumvention devices.
This is great news for uber nerds in Australia wanting to tinker with their PS2s and Xboxs. Unfortunately, this is bad news for intellectual property lawyers, as some of them are of the opinion (and I share this opinion) that the TPM provisions of the Copyright Act were too narrowly construed by the High Court judges.
Of particular note, the judges, in attempting to discover the purpose or intent of the provision, did not look to the extrinsic material of international treaties and its obligations. It seems that the judges took a rather literal and linguistic approach to the provision.
The Exposure Draft also changes the definition of a TPM. One wonders, if the case were to be litigated in 2007, whether the High Court would have come to the same conclusion in light of an amended definition of a TPM.
I'm not just interested in this because I am an uber nerd who's dying to tinker with my Xbox.
The issue of TPMs and circumvention devices also affects users of computer program who wish to make a back-up copy of a program they have bought (i.e. they are the licensee). Section 47C allows a licensee to make a copy of a computer program for back-up purposes. The purpose can be to allow the user to store the original media (i.e. CD or DVD ROM) and use the back up instead or vice-versa.
You may be familiar with the concept of "imaging" a disc. If not, I'll briefly explain it. If you buy a computer game, it comes on a disc, or CD. Quite often, after installing the game on your hard drive, the game will require you to have the CD in the CD drive in order to allow you to play the game.
The game itself remains on the hard drive, but the requirement for the CD is merely a means to authenticate you as a genuine licensee by detecting whether you are in possession of the original disc. Now, if one was paranoid about losing the disc, you should be, because once you lose that disc, the game on your hard drive becomes unplayable. Therefore, one might, and can under section 47C, make a back-up copy.
You may decide to make a back-up copy in the form of another disc. The other option is to create a file on your computer which looks like a disc. The file is usually an ISO file, and the process of reading the original disc and turning it into an ISO file is called "imaging".
Either way, both methods require your computer and CD drive to read the contents of the original disc. Computer game companies, in an attempt to prevent unauthorised copying, have incorporated a number of "unreadable" or "bad" sectors at the beginning of the disc. This means that when trying to copy the game, the bad sectors "throw off" the computer and the CD drive, thereby preventing copying. The games are often referred to as "copy protected games".
In my opinion, these "bas sectors" fall within the CURRENT meaning of a TPM under the Act. However, since licensees in Australia (i.e. customers who have bought the game legitimately) are allowed to make a back-up copy under section 47C, can they employ a method which CIRCUMVENTS this TPM in order to make that copy?
Examples of such "circumvention devices" are programs like Alcohol 120%, CloneCD, and GameJack. These programs are SPECIFICALLY designed to enable copying of copy protected games by forcing the computer to ignore those bad sectors (or read them in a certain way) and therefore not get thrown off by it.
The law is currently not clear as to whether we are currently allowed to use imaging software which incorporates a circumvention device.
However, the Attorney General's Department is currently reviewing the "exceptions" to the TPM provisions. One of them is to specifically allow the use of circumvention devices to enable the making of a back-up copy of a computer program (e.g. games).
They are currently taking submissions and will close on 22 September 2006. Since I am an uber nerd with an unhealthy obsession with copyright law, I will prepare a submission to the Attorney General's Department. Quite exciting really, as this will be my first contribution to the legislative process! And to think that the first contribution to law-making would be in the tax field, HA!
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Fearless
I just got back from the movies, after church. We watched Fearless. I gotta say, I wasn't that impressed. I mean, there was plenty of martial arts butt-kicking, more so, the movie opens up in a tournament scene with lots of fast fighting.
I gotta say though, most of the movie is actually a flash-back, and its not that the flashbacks are that lame, there's plenty of martial arts too. However, I didn't really like that bit where *warning: spoiler ahead* it was set in the countryside.
I hear that this is Jet-Li's last "Chinese Epic" movie. And I really wasn't expecting extended coverage of Jet Li's interaction with, Moon, a vision impaired girl, living in a Chinese version of Hobbiton.
Really wasn't worth the $15 to be honest. I much prefer Kiss of the Dragon, as James rightly pointed out, being Jet Li's better/best movie.
What do you think of "Fearless"?
I gotta say though, most of the movie is actually a flash-back, and its not that the flashbacks are that lame, there's plenty of martial arts too. However, I didn't really like that bit where *warning: spoiler ahead* it was set in the countryside.
I hear that this is Jet-Li's last "Chinese Epic" movie. And I really wasn't expecting extended coverage of Jet Li's interaction with, Moon, a vision impaired girl, living in a Chinese version of Hobbiton.
Really wasn't worth the $15 to be honest. I much prefer Kiss of the Dragon, as James rightly pointed out, being Jet Li's better/best movie.
What do you think of "Fearless"?
Monday, August 07, 2006
Wedding Bells
Okay - so I'm late in publishing news. I never said that this site was going to be the place where news was going to be broken. Anyways - Erns and Hezza are engaged!!
Since I am speechless, I will try to express my elation, joy, surprise and excitement by hijacking the quotations of other people: (okay, some are just random quotes)
"Holy Crap!" - Frank Barone - Everybody Loves Raymond
"Woohoo!" - Homer Simpson - The Simpsons
"Excellent..." - Monty Burns - The Simpsons
"What the?" - Rove McManus - Rove Live
"Married men don't live longer, it just seems longer." - Tony Denozo - NCIS
"No soup for you! Come back, one year!" - The Soup Nazi - Seinfeld
"Oxygen! I need some oxygen! This is major!" - George Costanza - Seinfeld
"That's gold baby!" - Jerry Seinfeld - Seinfeld
"You beauteeee!" - Chris Handy (aka "Buddha") Channel 7 Rugby Commentator
You know, I thought I had more quotes in me. How disappointing...
Since I am speechless, I will try to express my elation, joy, surprise and excitement by hijacking the quotations of other people: (okay, some are just random quotes)
"Holy Crap!" - Frank Barone - Everybody Loves Raymond
"Woohoo!" - Homer Simpson - The Simpsons
"Excellent..." - Monty Burns - The Simpsons
"What the?" - Rove McManus - Rove Live
"Married men don't live longer, it just seems longer." - Tony Denozo - NCIS
"No soup for you! Come back, one year!" - The Soup Nazi - Seinfeld
"Oxygen! I need some oxygen! This is major!" - George Costanza - Seinfeld
"That's gold baby!" - Jerry Seinfeld - Seinfeld
"You beauteeee!" - Chris Handy (aka "Buddha") Channel 7 Rugby Commentator
You know, I thought I had more quotes in me. How disappointing...
Saturday, July 29, 2006
Telemarketing Calls
Okay, I know this is an old topic, but recently I have been getting a lot of telemarkting calls during dinner time. I know these people are only doing their job, and there's no need to be rude to them - it's just that when I say "I'm not interested", they just keep talking to me.
I find this very frustrating. I am quite happy to be polite and say "I'm not interested" even if I say it 4 or 5 times. It just that the persistence of the caller makes me a little upset.
I have found a way to make these calls, not a reason to get frustrated or upset, but perhaps to have a little fun, and at not too much expense for the caller:
Me: "Hello"
Caller: "Hello Mr Yap, you have been selected to receive a new mobile phone"
Me: "I think you have the wrong number"
Caller: "Is this [my phone number]?"
Me: "Yes it is"
Caller: "Then I have the right number - in order to receive your free phone, I just need to ask you a few questions - do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Hang on, I don't understand. Why are you calling me? I don't remember entering any competition. Are you sure you have the right person?"
Caller: "Yes, I am sure you are the right person. Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "I don't understand - but why are you calling ME?"
Caller: "I'm not just calling you, you have been selected among a group of residents from your county... uh suburb."
Me: "My suburb? - Yes, but why are you calling me?"
Caller: "I'm not just calling you, a few other people from your suburb have also been selected."
Me: "Oh, I see. But how did I get selected?"
Caller: "You have been chosen at random. According to a survey, people in your suburb spend on average, between $40 to $50 in mobile phone calls. Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Hang on, why are you calling me again? I don't understand, why are you calling me?"
Caller: "Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "I don't know why you're calling me, I don't feel comfortable answering that question. Can we please end this conversation."
Caller: "Thank you" [hangs up]
As you can see, this call went for about 2 minutes, a lot longer than the usual "GO AWAY" type conversation. But the difference is, I came away from that conversation feeling, well, a little amused, rather than frustrated. And I didn't even have to get nasty with the caller.
So, if you find yourself getting regularly frustrated with cold callers at inopportune time, perhaps its time you had a little fun. You may want to try something like this:
Me: "Hello?"
Caller: "Hello, this is Bob from So-And-So Communications - "
Me: "Please enter your password, followed by the hash key."
Caller; "Hello?"
Me: "Please enter your password, followed by the hash key."
Or something like this:
Me: "Hello?"
Caller: "Hello {blah blah} do you own a mobile phone?
Me: "Blue"
Caller: "Sorry, I didn't hear you, do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "About 4pm, give or take half an hour."
Caller: "Sir, I'm not quite sure I understand you, do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Woollen jumpers are my preference, they keep you warm even if they get wet. Did you know professional kayakers wear wool?"
etc etc.
Any way - have fun with it. Remember, be polite.
I find this very frustrating. I am quite happy to be polite and say "I'm not interested" even if I say it 4 or 5 times. It just that the persistence of the caller makes me a little upset.
I have found a way to make these calls, not a reason to get frustrated or upset, but perhaps to have a little fun, and at not too much expense for the caller:
Me: "Hello"
Caller: "Hello Mr Yap, you have been selected to receive a new mobile phone"
Me: "I think you have the wrong number"
Caller: "Is this [my phone number]?"
Me: "Yes it is"
Caller: "Then I have the right number - in order to receive your free phone, I just need to ask you a few questions - do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Hang on, I don't understand. Why are you calling me? I don't remember entering any competition. Are you sure you have the right person?"
Caller: "Yes, I am sure you are the right person. Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "I don't understand - but why are you calling ME?"
Caller: "I'm not just calling you, you have been selected among a group of residents from your county... uh suburb."
Me: "My suburb? - Yes, but why are you calling me?"
Caller: "I'm not just calling you, a few other people from your suburb have also been selected."
Me: "Oh, I see. But how did I get selected?"
Caller: "You have been chosen at random. According to a survey, people in your suburb spend on average, between $40 to $50 in mobile phone calls. Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Hang on, why are you calling me again? I don't understand, why are you calling me?"
Caller: "Do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "I don't know why you're calling me, I don't feel comfortable answering that question. Can we please end this conversation."
Caller: "Thank you" [hangs up]
As you can see, this call went for about 2 minutes, a lot longer than the usual "GO AWAY" type conversation. But the difference is, I came away from that conversation feeling, well, a little amused, rather than frustrated. And I didn't even have to get nasty with the caller.
So, if you find yourself getting regularly frustrated with cold callers at inopportune time, perhaps its time you had a little fun. You may want to try something like this:
Me: "Hello?"
Caller: "Hello, this is Bob from So-And-So Communications - "
Me: "Please enter your password, followed by the hash key."
Caller; "Hello?"
Me: "Please enter your password, followed by the hash key."
Or something like this:
Me: "Hello?"
Caller: "Hello {blah blah} do you own a mobile phone?
Me: "Blue"
Caller: "Sorry, I didn't hear you, do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "About 4pm, give or take half an hour."
Caller: "Sir, I'm not quite sure I understand you, do you own a mobile phone?"
Me: "Woollen jumpers are my preference, they keep you warm even if they get wet. Did you know professional kayakers wear wool?"
etc etc.
Any way - have fun with it. Remember, be polite.
Friday, July 07, 2006
Communications Infrastructure - what the?
Can anyone please tell me why Australia, the country renowned for its innovation and creativity, has such a poor telecommunications system?
I've been scratching my head lately as to why Telstra hasn't been privatised already. Or at the very least, why the darn thing hasn't been split in half.
I know some of you would say that since its a government enterprise, built with taxpayer's money - it should remain in taxpayer's hands. I'm not so sure about that. I know Chob will want to qualify me severely on this one, but the practice of privatising government owned businesses (otherwise known as Public Trading Enterprises "PTEs") stems from at least two things:
1. An underlying ideological belief (whether founded or not) that the private sector is more efficient at running certain enterprises.
and
2. The government needs money, lots of it, and really soon.
How do we all feel about the privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank (1991 through to 1998 - raising a total of $8.1 billion), or QANTAS (1993 and 1996 - raising a total of $2 billion), or Australian Airlines (whoops - 1992 - $400 million). Are you still burning with anger?
As for staying in the public's hands - the government isn't giving it away - its getting money for it. I suppose what the government does with the proceeds is a related yet separate issue.
Now to Telstra. It owns pretty much all of the copper wire and telephone exchanges that carries all of our usual phone calls on the Publicly Switched Telephony Network (PSTN) otherwise known as the good old Plain Old Telephone System (POTS). Only recently has Optus laid some of its own cable and infrastucture.
So - how do you get phone services from other carriers like AAPT or Primus Telecom? These companies rent the phone lines from Telstra via wholesale, and rent the lines back to you via retail. So Telstra is a wholesaler. However, you can all get Telstra phone services to your place. This also makes Telstra a retailer.
No big deal right? No until Telstra the Wholesaler and Telstra the Retailer do something like this:
OPTUS: Hello Mr Telstra Wholesaler - I would like to rent some wholesale phone line from you.
TELSTRA THE WHOLESALER: Certainly, that will be $30.36 per month.
OPTUS: Umm, but your good buddy, Telstra Retailer is offering phone line rental to the general public for $26.95. I can't even sell to the public at that price.
TELSTRA THE WHOLESALER: That's why he's MY buddy. Now bugger off or pay.
OPTUS: Or go to the ACCC.
And it did happen in December 2005.
And even if Optus wins the court case, the fact remains that Telstra is one company that does two things.
Although the plan to operationally separate Telstra has been approved by the government, its still one company - which will always carry the risk of "internal collusion". In my opinion, the best way to ensure that Telstra the Wholesaler treats Telstra the Retailer just like every retailer is to fully privatise Telstra the Retailer. As for Telstra the Wholesaler - I'm not sure what we should do about that one. Perhaps we could keep in in the government's hands for now. However, the government doesn't exactly have a good track record with encouraging or producing an environment conducive to rolliing out fibre optic cable or whatever else is better than the good ol' twisted pair copper lines we all know and love.
So I say, split Telstra, flog off the retail part, and keep the wholesale part for now. Maybe then we'll see some decent pricing on phone line rental, which is the major sticking point for consumers trying to get a good deal on ADSL.
I've been scratching my head lately as to why Telstra hasn't been privatised already. Or at the very least, why the darn thing hasn't been split in half.
I know some of you would say that since its a government enterprise, built with taxpayer's money - it should remain in taxpayer's hands. I'm not so sure about that. I know Chob will want to qualify me severely on this one, but the practice of privatising government owned businesses (otherwise known as Public Trading Enterprises "PTEs") stems from at least two things:
1. An underlying ideological belief (whether founded or not) that the private sector is more efficient at running certain enterprises.
and
2. The government needs money, lots of it, and really soon.
How do we all feel about the privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank (1991 through to 1998 - raising a total of $8.1 billion), or QANTAS (1993 and 1996 - raising a total of $2 billion), or Australian Airlines (whoops - 1992 - $400 million). Are you still burning with anger?
As for staying in the public's hands - the government isn't giving it away - its getting money for it. I suppose what the government does with the proceeds is a related yet separate issue.
Now to Telstra. It owns pretty much all of the copper wire and telephone exchanges that carries all of our usual phone calls on the Publicly Switched Telephony Network (PSTN) otherwise known as the good old Plain Old Telephone System (POTS). Only recently has Optus laid some of its own cable and infrastucture.
So - how do you get phone services from other carriers like AAPT or Primus Telecom? These companies rent the phone lines from Telstra via wholesale, and rent the lines back to you via retail. So Telstra is a wholesaler. However, you can all get Telstra phone services to your place. This also makes Telstra a retailer.
No big deal right? No until Telstra the Wholesaler and Telstra the Retailer do something like this:
OPTUS: Hello Mr Telstra Wholesaler - I would like to rent some wholesale phone line from you.
TELSTRA THE WHOLESALER: Certainly, that will be $30.36 per month.
OPTUS: Umm, but your good buddy, Telstra Retailer is offering phone line rental to the general public for $26.95. I can't even sell to the public at that price.
TELSTRA THE WHOLESALER: That's why he's MY buddy. Now bugger off or pay.
OPTUS: Or go to the ACCC.
And it did happen in December 2005.
And even if Optus wins the court case, the fact remains that Telstra is one company that does two things.
Although the plan to operationally separate Telstra has been approved by the government, its still one company - which will always carry the risk of "internal collusion". In my opinion, the best way to ensure that Telstra the Wholesaler treats Telstra the Retailer just like every retailer is to fully privatise Telstra the Retailer. As for Telstra the Wholesaler - I'm not sure what we should do about that one. Perhaps we could keep in in the government's hands for now. However, the government doesn't exactly have a good track record with encouraging or producing an environment conducive to rolliing out fibre optic cable or whatever else is better than the good ol' twisted pair copper lines we all know and love.
So I say, split Telstra, flog off the retail part, and keep the wholesale part for now. Maybe then we'll see some decent pricing on phone line rental, which is the major sticking point for consumers trying to get a good deal on ADSL.
Sunday, June 04, 2006
What does "goodness" mean?
Okay, I am not talking about good vs evil goodness, but dietary goodness. I have just looked at a box of muesli bars and written in nice big colourful letters is "with the goodness of grains." It reminds me of reading a box of rice bubbles bars (LCMs I think), and it claimed to have the "goodness" of 1 cup of milk.
What in the world is "goodness"?!?!?! It's certainly not anything to do with water content - otherwise LCMs would be all mushy! As for the goodness of grains, does this mean I can feed it to livestock?
If there's one disturbing trend about the marketing of food, it's the use of the word "goodness" to give the impression that the product is healthy by relating it to a healthy product.
Can the goodness of grains be the carbohydrate energy content? or the fibre? can the goodness of milk be fat? or calcium? or sugar? or lactose? (that's NOT good).
Does Nicorette gum contain the "goodness" of 2 cigarettes?
Okay, I'm off to have my fruit, after all, if I wanted the goodness of a piece of fruit , I'll eat a piece of fruit.
What in the world is "goodness"?!?!?! It's certainly not anything to do with water content - otherwise LCMs would be all mushy! As for the goodness of grains, does this mean I can feed it to livestock?
If there's one disturbing trend about the marketing of food, it's the use of the word "goodness" to give the impression that the product is healthy by relating it to a healthy product.
Can the goodness of grains be the carbohydrate energy content? or the fibre? can the goodness of milk be fat? or calcium? or sugar? or lactose? (that's NOT good).
Does Nicorette gum contain the "goodness" of 2 cigarettes?
Okay, I'm off to have my fruit, after all, if I wanted the goodness of a piece of fruit , I'll eat a piece of fruit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)