期中考題參考
1.何謂自由軟體
2.自由軟體面對的挑戰
3.和未開放原始碼的軟體
4.自由度高的套件，為啥不欸當作自由軟體
5.DEBIAN社群契約 自由軟體領導方針
6.自由軟體使用者行為規範
2010年4月21日 星期三
四月十五日 開放進用筆記
期中考題參考
1.免費近用出版品的接受度
2.出版社在開放進用方面獲得哪些利益
3.德國研究基金會的作為
4.漢堡大學DEAL WITH開放進用
5.OA在圖書館如何實現其價值
6.哪些標章不能同時出現
1.免費近用出版品的接受度
2.出版社在開放進用方面獲得哪些利益
3.德國研究基金會的作為
4.漢堡大學DEAL WITH開放進用
5.OA在圖書館如何實現其價值
6.哪些標章不能同時出現
2009年6月11日 星期四
2009年4月27日 星期一
搜尋引擎 期中考後心得 4月27日
1.考完之後，老師說這次的結果不是很理想，並詢問是否要再考一次，有同學說下次會考的比較好，老師不以為意，並提出了準備了一段時間都準備不好的考試，一個禮拜難道就可以補回來？這的確是很確切的問題，對我來說是沒錯的，因為我考完之後連想要看的精神都沒有，懶散了，的確不會考的比較好，但是狗急跳牆，也說不定會有人能夠一個禮拜力挽狂瀾，這誰都說不准。
2.我登入了orkut，尋找相關有興趣的社群來加入，關於我喜歡的金屬樂團的社群，巴西的社群超多的，美國是少數，台灣根本沒有，目前還蠻適合來建立個台灣的社群的，不過能存活多久？試試看才知道。
2.我登入了orkut，尋找相關有興趣的社群來加入，關於我喜歡的金屬樂團的社群，巴西的社群超多的，美國是少數，台灣根本沒有，目前還蠻適合來建立個台灣的社群的，不過能存活多久？試試看才知道。
2009年1月9日 星期五
開放近用 翻譯
全部翻譯完成版本，翻譯的確是很困難的一件事。
Open Access from the Point of View of the Coalition for Action
‘Copyright for Education and Research’
By Rainer Kuhlen, Chair of Information Science, University of Konstanz; Spokesman for the Coalition for Action ‘Copyright
for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’)
從開放近用的角度來看‘教育和研究的版權’聯盟的行動
The Coalition for Action ‘Copyright for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’, ABU) was formed in the context of the current debate surrounding the reform of German copyright law. It aims to represent the interests of education and science and scholarship in a liberal treatment of knowledge and information dissemination vis a vis the legislator. The basis of the ABU is the Gottingen Declaration of 2004, signed by 6 academic organisations, 328 learned societies and 5 500 individuals(as of April 2007). Its central message is as follows: ‘In a digitised and networked information society, access to global information for the purposes of education and science must be guaranteed at all times from any place!’ This is certainly compatible with the goals of Open Access.
為計畫'版權的教育和研究' （Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’，新華社）聯盟的行動形成關於目前圍繞著改善德國版權法的辯論。它的目標是代表教育、科學和學問的利益對於議員散佈自由知識和資訊的處置。新華社最初是以2004年的哥廷根宣言簽署了6學術團體， 328名學術團體和5500個個人（截至2007年4月） 。其主要消息如下： '在一個數位和網路訊息的社會，為了教育和科學目的，全球的資訊必須保證在何時何地都可以近用！ '這無疑是符合開放近用的目標。
The ABU can only indirectly promote the implementation of the principle of Open Access in education and science. Generally, Open Access is not impaired by copyright. Copyright grants authors publishing rights. An Open Access publication, however, means that the author’s exploitation rights are no longer exclusive. However, it is the authors’ decision whether to also make their work available for commercial exploitation through contractual agreements.
ABU只能在原則下間接地促進開放近用在教育和科學上的落實。一般來說，開放近用不會受版權的損害。版權授予作者出版的權利。一份開放近用的出版物，無論如何，這意味著作者宣傳權利不再是專有性的。然而，是否讓他們的工作透過契約上的協定可利用商業宣傳，是作者的決定。
In any case, the author’s personal/moral rights are not affected by Open Access. Some of the problems in the overlapping areas of Open Access and copyright are as follows:
無論如何，作者在私人/道德上的權利都沒有被開放近用影響，一些關於開放近用與版權在重疊區域上的問題如下：
It would be easier for many authors to start applying Open Access if Section 38 of the German Copyright Law was changed so that authors of contributions to periodically published collections could have their exploitation rights (for non-commercial purposes) restored after a maximum period of six months from the date of the commercial publication of their work and so that one could not even waive this right contractually. The time delay may not be in the spirit of Open Access, but this regulation could inspire many authors to make their work freely available after an embargo period of this type.
如果德國版權法令第38條的改變對很多作者開始上傳開放近用來說會變的簡單些，作者在定期出版作品的貢獻可以使作者的宣傳權(非商業目的)從他們的商業出版品工作和沒辦法合約上的放棄權力的那天開始，最多六個月的期間內之後恢復。
時間延遲並不是開放近用的精神，但是此項管制可以激勵許多作者讓他們的工作在一段這類型禁用的期間之後免費被使用。
A difficult question is whether, in addition to being encouraged to make their work available for Open Access publication, authors should also be obliged to deposit, in parallel at least, any work in paralleling from research supported by public funds in the Open Access repositories of their institutions. This is currently a controversial issue, since, for some, not only the questions of ‘whether’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ constitute academic freedom, but also the question of ‘where’. For others, the question of ‘where’ should not be left exclusively to the free choice of the individual. The ABU tends to support the latter opinion, so that, in line with the goal of the Gottingen Declaration, all of the knowledge produced with the help of public funds can be made publicly available. Of course authors should continue to be allowed to choose freely where they publish their work commercially, so long as the Open Access publication is guaranteed without delay.
有一個困難的問題是，除了被鼓勵讓他們的工作可適用在開放進用出版品之外，作者應該也要被強制保存，最少相等平行，藉由他們的體系裡開放近用寶庫中公眾資金支持的研究，任何的工作都是對等的。這是目前一個有爭議的議題，因為對一些人來說，不只是”是否”，”何時”和”如何”組成的學術自由，也是”何處”的問題。對其他人來說，”何處”的問題在個人的自由選擇中應該不能被獨立。ABU偏向去支持後者的意見，結果，符合哥廷根宣言的目標，藉由可公開提供的公眾基金的幫助 ，全部的知識被產生。當然作者應該繼續被允許選擇出版他們的作品是否商業化的自由，只要開放進用出版
A considerable part of the knowledge that should be openly accessible is contained in so-called ‘orphaned’ works. On the basis of their publication dates, these works are still protected by copyright, but their authors can only be located with great difficulty or not at all. Due to this uncertain legal situation libraries often do not dare to digitalise these culturally important items, whatever their media form, and make them freely accessible to the public. So far, legislators have not solved the problem of orphaned works. The ABU has been active in this area with suggestions, and has in principle joined the German Research Foundation’s (DFG) demand on the EU to solve this situation by considering and treating these works as if they were in the public domain until a rights holder objects. From the point of view of the DFG and the Coalition for Action, it is imperative for the freedom of research and education that the digitalisation of orphaned works or works in the public domain does not justify the creation of new copyrights or exploitation rights of the digitalised original. A similarly liberal solution should be found for works that are no longer in print.
一部分可觀的應該被開放的近用知識包含在稱為孤兒的工作中；根據它們的出版日期，這些工作仍然被版權保護，但是他們的作者只能被定位在很大的困難或是絲毫沒有困難；由於這些不確定的合法狀況圖書館員常常不願意去數位化這些有文化性的作品，無論它們的媒體形式如何，以及讓它們被自由的公開近用。到目前為止，立法委員沒有解決孤兒工作的問題。ABU已經被建議在這個領域活躍起來，以及已經在原則上加入德國研究基金會(DFG)根據歐盟的要求來解決這些情況藉由 以及從DFG的觀點和，對研究和教育的自由來說是迫切需要的，在公眾區域工作或是孤兒工作的數位化沒辦法證實新版權的創作品或是原始數位化的廣告權。一個類似應該在工作上發明的自由處理型態不再只是影印。
The ABU sees Open Access as well as free licensing forms such as ‘creative commons’ that support authors’ information autonomy as promising solutions to the regulatory impasses of current copyright law without fundamentally questioning it.
ABU視開放進用和自由許可形式是一樣的像是”創作上的共識”，這共識支持作者的資訊自主像是對沒有基礎上質疑目前版權法規定的絕境。
Open Access from the Point of View of the Coalition for Action
‘Copyright for Education and Research’
By Rainer Kuhlen, Chair of Information Science, University of Konstanz; Spokesman for the Coalition for Action ‘Copyright
for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’)
從開放近用的角度來看‘教育和研究的版權’聯盟的行動
The Coalition for Action ‘Copyright for Education and Research’ (Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’, ABU) was formed in the context of the current debate surrounding the reform of German copyright law. It aims to represent the interests of education and science and scholarship in a liberal treatment of knowledge and information dissemination vis a vis the legislator. The basis of the ABU is the Gottingen Declaration of 2004, signed by 6 academic organisations, 328 learned societies and 5 500 individuals(as of April 2007). Its central message is as follows: ‘In a digitised and networked information society, access to global information for the purposes of education and science must be guaranteed at all times from any place!’ This is certainly compatible with the goals of Open Access.
為計畫'版權的教育和研究' （Aktionsbundnis ‘Urheberrecht fur Bildung und Wissenschaft’，新華社）聯盟的行動形成關於目前圍繞著改善德國版權法的辯論。它的目標是代表教育、科學和學問的利益對於議員散佈自由知識和資訊的處置。新華社最初是以2004年的哥廷根宣言簽署了6學術團體， 328名學術團體和5500個個人（截至2007年4月） 。其主要消息如下： '在一個數位和網路訊息的社會，為了教育和科學目的，全球的資訊必須保證在何時何地都可以近用！ '這無疑是符合開放近用的目標。
The ABU can only indirectly promote the implementation of the principle of Open Access in education and science. Generally, Open Access is not impaired by copyright. Copyright grants authors publishing rights. An Open Access publication, however, means that the author’s exploitation rights are no longer exclusive. However, it is the authors’ decision whether to also make their work available for commercial exploitation through contractual agreements.
ABU只能在原則下間接地促進開放近用在教育和科學上的落實。一般來說，開放近用不會受版權的損害。版權授予作者出版的權利。一份開放近用的出版物，無論如何，這意味著作者宣傳權利不再是專有性的。然而，是否讓他們的工作透過契約上的協定可利用商業宣傳，是作者的決定。
In any case, the author’s personal/moral rights are not affected by Open Access. Some of the problems in the overlapping areas of Open Access and copyright are as follows:
無論如何，作者在私人/道德上的權利都沒有被開放近用影響，一些關於開放近用與版權在重疊區域上的問題如下：
It would be easier for many authors to start applying Open Access if Section 38 of the German Copyright Law was changed so that authors of contributions to periodically published collections could have their exploitation rights (for non-commercial purposes) restored after a maximum period of six months from the date of the commercial publication of their work and so that one could not even waive this right contractually. The time delay may not be in the spirit of Open Access, but this regulation could inspire many authors to make their work freely available after an embargo period of this type.
如果德國版權法令第38條的改變對很多作者開始上傳開放近用來說會變的簡單些，作者在定期出版作品的貢獻可以使作者的宣傳權(非商業目的)從他們的商業出版品工作和沒辦法合約上的放棄權力的那天開始，最多六個月的期間內之後恢復。
時間延遲並不是開放近用的精神，但是此項管制可以激勵許多作者讓他們的工作在一段這類型禁用的期間之後免費被使用。
A difficult question is whether, in addition to being encouraged to make their work available for Open Access publication, authors should also be obliged to deposit, in parallel at least, any work in paralleling from research supported by public funds in the Open Access repositories of their institutions. This is currently a controversial issue, since, for some, not only the questions of ‘whether’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ constitute academic freedom, but also the question of ‘where’. For others, the question of ‘where’ should not be left exclusively to the free choice of the individual. The ABU tends to support the latter opinion, so that, in line with the goal of the Gottingen Declaration, all of the knowledge produced with the help of public funds can be made publicly available. Of course authors should continue to be allowed to choose freely where they publish their work commercially, so long as the Open Access publication is guaranteed without delay.
有一個困難的問題是，除了被鼓勵讓他們的工作可適用在開放進用出版品之外，作者應該也要被強制保存，最少相等平行，藉由他們的體系裡開放近用寶庫中公眾資金支持的研究，任何的工作都是對等的。這是目前一個有爭議的議題，因為對一些人來說，不只是”是否”，”何時”和”如何”組成的學術自由，也是”何處”的問題。對其他人來說，”何處”的問題在個人的自由選擇中應該不能被獨立。ABU偏向去支持後者的意見，結果，符合哥廷根宣言的目標，藉由可公開提供的公眾基金的幫助 ，全部的知識被產生。當然作者應該繼續被允許選擇出版他們的作品是否商業化的自由，只要開放進用出版
A considerable part of the knowledge that should be openly accessible is contained in so-called ‘orphaned’ works. On the basis of their publication dates, these works are still protected by copyright, but their authors can only be located with great difficulty or not at all. Due to this uncertain legal situation libraries often do not dare to digitalise these culturally important items, whatever their media form, and make them freely accessible to the public. So far, legislators have not solved the problem of orphaned works. The ABU has been active in this area with suggestions, and has in principle joined the German Research Foundation’s (DFG) demand on the EU to solve this situation by considering and treating these works as if they were in the public domain until a rights holder objects. From the point of view of the DFG and the Coalition for Action, it is imperative for the freedom of research and education that the digitalisation of orphaned works or works in the public domain does not justify the creation of new copyrights or exploitation rights of the digitalised original. A similarly liberal solution should be found for works that are no longer in print.
一部分可觀的應該被開放的近用知識包含在稱為孤兒的工作中；根據它們的出版日期，這些工作仍然被版權保護，但是他們的作者只能被定位在很大的困難或是絲毫沒有困難；由於這些不確定的合法狀況圖書館員常常不願意去數位化這些有文化性的作品，無論它們的媒體形式如何，以及讓它們被自由的公開近用。到目前為止，立法委員沒有解決孤兒工作的問題。ABU已經被建議在這個領域活躍起來，以及已經在原則上加入德國研究基金會(DFG)根據歐盟的要求來解決這些情況藉由 以及從DFG的觀點和，對研究和教育的自由來說是迫切需要的，在公眾區域工作或是孤兒工作的數位化沒辦法證實新版權的創作品或是原始數位化的廣告權。一個類似應該在工作上發明的自由處理型態不再只是影印。
The ABU sees Open Access as well as free licensing forms such as ‘creative commons’ that support authors’ information autonomy as promising solutions to the regulatory impasses of current copyright law without fundamentally questioning it.
ABU視開放進用和自由許可形式是一樣的像是”創作上的共識”，這共識支持作者的資訊自主像是對沒有基礎上質疑目前版權法規定的絕境。
2008年12月29日 星期一
網路社群建立與應用 12月29日 翻譯
查了16個單字，大概花了兩個小時半左右
One day, while he was shaving with a straight razor that was so worn it could no longer be sharpened, the idea came to him. What if the blade could be made of a thin metal strip? Rather than spending time maintaining the blades, men could simply discard them when they became dull. A few years of metallurgy experimentation later, the disposable-blade safety razor was born. But it didn't take off immediately. In its first year, 1903, Gillette sold a total of 51 razors and 168 blades. Over the next two decades, he tried every marketing gimmick he could think of. He put his own face on the package, making him both legendary and, some people believed, fictional. He sold millions of razors to the Army at a steep discount, hoping the habits soldiers developed at war would carry over to peacetime. He sold razors in bulk to banks so they could give them away with new deposits ("shave and save" campaigns). Razors were bundled with everything from Wrigley's gum to packets of coffee, tea, spices, and marshmallows. The freebies helped to sell those products, but the tactic helped Gillette even more. By giving away the razors, which were useless by themselves, he was creating demand for disposable blades. A few billion blades later, this business model is now the foundation of entire industries: Give away the cell phone, sell the monthly plan; make the videogame console cheap and sell expensive games; install fancy coffeemakers in offices at no charge so you can sell managers expensive coffee sachets.
有一天，當他在使用直的刮鬍刀刮鬍子的時候發現刮鬍刀已經很舊了沒有辦法在磨的很鋒利，他想到了一個靈感。如果刀鋒可以做成很薄的金屬片會怎樣？而不是花時間保持刮鬍刀片的鋒利，當刀鋒變成頓的時候男人可以直接的拋棄它們。在冶金實驗一些年後，刮鬍刀片可拋棄式的安全刮鬍刀誕生了。但是沒有立刻風行。在它的第一年，1903年，Gillette賣出了總共51個刮鬍刀以及168個刮鬍刀片，在未來的二十年中，他嘗試任何他想的到的宣傳噱頭，他把他自己的臉放在包裝上，讓他自己同時變的著名的以及一些人覺得的，虛構的。他以不可信的折扣賣了百萬個刮鬍刀給軍隊，希望讓軍人在戰爭時產生習慣在和平後也會帶著它們(刮鬍刀)。他以散裝刮鬍刀賣給銀行讓他們(銀行)可以遠離新的押金(刮鬍子以及存款比賽)。刮鬍刀與箭牌口香糖到咖啡、茶、香料、以及棉花糖都相關。除了免費幫忙去銷售這些產品，但是戰術幫了Gillette更多。經由贈送很多對他們沒有利益得刮鬍刀，他創造了對於可拋棄式刮鬍刀片的需求在幾十一刮鬍刀片之後，這種商業模式是整個行業的基礎：贈送手機，賣月租費；讓遊戲機便宜但是銷售比較貴的遊戲片；安裝昂貴的咖啡機在公司裡面不收費但是可以賣管理者昂貴的咖啡袋。
2008年12月22日 星期一
網路社群建立與應用 翻譯 12月22日
翻譯了1小時 查了5個單字
At the age of 40, King Gillette was a frustrated inventor, a bitter anticapitalist, and a salesman of cork-lined bottle caps. It was 1895, and despite ideas, energy, and wealthy parents, he had little to show for his work. He blamed the evils of market competition. Indeed, the previous year he had published a book, The Human Drift, which argued that all industry should be taken over by a single corporation owned by the public and that millions of Americans should live in a giant city called Metropolis powered by Niagara Falls. His boss at the bottle cap company, meanwhile, had just one piece of advice: Invent something people use and throw away.
King Gillette在40歲的時候是一個挫折的發明家，一個很苦的反資本主義者，以及一個軟木塞瓶蓋銷售員，在沒有構想、精神以及有錢的父母之下的1895年，他很難發揮它的工作。他責怪競爭市場的對手們，事實上，在前一年他已經出版了一本書，人類的漂移，在爭論全部的行業應該被一個公眾擁有的公司以及百萬的美國人應該生活在一個叫做Metropolis的大城市由Niagara Falls維持。他的在瓶蓋公司的老闆，同時有個一份建議：發明一些人們使用以及丟掉的東西。
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)