With so many choices today, matching database to need isn’t getting any easier.
The biggest debate in copyright law is also the most fundamental: for what purpose does copyright exist? There are two schools of thought about the appropriate
From the conclusion:
Realistically, no framework that we could develop will eliminate what appear to be ethical inconsistencies between these different situations. But we can acknowledge that we currently have a systemic bias against prevention and that decisions about whether to provide or withhold proven preventive actions are not just tough budgetary choices, but are also ethical ones. Because withholding primary prevention leads to unnecessary suffering and death, I believe that as a society we should be just as creative in finding ways to pay for it as we have been in finding ways to pay for the penniless woman’s lung-cancer treatment.
I recently presented a paper on a subject close to this, on big data ethics. A framing argument had to do with the obligations “the public good” puts on agencies, public or not. The classic turn in the NEJM perspective is to be “realistic,” which is to say, recognise scarcity or the inability to satisfy all. But the conclusion also raises some deeply problematic terms, like “we” “as a society” and so on. Terms that assert a unified society and, thus, the possibility of an identifiable public good, or that which benefits the people as a whole.
I find the terms problematic not because I would disagree with the notion of a “we” or of “society” to which the we would be belong or comprise it. It’s problematic because these same terms so easily become terms of division, of exclusion, not inclusion; of nations bounded by essential identities, wherein “culture” might as well be bred in the bone and not just what one does.
Yet, of course, medical decisions are inevitably nowadays financial ones, and no more so than in the US. It’s not likely to change soon or fast; and indeed costs are only going to rise. Which is where the logic of the public good comes into play, and solutions that serve that good and articulated by governmental agencies become very real.
Perspective from The New England Journal of Medicine — When Is It Ethical to Withhold Prevention?
Jörg Blumtritt: Data driven storytelling: from facts to narratives – Content Strategy Forum 2014 – YouTube
At this week’s Strata+Hadoop conference, I had the great good fortune to meet and talk with Jörg Blumtritt of Datarella. And since then–since yesterday–have been going over some of the interesting work he’s generously posted. Like this:
Varanda ITS Especial – Marcus Boon – Vanguardas, Underground e Pirataria Ingressos, Seg, 21/03/2016 às 18:30 | Eventbrite
Marcus’s work approaches the attractive problem of originality and reproduction sideways and historically. It’s work that I enjoy and that also bears relation to my own dissertation of long ago, which ultimately was on “liking” (uncanny similarity, unwanted desires, disreputable identity, exuberant marginality). That I’ve since worked in open source and with licenses that take as their point of departure the idea of legal copying is expected. So is my continued interest in the real relevance of Boon’s work for my own practice. But it’s also acutely relevant to that huge world of aesthetics—the world of pictorial art, fiction, poetry, tv, games, etc. All those objects imagined into representative being and valued as much for their use of given formal rules as for their originality in expression.
VARANDA ESPECIAL ITS – VANGUARDAS, UNDERGROUND E PIRATARIA COM MARCUS BOON, PROFESSOR DA UNIVERSIDADE DE YORK (TORONTO), JORNALISTA, ESCRITOR E PESQUISADOR O ITS tem a honra de convidar para Varanda ITS especial, com Marcus Boon, professor da York University em Toronto, pesquisador musical, ativista, escritor e jornalista. Autor do livro In Praise of Copying, publicado pela editora da Universidade de Harvard, no qual analisa as práticas de apropriaçao musical, pirataria e as cenas culturais globais. Escreve para a prestigiosa revista inglesa The Wire, considerada a “bíblia” da música underground mundial. Está no Brasil investigando as cenas culturais experimentais, especialmente na música, no Rio de Janeiro e outras capitais brasileiras para seu novo livro Essas e outras questões serão discutidas nessa Varanda especial realizada pelo ITS Rio. A Varanda acontecerá no dia 21 de março às 18h30, no na sede do ITS (Praia do Flamengo, 100, Cobertura) Este é um evento imperdível e que não acontecerá novamente. Como sempre, haverá nossa tradicional degustação de comes e bebes. Venha debater com o ITS diferentes visões a cultura mundial, o underground e as vanguardas. O evento é gratuito (mas fique à vontade para doar ao ITS). INSCRIÇÃO PRÉVIA OBRIGATÓRIA POR ESTE SITE. VAGAS LIMITADAS. TRAGA SUA IDENTIDADE PARA ENTRAR. Palestrantes: Marcus Boon é autor do livro In Praise of Copying, publicado pela editora da Universidade de Harvard, no qual analisa as práticas de apropriaçao musical, pirataria e as cenas culturais globais. Escreve para a prestigiosa revista inglesa The Wire, considerada a “bíblia” da música underground mundial. Atuou também como DJ, especializado em dancehall. Está escrevendo um livro em que compila várias cenas musicais do do underground mundial e das “subculturas” nas suas diversas manifestações. Publicou o livro Nothing: Three Inquiries on Buddhism, analisando a prática milenar no contexto da cultura contemporânea. Está no Brasil investigando as cena de música experimental no Rio de Janeiro e outras capitais brasileiras para seu novo livro. Mediação e Interlocução: Ronaldo Lemos: advogado, especialista em mídia, cultura, propriedade intelectual e tecnologia. É diretor do Instituto de Tecnologia e Sociedade do Rio de Janeiro (ITSrio.org) e professor da Faculdade de Direito da UERJ (Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro). Foi um dos arquitetos do “Marco Civil da Internet”, lei que protege direitos como privacidade e neutralidade da rede, aprovada em abril de 2014. Apresenta o programa Navegador na Globonews, focado em inovação. É mestre em direito pela universidade de Harvard e doutor em direito pela USP. É pesquisador visitante e representante no Brasil do MIT Media Lab. Foi professor visitante e pesquisador nas Universidades de Princeton e Oxford. Membro do Conselho de Administração da Mozilla e de várias outras organizações na área de tecnologia. Foi eleito em 2015 pelo Fórum Econômico Mundial como um dos “Jovens Líderes Globais”. Fellow da Ashoka. Membro do conselho de administração de várias organizações internacionais, como Mozilla e Access Now. Membro e vice-presidente do Conselho de Comunicação Social do Congresso Nacional. Colunista semanal da Folha de São Paulo. Consultor de tecnologia do programa Esquenta! da Rede Globo. Autor de vários artigos, tendo publicado os livros “Direito, Tecnologia e Cultura”, “A Vida em Rede”, “Futuros Possíveis”, “Tecnobrega: O Pará Reinventando o Negócio da Música”, dentre outros.
Ostrom, who won the Nobel in Economics, ought to be considered one of the most useful theorists for open source community work. Is it just plain old sexism that keeps her out of the open collaborative community pantheon? No doubt, that’s a factor. But it’s also the case that most—like, nearly all—involved in Foss pride themselves on *doing* over, say, reading, especially theoretically, quasi-philosophical works. A pity: Ostrom, from what little I’ve read, is actually very practical in her work.
All the more reason to value workshops such as this.
Source: The Ostrom Workshop
Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance – Call for Nominations open until 31 March 2016 | IASC-COMMONS
As the IASC is an institutional supporter of the Elinor Ostrom Award on Collective Governance we would like to draw your attention to the call for nominations for this award for 2015-2017.
Q&A: Author of ‘feminist glaciology’ study reflects on sudden appearance in culture wars | Science | AAAS
An insightful look by Mark Carey, an historian of science, into the difference that, in this case, gender makes to the study of natural phenomena. The point is that it’s logically and socially risky to abstract the phenomenon under study from the context—to make it a set of data points, however large that set is. A narrative of meaning can be attached to it, and inevitably will be; but it matters hugely to those directly affected by the phenomenon, as well as those studying it, whose narrative, whose perspective is used, engaged.
If one goal of glacier research is to help the people living in places like the Alps and Alaska adapt to shrinking glaciers—and the associated floods, landslides, and seasonal variation in water flows for irrigation and hydroelectricity generation—then it is important to study more than the physical properties of ice. Social scientists like myself work to understand those complex societies, their politics and economies, their cultures, and, yes, their gender relations because patriarchy and sexism marginalize certain segments of the population, just as racism marginalizes indigenous, Latino, and other peoples.Our paper argues that social science and humanities research can contribute to the development of appropriate strategies for specific and diverse societies to adapt to change. A woman’s experience securing postdisaster aid, rebuilding a home, and raising a family after a glacial lake outburst flood has destroyed her community is different than those of men. And for glaciologist Erin Pettit, the founder of the Girls on Ice program for young women to study glaciology, there is something productive and empowering that happens when high school girls learn science and conduct field research in an environment without boys.