Rambling Thoughts Blog

Bottled Water or Bottled Environmental Damage? (4 comment/s)

Jeff Angel (Director of the Total Environment Centre) — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:06:15 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

GUEST ARTICLE: While clean safe drinking water is vital for human health, Australians are becoming increasingly thirsty for bottled water products writes Jeff Angel (Director of the Total Environment Centre).

A recent report by the Earth Policy Institute said global consumption of bottled water rose 57% from 1999 to 2004 to 154 billion litres, with Australians consuming 550 million litres every year. And with the current big push from beverage companies of this ‘new’ product, the market is expected to keep growing to a worth of over $460 million per year.

credit: ccgd

Bottled water is an unjustified luxury that, except for essential safety or medical reasons, is simply a fashion statement roaming free of environmental responsibility.

The life cycle of a plastic bottle goes through various stages - producing the package, water sourcing, transport of a heavy product, merchandising, sale and eventually disposal. There are many serious implications at each of these stages.

The worldwide packaging for bottled water requires 2.7 million tonnes of plastic each year, with growing concerns about the environmental costs, such as the pollution and resource depletion from the oil, gas and coal used in the production process. The raw material cost will increasingly reflect its use as a crude oil derivative.

The NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change estimates that about 200 millilitres of oil is needed to produce just one one-litre bottle – and billions of bottles are produced each year.

The bottled water industry disputes this – but then they have crafted arguments that make them look like green warriors and a great social service.

“Spring Water”

Not only does the production process have serious environmental implications, but the sourcing and extraction of the so called ’spring water’ is endangering local groundwater supplies.

The bottled water industry is licensed to take 1,800 megalitres of water from the groundwater system in NSW every year. Note that the industry tries to play down its water impact by placing itself in the context of continental water supplies.

However, local sourcing can result in exhaustion and depletion of underground aquifers which have a flow on effect of drying out swamps and other water bodies, threatening aquatic plants and animals already under stress from the drying climate caused by global warming.

credit: Mindrazor

Coca-Cola Amatil is currently fighting the local community and Gosford City Council at Mangrove Mountain, north of Sydney, to triple its water extraction to 66 million litres a year.

Groundwater feeds into the area’s rivers and streams and currently the Mangrove Creek Dam is at less than 22% of capacity.

This fact and the noted lowering of the groundwater table in the area call into question the sustainability of local groundwater aquifers for bottled water extraction.

The economics are also of concern. If Coca-Cola Amatil is allowed to triple its extraction, it will be able to sell the water to retailers for around $18 million. This is far above the government’s extraction fee.

Price of Bottled Water

The average price of bottled water is $2.53 a litre against about a cent a litre for tap water.

Bottled water, often attractively described as ‘pristine’, ‘pure’, ‘clean’ and even ‘organic’ in marketing, is between 240-10,000 times more expensive than tap water - more than is paid for petrol, even though approximately 25% of bottled water has been sourced directly from municipal tapwater systems.

Over 90% of the cost of bottled water is associated with the bottle, lid and label.

Carbon Footprint

There are also significant costs in the shipping and transport of bottled water (a heavy commodity), particularly over long distances, resulting in burning massive amounts of fossil fuels.

Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of global warming pollution is produced every year by shipping bottled water from places such as Fiji. Talk about food miles!

Plastic Bottles: Landfill, Litter & Pollution

credit: Inocuo

However, the most devastating cost to the environment is the disposal of used bottles. Whether dumped into landfill or dropped as litter, the increasing number of water bottles is a growing problem.

Approximately 70% of plastic drink bottles end up in landfill and take up to 1000 years to biodegrade. While not being the most numerous litter item, they do take up a lot of space compared to other types of waste, comprising 38% of the total volume of litter.

Bottles that do not get recycled or landfilled pose a serious threat, according to the founder of the Beach-combers and Oceanographers International Association.

A one-litre plastic water bottle could break down into enough small fragments to be washed up on every kilometre of beach in the world.

There are an estimated 13,000 pieces of plastic on every square kilometre of the ocean surface. These tiny pieces are easily swallowed by marine life and can have a deadly effect. More than one million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals are killed as a result every year. And it’s not just bottles tossed overboard; any bottle dropped anywhere can eventually make its way into the ocean.

Alleged Health Benefits of Bottled Water

Despite the enormity of all these environmental costs, there exists the argument that bottled water is better for human health.

However, while access to clean drinking water is an issue in some countries, Australia is not one of them.

The Australian Drinking Water Guidelines which provide the framework for those who manage and deliver Australia’s water resources are far more stringent than the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code that regulates bottled water.

A recent analysis of bottled water published in The Australian, found that the best selling bottled water was no cleaner than the cheapest brand and none of the bottled water tested was any better than tap water from Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide (which is regarded as having the murkiest tap water).

In fact, an estimated 25% of bottled water is found to actually be just tap water in a bottle.

Furthermore, there has been some evidence that water stored in plastic bottles can be contaminated by chemicals leaching from the plastic cap or liner. Although there are regulatory standards limiting these chemicals (called phthalates) in tap water, there are no legal limits for phthalates in bottled water.

Tap water fluoridation is also the most effective, efficient way to combat tooth decay. Bottled water removes the benefit of fluoride and may result in increasing tooth decay, particularly among children.

We Don’t Need Bottled Water

So we don’t need bottled water in Australia. But then we consume lots of things we ‘don’t need’. To be a responsible consumer we need ask the question of each product – what is its environmental footprint from production, use and disposal; is there an environmentally preferable substitute; and do I really need it?

The biggest change you as a consumer can make is to not buy bottled water. Use home filtering systems, refillable water bottles, and drink tap water, if you want reduce the impact on landfills, and help prevent the drying out of groundwater resources, ocean litter and global warming.

This article was written by Jeff Angel (Director of the Total Environment Centre) and was originally published in the Green magazine, Autumn 2008, Issue 25. Jeff has given permission to republish the article on this website.

If you’re a blogger or an expert about a topic I cover on this blog I encourage you to contact me and I’ll consider publishing your guest article here including generous attribution and back links back to your website as thanks for your contribution

Why Bottled Water is a Scam

EDITOR: I’ve added the cartoon below because it perfectly summarises how illogical it is to buy constantly buy new bottled water instead of refilling the same bottle everyday with tap water instead.

credit: Steve Greenberg - Editorial Cartoonist for the Ventura County Star

Making War The American Way: One Contract At A Time

Dogbert — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:01:50 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

GUEST ARTICLE - PROFILES OF POWER: Commercial Warfare

The proliferation of private military companies in Iraq marks a dangerous turn towards outsourcing warfare, reports our chief military correspondent, Dogbert embedded deep in Sydney…

Black Hawk Helicopters Carrying Troops in Iraq credit: Department of Defense

Private military companies are profit seeking non state actors that specialise in hiring private military contractors to deliver core and support military services previously undertaken by the state, including; security provision, combat support, technical support, intelligence gathering, logistics, military training, and the procurement and maintenance of arms and commercial high technology.

Emerging private markets for force

Initially, private military companies operated in conjunction with the military. Deepening economic globalisation and the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1980s provided the impetus for military privatisation. The global market for military resources was soon inundated, setting the foundation for the birth of a professional private military industry. These factors shifted the global power balance to the US. The US was now able to downsize its armed forces, while strengthening its reliance on military contractors.

Initially, private military companies specialised in small scale, short-term security operations in unconventional battlegrounds. However, they have evolved from operating alongside US forces in support roles in the first Iraq war to providing indispensable combat assistance and security in the current Iraq war.

Spectrum of services

The shift from partial privatisation began when developed countries such as the US contracted-out the delivery of both support and core military functions in the early 1990s to private military companies. This was a radical policy shift because previously, only non-core functions were outsourced to maintain the integrity of wartime operations. States have ceded their sovereignty to the will of the market and undermined their monopoly over legitimate force.

About 180,000 contractors work for the United States (US) government in Iraq, outnumbering US forces by about 13,000, performing military tasks once the exclusive domain of the state (Gray 2007) (Allard 2007). PMF usage has surged tenfold between the first to the second Iraq War. Worryingly, private military companies are now the second largest partner in the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ in Iraq.

The spectrum of services offered by private military companies and their ability to fill skills gaps makes them indispensable to successful modern warfare. In Iraq, they gather and disseminate intelligence perform numerous critical operational and tactical roles and operated computer systems that generated the tactical air picture for the Combined Air Operations Centre. Soon, they could fill troop shortages when the ‘Troop Surge’ strategy is wound back (Gibson 2007).

Private military companies undertake indispensable defensive security operations in Iraq. Blackwater Security Consulting guarded former Iraqi Administrator, Paul Bremer. DynCorp International’s private guards train the new Iraqi police force. Aegis Defence provides security on all major Iraqi government projects (War on Want, 2006).

While the array of professional PMF services continues to open lucrative markets in Iraq and promises to slash war budgets, it also means the US is more reliant on them to formulate strategy and even provide food supplies.

Profit maximisation in Iraq

Private military companies say outsourcing improves efficiency, productivity and service. However, their imperative to grow has concentrated the market, meaning contracts are not awarded through competitive tendering. Halliburton was unilaterally awarded a contract for the supply of fuel in Iraq which forced the US to pay $2.64 per gallon of gasoline, double the price of buying and delivering fuel through the Pentagon’s own Defense Energy Support centre.

US Army heavy transport vehicle credit: James Gordon (US Government Photographer)

Premature withdrawal to minimise risk

Private military companies view warfare as lucrative business (Collins 2007). They aim to maximise returns by avoiding battles with high human and financial risk where their commercial and contractual goals could be compromised.

During upsurges of violence and contractor kidnappings in 2004, the US military had to contend with private military companies delaying, suspending, or ending operations because they found them too dangerous. Military contractors are not accountable, bound by the chain of command or concerned about US foreign policy objectives.

The US military has ceded some control over the implementation of its strategy in Iraq and its power to rapidly deploy troops to trouble spots without confronting contract renegotiations.

Opaque and unaccountable

Private military companies undertake indispensable security operations on behalf of the state, but operate without oversight. Commercial in confidence objections are used to reject responsibility for any wrongdoing. Accountable extends to shareholders only.

Aegis Defense Services coordinates security support for reconstruction contractors in Iraq. Halliburton and Bechtel sub-contractors control the majority of rebuilding projects

Effective privatisation involves open and competitive tenders and strict contracts with expiry dates. From 1997 to 2002, the Department of Defense nearly doubled its funding towards private military contractors from $47.2 billion to $71.6 billion without competitive bidding. Private military contractors in Iraq are not even monitored by the US Department of Defence to ensure they are properly fulfilling their contracts.

This self-regulation model has come under intense criticism in light of the faltering investigation into the role of Blackwater Security Consulting in the deaths of 11 Iraqis late last year (Parker 2007). Military contractors’ improprieties can only be dealt with internally through fines or termination of contract.

Unregulated state sanctioned violence in a war zone

Despite private military companies claiming to operate in free markets for force, they must be regulated. Private military contractors are exempt from criminal prosecution under Iraqi law due to Order 17 issued by the now defunct Coalition Provisional Authority. Nor does most international law, US law or the Geneva Convention hold any jurisdiction over them because of their murky legal status. As a result, no private military contractors have been prosecuted for alleged abuses in Iraq.

Private military companies in Iraq are only contractually bound by the special rules of engagement set by the Defense Department (Isenberg 2006). The Abu Ghraib prison scandal in Iraq illustrates this point. In the absence of oversight or enforcement powers, Titan Corp sub-contractors were outside overseas jurisdiction and exempted from Iraqi law, leaving authorities unable to prosecute them for alleged offences committed in their interrogation and intelligence roles (Fallah, 2007).

Control of the military agenda

Private military firms make and control the rules of the game away from public and media scrutiny. The neo-conservatism of the Bush Administration has politicised the tendering process towards ‘favoured contractors’ making non-competitive bids for open-ended contracts. The stranglehold private military firms had over military contracts only grew with the “just in time” strategy used by Cheney and Rumseld to respond to emerging military needs.

In 2001, Halliburton won a lucrative cost-plus contract worth almost $3.7 billion to provide logistics support in Iraq. It is now under investigation for overcharging. Similarly, Kellogg Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton overcharged the US military by up to 40 percent for the supply of meals in Iraq.

Lax internal recruitment standards

Inconsistent entry procedures have meant unscrupulous contractors lacking qualifications; training or ethical principles have been hired in war zones. In general, private military firms are luring elite officers and experienced soldiers from the armed forces due to their lucrative per day pay often ranging from $500 to $1,500 and contractual freedoms.

Perversely, while endorsing private military firms in Iraq, the US military is also facing severe retention issues because private military firms compete over public funds and uses them to attract publicly trained troops for private profit.

Cutting political costs

The US strategy in Iraq has shifted due to souring public opinion of the war. It is now designed to privatise the costs, losses and risks from the war while maintaining a security presence in line with US foreign policy.

In line with this, the Defense Department can tap the low profile force provided by private military firms while drawing down US troop levels (Gibson 2007). Private military contractors often tend to perform politically contentious tasks without regulatory oversight, insurance or medical cover (Knickerbocker, 2007).

Private military firms are filling a more accepted role as legitimate private actors doing the ‘dirty work’ for contracting states because their casualties are harder to monitor and publicise.

Department of Labor insurance-claims statistics indicate more than 400 civilian contractors had been recorded as killed in Iraq and another 6,646 as injured (Stockman 2006).

Private military companies lower political costs because in the eyes of the public, the cost of a contractor making a healthy living out of war pales into insignificance compared to the life of a soldier representing their country.

Blackwater embedded?

Blackwater Security Consulting has come under intense scrutiny over recent years for the way its private military contractors conduct themselves in Iraq. Late last year, Blackwater guards claimed they acted in self defence to protect State Department officials, returning “proportionate” force upon people they believed to be armed insurgents or suicide bombers (Ward 2007) (Reid 2007).

The Iraqi regime refute Blackwater’s version of events, asserting Blackwater acted aggressively and shot a car and randomly in the vicinity without provocation (Tavernise et. al 2007).

To Iraqi’s, Blackwater are undisciplined cowboys who have a track record of shooting first and thinking second (Bennett 2007) (Grier et. al 2007). Blackwater argues it was acting lawfully within its contractual duties (Sengupta 2007). Blackwater remains immune from prosecution because of Order 17.

Security contractors have become indispensable in the war because they enable troops to concentrate on combat tasks (Gray 2007). However, claims are emerging that private military companies are encroaching upon combat or support operations and blurring the lines between contractors and soldiers (Collins 2007).

If private military companies become further embedded into ‘mission critical’ roles, regulation and oversight must be hastened to tame such endemic excesses in the free market for force.

Embedded with KBR (15 minute Video)

You can watch a video below from PBS FRONTLINE (Private Warriors) taking a look inside the vast camps run by this Halliburton subsidiary. KBR (formerly Kellogg Brown & Root) is the military’s life line - and a target of the bloody, relentless insurgency. But what are the dangers in outsourcing the war to this extent?

FORA.TV: Privatizing America’s Foreign Policy (70 minute Video)

View a panel discussion with:

Douglas Brooks, Founder and President, International Peace Operations Association (IPOA)
Marcela Gaviria and Martin Smith, Co-Producers, PBS/FRONTLINE documentary Private Warriors chronicling the activities of private military companies in Iraq
William Hartung, President’s fellow at the World Policy Institute and director of the Institute’s Arms Trade Project
Moderated by Michael A. Cohen, Co-Project Leader, Privatization of Foreign Policy Project, World Policy Institute

Further reading about Modern Day Mercenaries aka Private Contractors

This article has been written by an anonymous writer who has chosen to write under the alias of Dogbert.

Dogbert is one of the main characters in the Dilbert TV series and comic strip

Read the 20 most popular Rambling Thoughts Blog articles

Australian TV Radio Online Coverage 2008 Beijing Olympics - Channel 7 SBS ABC (10 comment/s)

Neerav Bhatt — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 23:00:02 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

The 2008 Beijing Olympics in China will be broadcast on Australian TV by the Seven Network and SBS between August 8-28 2008.

ABC Radio will broadcast their coverage of the Beijing Olympics across Australia including Regional NSW but not in Sydney where the Macquarie Radio Network (owners of AM stations 2GB and 2CH) has bought exclusive radio coverage rights.

Beijing 2008 Olympic Games credit: http2007

Olympics Coverage on Australian TV & Radio

The entire Beijing Olympics coverage will be telecast in 16:9 wide-screen High Definition for the first time in Australia.

Johanna Griggs, Matthew White and Sandy Roberts will anchor the Channel 7 Olympics coverage and manage changing between events from their studio in the International Broadcast Centre.

Seven’s daily coverage will begin with an Olympic-flavoured Sunrise, followed by Kylie Gillies and Andrew Daddo with the Beijing-presented Yum Cha.

Live Olympics will continue to 6pm when News and Today Tonight intervene. The evening session starts at 7pm and continues to 2am.

Included in Seven’s commentary team are Raelene Boyle, Bruce McAvaney, Steve Moneghetti, Andrew Gaze, Duncan Armstrong, Daniel Kowalski and Peter Donegan.

Commentary for the Opening Ceremony will also include the very experienced Ric Birch and Sonia Kruger. Interestingly, Rebecca Wilson is also on the team.

Events at the Games will start at 9am local in Beijing time (11am AEST), which means most events, with the notable exception of swimming, will be seen live in Australian TV prime time.

Channel 7 Network director Ryan Stokes has admitted that they protested against the new 10am (midday AEST) start time for the swimming finals, which were done to suit US network NBC’s wishes to air swimming events in their prime time, because this will mean our boys and girls will be swimming to victory while it’s lunchtime in Australia.

Joining Bruce at the pool is Olympic gold medallist and accomplished swimming commentator Duncan Armstrong, while at the pool deck another former gold medallist, Daniel Kowalski, joins Seven for his first Olympic commentary role. Daniel will be the first person to greet the swimmers as they leave the pool following their events.

The Bird’s Nest, officially called the National Stadium is the venue for the opening and closing ceremonies and the track and field competition.

Bruce will also host there with a commentary team of Olympic silver medallist Raelene Boyle, Olympic gold medallist Steve Ovett, World Championship medallist Steve Moneghetti and Olympic finalist David Culbert bringing their years of athletic and broadcasting experience to the microphone.

Seven is also responsible for producing the complementary Olympic coverage on SBS TV which has paid a reported $4 million to show up to 20 additional hours of long-form sports such as road cycling, soccer, indoor volleyball and table tennis as well as the sports it had originally purchased broadcast rights for.

SBS TV Olympics coverage will air each day beginning at 11am and conclude at 2am the following morning, again only interrupted by SBS World News bulletins.

Pay-TV provider Foxtel will not be showing any Olympics coverage apart from its rebroadcasts of Channel 7 and SBS TV.

Olympics Coverage On the Internet

Knowing that Australians will want Olympic event results and see the Australian Medal Tally while they’re working in the office, Seven has announced its online partner Yahoo will stream live video of Beijing Olympics coverage during the daytime.

However with so many simultaneous sports, there is no indication yet which events will actually stream live.

Yahoo says it will provide the biggest Australian online Olympics coverage ever, boasting more than 100 hours of footage though it doesn’t indicate if all 100 hours are actually live. Its dedicated website will also provide 7 packages, streaming of the YumCha morning programme, along with loads of results, medal tallies, editorial and blogs.

Olympics Coverage on American TV

In the USA broadcast giant NBC will broadcast more than 3,600 hours of Olympics coverage across its television and cable networks and for the first time live streaming broadband video on the Internet.

The 3,600 hours of coverage promised is more than the combined total of every previous Summer Games televised in the US, and will be aired on the NBC, USA Network, MSNBC, CNBC and Telemundo networks, as well as NBCOlympics.com.

Read the 20 most popular Rambling Thoughts Blog articles

Catchup on Business News with Inside Business (ABC TV) (2 comment/s)

Neerav Bhatt — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 23:00:47 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

Whether you’re a business owner, share trader or general investor, make sure you watch Inside Business at 10am each Sunday on ABC TV for a wrap of the weeks business and financial markets news.

The host of Inside Business is well respected financial journalist Alan Kohler.

Previously a columnist at the Australian Financial Review (AFR), Alan has also served as Editor of The Age and AFR.

For the past few years he’s been dividing his time between television, on ABC TV’s Inside Business and Nightly News as well as writing for Fairfax (Age and SMH) newspapers.

Inside Business features:

A mixture of news, opinion, insight and analysis from the host Alan Kohler,
Interviews with movers and shakers in the business world including CEO’s, fund managers and senior financial analysts
A wrap up of the weeks market movements and analysis by people like Stockbroker Marcus Padley and Tom Elliott from MM&D Capital
A 1st person segment where owners of small/medium sized businesses around Australia talk about their experience, success stories as well as the times that things went wrong, what makes their business unique and the key to their success

Transcripts of interviews are available from the Inside Business Archive including links to streaming video in Realplayer & Windows Media Player formats at the bottom of each individual transcript.

Read the 20 most popular Rambling Thoughts Blog articles

Rockbox FREE MP3 iPod, Sansa etc upgrade: Games, Themes, More (1 comment/s)

Neerav Bhatt — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 06:01:40 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

This article reviews the FREE Rockbox software and explains how it hugely improves video MP3 players like: Apple iPod, iAudio X5, Sandisk Sansa and Toshiba Gigabeat with better audio playback quality, games, applications, plays more codecs (OGG, FLAC etc), themes, gapless playback and optional spoken interface.

These extra features make it really useful for travellers and people who have to commute long distances on public transport.

Themes

Rockbox allows you to install any pre-created theme or even create your own theme with background wallpaper and you can specify the information you want to see on screen

For example below are 3 themes (left to right): “Acotil blues”, “KratoSky2″ and “Plaintext”. As you can see there’s a huge choice of colours and you can decide whether you want to show more technical details like in “Plaintext”, album art like in “KratoSky2″ or a nice background image like “Acotil blues”.

Games

Rockbox supports lots of games including Sudoku, Asteroids, Doom, Bubbles, Blackjack and Tetris just to name a few (see below):

Better Features

Rockbox is an open source firmware replacement for a growing number of digital audio players. It has been in development since 2001 and receives new features, tweaks and fixes every day to provide you with the best possible music listening experience. Rockbox aims to be considerably more functional and efficient than your device’s stock firmware while remaining easy to use and customizable. You can configure almost anything about Rockbox you could want, pertaining to functionality. It is written by users, for users.

Another top priority of Rockbox is audio playback quality. Rockbox, for most models, includes a wider range of sound settings than that device’s original firmware. A lot of work has been put into making Rockbox sound the best it can, and improvements are constantly being made. All models have access to a large number of plugins, including many games, applications, and graphical demos.

You can load different configurations quickly for different purposes (e.g. a large font for in your car, different sound settings for at home). You can even customize your While Playing screen to display only and exactly what you want to see when your music is playing. In addition, Rockbox features a wide range of languages, and all supported models also have the ability to talk to you - menus can be voiced and filenames spelled out or spoken.

Specific extra features I use include:

Bookmarking - allows you to resume playback where you stopped listening not just for one audio file but for lots eg: audio books, music, podcasts etc
MPEG video support - to play video files which take up much less space than Quicktime MOV etc
5-band fully-parametric equalizer with lots of pre-sets
Support for over 15 Sound Codecs, including OGG, FLAC, MP3, AC3, WMA, WAV etc
JPEG image and text-file viewing

Notes

Rockbox is for people who like experimenting with computers and gadgets and can fix any problems they create. If the words 3rd party firmware don’t mean anything to you than I don’t recommend installing it
The standard software for your MP3 player is not removed. Each player has a special key that you can press to load the standard software insetad of Rockbox, eg: for the Sandisk e280 turn it off, turn it back on and press the LEFT arrow key (rewind) while it’s starting, this will load the standard Sandisk software
The programmers have made it clear that Rockbox will NEVER be able to playback DRM crippled files (eg: Apple encrypted AAC files) or work on file systems besides FAT32 (like NTFS or ext2)
Make sure you read the Rockbox Manual thoroughly before installing Rockbox on your MP3 player
The official Rockbox Themes page is at http://www.rockbox-themes.org

Other Reviews

Improve your iPod with Rockbox - “Over the past few years, I’ve been ripping my CD collection to Ogg Vorbis, intending to one day find a portable player for all those tracks of synthpop, reggae, and comedy. Now I’ve finally found a player for my 60-or-so gigs of Ogg files which has the the ergonomics, battery life, and accessory market of the iPod. The secret to having a player that deals with so many codecs, but that looks and acts like an iPod, is that it is an iPod - just one that I converted last night with a firmware swap to run the excellent, open source system called Rockbox. Rockbox isn’t perfect - and it sure isn’t for everyone - but I’m pleased as punch with it …”

Review: Rockbox - The Open Source Jukebox Firmware - Rockbox is a replacement firmware for various audio players, that opens up new features and fixes devices shortcomings. We don’t think of these devices as personal computers, but they are; and Rockbox is an alternative operating system. This review focuses on Rockbox as a replacement “OS” for the iRiver player …

Rockbox free iPod software - Clearly Rockbox is not for everyone. If you’re happy with the way your iPod works, and using open-source hacks is not your thing, you can live happily in blithe ignorance of Rockbox’ charms. But for those people who hanker after freedom from iTunes’ benign clutches, Rockbox offers a world of opportunities …

ROCKING THE POD (Linux magazine PDF) - To help you rock your iPod, the Rockbox project offers a firmware product called Rockbox. Rockbox has several features that the iPod lacks, for example, the ability to play Ogg Vorbis files, the ability to customize the user interface, and the option of extending the default software portfolio with plugins …

Read the 20 most popular Rambling Thoughts Blog articles

What its like to be a Research Scientist (1 comment/s)

Neerav Bhatt — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:00:59 +0000

Re-publishing this RSS feed in full is not allowed. Content originally from bhatt.id.au/blog/ Copyright Neerav Bhatt..

Patrick Lim is a research scientist working full-time as a member of the Angiogenesis group at the Heart Research Institute, looking at the role of special stem cells in blood on a person’s ability to recover from blocked blood vessels, and how these differ in men and women, as well as people with Diabetes.

Patrick’s Favourite Scientists:
“Dr Bunsen Honeydew” & assistant “Beaker”
from the Muppet Show

During this time, he’s also been procrastinating about finishing his PhD, which looks at how hormones (like testosterone and estrogen) control the function of different cells in the testes, and how it affects sperm production.

When he eventually grows up, he’d like to be a productive member of society and be part of some ground-breaking research that will get him interviewed on tv, and maybe even be filmed pipetting water into some tubes while looking thoughtful and intelligent.

When on the interwebs, Patrick can be found on Twitter at http://twitter.com/limburger2001

I met Patrick at a Sydney Twitter group meetup a few weeks ago. After finding out what he did at work I asked him if he’d like to be interviewed about what it’s like to be a Research Scientist.

Neerav Bhatt:
In the Autumn 2008 issue of “Fast Thinking” magazine Dr Geoff Garrett, Chief Executive and CSIRO Board member said “one of the most daunting problems - and this is an important issue for policy makers to consider - in my early years we were operating on year-to-year funding. It leaves little room for effective longer-term planning, for good strategy and its implementation”

Does your organisation operate on a year-to-year funding basis?

Patrick Lim:
Not exactly, the funding that we seek usually goes for a couple of years at a time, though there’s usually a review at the end of each year. But our group applies for funding each year anyway, so as to keep a constant flow of research and funds.

Its true that it may leave little room for long-term planning, but scientists can sometimes have our head so far into a subject that we need these deadlines in order to get us productive and producing meaningful results.

Anyway, I’d like to think that part of being a scientist is being able to work through these problems, so I understand the rant, but can see the other point of view.

Neerav Bhatt:
If so what effect does this have on how much time scientists who trained to do research have to spend on writing grant applications and appeasing bureaucrats?

Patrick Lim:
Well it depends on where you are on totem pole. As you proceed up the ranks, the less involved you are with the experiments, and the more time you spend on steering the research and seeking funding.

But to be honest, I disagree with the statement that writing grant applications and appeasing bureaucrats is a waste of time, because I think its part and parcel of research. Research is as much, or more an intellectual endeavour as it is a physical one.

I think writing grants forces people to really think hard about what their researching – I mean, if you can’t sell your research to the wider community, then you really should question whether you proposal is worthwhile.

Ultimately, I see publicly funded research laboratories as public companies with the government and its taxpayers as the directors and shareholders – the bureaucracy is in place to ensure that these research laboratories are producing a ‘return’ for the people’s investment.

Though it may feel like jumping these hoops are detracting from the ‘real’ research, I believe that these measures are in place to ensure that the meagre funds that are available to fund research are going to the right places. The way these measures are implemented however, is another story.

Neerav Bhatt:
Adjunct Professor of Science Communication at the University of Technology, Sydney and editor of www.sciencealert.com.au Julian Cribb recently said in the Australian newspaper:

“In the unceasing quest for knowledge, each year Australian scientists carry out more than 12,000 individual research projects, more than half of them funded by the public. However, in the combined public announcements of the universities and science agencies, only about 1200 outcomes are reported.

As a result, Australia has a science flood but a knowledge drought. Large parts of our science moulder in the yellowing leaves of journals, never to be delivered, never to be used”

What do you think about this problem?

Patrick Lim:
I personally think that the problem lies with the article, and less with regards to the state of research in Australia. The author implies that research that isn’t reported to the public through “combined public announcements of the universities and science agencies” are worthless and stagnating “in the yellowing leaves of journals”.

But through reading the article, it seems to me that the author has more of an issue with the dissemination of the research to the public than the quality. To be frank, the most probable reason why only one-tenth of these individual research projects are reported is because these are the few that are ‘newsworthy’ enough to make it through the popular media.

Not meaning to pass the buck here, but I haven’t encountered a scientist that wouldn’t talk your ear off regarding their research, so I don’t think that it’s the scientists that are being purposely secretive of their work. Unfortunately, not all 12000 of the individual research projects are seen as ‘glamorous’ or ‘sexy’ enough to garner attention from TV or magazines.

I have no doubt that a large majority of the research projects are worthwhile (see above regarding grant applications), but there is a lot of research, even just in our institute alone, which are so dry and focused that its only working on a small piece of a larger puzzle.

People don’t realise, and this may be due to issues with dissemination of information, that every cancer drug find, or every new material identified, sits on top thousands upon thousands of man hours in research to produce the foundations of knowledge needed to get to that finding.

To imply that research that doesn’t reach the public’s knowledge is therefore a waste is quite insulting – just because the last person in the relay is the one that crosses the line does not mean that the efforts of the other members don’t count.

Neerav Bhatt:
That’s quite interesting Patrick, you make some points that I hadn’t considered before.

Please tell the readers what you think someone who wants to be a researcher eg: a university science student should know about the realities of work as a Research Scientist.

Patrick Lim:
I think that anyone who wants to be a researcher should have some thoughts on what research they want to be involved in – read widely, and find what interests you, and don’t be afraid to contact the researchers in that field.

Also, be open to the fact that you aren’t stuck to one topic once you’ve decided. The important thing is that you have to be passionate about what you do, because you will have to live and breathe your subject. I think what separates a true researcher from someone who gets paid to work in a lab, is this passion.

The most fulfilling part of being a researcher is when your work is seen as worthwhile and useful by the wider community, as well as your peers. As a molecular biology guy, obviously the ultimate goal would be to part of research that cures a disease, or at least makes people’s lives a bit better. It’s a bit egotistical I know, but my hearts in the right place, I swear!

The most annoying bit about research is that it can easily take over your life. There is always another article to read, another experiment to do, and unfortunately, the effort doesn’t always equal results that you can use. In that way, research is a gamble, and it doesn’t always pay off. I think once you make peace with that possibility, and take steps to avoid it, then you’ll be a better scientist.

Science Can Be Fun

Don’t assume that scientists are boring because they do serious work. Patrick’s favourite scientists are the famous Muppet Show Scientists “Dr Bunsen Honeydew” and his assistant “Beaker”.

In 2004 the BBC conducted an online survey to find the most popular scientists on TV and in Movies. Dr Bunsen Honeydew and his trusty assistant, Beaker received a third of the votes, easily beating Star Trek’s “Mr Spock” and Dr Who’s Time Lord “The Doctor”.

Read the 20 most popular Rambling Thoughts Blog articles

Rambling Thoughts Blog

Bottled Water or Bottled Environmental Damage? (4 comment/s)

“Spring Water”

Price of Bottled Water

Carbon Footprint

Plastic Bottles: Landfill, Litter & Pollution

Alleged Health Benefits of Bottled Water

We Don’t Need Bottled Water

Why Bottled Water is a Scam

Further Reading

Making War The American Way: One Contract At A Time

Emerging private markets for force

Spectrum of services

Profit maximisation in Iraq

Premature withdrawal to minimise risk

Opaque and unaccountable

Unregulated state sanctioned violence in a war zone

Control of the military agenda

Lax internal recruitment standards

Cutting political costs

Blackwater embedded?

Embedded with KBR (15 minute Video)

FORA.TV: Privatizing America’s Foreign Policy (70 minute Video)

Australian TV Radio Online Coverage 2008 Beijing Olympics - Channel 7 SBS ABC (10 comment/s)

Olympics Coverage on Australian TV & Radio

Olympics Coverage On the Internet

Olympics Coverage on American TV

Catchup on Business News with Inside Business (ABC TV) (2 comment/s)

Rockbox FREE MP3 iPod, Sansa etc upgrade: Games, Themes, More (1 comment/s)

Themes

Games

Better Features

Notes

Other Reviews

What its like to be a Research Scientist (1 comment/s)

Science Can Be Fun