RV Office Requirements If You Want To Take Your Job On The Road
An RV office will take you one step farther than your home office does.
Sure, the home office has eliminated the commute to work, but why not make your office portable and just stay on vacation all the time?
Do you already have an home business that could easily be taken on the road? Good. Then you're ready to load up the RV and hit the road.
If not, then consider these options:
There are lots of online job opportunities that don't require you to be in one place all the time.
There are always jobs that you can find on-site at the various locations where you'll be traveling. (Here's how to find them.)
Depending on your particular skills and talents, chances are pretty good that you could put your skills to use anywhere!
Here are lots of fun ways to make money while you're RVing.
The most important thing for your mobile RV office is being able to maintain access to some basic office electronics and services like a computer, Internet & faxing services, a digital camera, and a cell phone.
Here's exactly what you need to know before you take your RV office on the road...
Continue reading...
View original story : big+things
Feed : The Fun Times Guide to RV Road Trips
Does this activity make sense to you?
The set up says 1 ball 12 players but the explanation has two balls.
I'm not sure what this activity does. So you've got passing and moving and then you've got a player basicly going from player to play to player with the ball.
Would you use this?
Activity #2
Set Up:
Progression from previous activity. 1 ball between 12 players.
Diagram (b)
Explanation:
One player starts of with the ball and passes it to any player and follows there pass
One player starts of with the ball and passes it to any player recieves it back and then passes it to a player either side of the 1st player they passed it to.
Coaching Points:
All players on there toes
Good quality passing and movement
Maintain high tempo
Communicate at all times
Activity #3
Forum: Coaching Forum
View original story : big+things
Feed : Message Board
Stop Making Commitments When You Can’t Live Up to Them!
This is one of my biggest pet peeves. On almost a daily basis, I run into a situation where someone made a commitment to me, and didn’t live up to it. It is tiresome, annoying, and flat out rude. I don’t pretend to be perfect, and I’m sure I’ve made my share of commitments that I couldn’t keep, but we need to put this pattern of recklessness to a stop.
Just this morning, I can already count two instances where people made promises to me and failed to live up to them. The first one was for a weekly Friday morning meeting that we planned for brainstorming and masterminding — the other party has failed to show on three of three occasions (yes, I’ve already removed this from my calendar now) — and the other was from a writer who committed to provide articles to me weekly, but hasn’t in several weeks (and hasn’t responded to my emails, either).
If You Can’t Live Up to Your Commitments, Don’t Make Them!
I can’t tell you how many times I was really excited about doing business with another company and had to pass because we weren’t able to commit to executing on our side of the relationship. While at the time, these situations were disappointing to both us and the other party, in the end, being up front about it probably saved our reputation and relationships with those companies. I’m very aware of our capabilities and try to never make promises I can’t keep . . . I strongly urge others take the same direction with their businesses.
How do you feel about it?
Related Posts:
Jazz Up Your Blog or Website with Video Broadcasting Online: Some Cool Webcam Tools
Don’t Get Screwed! How to Hire and Manage Developers and Programmers.
Reputation & Crisis Management Rockstars: Where to Turn When Things Get Crazy
Blogging Your Way to Financial Success
Never Accuse Your Customer Without Having All the Facts! AND Don’t Steal People’s Content!
View original story : big+things
Feed : TimeForBlogging
How free will Ordnance Survey's maps be? Your last chance to decide
Government consultation on OS mapping closes today - and has attracted withering comments from its own advisory body (updated)
From next month, you should be able to get digital forms of Ordnance Survey (OS) maps for free - free as in beer, and free as in speech - under a new initiative announced last November by the prime minister. And why's that important today? Because this is the closing date for the public consultation on which of those maps should be made available, and in what form.
The consultation, and the options it presents, stirred up strong feelings among the people working in geographic information. And the outcome could have a dramatic effect on how you use maps in the future - digital ones and paper ones.
Gordon Brown announced that OS "will open up its data relating to electoral and local authority boundaries, postcode areas and mid scale mapping information. The Government will consult on proposals to make data from Ordnance Survey freely available so it can be used for digital innovation and to support democratic accountability."
OK, so what about the detail? That's the tougher part. The Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG), which is ostensibly in charge of OS, began a consultation in December, setting out three possible options:
1) leave OS as it is.
2) make all OS's maps and digital data available for free reuse on a Creative Commons-style licence
3) make only some of OS's digital maps - roughly from 1:25,000 (equivalent to Explorer) to 1:50,000 (Landranger) - available for free reuse on a Creative Commons-style licence.
Option 2 is what the Free Our Data campaign has been pushing for since its inception in March 2006. The benefits are obvious: anyone who wants to build some sort of digital or even paper product can use the OS data - which you can rely on because it's the UK's national mapping agency, and so meant to get it right - and create new products and services that build on it.
But there's a catch: where's the money to come from? If we were in the middle of a boom, it might be easy to argue that OS should just be funded directly from the public purse. The catch, though, is that it isn't: it operates as a "trading fund", a government-owned business which charges for the use of its data. Its revenues last year were around £117m, on which it was profitable and gave a few million pounds to the Treasury. A profitable government business? They're like hen's teeth, you might think.
However the next catch is that half of its revenues came from the public sector - so actually this is the public sector charging itself and then saying how well it's done by remitting money to the Treasury. Except that the departments which pay for the OS data are centrally funded themselves. So not so clever.
It's also emerged from the consultation that OS undercharges the public sector compared to the private sector (which hasn't pleased the private sector). But the tricky thing is this: if you just make all the OS data free, can you really persuade the Treasury to provide the necessary extra £50m or so of public money that's needed to fund its operation? (£50m because you save £50m in public sector fees, but lose about that amount in private sector fees, and it costs about £100m to run the OS.) By contrast it's much cheaper to go with option 3 - you only have to fund the "lost revenue" from the digital maps and the loss of revenues on paper maps as rivals start using the CC-licensed data to produce their own paper maps. That's probably going to be closer to £20m.
Into this Gordian Knot scenario comes not just Gordon, but also Sir Tim Berners-Lee, who pushed it all through. But it's the detail that matters now. Which is where the consultation comes in.
You can find various responses: we published the Free Our Data response on the Free Our Data blog, obviously; and an informal one from Tristram Cary of Getmapping, a private company specialising in aerial photography (and which got into a legal battle with OS that nearly killed the company).
But by far the most interesting is the response from the Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information (APPSI) - the advisory body to the government that has the same role on information as the Council on the Misuse of Drugs does on, well, drugs.
APPSI reckoned that Option 2 - making it all free - is actually the more sensible option because it's logically "cleaner". That's a radical proposal.
As the UKAuthorITy.com site noted in a news story:
"The panel, which advises on policy and adjudicates in disputes over public sector licensing, says that a "free data" regime for the OS would be "the most holistic, durable and clearest solution". However it recognises that this would be an irreversible step and agrees with the government's inclination for a phased transition from the current trading fund model. Less complex, restrictive and expensive licensing is crucial to the success of the government's open data initiative, it says.
""In particular, OS should not have any intellectual property rights in derived data.""
That one alone is very important. At present, OS claims that if you create some new dataset while using an OS map, OS owns the copyright in that dataset. Yes, it does. This is the reason why you don't see much council data mapped out on Google Maps, even though there are plenty of people in councils who have the programming chops to do that. And it's also why you find some councils have been doing their mapping for public consumption on OpenStreetMap - which is free for use and doesn't have the same "derived data" rule.
The reason for the OS "derived data" rule is essentially to prevent people from re-using OS maps in other forms. But it drives local government and the public sector - not to mention the private sector - absolutely barmy. If the consultation has one effect, it should be to remove the "derived data" rule from OS products released under "OS Free". Ideally, and suggested by a number of people, it should move to something like the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) licence - meaning you'd have to say you used OS data, but otherwise leaving you free to build on it.
The final point about the APPSI consultation:
"In unusually forthright terms, the panel, chaired by professor David Rhind, a past head of OS, points to what it calls "a fundamental contradiction" in government information policy. "The great bulk of government organisations are those that provide that information to citizens and businesses at marginal cost or for free. But a relatively small number of information providers fall into a second category: notably the trading funds of Ordnance Survey, the Meteorological Office and the Hydrographic Office, and also the Royal Mail. There has been no consistent philosophy behind the allocation of a body to a particular category, other than 'make some money wherever we can'."
Lastly: it's interesting to compare the COI release (timed at 15.27 on 17 November, when the announcement was made) with the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) release, which has the same date but no time. The difference? The COI one doesn't include a quote from Sir Rob Margetts, OS's chairman - the clearest possible indication that OS didn't know what was coming.
The question now is: will the consultation give people what they want? And have you got your response in? If you need to do it quickly, then you could use Harry Metcalfe's quick'n'easy page. But hurry...
Update: the Local Government Association has a very robust response (PDF) to the consultation: "The consultation .. fails to recognize that substantial elements of core public sector geographic data are generated by bodies other than OS, and include local authorities (address and street data under a statutory requirement), Office for National Statistics (census geographies) and Defra (national park boundaries). To this extent, the OS database consists of surveyed, redigitised and collated data from these sources." In other words, why does OS get to dictate how data it didn't generate gets used?
And: "there must be clarity across the public sector about what constitutes a public task: indeed, we prefer the term public good because the issue is what should the public sector provide as a public good and therefore what is available for free, where should the public sector recover costs etc. So, local government is increasingly being asked to provide non-personal data for free on the basis that tax payers have already paid for the collection and collation of the data, while the same authorities have to purchase OS to enable this offer."
It's going to be very interesting to see how DCLG pulls together the threads. But the clear message from the public sector is: we don't like the way things are set up at the moment. Change is in the air.
Free our data
Internet
Government data
Charles Arthur
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
View original story : big+things
Feed : Technology: Technology blog | guardian.co.uk
![image for Make Screen Capture Videos Free Online Using ScreenToaster [How-To]](http://www.jamesoo.com/thumb/2b/4e/2b4e05651b63a4aa2f9beb8f0febfb07-256.jpg)