Having travelled fairly often to Europe and Asia before I retired, my "trick" for accommodating jet lag as quickly as possible was a walk in the sun. You should go out for a walk and let the sun reset your clock.
Having taught Mechanical Engineering for about 40 years, always with good student ratings, I believe that face time is an important aspect of the teacher-student classroom relationship. Good teachers gage the students' comprehension of the material being presented or discussed by the look on classroom faces. After you get to know a class, you know which students are good indicators of comprehension. Obviously, you then adjust your examples and explanations to surmount whatever conceptual barriers are slowing or even preventing wide understanding of a tricky bit.
To give a trivial example of a conceptual leap, young kids, learning the concept of subtraction for the first time, will often answer "5" when presented with "5 - 3 = ?". Misunderstand the symbols, take away the "3" and you're left with "5". Logical to them. What they are missing is that the numbers are not entities themselves, but represent the count of something else. Drawings on the board make that clear.
In the early 70s I taught two televised distance courses and even though the connection was two-way (I could see the class in a wide-angle view and hear them as well), both they and I found it very unsatisfying. I couldn't focus on any particular student, I couldn't chat with them after class individually, they couldn't reach me off-hours.
In the 90s I tried running a forum on the web site for two courses I taught. They rarely used it -- they always came to my door to ask their questions. Why? Because they didn't want their peers to know that they were not getting it and they wanted a longer more detailed explanation than a forum would provide. Answering a student's question requires understanding why they don't already know the answer.
Ditto. Further, I used to pay for an annual subscription to NYT Crossword Puzzles and I let that lapse because it really annoyed me that I was already paying NYT a substantial sum (~$60/yr) for that privilege and felt that I should have had free access to the rest.
"Nearly all of Thomas Edison's inventions benefitted from prior art."
You can leave Thomas Edison out of that sentence. Nearly all inventions are combinations and evolutions of prior art. In 40 years as a Mechanical Engineering consultant and professor, I've only seen two or three completely original, i.e., unprecedented, ideas.
In Canada, CTV has the franchise and even better, has an iPad app that showed the opening ceremony (actually about 15-20 seconds later than it was on TV). Having looked at the show on TV, I discovered that the iPad 3 image was actually better on the Internet. Unfortunately, CTV's desktop machine access is the pits for me -- it uses Silverlight and looks really bad; smearing images, etc.
Mike could use his Toronto connection to have a squint.
The thing about the prohibition of DRM circumvention that amazes me is that it is virtually unenforceable. If want a backup copy or a clone for my car to protect the original from the kids, I can make it in a few minutes and no one will ever know. I have done no harm. If I try to sell my copy at the local flea market, then I am doing harm.
What this kind of law does do is to promote and educate a whole generation of scofflaws. I think a lot of folks make an internal distinction between the laws of the land and their own moral compass. When they perceive that these clash, i.e., when breaking the law is not even slightly immoral or harmful, but is rather convenient, they do. Draconian laws simply move the boundary in their calculation in the wrong direction. Further, outlawing the tools to defeat DRM will be as effective as the war on drugs has been or prohibition was; an underground supply quickly rises.
This is the crux of the whole matter -- governments are only gradually coming to grips with the notion that the Internet has given ordinary people an instantaneous voice. The old school still believe that they were elected in place of the people who elected them, that their judgement replaces that of their electors and that they don't have to worry about the electorate until the next election. That was the way it had to be when it took weeks for goings on in a government to propagate to the electorate.
The solons in our governments haven't yet understood that today it is only a matter seconds before we know what they're saying and doing and that a few minutes after that, we know what other people (often quite knowledgeable) are parsing and thinking about it. The 'net is full of chaff, but most people who care about an issue will encounter thoughtful takes on it in minutes; takes that change their thinking about it. It's really quite wonderful.
Years after I had taken an engineering exam (and passed it) the professor retired. Meeting him socially much later (I was by then a prof myself), I asked if he knew that most of the students in that course had known that the 50 questions on his final exam were from a set of 250 and that virtually every fraternity had compiled that list. His response was "Oh sure, but then if you know the answers to those 250 questions, you know the material I taught."
I find that increasingly, I hardly browse at all; I'm a confirmed RSS reader. That means that I don't spend much time on any one site which is fundamentally what iPad magazines expect you to do. I don't want to be nailed to a single source any more; I want to hop around.
That's precisely what I meant. When a law is ridiculous, it might just as well not exist, for that's how folks will treat it. If draconian penalties apply to scofflaws, solutions to evade will present themselves. The harm, of course, is that copyright does have legitimate purposes, so those whom it's designed to protect will lose that protection just as street crossers lose the protection of a broken traffic light that's ignored.
"But what's changed when things go digital is the fact that every use involves copying. That wasn't true in the past. And copyright has never been designed to handle a situation where every use is a copy."
Regulatory capture assures us that the chances of copyright reform are slim to none at all. ACTA will make things worse, of course. The key issue, however, is that when laws become ridiculous they slowly become universally ignored. If a traffic light stays red for five minutes, you go through it presuming it broken. If copyright laws cannot or will not accommodate the digital age, we'll go around them.
After reading the comments here, I'm really pleased with my service here in Nova Scotia. Eastlink provides Cable TV, Phone, and Internet for a bundle fee with 30Mb/sec down and ~2Mb/sec up and I've never detected a cap.