恩恩

擦槍其實是一段愉快的時光

我在部隊的時候

他來擦完我的槍

換我擦他的槍

那感覺...不是情感的交流跟精神的合一可以形容的

:on_53::on_53::on_53:

擦槍.....在新兵訓時擦過57式步槍...每當打靶後擦槍會擦到心裡幹聲連連...每人心底偷偷問後連上長官媽媽可好

入部隊後就只分到一支佈滿牛油的手槍...學長交代...不用擦它把它藏起來放好..退伍時在原封不動繳回去就好了

:on_59::on_59::on_59::on_59:

校長大人，難不成您們當時的架槍報數~~

都是10把以上架在一起~~:on_60::on_60:

難怪看您爽得多心曠神怡...:on_53:

看來移民前得準備周全ㄚ,不然事情是麻煩多多ㄚ:on_44::on_44:

不管是房子或者車子或者事業,在台灣至少要能活的好,再來談移民ㄚ:on_80::on_80:

至少搬過去有個基礎ㄚ,可以馬上穩定移民後的不適應ㄚ,多少有點用處吧:on_16::on_16:

國外有些地方還真亂ㄚ:on_72::on_72:

釣魚也要申請執照嗎??:on_47::on_47:

還有哪些稀奇的執照呢:on_47:

大大的槍也真的太多了點吧,十把槍都一樣的嗎??:on_47::on_47:

釣魚申請執照，就如同開車要有駕照的道理一樣，要遵守各種規則，例如，在某季開放某種魚類，多重（大）的魚才可釣，不合規定者就是違法。

全都不一樣，因為用途不同，有打獵，自衛和練習等不同設計。

想必就是因為那裡的生活非常適合大大,所以大大才移民到那裡呢:on_15::on_15:

看這文章真讓我了解不少移民資訊!!
我也是差點一到紐西蘭去!!
但是因為家裡的事業發展~所以放棄了!!
改到我兩個弟弟現在在美國洛杉磯聖城讀書~
就讓他們完成我的心願吧!!

這篇文讓我受益良多!

今天下午拿到了在安大略省，有史以來的第一本正體中文版本的漁獵政府刊物（共47頁，由安省自然資源部發行的，另外是安省漁獵協會搜集的），大概的看了一下，認為值得提供來佐證我前些日子的回覆，增強說服力，所以就掃描貼上來供大家參考了，謝謝費心觀賞﹗

居然還有中文介紹啊

加拿大還真是窩心啊:on_49:

我一個當兵同梯的也是移民到紐西蘭

最後　好像也是因為生意的關係必需要回到台灣服兵役:on_14::on_14:

前人種樹後人涼﹗

要感謝資深華裔移民的爭取和貢獻；很多移民到這兒方便的就像待在原居留地樣的，就像沒出國似的。

看到這消息不知道是不是正確:on_47::on_47::on_47::on_72::on_72::on_72:


http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6315846683

http://www.faircopyrightforcanada.ca/

JUNE 12, 2008 UPDATE – CANADIAN DMCA INTRODUCED

Industry Minister Jim Prentice and Canadian Heritage Minister Josee Verner introduced Bill C-61 – the Canadian DMCA – earlier this morning. It is apparent that the worst fears of thousands of Canadians - over 42,000 as of this date on this group alone - have been realized. If enacted, the Canadian DMCA will leave Canada with one of the most restrictive copyright laws for the digital environment in the world. Far from providing assistance to the digital marketplace, this law will have a stifling effect on creativity, innovation, consumer rights, and free speech in Canada.

The key provisions include:

1. As expected, Prentice has provided a series of attention-grabbing provisions to consumers including time shifting, private copying of music (transferring a song to your iPod), and format shifting (changing format from analog to digital). These are good provisions that did not exist in the delayed December bill. However, check the fine print since the rules are subject to a host of strict limitations and, more importantly, undermined by the digital lock provisions. The effect of the digital lock provisions is to render these rights virtually meaningless in the digital environment because anything that is locked down (ie. copy-controlled CD, no-copy mandate on a digital television broadcast) cannot be copied. As for every day activities like transferring a DVD to your iPod - those are infringing too. Indeed, the law makes it an infringement to circumvent the locks for these purposes.

2. The digital lock provisions are worse than the DMCA. Yes - worse. The law creates a blanket prohibition on circumvention with very limited exceptions and creates a ban against distributing the tools that can be used to circumvent. While Prentice could have adopted a more balanced approach (as New Zealand and Canada's Bill C-60 did), the effect of these provisions will be to make Canadians infringers for a host of activities that are common today including watching out-of-region-coded DVDs, copying and pasting materials from a DRM'd book, or even unlocking a cellphone.

While that is the similar to the U.S. law, the exceptions are worse. The Canadian law includes a few limited exceptions for privacy, encryption research, interoperable computer programs, people with sight disabilities, and security, yet Canadians can't actually use these exceptions since the tools needed to pick the digital lock in order to protect their privacy are banned. In other words, check the fine print again - you can protect your privacy but the tools to do so are now illegal. Dig deeper and it gets worse. Under the U.S. law, there is mandatory review process every three years to identify new exceptions. Under the Canadian law, its up to the government to introduce new exceptions if it thinks it is needed. Overall, these anti-circumvention provisions go far beyond what is needed to comply with the WIPO Internet treaties and represents an astonishing abdication of the principles of copyright balance that have guided Canadian policy for many years.

3. The other headline grabber is the $500 fine for private use infringement. This will be heralded as a reasonable compromise, but check the fine print. Canadian law already allows a court to order damages below $500 per infringement, so the change may not be as dramatic as expected (though $500 in damages is the maximum for private use infringement). Moreover, it is already arguably legal to download sound recordings in Canada. Under the proposal, there are exceptions for uploading or posting music online (ie. making available) and even the suggestion that posting a copyright-protected work to YouTube could result in the larger $20,000 per infringement damage award.

4. The ISP provisions are precisely as expected with a statutory notice-and-notice system. However, check the fine print. The role of the ISP may be undermined by the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which the government trumpets in its press release.

5. The education community received several provisions that are largely gutted by the fine print. For example, library materials can be distributed in electronic form, but must not extend beyond five days. In other words, it turns librarians into locksmiths. Moreover, there is an Internet exception that educators wanted but it does not apply for any works that are either password protected or include a notification that they cannot be used. In other words, online materials that are available under a Creative Commons license are fair game (as they are already), but most everything else is still potentially subject to a restriction. This was precisely what many feared - rather than pursuing the far superior expansion of fair dealing, the education community got a provision that does little to enhance classroom learning.

原文恕刪；這消息是千真萬確的﹗

大哥啊:on_53:有您真好:on_41::on_41::on_41:

感謝 NKNK 大的美圖，除了第一張較「纏綿悱惻」外，其他三張皆有「寧靜詳和」及「致遠心清」之感，就不客氣的收下了﹗

考駕照時的試題，也可在考場電腦選擇自己的祖裔語文來作答，考試時間不限制。船照，釣照，獵照，槍照都可用中文來考。


這是個包容性很強的國家，很講究人道與同情的精神，值得他國借鏡。

兄弟您也真利害

清晨四點半還在掛網 :on_22::on_22:

七、八年前…我朋友在那邊考駕照…選中文…結果沒過

因為當地的中文是香港的中文…很多用語跟台灣不一樣…他有舉例…很好笑…但不記得了

現在不曉得有沒有台灣人的中文版本了:on_52:

g大那邊的時間跟我們這裡不一樣啦

這是無可奈何的事﹗原因是北美的汽車工業景氣亮紅燈，上游廠商訂單不若以往的綿密，當他們有所謂的停工 (production shut-down)時，我們也要被動的與其同步跟進。嚴峻的現實逼得我們也要暫休兩個星期。


順便閒話一下企業做法的比較。日本公司早就學精了，好比本田 (Honda)公司的合同與我們僅簽到2011年（三年一期），三年後再依市場狀況與合作滿意度重商續約與否；而美國公司簽的是較長期的約，一般來說，都至少五年到十年一期。不過，如遇美、加地區集體罷工時，由於工會強勢的介入，談判期間工會會付工資給會員，所以員工就有恃無恐的濫用手中的權利；反觀北美的日本汽車公司，他們絕對不讓員工加入工會，除了明言在先外，還時常利用公司開會時的機會教育，提醒這將會傷害到集體利益，這就是日系車廠的生存哲學。更絕的是，日本公司的基本工資只有北美的四分之三，福利也不似北美的優渥（像本公司的處方藥物、眼鏡、牙齒保健等項目，公司出百分之九十；員工出百分之十，而日本公司則最高百分之七十到八十），那麼，他們的生產成本就相對的低過其他競爭廠商，這是他們的優勢，不過員工流徙率很高，且在雇用時的試用期間 (probation period)較長，考核嚴苛，試用時給的薪水壓的比美、加公司低。在生產線上更嚴禁員工坐下工作（其實有些工作是可讓員工坐著作業的，如沖壓鉚釘等），他們的偉論是，站著對身心較健康。由於沒工會的監督壓力和由員工無記名投票的加薪建議（若員工可在北美的同業中找到比我們所付的時薪還高的話，我們迅即由會計部門同等甚至超過同業的待遇給付），他們就可以把生產成本壓到笑傲江湖，如豐田汽車公司 (Toyota) 就是明例。當別人沒訂單時，他們仍可日夜加班，以日班(day shift)下午班(afternoon shift)和大夜班(midnight shift)三班，每班八小時的形態在日夜趕工。簡單的說，日本公司是出了名的精打細算，這是他們根深蒂固的企業傳統。


得閒期間，天賜良機，個人可以在網路世界多加涉獵個痛快，這就是我無法正常就寢的原因；不知遠方的您目前的狀況如何？能否分享一下經營心得？


無論如何，先向您祝福了﹗

不錯﹗當時是沒有，後來香港移民看到九七後，大陸以懷柔政策對香港，他們也就陸續的回流到香港了，另個基本原因是本地的稅率高過香港許多，他們在香港較容易『搵食』（過生活之意）。


廣東人的粵語很有趣，剛來時，文化的差異搞得我們啼笑皆非，如發薪為出糧，地下室為土庫，竹生指的時出生在外國的孩子（意思是如竹子般兩邊有節，一不通中，二不通西兩邊文化的邊緣人）；返工是上班；返屋企是回家；下班是收工；宜加（發音，yi ga）是現在、如今、時下之意等等，在當時如在唐人街您不以廣東話來溝通的話，他們是懶得理你的﹗不過，在台灣移民來的多時，他們也就開始使用國語了，大陸人在六四後只要他們以跳機的方式，在機場移民局面前聲稱他們在大陸受到政治迫害，就可輕易的在加拿大居留，再加上他們大量的擔保親人移民（來後把親人再推給政府的社福單位負擔，搞的後來的華人移民和擔保困難重重﹗），如今的華文報幾乎百分之九十以上是以簡體字發行的，這兒的普通話也到處可聽得到，想不聽都不行。國語和普通話的差別，就在國語較斯文溫和；普通話較噪耳高亢。這真是應了「十年河東；十年河西」的變遷。

台灣人在這，對於自己的政治權利和社區服務(community services)並不熱衷；反觀大陸移民，現在摒除了以往對政治的不信任和對社會服務的冷漠，他們的政治企圖心可見一斑。他們在各行各業鑽得比台灣人要深、廣、快，個人驚訝的發現到，他們的英語溝通的能力非常有限，但是膽識卻其高無比，這是令人印象極端深刻的地方，總懷疑他們是怎混上的？因為加拿大昔日的就業要求水平很高，而語言這關是最基本的要求﹗


我這兒的時間正好落後您那邊十二個小時，正是日夜顛倒；您比我這邊先進了半天呢﹗