Suchergebnisse

In my Master's thesis \"Taking Pictures of the Photographer: the (In)visible Frames", the theory was inspired by practical work: my series of photographs called \"Photographers\". Myself a photographer, I've always loved to take pictures of other representatives of this craft in their work. So I have noticed that these people are often taking particular positions, and along with them, their inner states of being are also changing (as in the one who is taken picture of, too). The common perception is that it is the photographer who influences his/her \"victim\" – for example, by telling you to sit down and smile. When I heard about the existence of the specific phenomenon in quantum physics, where the existence of the observer can influence the outcome of the experiment, I thought that in photography, the one being observed can influence the one behind the camera – for instance, kneel and wait for a long while, feverishly pushing the button with one's finger. In this case, the actual result of this "photographic experiment", the picture, also influences the one who has been shot and the one who presses the button. Separately, in my work I also discuss the single occasion when these two functions are performed by the same person: namely, the \"production\" of a selfie. In my work, I associate the visual sterility of a photographic image, especially digital one, the special "tuning" effects done with the help of programs like Photoshop, as well as all the fashion for taking pictures (also of oneself), intertwined with the social norm to look \"nice\" on the picture (even where they don't resemble your looks), with the tradition that was practiced in the USA in the period from the late 19th to early 20th century. According to this tradition, along with the usual funeral and post-mortem photos, the people who had passed away were photographed \"as the living\". The use of special effects in contemporary digital photography, in this aspect, reminds me of the flowers and candles that were used to decorate the deceased, in order to conceal the fact that the latter has been dead for some time. So the author of a selfie reminds me of a suicider, who, in addition, uploads the results to any social network, where they will be immediately evaluated, or to the hard disk, where they are likely to be never seen by anyone again. In terms of posture, I have noticed that even the external photographers' attributes – the camera bag, clothing, a certain "professional" behavior – give a number of certain "advantages" both to teenagers, who are particularly sensitive to social pressure, and to the rest of society. \"Hipsters\" get more favor in their environment if they smarten themselves with \"vintage\" camera bags, while a statistical 30-year-old white person, in the daylight, feels free to kneel, lie down, move around his/her hands, and so on, if only s/he has a camera. So we can talk about the power of image, which Victor Pelevin has described in a great detail in his novel \"Generation P\": in his book, a government visualized by computers is ruling a whole nation. I dare say that in contemporary society, often we are disappointed with life due to the fact that it has been invaded by life-unfriendly rules of the world, determined by the geometry of the photographic image. Even in our daily life, we are often governed by the photographic shot, which my Master's thesis analyzes not only as the frame, but also as a pose and a border (limit).

In my Master's thesis \"Taking Pictures of the Photographer: the (In)visible Frames", the theory was inspired by practical work: my series of photographs called \"Photographers\". Myself a photographer, I've always loved to take pictures of other representatives of this craft in their work. So I have noticed that these people are often taking particular positions, and along with them, their inner states of being are also changing (as in the one who is taken picture of, too). The common perception is that it is the photographer who influences his/her \"victim\" – for example, by telling you to sit down and smile. When I heard about the existence of the specific phenomenon in quantum physics, where the existence of the observer can influence the outcome of the experiment, I thought that in photography, the one being observed can influence the one behind the camera – for instance, kneel and wait for a long while, feverishly pushing the button with one's finger. In this case, the actual result of this "photographic experiment", the picture, also influences the one who has been shot and the one who presses the button. Separately, in my work I also discuss the single occasion when these two functions are performed by the same person: namely, the \"production\" of a selfie. In my work, I associate the visual sterility of a photographic image, especially digital one, the special "tuning" effects done with the help of programs like Photoshop, as well as all the fashion for taking pictures (also of oneself), intertwined with the social norm to look \"nice\" on the picture (even where they don't resemble your looks), with the tradition that was practiced in the USA in the period from the late 19th to early 20th century. According to this tradition, along with the usual funeral and post-mortem photos, the people who had passed away were photographed \"as the living\". The use of special effects in contemporary digital photography, in this aspect, reminds me of the flowers and candles that were used to decorate the deceased, in order to conceal the fact that the latter has been dead for some time. So the author of a selfie reminds me of a suicider, who, in addition, uploads the results to any social network, where they will be immediately evaluated, or to the hard disk, where they are likely to be never seen by anyone again. In terms of posture, I have noticed that even the external photographers' attributes – the camera bag, clothing, a certain "professional" behavior – give a number of certain "advantages" both to teenagers, who are particularly sensitive to social pressure, and to the rest of society. \"Hipsters\" get more favor in their environment if they smarten themselves with \"vintage\" camera bags, while a statistical 30-year-old white person, in the daylight, feels free to kneel, lie down, move around his/her hands, and so on, if only s/he has a camera. So we can talk about the power of image, which Victor Pelevin has described in a great detail in his novel \"Generation P\": in his book, a government visualized by computers is ruling a whole nation. I dare say that in contemporary society, often we are disappointed with life due to the fact that it has been invaded by life-unfriendly rules of the world, determined by the geometry of the photographic image. Even in our daily life, we are often governed by the photographic shot, which my Master's thesis analyzes not only as the frame, but also as a pose and a border (limit).

In this paper author analyses issues in taking and implementing takeover bid i Lithuania and in European Union. Legal practice and perspectives in regulation is analized.

In this paper author analyses issues in taking and implementing takeover bid i Lithuania and in European Union. Legal practice and perspectives in regulation is analized.

Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.

Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.

Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.

Public Opinion in the EU: Factors Determining Attitudes Towards Immigration. The Cases of Sweden and Denmark Since immigration has been indicated to be one of the most important issues in the EU, the public opinion on this matter varies across the countries. Sweden and Denmark were chosen to analyse how two very similar countries in social, economic and cultural terms may have such different points of view towards immigration. Citizens in Sweden have been more supportive of the matter compared to the citizens of Denmark. The aim of this study is to examine what are the main factors contributing to such different public opinion on immigration and how such similar counties can have such opposing views. Economic, identity, contact, threat, mood and cue-taking theories try to explain the factors which influence the public opinion. Economic one argues that well-developed countries usually support the free movement of people and see it as a positive element thing for country's economics because immigrants do not burden strong economies as much as they would concern the economies of poor countries. Identity theory argues that citizens are more concerned that immigrants are a threat to local values and culture which they interfere. Contact theory explains that the more citizens are involved with immigrants, the more positive about immigration they become. Threat theory suggests that locals might become insecure about employment or welfare state. Since immigrants might be seen as a threat to take jobs or use heavily economic benefits especially when immigration flow is sudden and large-scale. Mood theory argues that citizens are usually unaware of politics and the reality of immigration therefore their opinion can be easily manipulated by others including media or an opinion by authoritative personalities, to name a few. Finally, cue-taking theory similarly suggests that opinion is formed by cues made by political parties. Other studies usually analyse and compare two or three theories while in this study it is attempted to combine all the major theories in order to have a much broader picture on the matter. Out of these theories and previous studies, ten hypotheses were established which were tested by implementing opinion polls. Surveys carried by Eurobarometer, European Social Survey and Gallup International were chosen to be thoroughly analysed to support the hypotheses. Furthermore, this study puts an emphasis on a state-level analysis rather than an individual level one since it is aimed to find the differences between the two countries but also because of available statistical data. The results show that identity, threat and contact theories explain the factors determining public opinion on immigration the best. The analysis showed that sudden and large-scale immigration increases the possibility for a more negative perception of immigration. During the migrant crisis, public opinion about immigration became obviously more pessimistic both in Denmark and Sweden. Also, if there is more contact with immigrants, the attitude towards them becomes more positive. The results in Sweden showed that citizens communicate with immigrants more often and they have more close relationships with them, compared to Denmark. Finally, in both countries, public opinion towards immigrants from countries outside the EU or of different ethnicity are way more negative, compared to the immigrants who came from the EU states or countries with similar ethnic background. Other theories suggested little or no support when applied in Sweden and Denmark. The outcome of this study allows a better understanding of what contributes to the construction of negative attitudes towards immigration. Also, why in some countries immigration might seem more of a threat, compared to other countries. It could also help to search for a solution to encourage a more positive perception of immigrants and thus their better integration in the society.

Since Lithuania's membership in the European Union on 1 May 2004, EU legal acts are directly applied in Lithuania. One of them is Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. Another international legal act regulating taking of evidence in the foreign countries in civil and commercial matters is The Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters adopted by the Lithuanian Parliament on 13 April 2004. In any case, it is important to pay attention to fact, that the regulation is the first EU legal act directly regulating process of taking of evidence in association among EU legal members, except of Denmark, to which the regulation is not adjusted. The article describes the reasons stipulated adoption of the regulation and its relation and advantages in regard to Hague Convention. the regulation sets two possibilities of taking of evidence in another member state, i.e. taking of evidence applying procedure of passive and active requisition. Both of these methods are equivalent therefore they are considering in the article. The important breakthrough was incorporation of taking of evidence applying procedure of passive requisition in to the regulation, despite of application is limited by voluntariness and based on permission from the state in which the evidence should be taken. The article in details considers all proceedings of taking of evidence defined in the regulation, provides ways to solve controversial issues and reviews the main foreign sources related to this subject.

Since Lithuania's membership in the European Union on 1 May 2004, EU legal acts are directly applied in Lithuania. One of them is Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. Another international legal act regulating taking of evidence in the foreign countries in civil and commercial matters is The Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters adopted by the Lithuanian Parliament on 13 April 2004. In any case, it is important to pay attention to fact, that the regulation is the first EU legal act directly regulating process of taking of evidence in association among EU legal members, except of Denmark, to which the regulation is not adjusted. The article describes the reasons stipulated adoption of the regulation and its relation and advantages in regard to Hague Convention. the regulation sets two possibilities of taking of evidence in another member state, i.e. taking of evidence applying procedure of passive and active requisition. Both of these methods are equivalent therefore they are considering in the article. The important breakthrough was incorporation of taking of evidence applying procedure of passive requisition in to the regulation, despite of application is limited by voluntariness and based on permission from the state in which the evidence should be taken. The article in details considers all proceedings of taking of evidence defined in the regulation, provides ways to solve controversial issues and reviews the main foreign sources related to this subject.

Since Lithuania's membership in the European Union on 1 May 2004, EU legal acts are directly applied in Lithuania. One of them is Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. Another international legal act regulating taking of evidence in the foreign countries in civil and commercial matters is The Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters adopted by the Lithuanian Parliament on 13 April 2004. In any case, it is important to pay attention to fact, that the regulation is the first EU legal act directly regulating process of taking of evidence in association among EU legal members, except of Denmark, to which the regulation is not adjusted. The article describes the reasons stipulated adoption of the regulation and its relation and advantages in regard to Hague Convention. the regulation sets two possibilities of taking of evidence in another member state, i.e. taking of evidence applying procedure of passive and active requisition. Both of these methods are equivalent therefore they are considering in the article. The important breakthrough was incorporation of taking of evidence applying procedure of passive requisition in to the regulation, despite of application is limited by voluntariness and based on permission from the state in which the evidence should be taken. The article in details considers all proceedings of taking of evidence defined in the regulation, provides ways to solve controversial issues and reviews the main foreign sources related to this subject.

Since Lithuania's membership in the European Union on 1 May 2004, EU legal acts are directly applied in Lithuania. One of them is Council Regulation (EC) No 1206/2001 of 28 May 2001 on cooperation between the courts of the Member States in the taking of evidence in civil or commercial matters. Another international legal act regulating taking of evidence in the foreign countries in civil and commercial matters is The Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters adopted by the Lithuanian Parliament on 13 April 2004. In any case, it is important to pay attention to fact, that the regulation is the first EU legal act directly regulating process of taking of evidence in association among EU legal members, except of Denmark, to which the regulation is not adjusted. The article describes the reasons stipulated adoption of the regulation and its relation and advantages in regard to Hague Convention. the regulation sets two possibilities of taking of evidence in another member state, i.e. taking of evidence applying procedure of passive and active requisition. Both of these methods are equivalent therefore they are considering in the article. The important breakthrough was incorporation of taking of evidence applying procedure of passive requisition in to the regulation, despite of application is limited by voluntariness and based on permission from the state in which the evidence should be taken. The article in details considers all proceedings of taking of evidence defined in the regulation, provides ways to solve controversial issues and reviews the main foreign sources related to this subject.

Introduction of Euro ended the money integration process which lasted for 50 years . Euro became the key axis of integration. In the context of the international monetary system, formation of the Monetary Union in Europe is perhaps the most important event since the failure of the world monetary system that functioned on the basis of the Bretton Woods treaty. The experience of the first Eurofunctioning year has shown that it became a factor that stabilized the fluctuation of interest, price, and exchange courses in a complicated economics globalization environment. When evaluating in the context of other monetary unions, the Euro project is a particular event in monetary history. Never before did it happen that a group of independent slates would refuse their national money at their own vvill and would concurrently retain political independence. This act determines quite a new combination of macroeconomic policy, based on general values and following the subsidizing principles. The policy based only on national interests can be neither productive, nor stable enough. The policy based on the common currency has an effect on all tjie spheres of economics: allocation of resources and revenues, economic growth, as well as labor, product, service, and finance markets.[.].

Introduction of Euro ended the money integration process which lasted for 50 years . Euro became the key axis of integration. In the context of the international monetary system, formation of the Monetary Union in Europe is perhaps the most important event since the failure of the world monetary system that functioned on the basis of the Bretton Woods treaty. The experience of the first Eurofunctioning year has shown that it became a factor that stabilized the fluctuation of interest, price, and exchange courses in a complicated economics globalization environment. When evaluating in the context of other monetary unions, the Euro project is a particular event in monetary history. Never before did it happen that a group of independent slates would refuse their national money at their own vvill and would concurrently retain political independence. This act determines quite a new combination of macroeconomic policy, based on general values and following the subsidizing principles. The policy based only on national interests can be neither productive, nor stable enough. The policy based on the common currency has an effect on all tjie spheres of economics: allocation of resources and revenues, economic growth, as well as labor, product, service, and finance markets.[.].

Rapid urbanization, unregulated industrialization, growing transport intensity and agricultural activities have created a problem of heavy metal (HM) contamination worldwide. HMs are long-term contaminants with the ability to accumulate in soil and plants and have no natural way to be removed. Forests near local contamination sources have been subjected to HMs concentration measurements. Trees are HMs bioindicators capable to record HM concentrations in the environment in the past. In this paper, concentrations of HMs determined in wood trees were compared with phytotoxic, excessive, deficiency and naturally found HM concentrations in plants. Results of our investigation showed that HM concentrations in trees that grew in potentially contaminated areas did not exceed phytotoxic and excessive values of HMs found in plants. Concentrations of HMs in a wood of pines varied: Ni – 0.1– 3.50 mg·kg–1; Cr – 0.1–1.50 mg·kg–1; Cu – 0.25–3.00 mg·kg–1; Mn – 10– 160 mg·kg–1; Zn – 2–75 mg·kg–1, Pb – 0.05–2.80 mg·kg–1 and those for birch ranged: Ni – 0.90–3.20 mg·kg–1; Cr – 0.90–2.50 mg·kg–1; Mn – 40– 130 mg·kg–1; Pb – 1.0–3.50 mg·kg–1. The higher transfer of HMs to wood was associated with higher concentrations of HMs in tree environment (soil and nearby water bodies) and the function of some HMs as elements necessary for tree physiological processes. The values of HM transfer factors for trees were: Ni – 0.001–0.55; Cu – 0.04–0.45; Zn – 0.03–0.6; Mn – 0.001–0.75; Pb – 0.002–0.085; Cr – 0.005–0.11.