text:
Home » NBA » Warriors vs Trail Blazers Game 1 LIVE stream: How to watch NBA playoffs Conference Finals
Warriors vs Trail Blazers Game 1 LIVE stream: How to watch NBA playoffs Conference Finals
The NBA Finals are nearing closer with the Conference Finals getting underway this evening, with the Warriors facing the Trail Blazers.
Steph and Seth Curry face off against one another in an NBA first for brothers facing off in a Conference Finals match-up.
But one storyline expected to dominate the series will be the absence of Kevin Durant, who is unlikely to return until at least Game 3, with some reports suggesting he may not be fit to come back at all.
Portland are aiming to pull off a huge upset by reaching the NBA Finals, but the Warriors have been here before and have the experience to know what they need to do.
Warriors vs Trail Blazers TV Channel
Sky Sports are the exclusive rights holders for NBA in the UK.
And Sky Sports have live coverage of the Warriors vs Trail Blazers game, starting at 2am BST on Wednesday.
Tonight's game will be shown on Sky Sports Main Event and Sky Sports Arena.
Warriors vs Trail Blazers LIVE stream
Sky subscribers can live stream the Warriors vs Trail Blazers online via SkyGo and the SkyGo app.
This means that all the coverage can be followed live on your desktop or laptop via the Sky Go app, which if you're an existing customer, is also available on iOS and Android smartphone and tablet devices.
Sky Go is also available on a number of platforms including Amazon Fire devices, iPad, Mac computers and laptops, Playstation 3, PS4 and Xbox One.
The Sky Sports app, available to download on iOS and Android devices, will also be providing live text coverage and updates.
If you're not currently a Sky Sports customer but can't stand to miss out on the action, you can add the channels to your box via a NOW TV subscription.
Day passes, which let you add Sky Sports channels for 24 hours, start at £7.99 a day, with a weekly pass starting from £12.99, and no locking in to a contract.
Kawhi Leonard: LeBron James the reason Raptors star will NOT join Lakers – huge claim
Zion Williamson: Duke star is overhyped – Expert makes bold Boston Celtics comparison
Spurs vs Nuggets Game 6 LIVE stream: How to watch NBA Playoffs first round clash online
Snooker fans left FUMING with BBC during World Championships after this appeared on screen
autoplay_video
Warriors vs Tra
NBA Draft Lottery: Zion Williamson would be best at Atlanta Hawks, NOT New York Knicks
'Smoke and mirrors': Ikin calls for Broncos to come clean on Roberts


text:
Q: LESS CSS: How to Create and Reference Associative Lists/Arrays Coming from Stylus, I'm looking to create a nested array/list structure like this (Stylus), but in LESS:
$myicons = {
    steel: "\e826"
    other: "\e826"
    coolstuff: "\e826"
    ...
}

for icon, ascii in $myicons
    .icon-{icon}
        @extend $icon-class
        &:before
            content ascii

Looking at the documentation, it appears that no such data structure is available.  Can anyone suggest an approach to create a similar structure, in which I can loop over key/value pairs in LESS?

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
About Join Donate
Activist Toolkit
Disaster by Design
Fission Stories
Missiles and Missile Defense
Nuclear Power Safety
Space and Satellites
Space Security
[ Blog ] All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Books
Dave Lochbaum, former director, Nuclear Safety Project | July 18, 2012, 1:46 pm EST
I've read that 18th century author Samuel Johnson cautioned against trusting anyone who had written more than he had read.
Johnson's words kept coming back to me in recent weeks as I was introduced at symposiums and conferences marking the anniversaries of the Fukushima and Three Mile Island accidents. The introductions of other presenters and I invariably included any books we'd authored. While I remain proud of the two books I have authored and was flattered by that recognition, Johnson's warning suggested that the audiences might have been more interested in the books I had read than the few I had written. In that spirit, here are some of the many books that I have read that I found especially insightful:
Controlling the Atom: The Beginnings of Nuclear Regulation 1946-1962 by George T. Mazuzan and J. Samuel Walker (1984) and its companion, Containing the Atom: Nuclear Regulation in a Changing Environment 1963-1971 by J. Samuel Walker (1992) provide amazing insights into some of the Atomic Energy Commission's decisions and indecisions. Although working for the NRC as its historian, Walker calls them as he sees them. Some of his calls don't reflect favorably on the AEC. The value of these books is in their detailing of what happened and why; not what any party might have wanted to happen or for revisionist motives.
Nuclear Reactor Safety: On the History of the Regulatory Process by David Okrent (1981) is an invaluable resource. Bob Pollard, my predecessor at UCS, had a copy of the manuscript of this book before it was published. Bob handwrote this warning on its title page: "If you value your life, don't even think about borrowing this." I understand why Bob treasured this book so highly. There's scarcely a month that goes by that I don't refer to this book to find out why certain things did or didn't happen. Okrent served on the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards when contentious issues like nuclear plant siting (there once was a proposal to build a reactor near the Brooklyn Bridge as well as one in Malibu, CA), emergency core cooling system performance, containment reliability, and reactor pressure vessel integrity. Okrent lays it all out. I encourage reading this book, but I won't lend you my copy either. It's available online for free here.
The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA by Diane Vaughn (1996) is not a book about nuclear power, but it describes similar situations faced by the nuclear industry and its regulator. Prior space shuttles experienced problems with the o-rings on their external fuel tanks. Rather than resolve the problems, their recurring nature led to their acceptance via what Vaughn termed "normalization of deviance." O-ring damage was not supposed to happen, but because it happened frequently the abnormal became normal. As Challenger's launch approached, NASA's consultants expressed concern that the unprecedentedly low temperatures could make the o-rings even more prone to failure. NASA flipped the concerns around and asked the consultants for the minimally acceptable temperature. Lacking sufficient data with which to establish that limit, no line was drawn and the Challenger lifted off to its doom. The "normalization of deviance" also occurs in the nuclear industry (Davis-Besse in 2002 was an example) as does the issue of dealing with risk uncertainties.
Eastland: Legacy of the Titanic by George W. Hilton (1995) is although not a book about nuclear power, but it explains the quintessential unintended consequence that problem solvers everywhere seek so hard to avoid. Following the April 14, 1912, sinking of the Titanic and the deaths of 829 passengers and 694 crew members, laws were passed in America requiring vessels to carry enough lifeboats for all persons aboard. On July 24, 1915, while still tied to the dock in the Chicago River, the day steamer Eastland capsized, killing 841 passengers and 3 crew members. The Eastland disaster was caused by the Titanic disaster – the weight of the lifeboats and davits added to the Eastland made the ship more prone to tipping over. Thus, a law with the good intention of preventing deaths like those of the 829 passengers aboard the Titanic had the misfortune of causing the deaths of 841 passengers fewer than three years later.
The Whistleblowers by Myron Peretz Glazer & Penina Migdal Glazer (1989) uses case studies of whistleblower cases in several industries, including the nuclear industry, to reveal the systemic factors that often polarize issues. Any single case could easily be dismissed as being caused by a disgruntled worker or overbearing manager. But the collection of cases reveals how common workplace dynamics often compel the emotional actions and reactions that can make bad situations far worse.
Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies by Charles Perrow (1984) may not have been the first to explore the high risks associated with complex technologies, but it remains among the best. Covering a number of accidents across a number of industries, Perrow identifies the recurring factors that need to be better managed to avoid becoming candidates for the sequel.
Helen Caldicott: A Desperate Passion by Helen Caldicott (1996) is an autobiography of an amazing person. I first met Helen in 1997 following a keynote speech she delivered at a conference in North Carolina. It was the first, but not the last, time Helen scolded me for not doing more about nuclear safety. Her autobiography explains both her passion to address nuclear safety issues and its desperation. A true visionary who'd never be convicted of not seeing the forest for its trees, Helen sometimes make me feel like I can't even see a tree for its bark. But it's a fortunate feeling in that it inspires me to think bigger and aim higher.
Aunt Carrie's War Against Black Fox Nuclear Power Plant by Carrie Barefoot Dickerson (1995) is a first-hand account of a citizen's campaign against the operation of a nuclear power plant in her community. Reflective of many similar campaigns across the country, it explains the challenges faced raising funds to pay experts, translating obtuse jargon into plain English, and avoiding being overwhelmed by the closed-ranks cohesion between the power company and its regulator – all in one's spare time carved from normal lives and jobs. It's a good complement to Caldicott's autobiography. Helen describes waging campaigns on the national and international levels while Carrie describes similar campaigning at the local and state levels.
Hostages of Each Other: The Transformation of Nuclear Safety Since Three Mile Island by Joseph V. Rees (1994) provides insights into the Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO), created by the nuclear industry in the wake of the Three Mile Island accident to be its peer watchdog. Rees describes how INPO works and some of the politics that give this watchdog less teeth than needed at times. Because INPO operates largely in the shadows, this book provides a rare peek behind the organization's curtain.
Safety Second: The NRC and America's Nuclear Power Plants by Michelle Adato, James MacKenzie, Robert Pollard, and Ellyn Weiss (1987) was authored by members of the UCS staff. But it was nearly a decade before I joined UCS, so it's not self-promoting my work. And it's out-of-print, so it's not a fund-raising ploy (or at least, not one likely to be successful). This book covers four topics: (1) the NRC's failure to resolve known safety problems, (2) the public's limited capability to participate in the NRC's processes in a meaningful way, (3) the NRC's failure to enforce its safety regulations, and (4) the fraternal relationship between the NRC and the industry it regulates. To update this book, UCS need only provide some recent examples, change the date, and perhaps revise its title to Safety Third.
The Truth About Chernobyl by Grigori Medvedev (1989) describes the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl nuclear plant in the Ukraine and its cleanup by someone who had worked at the plant during its construction and aided in its cleanup. The facts of what happened and why match many other books on the accident, but Medvedev provides insights into the culture as the plant was being built and in the wake of the disaster.
Licensed to Kill? The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Shoreham Power Plant by Joan Aron (1997) covers the Shoreham nuclear plant on Long Island, which cost nearly $5 billion to construct but closed permanently before ever operating above 5% power. It was the most expensive electricity never generated. Aron, who worked for the NRC, describes the legal and political battles involving county, state, and federal government agencies and many others.
Idaho Falls: The Untold Story of America's First Nuclear Accident by William McKeown (2003) explains how workers were preparing the SL-1 reactor in Idaho to restart on January 3, 1961, following a two-week maintenance outage. While moving individual control rods in and out of the reactor core to remedy longstanding sticking problems, a central control rod was pulled too far out of the core. Instead of about four inches, the control rod was pulled about sixteen inches. The reactor went from being shut down to over 100 percent power in a fraction of a second. That rapid power rise vaporized water inside the reactor vessel. The force of the resulting steam explosion lifted the reactor vessel nine feet out of the ground and expelled some of the control rods, one of which pinned a worker to the facility's ceiling. All the workers at the plant that evening died. McKeown chronicles why it happened. He also describes the efforts of those who had to deal with the highly radioactive bodies of the workers and the cleanup of the facility.
Windscale 1957: Anatomy of a Nuclear Accident by Lorna Arnold (1992) covers the October 1957 accident involving a gas-cooled reactor at the Windscale nuclear plant in Britain. Arnold describes why that happened and how the radioactivity released from that accident caused cow's milk to be dumped into the sea. Arnold also explains how filters – added to the plant's vent system and called "Cockcroft's follies" to ridicule their chief advocate – prevented that accident from having even greater consequences. This "back to the future" moment is timely as the NRC contemplates requiring vents at US reactors to be equipped with filters in the wake of the latest nuclear plant disaster, last year's Fukushima.
The Accident by Hans Heinrich Ziemann (1978) is a novel following characters like the local elected officials, the plant manager and an anti-nuclear activist through the contentious days leading up to a nuclear plant in Germany operating for the first time. Before the dust of those battles settles, the plant experiences a major accident resulting in dust of an entirely different sort. Former antagonists unite in their struggles to survive the disaster. Ziemann develops his characters as humans all trying to do the right thing, albeit with different definitions of "right," rather than as good guys and bad guys. Thus, the plant manager is not greedy and the anti-nuclear activist is not wacky.
We Almost Lost Detroit by John G. Fuller (1975) covers the October 1966 partial meltdown of the Unit 1 reactor at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant outside Detroit. It was viciously attacked by the nuclear industry at the time as being over-sensationalized speculation – criticisms that were blunted in the wake of the even larger meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979. This book describes much of the internal debate over nuclear plant safety levels going on between the nuclear industry and its regulator at the time, the Atomic Energy Commission.
Fermi-I: New Age for Nuclear Power edited by E. Pauline Alexanderson (1979) explains how power companies formed a consortium to finance, build, and construct a liquid sodium reactor. It also describes how an 11th hour modification to the plant intended to make it safer in event of a reactor core meltdown actually triggered a partial meltdown.
Nuclear Power Goes On-Line: A History of Shippingport by William Beaver (1990) describes the two lives of this reactor – first as a pressurized water reactor and its later reincarnation as a light water breeder reactor. Shippingport was among the first nuclear power reactors to operate in the United States. It was also one of the first reactors to be dismantled. The former site of the plant is now an empty field and a parking lot adjacent to the Beaver Valley nuclear plant outside Pittsburgh.
Shouldering Risks: The Culture of Control in the Nuclear Power Industry by Constance Perin (2005) uses extensive on-site interviews with the workers involved complemented by exhaustive review of available documents to provide thorough case studies of safety problems that occurred at three US nuclear power plants. While not headline-grabbers like Three Mile Island and Fukushima, these problems nevertheless explained how schedule pressures, communication barriers, and other commonplace factors can conspire to lead well-meaning workers to undesired outcomes.
Inviting Disaster: Lessons from the Edge of Technology by James R. Chiles (2001) examines several technological disasters, including Three Mile Island, to explain why they happened but also to draw recurring themes across them.
Voices from Chernobyl: The Oral History of a Nuclear Disaster by Svetlana Alexievich (2005) is a collection of first-hand accounts of how the Chernobyl accident affected people's lives. The book both puts the reader in the shoes of these people while at the same time making the reader glad to have worn different ones.
The Atom and the Fault by Richard L. Meehan (1984) provides the point of view of an insider during contentious proceedings regarding the seismic hazard and associated design features at nuclear power plants proposed in California.
Fallout by James W. Huston (2001) is a novel about terrorists attempting to use US assets to attack US facilities. Released shortly before 9/11, this book had the terrorists trying to attack a nuclear power plant on the California coast. And their target was not the thick, reinforced concrete containment building housing the reactor but the far less robust structure containing the spent fuel pool – and significantly more radioactivity than exists in the reactor core. Huston is a former US military pilot who applied this experience to determine the true weak spot at our nuclear plants.
Who Killed Karen Silkwood by Howard Kohn (1981) is about a worker at a nuclear fuel fabrication facility in Oklahoma who raised concerns about radiation protection for herself and fellow workers. On November 13, 1974, Silkwood died in a car accident while driving to meet a New York Times reporter. The documents she reportedly carried with her as evidence of her concerns were not in the car after the accident.
No Sacrifice Too Great: The Life of Lewis L. Strauss by Richard Pfau (1984) is a biography of a man who served on the Atomic Energy Commission at its beginning. Strauss is often remembered for uttering the infamous phrase that nuclear power would someday become "too cheap to meter" and for his role in removing the security clearance from Robert Oppenheimer. The latter incident came back to haunt Strauss – Washington politicians used it to deny him a position in President Eisenhower's cabinet.
The Dorset Disaster by Alexander Sidar III (1980) is a novel that provides a fictionalized account of an accident at a nuclear reactor in Connecticut and the turmoil it causes company representative, elected officials, and the public. While the accident is fictional, the distress is causes so many people seems all too real.
Posted in: Uncategorized Tags: by Dave Lochbaum, nuclear power safety
Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.
UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.
Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.
Stay Informed via email from UCS
Dave Lochbaum, former director of the UCS Nuclear Safety Project, is one of the nation's top independent experts on nuclear power.
Read Dave's posts >
Meet our other bloggers >
[ TOPICS ]
Science for a healthy planet and safer world
UCS Leadership & Experts
Funding & Financials
History & Accomplishments
Center for Science and Democracy
Clean Vehicles
All Things Nuclear
Got Science?
Reports & Analysis

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Are you looking for nanny vacancies in Slough? Babysits has a large overview of nanny vacancies, with 1 vacancies currently available in Slough matching your search criteria. Start contacting parent who are looking for a nanny to find a great nanny job in no time!
Are you looking for nanny jobs in Slough? There are 1 nanny vacancies in Slough available matching your search criteria.
Through the Babysits community, you can find nanny jobs from Slough. If you are looking for nanny jobs in Slough, then you are in the right place!
Are you looking for nannies in Slough? You can sign up as a parent!


text:
Home Careers Careers Advice Top ten most important apprenticeship tasks revealed
Top ten most important apprenticeship tasks revealed
An apprenticeship is more than boring admin, Positive Outcomes explains
To mark the start of National Apprenticeship Week, new research from leading apprenticeships provider Positive Outcomes, has revealed the top ten most important tasks undertaken by apprentices during the course of their traineeship.
Respondents to the study were originally asked, "What was the most unusual thing you had to do during your apprenticeship?" and requested to specify the task/requirement they were asked to complete.
Ryan Longmate, joint managing director of Positive Outcomes, said: "We received some really fun and quirky responses from this particular question within the survey, but what we found really interesting was the amount of answers given by apprentices that involved a high degree of responsibility and trust. A majority of the answers that came back demonstrated how the apprentices were being tasked with very senior projects. It goes to show that apprenticeships offer plenty of opportunities for diverse, entertaining and fun happenings as well as giving apprentices the opportunities to work on some very senior tasks."
From the answers compiled, the team at Positive Outcomes established a top ten of the most important assignments they were asked to undertake, which revealed the following results:
1. Put together the infrastructure for a new office
2. Organise an office opening with the mayor of the town
3. Introduce new concepts to the boss
4. Train other colleagues
5. Attend client meetings
6. Take part in a charity bike ride using a static bike in store
7. Book a yacht for 24 people
8. Take pictures of customers for the company's social media pages
9. Assist with a brand refresh for the company
10. Organise the company's social events
Ryan commented: "People often regard an apprenticeship as either being trade-based or involving monotonous admin tasks such as photocopying or simply making tea. This simply isn't true. Our research demonstrates how apprentices are given very important tasks to do."
The study, questioned 227 young adults aged between 16 and 24. Much of the research was aimed at gaining an understanding of young adults' outlook on apprenticeships, but as part of the wider study, respondents were asked to specify unusual occurrences during the course of their apprenticeship, of which most talked about the seriousness of their roles.
Ryan concluded: "Youngsters might see working life as a chore and meaningless before they've had a chance to experience it, but apprenticeships provide an understanding of the working world, fully immersing young adults within it and giving them serious responsibilities and a sense of fulfilment."
Positive Outcomes is one of the country's top ten independent training providers and a direct contractor in the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) Top 40 Providers list.
During National Apprenticeship Week the firm will be running a daily 'Ask the Expert' session on twitter, where between 3-4pm budding apprentices can ask the team at Positive Outcomes anything they want about apprenticeships using the hashtag #AskPTL.
The firm is also actively recruiting for roles at all of its sites, including sites in Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds, London, Manchester and Nottingham. For more information on job opportunities, apprenticeships and the work that Positive Outcomes do visit the website, or ring 0800 488 0488 to find out more.
Previous articleIndustries to Consider a Career in After Graduation
Next articleBFA urges more young people to get into Franchising
So you've finished your degree, but what next? You're now faced with the daunting prospect of trying to secure a job. You're often told...
Prepping for interviews
Personal resilience outweighs salary growth in terms of MBA programme benefits...
Study Advice
2018 was a record year in terms of the number of students finding a university place via Clearing so you are certainly not alone....
7 tools and apps you should download to make it through...
Teacher Training – Applying for School Direct
STUDENTS OF THE FUTURE HAVE THEIR FINGER ON THE CREATIVE PULSE
Career Tips on how to survive the transition from student to...


The occasion may seem a bit sentimental: this summer, after the long period of 52 years, a distinguished British financial weekly The Economist will move from its long-term home, a charismatic tower located at St. James's Street 25, to a new address. The move in itself may not have been so dramatic if it did not include the abandoning of an anthological architectural and urbanistic complex, which was named after the magazine that initiated it – The Economist Complex, a well-known realisation of Alison and Peter Smithson (1959–1964). The magazine here branded architecture, just like architecture provided the paper with an iconic status and an attractive late-modern pop aura. It was a happy and mutually beneficial marriage and it is hard to say who profited more from their long embrace. The end of their relationship is thus awaited with reasonable nostalgia and sentiment. Time will tell if the widely accepted name of the famous complex will keep on living and so keep the memory of its past client and owner, but their historical farewell definitely calls for a review of the key moments of their fruitful cohabitation.
The whole architecturally important story started with the troubles of the financial weekly with space. As a consequence of war bombing of London in 1941, the distinguished weekly lost its original building located close to Fleet Street, the old heart of London journalism. In the next twenty years the paper used various adapted spaces – from 1947 the building on Ryder Street in London district St. James, prestigious historical neighbourhood in the western centre of the city, just south of Piccadilly Circus. After a long period of tenancy and improvisations with space, the management of the paper decided to address the needs that resulted from the increased business activities by achieving optimum spatial conditions, while staying in the same exclusive city district, thus assuming the role of a building investor and entrepreneur. They bought the site plot in the principal traffic road of the district, historical St. James's Street, and embarked on their exciting architectural and construction adventure.
Fortunately, around that time, in 1956, the principal local government body, London County Council, made the decision that allowed the construction of towers in the centre of London, of course under special circumstances and in a carefully controlled distance among them. This type of construction was until then largely forbidden and again banned some eight years later. This provided the paper with a unique opportunity to construct a new tower as a new urban landmark, which they would skilfully use. The allowed plot-area ratio of 5:1, however, was not particularly generous, meaning that for every square metre of land, one could build five square meters of new offices and flats. Since the idea was to construct as much new office space as possible, and gain as much possible height, it was essential to accordingly grasp maximum possible free ground. In this sense, the financial paper acted quite resourcefully by freeing the acquired plot from the series of existing objects, thus increasing the total ground area while accepting the obligation of housing the dislocated users and contents in the future new complex. Only a valuable neoclassical building of the prestigious London Boodle's gentlemen's club from the 18th century was kept on the site.
And, for this overall architectural adventure to successfully commence, the paper decided, quite boldly and audaciously, after only a limited architectural competition, to engage appropriately ambitious architects for their ambitious constructing and business task – a young architectural couple who had only two previous realisations, but plenty of intriguing spatial theories – the confident, resolute and suggestive Smithsons.
Considering the novelty and relevance of Alison and Peter Smithson's architectural and urbanistic ideas, it is useful to analyse their London complex precisely through the network of their formative theoretical concepts, just as through the lenses of some of their already realised projects. In that sense, their recently completed school in Norfolk, the Hunstanton Secondary Modern School (1950–1954), was especially important and indicative. In that project the Smithsons creatively explored Mies's poetics and his formal and spatial instruments. A creative response to the legendary Mies's IIT campus and its central Crown Hall, as the epitome of precision, meticulousness and perfection of spatial relations and proportions, the Hunstanton School was its more ordinary, daily variant, a quotidian iteration of Mies's transcendent Schinkelesque spatial disposition and discipline, an unpolished reiteration of the sublime classical tradition. A steel column without its Miesian dematerializing chrome membrane, steel frames without their expressive representation, walls of exposed brick without Miesian hidden abstraction – the project represented, in Peter Smithson's words: Mies without mannerism, poetics without rhetoric. Refined, but natural; classical, but authentic. The school thus launched a new formal and spatial paradigm: the one of directness and authenticity, immediateness and veracity, both in materials and structures, and in its spatial effects and experiences – the idea of pure and factual, strong and direct truth. This is all summarised in the term then launched by the Smithsons – the anthological New Brutalism. Brutalism meant as art brut, béton brut, as exposed unmediated truth, as the immediacy and sincerity of children's drawing, creation without premeditation and plan; brutalism thus meant less as a new aesthetics and more as a new creative ethics. Peter Smithson, moreover, decisively emphasises: Brutalism to us meant 'direct': to others it came to be a synonym for rough, crude, oversized, and using beams three times thicker than necessary. Brutalism was opposite, necessary to suit the new situation, like Kahn's work at Yale. That wasn't rough or crude or oversized.
Understood in this specific sense and quite particular, paradoxical elegance, brutalism of the Smithsons, as their new creative philosophy, had yet an additional meaning and quality, deriving from the range of their powerful urban theories. This impressive theoretical corpus that systematically developed and ramified throughout their fruitful activity may be best summarised in the term urban re-identification, as the Smithsons coined it back in 1952 and officially introduced in 1953, at the crucial 9th CIAM congress held in Aix-en-Provence. According to them, modern urbanism with its functional zoning had spectacularly failed, completely neglected to grasp the true sense of life and the city. Four functional zones, treated as four mechanical abstractions, completely missed the real issues, dynamics and complexity of the current urban life. Instead of their reductive artificiality, what needed to be perceived and addressed was the pulsating complexity, vitality and real urban heterogeneity of the city. So, the outer mechanistic, geometrical order was to be replaced with an inner, organic organisation. New categories for observing the city could thus no longer be those of functional zones, but those of free and flexible relations and bonds. Addressed must finally be those vital issues such as the sense of belonging and urban re-identification, identity and the need of human association and human interactions, the same as the issues of mobility, growth and change. Four new operating categories, as the Smithsons proposed in their famous Identity Grid from 1953, could therefore be: house – street – district – city, as a continuous, uninterrupted and organically connected urban hierarchy, where the focus was not on architectural and urbanistic forms themselves, but on the relations of those forms with their users, on the ability of those forms to produce certain desired effects and to encourage certain ways of human behaviour, in accordance with the logic of their specific spatial frames. The form was thus not any more viewed and evaluated in itself, according to its autonomous formal value, but only as a vector for the encouragement of desired modalities of use, for enticing certain experiences and feelings of its users.
Once defined, the Smithsons then systematically tested their new urban concepts and categories in their own design projects. They so inaugurated their famous streets in the air in their crucial conceptual project Golden Lane from 1952. Streets, as historically confirmed forms of vibrant urban life, were vertically multiplied in a flexible megastructure which in itself united a residential unit, pedestrian communication, the whole district and the entire urban grid. In their potentially infinite ramification, the idea of flexibility, growth and change was suitably entailed. The Smithsons further equipped their streets in the air with specific spatial qualities: they were designed with greater width, with lateral setting opened to the light and the surrounding, and were supposed to meander from one side of the residential slab to the other, depending on the attractions on the surrounding terrain. At the junctions of their ramification and meandering, the Smithsons envisioned squares in the air, of three storeys in height, as historically confirmed forms of gathering, associating and developing intense social interactions.
Convinced that the modern city is characterised chiefly by soft, dynamic social groups and the imperative of their fast and efficient connection, they suggested, further on, in their next important project for Berlin-Haupstadt from 1957, two completely separate urban levels: an orthogonal network of fast roads on the ground and an attractive irregular elevated pedestrian megastructure, which offered a slower pace of movement and use, and was in itself suspended on towers with diagonally cut, chamfered corners as recognizable urban accents and landmarks.
Many of these central theoretical and design concepts would be fruitfully applied and incorporated in the case of The Economist Complex, with the provision that the previously defined megastructures would here need to be effectively adjusted to meet the highly delicate and sensitive urban context. The London case namely involved the interpolation into an especially delicate and valuable historical urban fabric and thus demanded a drastically different dimension of formal and contextual approach and sensibility.
That the Smithsons possessed the necessary design refinement even for such a unique and delicate task can be seen in their statement that: Our intention was to shift architecture towards particularity; its forms to arise from attention to persons and place... With their intention so clearly expressed, they started solving an extremely demanding and heterogeneous programme, challenging both in terms of the content and the spatial capacity, on the square site plot surrounded by three city streets – dominant St. James's Street in front, and Bury Street and Ryder Street in the background. Instead of merely following the then popular and widely exploited model for such hybrid urban tasks – concept of podium and tower: a continuous low horizontal base and an accentuated vertical steeple of the skyscraper, launched by SOM architects in 1952 with their Lever House on the New York Park Avenue, with which they could have maximised the valuable street façade – the Smithsons decided to solve their comprehensive task in a radically different and innovative manner, somewhat closer to the other legendary New York case – again the lesson of Mies and his famous Seagram Building from 1958.
The Smithsons divided the demanded programme into three separate and independent vertical volumes, with basically similar square plans yet with demonstratively different heights, depending on their specific contents and different urban positions. So the lowest, four-storey object, was situated in the most representative part of the site, right at the front of St. James's Street, next to its revered neoclassical neighbour, to which it adjusted with its similar height and with the overall solemn and conventional square format of the façade. In this way the new object simulated and respected not only its immediate neoclassical neighbour but also the entire scale and ambience of the valuable historical street. It, further on, suitably accommodated the most representative contents – the bank and luxury stores. The taller, eight-storey object is pulled back from St. James's Street, and moved to the back of the plot, aligned with Bury Street in the background, so that its height would not compromise the harmonised fine scale and consistent rhythm of the main historical urban artery. Its content was exclusively residential, with apartments and housing facilities provided for the needs of the preserved historical gentlemen's club. The tallest volume was the fourteen-storey business tower, the headquarters of The Economist, also pulled back to the depth of the plot, placed in the very corner, between the lateral and the back street. All three objects, despite obvious differences in their height and contents, basically followed the same spatial principle – with roughly square plans, they were all organised around the central communication and service core, with a ring of main spaces around it.
All three objects, as can be seen, are demonstratively placed on the outermost brinks of the plot, right on the lines of the bordering streets, so that in the centre of the plot, among the buildings, there remains a big open space– a platform for public social life and daily urban dynamics. In order to protect this valuable platform from the busy rhythm of the surrounding streets and to provide it with a specific status and character, the Smithsons slightly raised the surface of the platform from the the surrounding city levels and so created a separate, calmer and more ceremonial pedestrian zone. Beneath the platform, they placed an underground level with parking facilities, with access from the side street. Pedestrians, on the other hand, accessing the platform from St. James's Street, ascend a short staircase and or else adjacent mild ramp and access the solemn, sanctified and somewhat mystical world of the Economist Plaza.
Mystical – because the spirit of this plaza radiates with a specific mood and atmosphere. Consisting of an unusual plan, heavily asymmetrical and irregular, it is actually only a remnant of the built volumes around it, a specific leftover, a peculiar interstitial spatial fissure. Relatively narrow and squeezed, in order to make itself more spacious and open, it establishes with the built parts of the complex a whole set of balanced exchanges and concessions. The four-storey volume of the bank thus concedes to it a considerable portion of space by diagonally cutting a large part of its corner, allowing the plaza the possibility of forming a main central space, as well as soft transitions to its narrow spatial branches. The slanted angle thereby also becomes a recognizable spatial and formal feature and specific leitmotif of the entire complex, repeating itself in a smaller scale and in different manifestations on all three objects, right down to the level of detail.
Thanks to the similar formal and spatial principles, the three separate volumes acted as the members of the same architectural family. In that way, the Smithsons promoted the concept of the cluster, as a group of connected volumes, associated in idea and form, and with controlled mutual spatial relations. And further, in order to visually accept in this peculiar architectural family the remaining fourth object on the plot, the existing valuable neoclassical building, they added to the historical building, on the side towards the plaza, a specific, decorative spatial addition – a small transparent bay-window with slanted angles, as a legible formal signature by which the new volumes accept their historical cousin into a consistent and recognizable architectural structure.
Yet in order to secure in this compact and harmonious structure an appropriate presence for the plaza itself, the process proceeds with even more concessions. The public space of the open plaza protrudes even under the volumes of the towers by way of elegant porches, which offer comfortable covered parts of the public area. And to still further improve the impression of openness and spaciousness, the stone pavement of the plaza extends behind the transparent glass walls of the towers and proceeds further into their interiors, all the way to the central service cores, thus visually connecting the entire public ground floor zone in a unique experience of cohesion and spatial overlapping. The whole ground floor zone, either exterior or interior, thus becomes a continuous public and active social surface. Its attractiveness is enhanced by the beauty of the pavement – the noble light travertine, arranged in an effective dynamic pattern, which compellingly opens up the effect of the plaza and improves the experience of cohesion of the whole complex. Pulsating crystalline beauty of this surreally airy and transparent ground-floor zone thus reaches almost inconceivable dimensions.
These ethereal qualities of the plaza so far do not seem to disclose the expected traits of brutalism. This specific attribute, which undeniably defines and distinguishes this complex, resides instead in the shaping and detailing of the very buildings, although even then in its distilled and refined expression. The basic skeleton of the three objects is rendered in raw and exposed concrete and thus openly reveals its spatial and structural truth. Since the exposed construction frame is closed only with wide transparent glass surfaces, it simultaneously becomes an exposed frame of human activities that it houses and accommodates. Although in its idea and appearance this skeleton remains the same in all three volumes and is equally loyal to its modular precision and discipline, it also develops minute and controlled variations in three different objects resulting from their different functional and symbolic needs. So the module of the representative four-storey bank building is the widest – 3.20 m horizontally, while the height of the floors varies, culminating in a lavish mezzanine storey that houses the main banking hall. The horizontal module of the 14-storey business tower is also 3.20 m in ground floor and divided in half in the upper office floors. The residential tower has a smaller module throughout – 1.60 m, from the ground floor to the eighth floor, all of equal height.
The controlled complexity of this fine modular game and skilful manipulation with proportions has confirmed the already proven design skills of the Smithsons, developed already in the phase of the Hunstanton School, only this time rendered in more present, stronger and more tactile manifestation of the raw concrete nature, instead of fragile dimensions and appearances of steel. Had the original wish of the Smithsons been obeyed, this raw concrete appearance would have been directly seen also on the exterior of the complex. The clients, however, wanted to clad the concrete skeleton in Portland stone, the traditional representative material of London, as a symbol of an honourable status and tradition, used, among other places, on St. Paul's Cathedral and Buckingham Palace. Loyal to the authenticity and vitality of brutalism, the Smithsons did not give up and they eventually agreed on a compromise solution, acceptable for both sides: a specific, messy, rough and less valued variant of the Portland stone, the so-called Portland roach, stone dug from the surface layer of the deep limestone beds. It is grainier, more plastic and uneven, with rough but lively texture, mottled with small holes made by shells, traces of oysters and marine fossils – the material that possesses almost geological attractiveness and significance. This lively, shelly stone in its light creamy colour was used for cladding the outer concrete skeleton of all the three buildings.
The stone is attached to the concrete skeleton over aluminium rain-runoff jointing elements, which visibly detach the stone cladding from concrete elements. Stone slabs on the plaza level are, furthermore, also slightly elevated from the floor surface, which openly reveals the actual structural truth of the objects and the fact that the stone here has no load bearing capacity. Stone slabs are additionally decked with already presented motifs, recognizable chamfered edges, which are consistently present in all scales all to the level of tiniest details and dimensions. Slabs of bright Portland limestone, flaunting this familiar fine detail, appear as perfectly cut gemstones and provide the whole complex, especially in the combination of the floor travertine and transparent glass enclosures of the concrete skeletons, with the impression of a precious and unique crystal. Meticulously composed joints of the slabs and their precise geometrical grid reinforce this effect, as does the subtle plasticity of the stone slabs on the pillars with their graded vertical indentation, which gives the whole construction elegance and the effect of almost Gothic finesse and profiling. Without losing the strength and vitality of brutalism, here is attained the perfection of a peculiar architectural jewel.
By way of almost goldsmith's techniques, accomplished is thus a perfect urban insertion. In the prospect along St. James's Street astounds almost incredible mimicry; a resolute modern intervention is seamlessly incorporated in the historical image of the street front. The height and proportions of the front building, the density, rhythm and elegance of its profiling, affirm the bank building of the new complex as an equal member of the grand urban strip and a rightful modern counterpart of its immediate neoclassical neighbour. Behind this new, elegant and timeless building, however, hides a whole variety of modern spatial surprises.
In the discreet secrecy evolves a public space of rarely rich impression and atmosphere. Despite all its spatial constriction and narrowness, the unpredictability of this space and its unique formal effects irresistibly call for walking, investigating, and discovering of all possible pedestrian trajectories of the closely interwoven urban complex. Next to the ceremonial routes and daily passages, the layers of its beauty invite the visitors to stop, linger, meet with other people, interact, and spend some time in its timeless ambience, what is implicitly suggested by a strategically positioned long and elementary stone bench placed along the blind brick wall of the historical neoclassical edifice.
With all its ethereal qualities, plaza of the Economist embodies in a unique way the key aspects of the Smithsons' urban designs and theories. It is simultaneously a wide meandering street in the air of their renowned Golden Lane, created for meetings and interactions, just like its peaceful and formal elevated square, ideal for lingering and socializing. It also represents a conceptual relative of the irregular pedestrian megastructure of the Berlin-Haupstadt project, elevated and separated from the underlying traffic level and stretched among the towers with chamfered corners treated as verticals of urban landmarks. It is, further on, also a built representative of the advocated idea of the continuity house – street – district – city, this time rendered in the form of a cluster, as one of its possible embodiments, as well as a true generator of the feeling of urban re-identification, identity and belonging as a desired lost emotional and psychological urban dimension. And, finally, it is a unique manifestation of the poetics of brutalism, achieved, paradoxically, by most elegant means. Just as Peter Smithson announced, brutalism here was realised as that ...necessary to suit the new situation, like Kahn's work at Yale. (…) that wasn't rough or crude or oversized. And indeed, in its sublime appearance, The Economist Complex really does achieve touching qualities of brutalist subtleness of Kahn's Art Gallery at Yale, or the effect of timelessness of the plaza of Kahn's Salk Institute in La Jolla, at the same time assuming something of the universal classical qualities of the Schinkel's Berlin projects.
It is no wonder then that in the sedimented quietness of the space of the Economist plaza some of the anthological photographs were taken that evoke mysterious misty London spleen, with impeccably dressed businessmen with black bowler hats who walk on the bright surface of the square. Even the celebrated film director Michelangelo Antonioni chose exactly this charged atmosphere for the introductory scenes of his famous movie Blow-up from 1966. Whether as a demonstration of the contemporary yet atemporal London or as a backdrop for a pop metropolis from the rebellious swinging 1960s, its charged quality offered the necessary depth and potency for both.
If it is such a significant urban space, indirectly influenced by The Economist itself, the question is raised why this famous paper is about to abandon its widely recognized urban aura and frame.
Among other reasons, the paper is leaving due to the difficulty of the existing office space to allow for the organization of the changed working processes. In the office spaces of the paper, located on the 11th to the 14th floor of the Economist tower, the Smithsons set the spatial frame that encourages certain precise ways of organization and use – a series of offices for two journalists arranged around the central communication and service core. Such organization undoubtedly responded to the demands and logic of working processes and habits of the journalists at the time, as their users and clients. Moreover, such arrangement undoubtedly reflected also social ideas and ambitions of their architects; their egalitarian efforts to provide all employees, editors or assistants and beginners alike, with an equally good working conditions, giving all of them equally spectacular views from the Olympic heights of the towers to the surrounding attractive parts of London. They so determined the work modalities and outlines of working relations and processes that it resulted in difficulties with establishing other possible arrangements, such as, for instance, open-plan offices, just as it caused problems with the more expedient and faster connection of various business segments located on different floors. In accordance with the demands and complexities of new social networks and new multimedia products, information techniques and communication modalities of this global weekly, and the necessary accompanying equipment, the possibility of the intense cooperation of quite different character that includes a larger number of participants is now required.
So this summer, The Economist is moving. It will move to the refurbished Adelphi building, located behind the Strand, in the immediate vicinity of the paper's original headquarters in the very centre of London. In terms of the location, the paper is returning to its roots. But just as the complex in St. James's Street undeniably shaped the habits of its users and helped the paper to develop into a modern global magazine, some of its cultivated spatial and communication culture will surely continue to live in the new working conditions. St. James's Street will, on the other hand, also surely keep the memory of the audacity of The Economist, which, together with young architects, embarked on an exciting architectural and urbanistic adventure.
The most important thing is that the spell of the Economist plaza is kept even with the new owner, and that it remains a powerful spatial frame as instigator of productive urban processes and interactions. In that way, a fundamental architectural, urban and social testament of the Smithsons will survive, today even more, needed and acute– the imperative that people meet in architecture.


One in four women suffer from pelvic floor dysfunction, and it's not just the elderly. As early as the teen years, people may feel unexplained pain in the hips or low back, urinary leakage, or pain in the pelvic region. Often misdiagnosed, the pain can go on for years, but there is a way to treat these conditions and that's with a pelvic health specialist. We were delighted to have the opportunity to visit the studios of WZZM's My West Michigan and talk to Catherine Behrendt about this topic, with the hopes of reaching people who are struggling with these issues.
Gina Otterbein and Melissa VanKampen, both based in our Coopersville clinic, are two of our pelvic health specialists.
Melissa spoke briefly about our upcoming Healthy Pelvic series, which features three different events focusing on nutrition and a healthy pelvis, childbearing years, and menopause. The first of these three events takes place on Saturday, April 30. You can get more details on our events page.
View the entire segment below.
Check out our previous segments on My West Michigan where we talked about weight loss, using an exercise ball, the 3 minute exercise routine, concussions in student athletes and senior health.


Home > Research > Perspectives > Is the term 'Co-production' just another way to avoid having to talk about power?
Nobel Prize winning political economist Elinor Ostrom coined the term 'co-production' in the '70s, to describe the role of individual choice on decisions influencing the production of public goods and services. Her work emphasised that people who use services have assets that can help to improve those services, rather than simply needs which must be met. Since then, co-production has developed substantially and is specifically included in the Care Act 2014.
It's still a slippery concept though, and interpretations range from user involvement to actual co-creation of the service, its management and accountability. In particular it gained currency since the public services were struck by funding crisis. Birmingham's own Professor Emeritus Tony Bovaird charts the growth of co-production among service providers 'not simply in order to improve service quality by "bringing the user in" but also in order to cut costs, by making the user do more for themselves'.
Co-production continues to be a valuable tool for disabled people. It provided momentum to challenge the expectation that they should live in institutions and to assert their right to live in the community. It enabled the independent living movement to change how social care was delivered – from a system driven by services to one where people had greater say in the decisions that affected them. It has led to the development of personalised services including individual budgets.
Yet despite the significant gains, health and social care sectors continue to provide rather than serve. Although some power has leached away to users, control rests firmly with the institutions. With almost half (40%) of adult social care rated inadequate or requiring improvement, prospects for co-production do not appear promising. Impending funding cuts will put even greater pressure on leadership and quality of staff. Doing more with less invariably squeezes service levels leaving people and their families left with more of the responsibility and less of the resource.
In order to prevent co-production becoming a sop for austerity, it must develop in parallel with power-shifts. Collaboration necessitates a sharing of power and this demands a redistribution of resources and decision-making so that people using the service retain self-determination.
People – among all the stakeholders how much status and priority is afforded to the people who use the service.
Politics– whose interest is being served?
Profitability– are resources aligned with ethos?
Principles – does the internal culture, skills and attitude respect people?
Partnerships – are links with other organisations optimised for the people?
The implications of shifting-power can be profound. It may require a new calibration of social value, one that recognises the worth of community based care. In many cases, this will require the development of new service delivery models. It may involve the emergence of a new tier of brokers between people and traditional service providers. There is a rich seam of innovation to be mined here.
Whatever possibilities emanate, talk of co-production should be symbiotic with the practice of power-sharing. The culture of control that dominates health and social care sectors is unsustainable. As the Care Act suggests, co-production should be used to develop preventative, strength-based services that support assessment, shape the local care market and plan information and advice services. It's not an excuse for simply passing on costs and risks to people who use the service.
Sukhvinder is a lay member of the University of Birmingham Council, and Managing Director of Engage-Building Contingent Capacity; providing strategic and management consultancy to enable organisations to be more responsive to the people they serve.
Building Contingent Capacity, a report by The Barrow Cadbury Trust, Collaborate, Engage - Building Contingent Capacity and The University of Birmingham launched yesteday.


My research focuses primarily on understanding the effects of global environmental change (a.k.a. "climate change") on the functioning and structure of terrestrial ecosystems, and deciphering the underlying ecological mechanisms driving the responses. This includes the study of how rising atmospheric CO2, changes in ambient temperature, interannual climate variability (e.g. anomalously warm years or heat waves), reductions in biological diversity, and large periodic disturbances (e.g. wildfire) affect plant physiological processes, plant growth and survival, plant populations and plant communities, as well as ecosystem processes and feedbacks. Although my interests in ecology are broad, I am particularly keen on understanding how belowground processes are impacted by changing ambient environmental conditions (e.g. fine root dynamics, activity of soil fauna, soil hydrology and root biology). I attempt to bridge traditional ecological disciplines and seek out collaboration with scientists from other disciplines to address these wider-ranging ecological questions.
My research group and I also apply our expertise to directly address real-world environmental questions and challenges for clients such as the U.S. Department of the Interior, Southern Nevada Water Authority, Sempra Energy, American Vanadium, Washoe County Air Quality Management, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the Gas Technology Institute, The Nature Conservancy, the Desert Research Corporation, and Tu Biomics.


Born in the Shetland Islands and raised in Scotland, George came to England as a young man in the early 60's of last century.
A can-do attitude combined with strong business acumen and entrepreneurial enthusiasm culminated into becoming one of the leading commercial property developers of the East Kent region.
In 2009, George's dedication to and substantial involvement in the economic development of the East Kent region, was recognised by The Prince of Wales, who awarded him an MBE for services.
Born in Lisbon, Portugal and raised in the Netherlands Gonzo had a solid background in legals and financials before venturing into IT.
With almost 25 years of entrepreneurial experience Gonzo joined George Wilson in June 2016 as group consultant. He applies his comprehensive knowledge and experience to every facet of the dynamic construction and development business.
Richard started working for George Wilson over 35 years ago.
He combines a sharp financial mind with a hands-on mentality to deal with the numerous financial aspects of the modern day property developing business.
Kim started working for George Wilson Holdings 30 years ago as a receptionist and grew into the position of the chairman's personal assistant.
Her dedicated involvement in the daily processes of the company ensures that everything runs smoothly.
Ken has more than 40 years of experience as a Quantity Surveyor and as Project Manager is responsible for various development projects.
His wealth of accumulated knowledge proves useful from inception all the way to post-completion of our construction ventures.
The George Wilson Group encompasses a number of individual companies which together have been delivering successfully a wide range of innovative commercial developments.
We are unquestionably the premier commercial developer in East Kent and have been so for over 35 years. We bring to the market a broad spectrum of developments, ranging from Grade A office accommodation, specialised manufacturing facilities through to starter units and high-end residential developments. At George Wilson we embrace the exacting standards set by the demanding and dynamic commercial property market.
We have a client-oriented ethos; Our clients are at the heart of our developments.
We firmly believe in building long-term relationships and exceeding client expectations. Rather than just offering what is only available at that moment, we aim to provide our clients with what they exactly require.
Innovative, pro-active thinking and acting combined with our agile ability to adapt to ever changing market conditions have been proven to work over and over again in delivering premium properties.
For over three decades we have been working together as a team with our enterprising professional partners in architecture, engineering, construction and sales and are therefore able to respond to client demands and wishes in unison. This resulting in saving time, frustration and, very importantly, significant cost savings throughout the whole development process.
It all started back in the early eighties, when George Wilson wanted to buy a warehouse for his very successful company that dealt in parts for household appliances. The then existing market for commercial real estate couldn't offer him what he was looking for. The decision was made instantly, George was going to build his own much needed warehouse.
As a novice to the world of commercial real estate George saw many opportunities and possibilities arise that the established construction companies failed to notice. His entrepreneurial skills, tested and tried on his other companies, did prove very useful when entering the dynamic world of construction and development.
As an established commercial property developer in Kent for over more than 35 years, George Wilson has been instrumental in pushing forward the economic development of the East Kent region.
With the construction of various thriving industrial and business parks such as St. Augustine's, John Wilson, Joseph Wilson, Estuary View (Medical Center, Business and Retail Park), all situated in Whitstable. And the spacious, prosperous Lakesview International Business Park in Hersden, near Canterbury, George Wilson enabled economic growth, investment opportunities, jobs and prosperity.
With a bright and positive outlook on the future, existing business parks are being extended.
Such as the ongoing expansion of the already flourishing Estuary View Business park with retail, office and medical space, turning it into an even more attractive commercial hub for the wider Whitstable and East Kent region.
Working alongside with Quinn Estates, George Wilson Holdings is developing a substantial office building (80,000 sq.ft.) as part of the bigger Commercial Quarter in Ashford. This new significant business centre, located in a prime location in Ashford town centre, will generate major investment opportunities and several thousands of jobs.


The purpose of this study was to determine if a teacher's knowledge of a sixth grade student's prior academic performance affects the teacher's grading of the student's work on math papers. This study attempted to isolate the singular characteristic of a teacher's prior knowledge of a student's academic performance as a possible source for grading discrepancies.Four math papers were developed following the guidelines from the Indiana Statewide Test of Educational Progress (ISTEP) in mathematics for sixth grade. Four selected report cards representing high academic performance and four representing low academic performance were attached to the four student papers along with the appropriate answer keys. One-third of the instruments had high academic performance attachments, one-third had low academic performance attachments, and one-third had no academic performance attachments. The instruments were randomly assigned to experienced teachers for grading.The analysis of the data indicated that the mean number grades for high academic performance papers when compared to the control group differed significantly at the .05 level of confidence. The mean of the letter and number grade scores assigned to low academic performance papers compared to the control group did not differ significantly.Based on the findings of this study, conclusions were drawn. Among the conclusions reported were:1. Teachers' grades on the same math papers were remarkably varied.2. Number grades assigned to the same math papers differed significantly for high academic performance.3. The range for letter and number grades for each paper was extremely broad over all independent variables.4. The scoring discrepancies for letter and number grades created a question regarding grading validity.


text:
Medical Marijuana/Cannabis
Alzheimer's/Dementia
Cannabinoid (CBD) Oil
UK Health World
Home Health Call for fibromyalgia to be recogised as long-term disability
Call for fibromyalgia to be recogised as long-term disability
Campaigners have called on the Government to recognise fibromyalgia as a long-term disability.
It is estimated that tens of thousands of people in Ireland suffer with the condition, which is characterised by widespread pain and fatigue and can be difficult to diagnose.
College student Merissa Appel, 25, lives with fibromyalgia. She says she is in constant pain and finds everyday activities a challenge.
She said: "It's an up and down feeling, one day I could be fine and I'd have very minimal pain and then other days I can feel as if a ten-storey brick building has fallen on top me and the pain is crushing… It's debilitating and it's really hard for me to just get out of bed."
"It can be very isolating as well when friends don't understand what you're going through and they tend to stop hanging out with you because you're cancelling all the time."
Sufferers of fibromyalgia gathered at a conference in Dublin today calling on the Government to officially recognise it as a long-term illness.
Ursula Hakman, spokesperson for Fibro Ireland, said more needs to be done to help people with the condition.
"You need a multi pronged approach, you have to subsidise it and you have to finance it. If fibromyalgia would be on the long-term illness list it would be recognised and you would get financial assistance."
Not much is known about the causes of fibromyalgia, and Dr Shelagh Wright, a Chartered Psychologist, says it is difficult to treat.
"It's one of those conditions which does lend itself to self-management but that is complex, so the patient education component is really important.
"Patients are helped by some understanding of brain neuroscience."
Singer Damien Dempsey and his mum Adrienne Dempsey, who suffers with the condition, attended today's conference.
She said: "I'm in chronic pain and it's not a nice future to have to look to. I thought this was a time for me to enjoy my life but I'm not enjoying my life at all because I'm in pain 24/7."
There is no official data on how many people suffer with fibromyalgia in Ireland, but campaigners say tens of thousands have the condition.
They say they will continue their fight to have it recognised as a long-term illness.
Meanwhile, Merissa Appel says she won't let the condition stop her from living her life.
"It's not going to stop me getting my dream which is having a career in fashion.
"I'm going to continue working to represent people that have fibromyalgia, especially young people, because there is very little recognition in terms of younger people, so that is what I'm hoping to do."
Previous article11 'Taboo' Symptoms of Fibromyalgia
Next article49 Symptoms of Fibromyalgia – Anyone With Muscle Pain Should Read This
How Marijuana Helps Soothe the Symptoms of Chronic Pain
Chemo Kills Healthy Cells But THC Kills Cancer Cells Only
Fascia as an Organ of Proprioception and its Relationship to Chronic Pain
FDA Approves Cannabis For Brain Cancer Treatment
3 Studies That Show Cannabis Grows Brain Cells
More Evidence: Cancer "Commits Suicide By Eating Itself" After Exposure to Cannabis
Marijuana and Epilepsy: Here's How Cannabis Stops Seizures (12 Studies)
Medicinal cannabis is LEGAL in UK on NHS prescription from TODAY
Mum Who Took Illegal Cannabis Oil to Battle Terminal Cancer Given the All-Clear
Recent Posts: UK Health World
'Ignorant doctors need cannabis education', says professor
Bathing in Cannabis with CBD Bath Bombs! Great for Fibromyalgia and Improving Sleep
The '420 Bill' to Federally Legalize Marijuana Has Officially Been Introduced
Marijuana Treats Migraine Pain Better Than Prescription Medication, Study Finds
Medical Marijuana Sales Soaring in Oklahoma, Top $23M in May
Americans Wake 'N' Bake More Than Anyone Else in the World, Finds Global Drug Survey
Categories Select Category Alzheimer's/Dementia Cancer Cannabinoid (CBD) Oil Epilepsy/Seizure Fibromyalgia &Cronic Pain Health Lupus Lyme Disease Medical Marijuana/Cannabis Multiple Sclerosis (MS) Pain Uncategorized


A horrible idea. It will make the patents useless because it will be impossible to prove that someone had seen a patent or an implementation based on it before they used it. On the other hand, the patents must not cover the obvious solutions. If given the problem, any engineer with reasonable experience in that area comes with a solution in an hour, this solution must not be patentable.
The proposal is to let infringers avoid liability if they did not infringe on the inventor's control of the right to copy. Not surprisingly, this is something called copyright. Copyright is different from patent, as it should be.
Despite apparently proposing a large change, the proposal to allow "infringers avoid liability when they can show that they independently arrived at the invention" actually changing a few words and phrases to get to exactly the same place. To see why this is so, understand the law of copyright from which this proposal seems to have originated.
To show copying, a plaintiff must show that a defendant had access to the information and that there is substantial similarity between plaintiff's protected work and defendant's infringing work. Showing substantial similarity is simply the analysis of infringement that already takes place. The new element is a demonstration that defendant had access to the copied information. Plaintiff has presumably filed an application for a patent on the invention with USPTO and had them publish it on their public web site, which is well-known by many and indexed by Google for everyone else, which is sufficient to show access.
The new element that you propose is satisfied by the existence of the patent, which must already be demonstrated to show standing, and the old element is already litigated under the present system. So your effort to convert the patent system into a copyright system is a nullity. The elements of copying are already established by facts that must already be proved to establish infringement. You may have a different idea of copying with different elements than are found in copyright law, in which case you are proposing something different. However, if so, you are probably proposing something defective because you are not taking advantage of centuries of copyright jurisprudence to determine whether there was or was not independent copying. Either way, this is a poor idea.
In the software world, just keeping a history of your code and the changes to it (read: version control), should be enough in many cases to show that you came up with the idea yourself or gradually evolved your software naturally. More complicated things would no doubt need dated design documents or mathematical derivations or whatever. I see no reason why it would be difficult to show that you came up with something without copying it. It's the same sort of information I understand is needed to defend a patent's validity in court.
Independent invention in patent law is asinine. What's the motivation for disclosing your invention in a patent if some other yahoo can just say,"oh yea, I totally came up with that too..but I did it independently, so you can't touch me"
I surprised such an organization as smart as the EFF has proposed this moronic idea.
This defense would be good, and could be made workable, despite some concerns expressed by other commentators; essentially the patentee should have to prove copying, as copyright holders have to do in copyright suits. One way the defendant can prove they did not copy is to use a "clean room" approach as is done in software design to avoid copyright infringement.
Though this might do a bit of damage to my career, as I'm a patent attorney.
".. Google did not copy the Java source code over for use in Android and call it a day. In fact, a grand total of nine lines out of 15 million (that is, 0.000006%) were examined to be copied..."
Just like writing a book, we all have our own programming styles. We all write blocks and sections of code differently (short of the REALLY remedial stuff like a while statement or if x=1 statement). Some might say that someone who intentionally wants to infringe can just change a few variable names and call it done, but let's face facts. If someone did that in a book, we'd all know. And if someone went out of their way to change the coding syntax of entire blocks of code for the majority of the code to try to avoid infringement, then they're pretty much doing the work of writing from scratch. I don't know if getting rid of software patents completely is a good idea yet. But the current system needs to change. I personally think that changing the current system is less difficult a fight than trying to get it abolished altogether. One step at a time.
1. Patents are only supposed to be granted for something "novel" and "non-obvious"; if two or more companies independently arrive at the same idea, then it's probably a good sign that whatever got patented is reasonably obvious.
2. Right now, the patent system works using a "first-to-file" method. The first person to patent something gets the patent. This means that if Company A has spent five years of R&D to create something, and Company B files for a patent on the same concept 3 days before Company A does, then Company A is screwed. In a scenario like this, it would be pretty easy for Company A to provide a whole lot of evidence that they independently invented the concept.
3. There's also no requirement, under the current laws, to demonstrate that you've actually invented something that you've patented. Anyone else remember the whole fiasco with Rambus and JEDEC? That was an instance where a single company patented a bunch of stuff that was created through cooperation with multiple companies. That sort of trolling behavior needs to be stopped.
Too difficult to prove. Will be abused by clever lawyers.
(1) A jury (or judge if both parties waive their right to a jury trial) determines whether the defendant independently arrived at an invention. This is how the system works right now in determining whether a defendant "willfully" infringed a patent.
(2) The burden to show independent invention falls on the defendant. Worse-case scenario: The independent invention defense does nothing because no defendant can prove independence. But at least we don't accidentally destroy the whole patent system in the process (assuming we're worried about that). And legitimate patent holders won't have to bear the cost of disproving this defense.
(3) Allow the defendant to show independence by demonstrating that they could not have relied on a publication or disclosure by the patent holder. One of the key requirements of a patent is that that the patent disclose enough information to enable someone like the defendant to reproduce the patented invention. If the defendant can prove no access to a disclosure, then logically, the invention was independent. For example, the defendant shows that he came up with the infringing product on a vacation with no Internet access, proven by forensic analysis of journal entries he made on his computer.
(4) Allow the patent holder to rebut an independent invention through tracing. For example, suppose the defendant shows that he came up with the idea not from the patent, but from conversations he had with his college physics professor, who had never seen the patent. The patent holder could rebut this by pointing the physics professor regularly collaborated with another professor, who had seen the patent.
(5) Allow the fact-finder to consider the degree of infringement in assessing damages -- e.g. this invention was only 25% partially copied from patent so the defendant only pays 25% as much. This also more accurately reflects reality. For example, suppose there's a patent for "a method to make cats stop shedding." The defendant has never seen the patent, but frequently makes cat jokes with a friend who has. One of those cat jokes inspires the defendant to make something that is very similar to the patented invention. Independent or not? I think you could argue it either way, which is why being to assign partial fault is useful. The percentages won't be precise, but this isn't without precedent. We already allow juries to assign relative fault in negligence cases, so why not for patents?
Under this implementation, the independent invention defense would be expensive since the defense would be tasked by gathering tons of evidence about exactly how a particular innovation came about. But it would still be better than the status quo, and if you could force a patent troll to reimburse these costs upon winning a suit, that would deter non-meritorious claims.
Independently Invented? -Impossible to follow up.
If more than one inventor comes up with the same invention, isn't it kind of an obvious solution then?
The main problem is that it is too easy to get patents granted on obvious solutions or even on prior-art. Causes to that could be granting officers of USPTO or patent lawyers who lacks the "ordinary skill in the art", or that they get paid by the number of applications they grant, or they get paid on the side by the mega-company to grant trivialities.
Millions of programmers solve problems every day (that's what programmer do) in the most obvious way they can think of. Yet they infringe on dozens of patents for every program they write, without knowing it. Nothing new can be made without paying gigantic license fees. The time it would take to check all your solutions against patent databases and then applying for licenses or doing workarounds would be multiple times longer than it takes to develop the software.
*Worse program code - Due to unnecessary workarounds of obvious solutions.
*Longer development times - Due to searching for infringed patents, licensing bureaucracy or inventing in-optimal, non-obvious workarounds.
*More expensive software - Due to licenses, lawyers and longer development time.
There is nothing good with software patents. Delete!
465 thumbs up, including yours.
How on EARTH would a patent holder succeed in court if the defense could just claim ignorance?
Sorry, this just makes the whole enterprise look naive. Nobody's going to take this seriously if you leave such huge holes in your proposed system. I wanted to sign this petition, but now I can't.
The key to reform is a WORKING software patent system or NONE AT ALL. This takes the current broken system and just throws the broken on the other side of the fence.
524 thumbs up, including yours.


text:
History Quizzes
China's Loss of Sovereignty in Manchuria 1895 - 1914
China's Loss of Sovereignty in Manchuria
by James Graham
Published: May, 2004
Manchuria between the years 1895 and 1914 was under greater foreign control than any other major part of China. Russia and Japan competed fiercely to achieve this control, creating spheres of influence at China's expense and at each other's. The destructive Russo-Japanese War convinced the two powers of the need to work together and to exclude the Chinese from exercising real power over Manchuria. Chinese officials tried hard to block their advances with little success and only inter-power rivalry buttressed by Chinese settlement of the area saved Manchuria from annexation.
Excepting the 1858/1860 Russian Treaties, which cut deeply into 'Greater Manchuria' China had been relatively successful in restricting foreign activity to its coastal regions, treaty ports and parts of its tribute world. Japan's victory in the 1884-1895 Sino-Japanese War laid bare China's weakness and significantly altered this situation. Fought partly in Manchuria, this war left Japan in control of large stretches of Chinese territory. Soundly defeated, China was in no position to prevent Japan retaining possession of the Liaotung Peninsula. Her only option to maintain her sovereignty over the area was to lobby the foreign powers for support. That Russia, France and Germany did intervene by demanding a Japanese withdrawal from the area, via the Triple Intervention only ten days after the Sino-Japanese peace treaty was signed however had little to do with China's pleas. Russia the intervention's main driver wished to make Peking favourable to future demands including control of the peninsula herself. Germany wished to draw Russia's attention to its east and away from itself and France simply felt obligated to support Russia, its alliance partner. All three also agreed on the danger the Yellow Peril presented for European interests in the region. Each power thus intervened for its own reasons and it was nothing but good fortune that ensured China retained control of the Liaotung Peninsula in 1895.
Russia was not slow in extracting payment for forcing the Japanese out of Manchuria. The Li-Lobanov Treaty signed between China and Russia on June 3 1896 allowed Russia to significantly increase its presence in the area. It allowed the use of Chinese ports by Russia in the case of war and China's consent to the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway across Manchuria. The railway nominally a joint project between the Chinese government and the Russo-Chinese Bank was financed and completely controlled by Russia. Thus while China could name the president, real control lay with the Russian general manager. The line's political motivation is evident in that over the land it was constructed on the company would have absolute and exclusive right of administration. Nor was China allowed to interfere with Russian troop movements or munitions and also had to grant Russia decreased tariff rates. Russia's other major demand was delivered in true gunboat diplomacy fashion by a naval fleet in December 1897. China after delaying for three months was forced to lease the southern tip of the Liaotung Peninsula to Russia and allow a railway line to be built connecting it to the main Russian line. Combined with the previous concessions this was a major lose of sovereignty for China. That China negotiated for the time a relatively short lease of 25 years was seen as a victory is a reflection of China's lack of bargaining strength. The Triple Intervention, while helpful for China in the short run, resulted in it losing a greater amount of sovereignty in Manchuria over the long run.
Construction of the Russian railroads played a part in fermenting the anti-foreign anger that was crucial in involving Manchuria in the Boxer rebellion of 1900. Boxers were religious anti-foreign societies. While the movement spread to only parts of China it was widespread in Manchuria where it became mixed up with a general Chinese anti-foreignness. Combined with the Qing court's decision on June 21 1900 to declare war on the foreign powers, the general population of Manchuria felt free to vent their anger at the Russians. This included attacks on both the Russian controlled railway construction sites and attacks on Russian civilians and businesses more generally. The worst anti-Russian violence occurred after Russia signalled its intention on July 19 1900 to invade Manchuria, an occupation it achieved by October that year through the use of 100,000 troops. It took the Anglo-Japanese agreement of February 1902 to force Russia into agreeing to withdraw them via the Manchurian evacuation agreement with China of April 8 1902. The withdrawal was only ever partially completed with an estimated 37,000-85,000 troops and railway guards remaining until Russian-Japanese tensions over their continued presence necessitated their rapid increase. For the period 1900-1904 Manchuria was under the military control of Russia.
Military control did not equate to complete Russian control of Manchuria. Foreign and especially Japanese, pressure on Russia prevented her from annexing Manchuria or turning it into a more effective puppet state. Perhaps more importantly Russia simply lacked enough skilled personnel to rule Manchuria by itself and was especially deficient in trained translators. Chinese officials were thus invited back into the area and continued to administer a large amount of the Chinese population. This included the collection of taxation though Russian tax collectors always took priority. These officials were still under Imperial control and did their best to undermine Russia's influence. They were however crippled by the Russian army and lack of adequate force. Thus even during the Russian military occupation Manchuria was administered in part by the Chinese.
The Russo-Japanese War occurred for and on Chinese territory, a very vivid example of how much sovereignty China had lost over Manchuria. China unsure who would win took the wisest option and remained strictly neutral during the war. The same can not be said for the Chinese citizens of Manchuria who suffered all the deprivations and dislocations a war brings to the surrounding population. Crops and buildings were destroyed, movements restricted and peasants shot by Russians convinced they were Japanese. Against this only the increased demand for Chinese labour and goods can be set. Between February 1904 and September 1905 war raged in Manchuria with the entire region either an area of hostilities or a rear area diverted to support the armies. China was not even a participant in the Portsmouth peace conference that concluded the war. The peace agreement provided for the transfer of all Russian rights in south Manchuria, the South Manchurian Railway and the Liaotung lease to Japan. Significantly both armies were required to withdraw but had eighteen months to do so. During this period Manchuria remained under effective foreign military rule. American president Roosevelt was instrumental in achieving the peace and argued for the return of Manchuria to China and for a balance of power to continue in East Asia. His motivation was to defend the open door of China a policy heavily supported by China itself. The Russo-Japanese War convinced Russia and Japan of the futility of working against each other in Manchuria and dragged the US into active participation in China's affairs.
China's Loss of Sovereignty in Manchuria (Part 2)
China's Loss of Sovereignty in Manchuria (Bibliography)
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031 HighlightsEventsBirthdaysDeathsWeddings & Divorces
Weddings & Divorces


text:
Opening of Pierre Huyghe at the TarraWarra Museum of Art
September 8, 2015 - Current Posts, Diplomatic News
On Sunday the 30th of August at 2pm the opening of Pierre Huyghe's exhibition was held at the TarraWarra Museum of Art.You have till November 22nd to go and admire this exhibition.
Pierre Huyghe is, according to TarraWarra Museum, "one of the most significant artists working today". Born in Paris in 1962, he studied Arts in Paris and now lives in Santiago, Chile. He has held numerous exhibitions at leading institutions around the world including the Museo Tamayo Arte Contemporaneo in Mexico in 2012, the Centre Pompidou in Paris in 2013, the Metropolitan Museum Art (MoMA) in New York in 2015 and he even created a forest within the Sydney Opera House in 2008 for the Sydney Biennale!
Under the wild and wacky facade of Pierre Huyghe's work, there is a strong thought process. To him, "the museum is a collective memory, something that links us to culture and humanity" where he can create "a garden, a seascape, a museumscape with its own symbolic ecosystem that becomes a physical and mental landscape."
On Sunday, Mrs Myriam Boisbouvier-Wylie, Honorary Consul-General of France, was there to officially open the exhibition and to say a few words about Pierre Huyghes, his work, and the vitality of the presence of French artists in Australia.


The hip is a ball-and-socket joint. Normally, the femoral head is well covered by the hip socket or acetabulum. Hip dysplasia, sometimes referred to as acetabular dysplasia, occurs when one or more areas of the hip joint have not developed properly. Teenagers and young adults with hip dysplasia may complain of hip pain. They may experience pain with walking, running and contact sports.
The abnormality causes stress on the soft tissue that lines the hip socket and also strains the hip cartilage and bone. If hip dysplasia is not treated, the cartilage may wear away, and arthritis may develop.
Hip dysplasia should not be confused with another hip condition called acetabular impingement, which occurs when the femoral head does not fit well into the hip joint.
Download our patient fact sheet for hip dysplasia to learn more about treatment options, view helpful illustrations and find out how the hip specialists in Boston Children's Child and Young Adult Hip Preservation Program provide comprehensive care throughout each patient's treatment.


text:
Robert NUNNS
Personal Information | Event Map | All
Name Robert NUNNS
Born 22 Jul 1793 London
Christened 11 Aug 1793 Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Living 2 May 1816 Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Emigration 29 Apr 1822 New York, USA
On board Cincinnatus, from London
Name: Robert Nunns
Estimated Birth Year: abt 1792
Place: New York, New York
Source Publication Code: 9268
Primary Immigrant: Nunns, Robert
Annotation: Derived from transcripts made by the State Department from National Archives records. Includes immigrants of many origins. Few names from the end of 1821 through 1823 (documents lost). Pages 1-357 list names; pages 359-427 provide an index of vessels and
Source Bibliography: UNITED STATES. DEPARTMENT OF STATE. Passengers Who Arrived in the United States, September 1821 - December 1823. Indexed. Baltimore: Magna Carta Book Co., 1969. (Available from Tuttle, Rutland, VT.)
Source Publication Code: 503.10.91
Annotation: Date and port of arrival. Gender, occupation, country of origin, name of ship, and final destination may also be provided. Extracted from Customs passenger lists which are among the holdings of the National Archives. When family relationships were unclear, editor arranged passengers and dependents in alphabetic sequence by given name.
Source Bibliography: BENTLEY, ELIZABETH P. Passenger Arrivals at the Port of New York, 1820-1829. Baltimore: Genealogical Publishing Co., 1999, pp. 655-1373 (Ju-Z).
Nunns family emigration to New York
Passenger list 1822 Ship Cincinnatus
Occupation 29 Apr 1822
Living Abt 1845 Main Street, Setauket, Long Island, New York, USA
Nunns-Ridgway House
Built c1845. Robert Nunns built this home at approximately 128 Main Street. By 1874 the house was owned by Phebe Ridgway. The house, which stood between the present Setauket School and the Emma S. Clark Memorial Library, was torn down around 1954.
Source: The Setaukets, Old Field and Poquott by Three Village Historical Society
Piano F(orte) Manufacturer
Birthplace recorded as New York.
Census 15 Aug 1850 2nd District 18 Ward, New York City, New York, USA
Robert Nunns & family living next door to John Clark & family.
Occupation 1857 New York City, New York, USA
Pianos & tuning
Nunns family in business in New York
City Directory 1857
Misc 1823–1860 New York, USA
Piano makers
Nunns & Clark
One of the most illustrious and historical piano makers in American history were brothers Robert and William Nunns. Robert & Willian Nunns established their firm of R&W Nunns in 1823. The firm built pianos both under their own name and also for the prominent Dubois & Stodart Piano Company of New York City until 1836.
William Nunns: In 1836, William Nunns went into a separate partnership with Augustus Brumley to create the Nunns & Brumley Piano Company, a venture that was very short lived. In 1839, William Nunns left the firm entirely to his brother Robert. In 1843, William Nunns went into partnership with John & Charles Fischer to create the Nunns & Fischer Piano Company. Nunns & Fischer built pianos until 1848 when William Nunns withdrew to establish his own firm of William Nunns & Company, which remained in business until 1853 when he retired.
Robert Nunns: From 1832-1838, the name of the firm was changed to Nunns, Clark & Company when John Clark joined the firm. After 1838, the firm was known as Nunns & Clark. By the 1840's, Nunns & Clark were so successful that they had warerooms in several major cities in the United States. The Nunns & Clark firm enjoyed a superb reputation and great success until they closed around 1860.
Pianos by any of these names are exceedingly rare today and of museum caliber. They deserve the finest restoration and preservation available as they are irreplaceable parts of America's musical history.
Nunns & Brumley
Augustus Brumley began building small square pianos in New York City in about 1835, listed at 31 Reade Street in New York City. In about 1836, Brumley went into partnership with the renowned piano maker William Nunns, establishing the firm of Nunns & Brumley. In 1837, Brumley withdrew from Nunns & Brumley and went into partnership with James Smyth, forming the company of Brumley & Smyth. Brumley & Smyth was out of business by 1840. Pianos by any of these firms are exceedingly rare today, and are considered to be of museum caliber. They deserve the finest restoration and preservation available.
Source: http://antiquepianoshop.com/
Setauket Rubber Factory
Known as the 'upper' rubber factory, this building was located across from the current North Fork Bank at approximately 46 Route 25A. This area was known locally as 'Chicken Hill'. The factory was founded as the Nunns and Clark Piano Factory before the Civil War and then it was occupied by the rubber company.
Source: The Setaukets, Old Field…
Value of Real Estate: $7,000
Value of Personal Estate: $3,000
Census 14 Jun 1860 Brookhaven, Suffolk County, New York, USA
Post Office: Setauket
Living 1868 East Setauket, Long Island, New York, USA
See Joseph's will.
Person ID I702 1. Essex Ennevers
Father William NUNNS, Born: 1757, England , Died: 27 Nov 1835, New York City, New York, USA (Age 78 years)
Mother Mary GIBBS, Born: 1770, Devon , Died: 9 Jan 1831, New York City, New York, USA (Age 61 years)
Married 12 Apr 1792 Tiverton, Devon
Piano manufacturers: W. J. Ennever & Son and Ennever & Steedman, pianoforte manufacturers in London and the related Nunns family, pianoforte manufacturers of New York.
A short history of the Ennever and Nunns pianoforte makers.
Family ID F216 Family Group Sheet | Family Chart
Family (spouse) Eleanor RESTALL, Born: 14 May 1798, London, Middlesex , Died: 7 Nov 1852, New York, USA (Age 54 years)
Married 2 May 1816 Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Also recorded as 11/4/1816. FHL Film Number: 585391
Robert Nunns & Eleanor Restall
1. Elizabeth NUNNS, Born: 24 Aug 1817, London , Died: Yes, date unknown
2. Robert NUNNS, Born: 23 Jul 1819, London, Middlesex , Died: Yes, date unknown
3. William NUNNS, Born: 5 Aug 1821, Died: Yes, date unknown
4. Ellen NUNNS, Born: 7 Nov 1823, New York, USA , Died: 29 Jan 1898 (Age 74 years)
5. John NUNNS, Born: 1825/6, New York, USA , Died: Yes, date unknown
6. Maria NUNNS, Born: 1830/1, New York, USA , Died: Yes, date unknown
7. Henry NUNNS, Born: 6 Jul 1833, New York City, New York, USA , Died: 13 Jul 1892, Madison, Dane, Wisconsin, USA (Age 59 years)
8. Sarah NUNNS, Born: 1837/8, New York, USA , Died: Yes, date unknown
Born - 22 Jul 1793 - London
Christened - 11 Aug 1793 - Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Living - 2 May 1816 - Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Married - 2 May 1816 - Parish Church, St Marylebone, Middlesex
Emigration - 29 Apr 1822 - New York, USA
Living - Abt 1845 - Main Street, Setauket, Long Island, New York, USA
Census - 15 Aug 1850 - 2nd District 18 Ward, New York City, New York, USA
Occupation - Pianos & tuning - 1857 - New York City, New York, USA
Misc - Piano makers - 1823–1860 - New York, USA
Census - Address:
Post Office: Setauket - 14 Jun 1860 - Brookhaven, Suffolk County, New York, USA
Living - 1868 - East Setauket, Long Island, New York, USA


The unique texture and color collection creates the look of distressed wood flooring and complements the natural characteristics of any backyard. Unlike anything available in wood plastic composite decking today, Deckorators Heritage has rich colors, rustic embossing and durability for 25-years.
Give your room extra depth and dimension by Give your room extra depth and dimension by adding a unique 3D decorative wall covering. EnduraWall panels brings your room to life by adding a unique design element that turns an ordinary wall into a focal point.
AZEK decks are engineered to last beautifully. Unlike wood, AZEK decking materials resist scratches, stains, insects, moisture, mold, and mildew. View Decking. Railing. ... handcrafted pergolas and decorative shade canopies. View Pergolas. ... There you can browse our full line of capped composite decking and railing products.