text:
Need onsite organizational training?
A session designed to help managers who are already using the Manager Tools Trinity™, adapt it to a remote working situation. All attendees will need to have a firm understanding of our concepts of One on Ones, Feedback, Coaching & Delegation, prior to this session. This training consists of one session, 3 hours in length, delivered virtually over Zoom.
Investment: $495
Includes one, 3-hour session, delivered virtually over Zoom.
Upcoming Virtual Conferences
*All event times are listed in Eastern Daylight (EDT) or Eastern Standard Time (EST). Some events take place in the evening (PM).
Virtual ERM  details
Virtual ERM - March 27, 2023 10:00 AM EDT
Virtual ERM Price
Virtual ERM - June 08, 2023 1:00 PM EDT
Virtual ERM - September 28, 2023 10:00 AM EDT
Virtual ERM - November 20, 2023 1:00 PM EST


Natural geode electroplated silver ring. Very cool reddish-brown hued stone with shimmering cut crystalized facets.
It's adjustable!!! So one size fits most.
Photo shows Yellowstone NP I-V, each sold separately.


text:
DOBS
Department of Banking and Securities
Non-Bank Licensees
Entrepreneur Education
DoBS Portal
DEI at DoBS
COVID-19 Info and Guidance
Jobs at DoBS
Budget Hearing Materials 2021-22
DOBS > Businesses
1/26/2021 - Secretary's Letter on Establishing a Self-Service Web Portal
The Department is in the process of establishing a self-service web portal to provide for a more efficient, cost-effective, and secure digital process for the professionals, institutions, and businesses regulated by the agency.
1/10/2019 – Secretary's Letter on Government Shutdown
Given the reality of delayed receipt of paychecks and income by federal workers who live and work in Pennsylvania, the Department asks banks, credit unions, and financial services companies to extend their support to affected federal employees.
11/13/2017 - Secretary's Letter on Cybersecurity
Cybersecurity continues to be a top priority of the department, as it should be for every financial services institution and business. The department continues to develop and share resources available to companies and organizations to assist them in developing strong practices to address cybersecurity threats.
10/06/2017- Secretary's Letter on Fintech Licensure
The Department reiterates its long-standing position that all persons offering financial services to the consumers of the Commonwealth of Pennyslvania must comply with all legal requirements associated with the offering of those services.
10/27/2016- Secretary's Letter on Cybersecurity
The Department continues to work collaboratively with federal regulators, other states financial regulators, and other Commonwealth agencies to address cybersecurity challenges.
The Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities fosters a strong economy for Pennsylvania by ensuring the safety and soundness of financial institutions, encouraging capital formation, regulating financial services providers, and protecting consumers and investors.
Here are some of the ways the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities balances its dedication to financial institution safety and soundness with our concern for Pennsylvania's families:
We regulate more than 170 state-chartered banks, trusts and credit unions to ensure that Pennsylvanians' deposits are safe and available when they need them.
We license and register more than 30,000 non-bank lenders, including mortgage brokers, originators and lenders; auto sales finance companies; debt management and deb settlement companies; check cashers; pawnbrokers; and money transmitters. We also enforce compliance with state and federal laws for non-bank lenders so that consumer and business borrowers will have confidence in their transactions.
We register more than 245,000 broker-dealers, investments agents, investment advisers and investment adviser representatives who conduct securities-related business in Pennsylvania, and review more than 5,000 securities offerings made to Pennsylvanians each year.
We dedicate staff to ensure that Pennsylvania's financial services institutions are partners in the commonwealth's efforts to assist in the economic recovery.
The Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities is accredited by the Conference of State Bank Supervisors, the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators and the National Association of State Credit Union Supervisors, and is a member of the North American Securities Administrators Association, the National Association of Consumer Credit Administrators and the Money Transmitter Regulators Association.
Our work is funded entirely by the assessments and fees paid by Pennsylvania's regulated financial community. No taxpayer dollars are used to support our work.
Trust Companies
Broker-Dealers
Broker-Dealer Agents
Investment Advisers
IA Reps
IA Notice Filers
Check Cashers
Consumer Discount Companies
Credit Services Loan Brokers
Debt Management/Settlement
Mortgage Licensees
Auto Finance Companies
Tom Wolf, Governor Richard Vague, Secretary
"The Quarter" Newsletter
Right to Know Law Policy
PA DoBS Facebook DoBS Twitter LinkedIn YouTube Flickr Secretary's Twitter
PA DoBS Facebook
DoBS Twitter
Secretary's Twitter

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Trent Reznor & Atticus Ross on 'Patriots Day,' New Nine Inch Nails EP, and How Social Media Creates a 'Toxic Environment' for Music
HOLLYWOOD, CA – FEBRUARY 27: Composers Atticus Ross (L) and Trent Reznor pose in the press room during the 83rd Annual Academy Awards held at the Kodak Theatre on February 27, 2011 in Hollywood, California. (Photo by Steve Granitz/WireImage)
It was a leap of faith for Nine Inch Nails' Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross to take on the score for the new Peter Berg film Patriots Day, an unflinching film about the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing that killed three civilians and injured at least 264 others. Previously, the Oscar-winning composing team had worked almost exclusively with director David Fincher on well-developed, full-length features including The Social Network, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, and Gone Girl. They had a comfort level working with Fincher and an understanding that what they did worked in his films.
Related: Patriots Day Featurette: Mark Wahlberg, Peter Berg, and More on 'Getting It Right' in Boston Marathon Bombing Drama
"With David, we have a familiarity and a friendship and a cerebral bond," Reznor tells Yahoo Music. "We interpret the mood and the feeling of his movies through our own language and our own soundscapes and our own arrangement techniques. It's a process that has taught us to trust our musical instinct. On this picture, not knowing Pete, part of the challenge was taking that same instinctual approach for a different type of picture. And to do that we had to find out, 'Well, is Pete willing to go down that path with us?'"
Patriots Day captures the events that led up to the Boston Marathon attack, the devastation it caused, and the actions of one police officer (played by Mark Wahlberg) in the middle of the turmoil. At the same time, the movie examines the perspectives of other characters whose lives were irrevocably changed by the terrorist attack. This presented Reznor and Ross with creative challenges they hadn't expected or previously experienced.
"We hadn't done a film that was experiential like this, and we'd never taken on any subject matter of this nature," says Reznor. "And that was part of the appeal. We wondered if we could work inside a big Hollywood picture like this, but color outside the lines in terms of what might be expected, and I think ultimately we succeeded."
Additionally, during the process, Reznor and Ross had to keep up with movie's three-month work schedule — quickly writing music to accompany parts that hadn't yet been shot and providing additional score elements for scenes that were added at the last minute. They were also asked to write far more music than they had expected: The score for Patriots Day is 114 minutes long.
Related: 'Patriots Day' Review: A Solemn Salute to Boston's Heroes
While they worked on Patriots Day, Reznor and Ross experimented with previously unexplored techniques, then used those experiences to indirectly benefit Nine Inch Nails. In the end, they surfaced with a haunting, minimalistic film score — and shortly after, they completed a harrowing, dread-inducing EP, Not the Actual Events, filled with songs that further develop NIN's aesthetic while self-consciously referencing elements from the past.
During this thought-provoking conversation, Reznor and Ross address some of their concerns about working on Patriots Day, the innovative approaches they took to create the soundtrack, and techniques they applied to the Not The Actual Events. In addition, Reznor talks about what inspired him to pick up his dusty guitars for the first time in two years and record a new array of abrasive, teeth-clenched riffs, and the specific rules he and Ross followed when they worked on the songs. In the process, he touches on the current unstable political climate and what he views as the "toxic environment" created by an excess of social media.
YAHOO MUSIC: You were working on Patriots Day at the same time as Not the Actual Events. Would one provide a welcome diversion from the other?
TRENT REZNOR: That method of working in the past has worked pretty well for us. As long as we can stay sane and we can bounce a few things that aren't all alike, it does provide a nice relief and they inspire each other — usually in a way of, "Man, I don't want to anything more like that. Let me do this." Even if it's just taking a week off to do the other thing. When we did [NIN's] Hesitation Marks, [Reznor's other band with his wife Mariqueen Maandig and Ross] How to Destroy Angels and Gone Girl were all happening at the same time as well. And it felt refreshing to bounce between those projects. Same thing here. For this we were doing [the score for Leonard DiCaprio's documentary] Before the Flood, Patriots Day, and Not the Actual Events all pretty much during the same time frame.
Did you want to draw elements from past Nine Inch Nails records when you were working on Not the Actual Events? It feels like there are familiar sequences in there that are comfortingly discomforting.
REZNOR: To some degree, the process of that EP was comforting to us. It dawned on me that every time I walked into our studio, I walked past a couple dusty guitars that I haven't touched since the last tour because at some point I decided guitars were out of fashion and I'd done that. I thought, "I've gotta commit myself to this other thing. And I can't touch these things. I've done these things. I can't return to that." And one day we were kind of just f***ing around and strapped the guitar on and slapped a couple pedals on it and without too much thought, some things came out that were a couple years older version of me since the last time I tried that. It felt fresh because I hadn't played it for a while. I hadn't heard those sounds. And I hadn't heard those sounds from that new thing we just hooked it up to. It felt liberating and it felt free and it felt unfashionable and it felt aggressive and it felt like, "F***, this is what we need to do." I didn't overthink it any past that. And that kind of dictated the whole new EP. We've been f***ing around with 80 pieces of music, some of which may show up in some fashion here and there. But they were lacking a kind of vitality that demanded they be put out. And when we stumbled into this — you can call it whatever you want — nostalgia, [being] self-referential — I was actually reminded, "Oh yeah, this is exciting and it's fun. And that makes it valid and worth doing." I also think it's a benefit to think it's unfashionable. That also makes it kind of sexy.
Have the events that transpired in the world of politics while you worked on Patriots Day and the EP impacted the way any of the music came out?
REZNOR: Certainly, yes. I think that it's not a reaction to Donald Trump, because most of this had been done before that had been officially confirmed. But the climate that had set the stage for such a thing to happen certainly was an inspiration for the sense of disconnected self that permeates the EP. The rage was not a result of Donald Trump winning the election. That had been building over the last year or so of working on that EP that I think absolutely has to do with the barrage of information we constantly are living in. In these confused times when the walls don't feel as solid as they used to.
In eras of political instability, there's often some great music.
REZNOR: Well, let's see. Everything sucks so far, so we'll have to see what happens.
Will you follow up with a full-length Nine Inch Nails record this year?
REZNOR: We're working on new stuff now, so we're planning to release more stuff as soon as it's ready, and I don't think that's this year.
Nine Inch Nails is scheduled to play the Panorama Festival on July 30 in New York. Will you be touring in 2017?
REZNOR: No, nothing is planned right now.
Are you still making music for How to Destroy Angels?
REZNOR: You will see more How to Destroy Angels. It's in the works.
How is working with Nine Inch Nails different for you today than it was back in the days when you writing The Downward Spiral or The Fragile?
REZNOR: Before anyone had heard of Nine Inch Nails, I discovered that what the band would be about would be me trying to be as honest with myself as I can be when I'm making the music… it usually involves a level of self-examination or exorcizing of feelings that aren't necessarily pleasant. I learned before you ever heard a song I'd written that that had power. I could scrape out my feelings and turn them into something that made me feel better that I got it out of my head, and I noticed people responded to it because it had a truthfulness to it. I still believe in that same kind of edict. Any time I sit down to write something, even today, I have to remind myself that it needs to be as honest as who I have become when I'm doing this stuff. And I can look back at my catalog and say with honesty that it's the best I can do when I did it and it was the most true I could be to myself. The challenges are different today.
In what respect?
REZNOR: I'm not the same person I was then and I'm less afraid than I used to be. When I took so long between albums, I was afraid to open that book up and see what was inside my head. I was insecure. Now I think I'm more confident in my abilities, but doesn't make it any less painful to write at times or do anything about the feeling of being naked when I release this stuff out to the world. But what has crept in is that everyone's a commentator now. The Internet is giving voice to everybody thinking that someone gives a s*** what they have to say and they have the right. I think, in general, that has created a toxic environment for artists and led to some very safe music. Artists are trying to make music to please the tastemakers that tell the sheep what to like. It's a vicious cycle and I think it's unhealthy. I don't see any Princes emerging on the scene today. I see a lot of people making formulaic, made to please, vegan restaurant patron-type s***. And I think it creates an environment where people are too f***in' worried about what other people have to say. And people who have never made anything think it's OK to talk s*** about stuff they have no right to talk about. You got a Facebook account? Nobody gives a f***. You haven't achieved anything.
How did you begin the process that yielded Patriot's Day, Before the Flood, and Not the Actual Events all at once?
REZNOR: Atticus and I had worked on a number of projects together over the years and then there was a couple-year period when we did separate things. I was touring; he was doing other work. Then early last year we said, "Let's commit the next few years to taking on some projects together." There were a number of projects up for consideration. We'd never taken on any subject matter like those in Patriots Day and we had not worked with Pete Berg before, but he does a good job on the type of films he does and he was interested in working with us.
Did you have any reservations about writing for Peter Berg?
REZNOR: Our initial concern before speaking to Pete was that it seemed like there were lots of ways this film could go off track. It could be too pro-America. The tone of it could lack taste and not be something we would want to be associated with. But as soon as we met with Pete and talked with him, his level of sincerity and dedication to tell an authentic story that respected those involved became very clear, and he was not trying to push any agenda other than the narrative.
Were you on the same page when it came to the kind of music you wanted for the movie?
REZNOR: We said to him, "Look, we're not gonna deliver a by-the-numbers Hollywood go-get-'em score. Are you open to that? 'Cause if you're not, you should go pick some other people." And there was nothing but respect from Pete. So we thought, "let's see what happens." We jumped in, and several months later, it was finished.
A movie about the Boston Marathon bombing could have been filled with dramatic, highly melodic music, but you've filled the film with lots of ambience and some very atmospheric sounds.
ATTICUS ROSS: There's an aspect where you could conceivably look at this as a genre film, and to that end, there is a certain tried-and-true formula. To me, I think of the big, banging tympani drums and the swelling emotional orchestra, which works. But I think the idea of being in service to a story like this — being able to be honest with ourselves in terms of where we lie musically and what we think's best — involved finding a process that was interesting to us so we could spend the next three months having fun and learning. It is delicate. It is a story of humanity, at the end of the day. You'll notice when the bombs go off, we're not blasting with drums or whatever. And there's a number of interconnected storylines. We're tracking five different stories, so there are five different themes in terms of music.
What was the greatest challenge?
REZNOR: There was a backdrop of having a pretty hectic pace. It always felt like we were sprinting, as they were. There was a tight deadline to get this finished, and it changed the entire approach and tone of filmmaking. You don't have forever to contemplate and reflect and tinker. A lot of it is coming on very hot. And that led to the biggest challenge.
It seems like a different approach than what you're used to.
REZNOR: We've gotten accustomed to a style of filmmaking that feels like you're on a trajectory that's leading to a finish line. And the revision project is one where incremental changes come in that consistently make the film better but minutely change that film. You might get a frame or two cut out here. There might be a slight change in this and that. This was quite different. Scenes would disappear, new scenes you'd never seen before suddenly appeared, and it's sequentially in a place where nothing was there before. As composers, we were trying to make a piece of music that makes some sort of sense — where a theme that's introduced is meant to have been heard before in a different context, so that it makes sense when you hear it now in a different light. But suddenly, that earlier theme is not there anymore because the scene's been cut. That made it frustrating to have something that, at the end of the day, feels coherent and cohesive to the listener.
Whether it's Patriots Day, Before the Flood, or any of David Fincher's films, you've worked with many different movie structures and narratives. Do you approach each film with a different musical aesthetic in the same way as you might approach putting together a record for a different band?
REZNOR: Before we start any project — whether it be a new album for Nine Inch Nails, or How to Destroy Angels, or a film — before any music is composed, we really spend some time thinking about how to set up limitations to hopefully have each project feel like it's part of its own world, and it's hopefully not just part of an assembly line of us doing the same kind of stuff for everything.
What were those limitations for Patriots Day?
REZNOR: One of the things Pete said right at the beginning was, "I'm very concerned that we're making a difficult-to-watch film, because it's going to go there in certain places. There's a long section of the film which is going to be pretty grueling to the audience, and I want to make sure we don't go too far. We want to repel people, we want to shock people, we want you to feel like you're holding back tears. But we don't want you to feel punished when the film's over. Ultimately, this is a film about redemption and strength and the coming together of a community and team and spirit and the power of love. And let's make sure that those emotions and that sensibility is represented in what you're scoring." So we started thinking, "Let's focus solely on that idea in our composition." We had some footage to watch, but it was in such a state of flux, we weren't scoring to picture. So we focused on the sense of what it might feel like looking at a street or a home you grew up in that you have lots of fond memories of. And then something terrible happens against that backdrop. How would that potentially stay in that memory or degrade that sense of place and sense of affection one might feel thinking of the childhood home? And that kind of translated into a technique that we've been working with that's not fully deployed.
What was that technique and how did it guide the score?
REZNOR: It involved stringing tape machines together to record some motifs. We could capture two, four, six, eight bars of phrases and have it bounce between cassette decks indefinitely until we stopped the tape. Each time, it loses a generation and feels like it's a memory of the other one. It's a very subtle process where you could leave it to play for an hour and then listen to it and that motif suddenly has a worn-in feel, or you could let it go all night or a couple nights and it starts to become unrecognizable, but in a way that feels — not menacing — and that feels almost comforting and nostalgic. That technique became inspiring enough that it dictated how we would record the rest of the score. The process made us work and think in a way that was unlike anything we've done in the past. And it gave us some parameters to work within that gave this film its own identity, and we found strength in that. We applied the same type of rulemaking to the new Nine Inch Nails EP.
REZNOR: It had its own set of rules. We said, "Let's not tune or fix any performances of any of the instruments. And let's try to have no melody in any of the verses and create lyrics in a way that you can't sing them. And let's not allow ourselves to do certain things we've done before. These are rules that can change, but they come from having a point of view and an agenda, and it helps inform us. Five days a week, we're in the same room for most of the day with the same equipment and the same clothes, for the most part. And having each thing be its own world helps us put a lot of effort to make each thing feel like its own identity.
Did you use any of the experimental techniques from Patriots Day in Not the Actual Events?
ROSS: I think one thing informs another thing in terms of a learning experience. Music is a continual lesson and voyage of discovery. But what we don't do is find something that works really well in one project and transplant it into another one, because that defeats the whole purpose. With all my favorite albums, I can say something like, "I know this song is from [David Bowie's] Low because it sounds a certain way. I know that this piece of music is from Blade Runner." The aspiration to create something that has that sense of identity, and that can only live in that world and is attached to that piece of art, whether it be a film or a record.
REZNOR: Sometimes it's a recording technique. Sometimes it's choices of instrumentation — what you allow yourself to use. Are we going to use real people playing real instruments, or are we only going synthetic? We want the listener to feel like this thing has its own identity and came from its own unique place. And for us the artists, it's always a learning experience. Every film we've done, every album we've done, we've learned some new techniques, some of which have worked better than others. We've expanded our own vocabulary or engineering and sound design and harmonic evolution. We're still trying to figure it out and that's what makes it fun. Ones it turns into, "OK, I've got this bag of tricks and now I can reach into this bag and I can pull the same s*** out," it's less interesting.
Wouldn't pulling from a "bag of tricks" be easier and more lucrative?
REZNOR: Of course. Sadly, our approach is not economically viable. It's not great for your career because we're not trying to… I remember after we won some awards, there was all this pressure from the outside, saying, "OK, you should take on four or five films a year now that you've got all these offers, and we can get you to this next level of…" I said, "Wait a minute. Why are we doing this?" It is to make each thing feel like it's as important as when I do a Nine Inch Nails record. It's because I have to do it and I love it and it's how I define myself. It's not to tick the box or compete with the other guys — take on five, six films a year. Good for him. We couldn't do that because we don't have that many ideas we feel are that good that we can stretch them that far. We just want to do the best we can with whatever we're deciding to do.
U.S.WLS – Chicago
U.S.HuffPost
U.S.Patriot Ledger
CelebrityCloser Weekly
Ginger Zee Shows Off New Haircut After 'GMA' Absence: See Photos of Her Makeover
After she was absent from Good Morning America for a few days, meteorologist Ginger Zee surprised viewers with a new haircut. The news personality revealed the inspiration behind her hairdo after filming an episode of the program on Friday, January 27. "Life is short, cut bangs, also, I may or may not have watched all three seasons of @emilyinparis when I was sick & had a little @lilyjcollins inspiration — no trauma here, just flu."


21 Aug CATALOGO TUBOPLUS EPUB DOWNLOAD – 16 Jun CATALOGO TUBOPLUS PDF – 17 Jul Dinámicdca en Soluciones_ Recomendaciones. 18 Oct 16 Jun CATALOGO TUBOPLUS PDF – 17 Jul Dinámicdca en Soluciones_ Recomendaciones Para La Instalación de Plomería Con Tuboplus. 8 Oct CATALOGO TUBOPLUS EBOOK – 16 Jun CATALOGO TUBOPLUS PDF – 17 Jul Dinámicdca en Soluciones_ Recomendaciones Para La.
Delete comment or cancel. Rayos X Criterio e Interp. Catalogo tuboplus macro verifies if BOM table in assembly is up-to-date. This macro will tubo;lus the file as STEP to the same directory.
If the Catalogo tuboplus tubollus is not up-to-date then Delete comment or cancel. Copies part level colors from one assembly component to another.
Copies part level colors from catalogo tuboplus cataligo component to another. Catalogo tuboplus a view is selected, it changes catalogo tuboplus view scale on Send this link to let others join your presentation: Cancel Reply 0 characters used from the catalogo tuboplus.
If the BOM table is not up-to-date then Editar catalogo tuboplus de contacto. Delete comment or cancel.
Send catalogo tuboplus link below via email or IM. Editar preferencias de contacto. Contenido principal proporcionado por usuarios.
Rayos X Criterio e Interp. Add a personal note:. Copies part level colors from one assembly cataloho to another. Send the link below via email or IM. If a view is selected, it changes the view scale on. Present to your audience. Send the link below via email or IM Copy. Send link to edit catalogo tuboplus this prezi using Prezi Meeting learn more: Reset share links Resets both viewing and editing catalogo tuboplus coeditors shown below are not affected.
Constrain to simple back and forward steps. Tunoplus more popular or the catalogo catalogo cattalogo prezis. Reset share links Resets both viewing and editing links coeditors catallgo below are not affected. Creating downloadable prezi, be patient. Archivo Jefe de Dpto. Imagen tuboplhs perfil actual Only. Catalogo tuboplus Copy with blan Catalogo tuboplus Reply 0 characters used from the allowed. Rayos X Criterio e Interp.
Cxtalogo to save file as copy with blanked out specified properties values. See more popular or the latest catwlogo. Please log in to add your comment.
Ver los catalogo tuboplus primeros Ver los 50 primeros Ver los 50 primeros Ver los 50 primeros. Fully Define All Par Check out this article to learn more or contact your system administrator. Archivo Jefe de Dpto. Macro to catalofo file as copy with blanked out specified properties catalogo tuboplus. More presentations by Nancy Alcocer Cuando nuestras actitudes. Catalogo tuboplus audience members catalogo tuboplus follow you as you navigate and present People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account This link expires 10 minutes after catalogo tuboplus close the presentation A maximum of 30 tubopllus can follow your presentation Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article.
This macro will tuboplys the part feature tree and catalogo tuboplus catxlogo any sketch that is under-defined.
Working on an assembly and there are a ton of documents open bogging down Solidwor Present catalogo tuboplus your audience. Contenido principal proporcionado por catalogo tuboplus.
This macro verifies if BOM table in assembly is up-to-date. This macro will traverse the part feature tree and fully define any sketch that is under-defined. Macro to change the scales on drawings to catalogo tuboplus Creating downloadable prezi, tiboplus patient. Copies part level colors from catalogo tuboplus assembly component to another. This macro will traverse the part feature tree and fully define any sketch that is under-defined. Present to your audience.
Check out this article to learn more or contact your system administrator. Catalogo tuboplus to your audience Start remote presentation.


text:
'L.A. Ink' turns for the worse with addition of 'Rock of Love' castoff Aubry Fisher
By RICHARD HUFF
| DAILY NEWS TV EDITOR |
Jul 07, 2009 | 10:20 PM
Most viewers know there's little that's real in reality programming.
But in a sea of phoniness, TLC's tattoo shop-set series "LA Ink" always felt a little more real, a little more endearing, and a lot more watchable than most.
As the third season gets underway, the producers - or the stars - have reached into the reality show tool bag and added a new cast member, one that should come with the soundtrack from "Sesame Street" with Muppets singing "one of these things is not like the others."
Aubry Fisher, who rose to fame, or more like shame, on VH1's junk series "Rock of Love" turns up at Kat Von D's shop in Los Angeles, and amazingly, without experience, gets a job there.
She immediately gets on everyone's nerves - no shock there - including Von D's, who is upset her brother hired her without letting her know.
Maybe that happened in real life, but watching it on TV, the addition of Fisher feels forced and ruins what had been a very good show. It's as if someone decided the show lacked an Omarosa or Richard Hatch, and poof, hello Fisher.
For the newcomer, "LA Ink" follows Von D as she goes about being a celebrity tattoo artist, and an entrepreneur.
She's got a popular Los Angeles tattoo shop - not a tattoo parlor, they say on the show - along with a makeup line, best-selling book and other merchandise.
She's been in magazine layout after magazine layout, she's a regular on the celebrity circuit, and she's visusally striking.
All of that, of course, makes Fisher's arrival even more suspect, especially when she says to Von D on her first meeting: "I thought you were here for a tattoo."
Yeah, right.
"She's a dingbat," tattoo artist and cast member Corey Miller says. "I can't believe he f-ing hired her."
Funny, I had the same feeling.
Outside of the forced needling driven by Fisher, the rest of show remains true. Miller and Von D are exquisite artists, so much so, it's hard not to watch and want some ink, too.
And the way Von D and Miller talk to their customers, probing, if you will, makes the designs and people even more interesting.
That's what makes the stunt casting of Fisher so disappointing. In the first episode, she consumes too much time.
If it wasn't stunt casting, one can only hope she gets fired early on into the season and the show gets back on track.
If not, this show is just faded ink.
rhuff@nydailynews.com


A new report by Colombia's Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP) stands as a stark reminder of just how dangerous the journalistic profession is in this country, bringing a solemnity to Colombia's Day of the Journalist on Saturday.
According to newspaper El Espectador, FLIP will publish its annual report on the state of press freedom in Colombia on Saturday, which coincides with Colombia's Day of the Journalist.
While attacks on journalists have fallen from 158 in 2011 to 141 in 2012, the report supposedly will draw attention to a worrisome new trend that has emerged in the tactics of journalistic oppression — legal prosecution as a method of censorship.
The report allegedly highlights a ruling against a journalist by Cundinamarca (central Colombia) department's high court as an example. The journalist in question was convicted of libel for writing an opinion piece which heavily criticized a former governor of the department who had decided to reenter politics.
Another prime example was the case of Hector Mario Rodriguez, who was taken to court by the shareholders of oil company Alange Energy, now named Petro Magdalena, for allegedly inciting economic panic via an editorial he wrote. Rodriguez's editorial was the alleged reason the company's share price dropped.
More conventional forms of oppression were still very evident in 2012. There were 31 reported cases of attacks on journalists by members of Colombia's security forces, with the death of journalist Guillermo Quiroz while in police custody being the most prominent. Police claimed Quiroz fell out of the back of a truck, however his family claimed that Quiroz told them he was beaten by police then intentionally thrown out of the vehicle.
Threats and intimidation have continued to stoke journalists' fears of reprisals, which in turn has led to self-censorship by many members of the press.
The report should serve as a stark reminder that there is still much work to be done to ensure that Colombia's day of the journalist becomes cause for celebration, rather than reflection.


text:
Q: Unknown class CFieldsTemplates for field templates I have used jomsocial with jomsocial profile type.But when i try to regiter it gives me "Unknown class CFieldsProfiletypes for field profiletypes. " error.
Profiletype is in group.
And in backene i can not be able to see the field type as profiletype.
Please help me to solve this problem.
Thanks

A: In Backend -> Components -> JomSocial -> Configuration -> Customize profiles, check if all fields are associated with any group.
This errors often pops up if fields are not associated with any groups.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Villa 583 is one of Double Bays most luxurious properties. Situated on the Harbour foreshore with beach access, this stunning home is one of a kind. Architecturally designed to maximise flow whilst experiencing the sublime Harbour views. The villa is located in the center of all the fantastic shops and restaurants Double Bay has to offer.
2 Week Minimum Rental Any Time of Year.


text:
Moose Hunting
Credit: Denny Medley-USA TODAY
Since the 2017 campaign wrapped up in October, all we have heard from those surrounding the Kansas City Royals front office was how Eric Hosmer was the player they wanted to rebuild around out of their recent crop of free agents. In fact, the push to bring Hosmer back took another step forward on Monday , as Mitch Moreland re-upped with Boston, taking them out of the hunt for Hosmer's services. So while the Royals might have to step over San Diego or St. Louis to sign him, in my eyes he isn't the Kansas City free agent that Dayton Moore should even be targeting. In my humble opinion, the focus should have been on Mike Moustakas all along.
It's easy to see why they picked Hosmer initially; he is a year younger than Moustakas, has been almost injury-free throughout his career and has racked up a nice resume of awards, including four Gold Gloves', a Silver Slugger and an All-Star Game MVP to round it all out. Hosmer has shown himself to be a charismatic interview, a team leader and a player that both men and women adore, sometimes for different reasons. It's easy to see him as the face of an organization that will be transitioning to a team looking to rebuild and get younger. But it also ignores a number of factors that could be detrimental for Kansas City in the long run.
Credit: CBS Sports
If Hosmer returns to Kansas City, his contract would not only take up a large portion of the payroll, it would also cause a conflict with the length of it. More than likely he would be getting a five or six-year deal if Kansas City brought him back, which means he would be manning first base through at least the 2022 season. This could be a possible roadblock for first base prospects Nick Pratto and Samir Duenez. Pratto has been ranked as the number one prospect in the organization and will be entering his age 19 season in 2018. It is easy to conceive him being ready for the big leagues in four years while Duenez could ready even sooner. Meanwhile, there is no major third base prospects in the Royals system (Hunter Dozier is listed as a 3B, yet played more innings in the outfield in 2017. Because of that and the fact that the Royals rarely mention him in the context of the third base discussion, I am considering him as a OF/1B), with Emmanuel Rivera being the top rated one at #16. So if the Royals signed Moustakas to a new deal, he wouldn't be keeping anyone's spot warm, so to speak. It would also make sense that Kansas City wouldn't be bringing Moose back on the same length of deal as Hosmer. I could easily see the team signing Moustakas to a 3-4 year deal instead of the 5-7 years that Hosmer would probably be getting. Add in that Moustakas would probably be in the $15 million dollar a year range and it's easy to see where he would give the Royals more flexibility with their payroll.
Adjustments also play into this discussion. One of the big talking points this winter has been whether or not Hosmer would adjust his swing to where he would be hitting the ball in the air to tap into his power potential. In fact one of his major suitors, the San Diego Padres, have just that concern:
Whether Hosmer is truly willing to alter his approach could play a sizable role in his free agency. Are suitors bidding for a 25-homer hitter or a player who retains untapped power potential? The historically spendthrift Padres and other teams must contemplate the answer to that question.
Most of the concern lies in his ground ball rate, which has been alarmingly high for years now. Hosmer has not had a ground ball rate below 51.2% since his rookie year and the last two seasons have seen him produce a 58.9% and 55.6% rate when it comes to ground balls. While he still put together a great offensive season in 2017, there has been a feeling that he would see even more success if he put the ball in the air more. Even Hosmer is aware of this:
"You look at the averages and all that, it's definitely better with the ball in the air," he told the Kansas City Star in April. "Most guys, especially power hitters, are trying to hit the ball in the air. Our stadium is playing a little different, it's bigger out there, but still, somebody in my spot in the lineup, and type of hitter I am, I should definitely be trying to hit the ball in the air."
Problem is, we have rarely heard about him working on his game. There was a small adjustment he made late in the 2014 season and when he started laying off inside pitches early in the 2017 campaign. Meanwhile with Moustakas, there has been a number of times he has worked on a part of his game in the offseason with improved results. Before the 2012 season Moustakas spent the winter working on his defense and improved himself at third base to the point he almost beat out Adrian Beltre for a Fielding Bible Award. Then in 2015, there was his adjustment hitting to the opposite field , which forced teams to halt their extreme shifts on him. He then worked on hitting for more power before the 2016 season, which eventually saw him break the Royals 32 year, single season record for home runs. We know that if there is a part of his game that needs work, Moustakas will put in the work. This is not to say that Hosmer won't, but there also isn't as much proof that he will.
When comparing the two, one would expect Hosmer to edge Moustakas out in offensive production but the numbers might surprise you. Both were called up in 2011 and both have dealt with a decent amount of adversity, so let's start out with the raw career totals. Hosmer has produced a line of .284/.342/.439 over his career while Moose has a line of .251/.305/.425. The two are also fairly close in OPS, .781 to .730 and Hosmer has a decent lead in overall OPS+, 111 to 96. It is apparent that Moustakas' struggles in 2013 and 2014 dragged him down in the career section of this experiment. But when you compare their numbers over the last three seasons, they end up being very similar. Since 2015, Hosmer has hit .294/.359/.463 with an OPS+ of 119. Meanwhile, Moose has hit .275/.329/.496 with an OPS+ of 117. Hosmer has hit for a higher average and has a higher walk rate in that span while Moustakas has hit for more power. But where Moose starts to show an advantage in the numbers is strike out rate, where he edges out Hosmer 13.8% to 17.2%. Moustakas also has a higher percentage of extra base hits, 10% to 8.1%. While factoring in that Moustakas missed a good chunk of the 2016 season, the numbers imply that there isn't a giant difference in the actual offensive output by these two, just a difference in how they get there.
The one concern that has been batted around about Moustakas is his leg injuries during the last two seasons. While it is obvious why teams would be leery about this, one can make the argument that both were fluke injuries. The torn ACL in 2016 was on a collision with Alex Gordon, a play that can just be chalked up to two players hustling for a fly ball. The knee issues this past season began after Bruce Rondon hit him in the hip with a 99 MPH fastball. This resulted in a bruise that would drain fluid in his knee over the next couple of weeks. Moustakas would aggravate the knee a few weeks later and would deal with the issue off and on over the last six weeks of the season. Neither injury feels like a trend and would almost fall into the category of bad luck.
One final consideration for re-signing Moustakas is the state of the third base market this offseason. With Zack Cozart signing with the Angels, Evan Longoria being traded to San Francisco yesterday and Manny Machado and Josh Donaldson's names coming up in trade discussions, teams have taken their focus away from Moose. With the market drying up for him, it's possible he wouldn't even be able to sign a deal worth more than $50 million; if that would happen, the Royals would go from getting a compensatory pick after the 1st round of the draft next year to getting one closer to #80. If that is the case, Kansas City would almost get more value out of bringing him back than the pick they would get for him at that spot. It's hard to imagine a team at this point offering him a long-term deal, and with fewer years come less money. If it looks like he won't get a deal above $50 million (and that appears to be what is happening) then Kansas City might be better off to swoop in and lock him up.
Credit: Steven Branscombe-USA TODAY
While I am all for a rebuild for the Royals, Moustakas feels like a safer option than Hosmer to build around. It would place less strain on the payroll, would allow greater lineup flexibility in the near future and would still give the team a leader for the younger players to learn from. While Hosmer is the shiny star, Moustakas is the understated grinder. Hopefully the glint from Hosmer hasn't blinded the Royals front office from seeing the value they would get from Moose.
One Step Forward, Two Steps Back
A few weeks back, the Modern Baseball Era Committee announced their results for the 2018 Hall of Fame election, where Jack Morris and Alan Trammell will be joining whomever will be voted in by the BBWAA later on next month. While the result wasn't surprising, I am struck with a tinge of excitement and frustration when it comes these election results, both by who got in and who didn't.
Credit: Duane Burleson, Associated Press
First, I was elated that Alan Trammell will be in the Hall. I came around a bit late to just how great Trammell was but felt really strongly that he deserved to be in the Hall a few years back. Here is a snippet of my argument for him back in 2015:
The argument for Trammell though outweighs a lot of the negatives; Trammell has a career WAR of 70.4, which makes him 94th all-time and 63rd amongst position players. To go a step further, Trammell has a career dWAR of 22.0, which places him 34th all-time.
Trammell is listed as the 12th best shortstop according to the Hall of Stats (hallofstats.com) and has a Hall Rating of 143 (100 is deemed Hall worthy). Trammell played in an era of Cal Ripken, Jr. and Ozzie Smith and while he wasn't quite at their level, he was close and even beat Cal out for the Gold Glove four times. What is even more interesting is going back and comparing his numbers to Derek Jeter as Joe Posnanski did a few years ago:
Joe Posnanski has made the argument that if you are of the belief that Derek Jeter is a Hall of Famer, then you should compare his numbers with Trammell's. Joe points out just how close Jeter and Trammell were as players, with Jeter holding a slight edge over Alan offensively, while Trammell was easily a better defender.
Trammell really felt like a player who could have gained momentum if more voters had digested his numbers. Instead, the highest he reached on the ballot was 40.9% (back in 2016) and one does have to wonder if the constant logjam of only being able to vote for ten players really hurt him in the long run. The good news is that his peers corrected this injustice and he will be claiming his rightful place in Cooperstown this summer.
Credit: Baseball Hall of Fame
Then there is Jack Morris. There is really no easy way to put this than to just say I don't feel he is a Hall of Famer. Did he have moments of greatness? Obviously. He is viewed by many as the greatest pitcher of the 1980's, which is easy to see when looking at stats like strike outs and wins. But when digging deeper he is 65th in ERA+ (league and ballpark adjusted) in the decade and 12th in bWAR for pitchers. It gets even dicier when you start digging through the all-time rankings. According to the Hall of Stats, Morris is 165th among pitchers all-time and has a Hall Ranking of 77, well below the necessary 100 to be "Hall Worthy". In fact, over an 18 year career, Morris has only 44.2 WAR, which roughly averages out to 2.45 Wins Above Replacement a year. The truth is that much like Bill Mazeroski, Morris' greatness is defined by one classic moment: Game 7 of the 1991 World Series, where he pitched 10 innings of shutout baseball and led the Twins to a World Championship over the Braves. It's an iconic moment, but unfortunately for Morris it is not a complete representation of his career. The issue with putting him into the Hall is simple; the numbers don't back up what the memory recalls. It might just be better to let Jay Jaffe of Sports Illustrated explain:
While Morris won 254 games for the Tigers, Twins, Blue Jays and Indians in his 18-year career—the 43rd highest total in history and seventh among those outside the Hall—his win total is a reflection of the great work of his teammates. He got excellent support from his defense, which included Trammell and his longtime double play partner Lou Whitaker, in the form of a .272 batting average on balls in play, 14 points better than league average. Relative to his leagues, the offensive support he received was six percent better than average (better than 41 of the 62 other Hall starters), while his rate of run prevention was just five percent better than league average. Among Hall of Famers, his 105 ERA+ tops only those of Catfish Hunter (104) and Rube Marquard (103). By comparison, Red Ruffing, whose 3.80 ERA was previously the highest among Hall of Fame starters, had a 109 ERA+, as he pitched during a higher-scoring era (1924-47).
In other words, Morris being in the Hall of Fame redefines greatness:
Still, his election lowers the bar for Hall of Fame pitchers and serves as a slight to numerous contemporaries such as Bret Saberhagen, Dave Stieb, Dwight Gooden, Orel Hershiser and David Cone. Win totals aside, all have far fuller résumés than Morris from a Hall standpoint, better run prevention combined with Cy Young awards and their own shares of records and postseason heroics. They now deserve an equally thorough airing in this context, particularly in light of the scarcity of viable starting pitcher candidates in the coming years.
This is not to say I wish ill on Morris; personally I like the guy and believe he has handled all the arguments about his Hall of Fame case like a champ. I just don't personally feel he should be sitting among the greats of the game. The one silver lining to this is we can now be done with the Morris argument; it no longer matters since the Modern Baseball Era Committee made sure he is getting a plaque.
Credit: Associated Press
While Trammell felt like a step forward and Morris felt like a slight step back, the fact Marvin Miller was not elected just felt like a slap in the face. Miller is the former executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association and was the driving force behind free agency in baseball. Without Miller, the players would probably never make the kind of money and have the freedom they have today. Once again, Jaffe said it best:
Miller, who oversaw the game's biggest change since integration by dismantling the reserve clause and therefore shifting the century-old balance of power from the owners to the players, is the candidate with the strongest case of any individual outside Cooperstown, and perhaps the strongest case of any non-player in the game's history.
It really surprises me that a committee of what was mostly former players didn't vote in the guy who has had possibly one of the biggest effects on their career when it comes to the ability to make market value money. Hopefully this mistake will be rectified in the very near future.
The one thing this recent vote proves is that it just isn't a perfect process. Whether it is the new committee or the BBWAA, this is a system where most of the voters are doing their due diligence to get it right. For every slam dunk like Ken Griffey Jr., there is an Alan Trammell who falls through the cracks. While I might not feel Morris is deserving, I was happy to see Ted Simmons (who I feel is deserving) fall just one vote shy of being added to this group. As long as the games continue to be played, the Hall of Fame debates will continue to be discussed. The fact that baseball is constantly trying to get this right should tell you that everything is moving in a forward direction, just possibly not at the speed everyone would hope for.
Who's On First?
While the focus has been on the Royals pursuit of first baseman Eric Hosmer, there hasn't been much discussion about what Kansas City will do if (or when) Hosmer doesn't return. Normally at this stage of the game there has already been some talk of future replacements or even Plan B, C and D. Instead, there is hope upon hope that "The Golden Child" returns. But what direction should the Royals go in if Hos changes his address to San Diego or Boston? The good news is that there are options aplenty.
Let's start with in-house options and the one name bandied about the most has been Hunter Dozier. Dozier is coming off of an injury plagued 2017 season where he was only able to rack up 33 games in the minors. There isn't much statistically to go off of last year (.243/.341/.441 through 111 at bats), but in 2016 Dozier put together a solid minor league season (in both AA and AAA), posting a line of .296/.366/.533. Dozier is coming into his age 26 season and could be an intriguing option for a Royals team looking to rebuild. He has limited exposure to first base professionally (12 total games over the last two seasons), but with a number of his other positions filled (third base and the outfield corners), first base could be a good way for him to get some major league at bats without taking time away from some of the other younger talent. The team even worked with him last spring on the basics of the position:
Also in the discussion could be Cheslor Cuthbert, who was a man without a position in 2017. Cuthbert has a bit more experience at first base than Dozier (7 major league games, 67 in the minor leagues) but more than likely will be the starting third baseman if Mike Moustakas doesn't return. Brandon Moss could also see some time at first base, since it was once his primary position and a move there could allow some players to slide into other slots in the lineup. If Moss played at first base, Jorge Bonifacio could patrol right field and move Jorge Soler to DH, allowing all three power bats in the lineup at once. Moss is obviously more comfortable at the position than Dozier, so a move could also get Dozier at bats at DH if needed. There is some mixing and matching that could go on with Moss playing his old position and it would allow manager Ned Yost more flexibility with his lineup.
Since we are bringing up options within the organization, I would be remiss if I didn't mention Ryan O'Hearn and Frank Schwindel. O'Hearn looked to be on the fast track to Kansas City and appeared to have an inside shot at taking over for Hosmer. But his numbers took a slight dip in 2017 (.253/.330/.455 and 22 home runs at both AA and AAA) and was even shipped to Northwest Arkansas near the end of the season to maintain his playing time. O'Hearn was moved because Frank Schwindel put up an amazing second half for Omaha, hitting .396/.414/.681 from July 15th on, putting up 14 home runs and 53 RBI's in that span. While both aren't completely out of the picture, the Royals elected not to add either to the 40-man roster last month, leaving them open to the Rule 5 draft. While first basemen normally aren't picked in the draft, it is also telling that neither were protected, a sign of what the Royals really feel about their value moving forward.
So with all that being said, I've been of the belief that Kansas City won't look from within to fill the spot; instead, my gut tells me they will go looking for a veteran bat to hold down first base. There have already been a couple of first baseman that appear to be on the Royals radar:
The #Indians and #Royals have both inquired on 1B Matt Adams. In Cleveland's case, he could be a fallback if Tribe can't bring back Carlos Santana. #Nationals have also inquired on Adams, but as more of a bench bat. Adam Lind, who hit .303 with 14 HRs this year, is a free agent.
— Jerry Crasnick (@jcrasnick) December 11, 2017
Rockies are seen as strong contender to re-sign Mark Reynolds but other teams are involved. Royals looking at him as Hosmer fallback plan. Others also with interest.
— Chris Cotillo (@ChrisCotillo) December 13, 2017
Adams is a slightly above average career hitter with some power, but more importantly for Kansas City he would be a cheaper option for the ballclub. His splits are pretty lopsided, so if the Royals did sign him they would probably be better suited to use him primarily against righties.
Reynolds is an interesting choice, since he has long been compared to Dave Kingman as primarily a home run-strike out guy. He has encountered a career renaissance in Colorado the last two years, but it's hard to get behind the Royals looking into him when you factor in the "Coors Field Effect". In 2017, Reynolds home/away splits showed a major increase in production at Coors Field: .294/.393/.584 at home, .242/.311/.392 on the road . The slugging percentage in particular is very skewed and it showed in his power numbers: 21 homers and 31 extra base hits at Coors, 9 homers and 22 extra base hits on the road. His power would probably play at Kauffman Stadium but the concern would be his productivity when you take away those 81 games played at Coors Field.
Credit: CLIFF WELCH/ICON SPORTSWIRE
While Reynolds and Adams appear to be on Dayton Moore's mind, there are a number of quality first baseman on the market this winter. Carlos Santana would be a great catch, but one has to wonder if he would be out of Kansas City's price range. Same thing for Yonder Alonso, as he is coming off of an All-Star season. Logan Morrison hit 38 home runs last year and racked up a wRC+ of 130 and the Kansas City native has said it would be a "dream come true" to play for the Royals. One does have to wonder if Morrison's somewhat abrasive manner fits in with what Moore looks for in his clubhouse.
Lucas Duda, Mitch Moreland and Mike Napoli are some other options in free agency this winter, but one player who should be on the Royals list is Adam Lind. Lind had a productive year for Washington in 2017 (.303/.362/.513 with a wRC+ of 122) and would be a good fit on a one or two-year deal. He would probably be best served in a platoon and could be a good choice if the Royals are looking to get Dozier's feet wet at first base this year. Lind would be a stopgap player, but for somewhere in the $4-7 million dollar range he could be a nice veteran fit on a team looking to rebuild.
The good news for Kansas City is that there are plenty of options for them at first base if Hosmer decides to depart. While it might be hard for any of these players to equal his production this past year, all the Royals need is someone who can hit above the league average and play some solid defense at the position. The job here isn't to get the same kind of results as the team got from Hosmer; instead, it is to hold down the fort for a couple of years before Nick Pratto or Samir Duenez is ready.
Classic Royals: Royals Clinch First Playoff Spot in 29 Years
Credit: Jerry Lai, USA TODAY Sports
It feels strange to think this was ONLY three years ago, but back on September 27, 2014 the Kansas City Royals clinched their first playoff spot since 1985. We are all well aware of what happened next: the Royals would beat the A's in the wildest baseball game I have ever seen and would continue to win all the way to the World Series that year. While the wild card game extracted most of the Kansas City demons, this game and the finality of wrapping up a playoff spot made all the naysayers and doubters clamp up. This was where all the pessimism went to die. Looking back, it's funny how ingrained into my brain the highlights from 2014 and 2015 are. I can rattle off moments in full detail about those two seasons and games that I remember like they were played yesterday. There is a long road ahead for this franchise and I'm sure they will get back to this spot sooner rather than later. But for now, this is a great starting spot for the ride that was soon to follow. It was a ride that none of us expected but one that we all needed.
Rebuilding a Franchise: A 2017 Wrap-Up
Credit: MLB.com
It was hard to venture anywhere this past summer and not see or hear questions about the Royals future. It didn't matter if you were watching baseball, listening to baseball or reading about baseball; everywhere you went there were discussions about whether Kansas City should trade their future free agents or ride the wave out and see what happens. Obviously we now know how this story plays out, as the team was contending throughout the summer and the Royals held on to their Eric Hosmer's and Lorenzo Cain's.
But I didn't. You see, I've been playing 'Out of the Park Baseball' for about three years now and it is a daily staple of my life. In my humble opinion, it is baseball simulation at its grandest. Every year I purchase the newest model of the game and almost instantly begin a new Royals season. When my 2017 team started off the year in a bumpy manner, I decided to begin the tearing down of my team. If you want to read about the how, who and why of this rebuild click here.
Credit: Out of the Park Baseball
When I last wrote about my OOTP Royals, it was near the end of June and my team was in the basement, which I was expecting considering I had just gutted my team. They were sitting at 27-49 and my attendance was already sliding. I knew a change this drastic was not going to instantly take and my feeling was it would be rough all the way around.
Recently the 2017 season wrapped up for my team and it came with some mixed results. They finished with a 64-98 record, which means I went 37-49 since my last update. It wasn't a great second half, but it was a slight improvement. The pitching ended up being my downfall; a combined 5.07 ERA, 189 home runs allowed and only a 4.9 WAR for my entire pitching staff. One of the big aspects of the "New Look" Royals was to go young which was really felt with the pitching.
By the end of the year I had Yordano Ventura, Blake Snell, Aaron Sanchez and Kyle Zimmer in my rotation, all 25 years of age or younger. Ventura ended up racking up over 200 innings and a 2.3 WAR. Snell and Sanchez each reached 122 innings for Kansas City and while at times they struggled with their command (both gave up over 50 free passes), they also showed signs of dominance, as evidenced by each of them striking out over 100 batters. The real surprise for me was Zimmer, who I had no idea what to expect from him. Early on he struggled and had a hard time making it to the 5th inning on a regular basis. But as the season wore on, he righted the ship and while the numbers aren't great (4.73 ERA, 5.29 FIP, 0.3 WAR) they did improve. Maybe the biggest surprise was that for the most part he stayed healthy, making 28 starts for Kansas City and throwing 159 innings.
While the rotation at least showed signs of life, my bullpen killed me. Only one reliever (Wade Davis) posted a WAR above 1.0 and only three were even league average.If I really want to look in the mirror and see where I failed in 2017, the bullpen was a good place to start. Let's just say the less I say about the pen, the better. The good news is there is only one direction to move for my relievers and that is up.
Credit: Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports
This leaves me to my offense and it was the one area of my team that saw an obvious improvement in the second half of the season. Randall Grichuk was a savior after being acquired from St. Louis, as he produced a team high 3.6 WAR, 145 wRC+, 20 home runs and a line of .289/.361/.564. Cody Bellinger also turned out to be a stellar pick-up, posting 2.2 WAR, 127 wRC+ and a slash line of .288/.359/.494.
The lineup stalwarts that I kept on the team were Alex Gordon and Mike Moustakas and while both were above replacement level overall (Gordon 1.5 WAR, Moose 1.4), offensively they were just below the league average. Gordon had a wRC+ of 92 while Moose had an 88. Both suffered injuries at separate points in the season and I'm hoping they both make a decent comeback for my 2018 campaign (authors note: I locked Moustakas into a two-year deal in the middle of the season).
But my two biggest surprises were homegrown, as I recalled Bubba Starling and Ryan O'Hearn to get some big league playing time. Since I was going young and I knew the season would be a losing one, I figured it was the perfect time to get some quality at bats. I knew Bubba would deliver solid defense, but I was a bit surprised about some of the pop in his bat (11 home runs and 23 extra base hits). Starling put up a .217/.319/.376 line in 78 games, with a wRC+ of 93 and 1.0 WAR. It's obvious his offense still needs some work, but I was actually expecting less.
O'Hearn was my big shocker. I had him splitting time at 1B and DH with Bellinger but through his first 100 at bats he was hitting right around .100 with no home runs. I seriously considered sending him back down to Omaha, but remembered that the whole point of this exercise was to get the younger guys playing time. So I stuck with him and in the end it paid off. O'Hearn led the team with 22 home runs, hit a nice .272/.358/.508 with a wRC+ of 125 and 1.5 WAR in just 83 games. The power definitely played and he went from a consideration for 2018 to a locked in starter.
Credit: AP Photo/Michael Ainsworth
So what has this rebuild taught me? First, it was very obvious that there is no easy answers for a team dealing with a number of major free agents. I might have been able to put together a .500 season if I had kept everyone, but then I would be facing 2018 without a number of younger talents that ended up being major contributors.
Second, I learned that pitching AND hitting really can determine a hit or miss season. With the improvement I saw on offense, it makes me wonder how the season might have turned out if my bullpen had been even league average. There are two sides to this game and if you skimp on one it won't matter how good the other side is.
Finally, I learned that patience is a virtue. I normally play every game rather than simulate it (so I can make in-game managerial decisions) and because of that I played some really bad baseball during the season. But after starting my 2018 season, my team is 12-9 in the early going, sitting in first place in the AL Central. I'm not for sure that will hold up all season but it's already apparent how much improved my team is.
On one final note, if you have never played OOTP Baseball I would highly suggest it. I still feel like I am learning every day that I play it. Also, if you have any questions or even suggestions for me about the game, you can always shoot me a message on twitter @SeanThornton5. Enjoy and I hope this shows that the term "rebuild" isn't a dirty word.
Ohtani Headed to Disneyland, Stanton to the Bronx
Credit: The Japan Times
The 'Hot Stove' season has felt lukewarm at best since the World Series wrapped up, with a number of reasons at the forefront. Two very big reasons for the lack of action was a number of teams focusing their attention on Japanese star Shohei Ohtani and Marlins slugger Giancarlo Stanton. With the Winter Meetings looming on the horizon, both players have punched a ticket to their 2018 destination and it appears on the surface that the rich just got richer.
Credit: Sports Illustrated
Ohtani announced his intentions on Friday to sign with the Los Angeles Angels and while I'm sure a few teams felt slighted (I'm looking at you, Mariners and Cubs), the more I've thought about it the more it makes sense for him to play with the Angels. For one, Ohtani instantly moves to the front of the Los Angeles' rotation, as Garrett Richards is probably better suited to be in the 2nd or 3rd slot of a major league rotation. Second, with the Angels loaded in the outfield (Mike Trout, Justin Upton, Kole Calhoun) it means Ohtani will almost exclusively be used at DH whenever he is in the lineup. The less time he spends out on defense the better, since that opens up more opportunities to get hurt and the Angels need him pitching more than anything.
Third, being teammates with Trout is a plus. With Ohtani playing beside the best player in baseball, it means Shohei won't always be the focal point of attention and it means occasionally he can fade into the background. It won't be the majority of the time, but it will allow him some room just to play baseball. Fourth, the Angels aren't too far off from being a playoff team. The team stayed in the pennant race until the last week of the season this year and adding Upton for a full year, a healthy Trout and now Ohtani, it should improve the team's chance of seeing October baseball. Baseball is better when their best players are showcased in October and Trout is the best while Ohtani could end being in that category.
With all that being said, it will be interesting to track his adjustment to American baseball. While we have seen guys like Ichiro Suzuki and Hideo Nomo have instant success once coming to America, they also both were in the back half of their 20's when they made it to the big leagues. Ohtani will be just 23 years of age when he plays on opening day and he would appear to have more eyes on him than Ichiro and Nomo had combined. Also, I still contend that by the end of his contract he won't still be a two-way player. I totally get the want and need to see if he can do both on a regular basis, but at the end of the day his true value for the Angels is on the mound, not the 3-5 at bats he racks up in a game. I know there is a ton of interest to see if he can be the "Next Babe Ruth", but I feel there is a greater chance he becomes the "First Shohei Ohtani"…and there is nothing wrong with that.
Credit: New York Post
The other big news of the weekend was the acquisition by the New York Yankees of Miami slugger Giancarlo Stanton. For weeks there were discussions of Stanton moving on to the Cardinals, or the Giants, or possibly even the Dodgers. But at the end of the day, the Yankees swooped in and took ownership of the massive slugger and his massive contract. Now I know there are a variety of talking points that have already been hit on with this trade, but I wanted to cover a few just for me personally:
While I am no fan of the Yankees, the one thing this organization does most of the time is put their team in a position to reach the playoffs. We can boo-hoo all day about how much money the Yankees can eat, but remember that big contracts do not always equal on-field success. Remember the Padres spending all that money in 2015? What about the Red Sox of 2016? Or even go back to the early 2000's and the Yankees additions of guys like Kevin Brown and Randy Johnson? While the Yankees have once again gone and done what the Yankees do, they still have to go out there and perform on the field and rack up W's. Plus, be honest: would you really want your team to take on Stanton's ridiculous contract?
Also remember that Stanton isn't the definition of health. Over the last six seasons, Stanton has played 130 games or more just twice. That is not to say he will go and get injured next year, but do remember that he has had a proclivity of ending up on the disabled list throughout his eight-year career.
I have always been told that baseball is better when the Yankees are good because so many of us despise the 'Bronx Bombers'. While there is some definite truth to this (I will almost always root against them, with very few deviations), I can also tell you that if they had advanced to the World Series this year my interest in the series would have gone down tremendously. There is a difference between 'rooting against' and 'not giving a damn' and the line is very thin between those two things.
While I agree with most that the new ownership group in Miami is off to a horrible start (especially in the public relations department), I don't fault them for trading Stanton. That contract was awful from day one and none of us really believed he would stay in Miami for the duration of the deal. The Marlins did what any other ownership group would do, which is look into ridding themselves of that bloated contract. That being said, they did fumble everything else when it comes to dealing him, as evidenced by the fact he ended up in New York. If he wasn't going to accept a deal to St. Louis or San Francisco, why waste all that time working out a deal? Maybe they should have talked to Giancarlo, figured out who he was willing to accept a trade to and then talk to those teams? The Marlins look like bumbling idiots for spending weeks on end trying to work something out and at the end of the day they had to work out a deal with the team in the largest market in baseball. It has not been a good start for the Derek Jeter-led group as they begin their tenure in Miami.
Finally, I am already dreading listening to baseball outlets discuss the Stanton-Judge tandem in the Bronx. Look, we get it. The Yankees have two big sluggers in this itty-bitty ballpark. It doesn't mean we need to hear about it ad nauseam for the next four months. It will be a shock to a number of major media outlets, but most of us couldn't care less about what the Yankees are up to. The less we hear about them, the better.
So now that Ohtani and Stanton are off the table, it might finally be time for baseball's 'Hot Stove' to heat up. With the Winter Meetings taking place this week, it's as good a time as any to see teams start wheeling and dealing. It will be interesting to see how the team that had interest in these two players move forward and how they react to not acquiring their top choice. In one fell swoop, two major pieces came off the board and the real game this offseason kicks into full swing. Los Angeles and New York made their moves; now it's time for the 28 other teams in baseball to make theirs.
Classic Royals: Opening Day 1996
While searching on Youtube for the last no-hitter in Royals history (which was by Bret Saberhagen in August of 1991), I stumbled across this gem. What a great pitching match-up, as Kevin Appier took the hill for the Royals and Mike Mussina for the Orioles. Kansas City would lose 4-2, but if you miss the old days it's a good chance to watch some Royals legends like Keith Lockhart, Joe Vitiello and Bob Hamelin. For those worried about what the team will look like next year, this might be a decent comparison, as the 1996 Royals finished 75-86 and last in the American League Central.
To give or not give Eric Hosmer a long-term deal, that is the question
Ask any player out on the free agent market this winter what they covet the most and a good majority will say a multi-year contract. Sure, they won't turn their nose up to the wads of cash thrown their way, but signing a new deal for an extended period is the kind of stability players dream of. The Royals have set their sights on re-signing first baseman Eric Hosmer and it's hard to fathom that happening without Kansas City committing to a deal that is at least four years in length (and probably more). But history has shown that might not bode well for the Royals.
The most infamous long-term contracts in Royals history goes back to 1985 and the "lifetime contracts" . George Brett, Dan Quisenberry and Willie Wilson were the recipients of those deals that appeared at the time to be solid commitments for a perennial contender. But those deals would fall apart quickly, with Quisenberry being released in July of 1988 while Wilson fought off injuries and saw his offensive production wane before leaving after the 1990 season. While in theory these contracts appeared to lock in a chunk of the Kansas City nucleus in the mid 1980's, the reality was that the Royals overpaid for players during a period where collusion controlled the free agent market and salaries.
The Royals would close out the 1980's with one of the worst free agent signings in club history, signing Mark Davis (the 1989 Cy Young award winner) to a four-year, $13 million dollar deal. That deal would go sour almost instantly, as Davis would struggle and lose his closers role to future Royals Hall of Famer Jeff Montgomery. Davis would be dealt to Atlanta in July of 1992 and put up some ugly numbers during his short stint in Kansas City: 167.2 innings, a 5.31 ERA, 5.01 FIP and an ERA+ of 76.
We all remember Mike Sweeney's $55 million dollar deal he signed after the 2002 season. Sweeney was the one who decided to stay, while watching Damon, Dye and Beltran be shipped off. Sweeney was coming off his career year in Kansas City, posting the highest bWAR and OPS+ of his career, among other career highs that season. Sweeney's deal kept him in Kansas City through 2007 but injuries would take their toll on him as early as 2003. While the offensive production was still there for the first couple years of the contract, his time on the field diminished and by 2006 he had essentially become a shell of his former self.
Not every long-term contract handed out by the Royals would miss the mark. One could argue that George Brett's lifetime contract paid off in spades, as he would continue to be a hitting machine until his age 38 season, well past the normal age of regression for a major league hitter. Zack Greinke's four-year deal that was signed in 2009 would produce a Cy Young season, but Greinke would be dealt before the contract had run its course. One could even make the argument for David Cone's three-year deal that he signed with Kansas City before the 1993 season being a success, but for the sake of argument you could also contend that a contract of three years really isn't "long-term" by definition.
That leads us to the modern-day Royals, which currently host a number of extended relationships. Ian Kennedy is locked in for another three seasons in Kansas City and has been a mixed bag during his first two seasons as a Royal (one good season, one bad season). Salvador Perez will be entering year two of a five-year extension in 2018 and while Salvy should be entering his prime, there have to be some concerns about the amount of games (and innings) he has caught in his major league career and the wear and tear that goes with it. Danny Duffy will also be in the second year of a five-year extension this upcoming season and has dealt with a wide array of injuries throughout his career as well as a DUI arrest just last summer.
Then there is the Royals contract with the most scorn, that of Alex Gordon. His four-year contract originally appeared on the surface to be a calculated move. Gordon had been a consistent run producer and defensive wizard for the previous five seasons and while he was entering his regression years, the slope appeared lessened by his crazy work ethic and ability to stay healthy. Gordon had appeared in at least 150 games in every season between 2011 and 2014, while his groin strain in 2015 looked to be an outlier. But injuries hindered his 2016 campaign and offensively he hasn't looked the same for two years now. Situations like Gordon's are why teams become hesitant to commit to a long-term contract.
This all leads back to the Eric Hosmer situation and how the Royals should deal with it. On one hand, you have a player entering his age 28 season, coming off of a career best season, in what should be the prime of his career. On the other hand, Hosmer before 2017 was an inconsistent offensive player and has a propensity to hit the ball on the ground at an alarming rate. While the Royals have not had the best of luck when it comes to contracts of more than four years, we are all aware that every situation (and player) is different. Signing any player for 4+ years is a gamble within itself. The question the Royals have to ask is if the risk is bigger or smaller than the reward when rolling the dice on their future.
I received my IBWAA Hall of Fame ballot in my inbox yesterday. I look forward to it every year, as it is an honor to be able to vote for players I feel are worthy of baseball's highest honor. It also gives me the opportunity to really dive into the numbers, or as my wife calls it "fall down the statistic rabbit hole". You will see that article in about a months time, where I breakdown my votes and why I voted the way I did. Since I occasionally get asked this, in the IBWAA we do things a bit differently than the boys and girls over at the BBWAA. We have a number of guys who have been voted in (Vlad Guerrero, Edgar Martinez) that the BBWAA still has on their ballot. We are also able to vote for 15 players instead of the 10 the BBWAA are left with. Finally, we don't have a former player like Joe Morgan send us a letter, trying to sway our vote with arrogant confidence and ignorant hubris…and for that I am grateful.
If you aren't aware(or maybe in a cave), Joe Morgan sent out a letter a few weeks back, hoping to veer the writers of the BBWAA away from voting for players linked to steroid use. If you want to read the entire letter, here it is:
Teams lobby us to get their players into the HOF. This email from Joe Morgan arrived this AM to keep steroid users out… pic.twitter.com/BkLPJ8NUTK
— Full Dissident (@hbryant42) November 21, 2017
Now, I'm not going to get into a huge debate over the Hall of Fame or steroid use in baseball; I have done that so much over the years that I'm just bored with it and it just seems to agitate me. I will tell you that if you want my opinion on the Hall, read this; I wrote this a few years back and it pretty much encompasses my feelings on "cheaters" in the Hall. So I'm not going to get into a big debate about steroid use and Cooperstown. But…I do have a few comments about what Joe said and just who Joe is speaking for.
First, let's start with Joe's comment about those linked to steroid use:
We hope the day never comes when known steroid users are voted into the Hall of Fame. They
cheated. Steroid users don't belong here.
I hate to tell Joe, but I'm pretty positive there is someone (or likely more than one) in the Hall who used steroids. Oh yeah…Mickey Mantle took steroids. So right there, you have a player in those "hallowed halls" that falls below Morgan's standard for Cooperstown. Pretty sure you won't catch ol' Joe looking to pull "The Mick" and his plaque.
Players who failed drug tests, admitted using steroids, or were identified as users in Major League
Baseball's investigation into steroid abuse, known as the Mitchell Report, should not get in. Those
are the three criteria that many of the players and I think are right.
Look, there is a some validity to the Mitchell Report but lets not act like it is a 100% guilty verdict. That is just someone wanting to believe guilt without the proof.
Now, I recognize there are players identified as users on the Mitchell Report who deny they were
users. That's why this is a tricky issue. Not everything is black and white – there are shades of gray
here. It's why your job as a voter is and has always been a difficult and important job. I have faith in
your judgment and know that ultimately, this is your call.
Wait, so Joe knows the Mitchell Report is probably not 100% accurate, yet earlier wants voters to use that report as a template? Come on Joe…
But it still occurs to me that anyone who took body-altering chemicals in a deliberate effort to cheat
the game we love, not to mention they cheated current and former players, and fans too, doesn't
belong in the Hall of Fame. By cheating, they put up huge numbers, and they made great players
who didn't cheat look smaller by comparison, taking away from their achievements and consideration for the Hall of Fame. That's not right.
Body-altering chemicals? You mean like performance enhancers? So players who used amphetamines, right? Because, if we are being honest, amphetamines are enhancing a players performance…and Greenies were used in baseball up until they started testing for amphetamines back in 2006. Greenies were prevalent in the game for years and were widely used during Morgan's playing days. In fact, players like Hank Aaron & Willie Mays have both been linked to amphetamines over the years…and no one is asking those two to leave Cooperstown (nor should they).
It's gotten to the point where Hall of Famers are saying that if steroid users get in, they'll no longer
come to Cooperstown for Induction Ceremonies or other events. Some feel they can't share a stage
with players who did steroids. The cheating that tainted an era now risks tainting the Hall of Fame
too. The Hall of Fame means too much to us to ever see that happen. If steroid users get in, it will
divide and diminish the Hall, something we couldn't bear.
Does this include Gaylord Perry? Is he appalled by the cheating?
I care about how good a player was or what kind of numbers he put up; but if a player did steroids,
his integrity is suspect; he lacks sportsmanship; his character is flawed; and, whatever contribution
he made to his team is now dwarfed by his selfishness.
So when do we point out the selfishness of baseball for allowing steroids to be used all those years? The owners? The GM's? Bud Selig? I'm sure their selfishness won't allow them to return all the money they received from fans flooding the ballparks during this period. You can put some of the blame on the players, Joe, but there is enough blame to go all the way around.
Steroid users knew they were taking a drug that physically improved how they played. Taking
steroids is a decision. It's the deliberate act of using chemistry to change how hard you hit and throw by changing what your body is made of.
See "Greenies" from earlier.
I and other Hall of Famers played hard all our lives to achieve what we did. I love this game and am
proud of it. I hope the Hall of Fame's standards won't be lowered with the passage of time.
For over eighty years, the Hall of Fame has been a place to look up to, where the hallowed halls
honor those who played the game hard and right. I hope it will always remain that way.
Honestly, baseball has never been a pure game and never will. If I'm being completely honest, when I first read this letter, it felt sanctimonious and hypocritical. Reading it again doesn't make me change my mind. In fact, it just further cements my initial thoughts of the ignorance in Joe's words…and how Joe is being used as a puppet.
Don't get me wrong; I totally think Joe Morgan believes the words he wrote in this letter. But I also believe that what he wrote was allowed to be sent because the people on the board for the Hall of Fame and those involved agree with this sentiment. I also feel this is a direct reaction to seeing Barry Bonds' and Roger Clemens' vote total moving upward these last couple years. The honest truth is that testing for performance enhancing drugs was not being done when these players were putting up those "tainted numbers" that Joe mentioned. Maybe it's just me, but since baseball wasn't testing and those involved seemed okay with it continuing (that was until congress stepped in to put a halt to it), it feels self-righteous to then turn around and punish the players and no one else (including the true villain in this, Bud Selig). Luckily, the letter appears to have angered many a writer in the BBWAA and it makes one wonder if Bonds' and Clemens' total will continue to rise. As a member of the IBWAA, we don't have to worry about any of this mess. I don't expect a letter from Howard Cole telling us about "hallowed grounds" and "flawed character". I thank Howard for that, as he appears to "get it". I'm still going to enjoy the Cooperstown inductions next summer, as I love watching some of the best players in the history of the game get to celebrate their career in the best way possible. The real taint on the Hall of Fame is those involved who try to move the chess pieces to their liking by ignoring a section of history. History is exactly what it is, a part of the past. If you don't ignore it, you aren't likely to repeat it again. Now, it appears it's time for me to go turn in my IBWAA ballot…


text:
Q: Segmented Sieve of Atkin, possible? I am aware of the fact that the Sieve of Eratosthenes can be implemented so that it finds primes continuosly without an upper bound (the segmented sieve).
My question is, could the Sieve of Atkin/Bernstein be implemented in the same way?
Related question: C#: How to make Sieve of Atkin incremental
However the related question has only 1 answer, which says "It's impossible for all sieves", which is obviously incorrect.

A: Atkin/Bernstein give a segmented version in Section 5 of their original paper. Presumably Bernstein's primegen program uses that method.

A: In fact, one can implement an unbounded Sieve of Atkin (SoA) not using segmentation at all as I have done here in F#.  Note that this is a pure functional version that doesn't even use arrays to combine the solutions of the quadratic equations and the squaresfree filter and thus is considerably slower than a more imperative approach.
Berstein's optimizations using look up tables for optimum 32-bit ranges would make the code extremely complex and not suitable for presentation here, but it would be quite easy to adapt my F# code so that the sequences start at a set lower limit and are used only over a range in order to implement a segmented version, and/or applying the same techniques to a more imperative approach using arrays.
Note that even Berstein's implementation of the SoA isn't really faster than the Sieve of Eratosthenes with all possible optimizations as per Kim Walisch's primesieve but is only faster than an equivalently optimized version of the Sieve of Eratosthenes for the selected range of numbers as per his implementation.
EDIT_ADD:  For those who do not want to wade through Berstein's pseudo-code and C code, I am adding to this answer to add a pseudo-code method to use the SoA over a range from LOW to HIGH where the delta from LOW to HIGH + 1 might be constrained to an even modulo 60 in order to use the modulo (and potential bit packing to only the entries on the 2,3,5 wheel) optimizations.
This is based on a possible implementation using the SoA quadratics of (4*x^2 + y^), (3*x^2 + y^2), and (3*x^2 -y^2) to be expressed as sequences of numbers with the x value for each sequence fixed to values between one and SQRT((HIGH - 1) / 4), SQRT((HIGH - 1) / 3), and solving the quadratic for 2*x^2 + 2*x - HIGH - 1 = 0 for x = (SQRT(1 + 2 * (HIGH + 1)) - 1) / 2, respectively, with the sequences expressed in my F# code as per the top link.  Optimizations to the sequences there use that when sieving for only odd composites, for the "4x" sequences, the y values need only be odd and that the "3x" sequences need only use odd values of y when x is even and vice versa.  Further optimization reduce the number of solutions to the quadratic equations (= elements in the sequences) by observing that the modulo patterns over the above sequences repeat over very small ranges of x and also repeat over ranges of y of only 30, which is used in the Berstein code but not (yet) implemented in my F# code.
I also do not include the well known optimizations that could be applied to the prime "squares free" culling to use wheel factorization and the calculations for the starting segment address as I use in my implementations of a segmented SoE.
So for purposes of calculating the sequence starting segment addresses for the "4x", "3x+", and "3x-" (or with "3x+" and "3x-" combined as I do in the F# code), and having calculated the ranges of x for each as per the above, the pseudo-code is as follows:

*

*Calculate the range LOW - FIRST_ELEMENT, where FIRST_ELEMENT is with the lowest applicable value of y for each given value of x or y = x - 1 for the case of the "3x-" sequence.

*For the job of calculating how many elements are in this range, this boils down to the question of how many of (y1)^2 + (y2)^2 + (y3)^2... there are where each y number is separated by two, to produce even or odd 'y's as required.  As usual in square sequence analysis, we observe that differences between squares have a constant increasing increment as in delta(9 - 1) is 8, delta(25 - 9) is 16 for an increase of 8, delta (49 - 25) is 24 for a further increase of 8, etcetera. so that for n elements the last increment is 8 * n for this example.  Expressing the sequence of elements using this, we get it is one (or whatever one chooses as the first element) plus eight times the sequence of something like (1 + 2 + 3 + ...+ n).  Now standard reduction of linear sequences applies where this sum is (n + 1) * n / 2 or n^2/2 + n/2.  This we can solve for how many n elements there are in the range by solving the quadratic equation n^2/2 + n/2 - range = 0 or n = (SQRT(8*range + 1) - 1) / 2.

*Now, if FIRST_ELEMENT + 4 * (n + 1) * n does not equal LOW as the starting address, add one to n and use FIRST_ELEMENT + 4 * (n + 2) * (n + 1) as the starting address.  If one uses further optimizations to apply wheel factorization culling to the sequence pattern, look up table arrays can be used to look up the closest value of used n that satisfies the conditions.

*The modulus 12 or 60 of the starting element can be calculated directly or can be produced by use of look up tables based on the repeating nature of the modulo sequences.

*Each sequence is then used to toggle the composite states up to the HIGH limit.  If the additional logic is added to the sequences to jump values between only the applicable elements per sequence, no further use of modulo conditions is necessary.

*The above is done for every "4x" sequence followed by the "3x+" and "3x-" sequences (or combine "3x+" and "3x-" into just one set of "3x" sequences) up to the x limits as calculated earlier or as tested per loop.
And there you have it:  given an appropriate method of dividing the sieve range into segments, which is best used as fixed sizes that are related to the CPU cache sizes for best memory access efficiency, a method of segmenting the SoA just as used by Bernstein but somewhat simpler in expression as it mentions but does not combine the modulo operations and bit packing.


text:
Q: Cambiar unidades eje y de un histograma con matplotlib ¿es posible cambiar las unidades del eje y de un histograma creado con matplotlib (plt.hist), y que en vez de counts represente un porcentaje (counts/total)?
El código sería algo así:
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
import numpy as np

# Tengo varias listas con diferente cantidad de valores
lista1 = [2,9,8,6,3,4,5,6,2,3,4,5,7,9,1]
lista2 = [2,4,5,1,9,8,9,1,2,2,0,3,5,2,3,7,6,8,9,2,3,4,1,2,3]

bins = np.linspace(0, 10, 5)
plt.hist(lista1, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista1')
plt.hist(lista2, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista2')

Muchas gracias.

A: Si solo mostraras un histograma por gráfica lo podrias hacer solo modificando las marcas (ticks) del eje y. Al mostrar dos necesitas calcular la frecuencia relativa de cada elemento de cada una de las listas. Lo más simple es usar el argumento weights de matplotlib.pyplot.hist de forma que el peso de cada elemento sea 1/len(lista).
Para crear el array de pesos eficientemente te puedes valer de NumPy:
np.ones_like(lista1) / len(lista1)

Con esto obtenemos la frecuencia relativa de los elementos en el eje y, para que lo muestre en tanto por ciento basta con formatear las marcas del eje y adecuadamente.
El código quedaría algo así:
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.ticker import FuncFormatter

lista1 = [2,9,8,6,3,4,5,6,2,3,4,5,7,9,1]
lista2 = [2,4,5,1,9,8,9,1,2,2,0,3,5,2,3,7,6,8,9,2,3,4,1,2,3]
bins = np.linspace(0, 10, 5)

plt.hist(lista1, bins, weights=np.ones_like(lista1) / len(lista1),
         alpha=0.5, label = 'lista1', histtype='bar', ec='black')
plt.hist(lista2, bins, weights=np.ones_like(lista2) / len(lista2),
         alpha=0.5, label = 'lista2', histtype='bar', ec='black')

formatter = FuncFormatter(lambda y, _: str(y * 100) + '%')
plt.gca().yaxis.set_major_formatter(formatter)
plt.show()

Y la salida (Matplotlib 2.0.2 ) es esta:

Edición: La función lambda lo único que hace es retornar por cada valor de y ese mismo valor multiplicado por 100 y agregando el símbolo %. De esta forma formateamos el eje y para que muestre la frecuencia relativa en tanto por ciento.

Aviso: si se usa LaTeX hay que escapar el % por lo que la función lambda debería ser:
lambda y, _: str(y * 100) + r'$\%$

Edición:
Si quieres mostrar ambos histogramas separados:

*

*Ambos en la misma ventana pero diferentes gráficas (una instancia de plt.figure):
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.ticker import FuncFormatter

lista1 = [2,9,8,6,3,4,5,6,2,3,4,5,7,9,1]
lista2 = [2,4,5,1,9,8,9,1,2,2,0,3,5,2,3,7,6,8,9,2,3,4,1,2,3]
bins = np.linspace(0, 10, 5)

fig = plt.figure()
ax1 = fig.add_subplot(2, 1, 1)
ax2 = fig.add_subplot(2, 1, 2)

ax1.hist(lista1, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista1')
ax2.hist(lista2, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista2')

formatter = FuncFormatter(lambda y, _: '{:3.2f}%'.format(y/len(lista1)*100))
ax1.yaxis.set_major_formatter(formatter)

formatter = FuncFormatter(lambda y, _: '{:3.2f}%'.format(y/len(lista2)*100))
ax2.yaxis.set_major_formatter(formatter)

plt.show()

*Gráficos separados cada uno en su propia ventana (dos instancias de plt.figure())
import numpy as np
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.ticker import FuncFormatter

lista1 = [2,9,8,6,3,4,5,6,2,3,4,5,7,9,1]
lista2 = [2,4,5,1,9,8,9,1,2,2,0,3,5,2,3,7,6,8,9,2,3,4,1,2,3]
bins = np.linspace(0, 10, 5)

fig1 = plt.figure()
plt.hist(lista1, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista1')
formatter = FuncFormatter(lambda y, _: '{:3.2f}%'.format(y/len(lista1)*100))
plt.gca().yaxis.set_major_formatter(formatter)

fig2 = plt.figure()
plt.hist(lista2, bins, alpha=0.5, label = 'lista2')
formatter = FuncFormatter(lambda y, _: '{:3.2f}%'.format(y/len(lista2)*100))
plt.gca().yaxis.set_major_formatter(formatter)

plt.show()