text:
Q: ARM Memory Remapping ARM Page Table entry has TEX remap bits. I have read something like TEX remap is used along with the AP bits of the page table entry for access protection.

*

*Someone help me clarifying what are these bits and What they signify

*Is it somewhere related to memory remapping?
a. If so in what ways is it related to the Normal Memory Remap Register and Primary Memory Remap Register.

*Is linux kernel making use of these.
a. If so in which way linux kernel uses these. Kindly give me some usecases.

A: In a nutshell, the TEX bits in the page table are Type EXtension bits. They can be used to control caching of the pages at a fine grained level, but is usually used as a pure software context which the HW ignores.
See:
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.ddi0211k/Babgahdc.html
Linux uses these bits as software context for various memory management features:
#define PMD_SECT_MINICACHE     (PMD_SECT_TEX(1) | PMD_SECT_CACHEABLE)
#define PMD_SECT_WBWA          (PMD_SECT_TEX(1) | PMD_SECT_CACHEABLE | PMD_SECT_BUFFERABLE)
#define PMD_SECT_NONSHARED_DEV (PMD_SECT_TEX(2))

See: http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/arch/arm/include/asm/pgtable


The Rev. Guy L. Myers was installed as pastor of the Maple Spring Church of the Brethren on January 10, 2010. Rev. Myers was licensed into the Christian ministry in 1983. He received pastoral training through Logos Bible Training Center and through Trinity College of the Bible. He was ordained into the pastoral ministry in 1990 by the Western Pa. District of the Church of the Brethren. He served as pastor of the Conemaugh Church of the Brethren from 1988 2009. He has served as District Moderator, Chairman of the Districts Pastor & Parish Ministry Team and the District Church Life and Growth Team. Pastor Myers is frequently invited to hold evangelistic services.
Pastor Myers wife, Wendy, has also been very active in the life and ministry of the church. She has served as a Bible study leader, Vacation Bible School teacher and has been involved in the Multi Media ministry. Wendys passion is in reaching out to those who do not know Christ as Savior, with emphasis on the neighbors of the Maple Spring Church.
Pastor Guy & Wendy both enjoy being outdoors camping, hiking, fishing, gardening and simply enjoying Gods creation. We are looking forward to seeing what God has in store for the Ministry of the Maple Spring Congregation.


text:
Civil War Book Review: Learning from the Wounded
by Brett Schulte on March 19, 2014 · 0 comments
Devine, Shauna. Learning from the Wounded: The Civil War and the Rise of American Medical Science. (The University of North Carolina Press: 2014). 384 pages, 3 tables, 26 halftones, appendices, notes, bibliography, index. ISBN: 978-1-4696-1155-6 $39.95 (Cloth). Note: Also available in Kindle format.
Learning from the Wounded: The Civil War and the Rise of American Medical Science explores in depth how the experiences of army surgeons during the Civil War shaped American medicine for the last third of the nineteenth century. Instead of using the Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion, as many had done previously, author Shauna Devine utilized the same primary source material which the authors of that six volume work used, and she found something ground breaking. The source material was so much more in depth than the Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion due to space concerns. Suddenly, a war which has often been described as a medical nightmare took on new meaning. Devine ultimately argues that the Civil War "created the context for the most significant medical experience of the nineteenth century in the United States and in the process set American medicine on a new course."
Prior to the Civil War, American medical practice suffered from a lack of standardization or even qualification for prospective doctors. The American Medical Association was formed in part to rectify the situation, but the Civil War occurred before any reforms could really take effect. It was the Civil War, which presented challenges the American medical fraternity was completely unprepared for, which caused rapid advances in treatments and wide-scale adoption of the same. Bodies were available on a wide scale, and patients were present in overwhelming numbers. What started as simply an effort to reduce mortality rates from disease and wounds turned into experimentation and notation of wounds and diseases on a grand scale. Surgeon General William Hammond played a large role in this widespread study of diseases and wounds by creating the Army Medical Museum and ordering surgeons to prepare reports on the effectiveness of various treatment methods.
The massive number of casualties and sick led to the development of new and more effective treatment methods as well as allowing doctors to specialize in various diseases and/or treatments. The Civil War also brought up the question of who "owned" the dead bodies being produced in the thousands. The Union Army argued that these bodies belonged to them, and much research was done on cadavers. In turn, the existence of these bodies allowed thousands of doctors to actively practice anatomy, something which was severely lacking in pre-Civil War America.
Shauna Devine argues, and in my opinion argues successfully, that the wide scale sharing of causes and treatments for injuries and diseases through the Army Medical Museum and Army Medical School, and the encouragement for post war physicians to continue doing the same, significantly changed the American medicine for the better.
Learning from the Wounded: The Civil War and the Rise of American Medical Science will appeal to those interested in medical history, those specifically interested in how the Union Army reacted to overwhelming casualties and sickness, and anyone interested in the medical side of the Civil War.
This book was provided gratis for the purposes of this review.
Tagged as: learning from the wounded, shauna devine, the university of north carolina press
Article by Brett Schulte
Brett is a lifelong student of the Civil War and the founder and editor of TOCWOC - A Civil War Blog. In addition, he maintains The Siege of Petersburg Online, a "Battle Blog" covering every aspect of The Siege of Petersburg. Follow Brett on Twitter (@bschulte).
Brett has written 1514 intriguing articles.
Previous post: The Top 13 Controversies at Franklin: Part 14
Next post: Mississippi Marine Brigade – Part 4

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Mayor Norskog called the regular Council Meeting of March 11, 2013 to order at 7:30 P.M.
Hawkins made a motion to excuse Councilmember Ruymann as he had called the Mayor to say he would be unable to attend the meeting. Councilmember Fallow seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Motion was made by Councilmember Hawkins and seconded by Councilor Stephens to accept the regular meeting minutes of February 11, 2012 as written. Motion carried.
Mayor Norskog reported he had attended an Economic Council meeting in Aberdeen on March 6. It was a good meeting. A couple of the topics discussed were building a nature trail from Oakville to the coast and utilizing grant funding to revitalize historic buildings. The Mayor also informed the Council a new piece of equipment (grind rail) for skate board park.
Included in packets. Mr. Glenn answered a few questions regarding the medical marijuana issue.
Ms Cox definitely does want to extend the negotiations past June. Dan Thompson said he will be attending a meeting with the Lewis County Water Conservatory Board on Thursday, March 21. He will have a report at the March 25th workshop.
Included in packet. Lt Porter stated he will start including hours used for animal control on his report.
answer questions. A motion was made by Councilor Hawkins with a second by Council member Fallow to give the mayor authorization to sign the garbage service contract. Motion carried.
Lt Porter asked if a new lock like the one on the City Hall office door could be put on the law enforcement door. A motion was made by Councilmember Stephens, with a second by Councilor Sims for the lock to be installed. Motion carried.
The City Clerk submitted checks #17202 thru #17217 dated 2/27/13, in the amount of $2,766.58.
Motion was made by Councilmember Fallow and seconded by Councilman Sims to accept the Clerk's Report as presented for payment of the bills. Motion carried.
Preacher Bill stated two community events happening Thursday: 1. Community Gathering being offered by the Chehalis Tribe at 5:00 PM in the school cafeteria with food provided; and 2. Several area leaders will be attending a meeting at 6:30 PM in the school library.


text:
mysqli_stmt_execute() - SP, next result
--SKIPIF--
<?php
require_once('skipif.inc');
require_once('skipifconnectfailure.inc');
require_once('connect.inc');
if (!$link = my_mysqli_connect($host, $user, $passwd, $db, $port, $socket)) {
	die(sprintf('skip Cannot connect to MySQL, [%d] %s.', mysqli_connect_errno(), mysqli_connect_error()));
}
if (mysqli_get_server_version($link) < 50503) {
	die(sprintf('skip Needs MySQL 5.5.3+, found version %d.', mysqli_get_server_version($link)));
}
?>
--FILE--
<?php
	require_once('connect.inc');

	if (!$link = my_mysqli_connect($host, $user, $passwd, $db, $port, $socket)) {
		printf("[001] Cannot connect to the server using host=%s, user=%s, passwd=***, dbname=%s, port=%s, socket=%s\n",
		  $host, $user, $db, $port, $socket);
	}

	if (!mysqli_query($link, 'DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS p'))
		printf("[003] [%d] %s.\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));

	if (mysqli_real_query($link, 'CREATE PROCEDURE p(IN ver_in VARCHAR(25)) BEGIN SELECT ver_in AS _ver_out; END;')) {
		// one result set
		if (!$stmt = mysqli_prepare($link, 'CALL p(?)'))
			printf("[005] Cannot prepare CALL, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));

		$version = 'myversion';
		if (!mysqli_stmt_bind_param($stmt, 's', $version))
			printf("[006] Cannot bind input parameter, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!mysqli_stmt_execute($stmt))
			printf("[007] Cannot execute CALL, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		$version = 'unknown';
		if (!mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $version) ||
				!mysqli_stmt_fetch($stmt))
			printf("[008] [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if ($version !== "myversion")
			printf("[009] Results seem wrong, got %s, [%d] %s\n",
				$version,
				mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		mysqli_stmt_free_result($stmt);

		printf("[010] More results: %s\n", (mysqli_more_results($link)) ? "yes" : "no");
		printf("[011] Next result: %s\n", (mysqli_next_result($link)) ? "yes" : "no");

		if (!mysqli_stmt_close($stmt))
			printf("[012] Cannot close statement, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!$link->query("SELECT 1"))
			printf("[013] [%d] %s\n", $link->errno, $link->error);

	} else {
		printf("[004] Cannot create SP, [%d] %s.\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));
	}

	if (!mysqli_query($link, 'DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS p'))
		printf("[014] [%d] %s.\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));

	if (mysqli_real_query($link, 'CREATE PROCEDURE p(IN ver_in VARCHAR(25)) BEGIN SELECT ver_in AS _ver_out; SELECT 1 AS _more; END;')) {
		// two result sets
		if (!$stmt = mysqli_prepare($link, 'CALL p(?)'))
			printf("[015] Cannot prepare CALL, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));

		$version = 'myversion';
		if (!mysqli_stmt_bind_param($stmt, 's', $version))
			printf("[016] Cannot bind input parameter, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!mysqli_stmt_execute($stmt))
			printf("[017] Cannot execute CALL, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		$version = NULL;
		if (!mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $version) ||
				!mysqli_stmt_fetch($stmt))
			printf("[018] [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if ($version !== "myversion")
			printf("[019] Results seem wrong, got %s, [%d] %s\n",
				$version,
				mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!mysqli_more_results($link) || !mysqli_next_result($link))
			printf("[020] [%d] %s\n", $link->errno, $link->error);

		$more = NULL;
		if (!mysqli_stmt_bind_result($stmt, $more) ||
				!mysqli_stmt_fetch($stmt))
			printf("[021] [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if ($more !== 1)
			printf("[022] Results seem wrong, got %s, [%d] %s\n",
				$more,
				mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!mysqli_stmt_close($stmt))
			printf("[023] Cannot close statement, [%d] %s\n", mysqli_stmt_errno($stmt), mysqli_stmt_error($stmt));

		if (!$link->query("SELECT 1"))
			printf("[024] [%d] %s\n", $link->errno, $link->error);

	} else {
		printf("[025] Cannot create SP, [%d] %s.\n", mysqli_errno($link), mysqli_error($link));
	}

	mysqli_close($link);
	print "done!";
?>
--CLEAN--
<?php
require_once("connect.inc");
if (!$link = my_mysqli_connect($host, $user, $passwd, $db, $port, $socket))
   printf("[c001] [%d] %s\n", mysqli_connect_errno(), mysqli_connect_error());

@mysqli_query($link, 'DROP PROCEDURE IF EXISTS p');

mysqli_close($link);
?>
--XFAIL--
Unsupported and undefined, under development
--EXPECTF--
[010] More results: yes
[011] Next result: yes
done!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Plastic Stockist offers a great selection of Nylatron GSM Rod with enhanced bearing and wear properties. Available from 50mm diameter to 250mm diameter, Nylatron GSM rod comes in a grey-black colour finish. This plastic rod material is a cast grade of Nylon 6 with molybdenum disulphide additive. This additional filler enhances its bearing and wear properties without effecting the impact and fatigue resistance inherent to unmodified cast nylon grades.
Nylatron GSM rod typical applications are gears, bearings, sprockets and sheaves.


Justia › US Law › US Case Law › US Supreme Court › Volume 384 › United States v. Pabst Brewing Co.
In 1958, Pabst Brewing Company, the country's tenth largest brewer, acquired Blatz Brewing Company, the eighteenth largest, thus becoming the fifth largest with 4.49% of the total industry sales. The Government brought this action charging that the acquisition violated § 7 of the Clayton Act because its effect "may be substantially to lessen competition" in the production and sale of beer in the United States, in Wisconsin, and in the three-state area comprising Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan. The Government introduced evidence to establish a marked decline in the number of brewers and a sharp rise in the share of the market controlled by the leading brewers, both prior to and following this merger. It also showed that the combined share of the two companies in Wisconsin in 1957 was 23.95%, and in the three-state area was 11.32%. At the close of the Government's case, the District Court dismissed the case, finding that the Government had not shown that Wisconsin or the three-state area as a relevant geographic market within which the probable effect of the acquisition should be tested, and had not shown that the merger might substantially lessen competition in the continental United States, the only relevant geographic market.
1. By the language of the Act, the Government must only prove that the effect of the merger may be substantially to lessen competition in any line of commerce "in any section of the country." Pp. 384 U. S. 548-550.
(a) A violation of § 7 would be proved by evidence showing that competition may be substantially lessened throughout the country or only in one or more sections of the Nation, and failure to prove a relevant "economic" or "geographic" market is not an adequate ground for dismissal. P. 384 U. S. 549.
(b) Proof of the section of the country where the anticompetitive effect exists is entirely subsidiary to the crucial § 7 question, which is whether the merger may substantially lessen competition anywhere in the country. Pp. 384 U. S. 549-550.
2. The evidence as to the probable effect of the merger of these to large corporations, in an industry which is rapidly becoming more concentrated, on competition in Wisconsin, in the three-state area, and in the entire country, was ample to show a violation of § 7 in all these areas. Pp. 384 U. S. 550-552.
3. The Act is concerned with arresting concentration of the economy, whatever its cause, in its incipiency, and the Government has no duty to show that the trend towards concentration in the beer industry is due to mergers. Pp. 384 U. S. 552-553.
233 F.Supp. 475, reversed and remanded.
"where in any line of commerce in any section of the country, the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly."
acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition or to tend to create a monopoly in the production and sale of beer in the United States and in various sections thereof, including the State of Wisconsin and the three state area encompassing Wisconsin, Illinois and Michigan. . . . [Footnote 2]"
"the effect of the acquisition . . . may be substantially to lessen competition or to tend to create a monopoly in the beer industry in the continental United States, the only relevant geographic market."
233 F.Supp. 475, 481, 488.
We first take up the court's dismissal based on its conclusion that the Government failed to prove either Wisconsin or the three-state area constituted "a relevant section of the country within the meaning of Section 7."
entirely subsidiary to the crucial question in this and every § 7 case which is whether a merger may substantially lessen competition anywhere in the United States.
of competitors in the industry were becoming fewer and fewer, the leading brewers were increasing their shares of sales. Between 1957 and 1961, the Nation's 10 leading brewers increased their combined shares of sales from 45.06% to 52.60%. In Wisconsin, the four leading sellers accounted for 47.74% of the State's sales in 1957, and, by 1961, this share had increased to 58.62%. In the three-state area, the evidence showed that, in 1957, Blatz was the sixth largest seller, with 5.84% of the total sales there, and Pabst ranked seventh, with 5.48%. As was true in the beer industry throughout the Nation, there was a trend toward concentration in the three- state area. From 1957 to 1961, the number of major brewers selling there dropped from 104 to 86, and, during the same period, the eight leading sellers increased their combined shares of beer sales from 58.93% to 67.65%.
hold that the evidence as to the probable effect of the merger on competition in Wisconsin, in the three-state area, and in the entire country was sufficient to show a violation of § 7 in each and all of these three areas.
concentration in an industry, whatever its causes, is a highly relevant factor in deciding how substantial the anticompetitive effect of a merger may be.
"(a) Actual and potential competition between Pabst and Blatz in the sale of beer has been eliminated;"
"(b) Actual and potential competition generally in the sale of beer may be substantially lessened;"
"(c) Blatz has been eliminated as an independent competitive factor in the production and sale of beer;"
"(d) The acquisition alleged herein may enhance Pabst's competitive advantage in the production and sale of beer to the detriment of actual and potential competition;"
"(e) Industry-wide concentration in the sale of beer will be increased."
Times-Picayune v. United States, 345 U. S. 594, 345 U. S. 611; United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 351 U. S. 377, 351 U. S. 395; United States v. Philadelphia Nat. Bank, 374 U. S. 321, 374 U. S. 360, n. 37.
See, e.g., United States v. Von's Grocery Co., 384 U. S. 270; Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U. S. 294; United States v. Philadelphia Nat. Bank, 374 U. S. 321; United States v. El Paso Gas Co., 376 U. S. 651; United States v. Alcoa, 377 U. S. 271; United States v. Continental Can Co., 378 U. S. 441; FTC v. Consolidated Foods Corp., 380 U. S. 592.
While I join the Court's opinion, I add only a word in support of the Court's description of the anatomy of the "relevant geographic market" for purposes of the Clayton Act. The alternative leads to a form of concentration whose ultimate reductio ad absurdum is described in the Appendix to this opinion.
Every time you pick up the newspaper, you read about one company merging with another company. Of course, we have laws to protect competition in the United States, but one can't help thinking that, if the trend continues, the whole country will soon be merged into one large company.
It is 1978, and, by this time, every company west of the Mississippi will have merged into one giant corporation known as Samson Securities. Every company east of the Mississippi will have merged under an umbrella corporation known as the Delilah Company.
"If we could get together,' the president of Delilah said, 'we would be able to finance your projects and you would be able to finance ours."
"Exactly what I was thinking," the chairman of Samson said.
"That's a great idea and it certainly makes everyone's life less complicated."
The men shook on it, and then they sought out approval from the Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Department.
At first, the head of the Anti-Trust Division indicated that he might have reservations about allowing the only two companies left in the United States to merge.
"will take a close look at this proposed merger. It is our job to further competition in private business and industry, and if we allow Samson and Delilah to merge we may be doing the consumer a disservice."
The chairman of Samson protested vigorously that merging with Delilah would not stifle competition, but would help it. "The public will be the true beneficiary of this merger," he said. "The larger we are, the more services we can perform, and the lower prices we can charge."
The president of Delilah backed him up.
"In the Communist system, the people don't have a choice. They must buy from the state. In our capitalistic society, the people can buy from either the Samson Company or the Delilah Company."
"But if you merge,' someone pointed out, 'there will be only one company left in the United States."
"Exactly,' said the president of Delilah. 'Thank God for the free enterprise system."
The Anti-Trust Division of the Justice Department studied the merger for months. Finally the Attorney General made this ruling.
"While we find some drawbacks to only one company's being left in the United States, we feel the advantages to the public far outweigh the disadvantages."
"Therefore, we're making an exception in this case and allowing Samson and Delilah to merge. "
"I would like to announce that the Samson and Delilah Company is now negotiating at the White House with the President to buy the United States. The Justice Department will naturally study this merger to see if it violates any of our strong antitrust laws."
I concur in the judgment of reversal on the limited ground that the Government's evidence is sufficient to establish prima facie that Wisconsin and the tri-state area comprising Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois are both proper sections of the country in which to measure the probable effects of the acquisition of Blatz by Pabst under § 7 of the Clayton Act, 38 Stat. 731, as amended, 64 Stat. 1125, 15 U.S.C. § 18 (1964 ed.). However, I am wholly unable to subscribe to the Court's opinion, which appears to emasculate the statutory phrase "in any section of the country."
The Court is quite right in stating that the primary question in a § 7 case is whether the effect of the challenged acquisition "may substantially lessen competition." Ante, p. 384 U. S. 550. But any resolution of this question necessarily involves a study of statistics and other evidence bearing upon market shares, market trends, number of competitors and the like. Obviously such figures will vary depending upon what geographic area is chosen as relevant, and the possibilities for "gerrymandering"
"it will be necessary to decide what comprises an appreciable segment of the market. An appreciable segment of the market may not only be a segment which covers an appreciable segment of the trade, but it may also be a segment which is largely segregated from, independent of, or not affected by the trade in that product in other parts of the country."
"not where the parties to the merger do business or even where they compete, but where, within the area of competitive overlap, the effect of the merger on competition will be direct and immediate."
374 U.S. at 374 U. S. 357.
which there exist economic barriers that significantly impede the entry of new competitors. Of course, as Philadelphia National Bank and commentators [Footnote 2/2] have noted, no such designation is perfect, for all geographic markets are to some extent interconnected, and, over time, any barrier may be overcome or may disappear owing to structural or technological changes in the industry, e.g., refrigeration, which widened markets for "perishable" foods. Thus, in Philadelphia National Bank, it was recognized that large borrowers and depositors operate in something like a national banking market, and that very small borrowers and depositors are likely to confine themselves to banks in their immediate neighborhood. Nevertheless, the Court was able to find a four-county area in metropolitan Philadelphia to be a relevant "section of the country" in which to measure that merger. Some of the criteria cited there as supporting such a determination were the convenience of location for all but the largest bank customers as an important factor limiting competition by outsiders, the concentration of the defendant's business in that region, and administrative designations of that region as an "area of effective competition." 374 U.S. at 374 U. S. 359-361. See also Tampa Elec. Co. v. Nashville Coal Co., 365 U. S. 320, 365 U. S. 327, 365 U. S. 330-333.
sections of the country for measuring the effects of this merger. That is, on the basis of the evidence thus far submitted, I believe the Government has made a sufficient showing that significant barriers exist to prevent outside brewers from entering the Wisconsin market as effective competitors to those brewers already marketing beer there.
As a preliminary matter, it is clear that Pabst and Blatz both carry on substantial business and are direct competitors in Wisconsin. About 13% of Pabst's sales in 1957, the year before the merger, were made in Wisconsin, where Pabst maintained one of its four breweries. Blatz maintained its only brewery in Wisconsin, where it sold 31% of its beer in 1957. It is thus clear that the two beers were important competitors in that area; indeed, Blatz was the loading seller in Wisconsin and Pabst the fourth largest. There statistics become meaningful for antitrust purposes in the context of the further evidence showing substantial barriers to brewers who were not then selling beer in Wisconsin.
cost). Although there is no direct evidence in the record that beer is subject to high transportation costs, which would, of course, be highly persuasive evidence supporting the local market theory, it is relevant that about 90% of beer sold in Wisconsin comes from breweries located in that State or nearby in Minnesota. Indeed, in 1959, the Blatz brewery in Wisconsin was closed down, and Blatz beer was brewed in the four Pabst breweries, because "decentralization" was considered more efficient. To the extent that it is true that local breweries have an advantage in terms of efficiency, and thus cost, a significant barrier exists to brewers who wish to sell in Wisconsin but brew their beer in other areas of the country. Thus, in terms of the structure of beer marketing as reflected in sales statistics and brewery location, the record supports the relevancy of Wisconsin as a distinguishable and economically significant market for the sale of beer.
This picture of beer competition as essentially a localized or regional matter is buttressed by evidence of marketing techniques used by the industry. Beer is not a fungible commodity like wheat; product differentiation is important, and the ordinary consumer is likely to choose a particular brand, rather than purchase any beer indiscriminately. The record demonstrates a recognition in the industry that a successful sales program relies to a large extent on consumer recognition and preference for particular brands, and that this preference must be built up through intensive advertising and other promotional techniques. There is evidence in the record regarding efforts by Pabst and Blatz to enter new or undeveloped markets in this way, and the inference is inescapable that, were a brewer from, say, Colorado, interested in entering the Wisconsin market, a great deal of costly preliminary promotional activity would be required before sizable Wisconsin sales could be expected.
In addition, the record indicates that beer is sold through distribution networks operating on regional, statewide, and local levels. There are numerous examples in the record of the highly specialized salesmanship needed to induce local retail sellers to carry, display, and advertise new brands of beer.
This heavy emphasis on consumer recognition and promotional techniques in the marketing of beer supports the conclusion that there does exist a substantial barrier to a new competitor in a regional market such as Wisconsin. To enter this market, the new entrant must be prepared to incur considerable expense over a substantial period of time creating a distribution network and advertising his brand in order to compete more or less on a parity with an established seller in the Wisconsin market.
A further factor, the pervasive state regulation of the sale and promotion of alcoholic beverages, well documented in the record, supports the acceptability of Wisconsin as a relevant geographic market for beer. Methods of sales promotion permitted in one State are unlawful in others. State regulations govern labeling, size of containers, alcoholic content of beer, shipping procedures, and credit arrangements with wholesalers. A brewer wishing to enter the Wisconsin market does not merely start transporting beer to Milwaukee; he must comply with these various state requirements, which may differ from those in the States in which he has always dealt. Although this factor may not, by itself, be an effective barrier to distant competitors, it does reinforce the other factors examined in justifying the conclusion that there is a state or regional market for beer.
this means that those already within such a local market can engage in oligopolistic pricing or other practices without a very real threat that brewers operating in other areas could easily, and within a reasonably short time, enter the Wisconsin market as effective competitors of those already entrenched there.
It should be emphasized that we are faced here only with a dismissal after the presentation of the Government's case. On remand, the appellees can, of course, attempt to refute this showing by introducing evidence demonstrating either that these asserted barriers do not, in practice, exist or that, when seen in light of other factors, they are so unimportant that brewers who presently do not sell in the Wisconsin market are not, in fact, appreciably hindered from entering as effective competitors.
The trial court also found that, viewing the entire continental United States as the relevant market, the evidence submitted did not sustain the Government's contention that the acquisition may substantially lessen competition. I would not disturb that conclusion. I do not, of course, pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence to establish a prima facie violation of § 7 within Wisconsin or the three-state area, an issue which the District Court had no occasion to reach in view of its determination that neither of these sections was a relevant market.
For these reasons, I believe the District Court erred in dismissing the complaint at the close of the Government's case.
See in addition my concurring opinion in Brown, 370 U.S. at 370 U. S. 368-369.
See, e.g., Bock, Mergers and Markets 35-42 (1960); Kaysen & Turner, Antitrust Policy 101-102 (1959); Martin, Mergers and the Clayton Act 321-322 (1959).
of the country. But I cannot join the Court's opinion, because, contrary to the statements in that opinion, I believe that, in § 7 cases, it is the Government's duty, as plaintiff, to prove the "market" or the "section of the country" in which the claimed effect of the acquisition is manifest. This is an important, even essential, element of the judgment which must be made in a § 7 case. This Court has consistently recognized this. See, e.g., Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U. S. 294; United States v. Philadelphia Nat. Bank, 374 U. S. 321, 374 U. S. 355-362. It is true that the search for the relevant market is frequently complicated and elaborated beyond reason or need -- sometimes for purposes of delay or obstruction. But the search is nevertheless essential. It is not a snipe hunt.
In some situations, arithmetic as to the merging companies' aggregate volume of sales of the commodity involved may be impressive. Sometimes, the resulting size of the conjoined companies is great. But unless it can be shown that the effect may be "substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly" in a specific section of the country, courts are not authorized to condemn the acquisition. Congress has been specific in at least this respect, and I cannot agree that this standard should be denigrated. Unless both the product and the geographical market are carefully defined, neither analysis nor result in antitrust is likely to be of acceptable quality. Compare majority and dissenting opinions in United States v. Grinnell Corp., post, p. 384 U. S. 563 (involving §§ 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act).


Sharemo is Japanese ingenuity at its best. It's a new kind of website, dubbed "social sharing", where people can list things they have but don't need around the house, and borrow or take similarly listed items from other people across the country.
The website is in Japanese only.
I quickly set out to find a couple small items to test the service. After browsing through a small selection of Sharemo's more than 35000 listed items, I eventually selected this Nintendo DS game and a couple of Haruki Murakami books. I requested the items through the Sharemo website on a Saturday night, received shipment notifications (that told me how much shipping would cost) on Monday (for the DS game) and Tuesday (for the Murakami books), and the items arrived at the time I requested (9~12AM) on Tuesday and Thursday, respectively. Fabulous!
Each item you borrow from someone on Sharemo has a share period (シェア期間), which in my case is 10 days for the game and 90 days for the books. This period starts after I order the item and during this period no one can put a request in for it, but after it's over the item becomes available for the next user to request. How long you will be able to keep it after the period is over depends on if there is someone who wants it next, so basically you just wait. Then when another Sharemo user decides they want one of the items that I currently have, they "order" it, I get access to their mailing address and I send it to them COD.
In addition, if you are "borrowing" from someone in the same city as you (or somewhere close), you can even privately arrange with the current holder to go pick up the item yourself or meet somewhere and exchange, which will save you the shipping fee. Some people will contact you after you make the order and suggest different shipping methods to try and save you some money.
But you can also get things like used clothing, musical instruments and sporting goods. Here's a sample listing and a part-by-part translation (click to enlarge the picture if you can't read the numbers).
This is the title for the item listing.
This is the status of the item.
How long the item will be listed on Sharemo for before it is retired, the original owner chooses this when they list (or as they say on Sharemo, when you "デビュー = debut") an item.
The number of people that have shared the item so far.
People can specify a minimum R-point class for an item, either to add some assurance that the persons borrowing are reliable Sharemo users or just simply as a kind of reward for other good sharers.
How long you will be able to have the item before it can be requested by the next Sharemo user.
For an incomplete collection of items (ie. a manga series that is missing a volume or two), this indicates whether sharers are allowed to add the missing parts if they have it.
Whether the item is in good condition, damaged or broken.
Can't find what you want? Well that's okay, there's a request board where you can ask for someone to list a specific item for you! The guys at Sharemo really thought this out pretty well.
Listing, borrowing, and sending items on Sharemo all accrue "R" points. Members who have been using the service for a long time and who have saved up many points have access to a wider selection of items to borrow.
But members can also use their Sharemo R-points as a kind of currency to "take" items from other people. These "take only" items (listed as 引き取り限定) can be "purchased" with an amount of your R points specified by the person who listed the item (0 to 1000 points—yes, there are items you can take for 0 R points). You still have to pay for delivery, though.
From what I've seen of the items so far, most of the "take only" items are available for 100-500 points, which is not that much considering you get 500 points for signing up or listing an item and 100 points for passing on a borrowed item. You also get points for things like logging in and commenting on an item.
Well, not everything is easy to get rid of, even on Sharemo. People probably won't want to pay the shipping cost to borrow or even take your stinky old refrigerator, but if you've got lots of old books, small kitchen appliances, computer peripherals and old clothes that are cluttering up your tiny Japanese apartment, then this is a good option for you.
If you're just starting with the service, there's an element of uncertainty about the shipping aspect of Sharemo. How much will it cost? How long will it take? What if I'm not home when the item arrives? How do I send to the next person when they ask for it? Well worry not, I tested the waters myself and all is safe.
Cost is I think just about what you would expect. Delivery of the Nintendo DS game I borrowed was 600 yen and the two small Murakami books were also 600 yen shipped together. For the books it might have been cheaper just to buy them used at one of Japan's many used book stores but oh well. I think my next test will be to borrow a coffee maker and see how much that costs to deliver. I'll be sure to add that information into this article later.
As for delivery time, once an item is in the mail system it takes only a day or two to arrive, and you specify a desired delivery time when you request the item. But the catch is you never know how long it will take the sender to actually get around to mailing it. This isn't really a problem though as my (limited) experience is that people are very timely with their shipments. Japanese are typically very responsible which is part of the reason a site like this actually works.
If you're not home when your COD (着払い/chakubarai) Sharemo item arrives, that's not a problem; you get an Undeliverable item notice in your postbox and you have to take it to your local post office (or go through one of the delivery re-scheduling procedures, which you can even do online), where they'll ask to see your ID and then give you your item and take your money.
To send your shared item out again, simply put it in an envelope, box, bag or whatever the thing fits in and take it to the post office. Tell them you want to send it via 「ゆうパック着払い」 (yuupakku chakubarai) and the staff will be able to help you.
Apparently Sharemo has been around for some time on the Japanese mobile web, but it opened its service up to more users with a standard desktop-browser website this Summer. At the time of this article they were still running their grand opening campaign which gives users 500 R for signing up.
Sharemo is owned by Enigmo Inc., a Tokyo company focused on internet shopping and marketing services.
services shopping websites Posted under Living & Enjoying Japan by Nihonshock.


text:
Workgroup of Prof. Philipp Hieronymi
Oberseminar mathematische Logik
Prof. Dr. Peter Koepke
Dr. Peter Holy
Dr. Philipp Lücke
Monday 16.30-18.00 in room 0.007, Endenicher Allee 60.
The participants of the seminar are welcome for coffee and tea in the Plückerraum 1.012 at 16.00 before the talks.
09.11.2015 Peter Holy (University of Bonn) -- Forcing lightface definable wellorders without the GCH
(joint work with David Aspero and Philipp Lücke)
16.11.2015 Ana Njegomir (University of Bonn) -- Thin-very tall compact scattered spaces
In this talk we will introduce the notion of thin-tall compact spaces and introduce a forcing which preserves all cardinals and forces the existence of such a space. We follow the unpublished paper by M.A. Mota and W. Weis.
23.11.2015 Aleksandra Kwiatkowska (University of Bonn) -- Homeomorphism groups of spaces with many symmetries and their universal minimal flows
I will talk about compact and connected metric spaces, which are universal and ultrahomogeneous and about their homeomorphism groups. Then I will focus on the homeomorphism group of the Lelek fan and compute its universal minimal flow. This is joint work with Dana Bartosova.
30.11.2015 Sheila Miller (City University of New York) -- The quandary of quandles: a Borel complete knot invariant
The isomorphism type of the knot quandle introduced by Joyce is a complete invariant of tame knots. Whether two quandles are isomorphic is in practice difficult to determine; we show that this question is provably hard: isomorphism of quandles is Borel complete. The class of tame knots, however, is trivial from the perspective of Borel equivalence, suggesting that a less complex complete invariant of tame knots likely exists.
Friday 04.12.2015, 10:00 - 11:30, room 2.008 Markus Makarius Wenzel -- Intelligible semi-automatic reasoning in December 2015.
Isabelle was introduced in 1989 (by L. Paulson) as a generic logical framework for higher-order natural deduction. Intelligible semi-automated reasoning (Isar) was introduced in 1999 (by M. Wenzel) as a structured proof language for human-readable formal proof documents. Today, in December 2015, we see large applications of Isabelle/Isar in the Isabelle/HOL object-logic, e.g. in the Archive of Formal Proofs (http://afp.sf.net) with more than 240 entries.
After so many years, development of Isar is still not finished. Recent refinements of old concepts and additions of new concepts include: structured rule statements (Eigen-contexts), multi-branch elimination (case-splitting), structured backwards refinement. The new Eisbach language (by D. Matichuk et al) allows to define complex proof methods in their usual syntax, instead of traditional Isabelle/ML. Sledgehammer (by J. Blanchette et al) allows to generate semi-intelligible Isar proofs from machine-generated proofs (via external ATPs and SMTs).
The ultimate aim of Isabelle/Isar is to turn the results of formal proof production into mathematical documents with nice type-setting. Document source was mainly written in LaTeX in the past, but is now moving towards Markdown, with specific GUI support in the Prover IDE (Isabelle/jEdit).
Friday 04.12.2015, 16:30 - 18:00, room 0.007 Ralf Schindler (University of Münster) -- PFA^-
We isolate a new forcing axiom, PFA^-, which is strictly between BPFA and PFA. PFA^- is equiconsistent with a remarkable cardinal, it implies the failure of \square_{\omega_1}, but it is compatible with \square_\kappa for all \kappa\geq\omega_2.
07.12.2015 Regula Krapf (University of Bonn) -- Characterizations of Pretameness
The notion of pretameness was introduced in order to characterize the preservation of the axioms of ZF^- under class forcing. We will give some new characterizations of pretameness in terms of several properties which always hold in the context of set forcing but may fail in class forcing, such as the preservation of Separation, the forcing theorem and the existence of nice names. This is joint work with Peter Holy and Philipp Schlicht.
11.01.2016 Wolfgang Wohofsky (University of Hamburg) -- No large sets which can be translated away from every Marczewski null set
We will show the following (ZFC) theorem which is recently finished work joint with Joerg Brendle: There is no set of size continuum which is "s_0-shiftable", i.e., which can be translated away from every set in the Marczewski ideal s_0 (where a set of reals is in s_0 if for every perfect set there is a perfect subset disjoint from it). For regular continuum, the proof is easier, and we will go through it in detail. If there is time left, we will also discuss the singular case. The theorem is very much in contrast to the respective situation when s_0 is replaced by the meager ideal: there are models (e.g., all models that satisfy CH) with large meager-shiftable (i.e., strong measure zero) sets.
Friday 15.01.2016, 16:30 - 18:00, room 0.007 Chris Le Sueur (University of Münster) -- Determinacy a bit beyond co-analytic and class Prikry forcing with M-ultrafilters
It is a well known result that 0-sharp is equivalent to co-analytic determinacy, and a less well-known result that 0-dagger is equivalent to (omega^2+1)-Pi^1_1 determinacy, a level of the difference hierarchy on the co-analytic sets. I will show some results just below the latter level using weaker hypotheses. The methods are remarkable for using a combination of results provable in systems much weaker than ZFC and tools from inner model theory and forcing, ultimately requiring large cardinal strength. The forcing is particularly interesting because of this: in the weak setting it is a class forcing, and proving the forcing theorem is a challenge requiring an unusual solution.
18.01.2016 Philipp Lücke (University of Bonn) -- Ascending paths and forcings that specialize higher Aronszajn trees
One of the most basic questions asked about set-theoretical trees is the question whether they contain a cofinal branch. Special trees are important examples of trees without cofinal branches, because the non-existence of cofinal branches through such trees is absolute in a strong sense. In this talk, I want to consider properties of trees that cause them to be non-special in an absolute way.
25.01.2016 David Schrittesser (University of Copenhagen) -- Maximal discrete sets with large continuum
In recent joint work with Asger Törnquist, we showed how to construct definable maximal discrete sets in forcing extensions of L, in particular in the Sacks and Miller extension. In particular, the existence of such sets is consistent with V ≠ L. In this talk I shall show the stronger result that the existence of definable discrete sets is consistent with large continuum. In the process, I show an interesting generalization of Galvin's theorem. In particular, this applies to the example of maximal orthogonal families of measures (mofs). One might hope for a simpler way of constructing a mof in a model with large continuum: to find an indestructible such family in L. While such an approach is possible e.g. for maximal cofinitary groups, this is impossible for mofs.
01.02.2016, 10:30 - 12:00, room N0.003 Benno van den Berg (University of Amsterdam) -- Constructive set theory - an overview
I will give an overview of the area of constructive set theory, with special emphasis on Harvey Friedman's IZF (for intuitionistic Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory) and Peter Aczel's CZF (for constructive Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory).
Friday 05.02.2016, 16:30 - 18:00, room 1.007 Maciej Malicki (Warsaw School of Economics) -- Polish groups and the notion of ample generics
I would like to discuss some of my recent results on Polish groups in the context of the notion of ample generics. Recall that a Polish group G has ample generics if all its diagonal conjugation actions have a comeager orbit. This property has very interesting and strong consequences such as the automatic continuity property (i.e. every homomorphism from G into a separable group is continuous), the small index property (i.e. every subgroup H < G with [G: H] < c is open), and uncountable cofi nality for non-open subgroups (i.e. there are no countably infinite exhaustive chains of non-open subgroups in G.) First of all, I will discuss the existence of ample generics in the context of isometry groups of Polish ultrametric spaces. Then I will say a little about proving the main consequences of the existence of ample generics, when ample generics themselves are not present (i.e. for the isometry group of the Urysohn space or the unitary group). Finally, I will give examples of Polish groups with ample generics that fail to be non-archimedean.
Last changed: 27 January 2016


Scott and Jordana Snider met after college while pursuing careers in wildlife documentary filmmaking. They first worked together on the series "Tales from Belize" for National Geographic. They had an adventurous year exploring the jungle, coral reefs, and Mayan ruins of Belize, during which she served as associate producer and he as a cinematographer. After they were married, Scott and Jordana relocated to Charleston. They both had a passion for the natural world, so when a friend invited them to join the South Carolina Aquarium Alliance in 2003, they accepted.
Jordana was volunteering with the Folly Beach Turtle Team in 2009 when she discovered that the Aquarium was seeking funds for a new radiograph in the medical lab. She and Scott felt inspired to get more involved and graciously provided the final funds to acquire the equipment. It was during that time that Jordana met Sea Turtle Care Center™ manager Kelly Thorvalson and learned more about the Sea Turtle Hospital. Having previously served as a volunteer at the National Aquarium, Jordana decided to dedicate her time to volunteering in the hospital and now serves as the official videographer for the Sea Turtle Hospital.
Jordana is still a member of the Ocean Alliance, and Scott now serves on the Aquarium Board of Directors. The Sniders have been wonderful supporters of the Aquarium's mission and programming and made an inspiring leadership gift of support to Zucker Family Sea Turtle Recovery™.
Scott and Jordana are the proud parents of three beautiful girls, who have also become involved with the Aquarium through their schools. We are grateful for the support of the Sniders and honored to count them a part of our Aquarium family.


It would be nice to meet people from here! North Dakota isn't exactly the largest state. So as you may have noticed, meeting new people may be a bit harder.
Does 0verbo belong in this group?
Does aprilmay1982 belong in this group?
Looking for the right one Hey I'm 23 years old, looking for someone who enjoys life. I have a year and half old daughter. I enjoy hunting, fishing, and being outside doing something productive.
Does farmboy89 belong in this group?
Does ahoeger1992 belong in this group?
Well, I have lived in ND all my life. I hunt, fish, and work in this state. I own a house in Fargo but can't wait to get a place outside of town. I love the open country of this state and the people in it.
Does harwood39 belong in this group?
Does skycat4life belong in this group?
Does shyguy32 belong in this group?