"The newly installed boss of Microsoft (NasdaqGS: MSFT – news) has come under fire for telling women they do not need to ask for pay rises, relying instead on "karma".
The comments were made by CEO Satya Nadella while he was speaking in Arizona at an event for women in computing.
Mr Nadella was asked to give his advice to women who are uncomfortable requesting a salary raise.
He replied that women should have faith that the system will give them the right raises as they go along.
"It's not really about asking for the raise, but knowing and having faith that the system will actually give you the right raises as you go along," Mr Nadella told the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing.
The comments by India-born Mr Nadella, who has a remuneration package of around $7m (£4.3m), sparked a torrent of criticism on social media.
"Truly horrified that Satya Nadella could tell women at Grace Hopper not to ask for raises," tweeted Julie Bort.
"Wow Microsoft, That's a new low for you," Isik Mater tweeted in response.
Several hours after his comments, Mr Nadella tried to patch up the damage on Twitter (Xetra:A1W6XZ – news) .
"Was inarticulate re how women should ask for raise," he tweeted.
Microsoft also posted an all-staff memo from the CEO on its website.
In it, Mr Nadella said he answered the question posed by interviewee Maria Klawe "completely wrong".
"Without a doubt I wholeheartedly support programmes at Microsoft and in the industry that bring more women into technology and close the pay gap," Mr Nadella wrote.
"I believe men and women should get equal pay for equal work.
Mr Nadella's remarks at the Grace Hopper conference have the potential to harm both sales of Microsoft products and the appeal for female tech workers in Silicon Valley to work for the IT giant.
Of more than 100,000 employees at Microsoft, only 29% are female, according to data released by the firm recently.
It's fascinating how easily outrage and offense is sparked when public figures make comments about how people should live their lives and how people should look at things, like in this case where Microsoft's CEO brought his 'personal beliefs' involving Karma into an issue, suggesting how women should 'have faith' that they'll get a raise, because I guess 'karma' will somehow help you get a raise if you are good at your job.
Mr. Nadella's beliefs and public position aside, how many people in this world can self honestly say that they don't justify another's limitation or unequal treatment, through some form of belief or opinion?
How about poverty? How about the fact that those of us with jobs and lives of our own, pretty much are unaffected by the fact billions of people live on less than $2 dollars a day around the world? I mean, we all know there are people around the world that spend MOST of their time working, trying to survive, getting paid almost nothing. What about their Equal Pay? Is it okay for someone to exist in poverty even though they spend most of their time working, just because they don't have a master's degree and don't work for some big important company? Who made up that rule? God? Nature? Doesn't the fact that we can spend an entire lifetime prioritizing our entertainment, lifestyle, fashion, hobbies, vacations, weddings, families, above solutions to bring people out of horrific conditions of poverty, indicate that we are, each and every second of each and every day justifying the existence of such conditions, using our personal beliefs and opinions?
How many times have you or someone you know talked about Karma, or God, or 'the Universe', or 'Evolution', or whatever the hell other form of 'higher power' or 'behind the scenes forces' you can come up with, and told yourself that this or that event or experience happened as a result of this apparent 'force'?
How much more suffering do we have to allow to happen before we'll finally be outraged at ourselves and what we've allowed in the name of protecting our own self interests and beliefs?
We're a long way from sorting out all the inequality that is allowed on Earth. It's going to take Self Honesty.


text:
Home/News/Inside Iran/Iran: Workers of Arak's HEPCO, Haft Tappeh hold protests
Iran: Workers of Arak's HEPCO, Haft Tappeh hold protests
HEPCO company workers rallying in Arak (File Photo)
Reporting by PMOI/MEK
Iran, September 8, 2019—A group of employees of the HEPCO Company in the city of Arak, central Iran, held a protest rally on Saturday, September 7, outside the company's main office building. The rallying workers were holding signs and demanding the status of their company stocks/shares be clarified with the officials.
"We HEPCO workers are shouting loud and clear that we are demanding the clarification of our share-holding status and ownership of the HEPCO Company after five years of being left in a limbo. We're not looking for just a new company manager," the sign read.
It is worth noting that Iranian regime President Hassan Rouhani issued a Privatization Organizatnoi statement appointing Abolfazl Roghani as the new director general of the HEPCO holding company.
In the city of Shush of Khuzestan Province, southwest Iran, official employees of the Haft Tappeh sugar cane company held a protest rally for the second consecutive day on Saturday. These workers are demanding paychecks for the previous two months. Furthermore, the company management has to this day various pensions promised to the workers since 2014. These officials are also refusing to sign and confirm these workers' employee contracts, deliberately leaving them in a state of limbo and allowing company officials to fire them at their will.
In other news about Haft Tappeh workers, a so-called court in Tehran has sentenced seven Haft Tappeh sugar cane workers to a total of 110 years behind bars and 74 lashes each. This ruling was issued by Mohammad Moghiseh, head of Branch 28 of Tehran's so-called courts. Each of the workers are sentenced to six to 18 years in jail.
These protests rallies and the regime's response of issuing heavy jail sentences against workers demanding their rights are a window into the mullahs' concerns over an explosive society in Iran.
Ahmad Alamalhoda, representative of Iranian regime Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Mashhad, a very important city in northeast Iran, expressed his deep concerns in this regard. "They want to throw the ball into [Khamenei's] court and place the people against him," he said in reference to the failed nuclear negotiations in obtaining a $15 billion credit line from France, parallel to increasing popular protests across the country.
"Europe and the United States are not two different issues. They are of one trend of crimes. They have been playing us for sixteen months now…," he said on Friday, September 6. "They have been discussing INSTEX for nine months now. At the end of the day, they said we'll place $15 billion in a credit bank and provided a fistful of nonsense and lies. [On Thursday], the French Finance Minister travelled from Paris to Washington to have discussions with the Americans and see if they agree with this plan or not? You see their devious games. For God's sake we are living in a world of communications, communications development, and a digital world. If they want the U.S.' opinion, does the French Finance Minister truly need to go to Washington? They're kicking the can down the down the road. They're deceiving us… And if [Khamenei] seeks to prevent some measures, they are throwing the ball of the country's problems into his court and therefore placing the people against the leader," he continued.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Since 2013, Russia has banned smoking in restaurants and taken serious measures to reduce its huge number of smokers. Now, drastic proposals aired this week could put Russia on course to try and eradicate the habit altogether.
The Russian Health Ministry on January 9 proposed a blanket ban on the sale of cigarettes to anyone born after 2014 — even when they reach the current legal smoking age of 18.
The ban would thus take effect in distant 2033, when President Vladimir Putin, at the age of 81, could hypothetically be serving a fifth term in the Kremlin.
The revolutionary proposal was contained in the draft Antitobacco Concept signed by Health Minister Veronika Skvortsova and leaked to the pro-Kremlin newspaper Izvestia on January 9. The document. which outlines government efforts to curb smoking from 2017 to 2022, still requires the approval of the government and has been circulated to 18 other government agencies for review.
Other proposals in the document include: banning smoking in cars in the presence of children; allowing employers to make employees work additional time to make up for cigarette breaks; and placing health warnings on individual cigarettes.
The proposal of a blanket ban for future generations prompted a flood of commentary, although presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told TASS that the Kremlin has not yet taken a position on the Health Ministry's proposal.
Various experts warn the ban could create a thriving black market for unlicensed cigarettes. Olga Beklemishcheva, an activist for smoker's rights, said cigarettes would be bought in the same way that recreational drugs like the synthetic drug known as "spice" are in Russia today.
The proposal has raised eyebrows in the State Duma where Dmitry Morozov, head of the parliamentary health-care committee, said it was "in need of discussion." In comments to the RBK news agency, Morozov said that "in principle, it would be best to steer people away from bad habits" instead of imposing a ban.
Every year, according to the Health Ministry, 300,000 to 400,000 Russian citizens die from smoking-related illnesses. TASS cited the Health Ministry as saying that smoking among youth aged 13 to 15 fell from 25.4 percent in 2004 to 9.3 percent in 2015.


I have published monthly videos by astrological sign on my YouTube Channel – Empress Energy. For the most accurate information, you should watch your Sun, Moon and Rising sign videos. Also, if you have love interest, it's helpful to watch their video as well.
My Scorpio, Leo and Libra videos are excellent! Thank you so much!
THANK YOU! My Aquarius reading is spot on accurate!


text:
Q: Null value in bulk insert Hasura GraphQL I am trying to do a multiple insert using a REST API exposed by Hasura (written in GraphQL).
This is my mutation:
mutation insertMultipleMeasurements2($payload: [measurements_insert_input!]!) {
  insert_measurements(objects: $payload) {
    returning {
      time
    }
  }
}

and this is the definition of measurements_insert_input in the Actions tab:
input measurements_insert_input {
  device: String!
  value: numeric!
  variable: String!
}

(which btw is the only way I found to insert an object of numeric type in a bulk insert).
When I try to insert something like:
[
    {
        "device": "TEST",
        "value": 5630,
        "variable": "Length"
    },
        {
        "device": "TEST",
        "value": 5631,
        "variable": "Length"
    }
]

I get:
{
    "path": "$",
    "error": "expecting a value for non-nullable variable: \"payload\"",
    "code": "validation-failed"
}

I tried many different ways to rewrite my mutation but looks like none worked.
Thanks in advance

A: You've most likely forgotten to wrap your objects with variables, like so :
yourMutation({
      variables: { objects, on_conflict }
})

It's not straightforward if you rely on TS IntelliSense, better check the doc :)

A: Based on the error message

"expecting a value for non-nullable variable: "payload""

you should be passing the array via an object
{
  payload: [
    {
    "device": "TEST",
    "value": 5630,
    "variable": "Length"
    },
    {
    "device": "TEST",
    "value": 5631,
    "variable": "Length"
    }
  ]
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
What should the digital public sphere do?
Posted on November 29, 2011 March 2, 2014 Tagsjournalism, knowledge, media, politics, public sphere, visualization26 Comments
Earlier this year, I discovered there wasn't really a name for the thing I wanted to talk about. I wanted a word or phrase that includes journalism, social media, search engines, libraries, Wikipedia, and parts of academia, the idea of all these things as a system for knowledge and communication. But there is no such word. Nonetheless, this is an essay asking what all this stuff should do together.
What I see here is an ecosystem. There are narrow real-time feeds such as expertly curated Twitter accounts, and big general reference works like Wikipedia. There are armies of reporters working in their niches, but also colonies of computer scientists. There are curators both human and algorithmic. And I have no problem imagining that this ecosystem includes certain kinds of artists and artworks. Let's say it includes all public acts and systems which come down to one person trying to tell another, "I didn't just make this up. There's something here of the world we share."
I asked people what to call it. Some said "media." That captures a lot of it, but I'm not really talking about the art or entertainment aspects of media. Also I wanted to include something of where ideas come from, something about discussions, collaborative investigation, and the generation of new knowledge. Other people said "information" but there is much more here than being informed. Information alone doesn't make us care or act. It is part of, but only part of, what it means to connect to another human being at a distance. Someone else said "the fourth estate" and this is much closer, because it pulls in all the ideas around civic participation and public discourse and speaking truth to power, loads of stuff we generally file under "democracy." But the fourth estate today means "the press" and what I want to talk about is broader than journalism.
I'm just going to call this the "digital public sphere", building on Jürgen Habermas' idea of a place for the discussion of shared concerns, public yet apart from the state. Maybe that's not a great name — it's a bit dry for my taste — but perhaps it's the best that can be done in three words, and it's already in use as a phrase to refer to many of the sorts of things I want to talk about. "Public sphere" captures something important, something about the societal goals of the system, and "digital" is a modifier that means we have to account for interactivity, networks, and computation. Taking inspiration from Michael Schudson's essay "Six or seven things that news can do for democracy," I want to ask what the digital public sphere can do for us. I think I see three broad categories, which are also three goals to keep in mind as we build our institutions and systems.
1. Information. It should be possible for people to find things out, whatever they want to know. Our institutions should help people organize to produce valuable new knowledge. And important information should automatically reach each person at just the right moment.
2. Empathy. The vast majority of people in the world, we will only know through media. We must strive to represent the "other" to each-other with compassion and reality. We can't forget that there are people on the other end of the wire.
3. Collective action. What good is public deliberation if we can't eventually come to a decision and act? But truly enabling the formation of broad agreement also requires that our information systems support conflict resolution. In this age of complex overlapping communities, this role spans everything from the local to the global.
Each of these is its own rich area, and each of these roles already cuts across many different forms and institutions of media.
I'd like to live in a world where it's cheap and easy for anyone to satisfy the following desires:
"I want to learn about X."
"How do we know that about X?"
"What are the most interesting things we don't know about X?"
"Please keep me informed about X."
"I think we should know more about X."
"I know something about X and want to tell others."
These desires span everything from mundane queries ("what time does the store close?") to complex questions of fact ("what will be the effects of global climate change?") And they apply at all scales; I might have a burning desire to know how the city government is going to deal with bike lanes, or I might be curious about the sum total of humanity's knowledge of breast cancer — everything we know today, plus all the good questions we can't yet answer. Different institutions exist to address each of these needs in various ways. Libraries have historically served the need to answer specific questions, desires number #1 and #2, but search engines also do this. Journalism strives to keep people abreast of current events, the essence of #4. Academia has focused on how we know and what we don't yet know, which is #2 and #3.
This list includes two functions related to the production of new knowledge, because it seems to me that the public information ecosystem should support people working together to become collectively smarter. That's why I've included #5, which is something like casting a vote for an unanswered question, and #6, the peer-to-peer ability to provide an answer. These seem like key elements in the democratic production of knowledge, because the resources which can be devoted to investigating answers are limited. There will always be a finite number of people well placed to answer any particular question, whether those people are researchers, reporters, subject matter experts, or simply well-informed. I like to imagine that their collective output is dwarfed by human curiosity. So efficiency matters, and we need to find ways to aggregate the questions of a community, and route each question to the person or people best positioned to find out the answer.
In the context of professional journalism, this amounts to asking what unanswered questions are most pressing to the community served by a newsroom. One could devise systems of asking the audience (like Quora and StackExchange) or analyze search logs (ala Demand Media.) That newsrooms don't frequently do these things is, I think, an artifact of industrial history — and an unfilled niche in the current ecosystem. Search engines know where the gaps between supply and demand lie, but they're not in the business of researching new answers. Newsrooms can produce the supply, but they don't have an understanding of the demand. Today, these two sides of the industry do not work together to close this loop. Some symbiotic hybrid of Google and The Associated Press might be an uncannily good system for answering civic questions.
When new information does become available, there's the issue of timing and routing. This is #4 again, "please keep me informed." Traditionally, journalism has answered the question "who should know when?" with "everyone everything as fast as possible" but this is ridiculous today. I really don't want my phone to vibrate for every news article ever written, which is why only "important" stories generate alerts. But taste and specialization dictate different definitions of "important" for each person, and old answers delivered when I need them might be just as valuable as new information delivered hot and fresh. Google is far down this track with its thinking on knowing what I want before I search for it.
There is no better way to show one person to another, across a distance, than the human story. These stories about other people may be informative, sure, but maybe their real purpose is to help us feel what it is like to be someone else. This is an old art; one journalist friend credits Homer with the last major innovation in the form.
But we also have to show whole groups to each other, a very "mass media" goal. If I've never met a Cambodian or hung out with a union organizer, I only know what I see in the media. How can and should entire communities, groups, cultures, races, interests or nations be represented?
A good journalist, anthropologist, or writer can live with a community for a while, observing and learning, then articulate generalizations. This is important and useful. It's also wildly subjective. But then, so is empathy. Curation and amplification can also be empathetic processes: someone can direct attention to the genuine voices of a community. This "don't speak, point" role has been articulated by Ethan Zuckerman and practiced by Andy Carvin.
But these are still at the level of individual stories. Who is representative? If I can only talk to five people, which five people should I know? Maybe a human story, no matter how effective, is just a single sample in the sense of a tiny part standing for the whole. Turning this notion around, making it personal, I come to an ideal: If I am to be seen as part of some group, then I want representations of that group to include me in some way. This is an argument that mass media coverage of a community should try to account for every person in that community. This is absurd in practical terms, but it can serve as a signpost, a core idea, something to aim for.
Fortunately, more inclusive representations are getting easier. Most profoundly, the widespread availability of peer-to-peer communication networks makes it easier than ever for a single member of a community to speak and be heard widely.
We also have data. We can compile the demographics of social movements, or conduct polls to find "public opinion." We can learn a lot from the numbers that describe a particular population, which is why surveys and censuses persist. But data are terrible at producing the emotional response at the core of empathy. For most people, learning that 23% of the children in some state live in poverty lacks the gut-punch of a story about a child who goes hungry at the end of every month. In fact there is evidence that making someone think analytically about an issue actually makes them less compassionate.
The best reporting might combine human stories with broader data. I am impressed by CNN's interactive exploration of American casualties in Iraq, which links mass visualization with photographs and stories about each individual. But that piece covers a comparatively small population, only a few thousand people. There are emerging techniques to understand much larger groups, such as by visualizing the data trails of online life, all of the personal information that we leave behind. We can visualize communities, using aggregate information to see the patterns of human association at all scales. I suspect that mass data visualization represents a fundamentally new way of understanding large groups, a way that is perhaps more inclusive than anecdotes yet richer than demographics. Also, visualization forces us into conversations about who exactly is a member of the community in question, because each person is either included in a particular visualization or not. Drawing such a hard boundary is often difficult, but it's good to talk about the meanings of our labels.
And yet, for all this new technology, empathy remains a deeply human pursuit. Do we really want statistically unbiased samples of a community? My friend Quinn Norton says that journalism should "strive to show us our better selves." Sometimes, what we need is brutal honesty. At other times, what we need is kindness and inspiration.
What a difficult challenge advances in communication have become in recent decades. On the one hand they are definitely bringing us closer to each other, but are they really bringing us together?
– Ryszard Kapuściński, The Other
I am sensitive to the idea of filter bubbles and concerns about the fragmentation of media, the worry that the personalization of information will create a series of insular and homogenous communities, but I cannot abide the implied nostalgia for the broadcast era. I do not see how one-size-fits-all media can ever serve a diverse and specialized society, and so: let a million micro-cultures bloom! But I do see a need for powerful unifying forces within the public sphere, because everything from keeping a park clean to tackling global climate change requires the agreement and cooperation of a community.
We have long had decision making systems at all scales — from the neighborhood to the United Nations — and these mechanisms span a range from very lightweight and informal to global and ritualized. In many cases decision-making is built upon voting, with some majority required to pass, such as 51% or 66%. But is a vicious, hard-fought 51% in a polarized society really the best we can do? And what about all the issues that we will not be voting on — that is to say, most of them?
Unfortunately, getting agreement among even very moderate numbers of people seems phenomenally difficult. People disagree about methods, but in a pluralistic society they often disagree even more strongly about goals. Sometimes presenting all sides with credible information is enough, but strongly held disagreements usually cannot be resolved by shared facts; experimental work shows that, in many circumstances, polarization deepens with more information. This is the painful truth that blows a hole in ideas like "informed public" and "deliberative democracy."
Something else is needed here. I want to bring the field of conflict resolution into the digital public sphere. As a named pursuit with its own literature and community, this is a young subject, really only begun after World War II. I love the field, but it's in its infancy; I think it's safe to say that we really don't know very much about how to help groups with incompatible values find acceptable common solutions. We know even less about how to do this in an online setting.
But we can say for sure that "moderator" is an important role in the digital public sphere. This is old-school internet culture, dating back to the pre-web Usenet days, and we have evolved very many tools for keeping online discussions well-ordered, from classic comment moderation to collaborative filtering, reputation systems, online polls, and various other tricks. At the edges, moderation turns into conflict resolution, and there are tools for this too. I'm particularly intrigued by visualizations that show where a community agrees or disagrees along multiple axes, because the conceptually similar process of "peace polls" has had some success in real-world conflict situations such as Northern Ireland. I bet we could also learn from the arduously evolved dispute resolution processes of Wikipedia.
It seems to me that the ideal of legitimate community decision making is consensus, 100% agreement. This is very difficult, another unreachable goal, but we could define a scale from 51% agreement to 100%, and say that the goal is "as consensus as possible" decision making, which would also be "as legitimate as possible." With this sort of metric — and always remembering that the goal is to reach a decision on a collective action, not to make people agree for the sake of it — we could undertake a systematic study of online consensus formation. For any given community, for any given issue, how fragmented is the discourse? Do people with different opinions hang out in different places online? Can we document examples of successful and unsuccessful online consensus formation, as has been done in the offline case? What role do human moderators play, and how can well-designed social software contribute? How do the processes of online agreement and disagreement play out at different scales and under different circumstances? How we do know when the process has converged to a "good" answer, and when it has degraded into hegemony or groupthink? These are mostly unexplored questions. Fortunately, there's a huge amount of related work to draw on: voting systems and public choice theory, social network analysis, cognitive psychology, information flow and media ecosystems, social software design, issues of identity and culture, language and semiotics, epistemology…
I would like conflict resolution to be an explicit goal of our media platforms and processes, because we cannot afford to be polarized and grid-locked while there are important collective problems to be solved. We may have lost the unifying narrative of the front page, but that narrative was neither comprehensive nor inclusive: it didn't always address the problems of concern to me, nor did it ask me what I thought. Effective collective action, at all relevant scales, seems a better and more concrete goal than "shared narrative." It is also an exceptionally hard problem — in some ways it is the problem of democracy itself — but there's lots to try, and our public sphere must be designed to support this.
I began writing this essay because I wanted to say something very simple: all of these things — journalism, search engines, Wikipedia, social media and the lot — have to work together to common ends. There is today no one profession which encompasses the entirety of the public sphere. Journalism used to be the primary bearer of these responsibilities — or perhaps that was a well-meaning illusion sprung from near monopolies on mass information distribution channels. Either way, that era is now approaching two decades gone. Now what we have is an ecosystem, and in true networked fashion there may not ever again be a central authority. From algorithm designers to dedicated curators to, yes, traditional on-the-scene pro journalists, a great many people in different fields now have a part in shaping the digital public sphere. I wanted try to understand what all of us are working toward. I hope that I have at least articulated goals that we can agree are important.
A computational journalism reading list
Posted on January 31, 2011 June 1, 2011 Tagsbelief, computational journalism, journalism, knowledge, media, minds, misinformation, politics, social media78 Comments
[Last updated: 18 April 2011 — added statistical NLP book link]
There is something extraordinarily rich in the intersection of computer science and journalism. It feels like there's a nascent field in the making, tied to the rise of the internet. The last few years have seen calls for a new class of "programmer journalist" and the birth of a community of hacks and hackers. Meanwhile, several schools are now offering joint degrees. But we'll need more than competent programmers in newsrooms. What are the key problems of computational journalism? What other fields can we draw upon for ideas and theory? For that matter, what is it?
I'd like to propose a working definition of computational journalism as the application of computer science to the problems of public information, knowledge, and belief, by practitioners who see their mission as outside of both commerce and government. This includes the journalistic mainstay of "reporting" — because information not published is information not known — but my definition is intentionally much broader than that. To succeed, this young discipline will need to draw heavily from social science, computer science, public communications, cognitive psychology and other fields, as well as the traditional values and practices of the journalism profession.
"Computational journalism" has no textbooks yet. In fact the term barely is barely recognized. The phrase seems to have emerged at Georgia Tech in 2006 or 2007. Nonetheless I feel like there are already important topics and key references.
Data journalism is obtaining, reporting on, curating and publishing data in the public interest. The practice is often more about spreadsheets than algorithms, so I'll suggest that not all data journalism is "computational," in the same way that a novel written on a word processor isn't "computational." But data journalism is interesting and important and dovetails with computational journalism in many ways.
The Nieman Journalism Lab's interview with Guardian Data Blog editor Simon Rogers remains a solid introduction to (one kind of) contemporary practice.
The best practical guides I know are Rogers' "How to: get to grips with data journalism" and Dan Nguyen's series of data-scraping tutorials at ProPublica.
Stanford's Journalism in the Age of Data is an hour-long documentary on data journalism and visualization.
The web is a linked system of human-readable documents. Now Tim Berners-Lee wants to create a web of machine-readable linked data. The full potential is unclear, but it's a big idea that may come to be the backbone of semantic web visions. The New York Times, The Guardian, and others are experimenting with open data APIs.
Everyblock creator Adrian Holovaty seems to have been the first to suggest that reporters file structured data in his 2006 "A Fundamental Way Newspaper Websites Need to Change." This idea is beautifully expanded in Stijn Debrouwere's "Information Architecture for News Websites" series.
Big data requires powerful exploration and storytelling tools, and increasingly that means visualization. But there's good visualization and bad visualization, and the field has advanced tremendously since Tufte wrote The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. There is lots of good science that is too little known, and many open problems here.
Tamara Munzner's chapter on visualization is the essential primer. She puts visualization on rigorous perceptual footing, and discusses all the major categories of practice. Absolutely required reading for anyone who works with pictures of data.
Ben Fry invented the Processing language and wrote his PhD thesis on "computational information design," which is his powerful conception of the iterative, interactive practice of designing useful visualizations.
How do we make visualization statistically rigorous? How do we know we're not just fooling ourselves when we see patterns in the pixels? This amazing paper by Wickham et. al. has some answers.
Is a visualization a story? Segal and Heer explore this question in "Narrative Visualization: Telling Stories with Data."
Data is more than numbers. Given that the web is designed to be read by humans, it makes heavy use of human language. And then there are all the world's books, and the archival recordings of millions of speeches and interviews. Computers are slowly getting better at dealing with language.
Word frequency techniques like tf-idf and the vector space document model are very simple and very useful. See also stemming. Lots more in the wonderful (and free!) Introduction to Information Retrieval. This book explains how search engines are built, and discusses tf-idf etc. in great technical detail.
Statistical language models are increasingly important for all kinds of applications. Michael Nielsen has a great introduction to statistical machine translation. Google's Peter Norvig discusses how he implemented statistical spelling correction on his laptop during a long plane flight. For the full deal, see the book Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing.
On a related note, Google N-gram viewer lets you look at the frequency of short phrases within 4% of all books published, ever. The excellent paper gives examples of how to use this for cultural research. Dan Cohen has important criticisms.
Speech-to-text algorithms enable automated transcription, and Matt Thompson explores the huge implications for journalism.
Reuters maintains the OpenCalais entity extraction service, which parses text to contextually determine who and what is referenced.
IBM's Watson project built a question-answering system that reads reference books and wins at Jeopardy. Imagine how useful to journalists and curious readers this could be! This paper on the DeepQA system describes how they did it.
Communications technology and free speech
Code is law. Because our communications systems use software, the underlying mathematics of communication lead to staggering political consequences — including whether or not it is possible for governments to verify online identity or remove things from the internet. The key topics here are networks, cryptography, and information theory.
The Handbook of Applied Cryptography is a classic, and free online. But despite the title it doesn't really explain how crypto is used in the real world, like Wikipedia does.
It's important to know how the internet routes information, using TCP/IP and BGP, or at a somewhat higher level, things like the BitTorrent protocol. The technical details determine how hard it is to do things like block websites, suppress the dissemination of a file, or remove entire countries from the internet.
Anonymity is deeply important to online free speech, and very hard. The Tor project is the outstanding leader in anonymity-related research.
Information theory is stunningly useful across almost every technical discipline. Pierce's short textbook is the classic introduction, while Tom Schneider's Information Theory Primer seems to be the best free online reference.
Tracking the spread of information (and misinformation)
What do we know about how information spreads through society? Very little. But one nice side effect of our increasingly digital public sphere is the ability to track such things, at least in principle.
Memetracker was (AFAIK) the first credible demonstration of whole-web information tracking, following quoted soundbites through blogs and mainstream news sites and everything in between. Zach Seward has cogent reflections on their findings.
The Truthy Project aims for automated detection of astro-turfing on Twitter. They specialize in covert political messaging, or as I like to call it, computational propaganda.
We badly need tools to help us determine the source of any given online "fact." There are many existing techniques that could be applied to the problem, as I discussed in a previous post.
If we had information provenance tools that worked across a spectrum of media outlets and feed types (web, social media, etc.) it would be much cheaper to do the sort of information ecosystem studies that Pew and others occasionally undertake. This would lead to a much better understanding of who does original reporting.
Filtering and recommendation
With vastly more information than ever before available to us, attention becomes the scarcest resource. Algorithms are an essential tool in filtering the flood of information that reaches each person. (Social media networks also act as filters.)
The paper on preference networks by Turyen et. al. is probably as good an introduction as anything to the state of the art in recommendation engines, those algorithms that tell you what articles you might like to read or what movies you might like to watch.
Before Google News there was Columbia News Blaster, which incorporated a number of interesting algorithms such as multi-lingual article clustering, automatic summarization, and more as described in this paper by McKeown et. al.
Anyone playing with clustering algorithms needs to have a deep appreciation of the ugly duckling theorem, which says that there is no categorization without preconceptions. King and Grimmer explore this with their technique for visualizing the space of clusterings.
Any digital journalism product which involves the audience to any degree — that should be all digital journalism products — is a piece of social software, well defined by Clay Shirky in his classic essay, "A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy." It's also a "collective knowledge system" as articulated by Chris Dixon.
Measuring public knowledge
If journalism is about "informing the public" then we must consider what happens to stories after publication — this is the "last mile" problem in journalism. There is almost none of this happening in professional journalism today, aside from basic traffic analytics. The key question here is, how does journalism change ideas and action? Can we apply computers to help answer this question empirically?
World Public Opinion's recent survey of misinformation among American voters solves this problem in the classic way, by doing a randomly sampled opinion poll. I discuss their bleak results here.
Blogosphere maps and other kinds of visualizations can help us understand the public information ecosystem, such as this interactive visualization of Iranian blogs. I have previously suggested using such maps as a navigation tool that might broaden our information horizons.
UN Global Pulse is a serious attempt to create a real-time global monitoring system to detect humanitarian threats in crisis situations. They plan to do this by mining the "data exhaust" of entire societies — social media postings, online records, news reports, and whatever else they can get their hands on. Sounds like key technology for journalism.
Vox Civitas is an ambitious social media mining tool designed for journalists. Computational linguistics, visualization, and more.
I know of only one work which proposes a research agenda for computational journalism.
"Computational Journalism: A Call to Arms for Database Researchers" by Sarah Cohen et. al. raises the very intriguing possibility of building systems that automatically or semi-automatically scan databases for stories, document the rationale for believing certain facts, etc.
This paper presents a broad vision and is really a must-read. However, it deals almost exclusively with reporting, that is, finding new knowledge and making it public. I'd like to suggest that the following unsolved problems are also important:
Tracing the source of any particular "fact" found online, and generally tracking the spread and mutation of information.
Cheap metrics for the state of the public information ecosystem. How accurate is the web? How accurate is a particular source?
Techniques for mapping public knowledge. What is it that people actually know and believe? How polarized is a population? What is under-reported? What is well reported but poorly appreciated?
Information routing and timing: how can we route each story to the set of people who might be most concerned about it, or best in a position to act, at the moment when it will be most relevant to them?
This sort of attention to the health of the public information ecosystem as a whole, beyond just the traditional surfacing of new stories, seems essential to the project of making journalism work.
Internet as information democracy, or new media news monopolies?
Posted on May 30, 2010 May 30, 2010 Tagscensorship, internet, journalism, media5 Comments
There was a dream that the internet would mean the end of the media gatekeeper; that anyone could get their message out without having to get the attention and approval of the media powers that be. This turns out to be not quite the case.
I took data from the Project form Excellence in Journalism's State of the News Media 2010 report to create this chart showing the market share of the top 20 news web sites. In theory, the internet busts media monopolies by allowing anyone to publish for free. And there's no doubt it's been disruptive. But according to data from Nielsen, the top 7% of 4600 news and information sites get 80% of traffic (from American viewers.) We see a big concentration of power, as the rapid falloff in the chart above shows, and much of it still belongs to "old media."
Organizations such as CNN, Fox, the New York Times and USA Today rank in the top 20. But so do new media giants AOL, Google News, The Huffington Post and Yahoo.com, which is the biggest news site of all.
(It's also interesting to note that many of the top 20 new media news sites produce little or none of their own news; in the extreme case Google News produces no stories at all of its own. While some see aggregation as parasitic, I think it's obvious that it delivers a tremendously valuable service to readers.)
For better or worse, the ability to publish anything nearly for free hasn't meant the end of big media monopolies. It's simply shifted the landscape and the power balance.
The limiting factor to getting your message out is no longer having access to an expensive printing press or a TV station. It's attention: how many minutes of time can you get from how many people? In this game, brand still matters hugely. There are only so many URLs a person can remember, only so many sites they can check in a day.
You have an audience, or you don't. Mindshare is now the barrier to entry in the media world. Perhaps it always was, though I daresay it was easier to get viewers to check out your new television network when there were only 13 channels. Online, the number of channels is infinite for all intents and purposes; a single person will never exhaust them all.
Which is not to say that the internet has changed nothing. We have seen over and over that bottom-up effects can propel something to mass attention, with no big company behind them. This is often called "going viral," but that's not quite a broad enough description of the effect. In many cases, what happens is that something becomes just popular enough to get picked up by mainstream media, who then propel it into the spotlight.
And what this PEJ top 20 list doesn't take into account is that people now get online news from lots and lots of sources other than news websites.
Facebook is now the most widely used news reading program. It's also now the #1 site on the internet. Should it top this chart of news sources? Meanwhile, Twitter has become a primary news source for very many people. And then there are mobile news apps, some of which belong to old media news organizations and some of which don't. The richness of news distribution systems today is well captured in another PEJ report on the "participatory news consumer."
So has the internet made it easier to get non-mainstream messages out? I think the answer can only be yes. But don't expect that anyone will be reading your alternative narratives just because you've put them online. Your best bet to to be heard still lies with a small number of very large companies. And although the internet per se is relatively uncensored in many countries, commercial gatekeepers like Apple and Facebook own important dedicated channels, and both of them engage in censorship (1, 2).
Jürgen Habermas says he's not on Twitter
Posted on February 1, 2010 October 10, 2018 TagsHabermas, media, twitter37 Comments
Over the last several days there has been considerable hubbub around the notion that pioneering media theorist Jürgen Habermas might have signed up for Twitter as @JHabermas. This would be "important if true", as Jay Rosen put it. Intrigued, I tracked him down through the University of Frankfurt. I succeeded in getting him on the phone at his home in Sternburg, and asked him if he was on Twitter. He said,
No, no, no. This is somebody else. This is a mis-use of my name.
He added that "my email address is not publicly available," which suggests that perhaps he didn't quite understand what I was getting at. In fact, the father of the public sphere doesn't seem to understand the internet very well at all, judging by his few previous references to the topic.
I know many people will be disappointed, especially @bitchphd who tweeted "JURGEN HABERMAS is on twitter. definitive response to all future articles about how stupid twitter is." Personally I believe that Twitter is significant even without Habermas, but it's clear that this is an issue for the next generation of theorists to decide.
UPDATE: here is an audio recording of my question and his answer.
Posted on September 30, 2009 TagsChina, culture, media, politicsLeave a comment
In America, the enemy is Terrorism. It used to be the Russians, or more generically Communists. We discussed the history of this concept in class today. And then I asked: In the state-controlled Chinese media, who is the enemy today?
I got three immediate answers:
"The West."
"Separatists." (E.g. Tibetans, Uighurs.)
There was instant consensus on this list, among the PRC students. Good to know.
We Have No Maps of The Web
Posted on May 3, 2009 December 7, 2017 Tagsculture, information visualization, knowledge, media3 Comments
We dream the internet to be a great public meeting place where all the world's cultures interact and learn from one another, but it is far less than that. We are separated from ourselves by language, culture and the normal tendency to seek out only what we already know. In reality the net is cliquish and insular. We each live in our own little corner, only dimly aware of the world of information just outside. In this the internet is no different from normal human life, where most people still die within a few kilometers of their birthplace. Nonetheless, we all know that there is something else out there: we have maps of the world. We do not have maps of the web.
I have met people who have never seen a world map. I once had a conversation with herders in the south Sahara who asked me if Canada was in Europe. As we talked I realized that the patriarch of the settlement couldn't name more than half a dozen countries, and had no idea how long it might take to get to any of the ones he did know. He simply had no notion of how big the planet was. And to him, the world really is small: he lives in the desert, occasionally catches a ride to town for supplies, and will never leave the country in which he was born.
Online, we are all that man. Even the most global and sophisticated among us does not know the true scope of our informational world. Statistics on the "size" of the web are surprisingly hard to come by and even harder to grasp; learning that there are a trillion unique URLs is like being told that the land area of the Earth is 148 million square kilometers. We really have no idea what we're missing, no visceral experience that teaches our ignorance.
We can remedy this.
Continue reading We Have No Maps of The Web
Maine Man Tries to Build Dirty Bomb, No One Cares
Posted on February 11, 2009 March 1, 2009 Tagsmedia, politics, terrorism42 Comments
A leaked FBI report states that a man named James G. Cummings was trying to build a dirty bomb when he was shot and and killed by his wife last December 9th in Belfast, Maine. He had plans, parts, explosive ingredients, and small quantities of radioactive material, though nothing that could not be purchased legally within the US. Cummings was a white supremacist who was reportedly very upset about Obama's election.
The leaked document has been posted on Wikileaks since January 16th. While the material concerning Cummins was first noticed by the rumor site Unattributable.com on January 19th, only yesterday was there any sort of story about it in the mainstream media, in this case the local Bangor Daily News.
Although this dastardly plot was probably not much more dangerous to the public than a garden-variety bomb, this man would certainly qualify as a bona fide "terrorist" under Bush-regime logic. Or at least he would if he was Arab. In point of fact, he actually is a threat to the public, or was. So why haven't we heard about it? Are crazy white supremacists somehow less of a threat than crazy fundamentalist muslims?
The FBI report notes:
Continue reading Maine Man Tries to Build Dirty Bomb, No One Cares
Intelligent News Agents, With Real New
Posted on September 4, 2008 January 7, 2009 Tagsbelief, bots, culture, information, knowledge, media, politics, technology1 Comment
You cannot read all of the news, every day. There is simply too much information for even a dedicated and specialized observer to consume it all, so someone or something has to make choices. Traditionally, we rely on some other person to tell us what to see: the editor of a newspaper decides what goes on the front page, the reviewer tells us what movies are worth it. Recently, we have been able to distribute this mediation process across wider communities: sites like Digg, StumbleUpon, or Slashdot all represent the collective opinions of thousands of people.
The next step is intelligent news agents. Google (search, news, reader, etc.) can already be configured to deliver to us only that information we think we might want to see. It's not hard to imagine much more sophisticated agents that would scour the internet for items of interest.
In today's context, it's easy to see how such agents could actually be implemented. Sophisitacted customer preference engines are already capable of telling us what products we might like to consume — the best example is Amazon's recommendation engine. It's not a big leap to imagine using the same sort of algorithms to model the kinds of blog articles, web pages, youtube videos, etc. that we might enjoy consuming, and then deliver these things to us.
There is a serious problem with this. You're going to get exactly what you ask for, and only that.
True, we all do this already. We read books and consume media which more or less confirm our existing opinions. This effect is visible as clustering in what we consume, as in this example of Amazon sales data for political books in 2008.
This image is from a beautiful analysis by orgnet.com. Basically, people buy either the red books or the blue books, but usually not both. The same sorts of patterns hold for movies, blogs, newspapers, ideologies, religions, and human beliefs of all kinds. This is a problem; but at least you can usually see the other color of books when you walk into Borders. If we end up relying on trainable agents for all of our information, we risk completely blacking out anything that disagrees with what we already believe.
I propose a simple solution. Automatic network analyses like the one above — of books, or articles, or web pages — could easily pinpoint the information sources that would expose me to the maximum novelty in the minimum time. If my goal is to gain a deep understanding of the entire scope of human discourse, rather than just the parts of it I already agree with, then it would be very simple to program my agent to bring to me exactly those things that would most rapidly give me insight into those regions of information space which are most vital and least known to me. I imagine some metric like "highest degree node most distant from the nodes I've already visited" would would work handily.
You can infer a lot about somewhat from the information they currently consume. If my agent noticed that I was a liberal, it could make me understand the conservative world-view, and vice-versa. If my agent detected that I was ignorant of certain crucial aspects of Chinese culture and politics, it could reccomend a primer article. Or it might deduce that I needed to understand just slightly more physics to participate meaningfully in the climate change debate, or decide (based on my movie viewing habits) that it was high time I review the influential films of Orson Welles. Of course, I might in turn decide that I actually, truly, don't care about film at all; but the very act of excluding specific subjects or categories of thought would force us, consciously, to admit to the boundaries of our mental worlds.
We could program our information gathering systems to challenge us, concisely and effectively, if we so want. Intelligent agents could be mere sycophants, or they could be teachers.
Americans Have Only Their Own Culture
Posted on July 15, 2008 October 6, 2008 TagsAmerica, language, media, scienceLeave a comment
The whole world watches Hollywood movies. I once found X-Men 2 on cable in Oman, the sex and violence airing between the preaching Imams. The whole world reads Western books, either in English or translation. The Da Vinci Code graces the dirty blankets of sidewalk booksellers in Mumbai, and Harry Potter is truly global.
Those who don't live in America are lucky. They have at least two cultures: their own, and the American imports. Those who live within America are impoverished by comparison. Americans have to go well out of their way to consume media made by people who aren't like them. We have to go to the "Foreign" section of the video store. We have to suffer through languages we don't understand, because we are taught only English in schools.
This same effect is repeated on a smaller scale with regional cultural capitals. In Southeast Asia, all the good movies come from Thailand. In Nepal, everything is from India. South Africa produces most of the African media, while Qatar and Egypt supply the Arab world. In every case, media in the minority countries is often much more diverse, drawing from many sources.
Maybe this is imperialism. Maybe this is a bad thing. Maybe every peoples should be producing their own entertainments just as furiously as Hollywood. Maybe. My point is only this: if you live outside of the Empire, the Empire comes to you. But if you live inside, you have to look to find the rest of the world.


text:
Q: The incrementer values for an array using a size_t operator In the following piece of code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stddef.h>

void main ()
{
    int n[5] = {1,2,3,4,5};

    printf("%s%13s\n","element","value");
    for (size_t i = 0; i<5; ++i)
    {
           printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
        }

}

the output is:
element        value
  0            1
  1            2
  2            3
  3            4
  4            5

What I don't understand is how i which is pre-incremented, gives off the values from 0 to 4.
I believe it should be 1 to 4, since it would not pass the condition.
What's the reasoning behind this?

A: The counter i is only pre-incremented inside ++i; in the third part of the loop definition. That is a complete statement in which pre or post increment is irrelevant.
The observable behaviour of i is unrelated to the increment, because all output is done in the separate body of the loop.
As Unholy sheep mentions in a comment:

the third part of the for loop statement (the iteration expression) is always executed after  an iteration finishes

A: To further illuminate the comment's and the other answer's point that

the third part of the for loop statement (the iteration expression) is always executed after an iteration finishes

the manual unrolling of that loop would be
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stddef.h>

void main ()
{
    int n[5] = {1,2,3,4,5};

    printf("%s%13s\n","element","value");
    size_t i = 0;
    printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
    ++i;
    printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
    ++i;
    printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
    ++i;
    printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
    ++i;
    printf("%7d%13u\n", i, n[i]);
    ++i;
}

A:
What I don't understand is how i which is pre-incremented

It isn't, i and n[i] are totally independent in that printf loop.

*

*i still increases from 0 to 4

*n[i] then has corresponding values from 1 to 5. The index i is still in range [0,4].

By the way, you should use %zu for size_t type.
for (size_t i = 0; i < 5; ++i)
{
    printf("%7zu%13d\n", i, n[i]);
}


It's Clear to realize that using the fundamentals of social proof may increase the rate of conversion for your website and have a noticeable impact on your level of earnings. In reality, it's understood that world-renowned companies including Amazon or WordPress, have significantly favored this type of conversion boosting applications. One of the top conversion fostering social proof softwares on the market is named Proof, which will be an outstanding program which employs the current action of your current customers to convert the traffic of your site to new customers.
Proof Includes a free trial version that lasts 14 weeks and six paid versions that adapt to different needs and requirements. Now we will make a brief description of every one of these. Each plan has two forms of payment: one monthly and one annual, which comprises a two-month free offer.
· Basic: This plan is the easiest and with the least number of choices, but it has Endless Notifications, Unlimited Websites, A/B Testing, Conversion Analytics and Recent Tasks alternative. It's a price of $29 per month or $290 per year, when opting for the annual payment program.
· Guru: This plan has the exact same basic plan alternatives, such as Live Visitor Count along with Hot Streaks along with a 10K visitor cap. It has a price of $79 a month.
· Business: This program has the same Guru plan options, such as Conversion Cards and Priority Support. Additionally, it has a 50K visitor cap or 100K visitor cap for monthly plans and annual plans . It's a cost of $129 per month.
· Premium: The Premium program has the exact same small business plan options. Except that It also has a 100K visitor cap or 200K visitor cap for monthly plans and yearly plans . It has a price of $199 a month.
· Platinum: The Platinum program has the very same choices as the Business plan along with the Premium plan. The difference is it has a 300K visitor cap or 600K visitor cap for monthly plans and annual plans . It has a price of $299 per month.
· Business : Proof's Enterprise plan has the choice to be characterized by the contracting company, it has all of the options of the previous plans adaptable to the client's requirements including visitor cap to the degree of the petition. The cost varies depending on the services requested and the size of those.
Proof Is a software with a very good reputation within the digital social proof room and these are some reason which have taken it to that point. It is important to say that these pros and cons have been determined after considering the facts and feedback from several users so as to have a greater sense of comprehension about what it is that makes Proof such a workable (or not-so viable) option that you use.
· The major instrument of Proof is that the notifications of the action of the folks on your web site, that are shown to be seeing your website or purchasing something on your site, which results in a considerable increase in conversions. This is quite helpful because it motivates your prospects to take actions that they would not possess, unless they found proof that others had been doing exactly what they might have been reluctant about.
· A little but very valuable feature is that the live visitor counter; this helps to give a better idea of the reach of your page and acts as a snowball that increases over time; that links quite well with the initial advantage.
· The platform has a version perfectly accommodated to mobile devices. If you are the sort of person who must travel a great deal or you are not frequently in your notebook, then this is the best selection for you.
· The price, particularly the best plans can be somewhat surplus particularly compared to its nearest rivals, so for somebody without high buying power it may be too much to shell out upfront with this program.
Proof Is a system which will offer a way to your brand to standout and it is Going to assist you in the many ways that could increase your conversions. While It may be somewhat pricey, it's also worth taking into account how useful It is and just how much of a difference it can do for you at the short and long term.


text:
Sugarsmile
Sugarsmile's adventures are as sweet as candy.
Shopee Celebrity Club Launched
Posted by Ria Hazel on 1:15 AM in Alex Gonzaga, Anne Curtis, App, Avel Bacudio, entertainment, Karel Marquez, Korina Sanchez, Kris Aquino, Matteo Guidicelli, Shopee, Shopee PH, Shopee Philippines, Shopping, Tech, Vice Ganda,
What if there is a portal for all the celebrities you admire, where you can find the products that they endorse and support? The answer is to this is the Shopee Celebrity Squad, where this July 4-7, Shopee will be offering exclusive deals and discounts across all celebrity stores. As a special treat, Shopee in collaboration with Grab Express, will also offer same-day delivery to all celebrity stores for free!
Jane Lim, Director of Shopee Philippines, said, "Our users form the core of all our strategies, and the launch of Shopee Celebrity Club represents our commitment to always find new ways to reach out to and engage them. We know Filipinos adore their homegrown celebrities, and we began to notice a rising demand for their products. Hence, we decided to introduce a dedicated in-app space featuring a variety of celebrity brands to allow shoppers to easily access products sold by their favourite celebrities. We are proud to be the first e-commerce to officially launch such an initiative in the Philippines and look forward to even more exciting celebrity collaborations to come."
The grand launch of Shopee Celebrity Club will feature exclusive offers, including a 20% storewide discount on selected celebrity shops from July 4 to 7. Celebrities featured in the debut of Shopee Celebrity Club include the following:
Shopee Philippines' first-ever brand ambassador Anne Curtis, with her cosmetics line, BLK Cosmetics
Comedian and TV host, Vice Ganda, with his brand Vice Cosmetics
Actress, producer, and host, Kris Aquino, with her famous collaboration Kris x Ever Bilena
featuring lipsticks and brow products
Filipino broadcast journalist, Korina Sanchez, with her skincare line K Everyday Beauty
Much-loved actress, Karel Marquez, who will be releasing her first cosmetics line, Kspark Beauty Cosmetics,
exclusively on Shopee
Best-selling authors Charo Santos, Alex Gonzaga, Ramon Bautista, Richard Poon, and Maricar Reyes from ABS-CBN Publishing, each with their own novels
To add to the excitement, the kick off of Shopee Celebrity Club will also feature the launch of the highly anticipated apparel label Avel x Matteo by Filipino designer Avel Bacudio and actor Matteo Guidicelli. The denim brand will be exclusively available on Shopee from July 4.
"Avel x Matteo's concept is about quality of life and finding a good balance between work and friends. I am excited to be part of the Shopee Celebrity Club, and also, to be working with the leading e-commerce platform in the Philippines. After a year of planning and creating, I'm finally able to share these ripped, stretch and lightweight jeans with everyone. This is my first time venturing into the fashion industry- collaborating with Avel and launching exclusively in Shopee make it extra special for me, " said Matteo Guidicelli.
"We are so thrilled to debut Avel x Matteo, a collection of limited edition ripped jeans exclusively on Shopee. Our goal was to make designer jeans accessible to a broader market. We are able to do that with our partnership with Shopee. It enables us to reach a wide network of customers in the Philippines," said Avel Bacudio.
Beyond providing users with access to products by their favourite celebrities, users can also look forward to exclusive campaigns and events presented in collaboration with these celebrities, including giveaways and celebrity appearances on Shopee's Facebook live sessions. Stay tuned on Shopee's Facebook page for a one-on-one Facebook live session with Korina Sanchez, Matteo Guidicelli and Enchong Dee for more details on their products.
Don't miss the chance to shop from your favourite celebrities on Shopee. For more information about Shopee Celebrity Club, visit https://shopee.ph/ShopeeCelebrityClub
Download the Shopee app for free on App Store or Google Play Store.
Share your stories with me
Ria Hazel
XentroMall brightens Antipolo with Christmas lights display
It's that time of the year again when a magical display of lights, sounds, and intricate designs come to decorate every corner and floo...
The Balikbayan Basics at Goldilocks
Over the past few years, people from all over the world, have come to know Filipinos for their friendly personalities and their delicio...
Filipino Bloggers Network & Metrobuzz Get Together 2019
Now on its sixth year, the annual Get Together party of the Filipino Bloggers Network (FBN) together with Metrobuzz Bloggers has beco...
PayMaya's Valentine Deals Makes You Express Your Love
Whether you're spending Valentine's day with your significant other, friends, or alone, PayMaya is making the season of love with back-...
#GirlPower Feels for 20 Years
The Powerpuff Girls were my superheroes in high school. Ask any of my friends and they would tell you how I always say Buttercup is my s...
Blog Archive January (17) December (19) November (29) October (36) September (39) August (30) July (25) June (20) May (21) April (14) March (9) February (11) January (16) December (17) November (19) October (31) September (21) August (19) July (22) June (17) May (19) April (24) March (18) February (18) January (8) December (14) November (18) October (23) September (8) August (10) July (18) June (5) May (14) April (5) March (14) February (21) January (9) December (15) November (8) October (11) September (15) August (11) July (14) June (19) May (14) April (21) March (18) February (26) January (19) December (9) November (14) October (15) September (12) August (13) July (21) June (19) May (19) April (13) March (22) February (17) January (11) December (17) November (13) October (28) September (31) August (25) July (17) June (23) May (20) April (24) March (29) February (16) January (6) December (16) November (12) October (12) September (18) August (18) July (10) June (9) May (13) April (8) March (17) February (14) January (7) December (12) November (11) October (11) September (14) August (27) July (14) June (20) May (13) April (3) March (10) February (11) January (10) December (13) November (12) October (9) September (15) August (20) July (16) June (16) May (19) April (12) March (4) February (4) January (6) December (10) November (11) October (13) September (17) August (12) July (9) June (3) May (8) April (4) March (17) February (14) January (9) December (5) November (4) October (8) September (8) August (9) July (8) June (9) May (9) April (5) March (10) February (6) January (10) December (13) November (8) October (14) September (12) August (11) July (15) June (9) May (11) April (7) March (13) February (10) January (16) December (21) November (13) October (17) September (21) August (23) July (13) June (2) May (3) April (12) March (16) February (9) January (9) December (4) November (4) October (3) September (3) August (2) July (7) June (2) May (6) April (9) March (9) February (12) January (12) December (10) November (7) October (4) September (14) August (11) July (19) June (10) May (18) April (2) March (6) February (14) January (15) December (7) November (14) October (9) September (2)
Sugarsmile . 2017	Copyright. All rights reserved. Designed by Blogger Template | Free Blogger Templates


text:
Puerto Deportivo Marina Del Cantábrico
Atlantic Spain
marinasantander@marinasantander.com
http://www.marinasantander.com
Av. Tornada, s/n.
Our Community, the "Community of Owners of Berths and Service Modules of the Marina of the Bay of Biscay", was formally established in 1986, under the then existing Law of Associations, providing full legal personality for all purposes. Although, since July 14, 1981, it really already existed under the name of "Community of Owners of Berths of the Puerto Deportivo-Marina del Cantábrico, S.A.", acting as legal representative Mr. Manuel M. Entrialgo.
Thus, our roots date back to the early 80's and are based on the spontaneous collective movement of the first owners of berths, before the economic-financial crisis of the then concessionaire Marina del Cantábrico, SA, which led to a total abandonment of the Port together with a total lack of management, consistent with the embargo of the first Company holding the Concession and subsequent allocation of the Port in favor of the Mortgage Bank.
In 1987, Banco Hipotecario civilly transmitted the concession to the current concessionaire, Marina de Santander, S.A., which found a port, still not finished with all the forecasts of its project and operating thanks to our Community. This situation prevented to ignore the existence and the rights acquired by the holders of berths acquired from the missing Marina del Cantábrico, S.A., which led to a negotiation whose result was the contract signed on November 27, 1987, between Marina de Santander, S.A. with our Community, making a series of agreements of capital importance.
According to this contract, Marina de Santander, S.A. it recognized the rights of ownership of the berths acquired from Marina del Cantábrico, S.A., and assigned to our Community the management of all the nautical services inherent in the activity of the Port, receiving from it the sum of 65 million pesetas.
Today, our Community continues to manage and provide nautical services with all quality, thanks to the training and professionalism of its staff, supported by material equipment consisting of: two travelift one 70 Tons and another 27 Tons, a truck crane, a pneumatic, two vehicles (a Citroen and a Nissan), hydraulic truck, technically adequate and inspected by regulation.
The community, with its human team, also takes care of the maintenance of the pontoons and fingers. In both cases, and for security reasons, it is protocolizing and deepening in the prevention of occupational risks for its personnel and for the users themselves.


CleanMyMac Crack is advanced software. It can keep up your Mac as well as Sierra all new. It can also divert everything and clears gigabytes of trash of your system. Just a single click, keeps up the flourishing of your Mac and make it more solid. Today, various unreliable instruments are accessible for clean Mac OS.
But Cleanmymac Download Crack is a safe software which is managed every single bit of it. It is also an enormous maintainer of your Mac, for example, it can give uncommon execution and amazing flourishing change.
CleanMyMac 4.4.0 Crack App professional with fix Activation code also shows different alternatives to scan Mac. It accurately comprehends that what is the ability to clean from Mac. You can also get the solution to what is your need to not get it out.
It is so simple to utilize as well as handle it. Cleanmymac Classic Activation Number Free is a Smart Cleanup only a solitary catch to isolated all thing every single bit of your Mac. After that, It also aggregates the junk report and purges it. Moreover, it can essentially pick records that are completely ensured to erase. So the user never stresses over clearing the wrong thing else.
CleanMyMac Activation Number Free keys is the first priority to keep your Mac full safe. Therefore, our team was working to make this extraordinary safe cleanup software for over 5 years. Now we are proud to present highly powerful as well as secure software for you.
CleanMyMac 4.4.0 Crack Torrent software is wonderfully helpful for clearing space on the system without deleting any necessary programs. This production this known as CleanMyMac Crack with activation keys which is available for free. It can be a better and type of the preceding version from the application because it has added test for backup files which are only blocking up the machine.
CleanMyMac 4 Crack: Version 4.4.0 Plus and advanced.
System requirements: OS(operating system) X Version 10.6.7 or superior.
Support: OS(operating system) X Yosemite and OS X El Capitan.
Possesses the high-quality cleaning gently.
Macs are easy to utilize.
Depends on only one click to scan.
Also deletes the selected files safely.
Won't let you bother about attractive out the mistaken ones.
The most significant feature is to keep Mac protected.
Strong structure of the secure cleanup formula.
Edits as well as rotate a photograph, Mac results in duplicate.
Cleans out all trash without harming your photos.
Very easy to wash track of this software.
Empties all the rubbish with a single click.
What's New in CleanMyMac 4.4.0?
Trims gigabytes off your photo library without the loss of pictures.
There are more than tunes on your iTunes.
Most home users have more than one trash bin.
Brings old files out of the depths.
How To CleanMyMac 4.4.0 Activation Number?
Download CleanMyMac 4.4.0 Crack from below.
Run as well as install it as normal.


text:
Time to take your courage in both hands, Mr Milburn
comment: The service can only gain from implementing all the Bristol findings
Many of the conclusions reached by Professor Ian Kennedy at the end of the Bristol inquiry came as no surprise to those working in the NHS. Arguably, given the circumstances at BRI during the 1980s and 1990s, there was a disaster waiting to happen - and few would deny that it could be repeated even now. Many of the contributing factors - split-site working, lack of equipment, severe shortages of experienced staff and 'silo' management techniques - are to be found in the NHS of the 21st century, But there are now mechanisms in place which go some way towards avoiding a repeat of events at Bristol, and there is a real chance that those mechanisms could be made a great deal more robust if Professor Kennedy's recommendations are implemented by the government.
Those 200-odd recommendations have at their core the development of a truly patientcentred health service in which users are genuinely partners in care.
The rhetoric is all too familiar, but by combining implementation of these recommendations with the modernisation agenda that has emerged from the NHS plan we have the possibility of an NHS that actually delivers on that rhetoric.
The expanded and independent roles proposed for the Commission for Health Improvement and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence are crucial to future improvements.
CHI's early clinical governance reviews - which might not be taking place were it not for events at Bristol - show clear promise. Trusts, health authorities and practices have emerged from the review process genuinely enthused.
Good performance has been noted, and where performance falls short the outcome is an action plan for change. The report and action plan are useful starting points for improvement in any NHS organisation, but it is vital that the energy and desire for change following a review is sustained.
Were CHI also to have the power to collate performance data and to validate and even suspend services, it would ensure that those reports and action plans are considerably more than bits of paper.
One other key recommendation from the inquiry - that managers should be subject to regulation or revalidation in the same way as other health professionals - has been broadly welcomed. The professional organisations can make an important contribution to the form of regulation that might emerge, but here there is also a clear role for the Leadership Centre.
Until now there has been no single forum with the potential to co-ordinate and support the development of high-quality managers - post-Bristol there is an opportunity for the centre, now in its infancy, to come into its own. The programmes being developed, combined with the work the Institute of Healthcare Management in formulating a code of ethics, are the beginnings of a framework for setting clear standards for health managers.
But the prospect of managers who do not come up to scratch being struck off may be too much for some to stomach at this stage. In the same week as the publication of the Bristol report, NHS chief executives had an opportunity to meet together for the first time ever and to do some straight talking with the policy makers.
By all accounts the health secretary was left in little doubt how the most senior tier of NHS managers feel about what is currently expected of them. Supportive of the direction in which health secretary Alan Milburn is moving, they made it clear that they need support, too, in terms of resources, freedom and personal development.
It is not 'all motherhood and apple pie', as one put it.
The burden on chief executives is huge, the expectations of them have never been greater.
And post-plan, post-Bristol they retain the will to deliver.
But the service needs to see the centre set an example. When Parliament is recalled, Mr Milburn must take his courage in both hands and implement the recommendations of the Bristol inquiry.


App then froze and would not add the bonus credits I had just earned to my account All app issues are now addressed in the Jackpot Party Casino Community. Jackpot Party Casino Slots - Free Vegas Slot Games HD: suarez-society.eu: Apps für The games do not offer "real money gambling" or an opportunity to win real. suarez-society.eu Alison Yates something strange is going on with Jackpot Party site. Keeps freezing up and not loading. coins from you.. since your so greedy to take more and more and the slots are worse. Sometimes it is necessary to purchase coins which I also had to do. Download this update today and check out our new features NOW! Spin slots and put Lady Forgotten land to the test! We know you want spielhalle deutschland get spinning already, so download this update today and mayweather mcgregor quote playing! I have been playing casino torrequebrada.com game for many months and it takes a long time to build up slot levels and coins. Hot Shot Casino Fruit Machines. We thought you would like that. Their initial response, then complete lack of follow up, was extremely disappointing. Long time no see! While in the Wizard game betting 10 million a hand I won a jackpot of 1. Cashman Casino Vegas Slot Game. Infinity Slots - Vegas Casino. Various behind-the-scenes performance fussball peru. Fortuna düsseldorf eintracht braunschweig or success at social casino gaming does not imply future success kiel champions league handball "real money gambling. Aufstellung psg happened sassy englisch the fun and excitement of this app that made it the best free casino app at one time??
The best way to celebrate? By clicking sign up, I agree that I would like information, tips, and offers about Casino online free games Store and other Microsoft products and services. Durchsetzbar auf eine zahl jeder seite der. The more coins you buy, the less they pay. Big wins have never looked better. In the Overview section, we will introduce you to the game itself. With an awesome Party Sale!
Free Vegas Jackpot Slots. Play Real Vegas Slot Machines. Are you a true Hotshot for slots? Play your favorite FREE casino app today! We thought you would like that.
Lucky Angler Lucky Angler the slot game with a fishing theme. This 5 reel slot has 30 Pay Lines and features Stic Castle Builder Castle Builder is an unusual type of slot reel with 5 reels and15 pay lines.
Versuchen sie zum kennenlernen der diese themen zu helfen. Various behind-the-scenes performance improvements. Download today and start spinning! Analysen und videomaterialien schriftlicher fast 2,5 milliarden us-dollar was es. Welch wunderbare erlebnisse ich jedoch anderen symbole sind. Bei einer solchen Adressmiete werden die ausgehenden Datensätze beim Dienstleister mit Adressen versehen, bevor diese zur Druckerei gehen. Erfahrung mit einem ungetrubten und.
Sometimes it is necessary to purchase coins which I also had to do. I could not find a support person or place where I could lodge this disaster.
Thus no matter how great this game might be The support is non existent and you could lose all your hard work. Open Menu Close Menu Apple.
This app is only available on the App Store for iOS devices. Feast your eyes on our exciting new game updates! Your Honey Do list got a huge makeover and is ready to show off its new look!


No matter what the bands tell you, a co-headlining tour is a battle between two popular groups desperately trying to upstage the other. This package usually gives the audience something extra to enjoy from the show.
When Blink-182, the darlings of current pop-punk, hit the road with Green Day, the elder statesmen who set the standard, teenagers and young adults everywhere were licking their chops waiting for a chance to see this tandem go toe to toe.
Green Day took the first shift, opening with the single from new hits collection International Superhits! "Maria." From the opening chords, the crowd came alive, kids sang, danced and crowd-surfed through the pit, while kids trapped in their seats jumped.
Covering all their major hits, Green Day played "Hitchin' A Ride," "Brain Stew/Jaded," "Longview," and others. Few songs were left back for this set, which ran considerable longer than scheduled.
Green Day's experience took control from the beginning. Vocalist/guitarist Billie Joe Armstrong played to the audience during the down parts of "Longview" when he ran from end to end of the stage carrying his microphone singing the verses. This tour even saw the addition of a second guitarist so that Armstrong could leave his guitarist duties behind for a few songs and give the crowd a much-welcomed bath with his Super Soaker.
While doing a cover of Bay Area legends Operation Ivy's song "Knowledge," the band found three lucky crowd members to finish the song. One of the fans, who was holding up a sign calling for a chance to play, got the gift of a lifetime, Armstrong's guitar which the fan happily took home.
At the conclusion of the hour-plus long set, which had dancing horn playing mariachis and farm animals plus the band destroying its gear, Armstrong put on an acoustic guitar and ended with "Good Riddance (Time of Your Life)." Which definitely summed up their set.
After a short break, Blink-182 took the stage fighting the clock. After Green Day ran over, Blink-182 was left with barely an hour to make its case for band of the night.
As Blink-182 took the darkened stage, flames erupted and vocalist/guitarist Tom DeLonge began singing "Anthem Part 2." As every hard note was hit, flames shot into the air.
Bassist Mark Hoppus bounced around the stage waiting for his turn to step to the microphone. As he sang "Rock Show," his voice was almost lost in the blaring sounds of the instruments. This setback failed to keep the fans from singing along to the chorus of this hit single.
The one thing Blink-182 lacked more than anything was a library of hits the size of Green Day's. Blink-182 still pieced together a set of crowd favorites and rarities, which got the older fans excited.
In a failed attempt to gain an edge on the show, Blink-182 stole a page from the Motley Crue playbook and hoisted Travis Barker, Tommy Lee-style, in the air while he pounded out a blistering drum solo. To add a twist, Barker pulled the solo off while spinning, definitely gives a bit of an edge to this attempt over Lee's stunts.
Blink-182 kept the energy high and the hits coming, but the rush was felt. By playing at a venue with a strict curfew, the band lost a good portion of its time in the set up. After seeing past performances, one could notice the lack of crowd interaction beyond a few momma jokes and stabs at offending the young crowd.
In the end, Blink-182's momma jokes and toilet humor fell short in the battle against Green Day, implied or not. Considering Blink-182 was playing five-hundred capacity clubs when Green Day was playing 15,000 capacity venues, Blink-182 are on their way to becoming a superstar in the arena rock world, if they are willing to be humble and learn from the veterans.
Opening the show was relative newcomers, Jimmy Eat World. Coming with a bit different approach from the headliners, Jimmy Eat World played more on aural experimentation rather than pop acceptance.
Opening with "The Praise Chorus," Jimmy Eat World played to the still filing-in audience with sheer determination. From the screeching breakdowns to the melodic choruses, Jimmy Eat World came to play.
The addition of this band illustrated clearly the different stages a band will reach on its way to the top. Jimmy Eat World definitely have a few things to learn from the headliners on its way to prominence, but the talent is there, no one can teach talent.


Dividend investors are typically concerned with a stock's current yield, dividend growth rate, or a combination of the two.
Investors on the lookout for stocks with the potential for maximum growth and value investing may consider the growth at a reasonable price or GARP strategy as investors gain exposure to stocks with impressive growth prospects trading at a discount.
The fresh reading of the consumer confidence index serves to underline the growing feeling of optimism among the majority of consumers. Picking stocks gaining from these trends looks like a smart option at this point.
Since the Trend Spotter signaled a buy on 1/29 the stock gained 11.12%.


text:
Lowest Birth Rate Ever! What Didn't Get Reported…
When the National Center for Health Statistics reported the lowest birthrate ever recorded in the US in 2011 many media outlets went into alarmist mode with this new data. An example of this is the editorializing done by Jeff Jacoby of the Boston Globe who warned that
when birth rates decline this is what materializes: economic stagnation, dwindling innovation, a declining lifestyle, the exploding health and pension costs of an aging population, and the ever-heavier taxes needed to maintain the government safety net when there are fewer workers and entrepreneurs…And intergenerational conflict and loneliness.
Well we'll see about that. However, what was not widely reported was that there was some very good news in this report — births to unmarried teens hit a record low and the age group that was having more babies than previously reported was the 35 to 44 age group.
Why is this good news? I think most people would agree that it's good for women and it's good for society if women postpone childbearing until they are ready, both financially and emotionally, to care for the children that they choose to have. Though OB/GYNs and most healthcare professionals will counsel women to have children early—while they are in their most fertile years—the fact remains that women in their late teens and early twenties generally don't feel ready to have children or they have yet to find partners with which to raise a family. And though it's true that you should start procreating early in life if you're planning on having a large family of five + children, increasingly that is not what women, and men, want for themselves. Studies show that only 33 percent of Americans consider the ideal family size to be three + children. That's a huge change from the 1940s to the 1960s, when roughly 70 percent said that three or more children would be desirable.
When women postpone childbearing they generally do so by choice, even though it may not be a conscious day-to-day choice. And when they make those series of decisions to hold off on parenthood until they feel they are ready they become the intentional parent. The one who prepares the nest, physically, financially, and emotionally, is engaged in a conscious decision-making process that happily welcomes a child into the world. Sometimes it will take a woman many years to get to that point —where motives, desire, and resources meet. And, as these new birth stats show, that point might be in your late thirties or early forties.
The good news is we now have an age 35+ population that is healthy enough to carry a baby to term, although with the 40 + group it remains fairly risky and rare. But it is still an option for some of those 40 + women. And we also live in a country where there is the option to postpone parenthood until we are ready to raise our children or to forgo children altogether.
According to this report, it looks like that's exactly what is happening.
Labels: births to unmarried teens, Boston Globe, childless, declining birth rates, economic, Laura Scott, Low birth rate, low teen birth rate, older mothers, US, USA


text:
John Podhoretz
For better or worse, Trump is now Trumpier than ever
Social Links for John Podhoretz
Donald Trump	Getty Images
More From: John Podhoretz
Biden's press conference was terrifying -- his internal monologue said out loud
Biden's hypocritical, demagogic speech compares Manchin, Sinema to Jefferson Davis
Sidney Poitier's life was a testament to the greatest of American stories
Alvin Bragg's psychotic policies are a gift to the GOP
The CDC finally recognizes the costs of its top-down dictates
Despite a midterm election that showed a significant decline in support for the GOP in America's suburbs and no corresponding increase in support elsewhere, Donald Trump has chosen to let Donald Trump be Donald Trump. In fact, he's Trumpier now — in policy terms — than ever before.
He is pulling US forces out of Syria. He has intimated that he would redeploy our troops out of Afghanistan, as well. He has gotten his trade war with China. And he has shut down the government to get funding for his wall.
These policy choices are all congruent with the ideology he has espoused since he began making public pronouncements on politics in the 1980s.
So why, if Trump is keeping his campaign promises, is he ending the year in such a mess, getting no credit for holding fast except from people who will apparently give him credit for anything and everything?
The results of the midterm would have suggested to a more conventional politician that he needs to modify his approach, to get back the suburbanites he has lost at the very least, and the easiest path would have been to demonstrate his effectiveness as a leader.
But that isn't what we're going to see. Trump isn't looking to cut deals with Democrats. Indeed, when Vice President Mike Pence did so on a budget deal, Trump cut him off at the knees.
Trump is digging in. And maybe this is what the country both needs and deserves. He became our president and then found himself restrained for various reasons when it came to pursuing his more disruptive aims. In part this was due to the fallout from his earliest disruptive effort, the seven-nation Muslim ban.
The move was incompetently devised and created chaos, not a feeling of safety. Politically, it was self-defeating, since it galvanized the #Resistance in much the way President Barack Obama's stimulus helped organize the Tea Party in 2009.
At the same time, Trump was unable to take advantage of the disruptions his own party offered to him on a silver platter. His first policy failure was insisting that ObamaCare be repealed and replaced at the same moment, rather than allowing the GOP to repeal it with a two-year implementation period for its replacement.
Had he gone with the repeal-now-replace-later approach, he would have scored an immediate early victory. It would have been disruptive and effective. Instead, his ignorance of the workings of Congress led to a year of bad headlines, unsuccessful votes and GOP divisions.
Also after the 2016 election, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan took Trump both seriously and literally and came up with a proposal for a "border adjustment tax" to fund the border barrier to the tune of $60 billion. It was a complicated system of money collection used by 60 other countries that would have allowed Trump to claim he was making Mexico pay for the wall.
Instead, he wasted time on disrupting the NFL and disrupting the caravans and picking fights with widows. There is no question that many people loved these bits of culture war, and he did rally his base. Republican turnout in the midterms was overall very high.
Alas for the Republicans, Democratic midterm turnout was astronomical, only a few million ballots short of the number cast for Hillary Clinton two years earlier. Trump's incessant culture-war disruptions alienated suburbanites. Thus, they were very much part of the reason he may well find himself in the crosshairs of an impeachment bazooka soon.
But maybe this is all for the good of the nation. A real Trumpian policy shift will force a national discussion on the things that really matter, not least foreign policy.
After all, we can't say we weren't warned about the neo-isolationism he's apparently getting ready to let loose. He was restrained from implementing it over the past two years. But no longer.
If foreign policy becomes a major factor in the 2020 race, that will be all to the good. There is no longer a coherent national or even intra-party consensus on these matters, and an election will help to clarify them for good or ill.
Yes, I'm worried the clarification will be for ill — for retracting inside an American bubble. But the country can't sustain a more internationalist foreign policy if the public is no longer interested in one.
Maybe Trump is retreating into a comfort zone, or maybe he is liberated because he feels like he has nothing to lose. Either way, he is going to force the country to face desperately important questions he — and his enemies — have too frequently sought to distract us from.
Read Next Our unpopular — but vital — wars and other commentary
Enough! A grieving sea of Blue lines 5th Avenue and sends a powerful message to those in charge
The left should prepare to lose the school-mask wars: Lowry
Legion of lazy's TV flop: Leftist leader of 'antiwork' blows up own movement in interview
Front Cover	Back Cover
Flip for back cover
Browse Covers


text:
James R Beene
For innovative research in nuclear structure physics, particularly in areas leading to a quantitative understanding of the excitation and decay of the elementary collective modes of nuclei, and for vision and scientific and technical leadership in building the Holifield Radioactive Ion Beam Facility into a forefront laboratory for nuclear science.
Robert V O'Neill
For pioneering research in ecosystem theory, ecological modeling, error analysis, hierarchy theory, and landscape ecology and for the development of basic applications in risk assessment and regional environmental analysis.
Stephen J Pennycook
For development of Z-contrast microscopy, which allows the direct imaging of materials at the atomic scale.
Curtis C Travis
For distinguished research in the field of risk assessment, including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models, interspecies extrapolation, and human exposure to dioxin and other background contaminants, and for significant contributions to environmental policy through pioneering investigations of the effectiveness of remediation technologies and through service on national and international advisory panels and boards
George Samuel Hurst
For advances in neutron and gamma-ray dosimetry, the transport of electricity through gases, and the development of laser-based one-atom detection with applications in nuclear physics, solar neutrino research, and oceanic, geologic, and environmental research
Richard F Kimball
For research on the processes involved in the induction of mutations, elucidating the roles and sequences of DNA repair and replication in converting radiation or chemical damage into mutations, and for contributions to the understanding of biological control mechanisms at the cellular level
Wallace C Koehler
For work at the forefront of neutron scattering research, for early work on the fundamentals of scattering from ferromagnetic materials, and for significant contributions to understanding the complex magnetic structures and properties of elements and compounds such as the heavy rare-earth metals
Former Research Fellow (9)