text:
Tag Archives: Lifeline
Don't Forget Lifeline
There has been a big push nationwide to get customers enrolled in the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), that provides a $30 monthly subsidy for broadband providers – a discount that can be applied to any broadband product. With the ACP discount, a qualifying customer can buy a broadband product normally priced at $60 for $30.
Most ISPs seem to have forgotten about the FCC Lifeline program that can provide a monthly discount of $9.25 off a telephone or broadband bill for qualifying customers. Consumers can qualify for the Lifeline discount if the household income is at or below 135% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines or else by participating in Medicaid, SNAP (formerly Food Stamps), SSI, Federal Housing Assistance, VA Veterans pension, or VA survivor's pension.
It's a little easier to qualify for ACP since it is available to homes at or below 200% of Federal Poverty Guidelines. The ACP discount is also available to those who participate in Medicaid, SNAP, Federal Housing Assistance, WIC, SSI, or Lifeline.
That last requirement is the important one – customers can qualify for both the ACP discount and Lifeline, meaning an ISP can collect a total subsidy of $39.25 for a qualifying customer.
The FCC made some changes to the Lifeline program in July. The most important change for ISPs is that the cap for a lifeline subscriber was increased to 1.28 gigabytes per month – which is higher than the data cap for ISPs like Comcast. The FCC set the new annual budget for 2023 at $2.57 billion and changed the rule so that the size of the funding will be increased each year using the Consumer Price Index.
There have been a few barriers that have kept many ISPs from participating in Lifeline. Many of them thought that the $9.25 subsidy was too small to bother with. There also is a requirement that an ISP must be an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC), a status that is granted by State regulatory Commissions. Years ago, this implied that an ETC gained carrier of last resort obligations, which meant they were required to serve anybody in a service area. But since broadband has been largely deregulated, carrier-of-last-resort doesn't have much meaning these days.
A lot of ISPs said that Lifeline was a pain to implement. There was no easy way for ISPs to know if a household qualified, and audits of the program would often mean rebating funds to the FCC. That issue has largely been resolved since the FCC now maintains a database that is updated monthly of homes that participate in the various federal subsidy programs. An ISP can feel safe in giving the discount to a household on this list.
Any ISP that is participating in ACP in order to reach low-income households should consider the Lifeline discount as well. Extending a $39.25 discount to households is a significant saving.
There are still a few nuances for ISPs that try this. Practically everybody that qualifies for Lifeline will qualify for ACP, but not everybody that qualifies for ACP can get Lifeline due to the lower limit on household income.
There are still a lot of questions about how many ISPs are actually trying to implement the ACP discount. Most ISPs have a lot of customers that qualify, but ISPS don't seem to be pushing the discount. But for any ISP that wants to bring broadband to as many folks in a community as possible, a $39.25 customer discount can make it a lot easier to make broadband affordable.
Posted in Regulation - What is it Good For?
Tagged ACP, FCC, Lifeline
The Future of the Universal Service Fund
The FCC adopted a Notice of Inquiry on December 15 that asks for comments about the future of the Universal Service Fund. There is not a lot of time to respond with the holidays in the middle since comments are due on January 18. But the NOI is asking the right questions.
High-Cost Programs. On the topic of the High-cost programs, it asks how the giant BEAD grants will impact the future of the FCC broadband awards. It asks if there should be an additional round of RDOF. It asks if some of the highest-cost areas constructed with the BEAD grants will need ongoing high-cost support. It asks if the FCC should adopt a standard of 100/20 Mbps as a requirement for future high-cost support. It asks about the use of future reverse auctions.
Lifeline. The NOI asks about the future of the existing Lifeline fund in light of the funding given to the EBB program and now to the ACP program that provides a larger monthly broadband subsidy.
E-Rate. The NOI asks if the E-Rate program for schools and libraries should be changed due to anything that came out of the Infrastructure Act. It asks about ways to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse.
Rural Health Care. The NOI asks if the program changes due to telehealth funding in the Infrastructure Act.
Funding. The NOI asks if the method of funding the USF should be changed.
I've written about all of these questions before. Here are a few quick thoughts I have on these questions – each question deserves a much longer response:
The FCC's high-cost funding has outlived its usefulness. While this funding did a lot of good and helped telcos build rural fiber, it also made some telco owners rich through overpayments. The overpayments became obscene when the FCC gave $11 billion in CAF II funding to the big telcos and then ignored the reports that upgrades weren't being done. The RDOF reverse auction is a giant mess and will turn into a disaster if the FCC doesn't soon kill off unworthy awards in favor of BEAD grants. It's time to kill this program completely, get the FCC out of the broadband funding business, and downsize the USF accordingly. The need for broadband funding can always be revisited in a decade if some rural places still need ongoing support. But even revisiting the idea is suspect because the FCC is always going to rely on poor mapping and inadequate cost models to determine who gets funded.
The $9.95 Lifeline fund still has some use to support cellphone for homeless and other forgotten communities. But the monthly subsidy is too small to make home broadband more affordable. The FCC should either re-purpose the Lifeline fund to strictly support low-income cellphones or kill the program.
The E-Rate program provides noticeable benefits to schools and has brought gigabit broadband to some of the poorest parts of the country. I've never heard anything but good about the Rural Health Care funding.
As far as funding – if the High-cost fund and Lifeline programs are curtailed or eliminated then the amount of needed funding drops drastically. But I think a more fundamental question needs to be asked. Why is the FCC still being allowed to operate a giant slush fund? A huge percentage of the funding over the years has gone to the big ISPs. The USF has been riddled with stories of abuse and fraud. The primary problem with the USF is that regulators are trying to run national one-size-fits-all programs without the needed facts or staffing to do it right. I think it's time to have a conversation about ending the Universal Service Fund. The E-Rate and Rural Health Care programs are successful, but they are something that should be funded by Congress. Let's get regulators out of the funding business and aim the agency back towards their primary goal of regulating the broadband industry – instead of funding the companies the FCC is supposed to be overseeing.
Tagged FCC, Lifeline, Universal Service Fund
The FCC and Urban Broadband
Chairman Ajit Pai recently said during an interview in Buffalo that he supported what he called Gigabit Opportunity Zones as a way to get fiber built to poor neighborhoods in downtown areas of cities like Buffalo.
The idea of Gigabit Opportunity Zones comes from a bill that was introduced in the last Congress in November of 2019 by Georgia Representative Doug Collins. The bill is H.R. 5082 – the Gigabit Opportunity Act.
The bill would mimic many of the provisions of the Opportunity Zones that were created in the Tax Cuts ad Jobs Act of 2017. That law intended to spur infrastructure investment in low-income Census blocks. The original tax change allowed investors to gain two major tax benefits from investing in qualified infrastructure. They could defer or erase existing capital gains by investing capital gain profits into qualified projects for at least ten years. Investors would also see no capital gains from profits made on an opportunity zone investment.
The proposed broadband bill has similar, but different benefits. First, governors would have to
nominate areas in their state that would be eligible for the gigabit tax breaks. Such areas would have to
Face obstacles to economic development due to a lack of geographic broadband coverage or speed;
Are the focus of mutually reinforcing state, local, or private economic development initiatives;
Are poised for economic growth that requires access to high speed broadband for commercial purposes; and
Represent the areas of a state where such service would result in the highest return on investment.
Just like with the existing opportunity zone rules, an investor could defer or eliminate existing capital gains by bringing capital gains proceeds to a new qualified project. Even better than the existing opportunity zones investing, the new project could expense the cost of building the fiber network in the first year, thus realizing a huge capital loss in the first year (which is a great way to wipe out capital gains).
It doesn't look like the bill has moved forward since introduction beyond being referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. The purpose of the blog is not to say anything negative about the bill. It would be great if something like this would help spur building fiber to urban neighborhoods that might otherwise never see fiber. It does seem to me that the provisions that a qualified investment must result in the highest return on investment makes it likely that this would benefit the richest neighborhoods rather than the poorest. But those kinds of details get worked out during the legislative process.
What I found a bit disturbing is that this bill was brought up in response to the question of what the FCC could do for cities like Buffalo. The Chairman offered the following responses to the question:
He said the FCC had expanded the opportunity for people to qualify for the Lifeline program. From what I can see, this FCC has done the exact opposite and would like nothing better than to eliminate this part of the Universal Service Fund.
He mentioned E-Rate programs to bring better broadband to schools and libraries. The FCC did make it a bit easier for schools to turn that broadband outward to the parking lots during the pandemic, but otherwise this FCC hasn't improved the E-Rate program.
Chairman Pai said he had asked Congress for the authority to provide hotspots to poor urban neighborhoods, but that Congress hasn't given him that authority. This highlights that the FCC gave away their authority over broadband and now has no authority to do things like promote hotspots.
He mentioned the RDOF grant process as one that is bringing broadband to those that need it, without mentioning that the 'R' in RDOF stands for rural – none of that money is going to Buffalo.
He mentioned regulatory reform. By that, he is sticking with his story that deregulating the big ISPs will result in more investment in places like Buffalo. From what I can see, none of the big ISPs have responded to 'light-touch' regulation by building fiber to poor neighborhoods.
Finally, he cited the Gigabit Opportunity Zone legislation. That's a stalled piece of legislation that might bring benefits, but which has nothing to do with the FCC.
The Chairman's response should have been that the FCC is not seriously looking at solving the digital divides in cities. The FCC has done its best to write itself out of the broadband picture. The FCC still must administer the Universal Service Fund because it has no choice. The FCC Chairman is sticking to the pure fiction that the big ISPs will solve the broadband problems of the world in response to being deregulated. But in reality, the FCC is doing almost nothing for urban broadband and has no intentions of doing so.
Tagged Chairman Ajit Pai, E-Rate, FCC, Gigabit Opportunity Zones, Lifeline
FCC Modifies Lifeline Rules
The FCC released new rules for the Lifeline program in November. These rules will make it harder for some companies to participate in the program, but it opens up the door to many new participants.
The FCC has obsessed for years about fraud in the program. There are numerous cases over the years of the program providing Lifeline subsidies to people who are no longer eligible or who even died. However, a lot of that blame has to placed on the FCC. Carriers have never had any ways to know if Lifeline participant gets a job and is no longer were eligible, or even if the eligible family member dies and the subsidy continues to go to the household. The FCC has finally taken the steps to fix such problems through the creation of the National Lifeline Eligibility Verifier – a database updated monthly by government agencies that provide the support that makes participants eligible.
The following new rules are lifted directly from the FCC, which says the new rules will improve the program by:
Prohibiting participating carriers from paying commissions to employees or sales agents based on the number of consumers who apply for or are enrolled in the Lifeline program
Requiring participating carriers' employees or sales agents involved in enrollment to register with the program administrator, the Universal Service Administrative Co. (USAC)
Strengthening prohibitions barring Lifeline providers from claiming "subscribers" that are deceased
Taking additional steps to better identify duplicate subscribers, prevent reimbursement for fictitious subscribers, and better target carrier audits to identify potential FCC rule violations
Increasing transparency by posting aggregate subscribership data, including data broken out at the county level, on USAC's website
Increasing transparency with states by directing USAC to share information regarding suspicious activity with state officials
Restoring the states' traditional role of designating carriers to participate in the Lifeline program.
One of the requirements is somewhat unusual in that ISPs need to identify those employees responsible for enrolling participants in the Lifeline plan. For most ISPs, that's going to be the customer service staff. The requirement is a headscratcher because it's hard to conceive of any possible good way that the FCC can use this information.
The last bullet point highlights an opportunity for ISPs that want to participate in the program. For the last several years it's been exceedingly difficult for an ISP to enter the Lifeline program. During that same period, we've seen big telcos like AT&T withdraw from the plan in most of the states where they operate.
An ISP that wants to offer a low-price broadband product for low-income households can collect the Lifeline subsidy to offset price discounts. For example, an ISP could offer a low-income broadband connection and collect $20 from a customer and also collect the $9.25 Lifeline subsidy from the Universal Service Fund. The Lifeline funds are paid directly to the ISP from the Universal Service Fund.
More importantly, ISPs now can apply to become eligible for Lifeline with state regulators rather than from the FCC – which has been blocking new applications for several years. There is a particularly good opportunity for tribal ISPs since the Lifeline subsidy on tribal lands can be as high as $34.25 per qualified recipient.
Enrolling in the Lifeline program is another tool to help ISPs attack the homework gap. ISPs can use the subsidy to provide lower price broadband to qualifying homes with school students. If an ISP serves customers that qualify for a discount, it's hard to justify not joining the program and giving such customers a break on rates.
Tagged FCC, Homework Gap, Lifeline
The Census Bureau and the Digital Divide
John Horrigan recently wrote an interesting article in The Daily Yonder that cited the results of a survey done by the Census Bureau. The agency conducts an annual survey called the American Community Survey (ACS) of 3.5 million households. In recent years the survey has included a few questions about broadband. The most recent ACS survey included questions about the digital divide. The results are at first glance a bit surprising.
The survey shows that more than 20.4 million homes have no broadband subscription at home. The survey shows that 5.1 million homes with no broadband connection are rural and 15.3 million homes are non-rural. Anybody who tracks rural broadband instantly doesn't think those numbers can be right. However, the Census Bureau uses its own definition of rural which is different than the way most of the world thinks or rural versus urban.
According to the Census Bureau definition, rural is everything that is not urban. The Census bureau looks at the country by regional clusters of population. They count two kinds of urban areas – urbanized areas (UAs) are clusters with 50,000 or more people and urban clusters (UCs) which have between 2,500 and 50,000 people. Most of us would consider many of the UCs to be rural because within this category are a lot of rural county seats and the immediately surrounding areas. The Census statistics count a lot of people who live just outside of towns as urban when our industry considers homes past the last cable company connection as rural.
Horrigan interpets the results of the Census Bureau survey to mean that affordability is a bigger reason today than connectivity for why people don't have broadband. He reached that conclusion by considering a recent Pew Research poll on the same topic that shows that more homes cite reasons other than availability as reasons they don't have broadband.
The Pew Research survey asked households why they don't have broadband. Respondents could supply more than one response.
50% claimed that price was a major factor and 21% cited this as the primary reason.
45% said that their smartphone could do everything they need.
43% said they had good access to the Internet outside the home.
31% said they couldn't afford a computer.
Only 22% said that they couldn't order a broadband connection, and only 7% said that was the primary reason they didn't have broadband.
The Census Bureau also correlated their results with household income, and it's not surprising that low-income households have a much lower broadband connection rate. The Census Bureau survey showed that only 59% of homes that make less than $20,000 per year have broadband. The subscription rate for all households making more than $20,000 is 88%.
Interestingly, the FCC doesn't ask why people don't have broadband. They interpret their mission to measure broadband availability and they count homes with or without broadband connections. This raises a few questions. What exactly is the FCC's mandate from Congress – to get America has connection to reach the Internet or to make sure that America makes those broadband connections? I read the FCC's mandate from Congress to have some of both goals. If availability is not the primary reason why homes don't have broadband, the FCC might get more bang from their buck by putting some effort into digital inclusion programs. According to the Horrigan article, there are now more homes that can't afford broadband than homes that don't have a connectivity option.
This implies the need for a much-improved Lifeline Fund. The current Lifeline program is likely not making a big difference in digital inclusion. It provides a small monthly subsidy of $9.25 per month for qualifying households to save money on either their telephone bill or their broadband bill. It's becoming increasingly hard to qualify for Lifeline because the big telcos like AT&T are backing out of the program. Some cable companies provide low-cost cable lines to homes with school students, but to nobody else – and cable companies don't operate outside of towns.
In addition to a more effective Lifeline program, digital inclusion also means getting computers into homes that can't afford them. I've written before about the non-profit group E2D that provides computers to school students in Charlotte, NC. Perhaps some of the Universal Service Fund could be used to assist effective groups like E2D to get more computers to more households.
My firm CCG conducts surveys and we've seen anecdotal evidence in a few recent surveys in poor rural counties that a lot of homes don't buy the slow DSL option available to them because of price. These homes tell us that price mattered more than connectivity. I don't have any easy answer for the best way to promote digital inclusion. But there are folks in the country who have made amazing progress in this area and perhaps the FCC should consider giving such groups some help. At a minimum, the FCC needs to recognize that now that most homes have a broadband connection that price is a major barrier for the majority of those who are not connected.
Posted in The Industry
Tagged American Community Survey, Digital divide, digital inclusion, FCC, Lifeline, US Census Bureau
AT&T Withdraws from Lifeline Program
In March the Public Utility Commission of Ohio allowed AT&T to withdraw from the federal Lifeline program. This is a program that let's qualified low-income homes get a monthly discount of $9.25 from either their landline telephone or their broadband connection – only one discount per home. AT&T successfully withdrew from Lifeline in Illinois in 2018 and in twelve other states in 2017.
AT&T apparently hasn't been advertising or pushing the potential discount since they only had 7,300 homes in the state on the Lifeline program. The Communications Workers of America say there are almost 1.6 million households in Ohio that qualify for the discount – although not all of them are served by AT&T.
You might think that AT&T supports Lifeline by looking at their web site. However, clicking through to Ohio notifies customers that the discount will end in June and provides customers a list of other companies that might offer them the discount.
The Lifeline program started in 1985, and at the time the amount of discount was a significant savings for customers. Because of inflation the $9.25 discount represents a far smaller portion of a today's monthly telecommunications bill.
Participation in the Lifeline program has dropped significantly in the past few years, as has the way the fund is being used. The following revenue numbers come from the 2018 annual report from USAC – the entity that operates the Lifeline Fund. I extraopolated out the number of participants at $9.25 per month.
Telephone $1,477,548,000 $312,300,000
Bundle $25,554,000 $293,707,000
Broadband $18,610,000 $536,424,000
Total $1,521,712,000 $1,142,431,000
Participants 13,700,000 10,250,000
Since 2016 there are 2.5 million fewer participants in the plan – many certainly due to carriers like AT&T withdrawing from the plan. The USAC numbers show a big shift since 2016 of participants applying the discount to their broadband bill rather than to landline telephone or cellphone bill.
The Lifeline Program was in the news recently when the FCC Inspector General issued a fraud advisory that says there are a lot of duplicate names requesting Lifeline and a number of deceased people still getting the discount. Chairman Ajit Pai immediately issued a statement saying that the program needs to be cleaned up.
Fraud has always been a concern in the program. However, it's a little odd for the FCC to be complaining about fraud today since they are in the process of taking over validation of Lifeline subscribers. Eligibility to participate in Lifeline was previously the responsibility of the states, but in June, 2018 USAC launched the National Verifier, a database that lists everybody eligible to receive a Lifeline credit. As of the end of last year, the federal verifier was active in 18 states, with the remaining states and territories joining the program this year. It seems odd to be yelling about problems of the older state programs when the FCC has already implemented a solution that they believe will solve most of the fraud issues.
I published a blog several days ago saying how regulators are letting the public down. It's mystifying to me why the Ohio PUC and so many other states are letting AT&T out of the Lifeline program. The Lifeline Fund reimburses AT&T for every discount given to customers, so there is zero net cost to AT&T to participate in the plan. With the new National Verifier, AT&T takes no role in enrolling customers, who must enter through the national Verifier portal. I don't know why regulators don't insist that AT&T and every other company that sells residential telephone and broadband be required to participate in the program.
Tagged AT&T, Chairman Ajit Pai, Lifeline, National Verifier, USAC
AT&T Phasing out Lifeline?
A lot of homes still rely on the FCC's Lifeline program to get a discount on their telecom bills. The program is funded through the Universal Service Fund and administered through USAC. The lifeline program provides a $9.25 discount per household that can be applied to landline telephone, cellular telephone or landline data – assuming customers use a provider that participates in the Lifeline program.
AT&T still touts that they participate in the Lifeline program, but numerous customers around the country received notifications this year notifying them that they were no longer eligible for the Lifeline program. This particular notification was from a customer in Houston, Texas. If you visit the USAC website and look for Lifeline providers in Houston, AT&T is the only company that is listed for landline service. There are numerous cellular providers listed in Houston, but AT&T is not among them.
People might wonder why landline Lifeline is still important. Landline penetration rates are reported each year by the Center for Disease Control. (CDC). They track landline and cellular penetration rates through a huge annual survey that studies the topic to understand how the medical community can communicate best with the public during a medical emergency. They reported last year that the nationwide landline penetration rate was at 45% of households – a number far greater than many people would guess.
I hadn't looked at residential phone rates in a while and just looked at AT&T's residential rates. In case you haven't looked at landline rates, they are not cheap. AT&T has three packages: Complete Choice comes with Caller ID and 9 other features (not including Voice Mail) for $40 per month. Complete Choice Basic is a basic line plus Caller ID and Call Waiting for $36. A basic phone line with no features is $28 per month. None of these prices include taxes and fees that add at least another $10 per month. None of these packages includes long distance. AT&T offers lower rates for those that bundle telephone with Internet or cable TV (although they are actively knocking people off their TV product).
In Texas, AT&T mitigated the Lifeline discontinuation notices somewhat by offering discounts of between $8 and $12 per month for qualifying customers who will sign a term contract, and who know to ask for the discount. But since this wasn't widely advertised there is a good chance that few people asked for the discount. Discount plans like this also come and go and there is no guarantee of this discount surviving into the future.
I can't see that there are any penalties for AT&T no longer offering Lifeline. There was a time when the big telcos had to participate in the program, but as state Commissions have deregulated telephone service any such requirement probably no longer applies.
What's shameful about this is that I am sure that any AT&T executive will say that the company supports the Lifeline program. It certainly says so on their website. Both the AT&T and the USAC website imply that customers in Texas can still enroll in Lifeline, but numerous reports on complaint sites show this not to be the case. Perhaps a really persistent customer can still fight through the customer service gauntlet to get the Lifeline discount, but many customers report they've lost the discount.
What's also disturbing about this is that AT&T doesn't even have to go through the process of qualifying customers for Lifeline eligibility. In Texas customers must certify eligibility by going through the Public Utility Commission. The big telcos complained in the past that certifying customers was expensive and exposed them to liability if they granted eligibility to unqualified households. But Texas and a number of other states took over the certification process, meaning the telcos have little cost or liability for participating in the program, since USAC reimburses them for discount granted to customers. Why would a big telco stop giving the discounts when it costs them so little?
Tagged AT&T, Lifeline, Texas, Texas PUC, USAC
Putting the Lifeline Program on Hold
Earlier this month the FCC under new Chairman Ajit Pai reversed earlier FCC approval for nine Lifeline providers who had been granted the ability to provide either wireline or wireless Lifeline broadband service. The Lifeline program grants a subsidy of $9.25 per month for low-income customers.
These were the first nine companies that had filed for the new Lifeline Broadband Provider designation to provide the subsidy for broadband connections. The Lifeline program for 32 years has provided this same subsidy to telephone service, but last year the program was extended also to data services – with the caveat that a given household is only eligible for one monthly subsidy.
The nine providers are Spot On, Boomerang Wireless, KonaTel, FreedomPop, AR Designs, Kajeet, Liberty, Northland Cable, and Wabash Independent Networks. Four of the providers had obtained their new Lifeline status on December 1 with the others being granted in January. Boomerang Wireless had already started to serve lifeline-eligible customers and the FCC ordered them to notify their customers and to cancel all lifeline subsidies within 60 days of the new order.
The stated reason for the reversals was that the FCC wanted to "promote program integrity by providing the Bureau with additional time to consider measures that might be necessary to prevent further waste, fraud, and abuse in the Lifeline program." None of these companies has been accused of fraud but rather were the first nine companies to be granted the status of Lifeline Broadband Provider with the ability to sell a subsidized data product.
The fraud issue is an interesting one because the FCC had already overhauled the Lifeline processes to protect against fraud. For years carriers were allowed to self-certify that customers met at least one of several qualifications that made them eligible for Lifeline. But the FCC eliminated self-certification by publishing a national list of eligible customers – the list provided by and updated by other federal agencies overseeing eligible programs.
The FCC had also done compliance audits over the last several years looking for Lifeline fraud and didn't find much of it. The new FCC order cited a $30 million settlement from Total Call Mobile that had been found to be seeking reimbursement for duplicate and ineligible customers. But the vast majority of the lifeline providers were found to have few or no issues.
Customers may have other options because the 800 carriers that already provide a Lifeline voice subsidy are now also allowed to provide a data subsidy. But nobody knows how many of these existing providers plan to offer subsidized data, and in fact over 80 Lifeline-eligible carriers recently asked to be excused from the program. This includes most of the biggest carriers in the country including AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink, Charter, Cox, Frontier, Fairpoint, Windstream and Cincinnati Bell. There were also a lot of wireless carriers asking to be excused from the program.
It's possible that politics has something to do with this order. The FCC under past Chairman Wheeler had reset the Lifeline program's annual budget to $2.25 billion a year, indexed to inflation. There are Republicans in Congress who have called for the program to be capped instead at $1.75 billion annually. Stopping these new providers is one way to stop the program from growing. One would think that the withdrawal of the biggest carriers from the program will also greatly shrink the fund.
The most interesting thing about this order to me is that it seems to conflict with statements made by new Chairman Pai. On his first day as Chairman he addressed FCC employees and told them that one of his top goals was to bring broadband to all Americans. But this reversal of Lifeline status came just three days later and seems contrary to that goal.
It's certainly possible that after more internal review that these companies might still be granted Lifeline status. But this also might instead be an indicator that the new Chairman wants to curb the Lifeline program, or maybe even eliminate it. I guess we are going to have to wait a while to see what this all means, including the Chairman's statements about expanding broadband to all.
Posted in Current News, Regulation - What is it Good For?
Tagged Ajit Pai, FCC, Lifeline, Lifeline Broadband Provider
Is the Lifeline Program in Danger?
One has to ask if the FCC's Lifeline program is in trouble. First, within the last month 80 carriers have asked to be relieved from participating in the program. This includes many of the largest ISPs / telcos and includes AT&T, Verizon, CenturyLink, Charter, Cox, Frontier, Fairpoint, Windstream and Cincinnati Bell. There are a lot of wireless companies on the list and it's easier to understand why they might not want to participate. The rest of the list is filled out with smaller telcos and some fiber overbuilders.
These companies easily represent more than half of all the telephone customers and a significant percentage of data customers in the country. If these companies don't participate in the Lifeline program then it's not going to be available to a large portion of the country. The purpose of the Lifeline program is to provide assistance to low-income households to buy telecom services. It's hard to see how the program can be sustained with such a reduced participation.
Originally the program was used only to subsidize landline telephone service. For the las few years it also has been available to cover cellphone service as an alternative to a landline. The most recent changes expand the definition to also allow the plan to cover broadband connections, with the caveat that only one service can be subsidized per household. While it's not yet official, one can foresee that ultimately it will be used to subsidize only broadband and that coverage of telephones will eventually disappear.
The coverage that the new Lifeline provides for cellular data is a mystery. The plan covers 3G data connections and allows the providers to cap such services at a measly 500 megabytes of total downloaded per month. This seems to be in direct opposition to the stated goal of the Lifeline program to provide support to close the 'homework gap'.
I also foresee larger problems looming for the entire Universal Service Fund program, of which Lifeline is one component. It's already clear that the new administration is going to remake the FCC to be a weaker regulatory body. At a minimum the new FCC will reverse many of the regulations affecting the large telcos and cable companies.
But there is a bigger threat in that there are many in Congress that have been calling for years for the abolishment of the FCC and for scattering their responsibilities to other parts of the government. This could be done during budget appropriations or by including it in a new Telecom Act.
The opponents of the FCC in Congress have also specifically railed against the Lifeline program for years. There was a huge furor a few years ago about the so-called Obamaphones, where carriers were supposedly giving smartphones to customers, all paid for by the government. It turns out those claims were false. The only plan that was anywhere close to this was a plan from SafeLink Wireless. They used the Lifeline subsidy to provide eligible low-income households with a cheap flip-phone that came with one-hour of free calling plus voice mail. This very minimalist telephone connection gave people a way to have a phone number to use while hunting for a job and to connect with social services. But there were no Lifeline plans that provided smartphones to low income households like was portrayed by many opponents of the Lifeline program.
But rightly or wrongly, there are now a number of opponents to the Lifeline program, and that means that the plan could be a target for those trying to trim back the FCC. It's going to be a lot harder to defend the Lifeline program if none of the major carriers are participating in it. There certainly will be a lot of changes made in the coming year at the FCC, and my gut tells me that programs like Lifeline could be on the chopping block if the big players in the industry don't support it. If nothing else, the big ISPs would prefer to have funds allocated to Lifeline today to be re-purposed for something that benefits them more directly.
Note: In an interesting development the FCC just rejected a petition from the NTCA and the WTA that asked that small companies be excused from some provisions of the Lifeline order. The FCC ruling basically says that any small company that is receiving high cost support and that offers a standalone data product must accept requests from customers who want to participate in the Lifeline Program. I am sure that this is not the end of the story and there will be more back and forth on the issue.
Tagged FCC, Homework Gap, Lifeline, Obamaphones
2017 Regulatory Trends
Now that we are at the end of the year I'm going to spend a few blogs looking forward into 2017 from the perspective of small carriers. Predictions about the direction of regulation is perhaps the easiest trend to write about since it looks like the trend for 2017 will be to undo many of the things done by the FCC over the last few years. So here are the regulatory trends I think will be most important to small carriers.
Net Neutrality Will be Reversed. It's pretty obvious that the FCC's current net neutrality rules will be reversed in short order in the new year. We already have Commissioners Ajit Pai and Mike O'Rielly strongly on the record opposing the FCC's prior actions. This could be done in two ways. First could be a direct reversal of the net neutrality ruling. But another tactic might be to reverse Title II regulation but allow the net neutrality principles to stay in place – basically to acknowledge the net neutrality principles that the public clearly likes but to remove the ability to enforce those rules.
Interestingly, net neutrality hasn't had much direct impact on small carriers since none of them have the market power to violate it. The one impact of this reversal for small carriers is that it will unfetter Comcast, Charter, Verizon and AT&T from most regulations and will give them greater market power and the ability to more aggressively squash smaller competitors.
One benefit of net neutrality was that it gave the general public some comfort that they couldn't be preyed upon by large ISPs. So small carriers might want to periodically remind your customers that you will still be adhering to the principles of net neutrality even though this might not still be a formal requirement.
Reversal of New Privacy Rules. It's also clear that the FCC is going to reverse most or all of the new privacy rules. These rules stopped ISPs from using customer data without explicit permission. There were parts of these rule that small carriers didn't like. But for the most part small ISPs don't use customer data for marketing purposes and don't sell customer data to marketers. I think small carriers should periodically remind your customers that you don't misuse or sell their data, but that your big competitors do.
Lifeline Changes. I think it's likely that the new FCC will change the data lifeline program that pays $9.25 per month towards the data bill for qualifying families. At a minimum they might curtail this for cellular data plans, but there is even the possibility that they will eliminate it.
There is also talk of going back to a numbers-based method to fund the Universal Service Fund. This would impose a tax of around $1 on every telephone number. This is supported by the big telcos since they no longer control the majority of telephone numbers, but even more so because this would remove USF assessments on special access circuits.
A New Telecom Act. I expect Congress to enact a new telecom act. There are certainly parts of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that are way out of date. That Act concentrated on copper telco networks and on traditional large cable line-ups and we need to now acknowledge that copper telco networks are quickly disappearing and that the public wants non-traditional cable packages.
But I also expect that any new act is going to drastically change the role of the FCC. My guess is that Congress wants to throttle the FCC's power so that the agency won't have much power if there is another change in administration. There have been threats from Congressmen in the past year to abolish the FCC altogether, but I think once they look at all of the things the agency does that cooler heads will prevail. But we might be seeing permanently reduced federal regulatory oversight of the industry.
Resurgence of State Regulation. If the FCC delivers on the stated goal of the new administration to whack FCC regulations, I expect that some state regulators will step in to fill the regulatory gap. After all, regulators like to regulate! It would not be surprising to see the most active state regulatory commissions like California, New York, Texas and Illinois tackle topics that the FCC might drop. And that would undoubtedly mean a string of states-rights lawsuits.
Tagged Ajit Pai, FCC, Lifeline, Net neutrality, Telecommunications Act of 1996


The publication is devoted to the creative oeuvre of the modern American photographer. The most part of works by Howard Buffett is the result of his sojourn in different corners of the world that are situated far away from the civilization. The album divided into five thematic sections is preceded by the forewords by the Russian and foreign specialists and the author's welcoming word. The publication is supplemented with biography of the artist and information about the Fund of Howard Buffett.


text:
Entertainment News 🔥
Telegram 🎁
Watch Sports Live Now : Stream Live Sports
Download our new mobile app Watch Movies Free Mobile App
Stay protected, Download Free VPN Android App | Premium VPN for Just $1.99/Month All Devices!
Teen Mom: Family Reunion
Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2
Turn off light Favorite PreviousNext Comments (0) 4K Links
Tension is still high between team Briana-Roxanne and team Ashley-Tea. The OG girls get to know Kiaya and Kayla, while Ashley gets some horrible News: her husband Bar could be extradited from jail in Nevada to California.
Serie: Teen Mom: Family Reunion
Episode Title: Mudslide
Search for Videos or other Sources here, 123-movies website does not host or produce any of the Videos related to any Movie or TV Show. You can find any movie or tv show streams by searching the web from our website
Note : Please use search below or above to find streaming or video sources and watch 'Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2' online. Disclaimer: this site (123-movies.ink) doesnot or cannot host any movies, TV Shows, media, video files, etc and is not affiliated with sites or search engines which help you find these links. We only help our users to find media content using google or other search engines.
Netflix is one of the largest Internet movie and tv show on demand streaming service, which produces and hosts a huge library of movies and tv shows. :
Search Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 on Netflix
Prime Video, also known as Amazon Prime Video, is another video on demand service that is developed, owned, and operated by Amazon. :
Search Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 on Prime Video
Google Play Movies
Google Play Movies is operated by google and they are an online movie/Tv show streaming rental service. You can rent or purchase movies/tv shows. :
Search Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 on Google Play Movies
Search Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 on Google
Review & Comments across the web
Read Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 review on 🍅 Rotten Tomatoes
Read Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 review on Ⓜ Metacritic
Read Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 review on 🎞 TMDB
Read Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 review on ℹ IMDB
Let us know how good or bad this movie was? You can comment below or review Teen Mom: Family Reunion Season 2 Episode 2 for everyone to know.
Defiance is an American science fiction television show that takes place in the future on a radically transformed Earth containing new species arriving from space. In the show, Joshua Nolan…
The Other Two
An aspiring actor and his sister Brooke, a former professional dancer, try to find their place in the world while wrestling with their feelings about their 13-year-old brother Chase's sudden…
Regina Haywood is the newly promoted deputy inspector of East New York, a working-class neighborhood at the edge of Brooklyn. She leads a diverse group of officers and detectives, some…
Ancient Unexplained Files
Ancient investigations turn tech as specialists harness an advanced digital forensics lab and use the latest scientific discoveries to solve the biggest mysteries of ancient history.
In the year 2093, a team of scientists aboard the Nightflyer, the most advanced ship ever built, embarks on a journey to find other life forms. Their mission takes them…
God Shave The Queens
Less than a week after The Vivienne was crowned the UK's first drag superstar, she and all the queens from Season 1 of RuPaul's Drag Race UK embarked on a…
An anthology series set in a single hotel room, where every guest who comes to stay reveals a unique set of circumstances and quirks.
Genre: Drama, Mystery, Sci-Fi & Fantasy
Simone Clark is the oldest rookie in the FBI.
Teams of LEGO enthusiasts go head-to-head, with infinite possibilities and an unlimited supply of LEGO bricks. Teams of two will compete against each other in ambitious brick-building challenges to be…
Genre: Family, Reality
Why Women Kill
Three women living in three different decades: a housewife in the '60s, a socialite in the '80s and a lawyer in 2018, deal with infidelity in their marriages.
Ruby and the Well
When her father inherits an overgrown orchard, Ruby O'Reilly discovers a magic well. She's been designated its new "keeper," and now it's up to her and her friends Mina and…
Genre: Family, Sci-Fi & Fantasy
The Hustler
A team of contestants must work together to answer questions worth $10,000 each. But one member of the group has been given the answers in advance, and that person—"The Hustler"—will…
Bookmark - 123-MOVIES.SKIN
Alternative Sites
Official 123movies
123movies4u
Powered By 123-movies
As Featured on : The Best Free Movie Streaming Sites
123movies 123movies free free movies watch free movies watch movies online free hd movies

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Q: Android Emulator is not working in Android Studio 4.0 Recently, I updated my Android studio 3.3 to 4.0 version. I am unable to run Android Emulator.
Errors as follows:
Emulator: emulator: ERROR: It seems too many emulator instances are running on this machine. Aborting.
Emulator: WARNING: jdwp port creation fails, Icebox will not work.
Kindly, help me to resolve this issue.

A: Disable Anti virus protection of your system and launch application again, its worked for me

A: I've been struggling to get out this error for two days and suddenly magic happened !
I just opened my anti-virus protection software and granted full access (internet) to this "qemo-system.i386"
This is what I did in anti-virus protection software/firewall/applications

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


"I would not feel so alone," sang Bob Dylan back in 1966, "everybody must get stoned." It would seem lots of people have obliged: cannabis is now far and away the world's favourite illicit drug, با approximately 180 million people having taken it in the past year. In England and Wales در باره 13.5% از 16 به 24 years olds have used cannabis in the past year, and almost one in three people will try it at least once during their lifetime. از 6.4% of adults aged 16-59 who reported using cannabis in the past year, روی 40% said they used it at least once a month.
Certainly many people use cannabis without adverse effects, and indeed with plenty of very pleasant ones. علاوه بر این, there is evidence that cannabis can bring real medical benefits, for example in alleviating chronic pain. But there is also known to be a link between cannabis and paranoid thoughts.
"Paranoid" in this context means the unfounded or excessive fear that other people are trying to harm us. It's a feeling that is far more common than previously thought. That is understandable given that we are all constantly compelled to interpret social situations, weighing up the attitudes and intentions of the people we meet. Because it is impossible to know for sure what other people are thinking, there is ample scope for our anxiety to get the better of us.
Like most psychological experiences, there is a spectrum of paranoia within the population: many people have a few, relatively mild paranoid thoughts, while for a few people those thoughts are numerous, persistent, and profoundly unsettling. Cannabis users are more likely to be at the problematic end of that spectrum. مثلا, our study of the population of England found that the belief that people are deliberately trying to harm you is three times as common among cannabis users as it is among non-users. The belief that people are trying to cause you serious injury or harm is five times as common among cannabis users.
اما, what we see here is an association between cannabis and paranoia. Experts generally agree that regular use of cannabis starting from an early age is an accurate predictor of later severe mental health problems, but what hasn't been established is whether the drug causes paranoid thoughts. Maybe people suffering from paranoia are more likely to start taking cannabis; or perhaps the drug use and the suspicious thoughts are independent consequences of another factor entirely.
This question of the tangled interrelationship of paranoia and cannabis use was at the heart of a study we conducted with colleagues from the University of Oxford, the Institute of Psychiatry at King's College London, and the University of Manchester, published on Wednesday in Schizophrenia Bulletin. Why did we focus on paranoia rather than mental health in general? Other studies tend to lump all such problems together under the heading of "psychosis" or "schizophrenia", ولی as we've argued previously on this blog such experiences frequently occur independently: having paranoid thoughts doesn't mean, برای مثال, that someone will also hear imaginary voices.
To discover whether cannabis really does cause paranoia in vulnerable individuals, we carried out the largest ever study of the effects of THC (∆9-تتراهیدروکانابینول, the drug's principal psychoactive ingredient). We recruited 121 volunteers, all of whom had taken cannabis at least once before, and all of whom reported having experienced paranoid thoughts in the previous month (which is typical of half the population). None had been diagnosed with a mental illness. The volunteers were randomly chosen to receive an intravenous 1.5mg dose of either THC (the equivalent of a strong joint) or a placebo (saline). To track the effects of these substances, we used the most extensive form of assessment yet deployed to test paranoia, including a virtual-reality scenario, a real-life social situation, self-administered questionnaires, and expert interviewer assessments.
THC also produced other unsettling psychological effects, such as anxiety, نگرانی, lowered mood, and negative thoughts about the self. Short-term memory was impaired. And the THC sparked a range of what psychologists call "anomalous experiences": sounds seemed louder than usual and colours brighter; thoughts appeared to echo in the individuals' minds; and time seemed to be distorted.
Why is cannabis such a potent trigger for paranoia? Our statistical analysis showed that in our experiment the culprits were THC's negative effects on the individual's mood and view of the self, and the anomalous sensory experiences it can produce. Negative emotions leave us feeling down and vulnerable. Worry leads us to the worst conclusions. So when we try to make sense of the anomalous experiences – when we try, in other words, to understand what's happening to us – the world can appear a weird, frightening and hostile place. Hence the paranoia. Our analysis suggests that the impairments in short-term memory did not increase the paranoia.
Clearly cannabis doesn't cause these problems for everyone. And the suspiciousness wore off as the drug left the bloodstream. But the study does show that paranoia isn't tenuously linked to THC: for a significant number of people, it's a direct result.
Perhaps most importantly, the research shines a light on the psychological processes underlying paranoia in general. When we worry, think negatively about ourselves and experience perceptual disturbances, it's much more likely that we will feel needlessly suspicious of others.


I am very caring and reliable with 40 years experience in owning dogs, At the moment I own one super friendly English Pointer named Harlequin who is 3 years old. I am at home all of the time looking after him and our guests. We are very lucky to live in a bungalow in a quiet village right on the Ashdown Forest. I have a Landrover which is great for transporting the dogs to different parts of the 4600 acres of forest for walks.
I have been with Dogbuddy for over 2 years now and all the dogs have settled really easily I keep things calm and consistent for them while they are here. Harlequin loves the company and our guests enjoy playiing with him.
If you have special time requirements, simply let Sarah Jane know.
Great as always and happy to help short notice.
A great service from Sarah Jane! Our Schnauzer loved his stay, the surrounding areas that the dogs are walked on are beautiful. Thanks again and see you soon.


Actually, has he ever left?
This is an important article. The psychoanalytic community has had a curious affair with neuroscience. Some analytic clinicians feel that years of deep work repeatedly demonstrate its effectiveness and would rather not look to science to legitimitize its practice. However, in today's world, without objective research and scientific backing, psychoanalysis' future can seem uncertain at times.
Neuroscientists offer a unique portal and hopeful reassurance through which to support psychoanalysis & its future. In the article, some neuroscientists mention that they believe to date, little has been written outside of Freud that more closely resembles their scientific discoveries of the mind and neurons.
How about you? Did you need convincing?


Experts from the Korean music industry have announced their picks for this year's Korean Music Awards!
On the evening of February 28, the 15th Korean Music Awards were held in Seoul. Unlike most other music award shows, the ceremony's award winners are chosen based on industry experts' evaluation of the music's artistic merit, rather than decided based on sales. Nominees this year were albums and songs that were released from the period of December 1, 2016 to November 30, 2017, both in mainstream and non-mainstream music.
The Musician of the Year award went to BTS, and they are the first idol group to win the award.


text:
Q: poisson process modelling Consider a birth process, where at each unit time step $t$, on the average, there is a fraction of $0.012$ among all the populations who will give a birth. Suppose the doubling time is $m$, then, from $1.012^m =2$ we get that $m$ is approximately $58.108$, i.e., the whole population will double after $58.108$ time steps. Then, the frequency, i.e., the average rate of events per time step is $1/58.108$. We can thus model it using a possion process with parameter $1/58.108$. Then, the probability for a birth-event within one time step is $1-e^{-1/58.108}$, which is approximately $0.0171$. This reasoning should be right, right?
Now, probability is a proportion in some sense. Note the fact that a proportion of $0.012$ would give a birth during each time step. So, is it safe to say that the probability of giving a birth during each time step is $0.012$ then? But that is not the same as $0.0171$, not even close. Can anyone tell me why? Any comments are greatly appreciated.

A: You need to be careful with your definition, because you've defined it as a discrete time process where individuals have either $1$ or $0$ births in each interval. But you're trying  to model it as a continuous time process. Which is it?
Even if it is a continuous time process, it still doesn't make sense to use a time-homogeneous Poisson process (as you did, giving it a constant rate $1/58.108$). You will need to convince yourself that if individuals are each giving birth at a rate of $0.012$, then a larger population will have a larger population birth rate.
The thing which does this is called a pure birth process, or Yule process. This is different from a time-homogeneous Poisson process (constant rate $\lambda$) and different also from a time-inhomogeneous Poisson process (rate $\lambda(t)$ depends on time). In the pure birth process, the rate $\lambda_n$ depends on the number of individuals in the population. If you let the rate be equal to $\lambda \cdot n$ (i.e. a constant multiple of the population size) then the result is that the population size $N(t)$ is, unfortunately, not even a Poisson random variable. It turns out that $Pr[N(t) = n | N(0) = k]$ has a negative binomial distribution with parameters $k$ and $e^{\lambda t}$. Hope this helps!


text:
.. _faq:

F.A.Q
=====

I get a "``Permission matching query does not exist``" exception
----------------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes Django decides not to install the default permissions for a model
and thus the ``change_profile`` permission goes missing. To fix this, run the
``check_permissions`` in :ref:`commands`. This checks all permissions and adds
those that are missing.

I get a "``Site matching query does not exist.``" exception
-----------------------------------------------------------

This means that your settings.SITE_ID value is incorrect. See the instructions
on SITE_ID in the [Installation section](http://docs.django-userena.org/en/latest/installation.html).

<ProfileModel> is already registered exception
----------------------------------------------

Userena already registered your profile model for you. If you want to
customize the profile model, you can do so by registering your profile as
follows:

.. code-block:: python

    # Unregister userena's
    admin.site.unregister(YOUR_PROFILE_MODEL)

    # Register your own admin class and attach it to the model
    admin.site.register(YOUR_PROFILE_MODEL, YOUR_PROFILE_ADMIN)

Can I still add users manually?
-------------------------------
Yes, but Userena requires there to be a `UserenaSignup` object for every
registered user. If it's not there, you could receive the following error:

.. code-block:: python

                Exception Type: DoesNotExist at /accounts/mynewuser/email/

So, whenever you are manually creating a user (outside of Userena), don't
forget to also create a `UserenaSignup` object.

How can I have multiple profiles per user?
------------------------------------------

One way to do this is by overriding the `save` method on `SignupForm` with
your own form, extending userena's form and supply this form with to the
signup view. For example:

.. code-block:: python

    def save(self):
        """ My extra profile """
        # Let userena do it's thing
        user = super(SignupForm, self).save()

        # You do all the logic needed for your own extra profile
        custom_profile = ExtraProfile()
        custom_profile.extra_field = self.cleaned_data['field']
        custom_profile.save()

        # Always return the new user
        return user

Important to note here is that you should always return the newly created
`User` object. This is something that userena expects. Userena will take care
of creating the user and the "standard" profile.

Don't forget to supply your own form to the signup view by overriding the URL
in your `urls.py`:

.. code-block:: python

     (r'^accounts/signup/$',
      'userena.views.signup',
      {'signup_form': SignupExtraProfileForm}),

How do I add extra fields to forms?
-----------------------------------

This is done by overriding the default templates. A demo tells more than a
thousand words. So here's how you add the first and last name to the signup
form. First you override the signup form and add the fields.

.. code-block:: python

    from django import forms
    from django.utils.translation import ugettext_lazy as _
    from userena.forms import SignupForm

    class SignupFormExtra(SignupForm):
        """
        A form to demonstrate how to add extra fields to the signup form, in this
        case adding the first and last name.

        """
        first_name = forms.CharField(label=_(u'First name'),
                                     max_length=30,
                                     required=False)

        last_name = forms.CharField(label=_(u'Last name'),
                                    max_length=30,
                                    required=False)

        def __init__(self, *args, **kw):
            """

            A bit of hackery to get the first name and last name at the top of the
            form instead at the end.

            """
            super(SignupFormExtra, self).__init__(*args, **kw)
            # Put the first and last name at the top
            new_order = self.fields
            new_order.move_to_end('last_name', last=False)
            new_order.move_to_end('first_name', last=False)
            self.fields= new_order

        def save(self):
            """
            Override the save method to save the first and last name to the user
            field.

            """
            # First save the parent form and get the user.
            new_user = super(SignupFormExtra, self).save()

            # Get the profile, the `save` method above creates a profile for each
            # user because it calls the manager method `create_user`.
            # See: https://github.com/django-userena-ce/django-userena-ce/blob/master/userena/managers.py#L65
            user_profile = new_user.my_profile

            user_profile.first_name = self.cleaned_data['first_name']
            user_profile.last_name = self.cleaned_data['last_name']
            user_profile.save()

            # Userena expects to get the new user from this form, so return the new
            # user.
            return new_user

Finally, to use this form instead of our own, override the default URI by
placing a new URI above it.

.. code-block:: python

     (r'^accounts/signup/$',
      'userena.views.signup',
      {'signup_form': SignupFormExtra}),

That's all there is to it!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
José Miguel González Martín del Campo, mer känd som Míchel, född 23 mars 1963 i Madrid, är en spansk fotbollstränare och före detta fotbollsspelare. Han var en målfarlig mittfältare och representerade Spanien vid VM 1986 och 1990, samt vid EM 1988. Under femton säsonger med Real Madrid spelade han över 400 matcher.

Meriter

Spelare
 Mästare i UEFA-Cupen: 2
1984/1985 och 1985/1986 med Real Madrid.
 La Ligamästare: 6
1985/1986, 1986/1987, 1987/1988, 1988/1989, 1989/1990 och 1994/1995 med Real Madrid
 Mästare i Copa del Rey: 2
1988/1989 och 1992/1993 med Real Madrid.

Tränare
 Mästare i Grekiska Superligan: 1
2012/2013 med Olympiakos.
 Mästare i Grekiska cupen: 1
2012/2013 med Olympiakos.

Spanska fotbollsspelare
Spanska fotbollstränare
Spanska landslagsspelare i fotboll
Spelare i Real Madrid Castilla
Spelare i Real Madrid
Spelare i La Liga
Spelare i VM i fotboll 1986
Spelare i Europamästerskapet i fotboll för herrar 1988
Spelare i VM i fotboll 1990
Tränare i Rayo Vallecano
Tränare i Real Madrid Castilla
Tränare i Getafe CF
Tränare i Sevilla FC
Tränare i Olympiakos FC
Tränare i Olympique de Marseille
Idrottare från Madrid
Födda 1963
Levande personer
Män

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


What is the "luckybeginning.com"? Luckybeginning.com search page is categorized as a browser hijacker, because is installed on all known Internet browsers such as Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox, etc. as add-on or extension and modifies the browsing settings in order to display annoying banners, pop-up or link ads on every page you visit.
What is the "Dp-Search.com"? Dp-Search.com search page is categorized as a browser hijacker, because is installed on all known Internet browsers such as Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox, etc. as add-on or extension and modifies the browsing settings in order to display annoying banners, pop-up or link ads on every page you visit.


Alert Technology, one of only 36 start up companies selected, will present at this year's CleanTech Innovate.
Don't miss your chance to see the most investment ready, future disruptors in the CleanTech space.
Alert Technology Ltd has been have been pre-qualified by a panel of 10 distinguished judges and will be presenting their innovative sustainable technology solutions to a 300+ strong audience of active funders, corporates, support agencies and the media.
Don't miss your chance to see the most investment ready, future disruptors in the CleanTech space on Thursday 27th April at The Royal Institution in London's Mayfair.
Alert Technology Ltd has been pre-qualified by a panel of 10 distinguished judges and will be presenting our innovative technology solution to a 300+ strong audience of active funders, corporates, support agencies and the media.


Use the Camera Rig component to add and remove behaviors to drive your camera entity. To use the camera component, you must first add the Camera Framework Gem to your project.
Array of behaviors that define how a camera selects a target. The rig tries each acquirer in the order listed until one successfully finds a target.
Array of behaviors that modify the look-at target transform. The rig runs each in order to generate a final target transform.
Array of behaviors that modify the camera transform based on the look-at target transform. The rig runs each in order before setting the camera component's transform.
Target Acquirers identify valid targets and acquire their transforms for use in other rig behaviors.
Find a target by tag. If multiple entities are found, it uses the first to respond.
If selected, uses the target's rotation when determining camera behavior.
If selected, uses the target's position when determining camera behavior.
Look-at Behaviors changes the target transform to modify camera behavior.
Use OffsetPosition to change the position of the target's transform. Positions are often determined from the base of a model. But suppose, for example, that you want to determine its position 1.8 meters up from its base. You can use this property to achieve that positional offset.
Vector displacement of the target transform's position.
If selected, uses local coordinates. If deselected, uses world-basis vectors for the offset.
Use Rotate Camera Target to rotate the target separately from its source target. For example, you may want your character to look up and down without pitching.
The target cardinal's axis around which the camera rotates. Select the X, Y, or Z axis.
Name of event that provides the values for the rotation.
Index of the player (input device).
If selected, inverts the axis of rotation.
Multiplier for new input values to scale the speed of rotation.
Use SlideAlongAxisBasedOnAngle to modify the position of the look-at target based on an angle. For example, say that you set the target to slide along the forward and backward axis based on pitch. As the target pitched down, then the position would move ahead of the target. If the target is attached to the character, then every time the target looked down, it would be ahead of the character. Every time it looked up, it would be behind the character.
Select a vector component to ignore: None, X, Y, or Z.
The maximum slide along the axis when the angle reaches 90 degrees.
The maximum slide along the axis when the angle reaches -90 degrees.
Transform Behaviors are a critical component of how the camera responds to the target. For example, you can set the camera to face the target, follow from a distance, or follow the target at a specific angle.
FaceTarget causes the camera to change the rotation of its transform to look at the target. To use this feature, simply add it. There are no additional properties to configure.
FollowTargetFromAngle causes the camera to follow the target from a specified angle. This feature works well for top-down, isometric, and side scrolling cameras.
Angle at which to follow the target.
Rotation type of the angle for following the target: yaw, pitch, or roll.
The distance in meters from which the camera follows the target.
FollowTargetFromDistance causes the camera to follow the target from a specified distance. You can also set named events to trigger the camera to zoom in on or out from a target.
Minimum distance from which the camera follows the target.
Maximum distance from which the camera follows the target.
Event name that reduces the current follow distance, in effect zooming in.
Event name that increases the current follow distance, in effect zooming out.
Scale amount for the incoming zoom value.
The index of the player (device index) that this feature supports.
Offset Camera Position sets the camera's position to the target's position with an offset.
The vector offset in meters from the target.
If selected, local basis vectors are used. If deselected, worldbasis vectors are used.
Use Rotate to rotate a camera about one of its axes (X, Y, or Z).
Angle in degrees to rotate the camera.
Axis about which to rotate the camera.


text:
2019 LCEEQ Annual Conference Archive
In recognition of its 10th Anniversary, LCEEQ adopted as the theme for its Annual Conference, Well-Being – Being Well.
There are many daily stresses and pressures on students and educators alike at all levels from pre-school through university. In recent times, much more attention has been given to the need for both physical and mental wellness in society in general, but particularly in the field of Education. Mindfulness activities have become part of daily routines both in school and at home. There are numerous research studies examining the impact of stress on teachers, including a pan-Canadian study for which McGill University is a key partner. Our conference brought together experts from both the medical and educational communities to consider the many aspects of this important issue.
The 2019 LCEEQ Conference, Well-Being – Being Well, celebrated existing practices and innovation in the realm of wellness.
Evaluation Results & Handouts
Dr. Michael Ungar
Dr. Michael Ungar is among the best-known writers and researchers on the topic of resilience in the world. His work has changed the way resilience is understood, shifting the focus from individual traits to the interactions between people and their families, schools, workplaces, and communities. As the Canada Research Chair in Child, Family and Community Resilience and Professor of Social Work at Dalhousie University, as well as a family therapist, he has helped to identify the most important factors that influence the resilience of children and adults during periods of transition and stress. He is the author of 14 books that have been translated into five languages, numerous manuals for parents, educators, and employers, as well as more than 135 scientific papers. Dr. Ungar's immense influence comes from his ability to adapt ideas from his research and clinical practice into best-selling works like Too Safe For Their Own Good: How Risk and Responsibility Help Teens Thrive and I Still Love You: Nine Things Troubled Kids Need from Their Parents. His blog Nurturing Resilience appears on Psychology Today's website.
Dr. Ungar is also the founder and Director of the Resilience Research Centre where he coordinates over five million dollars in research in more than a dozen countries. Dr. Ungar regularly provides consultation and training to organizations like the World Bank, UNESCO, and the Red Cross. He is the former Chair of the Nova Scotia Mental Health and Addictions Strategy, executive board member of the American Family Therapy Academy, and a family therapist who works with mental health services for individuals and families at risk. In 2012 Dr. Ungar was the recipient of the Canadian Association of Social Workers National Distinguished Service Award for his outstanding contribution to clinical work with families and communities.
Dr. Jean Clinton
Dr. Jean Clinton is a Clinical Professor, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences at McMaster University, division of Child Psychiatry. She is on staff at McMaster Children's Hospital with cross appointments in Pediatrics and Family Medicine, and an Associate in the Department of Child Psychiatry, University of Toronto and Sick Children's Hospital. She is also a senior scientist at the INCH (INfant Child Health) Lab at McMaster University. In addition, she is a Fellow of the Child Trauma Academy, as well as a Zero to Three Academy Fellow since 2013. She has been a consultant to children and youth mental health programs, child welfare, and primary care for almost 30 years. Dr. Clinton was recently appointed as an education advisor to the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Education.
Dr. Clinton is renowned locally, provincially, nationally, and more recently internationally as an advocate for children's issues. Her special interest lies in brain development, and the crucial role relationships and connectedness play therein. Jean champions the development of a national, comprehensive child well-being strategy including a system of early learning and care for all young children and their families. She is equally committed to ensuring that children's and youths' needs and voices are heard and respected.
Dr. John Miller
John (Jack) Miller has been working in the field of holistic education for over 40 years. He is author/editor of 20 books on holistic learning and contemplative practices in education which include Whole Child Education, The Holistic Curriculum, Transcendental Learning: The Educational Legacy of Alcott, Emerson, Fuller, Peabody and Thoreau, and soon to be published Love and Compassion: Exploring Their Role in Education. His writing has been translated into nine languages. The Holistic Curriculum has provided the program framework for the Equinox Holistic Alternative School in Toronto where Jack has been involved in an advisory role. Recently he was asked to co-edit a book series for Information Age Publishing entitled Current Perspectives in Holistic Education and Holistic Education and Embodied Learning was published last spring. This book includes several chapters written by his thesis students at OISE.
Jack has worked extensively with holistic educators in Japan, Korea and Hong Kong for the past 20 years and has been a visiting professor at universities in Japan and Hong Kong. In 2009 Jack was one of 24 educators invited to Bhutan to help that country develop their educational system so that it supports the country's goal of Gross National Happiness. Jack teaches courses on holistic education and spirituality education for graduate students and students in Initial Teacher Education Program at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto where he is Professor.
Dr. Bruce Ferguson
Dr. Bruce Ferguson is a psychologist and Senior Consultant to the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Research Unit at SickKids as well as being an Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Toronto. He works to promote success for children and youth by considering all factors essential to well-being including health/mental health, home life, school, community life and peer relationships.
He was a member of the Minister's Advisory Group on Mental Health and Addictions Strategy which led to Open Minds, Healthy Minds, the Ontario initiative in child and youth mental health. Dr. Ferguson participates in School Mental Health ASSIST, Co-Chaired the EDU Expert Panel on Accepting Schools and currently Co-Chairs the Expert Panel on Well-being.
Dr. Nancy Heath
Dr. Nancy Heath is a James McGill Professor in the Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology, in McGill's Faculty of Education. She is an internationally recognized leader in student stress and self-injury and has worked in collaboration with schools for more than 25 years. Throughout her career, she has helped schools to enhance their response to mental health challenges including stress, anxiety, depression, and self-injury. She has published and presented nationally and internationally in the area and currently leads McGill University's National Teacher Mental Health and Well Being Initiative.
Dr. Ian Manion
Dr. Manion is a clinical psychologist and scientist-practitioner who has worked with children, youth and families for over 30 years. He is an adjunct professor in the School of Psychology at the University of Ottawa. Currently he is the Director of Youth Mental Health Research at the Royal's Institute of Mental Health Research. Dr. Manion is actively involved in research on mental health promotion, youth depression and suicide. He has a particular interest in systems research and how services are organized to best meet the mental health needs of youth. He is a committed advocate for child and youth mental health sitting on local, provincial, national and international boards and committees. He is scientific director for FRAYME, a newly funded international Network of Centres of Excellence (NCE) Knowledge Translation Platform focusing on integrated youth mental health care globally. Dr. Manion is co-founder of Youth Net/ Réseau Ado, a bilingual community-based mental health promotion program with satellites across Canada as well as in Europe. Ian is a person with lived experience and was one of the spokespersons for the Bell Let's Talk campaign in 2018.
View or download here
Total Registrants VS. Evals Received
Average Workshops Score
The conference met my expectations
The Conference will be of value to me in the future
The Conference had enough variety to maintain my interest
The Conference facilities were satisfactory
Michael Ungar – Resilience at Home and on the Job: Maintaining Our Capacity to Cope During Times of Change and Challenge
Jean Clinton – Connection is Key: The Power of Relationships
Workshops Block A
Michael Ungar – Helping Those Who Help Nurture and Maintain Their Resilience
John Miller – Whole Child Education
James Watts – 13 Reasons Why - Stress,Sex,Suicide & Spirituality
Andrea Videtic – Creating a Community of Practice for CEGEP Teachers
Erica Tomkinson – Cannabis - It's Legal! But is it Wellness?
Janet Strike Schurman – Strategies for ABAV Planning and Accessing Resilience at School
Cindy Finn – Sowing the Seeds for School Mental Health
Katherine Baker – Daily Physical Activity at School - Let's Get A Move On!
Chiaki Konishi – The Power of Social Wellness on Positive Student Outcomes
Dana Carsley – Mindfulness in the Classroom: Day-to-Day Strategies for Supporting Your Students
Workshops Block B
Bruce Ferguson – Making and Keeping our Children and Youth Well
John Miller – Love and Compassion: Exploring Their Role in Education
Nancy Heath – Using Mindfulness for Stress Management in the Teaching Profession
Sylvie Archambault – The ABC's of Diversity.../L'ABC de la diversité
Tracy Rosen – #selfies: Reflection of Our Well-Being
Jacob Tetreault – Feeling Well, Doing Well: Getting High Schoolers Mentally and Physically Ready...
Peter Chan – Mystery Club: Transforming Your School's Culture
N/A>
Christine Canzani – The 14 Needs for Every Day: A Nurse's Perspective on Health & Wellness
Sergine Gauvin – Mindfulness Practice in the Classroom
Yannik Blier – Keep Calm and Collaborate!
David Hill – Emotional Safety in the Classroom
Workshops Block C
Jean Clinton – Connection is Key: The Power of Relationships - Going Deeper
Ian Manion – Practicing What We Preach: Self-Care for School and Board Staff
Jovette Francoeur – Promoting Life Balance in Our Evolving Digital World
Martine Demers – Setting up an Emotions Room in Your School
Ted Temertzoglou – Physical Literacy: Gateway to Well-Being
Tracy Mangal – Responding to Anxiety Using Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Elana Bloom – The Family School & Support Treatment Team
Karen Rye – Picture This: Books to Promote Well-Being/ Albums jeunes pour promouvoir le bien-être
Amanda Argento – Promoting Emotion Regulation during the Transition to High School
Anne-Marie Parent – Promoting Positive Action in Witnesses of School Bullying: The Importance of Bystanders...
Ian Manion – Closing Plenary - Working Together for School Mental Health
© LCEEQ Inc. All rights reserved. Designed and hosted with love by Shiftfocus Media.
About LCEEQ
Membership Contact List
New & Recent Releases
LCEEQ Documents
Newsletters, Releases & More
LCEEQ Annual Seminar 2018
Monthly Prize Winners
A Policy of Educational Success
Register for Workshops
Workshops & Event Info
Leadership Workshop
Summer Math Institute
Annual Conference Reports
Math Focus Project Report
Leadership Workshop Report
Grants & Scholarships Info
LCEEQ Funding Overview
John Killingbeck
PDIG
Funding Applications
Please login to access funding applications...
PD Resources - 'a click away'
PDIG 2017-2018 Results & Reports
John Killingbeck Project Summary
Committee Database
PDIG Final Reports


text:
Where is Shipwrecked filmed? Can I visit the island? And when is the next episode on?
It certainly looks idyllic
Nisha Mal
After a seven year hiatus Shipwrecked is back on TV, as nine new castaways get to grips with surviving on an island.
The reboot sees the contestants split into two teams - each one residing in a different tropical setting - and left to fend for themselves.
For viewers, it's hard not to notice the show's amazing setting, with its white sandy beaches, palm trees and deep blue ocean water.
If you've been wondering where the castaways are, here's everything you need to know about where Shipwrecked is filmed.
Where is Shipwrecked filmed?
The E4 series is filmed on Aitutaki, located in Cook Island, in the South Pacific Ocean.
Shipwrecked's executive producer Neale Simpson says: "The Cook Islands is the ideal setting for our paradise island adventure.
"The stunning island backdrops are the perfect place to play out the hedonism, heroism and hilarity that the UK public will be able to enjoy once the show airs.
"The incredible islands became home to a richly diverse and remarkable group of characters which were the new generation of Sharks and Tigers."
Aitutaki was also used for a similar show aired in the US called Survivor Cook Islands.
In Shipwrecked, an area called Rapota is used as Tiger Island, while Team Shark live in Motorakau.
Aitutaki boasts warm, crystal clear waters that form a triangle shape, each leg stretches more than seven miles.
It also has a lagoon teeming with tropical fish, and occasionally turtles can be see coming out of the water.
The paradise island also has white sandy beaches, perfect for taking long walks across.
Can I visit Aitutaki?
Yes, but it isn't exactly going to be a cheap holiday.
This is definitely a luxury destination, ideal for a honeymoon or a once in a lifetime getaway.
The island's Pacific Resort Aitutaki boasts five stars. It has 29 bungalows and villas dotted around the water. Each room is air conditioned and offers breathtaking views of the tranquil lagoon.
The resort also has a spa and a restaurant, which serves plenty of seafood dishes as well as chicken, beef and veggie options.
If you were to book five nights in a bungalow at the Pacific Resort Aitutaki, prices start from around £1,692.
And, if you were to book a villa it'd cost you £1,842 for the same number of nights.
Of course, there are more affordable places to stay. . .
The Tamanu Beach Resort is located on the western coast of Aitutaki.
Prices for a beach front room start from around £705 for five nights.
Each room has a super-king size bed, a balcony, a TV and ceiling fans as well as a range of other features.
Prices of both resorts are subject to change, depending on the time of year you book and the current rates.
Can I fly there?
Yes, but it can take some time.
Unfortunately there aren't any direct flights to the Cook Islands from the UK, so you'll need to make a number of stops along the way.
Typically, you'll stop off in Singapore or Auckland before heading to the island's Rarotonga International Airport, which takes more than a day in travel time.
Once you've arrived, you'll then travel by boat to Aitutaki.
If you want to take this once in a lifetime trip then you'll have to save up, as according to skyscanner.net it'll set you back at least £1,000 during the summer months when flying from London Heathrow.
The best airport to fly from is Heathrow because it'll considerably reduce your travel time compared to flying from other UK airports, like Manchester.
Go to skyscanner.net to find out more and search for your preferred travel dates.
When is Shipwrecked next on TV?
The show airs weeknights on E4 at 9pm.
Empire Music HallLegendary Belfast music figure Ronnie Purvis passes away aged 70His partner Sylvia said that his legacy in the local music scene will live on
See inside iconic 19th century Belfast building as group seek funding for restoration
Christine Lampard showcases NI boutique as she talks pregnancy news on Loose Women
Christine LampardThe Co Down presenter was chatting exclusively to her fellow Loose Women panelists about her pregnancy news
Order Local: NI businesses urged to sign up to free service to show they are open for delivery or collection
Stay InIf your restaurant or takeaway is offering a delivery or collection service then it can be seen by up to 600,000 people on the free app
Liam Neeson says he's ready to retire from action films
Liam NeesonThe Ballymena-born actor will turn 69 in June
Liam NeesonLiam Neeson says he's ready to retire from action filmsThe Ballymena-born actor will turn 69 in June
Best books to read this year to help you think more positively
Fitness and wellbeingA great way to use up your free time in lockdown
Pharmacy codeword scheme for domestic abuse victims launches in Northern Ireland
CrimeThe 'Ask for ANI' scheme allows those at risk or suffering from abuse to discreetly signal that they need help
Holywood coffee shop offering free school lunches again to help struggling families
Family"Keep going parents and guardians, you've got this!"