text:
Editors • About the Site • Comes vs. Microsoft • Using This Web Site • Site Archives • Credibility Index • OOXML • OpenDocument • Patents • Novell • News Digest • Site News • RSS
Deathwatch of the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPC)
Posted in Europe, Patents at 3:50 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Battistelli put all his eggs in the "UPC" basket, attacked the sceptics, and now he digs his own grave
Summary: The UPC seems very unlikely to ever become a reality in the United Kingdom and even in Europe as a whole
THE UNITARY PATENT is a subject we have been covering for many years, since before it was even known as anything "unitary" (words like "community", "EU" or "European" were more common a bunch of euphemisms at the time). The UPC is definitely not for the EU or for Europe. It is not for Europeans or even for EPO staff (who are typically European scientists); rather, UPC is for prosecutors/lawyers and for mega-corporations (their clients), billionaires and Battistelli, who is dangerously close to them (see his political affiliation and professional background). The UPC must be stopped and EPO examiners too should work hard to stop it. Nothing would upset Battistelli more because his interests are often the very opposite of EPO interests (for instance, systematically lowering the quality of patents).
"Lobbying for UPC opened to non-EU states," Benjamin Henrion (FFII President) wrote earlier today, "dreaming wide open…"
Henrion referred to the British and paraphrased IP Federation as saying outrageous things. "Not reopen swpat [software patents] debate: we prefer to see the minimum of amendment to the UPC Agreement (i.e. to remove the UK)," he wrote. We were rather shocked to find IP Federation referred to as "UK industry" in this new comment (original post mentioned here the other day). Basically, someone has just called patent lawyers and other self-serving parasites (when it comes to the UPC) the "UK industry". To quote:
UK industry has announced a position on Brexit at http://www.ipfederation.com/activities.php?news_id=133
"Without a guarantee of continued UK participation post-Brexit, the UK should not ratify the UPC at present."
It didn't take long for some people to respond to this publicly. "Please note," this person wrote, "IP Federation is not synonymous with UK industry [...] If the UK does not ratify now, the whole UPC/UP project may simply evaporate" (which would be good for the real UK industry as much of it is SMEs). To quote:
Please note, IP Federation is not synonymous with UK industry [see the very short list of members] and the position does not appear to be unanimous even among that self-selected group.
The declared position is either extremely naive (on the part of those who believe there can be any guarantees in the present political climate), or extremely devious (on the part of those who never liked the whole idea anyway and rather hope it will just go away).
If the UK does not ratify now, the whole UPC/UP project may simply evaporate. The benefit to that part of UK industry that is not part of IP Federation's self-selected cabal will be lost.
"Not many SMEs I grant you," said another person about IP Federation's representation:
Strange comments about the IP Federation. The IP Federation represents a significant part of British Industry. Not many SMEs I grant you, but significant nonetheless.
In any event, their position seems to me to be pretty sound. Why would anyone want a patent that may not be valid in one (or more) jurisdictions? That's exactly what those who insist on ill-conceived quick ratification are asking for. There are so many questions that cannot be easily answered and, for which, the answers may be challenged in future even if they are answered that certainty is required. The easiest way to be certain is to NOT ratify. Status Quo maintained. If the UPC system can be adapted to make it certain (unchallengable) that the UK is/can be clearly in or out then all well and good.
One person said that "IP Federation positions are almost always taken up by the CBI (who don't have much expertise in the relevant areas) and they DO represent all of British industry." No, they don't.
"UK participation in UPC is silly," Henrion notes, considering the fact that the UK plans — as per the referendum — to exit the EU.
According to this new article from British media for lawyers, "UK ratification of the Unified Patent Court Agreement soon seems politically unrealistic, says expert" (that's the headline). To quote some bits:
Patent law specialist Deborah Bould of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com, said that it would seem "politically unrealistic" to expect the UK to pass legislation giving effect to the UPC Agreement if its participation in the UPC and unitary patent system was not guaranteed to continue after the country leaves the EU.
Bould was commenting after Benoît Battistelli, president of the European Patent Office (EPO), suggested that if the UK ratified the UPC Agreement before leaving the EU it could be allowed to continue its participate in the new system after its exit from the trading bloc. He suggested, though, that continued participation post-Brexit would be subject to the outcome of negotiation between the UK and EU countries.
"The UK's participation in the new patent system is a major part of its attraction, and its involvement was a factor in the decision that London should host a branch of the Central Division of the UPC. That said, subject to a possible amendment of Article 89 of the UPC Agreement, the Agreement is worded in a way which makes it legally possible for the UPC framework to continue without UK involvement," he said.
One problem with all of these articles is that their authors speak to patent lawyers rather than actual stakeholders in the industry. As UPC is a Trojan horse for software patents in Europe, expect many software companies to oppose it strongly. Published a short while ago was some UPC promotion from Jane Lambert, a longtime UPC booster. She wrote:
Patents are granted for the UK by the Intellectual Property Office ("IPO") pursuant to the Patents Act 1977 and the European Patent Office ("EPO") pursuant to the EPC. There is not yet such a thing as an EU patent but there is an agreement to set up a Unified Patent Court ("the UPC agreement") and legislation to permit the EPO to grant patents for the territories of most of the member states of the EU including the UK, France and Germany to be known as unitary patents.
As Parliament has already enacted legislation to enable the Secretary of State to ratify the UPC Agreement and the statutory instrument giving effect to ratification has already been drafted (see The Draft Patents (European Patent with Unitary Effect and Unified Patent Court) Order 2016 10 March 2016) it is also possible that the unitary patent and Unified Patent Court will come into being before the UK leaves the EU. However, the UK would cease to be party to the UPC Agreement upon our departure since the Agreement is open only to EU member states.
The only intellectual property right affecting the software industry that would actually cease to apply to the UK upon our departure would be the EU trade mark. The courts in the UK that have been designated EU trade mark courts will lose their jurisdiction over EU trade mark matters. However, registrations under the Trade Marks Act 1994 would be unaffected and EU trade marks would continue to apply to the rest of the EU.
It doesn't matter how much these patent law firms try to promote the UPC, Brexit is a real slap on their face. Days ago the EPO's Twitter account again promoted the dead/dying UPC using Battistelli's lies and lobbying in Munich. Are they not even trying to hide their meddling in political and legislative matters? What has the EPO become, a think tank?
"UK ratification of the UPC is what everybody else is begging the UK to do," says this new comment, but it's a lie. Team UPC begs for it, but it's not what people in the UK beg for (they don't even know what it is and probably never heard about it, due to the secrecy). Here is the full comment:
Good argument from Millipede. UK ratification improves the negotiating position of the UK, trying to squeeze a good "deal" out of the EU as it negotiates its exit. Who in the UK could be against that?
Further, UK ratification of the UPC is what everybody else is begging the UK to do. The work's been done already. A prime ministerial nod is all it now needs, I am told
Theresa May is a woman who does the right thing, rather than just court popularity. Just the right person needed now.
So Theresa, hold back on Art 50 by all means but, if you care about the UK's reputation in the world, screw your courage to the sticking place and get on and ratify the UPC. There is no reason not to, and every reason positively to do so.
In time for May becoming our Prime Minister one person wrote:
But with time limited after Art 50 notification, might not it be to May's benefit to hold off on ratifying the UPC in return for some other concession? Joining and then (messily) leaving serves her no purpose but eases everyone else's interests so is a good bargaining tool. Why give it up a pawn for free straight off when you have bigger treaties to negotiate from weak positions?
Calling/urging the UPC propagandists to just accept the reality, "A true European" wrote:
It is amazing to see how members of the profession are hoping for a quick ratification of the UPC by the UK or are trying to find ways to keep the UK in the system in spite of the Brexit. Thinking of bringing back remaining non EU- member states in the UPC is simply laughable. EPLA is dead as dead can be.
Millipede's contribution in this respect is revealing:
- the UK will have the advantage of the London seat of the UPC;
- the UK will have the advantage that once the system is started they will be considered indispensable for the continuation of the system (they are already deemed to be indispensable before the system has started), which will improve their negotiation position.
Having all the advantages but no inconvenient. That has been the UK attitude all along its participation to the EU. The presence of UK would certainly have been good for the system, but to come with the arrogance of being indispensable is going a trifle too far. Enough is enough!
The numerous attempts to salve the participation of UK at any rate is nothing more than a desperate attempt to try not losing the considerable personal profits the promoters of the UPC expected to make with the full UPC. It is clear that a UP without UK is much less interesting. But a Brexit is a Brexit.
Have those distinguished gentlemen thought of the mess their clients will be if the UK ratifies for latter leaving the agreement which is only be open to member states of the union? Probably yes, as it means more need for consultation, hence more fees. Cupidity has limits.
Does all those distinguish gentleman think that the UK parliament has nothing else to do than quickly ratify the UPC? Sneaking in some continued involvement with EU law in spite of the Brexit? I would like to see which explanation a MP will give to his constituency at the next elections if his constituency voted in favour of Brexit. As any MP wants to regain his seat, he would he be foolish enough to brave the opinion of his voters in this respect. A quick ratification is no more than wishful thinking.
Art 87(2) of the UPC Agreement provides that the Administrative Committee may amend this Agreement to bring it into line with an international treaty relating to patents or Union law. The amendments to the Agreement envisaged are of administrative nature, and said committee cannot take decisions which are of political nature. Amending Art 84 to sneak UK in is not in the competence of the Administrative Committee. Art 87(3) Agreement provides a protection mechanism should the Administrative Committee take decisions on a political level.
Instead of running after something which has gone, it would be wiser to put energy in saving what is left from the UP/UPC once UK has gone, but then to look at the matter with fresh eyes. The matter should be simplified and the influence of common law should be thrown overboard. After all, UK has left and the continent is not an area relying on common law.
"If the UK is to ratify now," wrote the following person, "it will be a total mess later on." Well, then forget about it and never ratify it. British people don't need it and if they knew more about it, they would not want it either. Here is the full comment:
If the UK is to ratify now, it will be a total mess later on.
Just think of the unitary effect scope when the two years delay will lapse should no agreement be found ? Remember how Serbia and Montenegro separated ? Patentee had to register their former patent to the Montenegro IP office. One could expect that a unitary patent territorial scope be reduced when the UK formally leaves EU, but will it be. Then, hopefully some UK laws would provide for a similar registration at UK IPO (and what about Scotland if a Scottish IP Office is enacted at some point ?). Overall, the british parlement might spend the next two years just adapting all laws to the Brexit. No need to add special legislations for a short lived unitary patent. UK courts would not have juridiction on former unitary patent over the UPC countries territories. Conversely, UPC would not have jurisdiction for former unitary patents over the UK territories. What about pending actions before the UPC Court of first instance in the London section and in other UPC countries ? and before the Court of appeal in Luxembourg ? Think of the clause "as an object of property" if the first applicant is from UK: then, the unitary patent applicable law would change upon the UK leaving with German law applying in a number of instances. This might be bad news for international company having their UK subsidiary applying for EP patents.
If the UK ratifies, it would be such a mess that no one (whether UK applicant or non-UK applicant) would ask for the unitary effect until the UK has formally left EU. Even EP patent bundles might be at risk unless you opt out.
Fortunately, this will not happen because the German will not deposit their accession up until the UK has left EU. Germans are not likely to gamble the whole European patent system on Brexit issues.
EU has to immunize itself from future inescapable UK laws and endless court actions up to the House of Lords. Just think of the SPCs legislation and the european first marketing authorization.
Recalling the European Patent Convention (EPC), one person noted the following:
And there was me, thinking about the 1973 European Patent Convention, a beautifully simple and rigorous model law of patents that has since then swept the world and has been adopted, more or less verbatim, all over the world. It came out of a fusion of (mainly) German and English patent law principles. What a shame, that Europe is no longer a beacon to the rest of the world, about how to live together in harmony.
English common law fact-finding has a role to play, in keeping litigants honest. Discovery and cross-examination are the only effective tools to stop parties in court from trotting out a string of porkies. How sad then, that a mainland European can't wait to see the back of English common law fact-finding procedures.
"A quick ratification is just promoting uncertainty," wrote the following person. To quote the full comment:
Do all those promoters for a quick ratification will honestly advise their clients to go along with the UPC knowing well that the Brexit is looming and will have presently unknown consequences? Please let's be serious and look a bit further than the end of one's own purse strings.
One thing investors hate is uncertainty. A quick ratification is just promoting uncertainty. The hope of finding some legal trick to keep UK in the UPC, or even bringing in further non-EU members, is not to be taken seriously. What has to be envisaged is anything but a "minor" reform of the UPC agreement.
Should UK ratify, it still would need Germany to ratify for it to enter into force. Nothing more is certain. Do you think they are so stupid to give an ace away just to please the profession? Such an ace is as well a bargaining option, but for the other side. This fact seems have been forgotten.
Should the UPC start in 2017 with UK in it, the only direct effect would be a high rate of opt-out, probably near 100%. No sensible patent owner would embark on such an adventure. The UPC might be in force, but with no or very little effect. Has any of those vehement promoters of quick ratification ever thought of this?
Sorry for Max Drei and Millipede, Brexit is there, and that's it. I have rarely seen so much cynicism and selfishness being expressed in this blog. As another blogger said, all the advantages but no inconvenient…
To paraphrase Max Drei: dear Angela do not ratify the UPC before the Brexit has taken place. Do not give this ace away to Teresa. It would just bring about a big mess.
"Back to the drawing board I am afraid," the following commenter wrote:
Some of the suggestions here are laughable. A quick ratification from the UK to get the system up and running, with the option then of the UK leaving the system in due course (as per Millipede's "win-win")? I don't think so.
Someone seems to have forgotten that the UPC is not simply a playground for patent litigators, it is a venue for companies to resolve their disputes. No major patent holder is going to leave its patents in the system under these circumstances. Thus, if everyone opts out, the system is going to be (using the phrase used by a commentator on an earlier post) an ex-parrot from the day it is born.
Back to the drawing board I am afraid….
One person spoke about the imperative of Brexit:
Let us hope that "Brexit means Brexit" is good old fashioned UK politics in which success is like rowing, staring fixed.in one direction while moving rapidly in the opposite.
Even if this is a vain hope: law is a servant, not a master, and given political will, much can be made possible.
Attacks on UPC sceptics came from "Anonymous" (probably an aggressive patent prosecutor) and several other offensive or inane comments will hereon be omitted to improve the signal-to-noise ratio. Basically, patent lawyers who invested a lot in UPC transitions don't want to see it go away (Bristows for example), as if the public doesn't count and they deserve their 'toys' no matter the circumstances (and Brexit). Speaking 'on behalf' (i.e. hijacking the voices) of SMEs and the British industry is a very dirty tactic. One person wrote about "the "pro-UPC" commentators" as follows:
I do not think that the "pro-UPC" commentators here are necessarily motivated (solely) by the thought of future profits. Remember, there will be many in the IP profession who will have invested considerable amounts of time and effort (as well as resources) in preparing the way for the advent of the UPC. Not wanting to see all of that go to waste is surely an understandable emotion, so let's not cast aspersions where none are really necessary.
Having said all of that, I have to say that I view the proposals for saving the UPC as akin to grasping at straws. Perhaps not completely hopeless, but not all that far from it.
It is certainly sad that yet another attempt at "harmonising" patent litigation in Europe looks set to be consigned to the waste bin of history. Nevertheless, at least from my perspective, there are some silver linings. Foremost amongst these is the possibility to re-open the issue of harmonisation of national patent laws. One of the biggest failings of the current UPC Agreement (and associated EU Regulations) is the fact that it leaves too many issues open with regard to applicable laws (for infringement and other matters). This can only lead to the kind of uncertainty that litigants so dislike.
From this perspective, those who are truly interested in a harmonised patent litigation system across Europe really ought to grasp with both hands the opportunity presented by Brexit (to properly address the issue of harmonisation of national laws). There will no doubt be political hurdles to overcome, but it is surely worthwhile taking on those challenges to secure a noble objective, namely the delivery of a robust and harmonised patent litigation system.
Is there anyone out there who is up for the challenge?
A patent attorney, who is regularly commenting in this site, wrote: "Lots of discussion on what companies will do – mainly from the point of those in the profession."
Well, it's a coup, so interests of SMEs do not count, even if they all generally oppose the UPC [1, 2] for good reasons. It's almost as if it all boils down to money/earnings of patent law firms, never mind the effects on the local industry (e.g. abuse by patent trolls). The following comment spoke about this:
Lots of discussion on what companies will do – mainly from the point of those in the profession.
What drives companies' decisions? Money.
The unitary patent provides a significant value for money option whether the UK is inside or not.
The UPC provides significant extra power over having to separately litigate in each country.
Even if the UK has to leave on the worst possible terms [no membership of the UPC, no membership of the unitary patent]:-
- does anyone believe the UK will not provide transitional provisions to ensure continued effect of unitary patents in the UK either by unilateral extension (unlikely) or deemed resumption of national effect of the European patent (more likely)?
- does anyone believe the UK will not provide for suitable transitional provisions for cases underway at the UPC?
Contrary to the impression given by recent events in the UK, politicians are not blind to money either. Something that is good for industry (and cannot be characterised as tax dodging) attracts political attention. This applies whether it is the UK government seeking to assist UK industry by having the UPC (and particularly the UP) open as soon as possible – or the German government seeking to reduce costs for German companies doing business in the UK.
The money says ratify. Will the politicians listen?
Where there's a will, there's a way: and where there is wonga, there is will.
"UPC may be good for big industry in or outside Europe, but certainly not for European SMEs," another person wrote. Here is the full comment:
I have always been told that the UPC has been set up for the benefit of European Industry and especially it's SME's. UPC may be good for big industry in or outside Europe, but certainly not for European SME's. The best proof of this is the idea to create an insurance in case of litigation for European SME's, which by the way still needs to be put together.
It is interesting to see now that the prime beneficiary will be, inter alia, US SME's. And for sure they will chose to be represented by UK lawyers and representatives for a large part. When this is not an incentive to push the UPC in UK for its own benefit, then nothing will ever be an incentive. As already said by another blogger, cupidity has limits.
I agree that the fears expressed towards the UPC remind one of the fears raised before the opening of the EPO. But this fear bears no relationship whatsoever with the Brexit. Please do not confuse the issues.
In any case, in view of the solid national traditions and the way some mock UPC trials proceeded, the biggest role will be for the Court of Appeal of the UPC in order to harmonise those different national approaches. In any local court with two judges from the same country this is bound to happen. Not in the Central division, but then with the Brexit why should there be a division in London? The answer is simply no. All the advantages and not any inconvenient……
One commenter said if there is a political will, there is a way: should the UPC have to be renegotiated, this does not mean that it will never be possible to come to an agreement. It could be strapped from all the wrong things which presently have been put in the agreement. But with the Brexit, UK does not have to put its nose in it.
There are plenty of parallels/similarities between TTIP/TPP and UPC as it's not about what's good for the population or even businesses, just mega-corporations (usually foreign). "I work for a mutlinational company," the following commenter wrote, "so luckily, our US comrades will received advice from within Europe that represents their interests." Here is this rather revealing comment:
There is a big difference between the EPC and the UPC. Does it need to be spelt out? One system gives pan-European rights in one swoop and the other takes them away.
I work for a mutlinational company, so luckily, our US comrades will received advice from within Europe that represents their interests.
I have to say, I find the tone of the introduction patronising and xenophobic. but then I'm English, so I'm in the European minority.
"So a quick ratification is out of the question in my view," another person wrote:
To be honest, do we not all overestimate the importance of the UPC in a Brexit scenario ?
If Brexit really happens, there is a long list of topics to be dealt with in negotiations and I sincerely doubt that the UPCA will be a "pawn" in this game.
There are thousands of issues more important to be negotiated. Law in general is just a part of those matters, IP is just a small part of the overall law package, patents a small part of the overall IP package and the UPCA just one part of the overall patent package.
I can understand that people having worked on this project for a good bit of their lives will stay optimistic.
But having already an EU project in IP, for which a solution needs to be found, i.e the EUIPO businesses, I sincerely doubt that anyone wishes to create another complicated "EU" project like the UPC with the UK leaving…
So a quick ratification is out of the question in my view…
Lots of attacks on the messenger ensued and here is just one which speaks about today's meeting in the UK:
But, of course the Ah-No Nyms point of view as a German patent attorney is of no relevance. Of relevance is the political will in UK and remaining Europe. And in view of the politicians taking the decisions the UPC is already a main topic. For instance a government conference with British industry and other relevant circles has already been scheduled for Thursday, 14th of July. Maybe the UPC or better the patent package will be a cornerstone for the future economic relationship between UK and EU to avoid more damages from the referendum outcome than absolutley necessary!
"Our VCs wouldn't spent a dime with the UPC even with the UK on board," the following person wrote (obviously not part of Team UPC). "The UPC is dead in the water and all (academic) discussions are just there for saving face," this person added. To quote:
Did you talk to any VC? Any SME? Anybody outside Europe?
Our VCs wouldn't spent a dime with the UPC even with the UK on board.
Legal Security? Nope! – Does that mean we could loose the IP (=our investment) in ONE court that nobody knows how they are deciding (and by which exact rules)?!?
Really cheaper? Not unless you were suing in at least 2 countries.
Experinced Judges? No Brits, nobody who is or was employed at the EPO! Who shall fill in all the positions? In Europe nobody would want to have German judges sitting everywhere.
SPC? Don't even start!
True European? Nope, at least Britain, Switzerland and Spain are missing from the "imoportant" or "big" countries.
South Korean colleagues were already asking on how to file national again…
So what money wants to ratify? Which industry?
Even Pharma was like "Well, we might test the sytem with one or two less important families".
If one wants to promote "European Patents" cut the annual fees! They are what is responsible for the biggest part of the costs.
The UPC is dead in the water and all (academic) discussions are just there for saving face (and not having to confess to themselves that all that money and time was wasted).
"Trust me when I say that Pharm will not touch the UPC with a bargepole," said the following person.
Trust me when I say that Pharm will not touch the UPC with a bargepole, irrespective of membership, location, or even tasty nibbles.
Those that say "we may test the system…" aren't really part of the decision-making processes. Hence why they spend their time hob-nobbing at conferences on the UPC.
Only a fool would put their pharma eggs in the UPC basket, irrespective of the quality of the judges.
As we noted here in past years, the UPC would be especially attractive to patent trolls. No wonder publications that are funded by patent trolls (like IAM) push for the UPC. They can attack thousands of European firms in one fell swoop (low cost, no brand/name to damage in the process). What good would that do to Europe? This patent and litigation bonanza would be useful to patent lawyers, no doubt, but at whose expense? Here is another comment:
Yes I have spoken to those outside the UK – and found the greatest interest outside Europe to be from the USA, particularly from CFOs of small to medium sized companies who want as big a portfolio as they can at the lowest price.
Lawyers tend to be cautious, but those who control the purse strings seem enthusiastic.
I started as an extreme sceptic on the UPC/UP package, simply because there is so much that is wrong with it. A better system could have been devised, but a better system might not have achieved the political impetus for agreement.
However, by talking to some of those who control the purse strings, I have become convinced that there is a real demand. Buy four, get perhaps 20 free, is a message that stirs the accountant's soul (if they have one).
Referring to "Meldrew" (an attorney), the following expressed similar views on why the UPC is not at all necessary:
I can second Meldrew's information. Most of the US companies are happy to exchange having to go to several separate European courts (all of these unknown to them) to one central European Court (also unknown to them).
Also on a European level the interest for the unitary patent and the UPC is large and although some may choose to opt-out from the start, many will trust the experience of the UPC courts (which next to British and German judges will also have experienced French, Austrian and Dutch judges).
I further agree with Meldrew that indeed the UP and UPC system may have been better. But this was the best we could get it at this moment and along the way I have become convinced that it will be a workable system and better, much better than what we currently have.
The negativism towards the UP and UPC reminds of old times at the start of the EPC, when everybody was negative and wanted to keep with the old national system. Or, if you want a stronger comparison, at the time of the introcution of the car or the train or any technological development. People tend to be quite conformistic and don't want a change. I predict here, that if the system starts, after ten years everybody will say that it has been an enormous success.
Lastly, to come back to the above discussion on Brexit, or rather UPC-exit negotiations: to my opninion it is better to start the system as soon as possible and only when it is running discuss the exit of the UK. Otherwise we will run the risk that the whole UPC will be re-negotiated, which probably effectively will mean that it will be impossible again to come to an agreement.
The bottom line here is that the UPC is not needed (except for the sake of those who invested in its passage), the UK is unlikely to ratify it (because of Brexit at the very least), and UPC might never become a reality anywhere in Europe because it was drafted with London in mind and this whole house of card is now falling.
The unworkable, irreparable mess (or unmitigated chaos) which is now known as "UPC" was never designed with Europe in mind. It was designed with Team UPC (its creators) in mind. Time to abandon it and move beyond this defunct effort at patent regime change. The public now knows too much to allow it to pass behind closed doors by gullible and/or corruptible politicians. █
Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.
Pages that cross-reference this one
Ignore the Bristows UPC Echo Chamber, the UPC is Not Happening
UPC Preparatory Committee Projects Optimism in an Effort to Salvage Its Dying Project, the Unitary/Unified Patent
Kluwer Thinks People Are Clueless About the Unitary Patent System and Pretends It's Business as Usual
What If EPO Under Battistelli Gets Broken Beyond Repair Just Like the UPC?
What Else is New
Links 21/1/2020: EarlyOOM Fedora Decision and AMD Zen 3 Microcode
Links for the day
IRC Proceedings: Monday, January 20, 2020
IRC logs for Monday, January 20, 2020
Links 20/1/2020: MNT Reform, Linux 5.5 RC7, KMyMoney 5.0.8
Mansion of Pedophilia – Addendum: Accessing and Assessing Court Documents
How anyone out there can do the job the media failed to do (after an apparently unprecedented arrest at the home of Bill Gates)
Mansion of Pedophilia – Addendum: Progress on Police Request
9 updates from the police department of Seattle but still nothing material/concrete, only promises and major delays
IRC Proceedings: Sunday, January 19, 2020
IRC logs for Sunday, January 19, 2020
Mansion of Pedophilia – Part VIII: More Than 4 Months of Waiting for Police Department to Send Over the Files They Claim to Have an Issue Opening
The police department (PD) of Seattle is unable to open its own files about arrest for pedophilia at Bill Gates' home; it has been unable to open these files for several months, it claims...
Starting a GNU Replacement for GitHub, Possibly Based on GitLab
"It might be easier if we start from the GitLab software," Stallman said
European Commission Pushes for Even Greater Patent Maximalism Instead of Rationality, Patent Zealots' Site Cherry-Picks China as Whipping Boy
Fear of China is being leveraged to promote an agenda of patent maximalists; the general idea they promote is that granting millions of low-quality patents is the only way to compete, even if in reality that merely handicaps the whole market
CRISPR Patents Disallowed, But Where Are the Journalists?
The narrative surrounding last week's decision against CRISPR patents may have been virtually monopolised by the litigation think tanks and law firms; it certainly feels like no journalism is left to rebut them, fact-check, and introspect
Links 19/1/2020: Wine 5.0 RC6, Alpine 3.11.3
Judges Reject EPO Patents on Life as Constitutional Complaints Against the EPO Pile Up in Germany
EPO judges throw out patents on life (CRISPR at least); there's now growing hope that they'll have the courage to do the same to patents on software
IRC Proceedings: Saturday, January 18, 2020
IRC logs for Saturday, January 18, 2020
StartPage (System1) Found New Spin Allies. Some Have Been Offered StartPage Jobs. Some Might Already be Working for StartPage in Secret.
Pro-StartPage voices appear to be paid (or have been promised pay) by StartPage; the key strategy of StartPage seems to be, attack and betray people's privacy while paying people in particular positions to pretend otherwise
IRC Proceedings: Friday, January 17, 2020
IRC logs for Friday, January 17, 2020
Links 18/1/2020: Mir 1.7 and GNU Guile 3.0.0
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, January 16, 2020
IRC logs for Thursday, January 16, 2020
Links 16/1/2020: Mozilla Layoffs, PinePhone Braveheart Shipping, KDE Plasma 5.18 LTS Reaches Beta
Microsoft is a Market Leader in Lying and Corruption
Microsoft is working hard to describe itself as the exact opposite of what it is and what it has been; 'Internet rot' helps a lot with this agenda, not to mention control of the media (the narrative)
The European Patent Organisation Continues to 'Piss All Over' Separation of Powers
The EPO continues to scatter invalid patents (IPs) that are European Patents (EPs) all over Europe and nobody can stop this, not even the judges of the EPO because they lack independence (by their very own admission)
Zealots of Team UPC (Patent Litigation) Now Attacking the Courts and the Judges, Removing Their Mask on the Face of Things...
The tactics of Team UPC aren't changing, only the shamelessness associated with these tactics is changing (because it looks like the end of days to them)
Microsoft Now Uses or Leverages Software Freedom Against Free Software
A reader's explanation of what Microsoft is trying to accomplish with its so-called 'embrace' and what steps will come next (how they manifest themselves)
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, January 15, 2020
IRC logs for Wednesday, January 15, 2020
Links 15/1/2020: CentOS Linux 8.1, Oracle VirtualBox 6.1.2 and GNU Sed 4.8
OSI Board at Microsoft: This is How Institutions Die or Completely Lose Their Purpose/Direction
The photo (or meeting) may mark the turning point of the Openwashing as-a-Standard Initiative (OSI), which less than a year earlier took a bucket of money from Microsoft
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, January 14, 2020
IRC logs for Tuesday, January 14, 2020
When Microsoft's Actions Speak for Themselves (About Back Door Access)
Unwittingly, people are being reminded of the 'special relationship' between Microsoft and the US Army (or government); The back doors or bug doors are still there, even 7 years after Edward Snowden's NSA leaks
Why You -- Yes, You Too -- Should Consider Migrating to GNU/Linux
The window is closing (and Windows/Vista 7 closing down); the chance to use machines that the users actually control is still there
Can We Please Stop Lying for Microsoft in the Mainstream Media?
Dishonesty for short-term financial gain (e.g. advertising money) will be a big loss in the long run. There's a reason why so many news sites perish and Datamation (where I wrote more than a decade ago) now throws away remnants of reputation by spreading a big lie from Microsoft.
It's Only Factual and Truthful to Point Out That About Half of the EPO's Management Committee Are From the President's Nation (and Many Are Underqualified Friends of His)
The patent-granting extravaganza of what a reader and contributor of ours likes to call "Club Med" will result in great pain (not just for the Office but for Europe as a whole); pointing out who's to blame (the culprits) is an exercise in practicality
Contact us (encrypted/PGP)
Supporting the Efforts
Support Techrights
Spread TechBytes
Billwatch Resurrected
Billwatch Articles Database
Billwatch Quotes Database
Billwatch Snippets Database – Part I
Billwatch Snippets Database – Part II
Billwatch Snippets Database – Part III
Billwatch Snippets Database – Part IV
Comes vs. Microsoft
Companies to Avoid
Foire aux Questions (French)
Get the Facts: Microsoft/Novell Deal
How to Use This Web Site
Introduction to Patents (in Videos)
IRC Archives
Making the Move to GNU/Linux
Microsoft Critique: Resources
ODF Resources
OOXML Abuse Index
Pages Archive
Patent TrollTracker Resurrected
Samba Resources
Site Archives (Download)
Site Wiki
The Free Software Credibility Index
Twitter and Identi.ca
Why Boycott?
Search Techrights
Google search produces more
relevant results, whereas
normal search places recent
ones first. Advanced search
America (2,136)
Antitrust (779)
AppArmor (4)
Astrum (4)
Audio/Video (41)
Bill Gates (875)
Boycott Novell (275)
Cablegate (70)
CDDL (3)
Courtroom (856)
Deception (2,640)
ECMA (207)
EFF (89)
Finance (1,094)
Flying Chairlet (6)
Fork (55)
Formats (440)
Fraud (315)
Free/Libre Software (2,240)
FSF (476)
FUD (1,085)
Fuji Xerox (9)
GNOME (239)
GNU/Linux (5,651)
GPL (608)
Identity Management (78)
Intellectual Monopoly (496)
Interoperability (353)
IRC Logs (1,792)
KDE (164)
Kernel (395)
Kyocera Mita (17)
LGPL (12)
Linspire (193)
Microsoft (10,210)
Minix (6)
Mono (1,010)
NetWare (124)
News Roundup (4,511)
Novell (3,530)
Office Suites (519)
OIN (167)
Open XML (1,217)
OpenDocument (846)
OpenOffice (376)
OpenSUSE (564)
OSDL (21)
OSI (100)
Patent Covenant (165)
Protocol (68)
RAND (113)
Red Hat (767)
RHX (3)
Ron Hovsepian (114)
Rumour (130)
Scalix (36)
SCO (446)
Search (230)
SLES/SLED (531)
Steve Ballmer (223)
SueMe (2)
TechBytes (91)
TechBytes Video (40)
Tivoization (36)
Turbolinux (67)
Ubuntu (499)
Virtualisation (327)
Vista 10 (82)
Vista 7 (446)
Vista 9 (7)
Xandros (259)
Xen (126)
RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates
Site Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content
Site Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page
IRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time
Stranger Than Fiction: Team UPC's Mental Condition
Links 14/1/2020: IBM Joins LOT Network; X.Org Server 1.20.7, Tails 4.2.2 and Zanshin 0.5.71 Released
Vista 7 is Dead, Long Live GNU/Linux
Links 14/1/2020: Git v2.25.0 and End of Vista 7
Systematic Abandonment of the Independence of Judiciary at the EPO (or Collective Amnesia)
They Always Say They Love Linux (and 'the Children')
The Media's Obligation is Not to Repeat the Lies of EPO Management, But Money Changes Things
The FSF and GNU Need a Better Savannah to Attract GitHub Refugees
Links 13/1/2020: Linux Lite 4.8, Linux 5.5 RC6, Corebird Continues as 'Cawbird'
GNU is Not Linux and Not UNIX, Either
Mansion of Pedophilia – Part VII: Guilty Verdict in Case of Pedophilia (Staff at the Mansion of Bill Gates), But Where Was the Mainstream Media?
Open Letter to Richard Stallman About the Free Software Movement
Links 12/1/2020: End of Windows 7, LibreOffice 6.4 RC2 and Sparky 5.10
EPO Management Already Meddles in (Illegally and in Clear Violation of the EPC) BoA Cases. Now It Does the Same to Bundesverfassungsgericht (FCC, Germany's Constitutional Court).
Links 12/1/2020: Wine 5.0 RC5, EasyOS 2.2.3
When You Hang Around With So Many Rich Criminals and Dictators You May as Well be One Yourself
When Some Transparency is More Equal Than Others
Design by Beccary and Weblogs.us · Valid XHTML · Valid CSS · Hosting by Schestowitz · Part of Bytes Media
Content is available under CC-BY-SA


text:
\section{Introduction}
\vspace*{-1mm}

Biological experiments~\citep{Markram+Sakmann-1995,Gerstner-et-al-1996}
suggest that synaptic change in several types of neurons
and stimulation contexts depends on the relative timing of
presynaptic and postsynaptic spikes.
Learning rules that mimic this observation
are called Spike-Timing Dependent Plasticity (STDP) rules.
In this paper, we investigate a learning rule that
only depends on firing rates and their temporal derivative while
being consistent with the STDP observations, according to
a series of simulations.

This learning rule is motivated by the desire to make it easier
to study machine learning interpretations for STDP, since
artificial neural networks are generally cast in terms of
firing rates. Deep neural networks~\citep{Goodfellow-et-al-2015-Book}
have been extremely successful in several major artificial intelligence
applications in areas such as computer vision, speech recognition,
natural language processing, game playing and robotics. All of these
breakthroughs have been achieved thanks to at least two
ingredients: (a) a deep enough neural network (with enough
layers) and (b) a form of stochastic gradient descent on
an objective function of interest, where the gradient
is obtained by back-propagation~\citep{Rumelhart86b}.

To illustrate the potential use of the proposed STDP rule
in bridging the gap between machine learning based back-propagation
and biology, we show that this STDP rule would correspond
to stochastic gradient descent on an objective function if
the neural activity would move towards reducing that objective function.

As usual, we assume the existence of a non-linear
transformation $\rho$ that is monotonically increasing, from the integrated
activity (the expected membrane potential, averaged over the random effects
of both pre- and postsynaptic spikes) to the actual firing rate.
In deriving a link between STDP and their rate-based learning rule
\citet{Xie+Seung-NIPS1999} started by assuming a particular pattern
relating spike timing and weight change, and then showed that the resulting
weight change could be approximated by the product of presynaptic firing
rate and temporal rate of postsynaptic firing rate. Instead, we go in the
other direction, showing that if the weight change is proportional to the
product of presynaptic firing rate (or simply the presence of a spike) and
the postsynaptic activity, then we recover a
relationship between spike timing and weight change that has the precise
characteristics of the one observed experimentally by biologists. We
present both an easy to understand theoretical justification for this
result, as well as, simulations that confirm it.

\begin{figure}[htpb]
\hspace*{-1mm} \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{biology-delta-w-vs-spike-timing.png}
\hspace*{-1mm}
\includegraphics[width=0.29\textwidth]{delta-w-vs-spike-timing.png} \hspace*{-1.5mm} %
\includegraphics[width=0.29\textwidth]{stdp-delta-w-vs-spike-timing.png}
\caption
{Left:
Biological observation of STDP weight change, vertical axis, for different spike timing
differences (post minus pre), horizontal axis. From~\citet{Shepherd-book2003}, with data from~\citet{Bi+Poo-2001}.
Compare with the result of the simulations using the objective function proposed here (middle).\newline
Middle and right:Spike-based simulation shows that when weight updates follow SGD on the proposed predictive
objective function, we recover the biologically observed relationship between spike timing difference (horizontal axis,
postsynaptic spike time minus presynaptic spike time) and the weight update (vertical axis). Middle: the
weight updates are obtained with the proposed update rule (Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp}). Right: the weight
updates are obtained using the nearest neighbor STDP rule.
Compare with the biological finding, left.}
\label{fig:STDP-biology}
\end{figure}

\vspace*{-1mm}
\section{Spike-timing dependent plasticity}
\vspace*{-1mm}

Spike-timing dependent plasticity (STDP) is a central subject of research in synaptic plasticity
but much more research is needed to solidify the links between STDP and
a machine learning interpretation of it at the scale of a whole network,
i.e., with ``hidden layers'' which need to receive a useful training signal.
See~\citet{Markram-et-al-2012} for a recent review of the neuroscience
research on STDP.

We present here a simple view of STDP that has been observed at least in some common
neuron types and preparations. There is a weight change if there is a
presynaptic spike in the temporal vicinity of a postsynaptic spike:
that change is positive if the postsynaptic
spike happens just after the presynaptic spike (and larger if the timing
difference is small), negative if it happens
just before (and again, larger if the timing difference is small, on the
order of a few milliseconds), as illustrated with the biological
data shown in Figure~\ref{fig:STDP-biology} (left) from~\citet{Bi+Poo-2001}.
The amount of change decays to zero as the
temporal difference between the two spikes increases beyond a few
tens of milliseconds.
We are thus interested in this temporal window around a presynaptic spike during which
a postsynaptic neuron spikes, before or after the presynaptic spike,
and this induces a change of the weight.

Keep in mind that the above pattern of spike-timing dependence
is only one aspect of synaptic plasticity. See~\citet{Feldman-2012}
for an overview of aspects of synaptic plastiticy
that go beyond spike timing, including firing rate (as one would expect
from this work) but also synaptic cooperativity (nearby synapses on the
same dendritic subtree) and depolarization (due to multiple consecutive
pairings or spatial integration across nearby locations on the dendrite,
as well as the effect of the synapse's distance to the soma).

\vspace*{-1mm}
\subsection{Rate-based aspect of STDP}
\vspace*{-1mm}

Let $s_i$ represent an abstract variable characterizing the integrated
activity of neuron $i$, with $\dot{s}_i$ being its temporal rate of change.
To give a precise meaning to $s_i$, we define
 $\rho(s_i)$ as being the firing rate of neuron $i$, where
$\rho$ is a bounded non-linear activation function that converts the integrated
voltage potential into a probability of firing.

A hypothesis inspired by~\citet{Xie+Seung-NIPS1999} and~\citet{Hinton-DL2007}
is that the STDP weight change can be associated with the temporal
rate of change of postsynaptic activity, as a proxy for its association
with post minus presynaptic spike times. Both of the above contributions
focus on the rate aspect of neural activity, and this is also the
case of this paper.

Using the notation introduced above,
the proposed equation for the average weight change for the synapse
associated with presynaptic neuron $i$ and postsynaptic neuron $j$
is the following:
\begin{equation}
\vspace*{-.5mm}
 \Delta W_{i,j} \propto \dot{s}_i \rho(s_j) \enspace.
\label{eq:delta-w-stdp}
\vspace*{-.5mm}
\end{equation}

Since stochastic gradient only cares about the {\em average change}, we could as well
have written
\begin{equation}
\vspace*{-.5mm}
\label{eq:delta-w-stdp-spiking}
\Delta W_{i,j} \propto \dot{s}_i \xi_j \enspace,
\vspace*{-.5mm}
\end{equation}
where $\xi_j$ is the binary indicator of a spike from neuron $j$. This works
if we assume that the input spikes are randomly drawn from a Poisson
process with a rate proportional to $\rho(s_j)$, i.e., we ignore
spike synchrony effects (which we will do in the rest of this paper,
and leave for future work to investigate). Note that in our simulations,
we approximated the Poisson process by performing a discrete-time
simulation with a binomial draw of the binary decision spike versus no spike within the time
interval of interest.

\vspace*{-1.5mm}
\begin{figure}[htpb]
  \hspace*{-7mm}\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{rate-change-stdp-link.pdf}
  \includegraphics[width=.49\textwidth]{ml_deltaw_vs_stdp_deltaw.png}
\vspace*{2mm}
\caption{
Left: When the postsynaptic rate (y-axis) is rising in time (x-axis),
consider a presynaptic spike (middle
dotted vertical line) and a window of sensitivity before and after (bold red window).
Because the firing probability is greater on the right sub-window, one is more likely
to find a spike there than in the left sub-window, and it is more likely to be close
to the presynaptic spike if that slope is higher, given that when spikes occur
on both sides, no weight update occurs. This induces the appropriate correlation
between spike timing and the temporal slope of the postsynaptic activity level,
which is confirmed by the simulation results of Section~\ref{sec:simulation}
and the results on the right.\newline
Right: The average STDP update according to the STDP nearest neighbor rule
(vertical axis) versus the weight update according to the proposed rule (Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp})
(horizontal axis). We see that in average over samples (by binning values of the
x-axis values), the two rules agree closely, in agreement with the visual inspection of
Fig.~\ref{fig:STDP-biology}.
}
\label{fig:stdp}
\end{figure}

\vspace*{-.5mm}
\subsection{Why it works}
\vspace*{-.5mm}

Consider a rising postsynaptic activity level, i.e., $\dot{s}_i>0$,
as in Figure~\ref{fig:stdp} (left)
and a presynaptic spike occurring somewhere during that rise.
We assume a Poisson process for the postsynaptic spike as well, with a rate
proportional to $\rho(s_i)$.
According to this assumption, postsynaptic spikes are more likely in
a fixed time window following the presynaptic spike than in a window
of the same length preceding it.
\iffalse
 i.e., $p_{\rm right}>p_{\rm left}$, where $p_{\rm right}$
is the probability of spiking the right window and $p_{\rm left}$
is the probability of spiking in the left window. Indeed, those probabilities
are proportional to the {\em integral} of $\rho(s_i)$ within the
corresponding intervals, which is proportional to the {\em average} of
$\rho(s_i)$ within the interval:
\begin{align}
  p_{\rm right} &= \int_{t_0}^{t_0+\Delta} \rho(s_i(t)) dt \nonumber \\
  p_{\rm left} &= \int_{t_0-\Delta}^{t_0} \rho(s_i(t)) dt \nonumber \\
\end{align}
\fi
Therefore, if only one spike happens over
the window, it is more likely to be after the presynaptic spike,
yielding a positive spike timing difference, at the same time as a positive
weight change. The situation would be symmetrically reversed if the
activity level was decreasing, i.e., $\dot{s}_i < 0$ and negative spike times
are more likely.

Furthermore, the stronger the slope $\dot{s}_i$, the
greater will this effect be, also reducing the relative spike timing
between the presynaptic spike and stochastically
occurring postsynaptic spikes, possibly just after
or just before the presynaptic spike. This assumes
that when spikes occur on both sides and with about the same time difference,
the effects on $W_{i,j}$ cancel each
other. Of course, the above reasoning runs directly in reverse when the
slope of $s_i$ is negative, and one gets negative updates, in average. To
validate these hypothesis, we ran the simulations presented in
Section~\ref{sec:simulation}.  They confirm these hypotheses and show that
Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp} yields a relationship between spike timing
difference and weight change that is consistent with biological
observations (Fig.~\ref{fig:STDP-biology}).

\vspace*{-1mm}
\section{Simulation results}
\label{sec:simulation}
\vspace*{-1mm}

\subsection{Method}
\vspace*{-.5mm}

We simulate random variations in a presynaptic neural firing rate $\rho(s_j)$ as well as
random variations
in the postsynaptic firing rates $\rho(s_i)$ induced by an externally driven voltage. By
exploring many configurations of variations and levels at pre- and postsynaptic sides, we
hope to cover the possible natural variations. We generate and record
pre- and postsynaptic spikes sampled according to a binomial at each discrete $t$ with probability proportional
to $\rho(s_i)$ and $\rho(s_j)$ respectively, and record $\dot{s}_i$ as well, in order to implement
either a classical nearest neighbor STDP update rule or Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp},
\footnote{
Python scripts for those simulations are available at
\linebreak[4]{\small \tt http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/$\tilde{~}$bengioy/src/STDP$\_$simulations}.}
 The nearest neighbor STDP rule
is as follows. For every presynaptic spike, we consider a window of 20 time steps
before and after. If there is one or more postsynaptic spike in both left and right
windows, or no postsynaptic spike at all, the weight is not updated. Otherwise, we
measure the time difference between the closest postsynaptic spike (nearest neighbor)
and the presynaptic spike and compute the weight change using the current variable values.
If both spikes coincide, we make no weight change.
To compute the appropriate averages, 500 random sequences
of rates are generated, each of length 160 time steps, and 1000 randomly sampled spike trains
are generated according to these rates.

For measuring the effect of weight changes, we measure the average squared rate of
change $E[||\dot{s}_i^2||]$ in two conditions: with weight changes (according
to Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp}), and without.

\vspace*{-.5mm}
\subsection{Results}
\vspace*{-.5mm}

Examples of the spike sequences and underlying pre- and postsynaptic states $s_i$
and $s_j$ are illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:examples-spikes-sequences}.

\begin{figure}[htpb]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{examples-spikes-sequences.png}}
\caption{Example of rate and spike sequence generated in the simulations, along with
weight changes according to the spike-dependent variant of our update rule, Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp-spiking}.
Top: presynaptic spikes $\xi_j$ (which is when a weight change can occur).
Middle: integrated postsynaptic activity $s_j$.
Bottom: value of the updated weight $W_{i,j}$.
}
\label{fig:examples-spikes-sequences}
\end{figure}

Fig.~\ref{fig:STDP-biology} (middle and right) shows the results of these simulations, comparing
the weight change obtained at various spike timing differences for Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp}
and for the nearest neighbor STDP rule, both matching well the biological data
(Fig.~\ref{fig:STDP-biology}, left). Fig.~\ref{fig:stdp} shows that
both update rules are strongly correlated, in the sense that for a given amount
of weight change induced by one, we observe in average a linearly proportional weight
change by the other.

\ifslow
\yb{ show that the rate of change DECREASES due to weight updates, contrary to Xie+Seung's hypothesis}

\yb{ optionally: note how this makes the network converge faster towards its fixed point during inference (conditional
on clamped input) }
\fi

\vspace*{-.5mm}
\subsection{Link to Stochastic Gradient Descent and Back-Propagation}
\vspace*{-.5mm}

Let us consider the common simplification in which
postsynaptic neural activity $s_i$ is obtained as a sum with the usual terms
proportional to the product of synaptic weight ($W_{i,j}$) and presynaptic
firing rate ($\rho(s_j(t-1)$), i.e., in discrete time,
\[
  s_i(t)=\alpha+\beta \sum_j W_{i,j} \rho(s_j(t-1)).
  \]
  from some quantities $\alpha$ and $\beta$. In that case,
  \[
  \frac{\partial s_i(t)}{\partial W_{i,j}} = \beta \rho(s_j(t-1)).
  \]
  Stochastic gradient descent on $W$ with respect to an objective function $J$
  would follow
  \begin{align}
    \Delta W_{i,j} \propto \frac{\partial J}{\partial W_{i,j}} &= \frac{\partial J}{\partial s_i(t)} \frac{\partial s_i(t)}{\partial W_{i,j}} \nonumber \\
    &= \frac{\partial J}{\partial s_i(t)} \rho(s_j(t-1)).
  \end{align}
  Hence, if
  \begin{equation}
    \label{eq:neurons-move-to-reduce-error}
  \frac{\partial J}{\partial s_i(t)} \propto \dot{s}_i(t),
  \end{equation}
  our STDP rule (Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp}) would produce
  stochastic gradient on $J$.

  The assumption in Eq.~\ref{eq:neurons-move-to-reduce-error} and the above consequence
  was first suggested by~\citet{Hinton-DL2007}:
  neurons would change their average firing rate so as make the network
  as a whole produce configurations corresponding to better values
  of our objective function. This would make STDP do gradient descent on
  the prediction errors made by the network.

  But how could neural dynamics have that property? That question is
  not completely answered, but as shown in~\citet{Bengio-arxiv2015}, a network with symmetric feedback
  weights would have the property that a small perturbation of ``output units'' towards better
  predictions would propagate to internal layers such that hidden
  units $s_i$ would move to approximately follow the gradient of the prediction error $J$
  with respect to $s_i$, making our STDP rule correspond
  approximately to gradient descent on the prediction error.
  The experiments reported by ~\citet{Scellier+Bengio-arxiv2016} have actuallly shown
  that these approximations work and enable a supervised multi-layer neural network to be trained.

\vspace*{-1mm}
\section{Related work}
\vspace*{-1mm}

The closest work to this paper is probably that of~\citet{Xie+Seung-NIPS1999}, which we have
already discussed. Notable additions to this work include demonstrating
that the spike-timing to weight change relationship is a {\em consequence}
of Eq.~\ref{eq:delta-w-stdp}, rather than the other way around (and a small
difference in the use of $ds/dt$ versus $d\rho(s)/dt$).

There are of course many other papers on theoretical interpretations of STDP,
and the reader can find many references in~\citet{Markram-et-al-2012}, but more
work is needed to explore the connection of STDP to machine learning.
Many approaches~\citep{Fiete+Seung-2006,Rezende+Gerstner-2014} that propose how
hidden layers of biological neurons could get credit assignment rely on variants of the REINFORCE
algorithm~\citep{Williams-1992}
to estimate the gradient of a global objective function (basically by correlating
stochastic variations at each neuron with the changes in the global objective).
Although this principle is simple, it is not clear that it will scale to very
large networks due to the linear growth of the variance of the estimator with the number
of neurons. It is therefore tempting to explore other avenues.

The proposed rule can be contrasted with theoretical synaptic learning rules
which tend to be based on the Hebbian product of pre- and postsynaptic activity,
such as the BCM rule~\citep{Bienenstock82,Intrator+Cooper-1992}.
The main difference is that the rule studied
here involves the temporal derivative of the postsynaptic activity, rather than
the actual level of postsynaptic activity.

\section{Conclusion and Open Questions}

We have shown through simulations and a qualitative argument that updating
weights in proportion to
the rate of change of postsynaptic activity times the presynaptic
activity yielded behavior similar to the STDP observations, in terms
of spike timing differences.

This is consistent with a view introduced by~\citet{Hinton-DL2007}
that neurons move towards minimizing some prediction error because
it would make this STDP rule perform stochastic gradient descent on that
prediction error. In parallel to this work, ~\citet{Bengio-arxiv2015} has
shown how early propagation of perturbations in a recurrent network
behaves like gradient propagation in a layered network, and could
compute the gradients necessary for learning using our proposed
STDP update. ~\citet{Scellier+Bengio-arxiv2016} have actuallly shown
through experiments using this approach that it was possible to
train deep supervised neural networks.

Many open questions also remain on the side of biological plausibility.
STDP only describes one view of synaptic plasticity, and it may be different
in different neurons and preparation.
A particularly interesting type of result to consider in the future
regards the relationship between more than two
spikes induced statistically by the proposed STDP rule.
It would be interested to compare the statistics of triplets
or quadruplets of spikes timings and weight change under the proposed rule.
against the corresponding biological observations~\citep{Froemke+Dan-2002}.

Future work should also attempt to reconcile the theory with
neuroscience experiments showing more complex relationships between spikes
and weight change, involving factors other than timing, such as firing rate,
of course, but also synaptic cooperativity and depolarization~\citep{Feldman-2012}.
In addition to these factors, some synaptic changes do not conform to
the STDP pattern, either in sign (anti-Hebbian STDP) or in nature
(for example incorporating a general Hebbian element as in the BCM rule).
In this regard, although this work suggests that some
spike timing behavior may be explained purely in terms of the rates trajectory,
it remains an open question if (and where) precise timing of spikes remains
essential to explain network-level learning behavior from a machine learning
perspective. It is interesting to note in this regard how the BCM rule
was adapted to account for the relative timing of spike triplets~\citep{Gjorgjievaa-et-al-2011}.

\ifarxiv
\section*{Acknowledgments}

The authors would like to thank Benjamin Scellier, Dong-Hyun Lee, Jyri Kivinen, Jorg Bornschein, Roland Memisevic and Tim Lillicrap
for feedback and discussions, as well as NSERC, CIFAR, Samsung
and Canada Research Chairs for funding, as well as Compute Canada
for computing resources.
\else
\fi

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


text:
Cookies on FT Sites
We use cookies for a number of reasons, such as keeping FT Sites reliable and secure, personalising content and ads, providing social media features and to analyse how our Sites are used.
Make the most of 2022 Lead your own way in business and beyond with our unrivalled journalism.
Get limited time offer
Special Report UK business & economy
Industry views
Executives and directors talk about international trade and exports
Share on whatsapp (opens new window)
Org Share
Jump to comments sectionPrint this page
Receive free UK business & economy updates
We'll send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding up the latest UK business & economy news every morning.
David Sproul, senior partner and chief executive, Deloitte UK
"The onus must be on midsized companies to be bold and focused on exports, long-term investment and growth. As the global economy evolves, consumer demand in emerging economies represents the single greatest opportunity for UK companies. The London Olympics and the diamond jubilee have given Brand Britain a welcome boost."
Christopher Humphrey, chief executive, Anite
"As a specialist technology company whose revenues are 90 per cent export, we need the government to facilitate good, uncomplicated commercial practice around the world. Simple rules and regulations that one can trust are as much a catalyst for growth as a stable currency and export insurance."
Phil Bentley, managing director, British Gas
"Mid-sized businesses provide a significant proportion of our employment and generate a great deal of this country's economic growth. We are rolling out smart meters to help businesses understand and manage their energy use, reducing their bills. We're also investing in start-up technology companies that are creating new products."
James Dracup, group managing director, Johnstons of Elgin
"Our traditional markets of the UK, eurozone and US have relatively little growth as financial uncertainty, austerity and economic malaise combine to squeeze disposable incomes. But we continue to invest in product innovation and intend to grow our percentage of exports from 25 per cent to more than 40 per cent by 2015."
John Jenkins, chief executive, GE Capital UK
"Mid-sized businesses lack awareness of alternatives to traditional bank lending that could help them fund their expansion. One useful measure would be to follow the example of France and the US and make real-time credit information available to a wider group of potential lenders, enabling them to identify potential borrowers more easily."
Michael Kennedy, chief executive, Drambuie
"The key word for exporters nowadays has to be 'volatility'. There are certainly no lack of opportunities out there. We have focused on the best opportunities, including Vietnam, India and Brazil. What's more challenging to manage are the traditionally important mature western markets such as Greece and Spain which change almost on a daily basis."
Get alerts on UK business & economy when a new story is published
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2022. All rights reserved.
Reuse this content (opens in new window) CommentsJump to comments section

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Juel is a Nordic surname.

Juel may refer to:

 JUEL, an implementation of Unified Expression Language
 , a Danish navy ship, also called HDMS Juel
 Niels Juel-class corvette, a Danish Navy shipclass, also called Juel class
 Thott Mansion, aka Juel Mansion, Copenhagen, Denmark

See also
 Jewel (disambiguation)
 Juhl (surname)
 Juul (disambiguation)
 Jul (disambiguation)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Hannah Greg ( Lightbody; 1766 – 1828), with her husband Samuel Greg, was the architect of a paternalistic industrial community in the north of England, a prominent Unitarian and significant diarist. While her husband Samuel Greg pioneered new ways of running a cloth mill, she supervised the housing and conditions of the employees, including the education of the child workers. The Gregs, despite family connections to the slave trade, were considered enlightened employers for the time, and though in the 1830s the apprentice system was questioned, Quarry Bank Mill maintained it until her death.

Early life and education
Lightbody was born in 1766, she was the daughter of a wealthy Unitarian Liverpool merchant, Adam Lightbody (1729–1778), and Elizabeth Tylston (1735–1801), who came from a prominent dissenting family. Elizabeth's grandfather was John Tylston, the "good doctor of Chester", who married a daughter of Philip Henry, the ejected preacher, and thus Elizabeth had moved easily within the London and Warrington dissenting circles. She was a member of the Liverpool Library, England's first subscription library, and the Octonian Society. (The name was explained by Henry Solly as being a discussion group limited to eight members.)

Hannah was the youngest of the three surviving children, all girls. The other three pregnancies had resulted in two still births and one perinatal death. She was eleven, studying in Henry Holland's School in nearby Ormskirk, when her father died, leaving her one-third of his wealth, held in trust until she was 21.

When she was sixteen, her cousin Thomas Rogers invited her to his home in Newington Green, then a village a couple of miles north of the City of London. He had children of a similar age (including Samuel Rogers, later an eminent man of letters), so she could attend Fleetwood House school in Stoke Newington a mile further north (in Dissenting circles it was "a fresh but important aim to educated daughters as well as sons"), and worship with the family at the Unitarian Church on the Green. Thomas Rogers was prominent among the London rational dissenters, and the two neighbouring villages were filled with Quakers and non-conformists, including those who started the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade. The Rogers family lived next door to Richard Price, the well-connected minister, where Mary Wollstonecraft was a visitor. Hannah learnt debating skills and read widely within a critical Unitarian framework.

It was probably during this stay near London that her first portrait was painted, now held in the Quarry Bank Mill archive.

Her connection to Price may later have been the introduction to his radical circle for her sister-in-law. With Roger O'Connor, Jane Greg sought out contacts in support of the cause the United Irishmen.

Marriage to Samuel Greg
Hannah Lightbody returned to Liverpool. Her sisters' husbands Thomas Hodgson and John Pares were investing in a cotton spinning mill in Caton near Lancaster. Pares had gained practical experience on Arkwright's water frames and was challenging the renewal of the patent. A man named Samuel Greg had found a similar site on the River Bollin near Wilmslow and had built a mill at Quarry Bank.

Greg had been born in Belfast in 1758; being known to be Irish was a further hindrance to progression. His father was a ship-owner who had land in the West Indies, and thirteen children to support. He sent two of his sons, Thomas and Samuel, to live with relatives in England; Samuel Greg was adopted at eight years old by his maternal uncle, Robert Hyde, a textile merchant and manufacturer. Samuel started working for the company in 1778, and was a partner by 1782. Robert soon died and his brother Nathaniel retired. At 24, Samuel had a fortune of £26000. He had a loom shop in Eyam, and built Quarry Bank mill to provide a safe source of yarn. Quarry Bank Mill in Styal (built 1784) was profitable and Greg was in need of a wife.

Hannah Lightbody and Samuel Greg married in 1789, and she left Liverpool to make a life in Manchester. In her marital home of 35 King Street, she learned how to manage a household, and was soon entertaining the members of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society after their meetings. In 1800 the Gregs moved to Quarry Bank House, next to the mill.

She introduced her husband, a Presbyterian by upbringing, to the Unitarians who attended Cross Street Chapel in Manchester. He accepted her faith. Their non-conformist religious beliefs provided the Gregs with important business contacts, an influential network of Manchester and Liverpool trading and banking families, as many of the major Industrialists were Unitarian.

The Greg family also had mills in Reddish, Calver, Bowlas, Bollington, Lancaster and Caton. In the Escowbeck Estate, in Caton they built their own observatory.

Quarry Bank estate

Samuel had leased the Quarry Bank Mill at Styal, and took a farm nearby as a summer house in the country for the children. By 1800, the family was living next to the factory.

The cotton mill was partly staffed by "parish apprentices", a system with similarities to indentured servitude. It dated back to the Elizabethan Poor Law, and came to be used as a way to care for illegitimate, abandoned, and orphaned children (foundlings). In the early years of the Industrial Revolution, entrepreneurs began to resist the restrictions of the apprenticeship system. Many of the parish apprentices at Styal were selected from the workhouses of Liverpool, London and Newcastle-under-Lyme. The Gregs saw themselves as enlightened employers; in 1831 they employed 351 "free hands" and 100 children, some local and some from urban workhouses.

When the mill was extended, the Gregs laid out a model village, a precursor to Robert Owen's utopian socialist experiment at New Lanark a decade later. They built workers' cottages for the waged adults and an apprentice house for the indentured children. In developing the community, they built Norcliffe Chapel, which still serves as a Unitarian place of worship.

The children were overseen by Hannah Greg, who delivered the services of a doctor, two teachers and two singing masters; in return, she expected weekly attendance at the Anglican parish church. After the children's thirteen-hour shift, Hannah provided them with lessons in reading, writing and arithmetic. When she was in Styal she delivered the lessons to the girls, and preached to them on Sundays. The Greg children were expected to take part in the teaching, as it was part of her dissenting belief that people should mix together, be frugal and accept their responsibilities to others.

In the 1830s the apprentice system began to be questioned. Hannah died on 4 February 1828 but Quarry Bank maintained the system until 1847.

Religion and politics
Hannah's life was shaped by British Unitarianism, a denomination of English Dissenters who have always valued education for girls as much as for boys. Dissenters suffered under various legal disabilities well into the 19th century, being barred from many professions and public appointments, which meant that their energy often went into trade and business instead. Many became wealthy as factory owners and helped to shape the Industrial Revolution. Another injustice of the time was that, before the Reform Act of 1832, Parliament had not changed with the growth and urbanisation of the country. Manchester, one of the greatest economic engine in Britain, had no MPs.

The Lightbody family worshipped under Dr Yates at the Kaye Street Chapel (which moved to Paradise Street, Liverpool in 1791).

Hannah had firm beliefs that men could not progress outside their God ordained social class. She belonged to wealthy merchantile middle class which in her eyes was the most fortunate place to be. She believed that she had a duty to look after the education of her workers so they could progress.

When she visited her husband's relatives in Ulster in 1794 she was struck by the poverty of the Irish peasantry. In a letter written during this visit she demonstrates a degree of sympathy with Irish radicalism that she may have imbibed from her sister-in-law, Jane Greg: " ... certain will be the day of retribution - England has not so much to answer for - but the crimes of this country and the crimes of old France are crying and will be visited ... to be Irish has always been sufficient to make anything obnoxious to the English government".

On the eve of the Irish rebellion of 1798, the British commander, General Lake, denounced Hannah's sister-in-law (reputedly a leading United Irish woman) as "the most violent creature possible". Jane Greg found refuge at Quarry Bank from loyalist retribution. She was living with Hannah and Samuel when she died in September 1817.

Their daughter Ellen later recalled that in the wake rebellion her parents were anxious lest her aunt's reputation, and letters she held from Lady Londonderry (Frances Pratt), step mother to Robert Stewart, the Chief Secretary for Ireland) revealing a mutual sympathy for the United Irish cause, might bring suspicion upon Samuel, as "the only Irish gentleman in the town".

As pressure mounted on the Greg household with the suppression not only of Irish rebellion but also of radical dissent in England, Hannah wrote to William Rathbone: "we will hold fast to our Enthusiasm whatever betide, and I believe it is at least one means of holding fast our integrity". The prospect of continuing at Quarry Bank near the peaceful village of Styal may have had "particularly strong appeal".

Children and her legacy
Hannah and Samuel had thirteen children, seven daughters and six sons. Four of their sons, Robert Hyde (1795–1875), John (1801-1882), Samuel Jr. (1804–1876) and William Rathbone (1809–1881), entered the business. Robert Hyde was also interested in astronomy and politics and was elected MP for Manchester in 1839. John was responsible for the Lancaster and Caton mills and eventually Bollington Mill. He served as alderman and mayor of Lancaster. Samuel Jr. took charge of Bollington Mill and unsuccessfully experimented with profit sharing; disillusioned, he became a preacher. William Rathbone was responsible for Hudcar Mill, Bury and then took over the troubled Bollington Mill; retiring from the business in 1850, he became Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office, and an avid essayist and pamphleteer.

Elizabeth Greg (1790–1882) married William Rathbone V, of the Liverpool mercantile family. She founded the first public wash-houses in the United Kingdom in the wake of the 1832 Liverpool cholera epidemic. Later she helped William Forster in formulating the 1870 Education Act.

The extended family were also involved in slavery: some with the triangular trade and some with abolition. Hannah's sister Elizabeth married Thomas Hodgson, who took part in the Atlantic slave trade; their son Adam Hodgson was a founding member of the Liverpool Anti-slavery Society in 1822. Thomas Greg, Samuel's father and his brother John Greg part-owned some sugar plantations in the Caribbean, especially Dominica. The best documented is Hillsborough, which included the ownership of 71 male slaves and 68 female slaves. In January 1814, twenty slaves absconded, and were recaptured and punished with 100 lashes for the males and 50 lashes for the females. The incident was triggered by the death of a slave in the plantation-run hospital; the run-aways believed he had been poisoned.

A former director of the Quarry Bank Mill, and author of a book about Hannah Greg, provided this summary of her philosophy and work. She was liberal and compassionate by nature, and all her friends were active campaigners to stop the slave trade and to move forward the emancipation of the slaves in the West Indies and America ... In reality, Hannah Greg did not say anything publicly about this because, apart from anything else, Samuel Greg inherited slave plantations. She couldn't be a public hypocrite so she kept quiet.

See also

 Factory Acts
 List of textile mills in Cheshire

References
Notes

Bibliography

External links
Quarry Bank Mill and Styal Estate information at the National Trust
National Trust: Collection of primary source documents relating to the Gregs and Quarry Bank Mill
Richard Arkwright's Mill Channel 4
Information and Photos

1766 births
1834 deaths
English Unitarians
People from Liverpool
Businesspeople from Manchester
19th-century English businesspeople
19th-century English businesswomen


Charlotte, NC – The first official day of spring has come and gone and Thursdays in the Queen City are soon to heat up, as the 15th year of Alive After Five (AA5), a Charlotte tradition, returns April 2.
This year, AA5 is back and better than ever with the addition of a beer and wine garden from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. in the plaza of the EpiCentre. The beer and wine garden will include ten beer and wine brands and feature live entertainment. Tickets include five samples of your choice and can be purchased via the AA5 website for $10 a piece each week.
"We are so proud that Alive After Five has thrived in Charlotte's vibrant uptown atmosphere since its humble beginnings 15 years ago. From locations at the Wells Fargo Plaza to the EpiCentre, Alive After Five has evolved into the Queen City's favorite live music experience," agreed co-founders Ed Duncan and Larry Farber.
11-piece musical powerhouse specializes in fusing music together in an unexpected way, making it a performance not to be missed.
On Thursday, April 9, AA5 salutes the 1980s when The Breakfast Club, America's favorite and most recognized 1980s tribute band performs. With their creative and buoyant spirit of music, The Breakfast Club will get your weekend kick-started during Charlotte's largest weekly happy hour.
Haywire, a fun-loving country party band that is more than their country roots, will create a light-hearted atmosphere when they perform live Thursday, April 16. This high-energy band is guaranteed to keep their audience moving when they play the Bud Light AA5 stage.
Back by popular demand, GrooveTown, a premiere, play-it-all party band, will add their swagger to the AA5 lineup on Thursday, April 23 with their versatile music portfolio. Featuring top vocalists and talented musicians, GrooveTown's performance will be one to remember.
On Thursday, April 30, local favorite Mo Money will heat up the Queen City's live summer concert series with a of mix quality musicianship and an extensive song list including old school favorites and today's popular dance hits. This five-piece band has performed with national acts from Aretha Franklin to Gladys Knight.
Perched high above Charlotte's most popular entertainment venue in an open-air rooftop location that boasts a spacious layout, contemporary design and breathtaking views of the Charlotte skyline, Rooftop 210 will be home to the 2015 season of AA5.
After the sun sets on AA5, the party won't stop at EpiCentre's hottest locations. Wristbands, which will be distributed at each entrance, grants attendees free cover to Whisky River, SUITE, StrikeCity, Bubble, Vida, BlackFinn and VidaVida for the night. Wristbands will only be distributed to those 21 and up.
No night out is complete without the ultimate dining experience. Each Thursday during AA5, all restaurants at EpiCentre will offer special menus, allowing guests to enjoy multi-course meals at their favorite eateries for discounted prices.
AA5 is how Charlotte kick-starts the weekend every Thursday in style! As the largest weekly happy hour and free entertainment celebration, AA5 provides a destination for friends and co-workers to gather, unwind and network while enjoying great live music, tasty beverages and a fun, casual atmosphere. With EpiCentre's prominent uptown location, whether you are walking, using many of the parking options or hoping the city light rail you can access Charlotte's No. 1 weekly event.


text:
In 2012, the major 'astrological question' was whether or not the Mayans had seen the future of mankind and had predicted the end of the world on Winter Solstice of that year. Well, obviously, the world did not come to an end – at least in the popular sense. However, that year a series of 7 squares between the planets of Uranus and Pluto began and perhaps our understanding of the world has ended and a new paradigm has begun.
In the last 4 years, the middle east has exploded with revolutions, Occupy Wall Street created a revolution of its own by coining "The 99%", workers in Wisconsin protested new labor laws, women have been granted equal pay, gays can now serve openly in the military and can marry in 30 states, the racial divide has occurred once again in Missouri, and we are still "Keeping Up With the Kardashians". Attempting to analyze these events through a political lens is perhaps futile, because we are all perhaps tainted by political ideologies. However, what is evident is an increasing disconnect between
[Read more…] about The Astrology of 2015
Is there a missing secret to dealing with Saturn?
The answer is an undeniable 'yes'!
However, in order to get to Saturn's secret sauce, it is necessary to ditch the rather two dimensional common interpretations of the planet that is considered 'the great malefic' and perhaps approach the planet with more understanding of its actual purpose in the horoscope which is to provide us with experiences and lessons to facilitate our inner growth.
On December 28, 2014, Saturn moves out of Scorpio and into fiery Sagittarius. Scorpio is a water sign and during Saturn's transit through the sign of the Scorpio, our lessons have centered on issues of survival, security, and the darker side of human nature (and within ourselves) in order for us to learn from our mistakes. Sagittarius, though, is a fire sign which is a completely different ball of wax.
But, before we get into what Saturn traveling through the sign of the centaur means, let's first try to understand Saturn on its own.
The Astrological Saturn:
Kronos is probably one of the most lopsided figures in Greek Myth. He is most known for devouring his children and ultimately being defeated by his son Zeus. Of course, we get some understanding of Saturn's darker side – rigidity, control, domination, limitation and fear from this single story. Yet, what often gets lost, is that Kronos himself defeated his own father (Uranus) and ushered in the 'Golden Age'.
Astrologically, Saturn (the Roman name for Kronos) may need a bit of redemption of his own. After all, there is good to be found in virtually every mythic creature – even the most foul and odious – and it's often through their toxicity that the quest of life comes alive and the individual journey begins. So, Saturnian lessons and limitation are often a call to action to propel the individual to become more whole and evolved.
Another obvious place to look for Saturnian imagery is in psychology and Carl Jung's concept of the shadow is a good place to start. According to Jung, the shadow is formed by the unconscious and represents the characteristics of the personality that are malformed and distasteful which the ego has difficulty integrating into conscious life that often evolve into our self-defeating and compulsive behaviors. Because the shadow is unconscious and has adapted to conscious life rather primitively, it appears in dreams and fairytales in a monstrous form – dictators, beasts we are subjugated to, evil father figures or nasty vile fairies. Additionally, the shadow appears in religious iconography as Satan or Lilith and in the mystical kabbalah as the opponent; all of which are viewed as negatively as astrology's Saturn. Thus, the shadow is connected to the Saturnian issues of fear and limitation and in our chart's it's where we are most hidden and the most vulnerable.
The most revealing symbolism for Saturn is found in the ancient art of alchemy. According to alchemical literature, Saturn is referred to as 'base material' or the stuff that alchemists wished to transmute into gold. There is much we can learn from the ancient art of alchemy and its connection to astrology. Of course, the traditional interpretations of Saturn still apply, perhaps the 'base matter' is most significant here. Alchemists long sought to remove 'base materials' of the self in order to achieve wholeness or inner gold. Saturn reflects psychic materials in our unconscious that are 'base' or instinctual. They are parts of ourselves that we would rather not let the world see However, where fairy tale and myth allude through complex imagery and symbolism the similarities between the main character and their projected shadow form, alchemy is rather blunt and proclaims that the essence of 'base matter' and the essence of the alchemist are the same. So, to state it simply, as the alchemist transmutes 'base matter' into gold, they transmute themselves in the process. Saturn is where the inner gold in the chart is to be found and his transits and progressions often bring to the surface the inner gold in other planets.
But, what are base materials and how do we interpret these ancient symbols into modern day language?
Today, we live in a rather sophisticated world in which most of us are not concerned about day to day survival. We no longer scrape the bottom of the barrel to sustain ourselves and metaphors like 'turning lemons into lemonade' are inspirational devices rather than actualities. So, the modern individual has to adjust 'base materials' into deeper spiritual waters rather than the shallow pool of mundane life. The closest thing we have to 'base materials' (besides the obvious) are the feelings and situations we experience – the good, as well as the bad – and these experiences form and craft who we are as individuals – and this psychological process in astrological terms is called Saturn. This is why Saturn in esoteric circles is considered, "the lord of karma," not because we are paying for crimes in a prior existence, but because our job is to master ordinary mortal life through its many lessons. Hence, why the Sun and Saturn form the spinal cord of the chart – together they create experiences and lessons to foster growth and development within the individual to achieve wholeness.
Now, some of the experiences are pleasant and we feel stable and secure in them. However, other experiences cause us pain that often at its seed level is the inspiration (or a better word may be germination) that ultimately propels us to triumph. In many ways, those that suffer through Saturnian placements, transits, and progressions are forced to deal with the lessons of the real world, its obligations, and its ultimate rewards. Furthermore, they come to understand that the lessons of life – even the most painful ones – are necessary catalysts for inner growth. In the end, it is our job to alchemically transmute our pain into a more worthwhile substance.
Saturn in Sagittarius:
Saturn will spend the next 2 ½ years in Sagittarius (although it will briefly return to Scorpio for a few months in 2015) and I feel rather optimistic about it. On the mundane level, issues regarding laws, political reform, and religious attitudes (along with scandals) will grace the headlines. Further, foreign relations and our interactions with the world at large, crisis in collective beliefs, prevailing attitudes and questioning political correctness may be necessary at this time. However, on the inner level, our lessons will be more spiritual in nature and we will question our inner purpose, our passions, and our individual place in the future.
Sagittarius is a dual sign (as are all the mutable signs) which is perfectly symbolized in the mythic Chiron. Chiron is an earthly deity who dabbles in a bit of everything, yet his major source of reputation was his ability to manipulate life through knowledge of herbs and magic in order to heal the wounded. Moreover, the passionate, fiery, and inspirational motivations of the human condition resulted in him being the teacher of heroic figures whom were all filled with unbridled potential. Chiron reflects the core of Sagittarius which is extremely optimistic and its natural mode of adaptation is to seek the greater meaning in any given situation and view life through the lenses of hope, inspiration, and envisioned possibilities of a bold new world – which can be difficult to see with Saturn transiting the sign.
Saturn can often block the initial impulses of an element when he transits the sign – especially if the sign is not akin to Saturn's nature – which Sagittarius is not. In the sign of the centaur, this can feel like life has lost its sense of purpose and direction. Living seems to lose its meaning and can ultimately provoke anxiety and depression – both of which are powerful internal motivators. It becomes our responsibility to dig within our own souls, because the lessons of Saturn in Sagittarius are intrinsically spiritual rather than mundane. We, usually through a series of hard lessons, are forced to be true to ourselves.
Saturn's job in any sign is to help develop a realistic experience; so invariably, a spiritual crisis is likely. We all go through life with aspirations and ambitions, but often we fail to live out our true potential because we lose sight of our inner vision or may lack the ambitions necessary to achieve them. Saturn in fiery Sagittarius (usually after a dose of purposelessness and lack of self-expression) urges us to put our 'money where our mouth is' and make something real with our visions which ultimately is our destiny and connection to God. In essence, our lives need to have a purpose. The problems and difficulties that occur while Saturn is in Sagittarius, could be the primal catalyst that ignites inner vision that turns lead (base matter) into gold.
Every god requires homage based on its nature and failure to pay is an act the ancient Greeks called hubris – a fancy word for spitting in the face of the gods. Ultimately transgressing the gods results in severe consequences and myth is littered with tragic stories that could have been avoided. Failing to pay homage to Saturn can result in lack of vitality, damaged self-esteem, and feelings of an unlived life – after all we all have to make something out of ourselves in order to be whole individuals. While Saturn moves through Sagittarius, it is time for us to envision our futures and take the necessary steps to achieve our dreams. This will rely on getting in touch with our intuitive perceptions and developing inner wisdom. In many ways, Sagittarius is perhaps the only sign that can follow Scorpio, because its nature is to seek understanding and hope after painful experiences. Saturn's movement through the sign will offer us understanding of the past few years and the wisdom to craft, create, and implement a better and grander tomorrow.
Sagittarius would not have it any other way. Will you?
Storm Cestavani, December, 22, 2014.


text:
Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office > Blog > Uncategorized > Solvang Pilot Fatally Injured in Plane Crash is Recovered by Sheriff's Search and Rescue and County Air Support
Solvang Pilot Fatally Injured in Plane Crash is Recovered by Sheriff's Search and Rescue and County Air Support
At approximately 8:00 p.m. last night, May 15, 2019, the Sheriff's Office was notified of an overdue aircraft out of the Santa Ynez Airport. The pilot had left earlier in the afternoon in his 2006 Aviat fixed-wing, single-engine aircraft for a solo, short flight around the area. His family became concerned when he did not return and was not in contact with them. A tracking system indicated that his plane was in the Figueroa Mountain Road area approximately two miles south of Ranger Peak. The Santa Barbara County Sheriff/Fire Air Support Unit was contacted and begin flying the area but due to the dark and foggy conditions, search efforts were suspended. A plan was formulated to resume search efforts at daybreak.
At approximately 3:00 a.m. this morning, May 16, 2019, the Sheriff's Search and Rescue Team was deployed. The team assembled and formulated a plan to reach the remote area where the plane's final radar track was detected by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center. At daybreak, the team drove into the area in 4X4 vehicles and a UTV (Utility Vehicle) and begin searching by foot. Using binoculars, at approximately 7:30 a.m. they were able to spot what appeared to be aircraft wreckage on the side of a steep hillside known as Goat Rock. An Air Support team flew over the location and confirmed there was a wrecked plane as well as a decedent about 100 feet on the ridge below.
It took Sheriff's Search and Rescue about an hour and a half to climb up a steep ridgeline to a point above the wreckage where they then utilized ropes to rappel down to the decedent. Search and Rescue and Air Support teams worked together to recover the decedent. He was hoisted out of the area by Copter 3 and was turned over to the Sheriff's Coroner's Office at the Santa Barbara Airport.
The decedent has been identified as being 68-year-old Pierre Josefsohn of Solvang. Josefsohn was an experienced pilot and its unknown as this time what led to the fatal crash. The Sheriff's Office is conducting a death investigation and the accident is under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board.


Legal skirmishing between US federal authorities and people associated with PokerStars and its parent entity, Rational Group, continued this week with the announcing of a $50 million settlement between Stars scion Mark Scheinberg and the US Department of Justice.
Scheinberg, the son of PokerStars founder Isai Scheinberg (and the official head of the company after Isai stepped down last year) appears to have been targeted by the DOJ due to his own ongoing interests in PokerStars, related to the junior Scheinberg's receipt of profits due to the PokerStars activity covered in the Black Friday indictments.
While PokerStars itself was freed from ongoing DOJ pursuit re: Black Friday in its 2012 settlement, the same wasn't true for the junior Scheinberg, which may have created an unknown and additional complication in the recent tussle between PokerStars and the AGA in New Jersey, where Stars attempted to purchase the struggling Atlantic Club casino. Mark Scheinberg's name was listed as a primary officer for Rational Group US, the ownership entity that would have controlled the Atlantic Club, post-purchase.
Is an extra $50 million enough to finally satisfy the US federal government's claims against PokerStars, and get them off the back of future Rational Group / Stars attempts to reenter the States? The colder truth is despite more than three-fourths of a billion in settlements (including money designated to go to former US Full Tilt players, whose wait now exceeds two years), all the federal stuff still amounts to only half of the legal pie: Each and every one of the United States' 50 individual states could still seek to wrest its own settlement from the company, as a back-tax fee of sorts… or a future cost of doing business.


A neurosurgeon is a useful ace who fixes sicknesses and conditions influencing the unmistakable structure, including the mind, spinal rope, spinal rope, and fringe nerves. Find and select right best neurosurgeon in Delhi NCR visit Credihealth site and check subtleties data about game-plan cost, OPD timing and book an online arrangement best neurosurgeon in delhi ncr. A legend among other quality Doctors to get-togethers for you and your childhood. It's brilliant opportunities to take obliging cures, winning Rs. 50/ - cashback on each system by strategies for Credihealth, 30% OFF on prescriptions and symptomatic tests. Favored viewpoint the Crediplus backing of 1-years at 199/ - Only. Any Information calls us at +91 8010994994.