text:
Law and Policy Analysis
Liability for Amplification of Disinformation: A Law of Unintended Consequences?
Jane E. Kirtley Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law, University of Minnesota
This blog is part of ACS's Blog Symposium remembering and analyzing the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol.
The New Year 2022 had barely begun when Twitter announced that it had permanently suspended the personal account of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), claiming that she had violated its policies against spreading falsehoods about Covid-19.
This wasn't the congresswoman's first brush with Twitter's misinformation policy. Her account was suspended several times for shorter periods during the summer of 2020, also for false claims about the coronavirus and the vaccines that target it.
But a tweet on January 1, 2022 that alleged "extremely high amounts of Covid vaccine deaths" was apparently the last straw for the social media company. Its spokesperson, Katie Rosborough, said that Greene's repeated violations added up to five "strikes," which under Twitter's system merits permanent expulsion from the platform.
Greene responded – using the messaging app Telegram – that Twitter "is an enemy to America and can't handle the truth." Predictably, her suspension added fodder to the claim that Greene was the latest political conservative to be "censored" by social media, following in the footsteps of former President Donald Trump, who was banned from several social media sites, including Twitter, in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021 attacks on the U.S. Capitol. Twitter had specifically cited two of Trump's tweets as violating its policy against glorification of violence: one stating that Trump was not going to attend President-elect Biden's inauguration, and the other praising the "75,000,000 great America Patriots who voted for" him. Both statements, Twitter said, conveyed the message that the election was illegitimate, and that Trump would support and protect those who sought to overturn the election by force.
In response to the bans on Trump and other conservatives, two states – Florida and Texas – enacted statutes in 2021 prohibiting social media companies from banning controversial posts, and discouraging them from engaging in content moderation, particularly if the moderation was based on the viewpoint expressed. The Texas law would require companies to publish detailed moderation reports explaining how decisions were made.
Federal judges in both states enjoined the statutes, ruling that the First Amendment and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protected the platforms' exercise of editorial discretion, with Judge Robert Pitman finding that the moderation reporting requirements in the Texas law would be "inordinately burdensome" and discourage any moderation, even of harmful content.
Both rulings are the latest in a string of cases recognizing that the constitutional protections enjoyed by the mainstream or traditional media extend to social media platforms as well. Under ordinary circumstances, First Amendment scholars would applaud these decisions.
But some have not. Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, together with Institute attorney Scott Wilkens, wrote in the New York Times that the companies' arguments that they should be immune from the consequences of moderation decisions are "deeply misconceived" and even dangerous. They contend that taken to their logical conclusion, these arguments would foreclose even "carefully drawn laws" that would compel greater transparency in the companies' use of algorithms or other standards to decide which accounts are suspended, undermining what they call "the integrity of the digital public sphere."
In a report issued in November by Aspen Digital, a project of the non-partisan Aspen Institute, its Commission on Information Disorder (whose members include Jaffer as well as journalist Katie Couric and Prince Harry, among others) also recommended that social media platforms be required to disclose information about their content moderation policies and practices, and to share their data with "authorized researchers." And Alan Rozenshtein, an associate professor of law at the University of Minnesota, observed on Lawfare that "government restrictions on content moderation may well be necessary to ensure the health of the digital commons."
The fact that scholars and think tanks who have long championed the First Amendment rights of freedom of the press and of speech are now advocating government regulation of social media as the way to promote democratic ideals is disconcerting, to say the least. But it is emblematic of a broader concern about fundamental threats to democracy itself. The spread or amplification of misinformation or disinformation through social media is regarded as particularly problematic. After the Capitol attacks in January 2021 and revelations in October by Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle took the opportunity to pounce on Big Tech by threatening to revamp Section 230 to create liability for amplifying misinformation or hate speech by using algorithms.
The term "amplification" is an interesting one in this context. Different bills define it in different ways. Some are aimed at the general promotion, or high ranking, of specific kinds of content, such as health misinformation or terrorist tracts, based in part on what will generate advertising revenues or "clicks." Others focus on the use of targeted algorithms that rank material based on personal data, such as peppering a particular user with numerous posts that reinforce erroneous beliefs about the legitimacy of the 2020 election.
But the goal of all these bills is essentially the same: to curb the virtually unlimited immunity social media companies enjoy when they act as conduits for user-generated content and exercise their own right to either amplify or remove it. The idea is that private companies cannot be trusted as the gatekeepers of information. The supporters of these initiatives argue that the tech companies have had ample opportunity to engage in responsible self-regulation, and have failed to do so, to the detriment of society and, ultimately, to the truth.
In the face of the very real possibility of a repeat of the January 6 insurrection, it is tempting to clamp down on the social media that are viewed as co-conspirators in the spread of disinformation. But as the scholarship of Professor Robert Pape at the University of Chicago has documented, of the 21 million people in the United States who believe that President Biden was not legitimately elected and that the use of force to restore Donald Trump to office is justified, only ten percent of them get their news from social media like Gab or Telegram. Instead, 42 percent rely on Fox News or other "mainstream conservative media," and the next largest proportion consume media such as CNN or NPR. This suggests that a significant component of amplification of disinformation occurs when the conventional media repeat it. Should those news media be subject to government regulation as well?
Some argue that they should be, and in some countries, they already are. Anti-"fake news" laws have been used in countries like Malaysia, Venezuela, and Kenya have been used to suppress opposition media. In late December, Stand News, a pro-democracy online news outlet based in Hong Kong, shut down after its facilities were raided by police and members of its staff were arrested on charges of "inciting hatred" against the government.
But so far, in mature democracies, most of the regulatory efforts are targeted at social media, who are feared by many in government because of their ubiquity and lack of accountability. In the United Kingdom, for example, a bill is pending that would create potential criminal liability for social media companies that fail to protect users by removing "harmful algorithms." The Conservative MP who chairs the parliamentary committee on the draft online safety bill refers to the social media landscape as "the land of the lawless." In his view, it is past time to impose responsibility upon them.
There is no question that the spread of disinformation threatens the core values of democracy. It is tempting to threaten those who disseminate it with legal consequences. But however well-intentioned these legislative initiatives may be, there are dangers inherent in the government deciding what constitutes harmful content.
Certain narrowly-defined categories of speech do not receive First Amendment protection: true threats and incitement to violence are two of them. However, falsehoods – unless they also harm a reputation – are protected.
Nevertheless, there are creative ways to tackle disinformation under existing law. One approach is through libel suits, such as those brought by election equipment operators and election workers against media who falsely claimed manipulation of the 2020 election, thereby defaming them.
These lawsuits may, it is hoped, get to the truth. But in any event, they will proceed with the robust protection of New York Times v. Sullivan and its progeny intact, preserving the right to speak about controversial subjects in good faith without fear of retribution.
The core teaching of Sullivan is essential: we should not leave it to government to be the arbiter of truth. In civil society, we want to presume that government is acting in good faith. But history teaches us that legislation intended to preserve and protect truth could become an instrument to suppress it.
Rather than provide bad actors with such weapons, the best remedy for false speech is more speech. Or as Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, "The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth."
First Amendment, Free Speech, National Security and Civil Liberties, Technology Law and Intellectual Property
Reforming the Electoral Count Act requires bipartisan buy-in—Democrats can't do it alone even with filibuster reform
"Gradually, then suddenly": How the Protecting Our Democracy Act addresses institutional decay
Accountability from Within


text:
Q: iOS push notification using FCM Currently we are using AWS for sending IOS push notifications and FCM for Android notifications. As FCM also supports IOS notifications, we want to consider that for 2 reasons

*

*It is free service (AWS is not that costly)

*to have single interface from app server for push and web notifications

but from FCM documentation, it looks IOS app has to be tightly integrated with FCM API for delivering push notifications (this is not required for AWS). so i want to know if there is a way I can send push notifications without any change to iOS app code.

A: The iOS app must be configured to receive messages from the FCM Servers.
You'll have to implement the necessary functions (callbacks specifically) in your client app that will handle/receive the messages as mentioned in the Setting Up a Firebase Cloud Messaging Client App on iOS.
It's also through implementing the needed functions you'll be able to generate a token needed by the FCM servers to send a message towards the device(s).

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
The Handmaiden Review: Why is The Handmaiden Controversial?
By Anshul Last updated Dec 26, 2022
Nagisa Oshima, a Japanese director, made the erotic classic In the Realm of the Senses in 1976. It is known as the film that made auto-erotic strangling popular in the US. Will The Handmaiden, by Korean director Park Chan-wook, be able to say anything similar? This movie is so exciting and sexy that it might become a worldwide trend to straighten your lover's crooked tooth in the bathtub with a finely serrated thimble. It's a weird scene that almost sounds like a bl*wjob. It looked so amazing on the screen that I almost forgot to breathe.
Park has been making violent movies for a long time. His brutal Vengeance trilogy, which includes Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, Oldboy, and Lady Vengeance, is well-known. Now, he has adapted the British author Sarah Waters's novel Fingersmith with the help of co-writer Jeong Seo-Kyong. He has moved the story of crime, love, and betrayal from Victorian London to colonial Japan-ruled Korea in the 1930s.
From this source material, he makes a horribly delicious suspense thriller that can be compared to Alfred Hitchcock's Rebecca or Henri-Georges Clouzot's Les Diaboliques. It's a drama of double-crosses and triple-crosses, with some head-spinning point-of-view shifts that make Park's camera the least reliable narrator possible. Halfway through the movie, there is a whiplash twist, a spectacular turn that turns everything on its head and restarts the story so that the audience can fully enjoy the taste of treachery.
There are three great actors in Park: "Count" Fujiwara, played by Ha Jung-woo, is a devilishly handsome career criminal and fake nobleman. He convinces Kim Tae-character, RI's pickpocket Sook-hee, to pose as a handmaiden in the home of a hideous plutocrat and book dealer. This horrible old man makes his niece Hideko, who is played by Kim Min-hee and is an heiress, read pornography to his dinner-jacketed guests in order to get them to buy his illegal rare books. Sook-job hee's is to convince Hideko to accept the Count's secret marriage proposal and run away when the time is right. For this plan to work, the handmaiden's presence as a chaperone is essential. The fake Count says that once he has drained the bank account of his new bride, Hideko, he will put her in a mental hospital and give Sook-hee some of her jewels. But Hideko and Sook-hee are attracted to each other in a very strong way. Who is being charmed?
Kim Min-hee, who is very pretty, does a great job as Hideko, with all of her gamine innocence, petulance, and sense of entitlement, and Kim Tae-Ri does a great job as the handmaiden, who is smart, worldly, and good at lying, but also has a romantic streak that you wouldn't expect. Ha Jung-woo does a great job of strutting and swaggering as the con artist and predator. His cocky attitude is really funny.
The film is full of eroticism. It's in the surfaces and textures, the rituals of teacher and student (the Count's visits are a lie because he says he's teaching her to paint), and of course, the secret sex theatre of mistress and maidservant. Sook-hee is allowed to take off Hideko's clothes in her bedroom, and Hideko, pretending to be the servant, takes off Sook-clothes-hee's in return. In the style of classic Victorian erotica, the handmaid shows her stunned mistress in bed what her wedding night will be like.
The Handmaiden is about p*rnography, but it's the kind of pornography that was popular in the time of Gutenberg: rare books. Hideko has to read sub-Sadean material out loud and then, in a very strange scene, she has to pose on a kind of porn trapeze with a male mannequin. And the shame that comes with porn has a political side. It is related to the shame of living under colonial rule. But in The Handmaiden, s*x is a refuge from p*rnography. Hideko and Sook-sex hee's is a refuge from porn and its tools of abuse and control.
As for the rich book dealer himself, Kouzuki (Jo Jin-Woong), he can't take away from our fake Count's ability to be a charismatic villain, but he is powerful and evil, and he reminds us of an octopus from Park's earlier movie Oldboy. Park may have been influenced by Luis Buuel's film Viridiana, which is about a troubled man who is obsessed with his niece. It's a great adaptation of Sarah Waters's original book, and it's a movie about pleasure and rapture, which most other movies can only hint at.
Click if you want to know about Twenty Five Twenty One Season 1 Review
Why is The Handmaiden Controversial?
The Handmaiden showed how Sook-Hee and Lady Hideko started to like each other and how their s*xual tension grew. The explicit scenes in the psychological thriller made it the talk of the town (don't watch it with your parents!) and Vogue called it the most erotic movie of 2016.
What is the Message of The Handmaiden?
The movie shows how women can be s*xual and independent. The book was written by a lesbian woman named Waters. Even though it might seem strange to have a male director adapt a well-known story about LGBTQ+ women, Park's version is respectful in every way.
Korean director Park Chan-wook has adapted the novel Fingersmith for the big screen. The film is a crime thriller that can be compared to Hitchcock's Rebecca or Clouzot's Les Diaboliques. Halfway through the movie, there is a whiplash twist that turns everything on its head. Kim Min-hee and Kim Tae-Ri star in the film. Ha Jung-woo plays the con artist and predator.
The film is full of eroticism. Hideko has to read sub-Sadean material out loud. And she has to pose on a kind of porn trapeze with a mannequin. The Handmaiden is a great adaptation of Sarah Waters's original book. The movie shows how women can be s*xual and independent. It's a movie about pleasure and rapture, which most other movies can only hint at. Vogue called it the most erotic movie of 2016.
The article is over now. I hope you may enjoy reading this article please do share your thoughts and suggestions with us and do not forget to visit our website thetoughtackle.com for more amazing articles.
Kim Min-heeNetflixThe HandmaidenWeTV
Anshul 389 posts
Hi. This is your writer friend Anshul Kamboj, who always tries to let everyone know what's going on in the K-Drama world. Writing is my happy place. It helps me get all my thoughts out and makes me feel free.
Tulsa King Episode 8 Release Date: How many episodes are there in Tulsa King?
Life on Mars Review and Audience Reaction: An Interesting Story for You!
Strangers Again Episode 6 Release Date: Streaming Guidance and Supporting Cast in the…
Brain Works Episodes 9 Release Date: Streaming Guide, Cast and Trailer!
Is Netflix Going to Renew Snowdrop Season 2? Release Date, Streaming Guide and…
Is Netflix Going to Renew Ghost Doctor Season 2 in 2023 End? Release Date, Expected…
Vin Scully, the Broadcaster for the Los Angeles Dodgers for…
Will There Be a Tulsa King Season 1 Episode 10? Is Episode 9…
Loki Season 3: When It Will Be Released?
IPL Mega Auction: Chetan Sakariya bags deal of Rs. 4.20…
Dead End Season 2 Release Date and Everything About Season 2
State Senator Scott Bennett Passed Away Suddenly And…
IPL Mega Auction 2022: No IPL for Saurabh Tiwary this…
Chip and Potato Season 4 Release Date, Cast, Plot and More…
Ozzy Osbourne Net Worth 2022 and His Personal Life!
Black Mirror Season 6: Release Date Rumours, Plot, and Cast…

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Who Demand Single Payer Now!
Our health system produces some of the worst health outcomes in the industrialized world — the U.S. has the highest rate of infant mortality and the highest number of avoidable deaths — and devours an ever-increasing share of our economy with health spending accounting for a whopping 17.9 percent of the GDP. Those fortunate enough to have insurance face prohibitively expensive copays, premiums, and deductibles that limit access to care, and medical expenses remain a leading cause of bankruptcy.
Instead, Medicare for All would give health care providers more autonomy because their clinical judgement — not the financial bottom line of insurance companies — will guide patient care. Patients would have free choice of any doctor, allowing providers to compete based on quality of care. Physicians would spend less time on administrative responsibilities like paperwork and billing, and more time seeing patients, which boosts both their work satisfaction and income.
This is really idealistic and not practical at all. Is this only written by medical students or was there collaboration with practicing physicians who actually know the practicality of these idealistic, theoretical claims? A lot of these facts seem false. The links that are attached do not lead to studies just more opinion papers or a dead end. This logic does not seem very well thought out. You did not address or even mention the likely presence of confounding variables in some of your statistics, for example, regarding infant mortality. Highest number of avoidable deaths would definitely have some confounders!
The authors and supporters of this might not be knowledgable in how other countries who have single-payer systems. I am a citizen of Canada and the U.S. and have several relatives who were or are physicians in Canada and know how their system operates. They have major shortages of staff and hospitals beds- people wait in the hallways on gurneys. People can wait 3+ years to even get to PCP. That goes against your point above the patients can see whatever doctor they want because all the doctors are full, so privilege and resources will win out. Most practices are full and not accepting new patients. They usually wait 1+ years to get a referral to a specialist. Then wait another 1+ year to schedule a surgery after seeing that specialist. ER waits can be 15+ hours easily. There are not enough residencies and med schools to train enough Canadian doctors because it is costly to open up new programs, so they are imported from other countries, which is not supporting local citizens and local economy.
To add insult to injury with the shortage problem, socialized medicine is running frustrated doctors out of Canada because the system is so broken. The ones who are left can't look after the community, so many people do not see doctors regularly because there are not openings. Some surgeons are only allowed to operate one day a week. Often they cap the amount of procedures you can do and cap the salary, so it deincentivizes work. These doctors want to work, they trained for many years to work and then are not able to because of lack of funding and lack of infrastructure. This goes against your point above that allows doctors to increase quality of care. This is false because their hands are tied in this waiting game. This gives them less autonomy, which counters your point above.
Why would physicians spend less time doing paperwork? Because they are seeing less patients? Not good!
It might theoretically provide equitable care (in practice, it won't, as I mentioned above), but the equal care will not be high quality. The system will then run on a budget instead of free cash flow, so everything will be minimalized. The lines will get longer and THAT will send people to their graves earlier, to mimic the wording you used above.


Advance Directive: What is it, and Why do I need one?
1. Appoints an agent to make health care decisions—In the modern era of health care privacy, HIPPA makes it very difficult to disclose medical information to anybody other than a patient. An Advance Directive allows you to appoint somebody you trust as your agent to make medical decisions on your behalf in the event that you are unable to make your own decisions. With an Advance Directive in place, your agent will have access to the medical information necessary to carry out your wishes. Your agent will only have access to HIPPA protected information in the circumstances you authorize in your Advance Directive.
2. Provides medical team with your instructions regarding desired medical care—An emergency situation can strike at any time. In some cases, you may be unable to discuss your medical care with the doctors in charge of treating you. For these situations, an Advance Medical Directive acts as your voice—instructing your medical team about lifesaving measures (resuscitation, artificial nutrition, etc.) you would like to receive, and those which you prefer to forgo. It is important that you discuss your instructions with your health care agent so they can effectively assist the medical staff handling your care.
3. Provides specific instructions for after your death—The death of a loved one is a difficult and stressful time, and unfortunately, many important decisions must be made quickly. With an Advance Directive, you can provide instructions to your agent on important topics such as organ donation, donation of your body, and funeral arrangements. You can provide very specific instructions regarding your funeral, or you can simply designate the person you would like to be responsible for making your funeral arrangements. By writing down your feelings on these very personal subjects, you will reduce the burden on your family in what can be an emotionally charged decision.
An Advance Directive has serious and far-reaching implications. Although you do not need an attorney to create a valid Advance Directive, it is a good idea to consult with an attorney to fully understand all of your options. We here at Delaney & Keffler, LLC will take the time to fully explain and discuss your options so that you can have peace of mind that your Advance Directive will be your voice in these difficult situations. Contact us today at 410-535-3476 (FIRM) or welcome@delaneykeffler.com for a free consultation.
Posted April 29th, 2011 in Estates & Trusts. Tagged: advance directive, death, estates.


text:
Printed from: http://bestriga.com/en/page/expanded/type/articles/object/25
Lakeside in Latgale
By Amy Bryzgel. 29.07.2008
Summer is the best time to get out of the city and head to the hills, lakes and meadows of Latvia. As arguably the most beautiful and unspoiled region of Latvia, Latgale is also probably the most under-explored.
Located in the south-east of the country, the region is just beginning to shake off its bad reputation as the poorest of the nation and develop itself as a great tourist destination in its own right. For city slickers, the region offers you Daugavpils, Latvia's second largest city and an interesting curiosity of old and new. For nature lovers, Latgale is Latvia's Lake District, offering miles of untouched nature, just as God intended. In short, Latgale has something for everyone, and if you're eager to get off the beaten track, this place definitely merits further exploration.
History of Latgale
The original inhabitants of the region were known as Latgalians, an Eastern Baltic tribe distinct from the western Baltic tribes, the Semgalians and Curonians of whom modern day Latvians are descendants. In the 13th century, the area was conquered by German invaders, much like the rest of modern-day Latvia, and became part of Livonia. In the 16th century it was annexed by the Polish-Lithuanian Empire, and as a result the area became predominantly Roman Catholic, which it has remained to this day. When the region came under Russian rule in the 18th century it was heavily Russified, especially in the 19th century when Russians were imported as colonists. The Latgalian language was banned, along with all printing in Latin letters, and the Orthodox faith was promoted over the Catholic one. Still the Latgalian culture and traditions survived underground, until after World War I, when the area was unified with the rest of Latvia on its independence, November 18th 1918.
Daugavpils Highlights
Latvia's second largest city is its best-kept secret. Often disparaged by Rigans as a "grey, depressing Soviet place," it is actually quite a charming little city, with its own unique appeal. The city's claim to fame is as the birthplace of one of the twentieth century's most outstanding and famous artists, Mark Rothko. Born in 1903, when the city was known as Dvinsk, as part of the Russian Empire, his family left Europe when he was ten. The Daugavpils native went on to become one of the most famous abstract expressionist painters from the New York school in the 1950s, and in 2007 his painting White Center (Yellow, Pink and Lavender on Rose) sold for US $72.8 million – the highest price ever for any post-war painting. Nowadays, you can see copies of his work on view at the Daugavpils History and Art Museum, located at Rigas iela 8 and open Tuesday to Saturday, 10.00-18.00 (www.dnmm.lv). The paintings were created in 2003 for the centenary of his birth. Plans are underway to build a Mark Rothko Art Centre in the city, a museum and artist's workshop that is hoping to put Daugavpils on the map as a tourist destination.
Another inimitable site in the city is the Daugavpils fortress. Currently on the Tentative List to qualify for World Heritage Status, this 19th century conglomeration is the only one of its kind in the Baltic States. Building began in 1810, as a defense against Napoleon's advancing troops to the East. After Latvia's annexation it was occupied by the Soviet Army until 1993. Essentially, it is a fortified town with schools, residences, office buildings, and even a church, centered on a main square for drills and military parades. Being a fortress, it is only accessible by one main entrance, and is completely surrounded by walls and a moat. You can gain access to the site for a minimal sum, and wander around the abandoned buildings to your heart's content. It's called "Cietoksnis", and you'll find it on Daugavas iela – follow the signs and you can't miss it! Open daily, 8.00-18.00.
The hill of churches might be your next stop in the city. If you follow 18. Novembra iela along the Daugava River and through the town, you'll eventually wind up in an area populated by churches for all denominations. The most splendid is the Russian Orthodox Church, which you won't be able to miss with its brightly painted blue facade with ornate white Baroque trim, complete with shiny golden domes. Across the street are the comparatively more austere Catholic Church (white) and the brick Lutheran Evangelical Church. It is quite interesting not only to compare the three different styles of the churches, but to consider the fact that these three buildings represent the very diverse makeup of this unique Latvian city, which has a population including about 17 percent Latvians, 53 percent Russians and 14 percent Poles.
After visiting the must-see historical sites, walk around and enjoy the quaint wooden architecture in a variety of colors. Take a trip across the river and feel as if you're already in the countryside. Enjoy the carefully tended local gardens, and marvel at the land that time forgot, marked by dirt roads and horse-drawn carts for transportation. Sit by the banks of the Daugava and enjoy a lazy summer afternoon.
Luxurious Lakes
Once you've had your fill of the city, you won't have far to go to reach the Latgalian paradise. A brief look at a map shows that this truly is lake country. It's just a matter of finding one to call home and setting up camp there to enjoy the pristine nature and spectacular views.
For city folk who tremble at the thought of treading too far from civilization, never fear – you can remain in Daugavpils and still enjoy the glorious Latgalian countryside. That's one of the benefits of this small city of just over 100,000 – although it's Latvia's second largest city, it really feels like a suburb. Located just six kilometers from the city center is the Large Stropu Lake (Lielais Stropu ezers), perfect for an afternoon picnic or nap, or even a swim on a hot summer's day.
Latvia's Second Largest Lake
Deep in the heart of Latgale is Lake Razna, the "Latgalian Sea" as the locals call it. From whatever angle you view it, it is spectacularly picturesque. The water is crystal clear and of drinking water quality, according to EU standards. Over twenty-seven kinds of fish call Razna their home, and as such most of the fish sold in Latvia come directly from here. Ten idyllic islands add to the lake's character, as well as its white sandy beaches. Whether it's wind-surfing, rowing, swimming, or sunbathing that interests you, you'll no doubt find a way to relax by Lake Razna.
Why not settle in with Razna's Swan? "Raznas Gulbis," as it is called in Latvian, is an exclusive VIP resort and recreation centre on the lake that can take care of all of your relaxation needs. This brand-spanking new complex offers everything from saunas and swimming pools, to conference and hotel rooms. Their modern, three-story entertainment house offers meeting rooms and ballrooms from anywhere between 50 and 150 guests.
A standard double room in the complex's hotel starts at €55 for a standard room in summer, or €65 for a double room with terrace. Splash out in of their villas (€185-215 for the first day, €170-200 every subsequent day, in summer); complete with fireplace, stereo, sauna or bath, terrace, grill, and Wifi internet. The "romantic villa" costs a bit more, but comes with all the more charm owing to the antique wooden furniture and classic style of the whole place. It is, as the owners describe it, a place for "those special days in your life."
Once you're settled in, you can rent their catamarans, water bicycles, kayaks, wind-surfing or other equipment to experience the lake from the inside. They also are completely outfitted with all of the proper beach equipment: volleyball, badminton, and fishing tackle. They can arrange horse-back riding for you, as well as scuba-diving. And when all of that activity has worn you out, there are a variety of restaurants and cafes on the premises to feed your hearty appetite worked up on the waves! You'll find "Raznas Gulbis" recreation center in Kaunata parish, Rezekne district. Tel. 2999 4444 or 2616 8888 (www.razna.lv).
Aglona
For the truly devout, Latgale is definitely the place to be in August. As Latvia's most Catholic region, it is also the location of the holiest of this religion's places, the Aglona Basilica located just 40 kilometers north of Daugavpils. On August 15, the feast day of the Virgin Mary, thousands flock to this site, which was the location of a sighting of Mary herself on that very same day in 1698. The church also contains a 17th century icon said to possess healing powers, which is another reason for Aglona's popularity as a pilgrimage site. Even Pope John Paul II visited here in 1993. But whether you're a believer or not, the church and its grounds are still interesting.


According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), gas consumption in 2015 will rise 1 percent over the previous year to reach nine million barrels a day—a little under the number of barrels of oil the U.S. now produces daily.
Last week I was in Melbourne, Australia, attending a conference for chief executives from all over the world. It's always inspiring and exhilarating to meet and share ideas with so many other global innovators, thinkers and problem-solvers. This is ultimately what's needed to cultivate the ideas that can lead to the sorts of life-changing advancements I discussed above.
Have a blessed week, and happy investing!