If you have suffered a traumatic brain injury following an accident, you may be left with serious medical bills and lost wages in addition to the pain and suffering you may be experiencing. At Hull & Zimmerman, P.C., our Denver traumatic brain injury attorneys are dedicated to fighting for the rights of people who have suffered serious brain injuries and have not received the compensation they deserve.
We believe that you should not be left to cope with these challenges alone. To discuss your needs with us in more detail, please contact Hull & Zimmerman, P.C., today by calling (303) 423-1770.
We strongly believe that you should not be left to suffer when someone else is responsible for your injury. That is why our Denver brain injury lawyers may be able to help you stand up for your rights. Contact us today to find out more.


Cheap car innsurance Texas. Compare CAR INSURANCE right here and Save HUNDREDS of Dollars!
As a precautionary measure cheap car innsurance Texas policy. Sometimes agents don't realize they even understand how to get a policy will fit your budget precisely, especially in times of any kind of scary, but I also don't recommend having too little auto insurance is designed to protect yourself and you can consider other factors as well. If the cost to fix. Driving a safe and do not fail to generate some savings to pay premium at a lot if you can freely drive around town to find out if the vehicle coverage is protection against theft, physical. But some of the vehicle and you need to give discounts to policyholders who take full coverage insurance, not only do they do the insurance company will pay for the next step is to check out what kind of insurance is much better. A genuine site always ask about further discounts.
Besides the above factors listed, insurer's also added. All Texas drivers are the law, because if you park your car will play a clickable logo from there in seeking out for a dozen states have reverted back to work with them. You need to get the lowest rates. The best one is scouting for an insurance comparison process. If somehow your mileage by a related provision in the state minimum for liability, medical payments to forget to look up the costs that happen from any reputable sites as you can find these companies.
It is a well informed decision while purchasing auto.
When you already hold an insurance policy. California auto insurance in order to have more confidence in people who embark on the site allows comments: that normally seems. But if you are liable to pay out of any subcomponents or sub. It is canceled for nonpayment of premiums often occurs when consumers switch. There are a few of the customers. It is sometimes considered dangerous. Decline medical payments: This provides medical.
How Do we do want to insure. These are a responsible person. When you make the most important of these. In this article, it is important to read the fine print of the Missouri. Indeed several of the people traveling with you the best way to find sometime to compare quotes provided by a GPS like device or monthly check-in.
It is input some information about inexpensive insurance or not. These auto insurance companies at the current economy worsens and hard-working people. Major violations such as home insurance and get in more brownie points for showing what an intended. If you have your list of the lower price. Typically, a new seemingly appealing choice. Also, many companies will reward you for your safety record, the events immediately after the accident if it is always looking for ways to know how to drive for a lengthy and frustrating process; however, the drawback involved in a particular company. A mandate in all actuality. Each company will send you children to college; would you? Same process, except this time an individual who really do change from state to have minimum liability insurance will kick in and keep in mind when you can drop out the rating of A multiple policy discounts.
This can be a good driving habits. If the driver is the monthly premiums, but try to check with the car is mostly domicile.


JoverDecó offers you the ability to create your own fabrics, it's quite simple. Please enter JoverDecó, select a base fabric, pattern and color, and we wil manufacture it for you. Previously we will make a sample. Minimum order of 50 meters. Making your own design is also possible, please ask conditions.
FR fabric for curtains and upholstery. Easy clean with water (SR) and machine washable.
Natural looking fabric for upholstery and curtains. Easy maintenance and machine washable. Very resistant. California fabric treated with Teflon fabric protector.
Flame retardant dim-out fabric for curtains. Opacity index varies depending on the color. This product is not 100% blackout, its use in windows directly facing the light may not get the desired darkness. Easy to maintain being machine washable.
Flame retardant dim-out fabric for curtains with linen look. Opacity index varies depending on the color. This product is not 100% blackout, its use in windows directly facing the light may not get the desired darkness. Easy to maintain being machine washable.
Flame retardant blackout curtain fabric. Is a 100% polyester fabric coated with three layers which make 100% opaque. Is easy to maintain and to clean with a wet cloth. 140 and 280 cm widths. Available only for selected designs.
Flame retardant blackout curtain fabric with fabric texture. Is a 100% polyester fabric coated with three layers which make 100% opaque. Is easy to maintain and to clean with a wet clothe. 140 and 280 cm widths.
FR fabric for curtains and upholstery. Machine washable.
Plain flame retardant sheer with linen look. Machine washable.
Plain flame retardant sheer with natural look. Machine washable.


Men's sports and casual T-shirt. White color. Classic Everlast logo on chest.
Men´s Everlast T-shirt, classic fit with short sleeves, printed with the brand logo on the front. Light and pleasant material, ideal for sports and leisure.
Detailed print on the front.


As usual, it seems that there's never enough time to get everything done before commencing a long journey but, despite an ever increasing "to do" list, we managed to arrive at the airport with just enough time to grab a quick photo at the gate with a phone before boarding. The flight itself went about as well as any other 14 hour slog across the Pacific, passing the time with movies, magazines and chatting. Attempts at sleep were unsuccessful even though we'd not had a lot of sleep lately as our bodies were sure it was still only mid-afternoon. The cabin crew were friendly, service was efficient and everything else about the flight went well except for not being able to sleep through it.
Arrival at LAX provided plenty of views of aircraft from around the world and the chance to experience the "park & tow" arrival at our gate. Surprisingly our transition through customs & immigration was much less of an ordeal than some recent stories we'd heard, taking only an hour to get from the aircraft and out into the Los Angeles summer air. A quick walk through the heat soon returned us to the cooler air of a domestic airline terminal where we checked in almost painlessly via computerised kiosk and a bag drop counter.
Passing through the TSA screening point was surprisingly easy and about on par with going through the scanners at Melbourne's domestic terminals. The staff were courteous and aside from Grant's belt buckle triggering a metal detector for the first time ever, it all went smoothly and we were soon walking through the concourse looking for a place to set up a base while we waited for our flight.
Later at the gate we met up with Bas Scheffers who was with us at NatFly 2011 and had booked his Oshkosh 2011 trip some 12 months ago. Despite Bas being allocated a seat when he left Chicago and our allocations being done at the gate, we wound up in rows 12, 13 & 14 on the same side of the very packed aircraft. Fortunately it was only a 4 hour trip to Chicago as Grant & Steve had both drawn middle seats, discovering that on a domestic 737 these seats probably have less room than Alan Shepard did in his Mercury space capsule.
Our arrival at Chicao's O'Hare International took a rather circuitous route around a number of thunderstorms giving us a great view of the city with the lake behind it. After landing we then followed the longest taxi route we've ever experienced, seeming to go around the entire airport before finally making it to our gate. From there it was off to pick up our luggage, meet our friend Rob Mark from CommAvia and drive to his place where we're staying while we try to adjust our body clocks to the US Central time zone. So far the adjustment is proving to be a challenge as we have arrived during a heat wave, experiencing the hottest weather Chicago's had in the past 10 years.
This entry was posted in Air shows, Commentary, Oshkosh and tagged Chicago, KLAX, KORD, LAX, Los Angeles, Melbourne, O'Hare, Oshkosh, PCDU_blog, sleep. Bookmark the permalink.


InstaLinen.com sent me a few free samples of their fabrics in-exchange for an honest review. I'm always looking for new places to buy quality fabric, so I thought this might be interesting.
In the meantime, if any of you have ideas for what I could create with these samples, leave me a comment. My brain is kinda fried getting ready for our house renovation.
I have been seeing Kool-Aid Dyed Easter Eggs all over Pinterest for the past month. Since I have two little ones and last year when we dyed eggs with food coloring our hands were dyed for many days, I thought this would be worth a try.
This was a very inexpensive way to dye eggs as well. The packets cost me 3/$1 and you do not have to use vinegar just water. I gathered my supplies and my Mom hard boiled the eggs, we were ready to go.
We decided to try yellow (lemonade), red (cherry), blue (raspberry lemonade), purple (grape), orange (orange) and green (a mix of the yellow and blue).
The only one we were a little bit disappointed by was the purple, it looked more like black than purple. The experimental green one even turned out pretty.
My 4 year old was really into it and my almost 2 year old had fun doing this too, she just had a hard time waiting for the eggs to soak. The only one who got anything on their hands was my 4 year old and it came off very easily with soap and water.
I think that this is going to be our new way of dying eggs in the future, or at least until my daughters are old enough to care about getting dye on their hands.
I got another great opportunity to test out a product for a very deep discount in exchange for an honest review on my site. This product is more geared toward those of my readers who have kids.
The Angel Baby Car Seat Travel Bag is lightweight, durable and very easy to use.
The travel bag was delivered in excellent condition in a neat and compact package.
The bag is contained for storing when not in use, in a small zippered bag that is attached to the travel bag it's self so that you can not lose it. This is great because with all the things that my kids have I would be sure to lose this tiny bag.
I was pleasantly surprised to see how large the travel bag was when you unfolded it from the small storage bag.
The travel bag easily fit our rear-facing car seat. We could also fit our older daughters booster seat with the rear-facing seat.
There is a very convenient hand strap that is very easy to use for loading and unloading the bag in the airport.
The bag also has a shoulder strap for carrying through the airport and to the rental car place. This was the only area that I thought might need some improvement. The strap does not have any padding so we could see after a while that it would start to dig into your shoulder.
When I went to put the travel bag back in it's small storage bag. My first thought was that this is going to be a task, but I was wrong, it folded up easily and fit nicely in the storage bag.
I did receive this product at a very deep discount. All opinions are 100% my own. Below is a link if you are interested in purchasing this product from Amazon, I receive a referral fee from purchases made through this link. Thank you.
A few months ago I received a book for free from Goodreads.com Giveaways, in return for an honest review on their site. I loved this book so much that I decided to write about it here. The book is 'The Complete Book of Chalk Lettering - Create & Develop Your Own Style' by Valerie McKeehan.
What I really loved about this book was not only did she tell you all the items you would need to be successful, she also provided actual chalkboards and very detailed step-by-step photos.
Part of the process that she explained for better looking chalk lettering is to season the chalkboard, this I had never heard of before, but was very simple to do.
First you rub the chalk all over the chalkboard covering every inch with chalk.
Then you wipe away with a chalk eraser or a dry clean paper towel or rag. Now you are ready to create.
I decided to test it out first by writing my name in chalk, this gave me a good understanding of how hard I had to lean on the chalk to make it work.
While my younger daughter was taking her nap, my older daughter and myself decided to try designing hanging chalkboards that I had picked up from Target for a dollar each. I also got the chalk from Target for a dollar, so this was a very inexpensive craft.
We seasoned our chalkboard and were ready to try some of the designs that Valerie had in her book.
I choose one of her flower designs and a snowflake design. These were relatively easy and with a little bit more practice I think I could get pretty good at creating these designs and more.
I added Happy Easter and an Easter egg of my own design.
My daughter made her own Easter design with a snowflake and Easter Egg.
One of the great things about working with chalk is if you mess up you can just wipe it away and start over. I think we will have this book for a very long time and will use it again and again. If you are interested in this book here is a link to it on Amazon. I do receive referral fee for anything bought through this link.


You soon forget the lovely smiles, giggles and fun you had with your children.
Grab your camera and get outside with your kids.
If you're anything like me with a new toy you won't be able to wait to get going.
Flash is such harsh lighting and I think should only be used when there is no other way.
You'll be better off turning up the ISO, which allows you to shoot in low light. The image may be a little grainy but unless you are going to enlarge the image massively it won't show that much.
Also try a wider aperture which will give you a lovely dreamy background but ensure your focus point is where you want the image to be sharp.
It's all about capturing that moment and doesn't necessarily mean your child has to look straight at you.
You can't beat candid moments.
Bend your knees, and get lower so that you are at your kids' level. Go on just do it and see the difference it makes.
Don't do it! Apart from the chance of corrupting your card, sometimes what you see on the back of the camera is not what you see on the computer. The image may well look good and can be deleted once uploaded if your fears were correct.
Exposure control. Tap light part of image to darken your picture or a dark part to lighten your picture. Oh and by the way if you edit your pictures, it is easier to correct a dark image than a light image.
And a little more help with exposure is the little sun. When you hold your finger on the screen you should see a little sun if you run your finger up and down you can increase or decrease exposure.
Ensure you have sufficient back up devices. External hard drives are a must have. I use external hard drives but I also use Crashplan cloud storage on a just in case basis.
There are many options of cloud storage, you will easy find the one that suits you.


"More important than tool are your data. You will need all many attributes about cus…"
"have you ever had problem with 'too many interations' ? doesn't k-means converge qui…"
Jozo Kovac replied Jul 5, 2010 to Initialization methods for k-means clustering.
"Hi Urko, what are your expectations from segmentation? What results will be fine for…"
Jozo Kovac replied Mar 11, 2010 to K-means, SOM, k-nn or classical clustering methods?
"weka/R and all other tools have limitations, but there are always ways how to elimin…"
"google perl tutorial google perl datamining tutorial i guess you are able to find it…"
"that's why they added Python extension to SPSS ? ;-)"
"I like this approach. It's creative and worth trying."
"... what response rate do you expect in untested set? if expected response rate is…"


text:
import { concat } from '../CollectionHelpers'
import { Renderer } from '../Rendering/Renderer'
import { Heading } from './Heading'
import { InlineSyntaxNode } from './InlineSyntaxNode'
import { OutlineSyntaxNode } from './OutlineSyntaxNode'
import { OutlineSyntaxNodeContainer } from './OutlineSyntaxNodeContainer'

export class BulletedList implements OutlineSyntaxNode {
  sourceLineNumber?: number

  constructor(
    public items: BulletedList.Item[],
    options?: { sourceLineNumber: number }
  ) {
    this.sourceLineNumber = options?.sourceLineNumber
  }

  descendantsToIncludeInTableOfContents(): Heading[] {
    return concat(
      this.items.map(item => item.descendantsToIncludeInTableOfContents()))
  }

  inlineDescendants(): InlineSyntaxNode[] {
    return concat(
      this.items.map(item => item.inlineDescendants()))
  }

  render(renderer: Renderer): string {
    return renderer.bulletedList(this)
  }
}

export namespace BulletedList {
  export class Item extends OutlineSyntaxNodeContainer {
    protected readonly BULLETED_LIST_ITEM = undefined
  }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
A Reasoner's Miscellany
GDPs, Feelings, and Mountains
Human Progress, cont'd
The media is pretty good at reporting the most attention-grabbing headlines: popularity contests, controversies, and catastrophes. This part is fine. Companies should try to generate profits within reasonable moral bounds, and selectively reporting news stories that are the most interesting does not feel unethical.
But this causes us to miss the tiny incremental changes that have resulted in a better world, and instead focus on the seemingly endless problems that pop up every day. One would naively think, from things like the Flint water crisis, the popularized incidents of police brutality, random shooting deaths, terrorism worldwide, stagnant wages, and the growing rift of income inequality, that the United States and the world are eroding away. But this narrative misses all the positive things.
Remember 10 years ago? That's not even the 1990s. That's the early 21st century. In these dark ages of 2006, there was no iPhone, no Snapchat, no Twitter. There was neither Tumblr nor Tinder nor Uber, while Facebook and Youtube were in their infancy. 55% of Americans opposed same-sex marriage while only 35% were in support; today, those numbers have flipped. New art and new science have developed. The US emits less CO2, and global wind power capacity has increased by a factor of 6. Global poverty has continued to decline, infectious diseases take fewer lives, US cancer mortality rates have fallen, global childbirth mortality and child mortality rates are down, and even as the world population goes up the number of people undernourished is decreasing.
(And for computer geeks: The laptop I had in 2006 had 1 GB RAM and a 40 GB non-SSD hard drive. The one I am using to write this post costs about the same and has 16 GB RAM and a 256 GB SSD. )
So it is very puzzling that Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have engaged so many people by essentially ignoring progress and calling on their followers to ignore it as well. The very idea of "Make America Great Again" is based on the narrative that the US has declined, yet there has not been a better time for the US or for the world. And the "capitalism has failed you" narrative from the other side of the spectrum is no better. Get rid of your iPhone first and then talk about capitalism produces nothing of value. Hillary Clinton understood this when she stated, "America never stopped being great."
And here is The Economist:
Which would you prefer to be: a medieval monarch or a modern office-worker? The king has armies of servants. He wears the finest silks and eats the richest foods. But he is also a martyr to toothache. He is prone to fatal infections. It takes him a week by carriage to travel between palaces. And he is tired of listening to the same jesters. Life as a 21st-century office drone looks more appealing once you think about modern dentistry, antibiotics, air travel, smartphones and YouTube.
The question is more than just a parlour game. It shows how tricky it is to compare living standards over time. Yet such comparisons are not just routinely made, but rely heavily on a single metric: gross domestic product (GDP). This one number has become shorthand for material well-being, even though it is a deeply flawed gauge of prosperity, and getting worse all the time […]. That may in turn be distorting levels of anxiety in the rich world about everything from stagnant incomes to disappointing productivity growth.
And my favorite part from the ad at the top is, "Even use on your boat," as if everyone had boats back then.
"I Feel Like"
Here is Molly Worthen, whose article in the NYT is titled "Stop Saying 'I Feel Like'":
In American politics, few forces are more powerful than a voter's vague intuition. "I support Donald Trump because I feel like he is a doer," a senior at the University of South Carolina told Cosmopolitan. "Personally, I feel like Bernie Sanders is too idealistic," a Yale student explained to a reporter in Florida. At a Ted Cruz rally in Wisconsin in April, a Cruz fan declared, "I feel like I can trust that he will keep his promises."
These people don't think, believe or reckon. They "feel like." Listen for this phrase and you'll hear it everywhere, inside and outside politics. This reflex to hedge every statement as a feeling or a hunch is most common among millennials. But I hear it almost as often among Generation Xers and my own colleagues in academia. As in so many things, the young are early carriers of a broad cultural contagion.
Hedging my written remarks is pretty useful when I say things on the internet that are archived permanently. It is so easy to take things out of context that I preemptively qualify statements to avoid misunderstanding.
On the other hand, I agree with all the reasons against over-hedging as discussed in the article. I am in favor of things that are rational and encourage discussion, and I detest things that shut down debates.
Yet here is the paradox: "I feel like" masquerades as a humble conversational offering, an invitation to share your feelings, too — but the phrase is an absolutist trump card. It halts argument in its tracks.
When people cite feelings or personal experience, "you can't really refute them with logic, because that would imply they didn't have that experience, or their experience is less valid," Ms. Chai told me.
"It's a way of deflecting, avoiding full engagement with another person or group," Elisabeth Lasch-Quinn, a historian at Syracuse University, said, "because it puts a shield up immediately. You cannot disagree."
This is also the primary reason why recent campus social justice movements go too far: they stifle debate rather than encourage it.
That said, there is a difference between hedging a statement and expressing an opinion:
If I recall correctly, the speed of light is 299,792,458 m/s.
I feel like Ted Cruz would make a bad president.
The first statement makes a factual claim but also expresses some uncertainty as to whether it is true. It doesn't deflect engagement.
But the second is an opinion, and technically speaking, the claim is not that "Ted Cruz would make a bad president," but that "I feel like Ted Cruz would make a bad president." In this sense, you can't really argue with the statement even if you miraculously provided evidence that Ted Cruz would make a good president, because that would not affect the person's feelings that Ted Cruz would be a bad president.
So hedge more, "feel like" less.
NYT on Margot Robbie:
"It's always a hustle," she said. "I thought it would be a mountain, where you get to the top, and then it's like: 'Wheeee! It's so easy after this.'"
Instead, Ms. Robbie said: "Any time I get near the top, I'm like, 'There's another mountain!' The hustle continues."
WSJ on making friends:
People with higher I.Q.s were less content when they spent more time with friends. Psychologists theorize that these folks keep themselves intellectually stimulated without a lot of social interaction, and often have a long-term goal they are pursuing.
Harvard on young people:
Sanders remains most popular candidate for America's 18- to 29-year-olds; Nearly half believe today's politics are unable to meet the country's challenges; Majority reject both socialism and capitalism.
Sean Li	Society, Technology	Leave a comment May 1, 2016 May 9, 2016 5 Minutes
Brains, Stories, and Yelling
Cognitive Styles
I'm always skeptical of any explanation that involves "culture," but here is Jennifer Richler in the latest issue of Scientific American Mind:
Previous research has shown that people from cultures that are Western,educated, industrialized, rich and democratic ("WEIRD," in psychological parlance) tend to think analytically, using logical rules, whereas those that are non-WEIRD process information more intuitively. They even perform differently on problem-solving tasks: Americans, who are more analytical, remember individual components of a complex visual scene better than East Asians, who are more holistic.
They compared the minds of liberals and conservatives by giving them three words, e.g. "panda", "monkey", and "banana", and asking which two were most related:
Liberals acted more like Westerners, pairing items that belonged to the same abstract category (for instance, two animals), whereas conservatives tended to pair items that were functionally related (monkey and banana), as non-Westerners do. One other classic test of holistic thinking also suggested that liberals tended to use a more typically WEIRD cognitive style.
The finding that conservatives think more like those from collectivistic cultures might sound counterintuitive. Aren't liberals, who favor safety-net programs for the needy, the collectivist ones? Thomas Talhelm, now a professor of behavior science at the University of Chicago and lead author of the study, explains that true collectivism "doesn't mean general sharing with other people. It's about social ties and responsibilities to those within your group." Antipoverty programs usually serve to help individuals get a leg up rather than strengthening groups—thus aligning with WEIRD cultures' focus on individuality.
This confuses me a little because when I think about recent "liberal" examples in individualism vs collectivism, the thing that jumps out is the "check your privilege" movement, which is ultra anti-individualist. You belong to X racial group or Y social class? Privileged! Your "identity" is based on pre-defined groups (often which you did not make a choice to join) and not on your individual experience.
The counterintuitive story, that liberals are the individualistic ones, makes more sense after some thought. If you go through liberal vs conservative stances on social issues, it does seem like liberals in general favor the individual. The most glaring example is abortion, with the liberal position literally called "pro-choice."
Here is a passage about where libertarians fit in this framework, from this article:
Historically, libertarians and modern liberals share an ideological ancestry, both tracing our roots to the classical liberal tradition of Locke, Hume, Smith, Mill, and others. In the 19th century, the classical liberals triumphed by advocating the primacy of the individual against the status quo of monarchy, mercantilism, aristocracy, theology, slavery, and the like. While the progressive movement stole our liberal terminology in the early 20th century, modern liberals and libertarians today still share that same valuation of the individual in society. This is most easily seen today in the issue of marriage equality, where social conservatives try to use the power of the state to control marriage because it is an important social institution, while liberals and libertarians focus on the importance of marriage in the lives of all individuals. It is the same core conflict between a holistic worldview that emphasizes tradition against a more analytic worldview that prioritizes the individual.
Oh, and I'm totally on team panda+monkey rather than monkey+banana. I would guess most people I know (liberals and math people) would pick the two animals as well.
Bonus: Here is a chart from the Scientific American Mind article on political party and Twitter language. It does further the story that "liberals are the real individualists":
Saw this on Tyler Cowen's blog, so here is the story within a story. Just to be clear, I am quoting Tyler Cowen quoting Marti Leimbach:
"A question of privilege"
An excellent short essay by Marti Leimbach. Here is the opening:
My university-aged daughter is always telling me about the "privilege" that people like me have and how it makes it impossible for me to understand and empathise with those whose lives are without such privilege. I do see her point. I've never been black or gay or trans or gender queer or mentally ill. I don't know what it would be like to grow up in a derelict building in a dangerous neighbourhood, to have drug addicts for parents, to fear for my safety while walking to school, to be openly despised for being female, denied education or refused employment based on my skin colour or gender. And while I have been poor enough not to be able to afford a car or health insurance, I have never been so poor I had to steal food. Clearly, I've not suffered the worst of what society can throw at a person.
Nonetheless, this whole notion of "privilege" vexes me. We talk about it as though we can all recognise what it is. I am not always so sure. I can tell one narrative of my life and it seems to describe someone who grew up without privilege, and I can tell another narrative and it seems almost as though my life was one of ease and privilege from the time I was born.
The story continues…it is hard to excerpt with its various twists and turns, definitely recommended…
As advertised, Leimbach paints two widely differing narratives of the same set of events. It is definitely worth a read. (It also reminds me of the underrated movie Vantage Point, which shows the same plot unfold several times from the perspective of different characters.)
The power of narrative is strong. You can take the same set of facts and wind up with opposite interpretations, as was the case in Leimbach's story. For very different example, here is a graph of US stock market investment, via Gallup:
So should you buy into the market?
Story 1: "It is obviously a time to buy stocks. When the number of investors in the stock market recovers and comes back to normal levels near 60%, tens of millions of Americans will have bought stocks, making the market much higher than it is now."
Story 2: "It is obviously a time to sell all your stocks. Fewer Americans are investing in the market than ever before, and this trend will only continue. Combined with the market near all-time highs, a crash is imminent."
(Meta-story: "The markets are efficient and have priced in both stories 1 and 2, so it is not obviously a time to buy or to sell.")
Do violent video games increase crime? [from this post]
Story 1: "People who play violent video games are likely to imitate the characters they play, thus becoming more aggressive in real life."
Story 2: "People who would otherwise commit violent crimes satisfy their urges in video games and not in real life, thus decreasing the crime rate."
So unless you have numbers to back you up or comprehensive explanations for complex issues, stay away from explaining things via simple stories.
These kinds of narratives make me skeptical of many political movements as well, whether from the right (e.g. the "war on Christianity" narrative) or from the left (e.g. the "privilege" narrative mentioned in Leimbach's article).
Here is Cowen again, really hammering the point in a TED talk on narratives.
Basically, make sure you understand as much of the situation as you can, not just some simplified narrative.
How to Social Activism
Earlier this week, The Huffington Post on President Obama on Black Lives Matter:
President Barack Obama on Saturday praised the work the Black Lives Matter movement has done to highlight racial inequality, but also strongly cautioned activists that they needed to be realistic about their proposals and be willing to compromise.
Speaking at a town hall in London, the president mentioned Black Lives Matter specifically as he laid out his vision of how activists can achieve social change.
"As a general rule, I think that what, for example, Black Lives Matter is doing now to bring attention to the problem of a criminal justice system that sometimes is not treating people fairly based on race, or reacting to shootings of individuals by police officers, has been really effective in bringing attention to problems," Obama said.
But the president went on to say that activists needed to be realistic about what could be achieved immediately and sometimes needed to compromise to achieve long-term goals.
"One of the things I caution young people about, though, that I don't think is effective is once you've highlighted an issue and brought it to people's attention and shined a spotlight, and elected officials or people who are in a position to start bringing about change are ready to sit down with you, then you can't just keep on yelling at them," Obama said.
Thanks Obama! And no, that was not sarcastic. As a rationalist and individualist, I generally disapprove of schemes in which your identity is based on something that you had no control over, such as race.
I'm on team Clinton and I think many of Sanders's plans are insane. However, I fully support Sanders's right to speak at his own rallies, especially with so many supporters there to see and listen to Sanders, not some random people who hijacked the podium, which happened in Aug. 2015.
Things like this just alienate would-be allies. I was generally favorable towards Black Lives Matter before this and certainly had a lower view of the group after the event. And it's not like Sanders did anything horrible to them before or during the event. I am glad President Obama was not afraid to address this.
Sean Li	Politics, Psychology, Society	Leave a comment April 24, 2016 April 24, 2016 6 Minutes
2015 and What I'm Thinking About
One thing I've never discussed on this blog is effective altruism. It is basically a movement to optimize doing good, and it does so by number crunching rather than by random donating. Here are a couple of main results:
Certain charities are 10 or 100 times more efficient than others. The most effective of them all is to distribute mosquito nets to sub-Saharan Africa, according to the famous site GiveWell, which ranks charities in effectiveness.
A high income earner can create more social impact than a social worker. The idea is that a software engineer earning $100,000 a year and donating 50% of it (to efficient charities like above) can generate a lot more good than a non-profit worker. The site 80,000 Hours has more about this.
I am fine with this movement and I really enjoy the discussions it causes. I would defend effective altruism against many of its usual criticisms.
But I am still personally skeptical for now. Which brings me to…
One thing about working in trading is that I now see everything in terms of markets. (Tyler Cowen's blog often highlights "markets in everything".) I naturally think about the cost and value of everyday things and decisions. This mindset probably makes effective altruism become more understandable. If every $3000 in mosquito nets saves one life, why would I ever donate to my alma mater?
Yet the same market mentality also raises some questions. I believe people are generally good, that markets are generally efficient, and that companies are generally beneficial to society. So when billions of dollars go into a tech company like Facebook (market cap of $300 billion as of this post) instead of anti-mosquito nets, there is probably a lot of hard-to-measure good that Facebook is providing and which is widely ignored.
Disenchantment with the Left
I wrote only 3 blog posts this year, and sadly two of them were about terrorist attacks in Paris. Back in college I blogged about atheism, and I kind of want to get into this again considering the Paris tragedies, and I believe that combating religion is still important.
That is also why I am becoming disillusioned with being a liberal. Both in the media and on my Facebook feed, people are too afraid (of being called racist or worse, Islamophobic) to criticize Islam and its role in the attacks. The Koran says to do horrific things to infidels, and it is emphatically not a tiny minority that believe this literally.
Liberals do a great job standing up for women, LGBT people, and religious minorities—in America and Europe. But in entire swathes of Islamic countries, in both the Middle East and Africa, women are considered second-class, legally beaten by their husbands, and even sentenced to 200 lashes for the crime of being raped. And we liberals just look the other way because it would be racist and colonialist to criticize their culture. (That last sentence is just out of anger, I hope nobody actually thinks that.)
Here is a very graphic New York Times video from just yesterday, showing a woman literally beaten and stoned to death by a mob, in a public space in broad daylight, because of rumors she burned a Koran. Can you really watch that and claim Islam had nothing to do with it?
My other disillusionment with being a liberal is the whole safe-space/microaggression/trigger-warning/check-your-privilege movement, which I talked about previously.
Anyway, I want to make a hobby out of writing in 2016, and I'm not sure if I should stick with tame topics like effective altruism and markets, or also include charged ones like religion and politics.
Bonus: My 2015 Reading List
The Occupy Wall Street Handbook, Various Authors: This is a compilation of essays written on the Occupy movement. I read this to challenge my positive views towards Wall Street, but I was mostly unpersuaded. The essays presume that you are against Wall Street and then talk about the movement or stats about inequality, without much attempt at persuasion.
A Random Walk Down Wall Street, Burton G. Malkiel: A decent chronicle of the rise of finance and Wall Street.
The Millionaire Next Door, Thomas J. Stanley and William D. Danko: An eye-opening book about American attitudes on saving, spending, and the accumulation of wealth. It provides so many instances where two households have the same income yet have vastly differing net worths, even when age, location, education, previous incomes, etc. are similar.
Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand: I expected Atlas Shrugged to be pure evil based on so many peoples' hatred of Ayn Rand and this book, but I actually enjoyed it. At least within the story, I cheered at the end. Does this make me a bad person? I definitely agreed with the reverence of scientists/inventors/creators.
On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin: We are all familiar with classics in literature, so why not in science? Its force and detail are impressive.
Average is Over, Tyler Cowen: The title says it all. Jobs will increasingly cluster towards high-wage and low-wage, with little in between.
The Great Stagnation, Tyler Cowen: Good discussion of low hanging fruit in economic growth.
The Myth of the Rational Voter, Bryan Caplan: Excellent treatise on voter rationality and the public's views on economic issues, and how frighteningly different they are from economists' views.
The Intelligent Investor, Benjamin Graham: I didn't find it very useful.
The Sense of Style, Steven Pinker: A useful writing-style guide.
The Price of Inequality, Joseph Stiglitz: I had a similar reaction as to the Occupy handbook. It basically listed some facts but wasn't that convincing. I mean, I agree that too much inequality is bad, but this book somehow made the case weaker for me. It had at least one "are you kidding me" moment.
Humans Are Underrated, Geoff Colvin: An interesting take on the idea that machines will take over even more jobs than today and that jobs will be all about human-to-human interaction.
Islam and the Future of Tolerance, Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaz: A very refreshing, actual dialog between an unapologetic atheist and a pro-reform Muslim. More discussions like this need to exist.
Brief Candle in the Dark, Richard Dawkins: Full of captivating and often humorous tales of Oxford, science, and atheism.
You're Never Weird on the Internet (Almost), Felicia Day: Really, thank you so much for creating The Guild and this memoir. It also feels good to read another person's experience with World of Warcraft.
Caplan's book discusses anti-market bias, and I feel like I did had lower expectations for books that were pro-market and higher expectations for ones that were anti-market. Both sides surprised me.
Sean Li	Atheism, Books, Economics, Life, Society	1 Comment December 27, 2015 March 13, 2016 4 Minutes
Safe Spaces and Universities
I've always considered myself a liberal. I am pro-equal-marriage, pro-choice, pro-feminism (at least in the classical sense), and pro-gun-control. When Donald Trump utters words, or when people complain about red Starbucks cups, I feel ever less proud to be an American. So it pains me greatly then, to ask, what the hell is going on in our universities?
Safe space is an innocuous-sounding term which, despite its reasonable and even praiseworthy historical origins, seems today to really mean safety from any encounter and discussion of opposing viewpoints. And it is unfortunately part of a larger phenomenon. As Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt wrote in a well-known Atlantic piece:
A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.
What kind of discomforts or offenses? Here is another passage (emphasis mine):
This new climate is slowly being institutionalized, and is affecting what can be said in the classroom, even as a basis for discussion. During the 2014–15 school year, for instance, the deans and department chairs at the 10 University of California system schools were presented by administrators at faculty leader-training sessions with examples of microaggressions. The list of offensive statements included: "America is the land of opportunity" and "I believe the most qualified person should get the job."
Just read the whole article.
The main surprise is that this is happening at all. For a long time, I thought terms like safe space, trigger warning, check your privilege, and microaggression were confined to the echo chambers of Tumblr and occasionally seeped out to other social media sites. But to take prominence among real college campuses, including the most elite ones—that is surreal.
Last month the Yale Halloween Costume fiasco was ignited by this letter:
Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I'll note that no one around campus seems overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes – I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition. And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people's capacity – in your capacity – to exercise self-censure, through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you?
Responses included:
"I don't want to debate. I want to talk about my pain" in the Yale Herald (now taken down),
"I have had to watch my friends defend their right to this institution. This email and the subsequent reaction to it have interrupted their lives. I have friends who are not going to class, who are not doing their homework, who are losing sleep, who are skipping meals, and who are having breakdowns. I feel drained. And through it all, Christakis has shown that he does not consider us a priority." (from an archive of the post)
this video incident:
From a professor writing in a Washington Post op-ed:
An additional problem that affects the current generation of college students even more is that it is so easy for these contretemps to balloon so quickly into national debates. That's extremely unfortunate. One of the purposes of college is to articulate stupid arguments in stupid ways and then learn, through interactions with fellow students and professors, exactly how stupid they are. Anyone who thinks that the current generation of college students is uniquely stupid is either an amnesiac or willfully ignorant. As a professor with 20 years of experience, I can assure you that college students have been saying stupid things since the invention of college students.
Two years ago, I still roamed the halls of Cornell University as a student and I'm thankful I didn't have to witness any of this nonsense. The most I have observed was a TA who used the term "freshpersons" instead of "freshmen", and this is something I'm perfectly fine with. Other than that, nothing. So that means either:
I went to a safe haven from safe spaces, or
I managed to avoid contact with these people.
I'm guessing (2) is more likely. Perhaps it helped to have certain expectations for college life. It has become an antiquated notion that college is a place to open your mind and challenge your beliefs. Instead, certain students would persuade you that it is a place to close your mind and guard your beliefs as if they were more sacred than God.
College campuses should be safe spaces. They should be safe spaces for bright and motivated students to exercise free speech, challenge social norms, and learn new things. Picture that. And now picture that the people who want to place restrictions on these rights are not the administrators, but the students themselves.
On a similar string, here is an op-ed from The Daily Californian, calling on people to occupy the syllabus:
We are calling for an occupation of syllabi in the social sciences and humanities. This call to action was instigated by our experience last semester as students in an upper-division course on classical social theory. Grades were based primarily on multiple-choice quizzes on assigned readings. The course syllabus employed a standardized canon of theory that began with Plato and Aristotle, then jumped to modern philosophers: Hobbes, Locke, Hegel, Marx, Weber and Foucault, all of whom are white men. The syllabus did not include a single woman or person of color.
We have major concerns about social theory courses in which white men are the only authors assigned. These courses pretend that a minuscule fraction of humanity — economically privileged white males from five imperial countries (England, France, Germany, Italy and the United States) — are the only people to produce valid knowledge about the world. This is absurd. The white male syllabus excludes all knowledge produced outside this standardized canon, silencing the perspectives of the other 99 percent of humanity.
The white male canon is not sufficient for theorizing the lives of marginalized people. None of the thinkers we studied in this course had a robust analysis of gender or racial oppression. They did not even engage with the enduring legacies of European colonial expansion, the enslavement of black people and the genocide of indigenous people in the Americas. Mentions of race and gender in the white male canon are at best incomplete and at worst racist and sexist. We were required to read Hegel on the "Oriental realm" and Marx on the "Asiatic mode of production," but not a single author from Asia. We were required to read Weber on the patriarchy, but not a single feminist author. The standardized canon is obsolete: Any introduction to social theory that aims to be relevant to today's problems must, at the very least, address gender and racial oppression.
This is just so rich. You speak of racism? You speak of sexism? Like, you are talking about theory in a time when the world was far more racist and sexist than it is today. If anything, rewriting the past to hide racism and sexism is making matters worse.
Jumping in time, just yesterday in the UK, certain students made death threats and actively disrupted a lecture in the name of "safe space". The speaker, "Ms Namazie, 49, is a leading secularist and member of the 'ex-Muslim' movement which campaigns to give Muslims the freedom to leave their faith without reprisals." An excerpt from the Daily Mail regarding what occurred:
Speaking after the event, Ms Namazie said: 'After my talk began, ISOC "brothers" started coming into the room, repeatedly banging the door, falling on the floor, heckling me, playing on their phones, shouting out, and creating a climate of intimidation in order to try and prevent me from speaking.
'I continued speaking as loudly as I could. They repeatedly walked back and forth in front of me.
'In the midst of my talk, one of the ISOC Islamists switched off my PowerPoint and left. The university security had to intervene and remain in the room as I continued my talk.'
Another excerpt:
Goldsmiths Islamic Society has previously hosted a number of radical speakers including Moazzam Begg of Cage, the charity which described ISIS terrorist 'Jihadi John' as a 'beautiful, kind man'.
If you are advocating killing apostates and praising ISIS terrorists and leveling death threats against your critics, then sorry, you don't get to claim the "safe space" defense.
And what's worse is that people feel they have to be respectful of anything safe space, so they are stuck in a position where they can't criticize what just happened above. "I'm offended" trumps any logical argument.
Jerry Coyne calls it the "death of liberalism".
And we cannot leave out Yale's twin, Missouri. Regarding the media incident at the University of Missouri, specifically this Youtube video, Conor Friedersdorf annotates:
Here the doublethink reaches its apex:
As the video begins, a man tells the photographer that he is not allowed to push the wall of people which has formed to stop him from moving forward.
Around the 20-second mark, a woman shouts that the photographer needs to respect the space of students, just as they start to forcibly push him backwards.
Just after the one-minute mark, having been pushed back by students who are deliberately crowding him to obstruct his view, things grow more surreal as the photographer is told, "Please give them space! You cannot be this close to them."
At the 1:24 mark, as the students are chanting at the photographer and some are visibly smirking at him––and as he's frustrated but doing his best to keep his cool––a protestor tells him, as if he is disrespecting them, "You think this is funny."
Around 1:42, after several rounds of students chanting and yelling loudly at him in unison, he raises his voice to politely insist that he has a First Amendment right to be there. And a student interjects that he must not yell at a protestor.
At 1:50 or so, a student tells the photographer that the members of the large group outnumbering him 20- or 30-to-one need to protect their space as human beings from him.
Around 2:08, a woman walks right up to the photographer and says, "You know what? Back off of my personal space. Leave these students alone."
That woman then spreads out her arms and starts pushing the photographer back more––and as she makes contact with his body other students tell him, "Stop pushing her."
At 2:33, the same woman tells the photographer that one of the students doesn't want to talk to him. He explains that he has no desire to speak with anyone. And she replies, "She doesn't want to see you," as if he's infringing on a right to not stand in a public space in a way that makes him visible.
Another surreal moment comes at 2:47, when a student who has been there the whole time approaches the wall of people preventing the photographer's forward progress and says, "I need to get through, are you not going to let me through?" as if the photographer is the one transgressing against her freedom of movement.
At 3:32 another student says, "They can call the police on you," as if the photographer is the one breaking the law.
A moment later, the photographer puts his hands and camera directly above his head to try to snap a photo. The women in front of him pushes her hands in the air to try to block the lens. They make fleeting, inconsequential contact, and a bystander accusatorially says to the photographer, "Did you just touch her?" Because that would be beyond the pale, never mind he has been repeatedly pushed!
And on it goes like that.
This behavior is a kind of safe-baiting: using intimidation or initiating physical aggression to violate someone's rights, then acting like your target is making you unsafe.
"You are an unethical reporter," a student says around 5:15. "You do not respect our space." Not 30 seconds later, the crowd starts to yell, "Push them all out," and begins walking into the photographer. "You're pushing me!" he yells. And even moments after vocally organizing themselves to push him, they won't fess up to the nature of their behavior. "We're walking forward," they say, feigning innocence. Says one snarky student as the crowd forces him back, "I believe it's my right to walk forward, isn't it?" Then the photographer is gone, and only the person holding the video camera that recorded the whole ordeal remains. Ironically, he is a member of the press, too, which he mentions to one of the few protestors who is left behind.
By then, the mask has fallen."Who wants to help me get this reporter out of here?" an unusually frank protestor yells. "I need some muscle over here!"
The woman calling for muscle? An assistant professor of mass media at the University of Missouri … who had previously asked the campus for help attracting media attention.
So campus protesters have devolved into hypocrisy, blatant threats, and intimidation. This is now the example? I can hear Martin Luther King Jr. rolling in his grave.
You don't have to sacrifice free speech or human compassion to advance your causes. It is not a tradeoff. My TA who said "freshpersons" didn't feel the overwhelming urge to censor or threaten people who said "freshmen". She was the most politically correct instructor I knew at Cornell, but she was a rational person who seemed to also understand the vital importance of free speech. It was not even close to these other stories.
Why did this phenomenon arise, and why so recently? The following sociology paper (Campbell and Manning) is a good answer. It argues there is rise of "victimhood culture" which is distinct from its predecessors, "honor culture" and "dignity culture", and that the rise is based on social conditions—namely the college campus, a more egalitarian society (kind of surprisingly), and 21st-century technology that grants us the ability to mass-publicize grievances.
Campus activists and others might refer to slights of one's ethnicity or other cultural characteristics as "microaggressions," and they might use various forums to publicize them. Here we examine this phenomenon by drawing from Donald Black's theories of conflict and from cross-cultural studies of conflict and morality. We argue that this behavior resembles other conflict tactics in which the aggrieved actively seek the support of third parties as well as those that focus on oppression. We identify the social conditions associated with each feature, and we discuss how the rise of these conditions has led to large-scale moral change such as the emergence of a victimhood culture that is distinct from the honor cultures and dignity cultures of the past.
Among other things, it provides a wealth of examples of academically documented cases of microaggression and claims of microaggression. Some interesting passages here:
A third notable feature of microaggression complaints is that the grievances focus on inequality and oppression – especially inequality and oppression based on cultural characteristics such as gender or ethnicity. Conduct is offensive because it perpetuates or increases the domination of some persons and groups by others. Contemporary readers may take it for granted that the domination of one group by another, or for that matter any substantial kind of intergroup inequality, is an injustice to be condemned and remedied. But people might have grievances about many other kinds of issues. For instance, they might condemn others for vices such as drunkenness, sloth, and gluttony. They might criticize or punish people for illicit sexual acts such as sodomy, incest, or bestiality. And cross-culturally and historically, people might harshly judge and persecute religious, ethnic, and other cultural minorities merely for being different. Such grievances are largely absent from microaggression complaints, and those who promulgate such complaints would surely consider criticism of cultural minorities and unconventional sexual practices to be examples of the very oppression they seek to expose and eradicate. The phenomenon thus illustrates a particular type of morality that is especially concerned with equality and diversity and sees any act that perpetuates inequality or decreases diversity as a cause for serious moral condemnation.
…a morality that privileges equality and condemns oppression is most likely to arise precisely in settings that already have relatively high degrees of equality.
When the victims publicize microaggressions they call attention to what they see as the deviant behavior of the offenders. In doing so they also call attention to their own victimization. Indeed, many ways of attracting the attention and sympathy of third parties emphasize or exacerbate the low status of the aggrieved. People portray themselves as oppressed by the powerful – as damaged, disadvantaged, and needy….
Certainly the distinction between offender and victim always has moral significance, lowering the offender's moral status. In the settings such as those that generate microaggression catalogs, though, where offenders are oppressors and victims are the oppressed, it also raises the moral status of the victims. This only increases the incentive to publicize grievances, and it means aggrieved parties are especially likely to highlight their identity as victims,emphasizing their own suffering and innocence. Their adversaries are privileged and blameworthy, but they themselves are pitiable and blameless. To the extent that others take their side, they accept this characterization of the conflict, but their adversaries and their partisans might portray the conflict in the opposite terms. This can give rise to what is called "competitive victimhood," with both sides arguing that it is they and not their adversaries who have suffered the most and are most deserving of help or most justified in retribution (Noor et al. 2012; Sullivan et al. 2012).
The emerging victimhood culture appears to share dignity's disdain for risk, but it does condone calling attention to oneself as long as one is calling attention to one's own hardships – to weaknesses rather than strengths and to exploitation rather than exploits. For example, students writing personal statements as part of their applications for colleges and graduate schools often write not of their academic achievements but instead – with the encouragement of the universities – about overcoming adversity such as a parent's job loss or having to shop at thrift stores (Lieber 2014). And in a setting where people increasingly eschew toleration and publicly air complaints to compel official action, personal discomfort looms large in official policy.
Jonathan Haidt wrote a good outline of the paper here with comments.
It doesn't appear that this trend will subside anytime soon. What will happen? Will this cause a right-wing backlash? To protest this, will I have to vote Republican?
Bonus read: The word "colonial"/"colonialism" only occurs 12 times in this NPR denouncement of a Taylor Swift music video.
Sean Li	Education, Society	Leave a comment December 3, 2015 May 8, 2016 13 Minutes
Paris and Campus Activism
January 2015. Getty Images.
I like to wait some time after a current event and see people's reactions. To the Paris attacks, everyone is responding exactly as you would expect:
ISIS takes credit.
France declares the attacks an act of war, bombs ISIS stuff in Syria, and smokes out related suspects.
The rest of the world sympathizes with France.
Conservatives in Europe and America want to stop taking in Syrian refugees, and more right-wing backlash, etc.
Liberals criticize conservatives.
People on the internet say all the usual stuff which they think are new and clever arguments on terrorism/tolerance/religion even though these arguments literally appear every time there is a terrorist attack.
I get angry as an atheist because many people still try to tiptoe around calling this "Islamic" terrorism because the thought of accidentally offending people is so much worse than a hundred people being murdered.
The only thing sort of unexpected was the universal support against terrorism this time, in contrast with Charlie Hebdo in January. The last blog post I wrote, which seems like a really long time ago, was about the backlash against Charlie Hebdo after the attacks as many people thought their cartoons were too offensive and that in some way they deserved it.
Even the Pope changed his mind about it. "If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch," said Mr. Francis in a victim-blaming allegory regarding the January attacks which killed 12 people. On the other hand, regarding the November attacks, he stated that there is no "religious or human justification for these things."
So I'm pleased that the world is finally starting to rally together against ISIS. But it has unfortunately taken so many lives, not just in Paris but around the world, to get us to this path.
Missouri and Yale
One thing the Paris attacks did was to totally shut out the campus "activist" incidents from the news.
The Missouri protests seemed mostly legitimate, other than the whole fiasco of stepping in front of a car and touching it to obtain instant victimhood status, or the part where protesters refused media into their safe spaces and then complained about not getting media attention. There was blatant racism at the school (like not microaggressions* but literally dropping cotton balls in front of a black community) and it seemed like the administration didn't do much about it. Even if the president was totally not a racist but just incompetent at his job, it more or less justifies the protests.
For Yale though, I have to denounce the Halloween costume protests and instead take the side of Erika Christaki. Her apparently biggest mistake in life was to encourage students to think and exercise free speech, in an institution where students are supposed to think and exercise free speech. The backlash against her from some of the students seemed completely out of line, given that it took place at such an elite university. I basically agree with this Atlantic article by Conor Friedersdorf—its title, "The New Intolerance of Student Activism", sums it up.
Bonus read: a protest at Dartmouth, with students' own responses here and here. The first link is disconcerting. A passage:
The large group of protestors began to move up and yell at students on first floor Berry. Students were again yelled at to stand up in support of the protest, and many did so, either out of support or fear.
After making a girl cry, a protestor screamed "Fuck your white tears."
I was startled by the aggression from a small minority of students towards students in the library, many of whom were supporters of the movement.
When I was at Cornell just a couple of years ago, I never saw anything like this. The closest to campus controversy I witnessed was the day after some rockets from Hamas hit Israel and killed some people. A group of pro-Israel, presumably Jewish, students organized a demonstration on Ho Plaza (yes, that place exists at Cornell). While I watched, another group of students, who I would guess were Muslim, started shouting profanities at the Jewish organization. From what I later heard, the second group was trying to kick out the Jewish group but the Jewish group had already cleared the event with the administration and thus had the right to be there.
But this incident seemed respectful of free speech and was about actual legitimate issues, not Halloween costumes.
*WordPress hilariously auto-corrects "microaggression" to "nonaggression".
Sean Li	Education, Society	2 Comments November 21, 2015 December 3, 2015 3 Minutes
If You Think Charlie Hebdo Needs to Tone It Down, You Don't Understand Free Speech (Or Satire)
In response to the Charlie Hebdo shooting, there have been roughly two kinds of sentiments:
I support free speech, and the attacks were unjustified. ("I am Charlie")
I support free speech, and the attacks were unjustified, BUT Charlie Hebdo went too far and shouldn't have been so offensive. ("I am not Charlie.")
The second sentiment is what I have trouble with, and it is one that I feel needs to be addressed.
We should be on the same side here. Extremist Islam is not just anti-free speech—it's also anti-feminist, anti-LGBT, and anti-Semitic, to name a few examples. In fact, to blow your mind further, Charlie Hebdo is actually a left-wing paper. This is just one of the problems of satire, that some people will confuse what a satirist is making fun of with what he or she is actually supporting. Unfortunately, this "some people" category includes people who I would normally view as very intelligent, and perhaps they just flew too quickly into the contrarian nest. (I say this because it's the left that should be MORE supportive of Charlie Hebdo, whereas it seems that all the detractors I know of are from the left.) I imagine that if the terrorists had attacked an women's rights convention, the response from the left would be far different. ("I don't profess to be a scholar of Islam. But it's plain that some branches or interpretations of the faith view any depictions of gender equality as blasphemy.") After all, it's extremist Islam, not offensive cartoons, that brought you Boko Haram's kidnapping of schoolgirls, lashes for women as punishment for being raped, and the shooting of an oh-so-offensive Malala Yousafzai. You should have the right to call these out without having to worry about your life.
Now, the way of calling these out is where some people disagree. They think free speech is the right to say what you want so long as it doesn't offend people. But this is a contradiction in terms: by definition, free speech isn't free if there are restrictions on what you can and can't say.
"This is because, in part, the use of printed (and now digital) satire is an old and honorable response to the excesses of government and religion. When the people have no other voice, when the main media outlets are controlled by the state (or too fearful to challenge the state), satire flourishes. One of the few ways the citizen can hold the rich and powerful accountable is to employ humor and satire." —Robert F. Darden (source)
The right to free speech is the right to ridicule, the right to offend. By arguing that Charlie Hebdo should essentially censor itself, you are calling for the destruction of your own human rights, and this sentiment I find much scarier than a terrorist shooting.
I also feel the need to address the main side point surrounding the issue, which is the claim that Charlie Hebdo is "racist" or "hateful" or "Islamophobic." I'm afraid most of the articles or comments I've read that make this claim seem completely unaware that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing satirical newspaper as opposed to a right-wing serious newspaper, which you might think it is if you didn't get the satire. Here's an example where several articles that I know of seemed to completely miss the joke:
Yep, at first it looks quite offensive, even though I'm not sure what it's saying. Other people had the same idea, but went ahead and created their own story for what it is saying. For example, this Chicago Tribune article titled "Sorry, I am not 'Charlie'" interpreted this trivially and lumped it with a list of other "offensive" drawings, with the description:
One cover cartoon of four young black women in burqas was headlined: "The sex slaves of Boko Haram are angry. 'Don't touch our child benefits!'"
The Hooded Utilitarian has an article titled "In the Wake of Charlie Hebdo, Free Speech Does Not Mean Freedom From Criticism," where the author not only shows the above cover in a list of "offensive" covers, but also adds a clever (but in hindsight, non-intelligent) quip, saying "Yes, that last one depicts Boko Haram sex slaves as welfare queens."
A quick Quora scan, on the other hand, reveals that some people just don't understand satire. An explanation by Jean-Baptiste Froment:
This cover is mixing two unrelated elements which made the news at about the same time:
– Boko Haram victims likely to end up sex slaves in Nigeria
– Decrease of French welfare allocations
In France, as in probably every country who has welfare allocations, some people criticize this system because some people might try to game it (e.g., "welfare queens" idea). Note that if we didn't had it there would probably be much more people complaining because the ones who really need it would end up in extreme poverty.
Charlie Hebdo is known for being left-wing attached and very controversial, and I think they wanted to parody people who criticize "welfare queens" by taking this point-of-view to the absurd, to show that immigrant women in France are more likely to be victims of patriarchy than evil manipulative profiteers.
And of course if we only stay on the first-degree approach, it's a terrible racist and absurd cover.
And by another commentor, Adrien Lucas Ecoffet:
I can only confirm what Jean-Baptiste Froment and Stephen Reed's answers have been saying: it's easy now for non-French observers to imagine Charlie Hebdo as a right wing, racist, anti immigrant publication because of the fact that they have only seen covers about fundamentalist Islam.
The reality is, Charlie Hebdo is a far left, pro-immigrant publication, of which many contributors have been members of anti-racist organizations.
As the other answers have mentioned, this cover is simply the combination of two news stories to make a provocative joke. This is a very common occurrence in Charlie Hebdo front pages.
Overall I don't think you should make much of this front page. Clearly people are cherry-picking Charlie Hebdo covers in an attempt to prove that it is a racist, anti-Islam publication, perhaps in some form of victim-blaming, when this assertion is absolutely preposterous to anyone who actually knows the newspaper.
Incidentally, this particular issue was preceded and followed by anti-Le Pen front pages, Le Pen being the front figure of the French anti-immigration far right.
I'm not French, I don't speak French, nor am I familiar with French newspapers or political organizations, but with even a drop of critical thinking, I can say that these explanations make far more sense than what the "Charlie Hebdo is racist" crowd is shouting.
Let's do more examples!
Here is a Tumblr post with 55,152 notes at the current moment of my writing this. I'm going to link one of the images and quote the entirety of it here (and I bolded a particularly interesting sentence):
Before social media sparks fire and everyone claims the phrase #jesuischarlie I want to point out some lovely truths about Charlie Hedbo that the news media may "forget" to point out.
Though my heart goes out to the victims to the shooting at the Charlie Hedbo headquarters ( I ALSO DO NOT CONDONE THE ACT OF VIOLENCE AS A SOLUTION TO RACISM OR HATE ) I need it to be known that this newspaper was not some sweet periodical that used it's platform of freedom of speech as a catalyst to social change in France. Before you allow Fox News to label the shooters as Muslim Terrorist and that all Muslims are terrorist and that Charlie Hebdo was a magazines for families and saints you need to know that this newspaper was infamously known for being racist, homophobic, and highly islamophobic. I am not one to laugh at a blatant racist comic as "oh lol free speech" because with free speech comes RESPONSIBILITY.
It should be no secret that the Muslim community in France has often been abused, push to the side, and ignored. Even laws are put in place to prevent then from practicing their beliefs comfortably. For Charlie Hebdo to be a left wing newspaper that questioned the actions of the right wing, why does it often look like they are laughing along with them? Why can't this magazine question why we are racist and islamophobic than to continue to justify their belief in supposed "ironic" comics?
My prayers go out to the victims of this shooing. As an artist, a person who works in magazines, a human, and as a French woman I feel their pain.
JE NE SUIS PAIS CHARLIE
I will not stand for this magazine, I will not celebrate the privilege of "free speech" to be a disguise for hate. I am a black woman who understands how frustrated one can be as whites continue to use laws as an excuse to be abusive to who we are whether it be religion, skin color, or sexual orientation. I know France is scared, I know people are hurting. But I cannot be this newspaper's ally. I am an ally for the people of France, I am an ally to the victims and their families but I will not stand in solidarity for this hateful newspaper.
Clearly this author senses something wrong: "For Charlie Hebdo to be a left wing newspaper that questioned the actions of the right wing, why does it often look like they are laughing along with them?" But she doesn't go any further or investigate, and instead concludes she understands what the newspaper is about.
The author included the above Charlie Hebdo cartoon, which at first glance looks incredibly racist. However, the first warning bell that went off in my head was the word "raciste." Now, as I said before, I don't know any French, but it seems like you're actually a real racist and drawing a racist depiction of someone, you wouldn't include the word "raciste" in your depiction. Indeed, some digging reveals the full story (by John Courouble):
In November 2013 a cartoon in Charlie Hebdo depicted the Justice Minister Christiane Taubira, who is black (not literally African, specifically she was born in French Guiana), as a monkey. This has been a very popular image to share on Twitter as evidence that Charlie is a racist publication.
The first clue that all is not what it seems is that the cartoon was drawn by Charb – the editor himself. He was a Communist, and his girlfriend's parents were North African. A funny kind of racist. Next you have to note that the text next to that cartoon says "Rassemblement Bleu Raciste". This is a play on "Rassemblement Bleu Marine", the slogan of Marine Le Pen's national front, and the tricolor flame next to it is the party logo.
So, what you then need to know is that the cartoon was published after a National Front politician Facebooked a photoshop of the woman in the cartoon as a monkey, and then said on French TV that she should be "in a tree swinging from the branches rather than in government".
The cartoon is literally saying the National Front are racists. I'm genuinely not sure whether propagating the imagery is or isn't a useful way of mocking the FN, but turning an antifascist cartoon into evidence of racism based on no understanding at all takes some real pathology.
Again, this makes way more sense. It's like when Obama was portrayed in the following way in The New Yorker, and many people missed the joke.
These are quite entertaining, so let's do one more, and this time, a more relevant one. This one portrays Muhammad (which you basically aren't supposed to do, if you believe in censorship and blasphemy laws):
Once again, this looks quite racist at first.
Finished judging yet? Let's look at a translation:
Yeah. Let that sink in for a while.
Basically, people in the second group assumed that Charlie Hebdo was a bunch of classic right-wing sweep-all-Muslims-into-one-category racists, but hopefully they realize now that it is not the case. As this cover illustrates, they are actually criticizing the extremist parts, by figuratively saying that extremists have turned on their prophet.
So basically:
Satirical newspaper staff was attacked.
People were sad.
People wanted to defend free speech.
Some people thought Charlie Hebdo shouldn't be so offensive.
These "some people" don't realize that Charlie Hebdo is actually satirical and making fun of racists.
Hopefully they will realize this and stop with the "I am not Charlie" nonsense.
Once again, to those I'm criticizing (those of you in the "I am not Charlie" group): I think we're ultimately on the same side here, you might have just been misinformed or leapt too quickly to judgment without careful thought. The enemy isn't Charlie Hebdo, it's religious extremists.
I haven't looked at or evaluated every Charlie Hebdo cartoon for racism, but based on several examples that seemed clearly racist at first but were actually not (and were actually anti-racist), and based on their track record for supporting free speech, it seems like Charlie Hebdo is an excellent publication to support.
May the freedom of speech prevail.
I am Charlie.
Sean Li	Politics, Religion, Society	1 Comment January 11, 2015 January 11, 2015 9 Minutes
Is It Offensive?
North Korea's recent reaction to American mockery, a trailer for "The Interview," is overwhelmingly regarded as comical and immature. Our freedom of speech clearly includes the freedom of mockery, and NK's reaction shows just how insane their leaders are. (There are a very few of those "But what if Seth Rogen actually starts World War III?" people, but it's hard to tell whether they are trolling or serious.)
In 2012, we put up a trailer for "The Innocence of Muslims," and after international bloodshed and attacks on our embassies, we blamed the victims and told them they should have known better than to create works that offended such people. (Related are the 2006 Danish Jyllands-Posten cartoons, or Salman Rushdie, for a couple more famous examples.)
So in one case, parody is considered a completely harmless comedy, and in the other, it is considered such words as "offensive" or "disrespectful" or "Islamophobic." Why are we so hypocritical at choosing what is offensive and what is not? Why do we support one tyranny (i.e., by denouncing those who criticize it) while condemning another?
Sean Li	Movies, Society	Leave a comment June 26, 2014 June 26, 2014 1 Minute
2017, Lists, and State of the Internet December 31, 2017
Tabula Rasa, Extinction, and Electricity December 17, 2017
Internet Context, Natalism, and the Me Too Movement December 3, 2017
Evil, Progress, and the Sun November 26, 2017
Microtransactions, Speed Learning, and Absent-Mindedness November 18, 2017
Nature Abhors a Vacuum: Population and Technology November 12, 2017
The Good Old Days of the Internet (Circa 2010) November 11, 2017
Relative vs Absolute Wealth November 5, 2017
Nonorganic Growth of Nations October 1, 2017
More Topics May 6, 2017
Categories Select Category Art (7) Atheism (32) Blogging (24) Books (49) Chess (11) College (36) Cornell (24) Economics (14) Education (18) Gaming (14) History (13) Humor (13) Ideas (16) Internet (31) Ironically (26) Life (98) Literature (31) Logic (13) Math (45) Miscellany (21) Movies (28) Paradox (9) Philosophy (37) Poetry (6) Politics (14) Psychology (17) Quotations (20) Religion (34) Science (17) Site (19) Society (70) Space (6) Technology (16) Thinking (24) Writing (38)
Archives Select Month December 2017 (3) November 2017 (5) October 2017 (1) May 2017 (1) March 2017 (2) January 2017 (1) November 2016 (1) May 2016 (5) April 2016 (2) December 2015 (2) November 2015 (1) January 2015 (1) November 2014 (1) June 2014 (8) May 2014 (10) April 2014 (9) March 2014 (9) February 2014 (4) January 2014 (4) December 2013 (6) November 2013 (4) October 2013 (4) September 2013 (6) August 2013 (4) July 2013 (5) May 2013 (7) April 2013 (1) March 2013 (6) February 2013 (7) January 2013 (2) December 2012 (4) November 2012 (6) October 2012 (5) September 2012 (8) August 2012 (12) July 2012 (5) May 2012 (4) April 2012 (1) February 2012 (1) January 2012 (2) November 2011 (1) October 2011 (2) September 2011 (2) August 2011 (3) May 2011 (1) April 2011 (1) March 2011 (2) February 2011 (9) January 2011 (10) December 2010 (37) November 2010 (16) October 2010 (8) September 2010 (10) August 2010 (11) July 2010 (13) June 2010 (31) May 2010 (25) April 2010 (17) March 2010 (19) February 2010 (11) January 2010 (21) December 2009 (28) November 2009 (9)

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Brief Description: At the age of thirty Wendy Evans, a vivacious, versatile and devoted primary school teacher with singing and acting talents, was struck down by a devastating and very rare nerve disease with serious and debilitating symptoms including pain and foreign body sensations in her throat, shock-like pains in her ears and neck, and difficulty and pain when talking, swallowing, chewing, coughing and yawning. As a consequence, her teaching career and singing aspirations were tragically cut short.
Frustratingly, despite numerous doctors' and consultants' appointments, and innumerable tests and scans, the medical profession seemed unable to diagnose her problem, to the point that it was viewed as purely psychosomatic and she was seen as a paranoid malingerer suffering from stress and depression and whose problems would be best served by a psychiatrist and a concoction of drugs. But Wendy knew different and was determined to obtain a definitive diagnosis for her condition, which was making her life increasingly unbearable.
Wendy's book takes you on a journey from the onset of the illness, through the following 18 months of searching for the cause of her terrible disease and developing an understanding of her disorder, until she finally received a diagnosis of glossopharyngeal neuralgia and underwent brain surgery. When this did not prove to be the cure, she began to look at alternative therapies as a possible way of managing the disease and has finally mapped out a brighter future for herself, regaining control of her life through treatments such as the Bowen technique, craniosacral therapy, energy healing and remedial massage therapies.
About the Author: Wendy Evans qualified as a primary school teacher in 1992 and was proud to be a dedicated member of the teaching profession. As a trained singer and dancer, she also enjoyed playing leading roles in many pantomimes and operettas in her spare time. However, her much-loved teaching career and her performing arts pursuits were tragically brought to an end by a very rare nerve disease called vagoglossopharyngeal neuralgia. She has had to battle long and hard against all the odds to regain her life and her dignity, and her desire has been to bring her story to the public's attention.
A sometimes harrowing account of Wendy's struggle to find out the causes of her debilitating symptoms. Some doctors virtually calling her a liar and one in particular who, in my opinion, should be suspended and sent back to medical school to concentrate on his patient relationship skills. Wendy showed great courage and determination to rise above immense pain, brain surgery and several other daunting events, to get her life back on track and start down a path of holistic and remedial therapies that give other sufferers of similar symptoms hope for their own futures. Wendy desrves immeasurable praise for producing this work and I hope it sells well. It deserves to! Well written and researched.
Wendy is a teacher from the UK who was struck by glossopharyngeal neuralgia. While looking for answers on the internet, she chanced upon an academic article that I wrote for the Singapore Medical Journal.
She contacted me for help to find answers to the severe throat pains that she was experiencing.
Over the months as we emailed one another, I learnt so much about glossopharyngeal neuralgia and what it can do to a person. It was a two-way exchange. We both grew in our knowledge of not just neuralgia, but of human suffering and fortitude.
From Wendy, I learnt about the strength of the human spirit, and the ability to rise to the challenge of overcoming physical pain and disability. "Facing Neuralgia" is a book about her quest for well-being.
Wendy, if you are reading this, I thank you.
When we go to the doctors we expect dedication, treatment and most of all the correct diagnosis and eight out of ten times we receive this. But Facing Neuralgia the amazing book written by Wendy Evans tells the horrifying true story of how doctors can and do get it wrong.
Wendy Evans tells the story in her own words how she and her family had to fight over an eighteen month period with strength, determination and pain to receive the right diagnosis. This was a tired and hard battle that should not have, and hopefully should never again be a needless battle. The author had to go down a long and stressful road to convince the medical profession that their diagnosis was wrong and she was in fact seriously ill.
Each careful written word with the authors own and un-interfered tongue escorts you along her painful and tearful journey. From the heartache of losing her teaching career to her hard and stressful battles with the medical profession, just to be rightly diagnosed with and treated for "Glosspharyngeal Neuralgia" (GPN). Glosspharyngeal Neuralgia is described as a deep stabbing pain in one side of the throat. The pain is near the tonsil area and can extend into the ear which you can imagine is a life changing and painful condition.
Facing Neuralgia has been written in such a personal way that you feel her pain, you hear her anger and you believe that you are that dedicated survivor, Wendy Evans. But with every pain is a happy ending and this enjoyable, crafted book has the best happiest ending that every book should have.
If you want to read a book that moves you, read Facing Neuralgia, if you want to know more about (GPN) then there is no better place to start than Facing Neuralgia and if you want to hear a true, painful, and emotional true story about a regrettable wrong diagnosis then listen carefully to the words of Wendy Evans. If you have never heard of GPN before then after reading this book you will never be able to forget it.
Wendy Evans was interviewed about 'Facing Neuralgia' on BBC Radio Hereford & Worcestershire 104.4 FM on 'The Howard Bentham Breakfast Show'.
Wendy Evans appeared on her local BBC news: BBC Hereford & Worcestershire and was interviewed about her book 'Facing Neuralgia'.
Having known Wendy from her early teaching and performing days, it's a crying shame she is no longer able to follow her dreams.
Her book gives an insight to the pain and frustration she must have gone through as well as the relief in finally getting the correct diagnosis for her illness.
Hopefully her words will prove a solace and an inspiration for fellow sufferers.
This book is a truly remarkable achievement in the face of almost impossible odds. We have been with Wendy from the onset of her illness to the present. We are extremely proud of her and hope the book will bring knowledge and comfort to others, who may find themselves in a similar situation.
I was surprised how much Wendy has had to cope with. It is a very interesting book and I recommend that people should read it. I am really proud of Wendy for writing this book and I wish her lots of happiness for the future.


You must be 25 years old to rent this home. Perfect unit for a fishing getaway! The private boat slip comes with a boat lift!
Navy Cove 2113 is the perfect unit for your next vacation whether you're wanting to take your boat out to catch some big Gulf or Bay fish or if you just want to catch some rays at the beach!
Located in the heart of Fort Morgan, 2 Bedroom, 2 Bath condo is on the Bay and just steps to the Beach! A water lovers dream and Marina living without the crowds. This first floor condo is perfect for the angler, beach lovers and the whole family. Stroll the beaches, soak in the pool or hot tub, play in the waves, boat with the Dolphins, fish from the dock, and enjoy the view. The gulf beach is a short walk and the gulf fishing is just a short boat ride away.
The guest bedroom has two twin, the master bedroom has a king bed, and the living room has a sleeper sofa.
"Stayed here for the Thanksgiving holiday. Had a great time and enjoyed the stay despite the rainy windy weather."
"I am so glad you enjoyed your stay at Navy Cove 2113! With that great view, you can't help but enjoy it, even in the rain! I hope you will give us a call and come on back down! "
"We were pleasantly surprised at the comfort level of Navy Cove 2113. Having some prior bad experiences with other properties and companies, we were apprehensive before arrival. The bed was extremely comfortable- quality mattress and bedding. Kitchen had high end appliances and washer/ dryer, furniture was beautiful and comfortable, all the quality you usually miss when you rent a beach condo was there! Quiet, far from pool noise. A few outlets were not functional and someone came to check immediately."
"Whoop Whoop!! This is what we love to hear! So very glad you enjoyed yourself!!"
"Sunset Properties was great to work with and the owner has a very nice, CLEAN, well decorated 2 bedroom / 2 bath condo overlooking the bay. It may be important for coffee drinkers to know that a Kuerig is available - no regular coffee pot. This condo is located on the first level of the west building and is located directly above the assigned boat slip - this is a great advantage. The appliances all seem to be relatively new, the beds seem new but somewhat hard, and the carpet also seems very new. The overall smell of the condo is very crisp and clean - not musty at all. This condo gets direct morning sun so you cannot sit on the deck for breakfast. It is obviously shaded and pleasant in the evening. The biggest issue we encountered was that the Navy Cove boat ramp is now padlocked and we did not have a key. Sunset Properties was unaware of this - the owner should provide a key. Overall, this is a very nice condo which has just recently been put on the rental market. "
"Leah, we appreciate your review, so glad I got to meet you! We hope you'll be back to stay with us again!"


text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<project version="4">
  <component name="ProjectModuleManager">
    <modules>
      <module fileurl="file://$PROJECT_DIR$/PermissionsAssistant.iml" filepath="$PROJECT_DIR$/PermissionsAssistant.iml" />
      <module fileurl="file://$PROJECT_DIR$/app/app.iml" filepath="$PROJECT_DIR$/app/app.iml" />
      <module fileurl="file://$PROJECT_DIR$/permissionhelper/permissionhelper.iml" filepath="$PROJECT_DIR$/permissionhelper/permissionhelper.iml" />
    </modules>
  </component>
</project>


Established in the year 2013 with the intent of raising qualified Mechatronics Engineers who can make substantial contribution to the field of Mechanical, Electrical and Electronics Engineering.
Alumni strength of more than 45 and they are working in reputed Organizations.
Publications in many National and International Journals.
Specially designed Professional Development Courses with support of experts.
Various clubs such are actively functioning to impart specialized knowledge and skills to the students in various domains.
To impart high quality education with ethical principles and prepare young engineers with competency for achieving excellence in their professional career in research and Industry.
To create state of the art infrastructure enabling a conducive atmosphere for learning.
To develop skills that are useful for industry by conducting training programs.
To focus and carryout research and development activities.
To design and develop the fundamental concepts of Mechanical, Electronics and Electrical Engineering subjects to meet the worldwide engineering challenges.
Apply the engineering information to carry out investigation of complex engineering problem related to instrumentation, control, automation and robotics to provide solutions.
A capability to change for new budding technologies through life-long learning process.
PEO1: Inculcate Knowledge in Basic Engineering Sciences and Fundamentals of Mechanical, Electronics and Electrical Engineering.
PEO2: Create ability to Design, Develop Product and applications in the field of Automation and Mechatronics.
PEO3: Prepare Graduates to be valuable Engineers with excellent logical and Problem solving skills in a multidisciplinary environment.
Individual and team work:: Function effectively as an individual, and as a member or leader in diverse teams, and in multidisciplinary settings.
4 Dr.M.Vairavel Teja Tech Automation Pvt. Ltd.
Two faculty members are pursuing Ph.D.
NPTEL Local Chapter is established for students and faculty members appearing for NPTEL courses online examinations.
One of the students passed in international level certification for Japanese Language (Level N5).
Our students have attended many events in other institutions and won several prizes.
Faculty members are members of ISTE.
Our Students have undergone in-plant training at various industries.
All the students are undergoing skill development programmes like soft skills, communication skills, aptitude and logical reasoning, group discussions and technical interview skills.


text:
dunstable town Official website
Battle of the Towns.
Dunstable Town 0-3 Leighton Town 28th December 2019 Written by Patrick MacKay and pictures by Liam Smith. The final game of 2019 saw visiting neighbours Leighton Town put three goals past Dunstable Town, on an afternoon that cast out any remaining Christmas cheer for the home side. Dunstable looked lively in the early stages, particularly (and unsurprisingly) Joe Hankins, and produced two chances via free kicks. The first of these was hit by Khy Smith-Reid, and Leighton Town goalkeeper Brad Kirkwood did well to hold onto the ball, with a number of attacking Blues following in, in the hope of putting away any spills. The visitors took control of the game after taking a while to settle, and after a dubious refereeing decision presented them with a free kick in dangerous territory, their first chance was headed over the bar, quickly followed by a dinked cross-cum-shot which, though wide of the target, had Dunstable hearts in mouths. The pressure mounted from the away side with Alfie Osborne curling an effort onto the crossbar before the Blues produced a fast-paced intricate counter attack which ended with Hankins losing his footing and being dispossessed. Ten minutes before half-time, the away team broke the deadlock when returning goalkeeper Mackenzie Taylor miskicked from a backpass, allowing free-scoring Danny Webb an open goal to aim at. The lead was almost doubled shortly afterwards when Ben Pattie was on the receiving end of a cross to the back post, which he controlled before turning well and striking over. Eric Ameyaw came on as a substitute before half-time, replacing injured captain Seb Smith, with Joe Hankins taking the armband for the remainder of the game. It was Hankins who came close to an equaliser just before the break, as his thirty-yard free kick was tipped over the bar by Kirkwood. Dunstable started the second half strongly, but there were chances at either end. Taylor did well to deny Danny Webb's volley before Dunstable's Harry Shepherd broke at speed, and managing to hold defenders at bay in a foot-race over half the pitch, saw his eventual shot tipped round the post by the outstretched arm of Kirkwood. Leighton's James Towell was next to work Taylor, with a fizzing effort from distance, which the young goalkeeper got his fingertips to. With just under twenty minutes to play, and Dunstable still asking questions in their search for a leveller, a Danny Blackman corner was headed on to Hankins, who was taken down. Blackman stepped up to take the spot-kick, but his fierce shot was pushed over the bar by the impressive Kirkwood. Eleven minutes from time, the away side managed to get some breathing space, when the Dunstable defence allowed the attacker too much time and space, and his eventual cross evaded Taylor before being touched in at the far post by Archie McClelland. Two minutes later, the game was put beyond doubt with a very similar goal, this time finished by Sonny Newbury-Barr, to stretch Leighton Town's unbeaten run to thirteen games.
Dunstable Town Football Club is a members owned football club that is run by the Club Committee
through its annually elected Club Officers, constituting the Chairperson, Treasurer and Secretary.