text:
News > Mexico
Mexico: Tropical Storm Nicholas to Bring Heavy Rains, Floods
Mexico Tropical Storm Nicholas: CONAGUA warned of the effects of tropical storm Nicholas, which will leave heavy rains across northeastern Mexico. | Photo: Twitter @DDMexico
Along its path, it will cause heavy rains with possible landslides, floods, causing that rivers and streams to overflow, in addition to strong winds and waves from two to three meters high on the coasts of Tabasco, Veracruz and Tamaulipas.
Another Tropical Storm, named Nicholas, that has just formed in the Gulf of Mexico, 285 km north-northeast of the port of Veracruz, will affect the country, the National Water Commission (CONAGUA) confirmed on Monday.
Tropical Storm Nora Kills One, Over Five Missings in Mexico
However, the havoc will not be as strong as occurred with Hurricanes Grace, Nora and Ida, Mexico's Civil Protection Coordination informed, although its trajectory will be monitored and watched.
CONAGUA warned that Nicholas will cause heavy rainfall in the Gulf of Mexico region, particularly in the states of Tabasco, Veracruz and southern Tamaulipas. The storm has been affecting these areas since Sunday evening, accompanied by winds of 65 kilometers per hour, while it is moving northwest at 20 kilometers per hour.
The midday view of the Gulf of Mexico shows that TS Nicholas dominates the western Gulf. Texas coastal radars indicate that most of the storm's rainfall is in the northeast quadrant of the storm. Heavy rains are likely over parts of Texas and Louisiana as the storm makes landfall pic.twitter.com/lqLqqpxQ7t
— John Collins (@collinsvoxwx) September 13, 2021
Alejandra Margarita Mendez, coordinator of the National Meteorological Service (SMN, in Spanish), said that the center of the tropical storm has approached Tamaulipas coast since early Monday.
Along its path, it will cause heavy rains with possible landslides, floods, causing that rivers and streams overflow, in addition to strong winds and waves from two to three meters high on the coasts of Tabasco, Veracruz, and Tamaulipas.
CONAGUA informed that another low-pressure system is moving off the coasts of the states of Oaxaca and Guerrero, in front of the Pacific Ocean, with heavy to torrential rains, possible landslides and strong waves.
Mexico Gulf of Mexico CONAGUA Tropical Storm Nicholas
by teleSUR/capc-MS
Olaf Hurricane Hits Mexico
Mexico: Severe Flooding Persists, State of Emergency Called For
Mexico: Grace Caused 9 Victims and Important Economic Damages
7,1 Magnitude Earthquake Shooks Six Mexican Cities

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Timothy McKenzie, dit Labrinth, né le  à Londres dans le quartier de Hackney, est un auteur-compositeur-interprète, musicien et producteur britannique.

Biographie

Il est produit par Syco Music, le label de Simon Cowell. Initialement, il pensait y travailler en tant que producteur, mais Cowell décida de le signer comme artiste solo.

Labrinth fait ses débuts dans les charts britanniques en , en collaborant avec le rappeur britannique Tinie Tempah sur Pass Out. Ce titre atteint la première place . Son premier single solo, Let The Sun Shine, sort en  et atteint la  des charts . Son premier album Electronic Earth sort le , après avoir été précédé par le single Earthquake avec Tinie Tempah et Last Time, qui atteignent respectivement la  et la  du classement .

Il enregistre également des singles avec The Weeknd et Kygo.

En 2018, une collaboration avec Diplo et Sia est formée. Ce groupe nommé LSD (pour Labrinth, Sia et Diplo) connaît ses prémices lors d'une collaboration entre Labrinth et la chanteuse pop, Sia, sur la bande-originale du film Wonder Woman. Le groupe sort quatre singles depuis l'été 2018, Genius, Audio, Thunderclouds et Mountains.

En 2019, il compose la bande originale de la série Euphoria diffusée sur HBO.

Discographie

Albums studio

Solo
 2012 : Electronic Earth
 2019 : Imagination & The Misfit Kid
 2023 : Ends & Begins

Avec LSD
 2019 : Labrinth, Sia & Diplo Present... LSD
 2021 : Fully Strapped

Bande originale

Série télévisée
2019 : Euphoria (Original Score From The HBO Series)
2021: Malcolm & Marie

Singles
 2010 : Let The Sun Shine
 2011 : Earthquake (featuring Tinie Tempah)
 2012 : Last Time
 2012 : Express Yourself
 2012 : Treatment
 2012 : Beneath Your Beautiful (featuring Emeli Sandé)
 2014 : Let It Be
 2014 : Jealous
 2017 : Misbehaving
 2018 : Same Team (featuring Stefflon Don)
 2019 : Don't Fence Me In
 2019 : Miracle
 2019 : Mount Everest
 2019 : All For Us (featuring Zendaya)
 2019 : Something's Got To Give
 2019 : Where The Wild Things
 2019 : Like A Movie
 2019 : Oblivion (featuring Sia)
 2020 : Still Don't Know My Name
 2020 :  No Ordinary
 2020 : Ave Maria
 2021 : Titans
 2022 : Yeh I F****n' Dit it (From "Euphoria" An Original HBO Series)
 2022 : I'm Tired (From Euphoria An Original HBO Series)
 2022 : Lift Off

Singles avec LSD
 2018 : Genius
 2018 : Audio
 2018 : Thunderclouds
 2019 : Mountains
 2019 : Genius (Lil Wayne Remix)
 2019 : No New Friends
 2019 : Heaven Can Wait (feat. Sia, Diplo & Labrinth) The Aston Shuffle Remix Singles en collaboration
2010 : Pass Out (Tinie Tempah featuring Labrinth)
2010 : Frisky (Tinie Tempah featuring Labrinth)
2011 : Let It Go (Devlin featuring Labrinth)
2012 : Playing With Fire (Plan B featuring Labrinth)
2013 : Lover Not A Fighter (Tinie Tempah featuring Labrinth)
2015 : Higher (Sigma featuring Labrinth)
2016 : Make Me (Cry) (Noah Cyrus featuring Labrinth)
2017 : To Be Human (Sia featuring Labrinth)
2017 : Pass Out (feat. Labrinth) : Sab-Beatz2018 : Majesty (Nicki Minaj featuring Labrinth)

 Distinction
 Nomination
 Golden Globes 2020 : Meilleure chanson originale pour Spirit (Beyonce, feat. ILYA & Labrinth) Le Roi Lion''

Récompense
 Emmy Awards 2020 : Meilleures musiques et paroles pour "All For Us" par Labrinth

Références

Liens externes

Naissance en mars 1989
Naissance à Londres
Producteur britannique de musique
Auteur-compositeur britannique
Chanteur anglais
Nom de scène
Artiste de RCA Records
Artiste de Syco Music

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Q: Improvement in the below mysql query SELECT * FROM *****
WHERE ((first_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB( '2015-07-28' , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND '2015-07-28')
      or (last_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB( '2015-07-28' , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND '2015-07-28'))

In the above query I don't want to type the date (2015-07-28) again and again Can I use a variable and assign that variable a value
day = '2015-07-28';
SELECT * FROM *****
WHERE ((first_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB(day , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND day)
      or (last_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB( day , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND day))

A: This can be done in MySQL with a user-defined variable:
SET @day = '2015-07-28';

SELECT * FROM *****
WHERE ((first_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB( @day , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND @day)
  or (last_appeared_on BETWEEN DATE_SUB( @day , INTERVAL 1 DAY ) AND @day));

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Joey Zocco talks with Ricky Funaro about the first week of the NBA season as they both make their Conference Finals picks and name an NBA Champion.
This entry was posted in Podcasts and tagged Conference Finals, Joey Zocco, NBA, NBA Champ, NBA Champion, NBA Predictions, Podcast, Ricky Funaro, ZML, ZML Podcast, Zocco's Modern Life. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
Solomon Burke Quotes
We've lost a giant, we've lost a legend, we've lost a man who created his own charisma and made it work around the world. It's just hard for me to really grasp that Wilson is already travelling towards the greater place.
Quotes by author Solomon Burke
Diamond In Your Mind.
The difference is I get a chance to say hello instead of goodbye, ... I get a chance to say it's so good to know we're still here with an opportunity to make it better, somehow, some way, for somebody besides ourselves. And how important it is to realize that we're not alone.
Take the Hank Williams' song
Make Do With What You Got
Don't you see the resentment that he's carrying, the pain that he's carrying? He gets into these problems and situations. It hurts me so bad when he has these problems, because I know there's an inner hurt there.
I'm still amazed people remembered and didn't give up on me.
As you grow older, you learn to understand life a little better.
I didn't need to borrow money from the record company, because if I had my own publishing company, and I had my own writers, I'd have enough to get and do whatever I wanted to do.
We were using the record as a tool to invest money into real estate all through the South, because we were living in an era where the South was changing.
We had some problems - my children were kidnapped during that time, and it just changed my whole way of thinking, from being in show business and everything else.
businessthetimestime
Leonard Chess passed, and that was the end of the Chess label for that time.
theendthetimestime
That was my choice at that time, and I still say Nixon was a great president. A very beautiful and wise man.
choicemanthetimestime
The deals that were made for Black artists at that time were not the deals that were made for white artists.
thetimestime
The secret was to just be cool, stay in God's graces, and work it out.
gracework
Solomon Burke on other topics
Solomon Burke Quotes on thetimes
Solomon Burke Quotes on time
Joel Salatin
Donna Rice
David R. Ellis
William Tyndale
Leon Kass
Minna Antrim
Steve Kerr


As we discussed in chapter 1, some scientists believe that it is important not to think about the movement while executing it (e.g., Masters, 1992; Maxwell, Masters, & Eves, 2000; Singer, 1985, 1988). For example, Singer suggested that the performer go though the motion mentally before actually performing the movement (step 2 of his Five-Step Approach). Subsequently, the performer is supposed to direct attention to an external cue in order to block out other thoughts; and during movement execution, the performer is instructed not to think about anything. Masters (1992) contends that conscious thought processes should be avoided altogether. Therefore, learners should be given as little instruction as possible. Otherwise, they may try to apply this knowledge and adopt a conscious mode of control, which is assumed to interfere with the automatic execution of the movement. For this reason, in their studies Masters and colleagues often have learners perform secondary tasks, such as random letter generation or tone counting, while practicing a motor skill (e.g., Masters, 1992; Maxwell, Masters, & Eves, 2000). This way, rules or explicit knowledge regarding the skill—which learners might develop if they were not distracted—is supposed to be reduced to a minimum.
Is it possible that the main advantage of adopting an external focus is that attention is not directed to the actual movement? In other words, is the only function of focusing on the movement effect that it blocks out other thoughts, or that it prevents individuals from gaining explicit knowledge about the movement? If this were the case, preventing learners from focusing on their movements by having them perform an attention-demanding secondary task might be just as effective as instructing them to focus on the movement effect. Yet, if there is an advantage to focusing on the movement effect, relative to focusing on another task, the former condition should lead to more effective learning.
Nancy McNevin and I examined this question (Wulf & McNevin, 2003) in a study in which we had participants learn the stabilometer task. One of the practice conditions was designed to prevent learners from focusing on their actions. In this condition, participants were required to continuously shadow, that is, repeat out loud, a story presented to them via a tape recorder while they were balancing on the stabilometer. Shadowing is a rather demanding task, so participants were not able to devote a great deal of attention, if any, to the balance task. We compared the effectiveness of the shadowing condition to that of external and internal focus conditions similar to those used in our previous studies. In the external focus group, participants were instructed to focus on keeping markers on the stabilometer platform horizontal, whereas in the internal focus group they were instructed to focus on keeping their feet horizontal. In addition, we included a control group without any attentional focus instructions.
The results are shown in figure 4.1. A couple of things are noteworthy here. First, the external focus condition was more effective than the shadowing condition. This was the case not only for performance during practice, when one might expect the secondary task requirement to degrade balance performance. Rather, the shadowing group was also less effective than the external focus group during retention, when the shadowing task was removed. This suggests that there were no "hidden" learning advantages of having to perform a distracting task. These results indicate that there is, in fact, an advantage to focusing on the movement effect. Simply "distracting" learners was not enough. Second, the external focus advantage was seen not only in relation to the shadowing group, but also in relation to the internal focus and control groups. As you can see from figure 4.1, there was no difference between the internal focus and control groups in the retention test. This finding is similar to the results of the ski simulator experiment discussed earlier (Wulf, Hö, & Prinz, 1998, Experiment 2). Those findings showed that instructions referring to the actual body movements are rather ineffective—in fact, no more effective than no instructions at all. The important point is that distracting learners from the motor task to be learned was not very effective. Even though it was not detrimental, it clearly didn't benefit learning. In contrast, having learners focus on the movement effect did.


text:
Very regularly, you hear self-proclaimed AI expert make statements like "within 5 years, we will have…" followed by an indication of a technology which requires semi-intelligent processing (like self-driving cars, computer-authored novels, or brain-computer uploading). This is how one should translate such statements:
If AI experts say:
"within 5 years": they mean "we already have this technology, it is just not widespread yet."
"within 10 years": they mean "we do not have this technology yet, but we know how to solve the problems that still need solving."
"within 25 years": they mean "we need to overcome numerous problems to get this technology and we do not know if they are solvable at all, but we are convinced that theoretically these problems should be solvable by the very smart young people that are currently entering the field."
"within 50 years": they mean "maybe this technology will be developed and maybe not, and even if it will be, it may take 50 years, or 500, or 5000, and humanity is likely to have destroyed itself before that time, but making these promises will get me a lot of media attention so I make them anyway, and 50 years is long enough for me to have passed away before anyone can tell me that I am wrong."
The moral of the story is: most self-proclaimed AI experts love to make promises about technology which will be developed, but the less we know about how to solve the problems associated with said technology, the further in the future they will place the technology. You should realize that if a problem has not been solved yet, in principle it is impossible to say when it will be solved — because you can only say that when the problem has been solved already.
Leave a Comment »	| Artificial Intelligence, General, Science	| Permalink
Posted by pspronck
Diversity IX: Google's wage discrimination
Last year, Google was accused by the US Department of Labor of discriminating against female employees as far as salaries are concerned. This is surprising, as Google is known for being a company which is overtly committed to, what they call, "equal pay practices." It is also striking that the accusation came without any supporting data.
Eileen Naughton, Vice President of People Operations, wrote a memo explaining how Google determines wages. In general, this is how it works:
First, they determine what the compensation should be for a person at a certain job level, with a certain role, at a certain location, with a certain job performance. That determines the basic compensation for a person in a certain job category. The salary can be adjusted a bit by an employee's manager, provided that the manager can provide a legitimate rationale. This procedure is blind with respect to gender.
Then, for every job category they compare the average of the compensation of men and women. If they find that there are statistically significant differences between the genders, they adjust the compensation at a group level, regardless whether this favors men or women. As Naughton states, they tend not to find any gender pay gap, so in practice such adjustments need not be made. They also do a similar comparison based on race, and no race pay gap is found either. (I do wonder why they do not also do an analysis for nationality, age, physical ability, level of education, height, and other attributes that are said to influence salary, but perhaps they get to those in the future.)
Overall, I do not fault Google for doing such an analysis. As a high-profile tech company, they tend to bear the brunt of the accusations regarding sex and race discrimination, and it is only wise that they have their defenses in order. It just gives me an uneasy feeling that the last step of their comparison methodology, adjusting salary based on which group one belongs to, is rather discriminating.
Considering how they set up their compensation plan, where they determine objectively what a person should earn with a certain job level, role, location, and performance, regardless of race, gender, or other personal attributes, there cannot be differences between the sexes by definition. So it is no wonder that their comparison procedure never finds them. The whole comparison feels completely superfluous.
The problem is what happens when their procedure does find some differences. Where did these come from? Evidently these point out that either an error was made somewhere in the original determination of earnings, or that the individual adjustments that managers make — with legitimate rationales, mind you — end up rewarding on average one gender a bit more than the other. If this then leads to an increase of the salaries of one gender, that amounts to gender discrimination.
For suppose you are a woman who does a good job but not so exceptional that her manager proposes to give her a slightly higher reward, and you are surrounded by women who do get their salaries positively adjusted. If this then leads to an average difference between the salaries of the sexes, you will see all the men who perform exactly like you getting their salaries increased, while yours stays the same. Basically, you are punished because some other members of "your group" perform exceptionally well.
In my view, Google's initial determination of earnings, based purely on what an individual does within the company, with some individual adjustments possible for exceptional performance, is the ultimate meritocratic way of rewarding employees. Doing a check at a group level, partly to ward off accusations and partly to see if the system works as intended, is only smart. Incorporating a step that bluntly adjusts salaries at a group level if the check points out that there are significant differences between certain groups, rather than finding out how these differences came about, is just discriminatory.
Leave a Comment »	| Diversity, General	| Permalink
Diversity VII: Red vs. green
In discussing the wage gap (the average difference in per-hour earnings of men and women), the main statement I see being brought up is "The fact that on average women earn less than men per hour is unfair towards women." The general rebuttal is: "You have to look at the underlying reasons for that difference," to which the response is: "You can talk about underlying reasons until you are blue in the mouth, but at the end of the day women earn less than men, which is unfair."
The wage gap appears to be not unfair, however. It is the result of individual decisions which people make. The correct characterization of the wage gap is not "women earn less than men," but "people who make choices A, B, and C earn less than people who make choices D, E, and F." Because on average women tend to make life choices which give them less earning potential than men, on average women earn less than men — however, on an individual basis a woman who makes particular choices earns just as much as a man who makes the same choices (actually, there are indications that at present, especially in the younger generations, women earn a bit more than men with the same choices).
You do not have to believe me in this respect: you just have to study the reports of the official institutions which examine the differences between men and women in the job market, such as the reports of the Dutch Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) and the United States Department of Labor, which point out that there are many clear reasons for the observed average differences in earnings, but that gender discrimination, if it even is one of them, has an unnoticeable effect. Thus, since it is not gender discrimination at work, the wage gap is not unfair.
Because all of this is rather abstract, I thought I would illustrate it with a highly simplified example. Imagine that there is a country called Bicoloria, where there live red and green people. There are only two industries in Bicoloria, which are of about equal size, namely a food industry which feeds the Bicolorians, and an art industry which provides the Bicolorians with entertainment. All Bicolorians work in one of these industries. The food industry, which has fairly unpleasant work circumstances, pays 200 credits per hour. The art industry, in which the work is much more pleasant, pays 150 credits per hour. The majority of red Bicolorians prefers the pleasant, artistic work in the art industry, while the majority of green Bicolorians is more interested in getting the high wages (and thus status) of the food industry. The net result is that 70% of the workers in the food industry are green, while 70% of the workers in the art industry are red.
Someone calculates that on average, a green Bicolorian earns 12% more than a red Bicolorian. "That's unfair towards red Bicolorians!" is the outcry. Red Bicolorians say: "It is systemic oppression of the reds by the greens!" and "How are we going to explain to young reds that over the course of their lives they will earn significantly less than greens?" But is this 12% difference in earnings really unfair? Because reds have a preference for jobs that pay less per hour, and choose jobs that they prefer, on average they earn less per hour. However, an individual red who decides to work in the food industry, earns just as much as an individual green who works in the food industry.
Moreover, what would be the effect of trying to solve this illusion of injustice? I have heard several possibilities, all of which have very negative consequences. Here are three ideas (each of which I have derived from actual discussions on the wage gap, and some of which have been implemented by particular governments and industries):
Idea #1: Increase the salaries of all reds by 12%. While this will make sure that the average salaries of reds and greens are equal, in every industry reds will earn 12% more than greens for doing exactly the same work. That is unfair.
Idea #2: Stimulate reds to work more in the food industry, and greens to work more in the art industry. This can be implemented using social engineering programs, which try to push people in particular directions. Many of such programs have been tried out in Western countries (e.g., stimulating men to take part-time jobs, and stimulating women to go into STEM fields). If these programs have the desired effect, they will indeed erase the wage gap. However, in general, it is found that the effect of such programs is negligible, as long as people are still allowed to follow their own preferences. Naturally, they can be made more effective by actually forcing people in different fields than they prefer, which leads to an overall significant decrease in happiness. I assume that nobody thinks that a good policy encompasses giving up freedom of choice.
Idea #3: Equalize pay between jobs, i.e., let both the food industry and the art industry pay 175 credits per hour. Overall, the same amount will be spent on salaries, thus this can be implemented with higher taxation on food and giving subsidies to the art industry. Again, the initial result will be that the wage gap between reds and greens will be eradicated. This is a typical socialist or communist system, in which there is no link anymore between what you do and what you earn. The natural follow-up will be that most people will no longer want to work in the unpleasant food industry, as the higher salaries of the food industry were the compensation for the work being less pleasant. The net result, which is common to any socialist or communist system, is that people can no longer be free to take a job of their choosing, and that most people will not be motivated to do a good job anyway (as you do not get rewarded for doing a good job), leading to poverty, unhappiness, hunger, and corruption.
In summary, "solutions" to the wage gap either unfairly give bonuses to individuals of particular groups just because they belong to those groups, or take away freedom of choice. Both these directions are infringing upon the core Western values of equal treatment of all people and individual freedom for all people.
The wage gap is the result of a system which allows individuals, with their individual differences, to follow their own preferences in making life choices. It does not affect individuals; it is no more than a statistic which you can attach to a group. It is the necessary consequence of there being differences between preferences of the sexes in general and a beautiful system which honors individuality.
Surface Pro 3 hotness
So, my Microsoft Surface Pro 3 died. It would not start up again. I tried the Microsoft solutions, which were the following four possibilities: (1) Press the Power button. (2) Press the Power button for 30 seconds then press it for 2 seconds. (3) Press the Power button together with the Volume Up button for 15 seconds. (4) Send your Surface Pro 3 away for repair.
Nothing worked, apart from maybe the Repair option, but as the price for repairing is about the same as for a completely new Surface, I did not want to go for that option — in particular as I had backups of everything apart from the last three days or so.
For half a day, I regularly pressed the Power button for shorter and longer times, and googled for diverse terms that were about dead Surfaces. After a while I hit a particular discussion thread. It first seemed to consist of a bunch of jokers, but since my Surface was a brick anyway, I put it, as recommended, into the freezer for half an hour, then thawed it, and tried again. That did not work.
Before putting it into the freezer once more, I followed a different recommendation, which was to heat the Surface from the back with a hair dryer for a couple of minutes. Without an expectations I did that, and lo-and-behold: after two minutes of "drying" the Surface suddenly booted up again! Its backside, at the time, was clearly heated, but not extensively so. It cooled off in a minute or 2 to room temperature. The fan did not even need to go into overdrive.
I immediately made backups of my latest files, because I don't trust that it will remain working — if it does, fine, but I am going to order a new one soon.
I know this is not much of a story, but I wanted to put it up just in case someone has the same problem and is willing to try anything. The Surface is a lovely machine, but the fact that it is almost impossible to repair, and the fact that if it dies you lose all the contents, makes it a bit of a risk to use.
Be careful if you try this — make sure in particular that the thing is really dead –, but it might be a way out should you get into similar troubles. And remember: nothing beats regular backups.
Leave a Comment »	| General	| Permalink
Diversity interlude
I don't know if I am yet done with the topic of diversity. The discussions about diversity are currently rather intense, and I feel I still have to say quite a bit about it. In general, I have noticed that my position is that diversity is based for at least a considerable part in biology, while those who are on the side of social engineering are of the opinion that it is all culturally determined. In that respect, I discovered a fascinating series of documentaries by the Norse comedian and sociologist Harald Eia, called "Hjernevask". I haven't yet completed watching them, but up to now I am pretty surprised about some of his discoveries. The two things that stand out to me are: (1) the role of biology in determining differences between genders and races is much bigger than I had previously assumed, and (2) evidently in "enlightened" western countries such as Norway the thought that differences can be the result of biology is actively shunned even by people whose job it is to know better. Heartily recommended.
Leave a Comment »	| Diversity, General, News, Science	| Permalink
Diversity III: Diverse equalities
This post is a follow-up to my post on the wage gap, and my post on the glass ceiling. In these posts I showed that there is no reason to assume that gender discrimination is at work in determining the salaries or promotion chances of women.
In The Netherlands, "equality" is generally seen as an ultimate good. Which is why underrepresentation of women and minorities in professions and organizations is often seen as inherently wrong. Certain political movements have made fighting inequality into a main feature of their program. For instance, minister Jet Bussemaker is quite miffed about the fact that only 18% of full professors in The Netherlands are female, and she therefore forces universities to appoint more women to such positions. For 100 new female full professors she makes extra money available for the next five years, and on top of that she also wants universities to put women on 200 chairs that are currently held by men.
Basically, this means that Bussemaker wants to change the top selection criterion for appointing someone to the position of full professor from "we want the best person for the job" to "we want someone who has no Y-chromosome."
For me, a major question is why she (and with her many others, such as professor Derks) believes that the underrepresentation of women in this area is the result of "inequality." The straightforward line of thinking that is commonly held, is that 50% of society consists of women, and thus, if women were treated equal to men, 50% of full professors would be women. Naturally, such a thought process is too simplistic. It is a silly notion to divide Dutch citizens according to particular criteria such as gender, immigration status, age, sexual orientation, or physical attributes, and then expect that the percentages you end up with are reflected by a certain profession. As I showed in the previous two posts, if you take into account unequal participation in the job market, the 18% female full professors that we have now are close to what you may expect if men and women have equal opportunities (assuming that in academics the statistics for job participation are about average for The Netherlands).
The point is that what minister Bussemaker and others like her want to see are not equal opportunities, but equal outcomes. What they fail to acknowledge is that if you confront 100 men and 100 women who already hold a good job with the prospect of another job with more status, offset by a greater workload and higher responsibility, 80 of the 100 men will accept that job, while 80 of the 100 women will walk away. In our society where people are given a lot of freedom of choice, women tend to make different choices than men, and thus equal opportunities do not lead to equal outcomes.
Assuming that minister Bussemaker does not want to take away freedom of choice, there are only two ways open to get a higher percentage of female professors: either making men less ambitious, or lowering the requirements for women (and only for women) to get the job. I have no idea how you would accomplish the first, so I am not surprised that she chose the latter.
Yes, I know that there are female associate professors who are ready to become full professors. But there are far more male associate professors with the same ambition. In an equal-opportunities environment, which we have now, you end up with more men being appointed than women, because with the same quality there are more men than women available for the job. When I say that Bussemaker lowers the requirements for women to become professors, I am not saying that that puts universities in a position where they are forced to promote female associate professors who are not ready to become full professors — I am only saying that these women no longer have to compete on a level playing field with men. It is possible for them to do a worse job than some men would do, and still be chosen for promotion over those men.
Professor Derks states that women do not want to adapt to the standards set by men. I assume that she means that many women want to be full professors in a part-time job with a nice balance between their work and home life. This sounds a lot like having your cake and eating it too. In practice, as with most high-demand jobs, being a full professor entails sacrificing much of your home life for your work. It is really a tough job. Maybe that is a standard set by men, but it means that if, as a woman, in an equal-opportunities environment you want to compete with men, you have to meet that standard. By replacing the equal-opportunities environment with an equal-outcomes environment, women can get away with doing a worse job than men.
In sports, women usually do not compete with men, as men tend to be physically stronger and faster. Consequently, female sports are seen as inferior to male sports. By creating a special academic division for women to compete in, where standards are lowered, you create a situation in which female academic achievements are seen as inferior to male academic achievements. If I were a female professor today, who clearly got the job because she competed successfully on a level playing field with men, I would not be happy about that.
The 100 extra positions that Bussemaker creates are filled by women only, which leads to a situation where some top-quality men see full professorships going to women who, even if they do a good job, do a worse job than these men would do. And if the rest of Bussemaker's plans get executed, they know that their chances to ever be promoted are diminishing rapidly, as they have to compete for a decreasing number of positions. If I was a young man who was contemplating a career in academics today, considering the unequal treatment of men and women and the lowered career prospects, I would probably choose a job outside the academic world, regardless of how much I love scientific research. All in all, the policies of Bussemaker may do serious harm to the quality of Dutch academics.
In conclusion, the belief that forcing universities to appoint more female professors will resolve some sort of societal injustice is misguided. In fact, it creates a societal injustice by lowering the standards that women need to meet to become full professors, while increasing them for men.
I wish to point out that there is another solution for the problem that certain female associate professors are not getting promoted, even though they are ready for it. That solution is to make the promotion to full professor an automated process when you meet certain criteria. This is the case in many countries outside The Netherlands, such as the UK. If you do the work, you get the position. I am in high favor of that.
Making the promotion to full professor based on individual accomplishments rather than the academic structure with only a limited number of available chairs, has the added benefit that there will be more full professorships in The Netherlands, and thus the requirements for the job may be slightly lowered for men as well as women.
2 Comments	| Diversity, General, News, Science	| Permalink
Diversity II: Diverse choices
This post continues my previous post on the topic of diversity, in which I discussed the first part of the sentence "Women still earn less and are slower to be promoted" (lifted from an article in De Volkskrant). In the present post, I delve into the second part. Is it true that women are slower to be promoted, and if so, is that (as is often suggested) the result of gender discrimination?
What I assume the author is referring to with the second part of their statement is the fact that the representation of women in higher positions in companies and organizations is considerably less than the representation of men. In the academic world in the Netherlands, for instance, only 18% of full professorships are held by women.
There is no debate about the fact that women are underrepresented in higher positions. What is up for debate is whether this is the result of gender discrimination. Despite the often-expressed but seldom-substantiated notion of some sort of "glass ceiling" that keeps women down, I would argue that the state of affairs is mostly the result of personal choices.
In The Netherlands, almost every job can be done part-time. In practice, we find that men usually take full-time jobs, while women predominantly choose to work part-time. According to the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics (CBS), in The Netherlands in 2017, only 33% of working men held a part-time job, compared to 78% of working women. The ministry of OCW (Education, Culture, and Science) reports that, on average, women have a work-week of 25 hours, while men have a work-week of 36 hours, i.e., on average women work 1.5 days less per week than men. It also reports that only 71% of women between 20 and 65 years of age have a job, as opposed to over 82% of men.
Referring to statements of professor Derks in the interview I mentioned above, working part-time has a big influence on career opportunities — thus, if you are interested in having a career, you should realize that working full-time is more or less a necessity. The detrimental effects of working part-time are two-fold:
First, when working part-time you simply accomplish less in your career in the same number of years than someone with the same abilities who works full-time. This leads to a lower status among peers, and a less impressive CV.
Second, professing the desire to work part-time shows a lack of ambition and motivation, which consequently leads to a reduced willingness of an employer to hand out a promotion.
The second effect is in line with differences between the average man and the average woman in how they view work (see, for instance, the report from Monsterboard). Typically, men are more driven by status than women: men far more than women seek a higher salary, possibilities for personal growth and development, independence, and responsibility; women far more than men seek possibilities to work part-time, possibilities to work from home, and a nice balance between work and home life. You may translate that as "on average, women are less invested in their work than men." That cannot help in having a career. The employer who says: "What I really want from my personnel is that they focus on their home life" has not been born yet.
Note that by no means I am saying that all women lack the motivational drive, the capacity, the experience, and the willingness to have a career. Obviously a considerable number possess these attributes, which is why we see such women in higher positions. They made the choice to invest in their work rather than their personal life, just like many men do.
It is a great benefit of our society that one can actually choose how to balance work and home life. But when someone chooses to be less invested in work, he or she should expect having a hard time getting into higher positions. That holds for women as well as for men. Since, in general, women tend to be much less invested in work than men, it is not surprising that in higher positions, the number of women dwindles. Whether or not the prevalence of women in part-time jobs fully explains the low number of women in higher positions is unknown. Saying that it is the result of gender discrimination, however, is unwarranted.
The only extensive scientific research on the topic that I could find is an article by Williams and Ceci of Cornell University in PNAS, who found that for tenured assistant-professor positions in biology, engineering, economics, and psychology in the US, if you compare female candidates with male candidates of equal quality and matching lifestyles, the chance for female candidates to be hired is twice as high as the chance for male candidates. The conclusion is that gender discrimination is at work here, but it is to the considerable advantage of women.
I wish to finalize this discussion with a simple calculation. Knowing that 82% of men have a job against 71% of women, and that 67% of working men have a full-time job against 22% of women, if we assume that there are about the same number of men and women between the ages of 20 and 65, that means that 78% of the people who work full-time are men, against only 22% women. If we compare that 22% with the 18% of women with full professorships in The Netherlands, it strikes me that these numbers are pretty close. So, while 18% sounds low, it is actually close to what you can expect if you take into account the generally accepted assumption that working full-time is a requirement for getting a high-end job.
In summary, there is no reason to assume that the underrepresentation of women in higher positions in companies and organizations is the result of gender discrimination. Still, there are political forces at work that try to enforce placing more women in higher positions. These forces are particularly strong in the academic world, where universities are ordered by ruling politicians to appoint more women as full professors. What I think about those forces I will discuss in a follow-up post.
Diversity I: Diverse wages
The term "diversity" refers to the uniqueness of individuals. In policy making, the theme of "diversity" refers to the inclusion of underrepresented groups of people in particular functions or domains.
In recent years, the theme of "diversity" has infiltrated many aspects of society, and now has serious impact on policies in governmental matters and professional life. I am quite wary about the effects of the diversity discussions. It is such a complex theme, however, that it is hard to formulate statements on it, without running serious risks of finding oneself under a bombardment of accusations of being some kind of –ist or –phobe, which then puts an end to any chance of getting into a civil parlay.
I think that the discussions around this theme, now they are widely politicalized, will only intensify in the coming years. As a scientist, I have the responsibility to deal with these matters as objectively as possible. As I am increasingly involved in policy making and providing advice in matters of policy, it is important to me to be able to express opinions in this domain that are as close as possible to the truth, without letting emotions and political pressure get in the way.
Today's ranting is instigated by an interview in the Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant with Belle Derks, professor of Social and Organizational Psychology at Utrecht University, specialized in "gender equality." I had many thoughts while reading this interview, and I might get back to it in the coming days. For now, I want to zoom in to the second sentence of the main text of the article, which is "Vrouwen verdienen nog altijd minder en klimmen minder snel op naar hogere functies" ("Women still earn less [than men] and are slower to be promoted"). For clarity, I wish to point out that this is not a statement of professor Derks as far as I can see, but part of the introduction of the journalists.
The quoted sentence is factually correct, but it suggests something that is factually wrong, namely that women get discriminated as far as their wages and promotion opportunities are concerned. With respect to wages, one only needs to read the report of the CBS (the Dutch Central Bureau for Statistics, a governmental organization that prepares reports on all aspects of Dutch social and economic life) on this matter, which is available from their website. This report investigates specifically gender differences in salaries in The Netherlands, and is updated up to the year 2014. In this report one can read the following:
For jobs in companies, the hourly salary of women is about 20% less than that for men. For government jobs, the difference is 10%. However, these numbers are not corrected for differences in actual work, i.e., it just averages the hourly wages of all women that have a job, and all men that have a job, regardless of position, education, or responsibilities. If you correct the differences for about 20 factors, which include age, experience, and position, then the percentages drop to 7% and 5%, respectively.
Does that mean that gender is the explanation for the remaining salary differences? The CBS report states that there is no reason to suppose that gender discrimination is at work here, as there are quite a few factors that can explain the remaining differences, which they were unable to take into account for lack of detailed information. These are, among others, motivation, job level, and secondary employment conditions such as exchanging salary for extra vacation days. As the report states that women are far more likely than men to work part-time, one might expect that in particular women would take the opportunity to sacrifice some salary for extra spare time, though the report does not delve into that.
As there are plenty factors available that may explain the remaining small differences in average wages between men and women, the CBS found no indication that gender discrimination is an explanation for these wage differences. I think that settles the matter.
What I found particularly interesting is that the report also made clear that up to 36 years of age, women actually earn a higher salary than men for doing the same work. However, again this has nothing to do with gender, but with the fact that among younger people, women have, on average, a higher education than men. Between 36 and 45 years of age, there are no significant differences in salaries between men and women. Over 45 years of age, men tend to earn more than women, for which an easy explanation is that in those age groups, men tend to have a higher education and more job experience than women.
How these trends will be extrapolated to the future is hard to say. If many women between 30 and 40 years of age are losing interest in work and accept lower salaries for, for instance, a more extensive home life, the picture might remain as it is now. If women keep focusing just as much as men on their careers and earnings, clearly in about 30 years, women will on average earn more than men in all age groups.
The discussion above has contextualized the first part of the sentence "Women still earn less and are slower to be promoted," and refutes the suggestion that women earn less than men because of gender discrimination. The second part needs another discussion, which I will get to later.
For now, the conclusion is that in The Netherlands a small gender wage gap exists, but that there is no reason to think that the explanation for it has to do with gender discrimination.
Religieuze beperkingen
In de Volkskrant van 25 juli 2016 schrijft Reinout Wibier, hoogleraar Privaatrecht aan dezelfde universiteit als waar ik werk, een opiniestuk getiteld "Atheïsten zijn beperkte mensen." In dit artikel dicht hij religie een charitatieve, inspirerende en troostende rol toe, die (domme) atheïsten niet wensen te zien. Bovendien beweert hij dat atheïsten niet begrijpen dat alle argumenten die je tegen religie kunt aanvoeren net zo goed gebruikt kunnen worden tegen de door atheïsten zo verheerlijkte wetenschap.
Wat mij behoorlijk tegen de haren instrijkt wat betreft de inhoud van dit artikel, is dat het atheïsten argumenten in de mond legt die ikzelf nooit zou gebruiken om mijn atheïstische overtuiging te verdedigen. Het artikel begint als volgt:
"In sommige kringen is het een teken van beschaving en ontwikkeling om praktiserend atheïst te zijn. Religie is een achterhaald concept en de bron van onnodig geweld en leed, zo is de gedachte."
Al bij de tweede zin slaat de heer Wibier de plank mis. Men is geen atheïst omdat religie zoveel kwaad in de wereld plaatst. Wie zich afkeert van georganiseerde religie vanwege het kwaad dat verricht wordt, kan nog steeds een niet-religieus gelovige zijn. Een atheïst gelooft niet in god enkel en alleen omdat er geen objectieve reden is om aan te nemen dat er een god bestaat.
Dat religie vaak gebruikt wordt om kwaad te verrichten, wat de heer Wibier ruimhartig toegeeft, doet niet ter zake. Evenmin is het voor het betoog van belang dat er ook goede daden verricht worden in de naam van religie, noch dat wetenschap voor goed en kwaad kan worden ingezet. Niks van dit alles heeft te maken met of men wel of niet in een god gelooft.
Feitelijk kan ik hier met mijn weerwoord tegen Wibiers artikel stoppen, want het grootste deel ervan gaat om het illustreren van deze tweede zin en vervolgens het deels ontkrachten ervan. Over atheïsme zegt dat echter niks. Maar omdat tussen de regels door Wibier suggereert dat religie meer bijdraagt dan dat het wegneemt, en dat atheïsme, of liever gezegd de wetenschap die hij op een hoop wenst te gooien met atheïsme, het niet beter doet dan religie, wil ik toch nog iets dieper op zijn argumenten ingaan.
Dat atheïsten soms meewarig neerkijken op "domme gelovigen" die blind een religieus leider volgen zal ik niet ontkennen. Als Wibiers betoog meer gericht is op de zelfingenomenheid van sommige mensen die zich atheïst noemen en die daarvoor gebrekkige argumenten in de strijd werpen, dan geef ik hem geen ongelijk, hoewel ik zijn eigen verhaal dan tegen hem moet keren en erop wijzen dat dit soort arrogantie juist bij religieuzen de norm is, zelfs al prediken ze nederigheid.
Ik ontken ook niet dat geloof mensen van steun kan zijn in moeilijke omstandigheden — doch ik wil vraagtekens stellen bij het idee dat dat een terrein is waar religie een soort alleenrecht heeft. Een nog groter vraagteken zet ik bij Wibiers opmerkingen omtrent religieus geïnspireerde goede doelen — alsof religie een noodzakelijk gegeven is om mensen "goed" te laten doen.
Net als Wibier heb ik in principe geen probleem met het al dan niet gelovig zijn van mensen. Geloof is een subjectieve keuze, en zolang het dat blijft, behoort het wat mij betreft tot de onaantastbare individuele vrijheden die een mens heeft.
Ik heb persoonlijk wel moeite met mensen die "goed doen" puur en alleen omdat hun religie dat voorschrijft. Dan ligt mijn sympathie veeleer bij de humanist, die zijn idee over hoe hij moet omgaan met zijn medemensen laat afhangen van zijn eigen moreel besef. Mensen die hun morele inzichten laten bepalen door een religie, meestal vertegenwoordigd door een religieus leider, zouden kennelijk net zo lief kwaad doen als hun religie dat opdraagt. Immers, religie vertegenwoordigt een "waarheid" die niet in twijfel getrokken kan of mag worden.
De essentie van wetenschap is dat er geen ultieme waarheid is, en dat alle stellingen, alle theorieën en alle bevindingen door iedereen betwijfeld kunnen, mogen, en moeten worden. Bij alles wat gesteld wordt, is men geacht te vragen "Is dat wel zo? Hoe weet je dat? Hoe is het getest? Welke voorspellingen kun je ermee doen die, als ze niet uitkomen, het gestelde ontkrachten?" Daaraan dankt de wetenschap haar kracht, en daardoor heeft de wetenschap geleid tot een technologische, geestelijke, maatschappelijke, en ethische vooruitgang waarbij de duizenden jaren stilstand in de tijd dat de religie het voor het zeggen had maar schril afsteken.
Georganiseerde religie kan het goede in mensen naar boven halen, maar ook het kwade. Of het nu een imam is die oproept tot vrede of tot het plegen van aanslagen, of de paus die naastenliefde of homohaat predikt, of een politicus die oproept om vrijwilligerswerk te doen of om immigranten een lesje te leren: eenieder die doet wat een al dan niet religieus leider opdraagt puur en alleen omdat die leider het zegt, is een gevaarlijk en verwerpelijk mens. Het kwalijke van religieuze instellingen is dat dit soort blinde mensen gezien wordt als de meest waardevolle leden van de gemeenschap, terwijl de wetenschap juist de vrijdenkers omarmt.
Wibier besluit met te zeggen:
"Maar wie religie categorisch afwijst als achterhaald of slecht is net zo oppervlakkig, beperkt, en misschien zelfs wel onverdraagzaam als diegenen die wetenschap afdoen als de bron van alle kwaad."
Welnu, collega Wibier: ik wijs religie categorisch af — althans in de vorm dat het van mensen eist dat zij hun denken en moreel besef overdragen aan een instantie, waarvan de leiders uitmaken hoe de mensen moeten handelen. Dat religie een hoop mooie en goede dingen heeft opgeleverd weegt niet op tegen het inherente verlangen van alle religieuze instanties om mensen te bombarderen tot willoze schapen die gedachtenloos de herder volgen. Niet voor niks wordt in de RK Kerk constant gerefereerd aan "de kudde" als men het over de gelovigen heeft.
Ik denk echter dat het "blind achter een leider aanlopen" gelukkig iets is wat niet veel mensen in deze karikaturale vorm doen — althans niet in onze Westerse maatschappij — of ze nu gelovig zijn of niet. Of, met een iets meer cynische blik: ik denk dat blinde volgers van gevaarlijke leiders net zo vaak gevonden worden in de religieuze als in de niet-religieuze hoek.
De verlichte vorm van religie, waarin gelovigen het eigenlijk ook niet allemaal zeker weten, en waarbij ze enigszins lacherig doen over het idee dat er een onfeilbare religieuze leider is die namens god spreekt, is een onschuldige vorm van vermaak die een steunende rol kan vervullen voor hen die er, wellicht wat naïef, gevoelig voor zijn. Maar mijn respect leg ik toch sneller bij bewuste atheïsten, die de argumenten voor het bestaan van god gewogen en te licht bevonden hebben, en die dus met geen mogelijkheid uitkomen onder het nemen van eigen verantwoordelijkheid voor hun daden.
Hoe dit in enig opzicht gezien kan worden als een reden om atheïsten ervan te betichten beperkte mensen te zijn, gaat mijn pet te boven.
Leave a Comment »	| General, News	| Permalink
The digital overlords are here
I read a very nice statement of prof. Pedro Domingos of the University of Washington in the Dutch newspaper NRC of May 4, 2016. In answer to the question "What do you tell people who are afraid that self-learning computers are getting so smart that they will take over the world?" he said: "Computers are stupid and they already took over the world. It would be better if they would be smarter." That's going to be my stock answer to this question from now on.
1 Comment	| Artificial Intelligence, General, News, Science	| Permalink
You are currently browsing the archives for the General category.


Four Reasons Why This Room Works Mix Of Old And New The Two White Barcelona Chairs U0026 Coffee Table Against The Louis Chair, Console Tabl.
Bond Sitting On A Barcelona Chair Right Before M Enters The Apartment. She Will Sit On The Empty Barcelona Chair.
Share This Pinterest Just Decorate!


text:
Growth Stories
Enfectors
About: [email protected]_2o21
Posts by [email protected]_2o21:
Education marketing during a pandemicPosted on October 14, 2021 (October 28, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Positioning Your Brand Story on IG: the Do's, the Don'ts and, the Rest!Posted on September 24, 2021 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Pharma Marketing in 2021Posted on September 14, 2021 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Towards a Regime of ResponsibilityPosted on September 6, 2021 (October 27, 2021) inGeneral
Amazon Brand AnalyticsPosted on July 26, 2021 (February 2, 2022) inMarTech
Monetising pinterestPosted on June 15, 2021 (October 27, 2021) inSocial Media
Celebrating 420, Digital Marketing Style!Posted on April 30, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
The impact of perfect ui/ux on your lead gen campaignPosted on April 29, 2020 (February 2, 2022) inMarTech
Keells, here for you and mePosted on April 22, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
How can your website survive a pandemic traffic attack?Posted on April 6, 2020 (February 2, 2022) inMarTech
HNB FinLit – Novel IdeaPosted on February 26, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inCreative Transformation
ROCELL seasonal campaignsPosted on February 26, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Keells Vine AdPosted on January 24, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inCreative Transformation
War RoomPosted on January 23, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inMarTech
HNB Assurance Supreme Health BenefitPosted on January 23, 2020 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Dev Magic – RTIPosted on December 17, 2019 (October 27, 2021) inMarTech
Design Lab Update – RocellPosted on December 17, 2019 (October 27, 2021) inCreative Transformation
ACCA Escape the challenge – 2019Posted on December 17, 2019 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Dev MagicPosted on September 19, 2019 (October 27, 2021) inMarTech
Design Lab UpdatePosted on September 19, 2019 (October 27, 2021) inCreative Transformation
Evolution of the Account ManagerPosted on July 3, 2018 (October 27, 2021) inGeneral
The first ever budget-botPosted on May 22, 2018 (October 27, 2021) inGeneral
Sri Lanka: The Land of the 'Mobile'Posted on March 6, 2018 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
10 tips for a better agency-client liaisonPosted on April 24, 2017 (October 27, 2021) inTips & Tricks
Critical Point of Traditional Marketing and Digital MarketingPosted on April 24, 2017 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
9 tips on #DigitalTransformationPosted on April 24, 2017 (October 27, 2021) inDigital Marketing
Enfectious
MAS Holdings
Zuellig Pharma
Keells
MillenniumIT ESP
Rocell
Melbourne Polytechnic
651 Kotte Rd, Kotte, Sri Lanka
2023 Enfection | Privacy Policy Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience. Read our Cookie Policy to find out more.
If you wish to disable cookies you can do so from your browser.


text:
← #صح_النوم: استفاقوا بعد غيبوبة ليواكبوا مشروع "العودة" By Marlene Sabeh
LF Letter to Congress: Ill-Founded at Best (By Marlene Sabeh) →
Lebanon's Minister of the Displaced Communicates with Syria for the Repatriation of Refugees: Why Now? By Marlene Sabeh
24 February 2019 Media and Communication Committee (0)
Lebanon's Minister of the Displaced Communicates with Syria for the Repatriation
of Refugees: Why Now?
In an interview conducted by the Middle East Newspaper, Lebanese Forces Party Chief Samir Geagea wondered why "the Free Patriotic Movement ministers and their allies failed to communicate with the Syrian regime during the governments of former Prime Ministers Najib Mikati and Tammam Salam, to secure the return of Syrian refugees", consequently undermining the fact that during PM Mikati's government (2011), the war in Syria was (brutally) raging and more than 70% of Syrian territories were under terrorists' control, making the "return" practically impossible. Nevertheless, the Free Patriotic Movement did much more than other Lebanese parties to control the randomized influx of Syrian refugees by proposing various efficient solutions during PM Salam's government in 2014, some of which were:
· - Completing a comprehensive survey/census of all Syrian displaced and keeping track of their numbers and locations.
· - Enforcing the registration of all Syrians refugees and their families.
· - Granting refugees work permits that can be monitored and revoked as deemed necessary.
· - Registering all Syrian births in the Syrian Embassy in Lebanon.
· - Deporting all habitual offenders and potential criminals.
· - Controlling the borders and preventing mass migrations.
· - Limiting entry to extreme humanitarian cases.
And most important was (and still is) the adamant opposition of Minister of Foreign Affairs Gebran Bassil to the Naturalization Project, despite United Nations Secretary General's 2016 initiative impelling all hosting countries to grant citizenship to Syrian refugees. In addition, Minister Bassil strived to enforce the registration of all Syrian births in refugee camps to avoid cases of undisclosed records and "no nationality" statuses that might predispose those individuals to claim the nationality of the country they live in.
So, no, FPM ministers and their allies did not "fail" to communicate with the Syrian regime in past governments; instead, and in the face of a ghastly and complex ongoing war, they offered operative solutions and created effective processes to control and minimize the detrimental effects of a multifaceted crisis of massive magnitude. They deftly compromised while other Lebanese factions and the international community watched in shameful silence.
But now, the situation is different. With about 85% of Syria's territories under government control, the "safe" and "dignified" return of Syrian refugees that President Aoun and Minister Bassil have long advocated for has become possible and favorable. With the doors tightly closed to naturalization and re-settlement, the time has come to communicate with the Syrian regime and the international community to endorse and support the only solution to the displacement crisis.
fcefcffe-99a9-4486-9274-202a18e3ac95|0|.0|27604f05-86ad-47ef-9e05-950bb762570c


text:
Donovan Crow
Creating Mobile web technologies
Donovan Crow > Articles by: Brandon Corvis
Brandon Corvis
Bran writes mostly on science and is an avid reader and writer of popular science. He brings sciency a literetic emphasis bring it to mainstream media for all.
Egypt Science
Great Pyramids of Giza
There has been a number of recent scientific discoveries about the Great Pyramids of Giza using technologically advanced methods. For
Science Space
The Big Bang isn't the beginning of the universe anymore
We used to think the Big Bang meant the universe began from a singularity. Nearly 100 years later, we're not so sure.
Astronomy Science
Rare three- planet conjunction of Mercury, Jupiter and Saturn to illuminate the sky this weekend
2021 is busy year for star watchers. January 10th will witness the alignment of 3 celestial planets. Do watch this spectacular event simply with binoculars.
Quantum Physics Tech
AI, quantum computing and 5G could make criminals more dangerous than ever, warn police
Law enforcement needs to be innovative and act now in order to keep face with near future criminal threats, warns 'Do criminals dream of electric sheep' paper.
Science Space Uncategorised
Tilts of the planets are the reason for season
Did you know about the how the seasons occur? It is due to the TILT. Find out different tilts for different planets of our Solar System
What are asteroids?
Asteroids are essentially remnants of the primitive building blocks that created the terrestrial planets in our solar system. Scientists believe that asteroids have not changed very much since the time they were formed, making them cosmic time capsules that can reveal how planets like our own world formed.
In addition, asteroids are thought to contain organic molecules like amino acids—the basis for proteins and DNA—leading to speculation that a meteorite from an asteroid could have seeded the early Earth with the building blocks of life.
Despite what Hollywood movies may lead us to believe, the risk of a collision between an asteroid and Earth is extremely small. NASA's Center for Near-Earth Object Studies regularly monitors the orbits of near-Earth asteroids and calculates their risk of impact within the next 100 years.
Using Light to Change Properties of Matter
Innovative Experiment Takes "Snapshots" of Light, Stops Light, Uses Light to Change Properties of Matter
Researchers Have Achieved Sustained Long-Distance Quantum Teleportation
The breakthrough, made by researchers at Caltech, Fermilab and NASA, among others, is a step towards a practical quantum internet.
The inset appears to move
Illusion Science
Reality how eyes plays tricks
Discovery Greetings Scientists
Happy Birthday Benoit Mandelbrot
November 20, 2020 January 5, 2021
Largely responsible for the present interest in Fractal Geometry. He showed how Fractals can occur in many different places in both Mathematics and elsewhere in Nature.
Moon Planet Science Solar System Space
Moon Crossing Face of Earth From a Million Miles Away
Astrophysicist Andrea Ghez Wins 2020 Nobel Prize for Physics for Supermassive Black Hole Discovery
The Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to three astrophysicists Tuesday for work that was literally out of the world, and indeed the universe. They are Roger Penrose, an Englishman, Reinhard Genzel, a German, and Andrea Ghez, an American. They were recognized for their work on the gateways to eternity known as black holes, massive objects that swallow light and everything else forever that falls in their unsparing maws.
Planet Solar System Space
MASSIVE NEW STORM BREWING ON JUPITER CAUGHT BY HUBBLE
A unique and exciting detail of Hubble's snapshot appears at mid-northern latitudes as a bright, white, stretched-out storm traveling around the planet at 350 miles per hour (560 kilometers per hour). This single plume erupted on Aug. 18, 2020 – and ground-based observers have discovered two more that appeared later at the same latitude.
This Sunday's eclipse arrives on the summer solstice, the northern hemisphere's longest day of the year.
Mars Rover shows a fascinating view of Earth and Venus
The rover captured Earth and Venus on June 5 after sunset. "Both planets appear as mere pinpoints of light, owing to a combination of distance and dust in the air; they would normally look like very bright stars,
The Magnetic Field of the Earth is mysteriously weakening, causing Satellites and Spacecrafts to malfunction
The Earth's magnetic field is weakening between Africa and South America, causing issues for satellites and space craft.
Scientists studying the phenomenon observed that an area known as the South Atlantic Anomaly has grown considerably in recent years, though the reason for it is not entirely clear.
Using this WhatsApp feature will land your phone number in Google search results
WhatsApp numbers leaking into Google search results
Copyright © All rights reserved. 2020 Theme: Minimal Grid by Thememattic


Quick tips to save money for your train ticket from Zaandam Kogerveld to Buettgen?
tickets booked in advance from Zaandam Kogerveld to Buettgen have the lowest fares. You may book up to 3 months in advance.
The most popular departure dates and times to go to Buettgen from Zaandam Kogerveld are more expensive, so try to be flexible if possible.
Our booking system will always propose you the best fare for your train e-tickets .
Do you need help to book your rail ticket to Buettgen?
Questions , remarks about your rail trip Zaandam Kogerveld to Buettgen?


text:
Çamyuva este o stațiune în districtul Kemer al provinciei Antalya (Turcia), situată la poalele munților Taurus, pe litoralul Mării Mediterane la 7 km sud-vest de orașul Kemer. Municipalitatea Çamyuva are 4 mii de locuitori (2007) și în ultimii ani a devinit o stațiune turistică populară, frecventată preponderent de turiști cu venituri medii din fosta URSS și Europa Centrală.

Stațiuni la Marea Mediterană