text:
\section{Introduction}
Connected and automated vehicles (\textit{CAVs}) are instrumented with wide arrays of specialised computers called Electronic Control Units (ECUs), sensors and connecting technologies to facilitate independent driving decisions and enable better perception of the environment to avert road transportation hazards. The ability of  \textit{CAVs} to make some or all driving decisions disrupts the current auto insurance claims and adjudication process where a physical driver is solely blamed for an accident. This disruption enables shared liability among multiple entities interacting with a \textit{CAV} including the Automotive Manufacturer, Service Technician and Software Provider and therefore makes adjudication challenging. Consider the fatal \textit{CAV} accident scenario described in [1]. In this scenario, assigning blame was arduous due to lack of transparency in the adjudication process. Furthermore, with the existing claims processing model, a claimant in this scenario would have to painstakingly wait for about 4-12 months for an insurer to make a decision based on the circumstances of submitted claim [29].  \\
Given the potential to assign blame to multiple entities, the adjudication process for \textit{CAVs} presents further interesting challenges, including: (1) the motivation of potential entities to evade liability by altering evidence; (2) keeping track of relevant interactions between a \textit{CAV} and other potential liable entities; (3) providing comprehensive evidence for adjudication; and (4) ensuring data accessibility. \\
Previous works that address vehicular forensics significantly rely on data stored in the Event Data Recorder (EDR); an automotive black-box replica installed in the vehicle for recording pre and post collision data [2] [3] [4]. Several challenges however persist with \textit{CAVs}. First, EDR data does not record all the relevant interactions of \textit{CAVs} with other entities. This prevents existing approaches from making liability decisions that consider these interactions. Second, modern day vehicles with communication capabilities log EDR data in central servers [8] introducing a single point of failure. Third, an evaluation on proposed techniques for vehicular forensics has been missing. \\
In this paper, we argue that BlockChain (BC) [5] technology has the potential to address the aforementioned challenges. BC is an immutable and distributed ledger technology that provides verifiable record of transactions in the form of an interconnected series of data blocks. BC can be public or permissioned [25] to differentiate user capabilities including who has right to participate in the BC network. Public BC such as for BitCoin [5], enables every participant to create transactions (BC communications), collaboratively verify them and append validated transactions to the ledger. Permissioned BC such as Hyperledger [6] on the other hand restricts participation by inviting participants to join and allows only selected participants to maintain the shared ledger. \\
BC replaces centralization with a trustless consensus which ensures that no single entity can assume absolute control of the BC and its contents. The decentralized trust provided by BC is well-suited for the \textit{CAV} adjudication process.  Also, the distributed structure of BC delivers robustness to a single point of failure. Therefore, we propose a BC Framework for auto-Insurance Claims and Adjudication (B-FICA). B-FICA is a vehicular forensic system for \textit{CAVs} that facilitates the collection of relevant evidence from potential liable entities. It consists of two main tiers namely, operational and decision. Given known identities of interacting entities in the auto insurance adjudication model, we use a permissioned BC to ensure that interacting entities are only privy to communications (transactions) they need to know. The operational partition comprises \textit{CAVs}, insurance companies, auto manufacturers, software providers and service technicians. As evidence, the operational partition stores specific instructions (software updates, change of CAV parts) from an auto manufacturer or service technician to a CAV owner as well as data generated by a \textit{CAV} when it is in an accident or behaves in an unexpected way such as over speeding or hard slamming of brakes. The aim of tracking interactions with the \textit{CAV} is to identify cases of neglect to instructions, while the \textit{CAV} data maintains a historical record of the \textit{CAV} performance and circumstances surrounding an accident. To ensure scalability, the operational BC partition is managed by entities with significant communication and storage capabilities such as auto manufacturer, insurance company and service technicians. The decision partition comprises the legal authorities including the police and courts, the government transport authorities, insurance companies and automotive manufacturers. In the decision partition, requests for complimentary evidence such as witnesses testimonies are made by insurance companies to the legal and government transport authorities. Also, contestable decisions reached in the operational partition are resolved in the decision partition.\\
Given the infrequent rate of data generation and vested interests of potential liable entities in adjudication model, B-FICA introduces a dynamic lightweight consensus and block validation protocol and a proof of interaction-execution mechanism. The dynamic lightweight consensus and block validation protocol allows BC managers to update the BC state for every received data contributing to evidence to prevent the alteration of evidence. The proof of interaction-execution mechanism offers non-repudiation, allows BC managers confirm the status of a BC communication and helps adjudicators identify if an accident was due to negligence. \\
\textit{The key contributions of this paper are summarized below:}
\textbf{(1)} We present B-FICA; a partitioned BC framework based on permissioned BC technology for obtaining comprehensive evidence to facilitate adjudication and claims processing. We use realistic scenarios to highlight the efficacy of our proposal. \\
\textbf{(2)} Our BC based framework is tailored to meet the requirement for the CAV adjudication process. We incorporate a proof of interaction-execution mechanism and a dynamic lightweight consensus and block validation protocol to mitigate malicious actions by participants. \\
\textbf{(3)} We conduct a qualitative analysis of B-FICA to evaluate the resilience of B-FICA against identified attack capabilities of malicious actors. Also, we conduct a comparative evaluation of B-FICA with existing approaches. \\
\textbf{(4)} We characterize the performance of B-FICA via extensive simulations using NS3 simulator and comparatively evaluate our proposal against an existing proposal using time overhead as a performance measure. \\
This paper is an extension of our preliminary ideas presented in our previous work [7]. Here we include a use case, algorithm and evaluations. \\
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The proposed architecture and components are described in Section 2. We present an overview of transactions in Section 3. Evaluation results are described in Section 4. Section 5 presents related works on vehicular forensics and BC applications and Section 6 concludes the paper and outlines future work.
\section{BlockChain based Framework for Insurance Claim and Adjudication (B-FICA)}
In this section, we discuss the details of the BC partitions. We begin by defining key concepts. \\
\textbf{Transactions:} Transactions are the basic communication primitive in BC for information exchange among entities in B-FICA.\\
\textbf{Partitions:} Partitions are communication segments that allow intended communication participants to exchange relevant transactions contributing to evidence. \\
\textbf{Dynamic Block (\textit{dBlock}):} An incomplete block containing validated transactions that allows validators reach consensus on the current state of the BC. \\
\textbf{Proposers:} Proposers are entities that initiate and submit transactions to the BC. \\
\textbf{Validators:} Validators are entities that are responsible for distributedly managing the BC by processing incoming and outgoing transactions in their partitions.\\
The proposed framework is presented in Figure 1. It describes the interaction between key components in B-FICA.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{partition_architecture}
\caption{Proposed Partitioned BC Based Framework.}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{BC Partitions}
The partitions in our framework are the operational and decision partitions. These partitions are intended to facilitate the communication of relevant information across our BC network. In the operational partition, transactions contributing to evidence are generated and stored in the dynamic block. In the decision partition, complimentary evidence is presented to insurance companies to facilitate compensation payments, contestable liability decisions are resolved and liability decisions involving multiple vehicles is made. \\
For BC communications, we utilize existing Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) such as a Certificate Authority (CA) to issue unique digital identities to BC participants in the operational partition and decision partition. The certificate or verification component of the CA is stored in the genesis block which serves as a starting point of the BC and used to authenticate and verify transactions.  \\
For communications initiated by a validator and completed by a \textit{CAV}, known keys of transaction participants are used to authenticate the transactions. However for transactions generated by a \textit{CAV} such as the accident-related data, we utilize changeable keys. This is because a \textit{CAV} is envisaged to also collect significant personal identifiable information of the owner and using known keys for communication might threaten the privacy of the vehicle owner. We utilize a pseudonym based privacy method similar to the approach in [30, 31] to address this challenge. In this approach, it is assumed that at the initial registration of a \textit{CAV} by a government transport authority, the \textit{CAV} is issued a set of pseudonyms for the purpose of communicating accident-related data. To prevent data misuse, a law enforcement agency registers for this service and obtains requisite communication credentials to participate in the process of uncovering the real identities of \textit{CAVs} for adjudication.  This approach does not require a vehicle to store significant amounts of short-lived pseudonymous certificate as akin to the public key certificate (PKC) approach. It offers user-controlled privacy to the \textit{CAV} owner by allowing a vehicle to change its pseudonyms at any given time.
\subsubsection{Operational Partition BC (OP-BC)}
The operational partition comprises all potential liable entities including the \textit{CAV}, auto manufacturer, service technician in addition to the insurance company responsible for paying compensations. For simplicity we focus on single entities for each of these however, the framework is generalisable to the case when there are several of each entity. \\
We assume that an auto manufacturer provides the software update needs of a \textit{CAV}. We also assume that a \textit{CAV} is 5G-enabled [30] and has a tamper-resistant storage for storing accident-related data such as the precise location, speed, time of event, video and picture data of an accident including data received from witnesses ($W_{i}$) via vehicular communication.\\
The proposers in the operational partition include the auto manufacturer, service technician and the CAV while the validators include the auto manufacturer, service technician and the insurance company. Validators are selected based on their possession of sufficient resources for processing transactions and blocks. Also, given that validators could also send transactions in the OP-BC, we utilize a dual signature transaction mechanism to ensure that transactions initiated by a validator are acknowledged by the recipient before they are sent to the BC. This  prevents the possibility of a validator generating fake transactions to evade liability.\\
In the operational BC, transactions are either signed by a single participant called single sign transactions or by multiple participants called multiSig transactions. The key transactions in OP-BC allow participants to report safety events, provide primary evidence, provide specific instructions, or notify execution of instructions. Section III provides a detailed description of these transactions.
Transactions in the operational partition are broadcast to the BC network and stored in the OP-BC. Each block in the OP-BC consists of two parts namely the block header and transactions. A block header contains the following: block sequence number (\textit{SEQ. NUM}), block ID (\textit{BLOCK ID}) which is the hash of the block, the hash of the previous block (\textit{PREV.BID}) which ensures immutability and the hash of the transaction altering the dynamic block (\textit{T.ALT.BID}) which is a pointer to the last transaction that changes the state of \textit{dblock}. For \textit{dblock}, the \textit{blockID} changes for every successfully validated transaction until dBlock reaches maximum block allowance ($B_{Max}$) and appended to OP-BC. The dynamic \textit{blockID} is also used to ensure immutability in OP-BC. The motivation for a dynamic block in our framework is primarily due to the vested interest of potential liable entities in the outcome of an adjudication decision and secondarily due to the infrequent rate of data generation for adjudication. The waiting for transactions in the running pool to reach $B_{Max}$ before validation offers rogue OP-BC validators' ample time to alter transactions to evade liability. For example, a rogue auto manufacturer who observes that a product defect was responsible for the accident could attempt to alter transactions in the running pool to evade liability. However, with \textit{dblock}, the updated \textit{blockID} would detect this attack. \\
\textbf{Transaction verification and dynamic block validation:} Once a transaction is sent to the OP-BC, the process of verification and validation begins by a validator checking first that the transaction generator is an authorized OP-BC participant. Next it checks to see if the transaction is complete. For example if a multiSig transaction has the signatures of all transaction participants and finally if the transaction is not a duplicate transaction sent by a particular participant. Algorithm 1 outlines the transaction verification and validation process in OP-BC.
\begin{algorithm}[h]
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent} \textbf{Input: Transaction} \\
\hspace*{\algorithmicindent} \textbf{Output: new \textit{dBlock ID}}
\begin{algorithmic} [1]
\STATE \textit{Verify transaction}:
\STATE  Verify  $PK_{AV}$ ;
\IF {$PK_{AV}$ is not valid for \textit{OP-BC}}
\STATE $Transaction$ is invalid ;
\STATE \textbf{reject Transaction} ;
\ELSE
\STATE \textit{Validate transaction}:
\STATE \textit{Compute new cBlock ID (ndB)} ;
\STATE \textit{ndB} = $Curr.T_{ID}$ + $dBlock_{ID}$ ;
\STATE Verify \textit{Computational consistency} ;
\STATE For every successfully verified \textbf{Transaction} ;
\WHILE {$dBlock < B_{Max}$}
\STATE \textit{ndB} = $Curr.T_{ID}$ + $dBlock_{ID}$ ;
\ENDWHILE
\ENDIF
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{Transaction Verification and Dynamic Validation }
\end{algorithm}
In the OP-BC, we assume that validators use predefined known keys to generate a dynamic block (\textit{dBlock}). Upon a successfully verified transaction, the transaction is validated in \textit{dBlock} by computing a new \textit{dBlock ID} (lines 9, 10). This is done by computing the hash of the successfully verified transaction \textit{(Curr.Tid)} and the hash of \textit{dBlock}. Once computed, validators compare their values to ensure computational consistency and reach consensus on the state of \textit{dBlock}. The validation process continues until \textit{dBlock} reaches the maximum block allowance ($B_{Max}$). Once reached, \textit{dBlock} is appended in the BC. In the case where different \textit{dBlock} output is derived, validators disregard current computation and revert to the last computation where \textit{dBlock} \textit{ID} was consistent across all validators. Then using the last validated transaction identified by the \textit{T.ALT.BID} identifier, OP-BC validators re-initiate the verification and validation process up until the current transaction to be validated by checking transaction timestamps. Repeating this process using the last successfully validated transaction will allow validators to reach consensus on the state of OP-BC and detect the likelihood of an attack. If however wrong computation persists leading to contestable decisions, \textit{dBlock} is presented to the decision partition validators for resolution.
\subsubsection{Decision Partition BC (DP-BC)}
The decision partition BC integrates auto manufacturers, insurance companies, legal authorities and government transport authorities. The proposers in the decision partition include insurance companies and auto manufacturers. On the one hand, the insurance companies initiate a request for complimentary evidence to facilitate processing of insurance claims. On the other hand, auto manufacturers also initiate a request to identify a liable \textit{CAV} in a multi-collision scenario. The validators in DP-BC are the government transport authority and the legal authorities who collaborate to reveal to identity of a liable \textit{CAV} in a collision scenario. The legal authority also provides complimentary evidence to an insurance company to facilitate liability attribution and claims processing. Each block in the DP-BC consists of a block header and transaction as with the OP-BC. However, the block header in DP-BC as opposed to the OP-BC does not include the hash of the transaction altering the block. This is because validation of transaction in the DP-BC occurs only when the running pool of transactions have reached the maximum block allowance ($B_{Max}$). Also, vested interest in the outcome of liability decisions is removed in the DP-BC as DP-BC validators are not considered liable entities in B-FICA. Once transactions in the running pool of a validator have reached $B_{Max}$, the validator creates a new block and the new block is appended to the DP-BC when consensus is reached on the state of the new block. \\
The request for evidence is the sole transaction stored in the DP-BC. The response to the request is sent as a unicast to the request initiator and not stored in the DP-BC. This is to ensure that sensitive privacy related information is not made public knowledge. \\
\textbf{Transaction verification and validation:} Upon the receipt of a \textit{RET} transaction, validators verify the authenticity of the transaction by verifying the signatures of proposers. Next, they verify that transaction is complete. Validators repeat this process for subsequent transactions until their running pool reaches maximum block allowance ($B_{Max}$). Next, validators create a block containing $B_{Max}$ transactions  and repeat the verification process to ensure that transactions are unique and verifiable. Once successful, the validation process begins by computing the hash of all transactions in the current block. Computed values are compared for consistency and the successfully validated block is appended to DP-BC.
\section{Overview of Transactions}
Having discussed the details in the BC-partitions, we discuss the details of interactions in each partition facilitated by the different kind of transactions. Transactions generated by proposers in our framework are secured using cryptographic hash functions (SHA256), digital signatures and asymmetric encryption.
\subsection{Operational BC Transactions}
Communication between entities in the OP-BC partition are referred to as operational transactions (\textit{OP-T}). \textit{OP-T} are evidence used for making liability decisions. They include relevant interactions between liable entities as well as collision data to identify cases of product, service and negligence liability [9]. Product liability refers to scenarios where blame is assigned to an auto manufacturer for product defect. Service liability refers to scenarios where the identified last action of a service technician caused the accident. Negligence liability refers to scenarios where failure by a vehicle owner to adhere to instructions from an auto manufacturer or service technician is found to be responsible for the accident. To capture these liability scenarios, the following transactions have been defined for the operational BC partition. \\
\textbf{Event Safety Evidence (ESE):} A \textit{CAV} sends this transaction to the OP-BC when an unexpected vehicle behaviour occurs such as hard brake slam, detection of wrong way driving and the detection of slippery road condition [10]. ESE is predicated on safety messages exchanged in vehicular networks [10]. ESE is a single sign transaction. Insurance companies use ESE to have a historical perception of the behaviour of a \textit{CAV}.\\
\textbf{Primary Evidence Transaction (PET):} A \textit{CAV} initiates the single sign PET transaction when an accident occurs. PET contains requisite data describing the accident. When an accident occurs, the \textit{CAV}CAV records all the required data, defined by [11], for making adjudication decisions. Details of \textit{PET} is described in Section III-C.\\
\textbf{Notification Evidence Transaction (NET):} \textit{NET} is initiated by a validator requesting the execution of specific action by a \textit{CAV} such as carrying out a software update. \textit{NET} is a multiSigned transaction requiring the signatures of the instruction issuer and the \textit{CAV} to be complete. The multiple signatures for \textit{NET} help prevent false notification claims by malicious validators when an accident occurs. For a software update instruction, the transaction includes the hash of the transaction, hash of the update file, dual signatures and a metadata field which gives details of the update file and a pointer to the location of the file.\\
\textbf{Execution Transaction (ET):} \textit{ET} is initiated by a \textit{CAV} as a single sign transaction in response to a \textit{NET} from an instruction issuer. \textit{ET} is linked directly to the \textit{NET} sent by a specific instruction issuer. The content of \textit{ET} includes the hash of \textit{ET}, the hash of the \textit{NET} it is responding to and an execution status field which is a binary indicator of execution success or failure. If however, a \textit{CAV} owner fails to execute the transaction and claims otherwise, the current firmware version of the updated device in the \textit{CAV} could be retrieved for adjudication purpose. We assume that the retrieved file shows the time stamp of the execution which is the time the update was installed by \textit{CAV} owner. Upon retrieval, the hash of the file is computed and compared with the hash of the update file in the BC. If computation differs, \textit{CAV} owner is blamed for negligence.
\subsection{Decision Partition BC Transaction}
In the DP-BC partition, communications are directed towards providing more evidence to an insurance company to facilitate compensation payments and identify a liable vehicle in a multi vehicle collision scenario. To make these decisions, both insurance company and auto manufacturer initiate a request transaction. \\
\textbf{Request Transaction:} In a given collision scenario involving a single or multiple vehicles, RET is sent by an insurance company after receiving the primary evidence transaction from a \textit{CAV}. \textit{RET} includes the hash of the \textit{RET}, collision data in the primary evidence and the signature of the insurance company. In response to this request the DP-BC validators provide complimentary evidence as unicast to the insurance company.
\subsection{Usage Scenario}
We consider a rear-end collision event. Adjudication decisions in the state of the art dispute settlement model in this scenario attributes blame vehicles behind the leading vehicle irrespective of the circumstance. This possibility motivates a rogue leading man-machine driven \textit{CAV} to  intentionally cause a rear-end collision to receive compensations [12, 13]. We assume a three vehicles ($CAV_{1}$, $CAV_{2}$ and $CAV_{3}$) collision scenario and classify vehicles involved in the collision as host and witnesses. For example, $CAV_{1}$ is a host vehicle when it submits \textit{PET} to OP-BC and becomes a witness when its data is provided as complimentary evidence or used to make liability decisions in multi vehicle collision scenarios. Decision making occurs at two levels. First in DP-BC and next in the OP-BC. In the first level, liability is attributed to a liable \textit{CAV} by DP-BC validators. Once a liable vehicle is identified, the second level decision is reached in OP-BC using operational transactions and complimentary evidence obtained by the insurance company. \\
In this scenario, the process of making the 2-level liability decisions follows three distinct phases namely evidence generation, validation and adjudication. In the evidence generation phase, \textit{CAVs} generate \textit{PET} by collating accident data. In the evidence validation phase, the validators in the operational partition confirms that \textit{CAVs} are valid BC participants and validates \textit{PET}. After this, OP-BC validators issue a request transaction (\textit{RET}) to DP-BC validators for first level decision making. In the adjudication phase, DP-BC validators reach decision on the liable \textit{CAV} and provide complementary evidence to the insurance company to facilitate second level decisions. \\
\textbf{Evidence generation:} After the collision, $CAV_{1}$, $CAV_{2}$ and $CAV_{3}$ independently record their perception of the collision event and each CAV receives an encrypted version of other CAVs perception. Once received, the vehicles generates \textit{PET} and sends it to the OP-BC. For $CAV_{1}$, \textit{PET} details include:
\begingroup
    \fontsize{8pt}{12pt}
    \begin{align*}
        PET =[T_{id} || T_{data} || PK_{CAV_1} || Sig_{CAV_1}]
    \end{align*}
\endgroup
$T_{id}$ is the hash of the transaction, $T_{data}$ is the transaction data which includes accident related data in $CAV_{1}$ tamper storage device. $PK_{CAV_1}$ is the public key of $CAV_{1}$ and $SIG_{CAV_1}$ is its signature on the transaction. The details of the transaction data is given below.
\begingroup
    \fontsize{8pt}{12pt}
    \begin{align*}
        T_{data} = [(loc, TS, VE_{px},  TS_{data},  E(CAV_{2}), E(CAV_{3}),  h(T_{data})]
    \end{align*}
\endgroup
\textit{loc} represents the location of event. \textit{TS} is the timestamp on the data which represents time of occurence. $VE_{px}$ is $CAV_{1}$ record of the event, $TS_{data}$ refers to the hash of the last recorded picture and video file contained in the tamper-proof storage device before and during the accident. We store only the hash of the video and picture files in the BC for scalability reasons because \textit{CAV} sensors such as LIDAR and cameras produce high precision memory intensive data [28]. Therefore, we assume that actual video and picture file are separately stored in a cloud storage by the \textit{CAV} owner. \textit{CAV} owner creates a public / private key pair for the cloud storage and provides public key to operational BC validators to access the file for adjudication purposes. $E(CAV_{2})$ and $E(CAV_{3})$ are the encrypted accounts of witnesses and $h(T_{data})$ is the hash of the collision data. It is used to assure its integrity.

\textbf{Evidence Validation:} After receiving the transaction OP-BC validators execute verification checks described in Section 2 and upon a successful verification the transaction is validated in the dynamic block as described in Algorithm 1. Next, the insurance companies and auto manufacturers of $CAV_{1}$, $CAV_{2}$ and $CAV_{3}$ initiate \textit{RET} in the (DP-BC).

\textbf{Adjudication phase:} Upon receipt of the request from proposers in the DP-BC partition, validators verify the signatures of the proposers using their public keys. Next, they perform integrity checks before analysing transaction data content to make the first level decision. Integrity check is performed by verifying that transaction data has not been altered by computing the hash of transaction data and comparing it against $h(T_{data})$ in the data content sent by proposers. If computation differs, data tampering is detected. In-addition, they decrypt encrypted data to compare the time stamp and location data across the request transactions received to ensure data consistency in both time and space. Once integrity checks are successful, DP-BC validators make first level liability decision by analysing \textit{RET} data. Once decided, complimentary evidence is presented to insurance company for liability attribution in OP-BC.
\section{Evaluation and Discussion}
In this section, we provide qualitative and quantitative evaluations of B-FICA. First we demonstrate how B-FICA is resilient to identified attacks. Next, we comparatively evaluate B-FICA against existing proposals. Finally, we characterize the performance of B-FICA.
\subsection{Security analysis}
It is assumed that adversaries are rational internal attackers [14] motivated to evade liability costs. More precisely, an adversary could be an auto manufacturer or service technician who could also suffer reputational cost [15] which poses a significant threat to their revenue and business continuity if held responsible for an accident. A \textit{CAV} owner could also be motivated to commit insurance fraud by staging an accident to receive compensation for injuries and damages. Table 1 summarizes the mechanisms that enable B-FICA to meet critical design requirements. Next, we discuss the adversary model and B-FICA defense mechanisms.
\begin{table*}[ht]
\caption {Requirement for blockchain based architecture} \label{tab:title}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{1.7cm}|p{15cm}|}
\hline
Requirement & Approach \\
\hline
Authorization & Partitions restrict communication to only authorized partition participants and allows communication to occur only on a need-to-know basis.  The genesis block in each partition contains the verification credentials of a Certification Authority (CA). The verification credential is unique for both partitions thus allowing only members in a given partition to authenticate and verify transactions.  \\
\hline
 Integrity & Transaction identifier ($T_{id}$) represents the hash of a transaction and used to ensure that a transaction originating from an BC participant is not modified. Also, we hash data contents in a transaction such as the primary evidence transaction to identify cases of evidence alteration. \\
\hline
Secure storage & Transactions that have been successfully verified are committed in the BC for adjudication. Also, by validating transactions in \textit{dblock}, evidence alteration is prevented. Furthermore, by storing data on the BC and dynamically validating transactions, we prevent the possibility of a rogue validator to make evidence unavailable. \\
\hline
Non-repudiation &  Transactions in a dynamic \textit{dBlock} are signed by all transaction initiators and verified by partition validators to prevent denial of action and to ensure auditability.\\
\hline
Decentralization & No single validator can independently make decisions on what data constitutes evidence. Data contributing to evidence are collaboratively verified by validators and only successfully verified transactions can be used to make liability decisions. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsubsection{Adversarial Model}
The adversarial model details the malicious capabilities of liable entities and demonstrates the resilience of B-FICA. \\
\textbf{Transaction deletion:} In the operational partition, a rogue validator could leverage the infrequent rate of transaction generation and the significant time it takes for transactions in the running pool to reach $B_{Max}$ in the OP-BC to delete implicating transactions so as to evade liability. This capability distorts the block validation process and makes adjudication challenging. This process is addressed in our framework via the dynamic block validation process where transactions are validated as they are received. The dynamic block validation results in an updated \textit{block ID} for successfully validated transaction. \\
\textbf{Sign fake transaction:} A rogue OP-BC validator could compromise a \textit{CAV}, sign a fake transaction so that the adjudication process would blame the \textit{CAV} owner for neglecting an instruction that could have prevented the accident. This attack is addressed in our framework using the transaction alter field in the dynamic block which allows all validators to keep track of the last validated transaction in a dynamic block. Also, the dynamic validation process described in Section 2 would enable validators to detect this attack. \\
\textbf{Collusion:} We define two cases of collusion attack across the BC-partitions below. \\
\textbf{* OP-BC Collusion (False Transaction):} In this case, the rogue validators collude to generate and sign a false transaction, verify and validate a block to achieve same BC state. We address this collusion attack using our dynamic validation process which requires validators to verify computational consistency for every successfully validated transaction to reach consensus on the current state of the dynamic block. Unless rogue validators are able to anticipate an accident and send the false transaction before the occurrence of an accident, its of no use sending a false transaction after a primary evidence transaction has been validated in the dynamic block (\textit{dblock}). If however, they collude to periodically send false transaction to be exempted from liability when an accident occurs, a \textit{CAV} owner would be able to detect this since it is authorised to read BC data. \\
\textbf{* DP-BC Collusion (Modification Attack):} in this case, an auto manufacturer colludes with its \textit{CAV} to modify the content of $T_{data}$, computes a new hash value of the data $h_{new}$($T_{data}$) and sends the modified content in a request transaction to the DP-BC. We detect this attack during the verification of transactions sent by all concerned auto manufacturers and insurance companies. Validators comparatively verify the hash of $T_{data}$ presented by all proposers and check the timestamp on the data and location of event. \\
\textbf{Sensor Alteration:} A rogue OP-BC validator could compromise an evidence generating sensor to produce authenticated messages that contain misleading information. To detect this attack, we solely rely on the verification of data consistency. B-FICA comparatively verifies data generated by a \textit{CAV} with data generated by other \textit{CAV}'s involved in the accident contained in the request transaction submitted by DP-BC proposers. Data consistency is also comparatively verified in both time and space by checking data timestamps and location. However, in the case where there are no witnesses, this attack can still go undetected.
\subsection{Comparative Evaluation}
In this section, we discuss further aspects of B-FICA and comparatively evaluate it with B4F[24] a closely related adjudication framework. The comparison highlights the strengths of our proposed framework which are summarised in Table 2.
\subsubsection{Proof of storage}
Recall that (Section 3-D), memory intensive data such as pictures and videos are stored in a cloud storage. This data is very useful in B-FICA for making adjudication decisions and processing insurance claims. In order to prove that data stored in the cloud storage has not been altered by the data owner (\textit{CAV} owner) who could be motivated to evade liability, B-FICA stores the hash of the data on the BC for integrity checks and non-repudiation. \\
The authors in [30], [32] conducted an experiment on the cost of storing accident videos in the cloud which is the cost of signing, transmitting, verifying and decrypting the file. In their experiment, they varied the size of accident files between 2 - 8 GB and utilized a data transfer rate of 1.2 GB/s even though it is predicted that the connection speed for 5G-enabled vehicles will be up to 1 Tb/s already achieved for stationary wireless connection [33]. Based on their results, the time overhead to deliver a 2 GB video file requires between 20 seconds to 1 minute and an 8 GB video file requires 1-3 minutes.
\subsubsection{Proof of interaction}
The attribution of liability and processing insurance claims in the \textit{CAV}-setting requires that an adjudicator is able to establish the actual liable entity in case of an accident to prevent wrong decisions. To achieve this, the authors in [9] defined product and negligence liability to identify when a validator is at fault and when a \textit{CAV} owner is at fault. In B-FICA, beyond storing accident-related data in the BC, we also prove that an interaction between liable entities have occurred. In the following, we outline a use case justifying this design choice. Consider a scenario where an auto manufacturer sends an update instruction to a \textit{CAV} owner and the \textit{CAV} owner fails to execute the update instruction and an accident occurs due to that faulty sensor. In alternative proposals such as [24], storing the hash of the update  instruction in the BC serves as proof that the auto manufacturer sent the instruction. However, there is no proof to show that the target \textit{CAV} received and executed the update instruction. This could lead to contestable liability decisions and wrong liability attribution. To address this, B-FICA incorporates an acknowledgement (\textit{ACK}) mechanism which allows a \textit{CAV} owner to confirm receipt of the update instruction sent by the auto manufacturer and a \textit{proof of execution mechanism} which informs BC validators if the transaction was successfully executed or not. This is so that in the use case described above, if a software bug still exists after executing the update, the auto manufacturer would be liable and if no proof of execution is received, the \textit{CAV} owner would be responsible for the accident.
\subsubsection{Practical benefits of B-FICA}
We illustrate the practical benefits of B-FICA over B4F [24] using the \textit{CAV} accident scenario presented in [1] where the driver was killed in the accident. In this scenario, making adjudication decisions was difficult because evidence was made inaccessible by a competing party. In the existing liability attribution and claims processing model this exceptional scenario could hinder making claims decision for at most 12-months [29]. A variant of this could be that competing parties selectively decide on what data contributes to evidence. B-FICA and B4F[24] both integrate all potential liable entities in the BC network and show comparable performance. However, B4F [24] is both vulnerable to contestable liability decisions as described above and selective data disclosure. Using B4F, a potential liable validator could decide to store only BC transactions that shield it from liability. This is because the validators in B4F separately store their interactions with the vehicle and possess significant control over what data is stored in the BC. An example could be that a service technician after a maintenance activity on a \textit{CAV} includes services it did not render in the maintenance report and stores the hash of the report in the BC. B-FICA on the other hand allows all validators to process all transactions contributing to evidence and using an \textit{ACK} mechanism, transaction participants are apprised on what data is stored in the BC.
\begin{table*}[ht]
\caption {Comparing B-FICA with B4F [24]} \label{tab:title}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|p{2.4cm}|p{1.0cm}|p{0.8cm}|p{12.8cm}|}
\hline
Features & B-FICA & B4F[24]  & Implication and Approach \\
\hline
Liability type (Product and Negligence) [9] & Both & Product & B-FICA presents a holistic approach in the adjudication process. This is because it also keeps track of the interactions between potential liable entities to identify cases of liability due to negligence. It uses multiple signatures (\textit{MultiSig}) to identify negligence and prevent repudiation of actions by ensuring that transaction participants acknowledge received transactions. This is not possible in B4F. \\
\hline
Independent storage of evidence & Not possible & Possible & This leads to selective data sharing which allows a validator to influence the outcome of a liability decision. This is akin to the B4F framework where a validator stores its interaction with a \textit{CAV} separately and is expected to store the hash of such transactions in the BC. However in B-FICA all data contributing to evidence is sent to the BC and processed by all validators. This is because while B4F treats validators as trusted entities, we argue that they could be motivated to repudiate their actions. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Performance Evaluation}
In this section, we evaluate the performance of B-FICA via extensive simulations. We distinctly evaluate the performance of the operational and decision partitions based on transactions processed in the partitions since they independently process transactions. To evaluate B-FICA, we use the NS-3 [16] simulator as it has been extensively utilized as an evaluation tool to analyze peer-to-peer networks. \\
We consider the primary evidence transaction and notification evidence transaction as primary evaluation transactions on which other transactions are predicated. More precisely, the request transaction is initiated after a primary transaction has been received by the OP-BC validators and the execution transaction sent by a \textit{CAV} is based on the notification transaction initiated by an auto manufacturer or service technician. \\
To realistically simulate the primary evaluation transactions, we utilize the road casualty crash data of New South Wales (NSW) [17] to simulate the generation of primary evidence transaction. The crash data report presents the traffic casualties for 2016. It gives a description of the type of crash which describes vehicles involved in a crash and categorizes a crash based on degrees of impact. For notification evidence, we assume weekly updates for connected and automated vehicle. \\
For evaluations, we group the multiple entities in OP-BC into clusters to reflect operational validators with same \textit{CAVs} in a region such as NSW as described in Section 2. For the decision partition, we consider one legal authority and government transport authority for a region. Using the crash casualty data, 42 car accidents occur daily therefore, \textit{CAVs} generate 42 \textit{PET per day} and decision partition validators receive 42 request transactions from insurance companies daily while operational partitions collectively receive 42 transactions. \\
$B_{Max}$ involves a tradeoff between overhead and security. This is because the value of $B_{Max}$  determines when \textit{dBlock} is appended to the BC and becomes immutable. While lower $B_{Max}$ values present larger BC overhead, larger $B_{Max}$ values increase the vulnerability of \textit{dBlock} by offering colluding validators the opportunity to exploit the validation process described in Section 2. Here, we set $B_{Max}$  to 7 and leave the  definition of an optimal $B_{Max}$ value for future work. We assume that at least one \textit{ PET} is generated every hour and a \textit{CAV} receives one notification transaction weekly. We refer to the above experimental settings as default configurations and are used in simulations unless stated otherwise. \\
In the rest of the section, we evaluate the time taken to verify and process OP-BC transactions in the dynamic block. In the decision partition, we evaluate the time it takes to process transactions in a block and the time overhead in providing a response to a request evidence. Furthermore, we comparatively evaluate our implementations against a baseline implementation (Section IV-2) and existing proposals.
\subsubsection{OP-BC Partition Performance Evaluation}
In the operational partition, we evaluate the key processes identified as verification and validation. These processes are critical in  B-FICA because they contribute to how long a complementary evidence is received and determines when a claims decision can be reached.\\
To provide comprehensive simulation, we simulate the OP-BC transactions: primary evidence, notification evidence and execution transactions using the following metrics: \\
\textbf{Verification time: }This refers to the time it takes an OP-BC manager to confirm conformance to verification policies (described in Section 2) after a transaction is received in the BC. \\
\textbf{Validation time: } This refers to the time an OP-BC manager processes a transaction in the dynamic block (\textit{dblock}). It is measured as the time required to compute a new \textit{dblock} ID. \\

\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{verifications}
\caption{Average verification and validation time on OP-BC validators.}
\end{figure}
The results shown in Figure 2 are the average of 14 runs. the standard deviation is also shown. As shown in Figure 2, the notification evidence (\textit{NEV}) has higher processing time compared to other transactions. This is because the \textit{NEV} transaction is a 2-signature transaction which requires additional time for verification checks. Furthermore, most transactions take several seconds to verify and validate. This can be attributed to the storage of transaction data on the chain. First, validators confirm that a transaction meets verification policies explained in Section 2. Second, validators verify the integrity of transaction data to ensure that the data has not been altered during transit by comparing newly computed hash of data to hash of data in the transaction. Finally, after the transaction validation process, validators verify their computations for consistency before a transaction is considered successfully verified and validated. Verification of computational consistency concludes the consensus process and ensures that validators have same computation for \textit{dblock} \textit{ID}. This final step also adds to the overall validation time.  \\
We also compare the verification time to an alternative implementation that stores only hash of transactions in the OP-BC. Results shows that B-FICA introduces additional verification overhead (0.30 seconds for \textit{PET}) which also impacts on how long before an insurance company receives complimentary evidence and can be attributed to the verification of components of transaction data for completeness i.e. for example, checking that $T_{data}$ in \textit{PET} is complete.
\subsubsection{DP-BC Partition Performance Evaluation}
We consider the time overhead in providing response to a request and the time it takes DP-BC validators to process transactions in a block when transactions in the running pool reaches $B_{Max}$. \\
\textbf{Time Overhead: } Time overhead refers to the processing time of the request transaction. It is measured as the time from when a transaction(s) sent from a proposer is received by validators until when the proposer receives an appropriate feedback. \\
\textbf{Block processing time: } This is measured as the time from when a DP-BC validator generates a block, processes transactions in the block and appends the block to the ledger. \\
\textbf{Time overhead evaluation: } To evaluate the time overhead, we compare B-FICA against 2 alternative implementations. In the first case called \textit{baseline}, we use similar transaction flow as B-FICA however, we do not hash or encrypt transactions. In the second case, we implemented the idea presented in [24] where actual transaction data are stored in a personal storage and hash of transactions are stored in the BC. \\
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{Time_overhead}
\caption{Comparative time overhead evaluation of B-FICA.}
\end{figure}
The results in Figure 3 shows that B4F expends the most time in processing transactions and providing feedback to the transaction proposer. This increased overhead can be because of the additional integrity verification checks conducted by DP-BC validators on data retrieved from the personal storage before providing response to the transaction proposer. Integrity verification hash involves computing the hash of the transaction in the personal storage and comparing it with the hash of transaction in the BC. This computation time therefore adds to the time overhead. Furthermore, compared to the baseline, B-FICA includes an additional overhead of 0.13 seconds to process transactions. This overhead which could be called security cost is the time taken for the encryption and hashing operations. \\
\textbf{Block processing time: } It takes a DP-BC B-FICA validator 56.2 seconds to process transactions in $B_{Max}$. Compared to  the alternative hash only implementation, it takes about similar time (56.3 seconds). This is because similar computation is performed to ensure DP-BC validators reach consensus (see Section 2) on the state of the DP-BC.
\section{Related works}
In this section, we provide a brief review about existing works on vehicular forensics, BC and its application in the vehicular networks domain.
\subsection{Vehicular Forensics}
Existing vehicular technologies enables a range of applications through vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANETs). Specifically, applications needed for vehicles to confirm their current state or prove their recent behaviors. For example, when vehicle collision occurs, it is important to maintain an accurate description of the situation for liability purposes. \\
The authors in [18] proposed a cooperative collision warning based motor vehicle event data recorder (MVEDR) for recording all critical information from a vehicle in an accident (primary vehicle) and neighbor vehicles for accident reconstruction. However, while MVEDR represents a vital solution for accident reconstruction for modern day vehicular forensics, it solely relies on data in the EDR which records only the perception of a host vehicle. This therefore makes it unsuitable for the anticipated \textit{CAV} adjudication model where liability is likely to be shared between multiple entities. \\
The author in [19] proposed EVIGEN protocol for obtaining data about a vehicles behavior from nearby vehicles. It involves creating a digital document to attest to the data collected for adjudication. While EVIGEN represents an overlay of MVEDR, it however relies on the availability of witnesses to obtain reliable data for adjudication.\\
The authors in [3], [20] have also  proposed forensic VANET applications to facilitate accident reconstruction. They identified the limitations of alternative proposals and defined dual sources of evidence for reliable data collection for accident reconstruction. In their proposal, a host vehicle can record its perception of an accident and also store data from neighboring witnesses. However, the challenge is that evidence retrieved is stored in different centralized databases which presents a single point of failure [20, 21].
\subsection{Blockchain Applications for Vehicular Networks}
In the vehicular networks domain, BC has been proposed for different purposes. The author in [22] proposed Blackchain, a BC based message and revocation accountability system for secure vehicular communication. The authors in [23] presents a BC based secure architecture for automotive use cases such as dynamic vehicle insurance which allows an insurance company to provide specific services to drivers by monitoring their driving patterns. However their proposal lacks a concrete example on how this will be achieved. The authors in [24] proposed Block4Forensic, a BC based solution for vehicular forensics that integrates concerned entities and facilitates the provision of necessary data needed for dispute settlement. However, it does not cover all liability types as specified in [26] for self driving vehicles therefore, we consider our proposal a holistic solution for vehicular forensics.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed a Blockchain based Framework for auto-Insurance Claims and Adjudication (B-FICA) for connected and automated vehicles (\textit{CAVs}). B-FICA enforces access control using partitions to prevent unauthorised access to data contributing to evidence and uses a dynamic validation protocol to prevent evidence alteration. Using a likely scenario, we demonstrated the efficacy of B-FICA describing how evidence is generated and processed. Security analysis demonstrates mechanisms utilised by B-FICA to achieve design requirements and its resilience against a broad range of malicious actions of potential liable entities. Simulation results shows that the proposed framework significantly decreases processing time compared to the state of the art. Generally, B-FICA brings credibility to the adjudication model for \textit{CAVs} and prevents data misuse at a marginal cost. \\
Our current work provides comprehensive information to decision makers, proves interaction between entities in the adjudication model and prevents potential liable entities from altering submitted evidence. An interesting direction for future work is to implement attestation protocols to ensure the correctness, reliability and integrity of data submitted for evidence by a connected and automated vehicle. Another future direction is to relax the assumption that the auto manufacturer provides the software needs of a \textit{CAV} and consider third party providers. We expect variations of B-FICA to be applicable in other liability scenarios, such as home or health insurance.
\section{Acknowledgement}
The authors thank the editors and the anonymous reviewers for their comments and insightful feedbacks. This work is supported by Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization's (CSIRO) data61 and the University of New South Wales.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


text:
Q: How to query a resolver from getServerSideProps that requires the context.session? I'm running into an issue with next.js and graphql where I have a ssr page called [status].tsx and in the getServerSideProps, I'm trying to query my resolver but the problem is, the resolver makes a query by getting the ctx.session from nextAuth that I passed to all my resolvers from my context file when I set up graphql. So when I call that query in getServerSideProps, I logged the session in my resolver and it returns null. Is there a way to get around this?
import React from 'react';
import { request } from 'graphql-request';
import { GetServerSideProps } from 'next';
import * as Queries from '../../graphql/queries';
import { SERVER_BASE_URL } from '../../utils/URLs';

export const getServerSideProps: GetServerSideProps = async ctx => {
    const status = ctx.params?.status as string;

    const data = await request(SERVER_BASE_URL, Queries.QUERY_GET_USERS_MOVIES);

    console.log('DATA: ', data); // errors

    return { props: {} };
};

Resolver:
export const usersMovies = extendType({
    type: 'Query',
    definition(t) {
        t.list.field('usersMovies', {
            type: 'UserMovie',
            resolve: async (_parent, _args, ctx) => {
                console.log('SESHH: ', ctx.session); // logs null
                return await ctx.prisma.movie.findMany({
                    where: {
                        userId: ctx.session!.user?.id!,
                    },
                    orderBy: [
                        {
                            name: 'asc',
                        },
                    ],
                });
            },
        });
    },
});

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


We thought that wichita ks sectional sofas surely the perfect design for your sofa's setup and plan, but personality and characteristic is what makes a room looks attractive. Get your independent concept and have fun! The more we try, the more we can view which great and what doesn't. The simple method to find your sofa furniture's style that you want is to start finding concept. You can get from websites, and save the pictures of sofa that remarkable.
In addition, essential conditions of the sofa's remodel is about the right arrangement and decor. Choose and decide the sofa furniture maybe a simple thing to do, but make sure to the arrangement must be totally right and perfect to the whole interior. And with regards to choosing the right sofa furniture's arrangement, the practicality must be your critical conditions. Having some instructions and guidelines gives people a nice starting point for remodeling and furnishing their house, even if some of them aren't efficient for a particular space. So, better keep the simplicity and efficiently to make your sofa looks gorgeous.
Do you think that wichita ks sectional sofas? We think that these will give you an creative measures in order to decorate your sofa furniture more lovely. The essential tips of getting the right wichita ks sectional sofas is that you must have the plans and concept of the sofa that you want. Don't forget to start collecting inspirations of sofa's plans or paint colors from the home planner or architect.
To sum up, if you're customizing your home, perfect concept is in the details. You can contact to the home planner or architect or get the perfect ideas for each space from home design websites. For your inspirations, check out these pictures of wichita ks sectional sofas, these can be extraordinary designs you can choose for cozy or amazing interior. Don't forget to take attention about related sofa topics so you will get a completely enchanting decor result about your home.
Related Post "Wichita Ks Sectional Sofas"


text:
StudentAidPandemic.org
2021-22 FAFSA webinars available
As students face what seems like an uncertain future due to the pandemic, it will be critical that they keep their options open by completing the 2021-22 FAFSA.
South Dakota high schools are encouraged to host their own financial aid night event, but Mapping Your Future also offers two national FAFSA webinar options for:
Financial aid professionals, counselors, and others who are helping those students complete the FAFSA
For the financial aid professionals and counselors webinar, Jennifer Martin, Director of Financial Aid Compliance at Johns Hopkins University, will be presenting. She will guide the attendees through the FAFSA, providing special emphasis on the changes from prior years.
This webinar will be offered on two dates, with the following registration links:
Tuesday, September 22 at 10 a.m. Central
Wednesday, September 30 at 1 p.m. Central
The FAFSA training for students and parents is scheduled for October 6 at 6:00 p.m. Central. The registration link is register.gotowebinar.com/register/3409025215216091151.
If you have questions or need more information, contact the Mapping Your Future staff at feedback@mappingyourfuture.org or (800) 374-4072.
← Middle and High School Counselors
A step forward in simplifying the FAFSA→
About Mapping Your Future
Mapping Your Future, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) charitable nonprofit organization, helping students plan better tomorrows. Our mission is to enable individuals to achieve life-long success by empowering schools, students, and families with college, financial aid, career, and financial literacy information and services.
Copyright © 2004-2021 Mapping Your Future and Decision Partners LLC. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Site Administration
Administrator Sign Up
Please enter your access code. Access codes are provided by your credit union, school, employer, or other organization.
Administrator Code:
Don't have a code? Learn more about bringing Mapping Your Future to your community.
If you've already registered, log in here.
If you've already registered as an administrator, log in here.
Not registered? contact us for more information on Mapping Your Future.
Please enter your access code. Access codes are provided by your sponsoring organization.
Don't have a code? Learn more about Mapping Your Future.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Produced in Solingen - the European Scissor capital by traditional craftsmen in Carbon Steel to have a long life span and be a real workhorse.
Durable straight blade 3" in length with micro serration on one blade to grip and hold thick hair. Actual scissor length 7" Total length including screw in finger rest 7.5"
Traditionally shaped, practical, satin stainless finish to this Scissor. Plastic comfort inserts. Screw in removable tang.
Mandy Says: This Scissor is perfect for professional dog groomers that require a durable Scissor that will cut thick hair and grip as it cuts and shapes. Perfect for a hard working professional dealing with thick coats. Low maintenance Scissor for real hard work.


Tim Adams is one of a number of industry leaders who have contributed to the new Rethink Building Materials book. Topics range from material impacts, waste and design improvements, with case studies and potential solutions also provided. Tim has written a piece on the impact of materials on the outcomes of a thermal rating.


Add life to longer stays at Orlando's first TownePlace Suites! Designed for "do it yourself" extended-stay guests each suite offers functional space for living and dining. All guests receive a daily suite refresh & those staying 7 nights or longer experience a weekly Full Service. Select from one of our studios, 1-, or 2-bedroom suites- each with a fully equipped kitchen including four burner range ovens. Located in East Orlando, our all-suite hotel is within walking distance to the University of Central Florida, Siemens & just minutes from the Central Florida Research Park & Lockheed Martin. Guests can enjoy comfortable extended-stay living in the University of Central Florida area while staying connected with our free WiFi and Internet TV options including Netflix & Hulu. New to the area? Our knowledgeable, friendly staff & easy on-site references allow you to connect with the neighborhood & surrounding areas.
Enjoy an extended continental breakfast each morning- including fried egg patties!


Men have two emotions: Hungry and Horny. They can't tell them apart. If you see a gleam in his eyes, make him a sandwich.
Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying there dying just like the rest of us who paid no attention to the rules.
- - - and as someone recently said to me: "Don't worry about old age--it doesn't last that long."
Susan !!!! that is VERY good !


The answer is a definite NO! Rubbing foods onto the skin CAN CAUSE allergy. When introducing a new food, it should be given in small quantities orally.
Vaseline, also known as petroleum jelly, is one of the most studied topical preparations available. Studies consistently show it is safe, does not cause allergies and helps hydrate and protect the skin. It is not absorbed into the body.


text:
// ---------------------------------------------------------------
// <autor>Pablo González</autor>
// <web>www.odra.com.ar</web>
// <blog>blog.odra.com.ar</blog>
// <email>pablo.gonzalez@odra.com.ar</email>
// <copyrigth>http://www.odra.com.ar/LGPL-3.0.txt</copyrigth>
// ---------------------------------------------------------------

using Microsoft.Practices.ObjectBuilder2;
using Microsoft.Practices.Unity;
using Microsoft.Practices.Unity.ObjectBuilder;
using NHibernate.Bytecode.Unity;
using NHibernate.Cfg;

namespace NHibernate.Unity
{
    public class NHibernateUnityExtension : UnityContainerExtension
    {
        private readonly bool _lazyBuildSessionfactory;
        private readonly bool _useBytecodeProvider;
        private readonly bool _useProxyFactory;

        [InjectionConstructor]
        public NHibernateUnityExtension()
            : this(false, true, true)
        {
        }

        public NHibernateUnityExtension(bool lazyBuildSessionfactory, bool useBytecodeProvider, bool useProxyFactory)
        {
            _lazyBuildSessionfactory = lazyBuildSessionfactory;
            _useBytecodeProvider = useBytecodeProvider;
            _useProxyFactory = useProxyFactory;
        }

        protected override void Initialize()
        {
            if (_useBytecodeProvider)
            {
                Environment.BytecodeProvider = new BytecodeProvider(Container);
            }
            Context.Registering += OnContextRegistering;
            Context.RegisteringInstance += OnContextRegisteringInstance;
            Context.Strategies.AddNew<SessionFactoryStrategy>(UnityBuildStage.PreCreation);
            Context.Policies.SetDefault(new SessionFactoryPolicy());
        }

        private void OnContextRegisteringInstance(object sender, RegisterInstanceEventArgs e)
        {
            if (!typeof(Configuration).IsAssignableFrom(e.RegisteredType)) return;

            e.LifetimeManager = new ContainerControlledLifetimeManager();
            var configuration = (Configuration)e.Instance;
            if (!_useBytecodeProvider && _useProxyFactory)
            {
                configuration.Proxy(p => p.ProxyFactoryFactory<ProxyFactoryFactory>());
            }
            Context.Policies.Get<SessionFactoryPolicy>(null).RegisterSessionFactory(e.Name, (Configuration)e.Instance, _lazyBuildSessionfactory);
        }

        private void OnContextRegistering(object sender, RegisterEventArgs e)
        {
            if (typeof(ISessionFactory).IsAssignableFrom(e.TypeFrom) || typeof(ISessionFactory).IsAssignableFrom(e.TypeTo))
            {
                throw new NHibernateUnityException("The type {0} cannot be registered on unity.", typeof(ISessionFactory).AssemblyQualifiedName);
            }
        }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Christopher Nolan Reportedly Producing an 'Akira' Trilogy For Warner Bros.
A live action remake of the beloved 1988 anime Akira has been floating around Hollywood for over a decade, attracting and dropping actors and directors at a shocking rate (at one point, Garrett Hedlund and Kristen Stewart were set to star). For whatever reason, this film doesn't want to get made. But Warner Bros. isn't giving up on this project and if a new rumor is to be believed, they've officially reached out to one of the most powerful and popular filmmakers in their regular employ to make it happen. So, how do you feel about not one, but three Akira films produced by Christopher Nolan?
That's the rumor being floated around by Den of Geek, who cite an unnamed source "close to Warner Bros." So, you know, grab your salt and all of that.
Akira, which was a popular manga by Katsuhiro Otomo before it was a film, is a strange and bloody science fiction tale set in post-World War III "Neo Tokyo." It's a cyberpunk epic about bikers and government conspiracies and psychic powers and people screaming "Tetsuoooo!" at the top of their lungs. People love this thing and they have been dreading an American remake since the moment Warner Bros. acquired the rights.
However, if anyone can calm the raging geeks, it's the presence of Nolan. If the guy who made The Dark Knight and Inception can't crack this thing, no one can. Den of Geek can't confirm that Nolan is actually going to direct Akira (this could be a Man of Steel-style situation where he produces and shepherds another filmmaker), but they do know he recently met with one of the directors previously attached to the project to discuss the material. It was literally just announced that he is going to have a mysterious new film in theaters on July 21, 2017. Could this untitled film be Akira? And could it be the first in an epic trilogy?
Since that mystery movie is less than two years away, we should know sooner rather than later whether or not it's Akira. If not, then consider this yet another weird chapter in one of the most tortured Hollywood development stories ever.
Filed Under: Akira, Christopher Nolan


text:
Charities may be asked for donor lists under CRA proposal floated by minister
Dean Beeby
Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay responds to a question during question period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Wednesday April 9, 2014.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press
Canadian charities would have to turn over lists of their donors' identities to the Canada Revenue Agency under a proposal being floated by the Conservative government.
The move is touted as a way to prevent tax-receipt fraud, but some charities are wary of the administrative burden — and the potential close surveillance of groups that criticize government policies.
Revenue Minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay made the suggestion behind closed doors this spring to charities officials in Ottawa as the government seeks ways to tighten regulation of Canada's charitable sector.
Findlay asked officials of the Heart and Stroke Foundation, the Canadian Cancer Society and others for their input, as well as their reaction to a proposal to standardize the format, size and colour of official income-tax receipts for charitable donations.
The consultation took place before a March 26 media event at which Findlay and Kevin Sorenson, minister of state for finance, boasted about the government's achievements in reducing red tape for charities.
The suggestion about turning over donor lists also came as some charities, subject to lengthy audits by the Canada Revenue Agency over their political activities, were feeling vulnerable and threatened by the Harper government.
Findlay's proposals apparently met with "stunned silence" initially, according to one witness, who requested anonymity. At least one charity official later spoke against them.
"You can imagine why neither of these proposals would reduce red tape for charities — and why, given the current climate, there would be significant concern about the intent," said the source.
Pamela Fralick, president and CEO of the Canadian Cancer Society, was also at the closed-door meeting and said the minister was "floating ideas" rather than putting forward concrete proposals.
Fralick said she would need to see more details before the society could adopt a position.
"Perhaps that will come forward in the next budget and we'll have a chance to review it and have a statement at that point," she said in an interview.
A spokesman for Findlay acknowledged there was a "wide-ranging and informal exchange on a variety of topics" at the event, part of the government's continuing efforts to consult with stakeholders.
"The insinuation that the minister has proposed any changes to charities regulations is completely false," press secretary Carter Mann said in an email.
"Any statements that may have been made were part of an exchange of opinions and comments, and were not official pronouncements or formal policy statements."
The Canada Revenue Agency has been battling fraudulent donation receipts for at least a decade, calling it one of the top five tax scams in Canada that costs the treasury hundreds of millions of dollars. Fake receipts can often be produced without the knowledge of a charity.
Four out of five Canadians file their income-tax returns online, without the need to submit receipts, so that scrutiny of most charitable donations occurs only when the tax agency specifically requests to see them.
Findlay's proposal that charities submit donor lists was described as a means to allow the Canada Revenue Agency to match the names with receipts.
But the proposal also surfaces as the agency conducts 52 political-activity audits of targeted charities, including environmental groups that oppose the government's pipeline and oil sands policies, requiring them to turn over emails, memos, letters and a range of other internal documents on threat of losing their charitable status.
Pen Canada, a Toronto-based charity defending freedom of expression, is the latest target, with two tax auditors poring over the books this week. Pen Canada has criticized several government policies, such as the muzzling of publicly paid scientists.
Charities can devote up to 10 per cent of their resources to political activities, although they cannot be partisan by endorsing particular parties or candidates.
But the definition of political activity is open to interpretation, and some charities say they fear the audits are designed to silence their criticisms — creating "advocacy chill," as it has been dubbed.
There are some 86,000 registered charities in Canada, though fewer than one per cent report any political activity.
Follow (at)DeanBeeby on Twitter
17:24ET 23-07-14


Because this is an Alumnae/i Association award for leadership, it traditionally goes to an alumna/us who has worked as a Dobbs volunteer in a number of different jobs over a period of years, showing leadership and dedication in not just one but many areas of service. It recognizes a kind of selfless dedication and willingness to serve, and has gone to alumnae/i who have always been willing to go the extra mile in their service to the school. Staying power as an active leader—long-term service as opposed to intense short-term service—is recognized by means of awarding The Richmond Bowl.
The Anna Howe Faculty Award is an award recognizing former or current faculty members who have helped shape and change the lives of their students. The award is presented to a teacher who has not only excelled in the classroom, but who, through guidance, encouragement, and support has made a meaningful difference to his or her students.
The Eliza Bailey Masters Fellowship Award is given to honor an alumna/us who exemplifies Miss Masters' philosophy through outstanding service to his or her community. While this award recognizes an alumna/us who exemplifies Miss Masters' ideal of service in the world beyond Dobbs, potential candidates should also have maintained their ties to and affection for our alma mater.
Created in 2015 to honor former Head of School Maureen Fonseca, the Young Alumnae/i Award recognizes an alumna/us under the age of 30 who embodies the values and mission of The Masters School—to learn, to strive, to dare, to do, and to be a power for good in the world—and who maintains a deep connection to Masters and to his or her fellow alumnae/i through volunteerism and active involvement in the life of the School.


In honour of World Cerebral Palsy Day, Sydney mum Ilse Martyns shared her daughter Amara's story with Sabrina Rogers-Anderson.
Like most first-time parents, Ilse Martyns and Ramiro Castellaz-Faico prepared the nursery and tried to decide on the perfect baby name while they impatiently awaited the arrival of their precious little bundle. They were a little surprised when Ilse went into labour at 35 weeks, but the pregnancy had gone so well that they weren't concerned.
When their beautiful baby girl Amara was born, they were over the moon. She seemed healthy and was breathing well on her own despite being born prematurely, but she was still placed in the neonatal intensive care unit at Sydney's Royal Hospital for Women to be monitored.
Two weeks later, Ilse and Ramiro were finally able to take Amara home and begin their new life as a family. For the first few months, life seemed almost perfect. But when Ilse took Amara in for her four-month check-up, their world was turned upside down.
When Amara was 12 months old, an MRI finally confirmed what Ilse and Ramiro had long suspected: their daughter had CP. Affecting one in 500 Australian babies, CP is caused by damage to the brain during pregnancy or birth and mainly affects muscle control and movement. But in Amara's case, the brain injury was found to be extensive, which meant that she would have other physical and intellectual impairments.
"We had our moments when we cried and got upset that she wasn't going to be like the other kids, but then we just thought, we have to get on with it and do what's best for her," says Ilse. And so began the cycle of physiotherapy, occupational therapy and speech therapy that comes with CP.
1 October is World Cerebral Palsy Day - visit the website to find out how you can get help or lend a hand.


text:
Luke Cage – The Main Ingredient (Review)
The second season knows what the audience is waiting for.
From the moment it was announced that the lead-up to The Defenders would include standalone series for Luke Cage and Iron Fist, fans anticipated the pairing of Luke Cage and Danny Rand. Even before Luke Cage, let alone Iron Fist, had premiered, fans were clamouring for a team-up miniseries. As early as November 2016, following the release of the first season of Luke Cage, actor Mike Colter was teasing the inevitable collaboration between these two character, "Yeah, we're getting ready to do Heroes For Hire eventually, come on. We're gonna do it."
There's a credible argument to be made that comic book fans were more excited about seeing Luke Cage and Danny Rand on screen together than they were to see the characters teamed up with Matt Murdock or Jessica Jones. After all, the characters have a long shared history. Both originated as part of Marvel's engagement with exploitation cinema during the seventies, thrown together into the same comic book as a pairing when neither character could keep a solo title afloat. Iron Fist and Power Man merged together to launch Power Man and Iron Fist in April 1978.
The unlikely combination of grounded bulletproof black man and aloof rich white kung-fu master stuck a chord with audiences, creating a comic book that was utterly unlike anything else on stands. While neither character could sustain a solo book for an extended period, Power Man and Iron Fist sold well enough that it went from a bimonthly title to a monthly book in May 1981. The series ran for seventy-six issues, finally retired in September 1986, reflecting the changes in an industry about to be rocked by Watchmen, The Dark Knight Returns and Crisis on Infinite Earths.
Danny Rand and Luke Cage have a long shared history together. Still, it is remarkable that Luke Cage managed to pull off this minor organisational feat. Barring Luke's introduction in the first season of Jessica Jones and Frank Castle debut in the second season of Daredevil, Marvel Netflix series generally focus on crossovers of supporting cast members: Jeri Hogarth appearing in A Cold Day in Hell's Kitchen, Rolling Thunder Cannon Punch, Eight Diagram Dragon Palm and Dragon Plays with Fire or Foggy Nelson appearing in AKA Sole Survivor and All Souled Out.
Still, Danny Rand's guest appearance in The Main Ingredient might be the best thing that has been done with this iteration of the character.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: chris claremont, comic books, continuity, crossover, cultural appropriation, danny rand, finn jones, iron fist, jo duffy, luke cage, mysticism, power man, Power Man and Iron Fist | 1 Comment »
The Defenders – Ashes, Ashes (Review)
Posted on August 23, 2017 by Darren
As much as The Defenders is hobbled by the Hand, it is also handicapped by Iron Fist.
It is very clear that the production team heading into The Defenders intended for Iron Fist to be a springboard to the crossover, to move the last pieces into place before the big event miniseries. After all, Iron Fist was heavily marketted as "the Last Defender." More than that, the series devoted pretty much all of its thirteen-episode runtime to fleshing out the Hand, the secretive ninja cult that would serve as the primary antagonists of The Defenders. There was a clear sense that the production team saw Iron Fist as something of an extended lead-in to The Defenders.
Sorry, Danny. But it's true.
There was just one problem with all of this. Iron Fist was terrible. By all accounts, the show was the result of a rushed production cycle that explains some of the shoddiness in terms of practical effects and direction, but its biggest problems were more fundamental than that. Finn Jones was the weakest series lead of the Marvel Netflix series by a considerable distance. Scott Buck was the weakest lead writer on a Marvel Netflix series by a considerable distance. The result was a car crash of a television series.
Given that this car crash was intended to serve as the lead-in to The Defenders, this causes significant problems for the sprawling eight-episode crossover.
Luke is a real hero.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: danny rand, finn jones, iron fist, review, the defenders | 6 Comments »
Iron Fist – Lead Horse Back to Stable (Review)
Posted on March 27, 2017 by Darren
K'un Lun is a notable void at the heart of Iron Fist, even before the closing moments of Dragon Plays With Fire.
There are any number of terrible mistakes that were made during the production of Iron Fist, fundamental flaws that could easily have been avoided by a more competent and committed creative team. The series was assigned a showrunner with a horrific track record. The production team cast a lead actor without any raw charisma and who was incapable of doing his own stunts, while refusing to put the character in a mask. The series focused more on board room antics than kung fu fun. The Hand were used as the primary antagonist.
You shall not pass.
However, one of the most grating disappointments is the simple fact that a lot of the really fun and interesting stuff about Danny Rand happens long before he stumbles back into New York in Snow Gives Way. There is a solid argument to be made that Danny Rand is a third- or fourth-tier comic book character, but there undeniable cool parts of the Iron Fist mythos. None of them take place in the offices of Rand Industries. Iron Fist is the story of a man who gained his power by punching a dragon in a heart. Whatever an adaptation of Iron Fist should be, it should never be boring.
And, yet, for whatever reason, the first season of Iron Fist makes a point to consciously shoot around the more impressive and distinctive parts of the Iron Fist mythos, reducing its title character to a cut-rate (and ironically trust-fund) Matt Murdock. Danny left K'un Lun behind, and it was a terrible mistake.
The watcher on the pass.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: appropriation, asian, cheap, danny rand, Dragon, finn jones, iron fist, k'un lun, racism | Leave a comment »
Iron Fist – Immortal Emerges From Cave (Review)
Immortal Emerges From Cave might just be the best episode of the first season of Iron Fist.
Of course, Immortal Emerges From Cave is not a good episode of television. It is bedevilled by all the other issues with Iron Fist, from inconsistent characterisation to dead-end subplots to pacing issues. It even adds a few new problems of its own, especially with a ham-fisted and ill-judged attempt to bring the character of Bride of Nine Spiders into live action. Immortal Emerges From Cave is unlikely to make much of an impression, and it certainly doesn't rank with the other best episodes of the Marvel Netflix series.
"Three men enter! One man (or two men) leave!"
At the same time, Immortal Emerges From Cave is the episode of Iron Fist that perhaps comes closest to fulfilling its own ambition. Immortal Emerges From Cave is a relatively self-contained narrative in the middle of the season, in which Danny finds himself forced to compete in a tournament against the Hand in order to save an innocent life. It is a hokey premise, but one that leads to a series of fairly middling set pieces in which Danny Rand works his way through various "levels" in pursuit of his goal.
Immortal Emerges From Cave feels very much like some forgotten z-list direct-to-video martial arts film from the nineties, a pulpy and absurd excuse to string together a collection of fight scenes. The result is not spectacular by any measure, but it is far more entertaining than the meandering story being told around it. Immortal Emerges From Cave might not succeed on general terms, or even on its own terms, but it at least has a strong sense of its own identity. That is enough to put it ahead of the rest of the season.
Glowing reviews.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: exploitation, fatality, finn jones, iron fist, kung-fu, mortal kombat, RZA, Television | 4 Comments »
Iron Fist – Shadow Hawk Takes Flight (Review)
Who is Danny Rand?
It is a question that any television show should be asking of its lead. The audience will be spending an extended period of time with this character in this world, so the character needs to be interesting and compelling in their own right. The other Netflix Marvel shows made a point of answering this challenge out of the gate. Into the Ring made it clear that Matt Murdock was a ball of repressed rage buried beneath Catholic Guilt. AKA Ladies' Night established Jessica Jones as a self-destructive super-strong survivor. Moment of Truth sets up Luke as the immovable object.
There are probably easier ways to make sure that Finn Jones stops giving interviews.
There is a recurring sense that Iron Fist understands that establishing its lead character is an important thing to do. Certainly, Snow Gives Way spends enough time on Danny Rand asserting his identity as the sole heir of the Rand Corporation. Shadow Hawk Takes Flight locks Danny in a psychiatric institution in which he is forced to prove his identity to people who believe that he has lost his mind. These are all plot points that, in theory, hinge upon Danny demonstrating who he is. They are, in theory, a solid way to introduce the character to audiences.
However, in practice, there is a recurring sense that Iron Fist simply doesn't care about making Danny Rand interesting. Iron Fist seems to think that it is enough that the character exists and loosely resembles a superhero. Just like Iron Fist seems to think that it is enough that the show exists and loosely resembles a superhero show.
Not quite a glowing endorsement.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: arkham asylum, characters, comic books, danny rand, finn jones, iron fist, psychiatric institution, serious | 4 Comments »
Iron Fist – Snow Gives Way (Review)
So, what is Iron Fist about?
To be fair, it is a tough question to answer. The final Netflix series, publicised as "the Last Defender", seems to have been a hard sell. Indeed, the emphasis on the show's position as "the Last Defender" recalls the marketing of Captain America: The First Avenger. In both cases, Marvel was selling a property that posed a creative challenge by tethering it to a looming mass-market crossover, counting on its position as "the last piece of the puzzle" to draw in audiences that might otherwise hold little interest in the material.
Fist first.
And, by and large, Iron Fist is defined by these outside demands. Any audience member trying to figure out what Iron Fist is or what purpose it serves will arguably get a better sense of that by tracing the outline established by the other Marvel Netflix shows. Iron Fist is not a television show that defines itself, instead existing in a narrative and marketing space that has already been defined for it by the demands of other multimedia. Iron Fist is not so much a television show as a bunch of stuff that fits in that space before The Defenders.
That much is evident even as early as Snow Gives Way, the first episode of the Netflix series. The pilot is arguably as instructive in what it fails to do as it is in what it actually accomplishes. It eats up fifty minutes of airtime without providing the audience with any real sense of who these people are, what they want, or what the series is trying to say that isn't on the agenda already set up by the other Marvel Netflix shows.
He's acting. Really hard.
Filed under: Television | Tagged: danny rand, finn jones, iron fist, marvel, netflix, pop culture, the defenders, the immortal iron fist | 6 Comments »


Coca i Fito Aloja Negre 2015 Spain > Catalonia > Wine > Red > Garnacha A Kensington Wine Market exclusive and a must if you're interested in checking out lesser-known wine regions! Spain's Falset Valley may well be the greatest unknown wine region in the world and this Aloja Negre, made by the brother team of Tony and Miguel Coca is among the cream of the Falset crop.
Lagar de Costa Rias Baixas Maio 5 2015 Spain > Wine > White > Albarino Lagar De Costa is a family owned winery located in the north western corner of Spain....famous for the white wine Albarino. This sophisticated, stylish, white is a Kensington Wine Market exclusive and one we are proud to represent.
Ortega Rioja Don Quintin 2011 Spain > Rioja > Wine > Red > Tempranillo Ortega Ezquerros is a family-run production based in Rioja, Spain. Starting in 1896 as a small collection of vines, Ortega Ezquerro continuously adapts and grows with the ever-changing wine environment, whilst maintaining their traditions and beliefs.
KJ Wines Circus Bear 2014 France > Languedoc-Roussillon > Wine > Red > Grenache Circus Bear is Kimberly Jones's latest addition from Maury, a village situated in the foothills of the Pyrenees - a stone's throw from the Spanish border.
Carlisle Derivative White Blend USA > California > Sonoma County > Wine > White > Semillon A Kensington Wine Market exclusive, and a solid 88 points from Robert Parker's Wine Advocate for the 2013 vintage! The review: "While highly recognized for his red winemaking ability, Mike Officer can certainly do nice things with white grapes, too.
Cotswolds Single Malt Whisky 50mL England > World > Scotch and Other Whiskies > Mini Bottles > Other The first release of Cotswolds single malt to find its way to Canada! The whisky is made from locally grown floor malted barley. It is matured in American oak and reconditioned ex-red wine casks.
Hyde 1938 No. 6 Presidents Reserve 50ml Ireland > Scotch and Other Whiskies > Mini Bottles > Cooley This is a 50ml. The Day 6 release in the KWM 2017 Whisky Advent Calendar is an Irish single blend. It is also the Hyde Distillery's 6th special release, released in honour of Ireland's First Prime Minister Douglas Ross Hyde.
Bodegas BaiGorr Baigorri Reserva 2010 Spain > Wine > Red > Tempranillo The Baigorri winery is located in the town of Samaniego at the foot of the "Sierra de Cantabria" mountains.


Today, in a visit to the International Antarctic Center in Christchurch, President Clinton announced the declassification and release of satellite images of Antarctica that will help scientists understand one of the world's most unique ecosystems. The images are the latest released through an Administration initiative that makes previously classified data vailable to the scientific community. In addition, the President announced that New Zealand is joining a U.S.-led program that promotes science and environmental education around he world.
Working Together to Protect the Environment. The United States and New Zealand work closely, and in cooperation with other nations, on a wide range of environmental issues, ncluding climate change, biodiversity, and ocean protection. One of the major successes is the international effort to protect Antarctica. Under the Antarctic Treaty of 1959, pearheaded by the United States, this remote continent is reserved exclusively for peaceful purposes. The International Antarctic Center, supported by the National Science foundation, is the headquarters of the U.S. and New Zealand Antarctic research programs and the staging ground for much of the scientific research taking place in Antarctica. Major research priorities include monitoring the Antarctic ozone hole and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.


text:
3 Strategies For Golf Clubs Online Today You Need To Use
The coach on the opposite crew came over to me recognizing my agony and said "good name". There was nothing good about it for me. It was fact versus reality! The stroll house with my brooding cousin was as painful as wearing a go well with of armor and being pelted with Randy Johnson fastballs. This incident jogged my memory of Mark Twain's 1889 novel, "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court docket." He addressed the 'kill the ump' sentiment, literally, in a sport of baseball the Connecticut Yankee organized for King Arthur, and the sentiment continues figuratively into trendy times.
Cast golf clubs supply a softer steel than a stainless-steel, and it permits you to have extra feel for the ball. Blade style irons also mean you can shape your pictures with higher ease than a extra forgiving golf membership. Some great examples of this type of membership are the Titleist 695 irons, or the Callaway X Tour irons. The Cost of those ranges from $800-$900 depending on options.
Is the individual hoarding and hiding objects?
• Robust gamers. All of those teams certainly had stand-out stars that shined brighter than others on their workforce. Each crew still had to work in live performance with each other to execute the plan on their journey to multiple championships. Michael Jordan, Derek Jeter and Brett Favre are Corridor of Fame players, however they couldn't win the championships alone. They wanted a surrounding cast of gamers who played a task within the total workforce success as effectively.
As a player, the fist thing to do on the court docket is to disclaim your opponent the chance to play as he or she would want to play. In other phrases, we wish to force our challenger into tough and uncomfortable situations. To succeed in this finish, one ought to research the opponent, search for weaknesses and exploit these faults. A crew doesn't determine on the mode of attack. This mode is presented, as an alternative, by the opponent's weaknesses. The one choice is whether or not or to not use that weak spot. The team does one of the best at exploiting the faults of the challenger, stands the higher probability of successful the game.
Would you like your life to be described like that?
Fredrik Jacobson was in an excellent position to once again seize victory on the European Tour, however Kaymer's file-breaking round knocked him off of heart stage and turned him into one other captivated observer. Jacobson arrived on the 18th tee in second place, three strokes behind Kaymer, who was sipping refreshments within the clubhouse and could solely be tied with an albatross on the par-5 finishing gap. After processing the situation, Jacobson played the 18th conservatively, guaranteeing par and sole possession of 2nd place.
Do you keep in mind the video footage of Michael shrugging his shoulders with outstretched arms running back down the court after draining what seemed like his 20th 3-pointer in a row? Michael was on fireplace and the Bulls rolled to their second title in as a few years. The Jordan 6 Rings dropped to commemorate this title additionally featured a white higher with laser print graphics. The midsole used black. Black was also used on the tongue and is the one shoe in the pack with a solid-colored tongue.
It is usually believed that one other golf membership or society was organized in Savanna Georgia across the similar time interval. The #3 and #5 wooden are commonly referred to as fairway woods, as a result of they are most often used through the second shot of play, when you need to be on the green.
The Thing You Need To Understand About Sports News Live And Why
What Everybody Else Does When It Comes To Academy Outdoor Sports And What You Should Do Different
How To Find Out Everything There's To Learn About Golf Clubs Online In 5 Basic Steps
What Everyone is Saying About Best Golf Equipment Is Dead Wrong And Why
Rumors, Lies and Golf Clubs Online


The aim of the event was to become familiar with Joomla 4.0 and especially the new backend template, to report and confirm bugs, to create and test patches and to write documentation.
With 83 participants, who met in their JUG, and countless Joomlers across the globe taking part from their homes, the event was very popular. Everyone was very welcome, newcomers, beginners or professionals, agency owners or administrators of a club page, no matter what was their previous knowledge.
The event started at 09.30am with a live video greeting from Alexander Metzler, Joomla Vice President, who thanked everyone for giving up their free time to take part.
Many thanks to all supporters, whether alone at home, in the office, at community meetings or at the participating JUGs, for helping to get the new version up and running. And of course, a big thank you to the organizers and especially to the sponsors who donate the drinks and pizza.
Afterwards Alexander Metzler gave the floor to Benjamin Trenkle, who first presented the daily program and gave a short introduction, explaining how bugs are reported in Joomla, what steps are necessary to fix them and how to set up a computer to test bug fixes. A special highlight was the clever distribution of tasks in lists for "Discoverer", "Adventurer" and "Conqueror", which was well received by the participants.
It wasn't just code that was written or tested, those who could not or did not want to program were invited by Mike Brandner, Documentation Translation Team (JDT), and Sandra Decoux (Marketing & Communication) to support the project with JDOCs, the official project documentation.
Then the teams started. As all the participants were connected online, it was not just typical beginners' questions that could be answered quickly. Experts were also available with advice and support. As a result, very tricky and specialised issues could also be worked on and quickly resolved.
Christian Schmidt, head of JUG Munich, shared regularly successes and motivated the participants, while Christiane Maier-Stadtherr, JUG Munich, was committed to looking after the chat rooms. David Jardin, Joomla Security Strike Team Lead, gave the final words, to thank everyone who participated and round off the successful PBF18 at about 5pm.
During the event, 71 test results were reported and 5 new pull requests were written. The charts of the JDocs showed great success with 17 new translators (global) with 1,434 improvements.
Overall it was, once again, a great atmosphere where mutual help was of particular importance. The learning curve on this day was very steep for all participants, with rays of hope as well as "A-ha" moments. For many attendees the day did not end here and they have continued to work and contribute to make Joomla better. The PBF was a lot of fun, like a good party, with good food and great people.
Everything important can still be found on www.pizza-bugs-fun.de (in German).
You can see some pictures of the event here.