text:
As explained by Mark Cuban
5 reasons the FCC might be wrong about net neutrality
Jonathan Vanian Feb 28, 2015 - 7:00 AM CST
This week the FCC passed new rules on net neutrality, which were essentially designed to limit the ability of internet service providers (ISP) to either slow down or boost the speeds of websites. While many experts praised the ruling, not everyone was thrilled by the outcome.
Who else should be regulated on the Net? Who is too big to fail, w little competition and has too much power over our wallets and experience
— Mark Cuban (@mcuban) February 27, 2015
On this week's Structure Show podcast, Mark Cuban — the billionaire businessman who made his name in tech and now owns the Dallas Mavericks and is featured on the television show Shark Tank — came on to opine on net neutrality and why he thinks the new rules are bad for the internet and bad for competition. What follows are a couple takeaways on why Cuban believes net neutrality will do more harm than good.
The Structure Show RSS Feed
1. The internet is working fine the way it is
"Look, I've had my same position on net neutrality for more than ten years and that is I think what is happening on the net works. I mean, I was involved in the internet right when it started. We started Audionet, which turned into Broadcast.com back in 1995 and for the past 20 years things have worked. And now the net neutrality folks seem to be getting some momentum creating the perception that the big ISPs that got us to this point have now become bad citizens and they are going to ruin the internet unless they're regulated. And from my perspective, I like the way technology goes and I like the competition and I like the way things are going. I think introducing regulations via the FCC is a huge mistake and I said so."
2. Government bureaucracy is worse than ISP dominance
"Comcast has always had that power, right? It's not like [company]AT&T[/company] and [company]Comcast[/company] had just recently become super big companies and they've changed their actions. I mean, one of the tenets of net neutrality is that no website, no legal website, should ever be discriminated against. Name me one that has been."
3. Don't worry about broadband providers. Worry about Google and Apple
"If you're going to talk about concerns, what's the fastest growing access methodology for the internet? It's mobile, right? And who controls access to mobile? [company]Google[/company] and [company]Apple[/company]. So the far greater risk, and I still don't think it requires legislation, but the far greater risk is OK…if Apple decides that Comcast's app is not right, Comcast is not going to be able to reach most of their market to get access through an app to their own broadband, which is crazy when you think about it but it's a possibility."
4. Net neutrality laws could end up like patent laws
"For all the years that we've been in the tech industry since we've been about 8 or 9 years old, the majority of tech companies did not get involved in DC. They did not get involved in regulation. This is all a recent phenomenon. And now, everybody's got a lobbyist, everybody's involved, everybody's got their opinion and I think it backfired on us, just like patent laws backfired on us. Look what happened with patents. That's what happens when…legislation gets involved with technology. And so I just think that if you're looking for pain points that the broadband ISPs aren't it."
5. Remember Janet Jackson's infamous wardrobe malfunction? That's the FCC for you
"What if there's some decision that just shocks everybody … It's happened time and time again where FCC regulations get tested, the decision goes against the FCC and they fight it for years. Just like the wardrobe malfunction from the Super Bowl in 2004, they spent money for 8 years. The FCC that you want to be the department of the internet is the company that spent taxpayer money trying to cover, debating, arguing the penalty of showing Janet Jackson's nipple … Now those people who want to protect decency in the United States and the content that's delivered over the internet is the purview of the FCC, where else would you go?"
Structure Show
47 Responses to "5 reasons the FCC might be wrong about net neutrality"
Michael Elling March 9, 2015
Why not disclose that Cuban is far from biased on the issue. AT&T and the Mavericks have significant commercial relationships. Also, Cuban appears on AT&T ads.
dosent matter March 5, 2015
whats the median speed in america?
Steve King March 4, 2015
Readers should also know that your "anti-consumer organization" AEI's focus and objective is "expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity and strengthening free enterprise." You know, free enterprise, the thing that actually provides a job for you unless you are on the government dole. And by "non-ideological consumer" you actually mean "liberal consumer" since Liberalism and Progressivism are much more Ideological than Conservatism since only one of these actually has a proven track record over history.
Andrew March 3, 2015
That is capitalism at work for you. If you want better services you better be ready to pay more money for them. It's the same as with anything else that you buy anywhere at any given time. The market controls the demand, pricing and availability of those services. As long as there are companies getting into the digital realm (which will always happen) there will always be a demand for ISPs to serve up their content.
Sure, let's just require that everyone get the same package, because it's only fair. So we all should get the luxury edition of a car when we go to purchase one because its not fair that we should have to pay to enjoy those same benefits that other people are willing to pay for. Why should a car manufacturer ever tier the products that they offer?
What self-entitled, preposterous belief system has infected our country to believe that unlimited access to our services should be free from economic pressures unlike anything else in the world?
It is clear that this is a government grab for power. Like any other entity our beloved government has become concerned with one thing, self preservation, which means that it is no longer accountable to the people it allegedly represents. What kills me is that our citizens are uninformed enough to think that our government is still working for us and doing the good thing by regulating what was already working. Never mind that our government is not disillusioned by such a false sense of trust when it comes to the American people. Don't be disillusioned by the feel-good story line of "protecting the internet" when all evidence simply states otherwise.
Nissan Thomas, Esq. March 2, 2015
Mark Cuban is an idiot!! Netflix paid Comcast for faster access, so the issue of the internet was working fine the way it was, is not accurate. Smaller start ups would have to come up with more resources to play in this unregulated world, and those with deep pockets would survive, while the rest would vanish, just like Comcast, ATT, and Verizon would want. Less competition, so that they can charge consumers higher fees.
Chris March 2, 2015
So who honestly believes their internet is going to get better and/or cheaper as a result of these new government regulations?
Ben March 2, 2015
Its going to stay the same.
kemorr March 2, 2015
While Google is very good at search, it's also very easy to point your browser to any of several other search engines out there, same with any of their other services. And for Apple, the mobile device industry is incredibly competitive and the personal computing space also. Google and Apple make a lot of money in very competitive markets because people freely choose them over several other competing products in their respective markets. This is a perfect example of why competition is good. This is in many ways the antithesis to the broadband provider market in many places.
Dave March 1, 2015
This article is pretty terrible. #3 basically lasts out what Verizon, Comcast and AT&T were hoping to do with 'fast-lanes'.
I hope Google puts a giant hole in AT&T's bottom line.
Matt March 1, 2015
AT&T net income in 2014 = $6.2 billion
Google net income in 2014 = $14.4 billion
Now who do you think wields more power over the internet? I would be equally scared giving more and more control to Google as I would giving it to AT&T…
yonian March 1, 2015
Readers should know that this study was done for the American Enterprise Institute, a Koch brothers financed anti-consumer organization. Comcast's allies are going to flood every public forum with misleading comments like Richard Bennet's and it's likely that libertarians will agree automatically because "government is always worse than private industry". Non-ideological consumers should know better. Fasten your seat belts, we're in for a bumpy ride. These guys have unlimited money and they will never give up.
Richard Bennett March 2, 2015
The Koch brothers do not fund AEI.
Joe Cruz March 1, 2015
Cuban is DEAD wrong. The Internet has now become a necessity, not a luxury. The ISPs (whose margins are said to exceed 90%) have had decades to improve service, expand service and yet with all of their cash flow, our average speeds in America are worse than most other Western nations while we endure the highest charges for Internet service and without a doubt what is clearly abominable customer service. As a billionaire, I'm sure Mark is oblivious to this (and probably presumes that's just fine, if you don't like it, just switch carriers – I would encourage him to read any of the anecdotes surrounding Comcast customers who have TRIED to cancel their service) – cementing their existing ability to charge for "premium" services (which would be defined by them or to "slow down" certain content (perhaps that of their competitors?) is insane. The FCC made the only decision they could because it was and remains the only RIGHT decision. Let's also not forget that we only have the Internet because of the massive investment of the federal government in the first place, and that capacity was transferred to industry at ridiciulously low transfer rates in the first place, so it's not as though they are defending intellectual property they created or discovered. They found a cash cow which they, of course, do not wish to give up. But this is too important to leave to a handful of shareholder motivated companies who will only look to this quarter's EPS rather than what's best in the long term interest of their customers and our country.
It's interesting how many suckers still believe US broadband speed is worse than it is in other developed countries when there is absolutely no legitimate empirical support for that nonsensical claim. I've written two studies on this subject, one comparing the US to the OECD nations and another comparing it to G7 nations and they find we're doing quite well. Chris Yoo did another study comparing the US to Europe that also finds we're doing fine, Roslyn Layton and Mike Horney find we're investing like mad, and Bret Swanson points out that American use more bandwidth than anyone else.
GigaOm hasn't reported on these studies, but they're out there for anyone who really cares to learn the facts.
U.S. vs. European Broadband Deployment: What Do the Data Say? – Yoo
Internet traffic as a basic measure of broadband health – Swanson
Innovation, Investment, and Competition in Broadband and the Impact on America's Digital Economy – Layton & Horney
The Whole Picture: Where America's Broadband Networks Really Stand – Bennett et al.
G7 Broadband Dynamics – Bennett
On the other side, you have an advertising survey by an English teacher and some interns teacher working for the Open Technology Institute saying select foreign capitols claim to have faster broadband than cherry-picked US towns. Even if the ads were true, this doesn't prove the point.
What are you gonna believe, actual data or carefully chosen ads?
We are better than I expected, but a lot slower than the top speeds, and this doesn't address that there are many placed in the country that don't have access to those kinds of speeds…
http://www.netindex.com/download/allcountries/
Elisabeth Zguta March 1, 2015
I agree with Mark Cuban. The worst scenario is always risk of regulation which never keeps up to the times – let the market swing and make its own adjustments
Derek Kerton March 1, 2015
Let me addresss #1, "The Internet is working fine the way it is."
Yes. Yes it has been working fine. We've enjoyed a pretty great, liberal, wild-west Internet so far. Too bad that the major ISPs have tried to change it at every turn. And eventually succeeded.
You see, the FCC has ensured a Neutral Network for decades. But the ISPs never agreed that they had the authority to do so. So, in 2010, Verizon sued the FCC, accusing them of exceeding their authority. Verizon won, so the protections our Neutral Network had enjoyed fell. Get it? We HAD Network Neutrality all along, but Verizon sued it away, and now we need it back.
The answer to "why do we need Title II" is simple: Verizon killed the other rules we had that were working, so we need a replacement if we want the Internet to keep working. Also, recently, we've had our first known examples of "an internet fast lane" with the Netflix and Comcast deal. Acting like these recent changes didn't happen is either:
– deliberately misleading and ingenuous; or
– ignorant of the recent facts.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2015/02/verizon-is-mad-that-its-huge-net-neutrality-gamble-backfired/
Saying "It has worked fine up until now." Is like saying "the USA has worked fine until now, why should we change how we govern" in 1861, even as the south opened fire on Fort Sumter. Lincoln understood he was at war. Cuban would rather we don't.
PS, I was going to use the Lusitania example, but didn't want to Godwin, so went Civil War instead.
Byron Bennett March 1, 2015
I'm not sure which root causes are at play, but the things that need to be fixed are:
1. Why are our broadband speeds not near the top of the list when compared to other countries?
2. Why is our price for mb/s out of line with the rest of the developed world?
3. Why is this so drastically more pronounced when it comes to mobile data?
Show some data that supports your claims. I've looked for it and don't believe it exists. Like so many other net neutrality bigots, you're a victim of false belief.
You are quick to call someone who doesn't support Comcast and its powerfull allies a bigot, but you don't reveal your own label, "Visiting Fellow, AEI Center for Internet, Communications and Technology Policy". I suggest that anyone reading this who doesn't know the agenda of the American Enterprise Institute spend a few minutes doing their own research.
http://www.aei.org/author/richard-bennett/
OK, according to the link you provided, the average BB speed in the US is 33.3 Mbps, more than fast enough to do anything you want to do on the Internet. The G8
average is 28.9, OECD is 27.6. EU is 27.5, and APEC is 25.1.
I don't see your problem. Is somebody going to claim Speedtest is funded by the Koch brothers?
Neil February 28, 2015
Nearly every commenter in support of net neutrality here pulls out the canard that there is a dramatic lack of competition in broadband. If that is the case, why does the FCC refuse to do a market analysis to justify the rules? Perhaps it's because the FCC'S own section 706 broadband reports show that competition in broadband has been growing over the past 10 years, while speeds have continued to climb and prices have maintained. In short, there are very few of the features of an anticompetitive market. Is it a perfectly competitive market? No, although wireless, with 4 nationwide carriers and dozens of regional and local carriers, is pretty damn competitive. But it is competitive enough to discipline bad market behavior. If it isnt, the FCC should show that first.
Ryan Mathis March 1, 2015
Growing? Sorry but I can't see how a market that is seeing increased consolidation and less consumer choice then before the 2005 reclassification counts as growing. Unless you're using the previous 4Mbps definition of broadband and throwing DSL, mobile, and satellite into the mix as acceptable alternatives for wired broadband. Since we deregulated the way we did shedding Title II, and completely discarded local loop unbundling for residential (LLU is still used for B2B) we've seen continued consolidation and even less choice than before the FCC's 2005 initiative.
One ISP per wire was never going to be a competitive market and the broadband over powerlines tech that Powell was banking on never came to fruition so on top of the problems we were going to have regardless the one thing that could have at least made a bad situation bearable ended up falling short.
The idea that intermodal competition and facilities based ISP's where infrastructure and services are run by one company would lead to broadband investment boom was incredibility short sighted.
-why does the FCC refuse to do a market analysis to justify the rules?-
Correct me if I'm wrong but they already have.
Source: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-329160A1.pdf
tim March 2, 2015
Just think, if the cable companies hadn't spent all that money upgrading their network, DSL would still be a highly competitive option. ATT and Comcast could duke it out with price wars, special offers and funny commercials. Except the cable companies tried to run away with the whole market by offering mbps that no on could match. That's when government needs to step in to make sure nothing like that ever happens again.
Rielly February 28, 2015
Who here has ever been impacted by the discriminatory actions that Net Neut is trying to prohibit? No one. This is yet another example of an over reaching, nanny state administration implementing a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
chad March 1, 2015
Who here? Do you have a netflix subscription? Because those tolls will eventually be passed on down to us if you do.
Ryan Mathis February 28, 2015
It's funny that Cuban mentions too big to fail, because with almost no one even attempting to address the severe lack of competition, companies like Comcast are quickly become too big too fail.
dreamtiger February 28, 2015
Cuban's #1 point is he likes the internet as it is. The purpose of the FCC's ruling is to keep it that way, so you need to wonder what Cuban is really selling here. There is a ton of slippery, deceptive double-talk being promulgated by anti Net Neutrality players right now. One example is that they are for a free internet as opposed to one regulated by the gov't, when we clearly need regulation to keep the net free, and so on.
Mike February 28, 2015
The Janet Jackson event was under a Republican FCC!
FCC staffers knew it was doomed legally, but politicos insisted.
Shiggity February 28, 2015
The problem with Mark Cuban is that his viewpoints were shockingly different when his net worth wasn't north of 1 billion dollars. Nothing but a flip flopper.
Billion-aires HAVE to hate net neutrality. The basis of their wealth is largely predicated on the exact opposite.
kemorr February 28, 2015
So his #1 point, apparently the basis for his whole argument, is an example from 20 years ago and incidentally one in which he started a company and ended up making a lot of money when he sold the company. Who wouldn't like that story.
I think the irony is that ISP have clearly demonstrated that the would prefer to extract more money from their current aging infrastructure by charging more to those who use more data and create fast and slow lanes. I don't think this is theoretical either, there are several examples where they have done this or tried/discussed doing this. The only reason they can do this because in many markets around the country there is little to no real competition for broadband access. AND if those fast lane/slow lane models continued to evolve, the company that he helped start 20 yrs ago and made a lot of money from MIGHT have been put at a disadvantage today compared to established startups and might NOT have even made it, let alone be sold for a large sum of money.
IF this was a free market and there was truly competition then I would agree that regulation is not needed. I think that is a big IF given the statistics on broadband access around the country especially compared to other developed nations.
So really it comes down to two things. Is internet access or broadband access something we think should be widely available to everyone or is it a luxury for those who have enough disposable income. And understanding when markets work and when they don't, something that is often misunderstood.
Bottom line, his example of why things work very well could NOT be true in the future if he got his way.
Obviously he doesn't feel this way, but he also doesn't understand some of the principles that allowed his success 20 years ago. (Which is often true, that kind of success is often more about being in the right place at the right time with the right person)
Ron Barr February 28, 2015
It's tenets, not tenants.
Joe Wood February 28, 2015
1. No it isn't. Otherwise Netflix wouldn't have to pay the ISPs
2. The government is answerable to the public, the ISPs to their shareholders.
3. That point is not mutually exclusive.
4. False analogy. Patents aren't bad, patent trolls are. Title 2 does not require any subjective judgement.
5. Title policing has been working fine for other mediums. This is not a censorship issue.
Netflix does not pay for priority routing. It simply pays for an Internet connection, as does every business. If it wants more it pays more.
If the Internet is the 21st century medium for press and bloggers, than isn't government control like the government deciding to regulate and own all of the printing presses in the country? Why doesn't that scare you? It's fine when your favorite political figure is in the White House, but what about when they aren't?
Cost, the FCC estimates that Internet "tax" will be as much as $10.00 and that they are not doing anything to stop it. The only FCC promise is to not "enforce" parts of the new regulations, but it will be government it self that will impose them and the courts that will enforce them.
Does your Netflixs work? Yes, than don't be so blind. Slaves are made in such ways.
sachanta February 28, 2015
For the record, Netflix does pay for priority routing… because they have had to keep their business alive…. read more on this link for proof.
http://technical.ly/philly/2014/05/09/graph-shows-netflix-speeds-changed-comcast-deal-comcast-roundup/
Daryl February 28, 2015
That graph is somewhat misleading as it just shows the net result, but nothing about the backend. If you want a picture of what happened, this article is a good read: http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/02/heres-comcast-netflix-deal-structured-numbers.html
In essense…. Netflix was paying Cogent (3rd party Transit provider) for the CDN's internet access. Cogent in turn promised Netflix they had the capacity Netflix required into the networks at Comcast and other ISPs. They lied. The result is that there was a bottleneck in the connection points between Cogent's backbone and Comcast's Backbone network. (In simple terms. Netflix was paying for a 10 Gig link to the internet from Cogent. Cogent in turn only had a 8 gig link connecting themselves to Comcast's network.).
Netflix's deal had nothing to do with paying for Priority access. What they did was pay to directly connect their CDN to Comcast's network. This means that the speed increases that were observed in the above graph can be directly attributed to 2 very simple and explainable reasons. 1. Netflix is still paying for a 10 gig link, but they are able to use all 10 gigs of it and not having to worry about the bottleneck at the interconnection point. 2. Netflix's servers are now connected directly to the Comcast network, thereby moving the traffic closer to the consumers and removing several hops that it used to take thru the cogent network before getting to the comcast network.
So the uptick people can see in the speed changes can be attributed to the fact Netflix moved their servers much closer to the users, thereby removing several bottlenecks and additional latency generated by being further away. It's not because Comcast is treating their traffic any differently than before.
Mcbeese February 28, 2015
Up until recently, companies like Netflix and the ISPs exchanged traffic with peering agreements. Now Comcast is charging Netflix for access, and because so many of us have no choice other than Comcast, Netflix is forced to pay. If our Broadband market were more competitive, Netflix could simply refuse to pay and turn off the tap to Comcast, and Netflix customers would leave Comcast and switch to another network, or switch to another video service accessible via Comcast. Comcast has shown that it is willing to abuse it's position in the network. Today it is Netflix …who knows what it might be tomorrow?
Not quite. Netflix still uses CDN networks for access to the internet. The CDN network in turn pays a backbone provider for access to the Internet. The Backbone providers then have peering agreements with each other to exchange data between their 2 networks. The problem is that Netflix is generating so much traffic that often the peering between the CDN's network provider and the big national ISP's is being constrained. The Netlfix/Comcast deal is nothing more than Netflix paying Comcast's CDN business so that Netflix content is now directly on Comcast's network and thereby bypasses those interconnection bottlenecks. There is nothing illegal or shady by Comcast happening there, at it's core it's simply Netlfix having to consider factors outside of price in it's choosing a CDN provider. [namely, How good is the CDN's network provider quality, and can they absorb the bandwidth across the upstream peering locations].
The issue is Netflix has made complaining to the court of public opinion an art form in their attempts to get better deals.
Something to Consider…. Comcast has built a national Fiber backbone network. Verizon and AT&T bought some of the original National Backbone network providers (Worldcom / The Original AT&T / UUNet). Amazon has built it's own CDN Network (Amazon S3). Google has built their own Datacenters and National Backbone network to connect their datacenters to all the backbone networks (Including nation ISPs). Netflix still just purchases CDN access from 3rd party CDN networks. In all these cases, except Netflix, The companies have invested capital heavily in order to improve the quality of their product, have more control over the customer's experience, and to lower the ongoing costs of doing business by bringing in-house some of the largest reoccuring expenses (Internet Access/ Transport/ Storage/ etc). In turn, it puts them on a better footing when dealing with the other players. Comcast, verizon, and AT&T all have backbones that generate almost as much internet traffic as their residental IP's consume. Amazon's network of CDN locations which were originally built to house their own websites, now also generates additional revenue as they are able to resell the extra capacity…. which doesn't cost nearly as much to add after the initial buildout needed for their own needs. Google, by building their own backbone is often able to get incredibly good deals on interconnection with other providers/ISPs because they do so much of the backhaul on the traffic they generate. Between "free" interconnection (peering) they receive, and the paid interconnection agreements they have with other backbones, their total transit costs are still cheaper than any "traditional" arrangement a company generating that much traffic would be outlaying with a traditional CDN network or with commercial access with a backbone ISP.
Netflix in turn hasn't made any major capital investments in their internet access needs. They are spending their money to contract with 3rd parties. As such they do not have the control over that access that other large players do. (They can complain to their CDN network, but they don't have any say in the dealings between their CDN and the CDN's ISP).
Traditionally Free Peering/Interconnection agreements were based off the theory that both parties were exchanging nearly identical amounts of traffic between the two networks, That both companies had invested similarly in their networks with similar cost structures, and that the heavy lifting of the traffic backhaul would be assumed by the originating network with the pass-off to the 2nd network happening at the closest peering location. Based off these general assumptions, It's obvious that Netflix has never been in a position to qualify for any sort of free peering agreement with any network.
sachanta March 1, 2015
Daryl,
Agreed. Netflix is not paying prioritization but rather for connectivity between carriers that is based on both carriers sharing having roughly the same amount of bandwidth passing through each other's network.
However, how is it that Comcast decided that Netflix customers get shorted here as opposed to all of Cogent's customers? It is possible that they could have just told Cogent that too much traffic is coming from their network and ask them to either pay up or carry more traffic on their pipes? The relationship (peering agreement) Comcast has is with Cogent not with Netflix.
This is not as innocent or academic as the whole thing is made to sound. I am sure this is a similar set of issues the power grid, phone networks as well as the world wide postal system experiences…. and yet over the last 100 years, they have been able to evolve, grown up and be profitable under a regulator who has set some basic rules of engagement. I don't see what the FCC did as anything but that.
Daryl March 2, 2015
that's the thing… Comcast didn't decide that Netflix got the shaft. There was a bottleneck at the interconnection point that was impacting all traffic coming from the Cogent network. Netflix traffic just happens to be the most visible because of the amount of data they are sending, and the fact that data is very sensitive to latency.
Netflix made the business decided to bypass Cogent because Cogent was not addressing the problem to their satisfaction. It wasn't the first time which Cogent has had issues with their interconnection with another network, and Comcast isn't the first company which they have had those issues with.
It is Cogent who decides how their different customers are prioritized and they decided to short Netflix:
http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/11/cogent-now-admits-slowed-netflixs-traffic-creating-fast-lane-slow-lane.html
This is simply because Netflix was paying less than Cogent's other customers. So, really, it was Netflix who decided to give their own customers the shaft, hoping they would blame the poor service on Comcast, and that would force Comcast to upgrade their connection for free. Thankfully, for the health of the Internet and everyone who shares it with Netflix, Comcast did not blink.
Quick correction….. It appears that Netflix has decided in the past couple years to build out their own CDN network instead of relying exclusively on 3rd party CDN's. The issue has been that the Backbones they are paying for Transit / access have not been expanding their interconnection with the other large networks to prevent bottlenecks stemming from Netflix's traffic. IOW's…. The Companies that Netflix has been paying for Internet access have failed to live up the Service Level agreement which Netflix has expected them too.
In turn I was wrong about the details of the Deal with Comcast. It was not a deal with Comcast's CDN business, but instead a transit deal with Comcast. In other words, As the networks which Netflix was paying for their access were unable/unwilling to upgrade their interconnections with other backbone networks, Netflix decided to go directly and pay to connect to that network.
Ultimately it's still the same general concept though. Netflix was paying a 3rd party. That 3rd party was failing to live up the SLA Netflix required by not upgrading their links to Comcast's network. Netflix decided to fire the 3rd party and go directly to where they needed their stuff delivered, and where they have direct control over the quality of that connection.
True. Netflix and Comcast customers were the victims. And Netflix DOES pay extra now in order to reach their subscribers.
Add it up: Netflix already paid their own connectivity bills, YOU paid your connectivity bill, and now Netflix pays Comcast the surcharge peering bill. That's three payments to ISPs for carrying your Netflix.
But now, what if a NEW ENTRANT tries to compete with streaming video. Netflix, as an established player, can afford and does pay Comcast. How does a new entrant compete with Netflix? It would be hard. Now, we have new victims, and Netflix is on the bad guy's side. This is the model Comcast wants – pay to play, exclude innovators.
Fred Campbell March 1, 2015
You should do some research about how the Internet peering/transit market works. The real problem for a new entrant at this point is Netflix itself, which has used its market power in the Internet backbone market to leverage preferential deals for its CDN. There is absolutely zero evidence whatsoever that Comcast tried to charge Netflix more for interconnection than Comcast charges any other CDN: http://cbit.org/blog/2014/09/netflix-secretly-holds-subscribers-hostage-to-gain-favorable-fcc-internet-regulations/.
You pay for connectivity with Company A.
Netflix paid it's connectivity bill with Company B.
Company B was not meeting the Service level requirements that Netflix required to reach customers at Company A (and others… don't forget Comcast wasn't the only ISP which bottlenecks at the Cogent peering points).
Netflix switched their connectivity bill to Company A due to Company B not providing the speeds they required.
Netflix is not paying a 3rd unknown fee for access to Company A's customers. They simply switched their Internet Access from Company B to Company A in order to improve their speeds.
And if Netflix is paying more, It's not because they were forced into it. They aren't stupid. Comcast publishes the rates it charges for CDN connectivity. The rates aren't some big secret. Odds are with Netflix's pull, and the amount of traffic they are generating, and the multi-year term and service level agreements they would need/want, That Netflix probably got a slightly better rate than the base published rate. If they are paying more it's because they went from the Dollar General of Backbone connections to the Target of Backbone connections.
voice of reason February 28, 2015
The proposed level of regulation of the internet is similar to the present level of regulation of airlines, TV and radio broadcasters, phone companies, and railways. The government does not own any of those enterprises, or dictate how they run their businesses. It simply requires them to use public resources for the public benefit, and to treat all customers fairly.
Does it scare you that the government owns almost all commercial airports in the US? Airlines seem to manage anyway.
The Future of Software Innovation? Hardware-Enabled AI & ML Innovation
Greg Fisher Apr 1, 2019 - 10:12 AM CDT
Getting the basics right
Five questions for… Keri Gilder, Chief Commercial Officer, Colt Technology Services. Can Connectivity be linked to Customer Experience?
Jon Collins Mar 4, 2019 - 3:54 AM CST
A GigaOm Research Infographic
GigaOm Infographic: Connectivity and Customer Experience
Jon Collins Feb 25, 2019 - 7:00 AM CST
Research Byte
Innovation without Compromise
How Industrial And Embedded Systems Providers Can Deliver Quality, Innovative Software
Jon Collins Jan 15, 2020 - 2:35 PM CST
Selecting the Best in Enterprise Microservices and API Management
William McKnight and Jake Dolezal Feb 21, 2019 - 12:00 PM CST
CIO Speaks – Episode 10: A Conversation with David Chou of Constellation Research
Steve Ginsberg


text:
A sentimental century
There is no sport in which sentimentality coexists with commercialism so closely, and at times so uneasily, as cricket. A Test match can play to near empty stands, and still have a large contingent of purists fretting over its continued existence; T20 is seen as its uncultured, uncouth offspring, the kid who threw away a university scholarship to go on the X Factor and is knee-deep in money, cheerleaders and rock and roll.
Success in sport means moving with the times. It is why Test cricket now uncomfortably straddles the line between traditionalism and an uncertain future, not knowing whether it wants to go forward or back, and why in building a successful cricket team pragmatism must take precedence when it comes to retiring the old guard and making way for new blood.
It is mission accomplished as far as England and Andy Flower are concerned: England sit at the top of the Test tree through the fortuitous butterfly effect of KP's bust-up with Peter Moores, and a perfect synergy between Flower and captain Andrew Strauss. Both Australia and India are fighting their way through a period of transition, with both facing accusations of sentimentality for not putting their old warhorses out to pasture.
One warhorse who, in the view of many, should have had his passage booked to the knacker's yard months ago is Ricky Ponting. The first suspicion of reverent sentimentality on the part of Cricket Australia came when he did not retire immediately after losing the captaincy, but was pushed down to number four in hopes he would rediscover his form. Two schools of thought can be ascribed to this: the first being that any possibility at all of a return to his imperious best was worth persevering for, and the second, and most likely, that no one wanted to be the one to swing the axe on a great career, and that if the failures persisted for long enough, Ponting would do the decent thing and retire himself.
You make a rod for your own back when you have achieved as much as Ricky Ponting has. Anything less than excellence means failure. The fact you scored your last hundred back in January 2010 – never mind that you have scored ten half-centuries since then – is failure. Your 78 against New Zealand at Brisbane this year still won't be enough to silence the critics. The skill in being a success at parties is knowing when to leave. People are saying you are finished. You need to bow out gracefully, to make way.
Or, you could say screw all that, smile and nod and grit your teeth and keep your head down and do it the hard way, throwing yourself through the dirt in one of the most desperate singles you've ever taken, and, spitting out bits of the SCG wicket and with mud on your shirt, raise your bat to the pavilion in cricket's version of the one-fingered salute to celebrate your 40th Test hundred.
This was more than just a fuck-you hundred to the critics calling for Ponting to be dropped. Comebacks like this are the culmination of the moment you realise that, when you get to this stage in your career, your biggest opponent is yourself. The engine of your talent is still what drives you; but the workings need a bit more TLC than they used to. Like a vintage Patek chronograph, the hallmark and craftsmanship remain unmistakable, but the timekeeping might no longer be as precise; the inner workings will need cleaning, dismantling and, in some cases, replacing.
Ponting, interviewed after a roll-back-the-years 134 – in which the swivel-pull made a triumphant return with all the fanfare of a conqueror marching into a city – acknowledged that he has had to return to basics: "There were a few technical aspects of my game which I have been doing and which have now paid dividends. It's all starting to come back. There's rhythm about my batting again."
Presumably – hopefully – now that the mechanism has been given a good old winding in that Sydney innings, he can continue keeping good time now for another year, another eighteen months, even. He will wind down eventually, to the extent where nothing will restart him, but that day is not yet.
Today, all the talk was of captain Michael Clarke's historic triple-century. Tomorrow, all the talk will be about Sachin Tendulkar's success or failure in chasing down that still-elusive hundredth hundred.
That all of this should, to a certain extent, overshadow the achievement of Australia's ex-captain is understandable.
But that new shirt Ponting changed into after raising his bat was probably more symbolic than the dive through the dirt: clean shirt, clean sheet, renewed confidence, clean start.
Thank god for sentimentality.
Posted in australia, cricket, india, ricky ponting, scg | No Comments »

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
from __future__ import absolute_import
from __future__ import division
from __future__ import print_function
from __future__ import unicode_literals

import re
import warnings

from chado.analysis import AnalysisClient
from chado.exceptions import RecordNotFoundError
from chado.export import ExportClient
from chado.expression import ExpressionClient
from chado.feature import FeatureClient
from chado.load import LoadClient
from chado.organism import OrganismClient
from chado.phylogeny import PhylogenyClient
from chado.util import UtilClient

from future import standard_library

from sqlalchemy import BigInteger, Column, Float, ForeignKey, Integer, MetaData, Numeric, String, TIMESTAMP, Text, create_engine
from sqlalchemy import event, exc as sa_exc
from sqlalchemy.ext.automap import automap_base
from sqlalchemy.ext.declarative import declarative_base
from sqlalchemy.orm import relationship, sessionmaker
from sqlalchemy.pool import NullPool

standard_library.install_aliases()

class ChadoModel(object):
    pass

class ChadoInstance(object):

    def __init__(self, dbhost="localhost", dbname="chado", dbuser="chado", dbpass="chado", dbschema="public", dbport=5432, dburl=None, offline=False,
                 no_reflect=False, reflect_tripal_tables=False, pool_connections=True, **kwargs):
        self.dbhost = dbhost
        self.dbname = dbname
        self.dbuser = dbuser
        self.dbpass = dbpass
        self.dbport = dbport
        self.dbschema = dbschema
        self.dburl = dburl

        if self.dburl is not None:
            if '@[' in self.dburl:
                # the url given by pglite is not in the correct format for sqlalchmemy
                self.dburl = re.sub(r"postgres://(.+)@\[(.+)\]/(.+)", r"postgres://\1@/\3?host=\2", self.dburl)
            engine_url = self.dburl
        else:
            engine_url = 'postgresql://%s:%s@%s:%s/%s' % (self.dbuser, self.dbpass, self.dbhost, self.dbport, self.dbname)

        if pool_connections:
            self._engine = create_engine(engine_url)
        else:
            # Prevent SQLAlchemy to make a connection pool.
            # Useful for galaxy dynamic options as otherwise it triggers "sorry, too many clients already" errors after a while
            self._engine = create_engine(engine_url, poolclass=NullPool)

        self._metadata = MetaData(self._engine, schema=self.dbschema)
        Session = sessionmaker(bind=self._engine)
        self.session = Session()
        if not offline:
            self._test_db_access()

        self._cv_id_cache = {}
        self._cv_name_cache = {}
        self._pub_id_cache = {}
        self._mapped = False
        self.model = None

        if not self._mapped and not offline:

            if no_reflect:
                # No need to do a full reflection of all tables for simple operations
                self._reflect_tables_subset()
            else:
                with warnings.catch_warnings():
                    # https://stackoverflow.com/a/5225951
                    warnings.simplefilter("ignore", category=sa_exc.SAWarning)
                    self._reflect_tables(reflect_tripal_tables=reflect_tripal_tables)
            self._mapped = True

        # Initialize Clients
        args = (self._engine, self._metadata, self.session, self)
        self.organism = OrganismClient(*args)
        self.export = ExportClient(*args)
        self.util = UtilClient(*args)
        self.analysis = AnalysisClient(*args)
        self.feature = FeatureClient(*args)
        self.load = LoadClient(*args)
        self.phylogeny = PhylogenyClient(*args)
        self.expression = ExpressionClient(*args)

    def __str__(self):
        return '<ChadoInstance at %s>' % self.dbhost

    def _reflect_tables(self, reflect_tripal_tables=False):
        Base = automap_base()

        class Blast_hit_data(Base):
            __tablename__ = 'blast_hit_data'
            __table_args__ = {'extend_existing': True}

            analysisfeature_id = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            analysis_id = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            feature_id = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            db_id = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            hit_num = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            hit_description = Column(Text())
            hit_name = Column(Text())
            hit_url = Column(Text())
            hit_description = Column(Text())
            hit_organism = Column(Text())
            blast_org_id = Column(Integer())
            hit_accession = Column(Text())
            hit_best_eval = Column(Float())
            hit_best_score = Column(Float())
            hit_pid = Column(Float())

        class Tripal_analysis_blast(Base):
            __tablename__ = 'tripal_analysis_blast'
            __table_args__ = {'schema': 'public'}

            db_id = Column(Integer(), primary_key=True, nullable=False, default=0, index=True)
            regex_hit_id = Column(Text())
            regex_hit_def = Column(Text())
            regex_hit_accession = Column(Text())
            regex_hit_organism = Column(Text())
            hit_organism = Column(Text())
            genbank_style = Column(Integer())

        Base.prepare(self._engine, reflect=True, schema=self.dbschema)
        if reflect_tripal_tables and self.dbschema != "public":
            Base.prepare(self._engine, reflect=True, schema='public')

        # Check for schema name instead of hardcoding?
        self.model = Base.classes
        self.model.blast_hit_data = Blast_hit_data
        self.model.tripal_analysis_blast = Tripal_analysis_blast

        # ambiguous relationships to same table
        self.model.feature_relationship.subject = relationship(self.model.feature, foreign_keys=[self.model.feature_relationship.subject_id], back_populates="subject_in_relationships")
        self.model.feature.subject_in_relationships = relationship(self.model.feature_relationship, foreign_keys=[self.model.feature_relationship.subject_id])
        self.model.feature_relationship.object = relationship(self.model.feature, foreign_keys=[self.model.feature_relationship.object_id], back_populates="object_in_relationships")
        self.model.feature.object_in_relationships = relationship(self.model.feature_relationship, foreign_keys=[self.model.feature_relationship.object_id])

        self.model.featureloc.feature = relationship(self.model.feature, foreign_keys=[self.model.featureloc.feature_id], back_populates="featureloc_collection")
        self.model.feature.featureloc_collection = relationship(self.model.featureloc, foreign_keys=[self.model.featureloc.feature_id], back_populates="feature")
        self.model.featureloc.srcfeature = relationship(self.model.feature, foreign_keys=[self.model.featureloc.srcfeature_id])

    def _reflect_tables_subset(self):

        self.model = ChadoModel()

        Base = declarative_base(metadata=self._metadata)

        class Analysis(Base):
            __tablename__ = "analysis"

            analysis_id = Column(BigInteger(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            name = Column(String())
            description = Column(Text())
            program = Column(String())
            programversion = Column(String())
            algorithm = Column(String())
            sourcename = Column(String())
            sourceversion = Column(String())
            sourceuri = Column(Text())
            timeexecuted = Column(TIMESTAMP())

        class Organism(Base):
            __tablename__ = "organism"

            organism_id = Column(BigInteger(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            abbreviation = Column(String())
            genus = Column(Text())
            species = Column(String())
            common_name = Column(String())
            infraspecific_name = Column(String())
            type_id = Column(BigInteger())
            comment = Column(Text())

        class Feature(Base):
            __tablename__ = "feature"

            feature_id = Column(BigInteger(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)

        class AnalysisFeature(Base):
            __tablename__ = "analysisfeature"

            analysisfeature_id = Column(BigInteger(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            feature_id = Column(BigInteger(), ForeignKey('feature.feature_id'), nullable=False)
            analysis_id = Column(BigInteger(), ForeignKey('analysis.analysis_id'), nullable=False)
            rawscore = Column(Numeric())
            normscore = Column(Numeric())
            significance = Column(Numeric())
            identity = Column(Numeric())

        class Db(Base):
            __tablename__ = "db"

            db_id = Column(BigInteger(), primary_key=True, nullable=False)
            name = Column(String(), nullable=False)
            description = Column(String())
            urlprefix = Column(String())
            url = Column(String())

        self.model.analysis = Analysis
        self.model.analysisfeature = AnalysisFeature
        self.model.organism = Organism
        self.model.feature = Feature
        self.model.db = Db

        # Inspired from https://bitbucket.org/zzzeek/sqlalchemy/wiki/UsageRecipes/ManyToManyOrphan
        # In chado, a feature can be part of multiple analysis, using the analysisfeature table
        # With the following code, when we delete an analysis, it also deletes all features that were only part of this single analysis
        # FIXME This is slow for analysis with many features, it runs 1 delete query per feature
        @event.listens_for(self.session, 'after_flush')
        def delete_feature_orphans(session, ctx):
            # List all features that were attached to a deleted analysis
            if any(isinstance(i, Analysis) for i in session.deleted):
                deleted_ids = []
                for i in session.deleted:
                    if isinstance(i, AnalysisFeature):
                        deleted_ids.append(i.feature_id)
                # Look for features that were part of the deleted analysis and are not part of any other analysis
                query = session.query(Feature).filter(~Feature.analysisfeature.any()).filter(Feature.feature_id.in_(deleted_ids))
                orphans = query.all()
                for orphan in orphans:
                    session.delete(orphan)

        self.model.analysisfeature.analysis = relationship("Analysis")
        self.model.analysisfeature.feature = relationship("Feature")
        self.model.analysis.analysisfeature = relationship("AnalysisFeature", back_populates="analysis", cascade="save-update, merge, delete")
        self.model.feature.analysisfeature = relationship("AnalysisFeature", back_populates="feature")

    def _test_db_access(self):
        tables = self._engine.table_names(schema=self.dbschema)
        if ('analysis' not in tables or 'feature' not in tables):
            raise Exception("Could not find Chado tables in db %s" % (self._engine.url))

    def get_cvterm_name(self, cv_id):
        """
        get_cvterm_name allows lookup of CV terms by their ID.
        This method caches the result in order to not hit the DB for every
        query. Maybe should investigate pre-loading popular terms? (E.g. gene,
        mRNA, etc)
        """
        if cv_id in self._cv_id_cache:
            if self._cv_id_cache[cv_id] is not None:
                return self._cv_id_cache[cv_id]
            else:
                raise RecordNotFoundError("Could not find a cvterm with id '%s' in the database %s" % (cv_id, self._engine.url))
        else:
            res = self.session.query(self.model.cvterm.name).filter(self.model.cvterm.cvterm_id == cv_id)
            if not res.count():
                self._cv_id_cache[cv_id] = None
            else:
                self._cv_id_cache[cv_id] = res.one().name

            return self.get_cvterm_name(cv_id)

    def get_cvterm_id(self, name, cv, allow_synonyms=False):
        """
        get_cvterm_id allows lookup of CV terms by their name.
        This method caches the result in order to not hit the DB for every
        query. Maybe should investigate pre-loading popular terms? (E.g. gene,
        mRNA, etc)
        """
        cvhash = cv + '____' + name
        if allow_synonyms:
            cvhash_ini = cvhash
            cvhash += '____' + 'syn'

        if cvhash in self._cv_name_cache:
            if self._cv_name_cache[cvhash] is not None:
                return self._cv_name_cache[cvhash]
            else:
                # If we allows synonyms, check the cache for the normal cvhash before throwing.
                if allow_synonyms and cvhash_ini in self._cv_name_cache and self._cv_name_cache[cvhash_ini] is not None:
                    return self._cv_name_cache[cvhash_ini]
                raise RecordNotFoundError("Could not find a cvterm with name '%s' from cv '%s' in the database %s" % (name, cv, self._engine.url))

        else:
            res = self.session.query(self.model.cvterm.cvterm_id) \
                .join(self.model.cv, self.model.cv.cv_id == self.model.cvterm.cv_id)

            if allow_synonyms:
                res = res.join(self.model.cvtermsynonym, self.model.cvtermsynonym.cvterm_id == self.model.cvterm.cvterm_id, isouter=True) \
                    .filter((self.model.cvterm.name == name) | (self.model.cvtermsynonym.synonym == name))
            else:
                res = res.filter(self.model.cvterm.name == name)

            res = res.filter(self.model.cv.name == cv)

            if not res.count():
                self._cv_name_cache[cvhash] = None
            else:
                self._cv_name_cache[cvhash] = res[0].cvterm_id

            return self.get_cvterm_id(name, cv, allow_synonyms)

    def _preload_dbxref2cvterms(self, cv):
        """
        This method caches all cvterms from a db in order to not hit the DB for every
        query.
        """

        res = self.session.query(self.model.cvterm.cvterm_id, self.model.dbxref.accession) \
                          .join(self.model.dbxref, self.model.dbxref.dbxref_id == self.model.cvterm.dbxref_id) \
                          .join(self.model.db, self.model.dbxref.db_id == self.model.db.db_id) \
                          .filter(self.model.db.name == cv) \
                          .all()

        for term in res:
            cvhash = cv + '____' + term.accession
            self._cv_name_cache[cvhash] = term.cvterm_id

    def get_pub_id(self, name):
        """
        Allows lookup of publication by their uniquename.
        This method caches the result in order to not hit the DB for every
        query.
        """
        if name in self._pub_id_cache:
            if self._pub_id_cache[name] is not None:
                return self._pub_id_cache[name]
            else:
                raise Exception("Could not find a pub with uniquename '%s' in the database %s" % (name, self._engine.url))
        else:
            res = self.session.query(self.model.pub.pub_id) \
                .filter(self.model.pub.uniquename == name)

            if not res.count():
                self._pub_id_cache[name] = None
            else:
                self._pub_id_cache[name] = res[0].pub_id

            return self.get_pub_id(name)

    def create_cvterm(self, term, cv_name, db_name, term_definition="", cv_definition="", db_definition="", accession=""):

        try:
            cvterm_id = self.get_cvterm_id(term, cv_name, True)
            return cvterm_id
        except RecordNotFoundError:

            # Not found, we need to create it
            # check if the db exists
            res = self.session.query(self.model.db).filter_by(name=db_name)

            if res.count() > 0:
                db = res.one()
            else:
                db = self.model.db()
                db.name = db_name
                db.definition = db_definition

                self.session.add(db)

            # check if the cv exists
            res = self.session.query(self.model.cv).filter_by(name=cv_name)

            if res.count() > 0:
                cv = res.one()
            else:
                cv = self.model.cv()
                cv.name = cv_name
                cv.definition = cv_definition

                self.session.add(cv)

            # Cvterm not found, create it
            if not accession:
                accession = term

            res = self.session.query(self.model.dbxref).filter_by(accession=accession, db=db)
            if res.count() > 0:
                dbxref = res.one()
            else:
                dbxref = self.model.dbxref()
                dbxref.accession = accession
                dbxref.db = db

                self.session.add(dbxref)

            cvterm = self.model.cvterm()
            cvterm.name = term
            cvterm.cv = cv
            cvterm.definition = term_definition
            cvterm.dbxref = dbxref

            self.session.add(cvterm)

            self.session.flush()
            self.session.refresh(cvterm)

            cvhash = cv.name + '____' + term
            self._cv_name_cache[cvhash] = cvterm.cvterm_id

        return cvterm.cvterm_id

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Berst is one of Brisbane's top rock covers bands that have been pleasing audiences for the past 5 years.
Berst continue to wow the audience with their on stage energy and power packed sound whilst working South-East Queensland's top venues. Such as Jupiters Casino, The Victory Hotel, O'Malley's Mooloolaba and a residency at one of Brisbane's best party venue's Irish Murphy's.
Also doing the B & S ball Queensland circuit for the past 4 years and receiving call-back after call-back entertaining a young UNI crowd.
Berst consist of three talented and experienced musicians- Woody ( bass and lead vocals ) Dale Mckay ( guitar and vocals ) and Dan Curtis ( Drums ).
With the perfect blend of Top 40 , Classic and Modern Rock and good time party music makes Berst an ideal choice for your next venue or private function.


WATERBURY, Vt. (AP) — The Vermont State Police say tests have determined that a trooper encountered heroin before he collapsed and was revived by three doses of the overdose-drug Narcan, but efforts to determine how the trooper was exposed to the drug were inconclusive.
Police say the privacy rights of Trooper Brett Flansburg prevent them from releasing further details of the case.
The incident began March 15 when Flansburg, who was then serving as an acting sergeant, stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation in Leicester. In searching the car, Flansburg found a small quantity of heroin.
Flansburg later collapsed in the parking lot of the New Haven barracks. He received three doses of Narcan.
Flansburg has since recovered and is back at work.
This story has been corrected in the short headline and the summary line to show the trooper encountered heroin, but that the cause of his collapse is unknown.


text:
NEW YORK REAL ESTATE ATTORNEYS
Condominium & Cooperative Representation
Condominium & Cooperative Owner & Shareholder Representation
Condominium & Cooperative Board & Building Representation
Condominium & Cooperative Litigation
Condominium | Board of Managers | New Construction Representation
Mitchell-Lama | Housing Development Fund Corporation (HDFC) & Third Party Transfer Representation
Division of Housing and Community Renewal Landlord (DHCR)
Commercial Landlord Representation
Buyouts and Sale of Apartment Lease
Commercial Tenant Representation
Division of Housing and Community Renewal Tenant (DHCR)
Tenant Associations
Mortgage Finance Practice Group
Purchase & Sale of Homes
Foreclosure Litigation Group
Homeowner and Tenant Associations
Title Insurance Claims Group
Commercial Leasing Services
Purchase & Sale of Multi-Family Dwellings & Buildings
Due Diligence and Transactional Risk Assessment of Multi-Family Dwellings
Cooperative and Condominium Discrimination
Disability – Reasonable Accommodation, Pet Necessity, Mental or Physical
Race, Nationality, Creed, Religion, Ethnicity, Sex, Family Status
Fair Housing Law
Real Estate Brokerage Litigation
Real Estate Administrative Proceedings | Environmental Control Board
Fire and Building Violations
Published Decisions
News & Appearances
Home / Published Articles / Disabled Resident Parking Spaces: Issues for Condo/Co-op Boards, Developers
Disabled Resident Parking Spaces: Issues for Condo/Co-op Boards, Developers
By Adam Leitman Bailey
https://www.alblawfirm.com/articles/disabled-resident-parking-spaces/
By Adam Leitman Bailey and John M. Desiderio
Fair housing mandates compel those responsible for management of condominiums and co-ops, as well as developers, to make specific arrangements for the parking needs of disabled persons. In this article the authors provide detailed reviews of the legal requirements to provide for handicapped parking facilities in multi-family housing facilities.
Until such time as society goes totally Green and automobiles disappear from our streets and high- ways, the need to have parking spaces adjacent to apartment buildings for residents and guests will continue to exist. Coupled with that need are laws and rules governing the use and assignment of parking spaces by and for persons with disabilities. All levels of government (federal, state, and local) have enacted laws and regulations to ensure that disabled persons are not denied parking spaces because of their disability and that the parking spaces for such persons provide ease of access to the buildings they live in or visit as guests.
However, compliance with these laws also affects and limits the rights of non-disabled residents in both newly constructed condominiums and old building co- ops. In addition, for developers of newly constructed buildings, compliance may impose legal obligations, previously overlooked by sponsors and buyers alike, that could require the re-drafting or amendment of new offering plans and that may provide condo boards with newly discovered claims against their sponsors.
This article will summarize the laws involved, note what condo and co-op boards must do to comply, and discuss the obligations that developers have to provide handicapped parking spaces in connection with new construction.
The Federal Law
The applicable federal law that governs the provision for and allocation of parking spaces for people with dis- abilities at a multiple dwelling is the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1998 (FHAA). Section 6(a) of the FHAA, codified at 42 USC § 3604(f)(2)(A), provides that it is unlawful:
[t]o discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection with such dwelling, because of a handicap of that person.
Section 3604(f)(3)(B) defines 'discrimination' to include:
a refusal to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to use and enjoy a dwelling.
The above provisions of the FHAA were interpreted and applied by the federal Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the case of Shapiro v. Cadman Towers, Inc. 1
In the Cadman Towers case, the Second Circuit noted that a regulation promulgated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 24 CFR § 100.204(b), provides an example of a 'reason- able accommodation' under the FHAA.
The example set forth in section 100.204(b) posits a building with 300 apartments and 450 parking spaces available on a first-come/first-served basis, and states that the duty to make 'reasonable accommodations' obligates the building management to reserve a park- ing space for a mobility-impaired tenant near that ten- ant's apartment. The regulation explains the reasons for this as follows:
Without a reserved parking space, [the tenant] might be unable to live in [the apartment] at all or, when he has to park in a space far from his unit, might have difficulty getting from his car to his apartment unit. The accommodation therefore is necessary to afford [the tenant] an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. The accommodation is reasonable because it is feasible and practical under the circumstances. (Emphasis added)
As noted by the District Court for the Southern District of New York, in Hubbard v. Samson Management Co.,2 '[r]easonable accommodations 'can involve changing some rule that is generally applicable so as to make its burden less onerous on the handicapped individual,' ' but '[w]hether a requested accommodation is required under the [FHAA] is 'highly fact-specific, requiring case-by-case determination.' '
In Cadman Towers, the Second Circuit noted that the building's management had argued that a reasonable accommodation under the FHAA cannot include dis- placing tenants who already have parking spaces as- signed to them or interfering with the expectancy of persons already on the waiting list. The Court ad- dressed this argument as follows:
The extent to which a 'reasonable accommodation' for a handicapped individual can burden or take away rights or privileges enjoyed by non-handicapped persons is an important question of first impression in this Circuit, particularly in the non-workplace context. However, it would be premature for us to reach this issue now. The district court found that Shapiro could be accommodated without displacing any existing tenants, because three parking spots are reserved for building personnel and these workers could park in a commercial garage. (Emphasis added).
Nevertheless, in Samson Management, the District Court said that '[t]o determine whether the [FHAA] requires a proposed accommodation, courts generally balance the burdens the contemplated accommodation imposes on the defendant against the benefits to the plaintiff.' As the Court explained:
As the balancing test suggests, courts typically find an accommodation reasonable 'when it imposes no undue financial or administrative hardships on the defendant . . . and when it does not undermine the basic purpose of the [challenged] requirement.' It is clear under the [FHAA] that a landlord may be 'required to incur reasonable costs to accommodate [a tenant's handicap] provided such accommodations do not pose an undue hardship or a substantial burden.'
In Samson Management, the building owner was found to have discriminated against the plaintiff by having failed to offer her a free, reserved parking space sufficiently near her apartment to meet her needs. The Court acknowledged that the building owner had argued 'correctly' that:
[I]f they were required to supply free, reserved parking for Hubbard, they might be similarly required to provide parking near the apartment of every handicapped tenant in the complex. If the current allocation of parking spaces disadvantages handicapped tenants, then Samson might indeed be required to allocate parking so as to assure handicapped tenants an opportunity equal to that of their non- handicapped neighbors to use and enjoy their dwelling. (Emphasis added).
New York State Law
The principles set forth in the Cadman Towers case and in the Samson Management case apply with equal force under the New York State's Human Rights Law (Executive Law § 296[18][2]) which provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to:
Refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford said person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.
The Appellate Division of the New York State Supreme Court, Second Department has held, citing Cadman Towers and Samson Management, that '[u]nder certain circumstances, a building owner may be required to grant a disabled tenant a parking space for his or her own use, as a reasonable accommodation for the tenant's disability.'3 (Emphasis added).
New York City Law
In addition to applicable federal and State law, the assignment and use of parking spaces in a multiple dwelling facility is also subject to requirements of the following provisions of the New York City Administrative Code:
New York City Administrative Code, Section 27-292.19.
(a) Where parking areas or garages are provided, at least one parking space but not less than five percent4 of the total number of parking spaces provided shall be suitable for use by people having physical disabilities. Where determination by percentage results in a number containing a decimal of 0.5 or more, the next higher number shall be used.
(b) Location, space, size and signage for parking spaces suitable for use by people having physical disabilities shall comply with provisions set forth in reference standard RS 4-6.
New York City Administrative Code, Title 27, Ch. 1, App. (Ref. Stds.), RS 4. RS 4.6.2 Parking Facilities
Except as otherwise provided in § 4.6.2.2 and 4.6.2.3, accessible parking spaces shall be designated as reserved for physically handicapped people by a permanently posted sign showing the symbol of accessibility (See 4.28.5). Such signs shall not be obstructed by a vehicle parked in the space.
RS 4.6.2.1 Multiple Dwellings
In the parking facility of a multiple dwelling, where such a facility is used exclusively on an accessory basis for park- ing by residents of the multiple dwelling, or employees of the management of the multiple dwelling or of the parking facility, or as provided by § 25-412 of the Zoning Resolution, the accessible parking spaces may be leased, rented or assigned to a person without a physical disability on a no longer than month-to-month basis.All leases, rentals, or assignments of such accessible spaces which are not made for the benefit of a person with a disability shall be on written condition that the space shall be relinquished immediately at the end of the term of lease, rental, or assignment to a person who requests of the parking facility's management that such accessible space shall be made available for the benefit of a person with a physical disability whose vehicle bears a special identification permit or license plate. Such a beneficiary shall be a resident or employee of the multiple dwelling. It shall be the responsibility of the Parking Facility Operator to inform the non-disabled user of the parking space that a request for the parking space has been tendered. Signs stating these requirements shall be permanently and prominently posted at each entrance and office of the Parking Facility. (Emphasis added)
Violations of these NYC Code provisions subject the violator to both civil and criminal penalties.
Applying the Law to Possible Problems
The Multi-Building Co-Op Scenario. A three-building co-op apartment complex has 400 parking spaces for residents and employees distributed in four parking lots. There is one lot with 100 parking spaces adjacent to each building (the 'building lots'), and the fourth lot with 100 spaces is located across from the complex on the opposite side of a busy street (the 'off-campus' lot). There currently are no spaces set aside for persons with disabilities in any of the lots. All of the residential parking spaces are rented to shareholders on a first-come/first served basis. There is a waiting list for spaces in each building lot and for spaces in the off-campus lot. Residents are assigned spaces in the off-campus lot be- fore they can become eligible for a building lot space. All residents pay a monthly rental fee for their parking spaces. The fee for building lot spaces is slightly higher than the fee for spaces in the off-campus lot.
Analysis of the Scenario. Whether or not a particular resident is a person with a disability is subject to proof of the disability. The person claiming the disability bears the initial burden of proof on this essential fact. However, once the disability is established, the board must comply with the law. In this scenario, therefore, it seems clear, from the above summary of the law, that the co-op board would be required to make a parking space available to any resident with a disability (a) who requests a parking space, (b) who owns an automobile, and (c) who possesses a special identification permit or license plate. The fact that non-disabled residents may have been on one or more of the various waiting lists for extended periods of time does not override the law's requirements.
In addition, any parking space made available to a person with a disability would have to be sufficiently close to the building in which he/she resides to accommodate the severity of the person's specific disability, i.e., in one of the three building lots and not in the off- campus lot. The co-op would also need to issue written 'month-to-month' rental agreements requiring that a space be relinquished immediately at the end of the rental term to any person with a physical disability who requests management to make a space available for his/ her benefit.
Accommodating the individual requests of disabled resident shareholders in this scenario would not impose an undue hardship on management. Presuming that the disabled residents pay the rental fees otherwise required of non-disabled residents, management would suffer no loss of revenue. Moreover, since all residents with parking spaces are required to pay rent for their spaces, requiring the disabled person to also pay the requisite rental fee is not likely to be found discriminatory.
Both federal law and NYC law require that a minimum number of parking spaces for people with disabilities be made available in parking areas or garages. If the co-op does not have parking spaces reserved for visitors only, it would likely be required to set aside additional handicapped spaces for such visitors in the minimum number prescribed by law. The law is not clear on this point, but prudence would dictate that the co-op reserve the additional spaces and that it do so in areas adjacent to and easily accessible to the buildings.
Condo Issues. Developers of newly constructed condominiums typically reserve the right to sell all of the condominium's parking spaces separately from the condominium apartment units sold to the residential owners. The developers' ownership of the parking spaces and unsold units often extends into the period when the residential owners have taken control of the condominium board. This duality of control by the residential board and by the developer sponsor over adja- cent areas of what is a single premises gives rise to many disputes between the board and the developer regarding the manner in which they exercise the respective rights specified for each of them in the condominium offering plan, declaration, and by-laws. The control and disposition of condominium parking spaces is often an occasion for such disputes because, before the time when all parking spaces are sold, compliance with and administration of handicapped parking requirements tends to be a dual responsibility of both the developer and the residential board.
[A]fter the resident owners take control of the board, the board is responsible for administering and policing the residents' use of the handicapped parking spaces.
Initially, the developer decides which of the condominium parking spaces are to be reserved for people with disabilities. However, after the resident owners take control of the board, the board is responsible for administering and policing the residents' use of the handicapped parking spaces. During the time when the developer still retains ownership of some parking spaces, the situation may arise where handicapped residents who did not purchase any of the parking spaces offered to them decide to park in the designated spaces 'illegally' – i.e., without paying the sponsor for the space. The sponsor may then claim that the unit owner is 'trespassing' on the developer's property and demand that the board act to stop the errant unit owner from using the sponsor's property as his/her private parking space.
In these circumstances, the law does not appear to require the available handicapped spaces to be used free of charge by handicapped residents who were offered the opportunity to purchase parking spaces but chose to not purchase. If those residents want to have handicapped parking spaces identified and reserved for them, the law does not preclude either the sponsor or the condo board from demanding that the unit owners involved purchase the right to the spaces they want. There is no discrimination if they are treated the same as all other unit owners.
The harder issue involves the situation where all of the available parking spaces have already been sold to non-disabled resident owners. In such a case, it would seem that, under the principles set forth in the Camden Towers and Samson Management cases, the condo board might be required to compel a non-disabled resident to sell his/her parking space to the handicapped resident. The authors of this article do not know of any published decision on this issue, but it is certainly possible that such a case could be filed (by either the disabled resident, the non-disabled resident, or the condo board) where a court will be asked to decide whether the board has the power to compel the transfer of the parking space and, if so, whether the condo board must compel the transfer to be compliant with the law.
The most intriguing unresolved issue in this area is whether developers have an obligation not only to set aside the required number of handicapped parking spaces, but also to identify them in the offering plan as additional common elements of the condominium in which all of the unit owners acquire an undivided ownership interest upon purchasing their apartment units. There does not appear to be any distinction between the developer's mandatory legal obligation to provide the building with a roof, hallways, heating equipment, and other common elements, as required by the building code, and the developer's additional mandatory obligation, under the FHAA, the New York Human Rights Law, and the New York City Administrative Code, to provide a minimum number of parking spaces for persons with disabilities.
It would seem, therefore, that developers have no legal right to 'sell' the parking spaces they designate for handicapped parking in the condominium garage. When parking is otherwise made available as part of the project, the developer assumes the obligation to provide those spaces as part of the building's common elements in the same way as it assumes the obligation to put a roof on the building and to install the required HVAC system, windows, and doors. Accordingly, upon the developer's transfer of its interest in the project to the residential board, there should be no requirement for either the board or any unit owner to purchase the 'unsold' handicapped spaces from the developer. The condo already 'owns' those spaces.
This is an issue that previously has been overlooked by buyers and developers alike, but, nevertheless, it is a real issue and one that could very well be raised in a future litigation. There are probably dozens of condominiums and hundreds of unit owners who have potential claims against their developers for refunds of the amounts they paid for parking spaces that were either initially designated by the developer as 'handicapped' spaces or that should have been so designated, i.e., spaces the developer 'sold' and for which 'sales' it should now be liable to pay refunds.
Condominium & Cooperative Representation Condominium | Board of Managers | New Construction Representation Housing Discrimination Disability - Reasonable Accommodation, Pet Necessity, Mental or Physical Fair Housing Law Cooperative and Condominium Discrimination Condominium & Cooperative Litigation Tenant Representation Landlord Representation
Adam Leitman Bailey John M. Desiderio
New Sprinkler-Notification Law Could Require Reissuing Proprietary Leases Squeezing Out Evidence of Apartment Overcrowding Q & A: When a Live-in Superintendent Is a Requirement The Inquiring Mind: Buying Building with Separate Heating Plant The Section 8 Program: Voluntary Participation Is a Thing of the Past
© 2021 Adam Leitman Bailey , P.C. | Legal Notice | ALBArticles | Attorney Advertising
Adam Leitman Bailey PC - New York Real Estate Attorneys
ab91e3b4d0e291c2f10da7b1b300cd44
ALBArticles


Catherine — This is lovely. Thank you. I'm anxious to read more.
Even though it is now Valentine's Day, I think these gift ideas are timeless, especially in my life. beautifully written Catherine. Thanks for the reminder.


John lives with his sick wife Maliya and is curious about the man Jesus. In a dream, Jesus promises to come and visit John and John begins serious preparations. However, something goes wrong and Jesus does not come. What could John have done wrong? Read on and see.
the title of this book scratches me!! I want it now!! Kudos...the title of this book scratches me!! I want it now!! Kudos Chris!


text:
Edmonton (YEG)
Edmonton international airport (YEG)
/fotos/yeg-aeropuerto.jpg
Edmonton International Airport, opened on November 15, 1960, is one of the largest in Canada and serves not only the Edmonton area, but also the entire Alberta province. It operates with domestic and international flights to destinations in the United States, Mexico, the Caribbean and a few European locations.
Official Website: flyeia.com
Number of Terminals - 1 - Open 24 hours a day.
Tel: +1 780 890 8382 / 800 268 7134. E-mail: [email protected] There is an information booth on the Arrivals level, across from Gate 7, that operates from Monday to Friday between 8:00 am and 0:00 am, Saturdays from 9:00 am to 8:00 pm and Sundays and holidays from 9:00 am to 0:00 am. Throughout the terminal, there are also white telephones and volunteers in blue uniforms for passenger assistance.
The airport is located 35 km (22 miles) to the south of the city of Edmonton.
Car rental counters are found on the ground floor (level P1) of the parkade.
Alamo (Tel +1 877 222 9075 / 780 890 7345 - Mondays through Fridays from 6:00 am to 1:00 am, weekends from 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
Avis (Tel +1 800 879 2847 / 780 890 7596 - Mondays through Fridays from 6:00 am to 1:00 am, Saturdays and Sundays from 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
Budget (Tel +1 800 268 8900 / 780 890 4801 - Mondays through Fridays from 6:00 am to 1:00 am, Saturdays and Sundays from 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
Enterprise (Tel +1 800 261 7331 / 780 980 2338 - 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
Hertz (Tel +1 800 263 0600 / 780 890 4435 - Mondays through Fridays from 6:00 am to 1:00 am, Saturdays from 7:00 am to 0:00 am, Sundays from 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
National (Tel +1 800 227 7368 / 780 890 7232 - Mondays through Fridays from 6:00 am to 1:00 am, Saturdays and Sundays from 7:00 am to 1:00 am)
Overnight Layover
Parking services at Edmonton international airport (YEG)
There are several parking areas for short- and long-term stays inside the grounds, all of them fenced and with security staff. There is also a passenger pick-up zone (Cell Phone Waiting Area) which is free for 45 minutes. More information: Tel +1 780 890 8983. Rates and reservations
Priority Valet - Located on the Departures level, to the south of gate 27. Available 24 hours a day and with valet parking service (Tel +1 780 890 8998).
Easy Parkade - Roofed parking across from the terminal, with access to the Departures level through covered walkways. It also has a VIP sector (Executive Park) on level 3, offering the closest spaces to the main building.
Value Park - Long-term area situated behind the previous sector, with a free, 24-hour shuttle service.
The enclosure has adapted toilets and telephones, Braille signage, over-sized doors, accessible counters, reserved parking spaces and a special shuttle between the parking lot and the terminal. The Skyshuttle service (Tel +1 780 465 8515) offers transportation for passengers with special needs by previous reservation. To request special assistance, contact your airline in advance.
Latest updates: January 19, 2020
1 - Frankfurt (FRA)9.82 - Toronto (YYZ)9.53 - Madrid (MAD)9.44 - London (LHR)9.45 - Washington D.C. (DCA)9.36 - Barcelona (BCN)9.37 - Atlanta (ATL)9.38 - Washington D.C. (IAD)9.29 - Dubai (DXB)9.210 - London (STN)9.1
Los Angeles airport
Paris Charles de Gaulle airport
You are in United Kingdom


text:
SPREADING GOD'S WORD THROUGH BOOKS AND ARTICLES
BE RECONCILED WITH GOD TODAY
Entirely Jesus is about the work of the Gospel
MORE IMAGERY
LAST DAYS SIGNS
MERE THOUGHTS
SYMBOLS: MOUNTAIN
The Symbol of a Mountain in
Pamela Ayn Austen
A mountain in Scripture is an authority before which a particular doctrine or frame of thought is first presented, and then that authority judges it, and that authority either becomes the powerful underpinning for that doctrine, or it rejects it and "casts it down from its cliff." Though I'm primarily speaking of a town, state, nation, judicial or legal body, king or empire, God's authority then condones it, temporarily allows it, or overthrows it entirely.
Sometimes, it is God himself who presents a doctrine or frame of thought; in which case he is both the presenter and the authoritative mountain that underpins the doctrine permanently, as with Moses on Mt. Sinai, and Jesus at the mount of transfiguration, to name but two instances.
In Luke 4:29, after Jesus had spoken a particular doctrine while in a synagogue in Nazareth, the people in authority rejected it, and they took him to the edge of the "hill" where their town was built, and they sought to throw him down from the cliff. They rejected both the doctrine and the presenter of the doctrine. But since God is the final authority, and since Jesus's words were true, God allowed Jesus to disappear from among them and walk away unscathed. Jesus's words in Luke 4 were then permanently underpinned, due to it being recorded forever in Scripture. God over-ruled the earthly authority that wanted Jesus's words cast down and forgotten.
The empire of Babylon was wicked in all of their doctrine, so God said in Jeremiah 51:25,26: "Behold, I am against you, O destroying mountain, you who devastate the whole earth, declares the Lord. I will stretch out my hand against you; I will roll you over the cliffs, and turn you into a charred mountain. No one will retrieve from you a cornerstone or a foundation stone, because you will become desolate forever."
God allowed Babylon's wicked and violent doctrine to go on for a long time, because God was using Babylon to discipline Israel and others; but he finally overthrew it, and "rolled it over the cliff." He rejected the doctrine that Babylon's authority had espoused and supported, and to get rid of it, he had to get rid of their authority entirely, which was the whole mountain. He rolled their doctrine off a cliff, and then he made Babylon a charred mountain that no doctrine was presented to anymore because their authority to judge was taken away from them.
When Jonah was thrown over-board, and the great fish swallowed him, he spoke to God and said, "To the roots of the mountains I descended. . . " Jonah 2:6 Which could mean, "My doctrine of disobedience to God wasn't just judged and thrown off a cliff; I was thrown clear down off the world into the underworld! My doctrine of defiance sent me to hell; that's how much God thought of it."
Jesus said to his disciples, "If you have the faith of a mustard seed, you can tell this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will obey. Nothing will be impossible for you." Matthew 17:20 They had not been able to cast the demon out of the boy who had seizures, and they had asked Jesus why.
The mountain in this case, the authority to judge, was Satan. The demons presented their doctrine of wanting to possess the boy to Satan, and Satan had accepted and underpinned it with the strength of his mountain, with the strength of his authority. The mountain Jesus wanted moved, and the authoritative decision-maker that Jesus wanted to over-ride, was Satan.
The only authority who can over-ride an authoritative body, or a mighty mountain, on earth or in the spirit world, is God. God sits as the final judge of any judgment. And Jesus didn't tell his disciples to un-do the mountain's authoritative decision and reverse it; they were told to move the entire mountain that made the evil judgement against the boy in the first place. Otherwise, the demons would just come back with a new doctrine against the boy, and the mountain would sanction it. The mountain itself had to be dislodged from the boy's vicinity, and taken from his jurisdiction, so to speak.
Jesus has given us authority through his name, by the power of his Spirit, and we enter into his ability to make authoritative decisions; we sit on his throne with him, on his mountain. Jesus gave to his disciples his ability to "over-ride authority", to cast Satan's decisions over a cliff, or with prayer and fasting, to move his mountain out of the vicinity entirely.
To cast a mountain into the sea does not mean the over-coming of a problem, or an almighty power to speak words and have them happen, as the Word of Faith crowd claims. It means to get rid of the reigning authoritative body that underpins a doctrine, a premise, a law, or an idea.
Sorrow For Besetting Sin
The Symbol of Silver
In Scripture
The Symbol of Clouds
SEND QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS
Contact Pamela Ayn Austen
entirelyausten@gmail.com
Search: What does a mountain symbolize in Scripture, What does a mountain symbolize in the Bible, Mountain Symbol, Mountain in the Bible, Moving Mountains, How do we move mountains, Moving mountain faith, faith to move mountains.
© 2020 Entirely Jesus, All Rights Reserved
Please Help Support This Gospel Ministry
"Where God's Word is taught pure and unfalsified, there is also poverty, as Christ says: 'I am sent to preach the Gospel to the poor.' Superstition, idolatry, and hypocrisy have ample wages, but truth goes a begging."
- Martin Luther


Promotional pens don't come any more stylish and classy than the Waterman Hemisphere Rollerball Pen. May be engraved in silver colour with your brand or personalization, or pad printed with your logo on the cap. Equipped with the ultimate smoothness of quality engineered blue rollerball, this Stainless Steel Waterman precision writing instrument with chrome trim will gild your gift with timeless elegance.


All registered graduate students automatically have BA status if they are under the age of 24, and MA status if they are over 24. BA or MA status confers the privileges of BA or MA respectively in relation to the University Library, the various Museums and the Botanic Garden, and governs the type of gown that should be worn. The College claims the appropriate status for those who are entitled, but who do not acquire it automatically.


text:
Q: Extracting schema from Union Avro I have the following union:
{
          "name" : "price",
          "type" : [ "null", {
            "type" : "array",
            "items" : {
              "type" : "record",
              "name" : "PriceType",
              "fields" : [ {
                "name" : "text_value",
                "type" : [ "null", "double" ],
                "source" : "element text_value"
              }, {
                "name" : "currency",
                "type" : [ "null", "string" ],
                "default" : null,
                "source" : "attribute currency"
              } ]
            }
          } ],
          "default" : null,
          "source" : "element price"
        }

From this union I get the schema of price field using this code:
Schema new_schema=schema.getField("price").schema();

Now I want to obtain the schema of the Union:
{
            "type" : "array",
            "items" : {
              "type" : "record",
              "name" : "PriceType",
              "fields" : [ {
                "name" : "text_value",
                "type" : [ "null", "double" ],
                "source" : "element text_value"
              }, {
                "name" : "currency",
                "type" : [ "null", "string" ],
                "default" : null,
                "source" : "attribute currency"
              }

How can I do this? And I How Do I insert a Union in a Record?

A: Since it's a union type you can extract the schema as follows:
new_schema.getTypes().get(0);

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
「Concerning」タグアーカイブ
Shirley Ballas undergoes 'urgent scan' after doctor finds 'concerning' hormone levels
'Strictly Come Dancing' judge said her doctor was 'mortified by my results'
Shirley Ballas has revealed she will undergo an "urgent scan" on all her organs after a doctor found her to have "concerning" levels of testosterone.
In an interview with The Sun on Sunday, the 61-year-old said that she was told by a doctor that her levels of testosterone were "the highest she's seen in a female".
Ballas added: "My NHS doctor is very good, so the fact that she is concerned makes me concerned – and she was mortified by my results.
"She said I have the highest testosterone levels she's ever seen in a woman, and testosterone can wreak havoc on the female organs. So she's requested an urgent scan of all of my organs at King's College, London."
Ballas continued to say that her doctor "won't speculate on what the cause is", stating: "She just says, 'We need to deal with this. Let's deal with the hormones and then see what else is there.'
"So I'll have the scans and then I'll be able to let everyone know what's going on."
The news comes after Ballas gave fans an update on her health following a doctor's appointment that was prompted by concerns raised by Strictly viewers who apparently noticed "lumps" in her armpit.
Earlier this month, she explained that a doctor had examined her underarm and breasts but "couldn't feel anything".
Shirley Ballas shared a message to concerned fans
(Instagram/Shirley Ballas)
The professional dancer went on to say, however, that the doctor had discovered her hormone levels to be "all over the place" and added that she will be having "full blood work done" on Friday (22 October).
Ballas has previously spoken about her family history of cancer. She recently had a scare in June when she found a lump in her shoulder but said her doctor "seems to think it will be fine".
Access unlimited streaming of movies and TV shows with Amazon Prime Video Sign up now for a 30-day free trial
In 2019, she had her breast implants removed in order to reduce the risk of developing the disease, as implants can block early signs of it being detected.
カテゴリー: ruf | タグ: Ballas, Concerning, doctor, finds, hormone, levels, Shirley, undergoes, Urgent | 投稿日: 10/31/2021 | 投稿者: ruf
The Best FIFA Awards 2021: Latest updates


text:
Travel with Rick Steves
Weekend Edition Saturday, hosted by NPR's Peabody Award-winning Scott Simon, wraps up the week's news and offers a mix of analysis and features on a wide range of topics, including arts, sports, entertainment, and human interest stories.
Del. Gov. Carney announces 10 p.m. curfew for businesses, zero-tolerance enforcement policy
Keona Berry walks down Market Street with a protective mask on her face on Friday, March 27, 2020, in Wilmington, Del. (Saquan Stimpson for WHYY)
Ask us about COVID-19: What questions do you have about the current surge?
Gov. John Carney announced another round of COVID-19 restrictions for Delaware on Thursday to help fight the winter virus surge as hospitalizations are on the rise in the state.
The decision comes one week after the governor announced a stay-at-home advisory and a one-month pause on in-person learning starting Monday, Dec. 14.
Under the latest order, restaurants and bars in Delaware are under a 10 p.m. curfew and indoor gatherings are limited to 10 people.
For businesses above 100,000 square feet in size, they must not exceed 20% of indoor capacity. All other businesses, including retail and restaurants, are limited to 30% indoor capacity. Smaller retail operations under 5,000 square feet, as well as houses of worship and funeral services, are limited to 40% of capacity.
Gyms and exercise facilities are also facing new restrictions, with classes at gyms limited to no more than 10 people and a requirement that gym equipment is spaced at least 10 feet apart.
These restrictions — along with a universal, statewide mask mandate — will take effect at 8 a.m. on Dec. 14.
Early data shows hopeful signs for pandemic learning in Philly, but huge questions remain
There are a lot of caveats, though. And it's possible signs of regression will begin to show up later this year.
"These additional restrictions are intended to protect Delaware's hospital capacity and protect lives this winter," Carney said in a statement. "Health care workers are on the job around the clock, caring for the sick. We all need to follow their lead and do our part to protect others."
Carney and the state Division of Public Health (DPH) also announced Thursday a zero-tolerance enforcement policy for businesses during the stay-at-home advisory, which is in place until Jan. 11.
Under the policy, the first report of a violation of these restrictions will result in a civil fine, and a second will result in the closure of the business until a reopening plan is submitted and approved by DPH.
Additionally, restaurants are required to share information on mask wearing, and have signage properly displayed at the patrons' tables, stating that the diners must be from the same household.
Carney's announcement comes on the same day Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf announced sweeping statewide restrictions, banning indoor dining and closing gyms and theaters for three weeks.
View the series
Trump's phone call; pandemic preparedness
We examine the legal and ethical issues raised by President Trump's leaked phone call. Then, why weren't we prepared for the pandemic and will we be next time?
Air Date: January 5, 2021 10:00 am
Listen 49:15
A growing number of Republicans are working to overturn Joe Biden's victory over President Donald Trump, and a surge of COVID-19 infections is imposing limits at the Capitol.
N.J. charges 12 more bars and restaurants with COVID-19 violations
N.J. bars face penalties of up to 66-day liquor-license suspensions for ignoring COVID restrictions.
About Emily Scott
@emilyivyscott escott@whyy.org