I just got an email from DeWang of Hidden Harmonies asking me to chime in on his recent blog post, one featuring an email discussion had with a certain Rosa Sow of Newsy.com, "a multi-source online video news site that monitors, analyzes and presents the world's news coverage". I'm not sure how much I can say but I'll throw in a few cursory thoughts.
Of course, everyone knows, a metric that is critically important for populous countries like China and India are the per capita figures. Compare to American consumers, the Chinese consumers are saints. Certainly, it's important to look at a country's total consumption. But it is also equally critical to consider the per capita angle. That angle is missing from this Newsy video. So, the problem with Western media is their self-touting virtue of supporting fairness and these various values. When its fairness for others, they go out the window. And, best of all, the media can do it in a way that Americans are completely oblivious.
That then leads to Americans feeling entitled to an out-sized proportion of the world's resources.
I'm going to chime in on DeWang and Ms. Sow's arguments over the above video itself1. Off the bat, I'm not quite sure I see the immorality and propaganda in this particular Newsy video, and I don't agree that the per capita figures are "critically important" for what this video set out to report.
The Wall Street Journal: China doesn't like being #1 because it doesn't want the world to think they're a "developed" nation when they see themselves still as a "developing" nation.
The Telegraph: China isn't the "villain" on climate change, and is investing heavily in "green energy".
Forbes: China's energy consumption suggests shift in its geopolitical influence.
France 24: China will influence how energy is used in the future.
Treehugger: China should "own up" to the title and the responsibilities of that title, should not enjoy "lax treatment", and is no longer "really" a developing nation.
As an aside, I don't really care if China is the largest or second largest. It's up there and its responsibility, to me, ought to be commensurate with its expectations of continued survival and development in a resource-limited world. The people that really matter in this discussion already know how significant or insignificant it is being the "largest energy consumer" country. They know the per capita figures and yadda yadda yadda. DeWang knows this too, but he, like the Chinese government, do also care how the average person in the world interprets this news.
I disagree the per capita angle is ancillary. The main narrative in the U.S. is that the rise in Chinese energy consumption means a lowered consumption by Americans. The predominant "view" in the U.S. of that news is as a threat. So, the question of fairness is out the window. That way of reporting (via omission) predisposes Americans into a more unfair (or belligerent) stance with the almighty U.S. military.
Now, DeWang isn't being clinically crazy here about how certain news and issues relating to China are being packaged for the American masses. There certainly are people and organizations advancing anti-China alarmist narratives out there, just as there are anti-U.S. narratives in China. I can empathize with him on this.
However, I do think he is being unfair to Newsy here. There's a difference between a report that says "China is a threat to us, look at how they're consuming energy more than us" and one that says "China now consumes more energy than the United States". It isn't fair to project the first statement onto the second statement, nor is it fair to ask someone giving the second statement to change their statement to counter or balance against the first.
…which is what I can't help but feel is what DeWang is after, and he's too quick to ascribe some sort of conspiratorial guilt of "unfairness" if they didn't do so.
I don't know if I've misunderstood or misrepresented DeWang here. If anything, though, I do think this was a battle poorly chosen. There are better examples of Western media bias to argue and this Newsy video wasn't really one of them.
Do you feel the Western media has made such a big deal about China surpassing the United States as the world's largest energy consumer where enough people out there are being mislead into an alarmist reaction towards China that explicit media reminders of per capita stats would put everyone back in whatever place they should be?
Her next response made me feel a bit prescriptive on my last email, because she's making me realize this media business is trickier than I thought. We had competing priorities. I feared further spread of "red scare" in the U.S.. She thought less from that perspective.
So, I agree, the examples are horrible, and I thought the post (okay, it was a long one) eventually explained me coming around to Sow's arguments.
I was really hoping you'd chime in on the questions I posed at the end – seriously – how can media get there? I didn't throw Xun Zi out there for nothing, because how countries behave within likely says how they behave outside.
You are a very smart guy, so I was hoping for some insights from you.
Thanks for the compliments. I did read your post fully and I think part of my cursory comment here was precisely to say that you were a bit too quick to the draw with the anti-Western media comments.
I don't really think you "came around" to Sow's arguments on the matter of per capita figures. I guess you could say you "came around" on her arguments that Newsy has "fair" as a goal but I didn't really think of you as arguing against her on that. It was more of you trying to prove Western media bias before you were willing to give Newsy a chance to sell you on their value proposition. Your reaction seemed to go from ascribing guilt by association to backing off and willing to give them a chance.
What guards Newsy from giving the consumers what they wish to hear, Fox News style?
Every media outlet caters to an audience of some sort, whether it be internal or external. What we hope for is competition.
How do you balance the should and want?
Not sure what you're referring to. The same way we all do?
Where do we draw the line between government responsibilities and media responsibilities?
Again, not sure what you're referring to. What I do know is that the government is an audience itself, and it has preferences for what it wants to see and hear from the media as well. As such, I'm not particularly confident in the government dictating media responsibilities.
I know you framed your post overall as something about breaking the mold on Western media bias but I don't think you really argued a case for there being a particular mold of Western media bias that is so pervasive that every entrant into the media industry should be scrutinized against it. I think there is definite bias in the Western media but it is closer to general social biases in the West amongst Westerners than it is some systemic conspiracy in the Western media itself.
Honestly? Seen more in the U.S. media about P.R. China surpassing Japan as the world's number two economy than I have seen about P.R. China (maybe) being the number one energy consumer.
As for the energy bit… it is a bit of a headscratch – given that the powers to be in Beijing are a bit shy about doling out even mundane information like energy consumption.
Yet, given the amount of money that is being poured into a new fleet of supertankers – it is not too surprising to see this development. Looks like Putin and the Saudis are going to have a new source of income for the next 20 or 30 years.
Minus me all you want folks – bottom line is P.R. China is getting more addicted to oil, to which it is going to have to play the same dance that North America and Europe. Last time I checked the Russians and OPEC will pluck whatever tune they want.
Matthew. Despite the fact that you are probably a dreadful Puritan, I voted you up. It is all about future energy security.
The fact remains that China is the massive last link in a global chain following an old school model of industrial development.
And the environment is paying the cost and beginning to bite back. Basically, it has become a chemical sewer.
As is said on another site, I would give an arm and a leg to view the survey results of what Chinese folk think about the chain of disasters mentioned in the headlines in 2010.
Honestly, if you really want to view the news – skip the talking heads and go straight to the sources – AP, UPI, and Reuters for international/national, then local media sources for regional/local news. We have the technology, and the ability, to get "the bigger picture".
For some reason, GDP without a per capita reminder seems less flagrant than, say, energy usage. Not sure why that is in my mind. GDP, itself, without the per capita modifier, is such a typically used number; it's more of a stretch to infer some sort of intent to distort on the part of the party using it. Energy usage, on the other hand, has no standard bandied-about acronym/metric. So when someone writes an article talking about how much energy China uses and how it's more than any other nation, I would think it's fair to infer a larger intent to mislead there. Of course, it's people who use energy, so naturally per capita should matter quite a bit.
Oh noes! The Chinese no longer charge machine guns with swords thinking they'd be immune to bullets! They are, GASP, refurb'ing an old Russian aircraft carrier! This both inflates "red scare" and gives license to further grow the American military-industrial complex, wherein the public's fears are inflamed and then used to justify increased military spending and American geo-political projectionism. It appears this recession is not bad enough … let's all dig deeper.
I'm going to guess that this is because GDP is seen a positive thing, and energy usage as a negative one. From a logical point of view there doesn't seem to be any other difference.
I was just just going to mention that Bin Wang, it's clear that both sides use the absolute or the per capita figure when it suits them best. But in Chinas defence: 1. Chinas per capita energy consumption is minimal when industry is taken out of the equation 2. The industry is still export oriented, meaning Americans just outsourced some of their effectively higher energy consumption 3. China is undertaking massive efforts to increase their energy efficiency, especially with rising raw material prices.
Yes of course, China celebrated overtaking Japan in absolute GDP, carefully omitting the per capita figure, when US media does the same it's all evil Western propaganda. It's a silly game, but it's still true that Energy consumption doesn't make too much sense without the per capita figures and a quick analysis where and for what this energy is being consumed with what grade of efficiency.
I think there is a big gap in my post I failed to address for people who do not accept that the Western media is so biased in a way that is dangerous for our world. Everything in my post hinges on that premise – that there is agreement the bias is egregious and dangerous.
Regarding "systematic conspiracy" – I am not arguing one way or another, and to me it's irrelevant. For example, racists don't need to conspire to be racists. The extent of their "conspiracy" is that their public display emboldens one another. Likewise, media bias in one outlet reinforces the same behavior in another.
Every media out let caters to an audience of some sort, whether it be internal or external. What we hope for is competition.
I am seriously trying to find an "answer" that could prevent that lack of "competition" in the U.S. media which resulted in the last Iraq invasion – for example.
Westerners understand the value of "check and balances." Why not extend that to the world stage?
Yes, the U.S. wants Iraq oil, but should it be allowed via an invasion? That's what I mean. Of course, if you don't accept the premise that the U.S. media biased the U.S. population into this WMD threat and this bringing of "freedom" to the Iraqis, then my argument to people with the position you have taken is really moot. We need to step back and debate about how egregious and how dangerous it is with the bias.
Chomsky's response to me was that the main "check" for the U.S. power is the American public.
I guess you could say you "came around" on her arguments that Newsy has "fair" as a goal but I didn't really think of you as arguing against her on that. It was more of you trying to prove Western media bias before you were willing to give Newsy a chance to sell you on their value proposition.
We agree, western media is pretty terrible and distortion in the media often leads to conflict within the populace.
I feel you are hung up on a need to "defend" Newsy, but my conversation with Sow in my post clearly evolved to fixing the "pretty terrible and distortion in the media." We disagree on whether that particular IEA news was biased or not. Obviously, I still hold it is biased without adding the per capita perspective. But, the conversation move on from there.
Watching them again, I can see an attempt at a broader view. At this point, I can accept them based on difference in prioritizing which perspective is more pressing.
There certainly are people and organizations advancing anti-China alarmist narratives out there, just as there are anti-U.S. narratives in China. I can empathize with him on this.
I will accept your position that you don't think the Newsy report was biased. My view – by omission, this is one of the thousand needles. On its own, it won't bring you down, but over time it will.
"just as there are anti-U.S. narratives in China" – we would have to look at how "unfair" it is on both sides to know truly how dangerous it is with one side vs the other.
Anyways, forgive me, I didn't want to go down this path of discussion – to proof media bias. I am not on a crusade looking for more converts – Noam Chomsky has a sufficient following. If you read the Chinese blogs within China, you will know they simply take Western media bias as a fact. Chomsky was invited to talk to the General Assembly recently. So I suspect that view is global.
The U.S. is a hegemon and the political culture that has formed in the international arena is dominated by "power" – that's well documented, and that view has been successfully advanced by people like Tsinghua Professor Yan Xuetong. The "check and balance" is crucial for world peace, and the "actions the public willing to take" and the media "fairness" seems to be the only solution. How we get there is really my question.
Thank you very much, Kai, for weighing in.
So, basically, accept my premise, for which I have never been able to produce any evidence, and you will agree with me.
We agree, western media is pretty terrible and distortion in the media often leads to conflict within the populace.
I don't think that challenges my latter sentence that you referred to. You trying to prove doesn't mean she didn't agree. It just means I felt you were trying to prove something to her. People can try proving things to people who don't need such things proven to them. It's a comment about what you were doing, not a comment about a disagreement between you two.
I feel you are hung up on a need to "defend" Newsy, but my conversation with Sow in my post clearly evolved to fixing the "pretty terrible and distortion in the media." We disagree on whether that particular IEA news was biased or not. Obviously, I still hold it is biased without adding the per capita perspective. But, the conversation move on from there.
Nah, I don't feel a need to defend Newsy. I never even heard of them before reading your post. You asked me to chime in and my cursory impression was that you went at her guns ablaze. I'm glad you guys found common ground and respect each other in the end, but I still felt it was odd that you went at her and that particular Newsy video the way you did off the bat.
On the video itself, my opinion is that there's nothing egregiously biased about it for not mentioning per capita comparisons. That doesn't mean I want people to think China is threatening American energy consumption. It just means I don't think that's a conclusion that must be so hawkishly guarded against. When people make that conclusion, then set them straight. You can't put disclaimers on everything, you can't give every related detail every time. They have to be prompted.
I am interested in your question about the world becoming "less power based" and without delving into a tangential conversation. I will just say that maybe power relationships are a given.
That being said, what I think you object to is the distribution of power. I also think the response you got echoes that sentiment, that the "public" ought to have a share of the power. Perhaps, even, as you mention later, enough power to act as a check on other dominant institutions. This strikes me as a very 'western' viewpoint.
Media is meant to be an extension of that civil check, but western media has become a commercial, rather than public enterprise. It has scared up a number of wars already so why wouldn't that pattern repeat?
Technology has changed media in a way that offers the public more checks on dominant institutions. The fact that we are having a conversation about this, in this particular setting exemplifies that point.
Now, instead of being transmitted information from a dominant source, we pass along information and media from peer to peer, from many peers to many more. Across what are currently, fairly open networks. We are talking to one another about news, daily, hourly.
If your point is that media has potential to be dangerous because of the effect it has on public sentiment, you are sort of tacitly conceding that the opposite is just as true. These characteristics could lead to power for a different group. I think new technology maximizes the potential for the latter.
Well, yes. What is the point for the Western media to remind its audience that they waste far more than the average Chinese, so that it can lose its readership?
First time here on china divide. I am not going to address whether media is biased here since I agree with Kai that even if I sincerely believe there were systemic bias in western media, this would not an example I'd pick.
With that said, I'd propose the problem here is with perception – or even perceived perception.
One could look straight in my eyes and say nothing is wrong.
You'd be technically right. But the underlying propaganda is so strong as to make the report biased.
[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us '569347467 which is not a hashcash value.


text:
Home / ac milan / begovic / boban / commentary / gazidis / hernández / ibrahimovic / maldini / rebic / Certain Types of Names
Certain Types of Names
Elaine ac milan, begovic, boban, commentary, gazidis, hernández, ibrahimovic, maldini, rebic
After years of patchwork transfer markets and Galliani free transfers, the sporting side of Milan has vastly improved since the return of Paolo Maldini. Even more so when Zvonimir Boban was brought in as Chief Footballing Officer last summer. If you have paid attention to the interviews with the players they have brought in since then, pretty much all of them have talked about answering a call from either Maldini and or Boban or both, and that having them at the club was what made them choose Milan. Even on the latest podcast, Milan goalkeeper Asmir Begović mentioned that he was at the club due to "certain types of names" calling him.
Having Maldini and Boban influencing players to come to Milan has provided a way for the club to bring in not only better quality players, but also players who will play on low wages. As far as the sporting sector is concerned, it really doesn't get better than this. This concept puts the team on the fast track to get back to winning ways, while cutting costs to improve the bottom line at the same time. It's perfect.
Remember how Leo Duarte described in one of his first interviews that he was at the mall, and his phone rang, he looked at the caller ID and saw "Paolo Maldini?" Just the name alone makes players want to jump at the chance to come to Milan.
What could have been tricky negotiations with Raiola went smoothly because of Boban
Likewise, Ibrahimovic spoke with both Maldini and Boban, but especially Boban. His influence was massive in getting the striker to return to the club, due to Ibrahimovic's parents originating from Bosnia and Croatia.
There are so many other stories from the other players, too. Boban was the first person to talk to Rebic, for example, who turned out to be a massive signing. Theo Hernandez recounted:
"I needed to play and my meeting with Paolo Maldini made me change my mind. He came to see me in Ibiza, we connected immediately. Maldini is a phenomenon, probably the best ever in my role. We talked and he knew me well. When someone like Maldini who chooses you, it shows he trusts you."
All of the important players came because of certain types of names
So if Maldini and Boban are bringing success to the sporting side of the club, why would Gazidis go behind their backs and talk to Rangnick about coaching and running the sporting side of things? How does changing the sporting director every single year help anything? And changing the director also means changing the plans for the football aspect of the club. It's completely ignorant, it hurts the club on every level, and takes us back to yet another year zero.
If Boban has been so influential in bringing in the two most influential players of the January mercato, then why fire him… really, for any reason? He and Maldini have done more for the club in nine months than Gazidis has done in twice that long. As the directors of the technical side, they deserve to know any negotiations in that sector, and they would never go behind someone else's back, let alone lie. That Boban was fired for outing Gazidis' deceit is the ultimate irony, since Gazidis has done little to nothing to improve the financial side of the club. But hey, at least all of the messages in the dressing room and tunnel of one of the most storied Italian are in English now. It's all about priorities.
One of these guys is shady, the other was fired
Gazidis' projects have typically made money before, but always at the expense of the football. Why he is screwing up the one area of the club that was improving fiscally, I'll never know. Disrespecting two amazing football legends like that tells me you don't respect football at all. And if firing Boban also means the exit of Maldini, then Milan will no longer even be a football club. I will just be another organization where Gazidis buys and sells young boys for profit, closer to human trafficking than a football club.
Maldini and Boban have brought back the players. They have brought back much improved football. Even after the mistake with Giampaolo, they corrected well with Pioli. They have brought back the fans, and the faith of the fans. Them bringing back Ibrahimovic was something Gazidis vetoed last year. His veto literally cost us the Champions League. Every ounce of credibility the club has regained is because of those two legends. Two legends that are now only one. A move that makes absolutely no sense when you consider all of the people who look to the club because of "certain types of names."
This post inspired by the music of The Smiths' "This Night Has Opened My Eyes"
Certain Types of Names Reviewed by Elaine on 12:27 AM Rating: 5
rebic
Podcast: Relaunching
Killer Italian Drama
The Importance of Keeping Maldini
Alessandro Nesta: Grace Under Pressure
How to Survive a Sports Famine
Podcast: Milan, Money, and the Masses
POLL: How and When Should Football Come Back?
At Home Ultras
Dear Football
No One Like Pirlo
Podcast: Chat with Asmir Begović
Milan, Interrupted

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


North Ferriby United have appointed former Scarborough Athletic joint-boss Paul Foot as their new manager.
Foot, who was a player and joint-manager at Boro alongside Bryan Hughes, departed the club in December of 2015 after being released from his role.
Former Boro defender Joe Lamplough will be his assistant.
They take over from Chris Bolder and Paul Robson, after the pair were sacked by the Villagers a fortnight ago.


text:
The metaverse's dark side: Here come harassment and assaults
The world's largest tech companies are hurtling headlong into creating the metaverse, a virtual reality world where people can have their avatars do everything from play video games and attend gym classes to participate in meetings
By Sheera Frenkel and Kellen Browning
Harassment, assaults, bullying and hate speech already run rampant in virtual reality games, which are part of the metaverse, and there are few mechanisms to easily report the misbehavior, researchers said
SAN FRANCISCO — Chanelle Siggens recently strapped on an Oculus Quest virtual reality headset to play her favorite shooter game, Population One. Once she turned on the game, she maneuvered her avatar into a virtual lobby in the immersive digital world and waited for the action to begin.
But as she waited, another player's avatar approached hers. The stranger then simulated groping and ejaculating onto her avatar, Siggens said. Shocked, she asked the player, whose avatar appeared male, to stop.
"He shrugged as if to say: 'I don't know what to tell you. It's the metaverse — I'll do what I want,'" said Siggens, a 29-year-old Toronto resident. "Then he walked away."
Seoul: A tech company opens its new office branch in metaverse
Nike buys virtual sneaker firm as metaverse buzz grows
Fast fashion brand Zara makes the first move to capture metaverse
The world's largest tech companies — Microsoft, Google, Apple and others — are hurtling headlong into creating the metaverse, a virtual reality world where people can have their avatars do everything from play video games and attend gym classes to participate in meetings. In October, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook's founder and chief executive, said he believed so much in the metaverse that he would invest billions in the effort. He also renamed his company Meta.
Yet even as tech giants bet big on the concept, questions about the metaverse's safety have surfaced. Harassment, assaults, bullying and hate speech already run rampant in virtual reality games, which are part of the metaverse, and there are few mechanisms to easily report the misbehavior, researchers said. In one popular virtual reality game, VRChat, a violating incident occurs about once every seven minutes, according to the nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate.
Bad behavior in the metaverse can be more severe than today's online harassment and bullying. That's because virtual reality plunges people into an all-encompassing digital environment where unwanted touches in the digital world can be made to feel real and the sensory experience is heightened.
"When something bad happens, when someone comes up and gropes you, your mind is tricking you into thinking it's happening in the real world," Siggens said. "With the full metaverse, it's going to be so much more intense."
Toxic behavior in gaming and in virtual reality is not new. But as Meta and other huge companies make the metaverse their platform, the issues are likely to be magnified by the companies' reach over billions of people. The companies are encouraging people to join the metaverse, with Meta, which makes the Oculus Quest headsets, cutting prices for the products during the holidays.
Zuckerberg, who appears aware of questions about the metaverse's harms, has promised to build it with privacy and safety in mind. Yet even his own lieutenants have wondered whether they can really stem toxic behavior there.
In March, Andrew Bosworth, a Meta executive who will become chief technology officer in 2022, wrote in an employee memo that moderating what people say and how they act in the metaverse "at any meaningful scale is practically impossible." The memo was reported earlier by The Financial Times.
Kristina Milian, a Meta spokesperson, said the company was working with policymakers, experts and industry partners on the metaverse. In a November blog post, Meta also said it was investing $50 million in global research to develop its products responsibly.
Meta has asked its employees to volunteer to test the metaverse, according to an internal memo viewed by The New York Times. A stranger recently groped the avatar of one tester of a Meta virtual reality game, Horizon Worlds, a company spokesperson said. The incident, which Meta has said it learned from, was reported earlier by The Verge.
Misbehavior in virtual reality is typically difficult to track because incidents occur in real time and are generally not recorded.
Titania Jordan, the chief parent officer at Bark, which uses artificial intelligence to monitor children's devices for safety reasons, said she was especially concerned about what children might encounter in the metaverse. She said abusers could target children through chat messages in a game or by speaking to them through headsets, actions that are difficult to document.
"VR is a whole other world of complexity," Jordan said. "Just the ability to pinpoint somebody who is a bad actor and block them indefinitely or have ramifications so they can't just get back on, those are still being developed."
Callum Hood, head of research at the Center for Countering Digital Hate, recently spent several weeks recording interactions in the VRChat game, which is made by a developer called VRChat and largely played through Oculus Quest headsets. In the game, people can form virtual communities and have their avatars play cards, party in a virtual club or meet in virtual public spaces to talk. Oculus rates it as safe for teenagers.
Yet over one 11-hour period, Hood said, he recorded more than 100 problematic incidents on VRChat, some involving users who said they were under 13. In several cases, users' avatars made sexual and violent threats against minors, he said. In another case, someone tried showing sexually explicit content to a minor.
Milian said Meta's community standards and VR policy outline what is allowed on its platform, which developers must adhere to. "We don't allow content that attacks people based on race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability," she said.
Minors are not permitted to create accounts or use Oculus devices, she said. Part of the responsibility, she added, lies with the developers of the apps.
VRChat did not respond to a request for comment.
After Siggens faced abuse while playing the Population One virtual reality game, she said, she joined a virtual support group for women, many of whom also play the game. Members regularly dealt with harassment in the game, she said. In June, Meta acquired BigBox VR, the developer of Population One.
Another member of the support group, Mari DeGrazia, 48, of Tucson, Arizona, said she saw harassment and assault happen in Population One "two to three times a week, if not more."
"Sometimes, we see things happen two to three times day that violate the game's rules," she added.
BigBox VR did not respond to a request for comment.
DeGrazia said the people behind Population One had responded to her complaints and appeared interested in making the game safer. Despite the harassment, she said, she has found a community of virtual friends whom she regularly plays the game with and enjoys those interactions.
"I'm not going to stop playing, because I think it's important to have diverse people, including women, playing this game," she said. "We aren't going to be pushed out of it, even though sometimes it's hard."
©2019 New York Times News Service
Electronics Tucson (Ariz)
The (Vox Media Llc) Mark E Zuckerberg
Jordan Toronto (Ontario)
Headphones And Headsets
Virtual Reality (Computers)
Oculus Vr Inc
Accidents And Safety
Horizontal Terms
Commerce And Industry
Andrew Bosworth (1982)
Can a tiny territory in the South Pacific power Tesla's ambitions?
Was Christmas 2021 a turning point for the metaverse?


In November 2017, like in October 2017, U.S. rail traffic had both a glass-is-half-empty and a glass-is-half-full feel to it. It's half empty because total carloads were down 0.9% (11,442 carloads) in November, their fifth straight year-over-year monthly decline after eight straight monthly increases. Railroads, of course, are concerned with their total level of business, not just particular commodities, so total carloads matter. Eight of the 20 categories the AAR tracks had carload declines in November, but three of these were especially important: coal (down 22,560 carloads, or 5.0%), grain (down 16,311 carloads, or 12.7%), and petroleum and petroleum products (down 3,877 carloads, or 7.2%). All three of these categories saw carload declines in November for reasons that don't have much to do with the state of the economy. So, the half-full feel comes from the fact that many traffic categories that are more sensitive to the economy did relatively well in November (e.g., steel, up 6.9%; stone, clay, and glass products, up 6.0%; chemicals up 3.6%). That's a good sign for the economy going forward. The fact that intermodal originations were up 3.8% (50,029 containers and trailers) in November and will almost certainly set a new annual record in 2017 is a good sign as well.
Originated carloads on U.S. railroads totaled 1,307,521 in November 2017, down 0.9% (11,442 carloads) from November 2016 thanks mainly to big declines in carloads of coal, grain, and petroleum products. Total carloads averaged 261,504 per week in November 2017, ahead of November 2015 (260,453) but otherwise the lowest weekly average for November since sometime prior to 1988, when our data begin.
U.S. intermodal originations totaled 1.37 million containers and trailers in November 2017. That's 3.8%, or 50,029 units, higher than in November 2016 and the tenth straight monthly increase. Weekly volume in November 2017 averaged 273,832 units, the eighth largest weekly average for any month on record and the fourth highest for any month this year.


A securities class action claim was recently filed on the behalf of the investors of Walgreen Co.
Based in Chicago, Illinois, Walgreens is the single biggest drug retailing chain in the U.S. Figures from the company's website reveal that through Feb. 28, the organization had more than 8,200 stores across the U.S.
A securities class action claim was recently filed to represent Walgreen investors.
On April 10, 2015, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announced that a shareholder class action had been brought forth to represent an institutional investor. The lawsuit – brought forth in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois – was filed to represent all individuals and organizations that purchased the common stock of Walgreens between March 25, 2014, and Aug. 5, 2014.
The securities class action claim launched by Robbins Geller involved allegations of false and misleading statements, and charged the company – along with some of its former officers – with breaching the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Pomerantz LLP announced a separate legal action on April 14, 2015, which also alleged that the major drug retailer – and also some of its officers – broke federal securities laws contained within the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Pomerantz securities class action claim was filed to represent all organizations or individuals who bought Walgreens securities between March 25, 2014, and Aug. 5, 2014. The legal action, brought forth in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, sought to recover damages against the aforementioned defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws existing under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Both of the aforementioned shareholder lawsuits claimed that during the class period, defendants provided statements that were false and misleading – and/or failed to reveal adverse information – about the business and prospects of Walgreens, including the specific benefit the major drug retailer would receive from its strategic partnership with Alliance Boots GmbH.
The securities class action claims specifically allege that defendants didn't disclose an earnings shortfall between $1.8 and $2.3 billion for fiscal year 2016 as well as the reasons for this unfortunate circumstance.
However, they did name specific goals, including $1 billion in combined synergies and between $9 and $9.5 billion in EBIT for fiscal year 2016. According to both of the aforementioned lawsuits, company stock rose to as much as $76.08 during the class period as a result of the false and misleading statements – and/or omissions made by defendants – during the class period.
Some of the allegations contained in the securities class action claims centered around statements defendants made about the strategic partnership between Walgreens and Alliance Boots GmbH, announced June 19, 2012.
That day, the two firms revealed their plan to develop the first global pharmacy-led health and well being enterprise. Walgreens and Alliance Boots stated that the two-phase process would result in a superior portfolio of health and wellness brands, a supply chain with no equal and a one-of-a-kind platform in developed and emerging markets.
For the first part of the partnership, which happened in 2012, Walgreens paid roughly $6.7 billion in cash and stock in exchange for a 45 percent equity ownership stake in Alliance Boots. This consideration consisted of $4 billion in cash and 83.4 million shares of the major drug retailer's common stock, worth roughly $2.7 billion at their closing price of $31.96 on June 18, 2012.
For the second part, Walgreens bought the 55 percent equity stake that was left Dec. 31, 2014, for roughly $5.3 billion in cash and 144.3 million shares of the major drug retailer's common stock. It is worth noting that while the first phase of the transaction did not require a shareholder vote, the second part did.
Walgreens publicly announced its goals for FY 2016 after the phase one of the partnership took place in August 2012. These metrics generated visibility, as both the company and analysts harnessed them as a means of evaluating whether the partnership – which the defendants repeatedly promoted as generating significant benefits – was succeeding.
In addition to assisting market observers in assessing the benefits of the partnership, the goals served as information shareholders could use when determining whether to vote in favor of step two of the transaction.
On an investor call held Aug. 6, 2014, defendants lowered their FY 2016 EBIT target to $7.2 billion, $2.3 billion less than the previous estimate's high end and $1.8 less than its low end.
Defendants also revealed that because the $7.2 billion EBIT estimate contained a new $1 billion worth of cost savings that were additive to the previously revealed $1 billion in cost synergies, the major drug retailer's base business would suffer a 4 percent negative compound annual growth rate during the next two years.
When investors found out about the earnings expectation shortfall, Walgreens shares fell more than 14 percent, closing at $59.21 per share on Aug. 6, 2014, compared to a closing value of $69.12 a share on Aug. 5, 2014.
Robbins Geller announced that if eligible investors want to serve as lead plaintiff, they have until no later than 60 days from the suit's announcement on April 10, 2015, to move the court. Pomerantz revealed that if shareholders purchased Walgreen securities during the class period and want to request appointment as lead plaintiff in the securities class action claim, they have until June 9, 2015, to move the court.


text:
Q: IE8 - Content Not Acceptable Symfony 2 App I have a website up and running (and i need to support IE8).
Server: Nginx, framework Symfony2/PHP/MySQL
The issue is simple: IE8 (8.0.6) shows an HTTP 406Content not acceptable on all HTML pages.
Headers (Nginx)
Cache-Control:no-cache
Connection:keep-alive
Content-Encoding:gzip
Content-Type:text/html; charset=UTF-8
Date:Mon, 25 Apr 2016 15:23:46 GMT
Server:nginx/1.6.2
Transfer-Encoding:chunked
X-Debug-Token:d7e68f

HTML (2 versions, not working)
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta charset="utf-8">
    <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=9; IE=8; IE=7; IE=EDGE" />
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow">
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
    <title>Htm 2</title>
    <link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" href="/favicon.ico" />
</head>
<body>
   ... hi
</body>
</html>

<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
    <meta charset="utf-8">
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
    <meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow">
    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">
    <title>Htm</title>
    <link rel="icon" type="image/x-icon" href="/favicon.ico" />
</head>
<body>
   ... hi
</body>
</html>

I have read tons of stuff on that matter but could not find any clue. The previous website version worked on IE8 and ran on Apache 2.

A: This bug was not related to Nginx but to Symfony 2 and FOSRESTBundle which relies on Client headers to negociate the response content via format listener.
Solution:
I changed my configuration to disable FOSRest to disable format listener for HTML pages.
fos_rest:
    format_listener:
        rules:
            - { path: '^/rest', priorities: [ 'json' ], fallback_format: json, prefer_extension: false }
            #- { path: ^/, priorities: [ 'text/html', '*/*' ], fallback_format: html, prefer_extension: true }
            - { path: '^/', stop: true }

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Surprise: Stephanopoulos Tempers Piers Morgan's Liberal Spin
Published: 9/21/2012 5:35 PM ET
Subscribe to Matt Hadro
Follow Matt Hadro on Twitter
By Matt Hadro
a News Analyst
Of all people, former Clinton operative George Stephanopoulos was the one throwing water on Piers Morgan's liberal spin. On Thursday's Piers Morgan Tonight, the host hyped that Mitt Romney's 47 percent remarks "could be an election-ending moment."
"Mitt Romney has clearly hit a bit of a buffer moment here. Could be a game-changing moment. Could be an election-ending moment," Morgan asserted before Stephanopoulos jumped in to stop him. "Wow. That's going a little far actually," he insisted.
Morgan wouldn't give in, though. "Is it going too far?" he asked again before his guest affirmed "I think it is" and provided some polling context.
[Video below. Audio here.]
"But look, and even after all of the hullabaloo over the 47 percent this week, Gallup Poll comes out today, Mitt Romney is picking up a point. It's a dead even race. Now the polls are all over the map right now and Mitt Romney is running out of both time and space, but you can't say game-ender yet," added Stephanopoulos.
A transcript of the segment, which aired on September 20 on Piers Morgan Tonight at 9:02 p.m. EDT:
PIERS MORGAN: You're the perfect guy to ask. Because when you were with Bill Clinton you went through great highs and the occasional massive low. Mitt Romney has clearly hit a bit of a buffer moment here. Could be a game-changing moment. Could be an election-ending moment in terms of --
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Wow. That's going a little far actually.
MORGAN: Is it going too far?
STEPHANOPOULOS: I think it is. I mean –
MORGAN: Because people are calling it like that –
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, and you don't want your low to hit in the September before the election, Bill Clinton's lows were more during the primary season, January, February. He was on an ascent going into the fall.
But look, and even after all of the hullabaloo over the 47 percent this week, Gallup Poll comes out today, Mitt Romney is picking up a point. It's a dead even race. Now the polls are all over the map right now and Mitt Romney is running out of both time and space, but you can't say game-ender yet.
MORGAN: So all these gaffes – supposed gaffes, I mean, do you see them as gaffes with your old White House hat on? How significant are these alleged gaffes be?
STEPHANOPOULOS: I think there have been more unforced errors than you would expect from a presidential campaign in the final months. I mean, if you go back to the trip to Europe and the Olympic gaffes – the convention, there were some significant mistakes at the convention, setting aside Clint Eastwood and the empty chair. There didn't seem to be a coordinated message coming out of the convention in support of Mitt Romney and his agenda going forward. And of course, you know, this tape coming out. Now you can say, is it a gaffe or is it what Mitt Romney really believes. Whatever it was, they didn't want it out this week in this way at this time.
MORGAN: Let's hear a bit of that tape again. It's becoming notorious. But let's play it to remind viewers who may not have heard it.
(Video Clip)
ROMNEY: There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the President no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has the responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's – that's an entitlement and the government should give it to them, and they will vote for this President no matter what.
MORGAN: See, here's the difficult question for you. When Bill Clinton was fund raising, for example, would he often go harder on the rhetoric, thinking he was in a secure room with people that he could trust, or is this Mitt Romney's big fatal flaw, that he's been caught talking in a different way?
STEPHANOPOULOS: You have just got to assume, when you're in a presidential race, that every single moment is on the record. There is no such thing as off-the-record in a presidential race. Now Bill Clinton – listen, every candidate makes mistakes. In fact, one time when he was President, President Clinton went before a fund raiser I think it was in Houston and he told the crowd, this was after he'd passed the tax increase, which ended up working, that he thought that he had raised their taxes too much. And that was a three or four-day story that we had to deal with. So it does happen. I think the problem here is that actually I think you actually left out the most damaging line in that soliloquy. And that was where he said my job is not to worry about them.
MORGAN: Yeah.
STEPHANOPOULOS: That's just like writing off –
MORGAN: I thought that, and also that calling them victims.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, and –
MORGAN: The moment you start calling half the country victims –
STEPHANOPOULOS: And then when you add to that –
MORGAN: It's a real patronizing pat-on-the-head kind of thing.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But that 47 percent is actually striking right at the heart of many Romney voters, especially the elderly who receive significant amounts of government assistance, Social Security and Medicare. That's why it caused so much trouble for him.
-- Matt Hadro is a News Analyst at the Media Research Center
Publication: BiasAlerts
Division: News Analysis Division
Tags: Piers Morgan, Mitt Romney, George Stephanopoulos, Election 2012, CNN
Filter BiasAlerts by Date Range


– Developed by Respironics to help their machines reach the optimal pressure by using a numbering system which allows the CPAP device to recognize the mask. It achieves accuracy and reliability by instructing the device to compensate for the specific mask type. Please Note: PR masks are the only masks designed with a resistance control number, so this machine feature is only compatible with Philips Respironics masks.


If you've used Tor, you've probably used Tor Browser, and if you've used Tor Browser you've used Firefox. By lines of code, Tor Browser is mostly Firefox -- there are some modifications and some additions, but around 95% of the code in Tor Browser comes from Firefox. The Firefox and Tor Browser teams have collaborated for a long time, but in 2016, we started to take it to the next level, bringing Firefox and Tor Browser closer together than ever before. With closer collaboration, we're enabling the Tor Browser team to do their jobs more easily, adding more privacy options for Firefox users, and making both browsers more secure.
The Tor Browser team builds Tor Browser by taking Firefox ESR and applying some patches to it. These changes add valuable privacy features for Tor Browser users, but having these changes also means that every time the Tor Browser team wants to use a new version of Firefox, they have to update the patches to work with the new version. These updates take up a substantial fraction of the effort involved in producing Tor Browser.
In 2016, we started an effort to take the Tor Browser patches and "uplift" them to Firefox. When a patch gets uplifted, we take the change that Tor Browser needs and we add it to Firefox in such a way that it's disabled by default, but can be enabled by changing a preference value. That saves the Tor Browser team work, since they can just change preferences instead of updating patches. And it gives the Firefox team a way to experiment with the advanced privacy features that Tor Browser team is building, to see if we can bring them to a much wider audience.
Our first major target in the uplift project was a feature called First Party Isolation, which provides a very strong anti-tracking protection (at the risk of breaking some websites). Mozilla formed a dedicated team to take the First Party Isolation features in Tor Browser and implement them in Firefox, using the same technology we used to build the containers feature. The team also developed thorough test and QA processes to make sure that the isolation in Firefox is as strong as what's in Tor Browser -- and even identified some ways to add even stronger protections. The Mozilla team worked closely with the Tor Browser team, including weekly calls and an in-person meeting in September.
First Party Isolation will be incorporated in Firefox 52, the basis for the next major version of Tor Browser. As a result, the Tor Browser team won't have to update their First Party Isolation patches for this version. In Firefox, First Party Isolation is disabled by default (because of the compatibility risk), but Firefox users can opt in to using First Party Isolation by going to about:config and setting "privacy.firstparty.isolate" to "true".
We're excited to continue this collaboration in 2017. Work will start soon on uplifting a set of patches that prevent various forms of browser fingerprinting. We'll also be looking at how we can work together on sandboxing, building on the work that Yawning Angel has done for Tor Browser and the Firefox sandboxing features that are scheduled to start shipping in early 2017.
Finally, we should recognize the value of the continued collaboration between Mozilla and the Tor Project with regard to security vulnerabilities. The importance of this collaboration was on display only a few weeks ago, when we were both simultaneously notified of a zero-day exploit targeted at Tor Browser using a vulnerability in Firefox. Working together, we were able to develop, test, and ship a fix to both browsers in under 24 hours.
The collaboration between the Firefox and Tor Browser teams is a great example of how Mozilla's principles of openness and participation can help advance security and privacy in the Internet. We're proud of all we've accomplished together with the Tor Project in 2016, and we're looking forward to continuing to making the web more secure and more private.
As a Firefox user from version 2, I'm very proud about the work Mozilla does for an open private and secure Internet. Thanks to Mozilla for being one of the few arms against Google's hostility.
Why is this? this site was working in previous versions (v6.0.5) only after upgrading to v6.0.8 has it stopped..
It's all open source so you can fix it yourself!
why does google sponsor tor?
why does google sponsor tor? Maybe not hostile, but curious?
So the new TBB will no longer be based on esr?
Thanks for all the necessary work over the last year!
I don't think that's what it means. Tor Browser will still be based on ESR unfortunately, and the next ESR will be ESR52. It's unfortunate because ESR does not fix any bugs marked low or moderate severity, so for Tor Browser will build up bugs for each year that are low and moderately severe, and does not get them fixed, only fixing high and critical severity bugs.
Since Stable FF52 is not released until march, is this when TBB the new TBB based on ff52 will be released?
Tor Browser will switch to ESR 52 when ESR 45 will be end-of-life. We currently plan to switch in June this year with ESR 52.2 coming out.
Firefox also added font tracking protection, something Torbrowser already had.
But I hope Firefox is not making the same mistake Torbrowser has.
It seems that font tracking on Torbrowser is still possible by system which is a risk too.
It looks like the "font.system.whitelist" differs for the different os versions, Windows version has some 7 more fonts anyway.
Shouldn't you remove the Microsoft and Apple named fonts? And or the ones that are specifically related to one OS?
There is also a mistake in the MacOs list, one dot to many in this name " .Helvetica Neue DeskInterface " .
No OS font tracking tracking should be the idea right?
No answer is not important?
I recommend opening a ticket at https://bugs.torproject.org/ if there's a bug to report. It's likely that nobody will run across old comments here.
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/18097 has a description you might want to read. It explains what we are currently doing. I am not sure I understand your point about different fonts for "different os versions". Maybe you mean things like https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/17999?
Regarding ".Helvetica Neue DeskInterface" that seems to be correct spelling.
- When will it be available ?
- will you please inform us what are exactly the right settings that everyone must have to be 'invisible' ? is it yet done per default ? can i uncheck the cookies option, the check my spell option , the other search engine(i hate twitter&google) ?
Thank you very much for your fantastic improvement & happy new year 2017 !
We had a GSoC project, Fingerprint Central, in 2016 which we are incorporating into our Q&A efforts right now. You can find a beta version on: https://fpcentral.irisa.fr/ The integration should be done in a couple of months.
The question about the exactly right settings is a tricky one as the behavior of other Tor Browser users plays a role here. But a good strategy is to keep Tor Browser as we ship it and adjust your security level according to your needs using only the security slider.
Thank you you very much for your answer and i will follow the good strategy.
It is a fr site but written in uk/us and with no script checked on ; my fingerprint is discreet.
-i do not see some advice like -e.g replace your user-agent (take this one it is the same than the most user) or shut down your camera embedded.
- i do not see the version of tor (is it not strange ?).
Just sayin, but I love Firefox for NOT being from Google ;). And I love how Firefox and Tor (Browser) development is bringing us a better and safer browsing experience :). Thank you!
No state of the onion at 33c3 ? WHY ??
I talked to Linus Neumann from the CCC content team back in September, and we concluded that this wasn't the right timing for another state of the onion talk at CCC. That is, I did not submit the talk.
I personally enjoyed Congress a lot more when I didn't have to spend two weeks leading up to it preparing my brain for a talk in front of 5000 people, and then the days after it trying to follow up to all the press buzz it created. This time I could actually sit down and talk to people, and that's what I did for four days straight.
Oh, and one more possibly useful answer: I'd say this 'Tor at the heart of Internet freedom' blog post series is a pretty great state of the onion, right?
Probably, because a lot of people in the CCC didn't like the trail by rumour thing that happen in the middle of the year... especially because people like [names the anonymous commenter wanted everybody to hassle more redacted] are still working or affiliated with the Tor Project & Company.
Uplifting Tor, I love it!
Thanks so much to Mozilla for giving Firefox to the world, to the FF devs for working to incorporate some of TB's features in FF, and to Mozilla for its role in cracking down on untrustworthy Certificate Authorities (DigiNotar and too many others).
Speaking of which, do you agree that onion services may point the way toward a solution to the CA mess?
Glad to see the work of Tor developers coming into Firefox! However you didn't mention Selfrando, is it coming forward to Firefox?
The selfrando folks are working with us and Mozilla and there is hope that Firefox will ship with it one day in the future (as well).
If mozilla sincerely wanted to promote anonymity they would include a warning on each visited link (broken sites as you call them) of what they require in order to view the information they provide. Just like on the https-everywhere a warning saying that the link you are about to open requires identification of the user and prohibits anonymity. This may create pressure from the conscious browser user on the sites about the reasons they enforce identity collection of visitors. Of course there would be very very few sites that the warning would not come up, but hey. Do people really know while using firefox that their every-step is being recorded and crosstabulated with all the rest of their identifying activity? No! They assume if they are not asked for a username and pw their visit is anonymous. Add no-script and https-everywhere on firefox and 95% of the internet is gone.
The sandboxing release may be something a professional developer can employ but neither debian or tor seem to provide any practical information of you are to get this thing to work. Some basic steps and suggested commands would be great. Even the flatpak -help shows very little info of how to make it run. Good-old tails is the most sandboxing fun you can have with your ID on.
> If mozilla sincerely wanted to promote anonymity they would include a warning on each visited link (broken sites as you call them) of what they require in order to view the information they provide.
> Just like on the https-everywhere a warning saying that the link you are about to open requires identification of the user and prohibits anonymity.
I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't think I've ever seen such a warning. Can you elaborate on this?
> Do people really know while using firefox that their every-step is being recorded and crosstabulated with all the rest of their identifying activity?
Most Firefox users (or users of any other browser besides Tor Browser) have probably never thought of it, and don't really care that much. If they do care, they're better of downloading Tor Browser. Does it make sense for Mozilla to do all the work you're suggesting when they could simply say "if you care about anonymity, download Tor Browser"?
> The sandboxing release may be something a professional developer can employ but neither debian or tor seem to provide any practical information of you are to get this thing to work.
I don't think the Tor Browser sandbox uses flatpak at all. I think it's written from scratch, and it's still in early development, so it'll get easier to use with time.
> I don't think the Tor Browser sandbox uses flatpak at all. I think it's written from scratch, and it's still in early development, so it'll get easier to use with time.
Kind of sort of. It uses something that the flatpak developers wrote called bubblewrap at runtime to do container setup.
The documentation (that was explicitly linked from the release blog post, and my release e-mail) specifically calls for bubblewrap so I'm not sure why they installed flatpak or are looking at flatpak.
Assuming bubblewrap is installed, it just is extract, run, and click buttons (nb: if they're running a grsec kernel there's one more step involved due to a build/go compiler issue).
My mistake. I didn't realize bubblewrap part of Flatpak. Even so, I too don't know why the OP mentioned "flatpak -help" if the sandbox is only based on bubblewrap. I haven't tried the sandbox quite yet, but I guess some users are having trouble with it.
Perhaps UX work and documentation would be helpful, but if/when the sandbox makes it into mainline Tor Browser, Tails, or Whonix/Qubes I imagine it'll be completely transparent when using that product.
Those instructions are out of date because binaries are available now, and the dependencies have changed in master since then.
Even the bubblewrap and Qubes developers are mystified, since the Qubes kernel is very similar to upstream kernel.
Yawning, does this info help to further investigate that Tor Ticket re: "Can't mount proc on /newroot/proc: Operation not permitted"?
At a glance, those instructions are pulling in unneeded dependencies (there is a difference between build and run-time dependencies for the project). But I don't use Qubes-Whonix at all, or Debian for that matter so I can't really comment on the rest of it.
Is the zero day (mentioned in the article) fixed also in latest Orfox 1.2.1?
In light of all the emphasis on security, and privacy concerns, why does Firefox require all kinds of permissions on their mobile browsers?
Amazing! I would like to help!
That's good to hear! Anything in particular you want to help with? If you want to work on Tor Browser and don't know where to start, we have tickets in our bug tracker marked with "tbb-easy": https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=!closed&keywords=….
If you want to help upstreaming patches or want to work on the Firefox side, just ping us. One easy way to do so is to drop by at our weekly Tor Browser meeting in #tor-dev at irc.oftc.net which is happening on Mondays 1900 UTC.
>That saves the Tor Browser team work, since they can just change preferences instead of updating patches.
How about the numerous cases when Mozilla have removed some features from their browser as "unused" though they were really heavily used by usual firefox users? Your feature will be used even rarier, so I guess they more likely remove them. How about the cases when Mozilla incorporate malicious functionality into their browser: Hello, Pocket, WebRTC PeerConnection, telemetry, healthreport and mandatory addon signing? How about eliminating powerful addons and making Firefox a gecko-based clone of Chrome?
We obviously cannot rely on Mozilla and need own fork.
The most mistake Firefox has ever made is adding WebRTC without any security warning, how mayny users leaks their real IP.
is webrtc the same thing than "hello" on firefox ?
Can Torproject still be careful during this collaboration and others into the future, please. Sometimes the bigger things gets the easier it is to fall.


text:
Tourism, tax crucial to Myanmar's future
Burmese daze
29 August 2012 By Richard Beales Follow @richardbeales1
Myanmar became the cutting edge travel destination of choice in 2012. Investors aren't far behind. An influx of visitors might bring the kind of dollars and attention that can help lift the Southeast Asian country's long-suffering people out of poverty. To make it work, the country needs a government that really wants to change Myanmar's fortunes, major longer-term investment and, among other structural changes, much higher taxes. It's a big ask.
After decades of military rule punctuated by repression and thwarted elections, President Thein Sein was sworn in early last year as the head of a new, nominally civilian government. Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Prize winner who has led Myanmar's opposition since the late 1980s, had been released from house arrest late in 2010. Reforms brought a visit last December from Hillary Clinton, the U.S. secretary of state, and Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy swept elections held in April. The EU in May suspended non-military sanctions for a year. Meanwhile, America has eased restrictions on exports to Myanmar, though imports remain banned.
But amid the international optimism, Suu Kyi, now a member of parliament, has called for "healthy skepticism." It's easy to see why. Even as the president promoted reformers in his cabinet this week and his energy minister said Myanmar would open up new exploration licenses to foreign participants, tens of thousands of people were fleeing heavy monsoon flooding. The United Nations said two of its staff members have been jailed for alleged involvement in ethnic violence in the west of the country – and there are other potential flashpoints too.
Myanmar's engagement with the rest of the world is, therefore, fragile. But there are some obvious growth opportunities, and tourism is one of them. A new Asian Development Bank report notes that fewer than 1 million visitors made it to Myanmar in 2010. That compares with 2.5 million for the much smaller Lao, and nearly 16 million in neighboring Thailand, which has a population slightly larger than Myanmar's roughly 60 million but boasts a bit less land area. And Myanmar has a lot going for it, from the snow-capped Himalayas to unspoilt beaches on the Andaman Sea via broad rivers like the Ayerawaddy. Along the way there are sights like the astonishing ancient city of Bagan with its thousands of Buddhist temples, pagodas and monasteries, and the ex-colonial bustle of Yangon.
Exploiting tourism will require more hotels, especially high-end ones for well-heeled tourists. And very visibly, the infrastructure isn't up to snuff. These are things visitors' dollars can help address. The danger is that places like the picturesque Inle Lake, already silting up and threatened by fertilizer and pesticide use, get overrun. But with careful management, tourism could be a quick economic win.
Elsewhere, Myanmar needs larger-scale investment. A promised new foreign investment law has, for now, been saddled with conditions that could deter some commitments. Yet the potential is obvious to any visitor. Foreign cellphones don't roam, credit cards are seldom accepted, and pristine U.S. banknotes are the most reliable tender. Starbucks and McDonald's are thankfully absent, for now. And then there are the potholed roads and sidewalks, the battered old Chinese-made buses, and the near subsistence-level existence of many of Myanmar's rural inhabitants.
A cosmopolitan Yangon-ite might cynically argue that the new openness is a last resort on the part of Myanmar's leaders. By this logic, the switch from military junta to tentative democracy came because there was virtually nothing left for the generals to wreck or loot. If so, that leaves little raw material for the NLD to work with. The ADB ticks through a range of indicators: slow progress on poverty reduction, low GDP per capita, fairly high government debt, and an almost unbelievably tiny level of tax collection – just 3 percent of GDP.
That touches on the big worry for investors: governance. It's no coincidence that Myanmar ranked a lowly 180th equal – along with Afghanistan, and better only than North Korea and Somalia – on Transparency International's corruption perceptions index. Government institutions overseeing finance and investment are both weak and too meddlesome.
Investors are weighing up the challenges and opportunities. Myanmar needs to learn from development mistakes elsewhere in Asia. Encouraging foreign and domestic investment while raising the government's official tax take and reducing graft could be a tough combination to pull off. But with the ADB saying GDP could expand at 7 percent to 8 percent a year for a decade or more, Myanmar has growth on its side. For those who spend the time and money to visit, it's hard not to hope this beguiling frontier economy can make things work.
Source: Richard Beales
Billboards in Yangon, Myanmar, July 8, 2012. (Richard Beales)
ADB release
ADB report
Reuters: Myanmar president promotes reformers in cabinet shake-up
Reuters: Myanmar to offer oil and gas exploration blocks
AP: Myanmar sentences 2 UN staff to jail for violence
AFP: Tens of thousands flee Myanmar floods: government
Money' Markets & Macroeconomics
Myanmar vote doesn't give clear win to investors
Myanmar must brace for post-sanctions cash deluge
Vietnam is a bad example to newly emerging markets
O-Burma trip rewards reformists for job half done
Myanmar needs private growth more than public debt
Myanmar's "lady" faces challenge of a lifetime
Myanmar's economy could expand at 7 percent to 8 percent a year, tripling per-capita income and becoming a middle income nation by 2030 if it can surmount substantial development challenges, the Asian Development Bank said on Aug. 20. The ADB published a report, "Myanmar in Transition: Opportunities and Challenges," the same day.


> I think is basically where all this is heading.
I don't object to saying we're considering this.
introduced, than change the current meaning of pairs so drastically.
slightly delayed, but I'll email something by 3:30pm Eastern.


7 May 2018, at 2:12p.m.
Changing the face of Asian shrimp production and technological innovation in marine salmon farming are set to be themes of the plenary sessions at this year's World Aquaculture Society (WAS) conference.
The WAS plenary session is taking place in the Berlioz Auditorium of Le Corum, in Montpellier on 26 August and is being opened by Robins McIntosh, Executive Vice President of Charoen Pokphand Foods (CPF), the largest integrated producer of aquaculture shrimp in the world. He is set to speak about his decades spent developing shrimp and tilapia aquaculture, first in Thailand and later all over Asia. He will focus how to deal with technical as well as socio-economic issues, drawing on his own experience which includes the management of shrimp broodstock development and genetics programmes.
He joined CPF in 2001 and was tasked with the job of reviving the company's shrimp division. As part of this process he oversaw the introduction of P. vannamei into Thailand, the development of SPF P. monodon, and the modernization of hatcheries and farms. His work helped the company to increase shrimp production from 5,000 tonnes in 2001 to over 90,000 tonnes annually in 2010 and the changes he introduced o CPF eventually made their way into most of Asian shrimp culture, turning a stagnant industry into one of the most dynamic growth stories ever in aquaculture.
McIntosh will be followed by Øyvind Oaland, Global Director, R&D and Technical at Marine Harvest ASA, who will offer an insight into how technological innovations and new production platforms will facilitate the sustainable growth of the company's salmon production.
He has been head of the global R&D department in Marine Harvest since 2008 and is a member of the senior management team in Marine Harvest Group. He has long experience of salmon farming, having been with Marine Harvest since 2000 in career that's covered fish health, food safety and product quality.
The plenary session will be followed by the AQUA2018 Student Spotlight Awards.