text:
The Most Unlikely Place
Artists/Gallery
Jean Jensen
Rex Miller
Tour Lewellen
The Most Unlikely Place is owned by siblings - Dennis Miller Jr., Jean Jensen and Rex Miller. The three grew up in Lewellen with an amateur artist mother and a carpenter father. In 2007, the three remodeled one of the oldest buildings in Lewellen to become an art gallery and cafe'. Their work can be seen at The Most Unlikely Place. While visiting, check out the cabinet of their mother's hand crafted dolls and poem, "Set Fire to Your Bridges."
Purchase artwork at artcld.com
Dennis Miller Jr
Pastels.
Dennis Miller Jr. is a retired naval comander, artist and organic farmer. Dennis and wife Cynthia own The Most Unlikely Place in Lewellen. Dennis is a pastel artist and returned to art about twenty years ago upon retirement.
Watercolors, pastels, oil.
Jean Jensen has retired from her career as a director of a non-profit to work full-time as an artist.
Featuring sculpture, wall sculpture, stained and etched glass and architectural installations.
Rex Miller is an organic farmer, artisan and musician.
Guest artists are featured each month at The Most Unlikely Place. To become a guest artist, apply to Cynthia Miller at 308-778-9557 or visit the gallery in person. Please share either a web site or photos of your work.
PO Box 135, 205 Main St., Lewellen NE 69147


This post in Danish for Mandag Morgen.
Android is considered to be the open platform and iOS the closed, and together they dominate the smartphone market. Apple is the heavyweight in the high-end market where they own 50-75% of the market. Apple has about 600 million active iOS devices, compared to 1 billion Google Android devices, and each quarter Apple is accountable for 10% of the total smartphone sales in the world, and one third of the total revenue. Despite the fact that there are more active Android devices on the market, Apple owns two-third of the app store revenue. It may seem obvious that Apple should expand their market share by producing a cheaper smartphone so they can capture new segments, but there is a risk that it would cannibalize their margin of high-end products.
While analysts and techies are impatiently waiting for the next new revolution within digital devices, Apple has set the date for their next media event on September 9, 2014, where the new iPhone is expected to be unveiled. There are a lot of speculation about what we can expect, will Apple make a cheaper iPhone or a faster with a bigger screen or a third surprise. Apple's SVP Eddy Cue announced early this summer that Apple has the best product pipeline he has seen in 25 years. This statement does not reduce the expectations to Apple and their historical ability to innovate.
The development of smartphones for the past 7 years has created a stable and functional platform, and where the main competitors in the smartphone market including Samsung, Microsoft, Google and Apple have followed each other in most of the progress we have encountered. There are many guesses about where we will be in the next 7 years, including Apple's iWatch and if that is going to change the market for smartphones - which is doubtful in a short term since watches, bracelets, glasses and other wearables so far are accessory rather than a primary device.
Two decades ago the phone industry anticipated that the future within mobile technologies would be focused on voice, today it is the "feature" we seem to use the least on our smartphones. The questions is whether it makes sense to call it a "phone" since our mobile behavior today is centered around data and connectedness. By the end of 2014 it is expected that 2 billion people will own a smartphone and that we will spend over 100 billion dollars on apps. Our smartphone have changed our lives in countless ways, the way we listen to music, watch movies, read books, pay with our mobile phones, and using apps as naturally as we used browsers. The way we shop offline as well as online through our smartphones has also changed dramatically, where 25% of smartphone usage is spent on searching for physical store information.
We are still at the beginning of a "smart data" era, and with the spread of smartphones and tablets there is an ideal infrastructure from which new innovation can flow. We can hope for a future where solution become more horizontal rather than vertical, where data, systems and hardware speaks better together and makes us independent of our digital devices as we have experienced with cloud-based software. There are still many industries that needs a technological upgrade, including the health care industry that many tech-companies are investing in disrupting. Even though most people in the West takes Internet access for granted, there is still a potential for new markets since 60 percent of the worlds population still aren't connected to the Internet. As smartphones becomes cheaper, it may also accelerate the spread of Internet access to all parts of the world, and based on the smartphone infrastructure, we can scale the access to health care, education and other vital sources of information and interaction, creating one giant leap for mankind.


text:
China Resists Origin Study, Points Finger at US
(USNewsMag.com) – More than 18 months after COVID-19 began ravaging the world, there are still no concrete answers as to how and where the virus originated. Back in May, President Joe Biden tasked intelligence agencies to find a cause and thus provide Americans — and the world — with many sought-after answers. On Tuesday, August 24, he received a classified report with its findings.
Did the virus jump from animal to human, or was it the result of a lab leak? As it turns out, despite attempts to investigate, there are still no real answers.
4 Million Deaths Worldwide
The novel coronavirus is responsible for more than 4 million deaths globally. More than 600,000 of those deaths occurred in the US, spurring demands for answers. Where did the virus come from, and why wasn't it contained faster before it claimed so many victims?
China (Still) Refuses to Cooperate
Unsurprisingly, China continues to refuse to cooperate with the investigation. While on the surface, it appears the Communist nation has let the World Health Organization (WHO) do its job, the reality is far more bleak. China has refused access to certain data sets, which makes a conclusive answer impossible.
Rather, they still point the finger at the United States. The answer, they claim, lies within Fort Detrick, a research laboratory in Maryland, not Wuhan. They've also refused to share critical patient data that could lead to answers, citing privacy concerns. Amidst the multiple investigations, China maintains the United States is simply playing a political game.
On the embassy website, spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, Wang Wenbin, slammed the US. "We urge the US to stop using the origins study to seek political manipulation," a statement read. He further went on to say the US is simply looking for a scapegoat for its poor response to the pandemic.
We May Never Know
Unfortunately, it seems we're no closer to knowing the source of the deadly virus. Avril Haines, director of National Intelligence, said the agency was hoping to find a "smoking gun" but noted that it was challenging on multiple fronts. "It might happen, but it might not," she continued. The WHO also continues to investigate despite roadblocks. Michael Ryan, head of the organization's health emergencies program, says "all hypotheses … are still on the table."
It seems that lack of access to information and China's refusal to cooperate have led to a stalemate — at least for now.
California's Digital License Plate System Had Serious Security Flaws
2022 Food Prices Highest On Record
Secretive Environmental Group Funding Local News On Climate Change
TikTok Facing Renewed Scrutiny And Bans
Putin's Only Aircraft Carrier Mysteriously Catches Fire
Incoming National Freeze Brings Up Dark Memories Of Texas Power Grid Reliability

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Buckhead glam is staging a comeback. For proof, look no further than Mission + Market—if you can find it. The confusing location in the Never Never Land behind Phipps Plaza does not adequately broadcast what's in store, but once you've stumbled into the Alliance Center space, the allure of the scene is unmistakable. Where else but in a neighborhood synonymous with the confluence of commerce and party life would you find a crush of singles ready to spend whatever it takes to satisfy their various appetites? The real surprise, however, is that Mission + Market is as serious about food as it is about style.
Born in a tiny village a few miles from the southern coast of England, Ian Winslade describes himself as a reluctant chef. His dream was to become an engineer, but, lacking the resources, he went to culinary school instead. Classically trained in French cuisine, he scored an apprenticeship in London and bounced around some of the United States's most prestigious restaurants (Le Bernardin and Jean-Georges among them) on both coasts, ending up in Atlanta. In 1994, he was the opening chef at Tom Catherall's then revolutionary Tom Tom in Lenox Square. At 54, after working for decades at places such as Bluepointe and Murphy's, he has finally taken the plunge and opened a place of his own. No longer will anyone tell him what to put on his menu.
Ian Winslade, a classically trained chef, grew up near the southern coast of England.
Winslade, who describes himself as "practically a pescatarian," isn't the kind of chef who wants to break down a whole pig or limit himself to the fare of the South. He is mostly inspired by the West Coast, where food tends to be lighter and more global. His backers in Mission + Market, Jonathan and Tony Akly, whose various business ventures focus on restaurant design and construction, are lucky to have found in Winslade a chef ready to explore his newfound freedom.
Winslade spent his childhood minutes away from the ocean, with beautiful fresh fish in abundance, and it's no coincidence that the vast majority of his dishes at Mission + Market involve delicate seafood preparations, many of them using no heat at all. It takes skill and knowledge to handle raw fish this way: glossy American red snapper with yuzu emulsion and impossibly thin Fresno chilies, juniper-cured steelhead trout with micro radish, albacore chu-toro painted with sesame. The best of these is a pearly ceviche of dayboat scallops with cilantro, mint, tomato, and jalapeño, simply seasoned with olive oil, lime, and fleur de sel.
The bracing astringency of Winslade's pickled oysters (with Sichuan pepper, cucumber, and lemon) is at the opposite end of the spectrum from his mellow, butter-basted clams with celery salad. His talents are on fullest display in a masterful dish of Maine mussels opened in white wine, garlic, shallots, and European butter, arranged like a bouquet and finished with bright parsley and lacy rusks of grilled bread.
Among the entrees, the almost-creamy steelhead trout over pea-scented rice grits is a miracle of delicacy, while the slender fillets of pan-sauteed European black bass feel timid next to a vivid pool of beet raita scented with cumin. Not everyone has to eat fish at Mission + Market; there is a stupefyingly rich and delicious wild mushroom polenta with a centerpiece of marrow bone (properly cut crosswise); a hearty rigatoni alla bolognese in a mist of microplaned Parmigiano Reggiano; and, for customers with more mainstream taste, a few pizzas and hamburgers.
Among the desserts, a matcha cake made with powdered green tea and pistachio creme patissiere and a strawberry rhubarb sundae with vanilla ice cream, sea salt, shortbread cookie, whipped cream, and toasted pecans are both easygoing and on the lighter side, if a little low on pizzazz.
A bottle of wine from the well-composed list is a better option than the often-silly riffs on classic cocktails or a glass of pinot noir from the Willamette Valley served at too warm a temperature.
How does someone humanize a giant glass box in an office park? Tony Akly of Restaurant Consulting Group, a structural engineer with an appetite for flashy details, pulls it off with a living wall of yellow-green moss, a trail of electric blue, crushed-velvet banquettes, mature ficus trees, a reasonably friendly show kitchen, and a sprawling patio. The combined effect counterbalances the severe slate and concrete aesthetics.
Mission + Market is rigorous enough about its food for gourmands and glamorous enough for scenesters. It also allows an old-school chef to return to what he truly loves: seafood without fuss.


The Nike Charge Shin Guards help protect your shins at a recreational performance level. The low profile comfort provided by these shin guards is teamed with an anatomically fit design for comfort, and foam underlay for impact protection. A large Nike Swoosh completes the look for instant brand recognition.


The surf is always up in Maui. Guaranteed to stand up on your first lesson. Fun, exciting, safe and easy to learn. All ages are encouraged to learn Hawaii's most popular sport. Two-hour lessons. Times vary from early morning surf to afternoon depending on the tide.
Ready to book your Maui Surf Lessons? Give our concierge team, Paradise Activities, a call at 808-669-2696 or email us at Activities@mauiresorts.com, so we can help plan your Maui vacation.


text:
Q: Shell script to display IP How can I create a shell script which receives a vector argument like
./script.sh google.com,yahoo.com
and display ip for each domain
like google.com 100.23.123.13

EDIT:
#!/bin/bash

while [ "$1" ];
do
host $1 | grep address | head -1
done

A: You can use the following script:
#!/bin/sh

for domain in $@; do
    host $domain | grep "has address" | awk '{print $1"\t"$4}'
done

Usage: ./script www.domain1.com domain2.com ...
For example:
$ ./script.sh www.google.com yahoo.com www.askubuntu.com google.ro
www.google.com  173.194.40.81
www.google.com  173.194.40.84
www.google.com  173.194.40.82
www.google.com  173.194.40.83
www.google.com  173.194.40.80
yahoo.com   98.138.253.109
yahoo.com   206.190.36.45
yahoo.com   98.139.183.24
askubuntu.com   198.252.206.24
google.ro   173.194.35.31
google.ro   173.194.35.23
google.ro   173.194.35.24

A: You can perform multiple-query lookups directly using the dig command e.g.
dig google.com yahoo.com

or for less verbose output
dig +noall +answer google.com yahoo.com

or to output just the IPs
dig +short google.com yahoo.com

A: You can do that this way.
Open a Terminal
$ gedit get_domain_ip.sh &

Add the following lines into the file and Save.
#!/bin/bash

read -p "Enter domain name : " DOMAIN_INPUT

host $DOMAIN_INPUT

#END

Flag the script as executable
$ chmod +x get_domain_ip.sh

Testing
neo@neo-H87H3-M:~$ ./get_ip.sh

Enter domain name : google.com
google.com has address 173.194.72.102
google.com has address 173.194.72.101
google.com has address 173.194.72.100
google.com has address 173.194.72.139
google.com has address 173.194.72.138
google.com has address 173.194.72.113
google.com has IPv6 address 2404:6800:4008:c00::8a
google.com mail is handled by 50 alt4.aspmx.l.google.com.
google.com mail is handled by 20 alt1.aspmx.l.google.com.
google.com mail is handled by 30 alt2.aspmx.l.google.com.
google.com mail is handled by 10 aspmx.l.google.com.
google.com mail is handled by 40 alt3.aspmx.l.google.com.

neo@neo-H87H3-M:~$

A: For single domain input>>
#!/bin/sh
#get IP
host $1 | head -n 1 | awk '{print $1,"\t",$4}'

For multiple domain input>>
#!/bin/sh
#get IP
for url in $@; do
    host $url | head -n 1 | awk '{print $1,"\t",$4}'
done

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Aynsley Lister has a lot going for him. He's a top quality singer, with a clear voice that's easy on the ear. As a guitar player, he's even better, capable of real fireworks. When he puts his mind to it, he's an imaginative songwriter. He has a crack band, with Bennett Holland on keys, Boneto Dryden on drums, and Steve Amadeo on bass. Oh yeah, and he's a good-looking sod too.
over which some injections of guitar climb, but it's the clear and easy vocal that marks him out – Lister has a distinctively English singing voice, lacking any American affectations. 'Everything I'll Have To Give' meanwhile, is a piece of soulful blues that's right in his wheelhouse, with a rolling, easy rhythm and a piercing guitar solo with enough twists and turns to keep Jeremy Clarkson happy.
But he mixes it up a bit after that. 'Il Grande Mafioso' has a cinematic vibe, with a Mediterranean feel instigated by the acoustic guitar intro, some seriously twangy guitar work, and piano lines that evoke the Harry Lime Theme. Later, the halting and moody 'Dishevelled' recalls his previous cover of Nina Simone's 'I'm Feeling Good'. It may not have the climactic peaks of the latter, but it does have a sinuous guitar solo, woven around the melody and elaborated with changes of pace. It also evokes a late night sleazy bar encounter beautifully, Lister's languid vocal perfectly delivered.
In between these, Lister occupies more straightforward territory with 'Won't Be Taken Down' and 'Time'. The former has a restrained verse, offset by a surging chorus with seriously big guitar chords bringing the oomph. The latter is light and sprightly, with twitchy guitar licks and one of the best hooks of the album in its soaring chorus.
For me, the second half of the album doesn't quite maintain sustain the standard set over these first six songs. This isn't to say that the track list includes any duds; Lister is far too professional for that, and there are always interesting things going on, not least in his guitar work. But a ruthless advisor might have advised pruning a couple of the slighter songs in order to push the quality threshold to the max.
As I say though, he still does interesting things. 'Troubled Soul (Intro)' is a delicate, Mark Knopfler-ish guitar vignette. 'Kalina' has a lovely, mellow guitar refrain, and here as elsewhere the interplay of Lister's guitar with Bennett Holland's keys is delightful. I'd have liked a stronger melody and chorus, but it still achieves lift off by means of Lister's guitar solo. Meanwhile 'Other Part Of Me' is a relationship celebration with a tune and arrangement that bathe the lyrics in sunshine – the Commodores' 'Easy Like Sunday Morning' springs to mind.
Aynsley Lister isn't easy to pigeonhole. He shifts shape fluidly around a soulful, bluesy, rocky style. I'm beginning to think he might be Britain's answer to Robben Ford – someone who wants to push the songwriting envelope and find new ways of expressing himself, and has the top-drawer musicianship to match. Hell, he's a better singer than Robben Ford too. If you haven't been giving Aynsley Lister your attention before, you should start now.
Eyes Wide Open is released by Straight Talkin' Records on 7 October. Check Aynsley Lister's tour dates for a gig near you.


The paper Efficient Leader Election in Complete Networks describes an algorithm with a time and message complexity linear to the number of nodes in the network. It focuses only on leader election, leaving aside what triggers leader election and how non-leaders discover the identity of the new leader.
Main idea: The candidate with the highest ID will become the leader during an election.
the neighbor must be the ID directly below the node's ID in the network. Exception: The last node's neighbor is the first node.
The algorithm allows passive nodes to become candidates at any moment and many nodes to become candidates at the same time.
Nodes carry state during an election. They update state as they become candidates and receive messages. Nodes receive messages from predecessors and candidates.
A node maintains three pieces of state: status, candidate_successor, and candidate_predecessor.
Each node's initial status is passive.
It gets to know candidate_successors and predecessors through 3 kinds of messages: message1, message2, and message3.
candidate_predecessor holds the most recently known candidate that contacts the node through message1 or message3. When a candidate node holds this value, it knows that everything between the candidate_predecessor and itself in the sense of direction of the candidate_predecessor's neighbor is a dummy.
candidate_successor holds the most recently known candidate that's higher ranked than the node. Since lower ranked candidates cannot become the leader, candidates that have a candidate_successor value will eventually become a dummy.
A node can spontaneously "wake up" for leader election. It does this by executing an initiate function. This function sets candidate_successor and candidate_predecessor to NULL and changes the status to candidate. It then sends message1 to neighbor.
There are two ways a node can become a leader. The first is if its the only candidate in an election. A node knows that its the only candidate in an election if it receives message1(sendingNodeId) and sendingNodeId is its own ID. This means that the message1(sendingNodeId = ownId) message it sent to its neighbor got all the way around the ring and back to itself without hitting any other candidates.
The second way is if the node is the highest ID candidate of the election. Nodes sending and receiving message2 and message3 help let the highest ID'd candidate know that it's the leader. A node is the leader if it receives message3(new_candidate_predecessor) and new_candidate_predecessor is its own ID.
The algorithm achieves the second way with cleverness; it's not an intuitive process. Let's break down how nodes set state and send messages when they receive messages. The following code snippets are in Ruby and only show essential parts of the algorithm. Constant meanings should be self-explanatory and @id is the ID of the node.
If the node hasn't "woken up," it becomes a DUMMY and passes the new_candidate_predecessor to its @neighbor.
If the node has "woken up" — i.e. it's currently a candidate—, it saves the new_candidate_predecessor as the @candidate_predecessor. What happens next depends on how the node's @id relates to the new_candidate_predecessor.
If the @id is the new_candidate_predecessor, that means the :message1 originally sent by @id has made its way all around the ring with no other candidates. Now it knows itself as the leader.
If the @id is higher than the new_candidate_predecessor, this means that the message made itself "around" the ring; it crossed the imaginary border between the lowest and highest ID'd nodes. This also means that @id is a candidate successor to new_candidate_predecessor; new_candidate_predecessor is a lower ranked candidate than @id. Knowing this, we set the node's status to WAITING — a way of letting other received messages know that the node already received message1 — and send message2(@id) to new_candidate_predecessor. This is the way the algorithm marks the new_candidate_predecessor's @candidate_successor with @id and eventually/or become a DUMMY.
Only waiting candidate nodes whose IDs are higher send message2 to nodes whose IDs are lower. In other words, if a message receives message2, it knows it can't be the leader. And since message2 is the only place where @candidate_successors are set, then message1 and message3 know that if the node has a @candidate_successor, then they can safely mark the node as a dummy before sending off a message3 to the @candidate_successor.
If a node message receives message3(new_candidate_predecessor) — new_candidate_predecessor being the candidate predecessor to the node that sent the message —, the node is essentially being told that, now, this new_candidate_predecessor should replace the @candidate_predecessor. What does this mean? To the node it means now all nodes from @candidate_predecessor to itself in the sense of direction of the @candidate_predecessor's neighbor are dummies.
If the @id is higher than the new_candidate_predecessor, this means that the message made itself "around" the ring; it crossed the imaginary border between the lowest and highest ID'd nodes. This also means that the new_candidate_predecessor is a candidate successor — a lower ranked candidate — to @id. We send message2(@id) to new_candidate_predecessor. This is the way the algorithm marks the new_candidate_predecessor's @candidate_successor with @id and eventually/or become a DUMMY.
If the @id is the @candidate_predecessor, then all nodes from itself to itself are dummies; it is the leader.


Did anyone here contribute to the 30 day email campaign? If so, did you send an email every day, or just a few? What was your favorite subject? Did you enjoy this project? Would you like to see another one in future?


text:
James J. Quinlan
Mass Torts & Complex Disputes
quinlan@blankrome.com
James Quinlan is a member of our Maritime Emergency Response Team ("MERT").
James Quinlan concentrates his practice on complex tort litigation, with particular emphasis on matters arising from product liability, aviation, maritime, and other transportation accidents.
James' other litigation experience includes commercial and insurance-related disputes. He is also experienced with motions practice, oral argument, the discovery process, trial practice, and post-trial work.
Before entering private practice, James clerked for the Honorable Daryl F. Todd, Sr., J.S.C. of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Civil Part.
Product Liability Recall
Served as second chair trial counsel in the defense of a major airline against allegations of negligence and intentional torts and helped secure a complete defense verdict.
Represented recreational aviation non-profit organization against allegations of negligence and assisted in securing complete dismissal of claim.
Represented charter aviation carrier in airplane lease dispute and assisted client in achieving successful resolution of matter.
Represented airport owners and/or operators against wrongful death and traumatic personal injury claims.
Secured summary judgment for trucking service repair company against a multimillion dollar product liability and negligence wrongful death claim that stemmed from a catastrophic trucking accident.
Secured summary judgment for a national tug boat company against Jones Act claimant.
Successfully defended sprinkler installer against multi-million dollar claims involving fire casualty and significant water discharge.
Represented major trucking company in defense of negligence and indemnity claims brought by a large manufacturing shipper and assisted client in achieving successful resolution of matter.
Counseled foreign vessel owner and vessel's captain on potential environmental claims from discharge and arranged for timely release of vessel from port while avoiding vessel's arrest.
What to Do about the South Philly Peeping "Tommy"?
RAIL: The Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law September–October 2018
The Legal Intelligencer's 2017 Lawyers on the Fast Track
James J. Quinlan, Stephanie Gantman Kaplan
Blank Rome Attorneys Named 2017 Lawyers on the Fast Track
Blank Rome Announces 2017 Promotions: 11 Partners, 4 Of Counsel
Alan J. Hoffman, Dayna C. Finkelstein, Andrew J. Haas, Alex E. Hassid, Michael A. Iannucci, Marquel S. Jordan
Blank Rome's James Quinlan Elected President of Brehon Law Society
Dealing in In-House Counsel – Inside Looking Out
Brehon Law Society Monthly Meeting November 17, 2015
Blank Rome's James Quinlan to Moderate In-House Counsel Panel at Brehon Law Society Meeting
Blank Rome's James Quinlan Moderates Brehon Law Society Panel on Commodore John Barry, Father of the U.S. Navy
Blank Rome's James Quinlan Hosts GW's Annual Alumni Outstanding Service Awards
Bridging Barry: A Review of Commodore John Barry's Legal Significance and the Bridge That Bears His Name
The Brehon Law Society CLE Panel April 29, 2015
2017, "Lawyers on the Fast Track," listed in The Legal Intelligencer
2016–2017, "Rising Star," listed in the Irish Legal 100
2012–2017, "Pennsylvania Rising Star" in Products Liability, listed in Super Lawyers©
Brehon Law Society
Failte Ireland
Friends of Julian F. Abele Park
George Washington University Alumni Association
Irish American Business Chamber & Network
Lawyer-Pilots Bar Association
James was elected as the 21st president of the Philadelphia Brehon Law Society for the 2016–2017 term. He is a member of the Friends of Julian F. Abele Park, and is actively involved with the George Washington University Alumni Association. He currently serves as vice president for awards for the Alumni Association's Executive Committee, and as co-chair for the Philadelphia GW Alumni Network. James was also appointed as a corporate ambassador for Failte, Ireland, The Republic of Ireland's National Tourism Development Authority.
George Washington University, BA, magna cum laude
Temple University Beasley School of Law, JD


text:
Browsing Tag The Beatles
A Conversation with STOLAR: "I Just Want To Create Soundtrack Options for Life"
Brooklyn-based songwriter and pop musician STOLAR pours his heart out for listeners in his ongoing project, Raw Emotions. Each song released in the raw emotions project is based ...
On August 1, 2018 / By Jessica Tyler
Artists	0
Under 1000: God Tiny
Hello! Welcome to "Under 1000", a new column highlighting artists with under 1000 likes on their official Facebook pages. Each piece will profile and interview an artist we ...
On March 1, 2017 / By Zach Raffio
Warped Tour Diaries: Ghost Town
From the pop aficionados to punk rockers and metalcore lovers, Ghost Town has something for everyone. Combining elements of all genres and making a few new ones, Kevin ...
On August 3, 2016 / By Sharan Paul
House of Heroes: Colors
With concept albums, it makes sense to consider their storytelling and thematics the make-or-break elements of their makeup. Sometimes that idea can deter listeners from the actual content ...
On July 11, 2016 / By Tim Dodderidge
MEB's 40 Greatest Punk Albums of All-Time
Punk rock began in the 1970s with artists who dabbled with garage rock, played at breakneck speeds, and integrated political dialogue. Needless to say, the genre has come a ...
On June 6, 2016 / By Tim Dodderidge
Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! – The Electric Frenzy That Was Beatlemania
If you were born in the western world and have a pulse, chances are you know The Beatles. They have been so widely conversed about, analyzed, and appreciated ...
On February 17, 2016 / By Matthew Hanzman
INTERVIEW: Swiggy of New Mayans
MEB Staff Member Heather Allen had an insightful chat with Swiggy of New Mayans on being influenced my films,something, and his debut single "Universe." MEB: So I wanted to start off with talking ...
Interview: Smoke Season
In a quaint yet clearly popular cafe in Los Feliz, California, staff writer Heather Allen got to sit down with local indie-pop band Smoke Season for an insightful look ...
On June 29, 2015 / By Heather Allen
Fall Out Boy: American Beauty/American Psycho
Everyone's favorite band of the 2000's, Fall Out Boy, recently released a new album entitled American Beauty/American Psycho, named after the two cult classic films. While I wish I could ...
On January 29, 2015 / By Alexa Rahmanparast


For this single, Djinee teamed up with ace music producer ExO Magege, who has worked the likes of Wizkid, Asa, Mocheddar, Timi Dakolo , Waje, Sound Sultan , Yemi Alade and a host of others. The song was also mixed and mastered by ExO Magege.
Euphoria. Beyond beautiful Nna m ukwu.


Join us as we begin our countdown of Double Exposure's Top Ten films of 2013!
Like every year in this strange stretch of film history, with its Venn-Diagram-overlap between small-screen and big-screen moviegoing, digital and celluloid projection, home video and streaming, and grassroots and studio funding, 2013 was confusing, noisy, rattled, and disjointed.
Computer Chess is nothing less than an origin myth: a glance at the moment when the difference between people and computers first became indiscernible. Its miniscule budget and limited setting might make it look small, but its intellectual reach is encyclopedic.
The 'Rotten Tomatoes' or 'Metacritic' effect means, beyond their initial critical reception, films are often denied the opportunity to reach their intended audiences. This year I cannot think of a film more critically maligned and shamelessly overlooked than M. Night Shyamalan's After Earth.
There are the controlled films—this year so controlled that they seem to vanish behind their own impenetrable outer surfaces, like candy at the hard-crack stage, almost no water left in the syrup—if you hit them they might shatter.


text:
How to Stream the 2023 Rose Parade Live
Questions You Ask January 2, 2023 1 min read
Tournament of Roses A New Year's tradition since 1890, the Rose Parade returns to the streets of Pasadena, California, on January 2, 2023, at 11 a.m. ET / 8 a.m. PT, with 80-plus floats, marching bands, and equestrian units. Here's how to stream it live. RELATED: How to Stream the 2023 Rose Bowl Live ABC…
Tournament of Roses
A New Year's tradition since 1890, the Rose Parade returns to the streets of Pasadena, California, on January 2, 2023, at 11 a.m. ET / 8 a.m. PT, with 80-plus floats, marching bands, and equestrian units. Here's how to stream it live.
RELATED: How to Stream the 2023 Rose Bowl Live
NYCStock / Shutterstock.com
ABC will air this year's parade, featuring activist and former Arizona congresswoman Gabby Giffords as grand marshal, representing the 2023 parade theme of "Turning the Corner."
Subscribers to DirecTV Stream ($69.99+ per month after a five-day free trial), Fubo TV ($64.99+ per month after a three-day free trial), Hulu + Live TV ($69.99+ per month after a seven-day free trial), Vidgo ($59.95+ per month), and YouTube TV ($64.99 per month after a seven-day free trial) can watch the parade coverage as part of the live stream of their local ABC affiliate.
NBC and Peacock
NBC's coverage of the…
How to Stream the 2023 Rose Bowl Live
The Best Ethernet Cables of 2022
충북 스웨디시 on IKEA's New Floor Standing Lamp Doubles as a Sonos Speaker – Review Geek
The CBD Joint Full Spectrum Gummies on IKEA's New Floor Standing Lamp Doubles as a Sonos Speaker – Review Geek


"People-first" language is meant to divide, it is meant to demean, it is meant to dehumanize, it is meant to pathologize, and yet, it is meant, as I said before, to make its users feel good. In that way it is ultimately destructive because it covers up the crimes.
Only when people get to choose their own labels will we get anywhere toward building an equitable culture.
If we convert horrid prejudices into pleasant sounding phrases, we diffuse those prejudices as an issue.
I'm autistic, not a person with autism. Autistic is my identity.
I'm a disabled person, not a person with disabilities. Disabled is my identity.
Identity first language is common among social model self-advocates. When hanging out in social model, neurodiversity, and self-advocacy communities, identity first is a better default than person first. Every autistic and disabled person I know uses identity first language. The words autistic and disabled connect us with an identity and a community. They help us advocate for ourselves.
There's a language gap between self-advocates and the institutions that claim to represent us. There's a gap between parents and their #ActuallyAutistic and disabled kids. There's a generational gap in the disability movement. This is confusing for those trying to be allies. The articles below offer perspective and advice on identity first and person first language from self-advocates. At the end, I collect tweets from autistic and disabled self-advocates in a Twitter moment. Witness and respect these perspectives.
Disabled person: "As a disabled person, I think…"
Them: "Don't let your autism define you."
Me: "I'm an autistic autist with autism. I like to autism autisticially."
I forgot my autism on the bus yesterday and had to go to collect it from the bus station, on the way there I found myself making eye contact and indulging in meaningless conversation with strangers!
Never been so glad to 'have' it back!
But please realise this: when autistic adults offer their experiences or insight, consider listening. We do not speak for your child, but we're not really all that different from them. Telling us we're "not autistic enough" insults us and trivialises the hardships many of us have endured. Hardships that, yes, may be very different from what your child might experience, but hardships nevertheless. I've earned the right to label myself as autistic. It explains everything. It is not all that I am, but it defines so much of who I am.
And that is why, for me at least, the identify label comes first. That I'm still a person should be obvious.
When you excise a core defining feature of a person's identity from their living, breathing self, you sort of objectify them a bit. And you make that core defining feature optional. Because it can be safely removed, and they're still a person. Right? Well, a person, yes — but not the sort of person they know themselves to be. And not the sort of person you can truly get to know. Because you've denied one of the main characteristics of their nature, out of an intention to be … compassionate? Dunno. Or maybe sensitive?
Whatever the original intention, the effect is just a bit dehumanizing. And a lot of us don't like it.
So, if you're into PFL – person-first language – please reconsider before you use it regarding autism. Cancer is one thing. Plaque psoriasis is another. Autism… well, that's in a league all its own. And I wouldn't leave that domain for all the money (or well-intended compassion) in the world.
Though person-first language is designed to promote respect, the concept is based on the idea that disability is something negative, something that you shouldn't want to see. After all, no one tells me that I should call myself a person with femaleness or a person with Jewishness. I'm a Jewish woman. No one questions that. Yet when I dare to call myself a disabled person, it seems the whole world turns upside down. That's because gender and religion are seen as neutral, if not positive, characteristics. The idea of separating the disability from the person stems from the idea that disability is something you should want to have separated from you, like a rotten tooth that needs to be pulled out.
Disability is only negative because society makes it so. For sure, there are negative aspects of my disability. (For the sake of simplicity, I'm focusing solely on my physical disability, which is both the most visible and the most integrated into my being.) Chronic pain and fatigue are no picnic. But for the most part, my disability is just another thread in the tapestry of my life. Pull it and the whole thing might unravel. Pull it and you might get an ugly hole where something beautiful once was.
Identity-first language is founded upon the idea of the social model of disability. In a nutshell, the social model says that though our impairments (our diagnostic, medical conditions) may limit us in some ways, it is the inaccessibility of society that actually disables us and renders us unable to function. The most basic example is wheelchair accessibility. If I am using my wheelchair and I can't go to a restaurant because it doesn't have a ramp, am I disabled by my cerebral palsy or am I disabled by the inaccessibility of the restaurant?
If that restaurant has a ramp, I am able to function perfectly within that situation. I am able to go in, sit at a table, order my food, eat it, and pay, just like everyone else. My wheelchair is not the problem. The inaccessibility of the restaurant is. Saying that I am disabled more accurately highlights the complex biosocial reality of disability. I am not merely a person existing with a label; I am constantly disabled and enabled by the interplay of my body and the environment.
But disability remains a social identity. To work from Tom Shakespeare, it is the intersection of ability and the social structure. There is no such thing as a legitimate way to define "normal." After all, if there were, the bizarre global minority of humans without black hair and brown eyes would be considered freaks. So, society defines certain people as outside of normal, and they do that with words.
For some groups, the hyphenation strategy is reached, be it "Scotch-Irish" or "African-American" or even "Student-Athlete," but for others, where a real belief in pathology remains, we keep the "person with" structure. A student with the swine flu. A student with cancer. A student with a learning disability." We don't hyphenate any of those because we do not accept them as cultural identities, rather, we view them as illnesses.
So call me "dyslexic," and call me "multi-attentioned" (or something), but stop pathologizing me. I don't "have" these things, I "am" these things, because your society has made it that way.
I believe that we have to challenge accepted strategies and ideas. And whether you call it "Normalism" or "Disablism" we need to understand how narrative impacts cultural belief. If we convert horrid prejudices into pleasant sounding phrases, we diffuse those prejudices as an issue. So, since you treat me as if I am "retarded," please don't hide behind your nonsensical, "Student with Learning Disabilities." That language might make you feel better, but it does nothing for me.
As long as you consider one way of doing things "normal," you will demean me and treat me as less than fully human. What I was trying to say in this post –in a way which would provoke conversation – was that the very concept of "accommodation" is so very wrong, because it is based in disablism – the belief that I and others are not, and will never get to be, "normal," unless "you" cure me by making me like you.
When ABA proponents tell parents that only several hours a day of relentless compliance training can "make us fit for society", they are not seeing a person. They are seeing a problem, a defect. Yet they insist on Person First Language.
When we are abused, and murdered, the perpetrators don't think we are "much more than autism". They use Person First Language and forget our humanity.
Or maybe they are trying to beat, stab, suffocate or shoot "the autism" out of us.
When the media blame us for our own murders, by pointing out how "tragic" and "pitiful" our lives are, they use Person First Language to point out how non-persons we are. This is dehumanization.
When the media and some "experts" speculate that a mass murderer might be Autistic, they use Person First Language to say autism makes people evil. To them, that's all we are.
Person First Language is not about "seeing a person before the diagnosis", or about "seeing much more than the diagnosis".
Person First Language is about putting as much distance between the person and "the autism". It is the opposite of acceptance.
It is like a contest to see how many ways one can talk about Autistics without using the word "Autistic".
Each time, they come up with a longer description that starts with "person" and ends with "autism".
It would be much more inclusive, and respectful of our voices, to simply say "Autistic". It is simple and direct. It does not waste words, it is easily understood. More importantly, it is the most accurate description of who we are.
In that wave of claiming who we are, from our perspective—in our proclaiming of what it is actually like to live as an autistic individual—many autistic self-advocates have embraced the word 'autistic.' In this way, we are not running from the degradation and falsehoods, but proudly proclaiming: "I am autistic." It may seem counter intuitive. But indeed, the act of accepting the word "autistic," in and of itself, makes something once untouchable—now held. For you see autism is not a disease—though many think it so, or at maximum treat autism like a plague to be eradicated.
The issue we take, in most circles of Aspergerians and Auties, is with the trials and tribulations parents face and share publicly in raising such "anomalies" (children with autism). Interestingly enough, if you listen with intent, you will note that the autistic parents of autistic children aren't complaining publicly about the woes of being a parent of a child with autism. We aren't declaring how hard it is to be a parent of a child with autism. Nor are we seeking sympathy. We understand what our child is experiencing. We understand the torment of living in a world, where you not only feel like you don't belong, but are told from the authorities that be (parents included) that your condition, your being, your very existence has "affected" everyone around you.
I am defined by autism because I want to be, because by embracing my autism I am embracing myself fully. I cannot separate the way my brain works from the rest of me. I leave it up to my son about how he wants to define himself. I will never tell him how to perceive autism. I imagine his perception will be ever-changing.
When you use person-first language, you are literally separating me from my identity, deliberately distancing me from an integral aspect to who I am. It feels like someone is dissecting me.
There's this idea that we're given more respect if we separate our disability or disabilities from our personhood, that the more distance we place between ourselves and our disability, the more respect we're given. This very idea is rooted in ableism.
Also important to note is that whether I'm called a Disabled person or a person with a disability, I am treated with the same level of disrespect.
When people continue to separate our disabilities from our personhood, they aren't thinking about how our disabilities impact our personhood and how its viewed by others.
My friend Eb on Twitter worded it best, people shouldn't need to use person-first language in order to be reminded that we're human beings deserving of respect and rights and that we also have other identities.
I think that when people insist on saying "but you're a person first!" and that people don't acknowledge my disability first, that can lead to accommodations being an afterthought. When folks continue to separate my disabilities from my personhood, they aren't thinking about what accommodations I need because they're too busy trying to NOT think about my disabilities.
I don't have autism. I am autistic.
That's a thing I've been saying forfuckingever. And yet people keep insisting on pointedly saying that I and others "have autism", are "individuals who happen to have autism", are "living with autism", or the ever popular "are individuals who just happen to have autism".
Those are a lot of words just to deny a fundamental part of who I am, huh? It's like people think if they wedge enough words between their identifier noun and the word autism, they'll pry the condition off of us.
I know that y'all are taught person first language, and many communities prefer it and I support that. But the purpose of person-first language is to respect the person you are describing. Ask them what they prefer. I, and many MANY other autistic people, prefer to be called autistic, not "living with autism" or "having autism" or "an individual who happens to have an intimate neurological understanding from living with autism" or whatever.
Source: Radical Neurodivergence Speaking: I don't have autism. I am autistic.
I cannot separate out which parts of me brain are wired because baby I was born this way and which parts of my brain should be marked off as AUTISM. Nor do I particularly care, to be honest.
Being autistic fundamentally shapes how I perceive and interact with the world, with a million cascading and subtle consequences. I would not be the same Julia I am now without whatever parts of my brain can be marked as AUTISTIC (and that's bad science in the first place, the brain is a whole lot more complicated and subtle than that, we know that there isn't one gene or one wiring variation that leads to autism).
"Autistic", or "with-Autism"? I had to decide this for myself quite some time ago, after a great deal of thought, since there are positives and negatives to both methods. Finally, it boiled down to one factor: communication. What does each say to the listener? What does each say to me? And to what effect?
Second, there is group that believes that autism is something you catch. Like a virus. Or that it's the result of an accident that suddenly injured you. They believe that it is simply a matter of time and effort before you are relieved of your autism, and that you will be just like you are now – just with all the problems removed and the nice parts remaining. This perspective is generally the result of failing to accept that your child is not just a poor substitute for the "real" child you believe you deserve. Person-first language protects this group from reality.
Finally, of course, there are those who, for their own practical reasons, prefer to preserve the illusion that autism can be removed from a person like a stain, leaving a pristine child ready to please his parents and join mainstream society invisibly. Some of these people have created images of themselves as beacons of hope with many books and speeches and postings, some as cutting edge researchers into a cure or the cause, some as major movers-and-shakers in the industry who may – any day now – slay the dragon. Person-first language preserves the delusion these people succeed within.
In all these cases, person-first language is used to hide the truth. And in none of these constructs is the autistic actually the primary beneficiary of the charade. Person-first language used as a default by anyone but the autistic himself is always selfish.
And always demeaning. The overwhelming message of "person-with-autism" is always "we wish we could really remove the autism from you, because it's offensive, and we're sure you'd be more acceptable without it." Of course, it can't be removed. At least not in the near future. So, until then, the autistic is stuck with his unacceptableness, no matter how kind and apologetic the label appears to others.
When you use person-first language, you create and then highlight a failing, a disappointment, a limitation. When I declare myself as an autistic, I acknowledge my difference as an acceptable part of my self-identification at the outset, and challenge you to do so too.
I would argue that "person with autism" risks misrepresenting the nature of the condition. It implies that autism is an attachment, like a torn ligament or a brain tumour, which can be isolated and removed without otherwise affecting the individual, when to my mind autism is intrinsic to the person's identity.
Another flashpoint is the word 'suffering'. One of the surest ways to raise the hackles of the autism community is to write or say that somebody "suffers from" autism or Asperger's syndrome. I've read and heard two examples of this in the last fortnight alone. There are two conflicting responses here: on the one hand it's insulting to people who get by reasonably well although they have some form of autism, and yet on the other there are autistic people who quite evidently do suffer, and we shouldn't shy from saying so. The key point, I think, is that while they may suffer from depression, from isolation, from short attention spans or from an inability to express themselves, saying they "suffer from autism" is aggravating to people who have worked hard to overcome the more debilitating aspects of the condition. It also puts a too simplistic gloss on the way people experience autism, since a strong adherence to routine can be comforting, and even rewarding, in the right context.
Though it is common for medical and cure-focused communities to refer to an autistic person as a person with autism, such references are not the lingo of the greater whole of the Autistic Community.
In a nutshell, saying a person has autism may imply that the person is defective or that there is an inherent problem or sickness within the person. It also implies that autism can somehow be separated from the person.
Being a deaf person, as well as a member of the Deaf community, I prefer to be referred to as Deaf. This is preferable to me rather than the terms "hearing impaired" or "person who has deafness." I don't have deafness, I am deaf. For me, it is the same with autism. I don't have autism, I am autistic. Since I do not view my deafness and autism as negatives, I use language that puts me in the direct light of both autism and deafness.
Saying "person with autism" suggests that the autism can be separated from the person. But this is not the case. I can be separated from things that are not part of me, and I am still be the same person. I am usually a "person with a purple shirt," but I could also be a "person with a blue shirt" one day, and a "person with a yellow shirt" the next day, and I would still be the same person, because my clothing is not part of me. But autismis part of me. Autism is hard-wired into the ways my brain works. I am autistic because I cannot be separated from how my brain works.
Saying "person with autism" suggests that even if autism is part of the person, it isn't a very important part.
Yet autism goes deeper than culture and learned belief systems. It affects how we relate to others and how we find places in society. It even affects how we relate to our own bodies. If I did not have an autistic brain, the person that I am would not exist. I am autistic because autism is an essential feature of me as a person.
Saying "person with autism" suggests that autism is something bad–so bad that is isn't even consistent with being a person.
It is only when someone has decided that the characteristic being referred to is negative that suddenly people want to separate it from the person. I know that autism is not a terrible thing, and that it does not make me any less a person. If other people have trouble remembering that autism doesn't make me any less a person, then that's their problem, not mine. Let them find a way to remind themselves that I'm a person, without trying to define an essential feature of my personhood as something bad. I am autistic because I accept and value myself the way I am.
In the autism community, many self-advocates and their allies prefer terminology such as "Autistic," "Autistic person," or "Autistic individual" because we understand autism as an inherent part of an individual's identity — the same way one refers to "Muslims," "African-Americans," "Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender/Queer," "Chinese," "gifted," "athletic," or "Jewish." On the other hand, many parents of Autistic people and professionals who work with Autistic people prefer terminology such as "person with autism," "people with autism," or "individual with ASD" because they do not consider autism to be part of an individual's identity and do not want their children to be identified or referred to as "Autistic." They want "person-first language," that puts "person" before any identifier such as "autism," in order to emphasize the humanity of their children.
Because when people say "person with autism," it does have an attitudinal nuance. It suggests that the person can be separated from autism, which simply isn't true. It is impossible to separate a person from autism, just as it is impossible to separate a person from the color of his or her skin.
Autism, however, is not a disease. It is a neurological, developmental condition; it is considered a disorder, and it is disabling in many and varied ways. It is lifelong. It does not harm or kill of its own accord. It is an edifying and meaningful component of a person's identity, and it defines the ways in which an individual experiences and understands the world around him or her. It is all-pervasive.
Person-first language opponents believe the best way to do this is by recognizing and edifying the person's identity as an Autistic person as opposed to shunting an essential part of the person's identity to the side in favor of political correctness.
It is impossible to affirm the value and worth of an Autistic person without recognizing his or her identity as an Autistic person. Referring to me as "a person with autism," or "an individual with ASD" demeans who I am because it denies who I am.
When we say "person with autism," we say that it is unfortunate and an accident that a person is Autistic. We affirm that the person has value and worth, and that autism is entirely separate from what gives him or her value and worth. In fact, we are saying that autism is detrimental to value and worth as a person, which is why we separate the condition with the word "with" or "has." Ultimately, what we are saying when we say "person with autism" is that the person would be better off if not Autistic, and that it would have been better if he or she had been born typical. We suppress the individual's identity as an Autistic person because we are saying that autism is something inherently bad like a disease.
Yet, when we say "Autistic person," we recognize, affirm, and validate an individual's identity as an Autistic person. We recognize the value and worth of that individual as an Autistic person — that being Autistic is not a condition absolutely irreconcilable with regarding people as inherently valuable and worth something. We affirm the individual's potential to grow and mature, to overcome challenges and disability, and to live a meaningful life as an Autistic. Ultimately, we are accepting that the individual is different from non-Autistic people–and that that's not a tragedy, and we are showing that we are not afraid or ashamed to recognize that difference.
"Autistic" is another marker of identity. It is not inherently good, nor is it inherently bad. There may be aspects or consequences of my identity as an Autistic that are advantageous, useful, beneficial, or pleasant, and there may be aspects or consequences of my identity as an Autistic that are disadvantangeous, useless, detrimental, or unpleasant. But I am Autistic.
These are not qualities or conditions that I have. They are part of who I am. Being Autistic does not subtract from my value, worth, and dignity as a person. Being Autistic does not diminish the other aspects of my identity. Being Autistic is not giving up on myself or limiting myself or surrendering to some debilitating monster or putting myself down. Being Autistic is like being anything else.
Why is it culturally appropriate and typical to accept race, religion, and nationality as markers of identity that ought to be designated with proper adjectives that (in English) precede the noun "individual" or "person" and not those that fall under the category that we call "ability?" Is it a reflection of a secret fear of the non-disabled of people who are not like them, or is it a reflection of the inhibiting fear of offending one of us? As most of us prefer to identify with proper-adjective language (disabled or Autistic), using this language is highly unlike to offend. Asking me, "So you have autism?" will almost always produce a wince and a cringe. An identity is not something that I have. It is who I am.
The golden rule of disability language has been that the person should come first in phrasing, preceding the condition that disables them. For example, people who have diabetes aren't "diabetics" in respectful usage but instead are "people with diabetes." But developmental conditions and those related to the brain are a trickier territory. With a nod to Francis Crick, if your brain is you and you are your brain (with some guidance from your endocrine system and your environmental inputs), then how appropriate or even rational is it to separate the person and the condition? Many people want to say "person with autism," but to a lot of autistic activists, that phrasing is silly, like saying "Person with Brain." For them, autism and brain and themselves are all one and the same. Autistic activist Jim Sinclair wrote in 1999 about instead using "identity first" language. The Autistic Self Advocacy Network also features an essay by autistic activist Lydia Brown, elaborating the concept. That doesn't mean, of course, that every autistic person prefers that phrasing, and it's always best to go with what any individual with a condition expresses as their preference.
For anyone who has been around Autistic communities, or is Autistic themselves, one of the first things they may notice is the different ways in which we are referred to. Some will say, "has autism/person with autism/people with autism", whilst others will say, "is [an] Autistic/Autistic person/Autistics".
These descriptions cover two broad categories of language: identity-first language, and "person-first" language. In my blog (and outside of it), I pretty much entirely refer to myself as "Autistic", rather than a "person with autism". Some people wonder why I choose to "label" myself. These people have probably been taught most of their lives that person-first language is the correct way, and that anything otherwise is inherently disrespectful. This could not be further from the truth. I and many other Autistic advocates, particularly those who support the neurodiversity paradigm, use identify-first language. In fact, I, for one, see person-first language as disrespectful, demeaning, and ableist.
Something that I see a lot of well-meaning non-autistic folks say to their Autistic children, siblings, relatives, or friends, is "you are more than autism", or, "you are not autism, you are still yourself", or, "don't let autism define who you are". Many of these same people insist on using person-first language, because they deem it somehow superior.
Despite that these people mean well, and want the best for their children, these quotes, and "person-first language" are ultimately harmful and damaging: damaging to the child's self-esteem, giving them the pressure to be "more than autism", whatever that even means. It is also damaging to the rest of the Autistic community, implying that autism makes a person less. "Person-first language" was not created by Autistics to begin with.
The first claim, that Autism can be separated from the individual, is complete nonsense. Autism is the way our brains are wired. Autism shapes our perception, the way we see the world, as well as how we think and feel. A lot who talk about "curing" autism seem to forget that doing so would completely change who we are as human beings. We would no longer be the same person. Autism is SUCH an integral part of who we are, and to take it away, to take our minds and how we think away, would make us lose our personhood. Back when I used to hate who I was (again, because of people sending a subliminal message that autism is a bad thing), I thought back on what my life would be like if I was non-autistic. I realized that I would not be the same person at all. Sure, I may not have had some of the bad experiences I've had, but I would also not love the things I love, believe the things I believe, and I also would not have many of the skills and talents I possess; at least not to the same level. I would be a completely different, foreign person. I wouldn't even recognize myself.
As many Autistic individuals have experienced, when I stopped hiding myself – when I no longer concealed the fact that I'm Autistic, and when I embraced that part of my identity, that is when I suddenly became a lot more confident in my abilities. I started to like myself, recognizing my strengths, while working on my shortcomings.
If an Autistic person asks me to use person-first language, I will respect their wishes and do so for them. However, we shouldn't be teaching Autistic kids to distance themselves from their autism. We shouldn't be telling them they're "more than autism". We should be telling them that they're Autistic, and teach them to be proud of their identity and neurology, and celebrate who they are.
The neurodiversity approach has important implications when it comes to language. A lot of people (typically neurotypical people who are helping or caring for autistic people) support 'person-first language' to describe autism. This means referring to someone as a person before stating their disability, a "person with autism".
You might have noticed that I do not use person-first language. What I use is called 'identity-first language'. This means referring to autism as an aspect of someone's identity, an "autistic person".
People who support person-first language say that no-one should be defined by their disability, that they are a person before they are anything else. It sounds like a noble aim, and they generally have good intentions. The trouble is, the very idea that person-first language is necessary comes as a result of the medical model of disability. It's bad to define a person by their disability if you think a disability is inherently a bad thing.
Identity-first language accepts that neurological differences and impairments are not inherently positive or negative, they are just aspects of a person's identity. You wouldn't dream of saying "a person with homosexuality", would you? Because that implies that being gay is negative, as well as something that could even theoretically be separated from the person.
The neurodiversity approach says that being autistic is comporable to being gay. It's an identity, and a natural and value-neutral aspect of human variation. And autistic people should be accepted and accommodated in the same way as gay people. If there are problems associated with being autistic (or being gay), like finding it difficult to communicate (or finding it difficult to get married) – those problems should be accommodated by society.
When you use person-first language, you are saying "Being autistic is entirely and inherently negative", and "Being autistic makes you less of a person", and "I have to be reminded that autistic people are human". Please stop saying those things to us.
The more I thought about it, "identity first" language started to again change how I thought about my disabilities. I stopped worrying about whether or not my disabilities "define" me, and started to embrace the fact that like it or not, I am part of a community, a shared identity. I'm disabled. And I do like it.
There are strong links between language about disability and thinking about disability, both in my own life and in the broader disability community. As tiresome as it can be to keep up with all the ways of thinking about disability language, it helps describe and shape who we are. Today, I find myself more comfortable with my disability identity than I have been since childhood, and much more empowered and proud.
If you are not Disabled and you are demanding the use of Person First Language (PFL), you are being ableist.
If you are Disabled and you are demanding that other Disabled people use Person First Language, you are being ableist.
If you are Disabled and want to use Person First Language when referring to yourself, I will respect that. I will also respect your right to demand that other people use Person First Language when referring to you.
But the Person First Language concept is ableist, and I can tell you why.
I do know the history of PFL. I also know that it was co-opted by non-disabled people who believe they are the authorities in what we should say and how we should identify ourselves. And that is the definition of ableism.
I want to debunk the notion that by using PFL society treats us better. If anything, it helps with the stigmatization of Disabled people. Instead of "seeing" us, society ignores us, we become "voiceless" and "invisible". There: debunked. But there is more.
Do you, PFL proponent, really see me (only me) and not my disability?
If your answer is yes, you are being ableist because you ignore an important part of me. If you ignore my disability, how are you being an ally – as you claim – and how are you going to support me (and all Disabled people) when we demand to be heard?
If you insist that you will support us, and continue to use PFL, you are being ableist because I (and many others) already said that respecting us means listening to our preferences, instead of demanding that everyone uses a language that we reject. You make it all about you, your preferences, your choices. How is this respecting me (and all Disabled people)?
Acceptable to whom? This is the greatest example of PFL as ableist language. It is silencing. It says non-disabled people are the ones who know what is "better" for Disabled people. It says that we, Disabled people, are non-persons who cannot define ourselves. It makes the choices of non-disabled people for disabled people, "official". PFL is not acceptable to me, and it is not acceptable to a lot of Disabled people. If you claim to be an ally, if you claim to use PFL because you respect us as people, you are NOT respecting us.
If you insist in using PFL because you don't want to create "controversy" and defy the ableist society, if you use PFL because it is more comfortable to you, you shouldn't claim to be an ally or advocate.
I'll be damned before they separate me from my autism too. I'm autistic. I've always been autistic. There has never been a me before autism. All parts of me are autistic as hell and I wouldn't have it any other way.
My autism doesn't reduce me at all. My brown skin doesn't reduce me at all. Ignoring these these parts of me do, because they make me myself. My autism and brown skin affects how I see the world and how the world sees and treats me. Neither my race or my autism are invisible to the world, I promise. They affect everything. Pretending that they do not matter means erasing the reality I am experiencing and that is dangerous to me. Until you see all of me, you do not accept or respect me at all. And if you don't? Well, then I am likely to lose any interest in you.
Before I found out I was autistic, I wasn't able to see myself clearly. I already knew myself like no other could, but I didn't understand myself the way I do now. I didn't have a community where I actually belonged. These things mean a lot to me, and because of them I am in a better place now. And it's all because I learnt that I am autistic. Therefore, this label means a lot to me. I never want to be separated from it ever again.
Identity-first language places the disability-related word first in a phrase. People who prefer identity-first language for themselves often argue that their disability is an important part of who they are, or that they wouldn't be the same person without their disability. For some people, identity-first language is about a shared community, culture, and identity. Identity-first language is also about thinking about disability as a type of diversity instead of something to be ashamed of.
Some communities that use identity-first language are the Autistic, Deaf, and Blind communities. Other people might use "disabled person" instead of "person with disabilities." Specific people might refer to themselves differently than most members of their communities, so it is a good idea to ask a person how they identify if you are writing about them or introducing them.
"Disability" and "disabled" are indicators of culture and identity. Thus, "disabled person" is an accepted term.
Within the Autistic community, IFL is widely preferred and often consciously chosen, because Autism is considered an identity. That is, you'd say "Autistic person" instead of "person with autism." In this way, being autistic is regarded as a facet of one's identity – a neurological state of being – and not as a source of shame.
A similar line of thinking is followed by many who are Deaf. While some people identify only as little-"d" deaf (referring to a physical state of being), others capitalize the "D" to indicate being Deaf as a culture and identity. So, using the principles of IFL, one would say "d/Deaf person.
These same concepts do not apply when it comes to the use of a term strictly for its medical definition. For instance, it is never okay to say something such as "Down syndrome person" or "cerebral palsy person." Here, you're referring to a person by diagnosis, which is perceived as dehumanizing.
Identity first: as in disabled person (as opposed to person with a disability) was originally conceived to challenge the medical view of disability and replace it with a socio-cultural view. It wasn't people's diagnoses that were the problem, it was society. Society was the main cause of disablement. Saying you were a disabled person was originally not about identity at all it was an acknowledgement that society was the predominant cause of barriers for people with impairments (see my post here for a more in depth breakdown of the social model of disability). It was a way of calling attention to society's physical and social barriers by tying oppression to the term disablement.
I sincerely doubt that most people who use identity first language are doing so to constantly be saying "hey you are oppressing me" or "hey I'm oppressed" (even though those two statements are likely true). They do it for the same reasons I do. It is a way to reject the idea that disability is a dirty word and to say that disability can be a part of a person's identity without sacrificing their humanity. It's a pushback against the stigma associated with disability (for more see this piece by Emily Ladau).
I however, choose to use IFL to directly challenge the bigotry inherent in assuming that I must be separated from my body to be considered human. I most definitely don't do it to pigeon hole my identity into one label. I am far to complicated for that, just like everyone else.
I continue to believe that people should have the right to self-label and I endeavor to respect people's personal preferences because we have been labeled by others far to often and it is time for us to take over the conversation about our own lives. I will not however accept the idea that my choice in sentence structure means that I am limiting my identity.
Person first language arose because disabled people were being referred to by demeaning and pejorative terms that had an identity first construction. In some communities, where a preferred identity first term hasn't arisen, person first is still the preferred construction.
Autistic is not a dirty word. When you act like it is, you aren't helping autistic people. You're contributing the very stigma that you pretend to abhor.
What can authors, editors, professional organizations, and scholarly journals do to truly reduce linguistic bias? First, all parties can become better educated about the core principle motivating person-first language: Everyone is a person first, not just children with disabilities (and definitely not just children with developmental disabilities). As the American Speech Hearing-Language Association suggests, 'do the same thing for both positive and negative attributes.' Refer to all persons, both those with and without disabilities, with person-firstlanguage. Conversely, authors, editors, professional organizations, and scholarly journals could begin to embrace identity-first language, both for persons with and without disabilities. Some disability scholars encourage the use of identity-first language from a disability rights, equality, and diversity framework. In fact, identifying with a disability is empirically demonstrated to be associated with improved well-being, self-esteem, and quality of life for persons with a wide range of disabilities, which is why identify-first language for persons with disabilities is often preferred. At the least, scholarly writing should endeavor to not use linguistic constructions that accentuate rather than attenuate the stigma associated with disabilities.


text:
By Bornstein Law December 19, 2018
There's a lot to fall in love with the New Year. A clean slate and a fresh start, the feeling that everything is possible, and of course, the best parties.
For the rental housing industry, however, the exuberance over new beginnings should be tempered with the reality there are a new set of laws to obey.
As we look into the back mirror of an eventful year, one of the highlights has been the defeat of efforts to repeal the Costa Hawkins Rental Housing Act. Our fraternity's successful outcome in the epic battle against Proposition 10, however, has obscured less prominent initiatives that were successfully passed and we summarize some of them here.
Senate Bill 407 – Retiring water-wasting plumbing fixtures
The water-conservation requirements of Senate Bill 407 have been rolled out in stages and the last hurrah goes into effect January 1, 2009. Effective this New Year, owners of pre-1994 multifamily properties must bring any water-wasting toilets, showerheads or faucets up to specs. To avoid getting a knock on the door from the toilet police, consult our earlier article.
Assembly Bill 1919 – Price gouging bans
In the wake of the tragic fires, now is a time for Californians to come together and help those in need, not for opportunistic landlords and merchants to exploit people in desperate need of goods and housing. That is why the Governor used executive powers to prohibit price gouging and extend the bans when further disasters ensued.
There was a great deal of confusion, however, on how and when California's price gouging protections would be applied. Although we noted in an earlier article that the attorney general attempted to provide guidance, it was the onus of the legislative branch to codify the disfavor of price gouging into law. AB 1919 criminalizes rent increases north of 10% after a state emergency is declared and also makes it illegal for landlords to evict a tenant after the proclamation of a state emergency and then rent the newly vacant unit at a higher rental price than the tenant could be charged.
Revisions to Bill 2164 – Landlord culpability in cannabis growing
We have long predicted that after the people have spoken by legalizing the recreational use of cannabis, there would be a lot of wrinkles to be ironed out in city halls and in the courts, and we are encouraged that the voice of landlords was not left out. This bill would add protections to unsuspecting landlords who have tenants engaged in the illegal cultivation of cannabis in the property.
This legislation affords owners the right to correct the underlying violation without being automatically slapped with a hefty fine by a municipality when a rogue tenant turns the rental unit into a greenhouse and the landlord had no knowledge. For more background, visit our earlier post on this subject.
Assembly Bill 2343 – Tenants given more time to respond to resolve evictions
Beginning in September, tenants staring at eviction will be afforded additional time to pay past due rent or defend against an unlawful detainer action – weekends and holidays will no longer count towards the previously set statutory limits for tenants to respond to answer eviction proceedings, a subject we dive deeper into this article.
Proposition F – San Francisco Evictees entitled to the right to counsel
San Francisco's Proposition F guaranteed city-funded legal representation for tenants facing eviction. One of our main takeaways in an earlier article was that tenant attorneys will create logjams and delays in what would otherwise be swift and perfunctory evictions. It was unclear exactly how this newly minted law would be implemented, but the program is gaining steam as Mayor Breed's office is starting to get their hands on the funds necessary to pay for the free legal counsel. Expect all of the machinery to come together in 2019.
Senate Bill 721 – ensuring balconies are not a death trap
Do you have a deck, balcony, or elevated walkway of more than 6 feet above ground level in a property with 3 or more multifamily units? If the answer is in the affirmative, SB 721 mandates that a licensed inspector stop by to ensure the structures are up to par so that these valuable open spaces do not create injury or death when a tenant enjoys a respite from cramped apartment life.
Redwood City tenant protections
Landlords in Redwood City will have to contend with newfound regulations, and we will reserve our commentary for a future article, but in the interim, you can get the official scoop from the city here.
Start 2019 on the right foot
The above changes in the lay of the land are not exhaustive, and surely more changes will be forthcoming – it's a little like taking a drink out of a fire hose. You don't have to make sense of it all – that's our job at Bornstein Law.
Author Bornstein Law


text:
Your full Service
Strategy Company
Loud Mouth Communications is a leading communications and marketing strategy company with more than 20 years of experience working with people, properties, and brands. We create unique, effective, and customized strategies in the areas of marketing, communications, branding, promotions, public relations, sponsorship, events, content management and media.
Wherever you're headed, you're not alone. If you need to revive, rejuvenate, reinvent, rethink, reimagine, or realign, we've got you covered. We lead with innovation and creativity, delivering customized strategies. We build long-term relationships by upholding our professional pillars of honesty, integrity, passion, and results.
At our core, we believe communication is the root of everything. How you communicate your ideas to the world requires the proper plan, the right focus, a vision and precision. Strategic communication is the starting point to convey every concept, build every relationship, and capture every like, follow, or sale. All of this begins with our commitment to communicate effectively with you.
The world is not the same as it used to be; in fact, it is different than it was a minute ago. As difficult as it may be to navigate change, it is also exciting to embrace it. In order to survive and thrive, it is necessary to innovate, adapt and even anticipate. We take an organic approach to marketing to ensure you have an effective strategy with all the right elements in the mix.
Every concept, innovation, or dream is driven by passion, and every project that ends in success has a great roadmap. Whether you are a company, or an individual, we ensure your success by developing a brand strategy that delivers an authentic and well-defined, dimensional, and prismatic brand to your followers, audience, consumers, or target market.
We are known for our wow-factor! We approach every event organically, and don't like to do the same thing twice. We only develop authentic, original, and truly customized event strategies. We draw inspiration from arts and culture and fuse them together with your objectives, to create one-of-a-kind events that are both impactful and memorable.
We're hardcore attention seekers, so we put that to work to help shine the spotlight on you. We know the media business inside and out, which helps us develop highly targeted and successful public relations, digital and social media strategies, that deliver results. It's all about finding the right angle, and we get it right every time.
We enjoy finding unique, interesting and dynamic ways to bring people and products together. We also believe in the magic of the right relationship, so we work hard to match brands and properties in order to facilitate consumer experiences, brand opportunities, XM programs, and hospitality. There is no magic formula for sponsorship, so each strategy is carefully curated with customized elements to deliver measurable results against objectives.
Days in Business
Of Projects
Of Strategies
Of Smiles
We've Launched A Radio Station
Media is our wheelhouse, so when a new major market radio station license was granted we developed and executed the marketing and event strategy to get the station on the air in just five weeks. We hit the ground running and pulled off the impossible, with on air and public launch events, big prizes, aerial acrobats – and of course live music. We got the station on the air, on time, and with a whole lot of fanfare.
We've Helped Music Festivals Find Partners
From the beginning, we have put our passion to work in the live music space. We have a deeply forged and authentic relationships with both properties and brands, and love to see the two working together in perfect harmony. It takes patience, commitment and experience to negotiate and execute effective partnerships, and we take our role very seriously. In a business where reputation and integrity matter, we stake ours on every deal we bring into the entertainment space.
We've Rappelled A Sasquatch Off A Building
Sometimes our projects are a big hairy deal. When our client asked us to make a big impression, what could be bigger than the spectacle of Bigfoot making a daring escape from atop a tall building to elude capture? Sure there were permits to acquire, and a Sasquatch stunt double to hire, but in the end there was great satisfaction watching Sasqi running down a busy city street back towards his mountain hideaway – with the media watching of course.
We've Raised Funds For Worthwhile Causes
We believe the foundation of a strong community is the willingness of companies and individuals to step up and help others. We have always believed in helping local causes and have donated time and services to many charities, including the Christmas Bureau of Edmonton, the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, the Lois Hole Hospital for Women, Little Warriors, In The Weeds, and The Edmonton Broadcasters Club.
We've Put Our Whole Heart Into Everything We Do
What people
"Loud Mouth Communications is passionate about both bands and brands, and has done their very best to go above and beyond the call of duty for me and my clients. In the world of music and partnerships you either get "it" or you don't – they get "it."
Kevin Goodman
CEO, FRC Marketing
"You're a rockstar!"
Billie Jo Aasen
CEO, Extreme Mudfest
"Expertise, creativity, passion, attention to detail, and teamwork – quite simply, there was no one else I trusted more. Loud Mouth Communications has reached a national level of success in a highly competitive industry with a determination to learn and grow, a dedication to expertise, and admirable standards of excellence."
James Stuart Hewson
Regional VP , Bell Media
"A joy to work and helped me turn my events into sellouts!"
Clayton Bellamy
"A holistic approach to relationships, incredible attention to detail, and organizational skills ensure Loud Mouth Communications success in creating and maintaining lucrative partnerships. A wealth of experience, a positive attitude, a strong work ethic, and a caring nature have also been instrumental in their success."
Troy Vollhoffer
CEO, Country Thunder Music Festivals and Big Valley Jamboree
"Incredibly authentic, trustworthy, and always a pleasure to do business with!"
CEO, Mouse Marketing
The Magic Eight Ball
Entrepreneurship is a constant and evolving learning experience that comes with its share of plot twists – like how to adapt when a global pandemic crushes your previously successful business mode.
SOMETHING STARTED
Edmonton: 780-497-1445
Toronto: 437-488-1445
info@loudmouthcommunications.com
53530, 924 91 Street SW
Edmonton, Alberta T6X0P2


text:
Q: JQGrid "Inline" Insert functionality I am new to JQGrid.I am using inline editing of Jqgrid. Functionality I am trying to achieve is
1. add new row in JQGrid
2. then press "enter" key.
3. This should call a method in .cs page (server side code).
Issue is I tried Keydown event,addRow functionality but I can only set  editurl:"\ \functionname" but cannot call method after pressing "enter"Key.
For example when we edit some data onrow  click it allows us to call server side method after  pressing "Enter" key. on insert button i need to achieve same functionality .

A: try this
keys:true
Read the wiki for usage
http://www.trirand.com/jqgridwiki/doku.php?id=wiki:inline_editing


text:
Johnson Hilliard
REQUEST A CONSULTATION: (423) 247-4176 Email Us
Materials & Capabilities
Welding Specialties
Equipment & Capabilities
About Johnson Hilliard
Johnson Hilliard was established in 1938. After serving as a Navy Pilot during World War II, B.O. Ripley was hired as a furnace salesman for the company. He later became President and a stockholder. In 1977, Mr. Ripley and his son, Richard Ripley, became the sole owners of Johnson-Hilliard. Ben Ripley is now the third generation of this family to operate and carry on this 75-year tradition.
Johnson Hilliard's commitment to quality has always translated to its clients. From large, industrial projects to small, detailed designs, the company offers fair pricing to clients, caters to their needs, and works to establish – and maintain – strong relationships.
In our early years, Johnson Hilliard focused mainly on fabricating furnaces, stokers, ductwork, heating, and sheet metal. As we grew, we became a metal shop. Now, we are moving into metal manufacturing, industrial, and architectural endeavors.
As Johnson Hilliard looks to the future, it does so with Ben Ripley at the helm. Ripley, the third generation of the Johnson-Hilliard brand, is ready to take what the metalwork company does best – and make it even better. With his crew of master craftsmen, he is prepared to do precisely that.
The company plans to capitalize upon the social media boom and pursue new travel opportunities to expand its brand. Modern technologies – including updated operating systems – have been implemented to help Johnson Hilliard and its workers move in this new direction.
It's a move that can't, and won't, be made without Johnson Hilliard's foundation: its workers, and their commitment to quality metal fabrication and design. With these pieces in place, Johnson Hilliard is crafting a new generation.
Metal Fabrication & Design
1100 Industry Drive


Publishers of educational and scientific multimedia titles.
WebCops handles safe and convenient internet distribution of Windows and OS X multimedia titles. All sorts of data files can be encrypted, also files that must be used by standard browsers/viewers/readers like Adobe Reader, Flash Player, Media Player or Word/Excel. WebCops has over the last many years been used by leading publishers of educational and scientific titles. Special tools are available for an easy migration from CD/DVD based distribution to Secure Download.


text:
It's Gilbert Gott-fired
Comic loses job after Tweeting Japan jokes
American comedian Gilbert Gottfried has been fired as the voice of a giant insurance company after making bad-taste jokes about the Japanese earthquake.
The controversial comic will no longer provide the voice of Aflac's duck mascot because of the gags he made on Twitter.
His messages have now disappeared from the site, but they included lines such as 'I was talking to my Japanese real estate agent. I said "Is there a school in this area? She said, "Not now, but just wait"' and 'Japan is really advanced. They don't go to the beach. The beach comes to them'
In a statement, Aflac said: 'Gilbert's recent comments about the crisis in Japan were lacking in humor and certainly do not represent the thoughts and feelings of anyone at Aflac.
'There is no place for anything but compassion and concern during these difficult times.'
Aflac – which operates in Japan, although Gottfried does not voice the masco there – has donated £750,000 to the International Red Cross for disaster assistance
Gottfried is no stranger to controversy. Three weeks after 9/11 attacks, he made light of the tragedy at a Friars Club to boos from the audience. However he turned the gig around by telling his version of the classic Aristocrats dirty joke.
Meanwhile, a Family Guy writer has apologised for tweeting 'If you wanna feel better about this earthquake in Japan, google 'Pearl Harbor death toll' in the aftermath of the tragedy.
After a backlash from his 165,000 followers, Alex Sulkin deleted the original post and wrote: 'I am sorry for my insensitive Tweet. It's gone.'
The Japanese attack on US forces in Hawaii in the Second World War killed 2,500 people.
This is the job Gottfried lost:
"No one will laugh at how great things are for somebody."
– Harold Ramis