All Global News on One Page

MIT Entrepreneurship Review: Despite the tawdry tales behind the recently released movie The Social Network, most Americans would still confess to at least a tinge of envy at Facebook founder, Mark Zuckerburg’s meteoric rise in business. Who would not dream of the techno gold struck by formerly geeky students the like of Zuckerburg, Sergei Brin, or Bill Gates? In fact, these titans are only the figureheads of a massive movement across American universities — students taking ideas from the classroom or the lab, and into the market. Student entrepreneurship derives from two powerful streams — education and business creation — meeting to form the most creative new products on the market.
Today, the MIT Entrepreneurship Review brings you a story of Inaki Berenguer, whose recent graduation present to himself was a company to run, a company that he conceived and brought to life within the halls of MIT.
Inaki Berenguer: My co-founders, Andres Blank and Alberto Sheinfeld, and I started Pixable when we were at MIT between our first and second years in the business school. Pixable is the place to go to browse and manage all your photos online — photos on Facebook, Picasa, Flickr, and even photos on your computer. It’s a way to unify your photos that are based on different websites, group and edit them, and do other cools things like creating video slideshows or photobooks that we would print and send to you.
We came up with the idea thanks to the trips that we were taking at MIT, particularly our trip to Japan. We went on the trip and at the end of it we wanted to create a photobook to remember the experience, so we went to all our classmates and asked if they’d give us their photos on a USB drive. And all we heard was, “No, they are on Picasa,” “They are on Facebook,” “They are on Flickr,” and so on. It was frustrating because the photos were already online and we had access to them, but we still couldn’t group them. So we said, “Well, let’s try and solve this problem for ourselves.”
When you’re starting to research a market that’s big enough, you’ll find opportunities there. So it’s a matter of being in that market and not just solving a problem, but solving a hard problem that isn’t solved yet. Even if you don’t solve the problem, along the way you’ll solve other adjacent problems and you’ll still be in the same big market. In our case, it also helped that we were solving a problem that we were experiencing ourselves as consumers.
In the middle of the second year we decided to put some money down and hire a development team in India. Most people don’t put time or anything out of their own pocket and just want investors’ money. But why would you invest in someone like that if they are not even ready to invest their time in themselves? With the initial money down, we actually went to India to work with the developers, wrote the product specs, and bought the domain. We also wanted to partner with a printing facility, so we flew to different printing facilities in the U.S. All of that happened in 2009 during our second year of the MBA program.
In March of that year we incorporated the company and raised half a million dollars from friends and family before finishing business school. We went to our friends for money and they gave us around 30K each here and there. And that’s another thing, you don’t ask your friends for money if you’re still considering taking a job. If you ask your best friend for 25K, that’s because you have skin in the game and you’re going to be with your startup no matter what happens.
We started working full-time on the startup in New York City right after graduation. In June, we closed our first round of financing of $2.5M from Highland Capital Partners, which brought to our board James Joaquin, who was the founder of oFoto and CEO of Kodak Gallery, and Bob Davis, the founder and CEO of Lycos and managing partner at Highland. We’re living the dream.
Biography of Inaki Berenguer:
Inaki is a founder and and CEO of Pixable. Before Pixable, Inaki completed Master’s and PhD degrees in Engineering at Cambridge University, completed an MBA at MIT, and spent two years as a Fulbright scholar at Columbia University. He also worked as a researcher at HP, NEC Labs and Intel. More recently, he spent two years as a management consultant at McKinsey & Company in the high tech, banking and telecom sectors, and as a manager in the Corporate Strategy Group at Microsoft. Inaki is trying to convince the rest of the team to open a Pixable office somewhere warm in Spain.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

There are roughly 15 million unemployed Americans. China has to generate 15 million new jobs a year just to keep employment levels where they are, or 300,000 jobs per week.
The official number of migrant workers, those from China’s impoverished rural regions who work in its cities, is estimated to be 120 million, or 9% of the population. That estimate is undoubtedly low and higher than the population of Mexico.
These are the reasons behind Beijing’s jawboning on the issue of its currency manipulation. Everyday low prices for Chinese exports have lifted the country into second place economically and its leaders are committed to stalling the inevitable revaluation as long as possible. This is their fiduciary obligation and also a social imperative in a country that is a cell phone swarm away from revolution in certain regions.
What’s interesting, however, is that China’s other cornerstone policy is its hold over the US and EU economies. Trillions are held in its government and, quietly, in blue chip stocks. Its been buying Yen and Greece’s bonds to keep both currencies higher.
China has also chosen to benefit, trade-wise, certain key influencers such as Germany’s automakers and certain US blue chips so they will lobby against retaliatory action on the currency front.
This week’s award of a Nobel Peace Prize to a jailed Chinese activist is an embarrassing backdrop but what will turn the tide is the anger of other emerging economies with job creation problems of their own “We are in the midst of an international currency war,” said Brazil’s finance minister earlier this week.
This week these emerging economies began to gang up against China as its artificially low Yuan is going to force them to have to competitively devalue their currencies and impose damaging protectionist measures.
World Bank chief Robert Zoellick knows where this leads — to a Great Depression — and has said so but the emerging economies are also in a box.
They have done what the US should have done long ago.
For months, US Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, has played good cop to Congress’ bad cop even though he has in his hip pocket proof that China’s 25% to 40% undervalued and can, without approval, impose an equivalent tariff on all Chinese goods and services. China protests that this retaliation would contravene World Trade Organization rules — a claim which is, considering the scale of their cheating, laughable.
Meanwhile, the devaluation of the US dollar is helping the stock markets along with the glacial improvement in incomes and spending. (US incomes were up 0.4% in August and consumer spending 0.5% following months’ of increases).
But this week’s events reveal that it is time that the US, EU, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Turkey and everyone must gang up. Since 2008 when the developed world hit the wall, China’s created another 30 million jobs or nearly the population of Canada or California. Enough’s enough.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

It’s that time of the year again. The glorious month where I grow my Octobeard.
Usually, when I grow a beard, it’s a very organized process. I plan and I trim and I shape. I use Just for Men Beard Formula to get rid of what I call the Miller Half Moon (the gray inverted arch that grows on the bottom of my chin, making me look like Dennis Miller). I brush out the knots and I even out the length. All of this work results in a beautifully designed beard, sort of like James Brolin’s.
When I grow an Octobeard, on the other hand, I do nothing. I leave my beard unkempt and wiry and gray. I let it blossom like an unencumbered weed. Eventually, I start looking like Rick Rubin or Zach Galifianakis.
Why, you may ask, do I grow the Octobeard? First, I want Winter to know that I’m not afraid of it — if the weather gets unseasonably cold, I’ll have an extra layer of fur to protect my mug. Second, I have to be prepared in case I decide on a Halloween costume that requires facial hair — if I want to be Serpico or Mr. Whipple or Captain Lou Albano, I won’t have to use that synthetic shit. And third, I grow the Octobeard because I can!
Facial hair is the one thing men have that women don’t (other than penises, prostates, testicles, chest hair, and an appreciation for Maxim Magazine). Sure, some women, mostly of Israeli, Italian, or Middle Eastern decent, have facial hair. They are, however, encouraged to get rid of it (by the way, I recommend waxing over bleaching any day – nobody wants to kiss a hairy lip, even if it is blond). And, no woman (except maybe some circus freaks or morbidly obese senior citizens) has facial hair to the extent that men do.
So, we cherish our facial hair. We embrace it. We experiment with it. I’ve had a mustache, a goatee, a vandyke, a soul patch, and mutton chops, and that was just last month. Facial hair allows us to assert our individuality and it allows us to look ridiculous. Those are two things men love.
To some, having facial hair defines them. What would ZZ Top be without their beards? What would Scott Ian be without his billy goatee? What would John Oates be without his mustache? No hippie worth his weight in weed would be caught without some sort of beard. Suburban dads who worship MMA fighters usually favor the close cut goatee. Mustaches are the staple of cops, cowboys, and queers.
If you’re not a cop, a cowboy, or a queer, mustaches are funny (unless it’s an ironic mustache which has been played out by hipsters from Williamsburg). Offering mustache rides is always funny. Y’know what else is funny? Guys that don’t have any hair on their head that make up for it on their face. They look like they’re upside down. I also enjoy laughing at guys who can’t grow facial hair. They are less male. They’re the same guys that don’t have chest hair or an Adam’s apple. Sad, but also funny!
In addition to being the butt of endless jokes, facial hair can be very useful. It can cover up zits and moles and pock marks. In my humble opinion, Bill Murray should have as much facial hair as he can find. If one had a cleft lip as a child, facial hair can cover that up too, just like Stacy Keach. Strangely though, until as of late (and for a sham nonetheless), Joaquin Phoenix has chosen to let his cleft lip exist naked. Not a good move. Facial hair can also eliminate the need for such commonplace nuisances as face washing, nose hair trimming, and tanning.
Good facial hair is hard to come by. I once got into a fight for admiring a dude’s facial hair at a bar. He thought I was clowning him. I wasn’t. I admire lots of men for their facial hair: Kenny Rogers, Burt Reynolds, George Michael, Abe Lincoln, and even Adolf Hitler. The Hitler mustache is on its way back. Sure it’s got some PR problems, but if you call it The Chaplin, you can rock that shit hard!
Good facial hair is also found on the non-famous. This guy is sporting the half-beard. Nice! I’d like to popularize cheek polkadots or the underbeard. I’d also like to shave everything off, then grow it all back, dye it orange, and become Alf. Alf knew how to wear his facial hair. Some people don’t.
A facial offender is a guy who wears his facial hair in such a wrong way that he should be stripped of the privilege of growing facial hair. Aging hipsters that sport the soul patch are facial offenders. Tools with Backstreet Beards (beards favored by The Backstreet Boys) are facial offenders.
The Amish are facial offenders. They have no style, so don’t try to look like them. That means you, James Hettfield! Wearers of the business beard are facial offenders. If it looks good at work, it should be shaved. Anybody with a Todd Palin goatee is a facial offender. Tight goatees are to the nineties what mustaches are to the eighties. They’re relics of a bygone era that should not be brought back until they can be ironic.
I, fortunately, am not a facial offender. Also fortunately, my ladies like me with stubble. Essentially, I’m always one step away from growing facial hair. How sweet is that? Now, I just have to get creative and one day, I may make it into The Society of Bearded Gents. Dare to dream!

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Gutenberg started this craze for ink-and-print. Before then, we had woodcuts and copyists, laboriously transcribing the prophets, the words of the Almighty, the words about the Almighty, and almighty words, mostly onto parchment… After Gutenberg, though, sales of books about non-religious subjects began to proliferate.
Finally, five hundred years after Gutenberg, in the wake of World War II, everyone went to college, either on the GI Bill or his or her parents’ wallet, and a vast new market for non-fiction books mushroomed out of what had been paper-marshland. It was like agribusiness — with a proliferation of publishers’ imprints. Soon, every self-respecting graduate (whether of college or the school of knocks) wanted to “be published.” It was Everyman’s fifteen hours of fame calling to us, long before Andy Warhol reduced it to minutes for the pictorati.
New technology aided and abetted this publishing trend — simplifying typesetting, mass binding, and printing itself. The advent of paperbacks allowed publishers to appeal to two classes of consumers: libraries and the “general public” — with richer customers still buying the library hardbacks for their private libraries. Despite radio, film and television the dream of “being published” lived on in our culture — indeed the rewards of being published were, in hindsight, remarkable. Where very few writers in history had ever been able to live off of their royalties as authors, suddenly there was a whole class of post-WWII “professional writers” who often supplemented their pay with journalism and teaching, but primarily relied heavily on the fruits of their book-labors — fictional and non-fictional.
Money was both a lure and a problem, though, for the publishers — and just as whole industries saw the rise of mergers, takeovers and “multi-nationals” that came to dominate what had once been multi-owned, geographically dispersed, independent firms, so mainstream publishing gradually devolved onto a few international parent companies, who amassed subsidiary imprints and benefitted from the supposed economies of scale. Even bookselling succumbed to the trend — Barnes & Noble, Borders and other chains crowding out the independents.
For authors who were successfully “marketed” by such conglomerates (such as the Bertlesmann, Hachette, News Corporation, Pearson, etc groups) the pickings were wonderful while they lasted. Rather like the housing market — and Wall Street!
But then came the dark cloud: a cloud that has seen the publishing industry go into sudden crisis mode — unseen, unreported and unknown to the general public.
Have you heard of the Frankfurt Book Fair, the world’s largest annual publishing get-together fest? Heard that it took place last week? Heard it reported on television, radio or in our newspapers. Heard anything about it?
No? Small wonder. The Frankfurt Book Fair, this year, has gone unreported in America, even though the bleak future that was discussed there behind closed doors (and in publishers’ booths) represents probably the biggest change in writing and publishing since Johannes Gutenberg, a goldsmith, experienced what he called “a ray of light,” and started up his first-ever movable-type press in 1440 in Strasbourg, then in Mainz.
Five hundred and seventy years later Frankfurt-am-Main, on October 5, 2010, found publishers from across the globe “in buoyant mood,” according to London’s Guardian newspaper last week — having banished 2009′s “mood of austerity,” and busy toasting Alfred Knopf’s advance of $2.5 million to a second-time Indian novelist Kiran Desai. (Heard of her?) This offer was based on a four-page proposal given out by Andrew Wylie, the New York literary agent. Brilliant!
But wait a minute! Wasn’t it Andrew Wylie who, in July, said he was going to sell digital rights to his authors’ books direct to Amazon, without bothering with publishers — like Knopf — at all?
Mmm. When in doubt, read the small print. On the web, that is. Track down, if you will, the London Times’ brave reporter, Helen Rumbelow, who wrote a piece called “Dead Or Alive” last week from Frankfurt itself. She said the people “in charge of the world’s books” had gathered for a great junket — and had encountered instead “a bloodbath”! “Nearly a quarter of a million people will arrive today at the glowering conference hall in Germany with an unprecedented mixture of fear and excitement,” she wrote. “The reason is digital.” She quoted one agent talking of “an industry in total flux and chaos,” another saying: “it’s like wrestling in fast-setting concrete.” And one previous, best-selling, chair of the Society of Authors opining: “I hope to God I’m being apocalyptic, but I’m deeply worried for the writers of the future.”
Summarizing, Helen noted: “The role of agents, publishers and retailers is up for grabs.” Print goes down the sink, digital takes over among young people — but without them being willing to pay the sums people did in the old days for a hardback book, and without the same number of books actually being read. Ergo: little or nothing left (at 10 per cent) for the poor author!
One literary agent declared the secret mood of Frankfurt as “vague hysteria” — with no-one having any idea what to do, or how to do it, “in a market changing so quickly.”
Well, authors: welcome to the same world that recording musicians have known for some time! It’s not the end of music, or even the end of people listening to music. It’s the end of being paid to make it! None of our author-societies — or newspapers here in America — is willing to tell the plain truth, but it is staring us in the face, and it’s called ruin by any other name!
An editor from a university press gave a confidential talk to my biographers group, here in Boston, a couple of weeks ago; she said her university press was reduced to printing only 300 copies of a new hardback.
Three hundred copies? Anyone wanting to live on (let alone fund research on) the 10 per cent royalties from 300 copies, please raise your hand!
Understand why I’ve been in a funk since visiting with publishers and agents in London last spring, as I explained in an earlier blog (Born Again Biographer)?
And my epiphany, as the garage door squeaked and protested, but finally opened over my four-year old, dusty hybrid (a trusty Ford Escape that I and my dog, Harvey, love)?
It’s this:
The printed book is dead — at least, the book as we have known it since Gutenberg. It’s going digital not only among the young, but even the ancient. And nothing can halt that — any more than medieval copyists and aficionados of hand-made parchment Bibles could in Gutenberg’s day. E-reading is a’comin’. The party’s over — and authors will have to adapt.
Part of that adaptation involves re-thinking the roles of agents and publishers. Did authors in Gutenberg’s day employ such middlemen? No – the printer acted as publisher/bookseller, securing advance subscriptions from interested customers. So what is to stop the modern — or postmodern — author from getting Amazon to print, market and distribute his or her work, from the manuscript e-text? Even audio-book it, if the author is willing to read it onto a digital tape? Why bother with an agent? Why bother with a publisher?
The editor who spoke to us the other week predicted the wholesale collapse of publishers, as an industry, in America in the next 24 to 48 months. Out of the ashes, yes, there will be niche areas of paper publishing — as in educational textbooks, perhaps — where specialist knowledge of a defined market will prevent the complete collapse of an imprint. But in terms of general printed books, fiction and non-fiction? Their future is science fiction, metaphorically as well as literally. It’s a brave new world in which the author is guaranteed: Nothing! You will be your own agent/publisher — responsible for your own digital editing, your own digital typesetting/formatting, your choice of e-jacket, your “book’s” advance publicity, and its marketing — the latter in co-operation with Amazon. Or Google, once they go into distribution.
My epiphany — such a big word for such a simple realization — is that my days of plenty are over. The years of the locust lie ahead. Out of the back of my beloved Ford hybrid I shall, grey-haired as I am, be in the future encouraging people to buy and download my digitized work, or hauling boxes of instant-printed books to sell at readings/talks I shall give around the country, into my dotage, on my chosen topics: the American presidency, military history, German literature, biography…
“Hang on to your day jobs!” one of our members remarked, at our biographers meeting. (Each of us is devoted to resurrecting a chosen life in biographical form, and we gain comfort from sharing our common concerns with fellow biographers.)
You know what: she’s right. Writing’s a great and wonderful craft, like painting or pottery, or playing jazz in front of aficianados. A few, like Kiran Desai, may actually make it big in the looming digi-world, especially if film rights attach; but for the rest of us, it’s going to be a matter of returning to our roots as authors rather than as commodities — and that may not be a bad thing. If we know at whom we’re aiming our work, we can surely match 300 copies — even exceed that modest total. We won’t get rich — but we’ll be published. And proud.
Nigel Hamilton is President of Biographers International Organization (BIO), and a senior fellow in the McCormack Graduate School of Policy and Global Studies, UMass Boston. His Biography: A Brief History, and How To Do Biography: A Primer, appeared in 2007 and 2008 (Harvard University Press). His latest biography is American Caesars: Lives of the Presidents, from Franklin D. Roosevelt to George W. Bush (Yale 2010).

Follow Nigel Hamilton on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/NigelHamilton1

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

The George Eastman House in Rochester, New York announced last week that they have unsealed the journals of actress Louise Brooks. The actress kept journals from 1956 until her death in 1985. According to an Eastman House archivist, there are 29 journals with approximately 2000 pages of hand-written text. She bequeathed them to the photography and film museum with instructions they remain sealed for 25 years.
The announcement has everyone wondering what they will reveal, and what sort of literary talent was this now iconic silent film star.
The answer may well lie in a book published earlier this year, Dear Stinkpot: Letters from Louise Brooks (BearManor Media). The recipient of the letters, and the editor of the book, is the celebrated contemporary children’s book author Jan Wahl.
Brooks was a lot of things to a lot of people. To some, including the British theater critic Kenneth Tynan, “She was the most seductive, sexual image of woman ever committed to celluloid.” Beauty, yes, and also brains. To the noted German film writer Lotte Eisner, Brooks was “An astonishing actress endowed with an intelligence beyond compare.” To the Academy Award winning film historian Kevin Brownlow, Brooks was “One of the most remarkable personalities to be associated with films.”
To Wahl, Brooks was a kindred soul with whom he corresponded for more than 20 years. Their roller-coaster friendship is documented in Dear Stinkpot. The title comes from Brooks’ nickname for the author.
Wahl met Brooks in 1957. At the time, he was a poor graduate student and aspiring writer. Brooks, nearly twice his age, was then a mostly forgotten silent film star. The aspiring writer and the forgotten actress struck up an intense friendship, as well as a correspondence that spanned more than two decades. What drew them together was the desire to write.
The craft of writing, as well as books, authors, and the actress’ current reading, are the dominant theme in Dear Stinkpot. There are, for instance, a handful of letters regarding Vladimir Nabokov. Wahl had taken classes with the Russian migr at Cornell University and was an advocate of his fiction, including Lolita.
At the time, Brooks was working on a never published essay titled “Girl Child in Films.” The actress read Nabokov’s then (in)famous novel — and disliked it, at first. Eventually, however, Brooks changed her mind about “Naby’s” fiction. She came to appreciate his use of language and sense of satire. Brooks even hoped Wahl might be able to pass along to Nabokov her 1951 autobiographical short story, “Naked on My Goat.” Brooks described it as her own version of Lolita.
As with Nabokov, Brooks at first disliked then came to appreciate the work of another contemporary writer. “The dialogue in Beckett is marvelous,” she would write in one letter. Other writers, including Hemingway, take her punches, as would F. Scott Fitzgerald for other reasons. There is admiration for earlier authors like Thackery and Dickens. There are gossipy anecdotes about the Algonquin Roundtable writers who hung out in her Ziegfeld Follies dressing room. And there is a consideration of Leslie Fiedler’s once seminal Love and Death in the American Novel.
Despite a continuous exchange of letters, it wasn’t easy being Brooks’ friend. (Elsewhere, she once famously wrote, “I have a gift for enraging people, but if I ever bore you, it’ll be with a knife.”) And here she admits, “The MAD AT BROOKS CLUB is a seething kettle.”
The first letter in this collection begins, “If you care to be my pen pal, I’ll thank you not to write on both sides of that thin paper.” In later letters, Brooks’ pointedly challenges Wahl’s early efforts at getting published (his first book, Pleasant Fieldmouse, with illustrations by Maurice Sendak, was published in 1964) , knocks his literary heroes, and occasionally comes off somewhat snarky. Apologies would follow, as would Brooks’ homemade fudge.
But along with the challenges were the rewards. Brooks could be witty, whimsical, profound, and endearing. And fascinating. What movie lover (and Wahl was that, as well as a collector of vintage films) wouldn’t want to receive letters detailing meeting Jean Harlow, how Lillian Gish acted with her hair, personal observations of Chaplin, Garbo, Buster Keaton and Clara Bow, critiques of films and film makers, critiques of film historians, and the admission that her favorite actor was Ronald Colman.
Only occasionally would Brooks reference her own work, her now immortal performance as Lulu in G.W. Pabst’s Pandora’s Box, and her still highly regarded roles in Diary of a Lost Girl, Beggars of Life and other films.
There were other epistoltory discussions. About her finances: CBS founder William S. Paley gave her a monthly allowance, in remembrance of their brief affair decades earlier. About religion: Brooks converted to Catholicism for nearly a decade and read various mystical texts including works about Saint Teresa of vila.
And about dance: especially Isadora Duncan. Apparently, Brooks saw the legendary dancer perform, most likely in the early 1920′s when she was still a teenage member of the Denishawn Dance Company alongside Martha Graham and under the tutelage of Ruth St. Denis and Ted Shawn. In the early 1960′s, Brooks was considering the subject of dance while working on a never finished essay on women and movement. One of Brooks’ singular observations was regarding Duncan’s large flopping breasts.
Wahl has written about his friendship with Brooks in earlier articles scattered in various newspapers and magazines. There is also a substantial piece about the actress in Wahl’s engaging book of autobiographical essays, Through a Lens Darkly (BearManor Media, 2008).
However, Wahl’s new book, Dear Stinkpot: Letters from Louise Brooks, is the most detailed and telling portrait yet of their friendship. The story of their friendship as revealed through these letters — and in Wahl’s worthwhile commentary interspersed throughout — is the story of two writers developing their craft. It is a revealing look at the later years of one of the remarkable personalities of the 20th century, and it suggests the kind of material which might be found in the newly unsealed journals.
Thomas Gladysz is an arts journalist and author. His interview with Allen Ginsberg on the subject of photography is included in Sarah Greenough’s “Beat Memories: The Photographs of Allen Ginsberg” (National Gallery of Art, 2010). And recently, he wrotess the introduction to the Louise Brooks edition of Margarete Bohme’s classic novel, “The Diary of a Lost Girl” (PandorasBox Press, 2010). More at www.thomasgladysz.com.

Follow Thomas Gladysz on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/thomas_gladysz

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

If Willie Sutton had been a hacker, we know what he’d have thought about cloud computing.
Sutton, of course, was the 1930s bank robber famous for his quip that he robbed banks “because that’s where the money is.” And for hackers, the cloud might be just as tempting because it’s where a great deal of data is being concentrated.
But how much loot will modern-day Willie Suttons really be able to plunder from the cloud?
The short answer will probably turn out to be: Not much. That’s because greater data concentration makes it easier to build strong, high walls around more of it at once. Think Fort Knox. There’s a lot of gold in there — but Willie Sutton wouldn’t have stood a chance if he had tried to grab it.
The long answer is a bit more complicated: Security in the cloud will depend on a number of technology practices and policy decisions that are just beginning to unfold in industry and government.
First, there is the industry side. As Business Software Alliance (BSA) has outlined in a set of guiding principles for the cloud, service providers must adopt comprehensive practices and procedures that include well-recognized, transparent and verifiable security criteria so customers can shop for the best. There also must be robust identity, authentication and access-control mechanisms commensurate with the level of sensitivity of the data being housed. And there must be comprehensive, ongoing testing of security measures before and after deployment of cloud solutions.
Those are things that must be driven by industry because prescriptive policy mandates would quite likely have the unintended consequence of fossilizing cloud technologies while they are still in their early stages of development.
That is not to say there is no role for public policy in promoting cloud security. There is, starting with tough laws against theft, fraud and hacking. Those were needed before the advent of cloud computing, and they are needed all the more now. And since security concerns are tightly linked to privacy concerns (they are twin pillars undergirding public trust in technology), it will be important for lawmakers to ensure that data stored the cloud enjoys the same legal protections as data stored on personal computers.
A wrinkle in all this for policy-makers is that, as with all cybersecurity matters, cybersecurity in the cloud is by its nature an international issue, so we need an international approach to building defenses. BSA has outlined how to construct such a global cybersecurity framework.
Industry and government should each carry out their respective responsibilities in securing the cloud with a sense of urgency because it will help build confidence in the marketplace, thereby speeding the maturation of technologies that hold the potential to touch off a new wave of IT-driven growth.
Also, Willie Sutton’s heirs are casing cyberspace. We should deny them any opportunity to score.
# # #
This post was also featured on the Business Software Alliance’s blog, BSA TechPost.

Follow Robert Holleyman on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/@RHolleyman

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

This article was published in “The Louisana Weekly” in the Oct. 11, 2010 edition.
Patches of New Orleans are dark as a country lane at nightfall because of corroded wiring from Katrina, missing power lines or voltage that’s turned off during road construction. After sundown, residents — especially the elderly — hole up in parts of the Lower Ninth Ward, Lakeview and other communities, while drivers wish their night vision was better.
The go-to company for street-light complaints is Robinson Industries, Inc., an electrical construction firm that’s repaired local lights since mid-2007, when it was the lowest bidder on a city maintenance contract. Entergy New Orleans, the former contractor, decided to give up that work in 2007.
“The city has nearly 55,000 street lights and 97.5% of them are working,” said Dwight Robinson, controller of Robinson Industries. About 1,500 lights are out now. Street lamps that need a new bulb or a photo cell to flick lights on at dusk are usually fixed within a week, he said. But other fixtures can require costly repairs that take time and often need approval from the city.
“Lakeview’s underground wiring is still affected by salt waters from Katrina,” Robinson said. The storm left wires in that community a corroded mess. What’s more, “Lakeview, New Orleans East and the Ninth Ward are greatly affected by ground subsidence, causing wiring to break,” he said. Subsidence is a sinking of the land’s surface. City workers and contractors use an expensive, “jack-and-bore,” tunneling process to fix broken, underground wiring.
Robinson said “in the Lower Ninth Ward, the main problem is that electrical wiring hasn’t been replaced where there aren’t houses, so we don’t have power lines to connect street lights. Numerous light fixtures and arms are still missing in that area” from Katrina’s wrath. Repairs for storm-related damage to lights are not covered by the company’s maintenance contract, however.
Of the 1,500 light outages, Robinson said “about 1,200 are due to budgetary and other constraints placed on us by the city.” He said non-routine expenses involving voltage and wiring must be authorized by City Hall, where the Dept. of Public Works oversees street lights.
The city’s recovery effort can interrupt voltage, Robinson said. Voltage is turned off to prevent injuries in areas where streets are under repair. “Road construction is underway on Paris, Mirabeau, St. Bernard, and St Charles Avenues and many other thoroughfares,” he noted. “In some cases, lines were cut by mistake during road repairs, and contractors planting trees on neutral grounds cut power lines. Funding to fix those lines has been a problem.” But, he said, the city’s insurance should cover some of it.
Robinson said “300 lights are out for other reasons. Sometimes, wiring is okay, but we can’t physically get to the lights because the streets are just dirt and sand and are inaccessible during construction.” The main reason for outages, however, is that lights simply go on the blink. “Our crews patrol at night and report bad fixtures, which a day crew then replaces.”
He said lights are also out when his company needs to find matching fixtures and poles, a process that can take time because old lamps are ornate.
Residents phone street-light complaints into a hotline at Robinson Industries. “While the vast majority of street lights are working, the ones that aren’t can impact a number of people,” Robinson said. “One street light that’s out may generate calls from five persons, so if 1,500 are out, that’s 7,500 phone calls.” He hears a fair amount of ranting and raving from the public, he said. Robinson Industries is based in Miami but its owners are from New Orleans.
Devona Dolliole, Mayor Mitch Landrieu’s communications director, said “the city’s streetlight problems from corroded wiring doubled after Katrina, and after that, Hurricane Gustav set the streetlight-repair schedule back by an entire year. The city has made progress in repairs, however, and about 97% of the lights are on now, versus 90% to 95% in recent years.”
Dolliole has a higher figure for disabled lights than Robinson, and said “across the city, 1,600 open orders exist for streetlights that are out. Corroded wiring and third-party damage are the major and most expensive issues. Vandalism, while it exists, is a relatively minor problem.”
Mayor Landrieu will deliver a budget to the City Council on Oct. 15, with a public-works allocation for streetlights. Dolliole said “$2 million was budgeted for street lights in 2010, but the program costs $4.3 million.” She didn’t explain how the gap will be covered. Robinson said his company will rebid its maintenance contract with the city soon, and declined to comment on its current value.
Dolliole said “in addition to Robinson Industries and other contractors who are repairing streetlights, City Hall has one Dept. of Public Works employee devoted full time to lights.”
She said “we heard a lot from the public about street lights being out in the Mayor’s community meetings, held around town in August. This administration takes public safety and quality of life very seriously and they are top priorities.” She pointed to a new development, saying the city plans to use grant money from the U.S. Dept of Energy and state Dept. of Natural Resources to install 1,300 LED, or light-emitting diode, street lights soon. Energy-saving, LED lights are composed of tiny, high-intensity bulbs that should help brighten the way for some local residents.
In the Lower Ninth Ward, you need a flashlight or lantern to navigate certain streets after sundown. Mack McClendon, executive director of the Lower 9th Ward Village, a non-profit group, said “we have entire blocks of street lights that remain out since Katrina. You can walk for several blocks and not see a light, especially on the north side of the Lower Ninth above North Galvez St.”
McClendon continued “when places are lit up, it deters crime. Since Katrina, light outages are part of the blight problem that’s been associated with crime.” He said street lights are a particular worry for the neighborhood’s senior population. “Before Katrina, 65% of residents were elderly here, and many of them came back and rebuilt. But they’re afraid to go out in dark streets.”
The Lower 9th Ward Village hears frequent complaints about streetlights at town hall meetings and when its volunteers go door to door, surveying neighborhood issues, McClendon said.
Al Petrie, spokesman for the Lakeview Civic Improvement Association, said a lot of lights have been replaced in his area recently, but added “in the more than five years since Katrina, some streets here still have no lights. Certain light fixtures in Lakeview haven’t worked at all since then, despite continued complaints by residents.” Petrie said digging to replace corroded wiring sometimes causes working lights to go out.
As the days get shorter, dark streets are worrisome, Petrie said. “We’re concerned about safety. We still have lights out on Harrison Avenue between West End Boulevard. and Orleans. People walk over to Harrison Ave. for dinner.”
The Lakeview Civic Improvement Association is waiting to see what Robinson Industries accomplishes from a to-do list of broken lights that the group submitted, before sending the company another list, Petrie said. end

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

In college towns like mine all across the US local authorities have run out of patience for the traditional beer-soaked tailgate parties. More specifically, they have run out of patience for the people in some of those parties, whom I’ve heard referred to by Iowa City’s Finest as “knuckleheads.” These are the folks who tend to have 12 beers in them by kickoff and are usually under the table or under arrest before the 2nd quarter.
Besides simply not drinking so much, there is another alternative. We used to call it “near beer.” Today in a world where stewardesses are now called flight attendants and an old joke is called “a previously recounted humorous narrative,” near beer is now called “a non-alcoholic premium malt beverage.” For once though the modified term might be more accurate. If you don’t think of it as beer in the first place, you may discover some flavors you actually like.
When I was a kid, near beer was something 13-year-olds would buy because they thought it made them seem as cool as the 17-year-olds who were able to get actual beer. In those days the process of making a non-alcoholic beer was the same as with a regular beer, with a step added – they would heat the beer to 172.4 degrees. This would evaporate the alcohol while leaving the rest of the liquid behind, then they would carbonate it. The result, then as now, was a beverage that had less than 0.5 percent alcohol. The (other?) downside was that it didn’t taste like beer.
Today’s NA beers still don’t, but they do taste a lot better, and some of the flavors do approach the real thing. Brewers accomplish this by not fermenting nearly as long as before. They are perhaps more deserving of the term “near beer” than their ancestors were. The side effect is that most of these tend to be on the sweet side of dry. We’re still not talking RC cola sweet here, but sweeter than what you are probably used to in a beer. In a world where it is otherwise nearly impossible to find a dry beverage with no alcohol in it to do with your meal, these are at least one alternative.
The most commonly sold NA beers in the US are O’Doul’s (made by Anheuser-Busch), Sharp’s (Miller) and Kaliber (Guinness). Those out there who know me will know how hard it is for me to say this, but the O’Doul’s Amber NA is actually pretty good (nb: specifically the amber, not the “lager”). It packs a lot more flavor than its far more popular sibling Bud Light, is malty but not too sweet, and would actually pass for real beer with someone who was not paying particularly close attention.
As for the other two listed above, let’s just leave it at “I didn’t like them.”
So which is the best choice for those who want to drink too much without drinking too much? I suggest a forth alternative: Clausthaler Amber. Rich and full-bodied, with a head that last more than three seconds, this brew benefits from adhering to its native Germany’s purity laws, which dictate ingredients are processes according to strict tradition. It is dry, flavorful, and great outside Kinnick Stadium, especially if you don’t want to watch the game on the 40-year-old flickering black-and-white Zenith at the county jail.
By request, here’s a recipe I posted here a while back for making your own bratwurst for the next game. Go Hawks!
Homemade Brats
10 ounces pork butt
6 ounces lean veal
2 ounces white onion, diced
1 teaspoon kosher salt
1/2 teaspoon fresh-ground white pepper
1 teaspoon fresh marjoram
1 teaspoon fresh parsley
1/4 teaspoon ground nutmeg
1/4 teaspoon toasted celery seed, ground
teaspoon fresh ginger
1/8 teaspoon mace
2 ounces dry white wine
Grind the meat and the onion through a 3/16″ plate, preferably on a hand-cranked meat grinder.
Add the remaining ingredients and mix thoroughly, then chill in freezer for 1/2 hour.
Mix again, and grind through a 1/4″ plate.
Stuff them into sheep or hog casings and air-dry them for about 30 minutes, or until dry to the touch. For a simpler alternative, skip the casings and just make patties for the grill. Separate them with wax paper or parchment and freeze until use.

Follow Kurt Michael Friese on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/KurtMFriese

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Our U.S. government permits us to travel anywhere and everywhere in the world, right?
Wrong.
Cuba is the only country off limits to Americans by U.S. government edict.
The U.S. government allows Cuban-Americans and a few others to visit Cuba, but bans the other 99% of Americans from venturing to the island nation of 11 million people.
Here is why: The U.S. remains entrenched in an archaic and nonsensical de facto cold war with Cuba.
During the actual Cold War, the U.S. never banned its citizens from visiting the Soviet Union or China.
Is Cuba such a dire threat to the U.S. and Americans that the U.S. should deprive Americans of the right to visit that country?
No.
Here are the top five reasons we should demand an immediate end to the U.S. government’s Cuba travel ban:
1.Our freedom: We should be free to travel wherever we choose without U.S. government hindrance.
2.Human rights double standard: The U.S. and the international community rightly call for human rights in Cuba, but the U.S. call rings hollow when the U.S. forbids its own citizens from visiting Cuba – a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – and the U.S. is the only nation in the world with a Cuba travel ban.
3.Travel ban double standard: If the U.S. government believes it appropriate to ban Americans from visiting nations that have a deplorable human rights record, the U.S. should declare dozens of countries off limits to Americans. Yet Americans are free to visit China and Saudi Arabia, U.S. allies whose human rights records are far worse than Cuba’s, as well as Iran, Syria and North Korea.
4.Failed policy: The U.S. government’s attempts to isolate, undermine, and change the Cuban government have failed miserably for nearly five decades. It’s time for a new approach that includes allowing all Americans to visit Cuba.
5.Popular opinion: Most Americans and Cuban-Americans favor ending the travel ban, according to public opinion polls. During my dozens of trips to Cuba as a journalist, the overwhelming majority of average Cubans I encountered want the U.S. travel ban ended, too.
President Obama and Congress should do what is right: End the Cuba travel ban now.
Eason Jordan is the CEO of the U.S.-Cuba Business Bureau. He previously served as CNN’s chief news executive.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

When I was 10 or 11, I went to my first sleep-away camp in upstate New York. One of the more intriguing characters there was a counselor, “Graveyard George,” who was so nicknamed because of all the scary stories he would rattle off to campers prior to bedtime. Graveyards were frequently included in his tales of horror.
I thought of George the other day after wrapping up about a 40-minute chat with Jason Huntley, the chief investment officer of Advisor Shares’ Mars Hill Global Relative Value in Colorado Springs, Col., the first actively managed exchange-traded long and short fund (symbol: GRV) listed on the New York Stock Exchange.
Huntley, bright, brainy, amiable and a wine lover to boot, is just the kind of guy I enjoy gabbing with, but he’s also a scary fella. Pointing to a fair number of ticking time bombs, he basically argues that too many investors are at risk of being swallowed up by economic and financial quicksand.
Employing a hedge-fund strategy — that is, betting certain investments will go up, while others will go down — Mars Hill Global looks to be fully hedged on a dollar basis. At maximum, it can be 50% short or 50% long. Currently, the ETF’s portfolio is exhibiting a decidedly bearish stance with a 25% net short position that Huntley says he would like to enlarge to maybe 50%.
Huntley, 38, who has been in the money management game since 1994 and opened Mars Hill Global (assets: $45 million) in July, is not one of those end-of-the-world guys screaming fire to grab headlines with dire predictions of a depression or a massive drop in the Dow to 1,000.
While most professionals believe the market is headed higher, Huntley strongly disagrees. Rather, he’s convinced the pieces are in place for continued deterioration of both the economy and the stock market, and he offers some persuasive reasons to document his case.
Among the factors that lead him to take a negative posture are excessive leverage, structural unemployment, mounting housing problems and the refusal of banks to lend because they see accelerated writedowns of poor housing loans.
Likewise, slower growth out of Europe and the risk that U.S. and European financial and economic problems could blunt a global recovery.
The clear and present danger here, as Huntley sees it, is that financial risks are growing.
Yet, he notes, investors are pressing the pedal on risk, having bid up stock prices about 10% to 12% since Sept. 1. Ridiculing this rise, Huntley describes it as “a heightened level of complacency that’s downright dangerous.”
Why so? Because, he says, Wall Street is too exuberant in its expectations of economic growth, which, means that earnings expectations are also excessive.
Over the past 18 months, he points out, companies have squeezed out a lot of profit margins, primarily at the expense of reduced jobs. But you can’t keep squeezing and squeezing forever, he says.
Add to this, he observes, are no underlying demand or underlying growth, signs of inflation from rising food, energy and health care prices, the unwillingness of the consumer to spend on a discretionary basis, deteriorating macroeconomic fundamentals and the fact the housing and job markets stink.
To Huntley, it means “at some point in 2011, we’ll see a double-dip recession and GDP will turn negative.” Or, in simple language, things will get worse before they get better.
What about the Christmas shopping season? Huntley, who also owns a stake in a winery in Walla, Walla, Wa., isn’t saying Santa will be a no-show, but he does expect him to be pretty frugal, noting “this is not a jovial environment for busy holiday spending.”
Translating all of this into the performance of the stock market, our grizzly figures global equities are vulnerable to about a 10% to 15% decline between now and year end, with the U.S. and Europe especially vulnerable. Or, he says, if the Bush tax cuts are not extended, we could see a very fast 10% to 15% correction.
Looking ahead to 2011, Huntley sees “a very difficult year” for the market, characterized by increased volatility, a further decoupling of emerging markets from the developed markets and very little in the way of expected returns.
Apparently, he’s not alone in his fears, what with jittery investors having pulled out an estimated $20 billion worth of domestic stocks in September.
On the political front, Huntley expects Obama to be a one-term president because, he says, he’s made too many mistakes and has failed to bring about the positive changes he promised. He also expects Republicans to capture the House in the impending midterm elections, which means, he says, very little will be done in the remaining days of Obama’s presidency in the way of fiscal stimulus and government spending.
Mars Hill Global, by the way, doesn’t buy or short individual stocks, preferring instead to use ETFs to take investment actions.
Its short positions are heavily focused on financials, notably through ETFs sporting the symbols IAI, KRF, XLF and EUFN, a European financial ETF.
Huntley is especially bearish on Citigroup, describing the banking biggie as “a house of cards that will eventually collapse.” Adds our Citigroup bear: “The stock is being artificially propped by the government and questionable accounting rules and I wouldn’t touch it.”
The ETF’s long positions center primarily on Russia and China and such small Asian countries as Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand.
So there you have it — the “graveyard George” of the investment arena. What makes it so scary is that if Huntley’s right, we could all soon get an unhappy insight of what financial graveyards are all about.
What do you think? E-mail at Dandordan@aol.com

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

The right of a Muslim woman to wear a niqab while testifying in a criminal trial may be determined by judges on a “case-by-case assessment”, Ontario's highest court has ruled.
The Ontario Court of Appeal ruling upheld a Superior Court decision.
The court also set up a framework for lower courts to apply in balancing a defendant's rights with a veiled woman's religious freedoms.
A lower court had ordered a woman to remove her veil, prompting the appeal.

Twenty years ago, Harvard’s Joseph Nye famously coined the term “soft power” to describe what he saw as an increasingly important factor in international politics — the capacity of “getting others to want what you want,” which he contrasted with the ability to coerce others through the exercise of “hard” military and/or economic power. The question of soft power, when it comes to Iran, is contentious. Most analysts seem prepared to acknowledge that the Islamic Republic’s soft power in the Middle East rose significantly in the first several years of this decade. But many Western analysts now argue that Tehran’s regional soft power has declined over the last couple of years, following the election of Barack Obama as president of the United States, the fallout from the Islamic Republic’s June 2009 presidential election, and the imposition of new sanctions against Iran over its nuclear activities.
Others — including the two of us — argue that Iranian soft power remains strategically significant and is perhaps even still growing. In this regard, we are struck by two developments today. First, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad traveled to Beirut — the first visit by an Iranian president to the Lebanese capital since President Mohammad Khatami went there in 2003. Although White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the visit demonstrated that Ahmadinejad was continuing his “provocative ways” and that Hezbollah “values its allegiance to Iran over its allegiance to Lebanon,” the Iranian president received what the Christian Science Monitor’s Nicholas Blanford described as a “rapturous” welcome from tens of thousands of Lebanese who turned out to greet him on his drive into Beirut from the airport. We include striking photographs of Ahmadinejad’s reception in Beirut today on www.RaceForIran.com.
During his trip to Lebanon, Ahmadinejad is scheduled to visit Dahiya, a heavily Shi’a southern suburb of Beirut, and tour southern Lebanon. We would anticipate strongly positive and enthusiastic reactions from populations in both settings. As Rami Khouri aptly put it today (see here, in the Daily Star):
We do not believe that any Western leader — or even any Arab leader — could travel to Beirut today and move about in an open motorcade, as Ahmadinejad did, let alone do so and attract crowds of tens of thousands of eager well-wishers. Security concerns alone would preclude such a scenario. And this is the reality, even though the United States and its European and Arab allies have put significant sums of money and political capital into trying to consolidate a “pro-Western” political order in Lebanon.
If Iran today has substantial soft power in the Middle East — as we believe it does — it has that power in no small part because it has picked winners rather than losers as its allies in key regional theaters. Whether we speak of Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestine, or Shi’a Islamist parties in Iraq, Iran’s regional allies are genuine political forces — that is, forces that win elections because they represent important and unavoidable constituencies with legitimate grievances. And, in many cases, those allies engage in what their constituents believe is thoroughly laudable resistance against what those constituents see as America’s (and Israel’s) hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East. Again, Rami Khouri put it very well:
Second, Colum Lynch, of the Washington Post and Foreign Policy, published an interesting piece today (see here) on the United Nations General Assembly’s election of Germany, India, and South Africa to rotating seats on the UN Security Council. (It should be noted that, while Turkey will give up its rotating seat on the Security Council at the end of this year, Brazil will stay on the Council for another year.) As Lynch writes:
The election provides these emerging powers, all of whom aspire to become permanent members of the council, with an opportunity to show their stuff on the global stage. But it also poses a challenge to the United States. New members India and South Africa, as well as current member Brazil, differ sharply from the United States on everything from the use of economic sanctions to constrain Iran’s nuclear program to the importance of human rights in international affairs. And they plan to be assertive about that opposition.
All of this underscores an important strategic point that we have been making for some time — in relative terms, the United States is becoming less capable of achieving its stated policy objectives in the Middle East, and the Islamic Republic is becoming more capable of achieving its objectives. This reality should prompt a fundamental recasting of America’s “grand strategy” in this critical part of the world.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

I’m now 18-9-1 on my College Best Bets for the season and I have a Best Bet on Wednesday Night’s game. Check my site at drbobsports.com, on Thursday after 3:15 Pacific time each week for analysis on every College game, most of which can be found in my Free Analysis Section.
Wednesday, October 13
***Central Florida (-5 ) 30 MARSHALL 12
Central Florida is a very good defensive team this season (4.2 yards per play allowed to teams that would combine to average 5.3 yppl against an average team), and the Golden Knights should have no trouble limiting a sub-par Marshall attack that is 0.3 yppl worse than average and averaging just 19 points per game. Central Florida has only allowed more than 17 points in one game (28 points to NC State) and that was a fluke given that the Knights only allowed NC State 244 yards at 3.6 yppl in that game. UCF is also 0.3 yppl worse than average offensively, but they’ve been better with Jeffrey Godfrey at quarterback (6.7 yards per pass play and 309 yards on 47 running plays) and Marshall’s defense has given up 5.8 yppl and 35.4 points per game this season to teams that would combine to average 5.2 yppl and 29 points against an average defensive team. My math model gives UCF a 59.4% chance of covering at -5 points and the Knights are already 3-0 ATS against bad teams this season, beating South Dakota 38-7 (-26 ), at Buffalo 24-10 (-7 ), and UAB last Wednesday 42-7 (-12). I’ll take Central Florida in a 3-Star Best Bet at -6 points or less and for 2-Stars at -7 points.

Follow Bob Stoll on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/drbobsports

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

“I heard through the grapevine that she may have slept her way into whatever she is trying to do in Hollywood.”
I can laugh it off now. In fact, I somehow find it highly amusing. My first thought upon reading dogtown dba’s comment on a message board last week was that I certainly didn’t sleep with the right people, because if I had, I would like to think I’d be a lot further along than I am now. And my second thought was, well, if he’s going to assume I did sleep my way through Hollywood, then I sure hope I can be linked to some amazing, good looking guys. Ryan Reynolds, perhaps? George Clooney? Ben McKenzie? Not to be picky or anything.
Anytime anyone has ever done an interview with me, the story goes something like this: I was the original Ugly Betty … I had three learning disabilities … I was always made fun of because I didn’t fit in … gained confidence when I went to college … the so-called ugly duckling became a swan, etc.
It’s a great story. Especially for those that have seen any of my yearbook pictures from back in the day. They laugh and say, oh, it wasn’t so bad. We all looked like that. Everyone was mean growing up. It takes everything in my body not to yell, “don’t you dare compare my life to yours. You have no idea what I went through.”
It was that bad. For most of my adolescence, it was a struggle just to get through the day. I was teased — relentlessly — from my bowl-shaped haircut with too short bangs, to my perfectionist work ethic to my love of Hello Kitty. Kids whispered and spread rumors. About what? I’m still not sure. But it was so bad that I felt the only way to stop the harassment would be to disappear altogether. I took my lunches to the bathroom and ate in stalls. I was too afraid to ask questions in class, so I stayed after for extra tutoring. I was told I’d never amount to anything in life. When I would approach classmates, they swiftly walked away. And I always lied that family was in town during homecoming weekend to hide the fact that no one would ask me out. Everyday I was on the verge of tears. Everyday I felt my self-confidence being chipped away at. Everyday I wanted to yell and scream at these kids who took pleasure at my expense. Everyday I wanted to know if there was something so wrong with me that I somehow deserved this kind of treatment. Yeah, it wasn’t so bad. It was worse.
Yet, I am one of the lucky ones. I’m still here. This week is National Bullying Prevention Week. Ironically, it comes on the heels of Rutgers student Tyler Clementi’s death. While Clementi was engaging in sexual behavior with another man, Clementi’s roommate and another student taped the act and webcast it on an Internet chat site. It can only be assumed that the embarrassment, shame and betrayal stemming from the situation caused Clementi to take his own life. And now, teachers, celebrities, advocates, politicians, mothers, fathers, etc. are taking to any forum they can to expose the dangers and heartache of bullying.
Ellen DeGeneres took to the airwaves last week to express her anger and sadness following Clementi’s death. She urged kids in similar situations to remember that she was different growing up too, and things would get better. There are people who can help. There are resources that you can turn to. Ending your life isn’t the answer.
My fear though, is that people will look at all this bullying and attribute it only to a problem that gays face. Parents of young sons and daughters will think, my child will never do such a thing. “I’ve taught them better than that.” The truth is, what have you taught them? When I was growing up, parents were often horrified to learn that their child was responsible for someone else’s pain, and yet, they had no idea how to do anything to change it. How could they when they didn’t even know it was happening? The fact is, bullying has no race, no gender, no sexual orientation.
I’m one of the lucky ones, you see. I had amazing parents who told me never to give up. They told me how much I was loved. If it wasn’t for their support, I know for certain that I would not have had the strength to get through such a difficult time. I also had a coach/therapist who specialized in learning disabilities and taught me that things would get better — that I would grow into who I was supposed to be. I just had to hang on. And I had an inner resolve that somehow gave me strength and courage even in the darkest hours. After all, when the going gets tough, the tough get going. And that’s what became my motto. I knew that I had two options in my life: I could let these kids destroy me and slowly fade away, or I could prove them all wrong, show them that they messed with the wrong kid, and get back at them by being happy, successful and confident.
It was a long road though. A very long road. The physical transformation (contacts, no braces, figured out hair and make-up) was far easier than the emotional one. For too many years after high school, I was the world’s biggest people pleaser. After being harassed for years, all I wanted was to be liked. And so, once I was everyone’s favorite friend, I then had to relearn what it meant to not be walked all over and to value yourself. I had to retrain myself to go from thinking that I’m never going to be good enough to I’m more than good enough. Saying it was one thing. Believing it was another.
I wasn’t gay. I wasn’t of a mixed race. I wasn’t any of the things you usually hear kids are bullied for. I was just an innocent, naive kid with an outdated haircut and a penchant for Sanrio characters.
When I recently attended my 10-year high school reunion, I’ll never forget what happened when I walked into that room. I’ll never forget the gasps, the look of amazement, and the embarrassment on my peers’ faces. I’ll also never forget the most popular girl in our class being so annoyed that I stole her thunder that night that she ignored me all evening even after I tried to say hello. Some things never really change. As one former jock told me later that night, “I’m so sorry for what I did to you. You didn’t deserve it. It was awful what we did to you. I’m just so glad that things turned out well for you and you look absolutely amazing now.” I’m not sure if he really meant it, or if he was trying to take me back to his hotel room.
Regardless though, it was one of those full circle, Romy and Michele moments that Hollywood loves to turn into Drew Barrymore movies. And since I’m being extremely open here, I’ll admit that I took some serious satisfaction from his admission. Unfortunately, one apology couldn’t (and wouldn’t) erase years of heartache and self-doubt. It never will. But you see, I am lucky. I’m still here. Tyler Clementi isn’t.
So when that blogger took to the message boards last week, it was the first time in my entire life that I truly realized how far I had come. Sure, being named Most Changed at my high school reunion helped. Yes, I got a kick out of St. Louis Magazine naming me one of St. Louis’ Top Singles. And it was totally awesome when I got cast on a TV show. But nothing compared to when I read those message board comments last week and my first reaction was to laugh. Of course, my parents and friends didn’t find it funny. They were outraged at what was being said. (One of my faves: “I used to think she was cute until I found out she wrote for The Huffington Post. Now she’s ugly.”) Maybe I should have been too. But now all I could do was laugh. Laugh at the absurdity of what was being said, and the knowledge that this was coming from people who don’t know me at all.
That didn’t mean I didn’t not think about some of the comments long after I had read them. They were mean and obnoxious, but I could handle it. I obviously wouldn’t have gone into the entertainment industry if I couldn’t. But many years ago, I wasn’t sure if I could. I didn’t know if I could take any more of the mean-spirited comments and the we-all-know-what’s-wrong-with-you-why-don’t-you? looks. That’s why we need more resources and more involved parents to really take a good look at their children and open up their eyes to the kind of person they are raising. It’s something I’d like to think everyone who went to school with me and now has kids will do.
Bullying will never stop. We know that. But we can work to be more aware, more available, and more attentive to those that need our support.
If for no one else, do it for Tyler. And that little girl with the bowl haircut who loved Hello Kitty.
Because it really does get better. I’m living proof.

Follow Jessica Radloff on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/JRadloff

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Has the internet made us more vicious? I ask because it sure seems to me that we are quickly becoming a people who have forgotten how to empathize with others. With our computer anonymity many of us have decided we can “say” things over the World Wide Web that we would never ever say to someone’s face. Cruel comments can be lobbed without personal risk so we send them out like invisible hand grenades, set to explode when opened.
Read some of the remarks others leave behind at your favorite news web site. Some of the remarks are way past mean, some are criminal as they issue death threats or illegally invade the privacy of others. And some recent actions taken with the help of the internet are also criminal. I’m speaking, of course, about the case of 18 year old Rutgers University student Tyler Clementi who committed suicide after learning his roommate had rigged a web cam to beam out his tryst with another male student – live – over the internet. Clementi’s sadistically-spirited roommate never gave a thought to how the shy classical violinist who was grappling with his sexuality might react to this horrific breach of privacy. And that’s the problem!
Dare I say the internet has become our means of tapping into our inner sociopath?
It’s not just the younger “internet generation” – but grown adults as well – who fail to stop to think what effect their actions will have on the target of their cruelty. Psychiatrists will tell you that’s classic sociopathic behavior, a complete lack of empathy for others.
I told you a few weeks ago about a new book I’ve written, Cirque Du Salahi – Be Careful Who You Trust, about the couple erroneously branded as the “White House Gate Crashers.” In the book, which highlights the poor journalism behind the splashy tale, I revealed that Michaele Salahi has suffered for 17 years with Multiple Sclerosis. It was a gut wrenching disclosure for Michaele and she wept when she talked about it on television.
The internet reaction was jaw dropping. The inhuman comments ranged from, “I don’t believe it. I want to see a Doctor’s note,” to “She picked M.S. because it matches with her initials – she’s too stupid to think of any other disease.” Many posts hammered the couple for their past debts and one went so far as to declare, “I’m wishing for a murder-suicide with these two.”
No matter what the perceived transgressions of a fellow citizen when they reveal they have a life altering, non-curable disease I would think the proper response would be one of sympathy. Not in the Salahi’s case and not in the case of Fox News commentator Glenn Beck after he recently disclosed he has a disease which might result in his total blindness. The internet comments included ugliness like this: “It is not Mr.Beck’s eyes that should fail, rather his vocal chords should shrivel up,” and this one from a man named Brian, “Beck is already blind to the truth, so what does it matter if he can’t see.” Alyn wrote, “He should not lose his eyesight. He should lose his life.”
What has happened to us? We’re supposed to be the country where people are proud to live free and have the freedom to speak our minds and not be vilified for it. It’s been our tradition for 300 years. Yet now, hiding under cover of a computer some of us have devolved into an Iran-esque cyber-stoning in the public square. Disagree with other’s opinions but don’t wish people dead because of them!
Five young people have committed suicide in the last few weeks after constant cyber-bulling made them feel life wasn’t worth living. Each of them was trying to sort out sexual feelings and did not yet have the adult ability to shrug off the ugly internet attacks. From New Jersey’s Rutgers University to small towns in Massachusetts, California, Texas and beyond, the lure of producing hateful missives and hitting the “send” button without so much as a second thought has contributed to needless deaths. Schools and other institutions hide behind the idea of freedom of speech as the reason why this can’t be curbed. But I’m reminded by Wendy Murphy, a victim’s advocate from Boston that, “The federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals put it … succinctly in 2002: ‘There is no constitutional right to be a bully.’”
Our laws and legal system must catch up to our technological ability to harass, defame and torture others through our computers. I propose prosecutors pursue the maximum penalty in the Rutgers suicide case (where two young people stand charged) as a signal to other hate filled people that the behavior is just not acceptable. If we can teach people the proper etiquette for a bowling alley we can certainly try for the same on the internet, right?
The temptation of instant internet connectedness has indeed put us in touch with our inner sociopathic feelings – from stupid and immature students to adults who write that they wish someone was dead – and I’m ashamed of us.
Diane Dimond may be reached through her web site: www.DianeDimond.com or at Diane@DianeDimond.com Her book is available at Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com

Follow Diane Dimond on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/dianedimond

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Republicans in Colorado sure are talking a lot about jobs. Maybe it’s because they all need one. But before getting promoted to the job of Congressman – or Governor (Dan Maes), they need to prove they can do the jobs they were originally hired to do.
Take Ryan Frazier – the Republican Aurora city councilman who is running for Congress in the 7th Congressional District. He’s trying to get a promotion from the Aurora city council, but he’s missed about 30 percent of meetings and votes over the last two years. Aurora city council is only a part time gig – -one that only pays about $1,000 per month, and Frazier hasn’t held any other paying job in the past two years. For most people, they would be fired if they missed 30 percent of their work – especially if they are getting paid by taxpayers.
It also should be noted that both Ryan Frazier and Dan Maes – who is the Republican running for Governor, have incredibly thin and questionable resumes, yet spend countless hours talking about how they are or were successful small business people, and therefore they understand how to run businesses…apparently into the ground. Frazier’s own company, Takara Systems, has been in existence for more than a decade, yet Frazier continues to bill it is a “start-up.” Frazier’s small company has been rated “high risk,” doesn’t have anyone who answers the phone – or return phone calls, and doesn’t have a physical office anywhere. All of this despite the fact that Takara Systems says it has offices in Aurora, Asia, and Africa. No one seems to understand what this company does, or where it does business, or even how it makes money. Frazier doesn’t report getting paid by them. The only apparent thing is Takara Systems brags on its website that it helps other companies “outsource” jobs overseas.
There are serious questions – even raised by The Denver Post, about Frazier’s finances, how he earns a living, supports his family, what his business actually does, where it’s located, and why it’s philosophy is to promote outsourcing good American jobs, when there are thousands of Coloradans out of work right now.
Dan Maes is another example. He’s recently come under fire — especially on conservative talk radio stations — for lying about his resume and not being able to establish how he pays for his mortgage or account for his own income.
The Republican Party in Colorado has nothing better to offer voters than candidates with murky, questionable “business experience.” Neither Frazier nor Maes have proven they can run anything, and there are more questions than answers about what their companies really do, and how each of them earns money and supports their families.
If they can’t be trusted to actually operate businesses with clients who pay them, how can they be trusted to run a state, or a nation, on behalf of taxpayers who are struggling to make ends meet and get jobs themselves. In both cases, former Colorado Republican Party chair and Congressman Bob Beauprez, questioned their qualifications for office. In Ryan Frazier’s case, he even told the Denver Post Frazier “ought to be hired, not promoted.”
Coloradans deserve to be represented by open and honest people who want to actually DO the job of representing the hardworking people of this state and moving it forward, rather than just HAVE the job so they can collect a taxpayer funded paycheck.

Follow Pat Waak on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/pwaak@coloradod

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

What follows is the letter from Servicemembers United cosigned by 27 of the most prominent activists in the DADT repeal effort. I’m proud to stand with these incredible soldiers and activists in support of a man who has been absolutely integral to this repeal effort.
Since becoming involved in the DADT repeal effort, I’ve seen Alex Nicholson work his fingers to the bone for all the soldiers affected by it while receiving little of the attention and accolades that he so richly deserves. He is doing this for all the right reasons, which makes it all the more infuriating when he and his work are personally attacked by a very powerful group that presents itself as an advocate for all LGBT people. An attack on him is certainly an unprofessional and immature attack on us all, and I’m proud to stand in support of him.
To All Concerned:
On Saturday, October 9, the spokesperson for the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) launched a personal attack against Servicemembers United’s founder and Executive Director, Alex Nicholson. The previous day, Nicholson, who is one of the nation’s leading “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) repeal advocates, had called out the White House for its lack of substantive action and support this year on DADT and called on Senior White House Advisor Valerie Jarrett to meet with DADT repeal advocates.
Instead of supporting the call for dialogue and greater White House accountability, the Human Rights Campaign’s official spokesperson made personal attacks and demanded that our community heap gratitude and praise upon the White House for where we are today on DADT. This attack was unprofessional, immature, and unproductive itself, and it was alienating and insulting to the entire LGBT military and veteran community.
Like Nicholson, and unlike HRC’s spokesperson or any of its leadership, each of us has served this nation in uniform and each of us has been directly impacted by DADT. We, as 27 of the nation’s most prominent DADT repeal activists of the past two decades have also worked to help make this discriminatory law a part of history. No matter the disagreement on strategy, we will not tolerate an attack against one of our own. We are united as veterans to fight “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” with effectiveness, diligence, and veracity. And we are determined to see legislative repeal this year, with or without HRC. Our brothers and sisters still serving in silence deserve nothing less.
Faithfully,
Dan Choi
Westpoint Graduate, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Jason Knight
Hebrew Linguist, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Darren Manzella
US Army, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Steve Lorandos
Petty Officer, 2nd Class – Submarines, US Navy
DADT Repeal Advocate
Brian Fricke
USMC, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Brian Muller
Army Bomb Technician, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Alastair Gamble
Arabic Linguist, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Anthony Wilfert
Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Brett Edward Stout
USMC Russian Linguist, Veteran
DADT Repeal Advocate
Rob Smith
US Army Infantryman, Veteran
DADT Repeal Advocate
Keith Meinhold
Petty Officer, 1st Class – Aviation – US Navy
DADT Repeal Advocate
Justin Elzie
USMC Veteran, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Ben Gomez
Petty Officer, 2nd Class – Legalman, US Navy
President, AVER, San Diego
Mara Stewart
Petty Officer, 1st Class – Linguist, US Navy
DADT Repeal Advocate
Julianne Sohn
USMC Comms.Officer, Discharged Under DADT
DADT Repeal Advocate
Julie Mendoza
US Air Force, Retired
DADT Repeal Advocate
Tanya Domi
US Army Veteran, Columbia Univ. Professor
DADT Repeal Advocate
Anu Baghwati
USMC Communications Officer, Veteran
Executive Director, SWAN
Jenn Hogg
Army National Guard, Veteran
DADT Repeal Advocate
Jarrod Chlapowski
US Army Korean Linguist, Veteran
Field Director, Servicemembers United
Larry Baxley
US Navy Intelligence Officer, Veteran
Former VA Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Justin D. Ford
US Army Veteran, Straight DADT Repeal Ally
Former North FL Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Walker Burttschell
USMC Veteran, Discharged Under DADT
Former South FL Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Gabriel Knous
USMC Veteran
Former Orlando Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Scott Spychala
USAF/ANG, Retired
Former IN Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Pepe Johnson
US Army Field Artillery, Discharged Under DADT
Former WV Veteran Field Organizer, HRC
Rasool Mutawakkil, Jr.
US Army Veteran, Straight DADT Repeal Ally
Former Tampa Veteran Field Organizer, HRC

Follow Rob Smith on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/robsmithonline

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

October is National Disability Employment Awareness Month. At Goodwill, we not only train people with disabilities to find jobs and excel in their careers: we also employ many people with disabilities around the world. As an employer, we know from experience that people with disabilities are hard-working and enthusiastic employees. They want to experience the pride and independence that come from a day’s work, just like everyone else.
A motivated person with a strong work ethic has the makings of a great employee. Unfortunately, people with disabilities have a more than 15-percent unemployment rate compared to the 9.3-percent unemployment rate of people without disabilities[1]. People with disabilities make up 22 percent of employees compared with about 70 percent of people without disabilities[2].
These statistics from the U.S. Department of Labor — combined with the fact that nearly one in six people has a disability — means that businesses, government agencies and nonprofits are overlooking a group of employees ready to work and help our communities prosper.
Many people with disabilities need little or no accommodation to do their jobs. Advances in technology are helping many workers increase their productivity, including those with disabilities. Employers can demonstrate social responsibility and economic commitment to their communities by hiring people with disabilities, which includes young people, older workers and veterans.
Employing people with disabilities allows them to earn paychecks and care for their families. They spend their earnings in local businesses and save for their children’s education and their retirement. Their employment has a huge impact on their economic stability.
People with disabilities bring a distinct life experience that adds to diversity in the workplace. If these reasons aren’t enough to cause employers to explore the possibilities, there may also be tax incentives to hiring people with disabilities, depending on where the business is operated.
Last year, Goodwill served more than 253,665 people with disabilities. Two such individuals are Patricia of Hi-Nella, NJ, and Terry of Miami, FL.
Patricia has always had a strong work ethic and even worked two full-time jobs. One day when she woke up, she felt the room spinning and couldn’t hear. She was later diagnosed with Mnire’s disease, a disorder of the inner ear that affects hearing and balance. Doctors told Patricia that her case would be a chronic and lifelong disability. After years of health challenges, she received employment assistance in a temporary services program at Goodwill Industries of Southern New Jersey and Philadelphia (Maple Shade). She later found a temporary job at the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services as a data entry operator. She now works as a contract employee for the state. Patricia has a new motto for her life: “Concentrate on what you can do, not what you can’t.”
Terry is an employee of Goodwill Industries of South Florida in Miami. He became blind as a child after sustaining a head injury. He later went to schools for students who are blind or hearing impaired. At school, Terry started to learn about music. His work at the Miami Goodwill led to his becoming a member of the Spirit of Goodwill band — a band with 28 members, all of whom have various disabilities and work at the Goodwill. Terry plays the saxophone and serves as one of the band’s lead singers. His story is one of those featured in a new documentary called For Once in My Life. I’ve seen it and it’s truly an amazing and extraordinary demonstration of the talents and skills of people with disabilities. View the trailer on YouTube.
Patricia and Terry are just two of the many people with disabilities who come through Goodwill’s doors, who are eager to work and to contribute to their communities. As an employer of people with disabilities, I encourage and urge business owners, government leaders and people in the community to focus on job candidates’ abilities, not their disabilities.

Follow Jim Gibbons on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/goodwillintl

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

On October 10, at more than 7300 venues worldwide, people joined the Global Work Party sponsored by 350.org to take actions aimed at knocking the carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere back down to 350 ppm. Actions ranged from planting community gardens to building bike trails, and in the case of All Power Labs, an artist work space in an industrial area of Berkeley, California, building and testing wood-chip-powered gasifiers and biochar makers.
Power pallet hums along
1 of 14
Green Technology: The Most Beautiful And Inspiring Projects (PHOTOS)
The 10/10/10 Global Work Party Kicks Off
Tales Of Attacks By Supposedly Domesticated Exotic Animals (PHOTOS)
Cities Ban Plastic Water Bottles, Plastic Bags, BPA, And More (PHOTOS)
Daseep The Tiger Cub: Baby Sumatra Tiger Born To Mother Previously Thought To Be Infertile (PHOTOS)
Animal Migrations: 7 Amazing Wildlife Journeys (PHOTOS)
Chief Scientist Bear Kaufman with the GEK Power Pallet — a 10kw generator powered by wood chips. The only emissions are the exhaust from the gas burning in the 18 hp Kubota engine.
comments(0)
<>
Total comments: 0 | Post a Comment
Rate This Slide
Rank #2 | Average: 8.6
Interesting
Incredible!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Current Top 5 Slides
loading…
Choose your Top 5 Slides
UserName
| Become a fan
Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow
loading…
Top User Slides
<>
| Become a fan
Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow
loading…
Users who voted on this slide
<>
loading…
The artists at All Power Labs took a skillset for building large kinetic sculptures for the Burning Man celebration and converted it to producing independent, low carbon power. While the rest of society may be content to wait for the oil to run out before they start thinking about alternatives, All Power Labs kicked into gear when the city cut off their electricity for building code violations ten years ago. Spark plug Jim Mason responded by jumping into gasifier development and construction, chipping up old shipping pallets and construction waste to keep the lights on and the artists working.
The basic technology to gasify wood was developed during WWII by individuals who wanted to keep driving in the face of gasoline rationing, but it was always a finicky process, dependent on the time-consuming preparation of fuel into dry, one inch cubes of wood. What Jim Mason and his crew of Steampunks and Burners have done is to optimize the recovery of thermal energy — producing a gasifier that runs on plain woodchips.
Using 21st century desktop manufacturing technologies like a computer guided plasma cutter, they perform what Mason calls “DIY power hacking.” Computer modeling of combustion processes remains such a complex problem, that it is faster and easier to just cut new parts out of metal and try them in fast build and test cycles. The design advances quickly because all the information is open source, and anyone can participate and offer improvements. People can be authors of their own power systems similar to the way that desktop publishing and the Internet created the information revolution.
All Power Labs now sells what it calls the “Gasifier Experimenters Kit” or GEK. They also offer a Biochar Experimenters Kit — biochar is a natural byproduct of gasification. On 10-10-10, about 50 GEK and BEK customers were on hand for a workshop to gain hands-on experience in construction, testing and modification of the machines. One part of the crew had stayed up until 2:30am the night before making two kinds of biochar that would be tested in a nearby community garden.
Biochar is a charcoal-based soil amendment that can dramatically increase plant growth. Biochar also sequesters carbon because plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow. If you burn a plant or let it rot or compost, all the CO2 returns to the atmosphere. But if you bake it and burn only the gas that comes out of it, you are left with charcoal that lasts for hundreds to thousands of years without breaking down, effectively sequestering carbon from the atmosphere.
Jim Fournier, CEO of Biochar Engineering Corporation, told the 10-10-10 work party that biochar is one of the only ways we have to actually remove carbon from the atmosphere and soon we are going to feel a lot of urgency to do that. Events like the floods in Pakistan, fires in Russian and the recent extreme heat in Los Angeles are just a taste of what’s in store for us. Historically, our atmosphere has had less than 300ppm of CO2. We may go to 450ppm or higher before we are able to get off of coal and oil. Because it takes about 100 years for natural processes to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, we have to find ways to help nature along. Biochar is one of those ways.
Fournier said that one ppm of atmospheric CO2 is roughly equivalent to 3 gigatons (Gt) of carbon and that biochar could remove at most 2 Gt per year. So even with help from biochar, we can only remove about a half of a ppm of CO2 from our atmosphere annually. We have dug ourselves into a very deep hole. It is past time to grab shovels and start digging ourselves back out.
On the morning of 10-10-10 we delivered two barrels of biochar to the community garden. I described my own experiments with biochar and cautioned the gardeners that because fresh biochar can act like raw compost, in the first year after adding biochar to soil it is important to add plenty of nitrogen as well — urine being my preferred source. Immediately someone produced a stack of drink cups, and we all trooped off to the bathroom to fill the cups with liquid gold in true DIY spirit.
Kelpie Wilson works as the Communications Editor for the International Biochar Initiative, a non-profit organization that supports the community of people working to implement biochar systems.

Follow Kelpie Wilson on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/@kelpiew

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Mark Mellman’s latest Hill column captures the essence of the moment, and echoes what I have been telling my friends for a while: this is the most unpredictable election in at least a dozen years — arguably the most unpredictable in my political career (which has been a 30-year run so far). I’ve said it over and over again, and it remains true: you look at some data, and it is easy to see all the conventional wisdom about a Republican tidal wave coming true. Another set of data tells you this may be a surprising year in terms of Democrats holding their own. We just don’t know the last-minute factors which will turn this one way or another.
If the Obama team hadn’t decided that outside efforts to help candidates were to be discouraged at all costs, and our groups working on campaigns weren’t being outspent 7-1 by the Chamber of Commerce with their foreign money, the Koch brothers, and Karl Rove’s banking, oil, and insurance company buddies, I think we’d have a better than even chance to do better than expected and hold the House and Senate. The Republicans’ completely secretive corporate money is just overwhelming us in a lot of places, and it is spreading the field by putting lots of formerly safe seats into real danger. It is easy to imagine losing 55 or 60 seats in the House.
But this whole populist anti-Wall Street, anti-corporate special interest thing is still stirring around on our side, too, and there is real evidence that it is working for Democrats in a lot of key races. Check out this number from a Bloomberg poll:
We’ve been seeing numbers like that all over the place in different races, and more and more Democratic candidates are picking up on the message and going on offense against the sleazy corporate ads flooding their districts. Meanwhile, activists all over the country are doing local demonstrations taking on these corporate advertisers with their undisclosed donations: there were 52 events around the country by MoveOn volunteers alone. And now the White House and DNC are getting into the act, attacking the Chamber and American Crossroads and their mysterious donations from who knows where.
If voters begin to understand that Democrats really are on their side, and will fight back against these shadowy special interests with their hundreds of millions in dollars coming from who knows where, our candidates can win a lot of these close races even with the outside groups outspending them so badly. But they also have to hear loud and clear from Democratic elected officials that they are standing up to these special interests when it matter the most, which brings me to my final point of the day: we need a far clearer and stronger message from the White House on whether they will take on the big banks that have committed foreclosure fraud.
So far on this issue as it has emerged over the last couple of weeks, when the White House had to make a choice on policy, the President has mostly done the right thing: his veto of that make-foreclosures-quick-and-easy nightmare of a bill that snuck through Congress in the dead of night was incredibly important. And while I would have chosen to go with a complete foreclosure moratorium, I give the White House a lot of credit for having Gibbs come out yesterday in support of the state AGs in their investigation of this fraud debacle, and in saying these simple but crucial words that probably hit some of these fraudulent bankers like a punch in the guts: “We just want to take the just and necessary steps to ensure that the process is being followed legally.” The reason that simple idea is so crucial is that banks and foreclosure mills are desperately moving to try and find ways to get around the inconveniences of the laws on the books so that they can get these foreclosures processed. With the White House vetoing their first attempt to circumvent the law, and saying clearly they are backing AGs in making certain that the law is actually adhered to, it gives the bankers and their foreclosure mills a massive problem.
So that’s mostly to the good, and plays into the populist surge that democrats are trying to ride in the final weeks of the campaign. What is terrible is the messaging coming out of Tim Geithner’s mouth. Check out this convoluted stuff:
Geithner here defends the banks, not only giving them a free pass on the fraud going on the foreclosure market, but actually saying they should get credit for temporarily suspending the foreclosure process “so they can make sure that they’re not causing any injustice to the borrowers”. Does anyone besides Geithner and the occasional Ayn Rand acolyte believe that these bankers are such moral, salt of the earth types that they care about the injustice being done to mortgage holders? It is this kind of messaging that makes a muddle of what Democrats are trying to do nationwide. The explosion of the mortgage fraud issue gives us our best opportunity yet to re-frame this election around populist economic issues that show Democrats to be fighters for the middle class and against the big banks and other special interests. The White House is on the right track ingoing after the Chamber and Karl Rove’s secretive and possibly foreign funding. They are doing the right thing in vetoing that terrible make-illegal-foreclosures-fast-and-easy bill, in backing the AGs, and in backing the rule of law on foreclosure fraud. Now they need to get their messaging right: make it clear, tough, and not in doubt as to being on the side of homeowners against the banks who are trying to rip people off.
Anyone confidently predicting what will happen in this election is full of themselves and will probably be proven wrong: no one knows how this puppy will turn out. The money and voters’ anger about the economy could overwhelm the Democrats, especially if they mush up their message. But an anti-special interest, anti-secretive corporate funding message gives us a real chance to make the results different than we thought.
Cross-posted on OpenLeft.com, where you can read all of my writing on messaging, the 2010 elections, and populism.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Twenty-nine states plus DC offer persons the option of declaring a party affiliation when they register to vote. Party registration totals thus provide a snapshot of the overall partisan balance within a state. Comparisons of these statistics over time provide a broader picture of overall trends.
First some important definitions.
Keep in mind that while surveys show party self-identification is a strong predictor of a person’s voting patterns, a person is free to vote for any general election candidate. Party registration is not exactly party self-identification, either. It is more sticky in that registrants need to fill out a form to change their party registration, while survey respondents are free to articulate their party preference of the moment to an interviewer. Typically, party registration is used as a qualification for voting in party primaries. A Republican living in a heavily Democratic area might register as a Democrat in order to cast a meaningful vote in a Democratic primary. Particularly in Southern states, where a long-term realignment towards the Republican Party has been occurring, a person may register as a Democrat to vote in state and local Democratic primaries but vote for Republican candidates in general elections.
One further aspect of voter registration is important to understand is the difference between active an inactive voters. Election administrators are constantly challenged to keep the voter registration rolls accurate. New registrations are constantly pouring in. If a voter who recently moved provides information that identifies their former address, election administrators will attempt to remove or port over the registrant’s voter registration record in their former local jurisdiction. This is known as purging. Often people do not notify election officials that they have moved. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (a.k.a. Motor Voter) outlines the procedure for election administrators to purge records of registrants who have not voted in recent elections, who filled out a National Change of Address Form with the Post Office, or to whom an official letter sent from their office was returned as undeliverable. Most election officials maintain two lists of registrants: active and inactive. Although the exact procedures vary among localities, inactive voters are generally registrants that election officials believe should be purged, but all of the procedures to do so have not been satisfied. In the tables below, I provide statistics for active voters, where active voter statistics are available in 2008 and 2010.
OK, enough with the important definitions. Let’s get to the good stuff!
The table below provides current party registration statistics for all states with party registration, except Utah, which does not post party registration statistics on-line. While most state reports are very current, some may be for a primary earlier in the year. I provide the reporting date to help identify a report’s shelf life. Registration has not closed in many of these states, so these are not the final numbers for Nov. election. As a comparison point, I provide the percent change in the party registration from the November, 2008 election. I aggregate all minor party registrations into one category, and note that eight states to not officially recognize any minor party.
Overall, a continued registration trend away from the major political parties is evident, one that observers began noticing in the 1970s. The Democrats lost 927,332 registrants and the Republicans lost 587,698 registrants since Nov. 2008. There are substantially more Democrats than Republicans, so as a percentage change, Democrats lost 2.1% and Republicans lost 1.9% of their Nov. 2008 registrants. Minor party registrations increased by 55,194 registrants and unaffiliated registrants increased by 101,429.
The state-by-state trends reveal uneven patterns of change among the states. Some of these changes appear significant in what they illuminate about hotly-contested races.
In Nevada, the economic downturn as taken its toll on registrations, with an overall decline of 101,011 registrations since 2008. The effect is weighing more heavily on Democrats. Democratic registrants have declined a whopping 12.2% since 2008, while Republican registrations have only declined 5.5%. These changes are likely fueling the tight Senate battle.
In Delaware, Democratic registrations are outpacing Republican registrations. This evidence appears to confirm surveys that show a comfortable lead for the Democrat in the Senate race.
In Iowa, Democrats registrations have dropped 5.3%, while Republican registrations have increased 4.1%. This confirms the Republican advantage in Iowa’s Senate and Governor polling. I speculate that at least part of this pattern is due to students who registered in 2008 to take part in the Democratic caucuses but have now moved from the state.
In Connecticut, Democratic registrations have surged, but Republican registrations have declined. Perhaps Democrats are indeed well-positioned in the Senate and Governor races, as polling suggests. (Note that for this one state, I report party registrations for the Aug. 10, 2010 primary, while the minor party and unaffiliated registrations are from a Sept., 2009 state election report.)
In states like Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma, I believe that declines among Democrats in comparison to increases for Republicans are part of a long-term trend of realignment from the Democratic to Republican parties in these states.
Finally, a fascinating trend is the rise of minor parties. This is despite the large decline in Maryland, when the State Board of Elections closed the Independent Party earlier this year because they determined it was not operating as a real party. Now, there are only 2,227,149 minor party registrants, so they start from a small base. Still, they are gaining while the major parties are in decline. This is NOT just a Tea Party movement. For example, in Maine, the growth is primarily among the Green Party.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Some in Conservative ranks have recently been denounced for lack of compassion due to their support of Tennessee firemen who refused to douse a burning house because the owner had failed to pay the annual 75 dollar fire protection fee.
No humans perished in the blaze as the authorities stood idly by, but the firemen’s mercilessness took on an added dimension when it was learned that the family’s three dogs and cat died in the inferno. That was enough to elicit a ringing condemnation from the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).
The HSUS also would have a problem with the stance of conservative elements in the Missouri Tea Party. They are opposing an initiative on the November state ballot that would require strict humanitarian treatment in dog breeding facilities, all too many of which are scandalously operated puppy mills.
As you can see, things can get pretty dicey for conservatives when the issues of money and regulation come into play. Being pro-free market and anti-big government, they tend to value money too much and regulation not enough, a blend that usually culminates in a hard-hearted brew. They fall prey to Oscar Wilde’s proverbial indictment of “knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing.” This is apparent in conservative opposition to making anti-pollution standards extra stringent to protect the most vulnerable in our society — the very old, the very young, and the very sick. Cost-benefit analysis persuades the right wingers that the country will get the most “bang for the buck” by setting standards at levels geared to the average healthy adult.
Indeed, if many conservatives had their druthers, they would strip the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency of its authority altogether to promulgate major rules to safeguard public health and the environment. Instead, approval to implement these rules would have to come from Capitol Hill. Under conservatives’ scheme, what few rules trickled out of a deeply divided Congress burdened with a host of domestic and foreign concerns would be bound to be too little too late — just the way right wing ideologues like it. Corporate America would have virtually free rein to engage in the dubious proposition of policing itself, which would also fit perfectly into many conservatives’ ideological template where profit trumps health.
Nor is conservatives’ merciless treatment confined to human beings and their pets. Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin promoted hunting of wolves from helicopters, even though aerial slaughter is essentially a glorified shooting gallery and is banned just about everywhere in the nation.
Proposed regulation to create wilderness and protect wildlife habitat has been resisted by many conservatives. They consider developers’ bottom line far more important than the preservation of habitat for a myriad of wild animals and plants.
Professor Jeffrey Sachs, distinguished director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University in New York City, put his finger on the mood spread by right wing behavior across the country. “Almost everybody complains, almost everybody aggressively defends their own narrow short term interests, and almost everybody abandons any pretense of looking ahead or addressing the needs of others.”
Yes, there are a lot of people in the conservative ranks who have compassion all right. It’s just that it’s for the princes of the marketplace, not the average Joe and the ecosystem’s many lesser species that populate the planet.
Edward Flattau is an environmental columnist residing in Washington, D.C. His fourth book Green Morality, is now available.

Follow Edward Flattau on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/greenmorality

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Last week, Mayor Bloomberg issued a press release advising people who get sick this season to stay home for at least 24 hours.
He makes it sound so easy.
Of course, Mayor Bloomberg has paid sick days. So, it’s hard for him to understand how the other half lives. The other half being the nearly 50% of New Yorkers who lack a single paid sick day.
According to a recent report released by Community Service Society and A Better Balance, entitled Sick in the City: What the Lack of Paid Leave Means for Working New Yorkers, the number of workers without paid sick leave jumped from 42% in 2008 to 48% in 2009. This report also found that 66% of all New York City low income workers have no paid sick days and that 75% of all New Yorkers (regardless of income level) support paid sick leave legislation.
Mayor Bloomberg, on the other hand, does not support paid sick leave legislation. Only one day after advising people to stay home when sick this season, Mayor Bloomberg weighed in on the paid sick days bill currently pending in the New York City Council, calling it “disastrous” for small businesses.
This bill that Mayor Bloomberg speaks of, which has garnered the support of 36 (out of 51) council members, would provide up to 5 paid sick days to employees of small businesses – defined as businesses with 20 or less employees – and up to 9 days for larger business’s employees. Sick days could be used when the employee is sick and could also be used to care for one’s sick children.
It would, in other words, alleviate the dread that working parents, particularly working moms, have in the morning when they wake with a sick child, knowing their decision to stay home and care for their child will have repercussions for their income and for their job security.
It’s a dread that Mayor Bloomberg has likely never felt. Which may explain why he is so easily dismissing the need for paid sick leave legislation.
But where is Mayor Bloomberg getting his information that this legislation, so important to the working families in New York, is also “disastrous” to the business community?
Certainly not from the independent estimates (rather than those put forward by business groups) that show the cost of paid sick days legislation for small businesses is a far less costly benefit than say, for example, mandatory health care.
And certainly not from the experience of San Francisco, a city that actually has paid sick leave legislation and whose businesses have not been harmed by the implementation of minimum paid sick leave.
In fact, the experience of San Francisco reminds us that sometimes issues that the business community does not like so much, that are arguably moral issues, turn out to be, well, not such big deals.
You know, like smoking bans in public places.
On the pending paid sick days legislation, Mayor Bloomberg went on to say: “It would be a disaster if the government tries to get in to run small businesses. If they run the bars and restaurants, they’ll try to run everything else.”
He said this after announcing his plan – backed by Council Speaker Quinn – to expand the city-wide smoking ban in restaurants and bars to parks and other outdoor arenas.
Confusing, no?
In light of the startling statistics regarding the lack of paid sick days for low income workers, Mayor Bloomberg’s opposition to the pending legislation makes him appear woefully out of touch with the realities of New York workers.
Of course, Mayor Bloomberg’s position on paid sick days is most troubling because women bear the brunt of the lack of paid sick days. Most of these low income jobs without paid sick days are female-dominated. Child care workers and elder care workers are often among those without paid sick days. Working mothers, including single working mothers, who often lack paid time off, are without recourse when a child is sick and must remain home from school. For these low income female workers and the children they support, paid time off is not a luxury; it is a necessity.
The fact that low income working mothers have to make a choice between staying home with sick children or losing a job is immoral. The public health threat created by low income workers who have to come to work sick just to keep their jobs and their low income pay is alarming. The ever growing number of New York residents without a single paid sick day is frustrating.
The fact that we cannot pass paid sick days legislation in this climate? Well, to borrow a term, it’s disastrous.
Mayor Bloomberg’s zeal for certain public health issues, such as the notorious anti-smoking ban in public places, stems from the fact that he used to be a smoker. Too bad Mayor Bloomberg was never a working mom or a low income worker with not a single paid sick day.
Maybe then we’d get the paid sick days legislation this city needs.

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com

Millionaires can probably skip this column. Most likely they’ve already got a team of financial professionals advising them about the best ways to pass along their wealth. For the rest of us, however, a quick refresher course on how the IRS treats gifts might prove helpful.
First, let me point out that 2010 is an odd duck year for inheritances because this year only, there is no federal tax on estates for people who die in 2010. So far, Congress hasn’t decided how the estate tax will be structured in 2011, but it is possible it will be reinstated in some form or another. As for passing along gifts while you’re still alive, the rules are still pretty much the same — if a little complicated.
Avoiding the gift tax. You’re allowed to make gifts of up to $13,000 per year per person to an unlimited number of people before potentially triggering the federal gift tax. (Married couples who file joint taxes can together give $26,000 per recipient.) These limits are periodically adjusted for inflation. You must file a Gift Tax Return (IRS Form 709) for any gifts that exceed these amounts.
This doesn’t mean you’ll necessarily ever have to pay a gift tax, however. You are allowed to bestow a total of $1 million in gifts during your lifetime above and beyond the annual $13,000 excluded amounts before the gift tax kicks in, which for most of us means never.
Also not counted toward the $1 million lifetime exclusion are:
Gifts to your spouse
Direct payments you make for someone else’s tuition or medical expenses
Charitable contributions
Gifts to qualified political organizations, such as political parties, election campaign committees and political action committees (PACs)
Note that to qualify for the $13,000 annual exclusion, your gifts must be of “present interest” — that is, there are no restrictions on the recipient being able to use the cash or property immediately; otherwise, they count toward the $1 million lifetime exclusion.
Rules for gift and estate taxes are very complex, so read IRS Publication 950 for more details. Adding further complexity, the gift tax rate for 2010 was reduced to 35 percent from 2009′s 45 percent. But Congress could well raise it in 2011. You’d be wise to consult a financial planning professional. If you don’t have one, the Financial Planning Association is a good place to start your search.
Open a 529 Plan. Another way parents, grandparents and others can share their resources is by contributing to a 529 Qualified State Tuition Plan to fund children’s education. Contributions up to the $13,000 annual limit ($26,000/couple) will not trigger the gift tax. Alternatively, you can jump-start the account by making a one-time contribution of up to $65,000 ($130,000/couple), as long as you don’t make any other gifts to that beneficiary for five years.
There are two types of 529 Plans:
Prepaid tuition plans, where you can prepay and lock-in future tuition at rates currently being charged by in-state colleges.
College savings plans, where you contribute to an account whose interest earnings grow tax-free until withdrawn to pay for eligible expenses at any college or university. You choose among several investment options at varying degrees of market risk and reward.
To learn more about how 529 Plans work, including tax implications, brokerage fees, investment risk and the potential impact on needs-based financial aid, read these guides at FinAid, the Securities and Exchange Commission and the IRS.
Open a Roth IRA for Kids. A good long-term investment in your children’s or grandchildren’s financial future while avoiding the gift tax is to fund a Roth IRA on their behalf up to $5,000 or the amount of their taxable earnings, whichever is less. You contribute on an after-tax basis, but the earnings grow, tax-free, until the account is tapped at retirement.
For young people, these earnings can compound tremendously over time. For example, if you made only a one-time $1,000 contribution for your 16-year-old granddaughter, at 6 percent interest the account would be worth nearly $20,000 — tax-free — at age 66. If she contributed an additional $50 a month going forward, it would grow to more than $210,000 at 66.
Fund Someone’s Benefits. Another way to help cash-strapped loved ones is to give them cash to help pay for health, homeowner/renter’s or auto insurance premiums or to fund their 401(k) plan or IRA. As long as you don’t exceed the $13,000/$26,000 annual limits, any such contributions won’t impact your gift tax exclusion amount.
It goes without saying that before you start handing out gifts you should make sure you’re on track to fund your own retirement, have adequate health insurance, can pay off your mortgage and are otherwise debt-free. You wouldn’t want to deplete your resources and then become a financial burden on others.
This article is intended to provide general information and should not be considered legal, tax or financial advice. It’s always a good idea to consult a legal, tax or financial advisor for specific information on how certain laws apply to you and about your individual financial situation.
To Follow Jason Alderman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/PracticalMoney

Source:www.huffingtonpost.com