hat tip to John D
Lizards, when confronted by hawks or sadistic children, have a neat trick for escaping: they can lose their tail and then regrow a new one. Scientists now think they have the "genetic recipe" for how lizards do this, a development that could one day help humans regrow things like muscle tissue and spinal cords
The study, published Wednesday in the journal PLoS ONE, looked at the tail of the green anole lizard. While other animals, like salamanders, frog tadpoles and fish, have the ability to regrow their tails just at the tip, lizards can have satellite cells throughout their entire tails that can regrow into skeletal muscle.
Scientists removed the tails from five lizards, chopped them into sections, as they are wont to do, and identified 326 genes in each section committed to regrowing the tail. The hope is that by discovering the exact mixture and amount of the genetic ingredients in lizard tails, researchers can discover new treatments for a plethora of human diseases, injuries and birth defects.
by Eduardo Galeano
He learned to write in the language of Georgia, his homeland, but in the seminary the monks made him speak Russian.
Years later in Moscow, his south Caucasus accent still gave him away.
So he decided to become more Russian than the Russians. Was not Napoleon, who hailed from Corsica, more French than the French? And was not Catherine the Great, who was German, more Russian than the Russians?
The Georgian, Iosif Dzhugashvili, chose a Russian name. He called himself Stalin, which means "steel."
The man of steel expected his son to be made of steel too: from childhood, Stalin's son Yakov was tempered in fire and ice and shaped by hammer blows.
It did not work. He was his mother's child. At the age of 19, Yakov wanted no more of it, could bear no more.
He pulled the trigger.
The gunshot did not kill him.
He awoke in the hospital. At the foot of the bed, his father commented:
"You can't even get that right."
The Ages of Josephine
At nine years old, she works cleaning houses in St. Louis on the banks of the Mississippi.
At 10, she starts dancing for coins in the street. At 13, she marries.
At 15, once again. Of the first husband she retains not even a bad memory. Of the second, his last name, because she likes how it sounds.
At 17, Josephine Baker dances the Charleston on Broadway. At 18, she crosses the Atlantic and conquers Paris. The "Bronze Venus" performs in the nude, with no more clothing than a belt of bananas.
At 21, her outlandish combination of clown and femme fatale makes her the most popular and highest-paid performer in Europe.
At 24, she is the most photographed woman on the planet. Pablo Picasso, on his knees, paints her. To look like her, the pallid young damsels of Paris rub themselves with walnut cream, which darkens the skin.
At 30, she has problems in some hotels because she travels with a chimpanzee, a snake, a goat, two parrots, several fish, three cats, seven dogs, a cheetah named Chiquita who wears a diamond-studded collar and a little pig named Albert, whom she bathes in Je Reviens perfume by Worth.
At 40, she receives the Legion of Honor for service to the French Resistance during the Nazi occupation.
At 41 and on her fourth husband, she adopts 12 children of many colors and many origins, whom she calls "my rainbow tribe."
At 45, she returns to the United States. She insists that everyone, whites and blacks, sit together at her shows. If not, she will not perform. At 57, she shares the stage with Martin Luther King and speaks against racial discrimination before an immense crowd at the March on Washington.
At 68, she recovers from a calamitous bankruptcy and at the Bobino Theater in Paris she celebrates a half-century on the stage.
And she departs.
Photograph: Saddest Eye in the World
Princeton, New Jersey, May 1947.
Photographer Philippe Halsman asks him: "Do you think there will be peace?"
And while the shutter clicks, Albert Einstein says, or rather mutters: "No."
People believe that Einstein got the Nobel Prize for his theory of relativity, that he was the originator of the saying "Everything is relative," and that he was the inventor of the atom bomb.
The truth is they did not give him a Nobel for his theory of relativity and he never uttered those words. Neither did he invent the bomb, although Hiroshima and Nagasaki would not have been possible if he had not discovered what he did.
He knew all too well that his findings, born of a celebration of life, had been used to annihilate it.
Father of the Computer
Alan Turing was sneered at for not being a tough guy, a he-man with hair on his chest.
He whined, croaked, stuttered. He used an old necktie for a belt. He rarely slept and went without shaving for days. And he raced from one end of the city to the other all the while concocting complicated mathematical formulas in his mind.
Working for British intelligence, he helped shorten the Second World War by inventing a machine that cracked the impenetrable military codes used by Germany's high command.
At that point he had already dreamed up a prototype for an electronic computer and had laid out the theoretical foundations of today's information systems. Later on, he led the team that built the first computer to operate with integrated programs. He played interminable chess games with it and asked it questions that drove it nuts. He insisted that it write him love letters. The machine responded by emitting messages that were rather incoherent.
But it was flesh-and-blood Manchester police who arrested him in 1952 for gross indecency.
At the trial, Turing pled guilty to being a homosexual.
To stay out of jail, he agreed to undergo medical treatment to cure him of the affliction. The bombardment of drugs left him impotent. He grew breasts. He stayed indoors, no longer went to the university. He heard whispers, felt stares drilling into his back.
He had the habit of eating an apple before going to bed.
One night, he injected the apple with cyanide.
So while you are loving the silly antics of cats on youtube, hackers are gaining access to your computer and personal information or just turning your computer into a robot to serve the hacker's ends no matter what they might be.
On an Internet in which large flows of traffic and information remain unencrypted, seemingly harmless activities like watching YouTube videos can allow security and intelligence agencies and well-funded private parties total access to a person's computer.
Morgan Marquis-Boire, a senior researcher and technical adviser at the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs who published a new study on the topic, describes in an article in The Intercept on Friday how such hacking can happen:
Companies such as Hacking Team and FinFisher sell devices called "network injection appliances." These are racks of physical machines deployed inside internet service providers around the world, which allow for the simple exploitation of targets. In order to do this, they inject malicious content into people's everyday internet browsing traffic. One way that Hacking Team accomplishes this is by taking advantage of unencrypted YouTube video streams to compromise users. The Hacking Team device targets a user, waits for that user to watch a YouTube clip like the one above, and intercepts that traffic and replaces it with malicious code that gives the operator total control over the target's computer without his or her knowledge. The machine also exploits Microsoft's login.live.com web site in the same manner.
Read more here.
Nick Hanauer is a rich guy, an unrepentant capitalist -- and he has something to say to his fellow plutocrats:
Growing inequality is about to push our societies into conditions resembling pre-revolutionary France. Hear his argument about why a dramatic increase in minimum wage could grow the middle class, deliver economic prosperity ... and prevent a revolution.
by Alex Kane
The "war on terror" has come home -- and it's wreaking havoc on innocent American lives. The culprit is the militarization of the police.
The weapons that destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq have made their way to local law enforcement. While police forces across the country began a process of militarization -- complete with SWAT teams and flash-bang grenades -- when President Reagan intensified the "war on drugs," the post-9/11 "war on terror" has added fuel to the fire.
Through laws and regulations like a provision in defense budgets that authorizes the Pentagon to transfer surplus military gear to police forces, local law enforcement agencies are using weapons found on the battlefields of South Asia and the Middle East.
A recent New York Times article by Matt Apuzzo reported that in the Obama era, "police departments have received tens of thousands of machine guns; nearly 200,000 ammunition magazines; thousands of pieces of camouflage and night-vision equipment; and hundreds of silencers, armored cars and aircraft." The result is that police agencies around the nation possess military-grade equipment, turning officers who are supposed to fight crime and protect communities into what looks like an invading army. And military-style police raids have increased in recent years, with one count putting the number at 80,000 such raids last year.
In June, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) brought more attention to police militarization when it issued a comprehensive, nearly 100-page report titled, War Comes Home: The Excessive Militarization of American Policing. Based on public records requests to more than 260 law enforcement agencies in 26 states, the ACLU concluded that this police militarization "unfairly impacts people of color and undermines individual liberties, and it has been allowed to happen in the absence of any meaningful public discussion."
The information contained in the ACLU report -- and in other investigations into the phenomenon -- is sobering. From the killing of innocent people to the almost complete lack of debate on these policies, police militarization has turned into a key issue for Americans. It is harming civil liberties, ramping up the "war on drugs," impacting the most marginalized members of society and transforming neighborhoods into war zones. Here are 11 important -- and horrifying -- things you should know about the militarization of police.
1. It harms, and sometimes kills, innocent people. When you have heavily armed police officers using flash-bang grenades and armored personnel carriers, innocent people are bound to be hurt. The likelihood of people being killed is raised by the practice of SWAT teams busting down doors with no warning, which leads some people to think it may be a burglary and try to defend themselves. The ACLU documented seven cases of civilians dying in these kinds of raids, and 46 people being injured. That's only in the cases the civil liberties group looked at, so the true number is actually higher.
Take the case of Tarika Wilson, which the ACLU summarizes. The 26-year-old biracial mother lived in Lima, Ohio. Her boyfriend, Anthony Terry, was wanted by the police on suspicion of drug dealing. So on January 4, 2008, a SWAT team busted down Wilson's door and opened fire. A SWAT officer killed Wilson and injured her one-year-old baby, Sincere Wilson. The killing sparked rage in Lima and accusations of a racist police department, but the officer who shot Wilson, Sgt. Joe Chavalia, was found not guilty on all charges.
2. Children are impacted. As the case of Wilson shows, the police busting down doors care little about whether there's a child in the home. Another case profiled by the ACLU shows how children can be caught in the crossfire -- with devastating consequences.
In May, after their Wisconsin home had burned down, the Phonesavanh family was staying with relatives in Georgia. One night, a SWAT team with assault rifles invaded the home and threw a flash-bang grenade -- despite the presence of kids' toys in the front yard. The police were looking for the father's nephew on drug charges. He wasn't there. But a 19-month-old named Bou Bou was -- and the grenade landed in his crib.
Bou Bou was wounded in the chest and had third-degree burns. He was put in a medically induced coma.
Another high-profile instance of a child being killed by paramilitary police tactics occurred in 2010, when seven-year-old Aiyana Stanley-Jones died in Detroit. The city's Special Response Team (Detroit's SWAT) was looking for Chauncey Owens, a suspect in the killing of a teenager who lived on the second floor of the apartment Jones lived in.
Officers raided the home, threw a flash-bang grenade, and fired one shot that struck Jones in the head. The police agent who fired the fatal shot, Joseph Weekley, has so far gotten off easy: a jury trial ended in deadlock last year, though he will face charges of involuntary manslaughter in September. As The Nation's Mychal Denzel Smith wrote last year after Weekley was acquitted: "What happened to Aiyana is the result of the militarization of police in this country...Part of what it means to be black in America now is watching your neighborhood become the training ground for our increasingly militarized police units."
Bou Bou and Jones aren't the only cases of children being impacted.
According to the ACLU, "of the 818 deployments studied, 14 percent involved the presence of children and 13 percent did not." It was impossible to determine whether children were present in the rest of the cases studied.
Edward Snowden may have recently received a three-year extension of his stay in Russia, but the former National Security Agency contractor says in a new interview with WIRED magazine that he still clings to hope of returning home to the United States, even if it means living behind bars.
"I told the government I'd volunteer for prison, as long as it served the right purpose," Snowden said the article released Wednesday. "I care more about the country than what happens to me. But we can't allow the law to become a political weapon or agree to scare people away from standing up for their rights, no matter how good the deal. I'm not going to be part of that."
Described by WIRED as "the most wanted man in the world," Snowden is being sought for leaking top-secret documents that unveiled widespread surveillance programs overseen by the federal government. He currently is hiding out in an undisclosed community in Russia, where he says he goes mostly unrecognized
One of my favorite performers and human beings has succumbed to his latest bout with depression.
BEIJING - A pedestrian's head was impaled with a knife that fell from an eighth-story balcony. Yunzhi Xiao, 57, was walking to a supermarket in Guangyuan, China, when he suddenly felt a "very heavy weight" on his head.
"It hurt a lot," Xiao told NBC News from his hospital bed. "I cried out, 'My head! My head hurts!' but I did not know what had happened." A street vendor shouted at Xiao, "There is a knife in your head!" He managed to walk another 100 yards before the pain became too much and he was forced to sit down at a phone booth. "Some warm-hearted people passing by saw me bleeding and called the police who took me to a traditional Chinese medicine hospital," Xiao added. "A few hours later doctors took the knife out of my head." According to local media reports and what Xiao was told by police, a knife that was being used on a balcony garden was knocked over the ledge by the wind on Thursday.
Aim for the head.
Here's the problem in a nutshell:
from Bill Moyer's site
Watch "Bill Remembers LBJ's Road to War," in which Bill looks back on President Johnson's deliberations over America's role in Vietnam and his decision to escalate and send in more troops.
We can start the list with the people at at Gamma Group International who author highly sophisticated and intrusive spyware and sell it to whoever can afford the $4M price tag.
Gamma International offers advanced spyware, which has repeatedly been discovered in countries who mistreat journalists, like Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. The Finfisher Technology sold by Gamma International is able to read encrypted files, emails and listen in to voice over IP calls. Among the targeted was Ala'a Shehabi, a journalist, university lecturer and activist from Bahrain, now living in London.
Country of origin: UK / Germany
Website: www.finfisher.com https://www.gammagroup.com/
Gamma International is part of the UK-based Gamma Group, which specializes in surveillance and monitoring equipment (both on- and offline) as well as training services. Gamma has offices and subsidiaries in the United Kingdom, including the Channel Islands, and Germany, but also in Southeast Asia and the Middle East.
The Gamma Group of companies, established in 1990, provides advanced technical surveillance, monitoring solutions, and advanced government training, as well as international consultancy to national and state intelligence departments and law enforcement agencies.
Gamma International is owned by Louthean John Alexander Nelson, son of Gamma Founder William Louthean Nelson, and Martin Johannes Münch (MJM).  Gamma is closely connected to German company Elaman ; the two companies are sharing an address and a phone number. Gamma has confirmed to Reporters Without Borders that Elaman is a retailer for its products.
Gamma International sells interception equipment to government and law enforcement agencies exclusively. Its FinFisher Suite (which includes Trojans to infect PCs, mobile phones, other consumer electronics and servers, as well as technical consulting) is regarded as one of the most advanced in today's market. A computer or smartphone is remotely infected by a Trojan, which is then controlled by government agencies through command and control servers. A computer can be infected via false update notifications of software, malicious emails or through physical access to a machine. Finfisher also offers technology to infect an entire Internet cafe in order to survey all possible users. When installed, it is almost impossible to safely remove the Trojan. Also, there are no safe ways to circumvent Finfisher on an infected machine.
The software is said to be able to bypass common methods and anti-virus detection. It can listen in to Skype talks, chats and encrypted emails and is even able to turn on a computer's microphone or webcam remotely. With FinFisher technology, it is even possible to gain access to encrypted files on a hard drive. Those Finfisher-features are promoted by the firm in different advertising videos
By Jeff Larson and Mike Tigas, ProPublica
Software created by the controversial U.K. based Gamma Group International was used to spy on computers that appear to be located in the United States, the U.K., Germany, Russia, Iran and Bahrain, according to a leaked trove of documents analyzed by ProPublica.
It's not clear whether the surveillance was conducted by governments or private entities. Customer email addresses in the collection appeared to belong to a German surveillance company, an independent consultant in Dubai, the Bosnian and Hungarian Intelligence services, a Dutch law enforcement officer and the Qatari government.
The leaked files -- which were posted online by hackers -- are the latest in a series of revelations about how state actors including repressive regimes have used Gamma's software (html version of .pdf file at this link) to spy on dissidents, journalists and activist groups.
HitchBOT, the hitch-hiking robot, is now at the halfway point in its journey across Canada. For its 3,870-mile journey, the talking robot will rely solely on the kindness of human strangers, like those below.
The journey is part of a social experiment to see if it can arrive in one piece at an art gallery in Victoria, British Columbia.
ABOVE: HitchBOT waits for a ride on the Trans-Canada Highway on Aug. 5.(click to enlarge)
Belgian tourists Kim Van Aerde, left, and Seb Leeson pose with their hitchhiker, HitchBOT, in Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario on Aug. 5. The two will drive the robot west along the Trans-Canada Highway.
Is Obama speeding up deportations?
While many undocumented immigrants are still being held at isolated detention centers, new reports are indicating that the Obama Administration is trying to "speed up" deportations. Buzzfeed's John Stanton joins to shed light on the issue.
The incident occurred during a ride along the Adelaide River near the Kakadu National Park. The group had been watching crocodiles jump for a piece of buffalo meat on a stick. A reptile nicknamed "Brutus" was the most impressive. He is estimated to be 80-years-old and 18 feet long. As the boat returned to the jetty, he was spotted clasping the bull shark.
A truly spectacular feat of science and engineering.
Rosetta launched in 2004 and has arrived at comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko on 6 August. It will be the first mission in history to rendezvous with a comet, escort it as it orbits the Sun, and deploy a lander to its surface. Rosetta is an ESA mission with contributions from its member states and NASA. Rosetta's Philae lander is provided by a consortium led by DLR, MPS, CNES and ASI.
The European Space Agency's Rosetta probe made its historic rendezvous with a comet on Wednesday after a 10-year, 4 billion-mile journey.
"We're at the comet! Yeah!" spacecraft operations manager Sylvain Lodiot yelled when confirmation of the crucial engine burn was received at ESA's Mission Control in Darmstadt, Germany.
Rosetta thus became the first spacecraft to hang out with a comet. Earlier missions, including ESA's Giotto and NASA's Stardust, have gotten close to comets before -- but they didn't stay.
"After 10 years, five months and four days traveling towards our destination, looping around the sun five times and clocking up 6.4 billion kilometers, we are delighted to announce finally, 'We are here,'" ESA's director general, Jean-Jacques Dordain, said in a statement. "Europe's Rosetta is now the first spacecraft in history to rendezvous with a comet, a major highlight in exploring our origins. Discoveries can start."
The car-sized Rosetta probe was launched in 2004, and woke up from hibernation in January for its final approach to Comet 67P/Churyumov-Gerasimenko, a 2.5-mile-wide (4-kilometer-wide) conglomeration of ice and dust that's been compared to a rubber ducky.
Rosetta's orbit is an odd duck as well. Technically speaking, it's not so much an "orbit" as a triangular course that keeps up with the comet. The maneuvers will give ESA's mission managers a chance to determine the dynamics for a true orbit and up-close observations that should continue through the end of 2015.
Right now, Rosetta is in a holding pattern about 60 miles (100 kilometers) from Churyumov-Gerasimenko, but eventually it's expected to close in to an altitude of 12 to 20 miles (20 to 30 kilometers).
In November, Rosetta is scheduled to send out a piggyback probe, named Philae, to descend to the comet's surface. Based on temperature readings made by Rosetta's instruments, scientists already have surmised that the comet has a porous, dusty crust with ice beneath. The surface is strewn with boulders the size of houses, and Churyumenko-Gerasimov's icy cliffs rise as high as 500 feet (150 meters).
ESA's science team will have to choose a suitable spot for Philae to drill into the surface, extract and analyze samples, and send pictures and data back to Earth. Meanwhile, the main Rosetta spacecraft will "escort" the comet as it makes its swing around the sun and heads back out toward Jupiter.
"Rosetta is the sexiest space mission that's ever been," Matt Taylor, the $1.75 billion (€1.3 billion) mission's project scientist, declared during Wednesday's webcast.
On the way to Churyumov-Gerasimenko, Rosetta made a series of flybys of Earth and Mars, and observed two asteroids called Steins and Lutetia. During the coming months, it will employ its OSIRIS camera as well as a spectrometer called VIRTIS, a miniature radio telescope called MIRO and other scientific instruments.
Rosetta gets its name from the Rosetta Stone, which archaeologists used in the 1800s to decipher the meaning of Egyptian hieroglyphs. In a similar way, astronomers plan to use the data from Rosetta to figure out the chemistry of comets, which are thought to preserve the primordial stuff of the solar system and potentially contain the building blocks of life.
Philae's name comes from an island in the River Nile where an obelisk was found with inscriptions that contributed to deciphering Egypt's ancient writing.
Conservative group accused of US troop aid scam
Kim Barker, reporter for the New York Times, talks with Steve Kornacki about her report on Move America Forward, a charity she says lied about its supposed mission to help deployed U.S. troops, enriching its founders instead.
Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Is Working
Although the enemies of health reform will never admit it, the Affordable Care Act is looking more and more like a big success. Costs are coming in below predictions, while the number of uninsured Americans is dropping fast, especially in states that haven't tried to sabotage the program. Obamacare is working.
But what about the administration's other big push, financial reform? The Dodd-Frank reform bill has, if anything, received even worse press than Obamacare, derided by the right as anti-business and by the left as hopelessly inadequate. And like Obamacare, it's certainly not the reform you would have devised in the absence of political constraints.
But also like Obamacare, financial reform is working a lot better than anyone listening to the news media would imagine. Let's talk, in particular, about two important pieces of Dodd-Frank: creation of an agency protecting consumers from misleading or fraudulent financial sales pitches, and efforts to end "too big to fail."
The decision to create a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau shouldn't have been controversial, given what happened during the housing boom. As Edward M. Gramlich, a Federal Reserve official who warned prophetically of problems in subprime lending, asked, "Why are the most risky loan products sold to the least sophisticated borrowers?" He went on, "The question answers itself -- the least sophisticated borrowers are probably duped into taking these products." The need for more protection was obvious.
Of course, that obvious need didn't stop the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, financial industry lobbyists and conservative groups from going all out in an effort to prevent the bureau's creation or at least stop it from doing its job, spending more than $1.3 billion in the process. Republicans in Congress dutifully served the industry's interests, notably by trying to prevent President Obama from appointing a permanent director. And the question was whether all that opposition would hobble the new bureau and make it ineffective.
At this point, however, all accounts indicate that the bureau is in fact doing its job, and well -- well enough to inspire continuing fury among bankers and their political allies. A recent case in point: The bureau is cracking down on billions in excessive overdraft fees.
Better consumer protection means fewer bad loans, and therefore a reduced risk of financial crisis. But what happens if a crisis occurs anyway?
The answer is that, as in 2008, the government will step in to keep the financial system functioning; nobody wants to take the risk of repeating the Great Depression.
The President's approval rating stands at 41 per cent. Sixty-one percent believe the country is headed in the wrong direction. Yet, twenty...
But how do you rescue the banking system without rewarding bad behavior? In particular, rescues in times of crisis can give large financial players an unfair advantage: They can borrow cheaply in normal times, because everyone knows that they are "too big to fail" and will be bailed out if things go wrong.
The answer is that the government should seize troubled institutions when it bails them out, so that they can be kept running without rewarding stockholders or bondholders who don't need rescue. In 2008 and 2009, however, it wasn't clear that the Treasury Department had the necessary legal authority to do that. So Dodd-Frank filled that gap, giving regulators Ordinary Liquidation Authority, also known as resolution authority, so that in the next crisis we can save "systemically important" banks and other institutions without bailing out the bankers.
Bankers, of course, hate this idea; and Republican leaders like Mitch McConnell tried to help their friends with the Orwellian claim that resolution authority was actually a gift to Wall Street, a form of corporate welfare, because it would grease the skids for future bailouts.
But Wall Street knew better. As Mike Konczal of the Roosevelt Institute points out, if being labeled systemically important were actually corporate welfare, institutions would welcome the designation; in fact, they have fought it tooth and nail. And a new study from the Government Accountability Office shows that while large banks were able to borrow more cheaply than small banks before financial reform passed, that advantage has now essentially disappeared. To some extent this may reflect generally calmer markets, but the study nonetheless suggests that reform has done at least part of what it was supposed to do.
Did reform go far enough? No. In particular, while banks are being forced to hold more capital, a key force for stability, they really should be holding much more. But Wall Street and its allies wouldn't be screaming so loudly, and spending so much money in an effort to gut the law, if it weren't an important step in the right direction. For all its limitations, financial reform is a success story.
Blowing ourselves off the planet has always struck me as a rather primitive and limited means of space travel. Barring use of (or perhaps in compliment with) quantum entaglement/teleportation schemes, this new idea of using a resonant cavity thruster design is interesting enough. I especially like it's refutation of the old conservative trope that you can't get something from nothing.
'Impossible' Space Engine Might Work, NASA Test Suggests
NASA researchers have reported fresh evidence that an "impossible" space propulsion technology might actually work.
A study from NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston says a microwave thruster system that requires no propellant appears to generate a tiny amount of thrust. If the technology pans out, it could make spaceflight far cheaper and speedier, advocates say. They argue that the thruster harnesses subatomic particles that pop into and out of existence in accordance with quantum physics -- a hypothesis that's mentioned in the study.
"Test results indicate that the RF [radio frequency] resonant cavity thruster design, which is unique as an electric propulsion device, is producing a force that is not attributable to any classical electromagnetic phenomenon and, therefore, is potentially demonstrating an interaction with the quantum vacuum virtual plasma," the researchers wrote in their study, which they presented Wednesday at the 50th Joint Propulsion Conference in Cleveland. [Images: Spacecraft Propulsion Concepts]
The technology's roots go back to British researcher Roger Shawyer, who claimed his "EmDrive" could generate thrust by rocketing microwaves around in a chamber. Solar power could be used to produce the microwaves, eliminating the neeed for propellant. Many scientists have dismissed or downplayed such claims, saying the system violates the law of conservation of momentum, Wired UK noted in its report on the technology.
In 2012, Chinese researchers said their version of the system could generate enough thrust to power a satellite. Then, an American scientist named Guido Fetta constructed his own device and persuaded the NASA team -- which included warp drive researcher Sonny White -- to try it out over the course of eight days in August 2013.
The NASA scientists said the device produced 30 to 50 micronewtons of thrust -- less than 0.1 percent of the thrust measured by the Chinese, but enough to justify further testing.
Great summation segment by Chris Hayes et al of the recent stupidity and hysteria that is the American political Mightmare Theater starring teeny weeny fear TP-ers like Napoleon Cruz and his whipping boy Boehnerapart.
It's as painful as watching a palsied waltz The self-enforced ignorance and out right audacious stupidity of fevered conservative zealots has reached radioactive levels.
It strikes me that a dam will break and there will be blood.
Some people live mythic and magical lives.
Some become myths to kith and kin and some become magicians sharing their craft in secret with the parts of the universe that can appreciate such things, some become both.
I would be humbled to present to you such a man who has managed for over 50 years to resist the potential ravages of cultural normalization that by dint of mere endurance drain the dreams and aspirations of most of us, leaving only husks of our original sparkling selves, to raise children, watch the paint peel off and eventually rot and succumb to one trifling ailment or another, our lives circumscribed by some wooden or stone marker forgotten by all except the random squirrel to indicate where he buried the winter stash.
Not many of us survive that existential assault. Some do though and they are treasures.
Roldo is such a person. He entered my ken by the accident of me striking out across Canada at 21 on a lark and with the very serious intention of discovering whether those post card pictures of the Rockies was backed up by any time/space realities or not. They were and so was Roldo. At the time (1970) he was playing the role of magnificent musical bard and musical historian. He occurred as part of a Winnipeg sojourn in a house of near loons, loons and beyond the pale loons who forever changed my perceptions of the world.
The Roldo, (he is as much a force of nature as a personality) was an ample sample of creative genius and wandering minstrel, insofar as he wandered through that house (affectionately dubbed Gertrude) which was artistically seminal in many ways for many people.
As a musician Roldo is immersed, which is the tell tale of true artistry. He didn't just play original music on instruments from antiquity I had never even heard of at the time, he could tell you everything about the history of the instrument and how it had evolved from earlier forms. He was a walking music education class and museum and performer all in one.
I remember that one the first things he told me about himself was that he lived in a tree. I believed him and you would have too if you had known him. In fact letting him speak for himself makes far more sense than me trying to describe an essentially indescribable person who opened me up to so much musical possibility.
Thank you, Roldo, for all of it.
Here then is a culmination of his 50+ years of accomplishment just a click away:
Direct sample tunes:
I say "you" rather than "we" because from the start of the mega war on Iraq which has endured since the 1991 Desert Storm assault via Kuwait through troops being sent today against ISIS I have been persistently and often loudly been in opposition to the illegal invasion and intentional wholesale destruction of Iraq by US military forces and political cowardice of the neocons signatories of the "Project for The New American Century" cabal.
• Elliott Abrams
• Gary Bauer
• William J. Bennett
• John Ellis "Jeb" Bush
• Dick Cheney
• Eliot A. Cohen
• Midge Decter
• Paula Dobriansky
• Steve Forbes
• Aaron Friedberg
• Francis Fukuyama
• Frank Gaffney
• Fred C. Ikle
• Donald Kagan
• Zalmay Khalilzad
• I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby
• Norman Podhoretz
• J. Danforth Quayle
• Peter W. Rodman
• Stephen P. Rosen
• Henry S. Rowen
• Donald Rumsfeld
• Vin Weber
• George Weigel
• Paul Wolfowitz
All of these listed are psychopathic war criminals who will never be prosecuted for the 100,000+ Iraqis murdered and the thousands of Americans maimed and killed at the behest of these fools and tools.You who celebrated these maniacs and their pyscho quasi-religious vision of American world dominance with flag waving and rapt attention to the ghoulish green CNN oracles in willful patriotic ignorance are not much better. You may have been duped, but just like the civilian Germans before you, your salutes to the death machines are no less morally implicated. Will you ever learn?
Shine on good humor- joni mitchell (Shine)
Shine on good will
Shine on lousy leadership
Licensed to kill
Shine on dying soldiers
In patriotic pain
Shine on mass destruction
In some God's name!
Others including those directly connected in service to the G Bush Jr administration
by Joshua Holland
While Americans tend to see their country's involvement in Iraq as two discrete conflicts - "Operation Desert Storm" in 1991, and the 2003 Iraq war -- most Iraqis view it as one protracted campaign.They have good reason. We've been waging hot and cold war on Iraq for almost a quarter of a century.
As American boots once again hit the ground in Baghdad -- and as the Obama administration mulls other "options" -- it's important to remember that after 24 years of military, political and economic intervention in Iraq's affairs we've caused a lot of death and hardship, but accomplished none of our stated goals. The region has never been less stable, there is still an abundance of innocent blood being shed, oil prices remain high and Iraqis enjoy neither democracy nor prosperity. Many suffer from a lack of basic public services like running water and electricity.
Saddam Hussein's government was a corrupt military dictatorship that brutally repressed dissent, but before the first Gulf War, Iraq was a functional country that had adequate public services and the security that allowed Iraqis to walk through their streets in relative safely.
US intelligence agencies were actively assisting Saddam Hussein in his conflict against Iran throughout the 1980s, and continued to do so as late as 1988. We knew who we were dealing with at the time. As Shane Harris and Matthew Aid reported for Foreign Policy last year, "The Iraqis used mustard gas and sarin [nerve agent] prior to four major offensives in early 1988 that relied on U.S. satellite imagery, maps, and other intelligence."
These attacks helped to tilt the war in Iraq's favor and bring Iran to the negotiating table, and they ensured that the Reagan administration's long-standing policy of securing an Iraqi victory would succeed. But they were also the last in a series of chemical strikes stretching back several years that the Reagan administration knew about and didn't disclose.
Following the Iran-Iraq war, Hussein's cruelty became a political liability, and Iraq's invasion of Kuwait triggered the first of two major US-led wars against the country.
And contrary to the belief of many Americans who were first introduced to Iraq with CNN's breathless coverage of "precision" bombings that supposedly minimized civilian casualties, the fighting was anything but clean.
The war began with a series of massive airstrikes in January of 1991, followed by a ground invasion in February.
The Iraqis offered only disorganized and ragged opposition to the American invasion, in February of 1991, and the much feared ground war quickly turned into a bloody rout, with many of the retreating Iraqi units, including the elite Republican Guard, being pounded by American aircraft, artillery, and tanks as they fled north in panic along a six-lane road from Kuwait City to Basra, the major military stronghold in southern Iraq. The road became littered with blackened tanks, trucks, and bodies; the news media called it the "highway of death."
While the "highway of death" gained international media attention, there were no reporters on another road out of Kuwait where a massive ground attack two days after the US had officially declared a ceasefire killed "not only Iraqi soldiers but civilians and children as well," according to Hersh. He added: "Many of the dead were buried soon after the engagement, and no accurate count of the victims could be made."
[The] offensive... was not so much a counterattack provoked by enemy fire as a systematic destruction of Iraqis who were generally fulfilling the requirements of the retreat; most of the Iraqi tanks travelled from the battlefield with their cannons reversed and secured, in a position known as travel-lock. According to these witnesses, the 24th [Infantry] faced little determined Iraqi resistance at any point during the war or its aftermath; they also said that [24th Infantry commander Barry] McCaffrey and other senior officers exaggerated the extent of Iraqi resistance throughout the war.
Hersh also reported allegations that Bradley Fighting Vehicles from the 24th Infantry had fired on more than 350 "captured and disarmed Iraqi soldiers, including Iraqi wounded who had been evacuated from a clearly marked hospital bus," and "it was not known how many of the Iraqis survived, if any."
There was similar destruction elsewhere. In a report to the UN Security Council following the withdrawal of US ground forces in 1991, then-Secretary General Javier Pérez de Cuéllar wrote that nothing his team "had seen or read quite prepared us for the particular form of devastation which has now befallen the country."
The recent conflict has wrought near-apocalyptic results upon the economic infrastructure of what had been, until January 1991, a rather highly urbanized and mechanized society. Now, most means of modern life support have been destroyed or rendered tenuous. Iraq has, for some time to come, been relegated to a pre-industrial age, but with all the disadvantages of post-industrial dependency on [modern technology].
Iraq would never fully recover, in large part due to crippling sanctions imposed by the UN at the request of the US and British.
For the first five years after the 1991 conflict ended, Iraq was barred from exporting oil - its lifeblood - and couldn't import food or life-saving medicines.
In 1995, The New York Times reported that "as many as 576,000 Iraqi children may have died since the end of the Persian Gulf war because of economic sanctions imposed by the Security Council, according to two scientists who surveyed the country for the Food and Agriculture Organization."
Researchers found that mortality rates for children under five had tripled during the war and its immediate aftermath. By , the rate had increased fivefold.
Deaths related to diarrheal diseases have tripled in an increasingly unhealthy environment... Water and sanitation systems have deteriorated, hospitals are functioning at 40 percent of capacity, food prices are high and many people are living on Government rations that provide only 1,000 calories a day.
A report by a coalition of human rights groups concluded, "Civilian suffering in Iraq is not an unexpected collateral effect, but a predictable result of the sanctions policy." In 1996, 60 Minutes host Leslie Stahl asked then-Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, "We have heard that a half-million children have died. That's more children than died in Hiroshima. Is the price worth it?" Albright responded, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."
And then there was the bombing. Lots of bombing. John Pilger reported for The Independent that "there is bombing almost every day: it is the longest Anglo-American aerial campaign since the Second World War; yet it is mostly ignored by the British and American media."
Good news, closet criminals: Unlocking your cell phone is about to be perfectly legal. The notoriously mercurial Congress passed a bill Wednesday that overrides a portion of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act forbidding the practice, and President Obama has said that he looks forward to signing off on it. Unlocking phones had been perfectly legal until 2012, when Congress refused to extend a provision allowing it.
Good news in the copyright world is rare, but we have a couple of small victories to celebrate this week. The bad news: They only emphasize how grossly unbalanced our system remains.
These wins for customer freedom center around a technology broadly known as DRM, which stands for Digital Rights Management -- methods used by hardware and software companies to allow customers only certain rights. It should more properly be called Digital Restrictions Management, because that's the real aim of DRM. People have found ways to break or work around DRM, but federal law makes it illegal to do so in most circumstances.
The cracks in DRM's legal facade are starting to grow, too. On Monday, the Copyright Office and librarian of Congress said, among other things, that it's OK to A) "jailbreak" your phone, thereby letting you install software not approved by the phone seller; and B) use brief excerpts of DVD videos in other works. Renewing a previously granted exception to federal copyright law, the office also said it was OK to unlock your phone so that you can use it with a different mobile network.
The exceptions are still fairly narrow, to be sure, and how widely they'll be used remains to be seen given the way our mobile phone and media markets work in the real world. But they're notable in several ways.
One is the language the Librarian of Congress, James Billington, used in his rulemaking document (1.5MB PDF). For example, he called the act of jailbreaking a phone "innocuous at worst and beneficial at best."
Industry arguments against these exceptions, for which the Electronic Frontier Foundation had led the fight, had been laugh-out-loud ridiculous. Apple, you'll be unsurprised to hear, took the hardest-line stance against the concept that customers should have the right to use the devices they've purchased as they see fit.
Apple's objections ultimately came down to its insistence that customer freedoms would "undercut the overall iPhone experience" (emphasis from the original document filed in the case). In other words, you should only be able to use the iPhone, which is nothing more than a handheld computer connected to digital networks -- albeit a wonderfully designed device -- in precisely the ways Apple determines.
Having lost in the Copyright Office, Apple responded with typical arrogance, telling the Cult of Mac blog that it might now be legal to use your iPhone the way you want to, but you'll void the warranty if you do. And you can expect Apple to keep up its cat-and-mouse game of using software updates to screw up jailbroken phones, as the iPhone Dev-Team -- leaders of the jailbreaking movement -- are warning.
The continued ability to unlock your phone and use it on a competing network isn't much help, because of the insanity of America's competing mobile standards. Even if you unlock a newer iPhone, you can't use it to its maximum capabilities on Verizon, Sprint or T-Mobile because of various radio and chip incompatibilites.
But if you travel overseas frequently, unlocking your GSM-based AT&T or T-Mobile phone will be nontrivial (assuming it isn't already unlocked, as mine is). You can use local SIM cards in many countries and save a huge amount of money.
The other important move by the Copyright Office was to allow people to remix videos in other works. Essentially, the copyright officials observed that it was ridiculous to believe that we're all but forbidden from quoting from others' creative work just because it's in a DRM'd video format.
Unfortunately, this exception is way too narrow in the real world. It allows circumvention of the DRM solely for:
(i) Educational uses by college and university professors and by college and university film and media studies students;
(ii) Documentary filmmaking;
(iii) Noncommercial videos.
In other words, it's still not allowed to quote from another video work for commercial use (other than in a documentary). This is nuts. If authors had to get permission from every writer or publisher whose work they intended to quote, scholarship and journalism would grind to a halt.
The copyright office's exemptions also included the right to bypass computer system dongles that are broken or obsolete; a research exception for studying video game security; and read-aloud functions in e-books if not provided by the publisher.
Again, we shouldn't overstate the value of Monday's ruling. The law remains horribly unbalanced in favor of the copyright holders. But any progress is helpful.
I've always contended that conservatives are a fearful bunch who instinctively are existential paranoids who find comfort in predictability, law and order, permanence and fixed rules. Here's some science to back that up:
Scientists Discover the Fascinating Psychological Reason Why Conservatives Are...Conservative
You could be forgiven for not having browsed yet through the latest issue of the journal Behavioral and Brain Sciences. If you care about politics, though, you'll find a punchline therein that is pretty extraordinary.
Behavioral and Brain Sciences employs a rather unique practice called "Open Peer Commentary": An article of major significance is published, a large number of fellow scholars comment on it, and then the original author responds to all of them. The approach has many virtues, one of which being that it lets you see where a community of scholars and thinkers stand with respect to a controversial or provocative scientific idea. And in the latest issue of the journal, this process reveals the following conclusion: A large body of political scientists and political psychologists now concur that liberals and conservatives disagree about politics in part because they are different people at the level of personality, psychology, and even traits like physiology and genetics.
That's a big deal. It challenges everything that we thought we knew about politics--upending the idea that we get our beliefs solely from our upbringing, from our friends and families, from our personal economic interests, and calling into question the notion that in politics, we can really change (most of us, anyway).
The occasion of this revelation is a paper by John Hibbing of the University of Nebraska and his colleagues, arguing that political conservatives have a "negativity bias," meaning that they are physiologically more attuned to negative (threatening, disgusting) stimuli in their environments. (The paper can be read for free here.) In the process, Hibbing et al. marshal a large body of evidence, including their own experiments using eye trackers and other devices to measure the involuntary responses of political partisans to different types of images. One finding? That conservatives respond much more rapidly to threatening and aversive stimuli (for instance, images of "a very large spider on the face of a frightened person, a dazed individual with a bloody face, and an open wound with maggots in it," as one of their papers put it).
In other words, the conservative ideology, and especially one of its major facets--centered on a strong military, tough law enforcement, resistance to immigration, widespread availability of guns--would seem well tailored for an underlying, threat-oriented biology.
The authors go on to speculate that this ultimately reflects an evolutionary imperative. "One possibility," they write, "is that a strong negativity bias was extremely useful in the Pleistocene," when it would have been super-helpful in preventing you from getting killed. (The Pleistocene epoch lasted from roughly 2.5 million years ago until 12,000 years ago.)
Hibbing and his colleagues make an intriguing argument in their latest paper, but what's truly fascinating is what happened next. Twenty-six different scholars or groups of scholars then got an opportunity to tee off on the paper, firing off a variety of responses. But as Hibbing and colleagues note in their final reply, out of those responses, "22 or 23 accept the general idea" of a conservative negativity bias, and simply add commentary to aid in the process of "modifying it, expanding on it, specifying where it does and does not work," and so on. Only about three scholars or groups of scholars seem to reject the idea entirely.
That's pretty extraordinary, when you think about it. After all, one of the teams of commenters includes New York University social psychologist John Jost, who drew considerable political ire in 2003 when he and his colleagues published a synthesis of existing psychological studies on ideology, suggesting that conservatives are characterized by traits such as a need for certainty and an intolerance of ambiguity. Now, writing in Behavioral and Brain Sciences in response to Hibbing roughly a decade later, Jost and fellow scholars note that
Americans have been waiting five years for a pay raise, but obstructionist Republicans don't care. Ed Schultz, Rep. Tim Ryan and CWA President Larry Cohen discuss the need to raise the minimum wage.