12345...10...


Roger Moore’s 007 would have lost licence nearly eight times in his seven films – Mirror Online

Never mind a licence to kill, its a miracle 007 even had a licence to drive judging by Roger Moores record in his seven films as Bond.

Shaken and stirred experts spotted enough law-breaking to clock up 91 points and get the super-spy banned nearly eight times.

The worst film offender jumped a river in The Man with the Golden Gun, drove a Mercedes on rail tracks in Octopussy and wrecked a Renault in Paris in A View to a Kill.

And Jardine Motors study found lots of crazy driving by other heroes.

But dishonourable mentions must go to Steve McQueen, Michael Caine and his pals, and Ansel Elgort who in one film each clocked up 50, 72 and 75 points respectively.

Vin Diesels 68 over nine Fast & Furious films seems positively safe in comparison.

Neil Greig, of UK Road Safety charity IAM RoadSmart, said: In the UK anyone attempting to drive fast and furiously will soon run out of rubber, run out of empty streets and run out of luck with the law.

Read the original here:

Roger Moore's 007 would have lost licence nearly eight times in his seven films - Mirror Online

Effort brewing to end closed-door congressional nominations – Santa Fe New Mexican

In Chicago politics of old, the powerful Democratic Party chairman sat in a hotel meeting room with several cigar-chomping cronies. They slated the chairman as their candidate for mayor.

Richard J. Daley used that backroom system to displace an incumbent as the Democratic nominee and then unseat him. Daley remained mayor of Chicago for 21 years. Only death in 1976 loosened his grip on power.

State Rep. Daymon Ely says he doesnt want a similar system of closed-door politics to infect a special congressional election in New Mexico.

As it stands, members of state party central committees would choose the candidates for a probable vacancy in the Albuquerque-based 1st Congressional District.

About 700,000 people live in the district. Only a few hundred party regulars would select the nominees to run in a special election.

To prevent insiders from picking who makes the ballot, Ely wants to change state election law when legislators go into session next month.

You make it a fair fight. I do not like this system of a small number of people deciding on the candidates, Ely said Tuesday in a phone interview.

How would he bring the general public into the selection process if senators confirm U.S. Rep. Deb Haaland as interior secretary and she resigns from her elected office?

Ely is not sure. He mentioned the possibility of qualified candidates from all political parties being placed on a single ballot, and a winner emerging through ranked choice voting.

In that system, if no one has a majority of first-place votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. Voters who selected the ousted the candidate as their top choice then have their votes count for their second choice. The elimination of candidates and shuffling of votes continues until a candidate has a majority.

Do I think my idea is fabulous and should be accepted as Bible? No, I dont, Ely said.

He has reservations about the very concept hes mentioned.

I dont like ranked choice voting. Im not a proponent of it, Ely said.

But its a starting point for discussion, he said. His reasoning is he expects opposition to holding both traditional primaries and then a special election to choose Haalands successor.

I know there will be complaints that having primaries is more expensive and more time consuming, Ely said.

State Sen. Mark Moores, R-Albuquerque, called Ely to offer his help in changing the system to replace Haaland.

The Constitution says the House of Representatives shall be elected by the people. A smoke-filled room to pick the nominees I dont think that meets the spirit of what the founders had in mind, Moores said Tuesday.

He shares another position with Ely.

I hate ranked choice voting, Moores said. There is no concrete plan right now, but I want to make a more open, democratic process. Thats democratic with a small d.

State Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto, D-Albuquerque, often leads the Legislature in crafting election laws. He has a different view of party regulars choosing political nominees.

Ivey-Soto said a mere 31 central committee members in his Senate district voted when he became the replacement candidate in 2012 after the nominee withdrew. No fuss occurred over that process, Ivey-Soto said.

But thats not a fair comparison.

New Mexico has 112 state legislators but only three members of the U.S. House of Representatives. Shutting out the public while political insiders choose high-profile congressional candidates isnt smart and it shouldnt be acceptable.

The field of contenders to replace Haaland probably would be large and unwieldy, especially for the Democratic nomination. Republicans havent won the 1st Congressional District since 2006.

Already two state legislators, Rep. Melanie Stansbury and Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, say they will compete for the Democratic nomination if Haaland moves to the Interior Department.

Several other politicians, as well as people from law, business and sports, say they might seek the congressional seat.

Elys next step is to huddle with professional bill drafters at the Legislature. He needs to review election law and consider the possibilities for removing power from party regulars and giving it to the public.

In Daleys era, top-down decisions were the norm. As mayor of one of Americas largest cities, Daley could order a technician to kill the microphone of a dissenting alderman without receiving any serious criticism.

Picking congressional nominees without a public vote might seem tame by comparison. Moores and Ely say otherwise. They hope to start a movement that will change the law.

Read the rest here:

Effort brewing to end closed-door congressional nominations - Santa Fe New Mexican

Problems with the timeline to interpret and moore’s law – All About Circuits

Hi everyone,

I need help with this timeline,

I've this drawing of moree's law in which there are different states, in my timeline the state starts from Move and the X is set with the number 3 in hexadecimal. The output value m in the states of move and updt the value m is obtained by an integer division of the value of X at that moment.

This is the beginning of the schedule, which we can see that the X has a value of 3 and is in the Move state, with this information I have to get everything else (state, X and m).

With all this information I have managed to make this schedule, but they tell me that it is wrong and I do not understand why,

I have been looking through many sites but I have not found the solution to my problem, thank you very much in advance!

Read more here:

Problems with the timeline to interpret and moore's law - All About Circuits

Moore’s law | computer science | Britannica

Moores law, prediction made by American engineer Gordon Moore in 1965 that the number of transistors per silicon chip doubles every year.

Moore's law. Gordon E. Moore observed that the number of transistors on a computer chip was doubling about every 1824 months. As shown in the logarithmic graph of the number of transistors on Intel's processors at the time of their introduction, his law was being obeyed.

Britannica Quiz

Computers and Technology Quiz

Computers host websites composed of HTML and send text messages as simple as...LOL. Hack into this quiz and let some technology tally your score and reveal the contents to you.

For a special issue of the journal Electronics, Moore was asked to predict developments over the next decade. Observing that the total number of components in these circuits had roughly doubled each year, he blithely extrapolated this annual doubling to the next decade, estimating that microcircuits of 1975 would contain an astounding 65,000 components per chip. In 1975, as the rate of growth began to slow, Moore revised his time frame to two years. His revised law was a bit pessimistic; over roughly 50 years from 1961, the number of transistors doubled approximately every 18 months. Subsequently, magazines regularly referred to Moores law as though it were inexorablea technological law with the assurance of Newtons laws of motion.

What made this dramatic explosion in circuit complexity possible was the steadily shrinking size of transistors over the decades. Measured in millimetres in the late 1940s, the dimensions of a typical transistor in the early 2010s were more commonly expressed in tens of nanometres (a nanometre being one-billionth of a metre)a reduction factor of over 100,000. Transistor features measuring less than a micron (a micrometre, or one-millionth of a metre) were attained during the 1980s, when dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) chips began offering megabyte storage capacities. At the dawn of the 21st century, these features approached 0.1 micron across, which allowed the manufacture of gigabyte memory chips and microprocessors that operate at gigahertz frequencies. Moores law continued into the second decade of the 21st century with the introduction of three-dimensional transistors that were tens of nanometres in size.

The rest is here:

Moore's law | computer science | Britannica

Were not prepared for the end of Moores Law | MIT …

Moores argument was an economic one. Integrated circuits, with multiple transistors and other electronic devices interconnected with aluminum metal lines on a tiny square of silicon wafer, had been invented a few years earlier by Robert Noyce at Fairchild Semiconductor. Moore, the companys R&D director, realized, as he wrote in 1965, that with these new integrated circuits, the cost per component is nearly inversely proportional to the number of components. It was a beautiful bargainin theory, the more transistors you added, the cheaper each one got. Moore also saw that there was plenty of room for engineering advances to increase the number of transistors you could affordably and reliably put on a chip.

Soon these cheaper, more powerful chips would become what economists like to call a general purpose technologyone so fundamental that it spawns all sorts of other innovations and advances in multiple industries. A few years ago, leading economists credited the information technology made possible by integrated circuits with a third of US productivity growth since 1974. Almost every technology we care about, from smartphones to cheap laptops to GPS, is a direct reflection of Moores prediction. It has also fueled todays breakthroughs in artificial intelligence and genetic medicine, by giving machine-learning techniques the ability to chew through massive amounts of data to find answers.

But how did a simple prediction, based on extrapolating from a graph of the number of transistors by yeara graph that at the time had only a few data pointscome to define a half-century of progress? In part, at least, because the semiconductor industry decided it would.

Wikimedia

Moore wrote that cramming more components onto integrated circuits, the title of his 1965 article, would lead to such wonders as home computersor at least terminals connected to a central computerautomatic controls for automobiles, and personal portable communications equipment. In other words, stick to his road map of squeezing ever more transistors onto chips and it would lead you to the promised land. And for the following decades, a booming industry, the government, and armies of academic and industrial researchers poured money and time into upholding Moores Law, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that kept progress on track with uncanny accuracy. Though the pace of progress has slipped in recent years, the most advanced chips today have nearly 50 billion transistors.

Every year since 2001, MIT Technology Review has chosen the 10 most important breakthrough technologies of the year. Its a list of technologies that, almost without exception, are possible only because of the computation advances described by Moores Law.

For some of the items on this years list the connection is obvious: consumer devices, including watches and phones, infused with AI; climate-change attribution made possible by improved computer modeling and data gathered from worldwide atmospheric monitoring systems; and cheap, pint-size satellites. Others on the list, including quantum supremacy, molecules discovered using AI, and even anti-aging treatments and hyper-personalized drugs, are due largely to the computational power available to researchers.

But what happens when Moores Law inevitably ends? Or what if, as some suspect, it has already died, and we are already running on the fumes of the greatest technology engine of our time?

Its over. This year that became really clear, says Charles Leiserson, a computer scientist at MIT and a pioneer of parallel computing, in which multiple calculations are performed simultaneously. The newest Intel fabrication plant, meant to build chips with minimum feature sizes of 10 nanometers, was much delayed, delivering chips in 2019, five years after the previous generation of chips with 14-nanometer features. Moores Law, Leiserson says, was always about the rate of progress, and were no longer on that rate. Numerous other prominent computer scientists have also declared Moores Law dead in recent years. In early 2019, the CEO of the large chipmaker Nvidia agreed.

In truth, its been more a gradual decline than a sudden death. Over the decades, some, including Moore himself at times, fretted that they could see the end in sight, as it got harder to make smaller and smaller transistors. In 1999, an Intel researcher worried that the industrys goal of making transistors smaller than 100 nanometers by 2005 faced fundamental physical problems with no known solutions, like the quantum effects of electrons wandering where they shouldnt be.

For years the chip industry managed to evade these physical roadblocks. New transistor designs were introduced to better corral the electrons. New lithography methods using extreme ultraviolet radiation were invented when the wavelengths of visible light were too thick to precisely carve out silicon features of only a few tens of nanometers. But progress grew ever more expensive. Economists at Stanford and MIT have calculated that the research effort going into upholding Moores Law has risen by a factor of 18 since 1971.

Likewise, the fabs that make the most advanced chips are becoming prohibitively pricey. The cost of a fab is rising at around 13% a year, and is expected to reach $16 billion or more by 2022. Not coincidentally, the number of companies with plans to make the next generation of chips has now shrunk to only three, down from eight in 2010 and 25 in 2002.

Finding successors to todays silicon chips will take years of research.If youre worried about what will replace moores Law, its time to panic.

Nonetheless, Intelone of those three chipmakersisnt expecting a funeral for Moores Law anytime soon. Jim Keller, who took over as Intels head of silicon engineering in 2018, is the man with the job of keeping it alive. He leads a team of some 8,000 hardware engineers and chip designers at Intel. When he joined the company, he says, many were anticipating the end of Moores Law. If they were right, he recalls thinking, thats a drag and maybe he had made a really bad career move.

But Keller found ample technical opportunities for advances. He points out that there are probably more than a hundred variables involved in keeping Moores Law going, each of which provides different benefits and faces its own limits. It means there are many ways to keep doubling the number of devices on a chipinnovations such as 3D architectures and new transistor designs.

These days Keller sounds optimistic. He says he has been hearing about the end of Moores Law for his entire career. After a while, he decided not to worry about it. He says Intel is on pace for the next 10 years, and he will happily do the math for you: 65 billion (number of transistors) times 32 (if chip density doubles every two years) is 2 trillion transistors. Thats a 30 times improvement in performance, he says, adding that if software developers are clever, we could get chips that are a hundred times faster in 10 years.

Still, even if Intel and the other remaining chipmakers can squeeze out a few more generations of even more advanced microchips, the days when you could reliably count on faster, cheaper chips every couple of years are clearly over. That doesnt, however, mean the end of computational progress.

Neil Thompson is an economist, but his office is at CSAIL, MITs sprawling AI and computer center, surrounded by roboticists and computer scientists, including his collaborator Leiserson. In a new paper, the two document ample room for improving computational performance through better software, algorithms, and specialized chip architecture.

One opportunity is in slimming down so-called software bloat to wring the most out of existing chips. When chips could always be counted on to get faster and more powerful, programmers didnt need to worry much about writing more efficient code. And they often failed to take full advantage of changes in hardware architecture, such as the multiple cores, or processors, seen in chips used today.

Go here to see the original:

Were not prepared for the end of Moores Law | MIT ...

Moore’s Law: The rule that really matters in tech – CNET

Intel co-founder Gordon Moore speaking in 2007 at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco. Stephen Shankland/CNET

Year in, year out, Intel executive Mike Mayberry hears the same doomsday prediction: Moore's Law is going to run out of steam. Sometimes he even hears it from his own co-workers.

But Moore's Law, named after Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, who 47 years ago predicted a steady, two-year cadence of chip improvements, keeps defying the pessimists because a brigade of materials scientists like Mayberry continue to find ways of stretching today's silicon transistor technology even as they dig into alternatives. (Such as, for instance, super-thin sheets of carbon graphene.)

Oh, and don't forget the money that's driving that hunt for improvement. IDC predicts chip sales will rise from $315 billion this year to $380 billion in 2016. For decades, that revenue has successfully drawn semiconductor research out of academia, through factories, and into chips that have powered everything from a 1960s mainframe to a 2012 iPhone 5.

The result: Moore's Law has long passed being mere prognostication. It's the marching order for a vast, well-funded industry with a record of overcoming naysayers' doubts. Researchers keep finding ways to maintain a tradition that two generations ago would have been science fiction: That computers will continue to get smaller even as they get more powerful.

"If you're only using the same technology, then in principle you run into limits. The truth is we've been modifying the technology every five or seven years for 40 years, and there's no end in sight for being able to do that," said Mayberry, vice president of Intel's Technology and Manufacturing Group.

Plenty of other industries aren't as fortunate. You don't see commercial supersonic airplane travel, home fusion reactors, or 1,000-mile-per-gallon cars. But the computing industry has a fundamental flexibility that others lack: it's about bits, not atoms.

"Automobiles and planes are dealing with the physical world," such as the speed of sound and the size and mass of the humans they carry, said Sam Fuller, chief technology officer of Analog Devices, a chipmaker that's been in the electronics business even longer than Intel. "Computing and information processing doesn't have that limitation. There's no fundamental size or weight to bits. You don't necessarily have the same constraints you have in these other industries. There potentially is a way forward."

That means that even if Moore's Law hits a wall and chip components stop shrinking, there are other ways to boost computer performance.

Before we get too carried away with lauding Moore's Law, be forewarned: Even industry optimists, Moore included, think that about a decade from now there could be trouble. Yes, all good things come to an end, and at some point those physical limits people have been predicting will turn out to be real.

To understand those limits and how they may be overcome, I talked to researchers at the big chip companies, academics, and industry gurus. I wanted to go beyond what what most of us think we know about semiconductors and hear it from the experts. Do they have doubts? What are they doing about those doubts? The overwhelming consensus among the chip cognescenti, I found, was, yes, there's a stumbling block a decade or so from now. But don't be surprised if we look back at that prediction 20 years from now and laugh.

For related coverage, see what would happen if Moore's Law fizzled and a Q&A with Intel's Mike Mayberry.

Strictly speakingMoore's Law is named after Gordon Moore, who in a 1965 paper in Electronics Magazine observed an annual doubling in the number of chip elements called transistors. He refined his view in 1975 with a two-year cycle in an updated paper. "I didn't think it would be especially accurate," Moore said in 2005, but it has in fact proved to be. And now, Intel times its tick-tock clock to Moore's Law, updating its chip architecture and its manufacturing technology on alternating years.

Here's a very specific illustration of what Moore's Law has meant. The first transistor, made in 1947 at Bell Labs, was assembled by hand. In 1964, there were about 30 transistors on a chip measuring about 4 square millimeters. Intel's "Ivy Bridge" quad-core chips, the third-generation Core i7 found found in the newest Mac and Windows PCs, has 1.4 billion transistors on a surface area of 160 square millimeters -- and there are chips with even more.

A transistor is the electrical switch at the heart of a microprocessor, similar to a wall switch that governs whether electric current will flow to light a lamp. A transistor element called a gate controls whether electrons can flow across the transistor from its "source" side to its "drain" side. Flowing electrons can be taken logically as a "1," but if they don't flow the transistor reads "0." Millions of transistors connected together on a modern chip process information by influencing each other's electrical state.

In today's chips, a stretch of silicon connects the source to the drain. Silicon is a type of material known as a "semiconductor" because, depending on conditions, it'll either act as a conductor that transmits electrons or as an insulator that blocks them. Applying a little electrical voltage to the transistor's gate controls whether that electron current flows.

To keep up with Moore's Law, engineers must keep shrinking the size of transistors. Intel, the leader in the race, currently uses a manufacturing process with 22-nanometer features. That's 22 billionths of a meter, or roughly a 4,000th the width of a human hair. For contrast, Intel's first chip, the 4004 from 1971, was built with a 10-micron (10,000-nanometer) process. That's about a tenth the width of a human hair.

Intel's Ivy Bridge generation of processors is an example of how hard it can be to sustain that process.

To make the leap from the earlier 32nm process to today's 22nm process, Intel had to rework the basic "planar" transistor structure. Previously, the electrons traveled in a flat silicon channel laid flat into the plane of the silicon wafer and with the gate perched on top. To work around the limits of that approach, Intel flipped the planar transistor's silicon on its side into a fin that juts up out of the plane of the chip. The gate straddles this fin the way a person might straddle a low fence with both legs. To improve performance, Intel can put as many as three of these fins in a single transistor.

The result is a "tri-gate" chip design that shrinks without suffering debilitating new levels of "leakage," which takes place when current flows even when a transistor is switched off. And it means Intel has one more "shrink" of the chip manufacturing process under its belt.

Developing the tri-gate transistors wasn't easy: Intel researchers built the company's first finned transistor in 2002, nine years before it was ready for mass-market production. And it wasn't the only challenge; other fixes include making gates out of metal, connecting transistors with copper rather than aluminum wires, and using "strained" rather than ordinary silicon for the channel between source and drain.

In 2013, Intel plans another shrink to a 14nm process. Then comes 10nm, 7nm, and, in 2019, 5nm.

And it's not just Intel making up these numbers. In the chip business, a fleet of companies depend on coordinated effort to make sure Moore's Law stays intact. Combining academic research results with internal development and cross-industry cooperation, they grapple with quantum-mechanics problems such as electron tunneling and current leakage -- a bugaboo of incredibly tiny components in which a transistor sucks power even when it's switched off.

Doom and gloomGiven the engineering challenges, a little pessimism hardly seems out of place.

A 2005 Slate article bore the title, "The End of Moore's Law." In 1997, the New York Times declared, "Incredible Shrinking Transistor Nears Its Ultimate Limit: The Laws of Physics," and in another piece quoted SanDisk's CEO forecasting a "brick wall" in 2014. In 2009, IBM Fellow Carl Anderson predicted continuing exponential growth only for a generation or two of new manufacturing techniques, and then only for high-end chips.

Even Intel has fretted about the end by predicting trouble ahead getting past 16nm processes.

In decades past, Moore himself was worried about how to manufacture chips with features measuring 1 micron, then later chips with features measuring 0.25 microns, or 250 nanometers. A human hair is about 100 microns wide.

Yes, there are fundamental limits -- for example, quantum mechanics describes a phenomenon called tunneling where the position of an electron can't be pinned down too precisely. From a chip design point of view, that turns out to mean that an electron can essentially hop from source to drain, degrading a chip with leakage current.

So is there an end to Moore's Law? In a 2007 interview, Moore himself said, "There is." He continued:

Now playing: Watch this: Father of Moore's Law on the future of microprocessing

0:42

That was five years ago, and few seem to want to venture too much farther beyond Moore's prediction.

"I think we have at least a decade before we start getting into issues," said Patrick Moorhead, analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy. "I still give it another decade," added Robert Mears, founder and president of Mears Technologies, which has developed a technology called MST CMOS designed to improve the performance of the conventional silicon channel.

Beyond siliconAlthough Moore's Law might not continue if transistors can't be shrunk, the post-silicon future shouldn't be overlooked. When traditional silicon transistors eventually run out of gas, there are plenty of alternatives waiting in the wings.

"The most probable outcome is that silicon technology will find a way to keep scaling, some way continue to deliver more value with succeeding generations," said Nvidia Chief Scientist Bill Dally.

One likely candidate keeps the same basic structure as today's transistors but speeds them up by breaking out of today's constraints in the periodic table of the elements. In transistors now, the source, drain, and channel are made from silicon, which inhabits a column of the periodic table called group IV.

But it's possible to use indium arsenide, gallium arsenide, gallium nitride or other so-called III-V materials from group III and group V. Being from different groups on the periodic table means transistor materials would have different properties, and the big one here is better electron mobility. That means electrons move faster and transistors therefore can work faster.

"You can imagine staying with fairly traditional transistors, moving to silicon-germanium, then III-V structures," Fuller said. But that's mostly a stopgap. "There is some potential future in that, but it pretty quickly runs into similar limits that hit silicon. There may be [performance improvement] factors of two, four, maybe eight to be gained."

Another tweak could replace the silicon channel with "nanowires," super-thin wires made of various semiconductor materials (including, it so happens, lowly silicon itself). More exotic and more challenging is the possibility of using carbon nanotubes instead. These are made of a cylindrical mesh of interlinked carbon atoms that can carry current, but there are lots of difficulties: connecting them to the rest of the transistor, improving their not-so-hot semiconductor properties, and ensuring the nanotubes are sized and aligned correctly.

Glorious grapheneWhich brings us to one of the most promising post-silicon candidates: graphene, a flat honeycomb lattice of carbon that resembles atomic chicken wire. If you roll up a sheet of graphene, you get a nanotube, but it turns out the flat form also can be used as a semiconductor.

One advantage graphene holds over carbon nanotubes is the possibility that it can be manufactured directly as a step in the wafer processing that goes on in chip factories, instead of being fabricated separately and added later. (This is a very big deal in the intricate and minutely choreographed business of chip manufacture.) Another is that it's got fantastically high electron mobility, which could make for very fast switching speeds if graphene is used to connect source and drain in a transistor.

"I think graphene is very promising," Fuller said.

But graphene has plenty of challenges. First on the list: it lacks the good "band gap," a separation in energy levels that determines whether a semiconductor conducts electrons or insulates. Graphene by itself has a band gap of zero, meaning that it just conducts electricity and fails as a semiconductor.

"Graphene has some very nice properties, but as it stands at the moment, it doesn't have a proper band gap," Robert Mears, president of Mears Technologies. "It's not really a replacement for silicon or other semiconductor materials. It's a good connect medium, conductor, but not necessarily a good switch at the moment."

Here's how Fuller describes an ideal transistor: "When you turn on, it comes on strong, and when you turn it off, it consumes almost no power. That's what you want for a great logic gate." The problem so far, though. is that "the graphene transistors today have been hard to turn off."

But there are ways to give the material a band gap, including using two separated strips of graphene fabricated as "nanoribbons." Varying the placement of the transistor gate or gates also can help. If scientists work out the challenges, the result could be a transistor that's not necessarily smaller, but that is a lot faster.

"We're in the early days of exploring the use of graphene, like we were with silicon a long time ago -- in the 1950s, maybe," Fuller said.

But wait, there's moreAnother radical approach is called spintronics, which relies on information being transmitted within a chip using a property of electrons called spin.

"If you could use spin to store a 1 or a 0, rather than charge or absence of charge, it doesn't have the same thermodynamic limits that moving charge around does," Fuller said. "You probably wouldn't run into the same power limits."

Silicon photonics, in which light rather than electrons carry information, could be involved in future chips.

"That can be a great partial solution between chips, or even on chips," Fuller said. Today, a large fraction of a chip's power is used to keep the chip components marching lockstep by broadcasting ticks of the chip's clock, but there are promising research projects to do that with optical links.

There are limits to how short optical links get, said Mears, who by the way invented the erbium-doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) technology that vastly improved fiber-optic network capacity. The problem: the wavelength of light is inconveniently large compared to chip components, he said.

"In spite of it having been one of my main research subjects, I'm not a great fan of optics on a chip," Mears said. "Any kind of optical waveguide on a chip will look huge compared to the kinds of devices you can put on a chip."

Fuller concurred. "What makes it great for communicating over long distances makes it difficult to make a logic gate out of them: photons don't interact with each other. If you want to build a NOR gate or NAND gate [two forms of basic logic gates out of which chips are assembled], you need to switch from photons to electrons for the gate, then back to photons to transmit the data," he said.

Mayberry is keeping an eye on so-called spintronics, but as with many technologies he's cautious. "A spin wave travels at a slower rate than an electron wave," he notes. There are also numerous manufacturing challenges.

Beyond that, there's a wide range of even more exotic research under way -- quantum computing, DNA computing, spin wave devices, exitonic field-effect transistors, spin torque majority gates, bilayer pseudospin field-effect transistors, and more. An industry consortium called the "Nanoelectronics Research Initiative" is monitoring the ideas.

"There are something like 18 different candidates they're keeping track of. There's no clear winner, but there are emerging distinctive trends that will help guide future research," Mayberry said.

It's certainly possible that computing progress could slow or fizzle. But before getting panicky about it, look at the size of the chip business, its importance to the global economy, the depth of the research pipeline, and the industry's continued ability to deliver the goods.

"There's an enormous amount of capital that's highly motivated to make sure this continues," said Nvidia's Dally. "The good news is we're pretty clever, so we'll come through for them."

Continued here:

Moore's Law: The rule that really matters in tech - CNET

Tenured UH music prof. dismissed by Board of Regents – The Cougar – The Daily Cougar

By Cristobella Durrette December 5, 2020

The UH System Board of Regents approved a recommendation for the dismissal of tenured Moores School of Music professor Lawrence Wheeler on the grounds of substantial and manifest neglect of professional or academic responsibilities.

The viola and chamber music professor came under fire for refusing to teach his assigned courses for Fall 2018 and Fall 2019 and failing to meet the faculty workload requirement of three undergraduate courses per semester, according to a statement of charges.

There is no doubt that on multiple occasions, professor Wheelers willful and unprofessional conduct not only interfered with the instructional and administrative functions of his home department, but also led to diminished student confidence in the Moores School of Music and by extension, the University of Houston, said Mark Clarke, associate provost for faculty affairs and development.

Wheeler has previously been subject to a hearing before the University faculty grievance committee. The tribunal provided a unanimous recommendation for Wheelers dismissal, Clarke said. Dismissal proceedings began in February 2019.

Wheeler pushed back against Clarkes claims, arguing that his termination after 44 years of service to the University follows a decade of discrimination by administrators, including Kathrine G. McGovern College of Arts dean Andrew Davis.

He said Davis leveled adverse administrative actions against him after he reported Davis for conducting an alleged improper relationship with a graduate student while Davis was the graduate studies director of the Moores School of Music. These claims have not been substantiated.

Outside of the alleged departmental administrative prejudice, Wheeler believes the call for his termination is in part a retaliation to his appearance before the Board of Regents in May 2017. At the time, he reported that UH was allegedly breaking the law by withholding faculty workload and salary information.

My dismissal is not the result of due process and fair and equal treatment, but bad faith, unethical and dishonest actions, discrimination and retaliation by various University administrators who represent you, the Board of Regents, Wheeler said.

Clarke reported that Wheelers claims were false.

The faculty hearing tribunal found his allegations to be baseless and lacking any evidence to support them, Clarke said.

Wheeler attributed his refusal to teach one of his assigned courses, a music fundamentals class, in Fall 2018 and Fall 2019 to the subject being outside of his area of expertise and to a difficulty reading the text required for the course. He has taught the course a total of seventeen times.

That course was assigned not because there were others who wanted to teach it, it was done deliberately to humiliate me and to put me in a situation where I might refuse to teach it, Wheeler said.

Chairman Tillman Fertitta pushed back on Wheelers claim.

I think that I could probably teach anything after seventeen times of practicing it, Fertitta said. If youre a professional, you learn to present something.

[emailprotected]

Tags: Board of Regents, Moores School of Music

Read the rest here:

Tenured UH music prof. dismissed by Board of Regents - The Cougar - The Daily Cougar

Semiconductor Leaders Bank on the Power of WBGs – News – All About Circuits

The invention of the silicon integrated circuit (IC) almost 60 years ago paved the way for modern computing and todays tech-fueled electronics era. While silicon isn't going anywhere, in the past few years, alternative semiconductor materials have taken the stage as strong competitorsespecially in the automotive and space industries.

This is occurring withMoores law as the backdrop,the axiom of Gordon Moore, co-founder of Intel, that the number of transistors in an IC doubles roughly every two years.

Its not a situation thats sustainable because as more transistors are packed into a smaller space, more heat is generated. And as time goes by, were very quickly approaching silicons physical limit as design engineers struggle to meet market demands for new devices with greater power density and energy efficiency.

While we dont know for sure when well reach this limitforecasters, including Moore himself, expect it to happen by around 2025what we do know is that we need semiconductor alternatives that can handle theconstraints of miniaturization better than silicon.

Thats where semiconductors like silicon carbide (SiC) and gallium nitride (GaN), wide bandgap (WBG) semiconductors, come in.

WBG semiconductors have drummed up a lot of excitement throughout the semiconductor industry, especially where power electronics are concerned.

The primary benefit of WBGs is that their bandgapsthe energy difference between insulating and conducting statesare much greater than that of silicon. As a result, devices using WBGs can handle higher voltages, operate at higher temperatures, and achieve higher frequencies while using less energy.

However, its a fairly new technology, and devices using WBG semiconductors currently cost more than their silicon-based cousins, which benefit from a proven track record.

To encourage the use of WBG semiconductor technology, the IEEE Power Electronics Society (PELS) released their WBG power semiconductors roadmap in September 2019, a strategic look at the long-term landscape of WBG, its future, and what the possibilities arewell worth a read for those seeking more contextual information about WBG technology.

This year has seen a lot of activity from big semiconductor industry leaders moving to explore technologies like SiC and GaN that offer them more power.

In March, STMicroelectronicswhich has already established a strong presence in the SiC market having first began working on WBG materials in 1996 with SiC MOSFETs and diodesacquired a majority stake in Exagan, a French GaN innovator.

While SiC and GaN are both WBG semiconductors, they address different parts of the power IC market. Thus, the acquisition will allow ST to meet different customer demands across industrial markets.

ST says that its GaN products will address a variety of applications such as power factor correction, DC/DC converters, and adaptors in segments like space, industry, and telecoms. Future developments of ST GaN products will target the automotive sector with on-board chargers for electric vehicles and mild-hybrid DC-DC converters.

More recently, Creeand Infineon were involved in deals that focus on expanding SiC development efforts.

In mid-October, Cree announced the $300 million sale of its LED business to SMART Global Holdings, Inc., a transaction that represents a milestone in Crees transformation to a pure-play global semiconductor powerhouse that will focus on SiC and GaN devices. Crees product line-up already includes SiC, mainly in its Wolfspeedproduct family, but the company is attempting to hone in exclusively on SiC by selling off other elements of the business.

Crees CEO, Gregg Lowe, said that the sale will position the company with a strategic focus capable of leading the transition from Si to SiC and the capital to support continued investments in growth opportunities across electric vehicle, 5G, and industrial applications.

Then in November, Infineon signed a supply agreement with GT Advanced Technologies (GTAT) for SiC boules in response to steadily increasing demand for SiC-based switches for both industrial and automotive applications.

With the supply agreement we have now concluded, we ensure that we will be able to meet the rapidly growing demand of our customers with a diversified supplier base. GTATs high-quality boules will provide an additional source for competitive SiC wafers fulfilling the best-in-class material standards now and in the future, said Peter Wawer, President of Infineons Industrial Power Control Division.

It's activities like these from semiconductor firms that paints a clear picture: WBG semiconductors like SiC and GaN will play a pivotal role as Si-based ICs begin to reach their physical limits and lose their momentum. No doubt, then, well soon begin to see much more of a focus on WBG technologies from semi companies both big and small.

Continue reading here:

Semiconductor Leaders Bank on the Power of WBGs - News - All About Circuits

Intel Editorial: Sparking the Next Era for the Intel Brand – Global Banking And Finance Review

The following is an opinion editorial by Karen Walker of Intel Corporation:

Intel, with our logo, bunny suits and iconic musical bong, is a brand familiar to people worldwide in fact, Forbes recently named us one of the worlds most valuable brands. Built on 52 years of innovation, a dedication to excellence, speed and performance, the Intel brand has remained largely untouched for years, even as the company has undergone a significant business evolution.

Today, we make a leap into the future, with a transformed Intel brand that reflects our essential role in creating technology that moves the world forward.

We are a different company than we were even five years ago. We are actively executing against a new growth strategy, creating a new revenue mix and pursuing new market segments fueled by data and the rise of artificial intelligence, 5G network transformation and the intelligent edge. Our diverse portfolio and the broader ecosystem are unparalleled. As we enter new markets and broaden our technology, we see an opportunity to play an even bigger role in our customers success. Opportunity that starts with Intel technology as the foundation or spark for the worlds greatest innovations.

At the same time, we are a team of over 100,000 dreamers and doers who believe strongly in our purpose: to create world-changing technology that enriches the lives of every person on Earth. There has never been a more urgent time to harness the breadth and scale of our reach to make a positive impact for people, business and our planet.

More: Intel Transforms Its Brand (YouTube video) | 11th Gen Core/Evo Launch (Press Kit)

As a marketer, my aspiration for the new Intel brand is to capture and convey both our business and cultural evolution through a simplified, focused platform that supports our 2030 ambitions while staying true to our history.

The new look and feel of the Intel brand is purposeful and inspired by Robert Noyces quote: Dont be encumbered by history. Go off and do something wonderful. This quote has long served as a source of inspiration and innovation across the company; its in Intels DNA. The mantra has been our North Star, guiding generations of workers to make a meaningful impact on the world. This new brand is not only representative of the technology we create, but also an embodiment of the human spark of ingenuity and innovation that runs through the company.

The new Intel brand also reflects our commitment to accelerating progress against the worlds most critical challenges. As our CEO Bob Swan stated this year: Our world is facing challenges unlike any we have seen before. The urgent need for action to address climate change; the deep digital divide; the lack of diversity, inclusion and equity in technology; and the global pandemic call for a new era of shared responsibility. To address this, we have raised the bar for ourselves and evolved our corporate responsibility strategy to increase the scale of our work with others to create a more responsible, inclusive and sustainable world, enabled through technology and our collective actions. This truth, in who we are and what the brand represents, infuses humanity into everything we do. It brings solutions to our customers that touch the lives of people across the globe.

These driving forces made clear it was time for our external image to evolve to better represent the company weve become:

We know a new brand wont come to life with new colors, sounds and logo; it needs to be a unifying rally cry built on action and aligned with our company purpose. We recognize that only through time and a continued track record for excellence in innovation and delivering for our customers will we shape and define ourselves.

Rather than introduce everything at once, our plan is to roll out our brand over time. We start today with the launch of our 11th Gen Intel Core processors, as they represent one of our biggest technical innovations in years.

Moving forward, you will see the brand reflected in:

We welcome you to join us in this journey, to transform the way you do business, to do something wonderful. Now is the time to take this internal mantra out into the world and celebrate it celebrate you and all the things your work inspires others to do.

All the world needs is an idea and Intel Inside to do something wonderful.

Karen Walker is senior vice president and chief marketing officer for Intel.

About Intel

Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) is an industry leader, creating world-changing technology that enables global progress and enriches lives. Inspired by Moores Law, we continuously work to advance the design and manufacturing of semiconductors to help address our customers greatest challenges. By embedding intelligence in the cloud, network, edge and every kind of computing device, we unleash the potential of data to transform business and society for the better. To learn more about Intels innovations, go to newsroom.intel.com and intel.com.

Intel Corporation. Intel, the Intel logo and other Intel marks are trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries. Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.

Tara Smith

503-696-2761

[emailprotected]

Read more from the original source:

Intel Editorial: Sparking the Next Era for the Intel Brand - Global Banking And Finance Review

Arthur (Artie) Satkowski | Obituaries | thedailynewsonline.com – The Daily News Online

Arthur (Artie) Satkowski, 69, of Medina, N.Y., passed away peacefully at his home on Wednesday, July 29, 2020, with his loving wife at his side.

Born on March 10, 1951, in Medina, N.Y., he was the son of the late Ben and Anna (Will) Satkowski.

Arthur worked for the NYS Department of Corrections & Community Supervision and retired with 25 years of dedicated service. He retired to Las Vegas for six years and returned home to be with his family and friends. In his younger years, he as an avid bowler and managed the Medina Bowling Alley. He enjoyed fishing with his father, brother, Tom and many friends. Arthur was a strong-minded individual who always spoke his mind in a tone for all to hear. This confidence carried over into his love of poker and his willingness to call you for the hand. Arthur possessed a green thumb, always producing one of the best vegetable gardens in the area. He would frequently be found selling the sweetest strawberries in front of his home. He had a great affection for dogs; leading him to his most recent endeavor of dog care and loved his two dogs, Luna and Bella. He truly treasured his family and friends.

He is survived by his wife, Pamela Jones Satkowski, a son, John Satkowski, two daughters, Melinda (Jason) Cogovan, Elizabeth Satkowski, all of Medina, N.Y.; a daughter-in-law, Sara (David) Bouche of Kendall, N.Y.; three stepsons, Jamie (Alisha) Duffina of Medina, N.Y., Kevin Jones of Oakfield, N.Y., Jason Duffina of Theodore, Ala. Also surviving are two brothers, Thomas Satkowski of Medina, N.Y., Jim (Barb) Satkowski of South Carolina; and a sister, Clara (John) Lockwood and a brother-in-law, Larry (Linda) Barnaby of Moores Fork, N.Y. Also surviving are numerous brothers- and sisters-in-law, nieces, nephews and grandchildren.

Besides his parents, Arthur is predeceased by his first wife, Nancy (Pries) Satkowski; maternal parents, Harold and Grace (Higgins) Pries; maternal parents, Clearance and Grace (Hawksby) Barnaby; stepson, Bobby Jones; grandson, Devante Boston; nephew, Justin Pries; and brothers-in-law, Jamie Winters and Gary Barnaby.

Relatives and friends may call on Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2020, from 11 a.m.-1 p.m. at the Oak Orchard Assembly of God Church, 12111 Ridge Rd, Medina, NY 14103, where a memorial service will be held at 1 p.m. with the Pastor Rev. Daniel A. Thurber officiating. Burial will be held at the convenience of the family.

Memorials may be made in Arthurs name to: PAWS, 3371 Gaines Basin Rd. Albion, NY 14411, or to: Strong Hospital, 601 Elmwood Ave, Rochester, NY 14642.

Arrangements were entrusted to the Bogan & Tuttle Funeral Home, 226 Pearl St., Medina, NY 14103.

Please light a candle or share a memory of Arthur at: http://www.bogantuttlefunerals.com

See the article here:

Arthur (Artie) Satkowski | Obituaries | thedailynewsonline.com - The Daily News Online

Intel Makes Changes to Technology Organization – Global Banking And Finance Review

Today, Intel CEO Bob Swan announced changes to the companys technology organization and executive team to accelerate product leadership and improve focus and accountability in process technology execution. Effective immediately, the Technology, Systems Architecture and Client Group (TSCG) will be separated into the following teams, whose leaders will report directly to the CEO:

As a result of these changes, Murthy Renduchintala will leave Intel on Aug. 3, 2020.

I look forward to working directly with these talented and experienced technology leaders, each of whom is committed to driving Intel forward during this period of critical execution, said Swan. I also want to thank Murthy for his leadership in helping Intel transform our technology platform. We have the most diverse portfolio of leadership products in our history and, as a result of our six pillars of innovation and disaggregation strategy, much more flexibility in how we build, package and deliver those products for our customers.

About Intel

Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) is an industry leader, creating world-changing technology that enables global progress and enriches lives. Inspired by Moores Law, we continuously work to advance the design and manufacturing of semiconductors to help address our customers greatest challenges. By embedding intelligence in the cloud, network, edge and every kind of computing device, we unleash the potential of data to transform business and society for the better. To learn more about Intels innovations, go to newsroom.intel.com and intel.com.

Intel Corporation. Intel, the Intel logo and other Intel marks are trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries. Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.

Will Moss

(650) 521-1754

[emailprotected]

Read more:

Intel Makes Changes to Technology Organization - Global Banking And Finance Review

7/28 Impact Wrestling TV Results: Moore’s review of Eddie Edwards vs. Trey Miguel for the Impact World Championship, The Good Brothers vs. Reno Scum,…

By John Moore, ProWrestling.net Staffer (@liljohnm)

Impact Wrestling TVTaped July 19-20 in Nashville, Tennessee at Skyway StudiosAired July 28, 2020 on AXS TV

Impact started off with a Previously on recap of last weeks show

Josh Mathews and Madison Rayne were on commentary

1. Eddie Edwards vs. Trey Miguel for the Impact World Heavyweight Championship. The commentators are calling Trey Trey Miguel now, but are also talking about how hes acting like a more serious wrestler now. Eddie and Trey started off with a collar and elbow lockup. Trey kept Eddie under control for the opening minutes. Trey then hit Eddie with a bulldog on Treys knee. Trey did a cool looking handstand into a headscissors into a dropkick leading to a one count. Eddie regained control with an atomic drop and Belly to Belly.

Eddie went for several quick pins on Trey for one counts. Trey and Eddie ended up knocking each other out heading into commercial.[c]

Trey and Eddie traded strong style punches in the center of the ring (I kinda miss Michael Elgins strong style exchanges where the punches look a bit more snug). Eddie blocked a Come Up Stunner, but Trey reversed the reversal and then nailed Eddie with the Come Up Stunner for the two count. Eddie reversed Treys dive into a flapjack. Trey reversed a Tiger Driver into a huracanrana. Eddie recovered and hit Trey with a Tiger Driver for a two count. After an exchange, Eddie nailed Trey with the Boston Knee Party for the victory.

Eddie Edwards defeated Trey Miguel via pinfall in 10:22.

Quickly after Eddies victory, World Class Maniac Eric Young made his entrance to confront Eddie. Young teased entering the ring, but he backtracked telling Eddie to sleep well and that hell do things on my time

Johns Thoughts: A really good opening match. Trey looked good and putting in good performances like this will do him well in the future when Impact decides to get behind him. He seems to be on that AJ Styles/Christopher Daniels path of being a future star (where in the past Jeff Jarrett was pushing Dezmond Xavier of the Rascalz as the future main eventer). Im willing to see how the reboot of Eddie Edwards goes. The guy has to be rebuilt after two years of acting like Perry Saturns Moppy phase. So far, so good. Eddies been playing it straight for the last few weeks. The next step, the guy should probably shave and trim his hair. There wasnt a problem visually with American Wolf Eddie right? His problem back then was his confidence and body language and hes conquered that.

Josh Mathews and Madison Rayne checked in from their commentary set where they ran through upcoming segments. Josh Mathews advertised Katie Forbes giving a free preview of her websites photos later on this show. He also said Wrestle House was premiering

They cut to the Wrestle House show. There was cheesy sitcom music in the background. Rosemary and Taya were chatting. Taya said she had enough and was going to leave. Taya tried to leave but she walked into a wall of fire where stock footage of WWE Producer Abyss was trying to hand her a bag of tacks. After more bantering between the wrestlers they cut to a TV Sitcom Intro for the show.

Alisha Edwards was shocked to find out that they were in a reality show. Tommy Dreamer introduced himself as the voice of Wrestle House. Dreamer revealed that it was his house. Larry D wondered if it was the House of Hardcore. Dreamer said it wasnt because he used his ECW checks before they bounced to buy it. More banter ensued[c]

Johns Thoughts: Im afraid that the creative team will get a bit too cute, especially with the Rosemary magic, but so far Im liking what Im seeing. I always like me some Reality-TV Dreamer. Which has me wondering, Dreamers backstage comedy skits are usually good ones. I hope hes the one creatively running this because he brings over the humor that he would do on the Edge and Christian Show of Awesomeness. Ultimately, I hope this is close to the Edge and Christian Show because while it had a rough start, that show ended up being pretty entertaining.

An ad aired for Talking Shop A Mania, which is The Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson wrestling special on Fite TV. The headline match is supposedly the Boner Yard Match. They showed Luke Gallows, Karl Anderson, and Maria Kanellis recreating their famous New Japan scene where they all stopped their match against the Kingdom to dance with Maria (this was back when New Japan had the Maria Kanellis ass cam and the overly horny Japanese color commentator)

The show cut back to Wrestle House. Team XXXL and The Deaners were arguing. Susie Yung got in between them and told them that arguments are bad and they should call a truce. Cousin Jake said no way jose to that. Dreamer cut in and said we didnt sign him (theres that E&C kayfabe humor). Kylie Rae recommended that they air high five to make the truce with social distancing. Johnny Swinger said that he learned you can bow like Mr. Fuji to shake hands with social distance. Everyone but Cousin Jake agreed to the truce. Susie told Jake to agree for me. Jake reluctantly gave in.

They cut back to Taya and Rosemary. Taya wondered the reason why everyone was here. Dreamer cut in and said that everyone is here for the opportunity to win a Million Dollars. Everyone celebrated with Dreamer doing a DX crotch chop. Rosemary yelled and telled everyone that it wasnt true. Dreamer insisted that it was true. Dreamer said he makes the rules and he usually makes income off this six bedroom house off AirBNB. The bedroom revelation caused the wrestlers to all sprint to claim their beds. Kylie and Susie were being too polite with their bed, which caused Johnny Swinger to take his bed.

Johnny Swinger offered Crazzy Steve to be his bed mate and young boy (as in the Japanese wrestling term). Steve disagreed and said he wasnt desperate. Swinger called Steve a Mizzark. More comedy antics ensued with the wrestlers claiming beds. Steve and Acey tried to claim the ring as a bed. Dreamer called for a Match time when both men entered the ring in the back yard. Suddenly through the power of magic, Acey and Steve were in their ring gear. Kylie agreed to be the referee.

2. Acey Romero vs. Crazzy Steve where the winner gets to claim the ring as a bed. Im recapping this match because they cut away from cinematic camera to a regular handheld. Steve tried to agree to split the ring in half. Romero then chased Steve around the ring as Steve struck sleeping poses. Romero then tossed Steve across the ring. Steve then fooled Ace into gassing himself out. Steve tried to agree to a truce again, but Ace hit Steve with a Atomic Drop into a Sleeper for the tapout win.

Acey Romero defeated Crazzy Steve via submission.

Johnny Swinger said he was proud of his young boy doing good work. The show cut away from the Wrestle House

Johns Thoughts: Mixed thoughts, but ultimately I thought it was fun. I kinda like that they took the Lucha Underground approach of doing cinematics during cutscenes, and traditional in-ring. Sadly the in-ring here was a comedy indie match. No fault of the producers, but not quite what I was hoping for. As for the comedy, I thought it was solid and Dreamer is definitly bringing over some of his Edge and Christian Show influence to this cinematic production.

Rohit Raju ran into TJ Perkins and Fallah Bahh backstage. Bahh handed Raju a surgical mask. Raju was a bit disgusted because it came from Bahhs hand, but he put the mask on. Perkins forced Raju to wear a neck gaiter. Bahh forced Raju to stand six feet away. Raju tried to tempt TJ Perkins to join the X Division again for some reason. Perkins said he would consider it.

TJs answer caused Chris Bey to run off and find Chris Bey. Raju tried to convince Bey that TJ Perkins was coming after Chris Beys title and that Bey might need backup to counter Fallah Bahh in the other corner. Bey agreed to let Raju be in his corner when he faces Perkins. The show then cut to an Ozzy Osbourne Travel Show commercial (which tells you Im not watching via screener this week)[c]

Gia Miller interviewed Ace Austin and Madman Fulton (I think Gia and Ace are a real life couple?). Ace cut off Gia during her question. Ace talked about two new guys showing up in his ring and cheap shotting him. Ace said the Good Brothers are trying to get their attention and Ace and Fulton are about to look very closely at the Good Brothers vs. Reno Scum match

A highlight package aired which showcased the TNA career of Chris Sabin and Alex Shelley, the Motor City Machine Guns

Ethan Page and Josh Alexander were trying to cut a promo backstage. Alexander yelled at Page a bit for being silent. Alexander talked about how the reason is because theyre missing their championship belts. Alexander said The North are as smart as they are talented. Alexander brought up the rematch clause they have as former champions. Page took off his glasses and was about to speak, but instead he pouted a bit and walked off

This weeks Impact Plus Flashback Match of the week was The Motor City Machine Guns vs. Beer Money Inc. for the TNA Tag Titles from TNA Victory Road 2010. There were multiple referees in the ring for some reason (because its TNA?). Somehow, this match ended with both referees counting three counts against the other team. The Hebners agreed to restart the match. They aired about 5 minutes and the Guns won

Johns Thoughts: I mean, therea a lot of great Guns finishes in TNA history. And the one they decide to show is the overbooked Only in TNA one? They have a lot of returning viewers. I dont think this is too harmful, but why would you remind returning viewers of some of the reasons they left (this being the illogical overbooked finishes).

Katie Forbes was hanging onto Rob Van Dam, running through some of the photos shes going to show viewers[c]

Johns Thoughts: I mean, I get that sex does sell if sold right; but this is just straight up trash and trashy. Didnt they learn from when they both didnt increase their popularity many times in the past, even so much as to getting their show banned on Twitch.

The show cut back to EC3 cutting a promo in front of his usual brick wall. He talked about having the longest undefeated streak in TNA history. He then bragged about beating TNA hall of famers in the past. His old theme played for a few seconds and cut off. EC3 said he doesnt care about any of that. He said hes destroying all of his history. EC3 talked about how he hates his past and when he looks in the mirror he sees failure.

He said he didnt fail in his career, but to get to his past successes he had to give up his soul. He said he doesnt fear his past, because his past is his biggest foe. EC3 said hes here for the distruction of his past. EC3 said in order to take back his power he must control the narrative

Johns Thoughts: Another good EC3 promo, but I still have my fears. The production and the delivery is strong. What I fear is the content. Its borderline pretentious without crossing the line into pretentious (a little bit of street-preacher in there). There is a level of being mopey and self hating. Im willing to wait on this though, because I have confidence that he pulls it all together. Im guessing well have to wait and see how this unfolds.

Gia Miller interviewed Moose backstage. Moose bragged about beating the Panda boy Fallah Bahh. Moose claimed to beat Bahh in 30 seconds and Gia Miller tried to correct him. Moose said he was throwing out another invitational for the TNA Championship. Miller asked Moose for his thoughts on EC3. Moose said EC3 wasnt getting an invitation because Moose doesnt want to conquer EC3s narrative yet. Heath [Slater] interrupted the interview saying he has an invitation. Slater claimed to have a TNA contract.

Moose said there is no committee. Heath pointed out that because theres no committee, then theres no TNA, and no TNA championship. An angry Moose agreed to give Heath a title shot next week. Moose left. Scott DAmore walked up to Heath and said Heaths contract in hand is as legitamate as something written by Heyman & Heyman law offices. DAmore said since Heath conned Moose into a match, that if Heath beats Moose he can get a roster spot

Johns Thoughts: Now a part of me likes the hook, but a part of me is really wondering why they are recreating the Heath Slater and Shane McMahon free agent storyline with DAmore playing the role of Shane McMahon? He might even be using the same lines that Shane used in 2016? Are we going to get Rhino eating Cheese Whiz and Crackers in two weeks? This is kinda making me want to see Heath go back to WWE and continue his program with Drew McIntyre, just for some fresh Heath.

3. Impact Knockouts Champion Deonna Purrazzo vs. Kimber Lee in a non-title match. Lee pummeled Purrazzo early on with forearms. Lee then hit Purrazzo with a huracanrana. Purrazzo rolled to ringside for a moment of respite. Lee caught Deonna in the ring with a pump kick for a two count. Lee used her legs to lock Purrazzo in a Full Nelson. Lee then locked Purrazzo in a body scissors submission. Deonna recovered and then stompped a mudhole at Deonna in the corner.

Josh Mathews said that Kylie Rae cant challenge for the title because shes stuck at wrestle house. Both women traded strikes with Deonna getting the upper hand. Lee avoided Purrazzos Fujiwara armbar. Lee gave Purrazzo a German Suplex for a two count. Purrazzo dragged Lee off the top rope and hit Lee with the Sacrifice Arm Breaker. Deonna locked in the Fujiwara armbar for the submission win.

Deonna Purrazzo defeated Kimber Lee via submission in 5:28.

Deonnas entrance theme was interrupted by Jordynne Graces generic entrance theme. Jordynne Grace made her entrance with an arm in a sling. Grace entered the ring and then beat up Deonna after revealing her arm wasnt injured

Johns Thoughts: Solid showcase match for the new champion and it looks like Kimber Lee will probably be designated as the gatekeeper wrestler moving forward, given the deep depth chart of Impacts womens division now. Simple and effective stuff with Purrazzo and Grace afterwards. Given how Grace vs. Purrazzo was arguably the match of the night at Slammiversary, I wouldnt mind a Grace vs. Purrazzo rematch at Bound for Glory? Maybe sooner (but they had Josh go out of his way to say that Kylie Rae is stuck in Wrestle House to explain why Kylie isnt challenging for the title).

Katie Forbes ran into Sami Callihan backstage. Callihan said he is a former world champ. Forbes walked away, joking that Callihan looked like a fan[c]

A Talking Shop A Mania ad aired, featuring characters from Southpaw Regional wrestling

A Brian Myers re-debut vignette aired

They cut back to Wrestle House. Swinger joked that he stunk up the bathroom and then reoffered Crazzy Steve a chance to share a bed and be his young boy. Steve did a creepy laugh and said it would be a great idea. They cut to The Deaners in a room. Jake was on the bed while Cody slept on the floor. They bantered over snooring. Tommy Dreamer emerged from Jakes comforter and proposed another match time. Jake wondered if its today, Dreamer asked for them to do it in the morning.

Cut to the morning

4. Cousin Jake vs. Cody Deaner in a Wrestle House match. Alisha Edwards was referee. Both Deaners continued to argue over the snoring. Cody bowed to try to call for a truce. Jake agreed and Cody tried to roll up Jake for a two count. Cody then beat up Jake around the ring. Jake countered Cody with an Irish Whip into a leaping front hip attack. Jake put on Codys hat and turned it. Jake hit Cody with a lariat for a two count. Cody hit Jake with a series of punches. Jake hit Cody with a sitout sidewalk slam for the victory.

Cousin Jake defeated Cody Deaner via pinfall in about 3:00.

Alisha Edwards claimed she didnt know which Deaner so she called Jake A Deaner. Jake and Cody then agreed on a truce.They cut back into cinematic mode where Cody was happy when he walked in front of a production RV trailer (or Private Bus?)[c]

Johns Thoughts: We didnt need two wrestle house segments this week. Someone in Impacts editing team needs to learn restraint, and lack of restraint usually leads to some sharks jumping. And can somebody give Cousin Jake another gimmick. The guy has a good look and exhibits great ability, but hes saddled with the country stereotype gimmick. I dont want a big man version of Rohit Raju running around too (lots of talent, but pegged as a comedy jobber)!

Sami Callihan ran into Ken Shamrock backstage. Callihan wanted Shamrocks explanation for losing their Slammiversary match. Shamrock acted biwildered and said he has to go and doesnt know when hell be back. Shamrock left. Katie Forbes then pointed at Sami to RVD saying that Sami was creeping on her. RVD told Sami to hip his distance away from Katie. Katie and Rob left after Sami blew them off

Rob Van Dam and Katie Forbes made their entrance. Forbes had her stripper money guns. Josh kept hyping up Katies Free.99 preview. Katie then plugged her website and said shes showing off things tonight for free.99. Katies photos then flashed on the screen, except with Sami Callihans face and voiceover over it. After the slideshow, Katie threw a fit. Josh Mathews hyped Good Brothers vs. Reno Scum for after the break[c]

Johns Thoughts: Uhm? Did somebody let Vince McMahon book some segments for Impact? Either that or Scott DAmore and Vince have the same sense of humor. I get that feeling sometimes. Anyway, what was that? Why? Im a fan of good ol fan service just like any red blooded American male, but this is just trash at several levels. Didnt they get banned from Twitch for this trash? And I didnt need the image of Sami Callihan with a stripper body. So this is how were kicking off Samis babyface run? The guy was the MVP of Impact for the last two years and now in 2020 hes a magic hacker and a stripper. Damn 2020.

An Impact Plus Ad aired

Dezmond Xavier and Zachary Wentz are back to the 70s show segments. Dez said he invited a power ranger, in suicide. Wentz said Suicide is not a power ranger (I agree). Suicide joined the smoke circle. They did a weed smoking montage

Josh Mathews and Madison Rayne checked in from their commentary set. They advertised Rohit Raju and Chris Bey vs. Bahh and Perkins, Moose vs. Heath for the TNA belt, a MCMG interview, and Eddie Edwards vs. a mystery opponent for the TNA title

Josh Mathews then interviewed Rich Swann via skype. Rich Swann said hes disappointed after being on the couch for 7 months, making his return challenging for the world championship only to get put back on the shelf. Swann said Young took away Swanns opportunity and may have changed Swanns life. Rayne asked Swann for a medical update. Swann said the doctors are telling him too many things, so much that hes in a dark place now. Swann said hell be by next week with an update for the fans. Swann said he cant handle it anymore and asked if Josh can end the interview now. Josh agreed

Entrances for the main event match took place. But before then they cut to commercials featuring the the Ozzyborne travel show[c]

Johns Thoughts: Hey, last time I was reviewing via AXS it was all Eddie Money commercials, now its Ozzy. Anyway, I think Rich Swann has the chance to cut one hell of a promo next week. Key with that is hopefully he drops the Lionel Richie tribute act, at least for one week. Swann showed in his feud with Sami Callihan that the guy can be a main event badass. Swann, despite being a lot smaller, reminds me of babyface Dean Ambrose in WWE (not necessarily the more edgy John Moxley), and thats not a bad thing. That man was world champ.

The show cut back with 9 minutes left at the top of the hour

5. The Good Brothers Luke Gallows and Karl Anderson vs. Reno Scum Adam Thornstowe and Luster the Legend. Karl Anderson and Adam Fn Thornstowe started off the match. Anderson ended up taking donw Thornstowe with a shoulder tackle. Thornstowe tried to run the ropes, but he was taken down by another tackle. Gallows tagged in and threw Kane like boxing punches in the corner. Gallows hit Thornstowe with a series of elbows. The Good Brothers traded tags to work on and keep Adam under control.

Ace Austin showed up at the top of the ramp where he took a seet. That allowed Luster to tag in and body slam Adam onto Anderson. Reno Scum traded tags and worked on Anderson for a bit. Anderson got a window of opportunity after hitting Thornstowe with a spinebuster. Gallows cleaned house off the hot tag. Anderson tagged back in. The Brothers hit Thornstowe with a Magic Killer for the victory.

The Good Brothers defeated Reno Scum via pinfall in 6:29.

Ace Austin distracted the Brothers which allowed Reno Scum to blindside Gallows and Anderson. Gallows and Anderson quickly dispatched Reno Scum (how ineffective are these guys?). Ace distracted Gallows and Anderson again to allow Madman Fulton to blindside them. Fulton actually cleared Gallows and Anderson from the ring. Ace and Fulton brawled with Gallows and Anderson to the back. Josh said they need to send a camera to follow the brawl.

They cut to the back where the two teams were still brawling. Gallows dumped Ace into a pile of cardboard boxes. Ace recovered and both teams brawled to the parking lot. The show cut away right before Gallows went for a big boot on Fulton

Johns Thoughts: Im happy that local California Bay Area Team Reno Scum got to make the main event on AXS, but I also understand that these guys are best utilized as enhancement guys for the stars (I do hope that Thornstowe in particular gets a singles run one day though. I got to see that guy have great feuds with people like Jeff Cobb, Brian Cage, Rich Swann, Drake Younger, Jacob Fatu, and other cali standouts. His only weakness is his cartoony promos). Anyway good showcase for the former Bullet Club members. Gallows and Anderson look way more of a big deal in three Impact weeks than theyve had in their entire WWE run. The only thing Im not a huge fan of is Ace Austin seemingly being setup as the sacrificial lamb for the debut of the Good Brothers.

Whenever they head to the next set of tapings, I really hope they right ship and do something similar to what Jason Powell proposed last week several times, that they push Ace Austin as the new Fergal Devitt. Anderson and Gallows have been in teams with Devitt and Devitts successors (AJ Styles, Kenny Omega, and Cody Rhodes). That sets up Ace as a future main eventer if they go that route. I can also see Ace add a level of menacing to him similar to what they did in New Japan with white meat happy-go-lucky Fergal Devitt to the edgy and quirky leader of Bullet Club.

This weeks show was solid, but I thought that the editing wasnt too great. It seemed like there were less matches and too much Wrestle House which made way for a comedy Rascalz smoke circle and a dud Katie Forbes segment? Wrestle House wasnt bad, but it looked like they squeezed two weeks of Wrestle House into one week of show to the point of immediate oversaturation. Everything else pretty much set up a few new programs and new characters. The best part of this show was definitely Eddie Edwards vs. Trey Miguel and it was a good first step in Eddie rehabbing his character.

Visit link:

7/28 Impact Wrestling TV Results: Moore's review of Eddie Edwards vs. Trey Miguel for the Impact World Championship, The Good Brothers vs. Reno Scum,...

Intel Editorial: The Pandemic Drives New Era of Tech Collaboration – Global Banking And Finance Review

The following is an opinion editorial by Rick Echevarria of Intel Corporation.

One hundred days ago, our CEO, Bob Swan, announced the Intel Pandemic Response Technology Initiative. Intel would invest $50 million to combat COVID-19 in ways we knew best: using technology to study and help with the diagnosis of the coronavirus, helping disrupted educators and students, and supporting innovative new ideas and projects.

Ive had the privilege of leading this initiative and seeing an extraordinarily committed group of Intel employees, customers and partners mobilize. In just over three months they have made possible new and creative uses for our technology to address a range of challenges. Weve come a long way, learned a lot and still have much to do. On behalf of this team at 100 days in I wanted to share some of that journey.

More: Intel Response to COVID-19 Crisis (Press Kit) | Intels PRTI at 100 Days: In Los Angeles, Online Classes that Inspire

So far, Intel has partnered with over 100 organizations on close to 200 projects totaling more than $30 million in contributions from the original pandemic response to first early steps toward recovery. In those early days, we provided ventilator manufacturers with vital parts. We assisted with the creation of virtual intensive care units.

Today, were providing technology and educational content for students who might otherwise be left behind. Were aiding businesses as they take the first steps to re-open safely. And were exploring ways Intel technology and our financial support can be used in the search for diagnoses, treatments and vaccines.

Our role through the pandemic points out undeniable lessons: Technology used to its potential can save lives and change lives. No one can solve these problems alone. And we will never thrive as we once did if we dont work with our customers and our communities to make our world better after we recover.

Three examples show how far weve come.

As weve moved through the lifecycle of pandemic response, its obvious the coronavirus has changed society, industry and Intel. Historic calls for change (the end to acts of racism, inequity and social injustice) in COVID-19s shadow illustrate how important the coming few months will be for all of us in the U.S. and around the world. Collectively, its led us at Intel to recognize several vital lessons.

Technology and its creative use are needed more than ever: Four months ago, Intel CEO Bob Swan wrote to our customers: You provide vital services, tools and infrastructure to millions of people who are directly struggling with this virus Day in and day out, it has proven true. Inside Intel and with our customers, weve broken down silos to move more quickly than ever. Newly discovered sources of technology value, like Providences care at a distance, prove to be life-changing as patients and care providers grow comfortable with them. Weve thought creatively and pulled together customers to provide services that are saving lives, educating students and keeping our community infrastructure solid.

Data collaboration and sharing have never been more important: Solving the challenges brought to the world by the coronavirus requires researchers worldwide to work together. The whole world has become a peer community. There is much we dont know about the coronavirus, but with the help of federated learning, researchers are able to privately share patient data as they collaborate to create a vaccine or treatment program. They can access a rich world of data to make better decisions and follow groundbreaking clues, all without breaching privacy laws. Our technology to effectively manage, share and collaborate using important data sets has never been as significant as when researchers are chasing a deadly virus.

Better health will go hand in hand with recovering economies: Peoples health will be critical to the worlds economic recovery, just as the economic recovery will be key to everyones health. Going back to doing things the way we did them before wont carry over after the coronavirus is solved. I keep going back to it, but telehealth is a great example. To best realize its benefits, we need to recognize its success and acceptance among people seeking physician guidance. Only that will allow it to thrive.

As a company, we have learned to operate with more empathy, agility and velocity. We look at our products not for what we know they can do, but for what they might be able to do in a changed world. Outside of our walls, we have come together in new ways with customers, partners and the community and weve seen what a difference working together can make when we all think and act creatively.

We wont forget these lessons. They will shape our approach, as we press forward with our goals for the next decade.

Life will be different for everyone around the world after the coronavirus is history. Doctors and patients will communicate from a greater distance. Educators will find lessons in distance learning to make online classes more effective and meaningful. Cures for many more diseases will come from the private, safe and efficient sharing of data.

Our Pandemic Response Technology Initiative cant solve all of the challenges were facing, but what we learn and what we teach others after this event will create a strong foundation for the future. Its inspiring to see how our technology and that of the broader high-tech industry will make enriching lives (even in a world as challenged as it is today) possible.

Rick Echevarria is vice president in the Sales, Marketing and Communications Group and general manager of the Intel Olympic Program at Intel Corporation. He leads Intels Pandemic Response Technology Initiative.

About Intel

Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) is an industry leader, creating world-changing technology that enables global progress and enriches lives. Inspired by Moores Law, we continuously work to advance the design and manufacturing of semiconductors to help address our customers greatest challenges. By embedding intelligence in the cloud, network, edge and every kind of computing device, we unleash the potential of data to transform business and society for the better. To learn more about Intels innovations, go to newsroom.intel.com and intel.com.

Intel Corporation. Intel, the Intel logo and other Intel marks are trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries. Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.

Laurie Smith DeJong

503-313-6891

[emailprotected]

See the original post here:

Intel Editorial: The Pandemic Drives New Era of Tech Collaboration - Global Banking And Finance Review

Singapore Researchers Look to Intel Neuromorphic Computing to Help Enable Robots That Feel – Global Banking And Finance Review

Whats New: Today, two researchers from the National University of Singapore (NUS), who are members of the Intel Neuromorphic Research Community (INRC), presented new findings demonstrating the promise of event-based vision and touch sensing in combination with Intels neuromorphic processing for robotics. The work highlights how bringing a sense of touch to robotics can significantly improve capabilities and functionality compared to todays visual-only systems and how neuromorphic processors can outperform traditional architectures in processing such sensory data.

This research from National University of Singapore provides a compelling glimpse to the future of robotics where information is both sensed and processed in an event-driven manner combining multiple modalities. The work adds to a growing body of results showing that neuromorphic computing can deliver significant gains in latency and power consumption once the entire system is re-engineered in an event-based paradigm spanning sensors, data formats, algorithms, and hardware architecture. Mike Davies, director of Intels Neuromorphic Computing Lab

Why It Matters: The human sense of touch is sensitive enough to feel the difference between surfaces that differ by just a single layer of molecules, yet most of todays robots operate solely on visual processing. Researchers at NUS hope to change this using their recently developed artificial skin, which according to their research can detect touch more than 1,000 times faster than the human sensory nervous system and identify the shape, texture and hardness of objects 10 times faster than the blink of an eye.

Enabling a human-like sense of touch in robotics could significantly improve current functionality and even lead to new use cases. For example, robotic arms fitted with artificial skin could easily adapt to changes in goods manufactured in a factory, using tactile sensing to identify and grip unfamiliar objects with the right amount of pressure to prevent slipping. The ability to feel and better perceive surroundings could also allow for closer and safer human-robotic interaction, such as in caregiving professions, or bring us closer to automating surgical tasks by giving surgical robots the sense of touch that they lack today.

While the creation of artificial skin is one step in bringing this vision to life, it also requires a chip that can draw accurate conclusions based on the skins sensory data in real time, while operating at a power level efficient enough to be deployed directly inside the robot. Making an ultra-fast artificial skin sensor solves about half the puzzle of making robots smarter, said assistant professor Benjamin Tee from the NUS Department of Materials Science and Engineering and NUS Institute for Health Innovation & Technology. They also need an artificial brain that can ultimately achieve perception and learning as another critical piece in the puzzle. Our unique demonstration of an AI skin system with neuromorphic chips such as the Intel Loihi provides a major step forward towards power-efficiency and scalability.

About the Research: To break new ground in robotic perception, the NUS team began exploring the potential of neuromorphic technology to process sensory data from the artificial skin using Intels Loihi neuromorphic research chip. In their initial experiment, the researchers used a robotic hand fitted with the artificial skin to read Braille, passing the tactile data to Loihi through the cloud to convert the micro bumps felt by the hand into a semantic meaning. Loihi achieved over 92 percent accuracy in classifying the Braille letters, while using 20 times less power than a standard Von Neumann processor.

Building on this work, the NUS team further improved robotic perception capabilities by combining both vision and touch data in a spiking neural network. To do so, they tasked a robot to classify various opaque containers holding differing amounts of liquid using sensory inputs from the artificial skin and an event-based camera. Researchers used the same tactile and vision sensors to test the ability of the perception system to identify rotational slip, which is important for stable grasping.

Once this sensory data was captured, the team sent it to both a GPU and Intels Loihi neuromorphic research chip to compare processing capabilities. The results, which were presented at Robotics: Science and Systems this week, show that combining event-based vision and touch using a spiking neural network enabled 10 percent greater accuracy in object classification compared to a vision-only system. Moreover, they demonstrated the promise for neuromorphic technology to power such robotic devices, with Loihi processing the sensory data 21 percent faster than a top-performing GPU, while using 45 times less power.

Were excited by these results. They show that a neuromorphic system is a promising piece of the puzzle for combining multiple sensors to improve robot perception. Its a step toward building power-efficient and trustworthy robots that can respond quickly and appropriately in unexpected situations, said assistant professor Harold Soh from the Department of Computer Science at the NUS School of Computing.

About the Intel Neuromorphic Research Community: The Intel Neuromorphic Research Community is an ecosystem of academic groups, government labs, research institutions, and companies around the world working with Intel to further neuromorphic computing and develop innovative AI applications. Researchers interested in participating in the INRC and developing for Loihi can visit the Intel Neuromorphic Research Community website. A list of current members can also be found at the site.

More Context: Neuromorphic Computing (Press Kit) | Intel Labs (Press Kit) | How Neuromorphic Computing Uses the Human Brain as a Model (Video) | Exceptional sense of touch for robots and prosthetics (National University of Singapore) | New breakthrough by NUS researchers gives robots intelligent sensing abilities to carry out complex tasks (National University of Singapore)

About Intel

Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) is an industry leader, creating world-changing technology that enables global progress and enriches lives. Inspired by Moores Law, we continuously work to advance the design and manufacturing of semiconductors to help address our customers greatest challenges. By embedding intelligence in the cloud, network, edge and every kind of computing device, we unleash the potential of data to transform business and society for the better. To learn more about Intels innovations, go to newsroom.intel.com and intel.com.

Intel Corporation. Intel, the Intel logo and other Intel marks are trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries. Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.

Alexa Korkos

415-706-5783

[emailprotected]

Read the original post:

Singapore Researchers Look to Intel Neuromorphic Computing to Help Enable Robots That Feel - Global Banking And Finance Review

Police may serve search warrants out of their jurisdiction, Alabama AG says – alreporter.com

The United States Supreme Court on Wednesday handed down two decisions strengthening religious liberty and expanding freedom of religion.

In the first case, the Court ruled in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor, saying that the Catholic nuns do not have to pay for medical procedures that they object to including abortion.

The decision was written by pro-life Justice Clarence Thomas. The 7 to 2 decision majority opinion is the biggest pro-life decision of the Trump presidency. This overturns a lower court ruling saying employees are entitled to abortion and birth control services.

The Montgomery-based Foundation for Moral Law praised the Supreme Courts decision in Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania. The Foundation had filed an amicus brief with the Court arguing in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poors case.

This case arose from Obamacares contraception mandate. The Little Sisters objected to complying with the Obamacare mandate of contraception and abortion services based on their religious convictions. The Trump administration issued new rules that exempted employers with religious and moral objections to complying with the mandate. The States of Pennsylvania and New Jersey sued, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled against the Trump administration and the Little Sisters.

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Third Circuit. The Court held that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 allowed the Trump administration to craft these regulations and that the Trump administration had complied with the Administrative Procedures Act in enacting the rules.

Consequently, it did not reach the religious freedom claim, but it held that it was proper for the Trump administration to consider the effect of federal religious freedom law when it passed the rules.

Public Service Announcement

GREAT win at the Supreme Court today on the Obamacare abortion drug mandate, said Republican Senate candidate Jeff Sessions. For the first time in nearly a DECADE, the Little Sisters of the Poor & other religious groups can do their good work without fear of being forced to violate their beliefs.

As Attorney General, I reversed the Obama administrations position in the Little Sisters of the Poor litigation, and said NO MORE to government persecution of religion, Sessions said. I have a lifelong record of fighting to protect religious freedom. This is one of many issues on which President Donald J. Trump and I worked on together to take a strong stand for religious liberty. I also started the Religious Liberty Task Force at the Department of Justice to protect religious freedom across the entire government.

Sessions is running for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate in the Republican primary on July 14. His opponent is former Auburn head football Coach Tommy Tuberville.

Although the majority opinion focused more on administrative law than on religious liberty, the Courts decision was a win for religious freedom because it upheld important rules that protect Americans with religious and moral objections to Obamacares contraceptive mandate, said Matt Clark, the attorney who wrote the Foundations amicus brief in this case.

Justice Alitos concurring opinion importantly emphasized that the courts must defer to a persons interpretation of his religious obligations when he raises a religious objection, Clark continued. As James Madison wrote in 1785, The Religion then of every man must be left to the conviction and conscience of every man; and it is the right of every man to exercise it as these may dictate.

Kayla Moore is the President of the Foundation for Moral Law.

The main opinion said that Congress considers religious liberty to be an unalienable right, Moore said. We commend Congress and the Court for recognizing it as such, and we hope that the Court will take that principle to its logical conclusion in every religious freedom case that it considers.

Bible scholar and cultural commentator Dr. Michael Brown said, This is a tremendous victory for freedom of religion and conscience in America. Under Obamacare, employers were forced to provide birth control coverage as part of their health plans, which for many Catholics in particular would be in violation of their faith. The court has overwhelmingly ruled for religious freedom, honoring moral objections of employers who now may opt out of providing abortion or birth control services.

The Supreme Court also released a ruling Wednesday saying religious institutions have the right to pick their own employees and are exempt from secular anti-discrimination laws.

Trump and moral conservatives won two big ones, Brown said.

In Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru the Court ruled that the First Amendment prevents courts from intervening in employment disputes between religious schools and the teachers at those schools who are entrusted with the responsibility of instructing their students in the faith.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, The religious education and formation of students is the very reason for the existence of most private religious schools, and therefore the selection and supervision of the teachers upon whom the schools rely to do this work lie at the core of their mission. Judicial review of the way in which religious schools discharge those responsibilities would undermine the independence of religious institutions in a way that the First Amendment does not tolerate.

Brown is the author of the new book, Evangelicals at the Crossroads: Will We Pass the Trump Test? He has written 35 books and hosts a nationally syndicated daily talk radio show The Line of Fire, as well as the host of shows on GOD TV, NRBTV, and METV.

Barbara Ann Luttrell is the Vice President of External Affairs for Planned Parenthood Southeast.

Planned Parenthood SE was upset with both rulings.

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld two Trump administration rules that allow employers and universities to push their religious or moral beliefs on employees and students by denying them access to insurance that covers birth control, Luttrelll said in a statement. Bosses and universities will be able to decide based on their own objections if their health insurance plans cover birth control.

Staci Fox is the President and CEO of Planned Parenthood Southeast.

Todays ruling deals yet another devastating blow to health care access in this country, Fox said. As is so often the case, it will hit people of color and low-income people hardest, and in the middle of a global pandemic that is already ravaging those communities. It is more proof that reproductive rights are under attack at all levels not just abortion access.

Both decisions were victories for Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall. The State of Alabama, under Marshalls leadership, had previously joined multistate amicus briefs to the Supreme Court in both cases, supporting the Little Sisters of the Poor and Our Lady of Guadalupe School: Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania; and Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru.

The First Amendment rightly recognizes that one of the unalienable rights all men and women possess is the right to exercise their faith, Marshall wrote in a statement. And today the Supreme Court has reaffirmed that fundamental truth in two important decisions. Thankfully, the Court recognized that the federal government need not force nuns to violate their sincerely held beliefs by providing contraceptive coverage to employees who help them care for the sick. And the Court likewise reaffirmed that the government has no authority to tell religious schools who they must hire or retain to teach their faith.

Visit link:

Police may serve search warrants out of their jurisdiction, Alabama AG says - alreporter.com

What the end of Moores Law will mean for the tech world and consumers – MyNorthwest.com

Are we ready for the end of Moores Law? Its something that could have huge ramifications in the tech world, and yet we dont seem to be doing much about it at the moment. So says David Rotman, editor of MIT Technology Review, who joined Seattles Morning News to explain what it is and why it matters.

It was in 1965 that Gordon Moore predicted that the number of transistors you could squeeze into a computer chip would double every year. And then later it became every two years. So its a prediction that you would get more powerful, faster computer chips every two years, he said.

When he predicted it, there were about 50 transistors on a chip. By 1975 it was 65,000 and now its 50 billion transistors on a chip, and thats why we have such powerful devices, Rotman explained. When you think about the progress, almost everything we use, our devices from smartphones to cloud computing to artificial intelligence all depends on the progress. The iPhone is 100,000 times more powerful in computing power than the computer on the Apollo spacecraft that went to the moon.

The conversation that happens when you get a contact tracing call

So what does it mean if this pace of progress doesnt continue? Weve come to expect the level of ease of use and immediacy that you get from an iPhone with its billions of transistors. Is there a change around the corner?

We know Moores Law will end sooner or later, and no one knows quite when, but it will end (likely within the next 10 years). So what happens next? No one really knows what comes next. And maybe more importantly, no one is really working on whats the next big technology, he said.

SCOTUS decision on scholarships to religious schools not applicable to WA

Thats what I found a bit troubling at the end of the article is that were not spending the money and the resources to find the next great technology that will drive progress through the next 50 years.

One of the possibilities is the advent of quantum computing because there youre using particles that presumably are as small as nature permits.

Quantum computing is, for now, very specialized. Its amazing what it may be able to do, but its not a generalized computing technology, he said.

Why do we not appear to be investing in the next big technology? Partially because it might require tossing out the way we do things now.

It would take you to completely throw out the rule book, rethink everything. And thats why Im thinking about what comes after Moores Law, it will end over the next 10 to 20 years, and finding a different approach will mean rethinking everything. And thats going to take a long time its going to take a lot of smart people thinking hard about it, he said.

Many of the things that we really are interested in these days, for example artificial intelligence the idea of self-driving cars or all these things, robotics that think for themselves these amazing technologies are really computational intensive, Rotman said. They require really powerful computers and so we just have an endless appetite for computational power.

Listen to Seattles Morning News weekday mornings from 5 9 a.m. on KIRO Radio, 97.3 FM. Subscribe to thepodcast here.

Go here to read the rest:

What the end of Moores Law will mean for the tech world and consumers - MyNorthwest.com

If transistors can’t get smaller, then coders have to get smarter – MIT News

In 1965, Intel co-founder Gordon Moore predicted that the number of transistors that could fit on a computer chip would grow exponentially and they did, doubling about every two years. For half a century, Moores Law has endured: Computers have gotten smaller, faster, cheaper, and more efficient, enabling the rapid worldwide adoption of PCs, smartphones, high-speed internet, and more.

This miniaturization trend has led to silicon chips today that have almost unimaginably small circuitry. Transistors, the tiny switches that implement computer microprocessors, are so small that 1,000 of them laid end-to-end are no wider than a human hair. And for a long time, the smaller the transistors were, the faster they could switch. But today, were approaching the limit of how small transistors can get. As a result, over the past decade researchers have been scratching their heads to find other ways to improve performance so that the computer industry can continue to innovate.

While we wait for the maturation of new computing technologies like quantum, carbon nanotubes, or photonics (which may take a while), other approaches will be needed to get performance as Moores Law comes to an end. In a recent journal article published in Science, a team from MITs Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) identifies three key areas to prioritize to continue to deliver computing speed-ups: better software, new algorithms, and more streamlined hardware.

Senior author Charles E. Leiserson says that the performance benefits from miniaturization have been so great that, for decades, programmers have been able to prioritize making code-writing easier rather than making the code itself run faster. The inefficiency that this tendency introduces has been acceptable, because faster computer chips have always been able to pick up the slack.

But nowadays, being able to make further advances in fields like machine learning, robotics, and virtual reality will require huge amounts of computational power that miniaturization can no longer provide, says Leiserson, the Edwin Sibley Webster Professor in MIT's Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science. If we want to harness the full potential of these technologies, we must change our approach to computing.

Leiserson co-wrote the paper, published this week, with Research Scientist Neil Thompson, Professor Daniel Sanchez, Adjunct Professor Butler Lampson, and research scientists Joel Emer, Bradley Kuszmaul, and Tao Schardl.

No more Moore

The authors make recommendations about three areas of computing: software, algorithms, and hardware architecture.

With software, they say that programmers previous prioritization of productivity over performance has led to problematic strategies like reduction: taking code that worked on problem A and using it to solve problem B. For example, if someone has to create a system to recognize yes-or-no voice commands, but doesnt want to code a whole new custom program, they could take an existing program that recognizes a wide range of words and tweak it to respond only to yes-or-no answers.

While this approach reduces coding time, the inefficiencies it creates quickly compound: if a single reduction is 80 percent as efficient as a custom solution, and you then add 20 layers of reduction, the code will ultimately be 100 times less efficient than it could be.

These are the kinds of strategies that programmers have to rethink as hardware improvements slow down, says Thompson. We cant keep doing business as usual if we want to continue to get the speed-ups weve grown accustomed to.

Instead, the researchers recommend techniques like parallelizing code. Much existing software has been designed using ancient assumptions that processors can only do only one operation at a time. But in recent years multicore technology has enabled complex tasks to be completed thousands of times faster and in a much more energy-efficient way.

Since Moore's Law will not be handing us improved performance on a silver platter, we will have to deliver performance the hard way, says Moshe Vardi, a professor in computational engineering at Rice University. This is a great opportunity for computing research, and the [MIT CSAIL] report provides a road map for such research.

As for algorithms, the team suggests a three-pronged approach that includes exploring new problem areas, addressing concerns about how algorithms scale, and tailoring them to better take advantage of modern hardware.

Lastly, in terms of hardware architecture, the team advocates that hardware be streamlined so that problems can be solved with fewer transistors and less silicon. Streamlining includes using simpler processors and creating hardware tailored to specific applications, like the graphics-processing unit is tailored for computer graphics.

Hardware customized for particular domains can be much more efficient and use far fewer transistors, enabling applications to run tens to hundreds of times faster, says Schardl. More generally, hardware streamlining would further encourage parallel programming, creating additional chip area to be used for more circuitry that can operate in parallel.

While these approaches may be the best path forward, the researchers say that it wont always be an easy one. Organizations that use such techniques may not know the benefits of their efforts until after theyve invested a lot of engineering time. Plus, the speed-ups wont be as consistent as they were with Moores Law: they may be dramatic at first, and then require large amounts of effort for smaller improvements.

Certain companies have already gotten the memo.

For tech giants like Google and Amazon, the huge scale of their data centers means that even small improvements in software performance can result in large financial returns, says Thompson. But while these firms may be leading the charge, many others will need to take these issues seriously if they want to stay competitive.

Getting improvements in the areas identified by the team will also require building up the infrastructure and workforce that make them possible.

Performance growth will require new tools, programming languages, and hardware to facilitate more and better performance engineering, says Leiserson. It also means computer scientists being better educated about how we can make software, algorithms, and hardware work together, instead of putting them in different silos.

This work was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation.

See the rest here:

If transistors can't get smaller, then coders have to get smarter - MIT News

Major online conference on COVID-19 and economy featuring eminent speakers this Friday – Scottish Legal News

Published 8 June 2020

A number of eminent figures are set to speak at a conferenceon the current crisis and the global economy.

The full-day webinar hosted by the Corporate and Financial Law Research Group of the University of Glasgow and Edinburgh Law School will explore the impact of COVID-19 on the global economy.

The global pandemic has prompted a series of unprecedented interventions by governments and regulatory agencies around the world. In the medium term COVID-19 might prove the watershed moment of this decade and beyond in a number of contexts.

These include a re-orientation of economic and monetary policy, the future shape of financial markets, debt sustainability and preservation of financial stability, and the development of corporate governance norms to serve social growth and the green economy.

This full-day webinar will examine what these changes might bring. It will specifically focus on the COVID-19 response in Europe (encompassing the eurozone, rest of the EU, and the UK). Eminent speakers and leading experts will consider the economic and legal aspects of the pandemic response, how these challenge todays dominant paradigms in law and the economy, and their implications for the future.

Does the global pandemic signal a paradigm shift in law and the economy? will feature a roster of top speakers including:

For speaker bios and short summaries of the presentations see here.

Register for the event here.

Read the original here:

Major online conference on COVID-19 and economy featuring eminent speakers this Friday - Scottish Legal News

This Week’s Awesome Tech Stories From Around the Web (Through June 6) – Singularity Hub

IMPACT

Cant Go Out and Protest? Heres How to Help From HomeDemetria Mosley | WiredWhether youre trying to maintain your social distance or just looking for other ways to speak up, here are some ideas on how to contribute. Not everyone is a front-liner, and thats OK because we need all types of people, says Andra Hudson, an activist and prison reformist based in North Carolina. There are many ways people can help out from their homes, and we need people to do it. We need everyone to show up.'

How to Protest Safely in the Age of SurveillanceAndy Greenberg and Lily Hay Newman | WiredIf youre going out to protestas is your right under the First Amendmentand bringing your smartphone with you, there are some basic steps you should take tosafeguard your privacy. Thesurveillance toolsthat state and federal law enforcement groups have used at protests for years put it at risk right along withyour physical wellbeing.

ARK Invest: AI Training Costs Dropped 100-Fold Between 2017 and 2019Kyle Wiggers | VentureBeatMachine learning systems are cheaper to train now than ever before. Thats the assertion of ARK Invest, which today published ameta-analysisindicating the cost of training is improving at 50 times the pace of Moores law, the principle that computer hardware performance doubles every two years.

All This Chaos Might Be Giving You Crisis FatigueMatt Simon | WiredYou might at this point feel lost or numb, and thats perfectly natural. Psychologists call it crisis fatigue: Your body is well adapted to handle temporary stresses, but it can get overwhelmed by the constant, unrelenting pressures of this horrible year.

Salto Jumping Robot Masters Pinpoint LandingsEvan Ackerman | IEEE SpectrumAs far as we know, the best way of getting Salto to stop jumping without destroying itself has been for someone with exceptional timing to try and snatch it directly out of the air mid-bounce. While amazing at jumping, Salto hasnt been particularly good at not-jumping. That is, at landing. Until now!

Lidar Helps Uncover an Ancient, Kilometer-Long Mayan StructureDevin Coldewey | TechCrunchLidaris fast becoming one of the most influential tools in archaeology, revealing things in a few hours what might have taken months of machete wielding and manual measurements otherwise. The latest such discovery is an enormous Mayan structure, more than a kilometer long, 3,000 years old, and seemingly used for astronomical observations.

The Facebook Groups Where People Pretend the Pandemic Isnt HappeningKaitlyn Tiffany | The AtlanticLosing track of a friend in a packed bar or screaming to be heard over a live band is not something thats happening much in the real world at the moment, but it happens all the time in the 2,100-person Facebook group a group where we all pretend were in the same venue. So does losing shoes and Juul pods, and shouting matches over which bands are the saddest, and therefore the greatest.

Image credit:Lucas Benjamin /Unsplash

Read more from the original source:

This Week's Awesome Tech Stories From Around the Web (Through June 6) - Singularity Hub

‘The problem of gendered language is universal’ how AI reveals media bias – The Guardian

If, during an election campaign, you heard one candidate described as brave and another candidate described as strong, which of the two would you be more likely to vote for? If the answer to this question seems obvious to you, thats because logically it is. But it also demonstrates the power of language to shape our thinking and influence our behaviour.

Gendered language is understood as language that has a bias towards a particular gender [and] reflects and maintains pre-existing social distinctions, explains Roxana Lupu, an expert in applied linguistics. It shows us two things not only does it signal the presence of sexism in the society, but it also reinforces those beliefs and perceptions. To put it simply: gendered language is that which promotes bias towards one gender, while simultaneously entrenching such bias further.

For a relatively new field of study in sociolinguistics (gendered language only rose to academic prominence in the 1970s), it has had no shortage of attention emerging alongside second-wave feminism, it deepened the collective understanding of how gender discrimination is proliferated, both directly and indirectly.

Lupu believes the media plays a fundamental role in disseminating gendered language among the population. We need to raise awareness to drive change, she says.

But raising awareness is hindered by a lack of information on just how big the problem is. Thats where artificial intelligence (AI) comes in.

Never before have we had the capability to analyse language in such a meaningful way at such massive scale, says Rich Wilson, owner of Deviance (a technology company that focuses on language analytics). This represents a huge opportunity for broad areas such as cultural or gender research, he continues, which means that evidence is now indisputable and quantifiable rather than just anecdotal.

It was precisely this thinking that inspired a recent media coverage study conducted by a female-led marketing agency, Mac+Moore, with the support of Deviance. As marketeers, the brands founders, Jess MacIntyre and Natalie Moores, spend a large portion of their time discussing the power of language and messaging with their clients. We work closely with companies to craft and shape the way they communicate with their audience, Moores says, so we know better than most how language can be a very powerful and persuasive tool and has the ability to shape peoples perception.

The difference in the medias treatment of men and women is a topic that has been growing in coverage over the past decade. Savvy brands such as Gillette have been using their marketing campaigns to highlight and challenge gender discrimination and how it damages women. But Mac+Moore wanted to take this one step further. We wanted to produce a data set that irrefutably demonstrated how gendered language is used in the media, says Moores, so that we had hard evidence that couldnt just be dismissed as an opinion.

Using a technique known as comparative linguistics (where two data sets are analysed in relation to one another), Deviances software would enable them to analyse in a detailed way any linguistic differences in the way men and women are described in the source material. Not only this, but it would enable the analysis of articles by publications from all across the UKs media landscape at a volume higher than humans alone have ever been able to process and in only a matter of hours. AI is perfect because it allows the analysis to be completely removed from any bias that we may have it allows for complete neutrality, says MacIntyre.

We chose the Labour leadership race as source material because its so topical and, whats more, theres never been a female leader of the party, but the odds of one being elected in this contest were four to one, says Moores. Statistically, it is more likely than ever that a woman will be elected, which would enable us to see with more clarity how gendered language is affecting the candidates chances for better or for worse.

And so they fed 145,000 words through the software, sourced from recent coverage of all five candidates from a broad cross-section of the medias online content amounting to 250 articles in total.

The results were startling: articles covering the only man in the race, Keir Starmer, were 4.4 times more likely to describe him using words meaning preferred and favoured, whereas the female candidates were 1.9 times more likely to be described using words such as brave (arguably patronising in this context), sad, violent/angry, and dislike.

Moreover, the results show that there is a huge focus on gender through the use of titles such as Ms or Mrs, which they were three times more likely to use for female candidates, whereas Starmer was referred to mostly by just his surname or the honorific Sir, which holds a positive connotation. Finally, Starmer was 1.6 times more likely to be discussed in terms of professional employment, politics, law and order, and belonging to a group, whereas the female candidates were much more likely to be discussed in relation to their families and, particularly, their fathers.

Not just this, but the web scraper tool used on the first analysis picked up the content of digital advertising on each website. This revealed that whenever a female candidate was discussed, ads were served against the content for clothing, fashion and beauty, says MacIntyre. This never happened for Keir Starmer the adverts served in articles for him were much more gender neutral. This, they believe, indicates an entrenched data bias in the software used by digital ad services that could potentially influence who consumes the content, the implication being that articles written about female candidates are only relevant for female readers, says MacIntyre.

There is strong evidence to support the theory that women are being portrayed and represented within the media in an overly negative and gendered way, which could be impacting the outcome of election campaigns, says Moores, and the implications of this are potentially huge both in politics but also wider society.

The two women are energised by the research and plan to use the results to push for companies to think more carefully about how content is presented. Although these results tell the story of one leadership election, the problem of gendered language is universal, says MacIntyre.

More than anything, the study demonstrates how AI can drive forward our awareness of the scale of the problem of gendered language: the first step to addressing the issue. The media has a responsibility to contribute to an equal society, says Lupu. For Wilson, if AI can help to highlight a path to progress, then we should grasp that opportunity with both hands. MacIntyre agrees: After all, if the world is changing, why shouldnt our language change too?

View post:

'The problem of gendered language is universal' how AI reveals media bias - The Guardian


12345...10...