Grab a free download of Boundarys chilled-out, bass-happy Rosemont

Posted on by

When Ghislain Poirier first appeared on the dance music scene a few years ago, he made a splash with gleefully noisy, jarringlyfrenetic tracksbuiltout ofwailing synthesizers and choppy beats. His songs offered the best parts of dancehall, techno, club rap, and pretty much everything else thats made to get people acting rowdy on a dance floor.At the time, this sort of genre agnosticism hadnt yet become as firmly entrenched in dance music as it is nowwhich meant thatfans scrambled to figure out what to even call Poiriers music. New Yorker pop critic Sasha Frere-Jonescame closest to nailing the musicshighly focused vibrancy when he coined the term lazer bass.

When hes not lighting dance floors on fire, Poirier records stuffunder the name Boundary that does pretty much the exact opposite. His new album Still Lifeis richly textured chill-out music thats calming and conducive to meditative statesbut still delivers enough bass to keep beat junkies happy.Each track is a skillfully uncluttered arrangement of meticulously well-designed tones, and each spin is like entering a perfectly manicured Zen garden of sound. For a sample of its habit-forming vibes, try this free download of Still Lifes standout track Rosemont.

Visit link:
Grab a free download of Boundarys chilled-out, bass-happy Rosemont

Professor Outlines Risks, Benefits of Genome Editing

Posted on by

Harvard Medical School professor George M. Church discussed the possibilities and potential dangers of genetic engineering on Wednesday. The lecture event, presented by the Harvard Museum of Natural History, covered a range of topics, including potential gains for genetic information and technologies and considerations of ethics and efficacy.

Church began the evening by highlighting the importance of genome testing, stressing that whether or not you have family history, whether or not you [are of] a particular ethnicity, all of us are at risk for rare diseases.

Genome testing has made advances in recent years, with the cost of sequencing an individuals genome having decreased in the past decade.But further advances in genome testing, Church said, could allow us to essentially see whats currently invisible, to essentially see the genomes around us.

Advances in the portability and affordability of genome testing, for instance, could lead to a sort of handheld DNA sequencing device that could dramatically impact diagnostics and field studies.

Moreover, Church said, if you have an inexpensive way of [sequencing genomes] you can really start testing a lot of ideas about cause and effect, with the potential to identify rare protective gene variants that could alleviate or eliminate some diseases.

Your genetics is not your destiny, Church said.

Church also discussed the possibility of de-extinction, bringing back species like the woolly mammoth. He predicted that the de-extinction process would largely depend on both ecological and economic considerations, in which species are judged both on their viability in modern ecosystems and their utility. He highlighted the woolly mammoth as an example of such a keystone species that could dramatically and positively impact the global ecosystem, citing his 2013 Scientific American article which outlined how mammoths could contribute to the reversal of global warming by keeping the tundra frozen.

Letting the tundra melt, Church said, is the equivalent to burning all of the forests in all of the world and their roots two and a half times over. Bringing back the woolly mammoth could be one important step toward preventing this catastrophic release of carbon, according to Church.

Church also briefly touched on human genetic enhancements, noting that changes in the modern environment and human behavior have framed the topic of altering ones genome in terms of necessity.

Our ancestors didnt need any genetic enhancements to be able to sit for twelve hours a day and eat fatty, sugary foods, but we need enhancements that handle that altered environment, he said. If we go into space, we need enhancements that handle radiation and osteoporosis...or else were dead. So what seems like an enhancement in one generation becomes life and death in another generation.

See the original post here:
Professor Outlines Risks, Benefits of Genome Editing

Maritza Novas, R.N., M.S.N and Alfredo Hoyos, M.D. to Speak at the EuroMedicom Aesthetic & Anti-Aging Medicine World …

Posted on by

Miami, FL (PRWEB) October 21, 2014

Global Stem Cells Group has announced that Alfredo Hoyos, M.D. and Maritza Novas, R.N., M.S.N. will be speaking at the EuroMedicom First AMWC Latin America Aesthetic & Anti-aging Medicine World Congress in Medellin, Colombia, Nov. 27, 28 and 29, 2014.

The World Congress Colombia event is organized in cooperation with the International Scientific Board of the AMWC Monaco event, the largest international event in the field of aesthetic and anti-aging medicine. The goal of the event is to showcase the AMWCs commitment to innovation, expertise and excellence in aesthetic and anti-aging medicine, and to share a wealth of experience and teaching skills with attendees from around the world.

In addition to keeping up with worldwide practices, the Medellin conference is designed to contribute to enhancing practitioners skills through advanced academic and clinical sessions, as well as lectures presented by prominent experts in the field like Hoyos and Novas.

Novas and Hoyos will discuss the latest advancements in stem cell medicine for cosmetic and anti-aging applications. Hoyos, founder of Stem Lab, Global Stem Cells Group's new representative in Colombia, will also discuss plans to hold a symposium on stem cell and regenerative medicine in Bogota in Feb., 2014.

Novas is a lead trainer and part of the research and development team for Stem Cell Training, a Global Stem Cells Group subsidiary. Hoyos, a prominent Colombian plastic surgeon, is the world-renowned creator of high-definition liposculpture and other advanced body contour techniques. Hoyos will also be promoting the new collaboration between Global Stem Cells Group and his Colombia-based Stem Lab biotechnology company, which develops stem cell techniques for regenerative medicine treatments.

Hoyos serves Global Stem Cells Group and its subsidiary Regenestem as exclusive representative for the Colombian territory. Hoyos will be in charge of all Global Stem Cells Group divisions and programs in Colombia, including patient recruiting through Regenestem, physician training and certification trough Stem Cell Training, and stem cell equipment and disposables sales through Adimarket. Five dates are planned for training and physician certification under the Global Stem Cells Group brand in Colombia during 2015.

For more information, visit the Global Stem Cells Group website, email bnovas(at)stemcellsgroup(dot)com, or call 305-224-1858.

About the Global Stem Cells Group:

Global Stem Cells Group, Inc. is the parent company of six wholly owned operating companies dedicated entirely to stem cell research, training, products and solutions. Founded in 2012, the company combines dedicated researchers, physician and patient educators and solution providers with the shared goal of meeting the growing worldwide need for leading edge stem cell treatments and solutions. With a singular focus on this exciting new area of medical research, Global Stem Cells Group and its subsidiaries are uniquely positioned to become global leaders in cellular medicine.

Read more:
Maritza Novas, R.N., M.S.N and Alfredo Hoyos, M.D. to Speak at the EuroMedicom Aesthetic & Anti-Aging Medicine World ...

Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing

Posted on by

PITTSBURGH -- An evidence suppression hearing for Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School founder Nick Trombetta will stretch into November after another day of arguments Monday was more notable for who did not testify than for who did.

Beaver County solicitor Joe Askar, who also represents the Rochester-based National Network of Digital Schools, invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refused to testify. Askar was subpoenaed by Trombettas defense team in their effort to get recorded conversations with attorneys, including him, tossed out by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti.

Trombetta -- who faces 11 federal charges -- is claiming that the FBI violated his attorney-client privilege by recording discussions with Askar, former PA Cyber attorney Timothy Barry, and Ralph Monico and Leo Daly, attorneys who also represented NNDS. A Sept. 30 hearing was continued until Monday.

Mr. Askar has neither committed nor been charged with any crime. Nor will he be. As the U.S. Supreme Court has said, the privilege is available not only to protect the guilty, but also the innocent: We have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendments basic functions is to protect innocent men, who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances, Bruce Teitelbaum, Askars attorney, said in a statement.

The ambiguities inherent in this complex matter and the possibility of misunderstanding compelled me, out of caution, to advise Mr. Askar to invoke his privilege, Teitelbaum said.

Barry was called to the stand by defense attorney Adam Hoffinger later in the day, but was excused after a lengthy off-the-record sidebar involving his attorney, Trombettas lawyers and prosecutors. Hoffinger said Barry would be recalled when the hearing continues next month.

Trombetta attorney Robert Salerno quizzed FBI agent Samantha Bell, the lead investigator, on synopses of calls monitored by agents, instructions to agents on recording calls and minimization, the FBIs name for when agents stop listening to calls that are irrelevant or might be protected by attorney-client privilege.

After Barry was excused, FBI agent Paul Allen took the stand and was questioned by Hoffinger on a June 2012 synopsis of a recorded call on which he noted that Trombetta would be talking to his attorney.

Hoffinger wondered how agents could know when to stop recording privileged communications if they truly did not know whether Trombetta had a personal attorney. Allen said he did not exactly remember, but testified that he might have simply written the note to be cautious.

Im not sure why I used the personal pronoun his, Allen said. I didnt mean anything by it.

Follow this link:

Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing

When Can the Police Search Your Phone and Computer?

Posted on by

Your computer, phone, and other digital devices hold vast amounts of personal information about you and your family. This sensitive data is worth protecting from prying eyes, including those of the government.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects you from unreasonable government searches and seizures, and this protection extends to your computer and portable devices. But how does this work in the real world? What should you do if the police or other law enforcement officers show up at your door and want to search your computer?

EFF has designed this guide to help you understand your rights if officers try to search the data stored on your computer or portable electronic device, or seize it for further examination somewhere else. Keep in mind that the Fourth Amendment is the minimum standard, and your specific state may have stronger protections.

Because anything you say can be used against you in a criminal or civil case, before speaking to any law enforcement official, you should consult with an attorney. Remember generally the fact that you assert your rights cannot legally be used against you in court. You can always state: "I do not want to talk to you or answer any questions without my attorney present." If they continue to ask you questions after that point, you can say: "Please don't ask me any further questions until my attorney is present." And if the police violate your rights and conduct an illegal search, often the evidence they obtain as a result of that search can't be used against you.

We've organized this guide into three sections:

If you consent to a search, the police don't need a warrant.

The most frequent ways police are able to search is by asking you for permission. If you say "yes" and consent to the search, then police don't need a warrant. You can limit the scope of that consent and even revoke or take it back after the officers begin searching, but by then it may be too late.1 That's why it's better not consent to a searchpolice may drop the matter. If not, then they will generally need to get a search warrant to search.

Law enforcement may show up at your door. Apart from a few exceptions, police need a warrant to enter your home.

The police can't simply enter your home to search it or any electronic device inside, like a laptop or cell phone, without a warrant.

Link:

When Can the Police Search Your Phone and Computer?

Brad Pitt Is Packing – Brad Says He Doesn’t Feel Safe Without A Gun – Second Amendment – F&F – Video

Posted on by


Brad Pitt Is Packing - Brad Says He Doesn #39;t Feel Safe Without A Gun - Second Amendment - F F
Brad Pitt Is Packing - Brad Says He Doesn #39;t Feel Safe Without A Gun - Second Amendment - Fox Friends =========================================== **Pleas...

By: NSTP - Wake The Hell Up America!

See the original post here:

Brad Pitt Is Packing - Brad Says He Doesn't Feel Safe Without A Gun - Second Amendment - F&F - Video

Federal court dismisses SPD cops' lawsuit decrying use-of-force reforms

Posted on by

A federal judge filed a ruling Monday that eviscerated the lawsuit filed by 126 Seattle cops decrying their employer's new use-of-force policies.

The cops filed a suit in May claiming that federally mandated use-of-force policies intended to correct a 2011 Department of Justice finding of "pattern of excessive force" in the department violated officers' constitutional rights to self-defense and legal searches and seizures.

The suit was filed against U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, the City of Seattle, Mayor Ed Murray, former Mayor Mike McGinn, the Seattle police chief, City Attorney Pete Holmes and Merrick Bobb, the Department of Justice's monitor of the Seattle Police Department, among several others.

The lawsuit argued that the new force guidelines, which took effect Jan. 1, violated officers' Second Amendment right to bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, as well as a Fourth Amendment right to be protected from illegal seizures. The complaint also alleged a violation of the Equal Protection Clause, saying the new force policies burdened their fundamental rights.

Read more background on the lawsuit here.

At the time, the Seattle Police Department distanced itself from the claims of its officers and U.S. Attorney Jenny Durkan derided the lawsuit as "without merit."

Judge Marsha Pechman seemed to agree in her Monday dismissal of the lawsuit.

First, she granted Bobb's motion to dismiss the suit against him because he is legally immune from lawsuits as an actor of the federal court at the behest of a judge.

As for the Second Amendment complaint, Pechman wrote, "(W)hile the Second Amendment protects and individual's right to bear arms, the Second Amendment does not provide that individuals have a right to use a firearm in any particular way."

She goes on:

Excerpt from:

Federal court dismisses SPD cops' lawsuit decrying use-of-force reforms

1st Amendment – Constitution – Laws

Posted on by

First Amendment: Religion and ExpressionWhat is the First Amendment?Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.The First Amendment Defined:The First Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.Stipulations of the 1st Amendment:The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the passing or creation of any law which establishes a religious body and directly impedes an individuals right to practice whichever religion they see fit.The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the Bill of Rights and the amendment which disables an entity or individual from practicing or enforcing a religious viewpoint which infringes on the freedom of speech, the right peaceable assemble, the freedom of the press, or which prohibits the petitioning for a governmental evaluation of grievances.In its infancy, the First Amendment only applied to laws enacted by Congress; however, the following Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court developed that the Due Process Clause attached to the Fourteenth Amendment applies the fundamental aspects of the First Amendment to each individual state, including all local governments within those states.The Establishment clause of the First Amendment is the primary pronouncement in the Amendment, stating that Congress cannot institute a law to establish a national religion for the preference of the U.S. government states that one religion does not favor another. As a result, the Establishment Clause effectively created a wall of separation between the church and state. How the First Amendment was created:When the original constitution was created there was significant opposition due to the lack of adequate guarantees for civil freedoms. To offer such liberties, the First Amendment (in addition to the rest of the Bill of Rights) was offered to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789 and later adopted on December 15, 1791.Court Cases tied into the 1st AmendmentIn Sherbert v. Verner, the Supreme Court applied the strict scrutiny standard of review to the Establishment Clause, ruling that a state must demonstrate an overwhelming interest in restricting religious activities.In Employment Division v Smith, the Supreme Court went away from this standard by permitting governmental actions that were neutral regarding religious choices.Debs v. United States on June 16, 1919 tested the limits of free speech in regards to the clear and present danger test.1st Amendment: Freedom of SpeechFreedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment and is re-established in the majority of state and federal laws. This particular clause typically protects and individuals right to partake in even distasteful rhetoric, such as racist or sexist comments and distasteful remarks towards public policy.Speech directed towards some subjects; however, such as child pornography or speech that incites an imminent threat, as well commercial forms of speech are regulated.State Timeline for Ratification of the Bill of RightsNew Jersey:November 20, 1789; rejected article IIMaryland:December 19, 1789; approved allNorth Carolina:December 22, 1789; approved allSouth Carolina: January 19, 1790; approved allNew Hampshire: January 25, 1790; rejected article IIDelaware: January 28, 1790; rejected article INew York: February 27, 1790; rejected article IIPennsylvania: March 10, 1790; rejected article IIRhode Island: June 7, 1790; rejected article IIVermont: November 3, 1791; approved allVirginia: December 15, 1791; approved allGeorgia, Massachusetts and Connecticut did not ratify the first 10 Amendments until 1939

First Amendment: Religion and ExpressionWhat is the First Amendment?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The First Amendment Defined: The First Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.

The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.

Stipulations of the 1st Amendment: The First Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits the passing or creation of any law which establishes a religious body and directly impedes an individuals right to practice whichever religion they see fit.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a part of the Bill of Rights and the amendment which disables an entity or individual from practicing or enforcing a religious viewpoint which infringes on the freedom of speech, the right peaceable assemble, the freedom of the press, or which prohibits the petitioning for a governmental evaluation of grievances.

In its infancy, the First Amendment only applied to laws enacted by Congress; however, the following Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court developed that the Due Process Clause attached to the Fourteenth Amendment applies the fundamental aspects of the First Amendment to each individual state, including all local governments within those states.

The Establishment clause of the First Amendment is the primary pronouncement in the Amendment, stating that Congress cannot institute a law to establish a national religion for the preference of the U.S. government states that one religion does not favor another. As a result, the Establishment Clause effectively created a wall of separation between the church and state.

How the First Amendment was created: When the original constitution was created there was significant opposition due to the lack of adequate guarantees for civil freedoms. To offer such liberties, the First Amendment (in addition to the rest of the Bill of Rights) was offered to the states for ratification on September 25, 1789 and later adopted on December 15, 1791.

Original post:

1st Amendment - Constitution - Laws

Cryptocurrency meets cash at new bitcoin ATM in Fells Point

Posted on by

Cryptocurrency may be the future, but it lives in what is, for many, still a cash world.

So while bitcoin advocates push for ways to encourage people to use the digital form of payment, they also must meet consumers and their wallets where they are.

A company that plans to install as many as 100 bitcoin ATMs by year's end installed the region's first of the machines Monday night at Fells Point bar Bad Decisions. More are planned for Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport and Amtrak stations, Wal-Marts and 7-Eleven stores around the region.

While usage of bitcoin is still low even at establishments like Bad Decisions, a well-known early adopter of technology and social media advocates hope the ATMs will make it easier for technophiles to give bitcoin a try.

"It's going to be an easy entry point for consumers to actually get bitcoins," said Josh Riddle, CEO and co-founder of Bitsie, a Baltimore startup that works with brick-and-mortar stores to help them accept bitcoin payments.

Otherwise, the virtual currency exists solely online. A public ledger system tracks who owns which bitcoins, each of which was worth about $380 as of Monday. Most bitcoin users get them by buying them on one of a host of online exchanges, or by accepting them for goods or services being sold. Bitcoin "miners" generate new bitcoins by helping to process and verify bitcoin transactions.

The currency is not backed or controlled by any government, but its advocates say it is safer than traditional money. The transactions are secured by "military grade cryptography," according to the Bitcoin Foundation, and the codes that are assigned to bitcoins that verify a person's ownership can be stored on devices that don't remain connected to the Internet, protecting them from hackers.

But uncertainty over the safety and future of bitcoins has contributed to wild swings in their value. Bitcoins, which can be divided in pieces down to eight decimal places, have lost two-thirds of their value since hitting a peak of nearly $1,150 apiece in December 2013.

Bitcoin ATMs allow users to quickly use cash to buy bitcoins or to turn their bitcoins into bills. There are only about two dozen around the country; until Monday, the closest ones to Baltimore were in New York, Chapel Hill, N.C., and Columbus, Ohio.

The North Carolina-based company Coin Outlet installed the machine at Bad Decisions, a logical choice because it is the site of a regular meetup of bitcoin enthusiasts, Coin Outlet CEO Eric Grill said. But the plan is to go well beyond the bar Coin Outlet has a relationship with Locant Services, a company that operates kiosks for payphones, ATMs and other services at 100,000 locations across the country.

Read the rest here:

Cryptocurrency meets cash at new bitcoin ATM in Fells Point

Cryptocurrency Round-Up: PayPal Founder Sceptical of Bitcoin and Bitnet Receives $14.5m Funding

Posted on by

Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrency markets remain stable, as Bitnet secures Series A funding.(IBTimes UK)

The price of bitcoin has remained relatively stable over the past 24 hours, shifting by less than 1% in value since yesterday.

Most other major cryptocurrencies have followed in bitcoin's lead, with litecoin, dogecoin and peercoin all moving by between 0% and 2%.

The biggest mover across all digital currency markets is uro, the "hybrid commodity token" that pegs its value to the fertilizer urea. Uro's price jumped by 45% to take its market capitalisation up above $1.5 million for the first time since July.

The co-founder of PayPal, Peter Thiel has said that despite bitcoin being founded on the same set of ideas as PayPal, the two have developed in very different directions.

"Bitcoin is the opposite of PayPal, in the sense that it actually succeeded in creating a currency," Thiel said in a talk at the Booth School of Business in Illinois.

"However, its payment system is lacking, and it is often used to make illegal transactions, such as to buy heroin. Until bitcoin is used to make more legal transactions, I am a bit sceptical."

Thiel has previously described bitcoin as "badly lacking", saying in a Reddit AMA (ask me anything) last month that he would become "more bullish" on bitcoin when the payment volume of bitcoin significantly increases.

Bitnet secures $14.5m Series A funding

Bitcoin payments processor Bitnet has raised $14.5m in a Series A funding round that it hopes will go some way to enticing major merchants into using its payments software.

The rest is here:

Cryptocurrency Round-Up: PayPal Founder Sceptical of Bitcoin and Bitnet Receives $14.5m Funding

Houman Shadab discusses Bitcoin and blockchain derivatives before the CFTC. – Video

Posted on by


Houman Shadab discusses Bitcoin and blockchain derivatives before the CFTC.
New York Law School professor Houman Shadab discussed the regulatory challenges facing Bitcoin and blockchain derivatives before the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on ...

By: Houman Shadab

Read more:

Houman Shadab discusses Bitcoin and blockchain derivatives before the CFTC. - Video