ABB will provide technology for Formula E car pitstops – Innovation Origins

Posted on by

It is really incredible how quickly a Formula 1 car is fitted with a brand new set of tires during a race. A few seconds, thats all it takes. In a Formula E race, that was all done very differently not so long ago. Its not the tires that were swapped, but the whole car. The problem was that one battery charge was not powerful enough for a complete race. This was ended in 2018 because it was too risky. Since then, the races last just over three-quarters of an hour.

However, as of 2022, things are set to switch to an even higher gear. Formula E cars are advancing their development at an extremely fast pace. Both the electric motor and the battery are becoming more powerful with every year. The same goes for the speed at which a battery can be charged.

The Swiss industrial conglomerate ABB is one of the frontrunners in this technology. They will have the honor of being the first to charge the so-called third-generation E-cars (Gen3) from 2022 onwards. ABB announced this today. This happened during a video meeting in which, among others, the founder of Formula E Alejandro Agag, Formula E CEO Jamie Reigle and Tarak Mehta, who is responsible for electrification at ABB, were present.

It will not be as fast as Formula 1 cars just yet. But sitting back and doing nothing is not an option either. The idea is that mobile charging stations can charge two cars at the same time in just 30 seconds. In that half-minute, 4 kWh of current needs to flow into the battery. ABB has not yet explained how they exactly intend to accomplish this. But apparently they are ready and willing to take the plunge.

As Formula E builds on the first successful phase of our partnership with ABB, we are delighted to extend our relationship through a deeper level of integration in Gen3. says Reigle. ABB will provide critical charging technology that will improve the racing product and showcase the potential of enhanced charging capabilities for electric vehicles.

According to Mehta from ABB, Formula E is much more than just a race for the Swiss. It is our test-bed for innovative electromobility technologies, driving development to the production line of electric vehicles and ultimately contributing to a cleaner environment for all,

To date, ABB has installed more than 14,000 DC high-speed chargers in over 80 countries. This makes it one of the leading suppliers of this technology. Competitors include Tritium, Schneider Electric, Siemens, ChargePoint and our own Alfen. In Formula E, ABB is the official partner of the TAG Heuer Porsche team.

Excerpt from:

ABB will provide technology for Formula E car pitstops - Innovation Origins

TEVET Awarded Honeywell KCNSC Small Business HUBZone Award for Making Technology Acquisition Easier and Supporting the US Economy – PRNewswire

Posted on by

GREENEVILLE, Tenn., July 16, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- TEVET, a premium test and measurement supplier, today announced the company received the Honeywell KCNSC Small Business HUBZone Award.

After years of exceptional service including OEM agreements, PO consolidation, marketplace customization, and on-time delivery, TEVET has helped keep Honeywell missions a success. TEVET maintains a commitment to service within HUBZone communities, and as a result, was recognized as a small business and HUBZone leader amongst Honeywell's numerous suppliers with the Kansas City National Security Campus Small Business HUBZone Award.

"The support Honeywell KCNSC has demonstrated over the years by working with TEVET speaks volumes to their commitment of meeting small business goals and using DOE SCMC contracts for streamlined procurement transactions," said TEVET Account Manager, Evie Webster. "The Honeywell NSC Procurement and Small Business Diversity teams have processes and communication tools in place that allow us to work together and supply successful components for mission-critical systems."

Commitment to Customers and Community With TEVET, customers like Honeywell can join in and invest in HUBZone businesses while also protecting their technology investment by selecting an acquisition partner with the foundation, processes, and certifications in place to meet current and future requirements.

"It's an honor to be recognized for our commitments and service to our customers, and community," said Tracy Solomon, CEO of TEVET. "Our success has and will always continue to be our community's success."

TEVET makes business easy for customers, using sophisticated processes and systems not typical for small businesses, including:

For more information, contact TEVET or visit tevetllc.com/about-tevet/.

About TEVET Selecting and acquiring the right technology to meet specific challenges requires a partner that can add value at every step. TEVETbrings more than 15 years of experience to the acquisition of technical products, systems, and instrumentation - with support from identification to sustainment. With competencies in quality, technology, and personnel, TEVET provides best-in-class acquisition strategies, so customers, suppliers, and partners are successful. TEVET strives to execute at the highest levels, providing service to Country, Customer, and Community. For more information on TEVET, visit http://www.tevetllc.com.

CONTACT: Morgan Norris, [emailprotected]

SOURCE TEVET

https://tevetllc.com

See original here:

TEVET Awarded Honeywell KCNSC Small Business HUBZone Award for Making Technology Acquisition Easier and Supporting the US Economy - PRNewswire

Banks face fairness challenges as they commit to AI technology – ComputerWeekly.com

Posted on by

Three-quarters of banking executives think artificial intelligence (AI) will determine whether they succeed or fail, but they face major governance challenges, including ensuring decisions made by AI are fair and ethical.

A report from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) saiddata bias that leads to discrimination against individuals or groups was one of the most prominent risks for banks using the technology.

AI is currently high on the banking agenda and the disruption caused by Covid-19 has intensified its adoption in the sector, according to the EIU. Banks are using AI to create more personalised banking services for customers, to automate back-office processes and to keep pace with developments at the digital challenger banks pioneering AI in the sector.

But banks will need to ensure ethical, fair and well-documented AI-based decisions, said the EIUs Overseeing AI: Governing artificial intelligence in banking report. It said decisions made by computers must remain ethical, without bias, and these decisions need to be explainable.

To achieve these goals, AI should be ethical by design, data should be monitored for accuracy and integrity, development processes need to be well documented and banks need to ensure they have the right level of skills.

Pete Swabey, editorial director for Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA) Thought Leadership at the EIU, said: AI is seen as a key competitive differentiator in the sector. Our study, drawing on the guidance given by regulators around the world, highlights the key governance challenges banks must address if they are to capitalise on the AI opportunity safely and ethically.

A potential lack of human oversight is a major concern, according to the EIU. It said recruiting and training people with the right skills should be a priority: Banks must ensure the right level of AI expertise across the business to build and maintain AI models, as well as oversee these models.

But as pioneers of IT, and with their wealth of IT skills and research funds, banks are in a good position to set standards is AI development.

Prag Sharma, senior vice-president of Citis Innovation Labs, said: Bias can creep into AI models in any industry, but banks are better positioned than most types of organisation to combat it. Maximising algorithms explainability helps to reduce bias.

Adam Gibson, co-founder of AI ecosystem builder Skymind Global Ventures, said it was important to first define what ethics means to your product so you have guidelines to follow when you are designing AI applications.

Also, you need diversity of thought and cross-functional teams to look at all aspects of the services you are building throughout its lifecycle, he said.

Collaboration with different people from different backgrounds is key to minimising bias and ethically questionable activity during the AI decision-making process. This doesnt just include the people with the skills to build the tech, but also the users of the services.They will know first-hand any biases and will be able to flag them during the design process before the AI services are launched.

Gibson added that AI is built through datasets, and often racist AI models come from racist datasets. This is what we need to be aware of to help minimise and protect us from innovation that isnt beneficial to society, he said.

Originally posted here:

Banks face fairness challenges as they commit to AI technology - ComputerWeekly.com

Press Release: One Community Health Opens New Clinic With Technology Designed To Limit Spread Of COVID-19 – The Lund Report

Posted on by

One Community Health (OCH) is opening a new health clinic at 849 Pacific Avenue in Hood River, Oregon. Replacing their 29-year-old facility, the new 38,000 square foot health center offers modern amenities and new technology to help reduce the risk of COVID-19 transmission.

While construction started on the new building before the arrival of COVID-19, OCH, in partnership with Scott Edwards Architecture LLP and Bremik Construction Inc., were able to make adjustments throughout construction to incorporate cutting edge technologies to help prevent the spread of the virus.

Negative pressure rooms, photohydroionization technology, MERV-15 air filtering, and air change optimizations are some of the ways the new building will help keep patients and staff safe. With these new systems, rapid COVID-19 antigen testing, and enhanced safety training and procedures, well be providing patients with one of the safest environments to receive care, including oral health, stated Dr. Elizabeth Aughney, Chief Health Officer for OCH.

In addition to multiple layers of COVID-19 defense incorporated into the buildings HVAC systems, the added size (almost 3 times larger than the previous clinic) offers patients and staff more room to comfortably maintain distance. While the building provides immediate benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic, many more will be realized in the future.

For over 34 years One Community Health has served residents of the Columbia River Gorge with a special focus on vulnerable and underserved communities. For example, we know from our own data (over 3,100 tests) that those who identify as Hispanic are over 3 times more likely to test positive for COVID-19. Now more than ever our patients deserve this safe, cutting edge, and beautiful space along with additional access to our amazing providers and care teams, stated Max Janasik, Chief Executive Officer for OCH.

Starting today, patients will be seen in the new clinic and have access to integrated whole-person care including physical, mental, oral, and preventative health services.

About One Community Health

One Community Health (OCH) is a nonprofit, Federally Qualified Health Center with locations in The Dalles and Hood River, Ore. Formerly known as La Clnica del Cario Family Health Care Center, Inc., it was founded in 1986 and today has evolved into an official Patient-Centered Primary Care Home recognized as the Best Primary Care Clinic of 2019 by the Central Oregon Independent Practice Association (COIPA).

OCH currently provides services to more than 16,000 patients. In addition, OCH excels in providing educational programs and support that reflect its integrated approach to health and wellbeing. Dedicated to advancing health and social justice for all its community members, OCH serves patients from the Mid-Columbia River Gorge Region: Wasco, Hood River, Klickitat and Skamania Counties.

Follow this link:

Press Release: One Community Health Opens New Clinic With Technology Designed To Limit Spread Of COVID-19 - The Lund Report

Is Microvision (MVIS) Stock Outpacing Its Computer and Technology Peers This Year? – Yahoo Finance

Posted on by

Investors focused on the Computer and Technology space have likely heard of Microvision (MVIS), but is the stock performing well in comparison to the rest of its sector peers? Let's take a closer look at the stock's year-to-date performance to find out.

Microvision is a member of our Computer and Technology group, which includes 606 different companies and currently sits at #10 in the Zacks Sector Rank. The Zacks Sector Rank considers 16 different groups, measuring the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks within the sector to gauge the strength of each group.

The Zacks Rank is a successful stock-picking model that emphasizes earnings estimates and estimate revisions. The system highlights a number of different stocks that could be poised to outperform the broader market over the next one to three months. MVIS is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #2 (Buy).

Over the past 90 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for MVIS's full-year earnings has moved 43.33% higher. This is a sign of improving analyst sentiment and a positive earnings outlook trend.

Our latest available data shows that MVIS has returned about 163.89% since the start of the calendar year. In comparison, Computer and Technology companies have returned an average of 15.54%. As we can see, Microvision is performing better than its sector in the calendar year.

Breaking things down more, MVIS is a member of the Lasers Systems and Components industry, which includes 6 individual companies and currently sits at #40 in the Zacks Industry Rank. On average, this group has gained an average of 2.02% so far this year, meaning that MVIS is performing better in terms of year-to-date returns.

MVIS will likely be looking to continue its solid performance, so investors interested in Computer and Technology stocks should continue to pay close attention to the company.

Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free reportMicrovision, Inc. (MVIS) : Free Stock Analysis ReportTo read this article on Zacks.com click here.

See the original post here:

Is Microvision (MVIS) Stock Outpacing Its Computer and Technology Peers This Year? - Yahoo Finance

The biggest media and technology companies are having an identity crisis – CNBC

Posted on by

stockcam | iStock Unreleased | Getty Images

Media companies are having an identity crisis. And, just like in life, coming to grips with who they are will define the rest of their existence.

It used to be simple: there were content companies, distribution companies and technology companies. Disney was a content company. It made movies and TV shows. Comcast was a distribution company. It provided cable hookups to watch programs that Disney (and many others) make. Google was a technology company. It made phones and set-top boxes and operating system software.

The blurring began about a decade ago, when Comcast acquired NBCUniversal (the parent company of CNBC). AT&T, mostly a tech company, went big into distribution when it acquired DirecTV in 2015, then bought content behemoth Time Warner in 2018.

As television has grown more and more connected to the internet, new layers of distribution have developed. Companies like Roku aggregate streamingapplications through hardware. Companies like Netflix aggregate content within a platform.

Some companies, like Comcast, are trying to play at nearly every level of the media supply chain, offering broadband, creatingFlex broadband boxes, developing and selling theXfinity/X1 operating system, creatingPeacockas a new digital distribution platform and selling NBCUniversal content to other platforms.

Establishing dominance at every level will be difficult. It's part of the reason why Peacock and AT&T's HBO Max are holding out from carriage deals with Roku and Amazon, as CNBC reported earlier this week. It's also why Google suddenly jacked up its YouTubeTV pricing 30% in the middle of the pandemic. Companies can only do so many things well.

The path these companies choose will dictate how much they spend on content, their M&A strategies, and ultimately, their stock prices. Welcome to the new world order of media.

There are now three different tiers to content distribution, each relying on the layers below it.

The base level of distribution is the same as it's always been -- a pipe to the home. The only difference is now the connection may be mobile broadband (such as Verizon's 5G Home) instead of cable or fiber.

The next level of distribution is new -- aggregating streaming applications, which are replacing linear networks as the main channels of content, and delivering them in new types of hardware and software.

In the old world, pay-TV companies owned this level of distribution. You'd get a set-top box through Comcast or Dish, and it would contain all the linear TV channels that you subscribed to.

But cable companies often didn't make their own set-top box, and the makers of those boxes (Cisco, Pace, Arris, TiVo, Broadcom, etc.) didn't shift quickly or successfully enough to offer digital TV hardware.

Instead, that market went to Roku and Amazon (Fire TV), which control about 70% of the more than 400 million connected U.S. TVs.Apple (Apple TV), Google (Android TV/Chromecast), Samsung, Comcast (Xfinity/Flex), Microsoft (Xbox) and Sony (PlayStation) also play in this world.

That's a lot of companies aiming to "control the living room," as Lightshed media analyst Rich Greenfield wrote in a note to clients this week. The companies that control your TV can theoretically run your entire home through connected devices and voice applications. It's not a stretch to imagine consumers living in an Apple House or an Android House or an Amazon House.

The third level of distribution are companies aggregating content from different producers within their subscription video services. This is Netflix and Amazon Prime Video and Hulu -- services that have licensed content from other companies and added their own original programming. These companies want you to spend as much of your life as possible within their application. As Netflix has said, the main competition is sleep.

These kinds of services act as mini-cable services or jumbo networks. "Three to five" of them will ultimately succeed, said Starz CEO Jeffrey Hirsch in an interview.

"Whether it's Peacock, HBO Max, Netflix, Amazon or Disney and Hulu, these guys are going to be fighting to be the primary aggregator that serves everybody in the home," Hirsch said. "Eventually it's going to be kids, sports, news and weather. These guys are fighting to replace the traditional cable TV bundle."

The overlap is where things start to get messy -- and where all of the intrigue of media and technology lies right now.

As Hirsch said, it appears AT&T's HBO Max and Comcast's Peacock would like to join the ranks of the large umbrella platforms. They want their applications to be the center of your viewing world -- hence the slogan "HBO Max: Where HBO Meets So Much More." This is partly why both of those companies are currently fighting Amazon and Roku in carriage negotiations.

But it's not clear yet that Peacock will have the breadth of content to do this.

Then there'sViacomCBS, which is planning to launch its expanded CBS All Access application later this year. Does ViacomCBS also want to be a platform? Its CEO Bob Bakish said earlier this year that he wanted to be both a platform and an arms dealer, keeping some content exclusive and licensing some to other distributors, like it did with Peacock earlier this month.

Can HBO Max get enough subscribers to pay for the amount of content spend it will need to compete with Netflix?Is Apple TV content to be a premium niche service or does it want to be Netflix?

With Disney+, ESPN+ and Hulu, Disney seems primed to be one of the dominant content companies. But so far, Disney doesn't own a living room device. Could Disney acquire Roku? Could it build something itself? Does it want to be something closer to Comcast? Does Netflix?

"You could end up with somebody that has Charter's Spectrum broadband into the home, with an Apple TV, spending their time watching Peacock," said Hirsch. "It kind of feels like if you put all these companies in a pot and shake it out, it's kind of mud. There's so much flexibility and so many combinations for consumers."

Disclosure: Comcast is the owner of NBCUniversal, parent company of CNBC and CNBC.com.

WATCH: HBO Max under pressure to justify price premium, analyst says

Read the original post:

The biggest media and technology companies are having an identity crisis - CNBC

How technology Is helping the oil and gas industry to persist – The Energyst

Posted on by

Once formidable giants with a monopoly on the energy sector, the oil and gas industry is having a bit of an identity crisis. The rise of environmental activists like Greta Thunberg; Googles announcement that it plans to invest $2bn in wind and solar energy with the aim of making it powered entirely by renewable energy sources; and the enthusiastic adoption of technology in other industries its no surprise that the public perception of the oil and gas industries is that they are dinosaurs and belong in the past.

In Great Britain, for example, we feel much more positive about renewable energy sources than traditional ones, with a European Social Survey revealing that over 70% of Brits think a large or very large amount of electricity should be generated from renewable energy, as opposed to 27% thinking it should come from gas.

Keeping up with the timesTraditionally, the gas and oil industries have done so well that perhaps the drive to improve and innovate simply wasnt there. The product was in high demand, so what was there to worry about? Industry chiefs instead focused on a model of growth and reserve exploration. Technology like automation and robotics, which other industries such as retail, manufacturing and even trading have embraced have been slow to be adopted by the fossil fuel industries. However, they are beginning to catch up and realise the benefits.

RoboticsRobotics has made a lot of boring and dangerous elements of drilling safer. For example, connecting and disconnecting drill pipes an integral part of the drilling process, but an extremely dangerous operation for the men and women who did it. Nowadays, technology like the Iron Roughneck robot automates this process, taking risk to human life completely out of the equation. There are also robotic snake arms that can carry out vital inspections in confined spaces.

Artificial intelligenceAI, used by so many industries to predict trends, manage stock levels, handle large levels of data and so much more, is now being harnessed by the gas and oil industries to automate processes, predict trends, improve performance and generally make their operations more efficient and cost-effective. It can even help in resources exploration by mapping and identifying petroleum deposits beneath the earth or detecting equipment failure or gas leaks.

The large levels of data that AI can generate means that many gas and oil companies will now be relying on cloud computing to improve how that data is processed.

The environmental issueThe biggest hurdle that the oil and gas industries face is the thorny issue of pollution. For many, oil spills, burning methane and noxious fumes are the faces of fossil fuel, with a recent study showing that air pollution from oil and gas production is visible from space.When we think of a clean planet, were not really thinking about the oil and gas industries. Is there a place for them in a greener world?

Using progressive air pollution control technologies, like those offered by ERG, will go a long way to help improve industry emissions and will also improve public opinion of them. Fossil fuel companies have also successfully integrated the Internet of Things into their systems, which has not only lead to improving the quality of data, but it has also led to reduced energy use and oil spillages, meaning they have less of an impact on the environment.

So, there could still be a place for the oil and gas industries. They just need to grasp the technological advances to help them become cleaner, more efficient and relevant in a changing world.

Link:

How technology Is helping the oil and gas industry to persist - The Energyst

Global Video Streaming Market 2020-2025 – Increased Technology and Digital Media Consumption Since the Outbreak of COVID-19 – ResearchAndMarkets.com -…

Posted on by

DUBLIN--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The "Global Video Streaming Market - Analysis by Streaming Type (VOD, Live), Revenue Model (AVOD, TVOD, SVOD), by End User, by Region, by Country (2020 Edition): Market Insights, COVID-19 Impact, Competition and Forecast (2020-2025)" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

The Global Video Streaming Market, valued at USD 42.14 Billion in the year 2019 has been witnessing unprecedented growth in the last few years on the back of increasing internet penetration, escalating number of smartphone users and rising investment in good content.

Additionally, increasing technology in digital media and lockdown across regions and countries as a result of COVID-19 pandemic will drive the Video Streaming market value in the near future. Traditional media companies and the streaming video on demand platforms like Netflix, Disney+ and Amazon Prime are competing for the best quality content to stream on their platforms and grow their subscriber base and the pandemic has provided an opportunity to these companies to leverage the discretionary spend of the consumers.

Among the Streaming Type of the Video Streaming market (Video on Demand and Live), Video on Demand has been gaining popularity globally and is expected to keep growing in the forecast period. The demand of VOD in Video Streaming is due to demand of watching videos according to their choice which will keep increasing in future.

Among the Revenue Model of the Video Streaming market (AVOD, TVOD and SVOD), SVOD has been gaining popularity globally and is expected to keep growing in the forecast period. The demand of SVOD in Video Streaming is due to its availability anytime and higher revenue generating type which will keep increasing in future.

Among the End User of the Video Streaming market (Media and Entertainment, Education and Awareness, IT and E-commerce, Others), Media and Entertainment is highly popular globally and is expected to keep growing in the forecast period. The demand of Media and Entertainment in Video Streaming is due to the demand of entertainment on digital platform which will keep increasing in future.

The North American market has the largest share historically and is expected to lead the global market throughout the forecast period. The increasing demand of Video Streaming is due to higher adoption of digital media in the region and due to growing penetration of Internet.

Scope of the Report

Key Topics Covered

1. Research Methodology and Executive Summary

1.1 Research Methodology

1.2 Executive Summary

2. Strategic Recommendations

2.1 Focus on Offering Quality content to Consumers

2.2 Focus on Offering Better Experience to Consumers

3. Video Streaming Market: Product Outlook

4. Global Video Streaming Market: Sizing and Forecast

4.1 Market Size, By Value, Year 2015-2025

5. Global Video Streaming Market Segmentation - By Streaming Type, By Revenue Type, By End User

5.1 Competitive Scenario of Global Video Streaming Market: By Streaming Type

5.1.1 Video on Demand - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.1.2 Live - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.2 Competitive Scenario of Global Video Streaming Market: By Revenue Type

5.2.1 AVOD - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.2.2 TVOD - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.2.3 SVOD - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.3 Competitive Scenario of Global Video Streaming Market: By End User

5.3.1 Media and Entertainment - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.3.2 Education and Awareness - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.3.4 IT and E-commerce - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

5.3.5 Others - Market Size and Forecast (2015-2025)

6. Global Video Streaming Market: Regional Analysis

6.1 Competitive Scenario of Global Video Streaming Market: By Region

7. North America Video Streaming Market: An Analysis (2015-2025)

8. Europe Video Streaming Market: An Analysis (2015-2025)

9. Asia-Pacific Video Streaming Market: An Analysis (2015-2025)

10. Global Video Streaming Market Dynamics

10.1 Drivers

10.2 Restraints

10.3 Trends

11. Market Attractiveness

11.1 Market Attractiveness Chart of Global Video Streaming Market - By Streaming Type, 2025

11.2 Market Attractiveness Chart of Global Video Streaming Market - By Revenue Type, 2025

11.3 Market Attractiveness Chart of Global Video Streaming Market - By End-user, 2025

11.4 Market Attractiveness Chart of Global Video Streaming Market - By Region, 2025

12. Competitive Landscape

12.2 Market Share Analysis

13. Company Analysis (Business Description, Financial Analysis, Business Strategy)

13.1 Amazon Prime Video

13.2 Netflix

13.3 Hulu

13.4 Akamai Technologies

13.5 Youtube

13.6 Roku

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/pgve9i

The rest is here:

Global Video Streaming Market 2020-2025 - Increased Technology and Digital Media Consumption Since the Outbreak of COVID-19 - ResearchAndMarkets.com -...

LendCare launches new technology to accelerate point-of-sale financing for Canadian merchants and consumers. – Canada NewsWire

Posted on by

TORONTO, July 16, 2020 /CNW/ -LendCare Capital, a leading Canadian point-of-sale finance and technology company, announced today the launch of their new online financing and origination platform, FrontLine.

FrontLine is a proprietary software technology designed to provide merchants and consumers with a flexible and mobile friendly financing experience, where transactions happen in real-time on the platform.

"Developing an online point-of-sale solution that was universally accessible by merchants and consumers was the next logical step to support our growing number of partners in the broad range of verticals that we support." said Ali Metel, CEO, LendCare Capital. "Our platform will accelerate the point-of-sale process and better position businesses for growth, all while providing them with an innovative and customer-centric experience". Ali Metel went on further to say. "FrontLine is an integral piece of LendCare's goal in implementing what we perceive as Canada's first national full credit spectrum single point-of-sale financing solution, giving merchants a true one-stop platform with a single technology integrated with a single lender to address financing needs from Prime to all the non-Prime credit grades, maximizing sales volume and eliminating the need to deal with multiple lenders."

This tech-forward tool allows merchants to take their customers from 'apply to buy' within minutes, either in-store or remotely from any mobile device or computer. This includes the ability for merchants to integrate FrontLine application links into websites, QR code scans and shopping cart check-outs.

FrontLine comes with a vast array of features like; instant credit decisions, seamlessly integrated fraud detection, sales pipeline updates, lead management and the option to email or text unique links to customers, allowing them to complete their own applications remotely, from any device.

The FrontLine platform also allows for customized workflows, based on unique business or product categories, and will enable merchants to track credit decisions, monitor sales and receive payments, all electronically.

LendCare has been testing FrontLine over the last quarter with a select group of partners to great reviews and will now begin migrating the company's current network of over 6000 partners across Canada to the new platform.

About LendCare Capital

LendCare is a Canadian consumer finance and technology company, which enables over 6000 businesses to increase their revenue by providing full credit spectrum financing at the point-of-sale. For over a decade, LendCare has cleared a path to providing fast, reliable and affordable financing options for the Powersports, Auto, Retail, Home Improvement and Health sectors, while processing over $5 billion in loan applications to date. With a dedicated team of finance experts and well-established partnerships with merchants, top dealerships and brokers, LendCare bridges the gap between credit score and customers living their best life.

SOURCE LendCare

For further information: Media inquiries: Jackie Bain, Head of Marketing, [emailprotected], 1-866-291-4045 ext. 1801, Related links: http://www.lendcare.ca

https://www.lendcare.ca/en

Go here to read the rest:

LendCare launches new technology to accelerate point-of-sale financing for Canadian merchants and consumers. - Canada NewsWire

Facial recognition technology: UMass Amherst professor calls for creation of federal office to regulate contr – MassLive.com

Posted on by

A Massachusetts professor is arguing for the creation of a federal agency, akin to the U.S. Food and Drug administration, to regulate the controversial use of facial recognition technology, a piece of software that continues to be lambasted for its potential civil liberties violations and racial biases.

The proposal was put forward by University of Massachusetts Amherst computer science Professor Erik Learned-Miller during a livestreamed discussion Wednesday about the hotly debated software, its ramifications and even its possible positive uses.

Despite the technologys controversies and criticisms, facial recognition remains largely unregulated at the state and national levels.

A growing number of communities across the country, including several in Massachusetts, have taken it upon themselves to pass municipal restrictions on the use of the software in the absence of more sweeping legislation.

But many advocates, politicians and researchers do not think going town by town or city by city regulating the software is enough. The technology is moving far more quickly than policymakers can act and is sometimes being used in the shadows without the publics knowledge, they have argued.

Individual measures implemented by towns or cities are not sufficient in guaranteeing the consistent protection of peoples rights, Learned-Miller said in a statement earlier this summer.

We should seriously be thinking about a new federal office to regulate face recognition, because there are so many complexities and so many issues that it entails, the UMass professor said during Wednesdays online discussion. We need a coordinated effort to do this.

Learned-Millers question-and-answer session comes as citizens across the country continue to speak out strongly against systemic racism, calling for an end to police brutality and demanding a demilitarization of American law enforcement agencies.

Facial recognition technology has not been exempt from such discussions, and Massachusetts has been at the forefront of debates on the software.

Seven communities throughout the state have either outright or temporarily banned the municipal use of the technology, with Boston becoming the second-biggest U.S. city to restrict the software. San Francisco was the first and largest community in the country to ban the technology, doing so in May 2019.

The roughly hourlong event Wednesday was part of the UMass College of Information and Computer Sciences series of webinars called Technology and Social Justice. Each discussion focuses on a different technology whose impact on society is significant in both visible and invisible ways.

The rapid adoption of new softwares and the quick pace of innovation amplify the positive and negative impacts of computer science research, Laura Haas, the dean of the college, pointed out.

As computer scientists, we must grapple with research challenges while critically accessing the potential for misuse, hidden bias, lack of transparency and unintended consequences of our technical innovations, she said.

University of Massachusetts Amherst computer science Professor Erik Learned-Miller, during a livestreamed discussion, called for an independent federal agency to regulate the use of facial recognition technology, a controversial piece of software criticized for its potential to violate citizens' privacies and for its racial biases. (Jackson Cote/MassLive via Zoom)

An award-winning expert on the form of biometric surveillance, Learned-Miller cowrote a report titled Facial Recognition Technologies in the Wild: A Call for a Federal Office that provides actionable recommendations for overseeing the use of the software.

The project, funded by a grant from the MacArthur Foundation, was coauthored by computer scientist Vicente Ordez of the University of Virginia, Jamie Morgenstern of the University of Washington and Joy Buolamwini, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology researcher and founder of the Algorithmic Justice League.

Buolamwinis work has been central to the dialogue on facial recognition, and she even testified in favor of a statewide moratorium on the softwares use in Massachusetts in October.

In 2018, the researcher conducted a study called the Gender Shades project that put the softwares racial bias problems on full display.

She ran more than 1,200 faces through recognition programs offered by Face++, IBM and Microsoft and found the technology frequently misidentified women of color.

Her and Learned-Millers paper talks about everything that could go wrong with the software and urges officials to adopt a federal office to manage the technology, according to the UMass professor.

There are a slew of issues that plague facial recognition, from its potential to breach peoples privacies to its track record of racial profiling, Learned-Miller noted.

During Wednesdays online discussion, the computer science instructor brought up the recent case of Robert Williams, a Black man living in a suburb of Detroit, Michigan, who was wrongfully identified by the software and taken into custody for a crime he did not commit, according to the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts.

Williams case, advocates and experts like Learned-Miller have pointed out, is a prime example of the real-world consequences of facial recognition technology.

He was arrested in front of his family and detained for 30 hours, Learned-Miller said of Williams. Also, he was humiliated and intimidated, and his kids went through trauma.

Learned-Miller added, These are really serious problems, and we want to try to figure out how we can avoid these things.

The professors report, according to a statement, specifically calls for a governmental model, inspired by some of the FDAs offices that regulate medical devices and pharmaceuticals, that would categorize facial recognition technologies by degrees of risk and issue corresponding restrictions.

The FDA provides a model or precedent of centralized regulation for managing complex technologies with major societal implications, the statement said. Such an independent agency would encourage addressing the facial recognition technologies ecosystem as a whole.

Fielding a question from MassLive on Wednesday about how technology companies that sell facial recognition software would be monitored, Learned-Miller answered, The way it would work is just the way the FDA works.

Lets say youre a medical device company and you want to make a new implantable pacemaker, then what you do is you show the design of the pacemaker to the FDA, he said. The design, the tests, the engineering practices, the quality-control procedure results, you submit 1,000 pages of stuff to them that says, Look, we really know what were doing.' "

Such products also have to go through clinical trials, where they are tried out on volunteers, and the companies that create the devices have to argue they are safe and effective as well.

I would like to see all those same kinds of ideas implemented so that a company that wants to get into the business has to provide this level of support, the UMass professor said of the facial recognition technology industry.

Aside from its potential dangers, facial recognition technology offers some positive applications, Learned-Miller noted during the discussion.

It could be used to diagnose certain medical conditions, unlock personal computer devices and even find minors who have disappeared or been abducted, he claimed.

Its currently used that way by the FBI and has been responsible for helping to find a large number of missing and abused children, the professor said.

The software, Learned-Miller emphasized, has beneficial applications that should not be thrown away.

That raises the follow-up question, Can we find a way to allow the reasonable applications while regulating the dangerous ones?,' " he said.

At one point during the online discussion, Learned-Miller was asked by fellow facial recognition technology expert Buolamwini what approaches the UMass professor would recommend for addressing the harmful aspects of the software in the absence of an FDA-style federal office.

Noting that Buolamwinis question was nuanced, Learned-Miller answered that a temporary ban on certain facial recognition technologies would be a pretty reasonable option right now.

However, such restrictions would outlaw certain uses of the software that people believe to be benign, like sorting through photographs on a personal computer.

Id like to be able to move as quickly as we can towards allowing the low-risk applications and holding off on the high-risk applications, Learned-Miller said, which means I would support a temporary ban on applications deemed to be high-risk.

Related Content:

Go here to read the rest:

Facial recognition technology: UMass Amherst professor calls for creation of federal office to regulate contr - MassLive.com

Mullen Technologies, S3R3 Solutions extend letter of intent for electric car manufacturing facility on the West Plains – The Spokesman-Review

Posted on by

California-based Mullen Technologies has renewed its letter of intent with S3R3 Solutions following a new round of funding that will go toward building an electric car manufacturing facility on the West Plains.

At a board meeting Thursday, S3R3 Solutions formerly the West Plains Public Development Authority approved the revised letter of intent with Mullen Technologies that calls for the agency to build and lease 1.3 million square feet of assembly and manufacturing space for the companys Dragonfly K50 electric sports car.

The manufacturing and assembly facility for the Dragonfly K50 electric car would create 55 jobs at initial startup and is projected to add 863 jobs by 2026, according to officials. Mullen Technologies, through Mullen Energy, also has expressed interest in bringing in research and development for lithium-ion batteries, which would create up to 3,000 jobs.

Mullen Technologies recently entered a $135 million financing agreement with Axiom Financial that will go toward acquiring an existing electric vehicle plant and paying the more than $50 million deposit required in the letter of intent to build the West Plains manufacturing facility.

The company intends to meet requirements of its letter of intent with S3R3 Solutions by late this year. It anticipates starting Dragonfly K50 assembly and development of the cars battery packs in a 500,000-square-foot facility that will span an additional 800,000 square feet as battery production expands, according to a news release.

S3R3 Solutions has proven its ability to streamline projects and we stand ready to deliver on the Mullen project to bring hundreds if not thousands of jobs to the Spokane region, Al French, Spokane County Commissioner and S3R3 Solutions board chairman, said in a statement.

S3R3 Solutions will lease the land from the Spokane International Airport to build the facility near Thorpe and Craig roads. The project is to be financed through a revenue bond that would be paid back through the lease agreement with Mullen Technologies.

Mullen Technologies, a privately held company, also signed a letter of intent last month to merge with Miami-based Net Element, an electronic payment technology company. The reverse merger, a process in which a privately held company takes control of a publicly traded company, would allow Mullen Technologies to acquire Net Element and bypass what can be a somewhat lengthy process of going public on its own.

The merger is anticipated to occur in the third quarter, pending stockholder and board approval.

Mullen Technologies expects to launch the Dragonfly K50 in the first half of 2021, according to a company release.

Mullen Technologies did not respond to a request for comment about the projects status or timeline.

The company has several subsidiaries, including Mullen Auto Sales, a group of preowned auto dealerships in California and Arizona; CarHub, a digital platform for buying and selling cars; Mullen Energy, a division that focuses on advancing battery technology; and Mullen Finance Corp., which offers vehicle leases and loans.

Mullens subsidiary, Smart 8 Energy, began sourcing ventilators, COVID-19 antibody and virus test kits and personal protective equipment during the coronavirus pandemic.

Here is the original post:

Mullen Technologies, S3R3 Solutions extend letter of intent for electric car manufacturing facility on the West Plains - The Spokesman-Review

Online Casino Affiliate Program – SuperiorShare Affiliate …

Posted on by

There are few Rival casinos which can claim to be Superior! Weve found Scott and the team to be amongst the most capable programs we work with in our time with them.

- vegasslotsonline.com -

I've been working with Superior Share for the better part of a decade now and I've always been impressed. They've taken the time to understand my business and work proactively to help us succeed. We've never had a payment issue either, which is always nice.

- Freechips.tv -

I have far more ACTIVE players at Superior than I have ever seen at any other Rival casino in the 11 years I've been promoting them. So a big pat on the back for your retention guys!

- KasinoKing.co.uk -

SuperiorShare has proven to have great conversion, high player values and a outstanding affiliate manager.

- NDC -

Cooperating with Superior Share has been a very positive experience - they are committed, professional and very communicative. Overall a great partner and we can highly recommend working with them!

- OnlineCasinoReports.com -

The rest is here:

Online Casino Affiliate Program - SuperiorShare Affiliate ...

Letters: Britain’s latest immigration policy is shameful and an abuse of power – HeraldScotland

Posted on by

I HAVE for years felt exceedingly uncomfortable concerning successive UK governments attitudes to inbound immigration, in particular that the country has unashamedly sought to attract "the best and the brightest" from other countries, many of which can ill afford to lose their own homegrown talent, especially in sectors like medicine, life sciences, IT and engineering.

I feel a sense of shame that the UK seeks to plunder the best people from abroad, rather than train enough of our own and pay/treat them sufficiently well to discourage them from seeking better pay, terms and conditions in other better developed nations, although I am not sufficiently naive to believe that seeking international experience in either direction is necessarily a bad thing.

However, reading the UK Governments latest, post-Brexit, points-based system, which the Home Office confirms will include a route for skilled workers (and, by implication, exclude a route for those they consider to be "unskilled workers", presumably including the very hospital porters, cleaners, laundry and cleaning staff who ensured the Prime Minister was kept clean, fed and watered during his recent spell in ICU), my discomfort has turned to revulsion in what could be reasonably viewed as legitimised, 21st century human trafficking ("Immigration rules branded a slap in the face for vital care workers", The Herald, July 14).

And by depleting the professional resources of less well-off nations, especially in the healthcare sector during the Covid-19 pandemic, the hard-right, English exceptionalist flank of what Boris Johnson has the effrontery to call "One Nation Conservatism" (one nation, right enough and the others, it seems, can go to hell) should but wont be utterly ashamed of itself.

Sufficient Thursday nights appear now to have lapsed since his recent near-death experience that the most unprincipled Home Secretary since Theresa May and her "hostile environment" feels able to revisit the classification of care workers invariably on the minimum wage and often at extreme and even deadly personal risk as "unskilled".

The Conservative Party, it would seem, has never shaken off the epithet of "the Nasty Party" given to it by the aforementioned Mrs May; it is clear to me that it still views the plundering of scarce resources of less economically-well-off nations for the UKs own financial enrichment as a legitimate strategy yet again for the procurement of human resources and history, I hope, will judge them, and those who go along with this latest abuse of power as harshly as the moral majority now views slavery.

Mike Wilson, Longniddry.

NICOLA Sturgeon says excluding social care staff from UK's new, points-based visa plan would be devastating.

What about all the retail and hospitality workers who have been probably more devastated by the huge redundancies in their industry?

Surely she could use her jobs quango, Skills Development Scotland, to set up retraining schemes to enable Scottish workers to do these jobs?

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven.

Go here to see the original:

Letters: Britain's latest immigration policy is shameful and an abuse of power - HeraldScotland

Making real the ideals of our country – The Economist

Posted on by

Jul 14th 2020

THE PAST IS never dead. It's not even past, wrote William Faulkner, an American novelist. The observation rings especially true for the agonising problem of race in America. After centuries of slavery and segregation, African-Americans achieved formal legal equality only in the 1960s. Yet discrimination persists and they are far more likely to be victims of police violence than other demographic groups.

Cory Booker is a Democratic senator from New Jersey with bold ideas on how to improve the situation. In an interview with The Economist, he traced the cords of injustice that lay the foundation for todays problems, and offered solutions ranging from baby-bond legislation (giving poor children trust accounts) to removing ageing lead pipes that literally poison the countrys children.

Thats not radical, he says about these sorts of reforms, but common moral sense. The interview below with Mr Booker has been lightly edited.

***

The Economist: When you see a mass movement for racial justice happening again in this country and when you see frustration, not just over criminal justice, but the fact that black and white income gaps and wealth gaps are basically the same since 1968, what does that make you conclude about American society and government? Is it that formal legal equality has failed to guarantee equality of opportunity for black Americans?

Cory Booker: Look, we are a nation that has strong, sort of unbroken cords of racial injustice that have been with us for generations. And where lots of generational wealth has been created through the GI Bill [support to veterans for housing and education] through Social Security, through the Homestead Act, which granted massive tracts of land to new immigrants to this country. These are things that blacks were excluded from, that were barriers to economic opportunity.

We have a nation like that, up into my lifetime. My parents literally had to get a white couple to pose as us in order to buy a home in an affluent area of suburban New Jersey with great public schools. But we still live in a country where this denial of equal education is a part of our national fabric. Even today, we see schools that African-Americans attend receiving dramatically less funding than schools that are predominantly white.

These strong cords of injustice have never been broken. Our prison population has gone up about 500% since 1980 alone. Theres no difference between blacks and whites in using drugs or dealing drugs. But African-Americans were arrested for those crimes at rates three or four times higher than whites.

We have powerful, powerful forces of overt and institutional racism over the years that has really underdeveloped African-American opportunity and equality. It stretches now from the health-care system to issues of environmental justice. The number one indicator of whether you live around a Superfund site [designated a heavily polluted area] or drink dirty water or breathe unclean air is the colour of your skin. All of these things in their totality create a nation that still has such savage disparities and outcomes based upon race.

And I am encouraged that in this momentand I hope it's not a moment, I hope it grows to a greater movementthere is a greater expansion of our circles of empathy for each other. A greater understanding of the injustices that are there. It seems to be the dawning of an expansion of our moral imagination about how we can actually become a nation of equality, a nation of justice, and a nation that honors its highest values with a reality that reflects them.

The Economist: And how do you begin that difficult task of unwinding those deep threads that have not ever been broken? Whether its housing, policing, criminal justice, environmental issueshow do you start that? And do you feel optimistic about the possibility of change on some of those entrenched policy areas?

Mr Booker: Well, in a larger sense, first of all, the personal pronoun you use: I hope it's not a you, I hope its how do we do that? It's very hard in our country for us to create leaps in advancement without there being a greater sense of collective we, and a collective responsibility. The incredible legislation that's passed in our past from the suffrage movement to the labour movement to the civil-rights movement of the 1960s were all movements that happen because large swathes of American people put on personal responsibility to make dramatic change. The progressive movement in the 1920s was fuelled by people who weren't often directly affected by issues, seeing an urgency to change based on a growing consciousness.

It seems to be the dawning of an expansion of our moral imagination about how we can actually become a nation of equality

That is still ongoing: trying to expose the realities that are affecting our country as a whole and black people in particular, so that people feel a sense of moral urgency to address them. There are things that go on in our prison system that most Americans dont realise happen: that we shackle pregnant women when they're giving birth, that we put children in solitary confinement for extensive periods of times, even though our psychological professionals say that its torturous and causes brain damage.

I was encouraged when I heard very learned people telling me they never knew about what happened in Tulsa, Oklahoma. [The prosperous neighbourhood of Greenwood, known as Black Wall Street, was destroyed by white residents in 1921.] Where people didn't know about the many places around this country that had seen such racial terror to the point where thousands upon thousands of Americans were lynched, often elected leaders, poor judges pulled out into streets and beaten. These stories have just been whitewashed from our history. I'm hopeful that we are at a period where awareness is growing, and with that, a sense of urgency to address it.

Now, when you talk about me in a particular senseand use that personal pronoun like you, Cory Booker, as a senatorI have an obligation to try to continue to push the bounds of justice as a United States senator and propose things that will actually have a very practical impact on disparities.

For example, baby-bond legislation is not that sexy, but it's this idea that every child, regardless of race, born in our nation, gets a $1,000 savings account. And then based upon their income, just like we base the earned-income tax credit, that child will get up to $2,000 a year placed in an interest-bearing account that compounds interest. By the time they're 18, the lowest-income American kids will have upwards of $50,000 saved.

Columbia University looked at that legislation for young adults and found it would virtually close the racial wealth gap. Policy solutions like that, like massive expansions of the earned-income tax credit [which tops up the wages of low-income Americans] or the child tax credit. These are things that affect poverty overall in our country, but would end poverty for a significant percentage of African Americans.

The Economist: After this period of consciousness-raising, what else might go in a Great Society-like radical programme of change, assuming that Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump were not part of this conversation for the moment?

Mr Booker: I hope that our policies begin to reflect what real public safety is. We know unequivocally by the facts that expanding Medicaid lowers violence. Expanding the earned-income tax credit lowers violence. You can go through these things that you know empower people. There are pilot programmes all over this country that show that dealing with people who are struggling with mental illness with police causes their death.

I hope that our policies begin to reflect what real public safety is

Black folks are 2.5 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than somebody white. Someone with a mental illness is over ten more likely to be killed by the police than someone whos white. And to think that we actually could have services that help people have [mental] health-care. Thats not radical, that's just common fiscal sense, as well as common moral sense. To have an expansive view of public safety, to start investing as a society into those things that help people, who are hurt and fragile, can lead to greater human flourishing.

Our country is an outlier. We really dont do much for children until they turn five or six. So we lead industrial nations in infant mortality, in maternal mortality and in low-birthweight babies. It would be cheaper to revive at-risk women doula-care than to pay the extraordinary costs of premature birth. Something called nurse-family partnershipswhich is just having a nurse visit a home to be supportive with information for at-risk pregnant womenactually lowers encounters with police dramatically. Every taxpayer dollar you spend on the programme saves four or five taxpayer dollars because it lowers visits to the emergency room for that mother and that child.

Its not like we dont know how to elevate human potential while saving taxpayer dollars, or how to lower our reliance on police, courts and prisons. We know enough already. Its just that were not, as a society, collectively prioritising what would be a much more beloved way to move forward. And so this greater human consciousness, I hope elevates this ideal that, whether youre a fiscal conservative or a progressive liberal, these are things that abide with all of our values. Its why Ive had some success moving criminal-justice reform with strange partners, like the Koch brothers or the Heritage Foundation.

In a globally competitive environment, America is really falling behind those nations that do a better job of elevating human flourishing and human potential. The number China has in their top 10% of their high-school students is relatively close to the number of all of our high-school students. In a global knowledge-based society, your greatest natural resource is the genius of your children.

In a globally competitive environment, America is really falling behind those nations that do a better job of elevating human flourishing and human potential

And were doing a bad job because were a nation that has an astonishingly high level of children whose brains are addled by permanent lead damage. There are over 3,000 jurisdictions where children have more than twice the blood-lead level of Flint, Michigan, and they are disproportionately black and brown children. And so right now we don't even care enough. And I know we have the heart for it, but were not manifesting it in our policies to do something simple, which would have been a fraction of the last covid-19 bill. Why dont we as a country replace every lead service line in America that goes to our schools, to day-care centres and to homes in the United States that would actually pay for itself through the productivity of those children and saving them from the violence associated with lead poisoning.

There are a lot of common-sense things that we can do that should accord with the values of everybody who calls themselves pro-life to everybody who calls themselves a progressive, but we're just not doing it.

And so this is what the echoed words of our ancestors said. Martin Luther King, who wrote in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, was very critical. He actually said Im not as upset with the White Citizens Council or the KKK, I'm far more upset with the white moderates who are doing nothing. And he eloquently said that we have to repent in our day and age, not just for the vitriolic words and violent actions of the bad people, but the appalling silence and inaction of the good people.

Well, I fear that we will have to repent in our generation, if more of us who are good peopleand that is the overwhelming majority of Americanslet another generation go by, where we dont correct these persistent injustices with strategies that we know work and that we know will save us taxpayer dollars. Yet we fail to engage in the struggle to make them possible. As the great abolitionist Frederick Douglass said, If theres no struggle, there is no progress.

The Economist: A programme like baby bonds, which would do a lot on the racial wealth gap, would take 18 years for those accounts to accrue. And in the present day, theres a strong racial child-poverty gap. What do you see as the tools to fix that problem?

Mr Booker: The two very obvious tools are a massively expanded earned-income tax rate by more than half and a massively expanded child tax credit, like a lot of our peer nations do. But there's other tools that wed have to use to catch us up to the rest of the industrial world, like having affordable child care. We have a country in which child care in most states is more expensive than state-college tuition. It is unconscionable that we are doing that.

These are insane things that go on in this country that in our peer nations do not

We have something called the mortgage-interest deduction, for example, that is overwhelmingly used by the higher income. That tax expenditure goes to the wealthy in our country overwhelmingly. Why dont we do something for working people in America and have a rental tax credit if youre paying more than a one-third of your income on rent, which would cut poverty by the millions in America and give people security? One of the things that so undermine student performance are families who face evictions and are jumping from apartment to apartment. So theyre facing issues of fairness in our tax code like the ones I just mentioned, while also dealing with issues like paid family leave or child care that would take America so far in ending racial gaps.

A friend of mine named Natasha who worked a minimum-wage job couldn't afford housing. Her son was sick with asthma. Again, a black child is about ten times more likely to die of asthma complications than a white child. And she had to make a terrible decision of whether to stay at her job and get a pay-cheque that she really needed to keep a roof over the head of her kid, or to leave and go across the street and be with her child in the emergency room who was gasping for breath. I mean, these are insane things that go on in this country that in our peer nations do not. And we put our families in deep levels of stress and anxiety that ultimately undermines their overall flourishing.

We in this generation can end those things if we are committed to making real the ideals of our country and the laws of our countrythat we really are a nation that believes in life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that believes in human flourishing; that believes in equal justice under the law. And these are things that I think are long past [due]. Time has come. And, interestingly, they poll really well on both sides of the political aisle. But our people in elected office need more of a push to make them the law of land.

The Economist: You remain the optimist.

Mr Booker: Thank you. Forever, a prisoner of hope. And if anything, our nation's history is testimony, the triumph of hope, often under insurmountable conditions and odds.

Link:

Making real the ideals of our country - The Economist

Trump reduced fines for nursing home violations. Then Covid-19 happened. – Vox.com

Posted on by

Few places represent the calamity of the Covid-19 pandemic as well as the Life Care Center of Kirkland.

Starting in February and escalating into early March, the nursing home in a Seattle suburb became one of the diseases first hot spots in the United States. By March 9, more than a week before any state had issued a stay-at-home order, the Kirkland facility already had 129 cases (81 among residents; the rest among staff and visitors) and 23 deaths from the novel coronavirus, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.

Before long, it became clear that practices at the Kirkland facility contributed to the spread of the virus there, according to federal inspectors. A Washington Post investigation found that the problems were endemic to the Life Care Center chain of nursing homes: Dozens of Life Care homes received below-average staffing ratings or were flagged during inspections for not having enough nurses to properly care for patients.

But for all the problems with the Life Care Center chain, it would soon become clear that its experience would not be unique. While the Kirkland facility may have been the first known US nursing home hit, it would not be the last.

Estimates vary, but analysts Gregg Girvan and Avik Roy found that as of June 29, 50,779 of the 113,135 US deaths from Covid-19 (or 45 percent) were deaths of residents of nursing or long-term care facilities. Their numbers suggest that about 2.5 percent of all nursing home residents have been killed by the disease; in New Jersey, which is particularly hard hit, the share is over 11 percent.

This is partially due to the disease being particularly lethal among older people, and an early acute shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE) like masks across the board. Death rates have been high for seniors in general, not just those in nursing homes. A CDC report found that as of July 1, more than 80 percent of Covid-19 deaths were among people 65 and over.

But investigations have since revealed that the conditions at too many nursing homes were conducive to the coronaviruss spread, abetted by both state and federal policies. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) ordered nursing homes to take in Covid-19 patients discharged from hospitals, contributing to superspreader events like one in Troy, New York, documented by ProPublica. Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) also signed executive orders offering partial legal immunity to nursing homes during the crisis, limiting families abilities to seek redress when the states strategies failed.

An important context for these events, however, is federal policy. Since well before the coronavirus pandemic, the Trump administration has been targeting regulations in the nursing home industry, pushing a deregulatory agenda that advocates say has worsened conditions for residents and will make them worse still in the pandemic era.

Covid-19 is a once-in-a-lifetime health crisis that is catching almost all institutions and politicians, regardless of party ill-prepared. But there is no question that the administration, at the prodding of industry, has enacted and proposed moves aimed at easing regulations on nursing homes moves that patient advocates have said were increasing health risks for residents well before Covid-19 came to the US.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the federal agency that oversees Medicare and Medicaid, is in charge of regulating and overseeing the nursing home industry. (The large majority of funding for nursing facilities comes from Medicaid or Medicare, meaning that CMS certification is a key prerequisite for most to function.) The agency outsources the job of conducting inspections to state surveying agencies, operated by state governments. Together, CMS and its surveyors are the main system of accountability for the 15,600-odd nursing homes in the US and their 1.3 million inhabitants.

The Trump CMS moved to curb fining nursing homes that were found violating regulations in particular, regulations meant to prevent the spread of infectious disease. Infection control deficiencies are by far the most cited regulatory failing in nursing homes, and the Trump administration has acted to reduce the amount of money fined, and to move away from a system of daily fines that experts say is more effective at changing facility behaviors. (In the face of the coronavirus outbreak, the administration last month announced it would increase fines; more on this below.)

If the move to cut fines worries experts, future changes heralded by the Trump administration are even more concerning. Under the Obama administration, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a rule requiring all facilities to employ a dedicated infection prevention specialist at least part time. CMS Administrator Seema Verma has proposed rolling back that rule and only requiring such specialists to serve as consultants, potentially covering many different nursing facilities.

At the time it was proposed, trade publications and some advocates for seniors and people with disabilities took note of the new rule, but it was largely ignored. It wasnt until March, when the pandemic hit, that the proposed rule change got attention in the mainstream press. The rule still hasnt taken effect, but will, barring unexpected changes to administration policy, if Trump is reelected.

The administration has also sought cuts to Medicaids budget that could negatively impact nursing homes, reduce funding for infection control, and likely worsen protections for residents. These changes, like the Obama rule rollback, have not taken effect yet but could with a second Trump term.

I think the pandemic has revealed a lot of these serious problems, Toby Edelman, senior staff attorney for the Center for Medicare Advocacy and a veteran resident advocate on nursing home issues, says. But whether the country will do better going forward I dont know.

The primary tool the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has for enforcing care standards at nursing homes is civil money penalties. These are essentially fines for facilities found not to be in compliance with CMS care standards. These violations are identified through an annual, unannounced surveying process, conducted by state-level agencies with information then reported up to CMS.

Under the Trump administration, the average fine levied has fallen to $28,405, from $41,260 in Obamas final year in office, according to a 2019 analysis by Jordan Rau of Kaiser Health News.

Moreover, average fines for incidents involving immediate jeopardy the most serious designation have fallen, Rau found, to about 18 percent less in Trumps first year than they did in 2016. A finding of immediate jeopardy is just like the name implies: a situation in which noncompliance with regulations has placed the health and safety of recipients in its care at risk for serious injury, serious harm, serious impairment or death, per CMSs guidelines.

One example highlighted by a recent report from the Government Accountability Office, a congressional watchdog agency, illustrates what an instance of immediate jeopardy looks like:

A New York nursing home experienced a respiratory infection outbreak that sickened 38 residents. The nursing home did not maintain a complete and accurate list of those who were sick, did not isolate residents with symptoms from residents who were symptom-freenor did it isolate staff members helping sick patientsand continued to allow residents to eat in the community dining room.

Civil money penalties ideally provide a strong financial incentive for nursing homes that put residents at risk of infection to change practices. For that reason, toward the end of the Obama administration, CMS began requiring regional offices to impose penalties whenever residents were found to be in immediate jeopardy, instead of letting regulators decide whether to levy a fine.

Under Trump, CMS has gone to a system of giving regulators discretion to levy fines for immediate jeopardy violations. Instead of an automatic fine, a regulator may just instruct the nursing home to change its practices or do a training. (The June 1 rules removed some discretion around fining for infection control practices specifically, but civil money penalties are only allowed if facilities also had a previous infection control deficiency.)

In a newsletter for its Patients Over Paperwork initiative, meant to publicize deregulatory efforts, CMS explained that reduced fining came because of complaints that civil money penalties are not applied consistently or fairly to nursing homes found out of compliance.

The decline in fining can have serious implications for public health especially in a pandemic. By far the most common infraction identified in state-agency surveys is a failure of infection prevention, according to a recent report from the GAO. From 2013 to 2017, 82 percent of all surveyed nursing homes had an infection control deficiency in at least one surveyed year. (The second most common deficiency, related to ensuring the environment is free from accidents, was identified in 37 percent of homes.)

As it happens, the new rule requiring fines for immediate jeopardy late in the Obama administration meant that the total number of fines imposed actually went up at the beginning of the Trump administration: 3.5 percent of inspections resulted in fines in 2016, compared to 4.7 percent in the early Trump administration. On June 15, 2018, the Trump administration formally reversed this enforcement change.

Raus data analysis also highlighted an even more meaningful shift in policy under Trump: from per day fining to per instance fining. Per-instance fines became much more common under Trump as the result of a CMS policy change in July 2017. Per-day fining means that facilities have to pay up for each day they were found to be out of compliance with Medicare and Medicaid regulations. Per-instance penalties, by contrast, apply to each time they get caught by surveyors.

The difference is easier to grasp with some examples. The Unique Rehabilitation and Health Center, a nursing home close to Union Station and the Capitol in Washington, DC, was fined a total of $110,448.65 in 2017 on a per-day basis. Among other problems, the districts inspectors found that the home failed to do proper wound follow-up with a patient, leading to emergency surgery when the wound deteriorated. That penalty was imposed on a per-day basis for 77 days, meaning the home was fined an average of $1,434.40 per day it was in violation of proper wound care and other policies.

By contrast, the BridgePoint Sub-Acute and Rehabilitation National Harbor, a nursing home in southwest DC, received a per-instance fine of $17,820.25 in 2017. District surveyors found that the home had placed residents in immediate jeopardy of harm by failing to properly freeze fish and beef, with puddles of bloody juices dripping onto the freezer floor. Instead of issuing penalties for every day the freezer was not at a low enough temperature, producing rancid meat for residents, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services fined the company once on a per-instance basis.

The result was a much lower fine than Unique Rehabilitation received, even though both were found to be putting residents at risk of serious harm. Tellingly, Unique Rehabilitation was fined before the July policy change by the Trump administration (on February 8, 2017) and BridgePoint was fined after (on October 20, 2017).

Some experts in the nursing home industry argue that per-instance fining provides a weaker incentive for nursing homes to improve.

The idea behind daily compliance is, if you dont have a fire extinguisher, say, youd be fined until you get it in place, and then the fines would stop, David Grabowski, an economist at Harvard Medical School who studies long-term care, told me. Its an effort to hold the facilities feet to the fire in terms of improving something thats out of compliance. The shift to per-instance fining weakens that regular incentive.

In a group letter to Congress in 2019, a coalition of patient advocates including the Center for Medicare Advocacy, Justice in Aging, the Long Term Care Community Coalition, and the National Consumer Voice for Quality Long-Term Care denounced CMS for lessening fines, arguing, These changes are counterproductive. The threat of fines is a critical deterrent to abuse and substandard care, particularly when they are large enough to impact a facilitys actions.

These changes in how nursing homes are fined have not happened in a vacuum. The American Health Care Association, the biggest lobbying group for the nursing home industry, sent a letter to President-elect Trump in December 2016 urging him to reverse many Obama administration initiatives, like requiring fines in immediate jeopardy cases. We request that [the fine requirement] be repealed and that [civil money penalties] and other remedies be halted from being applied retrospectively, Mark Parkinson, AHCAs president and CEO and a former Democratic governor of Kansas, wrote to Trump in the letter.

AHCAs voice on this issue is powerful. It dramatically ramped up its lobbying spending in the late Obama administration, per OpenSecrets, and spent about $23 million on lobbying from 2014 to 2019, during the period of Obamas regulatory ramp-up and Trumps drawdown.

Its time to recognize that when nursing homes receive citations, its a failure of CMS and the survey process. Citations andfineswithout assistance will not help us keep residents and staff safe from this virus, AHCAs Cristina Crawford told Vox in a statement. Independent research shows COVID-19 outbreaks in long term care are not related to quality of care, past infection control and many other factors. It is a critical point to include in any piece along these lines. This research shows the prevalence of COVID-19 in skilled nursing facilities is correlated to the COVID-19 rate in the community, the size of the facility, and proximity to an urban area.

(The research AHCA refers to is preliminary: Some studies have found no relationship between a facilitys star rating from CMS, an indication of its quality based on past violations, and its Covid-19 record, while others have found a relationship between facility quality and Covid-19 deaths.)

Its important to note that the fall in fining might not have caused a decline in infection control at these facilities. The situation was dire before Trump took office. But patient advocates agree that in normal times, fining, in particular per-day fining, can be a powerful tool to get facilities in line and particularly useful in heading off something like the coronavirus pandemic.

Indeed, as the Covid-19 pandemic continued, the Trump administration embraced fining for infection control. And while that seems like a good move on paper, even experts who embrace per-day fines argue that compared to other things CMS could be doing to protect patients like supporting increased staffing, testing, and PPE availability fining is the wrong priority right now, even if it was the right priority during a non-crisis time.

CMS should be doing two things. First, they should be providing facilities with testing and personal protective equipment. Second, they should be looking to provide education and guidance to facilities on best infection-control practices, Grabowski of Harvard Medical told Skilled Nursing News. If the goal is to save lives and protect residents, then this is not the right enforcement action. Facilities have limited resources right now.

Weak fining is one of the deregulatory actions most under the control of the Trump administration itself. But it has also pushed changes to rules, laws, and appropriations that could exacerbate the infection control problem at nursing homes.

These changes, proposed before the pandemic, have not taken effect yet, and Covid-19 may yet change the administrations mind. But taken together, the proposed rules suggest an administration determined to ease infection control and public health regulations on nursing homes.

The most significant of these is rescinding the rule requiring part-time infection control specialists at nursing homes. The requirement was an Obama-era initiative only issued as a final rule in September 2016. The measure would require that every nursing home have an infection control staffer (most likely a registered nurse with specialized training on infection prevention) on at least a part-time basis. The Trump administration would instead allow homes to hire consultants spending much less time in each facility, potentially weakening infection control oversight.

Grabowski notes that because the measure is so recent, we have no empirical work on whether requiring an on-site infection preventionist (the Obama approach) works better than allowing contractors who work at multiple facilities (the Trump model).

But Edelman of the Center for Medicare Advocacy argues the Obama requirement was an overdue reaction to a longtime failure of CMS to police infection control failures, as evidenced by the vast majority of facilities being cited for deficiencies on infection prevention.

I really thought this was one of the best things done in the final rules in 2016, Edelman says. Most of it was pretty much what [Medicare advocates] had said for 25 years. Rescinding it, he says, was a step backward.

The Trump administration has also proposed weakening protections in the Nursing Home Reform Act, the 1987 law that serves as the primary basis for CMSs regulation of the sector. CMSs 2020 and 2021 budget requests both include an ask for Congress to end the mandate that nursing homes be surveyed annually. Instead, top-performing nursing homes would only be required to be surveyed every 30 months. Verma, CMSs administrator, has referred to this as a risk-based survey model, arguing that annual surveys are overly costly.

The danger here is that even top performers can have deep weaknesses, a fact underlined by the Covid-19 pandemic. The Citys Susan Jaffe analyzed New York states inspections in March and April of New York City nursing homes, and found that 600 people have died of Covid-19 in nursing homes that were given a perfect record by surveyors. Surveys of their infection control happened as the pandemic progressed and yet did not identify any failures. That should serve as a reminder that even low risk facilities can see failures, especially during pandemics like Covid-19, and probably shouldnt go without any oversight.

Finally, the Trump administration is also pushing for budgetary changes that affect nursing homes and could be deleterious for infection control efforts in those settings.

The administrations efforts to defund Medicaid are less directly part of an effort to spare nursing homes from onerous regulations, but they could weaken access to care and harm quality at facilities all the same. In particular, the administration has tried to convert Medicaid into a block grant. A report by the Commonwealth Fund suggests that a block grant as designed by the Trump administration would reduce Medicaid spending by $110 billion over five years, or about 10 percent. As the Center for Medicare Advocacy has noted, such a shift could reduce access to nursing care and increase risk to patients by eliminating consumer protections.

For instance, nursing homes that choose to accept Medicaid are currently required to accept Medicaid reimbursement as their full payment and not demand additional funds from patients; that rule goes away with a block grant. Rules requiring adequate training for staff (including training in infection control) could also go away, as could rules guaranteeing eligibility for qualifying residents.

Lowering funding for nursing homes can also put pressure on staffing, reducing the number of staff available and lowering their pay. Nursing homes tend to be understaffed as it is, and a squeeze on Medicaid, already the least generous payer they take, could make matters even worse. The payments side of this has some shortfalls, which leads to real workforce shortages, Grabowski says. Many of these buildings lack staff and pay their staff, the direct caregivers, close to minimum wage. Thats just a huge part of the expenditures 60 to 70 percent of expenditures are labor.

In a period when we need workers in hot spots to observe public health guidelines closely, such shortages could cut against those efforts.

Economist Krista Ruffini has used changes in the minimum wage to estimate that nursing homes with higher wages have fewer health code violations, fewer incidences of bedsores among residents, and lower mortality; she estimates that a 10 percent increase in the minimum wage could prevent 15,000 to 16,000 deaths a year. Lower wages, by contrast, could lower care quality at the potential cost of lives. Other studies have found staffing levels at nursing homes are also related to mortality, suggesting that Medicaid cuts that cascade down to nursing homes could also be deadly.

Lowering wages can also be particularly dangerous for infection control in another way: It could force staff to take other jobs to get by. At the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington, CDC researchers have specifically cited the phenomenon of staffers working at multiple nursing homes as contributing to the pandemic. Lower reimbursements that lead to lower wages could exacerbate this problem.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services June 1 announcement of ramped-up enforcement of infection control violations was only one item in a string of policy changes the Trump administration has announced through the agency as Covid-19 ripped through the country.

On March 20, CMS announced it would halt all state surveys of facilities. Instead, it would only conduct targeted infection control surveys, and surveys in cases involving immediate jeopardy to patients, during the pandemic. These targeted surveys found major failings. (On March 30, they reported that 36 percent of facilities surveyed failed to follow proper hand-washing and a quarter failed to use PPE properly.)

On April 15, they increased payments for Covid-19 tests to try to accelerate testing availability at nursing homes. On April 19, they announced a new requirement that nursing homes report any Covid-19 cases and deaths. By May 18, they were already providing guidance about how to relax restrictions on visitation amid the crisis. And on June 1, they announced the new heightened infection control penalties.

The administration has painted these as ramping up enforcement and oversight. But experts say these decisions have overall translated to less oversight and regulation.

Initially I was very supportive of the pivot that CMS did from the typical survey and certification to focus only on infection control, Grabowski says. But as time has worn on, hes grown concerned over the lack of in-person access to facilities, either by state surveyors or by an even more important monitoring source: family, who along with staff members are the most frequent source of complaints and referrals of nursing homes to regulators. Due to Covid-19 concerns, these family members are usually barred from facilities, which makes failures of infection control and other regulatory lapses invisible to residents biggest outside advocates.

Edelman notes much of the surveying during the pandemic has been done remotely, through videoconferencing software, which greatly limits what staff can pick up.

But her biggest concern is that the federal government and CMS are not pairing surveys on infection control with an effort to get testing and other resources to nursing homes in a timely manner, a failure that continued with the June 1 announcement of more penalties but not more aid for testing and PPE.

In terms of getting testing to facilities or making sure everyone has equipment, setting standards for Covid-only facilities, the feds pretty much say the states are on their own, Edelman explains. Our contact at CMS has said this twice: that the pandemic is locally executed, state-managed, and federally supported. Theyre pushing responsibility onto the states.

Shunting responsibility is a theme when it comes to managing nursing homes. In 2010, the moral philosopher Kwame Anthony Appiah made a list of practices that he believed people in the distant future will condemn our generation of humanity for, much as people in the 21st century condemn slavery or the denial of womens suffrage. The abandonment of older Americans in nursing homes was near the top of his list.

When we see old people who, despite many living relatives, suffer growing isolation, we know something is wrong, Appiah wrote. But the situation is worse than isolation. Its one of neglect in the face of real, life-and-death dangers faced by residents in these facilities every day. Bioethicist Charles Camosy has cited nursing homes as a place where our throwaway culture thrives, only with human lives rather than consumer goods.

The Trump administration is not solely responsible for the pandemics ravaging of nursing homes. But it has certainly contributed to the neglect that Appiah laments.

Continued here:

Trump reduced fines for nursing home violations. Then Covid-19 happened. - Vox.com

With ballot finalized, county elections will be unopposed – Greenfield Daily Reporter

Posted on by

HANCOCK COUNTY With the ballot finalized for the 2020 general election, most local elections in Hancock County will be unopposed. The deadline for independent candidates to file passed by on Wednesday, July 15, with no new new candidates, which means county offices will be filled by the Republicans who won in the June primary.

Those candidates include D.J. Davis for Superior Court 1 judge; Dan Marshall for Superior Court 2 judge; John Jessup and Bill Spalding for county commissioner; Kent Fisk, Robin Lowder and Keely Butrum for county council; Jane Klemme for county treasurer; and David Stillinger for county coroner.

Janice Silvey, chair of Hancock Countys Republican Party, said in June she believed the party had a strong field of candidates and was happy with how the election season had turned out.

Without any county-level contested elections, the biggest draw to the polls for most voters will undoubtedly be the presidential election between Republican Donald Trump and his presumptive Democratic opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden. However, there are also a number of other contested elections for state and federal office.

In the state Senate, Republican Mike Crider, R-Greenfield, is running for re-election in District 28. Crider, who was first elected in 2012, previously served as the director of Law Enforcement for the Indiana Department of Natural Resources and is running for his third term.

Criders Democratic opponent is Theresa Bruno, a member of the Warren Park Town Council in eastern Marion County. In a recent interview with the Daily Reporter, Bruno said she is passionate about education as a teacher and about health care as a survivor of a brain aneurysm.

Two of Hancock Countys representatives in the Indiana House of Representatives are running unopposed for reelection: Republicans Bob Cherry (District 53) and Sean Eberhart (District 57).

The race for the District 88 seat, which includes a portion of Hancock County containing Fortville and McCordsville, will be contested. The Republican nominee is Fishers attorney Chris Jeter. The Democratic nominee is Pam Dechert, who lives in the Geist area and works for Blackbaud, a software company that provides services to nonprofits.

Rep. Greg Pence, who represents Indianas 6th Congressional District, which includes Hancock County, is running for a second term. Pence recently told the Daily Reporter his biggest priorities include working to ensure businesses can reopen and the economy can recover from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, along with his work on transportation and infrastructure issues.

Challenging Pence is Democrat Jeannine Lee Lake, who also ran against him in 2018. Lake is the publisher of The Good News, a publication in Muncie highlighting religious news and minority communities. Lake said she would be an advocate for equality for people of color, women, and LGBT people, along with prioritizing education and infrastructure funding. Libertarian Tom Ferkinhoff, who also sought the seat in 2018, will be on the ballot again as well.

At the state level, Gov. Eric Holcomb, whose executive orders have set state policy throughout the COVID-19 crisis, is up for re-election. Holcomb served as lieutenant governor under Mike Pence before his election to his first term in 2016. The Democratic nominee is Woody Myers, who previously served as the health commissioner for both Indiana and New York City before resuming a career in the private sector. Libertarian Donald G. Rainwater II also will be on the ballot.

The state attorney generals race also will be contested. At their recent convention, Republicans chose Todd Rokita over the scandal-plagued incumbent, Curtis Hill. Rokita served in the U.S. House of Representatives from 2011 to 2019 and as the Indiana secretary of state from 2002 to 2010. His Democratic opponent is Jonathan Weinzapfel, who previously served two terms as the mayor of Evansville and also was a state representative for five years.

The general election will be held on Nov. 3, 2020.

Excerpt from:

With ballot finalized, county elections will be unopposed - Greenfield Daily Reporter

Is the 2005 Film ‘V for Vendetta’ About a Virus and Set in 2020? – Truth or Fiction

Posted on by

Claim

The 2005/2006 film V for Vendetta was set in the year 2020, and its premise was the use of a virus to control populations.

Reporting

On June 21 2020, the Facebook page Cosmic Enlightenment shared the following meme, which claimed that the 2005 filmV for Vendetta was about the use of a virus to control populations and that it was set in the year 2020:

Alongside a still image of a character in the film, text read:

DID YOU KNOW?

A 2005 film titled V for Vendetta is about a totalitarian dictatorship that gains its power by creating a society of fear due to an alleged virus spreading throughout the world. In the film the media pushes fear-based propaganda on the television screen of every household and on the city streets. The authoritarian dictator promises security but not freedom. The constant theme of this is for your safety is repeated throughout the film. Most importantly the film ends with society waking up and the corrupt, fascist regime is dismantled. What year is the film set? 2020

The claim aboutV for Vendettas premise and setting in the year 2020 strongly resembled another, earlier coronavirus prediction rumor that the filmAkira was also prescient about the year 2020:

Did Akira Predict a 2020 Coronavirus Outbreak?

Although the film was in limited release in December 2005,it wasnt released to the United States until March 2006.

A March 2006 review written by Roger Ebert mentions the year 2020 at the start:

It is the year 2020. A virus runs wild in the world, most Americans are dead, and Britain is ruled by a fascist dictator who promises security but not freedom. One man stands against him, the man named V, who moves through London like a wraith despite the desperate efforts of the police. He wears a mask showing the face of Guy Fawkes, who in 1605 tried to blow up the houses of Parliament. On Nov. 5, the eve of Guy Fawkes Day, British schoolchildren for centuries have started bonfires to burn Fawkes in effigy. On this eve in 2020, V saves a young TV reporter named Evey from rape at the hands of the police, forces her to join him, and makes a busy night of it by blowing up the Old Bailey courtrooms.

Of the films basis, Ebert added:

This story was first told as a graphic novel written by Alan Moore and published in 1982 and 1983. Its hero plays altogether differently now, and yet, given the nature of the regime. is he a terrorist or a freedom fighter? Britain is ruled by a man named Sutler, who gives orders to his underlings from a wall-sized TV screen and seems the personification of Big Brother.

A Google search returneddisparate answers about the films chronological setting:

Listicles about the film often didnt mention a specific year for its setting before the 2020 coronavirus pandemic, often vaguely referencinga dystopian future.

Another simple Google search returned a brief synopsis above links to other plot summaries forV for Vendetta, where the virus element isnt emphasized at all:

Following world war, London is a police state occupied by a fascist government, and a vigilante known only as V (Hugo Weaving) uses terrorist tactics to fight the oppressors of the world in which he now lives. When V saves a young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman) from the secret police, he discovers an ally in his fight against Englands oppressors.

In June 2020, Screenrant revisited the plot of the film version ofV for Vendetta, framing it in terms of all that had transpired since 2005:

When the coronavirus pandemic became a worldwide panic, audiences turned to Contagion. During the most recent Black Lives Matter protests, bookshops reported record sales of works by Black authors (while, unfortunately, Netflix noted a sudden uptick in viewer numbers for The Help). Now, as protests continue across America and worldwide in opposition to police brutality against Black citizens and the scourge of systemic racism, it shouldnt surprise us that Netflix has been hyping V For Vendetta.

[]

Part of what keeps the fascistic government of V For Vendettas 1980s Britain in power is a pandemic. A disease known as St. Marys Virus has ravaged Europe and killed over 100,000 people by the time the film starts. It is later revealed that the virus was an act of biological warfare by Creedy, the leader of the ruling Norsefire Party, which was then blamed on a terrorist group. The result of this massacre and subsequent fearmongering was an overwhelming majority in Parliament for Norsefire. Its not exactly difficult to see why a dystopian thriller featuring a pandemic would prove so enticing right now. Its partly why audiences turned in droves to Steven Soderberghs Contagion after the coronavirus became a worldwide concern.

However, that assessment drew from concerns during the timeV for Vendetta was originally written as a graphic novel in the 1980s, and again at the time the adaptation appeared (on the heels of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq):

The key difference, of course, is that Contagion takes a relatively realistic direction in showing how a devastating pandemic would likely originate and unfold worldwide, whereas V For Vendettas pandemic is an act of biological warfare. The latter taps into political concerns that were common in both the late-1980s, when the graphic novel was written, and the mid-2000s, when the movie was made. During the 80s, there was a consistent fear that the Soviet Union would utilize germ warfare against America as part of the ongoing Cold War. The Bush administrations case for invading Iraq in the 2000s rested partly on the assertion that the country had never fully dismantled their biological arsenal, despite the Iraqis own claims that they had long abandoned this project. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has, as of the writing of this piece, claimed more than 456,000 deaths worldwide, a number that greatly eclipses that of V For Vendettas virus.

Again, that analysis existed through the retrospective lens of authorship in mid-2020, during an active pandemic. By contrast, a 2018 editorial aboutV for Vendettas relevance in that year only uses the word virus once and not in a literal manner referencing the actual virus in the film:

V for Vendetta is not merely a cautionary tale for our countrys political morass or trajectory it is a retelling of events that have, in their fundamental essence, already occurred. Responding to the film a decade ago, Moore savaged the Wachowski sisters adaptation as a Bush-era parable by people too timid to set a political satire in their own country. But as it turns out, the Wachowskis didnt need a CGI shot of the Lincoln Memorial exploding to make enduring commentary on the disease lurking in the heart of the American government. It has been encroaching for many decades now, festering and feeding on the worst bigotries of its citizenry, a virus of greed and inhumanity that has corrupted even the noblest intentions of our liberal democracy. Like Evey, we continue to endure each days fresh traumas, waiting in our cells for a new dawning; waiting for a time when, like Valerie, we will have our roses and apologize to no one; waiting for a day we know can only come after we decide wed rather die behind the chemical sheds than suffer one more injustice.

As is often the case in retroactive assessments of pop-culture predictions, the claim thatV for Vendetta was set in 2020 and was about a virus contained some truth, mashed up with a lot of Monday morning quarterbacking to make it look more prescient for attention and clicks. A virus was a plot element ofV for Vendetta, but the virus was not the films central focus. Moreover, a 2006 review by Roger Ebert placed the film as set in 2020, but most other pre-2020 references dont mention any year (or 2020 specifically). Although the meme wasnt completely fabricated, it was also clearly created with the benefit of hindsight which is, if youll pardon the dad joke, 2020.

See more here:

Is the 2005 Film 'V for Vendetta' About a Virus and Set in 2020? - Truth or Fiction

How Black Lives Matter Has Been Coopted by Russia’s Government and Its Opposition – Foreign Policy

Posted on by

As Black Lives Matter protests spread across the globe, Russia has proven a notable exception. There have been solidarity demonstrations and localized movements against racism and police violence in Helsinki; Almaty, Kazakhstan; and Vilnius, Lithuania; but no such scenes in Moscow. Instead, Russia has used the civil unrest in the United States to continue its history of reflecting the United States most unbecoming aspects on itself. The Russian government and its liberal opposition alike have used their platforms to discredit the relatively peaceful spirit of the demonstrations and project ideas of U.S. weakness. And in doing so, the opposition stands to harm its larger fight against Russian state oppression.

The development of the Russian Lives Matter social media movement is perhaps the strongest example of how the liberal opposition in Russia has unwittingly aided its government in subverting a global anti-racist effort. Russian Lives Matter started after police raided a home in Yekaterinburg and killed a resident on May 31. Since the police shooting, members of Russias libertarian movement, including Libertarian Party leader Mikhail Svetov, have used the hashtag to shed light on Russian police violence against citizens. The hashtag is not a show of solidarity with the internationally known Black Lives Matter movement. Instead, #RussianLivesMatter has been used to undermine the American fight against systemic racism by downplaying the impact of racism against African Americans, by suggesting police killings of Black Americans were deserved, and by framing empathy towards victims of police violence in Russia as a zero-sum game.

The hashtag itself hints at the exclusionary undertones of the movements participants. In a recent podcast interview with the independent Russian media site Meduza, Svetov made clear that his concern was not racism, but police violence against ethnic Russians (a point he drove home by using the word russkie, meaning ethnic Russian, rather than the more all-encompassing rossiyane). Asked whether policing in Russia is influenced by race, Svetov demurred saying it depended on the region, noting that in Chechnya, for example, police violence is focused on Russians. In truth, much Russian police violence is targeted at ethnic minorities and migrants from Central Asia, Africa, and elsewhere, as can be seen in recent cases such as the September 2019 police torture of two Uzbek migrants and the June interrogation of Afro-Russian blogger Mariya Tunkara.

The omission of minorities from the Russian Lives Matter movement coincides with outright dismissals of Black Lives Matter, as Meduza noted, with supporters on Twitter saying things such as I dont give a damn about blacks in America when theyre lynching Russians in Yekaterinburg. Prominent Russian journalist Oleg Kashin added to the racist imagery online by posting a meme of Martin Luther King Jr. surrounded by shoeboxes and cellphone boxes with the text Martin Looter King.

Such racist sentiments have placed members of the Russian opposition in strange proximity to the government. Russian liberals who have vociferously opposed President Vladimir Putins regime are now silent at best and parrot Moscows messaging at worst. Russian liberals such as Ksenia Sobchak, who ran against Putin in 2018, and the high-profile journalist Yulia Latynina have gone a step further, writing articles and creating social media posts that focus on looting, property damage, and a perceived lack of law and order in the United Statesa near mirroring of government media, which portrays U.S. society in a state of chaos. Sobchak recently lost her job as a spokeswoman for Audi after posting a racist tirade on Instagram describing Black Americans as stupid and lazy. Latyninas recent op-ed in Novaya Gazeta compared the Black Lives Matter movement with Ukraines Euromaidan protests to undermine African American complaints of racism. That is why it is ridiculous and shameful to regard these pogroms as rebellion against the system, and to equate the rioters and even peaceful protests with those who really risk their lives when they go to the Maidan or Tiananmen Square. The protests, she wrote, were pogroms and the protesters hooligans.

The language echoes that of Russian state-controlled media. News sites such as RT and Sputnik have published articles decrying the woke mafia and focusing on an alleged rise in crime following demands to defund the police. Even the famous film Brother 2 received a new endingRussian viewers of state-controlled Channel One were surprised to see images of looting and police violence at the U.S. protests juxtaposed with the song Goodbye America.

Moscow, meanwhile, has used the opportunity to undermine U.S. legitimacy at home. In a recent interview, Putin pointed to the U.S. protests and Washingtons mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic to contrast Russias rigorous law-and-order response.

This instance is hardly the first time Russia has sought to exploit U.S. racial issues, particularly police and civilian violence towards African Americans, for domestic and geopolitical purposes. During the 2016 presidential election, Russian operatives targeted African American communities with disinformation, including posts on police mistreatment of African Americans and posts on Instagram promoting Black women and beauty. The Internet Research Agency also created content on YouTube that focused on the Black Lives Matter movement.

These well-documented efforts demonstrate how systemic racism and police brutality against American civilians and specifically African Americans present a national security problem for the United States. Of course, the genesis of the threat is not Russias meddling, but the United States failure to address centuries-old systemic racism, which hands authoritarian regimes such as Russias an opportunity to undermine U.S. foreign policy in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. When Russia uses state-sanctioned violence against ethnic minorities and political opponents, can the United States project itself as a counter to this regime? As U.S. policymakers learned in the competition against the Soviet Union for influence in the newly independent African states during the 1960s, they cannot successfully promote democratic values abroad when U.S. citizens are denied their rights at home.

With the 2020 election on the horizon, Ukraines pivot toward the European Union, and an impending revision of the Russian Constitution that would extend Putins term limit, it is a critical moment for U.S.-Russia relations. And the failure of Washington to uphold fundamental rights within the United States will endanger the opposition in Russia and elsewhere.

Russias opposition, for its part, has missed a critical chance to build transnational solidarity against police brutality. In using the notoriety of the United States Black Lives Matter slogan and American white supremacy logic to shed light on Russian police brutality and promote ethnic Russian nationalism, opposition members have undermined their own cause. In its eagerness to ignore the role of racism in Russia, the Russian Lives Matter movement has inadvertently stumbled on the same messaging as Putins regime. In the long run, this can only hurt its cause. Putin has no problem using the police and accusations of hooliganism to stop public demonstrations against his regime. Now, Moscow can point to the very logic of the opposition regarding the protests in the United States amid any accusations of state oppression.

Read this article:

How Black Lives Matter Has Been Coopted by Russia's Government and Its Opposition - Foreign Policy

Raise your glasses and toast booze-biz Jews – The Jewish Star

Posted on by

By Joel Haber, The Nosher

This may be surprising, but Jews have a long and very influential history in the alcohol industry spanning Europe, Israel and North America.

For most of the 1800s, Eastern European Jews held a virtual monopoly on the business in their regions. They produced much of the beer and hard alcohol, and ran nearly all the taverns where it was sold. Jews had been in the trade for centuries, but when Polish landowners saw they could make 50 percent greater profits by turning grain into alcohol than by selling it for food, Jews seized the chance to play an integral role.

At the time, Polish Jews could neither become nobility nor work the land as peasants. While many Jews turned to trading and peddling, the lords saw a different opportunity. Jews were considered good with business, they reasoned well, and would be unlikely to drink up the product. So, under a leasing system known in Polish as propinacja, Jews were granted exclusive rights to run the alcohol industries.

By the middle of the 19th century, approximately 85 percent of all Polish taverns had Jewish management. Jews similarly dominated the industry in the Pale of Settlement (in todays Ukraine and Belarus), though on a slightly lesser scale.

Jewish participation in the alcohol business was so prevalent that according to Glenn Dynner, author of Yankels Tavern: Jews, Liquor, & Life in the Kingdom of Poland, 30 to 40 percent of Polands Jews (including women and children) worked in the industry. Thats an impressive statistic by itself, but considering that approximately three-quarters of world Jewry lived in Eastern Europe at the time, that amounts to about 25 percent of all Jews in the world!

But the 19th century seems to have been a peak time for Jewish involvement in alcohol worldwide.

In Hungary, we encounter many Jewish families prominently involved in wine production. The Zimmermans, for example, were among the famous and award-winning producers of Tokaj wine. (Their pre-Holocaust winery is now owned by one of the regions top producers.) Similarly, the Herzog family produced such high-quality wine (alongside their beer and spirits) that Emperor Franz Josef appointed them his exclusive wine suppliers.

In Germany and France, meanwhile, Jews were dragging the local alcohol industries into the modern age. In France, Jewish wine producers were vertically integrating into sales as well, while in Germany, Jews created the first industrial-scale breweries.

Across the Atlantic, German Jewish immigrants to the United States were disproportionately represented in alcohol production. In Jews and Booze: Becoming American in the Age of Prohibition, Marni Davis points out that they primarily focused on distilling whiskey due to its nationalistic significance. Those who bought and drank whiskey championed it as a deeply American product.

Simultaneously, back in Ottoman Palestine, wine production was returning for the first time in hundreds of years. Though ancient Israel was well known as a wine-producing region, hundreds of years of rule by Muslims (for whom alcohol is forbidden) turned the industry into little more than a memory. But when more Jews began immigrating and joining the small community that was already living there, the cultivation of grapes gradually returned.

In 1848, the Shor family opened a winery in the Old City of Jerusalem, adjacent to the Temple Mount itself. They were joined in the business in 1870 by the Tepperbergs and in 1889 by the winery later to be known as Carmel. These laid the groundwork for the booming wine industry that exists in Israel today.

Why were so many Jews prominently involved in the alcohol business during the 19th century? It was a period of transition in the world, with industrialization leading (among other things) to a big increase in alcohol production and consumption. At the same time, the old persecution of Jews had removed many other income sources, leaving Jews with few other ways to make a living. So part of the answer may be that, as had been the case so many other times throughout history, Jews simply took advantage of whatever opportunities they had, and succeeded.

Jews rapidly left the business toward the centurys end, thanks to both increased competition and government oppression, leaving this chapter in our history largely forgotten. Furthermore, even while Jews were prominent in the industry, there was an internal stigma against Jewish involvement in a profession that was seen as less than honorable and at times required the use of some loopholes to remain in compliance with Jewish law. In other words, the Jewish community also forgot because it wanted to forget.

Interestingly, however, many common Jewish surnames today indicate a connection to the alcohol profession: Kaback, Kratchmer, Schenkman, Korczak, Vigoda, Winick and Bronfman, to name a few. Plus, many of the alcohol businesses run by 19th-century Jews still exist, including the Israeli wineries, Loewenbrau Brewery, Herzog Winery and Fleischmanns Spirits.

While the legacy of Jews role in the alcohol business may be partly forgotten, the impact is far from gone.

Read more:

Raise your glasses and toast booze-biz Jews - The Jewish Star

Yorko: All of Lansing must work to protect Black, Indigenous and other people of color – Lansing State Journal

Posted on by

Jessica Yorko, guest writer Published 12:18 p.m. ET July 16, 2020 | Updated 12:18 p.m. ET July 16, 2020

Jessica Yorko(Photo: Courtesy photo)

A palpable power shift is underway in our nation and community. We stand at the precipice of bending the arc of the universe towards justice for centuries to come.

Listen and you will hear grief, frustration, exhaustion, pain and uncertainty. Look and you will see courage in the face of great risk, soul searching, glimmers of reckonings and comeuppances, healing spaces for people harmed by anti-Blackness and refrains of Time's Up on Racism.

You will also see head-ducking, blame-shifting and doubling down on racism.

When we look back on this moment in history, what will we say about the role we played? Did we bear witness to pain and injustices that have gone unseen and unheard for far too long? Did we amplify the truths being elevated in this moment? Did we create accountability to Black, Indigenous and other people of color in all levels of government and society?

How are we, as white individuals, taking responsibility for harms we have caused to Black people and other people of color, regardless of intent? Do we have the humility and resilience to hear things that need to be said while working towards reconciliation and reparation? How do we listen and truly value the myriad Black and brown voices and lives in our community loud and quiet; rich and poor; queer and straight; transgender, non-binary and cis-gender; office-holders and private citizens; young and old?

Are we willing to talk about eliminating government-sanctioned use of captivity and lethal force against fellow humans?

Are we willing to re-envision government so it no longer includes institutions created to keep people in captivity? Captivity that, per the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, allows for the ongoing, legalized use of free labor (also known as slavery) among incarcerated peoplewho are disproportionately Black and brown?

What are our reservations, fears and concerns about eliminating vestiges and tools of human enslavement in our nation?

Lansing can seize this moment to abolish and restructure the systems that repress, subjugate, terrorize and murder Black and brown people. Lansing residents are leading a movement that re-envisions government structures, policies and budgets to eliminate racial oppression.

When you look back on this moment, what will you say about your role? Were you an accomplice in eliminating human enslavement? Or are you a sympathizer with those fighting to maintain the status quo of legal enslavement and use of deadly force against fellow humans?

I implore the people of this city, elected and otherwise, to look deep within themselves, seize this moment and work together until thatbright day of justice emerges.

The status quo has never been good enough. We owe it to ourselves and to each other to do better.We have a clear road map and mandate to do better. Followingthat road map is not only the work ofBlack and brown people. It is incumbent upon each of us to seize this moment and bend the arc toward justice.

Jessica Yorko isLansing residentwho served as a member of the Lansing City Council from 2010-2017.

Read or Share this story: https://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/opinion/contributors/viewpoints/2020/07/16/lansing-must-work-together-protect-people-color-viewpoint/5434226002/

Read the rest here:

Yorko: All of Lansing must work to protect Black, Indigenous and other people of color - Lansing State Journal