To protect ecosystem, improve balance on critical regulatory panel – theday.com

Connecticut law requires the state toreduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percentfrom 2001 levels by the year 2050 and to do itwithout discouraging industry or weakening the state's economy. Intermediate goals, including a 45 percent reduction in the next 10 years, are just as ambitious.

The state's Comprehensive Energy Strategy wisely recognizes, however,that in an ecosystem nothing stands alone.Carrying outthe mandaterequires a string of different public and private tactics that willuse energy more efficiently; generate it with fewergreenhouse gas emissions;andfoster elements that balance outemissions.

Energy and the environment are naturallycompeting interests, butone environmental solution can also be the bane ofanother. It is perilously easy to undercut the balance while attempting to make progress in cutting emissions.

To provide expertise on what could happen to an ecosystem is whythe Connecticut Siting Council is statutorily required to have two qualified ecologists on the board. The council's approval is needed for locating "siting" electric generating, transmissionand storage facilities.

Right now the board has two vacancies and one qualified ecologist. By law, the governor appoints five "public members" to the board, among them the two ecologists. Gov. Ned Lamont has yet to appoint at least one more. Energy production proposals are coming in thick and fast, however, and some may cause harm out of proportion to their benefits. The council needs all the expertise it can muster.

Solar panel field siting proposals, in particular,have become a significant subject for the council's agenda. The council has just received a request to reopen a proposal from Greenskies for solar paneling on Oil Mill Road in Waterford,which it denied in 2018.The citizen environmentalist group Save the River-Save the Hills, has fought the proposal, which would clear 75 acres of woodland for 45,976 panels under the latest version.

An East Lyme property ownersued a Greenskies subsidiary over "virtual clearcutting" and siltation of his property and local streams. A member of the Niantic River Watershed Committeetold TheDay last fall that expertise was lacking in the review. Two more eastern Connecticut proposals are coming up. Quinebaug Solar LLC has asked to reopen its application to build a massive 50-megawatt solar voltaic field on 561 acresof 29 privately owned properties in Canterbury and Brooklyn. A much smaller, 1.95-megawatt proposal for 13 acres offShort Hills Road in Old Lyme has caught the attention of environmentalists, who want the siting council and the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to hear their viewpoints.

Michael W. Klemens, a seven-year former member of the siting council board, has been sounding alarms about the environmental impact of solar fields when there is clear-cutting as in East Lyme and potentially in Old Lyme and Waterford but even when the site is largely open fields. He asks why the state does not seek to to put such developments along highways, for instance, or in other developed areas where the drainage and habitats are already artificial. It's a good question, and one that the siting council should be considering when asked for approvals.

When the council denied Greenskies'Waterford petition in 2018, it gave three reasons: impact on water quality, storm drainage and wildlife, including birds. What the council will decide about the Oil Mill Road site should dependnot only onwhat it can allow but also on what it should allow, in the big picture.And in a development as huge as the Quinebaug proposal, the effects would inevitably alter the ecology of a pristine part of Connecticut, a tiny state that can't afford to be giving pristineaway.

Above all, don't make things worse.Governor Lamont, appoint one if not two more ecologists to the siting council, and hear their expertise along with that of the engineers and developers.

The Day editorial board meets regularly with political, business and community leaders and convenes weekly to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Tim Dwyer, Editorial Page Editor Paul Choiniere, Managing Editor Tim Cotter, Staff Writer Julia Bergman and retired deputy managing editor Lisa McGinley. However, only the publisher and editorial page editor are responsible for developing the editorial opinions. The board operates independently from the Day newsroom.

View post:

To protect ecosystem, improve balance on critical regulatory panel - theday.com

Preserve the Sacred Lands of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem – CounterPunch

Storm over the Gallatins. Photo: Jeffrey St. Clair.

Wilderness designation preserves many values. Designated wilderness is a storehouse for carbon and insurance against climate change. Wilderness preserves critical wildlife habitat and wildlife corridors. Wilderness provides for clean water and clean air. And, of course, designated wilderness protects the scenery and ecosystem integrity that supports Montanas economy.

However, there is yet another value preserved and enhanced by wilderness designation. It demonstrates a commitment to the inherent reverence and spiritual significance of wildlands.

In every human culture, we find that wildlands are at the core of hallowed landscapes. Sacred lands are places where the usual activities of any society are limited, and people approach these places with respect, humility, and awe.

In every culture that I have reviewed, I have found that high mountains are revered terrain. Mount Olympus was the home of the gods to the ancient Greeks. The Zoroastrian culture revered Mount Damvand in Iran. Mount Fuji was venerated by the Shinto religion in Japan. Mount Sinai is central to Judaism traditions. The Incas of Peru thought mountains were portal to the Gods. Machapuchare was a sublime Nepalese mountain worthy of a long pilgrimage to visit. Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania was fundamental to African tribal religious beliefs. The ancient Celts of the British Isles honored the forces of nature, and among their sacred mountains was Croagh Patrick in Ireland. The San Francisco Peaks were divine in the natural world of the Navajo. Closer to home is the Crow tribes reverence for the Crazy Mountains by Livingston.

Every culture has a way of mountain worship. In American culture, we have hallowed landscapes as well. Designated wilderness, national parks, and such public spaces are our version of sacred lands.

A common denominator of these lands is that people generally did not live among the sacred lands, but they did visit. And when you visited sacred lands, you did so with respect.

In a sense, the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem is one of our Nations sacred places. The ecological integrity and the spiritual value of this ecosystem are still in jeopardy. As the population of Montana and the country continues to grow, these sacred places become even more critical to our society.

We have a chance to demonstrate our appreciation for sacred places of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem by designating wild places like the Gallatin Range, Crazy Mountains, Pryor Mountains, Lionhead, and other roadless lands of the Custer Gallatin National Forest as designated wilderness.

Wilderness is our societys way of codifying self-restraint and humility and appreciation for natural processes and landscapes.

The Custer Gallatin National Forest wildlands are essential to our culture, but also vital to the others or the creatures that reside on these lands such as grizzly bear, bighorn sheep, wolverine, elk, trout, on down to butterflies and other insects.

The opportunity may not come again. We, as a society, have an obligation and responsibility to preserve the sacred lands of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. We can do this by supporting wilderness designation for the Custer Gallatin National Forest roadless lands.

Originally posted here:

Preserve the Sacred Lands of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem - CounterPunch

Artificial intelligence requires trusted data, and a healthy DataOps ecosystem – ZDNet

Lately, we've seen many "x-Ops" management practices appear on the scene, all derivatives from DevOps, which seeks to coordinate the output of developers and operations teams into a smooth, consistent and rapid flow of software releases. Another emerging practice, DataOps, seeks to achieve a similarly smooth, consistent and rapid flow of data through enterprises. Like many things these days, DataOps is spilling over from the large Internet companies, who process petabytes and exabytes of information on a daily basis.

Such an uninhibited data flow is increasingly vital to enterprises seeking to become more data-driven and scale artificial intelligence and machine learning to the point where these technologies can have strategic impact.

Awareness of DataOps is high. A recent survey of 300 companies by 451 Research finds 72 percent have active DataOps efforts underway, and the remaining 28 percent are planning to do so over the coming year. A majority, 86 percent, are increasing their spend on DataOps projects to over the next 12 months. Most of this spending will go to analytics, self-service data access, data virtualization, and data preparation efforts.

In the report, 451 Research analyst Matt Aslett defines DataOps as "The alignment of people, processes and technology to enable more agile and automated approaches to data management."

The catch is "most enterprises are unprepared, often because of behavioral norms -- like territorial data hoarding -- and because they lag in their technical capabilities -- often stuck with cumbersome extract, transform, and load (ETL) and master data management (MDM) systems," according to Andy Palmer and a team of co-authors in their latest report,Getting DataOps Right, published by O'Reilly. Across most enterprises, data is siloed, disconnected, and generally inaccessible. There is also an abundance of data that is completely undiscovered, of which decision-makers are not even aware.

Here are some of Palmer's recommendations for building and shaping a well-functioning DataOps ecosystem:

Keep it open: The ecosystem in DataOps should resemble DevOps ecosystems in which there are many best-of-breed free and open source software and proprietary tools that are expected to interoperate via APIs." This also includes carefully evaluating and selecting from the raft of tools that have been developed by the large internet companies.

Automate it all:The collection, ingestion, organizing, storage and surfacing of massive amounts of data at as close to a near-real-time pace as possible has become almost impossible for humans to manage. Let the machines do it, Palmer urges. Areas ripe for automaton include "operations, repeatability, automated testing, and release of data." Look to the ways DevOps is facilitating the automation of the software build, test, and release process, he points out.

Process data in both batch and streaming modes. While DataOps is about real-time delivery of data, there's still a place -- and reason -- for batch mode as well. "The success of Kafka and similar design patterns has validated that a healthy next-generation data ecosystem includes the ability to simultaneously process data from source to consumption in both batch and streaming modes," Palmer points out.

Track data lineage: Trust in the data is the single most important element in a data-driven enterprise, and it simply may cease to function without it. That's why well-thought-out data governance and a metadata (data about data) layer is important. "A focus on data lineage and processing tracking across the data ecosystem results in reproducibility going up and confidence in data increasing," says Palmer.

Have layered interfaces. Everyone touches data in different ways. "Some power users need to access data in its raw form, whereas others just want to get responses to inquiries that are well formulated," Palmer says. That's why a layered set of services and design patterns is required for the different personas of users. Palmer says there are three approaches to meeting these multilayered requirements:

Business leaders are increasingly leaning on their technology leaders and teams to transform their organizations into data-driven digital entities that can react to events and opportunities almost instantaneously. The best way to accomplish this -- especially with the meager budgets and limited support that gets thrown out with this mandate -- is to align the way data flows from source to storage.

Go here to read the rest:

Artificial intelligence requires trusted data, and a healthy DataOps ecosystem - ZDNet

How to fall in love with the Apple ecosystem all over again — spend more money and buy new stuff – ZDNet

Regular readers will know that I am giving serious consideration to dumping the iPhone and making a switch to Android. Apple's ecosystem feels buggy and slow, and the Cupertino giant seems to be having trouble keeping up with the fixes. And then there's that constant fear that each update will bring some calamity related to performance or battery life or some other vital part of the system.

Apple AirPods Pro

Active noise cancellation for immersive sound. Three sizes of soft, tapered silicone tips for a customizable fit. Available at Amazon.

Read More

But I've discovered a way to fall in love with Apple again. It's easy. Get new hardware.

Must read:Apple's AirPods Pro are the best earbuds you can buy, but for all the wrong reasons

Over the past few weeks, I've been testing a lot of new Apple hardware -- the iPhone 11 Pro Max, the Apple Watch 5, and the AirPods Pro. And you know what, they're all good.

Really good.

So good that it feels like all my issues with the platform have evaporated.

Everything works, and everything feels tightly aligned, and like it was made to work together.

No, I'm not seriously suggesting that people do this, or that make sense to drop many dollars every year on hardware. Still, it's interesting to notice this side-effect of Apple's aggressive upgrade cycles.

But I do know people who do this, and it is interesting to observe that they are much happier with their tech.

But then, if you are willing to spend thousands a year upgrading tech, you've likely successfully convinced yourself that this is a good move.

Is this a deliberate scheme on Apple's part? Sell us new shiny stuff, then gradually, over months, give us reasons to feel distressed with our once-loved devices.

No idea (although I have a hard time believing that this has escaped Apple's notice), but I have no doubt that this, combined with the fact that shifting platforms is not an easy endeavor, helps drive bountiful quarterly sales.

Apple's problem seems to be that it can't keep older hardware feeling good for long. Batteries wear out, and the silicon starts to groan under the weight of operating system updates and newer apps.

But I also know that come iOS 13, watchOS 7, and the slew of firmware updates that the AirPods Pro will undoubtedly get over the coming months, this hardware too would start to feel old, slow, and buggy and the ecosystem would once again become fragmented and disjointed.

That would signal that it was, once again, time to get new hardware.

And so, the cycle of consumerism continues.

See the original post:

How to fall in love with the Apple ecosystem all over again -- spend more money and buy new stuff - ZDNet

IBM: building a digital ecosystem to support the mine of the future – Mining Global – Mining News, Magazine and Website

By Daniel Brightmore . Feb 05, 2020, 6:46AM

Technology, in its various stages of evolution, is our business at IBM, reflects Manish Chawla, Global Managing Director for Energy & Natural Resources. We've been involved in mining for decades, and just like in any other industry weve re-invented our offerings to add services, software, data handling, cloud and AI capabilities. Our focus has progressed from IT and core functions to meet the needs of business transformation projects such as SAP implementations or process outsourcing, to support the mining industry in managing data as a strategic asset; helping the industry to capture, monetise and secure it.

IBMs portfolio features a set of offerings targeting enterprise & operations transformation, outsourcing, SAP implementations, and helping clients use their data to their specific strategic advantage. Look at technologies such as blockchain for traceability in the supply chain, Chawla adds. Today, we are a full-service partner focused on the employee experience, while using technology for transforming various functions across a mining organisation.

Chawla notes a recognition from the mining industry that technology can now solve specific problems from connectivity through to autonomous solutions. Now were able to harness the data, the C-suite can see the importance of digitisation and how it will drive the business in the future, he says. A technology-savvy and enabled mining enterprise is critical for attracting and supporting the workforce of the future. How do you get people out of the unsafe conditions of underground mines in remote areas and make the industry attractive to a new generation? Technology holds the key.

We believe industrial businesses are ready to move towards business reinvention: scaling digital and AI and embedding it in the business. It's about hybrid cloud, moving mission critical applications from experimentation to true end-to-end transformation. The key to winning is centred around what we at IBM call the Cognitive Enterprise. - Maxelino Nelson, Senior Executive for Industry Innovation, Global Solutions, & Business Strategy at IBM

A recent study by the World Economic Forum forecast that over the next decade the mining industry will create further value of $190bn from additional transformational measures. When these strategies are executed in a more integrated fashion, inside-out and outside-in transformation, we believe businesses will be at a great advantage from humans and machines working together, explains Maxelino Nelson, Senior Executive for Industry Innovation, Global Solutions, & Business Strategy at IBM. This will outperform humans or machines working on their own. Its a great opportunity for us and our mining clients to solve some of the societal challenges relating to sustainability while developing the mining sectors ecosystem to partner with IBM to truly transform the business in a more holistic way.

Nelson notes that over the past 5-10 years the digital transformation journeys IBMs clients have taken have been characterised by AI and experimentation with customer-facing apps; activities that have been driving the cloud during chapter one of a digital reinvention.

What will chapter two hold? We believe industrial businesses are ready to move towards business reinvention: scaling digital and AI and embedding it in the business. It's about hybrid cloud, moving mission critical applications from experimentation to true end-to-end transformation. The key to winning is centred around what we at IBM call the Cognitive Enterprise.

With the initial trends of the first chapter maturing, Nelson maintains were on the cusp of the next big shift in the business architecture. It will be driven by the pervasive application of AI and cognitive technologies, combined with data, to the core processes and workflows across mining organisations alongside important functional areas such as finance, procurement, talent and supply chain. The results of this revolutionary change will be defined as the Cognitive Enterprise.

Companies that get this journey right are on the way to being a Cognitive Enterprise, affirms Nelson. In our experience, critical areas for natural resources industries to get right on this journey are openness and collaboration, integration, intelligent workflows and cultural skills. In a time of continued volatility and disruption, open innovation and co-creation are vital to be able to partner across ecosystems and learn from other industries to achieve fundamental transformation as 90% of the jobs in mining are changed, not necessarily replaced, through technology.

How is IBM helping companies embrace Mining 4.0 and support the move towards the digital mine of the future? We've developed a data-driven productivity platform with Sandvik, a leading supplier of underground mining equipment. This partnership has seen us connect their assets, their equipment, to our cloud to be able to pull data off. The value proposition to a mining company is not only to get data from the Sandvik equipment, but also from other vendor feeds, explains Chawla. Interoperability as well as the open data standard is critical for a mine operator. They get visibility to production information, help with equipment, maintenance analytics and improved uptime.

Built on IBM technologies, Sandvik offers a platform for underground mine optimisation, both for production and data/maintenance related aspects. We're also the primary data analytics platform and AI software services partner for Vale for where they have an AI centre of competence, Chawla reveals. We're doing an extensive set of use cases with them, including route optimisation for trucks, testing safety use cases and optimisation of smelters. IBM is also working with Newmont Goldcorp to help them better understand their ore body, allowing them to reduce the time spent by geologists in analysis and data collection to determine where to guide the next drilling campaign. We've reduced inaccuracy by 95% with the geology data platform that we call cognitive ore body discovery, says Chawla.

IBM is committed to supporting the sustainability efforts of mining operations across the globe. By using intelligent workflows on the blockchain to address social sustainability in the context of the entire supply chain, miners can demonstrate social responsibility and also begin to build a culture of innovation, believes Chawla. The work we are doing on the Responsible Sourcing Blockchain Network (RSBN) with RCS Global allows businesses to track cobalt from industrial and mining companies to ensure that they are working responsibly, whether it's in the Congo or other parts of the world, across the supply chain from mine to smelter to battery manufacturers and to automotive OEMs.

IBM are seeing many automotive OEMs joining the platform along with key industrial scale miners operating cobalt mines in Congo who wish to augment their use of OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) responsible supply chain guidelines. The company is looking to extend the network to other metals such as tin, tantalum, and gold, which are all important to the new economy emerging for minerals associated with electronics and EVs.

Chawla notes the demand, driven by the rise of EVs and electronic brands, for an active, working and open democratic network to ascertain responsible sourcing and support artisanal miners to be able to operate safely in a fair-trade manner.

IBM is also working with Minehub a mining and metals trading platform helping it streamline operations with various business partners across the mining ecosystem. The MineHub platform is not a market-maker; it allows buyers and sellers to agree on trade. It comes to play once the trade has been set and the terms have been agreed, explains Chawla. This helps to improve the operational efficiencies, logistics and financing, while concentrating the supply chain from the mine to the buyer.

MineHub has been working in collaboration with IBM and other industry participants across a value chain that includes the likes of ING Bank, leading precious metals firm Ocean Partners and Capstone Mining. Minehub also features clearing houses, refiners, smelters, financiers and other providers like Kimura joining along with royalty holders and streamers such as Lincoln. A tier one miner is also set to trial the platform. Chawla notes they are all benefiting from the efficiencies of the platform, all providing key pieces of information to these transactions.

When it comes to digital innovation across the mining panorama, Chawla says its still a challenge to ensure all parties are aligned so that everyone benefits. Its important to get centre-led IT and overall C-suite leadership both working towards the improvement of operating assets, he says. With much of the work we do, we also think hard about the experience of frontline employees and incorporate this into the design of the solutions to ease adoption. Weve taken this approach with Sandvik where weve done design sessions at the mine site with shift supervisors, truck drivers and mine managers.

A key obstacle to overcome in order to successfully integrate digital innovation is access from a network perspective and being able to capture the data. Many companies are upgrading their networks and 5G is exploding, notes Chawla. Allied to this he believes measured interoperability is vital. Mining companies operate differing fleets from a range of vendors with equipment right across the value chain. Each vendor is pitching their own solutions. Do they go with one of the vendors? Or do they go with developing their own platform? And then, will the vendors open up and share the data that the mine operators and ourselves can leverage in partnership? This complex ecosystem becomes a challenge. If it's approached in collaboration with interoperability in mind, then you can accelerate. But that is a continued two steps forward, three steps back kind of situation.

IBM is pushing forward in 2020 to meet its goals around driving innovative solutions for the energy and natural resources industries. We want to infuse more data and AI capabilities into their operations to take them live, pledges Chawla. We will be continuing our work on three specific new platforms to further enhance the idea of ecosystems coming together to drive tangible outcomes for our clients in all the vectors of mining. Chawlas team also plan to nurture and scale IBMs cybersecurity offering to secure operating technology and systems. As more plants, more mines, and more equipment get connected, the cyber threat increases, so were pleased with the tremendous progress were already making to secure operations as they grow.

Nelson confirms IBM is currently working with a large oil and gas super-major for potential partnership to co-create a digital mining services integrated platform. This platform is tendered around developing a different model for how mining companies consume digital solutions and services, and how mining providers and solutions developers can make them available to the industry. It is a game changer and it shows how upbeat and interesting the mining industry has become to wider industries."

Read more:

IBM: building a digital ecosystem to support the mine of the future - Mining Global - Mining News, Magazine and Website

Organizations only protect 60% of their business ecosystem, Accenture finds – CIO Dive

Dive Brief:

Data privacy regulators consider the health of business cybersecurity programs when calculating fines. Companies face fines even if they have extensive cyber hygiene.

Regulators also consider how long it takes companies to recover when calculating fines. More than half of leaders experienced a breach for more than 24 hours, whereas 97% of non-leaders said the same, according to Accenture.

Any lag time in remediation deepens a company's chance of fines under the General Data Protection Regulation or the California Consumer Privacy Act. While GDPR went into effect in 2018, most of its penalties finesare still in the "intent to fine" stage,leaving room for companies to negotiate with regulators.

Early detection is a company's best defense from a breach. However, less than one-fourth of non-leaders are able to detect a breach within a day, compared to 88% of leaders, according to Accenture.

Samantha Schwartz/CIO Dive, data from Accenture

Data lives in motion, flowing between business partners and security systems. Bad actors find holes in data aggregators, brokers, contractors, or other service providers that sit between customers and the companies they do business with.

Quest Diagnostics and LabCorp'sdata breach was caused by a weak link in their business ecosystem: their billing collector. The billing company was compromised for eight months and left the two companies answering to Congress. The companies' third-party risk management was in question, their internal security programs were not.

Only 15% of organizations have some degree of confidence in how they mitigate supply chain threats, according to Microsoft. Whitelisting, a mechanism for approving connections, is a solution for assessing third parties. With whitelisting, transactions are denied by default.

More here:

Organizations only protect 60% of their business ecosystem, Accenture finds - CIO Dive

Structo Partners with Pro3dure to Extend applications in the Velox ecosystem – Manufactur3D

Above: The Structo Velox 3D Printer from Structo/Image Credit: Structo

Structo, a dental 3D printing solutions provider and the manufacturer behind Velox the worlds first all-in-one 3D printer announced a partnership with German 3D printing materials company, pro3dure. This partnership will see Velox users gain access to pro3dures range of dental 3D printing materials. Structo continues to collaborate with industry partners in various areas to build upon Veloxs in-office dental 3D printing ecosystem.

We are committed to continue developing the Velox ecosystem of hardware, software and materials to empower the delivery of same day dentistry explains Huub van Esbroeck, Founder at Structo. Todays announcement will see Velox users gain access to pro3dures range of industry-leading dental 3D printing materials which gives them a range of options for their in-office 3D printing needs.

This collaboration will see pro3dures 3D printing material for Splints, Surgical Guide, Indirect Bonding Trays, and Temporaries calibrated and made available to print on the Velox 3D printer in dental practices with more applications coming soon. On top of Structos proprietary dental model material (Structomer Model), this partnership opens a whole range of new applications for Velox users.

We strive to make our range of dental materials as widely available as possible, said Dr. Martin Klare, CEO of pro3dure. The Structo Velox is a revolutionary ecosystem that will change how 3D printing is adopted in the dental office and we are proud to introduce our range of 3D printing resins with the worlds largest spectrum of dental applications available on that platform.

Speaking about the partnership, Huub notes the importance of working with partners like pro3dure to continue pushing the envelope of chairside 3D printing in dentistry. This is another step for us to provide more options to all Velox users worldwide and we will continue working with industry leaders to add more value and streamline the chairside 3D printing workflow for our industry.

We started off with just the hardware that does the print, wash and cure cycle of a 3D printing workflow. With more partnerships like these, we are confident that the Velox ecosystem will be able to empower dentists to deliver better patient care with revolutionary new solutions, Huub concluded.

About Manufactur3D Magazine:Manufactur3D is an online magazine on 3D Printing. Visit ourGlobal Newspage for more updates on Global 3D Printing News. To stay up-to-date about the latest happenings in the 3D printing world,like usonFacebookor follow us onLinkedIn.

More:

Structo Partners with Pro3dure to Extend applications in the Velox ecosystem - Manufactur3D

Epic and about 60 hospital chains come out against rules that would make it easier to share medical info – CNBC

Judith Faulkner, CEO of healthcare IT giant Epic Systems.

Source: Epic Systems

Epic Systems CEO Judy Faulkner recently urged some of the largest health systems in the country to sign a letter opposing proposed rules designed to make it easier for patients to obtain their medical information and share it with apps.

About 60 of these health systems have signed it.

The letter, which was obtained by CNBC, was addressed to Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar and opposed proposed rules designed to help medical information flow more easily between health systems and patients. The rules also aim to make clinical data accessible through application programming interfaces (APIs).

Epic, which is privately held, sells its electronic medical record software to hospitals across the country and is one of the largest health-technology companies in the U.S. An Epic installation is a major undertaking and can cost upwards of $1 billion for a major health system to implement.

Epic's CEO Judy Faulkner previously urged health care executives to take a stand with her: "HHS needs to hear from you so they understand that you feel these issues are important," it says. "Very little time is left."

A spokesperson for HHS told CNBC that it did indeed receive the letter. "We appreciate all stakeholder feedback as we continue to finalize the rules," they said. "Our ultimate goal is to ensure that patients are able to easily access their electronic medical records."

The largest technology companies, alongside patient advocates and caregivers, have taken the opposite stance and have spoken out in favor of the rules. Apple, Microsoft and Google recently joined a call with a non-profit called Carin Alliance to discuss ways to get the rule finalized and released. These companies favor the rules, in part because greater interoperability between systems that store medical records could help them move into the $3.5 trillion health care sector.

"There are many health systems that have deep concerns regarding the rule, and they've shared those concerns with HHS," Epic said in a statement to CNBC. "We are supportive of the goals of the proposed regulations, but we believe that important changes must be made to the rule before it becomes final in order to protect the privacy of patients and their personal health information. We appreciate the work that HHS is doing to incorporate different perspectives and ensure that the final rule is a good one."

The letter reads, in part, "While we support HHS' goal of empowering patients with their health data and reducing costs through the 21st Century Cures Act, we are concerned that ONC's Proposed Rule on interoperability will be overly burdensome on our health system and will endanger patient privacy. Specifically, the scope of regulated data, the timeline for compliance, and the significant costs and penalties will make it extraordinarily difficult for us to comply."

The letter goes on to recommend some changes, including more clarity around health information related to family members, and a longer timeline -- at least 12 months to prepare and 36 months for "development of new technology required by the rule."

It was signed by health systems including Ardent Health Services, Atrius Health in Massachussets, Bay Health in Delaware, NYU Langone Health in New York, Parkview Health in Indiana and Ohio, University Health System in Texas and UW Health in Wisconsin among others. Several life sciences companies also signed it, including Exact Sciences, maker of a diagnostic test for colorectal cancer.

A handful of organizations were also listed as sending their own separate letter.

One doctor who signed says he shared Epic's privacy concerns as the number of proposed medical apps skyrockets.

"There are tens of thousands of health care apps," said Neil Calman, MD, chairman of family medicine at Mount Sinai in New York and president of the institute for family health, in an interview.

"Getting these big computer systems to communicate in a predictable and secure way took a decade and now people are writing these apps in all different languages. There's no possible way a system that has been in development for decades now could all interface with all these apps and keep information secure. This needs a lot more thought, and more structure and regulation."

Some health IT experts note that the letter has not been signed by some of the largest health systems in the Epic ecosystem, and they say that's significant.

"Their absence represents a thundering silence," said David Brailer, the first National Health Information Technology Coordinator, appointed by George W. Bush. "Many health systems are quietly discussing how the data access and data fluidity actually benefits them in the long-run."

Here is the full list of health systems and health companies that signed the letter, not including those who chose to send their own:

Access Community Health Centers; Community Health Center Network; Altru Health System; Atrius Health; Adventist Health Portland; Affirmant Health Partners; Lovelace Health System; Arc; UT Health Athens; Ardent Health Services; Bay Health; Buffalo Medical Group; Christie Clinic; Deaconess Health System; Genesis Healthcare System; Catholic Health; Community Health Network; Exact Sciences, Group Health Cooperative, South Central Wisconsin; Charlotte Eye Ear Nose & Throat Associates; Confluence Health; Fresenius Medical Care; Gundersen Health System; Guthrie; HonorHealth; Institute for Family Health; Mercy; UnityPoint Health; Hospital Sisters; HSHS Wisconsin; Iowa Specialty Hospitals & Clinics; Mercy Care; MVHS; HSHS St. Clare Memorial Hospital; HSHS St Joseph's; HSHS Illinois; Mary Washington Healthcare; Mercy Health Services; Middlesex Health; Beth Israel Lahey Health; NYU Langone Health; PeaceHealth; Piedmont Healthcare; Northshore's Evanston Hospital; OhioHealth; Pembia County Memorial Hospital; Pine Rest Christian Mental Health Services; Norton Healthcare; Parkview Health; Permanente Dental Associates; Prevea Health; River Valley Primary Care Services; Singing River Health System; University Health System; Vancouver Clinic; Riverside; Southcoast Health; Titus Regional Medical Center; UT Health San Ontonio; Wellstar Medical Group; Self Regional Healthcare; SSM Health; UHS Inc. and UHS Hospitals; UW Health; West Virginia University Health System.

See original here:

Epic and about 60 hospital chains come out against rules that would make it easier to share medical info - CNBC

US Federal Court Judge Allows UnitedCorp to Continue its Antitrust Suit against Bitmain, Kraken, Roger Ver and the ABC Bitcoin Cash Development Team -…

Court grants leave for UnitedCorp to submit an amended complaint

Miami, Florida--(Newsfile Corp. - January 31, 2020) - Miami-based United American Corp ("UnitedCorp") (OTC Pink: UAMA) announced today that in a ruling issued by Magistrate Judge Chris McAliley of the US District Court, Southern District of Florida on January 28, 2020, the Judge allowed UnitedCorp to continue its antitrust lawsuit originally filed against Bitmain Group, Bitcoin.com, Roger Ver, Jihan Wu, Kraken, Jesse Powell, Amaury Sechet, Shammah Chancellor and Jason Cox (the "Defendants"). UnitedCorp will have 30 days to submit an amended complaint to address certain issues brought up by the Court after it granted without prejudice the motion to dismiss.

The Court also rejected a motion from counsel of the Bitmain Group and Jihan Wu to have them excluded from the complaint due a one-week delay in service in China. In a related ruling on January 21, 2020 the Court denied a motion by UnitedCorp without prejudice for a 90-day extension to serve foreign defendants Saint Bitts LLC and Amaury Sechet.

The two rulings mean that the complaints can be amended but will not include the two defendants that could not be served in foreign jurisdictions. This ruling comes as the result of a motion presented by the Defendants one year ago on February 1, 2019 to dismiss the complaint in its entirety with prejudice.

While the Judge recognized that there were some deficiencies in the initial UnitedCorp complaint which needed further definition in terms of the Defendants' actions and the injuries to the company, UnitedCorp believes the Court recognized that prima facie, there were key questions of law that needed to be addressed and defined in the emerging cryptocurrency industry.

During the hearing, the Judge questioned defense counsel on the role of Kraken as an exchange had in defining the cryptocurrency market and subsequently did not accept, for now, Kraken's assertion that it had no role in the market and therefore could not be part of the antitrust complaint.

Judge McAliley also did not accept for the time being, assertions made by counsels for Ver, Cox and Chancellor that the Defendants' actions by implementing Checkpoints in the software code, amongst other things, resulted in two competitive chains, therefore there were no antitrust issues to be evaluated since the action would have resulted in increased competition. The Court questioned furthermore, whether those actions are now preventing future changes in consensus rules and if the Bitcoin ABC software patch on November 15, 2018 was applied to both network nodes and exchanges.

The Court raised questions about the market value in the Bitcoin Cash ticker (BCH) at the time of the hard fork and questioned if Kraken would have benefited from its delisting of the resulting coin (Bitcoin SV - "BSV") thereby discouraging trading of BSV just after the hard fork.

The Judge continued to questioned counsel for Kraken on the economic basis for the decision to delist Bitcoin SV as well as its arguments to the effect that BSV would have been unstable with lack of liquidity since this seemed to be the case for many other cryptocurrencies traded on Kraken - not just BSV.

In its defense Kraken counsel argued that it was obliged to disclose to their clients that it believed there was a lack of liquidity in the BSV market which required the immediate delisting of BSV, an argument which was not accepted by the Court at this stage in the proceedings.

One of the more interesting points raised by the Judge in the hearing was whether the US Federal Court could rule on whether or not the Satoshi Nakamoto White Paper of October 31, 2008 (the "White Paper") which initially defined Bitcoin, could be considered as a binding contract or rules among the users in the Bitcoin industry. The Court left open the possibility that this question might have to be addressed at some point.

"We are very pleased with the outcome of the January 28th hearing and that the Court has given us the opportunity to provide additional information and resubmit an amended complaint," stated Benoit Laliberte, President and CEO of UnitedCorp. "We believe the Court has recognized the importance of establishing law in what has been to date, a fairly undefined environment. Bitcoin was developed as a decentralized and distributed peer-to-peer electronic cash system operating under democratic principles created within the network. Any move to centralize or control the network is against its very philosophy and foundation. We are very encouraged by the interest this has generated from antitrust professionals, most of whom agree that this suit is very timely given that antitrust laws are now almost 100 years old, and furthermore that it is time to assess the limits and legality of actions within the cryptocurrency industry."

Story continues

Background to the Suit

The suit, which was launched on December 6, 2018, is the first antitrust action brought in the United States involving the cryptocurrency industry and is being closely watched by antitrust professionals and the cryptocurrency world.

It alleges that the Defendants collectively engaged in unfair methods of competition, and through a series of deceptive and unfair practices, manipulated the Bitcoin Cash network for their benefit and to the detriment of UnitedCorp and other Bitcoin Cash stakeholders. It further alleges that these actions resulted in the network losing more than US $4 billion in unrecoverable value to network participants at the time as a direct result of the alleged hijacking of the network. This, in addition to a forced network fork with the implementation of their specific new rules set in the Bitcoin ABC 0.18.5 version under the control of the Defendants. UnitedCorp alleges that these new rules set have irreparably harmed the Bitcoin Cash blockchain network and Bitmain, along with the co-Defendants, should be held liable.

UnitedCorp alleges that the Defendants colluded to effectively hijack the Bitcoin Cash network after the November 15, 2018 scheduled software update with the express intent of centralizing the network. This includes allegations that Roger Ver, along with Kraken and developers of Bitcoin ABC, colluded with Chinese-based and Chinese government-financed mining rig manufacturer Bitmain to unfairly redirect hashing power at the exact moment of the scheduled software update, forcing the implementation of Bitcoin ABC software centric checkpoints and thereby moving the network away from its native Bitcoin-based blockchain design.

UnitedCorp also believes that the attempt to dominate the network in favor of a particular Bitcoin ABC version was enhanced by Bitmain's use of firmware known as "Overt ASICBoost" which provides significantly increased operational mining efficiency. This firmware was made available in advance of the last Bitcoin Cash update by Bitmain only to Bitcoin ABC-supported pools, which are operated by Bitcoin.com which is owned by Roger Ver. Overt ASICBoost was not usable by other Bitcoin Cash pools in a time frame that would have allowed them to apply the efficiency during the software upgrade. This gave the Bitcoin ABC-Bitmain-Bitcoin.com group-supported pools a significant advantage and allowed them to accomplish the network control centralization plan.

UnitedCorp alleges that these activities are evidence of not only a violation of the accepted standards and protocols associated with Bitcoin since its inception, but a violation of US antitrust laws, including parts of the Sherman Act.

In their motion to dismiss, the Defendants had argued that the UnitedCorp action did not meet the standards to proceed.

In its opposition to dismiss, UnitedCorp provided a significant number of details to support the suit including evidence that the Defendants themselves made explicit statements declaring that they coordinated, conspired and agreed with each other. This included a YouTube video from an online forum where Andreas Brekken, a Kraken software engineer, acknowledges that Bitcoin ABC developers and crypto exchanges such as Kraken agreed to the entire scheme in advance. In the video, Brekken further admits that the scheme had been planned for a long time and included a software patch that could be applied by the exchanges at a strategic point during the software update which "prevents all future re-orgs" - in other words which allows control of the network.

UnitedCorp's filing also provides support for the allegation that the Defendants' collective actions were for unlawful purposes and in an attempt to manipulate the cryptocurrency market for Bitcoin Cash, violated consensus rules regarding voting and precluded any future changes to Bitcoin Cash functionality and changes to the consensus rules. The actions are compared to the illegal action of "bid rigging" in that Bitmain "mercenary" miners were temporarily redeployed to the Bitcoin Cash network during the software upgrade for the sole purpose of diluting the traditional voting process exercised by existing Bitcoin Cash nodes to dominate the process for a short period of time. This violated the established ground rules of the network that others had respected and relied on for years.

The Bitcoin White Paper clearly states that "Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism." Therefore, the use of CPU power that was never part of the network prior to the network upgrade could not possibly have "rejoined" the network for the voting process. The transient spike in CPU power could only have been achieved at that time through deliberate and coordinated manipulation by the Defendants.

About United American Corp

Established in 1992, United American Corp is a Florida-based development and management company focusing on telecommunications and information technologies. The company currently holds the rights to manage a portfolio of patents and proprietary technology in telecommunications, social media and Blockchain technology, and owns and operates the Data Center Domes which are designed to provide heat for agricultural operations using computer equipment in naturally cooled data centers where efficiency and low-cost operations are a priority.

This news release contains forward-looking statements that are subject to various risks and uncertainties. The Company's actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements as a result of numerous factors that may be beyond the Company's control. Forward-looking statements are based on the expectations and opinions of the Company's management on the date the statements are made, and the Company assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements should circumstances in management's expectations or opinions change.

Source:United American CorpContact:Investor Relationsinvestorrelations@unitedcorp.com

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/52000

See the original post here:

US Federal Court Judge Allows UnitedCorp to Continue its Antitrust Suit against Bitmain, Kraken, Roger Ver and the ABC Bitcoin Cash Development Team -...

McAfee Continues Bitcoin Tirade: BTC is the Hotmail of Crypto – Ethereum World News

Over the 11 years that the cryptocurrency industry has existed, Bitcoin has been at the top; BTC has always had dominance over altcoins, managing to outpace the growth of other digital assets, even with the introduction of what are called Bitcoin killers.

This seems to be for good reasons: altcoins, even those that have promising technology, have failed to gain the adoption they need to succeed, are subject to harsh regulation by the worlds authorities, do not have enough market liquidity to be a viable investment or even utility token, or have a skewed tokeconomics model unlike Bitcoins strict supply cap and set inflation schedule.

According to John McAfee, however, Bitcoin is quickly proving itself to be the Hotmail of crypto.

In a tweet published Tuesday, McAfee said that he believes Bitcoin is the Hotmail of Crypto, referencing the mailing services booming start buy rapid fall from grace after the introduction of competing services in Gmail, etc. that may have been deemed better than the incumbent technology.

This comes shortly after he said that Bitcoin is old, clunky, [has] no security, no smart contracts, no decentralized apps, and as a result is thus the true s**tcoin.

This comes shortly after McAfee revealed that his massive Bitcoin price bet was a ruse to onboard new users, presumably citing the mass media coverage this oddball price target created. He went on to write that he thinks while Bitcoin was the first of the cryptocurrencies, its an ancient technology, before likening the first blockchain to the Model T of automobiles.

McAfee isnt the only one to have made such statements about the future of BTC. Per previous reports from Ethereum World News, Roger Ver, former CEO of Bitcoin.com and one of the industrys earliest entrepreneurs, said in a CNBC interview that he expect for BTCs primacy to be phased out over the next few years by things like Bitcoin Cash (BCH):

The real interesting one is Bitcoin Cash. I think it has the ability to go up a thousand times where it is currently because its looking to become peer to peer electronic cash for the entire world. The smart money is going into Bitcoin Cash because it has the economic characteristics that made Bitcoin popular to begin with.

While McAfee and others are certain of this assertion, BTC still has the largest market share out of all cryptocurrencies and is one of the best and most consistent performers over the past few years, meaning that the market still sees the most crypto promise in Bitcoin, not in Ethereum, Monero, or anything else.

Here is the original post:

McAfee Continues Bitcoin Tirade: BTC is the Hotmail of Crypto - Ethereum World News

Bitcoin Cash: debates tend to be raging all over mining tax – Sahiwal Tv

Let's get collectively Some influential users regarding the Bitcoin Cash community have actually suggested the organization of a voluntary participation of BCH miners: bookkeeping for 12.5per cent of their particular mining incentive, it must be made use of to invest in the introduction of the community. But not every person agrees, plus the the very least we are able to state is considering that the unrest prevailed.

We said about this at the conclusion of January: Jiang Zhuoer, CEO of this BTC.TOP mining pool, initiated energetically a debate regarding the introduction of an income tax of 12.5% of the mining reward in the Bitcoin Cash community. Following this statement, sympathizers and opponents joined a war by message interposed on social networking sites, debating the different things for this suggestion.

In front of this reaction at the least cautious of this neighborhood, Jiang Zhuoer posted a new pass on their private weblog so that you can react to the primary problems of this neighborhood and also to guard himself against critique. Its by continuing to keep exactly the same your oscillating between your conciliation as well as the barely veiled hazard allow Mr. Zhuoer explain hearing a number of the community's remarks.

In particular, the crystallization of an element of the critics all over management donations by a foundation based at Hong Kong reacted the daring CEO. Let the miners reassure by themselves, eventually, they might are able to select which jobs they desire distribute their particular share of reward. What if, on representation, no successful project happy the victorious miner? Don't stress, Mr. Zhuoer has clearly considered every little thing: all they should do is deliver the 12.5% of the mining incentive to an address for burn, where in actuality the tokens are damaged.

Obviously, in the extremely magnanimous impulse, Mr. Zhuoer additionally covers the actual quantity of the mining incentive that ought to be subtracted: he thinks that this figure might be decreased, specially just in case ofprice enhance from BCH. He also talked about a mining taxation that could slowly die out over time.

Finally, Jiang Zhuoer wishes this enhance becoming voted by minors through a 3-month vote, where the assistance of 2/3 regarding the processing energy of voters validate the suggestion. According to him, it is necessary that its minors just who choose their particular fate. But on the other hand, the Devil is within the details : in the eyes, voters really should not be simple miners just who switch their particular processing energy between BTC and BCH in line with the profitability of-the-moment, but fervent believers BCH usually, clearly, it doesn't count really.

Of course, The approach detailed doesnt call into concern ab muscles concept of the voluntary donation one good third of hashrate BCH would choose to enforce in the other countries in the minors. Leaving the choice between a forced donation and an destruction area of the coinbase reward will have the ability to laugh whenever confronted with the fact of "choice" leash.

Remember that considering that the community Bitcoin Cash reacted into the development, a few of the first support regarding the suggestion disengaged: Roger Ver for instance, withdrew through the team trying to enforce this share.

Bitcoin Cash is certainly not the actual only real community to explore these ways. Indeed, the Litecoin basis additionally recently debated the alternative of applying an equivalent taxation. So many altcoins trying to find their particular method whether or not this means slowly leaving the smallest amount of perfect of decentralization?

Read more from the original source:

Bitcoin Cash: debates tend to be raging all over mining tax - Sahiwal Tv

Why Middlebury was deemed one of the worst colleges for free speech according to FIRE – Burlington Free Press

Ezra Nugiel, for the Free Press Published 9:08 a.m. ET Jan. 31, 2020

Middlebury College has landed on a list of Americas 10 worst colleges for free speech, assembled by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), a nonprofitfocusedon protecting free speech rights on college campuses in the United States.

FIRE includesthe following in Middlebury's list of "speech-chilling" infractions:

"They denied a willing audience the opportunity to hear Legutkos arguments and critics from challenging him, either through peaceful protest or pointed questions," FIRE wrote about Middlebury in their list.

"The unilateral cancelation of Legutkos speech was one of the most troubling infringements on student and faculty free speech and open inquiry rights we saw last year."

Find the Free Press' coverage on Legutko's visithere.

See the Free Press' coveragehere.

"The college quickly backed down and has sinceupdateditsdemonstrations policy, to its credit," writes FIRE.

Coverage from the Middlebury Campus, Middlebury's student-run newspaper, can be foundhere.

"Until we see clear evidence that these infringements wont happen again, Middlebury finds itself on this most inauspicious of lists," FIRE writes.

Middlebury Collegehas an opportunity to redeem themselves from this article's claims, asCharles Murray is scheduled to return to the campus this March.

Since 2011, FIRE hasnamed65 individual colleges and universities as Americas worst for free speech. Their 2020"Worst Colleges for Free Speech" list marks theirninth year compiling theirworst-of-the-worst list.

Middlebury found itself onthe list alongside:

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education is a nonprofit educational foundation founded in 1999 in Philadelphia. FIRE was foundedby University of Pennsylvania professor Alan Charles Kors and attorneyHarvey Silverglate.

FIRE says the organization strives to educatethe public aboutthreats to free speech rights andmeans to preserve them on U.S. college campuses.

FIREs website states its mission is "to defend and sustain the individual rights of students and faculty members at Americas colleges and universities. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of association, due process, legal equality,religious liberty, and sanctity of consciencethe essential qualities of liberty."

Follow Ezra on Twitter: @EzraNugiel

This coverage is only possible with support from our readers. Sign up today for a digital subscription.

Read or Share this story: https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2020/01/31/middlebury-syracuse-harvard-worst-college-campuses-for-free-speech-according-to-fire/4620393002/

Read the original post:

Why Middlebury was deemed one of the worst colleges for free speech according to FIRE - Burlington Free Press

In One Month, For Freedoms Will Stage the Largest Congress of Creatives in Americas History. Will You Join Us? – artnet News

Nearly 250 years ago, representatives of the American colonies met in two Continental Congresses. At the Second Congress they signed a Declaration of Independence that put forth a radical and profoundly imaginative statement of values and ideals.

The United States now finds itself at a moment in which creative thinking and revolutionary imagination are desperately needed.

One month from now, in Los Angeles, California, a city and state with a rich history of ambitious social and creative movements, we will convene perhaps the largest gathering of creative minds in American history. This meeting of artists, academic, cultural institutions, and social justice advocates will take place February 28 to March 1. A first-of-its-kind event, it will be convened by For Freedoms, an anti-partisan platform to promote civic engagement, civil discourse, and direct action through art.

Since For Freedomss founding in 2016, we have worked to lead through culture, placing the arts at the forefront of a national conversation about how to move forward as a unified society. To revisit prior national definitions of liberty, we took inspiration from president Franklin Delano Roosevelts Four Freedoms speech, in which he proclaimed that Americas identity was centered on freedom of speech and freedom of worship as well as freedom from want and freedom from fear.

For Freedoms, Four Freedoms 1 (2018) in New Orleans, from the For Freedoms 50 State Initiative. Photo by John Ludlam.

Norman Rockwell created some of his most acclaimed works to illustrate those four freedoms. We restaged those artworks, but broadened the conversation from his middle-class, white, Anglo-Saxon context, inviting people of all races and religions to pose for our 21st-century reimaginings of those scenes. What was created was a vital illustration of a multi-cultural, multi-faith, multi-racial vision for America and the world.

One of the principles driving For Freedoms is at the heart of this question: How can artists and other storytellers and creative people come together to move beyond division and uplift humankind? How can we foster non-binary thinking, based on the philosophy that when we choose a side, someone is always going to lose? What does a future look like where no one wins or loses but everyone plays?

The For Freedoms Congress (FFCon) is where we start.

The idea for the Congress was seeded by our previous project, the 50 State Initiative, the largest creative collaboration in American history. Working with 800 artists and 250 museums, arts institutions, and universities across the country, we supported billboards, exhibitions, and arts-led townhall meetings in every state and in Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico that aimed to inject nuanced thinking into public discourse in the lead-up to the 2018 midterm elections.

Town hall at the Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis, 2018, as part of For Freedoms Town Hall: The 50 State Initiative. Photo by Virginia Harold.

What we learned was that the biggest asset that resulted from the project was the network of creative people who believed in their capacity to change the world through culture. We heard from these people that they wanted to meet face to face. The Congress is the first attempt to make that wish a reality.

We believe in the power of community and in the endless possibilities of working together to create the future we want to see. At this moment of collective national anxiety, we hope the sight of creative and empathetic people coming together will be a balm for the soul.

But we are aiming higher than that as well.

We want this gathering to supercharge this nations cultural infrastructure. We think that by working together, we can create a set of digital tools and plans for each institution to take back to their communities and begin to share with their fellow citizens. The idea is to spread engagement and purpose alongside these trusted and respected institutions.

Lawn sign activation at INTO ACTION, Los Angeles, 2018. Photo by Claire Woolcott.

Modeled on prior convenings in art and American politics, programming will include teaching, game-playing, co-creation, and reflection, and will be rooted in values such as community, transparency, and equity. A series of focused, artist-led planning sessions will result in an artists platform for civic action in 2020 and will articulate values shared within the greater community. There will also be four public townhall sessions in which participants explore Roosevelts Four Freedoms and what they mean today.

Events, all of which will be minimal- to zero-waste, will be hosted by the Los Angeles County Department of Arts and Culture, the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art, theHammer Museum, the California African-American Museum, the Japanese American National Museum, and the Crenshaw Dairy Mart.

We believe culture leads to change. But not without all of us playing a role to drive that change. Its no mistake that this Congress takes place in an election year, in a nation as bitterly divided as it has been in decades. The conventions of the major political parties have become driven by ratings and stagecraft. Here it may be worth remembering that in his farewell address, George Washington warned against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

In contrast, we plan to have artists lead genuine and candid discussions. The focus will be on beginning to build a new and different political future in an event that opens participants hearts and minds to deeper truths about themselves in a spirit of solidarity. As artists and other creatives, we can imagine no higher mission.

See original here:

In One Month, For Freedoms Will Stage the Largest Congress of Creatives in Americas History. Will You Join Us? - artnet News

What BDN readers think about planned live-action ‘Bambi’ movie – Bangor Daily News

Robert F. Bukaty | AP

Robert F. Bukaty | AP

In this July 31, 2018, file photo, a doe and her two fawns prepare to cross a road near Bar Harbor.

Last week, I told you about Disneys plan to turn the classic film Bambi into a live-action movie, and shared my fear that hunters could become less popular for future generations as a result.

As you might expect, BDN readers were quick to chime in on the issue. Heres some of what they had to say, in both our comments section and on social media. Responses are edited for space and clarity.

From SmartenUp: [You wrote]: With that said, the new, more realistic, live-action Bambi worries me a bit.

Good, I am glad, it should!

Animals die. Blood is shed.

Exactly.

Even for an avid hunter, taking the life of an animal can be an emotional event.

If it is emotional for you, think how it affects the animal and the animals family!

But hunting puts food on our tables

Lots of other ways to do that without shooting, without killing.

I am now looking forward to this new version of Bambi.

From Nunyabiznizz: Many of you folks who do not believe hunting is a scientific way of managing animals have your head in the sand. You would all probably be the first to complain when Bambi eats all the flowers you meticulously planted a couple months earlier. Or the garden vegetables you spent hours planting. Never mind when you hit one with your beloved Prius and must pay thousands of dollars to get it repaired. Have you seen an animal die from starvation? I have seen the final chapter (death) of this and cannot comprehend the suffering it must have endured.

For me, hunting is not about the killing. It is time spent with my family and friends. If I only went in the woods to kill something I would never go in the woods. However, when the opportunity presents itself I do my best to make a clean, ethical shot. I thank GOD and revel in the fact that I have an organic, tasty animal to share. I truly feel bad for those who do not have the opportunity to experience everything hunting has given to me.

From OrgFarm: I think the future of Maine sportsmen and sportswomen would fare better if the BDN didnt have a sports writer who regularly writes articles to stir up a bees nest of anti-game management folks like we see here.

One last thing. I hope all of you that look down on us hunters are vegetarians! If you think any commercially farmed animal is living a life of nirvana for your nourishment you are sadly mistaken.

From RustyHalo: Heres the case of another BDN writer hypocritically griping about the damage that the First Amendment will do if allowed to go unchecked in this case, causing unfounded trauma to moviegoers who might get a bad taste in their mouth about hunters if they see Bambi 1 or Bambi 2.

Editors note: The First Amendment dictates that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. A columnist pointing out possible ramifications of a film does not abridge freedom of speech.

Of course, as BDN readers, we have the uninterrupted pleasure every year of seeing the photographic glorification of the Great Maine Hunter (and a few Great Out-of-State Hunters) standing with a high-powered rifle and a goofy grin over the bloody carcass of another magnificent Maine creature during the annual harvest. Thats good free speech. Got it.

For those of us who choose not to hunt, most also choose not to gripe about the annual bloody gallery of dead eyes, lolling tongues, and dripping blood. Live and let live, is our motto, although come to think of it, thats sort of an ironic stand for us to take, given the fact that hunting is a recreational activity where animals die and blood is shed.

From Vix04087: I actually think the recent live action versions are geared more for adults than children. I recently took my 5-year-old grandson to see the Lion King which was one of my adult childrens all time favorite movie 25 years ago and he was totally bored and even seemed to miss the trauma that was implied with the death of Mufasa. I think preconceived ideas of killing animals comes from adults and is passed down to young minds. If we just taught children where their food comes from, not just wild game, but all meat they would not see hunting as slaughter but as a personal choice.

From Jonathan Albrecht: [You wrote] it [hunting] helps keep wildlife populations in a healthy balance. A healthy balance for whom? The animals or humans? I too see myself as a reasonable, rational former hunter and conservationist who is willing to consider other points of view. But as I get older and modern life changes, it becomes less tenable to believe that hunting contributes to a healthy balance or puts meat on the table. Hunting has become just another hobby in our quiver of hobbies like football, baseball, poker, or coin collecting that has emotional highs and lows, but which continues to lose positives and gain negatives and someday may become as irrelevant as an 1890 telephone. Well be puzzled why we ever thought it was so wonderful.

From Christian Pearl Belanger: As a moderate, and an avid Bambi fan from childhood, it never changed my views on hunting. It just gave the the hard facts of life and I was really blue about it for a week but I accepted that death is a part of life and then learned that there are reasons for the laws around hunting seasons.

From Charlotte Hanks: Hardcore liberal here. Hunting your own meat is much more ethical than supermarket factory farmed meat. I used to raise my own meat, I know what it is to rear an animal for slaughter. Thats better than factory farmed, but still not as ethical as hunting. If youre going to eat meat, you have to be okay with killing animals, or youre a hypocrite.

See the original post:

What BDN readers think about planned live-action 'Bambi' movie - Bangor Daily News

What are the limits of freedom of speech? – The New Indian Express

Sharjeel Imam, Yogi Adityanath, Anurag Thakur...now Anant Kumar Hegde. And before them Rahul Gandhi. Whats common between them? Yes, in different ways, and with varying degrees of infractions, all of them relate to contentious political expressions in the public space. The propriety of the words Yogi and Thakur used, which rang out from campaign loudspeakers, belongs to another domain. Nuanced questions of discourse ethics have only a remote connection with those.

But curiously, what Hegde has managed to convey in the latest episodethat Mahatma Gandhi only led an adjustment freedom struggle in cahoots with the British colonial masters, and that any eulogising of him only makes his blood boilis not vastly different in its degree of irreverence from what the young scholar, from another end of the political spectrum, said a few days ago. Sharjeel Imam in fact thinks Gandhi is the biggest fascist of them all.

That is not what landed him in jailit was, instead, a call for a blockade of Assam, over-interpreted as calling for Indias dismembermentbut his views on Gandhi, the Constitution et al form the more arresting parts of his speeches. Should they be banned? Should Hegde be made to apologise for what he said, as the BJP now wants him to? Should party loudmouths be taxed every time they go overboard, to shore up our exchequer? Or should contentious speech existand invite calm refutation?

That political discourse has been plumbing some spectacularly new lows in the recent past is no news. But what we are presented with here is another interesting dilemma about free speech and its limitshow to navigate between a mool mantra of liberal democracy and the wider imperative of finding ways to conduct debates without causing harm to collective sanity? Perhaps the only clear limit needed is when speech poses the threat of actual, physical harm to people.

Go here to read the rest:

What are the limits of freedom of speech? - The New Indian Express

‘You’re the ENEMY of free speech’ Piers Morgan slams ‘snowflakes triggered by everything’ – Express

Good Morning Britain (GMB) hosts Piers Morgan and Susanna Reid were left stunned as a heated debate on freedom of speech unfolded on the show. The row caused Piers to brand "snowflakes triggered by everything" as the "enemies of free speech". The clash comes after an Oxford College professor caused controversy as they wanted guests to sign a code of conduct to attend a debating event. University of Sussex Philosophy professor Kathleen Stock argued it is illegal for universities to stifle free speech.

Whereas City University's Student Union vice president of education Saqlain Riaz argued sensible debates should have safeguarding policies.

Mr Riaz said: I am stating the fact that as a society we are moving forward.

We are having these conversations.

Freedom of speech isnt just for Kathleen or Piers Morgan it is for everybody."

DON'T MISS:Piers Morgan shut down by Holly Willoughby over x-rated swipe

Ms Stock answered: This is part of the problem.

We are confusing the discussion of difficult ideas with personalised insults.

In fact, we are finding more personalised insults the more we shout out."

But Piers was having none of it. He raged: "Universities have become so infused with snowflakes who can't take any criticism and who get triggered by absolutely everything. And in the end, that is the enemy of free speech. Universities should be about challenging your own ideas."

The outspoken host added: "The tenet of universities should be free speech and debate. And yet it is being stifled everywhere we look."

Originally posted here:

'You're the ENEMY of free speech' Piers Morgan slams 'snowflakes triggered by everything' - Express

Doctor Who: fan reaction to first black Time Lord exposes Britain’s deep divisions on race and gender – The Conversation UK

BBC audiences were recently introduced to their first black Doctor Who. In the episode which aired in the UK on January 26, Jo Martin previously best known for roles in Holby City and Blue Story played an ostensibly ordinary human who was, towards the end of the episode, revealed as a previously unknown (possibly past, future or parallel) incarnation of televisions most famous Time Lord.

A few weeks earlier the latest version of the shows recurring super-villain, The Master, had for the first time been portrayed by a person of colour, a role played with manic zeal by Sacha Dhawan in a performance dubbed by The Guardian as the Hot Camp Master.

Both events provoked strong responses on social media, from enthusiastic plaudits through to rants from fans ranging from the sincerely woke to the reactionary and even racist. The latter response might be considered out of character for the followers of a show whose liberal hero has for more than half a century renounced violence and struggled for peace, social justice and environmental sustainability.

This is a series whose very first episode had a female producer, Verity Lambert, and a British Asian director, Waris Hussein phenomena virtually unheard of back in 1963. (The latter was also played by Dhawan in the BBCs 2013 docudrama An Adventure in Space and Time.)

Its a programme which, in 1972, argued passionately (albeit symbolically) in favour of membership of the European Economic Community (or in its own terms the Galactic Federation), and a year later railed against the impacts of industrial pollution.

In recent years, it has foregrounded LGBT+ protagonists, issued dire warnings against climate change and even made reference to the fabrication of evidence to support the invasion of Iraq.

Yet since 2017, when Jodie Whittaker was cast as the first female Doctor Who, arguments have raged between those strange misogynists depicted by the Huffington Posts Graeme Demianyk as man babies and, in contrast, the likes of The Guardians Zoe Williams, who heralded Whittakers Doctor as representing the revolutionary feminist we need right now.

If, like mine, your social media bubble overwhelmingly favoured the Remain campaign and still cant get its head around the fact that the majority of people didnt, then your friends and followers may well have applauded Martins appearance. But you might then be surprised if you were to venture into some Doctor Who fan forums. Youd see quite a backlash against what some perceive as the politically correct direction their favourite show has taken. This show and all it used to offer has been destroyed by politically correct writing and casting, opined one fan. Another responded: Its not woke, unless your idea of woke is it has a black woman in it. Its the blandest form of mainstream liberalism but some internet talking heads treat it as if it was 50 minutes of Jodie Whittaker reciting the Communist Manifesto.

The outrage of the anti-PC brigade has simultaneously fuelled and been fuelled by coverage in the mainstream media. Echoing a populist press narrative that the series has become, in the words of the Daily Mail, a tiresome ordeal of political correctness since Whittaker assumed the role, The Sun reported this week that viewers baulked at the programmes unbearable political correctness as another female Doctor was revealed.

Also writing in The Sun, Jeremy Clarkson observed that angry fans say its littered with ham-fisted attempts to ram Lefty dogma down our throats.

This backlash has sparked an equal and opposite reaction one which, like the fan who described the series current ideological stance as the blandest form of mainstream liberalism is not simply aligned with that stance, but which is concerned that its stance is not radical or robust enough. Writing in the New Statesman, assistant editor Jonn Elledge has argued that the casting of the first female Doctor has been undermined by the fact that that she has been given no material as meaty as that written for the supporting male characters.

Despite having repeatedly argued for the importance of that casting decision in books and articles, both here and elsewhere, Ive since expressed concern at the series simultaneous weakening of the character.

Jack Hudson has recently argued in The Guardian that, beneath its guise of progressive politics, the show has in fact grown profoundly conservative in ways which may at once alienate both its progressive and its reactionary fans.

In December Lenny Henry (in the run-up to his recent appearance in the series) was quoted as suggesting that BBC bosses would rather cast a dog than a black actor in the title role. In this context, Martins casting as the first black, female Doctor seems particularly significant.

Yet Martins Doctor is not (as yet) the series lead. Progressive voices in fandom have sometimes suggested that, when Whittaker eventually leaves the series, her successor will most likely (and most appropriately) be a woman of colour. There may now be those who fear that Martins tangential Doctor (whoever and whenever in the Time Lords timeline she may turn out to be) has ticked both those boxes and that the production team may next time once more fall back on casting a white, male lead.

These arguments will doubtless continue to rage, along with much bigger ones. The polarisation of political perspectives among the British public since the Brexit referendum of course remains a matter of ongoing national concern. The current disagreements amongst Doctor Who fans once a group which unambiguously embodied the liberal consensus may appeal to the mainstream media precisely because they mirror those larger societal divisions, and may prove of greater significance as indicative of those broader ideological shifts and splits.

Here is the original post:

Doctor Who: fan reaction to first black Time Lord exposes Britain's deep divisions on race and gender - The Conversation UK

Henry Louis Gates Jr. on What Really Happened at Obama’s ‘Beer Summit’ – The New York Times

Henry Louis Gates Jr. is one of a handful of academics who have crossed over into something approaching true celebrity. Which is apparently what happens when youve written and edited dozens of books of popular history; had a guiding hand in 18 major documentaries on black history, the most recent of which was Who Killed Malcom X?; and spent six seasons uncovering the genealogical mysteries of famous people as host of PBSs Finding Your Roots. Gatess desire to reach beyond the ivory tower in addition to writing landmark works of literary criticism like The Signifying Monkey, hes the director of Harvards Hutchins Center for African and African-American Research was motivated by some very personal feelings. My brother asked me once, says Gates, 69, recalling a time when he and his work were less well known, When are you going to write a book that Daddy and Mama can read?

Theres no arguing that popular storytelling and factual scholarship can be combined in useful ways. What Im curious about is your opinion on the limits, if there are any, of that combination. Its an excellent question. It took a long time for black scholars and filmmakers to feel comfortable representing black historical figures in three dimensions. Take Harriet Tubman. Students think Harriet Tubman was basically leading a train of slaves out of Grand Central Station. But I think the number she saved was closer to 70 which was a lot, by the way. Or: The myth that our ancestors were kidnapped by your ancestors, David, is just untrue. The fantasy is that my 10th-great-grandmother and -grandfather were out on a picnic and some white people jumped out of the bushes and they ended up on a plantation in Virginia. Thats not how it happened. But one of the things that Ive dedicated my career to is showing that black people are just as complex, positively and negatively, as anybody else. For years, the mythos that undergirded black history was that the slaves were the victims of European dominance. But really it was the Europeans who were selling guns to African kings, who engaged in wars against other Africans in order to defeat them and then sell the victims to Europeans. I remember once I was asked to consult on a project about Martin Luther King. I said, You cant do hagiography anymore. King was complicated. He had affairs and doubts. He was a flawed person but also a great man, and showing him in his full complexity would make for a better film than pretending he was a walking saint. But the historian who was involved in this project said: Too many racists. Theyre not ready for that.

Henry Louis Gates Jr. addressing a class at Harvard in 1996. John Blanding/The Boston Globe, via Getty Images

Was conciliatory thinking along the lines of racists arent ready for that in your head in 2009 when you were dealing with the incident with the Cambridge police? Oh, yeah. President Obama made an innocent comment that the arrest was stupid, which it was. Then all of a sudden all these racists are beating up on him. My whole attitude was channeled through the desire to protect our first black president. But there was another motivation. I thought that it would be hubristic and dishonest if I compared what happened to me to what happens to black people in the inner city. I thought, If I didnt have the protections of class and status

The outcome wouldve been very different. Right. When the policeman, Sgt. Crowley, and I met, I said, Why did you arrest me? He said, I was afraid that I wasnt going to be able to go home to my wife, because I was convinced that your partner was upstairs and he was going to come down and blow me away. He told me he had gotten a call: Two black guys are breaking into this house. One of them answers the door me when he rang the bell, and Im stepping over suitcases, because Id just come back from a trip. Unbeknown to me, one pattern of thievery is bringing empty suitcases to a house. So the officer saw a black face, he saw the suitcases: Thats part of a profile. I was what Barbara Johnson calls an already-read text. He couldnt hear me, couldnt see me. Well, that might be related to police excesses and abuses, but its a far end of the scale, and I was able to reverse what happened to me, unlike an Eric Garner. So my whole reaction to my arrest was determined by two things: The attacks on President Obama and my own determination not to claim too much for my own victimization.

Then when you actually had the beer summit, did President Obama say anything helpful, or was that whole thing pro forma? Oh, thats interesting. I was at Marthas Vineyard, and I had been getting instructions from the White House, through Glenn Hutchins. They told me not to wear a bespoke suit. We dont want it to be about class. All of the sudden I was the upper-class black person against the working class. I go, Im the victim! They go, No, dont wear one of those suits. I go: These are the only suits I have. Im not going out to Sears and Roebuck and buying a suit. Then they go, Do not fly down in a private plane. Glenn Hutchins owns a private plane. Glenns a billionaire. Hes one of my best friends. The only way we could get to Washington was on Glenns plane, because there was fog. Anyway, we got to the White House, and we and Sgt. Crowleys family all got to the library at the same time. I walked over to Sgt. Crowley. He had his kids there, and I said to them: Hi, Im Professor Gates. Hope you come to Harvard one day. Maybe youll take one of my classes. Then I said to him, Can I have a word with you? He and I went off and did the beer summit ourselves. I said, Look, I dont know about you, man, but I just want this to go away. He goes, This is a nightmare. I said to him: The president has come under attack. Racisms coming out of the floor. Im sure youre a decent person. I forgive you. Lets move on. He goes, That would be the best thing that could happen. I said, Maybe we could find a way to lecture about it. He laughed and said, Anything I can do to get off the beat. I realized he was funny. I think that gay people have a sense of whos homophobic. I think that Jewish people have a sense of whos anti-Semitic. I definitely think black people I could walk out there and tell you, That [expletive] is a racist.

The White House beer summit, held in the Rose Garden in 2009: from left, Vice President Joe Biden, Gates, Sgt. James Crowley and President Barack Obama. Joshua Roberts/Bloomberg, via Getty Images

And youre saying you didnt get that vibe from Sgt. Crowley? I didnt get that vibe from him. When we were called into the Oval Office, I said to the president, Mr. President, we had a great conversation in the library. He said, Oh, it sounds like its all settled. The actual beer summit was us doing small talk. And the reason Joe Biden was there is that the Cambridge police had insisted that because there were going to be two black guys at the table, they wanted two white guys at the table! They had sent somebody involved in the Cambridge police structure to be there. As we were walking out to the Rose Garden, somehow that guy got pushed to the side, and Joe Biden jumped in the line. Thats what nobody ever figured out: Why is Biden at the table? He was there to be the second white guy.

As far as you can tell, how much is Bidens appeal to black voters solely about his association with Obama? Biden, wisely, has wrapped his arms so tightly around Barack Obama that theyre inextricably intertwined, at least in his speeches. Hes polling so positively among black people because of the Obama residue. But that could change overnight. I havent endorsed any candidate, because I have too many friends. Elizabeth Warren was my colleague. I did Bernie Sanderss family tree. In 2018, I got an award in Delaware, along with Joe Biden and Ron Chernow. I spent a whole evening with Biden, and I liked him. All of this is to say that I have been sort of watching the field. But, I mean, Im going to vote for whatever Democrat emerges. I want to say this right, because I havent said this to anybody: Among all the candidates, the person who I believe could stand toe-to-toe, strongest and longest with Donald Trump is Mike Bloomberg.

Why? Who do you think his constituency is? I know Mike Bloomberg socially. Every summer I go to a dinner on Marthas Vineyard with Mike Bloomberg. Ive argued with him about policies that I didnt like. He is enormously intelligent and capable. When he was mayor, I watched him. He could wear it lightly. Its not like Jimmy Carter with the weight of the world on him. I think that hes tough, and I think he could take on the bully Donald Trump. Very few people can stand up to a bully. Mikes got some bully in him. I think hes good.

Stop and frisk isnt too much of a problem for him? He faces two problems that he has to overcome. He has already apologized for stop and frisk, but he has to put it behind him, and also the Central Park Five. What the city and the legal structure did to those five boys was shameful. The mayor has to put that behind him. If hes successful doing that, I think black people want him, because he is smart, sensitive, strong. I think he cares about health care. He understands the economic system. This is not an endorsement. But I would support him if he got the nomination.

Something I see your guests do on Finding Your Roots is framing their narratives as triumphant ones, and Id say a similar form of exceptionalism shapes how a lot of Americans think of the countrys past. In what way does our propensity for that kind of thinking inhibit our ability to fully reckon with subjects like racism and slavery that dont easily fit into a narrative of exceptionalism? Because that tension is obviously at the root of the conflict over, for example, the removal of Confederate monuments. I feel as if you and I are sitting here, were having coffee, and we hear this noise, and these zombies come out of the floor, and the zombie is white supremacy. We thought these [expletive] were dead. Im trying to use the popularity of Finding Your Roots to get these political messages in there without being a scold. I am trying to deconstruct notions of racial purity. There is no racial purity. We are all diverse. Showing diversity is important to me politically, and insofar as we can achieve that, our series has an educational value for the larger country, particularly at a time when were at Redemption redux.

Gates with Soledad OBrien on the set of Finding Your Roots. PBS/Ark Media, via Everett Collection

We understand the Redemption era now as a white response to the gains black people made during Reconstruction. Is it too simplistic to say that the energy driving the current moment is also a reaction to black progress and Obamas becoming president? Ive spent a lot of time thinking about your question, and I dont know the answer. If were sitting around in a bar with a bunch of black people, they could say, Barack and Michelle drove all the white people totally out of their minds. I think thats partly true. The other thing, though, is that between Martin Luther Kings death and now, the black middle class has doubled and the black upper-middle class has quadrupled. But simultaneously, if you look at the wages of white workers the chance of your kids doing better than you if you were in the white working class, thats over. So you might look at a black family in the White House, all these black people who joined the upper-middle class, and theres a kind of collective What the [expletive]?

Which youre saying resulted in resentment? Its the curve of rising expectations. When its interrupted, people go nuts. After World War II, G.I.s got mortgages so they could live in the suburbs and buy a house, buy a car, then a TV. Their kids could go to college. Their grandchildren could be doctors. That was the promise of America. That promise is over. That drives people crazy, and then they target, they objectify, they need a scapegoat. So its not just Michelle and Barack. They are part of the larger phenomenon. To go from them to Trump is a seismic revolution that is the result of a collapse of expectation.

You mentioned college: I went back and read Loose Canons, and theres a line in there in which you say that college students are too old to form but not too old to challenge. How does a line like that resonate today, when challenging students can seem like such a fraught proposition? Political correctness is heinous if it comes from a person on the left or the right or a person of color or a white person. Lets take a hot-button issue. I wrote the introduction to the 50th-anniversary edition of Albert Murrays The Omni-Americans, and there was this paragraph I wrote last summer that I saw when I was cleaning out my Word files on my iPad. In it I said, Only people not familiar with this history of slavery or Ta-Nehisi Coatess recent work would wonder if there was an economic disadvantage to African Americans subsequent to the Civil War because of slavery and then because of the rollbacks of Reconstruction. I said, However, reasonable people could disagree about reparations. But, I continued, there are few people today who have the courage to stand up within the community and say, I genuinely think reparations is a mistake. Now Im not saying thats my position. But Im saying you will find nobody black standing up and criticizing reparations its very rare because theyre afraid that students are going to boycott them or that theyll be called an Uncle Tom. Thats not right. We fall apart, particularly in the academy, when we succumb to or perpetuate that kind of intellectual bullying.

What is your position on reparations? I do believe that its impossible for any rational person not to understand the cost of 400 years of slavery and then another century of Jim Crow. We have to find ways to compensate for that cost. Affirmative action, to me, is a form of reparations. So is health care Obamacare or a variant. And theres reform of public education. One of the most radical things we could do to reform public-school education would be to equalize the amount of money spent per student in every school. That is never going to happen, but that would constitute a radical shift. Those are my three big principles of reparations, and two of the three affect poor people in general. But Im a scholar of African and African-American history. There were palpable costs to antiblack racism that have had profound effects on the state of black America. These effects are cumulative, and somebody has to do something about it.

In terms of your own writing, youre a long way from the guy who made his name with a dense academic book like The Signifying Monkey. Something like Stony the Road is written in much simpler language with much less jargon. How do you make sense of that evolution? The Signifying Monkey is my tenure book. I was just trying to get tenure. I was trying to be a bridge between the black tradition and poststructuralism and deconstruction. Then I got tenure, and as far as the evolution of my own prose, once you get tenure, you could write films, you could do anything. A crucial point came when I gave a lecture at Howard University. A friend of mine invited me down to deliver my essay called Binary Oppositions in Chapter 1 of Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. I thought I was introducing structuralism. When I was done, I expected a standing ovation. The first question I got was: Yeah, brother. All we want to know is, was Booker T. Washington an Uncle Tom or not? That had a profound effect on me. I have an ego. I want the audience to be with me. Thats what you see in my evolution.

David Marchese is a staff writer and the Talk columnist for the magazine.

This interview has been edited and condensed from two conversations.

See the original post:

Henry Louis Gates Jr. on What Really Happened at Obama's 'Beer Summit' - The New York Times

Virginia poised to make ‘conversion therapy’ illegal for minors – The Winchester Star

WINCHESTER Both chambers of the Virginia General Assembly have passed legislation that would prohibit conversion therapy for people under age 18.

The House of Delegates on Monday voted 66-27 in support of HB 386, which would ban any health-care provider or person who performs counseling as licensed by the Department of Health Professions from engaging in conversion therapy with a minor. Doing so would constitute unprofessional conduct and would be grounds for disciplinary action. All House Democrats, including 10th District Del. Wendy Gooditis of Clarke County, and 11 Republicans voted in favor of the bills passage. Twenty-seven Republicans, including 29th District Del Chris Collins, R-Frederick County, and 33rd District Del. Dave LaRock, R-Hamilton, voted against the bill.

On Jan. 21, the Senate voted 21-18 in support of similar legislation, SB 245. Sen. Jill Vogel, R-Upperville, who represents the 27th District, was the only Republican to vote in favor of the bills passage.

Each chamber must now consider the others legislation.

Conversion therapy is defined in HB 386 as any practice or treatment that seeks to change an individuals sexual orientation or gender identity.

To date, 19 U.S. states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have passed laws banning conversion therapy for minors.

I have known people whose parents had forced them into conversion therapy, Gooditis said in a text. Not only did it have no effect whatsoever on their sexuality or identity, but the effects it did have were to drive them from their families and create huge, long-term mental distress. Some of the methods used which they described to me were appalling forms of physical and emotional abuse, and we must not permit these to be inflicted on people in the name of trying to force them to be something their families want them to be.

In a message to The Star, Vogel wrote: I do not support adolescent conversion therapy. Medical science does not support the benefits of such a practice and instead the evidence shows the severe harm [that] can be done to a child.

But LaRock countered in an email that HB 386 would rob parents and their teens of the right to make the best treatment decisions for the childs unwanted sexual desires or their choice of sexual identity, limiting the freedom of Virginias youth and their parents to select therapists that work for them. This bill also violates the special nature of the client-therapist relationship, threatens religious liberty, and quite possible free speech rights. Scientific studies have shown that sexual orientation can, and does, change, especially in youth. Public policy should be based on sound, evidence-based science, not ideologically-driven political correctness.

The Human Rights Campaign (HRC) the nations largest LGBTQ civil rights organization has called conversion therapy dangerous, especially among minors. HRC says conversion therapy can lead to depression, anxiety, drug use, homelessness and suicide.

The American Psychiatric Association also strongly opposes conversion or reparative therapy. The APA says it does not believe that same-sex orientation should or needs to be changed, and efforts to do so represent a significant risk of harm by subjecting individuals to forms of treatment which have not been scientifically validated and by undermining self-esteem when sexual orientation fails to change. No credible evidence exists that any mental health intervention can reliably and safely change sexual orientation; nor, from a mental health perspective does sexual orientation need to be changed.

Collins could not be reached for comment.

Continued here:

Virginia poised to make 'conversion therapy' illegal for minors - The Winchester Star

Solvays mayor threatened to fire the villages lawyers. Instead, they quit – syracuse.com

SOLVAY, N.Y. -- Three days after the Solvay mayor berated a village attorney in front of a roomful of people, the villages law firm quit.

Costello, Cooney & Fearon has been Solvays legal counsel for 23 years. Friday, the firm sent Solvay a letter saying they were ending the relationship.

I am ethically precluded from discussing any of the reasons that led to this, said attorney Kevin Gilligan. But after 23 years were not going to be their attorneys.

Solvay Mayor Derek Baichi has been critical of the villages lawyers for months, complaining in vague terms about several investigations the board launched into its own members and the police chief. Hes threatened to get rid of the firm and tried at least once to withhold their payments.

He also tried to reappoint the firm to a full-year term earlier this year, but was blocked by the rest of the board.

At a meeting last Tuesday, Baichi told Nadine Bell, a partner at Costello, Cooney & Fearon, that she needed to earn their money. He was asking Bell to disapprove of a proposed resolution that would have forced Baichi to reimburse the village for an investigation into the police chief.

Nadine, you gotta give the right answers, dont give me this political correctness garbage," he shouted. "Do your job.

The resolution was eventually dropped, after which Baichi said he was given misinformation.

Baichi has also lambasted Kevin Gilligan, a Costello lawyer who has worked for the village since 1997.

In December, Baichi tried to block a resolution to pay the villages legal bills for the month. He told Gilligan he would pay the bills if Gilligan disclosed information about an investigation into another board member.

Ill make you a deal. I want you to read the email you sent to this board within the last 24 hours about one of those investigations, Baichi said. If you read the email Ill vote yes.

I wont read the email. Its a confidential attorney-client communication, Gilligan replied. It would be a violation of my legal ethics.

Baichi eventually relented and said that he would agree to pay the law firm for services theyd already provided, but noted he was unhappy with a pair of investigations that were ongoing.

Alright you know what Ill do? Ill vote yes, only because its Christmas and Kevin youve been a pretty decent lawyer these past two years," he said. "Ill vote yes because I dont want to ruin Christmas.

Baichi tried to reappoint Costello, Cooney & Fearon earlier this year -- an effort that was blocked by the majority of the board. The majority of the board instead recommended issuing a request for proposals to seek bids from other firms.

The board agreed to keep Costello, Cooney, Fearon on a month-to-month basis until the RFP was completed. That RFP is ongoing and one law firm has applied.

Solvays board has been beset by internal investigations for much of the last seven months. Those investigations (one into a pair of board members and another into the police chief) have been a source of constant friction and open hostility between the mayor and his opponents on the board. Theyve also been shrouded in secrecy. Baichi has said repeatedly he cant discuss the details because the village lawyers have advised him against it.

Costello, Cooney, Fearon has represented Solvay since 1997. Gilligan said he was first appointed by Mayor Anthony Modafferi 23 years ago. Since then, he said, hes made a lot of friends working with Solvay.

Well miss working with the village after 23 years, he said. I met a lot of the people and love them very much.

Gilligan sent the village a letter last week alerting officials that the law firms services would end on Feb. 14.

He also commended Bell for operating on a totally ethical basis" at last weeks contentious meeting.

The Solvay board will hold a special meeting Tuesday night to discuss the future of the villages legal representation.

Correction: An earlier version of this story said Baichi tried to appoint another law firm earlier this year. He tried to reappoint CCF, but the board voted against him and instead opted to issue a request for proposals for firms.

Originally posted here:

Solvays mayor threatened to fire the villages lawyers. Instead, they quit - syracuse.com