State, University of Tennessee disagree on whether board of trustees’ approval is needed for new UT Promise scholarship program – Chattanooga Times…

NASHVILLE The University of Tennessee system's implementation of its own "last-dollar" college tuition scholarship program has come under challenge from state auditors who question interim UT system President Randy Boyd's authority to implement it without getting the UT Board of Trustees' specific approval.

Comptroller Justin Wilson's office says in the finding that trustees "neither officially approved the UT Promise program nor ensured management assessed the program's long-term impact."

"We said UT should have gotten board approval before announcing Tennessee Promise," Wilson told state House and Senate Government Operations Committee members earlier this month. "They disagreed. We don't read the language the same way they do."

Indeed, UT does contest the finding in the audit, one of two done since the 2018 passage of then-Gov. Bill Haslam's UT Focus Act. The act, which restructured the UT system's board of trustees, was spurred by Republican lawmakers' penchant for ranting at UT. That was often directed at the Knoxville campus, which GOP lawmakers routinely attacked as a bastion of political correctness over issues like gender-neutral pronouns and promiscuity with regard to UT Knoxville's annual "Sex Week."

In its official audit response, UT disagreed with Wilson's finding. It said Boyd's UT Promise, which is modeled after the earlier Tennessee Promise program, which offers similar tuition aid and mentorships for students attending community and technical colleges, didn't require trustees' formal approval for a simple reason.

"UT Promise is not a policy; it is a mentorship program like many other scholarship programs offered by the University," UT said in its response. "Likewise, UT Promise is not a 'waiver or discount of students fees'" as characterized in the audit, UT said.

The university system also made the case in its formal response that when UT trustees approved the overall budget, they were in effect approving everything in it, including the new initiative.

Boyd defends action, mildly

In his own appearance before the joint committee, Boyd made the same argument about initiating the UT Promise but used a more conciliatory approach. And the interim president noted he did speak with new trustees individually in private before announcing it publicly.

"I should probably just start with saying that I agree with the comptroller," Boyd told legislators. "When we have major initiatives, that's something we should consider to have conversations publicly about them. So your chief, key observation is something that we agree with."

Noting that UT, which has campuses in Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin and Memphis, seriously takes its status as a land grant institution to provide "more opportunity for more Tennesseans," Boyd told lawmakers that if a student's family makes less than $50,000 and the student is academically qualified, they can enlist in the program and attend "free of tuition and fee.

"We'll also be providing them with a series of mentors," Boyd said, later adding, "we're going to require them to have skin in the game" by doing a day's worth of community service each semester.

UT Board Trustee Chairman John Compton, a 1983 UT Knoxville graduate and former PepsiCo CEO, told lawmakers "it's my personal opinion that the introduction of the UT Promise scholarship program further expands the university's commitment to affordability and access to all."

First tnAchieves, then Tennessee Promise, now UT Promise

Few people likely understand the ins and outs of combining last-dollar scholarships for students along with mentor guidance as well as Boyd, a Knoxville businessman.

After making a fortune in the pet product business think "Invisible Fence" Boyd spearheaded creation of tnAchieves, a private nonprofit Knoxville group working to get first generation students into college.

The idea is that with federal Pell Grants and similar aid already available, providing the additional "last dollar" scholarship money wasn't so huge a lift. Enlisting the help of volunteer mentors, the program helps prospective students apply for and succeed in school. The programs also require students to perform some type of community service.

The local program attracted the attention of a fellow Knoxvillian, Haslam, who wanted to boost the number of Tennesseans with community or technical college or university degrees. With Boyd coming to work for Haslam as an unpaid adviser, Haslam initiated Drive to 55, an effort to get 55% of adult Tennesseans with college degrees or certificates by 2025.

Along with that was a method to get part way there, the Tennessee Promise, which now provides last-dollar scholarships and the voluntary mentor program for students attending community or technical colleges. It relies on funding from a special Tennessee Education Lottery account.

The program has drawn national attention. Haslam later made Boyd his commissioner of community and economic development. Last year, Boyd ran for governor, losing the 2018 GOP primary to now-Gov. Bill Lee in a four-candidate field. Before leaving office, Haslam named Boyd interim UT president.

And now there's a UT Promise which Boyd told lawmakers could allow a student to attend any UT campus "free of tuition and fees. We'll also be providing them with a series of mentors [and]we're going to require them to have skin in the game" by doing a day's worth of community service each semester.

The UT Promise is going to be a "lot less expensive than sometimes people might think," Boyd said. While first-year estimates peg it at $5.7 million, Boyd said "that may sound like a lot, [but] in our overall budget, that's less than 5% of the total institutional aid that we provide students in the system. And it's only .37% of our entire budget."

Moreover, the university is creating a $100 million endowment to fund it, Boyd said. Having already raised more than $25 million in the past three to four months, he said, that's a quarter of the way to the endowment's goal. "Alumni are excited about this program, and they're willing to support students that apply for this program," he told lawmakers.

He added: "In spite of all those things I just shared, it is something that in the future that when we do have big public initiatives, whether we're required to vote on it or not, it may be something that we'll look at and [have] the conversations about in the general forum."

The audit also covered a number of other areas regarding the UT system.

Contact Andy Sher at asher@timesfreepress.com or 615-255-0550. Follow him on Twitter @AndySher1.

Original post:

State, University of Tennessee disagree on whether board of trustees' approval is needed for new UT Promise scholarship program - Chattanooga Times...

A Christmas Carol star has perfect response to people who said that mixed-race couples didn’t exist in the 19th century – indy100

The BBC's fresh and gritty take on Charles Dickens A Christmas Carolhas captivated audiences for the past three nights, breathing new life into the famous story about Ebenezer Scrooge.

Those familiar with the tale will be aware that Scrooge is particularly mean to his employee Bob Cratchit which has a knock-on effect on his family. The Cratchit's are here again but in this new version, they have been reimagined as a mixed-race family with the role of Mary Cratchit being played by actor Vinette Robinson.

Unfortunately, as it seems to be with almost anything that is slightly progressive these days, there was a lot of negativity to this new portrayal of the family and, yes, it came from Twitter.

Now, we really don't need to go into the fact that the Cratchit'shave previously been played by a family of frogs and pigs in the past butRobinson had the perfect response to the accusations of 'political correctness.'

On Twitter, Robinson shared a thread from the very informative account 'Whores of Yore' which gave a very detailed breakdown of the many mixed-race couples that would have existed in the time of Dickens' novel and why the latest adaptation of the novel was factually accurate.

For those interested, here is the fascinating and educational thread in full.

Whores of Yore also responded to Robinson and shared a link to a book about mixed-race relationships in the 19th century which most people should probably read.

See the rest here:

A Christmas Carol star has perfect response to people who said that mixed-race couples didn't exist in the 19th century - indy100

All the reasons Arsenal fans are entitled to expect better… – Football365.com

Surely youve all had enough of your families by now. Talk to us instead: theeditor@football365.com

Arsenal expectationAs JN picked out Arsenal fans in particular, let me give you some reasons why expectations are as they are:-

we were promised a title challenging side when we moved stadiums after some short term pain (this was 13 years ago BTW) our CEO at the time compared us to Bayern Munich in terms of the size of club we are constant statements by management and owners that they have ambitions to win the league and challenge in the CL (stop laughing) we have the highest ticket prices in the country we have had a pretty sustained period of success from the appointment of George Graham in 1986 until the last decade so comparison to the 1970s are a bit of a misnomer we are the 3rd most successful side in English football league history

So yeah, I think those facts speak for themselves as to why the fan base expects a competitive sideTom (sorry I cant adjust my expectations to a mid table side) London

Patience will pay* Ill start with an anecdote from the late Burt Reynolds about an audition he and a colleague* failed at, They were given the reasons they didnt get the part as they were leaving, he turned to the guy and said you are in big trouble my friend , I can learn to act ,you will never get rid of that huge Adams apple.

* Im writing this before the Newcastle game and that anecdote will ring true either way this current group is going to be inconsistent as hell if the result today is a win loss or draw analyse what went right and what went right and shave faith that the current management will be able to fix it.

* Klopp deserves all the respect in the world ,but claiming that OGS has to get 51 points out of the next 60 is ridiculous , the circumstances in each case are different in terms of squad strength ,The upturn in fortunes arrived as much because of the new manager The main reason Utd cannot open teams up is there is no one to unlock those teams a situation every coach since Moyes allowed to fester.

There is finally a clear plan ( Build a young team augment it with players you need and eliminate those who arent good enough ) which is why the architect of that plan should be encouraged to succeed not because he is the reason for some our greatest memories of the late 90s football.* I disagree with Allens position on Utd not promoting failing youth, Chong and Gomes have not taken their chances in the games they have played Greenwood and Williams have and are integrating into the team. Those two have played comfortably more than Rojo, Jones, Matic or Mata.

Ole has handed out more debuts in this one year than every manager since Ferguson . Gomes and Chong have been too good for the 2-23s but amongst the worst players in the Euro/Carabao matches . They are also demanding pay rises to sign what are already improved contracts who has failed who ?

* We could go the saferoute and get f365 and the medias Argie crush but Im not quite in the mood to take advice from the same people who said we must get Maguire when they knew his deficiencies, and now look at us and tell us he is a bit meh.Thats been going on for too long a cheque book manager should also not be a priority, get someone who can work with the team that is emerging and choose who the weak links are and continue to fine tune it ,

* Recruiting properly is right now Utd best chance of catching up especially as most of the core of Liverpool team as a group reaches 30 next season

* Colleague turned out to be Clint Eastwood so he didnt do too badly eitherRoode, MUFC

Were all the samein reference to Wiks message about technological superior races and coffee coloured people. There are no races, no technological advance race, no coffee coloured or any other coloured race. All humans belong to the human race and have black ancestors. Racism will not die out any time soon as education is not enough. There are plenty of people in the world who only believe what they want to believe regardless how established the evidence to the contrary is. Even in supposedly well educated and advance countries there are flat earthers, anti-vaxers and people who believe eating broccoli will cure cancer. Ultimately people have such over inflated views of their own intelligence that they will believe anything if they think it will benefit them or make them superior.Marc LFC.

Going deeperI think the problem with the racist abuse in stadiums at the moment is actually a symptom of a much larger problem; forgetting that footballers are humans,

I imagine the fame, success, and wealth of footballers triggers in many people a type of reverence that elevates them to a position of post-human, a type of superhuman that is different to your average person, but theyre not. These are people who will experience devastating life tragedies, live with the demons of their youth, and are plagued with the same types of insecurities and fears of what lies around the corner just like anyone else.Research in psychology shows that our life circumstances only account for around 10% of our happiness, so all their wealth and success means very little in that regard. In a lot of cases as well, were talking about men who moved away from their families at 12 years of age think of the trauma in that alone.

The stadium owners are guilty too. There is a twisted morality at work when an organisation is tolerant of their employees receiving the level of abuse that footballers are subjected to within their premises. The FA and the premier league provide the structure these systems function within, and are guilty as well.

Im not cynical, but stamping out racism wont do much. Next it will be homophobia, then xenophobia, then religious discrimination, so on so forth, until the real issue is tackled. People see these guys on the television, driving to training in their bentleys, and think that makes them different to them, but it doesnt. Its a consequence of our materialist society that weve mistaken these decorations for the substance of life, and consequently miss that the uniting qualities beneath the surface between people are the same. Life is hard, A real superhuman is someone who makes it easier for others.Anonymous

Sectarianism in ScotlandHaving watched the Spurs v Chelsea match and like everyone being appalled i have to commend Gary Neville. Whilst he admitted he didnt do enough as a player he was brave enough to call out the authorities in England namely the PFA for their total lack of effort in dealing with unacceptable issues at matches.I know hes now apologised but Dave Jones certainly handled it badly albeit the voice in his ear left him sadly with little choice.Here in Scotland there are still a handful of teams fans who subject sectarian bile . My own team Rangers has a section of fans who being the Protestant team like to sing about 1690- William of Orangethe Billy Boys etc despite having sections of the ground closed by UEFA for European ties.Across the city Celtics Green brigade often have anti poppy banners and enjoy singing IRA songs despite numerous fines by UEFA.Through in Edinburgh it happens albeit to a lesser extent between Hearts and Hibs. These problems are certainly up here due to society and for some their cultural upbringing.I sadly cant see it changing here for some time yet. At least you dont have those issues down south.And have to agree with Kevin. The Edinburgh derby is the European match to watch! Although as he said it wont be pretty.Merry Christmas everyone. Personally wasnt sure id be here for this Xmas after getting ill this year so i hope everyone enjoys the fixtures on Boxing Day.And big thanks to F365. You guys run the best online site and its appreciated!BestNeil, Glasgow

Pogba and Maguire dont compareJust want to point out that Pogba has been at Man United for a three years and have accumulated a lot of baggage during that time. In addition, he had been with them before and didnt leave under the best of circumstances (including a falling out with SAF).

By contrast Mr Most Expensive Defender has been there for 4 months, very much still in his honeymoon period and is still very much an improvement over what came before. Even then Maguire has had his criticism too, especially due to his price tag and being compared to VVD.

Im not disputing your overall point necessarily, I just dont think this is a good example of it.Yaru,Malaysia

View post:

All the reasons Arsenal fans are entitled to expect better... - Football365.com

Moses Sumney Cries In Front Of The Camera In New Music Video for Polly – mxdwn.com

Aaron Grech December 23rd, 2019 - 10:04 PM

Performer Moses Sumney has debuted a raw new song and accompanying music video titled Polly, the closing track from the first part of his upcoming albumgr, which will be released in two parts viaJagjaguwar Records. The first partwill be released digitally in February of 2020, while part two, along with the physical album in its entirety, are set to be released on May 15th.

Polly, features a still shot of Sumney in front of the camera, as he begins to bare his emotions, breakdown and cry as the songs lyrics are shown. The song features a simple instrumental with only an acoustic guitar, and Sumneys somber voice carrying the emotional track.

Pollys about wishing you had a few more arms than you do, Sumney stated in a press release regarding the recent song. As opposed to the experimental and grandiose instrumentation on his previous single Virile, this new track is heavily stripped down. Regarding Virile, Sumney explained:In a post-human world, the last remaining man is caught between beauty and brutalitys battle to dominate the earth and his body.

gr follows Sumneys acclaimed debut albumAromanticismand his subsequent EPBlack In Deep Red, 2014,the latter of which was released last year. The performer was also featured on James Blakes latest album releaseAssume Form, which also held features from Andree 3000 and Travis Scott. This latest album project was recorded in Sumneys newest home inAsheville, North Carolina, following his previous stint in Los Angeles, California.

Photo Credit: Sharon Alagna

Go here to read the rest:

Moses Sumney Cries In Front Of The Camera In New Music Video for Polly - mxdwn.com

‘After Nature’: a show discovering the post natural world – Daily Sabah

Vision Art Platform, a newly established art platform in Istanbul's Maslak neighborhood, is currently hosting "After Nature," a group exhibition by Gkhan Balkan and Berkay Budan.

Speaking to Daily Sabah, the platform's founder Hayrunnisa Tayar elaborated on the gallery and its recent show. Tayar said she decided to deal with arts as a job when she realized art's relationship with reality and life. She thinks that art isn't something discovered in later periods, instead, it is what life brings with itself to us.

Tayar's platform aims to bring together audiences of all generations and different roots under the roof of art through workshops, artist talks, performances and experience-based activities open to interaction along with exhibits. "Combining the dynamism of modern urban life with street art, pop art, interdisciplinary experiences and the creative face of contemporary art and also establishing an understandable and accessible bridge to art is the essence of the difference that the Vision Art Platform creates," she said.

"After Nature" is the premiere of Vision Art Platform's art and event program, which aims to connect and interact with the viewers who are into art as well as with those who have no close contact with art in their daily lives. In the exhibition, Gkhan Balkan rejects the principle of a human-centered universe in the development potential of techno-evolution, which he calls "the third nature" and opens the door to new kinds of existences. While Berkay Budan treats the aftermath of nature as a process of decay, of submission to chaos, that is - entropy. The artworks that emerge as a result of these approaches produce an uncanny duet about the state of unity of contrast and uncertainty.

With the works of Balkan and Budan, Tayar noted that they observed both similarities and differences in the two artists' productions, which were highly impressive, and decided to open a show with them. Curated by Rafet Arslan, the exhibit will run until Jan. 20, 2020.

No victory after nature

The story of human civilization's intervention and transformation of nature is a reflection of its process of becoming the subjects of the planet. As human beings produced tools and attempted to build cities, their struggle and relationship with nature produced uncertainty and chaos that transcended their imagination through technological and industrial revolutions.

As humanity moved from Immanuel Kant's evaluation of "the second nature" created by human power to the discussions of the "Anthropocene" age, the ecological and sociological dimensions of human's effect on nature, which touched on daily life, has also been brought into question. The human species' destruction of the planetary ecosystem, the declining natural resources, growing social unrest and the wars that they triggered started to be discussed.

Today, we have reached the final stages of human civilization's struggle against nature while fulfilling its own goals and ambitions. We should also realize that there is no victorious future for man on the horizon in the world after nature.

Artist Gkhan Balkan takes the concept of second nature produced by man one step further and creates his own image through a wide delta of thoughts covering post-human futures such as artificial intelligence (AI), nanotechnology and robot evolution while painting the loss of nature and reality through the nature fiction of the architectural and the artificial. In the exhibition "After Nature," the artist reveals a competent image in which he seeks the plastic language and forms of the future.

Berkay Budan, on the other hand, presents pure and untouched natural landscapes, which occupy an important part of the art of painting, with his new productions on metal plates over the uncertain and destruction-prone image of the age in which he lives. While the artist builds romantic extensions on the apocalyptic image of industrial society suggesting the absence of nature in the landscapes he reveals, he continues his unique image on the landscape through the figure in his sculptural works.

Similar concerns have been observed in the works of both artists with their innovative pursuits in material selection and experimentality in their aesthetic applications. However, both artists' perspectives on the post-natural world have developed with very different dynamics. Speaking to Daily Sabah, curator of the exhibition, Aslan said: "To put the two artists who produce different concerns into a duet, to look after what is visible; creating harmony with appearances that looks like oppositely was the main challenge of this exhibition."

"The exhibition is a new suggestion about our fictions on what is known and seen and a puzzle about our perception of general perceptions. In this sense, putting the works by the two artists in different times and series together in a new context is, above all, creating a space for new questions," he said.

Continued here:

'After Nature': a show discovering the post natural world - Daily Sabah

Misinformation, hacking, and imploding startups: 18 books to read in 2020 that puncture Silicon Valley utopianism – Business Insider

sourceAmazon

For your everyday tweeting, Uber Eating, back-to-back meeting tech bro, the idea that rapid technological change could have its downsides is an inconvenient truth.

Thats why weve rounded up 18 books puncturing Silicon Valley utopianism. From the rise of Big Data to the fall of Theranos, these authors delve into the tech fairy tales weve been sold and uncover the underlying truth.

Arm yourself with the tools to take on Big Tech from this bestselling list of tech experts.

Mike Isaac, the award-winning New York Times technology reporter, digs deep into the history of Uber, the worlds best known -and most controversial -ride-hailing firm.

Praised for laying out the companys many woes without making a caricature of the companys eccentric ex-CEO Travis Kalanick, Isaac offers the essential guide to understanding how Uber became what it is today.

As the company continues to face down controversy around the world, this book puts the pedal to the metal in a way nothing else has before.

Find it here

Richard Seymours dark polemic on the digital age might be the most sobering on this list.

Hardly a day goes by without the President of the United States firing vitriol at his enemies via social media, as Seymour observes in what he assures his readers is a horror story come to life.

Seymour dedicates his book to the Luddites those that smashed machinery apart during the industrial revolution with his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Reading it might just make you want to do the same.

Find it here

In Emily Changs shocking foray into the exploits of some of the worlds most unsavoury tech bros, drug-fuelled sex parties are the norm in the suburbs of Silicon Valley.

Rejected as salacious nonsense by Elon Musk who is himself alleged to have attended one such party Changs work exposes the Valleys notoriously male-dominated and sexist culture.

In the final chapter, Chang reveals: Writing this book has been like going on a trek through a minefield, with fresh mines being laid as I walked.

Dont miss it.

Find it here

Read the inside story of the startup that continues to make headlines around the world.

After founding Theranos, a healthtech company which claimed to have revolutionary blood-testing capabilities, Elizabeth Holmes set a series of calamitous events in motion.

John Carreyrou received universal acclaim for his forensic analysis, seeking sources from top to bottom within Theranos, the sham company that drew massive investments from the likes of Rupert Murdoch and Carlos Slim.

While it remains to be seen what will become of Holmes, Carreyrous hard-hitting investigation is now set for a Hollywood adaptation, directed by The Big Shorts Adam McKay and starring Jennifer Lawrence.

Find it here

Invisible Women exposes what author Criado Perez dubs the one-size-fits-men bias in design and technology, highlighting the endless number of mismatches in everyday life, from fitness monitors to items of clothing to car safety.

The winner of the Financial Times Best Business Book of 2019, Invisible Women is a compelling insight into the dangers of treating male bodies as the default in policymaking.

Find it here

Financial Times journalist Rana Foroohars deep-dive critique of the internets pioneers takes a forensic look at the biggest companies dominating our lives, including: Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix and Uber.

In examining each case study, Foroohar unpicks how the tech giants slowly but surely started to betray their founding principles, from Googles old mantra Dont be evil to Mark Zuckerbergs vision of creating communities around the world.

Like with so many on our list, Dont Be Evil might leave you feeling a little more nervous about the world we live in, but a lot more informed.

Find it here

Jamie Susskind confronts some of the most important questions of our time, effortlessly mapping his knowledge of political theory onto the latest developments from Silicon Valley, revealing a host of ethical quandaries and impracticalities.

Susskind doesnt hone in on any particular companies, instead abstracting their capabilities and what they might mean for all of us in our everyday lives or, as he calls it, the digital lifeworld.

For all its grand implications, Future Politics is an accessible read, peppered with self-deprecating humour and pop cultural references throughout, and will make you only more curious about the road ahead.

Find it here

Shoshana Zuboff, a professor of social psychology at Harvard Business School, has been using the term surveillance capitalism to describe the economic model of Big Tech since at least 2014, around five years before publishing this weighty tome.

She offers the reader a shocking insight into the business model that underpins the digital world, detailing in razor-sharp detail how the likes of Facebook and Google are using our data to advance their interests.

Zuboff effortlessly infuses what we already know with her trademark academic analysis, allowing us to grasp the big picture. The landmark book is a follow-up of sorts to her previous work, 1988s The Age of the Smart Machine, which was likewise considered definitive in its field.

Find it here

Automating Inequality is an unsettling insight into the world of robotic decision-making, exploring how algorithms are already being used to make decisions about who should be paid, who should be surveilled and in some cases who should be born.

Eubanks, a professor of womens studies at the University of Albany, paints a compelling picture of inequality at large, intensified by the distancing of human beings from human affairs.

The unfiltered impact of new technology on issues like race, class and gender exemplifies how machines have yet to learn how to make decisions the way humans do.

Find it here

Jamie Bartletts manifesto for technological resistance, longlisted for the Orwell Prize, offers a comprehensive overview of the threats posed by the Internet to our very way of life.

Most recently heard hunting down the Missing Cryptoqueen for the BBC, Bartlett offers a sobering guide to the ways in which both individuals and institutions can stop Big Tech from taking over our culture, elections, economy and more.

Bartlett works at think-tank Demos, and previously presented a two-part BBC documentary series called The Secrets of Silicon Valley.

Find it here

While technically more a series of sociological experiments than tech expos, Bloodworths book dramatically reveals the everyday reality of those working in the UKs tech-driven gig economy.

Whether stacking shelves in an Amazon warehouse or seeking passengers as an Uber driver, Bloodworth steps into the lives of those doing Big Techs heavy lifting without seeing much of the reward.

Selected as The Times current affairs book of 2018 and longlisted for the Orwell Prize, Hired is an in-depth study of the conditions imposed on those benefiting least from the technological revolution.

Find it here

Christopher Wiley, the Cambridge Analytica whistleblower, lifts the lid on his time at the now-infamous political consultancy.

Revelations abound about the companys working culture, including the behaviour of former CEO Alexander Nix, while Wiley reveals bit by bit the kind of power he wielded while rifling through individuals personal data.

While the true impact of Cambridge Analyticas work in the US, UK and elsewhere around the world continues to be argued, Wileys insight gives you the best chance yet of making that assessment for yourself.

Find it here

Algorithms are everywhere, organising the unfathomably large quantities of data produced by each of us every day.

In We Are Data, John Cheney-Lippold spells out what the implications might be for our algorithmic identities in the digital age, and how they underpin everything from architecture to accountancy.

A professor of digital studies at the University of Michigan, Cheney-Lippold implores his readers to try to fully grasp the problems that lie ahead, so that we might have the best chance of reaching a solution.

Find it here

Stuart Russell already has one of the best-known books on artificial intelligence to his name, having authored Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach in 1995 with co-writer Peter Norvig.

Now, Russell returns to the question and doesnt hold anything back.

The University of California professor outlines the darker consequences of pushing the frontiers in artificial intelligence or, as he calls it, the most important question facing humanity.

Find it here

Writing with the pace of a thriller novel, Andy Greenberg tells the story of Russias infamous hacking group of the title.

Sandworm is the must-read guide to state-sponsored hacking, described by the LA Times as a comprehensive look at the technical, military and political stories of this new hidden war.

Find it here

With his 2018 book, journalist Corey Pein set out to learn how such an overhyped industry as tech could sustain itself as long as it has.

He slowly works the crowds at conferences, pitches his wacky ideas to investors and interviews a cast of ridiculous characters: cyborgs, tech bros, hackers and obedient employees all feature.

LWWWD is an incisive portrait of a self-obsessed industry hellbent on succeeding by whatever means necessary.

Find it here

Martin Moore has some big questions for Big Tech, breaking his book into three overarching themes: hackers, systems failure, and alternative futures.

From the rise of alt-right media outlets like Breitbart, through to the rise of what he dubs surveillance democracies, Moore maps a path from old Soviet disinformation campaigns through to those alleged to have played a part in the 2016 US Election.

A seriously engaging work that should be read by anyone curious about the impact of new technology on national security.

Find it here

One of the most unsettling and illuminating books about the internet ever written, so says the New York Times, New Dark Age reveals the dark clouds gathering over our dreams of a digital utopia.

Looking at the ways machines have already began besting their human competitors, such as the AI that defeated chess Grandmaster Garry Kasparov, Bridle suggests a new path forward: centaur chess, a kind of team-up between humans partnered with computers.

The implications for a post- or transhuman world are to say the least mind-blowing.

Find it here

Go here to see the original:

Misinformation, hacking, and imploding startups: 18 books to read in 2020 that puncture Silicon Valley utopianism - Business Insider

WISeKey to Hold its 13th Annual Cybersecurity IoT Blockchain Roundtable in Davos on January 22, 2020 – GlobeNewswire

WISeKey to Hold its 13th Annual Cybersecurity IoT Bloackchain Roundtable in Davos on January 22, 2020

Geneva December 23, 2019- WISeKey International Holding Ltd ("WISeKey", SIX: WIHN, NASDAQ: WKEY), a leading global cybersecurity and IoT company, today announces that it will hold its 13th Annual Cybersecurity Roundtable in Davos on January 22, 2020 (starting at 6:00pm CET), at the Piano Bar of Hotel Europe (Promenade 63, 7270, Davos Platz, Switzerland).

This closed-door event will take place during the upcoming World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos. For more information and registration details visit https://www.wisekey.com/davos/.

Agenda for the 2020 Cybersecurity Roundtable includes the following events:

Cybersecurity Tech AccordAs a core signatory of the Cybersecurity Tech Accord, this networking reception hosted by WISeKey and the Cybersecurity Tech Accord will include a panel conversation focused on the role cybersecurity plays in ensuring the trust in our digital economy, and how the technology industry can work together to further improve the security of our online ecosystem. It will particularly look at the role of technology can play in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, with a special focus promoting peace, justice, and strong institutions.

The Cybersecurity Tech Accord is a public commitment among now more than 130 global technology companies to protect and empower civilians online and to improve the security, stability and resilience of cyberspace. Since forming the Cybersecurity Tech Accord, signatories have supported initiatives on email and routing security, implemented Domain-based Message Authentication, Reporting and Conformance (DMARC) in their own operations, participated in global requests for comments on the UNs new High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation, and endorsed the Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace as an early supporter. Additionally, the group has coordinated with like-minded organizations such as the Global Cyber Alliance, the Internet Society, and the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFCE).

2020 Blockchain Outstanding AwardsChina Blockchain Application Center will present the "2020 Blockchain Outstanding Awards" to companies and individuals who have made great impacts globally to the development of Blockchain industry in the past year.

TransHuman Code for a Sustainable Era RoundtableFollowing the Tech Accord panel discussion, WISeKey will hold its 3rd Annual "TransHuman Code Meeting of Minds Roundtable." This year the roundtable will have special focus on Human Sustainability using Deeptech technologies. The TransHumanCode Platform coupled with AI agents, data mining, machine learning, and natural language search, will comprise the latest Deeptech revolutionary technologies. They comprised of AR/VR, IoT wearables like smart glasses, autonomous sensors, and decentralized computing with blockchain. This decentralized computing will provide greater security and data authentication, speeding everything up. Adding advanced integrations, the TransHumanCode platform secured by WISeKey will seamlessly work with physical environment. It will overlay everything including conversations, roads, conference room, and classrooms with AI-powered interaction and intuitive information.

In the TransHumanCode era, every physical element of every building in the actual world will be fully digitized. There will be virtual avatars for each human being and one can roam in virtual work or meeting places. This means that every piece of information around the world will become human centric.

The final version of the "transHuman Code" book bestseller will be distributed and an insightful interactive conversation will start on the precarious balancing act between technology and humanity in the application of AI, blockchain, cybersecurity, IoT, and robotics to education, employment, communication, transportation, communities, security, government, food, finance, entertainment and health.

We truly look forward to welcoming you. Historically, this event has been quickly oversubscribed. To avoid disappointment, please CLICK HERE to book your place now.

About WISeKey

WISeKey (NASDAQ: WKEY; SIX Swiss Exchange: WIHN) is a leading global cybersecurity company currently deploying large scale digital identity ecosystems for people and objects using Blockchain, AI and IoT respecting the Human as the Fulcrum of the Internet. WISeKey Microprocessors Secures the pervasive computing shaping todays Internet of Everything. WISeKey IoT has an install base of over 1.5 billion microchips in virtually all IoT sectors (connected cars, smart cities, drones, agricultural sensors, anti-counterfeiting, smart lighting, servers, computers, mobile phones, crypto tokens etc.). WISeKey is uniquely positioned to be at the edge of IoT as our semiconductors produce a huge amount of Big Data that, when analyzed with Artificial Intelligence (AI), can help industrial applications to predict the failure of their equipment before it happens.

Our technology is Trusted by the OISTE/WISeKeys Swiss based cryptographic Root of Trust (RoT) provides secure authentication and identification, in both physical and virtual environments, for the Internet of Things, Blockchain and Artificial Intelligence. The WISeKey RoT serves as a common trust anchor to ensure the integrity of online transactions among objects and between objects and people. For more information, visit http://www.wisekey.com.

Press and investor contacts:

Disclaimer:This communication expressly or implicitly contains certain forward-looking statements concerning WISeKey International Holding Ltd and its business. Such statements involve certain known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which could cause the actual results, financial condition, performance or achievements of WISeKey International Holding Ltd to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. WISeKey International Holding Ltd is providing this communication as of this date and does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements contained herein as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

This press release does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any securities, and it does not constitute an offering prospectus within the meaning of article 652a or article 1156 of the Swiss Code of Obligations or a listing prospectus within the meaning of the listing rules of the SIX Swiss Exchange. Investors must rely on their own evaluation of WISeKey and its securities, including the merits and risks involved. Nothing contained herein is, or shall be relied on as, a promise or representation as to the future performance of WISeKey.

Read the original post:

WISeKey to Hold its 13th Annual Cybersecurity IoT Blockchain Roundtable in Davos on January 22, 2020 - GlobeNewswire

How I Learned to Love Free Speech – The Good Men Project

When I was in high school, my boyfriend was black. His father was a Baptist pastor at a local church and worked as a park ranger at Valley Forge National Park. Mr. Jones* was a kind but tough man, who wouldnt let you get away with anything. I was intimidated by him, especially as someone who had actively renounced the church, but I also deeply respected him.

One fall, we got word that the KKK would be hosting a rally at Valley Forge. Valley Forge is a sprawling park of grass and forests filled with history, deer, and monuments to the founding of the United States. In the winter of 177778 George Washingtons rebel army camped out Valley Forge, awaiting attack from the British occupying Philadelphia across the river. Hundreds of soldiers died that winter in Valley Forge, but when the rebel army left the encampment in June of 1778, they were stronger and more prepared than when they entered. The rebels defeated the British under Lord Cornwallis at the Battle of Monmouth, and went on to win the fight for American independence.

Two-hundred and thirty years later, the Ku Klux Klan was using this very land to promote their hatred and Mr. Jones, a black man who they would rather see dead, was in charge of providing their protection detail. I was appalled. I asked Mr. Jones, How can you protect them when they want to kill you?

Mr. Jones was quiet for a minute and thought. Then he replied, Because this is what Washingtons men died here for.

Freedom of speech is a uniquely American concept. Even other European countries with whom we are closely allied lack the same protections that our First Amendment provides us. For many on the left, this fundamental freedom often brushes up against our desire to protect the most vulnerable among us. The desire to shut down speech we disagree with feels justified when the speech is hateful and only causes harm.

I asked Mr. Jones why he didnt ask to switch shifts with someone that day so he didnt have to protect the Klan. He told me that he wanted to be there, he wanted Klansmen to see him, a black man, defending their rights. He had specifically asked to be on their detail.

The First Amendment protects us from retaliation from the government for our speech, this is why the KKK was able to host a rally in the National Park because it is government land and the government can not discriminate based on the content of your speech. Today, most speech does not happen in government-controlled forums, though. Most speech happens in forums controlled by corporations, who do not have the same First Amendment requirements.

Its probably a good thing that companies can make their own decisions about what speech to allow or not. Forcing a platform to host content they disagree with and would rather not host is a form of compelled speech in and of itself. However, some companies are so big as to function essentially as public forums. Yet, they are still able to choose which speech to allow or not based solely on the content. Twitter, Facebook, and Google, for example, are spaces where the general public congregates for discussion, yet certain viewpoints are systemically discriminated against. Most of the time, I disagree with the views that are being silenced and am glad to see them gone. But what happens when your views fall out of public favor?

When I was heavily involved in animal rights, I participated in illegal speech. Despite the First Amendment, animal agriculture corporate lobbyists have succeeded in making certain speech illegal. In many states, these Ag-Gag laws have not been struck down as unconstitutional. My goal was to dismantle the entire animal agriculture industry one of the most powerful industries on the planet and to create a world of total animal liberation. I knew then how important free speech was. While my friends and comrades were being thrown in jail for their activism, it was not hard to imagine a future where all speech calling for animal liberation was banned on Twitter for Facebook after all, these companies make major ad revenue from the animal agriculture industry.

Ten years after that KKK rally in valley forge, I was starting to really understand Mr. Jones lesson. If I wanted free speech for myself and my activism, I needed to support free speech for all. People were already calling my organization terrorists, violent, and hateful for trying to liberate animals. What if they started saying animal liberation was hate speech? What if the government didnt let us hold rallies and protests? What if Twitter was able to prevent us from getting our message out? How would we ever save those billions of innocent lives?

A few years later, and I find myself in this exact position. Defending womens rights is now seen as hate speech on major platforms like Twitter and Facebook. Women are being silenced, banned, and de-platformed for defending their rights. In countries where there is less freedom of speech, cops are knocking on the doors of feminists. There are relatively few online spaces where people are allowed to express dissent any more, as major corporations keep a tight leash on public discourse. While treating public forums like Twitter and Facebook as such and requiring them to become a nationalized utility would go a long way to creating spaces for free speech, this is unlikely to happen. Creating privately-controlled places which allow dissent and unpopular opinions, in the spirit of free speech, will become more and more vital to maintaining anything resembling a free nation.

Speech that is pushing up against corporate interests and the status quo needs to be protected no matter what side it is coming from.

Washingtons soldiers did not freeze and starve to death in Valley Forge so that corporations could control our speech. Mr. Jones knew that protecting the rights of the KKK on that September afternoon meant protecting the rights of all Americans, including activists like myself. Now, as I find myself defending the values of free speech to well-meaning progressives, Ive been thinking a lot about Mr. Jones. I think he would be proud.

*Name changed

A version of this post was previously published on Medium and is republished here with permission from the author.

All Premium Members get to view The Good Men Project with NO ADS.

Need more info? A complete list of benefits is here.

Photo credit: istockphoto

View original post here:

How I Learned to Love Free Speech - The Good Men Project

2019 was the year ‘cancel culture’ took on a gorgeously messy life of its own – Mashable

To celebrate reaching the end of this year, we asked our reporters to look back on 2019 and pick one thing they thought stood out from the rest of the cultural chaos and cursed images. You can find the complete selection of our choices here.

2019 was the year "cancel culture" lost all meaning.

Though the various scandals this year influencer drama, blatant racism, botched makeup launches ended in countless Notes App apologies and comment sections filled with fancams, few had lasting consequences. Sure, 2019 gifted us with plenty of public outrage, but in the end it's the cancel culture discourse that's more memorable than any canceling itself.

The word "cancel" has been been around since late Middle English, but but became a call to stop supporting public figures as the #MeToo movement started gaining traction. Merriam-Webster credits black Twitter users with creating and popularizing the word's new meaning, defining someone cancel-worthy when the person in question expresses an "objectionable opinion" or has "conducted themselves in a way that is unacceptable." To continue supporting them, Merriam-Webster wrote in a "Words We're Watching" post this July, "leaves a bitter taste."

Canceling someone goes beyond public shaming at its core, the act of canceling is an attempt to take away someone's power and influence.

While earnest, canceling rarely has real world consequences, and the action of canceling tends to be a bit performative. The phrase "cancel culture" the internet-wide affinity for declaring an individual problematic has been likened to a digital witch hunt.

Ronan Farrow, the journalist who helped expose Harvey Weinstein for abusing his influence to assault women in the film industry, dismissed cancel culture as "by and large quite silly." During the Obama Foundation summit, President Barack Obama called out call out culture, calling it "not activism." When comedian Shane Gillis was fired from Saturday Night Live after a video of him using racial and homophobic slurs emerged, presidential candidate Andrew Yang denounced his canceling as life altering.

Searches for the phrase "cancel culture" surged in 2019, Google Trends shows. They rose in May, when YouTubers James Charles and Tati Westbrook publicly ended their friendship over a brand deal, and again when the video of Gillis resurfaced. And then they skyrocketed when Obama came out with his unfortunate boomer take on cancel culture.

The notion of canceling is so pervasive, that when the House of Representatives impeached Donald Trump in a historic vote, Twitter users joked he'd been canceled.

"Cancel culture" was this year's Macquarie Dictionary's Word of the Year. Last week, Los Angeles comedian Zach Broussard amended his annual Top 1000 Comedians of the Year with an option to "cancel" anyone on the list in an effort to make it "100 percent creep free, asshole free, and weirdo free."

As Andrew Yang told The Hill "Cancel culture has really become sort of a source of fear for many Americans where we live in a culture that you are somehow afraid that if you say the wrong thing that your life could be changed forever." He added, "To me, it's vital that we humanize each other. We humanize the consequences of some of these impulses not just in terms of who hears the expression but who is losing a livelihood as a result."

Yang has a point: Many are afraid of saying the wrong thing. But shouldn't we all be more aware of our words, given the increasingly public nature of the internet? Public figures might as well save themselves the headache and watch their mouths.

Critics of "cancel culture" claim to defend free speech comedian Dave Chapelle claimed the First Amendment is a "first for a reason" while accepting the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor. It's ironic, since nobody is stopping public figures from saying and doing anything problematic, but at the same time, freedom of speech doesn't guarantee freedom from backlash. As the Washington Post wrote earlier this year, cancel culture is democracy at its finest. Yes, the First Amendment protects your right to be a dumbass, but it also protects the right of others to call you a dumbass.

Whether cancel culture really works is debatable Gillis didn't get the SNL gig, but he's still performing. James Charles lost a few million subscribers but has regained them since the feud. Lizzo, who was lightly canceled for including a Postmates employee's first name and last initial in a complaint on Twitter, was awarded Time's Entertainer of the Year. "Strange Planet" comic creator Nathan Pyle was entangled in a canceling for being pro-life but his book still has rave reviews. Tana Mongeau, the YouTuber who planned an anti-VidCon that ended in Fyre Fest-levels of disaster, was invited to VidCon as a Featured Creator and won the Streamy Creator of the Year award this year.

The parameters for what's cancel-worthy remain fuzzy, which is what makes cancel culture both so hard to define and so persistently controversial.

The example that perhaps sums it all up best is that all 1,000 comedians on Broussard's list were canceled just two hours after the list went live. All 2,000 comedians slated to take their spots in the event of any cancellations were canceled, too. Broussard ended up adding the option to uncancel anyone on the list who had been previously canceled. The list is dynamic, constantly fluctuating between adding comics to the canceled list and then putting them back on the original list when they've been uncanceled.

Getting canceled, uncanceled, and then canceled again is really the most fitting way to close out this decade. 2019 was the year cancel culture took on a gorgeously messy life of its own.

Link:

2019 was the year 'cancel culture' took on a gorgeously messy life of its own - Mashable

Rugby League: Toronto Wolfpack say Sonny Bill Williams has ‘right to freedom of speech’ after Uighur tweet – Newshub

Up to two million Uighurs have been rounded up en masse in the past two years and put in detention camps in the northwestern region of Xinjiang for crimes as minor as teaching Islam or downloading messaging apps.

Many have detailed torture and brainwashing in the camps, with recent reports saying mass rape is being committed against Uighur women.

But the Toronto Wolfpack, who Williams has signed with for the 2020 season, said in a statement the team doesn't take a political stance.

"While the Toronto Wolfpack will never take a stance on political issues, our players will always have a right to freedom of speech," the spokesperson said.

In his tweet on Monday, Williams echoed Arsenal playmaker Ozil - also a practising Muslim - that more countries should speak out against China's policy of detaining Uighurs in re-education camps.

"It's a sad time when we choose economic benefits over humanity #Uyghurs," Williams wrote, accompanied by an image illustrating oppression against the Muslim minority group.

Read more:

Rugby League: Toronto Wolfpack say Sonny Bill Williams has 'right to freedom of speech' after Uighur tweet - Newshub

From the Age of Persuasion to the Age of Offense – lareviewofbooks

DECEMBER 23, 2019

WHEN IT COMES to chroniclers of the United Statess political decline, readers today are spoiled for choice. But none brings quite the same background to the job as does David Bromwich, in whose bibliography early titles like A Choice of Inheritance: Self and Community from Edmund Burke to Robert Frost (1989) and Hazlitt: The Mind of a Critic (1983) have given way to, most recently, American Breakdown: The Trump Years and How They Befell Us (2019). An eminent scholar of, among other things, 18th-century poetry, criticism, and philosophy, Bromwich has in recent years turned up every few months in left-leaning publications like The New York Review of Books and the London Review of Books to offer commentary on American politics. That he takes a dim view of Donald Trump is no surprise, but his view of the intellectual fashions of the left so volubly opposed to Trump is even dimmer, and more incisive for it.

American Breakdown, Bromwichs second book this year, closely follows How Words Make Things Happen, an infinitely less topical-sounding text that would seem to belong more to the roster of Bromwich the distinguished English professor than Bromwich the political commentator. But it does clarify that the author looks upon politician and poet alike with the same critical eye or rather, that he listens with the same critical ear. That goes for the political speechwriters as well. He was the first man of the right to leaven his moralism with jokes, Bromwich writes in a damning piece published shortly after the death of William Safire and later collected in the volume Moral Imagination (2014). With fun and pace, with plenty of euphemisms, and with calculated self-depreciation, he did more than anyone else to legitimate a reactionary president, Ronald Reagan, as a new kind of centrist.

One might expect a man of the left to condemn a figure who connects the political style of McCarthy with that of Rush Limbaugh. But Bromwich doesnt go easy either on the likes of Barack Obama, who, as he summed up in a 2014 LRB piece, watches the world as its most important spectator. The headline of an earlier essay in that same publication delivers a plainer assessment: A Bad President. What sets Bromwich off about both Safire and Obama is their abuse of language, and not the kind of syntactical misfires on which critics of George W. Bush fixated, and critics of Trump now fixate, with such righteous glee. In Bromwichs view, Safire used words to stoke the flames of the Vietnam War, and later to press forward the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Obama used words first to make promises closing Guantanamo Bay, restraining domestic surveillance and then to retroactively convince his supporters of the obvious impossibility of keeping those promises.

Acts such as ordering drone strikes bother Bromwich at least as much as they bother Obamas other critics on the left, but those other critics have seldom looked past Obamas famously soaring eloquence to the emptiness of his words. Bromwich indicts Obama as well as other members of his party for failing to sell their cause to the American public with speech equal to the task, or even speech equal in force to that used with such seeming carelessness by the opposition.

The Democrats have a language problem, writes Bromwich in a piece published in the LRB this past spring.

They refer to Trump in clinical jargon as a narcissistic personality, toss about Greek words like homophobic and misogynistic, transphobic and xenophobic, and actually made themselves believe that Trump calling Hillary Clinton a nasty woman was shocking, when in most peoples minds it was another forgettable piece of bad manners vulgar, yes, but we knew that. The elevation of abstract language with no salt or savour, and no traction in common speech, the anathemas that come across as finger-wagging, the antiseptic prudery that runs in a pipeline from campuses to center-left journalism and finally to the Democratic Party: these misjudgments form a pattern with a history.

In this historical pattern Bromwich detects an entrenched complacency which few in the academic-corporate-political-digital elite are ever made aware of, one that has driven American liberals into positions whose untenability is made clear by the strained language used to justify them. Bromwich draws a notable example from Brett Kavanaughs Supreme Court confirmation hearing, when the phrase believe all survivors took on the expanded meaning treat all accusations seriously, even when most Americans still believe that an accused person is innocent until proven guilty, and it would be a moral disaster for Democrats to discard the principle as the condemned property of right-wing libertarians.

The presumption of innocence isnt the only principle Bromwich sees as in danger of abandonment by the left. In the fall of 2016, he published a 10,000-word LRB essay on free speech, a concept that, during the first decades of the 21st century, has become rather the worse for wear. The very words free speech now call to mind an ignoble modern dichotomy: on one side the anonymous internet troublemakers disingenuously defending their compulsion to launch scattershot personal attacks, and on the other the targets of those attacks (or their self-proclaimed champions) defending their calls for vengeance against the attackers by insisting that, because the First Amendment only prohibits punishment by the government, no form of private sanction social ostracism, termination of employment, de-platforming can even theoretically violate their free speech.

The point is true but trivial: when one individual demands the silencing of another, those who accuse the demander of infringing on free speech are claiming the violation not of a written law but of a cultural principle. The demanders protests that he hasnt violated the former only underscore his violation of the latter, a distinction not everyone readily acknowledges. Asked in a late interview how he fell away from his belief in Catholic doctrine, Graham Greene said he had been converted by arguments and he had forgotten the arguments, Bromwich writes in What Are We Allowed to Say? Something like this has happened to left liberals where freedom of speech is concerned. The last two generations were brought to see its value by arguments, and they have forgotten the arguments.

Born in 1951, Bromwich falls squarely into the generation of professors now watching in astonishment as their students, most of whom grew up in the 2000s and 2010s, blithely dismiss and even display undisguised contempt for what once seemed like the settled values of liberal democratic society. He ascribes this state of affairs to several recent developments; one of the most important and least surprising is the soft despotism of social media, that distinctively 21st-century technology almost as enthusiastically resented as it is adopted. Bromwich, who has no social media presence of his own, seems not to engage with it at all, but his description of its customs and expectations will sound discomfitingly familiar to those of us who do:

[A] new keenness of censorious distrust has come from a built-in suspicion of the outliers in public discussion. Social media refer to these people as trolls and sometimes as stalkers; any flicker of curiosity about their ideas is pre-empted by a question that is not a question: Whats wrong with them? Meanwhile, those inside a given group have their settled audience of friends and followers, to adopt the revealing jargon of Facebook and Twitter: a self-sufficient collectivity and happy to stay that way. To be friended in the Facebook world is to be safe walled-up and wadded-in by chosen and familiar connections. An unsafe space is a space where, if they knew you were there, they might unfriend you.

Outside, all is uncertain, obscure, and apt to bring on sensations of fragility. Adversarial stimuli are to be ignored where possible and prohibited where necessary. Inside, a provocative and half-disagreeable remark amounts to a declaration of the intention to defect. To someone who has grown up in such a setting, the older protections of individual speech are an irrelevance.

Facebook began at Harvard before it spread across the world; teaching at a university, and especially an Ivy League school, offers a vantage on the attitudes of the young before they become the attitudes of the majority. Bromwich teaches at Yale, where not long ago a diversity administrator sent out an email urging students to mind that their [Halloween] costumes didnt cause offence or encroach on sensibilities of gender, race, or culture. An associate master of a residential college followed up with a message of her own, saying (as Bromwich summarizes) that Halloween was a time for a lark and everyone should lighten up. Not long ago, both the cautionary letter and the reply would have seemed hilarious for their condescension and paternalism, but in 2015 the reply led to an immediate demand by some residents of the college that the associate master be sacked.

An undergraduate subsequently wrote a telling testimony in a student newspaper, claiming (again, in Bromwichs summary) that the permission granted to culturally appropriative and possibly insulting costumes had deprived her of a safe space; after reading the wretched email, she found herself unable to eat, sleep, or do homework in a building where authority had been ceded to the person who wrote it. On the issue of free speech, the divide between Bromwichs generation and this students comes down to the question of whether the harm done by words belongs in a category or on a spectrum with the harm done by physical violence. But even some of Bromwichs contemporaries profess views on the matter that have more common currency among the young. Take the director of Bristol Universitys Centre for the Study of Ethnicity and Citizenship, Tariq Modood (born 1952), whom Bromwich quotes as writing, The group which feels hurt is the ultimate arbiter of whether a hurt has taken place.

To experience the feeling is to suffer the injury, Bromwich paraphrases, and how seriously one can take the idea reflects ones position on free speech in this cultural and political moment. The same goes for any of the labels now routinely applied to allegedly hurtful forms of expression hurtful included. We have such labels today, of course, quite a lot of them, from the all-purpose inappropriate to the dreaded divisive, writes venture capitalist Paul Graham in What You Cant Say, an essay published just before the rise of social media as we know it in 2004. In any period, it should be easy to figure out what such labels are, simply by looking at what people call ideas they disagree with besides untrue. Why identify those labels? Because if a statement is false, thats the worst thing you can say about it. You dont need to say that its heretical. And if it isnt false, it shouldnt be suppressed.

Graham urges us to pay especially close attention whenever an idea is being suppressed. Web filters for children and employees often ban sites containing pornography, violence, and hate speech. What counts as pornography and violence? And what, exactly, is hate speech? This sounds like a phrase out of 1984. Bromwich affirms, in the preface to Moral Imagination, that he casts his vote with the Orwell of 1984 against those who assent to the theory that a bond exists that is more humanly compelling than the moral duties of men and women toward each other in the light of our shared condition on earth that is to say, with humanity itself over and above any of its subgroups, especially those founded on ideologies. Ideology is religion that has not built its church, and religion is ideology grown lofty and distinguished. This was the common view of the educated in liberal societies half a century ago. If it remains so today, we who hold the belief have lost our voice.

Proposed sanctions against hate speech now rest on the idea that insult, carried by words alone in the absence of physical menace or a threat to livelihood, tends to impair the self-esteem of individuals. This assumption Bromwich blames on [t]he fiction of cultural identity, a phrase at which some readers, not all of them undergraduates, may bristle. But Bromwich rejects the notion that every human being belongs first to a culture, a group that confers the primary pigment of individual identity on the persons it comprehends. Calls for suppression of negative speech about such groups presume, to Bromwichs mind incorrectly, that vulnerable persons have always already delegated their identity, their morale, and their empirical consciousness to the named identity of the group. But those who see in group identity a necessary shelter from the tidal force of the mass culture and a place for affirmation and resilience protection, that is, from harm threatened in part by words find it natural to embrace a form of censorship.

For those in favor of such censorship, its mechanisms of enforcement and exclusion eventually produce a fortunate and economical result: self-censorship. We stay out of trouble by gagging ourselves, and we do so in order to avoid accusations unchallengeable when the group which feels hurt is the ultimate arbiter of whether a hurt has taken place of having inflicted harm with our speech. One such harm is microaggression, which Bromwich defines as occurring when, in an encounter between a member of the dominant culture and anyone not identified with that culture, the former by word or gesture betrays an assumption that there is something unusual about the latter. How should such an offense be punished? By re-education, it has been suggested, in the form of additional diversity training and sensitivity training. Persuaded by this concept and by a therapeutic literature and practice that cater to it, young people of more than one race have come to think themselves uniquely delicate and exposed.

When individuals and groups fear for their safety even in a pure war of words, cogent argument and debate becomes impossible. Safety in argument or debate is of course an unintelligible demand, Bromwich writes,

but the trouble with those who think they want it isnt that they are incapable of giving reasons backed by evidence. Rather, they have had no practice in using words to influence people unlike themselves. That is an art that can be lost. It depends on a quantum of accidental communication that is missing in a life of organized contacts.

How Words Make Things Happen ends with a lightly revised version of his free speech essay, and the lost or at least vanishing art of persuasion constitutes the common thread between that essay and books preceding chapters. Originally delivered as the University of Oxfords Clarendon Lectures, those chapters deal with whether and how the use of words to make others believe something they were not disposed to believe occurs through the use of language alone.

To make his case, Bromwich draws from the work of Burke and Orwell, as well as that of prose writers like Henry James and Walter Bagehot, poets like Shakespeare and Yeats, and philosophers like Aristotle and John Stuart Mill. The books partial inspiration and half-namesake, J. L. Austins How to Do Things with Words, deals with what that linguistic philosopher calls the cases and senses [] in which to say something is to do something; or in which by saying or in saying something we are doing something. (Examples include I take this woman to be my lawfully wedded wife and I name this ship the Queen Elizabeth.) Bromwich sets Austins definition of such performative utterances in opposition to W. H. Audens seemingly offhand pronouncement, in his elegy for Yeats, that poetry makes nothing happen.

Bromwichs interest here lies not in poetry exactly, but in the half-metaphorical, half-literal usages that mark a boundary between rhetoric and poetry, or between the persuasive and the imaginative uses of words, and in what about an attempted act of persuasion makes it so hard for us say for sure whether the words are fanciful or accurate, fictional or matter-of-fact, plainly false or manifestly true. Burke believes in the persuasive superiority of words to images, because words leave more to the imagination; they are better suited to feeding the passions for the very reason that they have a harder time approaching clarity and truth. But the passions of the listener dont necessarily conform to the intention of the speaker, and Cicero seems aware of the danger when in De Oratore he cites Demosthenes on the most important parts of an oration: delivery, delivery, and delivery meaning that you can always make the same words mean different things.

Argue with nothing but a well-ordered troop of reasons and you will convert only people who live by reason and logic. And they are few. This is advice Bromwich has tried to publicly convey to Democratic politicians and their speechwriters, as yet to little noticeable effect. What actually persuades is not reason but the semblance of reason, whether employing true or false logical sequences based on well-attested evidence or specious evidence. The processes involved in convincing others are not essentially different from those we employ in convincing ourselves, a powerful dramatization of which Bromwich finds in Julius Caesar: Brutus convinces himself that the assassination of Caesar is a necessary act, politically considered. But he wants very much to think that it is also right, and so in a soliloquy treats himself as a typical citizen who looks to be sure that his motive as well as his image is untarnished.

The Satan of Paradise Lost also convinces himself, and in so doing displays both an instinct for improvisation which tracks and assimilates the motives of his audience and a restless desire to spread the nets of his own mind and prevent any doubt from escaping. He drops one argument and takes up another as a matter not just of persuasion but almost of self-preservation, demonstrating the usual character of excited speech when it aims to convert a chosen audience, especially political discourse and the rhetoric of self-justification as we still hear it today. Henry James, by contrast, asks us to imagine speech that defies interpretation, a language appropriate to a perceptive mind that sees and tells the truth about people without wanting to have any power over them. Mastery of such a language the language of a world in which the devices of persuasion dissolve in the sheer activity of thought and feeling would begin with a vow of separation between knowing and doing, the kind of vow Isabel Archer nearly makes in The Portrait of a Lady.

In our world, even potentially effective persuasion requires that we have feelings about beliefs: in other words, no tears in the speaker, no tears in the listener. Hence the store we set not just by sympathy but also by empathy, an arcane word revived to prove how thoroughly we are impressed by the sympathetic imperative. Burke describes sympathy as a sort of substitution by which we are put into the place of another man, and affected in many respects as he is affected, a facility demonstrated in his speeches of the 1780s on the plight of the distant colonists in America and the subjects of British India. In his House Divided speech, Abraham Lincoln blends the language of objective forces and that of human actors who are bearers of sentiments, beliefs, and expectations, betting that this unusual combination of evoked authorities would plant a conviction about how to act in a consequential matter of right and wrong. Hence the importance of saying we are against slavery and the importance of hearing ourselves say it: speaking the words of conviction hardens us for the conversion of words into deeds.

Statesmen like Burke and Lincoln had specific goals they wished to achieve with their speech, but what about poets like Yeats and Auden? In their cases, Bromwich frames persuasion as a kind of dreaming aloud, which the dreamer asks other people to listen to and be somehow affected by. How responsible is the dreamer for the real-world consequences, if any, of those dreams? Over the course of his life, Yeats went from an aestheticism that shunned in principle the rhetorical aim of changing the minds of readers or affecting their practical lives in any way to writing poems that came close to propaganda for aristocratic society. Auden found his early fame as the self-conscious leader of a poetic movement dedicated to political reform and possibly to revolution and ended up claiming an exemplary civic function for art, a function that deliberately excluded any notion of pragmatic effect. But Orwell, by the time of his critical commentaries on both poets in the 1930s and 1940s, had come to believe that serious literature could not escape having a political motive. Nor could it inoculate itself against having a persuasive effect.

Writing on Yeats, Orwell notes that by and large the best writers of our time have been reactionary in tendency, on his way to the conclusion that a writers political and religious beliefs are not excrescences to be laughed away, but something that will leave their mark even on the smallest detail of his work. Audens line, in In Memory of W. B. Yeats, about poetry making nothing happen reads as if written in anticipation of such a charge, but Bromwich also detects in the elegy a hope that words, engendered by poetic imagination, may somehow be exempt from the burden of moral responsibility, because they do not mean to persuade. And there is a self-protective defense against the fear that sometimes words may actually make things happen. But, for Bromwich, words do make things happen, if only uncontrollably, unspecifiably. And in the presence of great writing, for that reason, it is appropriate for us to fear as well as admire even those words whose greatness we recognize.

In academia, that fear has lately taken forms of which Bromwich would surely disapprove, beginning with the expectation of trigger warnings before classroom discussion of any work with the potential to remind students of their own traumatic experiences. People should have the right to know and consent to what theyre putting into their minds, just as they have the right to know and consent to what theyre putting into their bodies, a former Oberlin student who campaigned for the application of such warnings to Antigone told The New Yorkers Nathan Heller in 2016. Bromwichs response to that line of thinking goes back to Milton, who in his anti-censorship polemic Areopagitica argues that the

good and evil we know in the field of this world grow up together almost inseparably; and the knowledge of good is so involved and interwoven with the knowledge of evil, and in so many cunning resemblances hardly to be discerned, that those confused seeds which were imposed on Psyche as an incessant labor to cull out and sort asunder, were not more intermixed.

Thus, as Bromwich puts it,

to try to purify ourselves by renouncing all exposure to dangerous words is to legislate for the preservation of our innocence; but Milton doubts that this can be done. The censor holds a very different view: impurity invades or insinuates from outside, it is a kind of pollution, and the duty of moral guardians is to secure and deliver us.

But [i]mpurity, after all, springs from us, among others. Any law devised to winnow out the noxious materials can only weaken the very people it protects. The zeal of todays aspiring moral guardians looks like the natural progression of what Bromwich describes in a 2001 essay as our

therapeutic culture with its glamorous, garish, and finally abject dogma that in every life there are wounds that need healing; that the unhappiness of life comes down to an avoidable trauma or series of events to investigate and anatomize; and that experience may be reduced to experiences on the understanding that bad experiences often happen early and always occur as side effects rather than as signs of inveterate character.

Bromwich sees social media as having ensured, in the years since, that [o]ur verbal surroundings online are created by affinity; and each day a hundred small choices close the circle more tightly. You dont say wrong things the sort of things that will startle your friends. (Though not a social media user, Bromwich himself has described the trouble he got into with left-liberal friends for writing the Bad President piece.) In a description of the implications for free speech bundled with a critique of one of his btes noires, Americas tendency to blunder into foreign interventions he looks, as others have, to Orwells Nineteen Eighty-Four:

Doublethink, Orwell wrote apropos of life in Oceania, was the mental technique that allowed one to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them. The process found its consummation in the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word doublethink involved the use of doublethink. It is like that with freedom of speech and self-censorship in the West. We must spread freedom of speech in order to make the world free. And to do the job well, we must watch what we say.

But Bromwich sees the freedom to speak ones mind as a physical necessity, not a political and intellectual piece of good luck; to a thinking person, the need seems to be almost as natural as breathing. He quotes E. M. Forster asking, How do I know what I think till I see what I say? a question that applies not just to writing but to friendly or unfriendly conversation, or a muttered soliloquy. Yet the good of free speech has seldom been a common intuition, and it is not a universal experience. It matters to a few, much of the time, and to others at unpredictable times.

We live, fair to say, in unpredictable times. In his recent writings on politics, Bromwich has attempted to make sense of what brought about not just the chaotic Trump presidency but also the delusion and irresponsibility of those, in the Democratic establishment and elsewhere, who claim to want to bring it down. Faced with the constitutional changes masterminded by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, Obamas timidity and misjudgment, and the better and more fluent liar now occupying the White House, Bromwich diagnoses a near-autistic breakdown of political speech in America. This has resulted in a public conversation rendered incoherent by demands: demands for special treatment, for the charged redefinition of common terms, and for not just the silencing of but the extraction of public apologies from opposing voices apologies that, when delivered, possess the moral stature of hush money.

In an environment like this, who can hope to change another mind with words alone? The failure of persuasion extends to the debate over free speech itself: thanks to avoidance of all but the most perfunctory interaction with the other side, advocates for restricting free speech and advocates for unrestricted free speech alike wrongly see their own cases as inherently convincing. Few can execute even the most basic techniques of persuasion, such as first showing others that they already agree with themselves and that we agree with them more than they think, presenting the preferred conclusion in such a way that it falls in with their already existing beliefs and shapes a connected narrative of their interests over time. Self-persuasion, however, remains strongly in evidence, not least in Americas grand act of Brutus- or Satan-like conviction, condemned increasingly often by Bromwich, of the value of spreading democracy by force and commerce.

In his own cautioning against restrictions on free speech, Bromwich draws from no less a philosophical pillar of liberalism than Mills On Liberty. If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind, Mill writes. But Bromwich sees Mill as having lost a great deal of his persuasive force since 1859: Quote this passage to a roomful of academics today, withhold the name of Mill, and not one in three will credit that any intelligent person could ever think something so improbable. The philosopher opposes the affixing of any penalty at all to dissent from what the majority supposes are the components of a better world, not a fashionable view by the standard of the 2010s. But he does so because he believes in certain liberties owed to all persons simply because they are persons: freedom from subordination because of ones sex or sect, for example, but equally freedom to know your mind by speaking your mind to another person.

And if in speaking your mind you offend another person, should your speech then be ruled out of bounds? Much might be said on the impossibility of fixing where these supposed bounds are to be placed, writes Mill, for if the test be offence to those whose opinion is attacked, I think experience testifies that this offence is given whenever the attack is telling and powerful. Or, as Graham puts it, writing in a 21st-century society inexorably re-sensitizing itself to verbal offense:

No one gets in trouble for saying that 2 + 2 is 5, or that people in Pittsburgh are ten feet tall. Such obviously false statements might be treated as jokes, or at worst as evidence of insanity, but they are not likely to make anyone mad. The statements that make people mad are the ones they worry might be believed. I suspect the statements that make people maddest are those they worry might be true.

By this logic, a disinterested truth-seeker in the United States of the 2010s could do worse than to take most seriously the beliefs that provoke the angriest responses and widest-spread calls for suppression. In and of themselves, reactions of that character reveal a basic faith in the power of words, a perhaps surprising discovery when words in public have never been spoken in greater quantity, nor, seemingly, with greater carelessness (not least by the president of the United States). A society that restricts speech, or desires to, is a society that believes words make things happen. The harsher the consequences for speech, the greater the power imputed to speech. The kinds of speech that remain most free that is, most free from potential consequences are consequently the least powerful. Poetry may not make anything happen right now, but as Clive James has quipped, the best way to make it relevant again would be to ban it.

But even poets can now be extorted for apologies, as demonstrated last year by the case of Anders Carson-Wee, who dared to appear to be writing in the vernacular of a culture not his own. With the joint arrival of multicultural etiquette and globalization, we have come to dwell increasingly on hidden injuries that threaten the norms and civilities desirable for people everywhere, writes Bromwich near the end of his free speech essay. For as much as has changed since Miltons day, legislation for the preservation of our innocence holds out no more promise now than it did then. We correct one another publicly, aggressively, with great moral righteousness and in highest dudgeon, but that doesnt mean we know ourselves well enough to be sure that our corrections are correct. To Bromwich, this behavior shows that the narcissism of humanity remains as conspicuous as ever at a moment when we can least afford the indulgence words he published before any of us ever had to speak the words President Trump.

Based in Seoul, Colin Marshall writes about cities and culture.He writes theLARBKorea Blogand is currently at work on the bookThe Stateless City: A Walk Through 21st-Century Los Angeles.

Read the rest here:

From the Age of Persuasion to the Age of Offense - lareviewofbooks

California Freelancers Sue To Stop Law That’s Destroying Their Jobs. Pol Says Those ‘Were Never Good Jobs’ Anyway. – Reason

A nonprofit legal foundation is suing California on behalf of freelance workers who say the state's recently passed Assembly Bill 5 (AB5) will destroy their livelihoods. Set to take effect on January 1, 2020, AB5 will make it illegal for contractors who reside in California to create more than 35 pieces of content in a year for a single company, unless the outlet hires them as an employee.

"By enforcing the 35-submission limit, Defendant, acting under color of state law, unconstitutionally deprives Plaintiffs' members of their freedom of speech as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution," states the lawsuit, which was filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation.

The bill's pending implementation has wreaked havoc on publications that rely heavily on California freelancers. Just last week, Vox Media announced itwill not be renewing the contracts of around 200 journalists who write for the sports website SB Nation. Instead, the company will replace many of those contractors with 20 part-time and full-time employees. Rev, which provides transcription services, and Scripted, which connects freelance copywriters with people who need their services, also notified their California contractors that they would no longer give them work.

"Companies can simply blacklist California writers and work with writers in other states, and that's exactly what's happening," Alisha Grauso, an entertainment journalist and the co-leader of California Freelance Writers United (CAFWU), tells Reason. "I don't blame them."

Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-San Diego), the architect of AB5, has heard these stories. "I'm sure some legit freelancers lost substantial income," she tweeted in the wake of Vox's announcement, "and I empathize with that especially this time of year. But Vox is a vulture."

"These were never good jobs," Gonzalez said earlier this month. "No one has ever suggested that, even freelancers."

But many of the freelance journalists, writers, and content creators who now have to navigate the disastrous consequences of Gonzalez's legislation beg to differ.

"I've been able to earn nearly three times the amount I did working a day job, doing what I absolutely love, and having more to volunteer and spend time with loved ones," wrote Jackie Lam, a financial journalist. Kelly Butler, a freelance copywriter, echoed those sentiments. "Thousands of CA female freelancer writers, single moms, minorities, stand to lose their livelihood due to this bill," she said. "I was told by a client because I live in CA they can't use me. I made $20K from them this year."

Grauso says that CAFWU, the group fighting against AB5, is composed primarily of the people that Gonzalez claimed the bill would help. It is currently 72.3 percent women, which, according to Grauso, is no coincidence.

"The reality is it still falls primarily on women to be the caretakers and caregivers of their families, and freelancing allows women to be stay-at-home mothers or to care for an aging parent," Grauso notes. "Being made employees kills their flexibility and ability to be home when needed. I cannot stress enough how anti-women this bill is."

The 35-piece per publication limit comes out to less than one piece per week. Anyone who writes a weekly column, for instance, is likely out of a job if their publisher cannot hire them as an employee. The bill also penalizes freelancers who create content in non-traditional formats such as blog posts, transcriptions, and listicles, the latter of which are often requested in bulk and take only "about 20 minutes to compile," writes another freelancer.

"[AB5] was drafted by a lawmaker who had the outdated mindset that most writers work within the old, traditional newspaper and print model," explains Grauso. "But the vast majority of writers are in the digital media space, which operates completely differently."

According to the Hollywood Reporter, Gonzalez initially set the annual limit at 26 pieces, but later changed it to 35 after a backlash. "Was it a little arbitrary? Yeah," Gonzalez told the Reporter. "Writing bills with numbers like that are a little bit arbitrary."

The assemblywoman recently tweeted that unemployment trending lower is "useless" because "people have to work 2-3 jobs or a side hustle" to make ends meet. "Now is the time to demand more," she said.

According to the most recent Census data, only 8.3 percent of workers have more than one job; of that number, only 6.9 percent have more than two jobs.But Gonzalez doesn't seem to care about the data, and has made it pretty clear that she does not want to listen to her constituents.

"[Freelancers] shouldn't fucking have to [work 2-3 jobs]," the assemblywoman, addressing a detractor, said in a Twitter exchange last week. "And until you or anyone else that wants to bitch about AB5 puts out cognizant policy proposals to curb this chaos, you can keep your criticism anonymous."

Continued here:

California Freelancers Sue To Stop Law That's Destroying Their Jobs. Pol Says Those 'Were Never Good Jobs' Anyway. - Reason

Bee Gees – Immortality (Live in Las Vegas, 1997 – One Night Only)

Join the Bee Gees on Facebook - http://facebook.com/beegees Twitter - http://twitter.com/beegeesInstagram - https://www.instagram.com/beegees/

From the album & film 'BEE GEES - ONE NIGHT ONLY'

BUY THE FILM ON BLURAYAmazon USA http://amzn.to/17nlV6OAmazon Canada http://amzn.to/1dGNfydAmazon UK http://amzn.to/1aulCJ4Amazon France http://amzn.to/194GPLGAmazon Germany http://amzn.to/18pHtUNAmazon Spain http://amzn.to/13A4U4KAmazon Japan http://amzn.to/16Lf30N

BUY THE FILM ON DVDAmazon USA http://amzn.to/1dGMK7vAmazon Canada http://amzn.to/15KjZUfAmazon UK http://amzn.to/1bL0i3yAmazon France http://amzn.to/1brrg1GAmazon Germany http://amzn.to/1aun0eUAmazon Spain http://amzn.to/15oR9ZLAmazon Japan http://amzn.to/18pHPL6

BUY THE CDAmazon USA http://amzn.to/18myobUAmazon Canada http://amzn.to/1aTaDN4Amazon UK http://amzn.to/14hyWAwAmazon France http://amzn.to/18myyjCAmazon Germany http://amzn.to/14hBcIfAmazon Spain http://amzn.to/18pHEPXAmazon Japan http://amzn.to/18mzbcU

DOWNLOAD THE ALBUMiTunes http://itunes.apple.com/album/one-nig...Amazon USA http://amzn.to/1bL0zn7Amazon UK http://amzn.to/15KiCoEAmazon France http://amzn.to/1bL0K1YAmazon Germany http://amzn.to/13maMTAAmazon Spain http://amzn.to/13mblN6Amazon Japan http://amzn.to/11ZzsD1

STREAMING ONLINE Deezer http://www.deezer.com/en/album/86483Grooveshark http://grooveshark.com/#!/album/One+N...Last.FM http://www.last.fm/music/Bee+Gees/One...MySpace https://myspace.com/beegees/music/alb...Rdio http://www.rdio.com/artist/Bee_Gees/a...Rhapsody http://www.rhapsody.com/artist/bee-ge...Slacker http://www.slacker.com/album/bee-gees...Spotify http://open.spotify.com/album/20030AO...

Manx Productions Inc. 1997 Barry Gibb, The Estate of Robin Gibb and Yvonne Gibb, under exclusive license to Capitol Music Group

View post:

Bee Gees - Immortality (Live in Las Vegas, 1997 - One Night Only)

Video Reveals The Intense Eternals Workout That Got Kumail Nanjiani So Dang Fit – CinemaBlend

If youre going to play a super-powered humanoid being with near-immortality, it helps to look the part. Actor Kumail Nanjiani did just that. At this point weve all seen how shredded the Stuber and Silicon Valley actor got to play Kingo in the MCUs Phase 4 film Eternals. Now we know part of how he did it, because a new video has revealed Kumail Nanjianis intense Eternals workout. Check it out:

The Eternals received a massive genetic assist from the Celestials to look the way they do and have their abilities, but the rest of us have to work for it, including actor Kumail Nanjiani. This video from TMZ gives us a sample of the intense workouts the actor went through in order to attain the physique that broke the internet and completely changed our perceptions of an actor who is known for playing the kind of characters that dont usually have six-packs.

Although this is certainly only a small portion of Kumail Nanjianis Eternals training program, as you can see above, he wasnt necessarily doing anything fancy. These arent Olympic lifts or compound exercises. The first exercise looks like a cable lower chest raise, which is isolating his chest and also working his shoulders that looked so well-defined in his widely circulated Instagram post.

After that you see Kumail Nanjiani using a machine to work on his biceps and back. It may not look special, but if you see the weight on that stack, hes clearly working out hard and putting a lot of effort into achieving the desired result. And thats what weve heard from his personal trainer, that Kumail Nanjiani drank the Kool-Aid and really committed to the process.

Hes not just going through the motions, every rep is a real effort and you can see it on his face. Kumail Nanjiani isnt wearing lifting gloves either. Hes earning his calluses.

Now of course, Kumail Nanjiani himself has noted that he was only able to achieve what he did thanks to having the resources of time and money at his disposal. It was his job to get into the shape he did. But, at least here, he was also working out on machines that you can find at most gyms, so an approximation of an Eternal-like physique may not be so out of reach.

In addition, having some musical motivation is always helpful. While to my knowledge Kumail Nanjiani has yet to release his workout playlist, hes got a little Kendrick Lamar playing in the background here to help power him through.

Kumail Nanjiani will need to be in great shape as Kingo, who along with the rest of the Eternals will face off with the Deviants in Marvels weird and risky Phase Four film. Eternals opens in theaters on November 6, 2020. Thats just one of a slew of exciting films headed to theaters next year. Check them all out with CinemaBlend's 2020 release schedule.

The rest is here:

Video Reveals The Intense Eternals Workout That Got Kumail Nanjiani So Dang Fit - CinemaBlend

A 1994 Movie in Which Paul Walker’s Brain Gets Transplanted Into a T-Rex Is Getting a ‘Gory’ Streaming Re-Release – menshealth.com

While the late Paul Walker is remembered primarily for his role in the long-running Fast & Furious action franchise, his contributions to the cinematic canon don't end there. All the way back in 1994, when he was right at the start of his career, Walker appeared in a bizarre science-fiction-comedy mashup alongside fellow rising star Denise Richards.

Its title? Tammy and the T-Rex.

The premise was simple. Tammy (Richards) is a teenage cheerleader who boyfriend Michael (Walker) is injured and ends up in a coma. A series of perfectly reasonable events results in Michael's brain being transplanted into the body of a robotic tyrannosaurus rex by a mad scientist as part of an experiment designed to achieve immortality. When the newly dino-fied Michael crashes a party, Tammy realizes it's her beau, and must race against time to find him a new, more suitable body.

"A guy came to me who owned theatres in South America and he said, 'I have a T-Rex,'" says screenwriter and director Stewart Raffill. "It was animatronic and was going to a park in Texas. The eyes worked. The arms moved. The head moved. He had it for two weeks before it was going to be shipped to Texas and he came to me and said, 'We can make a movie with it!' I said, 'Whats the story?' and he said, 'I dont have a story, but we have to start filming within the month!' and so I wrote the story in a week. You obviously couldnt play it as an actual monster, because it wasnt that good of an animatronic beast and I had to work with what was available, so that was the concept I came up with... I was just trying to do a film for people that like wacky movies."

It might have been forgotten, but Tammy and the T-Rex was actually the first movie either Walker or Richards had ever starred in. "The casting was interesting because we had two young cast members in Paul Walker and Denise Richards," says Raffill. "It was Pauls first film and he so adorable and friendly. He was 17 years old and had the most amazing smile. Denise hadnt done anything either."

While the wacky hijinks are to be expected from a movie riding on the coattails of the era that brought us Drop Dead Fred and Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead, the tone of Tammy and the T-Rex was originally intended to be darker, but the gory scenes were removed in the United States so the movie would appeal to a family audience.

This year, however, disribution company Vinegar Syndrome acquired the rights to the movie and released the "gore cut" in theaters, with ten extra minutes of footage. And come January, Tammy and the T-Rex will be available to stream on horror platform Shudder, in all its bizarre, gory glory.

Continue reading here:

A 1994 Movie in Which Paul Walker's Brain Gets Transplanted Into a T-Rex Is Getting a 'Gory' Streaming Re-Release - menshealth.com

ZUMO Performance of the Week: Daiya Seto Breaks Ryan Lochte’s SCM 400 IM World Record at ISL Vegas Final – Swimming World Magazine

This weeks ZUMO Performance of the Week goes toDaiya Setoof Energy Standard and Japan as he broke the world record in the 400 IM in short course meters on Friday at the final of the International Swimming League in Las Vegas. Seto was making his debut for the Energy Standard team as he signed on to the team before the season started but didnt swim in a meet for the team until the Vegas final.

Seto swam the 400 IM at 3:54.81, loweringRyan Lochtesworld record of 3:55.50 that had stood since 2010 as Seto was miles in front of second placeDuncan Scott. Seto came up huge for Energy Standard as he won the 400 IM, 200 IM and 200 butterfly as Energy Standard defeated the London Roar by 9.5 points. He lowered his personal best in the 400 IM by less than a second as he was 0.03 off Lochtes world record earlier this year, showing he was in prime condition to take another stab at the world record.

Lochtes record was good for the world title back in 2010 and included a killer last 100m freestyle. Seto was between 2-3secs up on Lochtes pace throughout the first three strokes, felt the heat and pain on freestyle but had done enough:

Seto will be one of the faces of the 2020 Olympic Games this coming summer in Tokyo as he is coming off a summer where he won both IM gold medals at the World Championships. The 25-year-old has been on fire as he will be looking to improve on his bronze medal from Rio in the 400 IM. He also was fifth in the 200 fly final in Rio and will have a chance to win a medal in that event in Tokyo next summer. If Seto can win a gold medal in front of the Tokyo crowd in the Olympics, then he will launch himself into swimming immortality.

Congrats to Daiya Seto on winning this weeks ZUMO Performance of the Week!

All-Time Top Ten Mens 400 IM (SCM)

ZUMO Performance of the Week: Arno Kamminga Solidifies Olympic Berth With 58.6 100 Breast at Amsterdam Cup

ZUMO Performance of the Week: Danas Rapsys Nearly Cracks World Record in 400 Free at European SC Championships

ZUMO Performance of the Week: Anna Hopkin Nearly Breaks 21 Seconds in 50 Free at Mizzou Invite

Original post:

ZUMO Performance of the Week: Daiya Seto Breaks Ryan Lochte's SCM 400 IM World Record at ISL Vegas Final - Swimming World Magazine

‘Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker’ has a ‘Harry Potter Cursed Child’ problem – Mashable

The moment Darth Vader looms over Luke Skywalker in the climax of The Empire Strikes Back and declares that he is Luke's father is one of the greatest twists in cinema history. Paternity reveals weren't a new concept when The Empire Strikes Back came out, but Vader's confession remains the most enduring example of the trope because its near-perfect execution ensures that audiences focus on what it means for the story instead of the awkward reality that Darth Vader got someone pregnant.

That's the bar any "I am your father" reveal has to clear. Its narrative implications have to be stronger than the base fact that characters bone. Long-running franchises like Star Wars should have enough built-up emotional resonance to clear that bar easily, but The Rise of Skywalker's paternity (or rather, grand-paternity) twist that Rey is Palpatine's granddaughter doesn't come close and it's not the first mega-franchise to run its story to the ground with a similar failure.

The stage play Harry Potter and the Cursed Child premiered in June 2016 and functions as a canon sequel to the beloved children's books that inspired a generation, and also hedges its plot on the uncomfortable surprise that Voldemort had a daughter with Bellatrix Lestrange. His daughter Delphini unveils herself towards the end of the show and is supposed to come off as a threat, but the mere idea of Voldemort having an orgasm is scarier than any spell Delphini can cast.

Part of the reason Voldemort's bedroom activities dominate the mind after seeing or reading Cursed Child is how little it makes sense given what Harry Potter fans know about Voldemort. He's a narcissist, a barely-human husk of a person who eschews human connection in favor of pursuing power. His evil is rooted in self-hatred and entitlement not the looming suspicion that he's trying to fuck your wife. To say Voldemort had sex even once is to recontextualize his character in a way that's icky at best and deeply uncomfortable at its worst.

Similarly, Rey being Palpatine's granddaughter lacks impact on the greater story of Star Wars beyond the fact that fans can't unsee their mental images of Palpatine making the beast with two backs at any point on his quest for galactic domination. The Rise of Skywalker could have skipped that entire plot point and still ended exactly the way it did, except it didn't and the only real takeaway from the twist is the enduring knowledge that Emperor Palpatine was horny. Palpatine, like Voldemort, is at the end of his series a half-dead, decaying corpse of a man whose sacrifices in pursuit of immortality should definitely have nuked his dick game, but Star Wars insists that the Emperor's physical and mental corruption by the dark side was no obstacle when it came time to sling it.

Cursed Child and The Rise of Skywalker make the exact same mistake in assuming that the continued genetic legacy of a character no one wants to think about naked is more interesting than any of their extant themes about war, loss, and heroism. Star Wars and Harry Potter are both about fighting totalitarian regimes, but their sequels insist that fascism isn't nearly as bad as what happens when evil wizards nut. It's lazy storytelling to extend the shelf life of a villain because no one has any better ideas, and that laziness becomes egregious when that shortcut comes packaged with inescapable visions of unthinkably weird sex.

Cursed Child and The Rise of Skywalker are allegedly the last we'll hear from these particular characters in their respective franchises, which is both a relief (please, for the love of god, don't tell us Peter Pettigrew or Grand Moff Tarkin had kids in a sequel series twenty years down the line) and a disappointment. The last words in both of these iconic stories are forever written as they are, with Voldemort and Palpatine screwing their way to continued relevance, and no Jedi mind trick or obliviate spell can fix it.

Originally posted here:

'Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker' has a 'Harry Potter Cursed Child' problem - Mashable

Wonder why colors red and green are associated with Christmas? Find out here – Republic World – Republic World

Christmas is around the corner and it's hard to miss the city immersedinfestive colours and decorations and cherishing the holiday spirit. According to reports, however, both red and green colourswere initially used to celebrate a different festival. People used to grow red and green coloured holly plants with the belief that they were meant to keep the earth a beautiful place in the winter season. Ancient Celtic people decorated their houses with the holly plants to bring good luck upon their families for the entire year. They also decorated their homes with small figures known as sigillaria present on the boughs of evergreen trees.

According to reports, the pairing of both the colours dates back to before the 14th century and continued well into the 14th century when both the colours were used in painting rood screens used in ancient church architectures. The screens were used to separate the area of the congregation and the priest. A research scientist was of the opinion that the separation of the areas could have led people to relate the colours with a different boundary, probably the mark of a year ending and the beginning of a new year on the day of Christmas. There are many Christians who are of the belief that the colours red and green were based on the life of Jesus, whose birth is celebrated on Christmas. According to reports, Green represents the immortality of Jesus and red showcases the bloodshed by the holy figure during his crucifixion.

Read:Sri Lankan Cardinal Calls For Moderate Christmas Amid High Security

For many people, the festival of Christmas is incomplete without listening to or singing atmospheric and angelic carols. There are some cult favourite songs and carols that are played every year. But little did one know about the origin of the melodious songs. Here are a few fascinating backstories of popular Christmas carols.

Read:Queen Elizabeth II, Close Family Celebrate Christmas

This song has an interesting history attached to it. On Christmas Eve 1818, St. Nicholas church experienced an ill-fortune as the organ had stopped functioning and there was no possibility it could work again for the liturgy. However, Fr Joseph Mohr did not just give up and sing out a poem he had written many years ago. It was then that the carol Stille Nacht! Heilige Nacht (Silent Night! Holy Night) was heard for the first time in a village church in Oberndorflocated in Austria.

Read:Deepika Padukone And Ranveer Singh Get Cozy This Christmas, Sends Fans Into A Tizzy

This song brings in a lot of nostalgia as this song is every childs favourite. It invokes a feeling of hope that Santa Claus along with his team of reindeer, would be coming to place presents under the Christmas tree. 'Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer' was composed by the department store chain Montgomery Ward as an option to save money for their annual Christmas promotions.

Read:Christmas Rush Leads To Traffic Snarls In Delhi

Go here to see the original:

Wonder why colors red and green are associated with Christmas? Find out here - Republic World - Republic World

Our top Google searches of the decade were just plain embarrassing – Citizen

Google thought it might be a fun idea to let the world know the top ten things people in different countries have searched for over the past year. Well, it wasnt. It was a terrible idea. It might be fine for countries that have citizens who spend their days searching for truth, happiness and the meaning of life, but for a country like ours, its just downright embarrassing.

South Africas top trending question of 2019 was, Why were cornflakes invented? Look, I think its healthy that people ask questions. Dont take anything for granted. Keep asking until you get answers. But cornflakes above what happens when you die? Or is there a god? Or why cant you get a decent bunny chow in Cape Town?

Why were cornflakes invented? doesnt strike me as a question that a mentally sound adult would ask the global hive mind. Please let it not be. I can only imagine that every ten-year-old with a smartphone has googled this question at least once. If I had had a magical device that answered everything at that age, I might have also wanted to know why my mother was feeding me cornflakes for breakfast rather than, say, a plate of chips covered in bacon and cheese and why it was even necessary to invent this abominable cereal killer.

A lot of children in our country are lucky to get a pebble to suck on in the morning and they wouldnt have been among those asking this ridiculous question. Anyway, a pebble is probably healthier. Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsantos yummy weedkiller Roundup, has been found in corn-based products made by Kelloggs and other companies. Sugar disguises the taste of the cancer, but still. Perhaps it is understandable why so many people wanted to know why this crunchy poison was invented. I dont know what the answer is and Im not going to google it because then Ill be just like the rest of you and, quite frankly, Id sooner eat cornflakes.

Third on the list was, How many votes for a seat in parliament? This was googled multiple times with increasing frequency by Kanthan Pillay in May this year. The question is unlikely to trend again until the next general election.

Number 4 on the list was, How did Cameron Boyce die? I would have imagined that #5 would have been, Who is Cameron Boyce? But no. It was, How long is a rugby match? Guys, you might think your women are quite happy playing with their phones while you watch the game, but theyre trying to find out if they have enough time to slip out for a quickie with Dave who doesnt have a telly. Please dont google Who the fuck is Dave?

Question 9 was, What is media? I presume this was asked by people who live in caves and have never seen a newspaper or any kind of electronic device. Id like to meet them some day. If youre one of them and you are reading this, send a smoke signal. Ill be along shortly with a bottle of tequila. And maybe a shotgun.

Coming in at #10 is this gem. What is teenage pregnancy? Quite frankly, I dont know how all these people managed to type this into Google given the amount of drool that must have been dripping onto their device.

Bumping cornflakes into second spot, the top search of the entire decade was, How to make slime. I thought it would be obvious. Chop politicians up and feed the bits into a blender.

Countless South Africans also wanted to know How to lose weight in 3 days. My lifestyle is predicated upon leaving things until the last minute, but this is on another level altogether. Who looks in the mirror on a Tuesday and realises that terrible things will happen if they dont lose 30kg by Friday?

Our troglodytes who struggle to grasp concepts like media and teenage pregnancies also wanted to know How to grow hair fast? and How to draw eyebrows. Making me slightly less ashamed to be South African, the 5th most asked question of the decade was, Where am I? Its a question that frequently crosses my mind, but never to an extent that I have thought to google it. Perhaps I have never been drunk enough. No, thats not it.

Topping the trending searches list for not only the year but also the decade is load shedding. No surprises there, then. It used to be that people were curious to know more about this fresh hell lurching into their lives. Now we know. And yet, we dont. Schrodingers power station.

Thanos, too, features on both lists. Derived from Thanatos, the personification of death and immortality. South Africans are not complete morons after all. They want to know about Greek mythology. No, wait. This Thanos is a comic-book anti-hero. Sigh.

Coming in at #9 for the decade is Teachers Day, presumably searched by teachers under the impression that this is the one day of the year when they are legally entitled to come to work drunk and engage in sex-for-marks orgies with teenage girls who havent yet got around to googling what pregnancy means.

Its hard to believe that nothing related to genitalia made it into the top ten searches. Its just not possible. Not for South Africans. We are endlessly fascinated with our and other peoples bits. I imagine if youre not very bright and you eventually manage to find out what teenage pregnancy means, you will sooner or later stumble upon PornHub and go blind in a relatively short space of time. This can only be a good thing.

For more news your way, download The Citizens app foriOSandAndroid.

See the rest here:

Our top Google searches of the decade were just plain embarrassing - Citizen

4 Philadelphia Eagles legends named among HOF finalists: 3 Reactions – Inside the Iggles

Use your (arrows) to browse

CANTON, OH AUGUST 3: The exterior of the Pro Football Hall of Fame prior to the NFL Class of 2013 Enshrinement Ceremony at Fawcett Stadium on Aug. 3, 2013, in Canton, Ohio. (Photo by Jason Miller/Getty Images)

The NFL has gone all out for its 100th season, announcing earlier this year that the Pro Football Hall of Fame wouldinclude as many as 20 inductees in their 2020 class. That got Philadelphia Eagles fans to thinking.

Seeing as how theyre long overdue, might this finally be the year that the likes of Randall Cunningham, Eric Allen, Al Wistert, and Harold Carmichael get their due?

All of them were given the nod as semifinalists, along with the likes of Donovan McNabb and Troy Vincent. Well, theres been an announcement from the Hall, and we now know who the finalists are. Take a look!

Congrats to Eagles legends Harold Carmichael, Dick Vermeil, Bucko Kilroy, and Al Wistert for coming one step closer to football immortality! Here are three reactions.

Use your (arrows) to browse

Read more from the original source:

4 Philadelphia Eagles legends named among HOF finalists: 3 Reactions - Inside the Iggles