The Hindu | PMO, NSA tracking impact of Chinese FDI in South Asia The Hindu PMO, NSA tracking impact of Chinese FDI in South Asia. Arun S. New Delhi, July 08, 2017 23:56 IST. Updated: July 08, 2017 23:56 IST. Share Article; PRINT; AAA. The Centre has begun its first ever in-depth assessment of Chinese investments in India's ... |
Read this article:
PMO, NSA tracking impact of Chinese FDI in South Asia - The Hindu
Photo: BRETT CARLSEN, NYT
Waymo dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, but the two companies are still involved in a bitter lawsuit.
Waymo dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, but the two companies are still involved in a bitter lawsuit.
Waymo scales back claims against Uber in driverless car dispute
Waymo, the autonomous vehicle business that operates under Googles parent company, dropped several patent claims against Uber on Friday, pulling back some of its major allegations in a bitter lawsuit over driverless technology.
In a federal court filing, Waymo said it was dropping three of its four claims over Uber violating its patents related to light detection and ranging sensor technology, or lidar. Lidar is a vital component in driverless car technology, helping the vehicle detect its surroundings to navigate roads.
The case, an acrimonious battle between Waymo and Uber, spotlights the arms race surrounding autonomous vehicle talent and technology. It is especially significant for the Google unit now Waymo that spent years working on driverless car technology before other tech companies took an interest. But as Waymo searches for a way to make money from self-driving cars, many of its best engineers have left for potential competitors, carrying valuable knowledge of its technology with them.
The case with Uber, the ride-hailing company, began when Waymo filed suit in February, claiming Uber was using intellectual property stolen by one of Googles former project leaders in its driverless vehicles. That set off months of wrangling, eventually leading Uber to fire the former Google project leader, Anthony Levandowski. The case is scheduled for trial in October, with the thrust of it centered on Uber misappropriating Waymos trade secrets.
Waymos dropping of three patent claims against Uber weakens its original argument for bringing the suit. Still, each side called the latest legal move a victory.
Waymo said it agreed to scale back its patent claims because Uber had halted work on a lidar design that violated Waymos patents and is proceeding with a different design. Waymo is permitted to reassert its claims if Uber returns to the design that Waymo challenged. The company said Ubers current lidar design still violates one of its original patents.
We continue to pursue a patent claim against Ubers current generation device and our trade secret claims, which are not at all affected by this stipulated dismissal, Waymo said. We look forward to trial.
Uber said the dropping of the three claims was yet another sign of Waymo overreaching and not delivering on its claims.
Last month, Waymo received a signal from federal court that the patent claims were not its strongest legal argument in the case. Judge William Alsup of U.S. District Court in San Francisco, who is overseeing the case, urged the companys lawyers at a hearing June 7 to drop the patent claims because youre going to lose on all these patent claims unless you pull some rabbit out of a hat.
Uber, meanwhile, has been trying to distance itself from the actions of Levandowski, who joined Uber last year.
Waymo has said that Levandowski worked with Uber to steal proprietary information from Google before joining Uber. Waymo said Uber was aware that Levandowski had stolen files.
Uber said it expressly told Levandowski not to bring any stolen documents to the company or apply any of Waymos intellectual property to Ubers autonomous vehicle efforts. The company said Waymos lawyers have not found the stolen documents in Ubers possession, despite extensive discovery.
The matter has been complicated by Levandowski asserting his Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination. Uber said it urged him to cooperate with Waymos lawyers and fired him when he continued to refuse.
In a separate filing Friday, Uber said Levandowski, before invoking his Fifth Amendment right, told Travis Kalanick, then Ubers CEO, that he had downloaded the documents from Google because he was worried that he might not receive full payment of a $120 million bonus owed to him. Uber said this indicated that his actions were unrelated to his work at Uber.
Daisuke Wakabayashi is a New York Times writer.
Link:
Waymo scales back claims against Uber in driverless car dispute - SFGate
Todd Richmond, Associated Press
MADISON, Wis. (AP) A Wisconsin law that requires homeowners to let assessors inside as a condition for challenging their property taxes is unconstitutional as applied to a pair of Racine County property owners, the state Supreme Court ruled Friday.
The court said in a 5-2 decision that such visits amount to unreasonable searches and that assessors need to get warrants if they can't obtain the homeowners' consent.
The ruling involves Vincent Milewski and Morganne MacDonald, who own a home in the Town of Dover in Racine County. According to court documents, they tried to challenge their 2013 property tax assessment in front of a town review board.
The board refused to hear the challenge because Milewski and MacDonald wouldn't let an assessor inside their home. Under state law, people who refuse an assessor's request to view their property can't contest the assessment to local review boards.
Milewski and MacDonald sued. A judge dismissed the lawsuit and a state appellate court upheld his decision. The state Supreme Court reversed that ruling.
Writing for the majority, Justice Dan Kelly said Milewski and MacDonald were faced with a difficult decision: relinquish their constitutional right to be free of unreasonable searches so they could challenge the assessment or exercise their rights and forfeit their ability to contest the assessment.
Kelly said an assessors' visit without consent is a search as defined in the U.S. Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures. The town failed to show how assessing taxes is such a special need that the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply, which means assessors must obtain search warrants to enter without consent, he wrote. Assessors can use other means to gather information about the property, he said. Milewski and MacDonald can challenge the assessment without an interior inspection, he concluded.
He said the law was unconstitutionally applied to Milewski and MacDonald's situation. But he said the law isn't unconstitutional on its face, holding only that it can't be read to require a viewing that violates the Fourth Amendment.
The town's attorney, Jason Gehring, didn't immediately respond to a voicemail seeking comment.
The court's conservative-leaning majority reached the decision. Shirley Abrahamson and Ann Walsh Bradley, the only two liberal-leaning justices, dissented.
Abrahamson wrote in a joint dissent with Bradley that such choices are common in the law and are seen as constitutionally valid. She also complained the majority opinion is overly complex and intricate even though her dissent goes on for 47 pages compared with Kelly's 53 pages and doesn't say what should happen next.
The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative law firm that represents Milewski and MacDonald, issued a statement calling the decision "a victory for private property rights."
The Wisconsin Realtors Association, the state Department of Justice and the Institute of Justice, a law firm specializing in constitutional protections, all filed friend-of-the-court briefs urging the Supreme Court to strike down the law.
___
Follow Todd Richmond on Twitter at https://twitter.com/trichmond1
Read more:
Homeowners don't have to let assessors in to challenge tax - The Edwardsville Intelligencer
Being Libertarian | In Case You Missed It: Austin Petersen, Second Amendment, CNN. Being Libertarian Welcome to the fifth installment of In Case You Missed It, a weekly news roundup that focuses on some of the biggest news stories from around the globe every week. So, in case you missed it, here's your week in review: ... |
Follow this link:
In Case You Missed It: Austin Petersen, Second Amendment, CNN. - Being Libertarian
NewsBusters (press release) (blog) | Here's a First Amendment Case You Should Care About NewsBusters (press release) (blog) First Amendment cases are very much on the national mind these days, and the news from the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) is very encouraging for those who believe in strong protections for constitutional freedoms. The court delivered a First Amendment ... |
More:
Here's a First Amendment Case You Should Care About - NewsBusters (press release) (blog)
The First Amendment protects our right to use electronic devices to record on-duty police officers, according to a new ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Fields v. Philadelphia. This right extends to anyone with a recording device, journalists and members of the public alike. And this right includes capture of photos, videos, and audio recordings.
EFF filed an amicus brief seeking this ruling. We argued that people routinely use their electronic devices to record and share images and audio, and that this often includes newsworthy recordings of on-duty police officers interacting with members of the public.
The Third Circuit began its Fields opinion by framing the right to record in history and policy:
In 1991 George Holliday recorded video of the Los Angeles Police Department officers beating Rodney King and submitted it to the local news. Filming police on the job was rare then but common now. With advances in technology and the widespread ownership of smartphones, civilian recording of police officers is ubiquitous. . . . These recordings have both exposed police misconduct and exonerated officers from errant charges.
The Third Circuit recognized that all five federal appellate courts that previously addressed this issue held that the First Amendment protects the right to record the police.
The court next reasoned that the right to publish recordings depends on the predicate right to make recordings. Specifically:
The First Amendment protects actual photos, videos, and recordings, . . . and for this protection to have meaning the Amendment must also protect the act of creating that material. There is no practical difference between allowing police to prevent people from taking recordings and actually banning the possession or distribution of them.
The court also reasoned that the right to record the police is grounded in the First Amendment right of access to information about their officials public activities. The court explained:
Access to information regarding public police activity is particularly important because it leads to citizen discourse on public issues, the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values, and is entitled to special protection.
The court identified the many ways that civilian recordings of police activity are beneficial by capturing critical information:
Importantly, the court concluded that recordings of on-duty police have contributed greatly to our national discussion of proper policing. Among other things, they have improved professional reporting, as video content generated by witnesses and bystanders has become a common component of news programming. As a result, recordings have spurred action at all levels of government to address police misconduct and to protect civil rights.
Qualified Immunity
The Third Circuit erred on the issue of qualified immunity. This is a legal doctrine that protects government employees from paying money damages for violating the Constitution, if the specific right at issue was not clearly established at the time they violated it. In Fields, the Third Circuit unanimously held that going forward, the First Amendment protects the right to record the police. But the majority held that this right was not clearly established at the time the police officers in the case violated this right.
Judge Nygaard dissented on this point. He persuasively argued that this right was in fact clearly established, given the prior rulings of other appellate courts, the City of Philadelphias own policies, and the frequency that people (including police officers themselves) use their mobile devices to make recordings. On the bright side, the Third Circuit remanded the question of municipal liability, so there is still a possibility that the injured parties, whose right to record was disrupted by police, can obtain damages from the city.
Location of Recording
The Third Circuit in Fields sometimes formulated the First Amendment right to record police as existing in public places. This is true. But the right also exists in private places. For example, a home owner might record police officers searching their home without a warrant. Also, a complainant about police misconduct, speaking to internal affairs officers inside a police station, might record those officers discouraging her from pressing charges. In such cases, there is a First Amendment right to record on-duty police officers in a private place.
Rather than ask whether the place of recording was public or private, courts should ask whether the subject of recording had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Critically, on-duty police have no such expectation while speaking with civilians, whether they are in a public or private place.
The Fields decision is not to the contrary. Rather, it simply addressed the facts in that case, which concerned civilians recording on-duty police officers who happened to be in public places. Also, the Fields opinion at another point correctly framed the issue as recording police officers performing their official duties.
Interference
The court discussed another possible limitation on the right to record the policewhether recording may be subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions to ensure that it doesnt interfere with policy activity. However, this issue was not before the court. It remains to be seen how future courts will address limitations on the First Amendment right to record the police.
The Third Circuits Fields decision is an important victory for the right of technology users to record on-duty police officers. But the struggle continues. Across the country, many government officials continue to block members of the public from using their electronic devices to record newsworthy events. EFF will continue to fight for this vital right.
See the rest here:
Third Circuit Declares First Amendment Right to Record Police - EFF
President Donald Trumps denials and lashings out at those accusing him of sexual assault and harassment while he was on the campaign trail last year were meant to corral voters and were protected by the First Amendment, making them non-actionable in a lawsuit, Trumps lawyers claimed in a court filing late Friday.
In the latest filing in the case involving former Apprentice contestant Summer Zervos, Trumps personal lawyer Marc Kasowitz, who is now also heading up the presidents team against federal probes into whether or not his campaign colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election, reiterated his clients defense that he cannot be sued in state court because of his current office from a filing in March.
Legal news site Law Newz was the first to report on the filing.
Daily Emails and Alerts - Get the best of Newsweek delivered to your inbox
U.S. President Donald Trump arrives for a working session at the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany, July 8, 2017. REUTERS/Markus Schreiber
The latest 53-page filing, calling for a dismissal of Zervoss defamation claim, also stated that Trumps statements against the victims were in the context of a heated political campaign and therefore were protected by the First Amendment.
The allegedly defamatory statements were made during a national political campaign that involved heated public debate in political forums, the filing read. Statements made in that context are properly viewed by courts as part of the expected fiery rhetoric, hyperbole, and opinion that is squarely protected by the First Amendment.
Later, the filing asserts that Trumps statements were meant to convince the public to vote for him.
The Statements all of which were advanced during a heated political campaign to convince the public to vote for Mr. Trump, and many of which were published via Twitter constitute non-actionable rhetoric and hyperbole that is protected by the First Amendment, it read.
The filing also states that because Zervos was not specifically mentioned by Trump, who denied many accusations of sexual assault and harassment throughout the late stages of his campaign, she cannot claim she was defamed.
Zervos first claimed in October that Trump had tried to kiss and grope her in a Beverly Hills hotel room in 2007, and Trump later responded to several allegations on Twitter without specifically citing Zervos. Her lawyer, Gloria Allred, then filed a defamation lawsuit on January 17. Shes demanding almost $3,000 in damages and a public apology from the president.
"This election is being rigged by the media pushing false and unsubstantiated charges, and outright lies, in order to elect Crooked Hillary!"Trump tweeted on Oct. 15.
Trump also posted the same day: 100% fabricated and made-up charges, pushed strongly by the media and the Clinton Campaign, may poison the minds of the American Voter. FIX!
View original post here:
Donald Trump Slammed Sex Assault Accusers For Votes, President's Lawyers Claim - Newsweek
The grey area between privacy and First Amendment rights were central to TheWraps panel discussion in Los Angeles Thursday night, The First Amendment In the Age of Trump and in the current climate there were plenty of issues to debate.
Brian Knappenberger, director of the documentary Nobody Speak: Trials of a Free Press, said that Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiels secret involvement in the Hulk Hogan/Gawker trial threatened the First Amendment rights of the free press. But the irony is that the First Amendment in part protects Thiels secrecy.
Or consider how universities have been locked in debate over whether figures like Ann Coulter or Milo Yiannopoulos have the right to speak on college campuses. The First Amendment protects their right to speak, but it also protects those fighting back against that speech. Are students exercising their rights or are they suppressing debate?
Also Read: What Happens if the Media Defies White House Camera Ban?
Then theres the case of writing on the internet. Fake news, false memes and outright hate speech can easily proliferate online, all under anonymity. Their words have proven dangerous and made people mistrust the media, yet the First Amendment protects their anonymity.
The talk followed a screening of Knappenbergers Netflix documentary Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press. It charts how Gawkers decision to publish Hulk Hogans sex tape led to a trial that has potentially opened the flood gates for billionaires to make news outlets they dont like disappear.
Im bothered by the secrecy of what happened here. As I understand it, what Peter Thiel did here used to be illegal, Knappenberger said during the panel discussion. Theres this notion that this can be done in secret, that a thumb can be placed on this conversation in a way that is invisible to the participants involved, invisible to the public and invisible to the jury as well. That is troubling to me.
Also Read: 'Nobody Speak' Director Compares Hulk Hogan, Gawker Trial to President Trump (Video)
But Ricardo Cestero, a partner at the law firm Greenberg Glusker, argues that the secrecy of Thiels actions is part of what the First Amendment protects.
Peter Thiel had a First Amendment right to do whatever lawfully he was allowed to do in order to shut down a publication that in his First Amendment belief wasnt worthy of continuing to exist, Cestero said. Its a jury verdict that balanced the privacy of a celebrity against the publications First Amendment right to do what it did. Peter Thiels involvement is part of what the First Amendment allows.
Cestero argues that the real issue is a flaw in our legal system rather than a failure to recognize the First Amendment. Wealthy individuals who dont like what they read or see in the media can file an arguably frivolous lawsuit, and theres no way for media companies to combat it.
Also Read: What Happens if the Media Defies White House Camera Ban?
Our legal system has gotten to the point where it is cost prohibitive for anything other than companies that are fully insured or the extraordinarily wealthy people or corporations to really litigate meaningful cases like this one, Cestero said. We as a society should look at ways to solve that problem.
Lanny J. Davis, a former lawyer for the Clinton White House during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and the co-founder and partner of Davis Goldberg & Galper, reiterated how the Hulk Hogan/Gawker case mainly concerned the balance between privacy rights and First Amendment rights. He said that when we argue about First Amendment rights disappearing, we shouldnt lose sight of the fact that Terry Bollea, i.e. Hogans real name, was entitled to privacy as also protected by the Constitution.
Theres a grey area where First Amendment and privacy rights overlap, and people who are progressive need to have a balance in looking at both sides, Davis said.
Also Read: Milo Yiannopoulos Supporter Sues Berkeley for $23 Million
Davis went on to say that these rights extended to Thiels own privacy, but hes ultimately in favor of transparency in litigation. The First Amendment allows anybody to be outed and the person outed to be offended. The principle of the First Amendment is that shouldnt be subject to any penalty. But whats offensive and whats constitutional are different, he added.
David Greene, Civil Liberties Director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said that theres still an issue with billionaires like Thiel putting their thumbs on the scale. Greene said the verdict in the Gawker case was disproportionate to anything hes seen in a privacy case like this.
What you get when you have someone funding it is you have this concern that youll soon get this disproportion, Greene said. And our system isnt well equipped to handle that disproportion. The system that we rely on breaks just a little bit when you have this type of involvement in the cases.
Also Read: President Trump Can't Jail Journalists for Reporting Leaks - Or Can He?
So is the First Amendment under attack more now than when Trump took office? Greene said there may not be a legal solution to the president attacking the media, but we still need to fight back against that language.
The concern I have in the rhetoric I hear now is its engendering distrust in these institutions that are so vital, Greene said. There are media institutions I like and those I dislike, but I want them all to survive, because thats the way the system works. The more people reporting the better.
Also Read: 'Nobody Speak' Review: Money Muzzles the Media
Davis said all presidents have been irritated by the media. But Donald Trump is different.
The difference is Donald Trump demonizes people and creates dangerous, violent tendencies in certain extreme minded, and I think fascist-oriented people, he said. We have to try and avoid attacking motives and demonizing people we disagree with. We lose the heartland of this country when we do that as opposed to civil disagreement, and keeping with our criticism of the media, which is sometimes deserved, is that we dont personalize our differences. We dont demonize our opposition. Thats what President Trump does, and thats what makes him dangerous.
Check out the whole video from Thursdays panel discussion above, Nobody Speak is available on Netflix now.
On Sunday, Donald Trump derided the use of anonymous sourcing in news stories. He also said in February that news outlets "shouldn't be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody's name." It's strange he thinks that, because he's used a lot of anonymous sources himself. Here are some examples.
Two years after President Obama released his birth certificate, Trump said it was not believable to some people."You know, some people say that was not his birth certificate," he told ABC in August 2013. "I'm saying I don't know. Nobody knows and you don't know either."
Trump said one of thesources "called myoffice."
Trump took care to describe this sourceas "extremely credible."
Trump so oftensources information to "many people" (without naming any of them) that there's a well-worn #manypeoplearesaying hashtag on Twitter.The Washington Post wrote an article about it, which includes the examples on the next three slides.
At a rally in September, a man in Trump's audience said President Obama was a Muslim and not even an American, then asked Trump to get rid of Muslim training camps.
You know, a lot of people are saying that, and a lot of people are saying that bad things are happening out there, Trump responded.
In early January, Trump said he had heard from many Republicans worried that his rival, Sen. Ted Cruz, was born in Canada.
Id hate to see something like that get in his way, but a lot of people are talking about it, and I know that even some states are looking at it very strongly, the fact that he was born in Canada and he has had a double passport, Trump told thePost.
In May 2016, Trump told the Post what some "people" believe about the death of Vince Foster. I dont bring [Fosters death] up because I dont know enough to really discuss it, Trump said. I will say there are people who continue to bring it up because they think it was absolutely a murder. I dont do that because I dont think its fair.
Soon after Trump called for an end to anonymous sourcing, The Associated Press noted, "Members of Trump's White House team regularly demand anonymity when talking to reporters."
Surprise: Trump berates the news media for doing something hes done himself
On Sunday, Donald Trump derided the use of anonymous sourcing in news stories. He also said in February that news outlets "shouldn't be allowed to use sources unless they use somebody's name." It's strange he thinks that, because he's used a lot of anonymous sources himself. Here are some examples.
Here is the original post:
Is Freedom of Expression in Danger? First Amendment Experts ... - TheWrap
Updated 20 hours ago
Ron Barber had a passion for justice, a calm demeanor and a sharp intellect a combination that served him and his clients well as he successfully argued in Pennsylvania courts for the First Amendment rights of the media and individual civil liberties.
Ron was the most gentle trial lawyer I have ever seen, said fellow partner David Strassburger, who worked with Mr. Barber on many cases at the Pittsburgh law firm of Strassburger McKenna Gutnick & Gefsky. There was no fire and brimstone in him at all. His passion came through with his intellect and the words that he chose rather than the volume that he spoke them at.
Being honest about what he was saying resonated with every judge and jury he stood before.
Ronald D. Barber, 56, of Sewickley died Thursday, July 6, 2017, at West Penn Hospital in Pittsburgh of complications from prostate cancer.
Born in Fort Lewis, Wash., on Aug. 12, 1960, he was the son of Mary Barber of Sewickley and the late Alan Barber.
Mr. Barber graduated from the University of Pittsburgh School of Law in 1988 after completing undergraduate studies at Pitt in politics and philosophy with magna cum laude honors.
He began at the Pittsburgh law firm as an associate attorney and became a partner in 2003. His career at the firm bookended a period between 1994 and 2000 when he pursued another passion teaching and served as the permanent law clerk for Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Ronald Folino.
Known for mentoring younger attorneys, Mr. Barber was an adjunct faculty member at Pitt, teaching courses on ethics, public policy and mass media.
He was a pro bono legal adviser for the university's student newspaper, The Pitt News, where he'd served as an editor while a student.
Strassburger said Mr. Barber obtained a ruling from the state Supreme Court that settlement agreements resolving claims against public agencies in this case, a civil rights suit filed against the Westmoreland County Housing Authority should be made public, even if paid with insurance money.
He successfully argued so many of those types of issues that did not result in a lot of notoriety but served to educate the bench and others about the importance of open government, Strassburger said.
He was a member of the legal committee of the Pittsburgh chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union.
If he saw there was a wrong that needed righted, that's what he saw as a good case, said his wife and fellow attorney, Jean Novak. He was always doing the right thing, whether or not it benefited him.
During his two-year battle with cancer, Mr. Barber participated in a trial treatment in the hope, even if it couldn't help him, it would help other people in the future, she said.
When not working on cases, Mr. Barber enjoyed hiking at Cook Forest and playing chess.
A former longtime president of the Pittsburgh Chess Club, he often visited prison inmates to teach them the game.
He thought chess was a great equalizer, and he was devoted to doing what he could to promote the game to everyone, his wife said.
There will be no viewing for Mr. Barber. A memorial service is planned for later in the summer.
In addition to his wife and mother, Mr. Barber is survived by two children, Zachary and Alexandra Barber, both of Squirrel Hill.
Memorial donations were suggested to the Look Good Feel Better Foundation, 1620 L Street NW, 12th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20036, or to Animal Friends, 562 Camp Horne Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15237.
Jeff Himler is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-836-6622, jhimler@tribweb.com or via Twitter @jhimler_news.
Precheck enrollment returns to Unity airport
GCDC executive director search put on hold
Lycippus Hardware & Supply store to be put up for public sale
Fayette County commissioner's wife receives prison term in shooting case
Irwin woman chooses trial over plea offer in child endangerment case
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
Five hurt in three-vehicle Lower Burrell crash
Port Authority bus crashes into war memorial cannon
Jury: Newlywed had husband killed to get his insurance money
Read the original here:
A pair of Polish regulators said today that investors and banks should avoid dealing with digital currencies like bitcoin and ether.
In a joint statement, the Polish National Bank and the Financial Supervision Commission delivered a broad warning against investing in digital currencies, citing price volatility and the risk of fraud. The regulatorsclarified thatcryptocurrencies it identifies bitcoin, litecoin and ether are not consideredlegal tender in Poland.
While the statement itself does not outline any specific policy measures in light of the tech, it does state that financial institutions should avoid doing business with cryptocurrency exchange services "in particular with regard to the risk of exploitation of these entities for money laundering and terrorist financing", according to the statement.
"The decision in this regard should be preceded by a thorough analysis of the potential consequences, including legal risk and reputation risk," the regulators added.
While arguing thatdistributed ledger techshould be distinguished from cryptocurrency applications, the regulators called for increased scrutiny before any broader adoption happens.
"Many functional, operational and legal aspects of this technology, however, should be subject to a detailed and thorough analyzes and tests before the mass introduction of the financial market," the statement read.
In February, CoinDesk reported that Polands financial ombudsman, Aleksandra Wiktorow, urgedthe country's Ministry of Finance to regulate cryptocurrency exchanges. That call followedthe closureof Bitcurex, the country's oldest bitcoin exchange,which sparked an investigation by local authorities.
Image via Shutterstock
The leader in blockchain news, CoinDesk is an independent media outlet that strives for the highest journalistic standards and abides by a strict set of editorial policies. Have breaking news or a story tip to send to our journalists? Contact us at [emailprotected].
See the original post here:
Polish Regulators Warn Banks and Consumers on Cryptocurrency Risks - CoinDesk
Fundstrat's Tom Lee on Friday became the first major Wall Street strategist to formally lay out his views on bitcoin.
The digital currency could be worth as much as $55,000 by 2022, Lee said in a report titled "A framework for valuing bitcoin as a substitute for gold."
"We believe one of the drivers [of bitcoin] is crypto-currencies are cannibalizing demand for gold," Lee said in the report. "Based on this premise, we take a stab at establishing valuation framework for bitcoin. Based on our model, we estimate that bitcoin's value per unit could be $20,000 to $55,000 by 2022."
Bitcoin traded near $2,540 on Friday. The digital currency has more than doubled in value for the year, and high interest prompted a Goldman Sachs technical analyst, a team of Morgan Stanley analysts and Citi researchers to issue reports on bitcoin or the blockchain technology behind it in the last few months.
However, Lee is the first widely followed market strategist to issue a report dedicated to predicting bitcoin's price. Lee also happens to be the most bearish strategist on U.S. stocks currently. He was JPMorgan Chase's chief equity strategist from 2007 to 2014 before co-founding Fundstrat Global Advisors, where he is managing partner and head of research.
The strategist's case for bitcoin is a basic supply-and-demand story, similar to the argument other proponents of bitcoin use when playing up its future as "digital gold."
Gold's market value of $7.5 trillion is exponentially greater than bitcoin's $41 billion. But Lee pointed out the precious metal's supply "is surging as mining soars to all-time highs," while the number of available bitcoins is rapidly approaching its inherent 21 million-coin limit.
"A simulation shows that this will slow even further to less than 1.5% growth by ~2020, meaning bitcoin supply will grow even slower than gold," Lee said.
Bitcoin is also theoretically a better way to store value, proponents contend, since governments can easily decrease a currency's worth by printing more of it.
The constraints on bitcoin's supply and the potential worth of the digital currency mean there will be high demand for a limited product, driving up the price. Bitcoin has already surged from below $1,000 on Dec. 31 to briefly top $3,000 in June.
Lee also expects investors could look at bitcoin as a substitute for gold, and his model shows the digital currency could be valued at $20,300 by 2022. Adding more variables to the model puts the value of bitcoin in five years in a potential range of $12,000 to $55,000.
"In other words, substantial upside exists in owning cryptocurrencies here," Lee said.
He also expects central banks will consider buying the digital currencies if the total market value tops $500 billion. Including bitcoin and its rival ethereum, the value of all cryptocurrencies hovers around $100 billion, according to CoinMarketCap.
"In our view, this is a game changer, enhancing the legitimacy of the currency and likely accelerating the substitution for gold (by investors)," he said.
Lee noted a Bloomberg news report that central banks have looked into the possibility of owning digital currencies.
In March, Federal Reserve Governor Jerome Powell cautioned in a speech about the potential challenges for a central bank to issue a digital currency, including privacy.
To be sure, digital currencies such as bitcoin often swing wildly and operate in unregulated markets. While the lack of regulation is what has attracted many buyers, many consider bitcoin the "Wild West." Three years ago, Mt.Gox, the largest bitcoin exchange then, filed for bankruptcy and said it lost 750,000 of its users bitcoins and 100,000 of the exchange's own.
The future of bitcoin is also in question. This summer, the digital currency could split if developers don't agree on the same system to upgrade bitcoin.
Lee acknowledged bitcoin's volatility in his report, noting that annualized bitcoin volatility is 75 percent, "substantially higher than gold's 10%. But as noted, gold's volatility approached 90% from 1971 to 1980 as the U.S. abandoned the gold standard hence, we expect this to improve over time."
View original post here:
Top Wall Street strategist sees bitcoin 'cannibalizing' gold, worth as much as $55000 - CNBC
Bitcoins price could be in for a big drop, and thats because the cryptocurrency is facing a potentially contentious upgrade to its core software in August. If you havent heard about the impending deadline for a user-activated soft fork, heres the story:
For close to six years, the Bitcoin community has struggled to arrive at a consensus on how to scale the 1MB block size to meet growing popularity and adoption. A proposed user-activated soft fork (UASF) is an attempt to nudge the Bitcoin network to embrace and activate segregated witness (SegWit) which some believe to be one of the most promising scaling solutions by August 1.
In 2012, the network confirmed a daily average of 8,000 transactions. Today, that figure is around 350,000. Transaction overflow has resulted in high fees as users compete every 10 minutes for limited space in the Bitcoin block. The time it takes the network to confirm payments has also grown longer, at times going into hours.
Choosing and implementing a scaling solution for a decentralized platform is difficult. Having no central decision-making body is a good thing, for the most part. It makes Bitcoin less susceptible to censorship or takeover.
Several Bitcoin improvement proposals (BIPs) have been developed to fix the scaling problem. They all require a slow consensus-building process within the community.
Bitcoin core developer Pieter Wuille first proposed SegWit in 2015 to solve issues unrelated to scaling. He wanted to fix transaction malleability, or the possibility of an attacker changing the identification details of a transaction before it confirmed.
It turned out that SegWit could also create about 60 percent more room in the Bitcoin block to accommodate more transactions. It would achieve this by storing signatures separately from other transaction data.
Developers, business leaders, and miners present at the December 6, 2015 Hong Kong Bitcoin Scaling Conference signed a statement declaring a pursuit of SegWit as the first layer of scaling.
A team of developers selected at the Hong Kong meeting released the SegWit code in October 2016. To activate, the code requires at least 95 percent of nodes to signal their support. Miners and nodes owners, however, have not been enthusiastic about SegWit. So far only 33 percent of about 7,500 nodes in the network are signalling support for it.
On February 25, an anonymous core developer who goes by the pseudonym Shaolinfry published the UASF as BIP148 on the Bitcoin-developer mailing list. He or she also released the corresponding code. The mission of the UASF was to nudge more miners and nodes to embrace SegWit and hasten its activation.
Many who agree with Shaolinfry take the view that miners in particular lack the incentive to adopt SegWit. A full Bitcoin block guarantees them increased revenue in the form of the high fees users pay to speed transactions. It is therefore users who have the interest in pushing for a more efficient system.
Indeed, some users are setting up new nodes specifically so they can use them to signal support for SegWit.
Even though UASF carries the name soft fork, meaning a software upgrade that is compatible with the preceding version, it could turn into what is known as a hard fork. If half or more of the miners refuse to meet the demands of soft fork supporters, the upgrade could fail to recognize nodes that continue to run the older version. In the words of Cornell University computer science professor Emin Gn Sirer, UASF is just the face saving name for a hard fork.
Indeed, any change to the core software is a hard fork if it alienates those in the network who dont accept it, and it could therefore lead Bitcoin to split into two independent coins.
Those who oppose a UASF believe SegWit provides only short-term relief. With fast-growing Bitcoin adoption, they believe the capacity created will soon fill up again and the problem will return.
They also believe those pushing for UASF and SegWit prefer a smaller block size so they can implement their own second-layer solutions.
To a majority of those who oppose UASF and SegWit, increasing or removing the cap on the block size is the only way to solve the scaling problem. Some also think UASF poses security risks to the network. Bitcoin core developer Gregory Maxwell, for example, has said, I do not think it is a horrible proposal: it is better engineered than many things that many altcoins do, but just not up to our normal standards.
In the run-up to the potential fork in August, experts are advising users to protect their coins by making sure they use wallet services that support the UASF. A user could also set up a full node and signal for UASF as a way to protect their coins. Developer and blogger Jimmy Song:
[Users] supporting BIP-148 means they can support both forks when the UASF happens. There are really only economic benefits, not really economic penalties for supporting a BIP-148 fork other than some fixed costs. [Users] do not have to choose which software they run, they can run both and really, they should if they want to maximize their value.
On June 17, Chinese miners representing 80 percent of the Bitcoin hash power issued a statement declaring support for SegWit. Theyve also expressed their intent to have the upgrade implemented in July. If the Bitcoin community can agree to adopt SegWit before August 1, there will be no need for UASF.
The Bitcoin price may drop because of possible contentious forks ahead, but if it does, it will likely recover once the deadline for the UASF passes and a resolution to the present uncertainty becomes more clear. And since investors will want to buy in prior to the recovery, it is also possible a drop wont happen at all.
Rupert Hackett is general manager of Bitcoin.com.au, Bitcoin.co.uk (subsidiary of Bitcoin.com.au), and BuyaBitcoin.com.au. He specializes in the digital currency and digital payment space and holds the worlds first Masters degree in digital currencies. He writes for multiple Bitcoin and tech websites and is an acting Board Director for the Australian Digital Currency Commerce Association (ADCCA).
Excerpt from:
Why Bitcoin's value could get even more volatile - VentureBeat
China's central bank adviser considers Bitcoin to be a financial asset and not money, calls for the government to create its own digital currency. Read more...
The widespread adoption of Bitcoin among the masses has made it part of the global economic system. While the number of Bitcoin users continue to grow, there is still a lack of clarity about the cryptocurrencys status in the financial system. Countries like Japan have already assigned a legal position to Bitcoin as a currency, and there are others that are mulling regulations to bring the digital currency within the purview of the countrys legal structure.
By design Bitcoin shares similarities with different financial instruments. The cryptocurrency can be classified as both money and asset. However, many governments fear that by calling the virtual currency money, they will be undermining the countrys monetary system. At the same time, they cant simply ignore Bitcoin either, thereby forcing them to call it an asset instead of money.
A recent comment by one of the advisers at the Peoples Bank of China perfectly matches the observation. In an interview Sheng Songcheng mentioned,
Bitcoin does not have the strong fundamental attributes needed to be a currency as it is a string of code generated by complex algorithms But I do not deny that virtual currencies have technical value and are a type of asset.
Sheng went on to further explain the reason behind it by stating that the finite supply of Bitcoin, set to be fulfilled by the year 2140 will create a mismatch between the economic needs of the future and the actual capabilities of the cryptocurrency.
However, Sheng accepts the superiority of the cryptocurrencies over traditional currencies, thanks to their qualities. He believes that a cryptocurrency with more government control over it might be the next step towards creating the future monetary system that is more consistent with the evolving needs.
Currently, Bitcoin holds the status of a virtual good, similar to game tokens, downloadable content, etc. However, new regulations in the near future might soon change it.
Originally posted here:
Bitcoin Can't Be Considered as Money, Says PBOC Adviser - newsBTC
Local Sports
Jul 8, 2017
T-R PHOTO BY THORN COMPTON BCLUW senior Samantha Ubben, left, celebrates with senior Macy Kock after the Comets won their Class 2A Region 3 semifinal game against South Hamilton on Friday 4-1. With the win, BCLUW moves on to face Waterloo Columbus on Monday with a trip to the state tournament on the line.
CONRAD Once again a standing room only crowd was on hand to watch the Class 2A No. 12 BCLUW softball team play their Class 2A Region 8 semifinal match against No. 13 South Hamilton on Friday night, and both the Comets and Hawks fans were treated to a great, tight game from both teams.
In the end, BCLUW came away victorious, defeating South Hamilton 4-1 and earning a second-straight trip to the Regional Finals match with a trip to the State Tournament on the line.
Comets head coach David Lee said his girls played an outstanding game against a team that beat them earlier this season.
I thought our game was complete tonight, Lee said after the win. Offensively I thought we were right on the edge, we took the extra base when we could just look at the number of close plays if you want to see about that and they have great arms. We beat some throws from people who have great arms. We know we have to challenge people but we have to push the envelope because thats how we get runs once in a while.
Both teams got off to a slow start at the plate on Friday, with BCLUW (29-8) starting pitcher Samantha Ubben fanning the first three batters for the Hawks and South Hamilton (20-9) pitcher Taylor Volkmann retiring her first three batters faced.
T-R PHOTO BY THORN COMPTON BCLUW sophomore Easton Swanson slides around the tag at third base as she knocked down the first Comets hit of the game in the second inning of their 4-1 win over South Hamilton to advance to the Class 2A Region 3 finals match on Monday.
It was a similar setup in the second inning, with Ubben pitching yet another 1-2-3 inning on two ground outs and a fly ball, but after a strikeout from Comets first baseman Jordyn Beeghly to start the bottom of the second, sophomore Easton Swanson stepped up to the plate and belted a triple to get the offense rolling.
Senior Sara Sharp brought Swanson home in the ensuing at bat with a single, her first of three hits on the night for BCLUW. After the game, Sharp said she was knew it was a big moment for her in this game and she was ready to step up for her team.
I just got up to bat and I knew I had to get the job done, she said. I knew we had to score some runs in order to do what we needed to do.
Runs were at a premium all night, but after yet another extra-base hit from senior Leah Yantis in the third and an RBI single from Ubben, the Comets found themselves in a slightly comfortable lead up 2-0 after three innings played.
That comfort soon dissipated, however, as BCLUW was trapped in a bases-loaded jam in the top of the fourth with no outs, but after a discussion at the plate between Lee and his infield the girls got back on track and minimized the damage, allowing South Hamilton their only run of the night in the inning.
T-R PHOTO BY THORN COMPTON Comets seniors Samantha Ubben and Sara Sharp attempt to tag out South Hamilton senior Alissa Moss during the fourth inning.
We really dug ourselves a hole there in the fourth, we had an error and they just had two bloop hits that we couldnt get to, Lee said. I thought Sam really bore down, we gave up one run there but boy we could have given up a bunch. Jenna (Willett) made a great play on that one ball in center field too.
Both teams went scoreless again for the next two innings, but the Comets were able to give themselves some insurance in the sixth, with Beeghley starting off the frame with a standing double, Swanson laying down a sacrifice bunt to score pinch runner Kiersten Kruse from second, and Sharp knocking in her second extra-base hit of the night, later being driven home by a single from catcher Kate Goecke.
Everybody stepped up a little bit, Lee said of his teams effort. Sara hit the ball, Swanson hit the ball. Sara made a great play here at third base at the end where she bobbled the ball but still was able to get the out, and that was one where we needed it.
The errors, whether at the plate or in the field, didnt seem to effect the team. The team just stepped up and made the next play, whatever it had to be. That is what I am so pleased with the kids about.
Ubben pitched a complete game for BCLUW, giving up only one run off four hits and striking out nine. Sharp went 3-for-3 offensively with an RBI and a run scored, while Ubben and Swanson each had a hit and an RBI.
T-R PHOTO BY THORN COMPTON
The Comets get a bit longer of a rest than the last couple weeks now, as they have two days off before taking on Columbus Catholic for the 2A Region 3 crown Monday night.
Lee said, though they have an extra day to prepare, the teams approach to this finals match wont be any different than what theyve done all season.
We will do what we have been doing all year, he said. We will actually take Saturday off, we wont do anything then and we will practice on Sunday night when it is cooler. Then we will do what weve done on Monday morning and get ready to go play the game. We are kind of in a little pattern with what we do to get ready so we will stay with that.
That game against Columbus Catholic is set for a 7 p.m. start in Waterloo on Monday.
LA PORTE CITY The East Marshall softball team got yet another win in the Class 3A Region 5 tournament on Friday ...
GILBERTVILLE Chandler Sponseller hit his first-career home run and the West Marshall baseball team ended the ...
Originally posted here:
Comets clip Hawks in semifinals - Marshalltown Times Republican
When Breana Thurness saw the throw from the West Burlington Notre Dame shortstop sail over the first basemans head, she couldnt help but smile as she dashed to home plate.
As the junior stomped on the plate, she capped off a three-run really in the bottom of the seventh that allowed West Liberty to top West Burlington, 5-4, in the Class 3A regional softball semifinal Friday.
"Im just glad that I got to have this because this is something Ill remember forever, Thurness said. I was so excited I just wanted to give the team a hug. It was a big moment.
It took some heroics from Thurness to even put the Comets in that position. They trailed 4-2 entering the seventh inning and with two runners on base and one out, she trailed 0-2 in the pitch count. She fought back, and eventually ripped a double down the third-base line to score two runs and tie the game.
Shes a good hitter, coach Dave Reynolds said. Shell drive the ball that way all the time. She probably deserves some all-league votes but didnt get them.
If things had gone just a little differently, that scenario never would have played out. Reynolds forgot to re-enter Thurness into the lineup, but West Burlington coach David Oleson didnt question it until Thurness was on second base after already tying the game with her two-RBI double. Had he noticed while she was in the batters box, she would have been out before having a chance to hit, which would have been West Libertys second out of the inning.
Thats a miscue I wont make again, Reynolds said.
Before all of that, the Comets appeared to be in complete control of the game entering the seventh inning after an RBI single by sophomore Skylar Wendt to break a 1-1 tie in the bottom of the sixth. With the way junior pitcher Emma Martin had been hitting her spots through six innings, Reynolds said he thought they had the Falcons.
But the Falcons finally got to Martin and scored three runs in the top of the seventh to take a 4-2 lead. Even so, there was no panic in the Comets.
I knew we would start hitting the ball, Reynolds said. I could see it in those captains' eyes when we came up to bat. I never give up on these guys and they never cease to amaze me.
Reynolds said his entire team, even the young players, hasnt been fazed by pressure all season, and it was more of the same Friday night. At a time where it would have been easy to sulk, the Comets entered the seventh inning ready to make the Falcons work for the win.
Sophomore Macy Akers started the bottom of the seventh with a walk, and senior Haddie Anderson followed with a single on the next at-bat. Freshman Austyn Crees sacrifice bunt moved the runners into scoring position for Thurness, who was confident even though she was 0-for-1 at that point.
You just have to stay positive through everything, Thurness said. Even if youre nervous, you have to stay strong. The team always has your back, and thats kind of what calmed me down is I know I have them to fall back to.
But Thurness came through in the biggest moment of the night, and after narrowly avoiding a tag on a ground ball to the short stop, made it clear home to clinch the Comets biggest win of the season and a birth in the regional championship.
West Liberty will now face its biggest test of the season in Davenport Assumption in the regional championship Monday night in Davenport. Assumption is 39-1, and its only loss came in its first game, to Moline 4-3.
We have to come out and play the best we can, Reynolds said. Whatever happens, happens. Its a tall task, but theyre up for it. Well leave it all out on the field.
Read more here:
Myth: Psoriasis is a disease that will impact someone for the entire lifetime, there is no cure.
Truth: This is false. Almost psoriasis is a very persistent disease, there are number of treatments that can be used to help combat this ailment. Psoriasis is an inflammatory skin disease in which the bodys immune cells start to attack itself. Psoriasis affects approximately 2% of all adults and is often associated with a poor quality of life and other diseases such as obesity and diabetes hypertension and metabolic syndrome. In this disease, an immune cell called interleukin-23 is hypothesized to play an important role in the bodys inappropriate inflammatory state. This Al is believed to be responsible for inducing and maintaining inflammatory cells. Currently, there are a number of available therapies that can be used to help treat psoriasis. Some of these treatments include antibodies whose purpose is to attack immune cells responsible for the inflammatory response in the body. One example is Ustekinumab, which targets a subunit in interleukin-23. Previous research has shown that this drug is safe, well-tolerated, and effective in treating psoriasis patients.
Recently, a clinical trial compared the efficacy onset, and duration of clinical response between Ustekinumab and another antibody drug, risankizumab. In this study, patients were administered one of the two antibodies and were analyzed for their responses. Although both drugs prove to be effective against arises in more than half of the patients, it was found that Usenkinumab was more effective. As well, it was found that patients who were administered Usenkinumab had both faster and longer benefits in response to this drug, in comparison to riskankizumab. Read more about the effectiveness of different antibody treatments in psoriasis here.
Go here to see the original:
By 2010 the site was bringing in $50,000 to $60,000 a year says Kepnes, from e-books he had written (which he sold for $6.99 to $29.99), sponsored posts and a little bit of affiliate marketing, so he decided to focus on Nomadic Matt full time. Kepnes soon added media courses and wrote a New York Times best seller, "How to Travel the World on $50 a Day."
All the while, Kepnes kept traveling. "I went scuba diving in Fiji, safaried across Africa, went to the Galapagos, went hiking in Patagonia," he says, "to name a few." To date he's been to more than 90 countries.
During that time, Kepnes says he's continued developing his travel courses, upped his affiliate revenue and regularly launched new products. By 2013, the site was bringing in six figures. Now, Nomadic Matt has 1.5 million visitors a month and grosses about $750,000 year, according to Kepnes. He has three full-time employees a stable of freelancers. He also co-owns a hostel in Austin, Texas.
These days, Kepnes, 36, says he travels about six months of the year, and splits the rest of his time between New York City and Austin. "If I'm not traveling, I'm probably working. I pretty much am always working, but I like my job so I don't mind it," he says.
Follow this link:
Only a month after Donald Trump took over the presidency, travel executives predicted his call for a ban on travel from several largely Muslim countries and his promise to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border would make international travelers feel unwelcome in the United States.
But new data show that inbound international travel grew 5.2% in May, marking the 13th straight month of positive year-over-year growth, according to the U.S. Travel Assn., the trade group that represents the nations travel industry.
Still, the analysis suggests that the growth of international travel is slowing, possibly because of a strong U.S. dollar and Trumps proposed policy changes, according to the group.
The stronger U.S. dollar will likely continue to weigh on international travel, and President Trumps rhetoric and policies, including travel restrictions and anti-immigration stance, pose additional risk to international traveler sentiment, the report said.
Domestic travel is projected to continue to grow over the next five months by 2.2% on a year-over-year basis spurred by strong business investments and rising household income.
Still, the travel association took a swipe at Trump, saying a turbulent start to the Trump presidency and his failure to deliver on campaign pledges of fiscal stimulus, tax reform and reduced regulations has the potential to undermine confidence from both businesses and consumers alike.
In February, two studies suggested that Trumps policies and rhetoric already had hurt the travel industry. An analysis of about 300 million online air travel searches in February found that flight searches from international origins to the U.S. dropped 17% after Trump took office and signed an executive order Jan. 27, banning travel from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, Yemen and Somalia. The Supreme Court ruled in June to allow much of the ban to take effect, but also applied significant restrictions. Iraq was removed from the later ban.
Around the same time, the Global Business Travel Assn., the trade group for the worlds travel managers, said business travel bookings in the U.S. dropped 3.4% in the week after Trump signed the order compared with the previous week.
To read more about the travel and tourism industries, follow @hugomartin on Twitter.
ALSO
Strong June rebound signals job growth is solid again but substantial raises remain elusive
Stocks rebound after solid jobs report
UCLA grabs the top spot among 225 universities in business creation
Why some pot businesses hide their cash and others truck it straight to a federal vault
Excerpt from:
Trump's polices were expected to hit the travel industry hard. That ... - Los Angeles Times
Miami Herald | Shevchenko's world travels lead to title shot at UFC 213 Miami Herald Valentina Shevchenko has no idea how many countries she has visited or how many millions of miles she has covered in her lifelong pursuit of insight, enlightenment and new martial arts skills. Fighting is her profession, but the quest for knowledge is ... |
See the article here:
Shevchenko's world travels lead to title shot at UFC 213 - Miami Herald
Mateo Valero is Director of the Barcelona Supercomputing Center
In this video from ISC 2017, Mateo Valero from the Barcelona Supercomputing Center describes the innovations behind MareNostrum 4, the #13 supercomputer on the TOP500.
MareNostrum 4, hosted by Barcelona Supercomputing Center, is entirely aimed at generating scientific knowledge and its computer architecture has been called the most diverse and interesting in the world by international experts. Equipped with Intels latest processing and networking technologies, MareNostrum provides 11.1 Petaflops of processing power to scientific production. This is the capacity of the general-purpose cluster, the largest and most powerful part of the supercomputer, which will be increased thanks to the installation of three new, smaller-scale clusters, featuring emerging technologies, over the next few months. The capacity of 11.1 Petaflops is 10 times greater than that of MareNostrum 3, which was installed between 2012 and 2013.
According to the Top500 ranking published on 19 June, the MareNostrum 4 supercomputers general-purpose cluster is the third most powerful one in Europe and the thirteenth in the world. The Top500 list is based on how quickly supercomputers execute the high-performance linpack benchmark.
See our complete coverage of ISC 2017
Sign up for our insideHPC Newsletter
Read more here:
Mateo Valero on how the MareNostrum 4 Supercomputer will ... - insideHPC