Daily Archives: August 6, 2017

Houston Astros Report: The evolution of the rainbow uniform revealed – House of Houston

Posted: August 6, 2017 at 3:11 am

SEATTLE, WA - JUNE 24: Starter Lance McCullers Jr.

Houston Texans: Five Reasons why Deshaun Watson could be great or a bust by Kenneth Cline

The rainbow uniform design has continued to be one of my favorite Houston Astros uniform design pieces and its right up there with the Shooting Star design of the 1960s. The design of the uniform that I mention of lasted for 21 years from 1975-86 and it has truly stood the test of time.

Paul Lukas of ESPN.com wrote a spectacular piece in regard to the untold story of the uniforms and how one begotten design firm created something that was revolutionary in its own right. Although I wasnt alive when the unis debuted back in 1975, I do recall seeing them at games in the Astrodome before they were modified after the 1986 season, one of the best in team history.

Seeing greats like Nolan Ryan and guys like Mike Scott, Alan Ashby, Jim Deshaies and Billy Hatcher don those uniforms was nothing short of amazing.

I didnt get to go to many games in my early childhood as my family was growing at the time and all my parents resources were focused on keeping a roof over our head and plenty of food to eat. But there were many occasions where I got to go to games and Id just be in awe of the luminosity of the unis as well as the effervescence of our home field, fresh off multi-million dollar renovation where whole interior appeared to be a giant rainbow.

I want to let you read the piece itself but Gary Rollins, the director of Astros TV and radio network, was more in favor of the traditional design like the Detroit Tigers and Los Angeles Dodgers but was steered more in the direction of something more bold. The network was hemorrhaging money at the time and were on the verge of declaring bankruptcy. But it was the new look that staved off such a notion and were a big hit.

Heres a categorization of the evolution by uni expert Paul Lukas:

I do disagree with Lukas in regard to the notion of the 75 jerseys being the best. Im just not a fan of the number being encapsulated in a circle but Im more in favor of the final rehash that continued from 1977-86. Even former Astros president and general manager Tal Smith lobbied hard to get the circle removed.

There were also sorts of designs proposed from a white star on the front to a unique-looking A on the cap of the uniform as well as orange pants. Take a look of those pics None of those wouldve been a good idea because one needs the audacity of such a new concept but not the point of being too tacky. I think the Houston Astros found a perfect medium with the two, hence the design that many of us still wear to this day as a homage to a notable era in franchise history.

Want your voice heard? Join the House of Houston team!

It wouldve been an injustice had this story had not been told and Im glad that a fellow journalist went out to seek the truth and to report it as fully as possible. That is, of course, one of the guiding principles in this business. Lets hope this design continues to stand the test of time like it already has.

Go Astros.

Original post:

Houston Astros Report: The evolution of the rainbow uniform revealed - House of Houston

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on Houston Astros Report: The evolution of the rainbow uniform revealed – House of Houston

EPL at 25: An evolution to find the winning edge – The Straits Times

Posted: at 3:11 am

It took a quarter of a century. The Premier League had gone from an almost exclusively British affair to a cultural melting pot, a place where players and managers from across the footballing world congregated and combined. But it was not until its 25th year that anyone won the league playing with a back three.

It is an indication of what a revolutionary Antonio Conte has proved. When the season starts on Friday, the Premier League may look like Serie A: not in the pace of the game, but in the formations.

The back three, largely unfashionable apart from a spell in the 1990s when Roy Evans' Liverpool and Brian Little's Aston Villa championed it, was used by 18 clubs last season. Even Arsene Wenger, a devotee of the back four, has become a late convert. Even Jose Mourinho has experimented with it. And they had been more English than the English in their preference for a defensive quartet.

For the first half of its existence, the Premier League's dominant formation was the traditionally British 4-4-2. Arguably the division's greatest side, Manchester United's 1999 Treble winners, just played it better than everyone else, albeit with split strikers.

Wenger brought the first injection of Total Football principles to the system, players such as Thierry Henry, Dennis Bergkamp, Robert Pires and Freddie Ljungberg exchanging positions within the shape. Arsenal had a striker who did not always lead the line, a genuine No. 10 and inverted wide midfielders, rather than wingers.

Mourinho also brought a sea change in thinking when he first arrived in 2004. He removed a striker for an extra midfielder, helped by Frank Lampard's ability to outscore most forwards, prioritising the control a specialist anchorman gave him and preferring 4-3-3.

The cautious, counter-attacking approach he and Rafa Benitez introduced was copied. Alex Ferguson also started to field a third central midfielder, valuing possession, particularly in Europe.

Wenger abandoned 4-4-2 when Patrick Vieira left and Cesc Fabregas emerged. English football became less fast and furious. Its teams acquired more nous, which was reflected in its golden age in the Champions League in the 2000s.

Its lesser lights had a similarly pragmatic blueprint, courtesy of Sam Allardyce. He fielded a solitary striker, concentrated on clean sheets and set-pieces and kept teams up.

Players evolved to suit the new systems. The default ploy became 4-2-3-1. The specialist predator became an endangered species, along with the impotent target man; forwards needed to be a hybrid. Attacking midfielders, inverted wingers and No. 10s began to flourish.

The 2010s brought a drop in standards, an increase in goals and a clash of competing ideas. The emphasis on defence declined. Three teams scored a century of goals; a policy of all-out attack mixed with extreme tactical experimenting almost won Brendan Rodgers' Liverpool the title, even if it was a formula few could copy.

After two throwback champions, Mourinho's Chelsea resembling the side of a decade earlier and Leicester's 4-4-2 addicts caring little for possession and offering reminders of the 1980s, came a new era. Perhaps Conte has won the battle of ideas, but in one respect Mauricio Pochettino and Jurgen Klopp have taken English football back to its roots, with gegenpressing a new term for high-tempo football.

In another, the degree of tactical flexibility is new and perhaps will be more prevalent in the future. Pep Guardiola, always liable to change shape, could be a pioneer while Klopp has something both familiar and alien, using a false nine and little width in attack. But history tends to be written by the winners, so for now, Conte seems the most influential innovative import.

More:

EPL at 25: An evolution to find the winning edge - The Straits Times

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on EPL at 25: An evolution to find the winning edge – The Straits Times

School Shootings And Evolution: A Response To Pastor Hines – Patheos (blog)

Posted: at 3:11 am

Today Im going to do something unusual: write a direct and explicit response to a Christian. Instead of doing this to another Patheos blogger I am instead going to write to a Christian pastor who publishes videos on YouTube. The pastorI am responding to is Pastor Hines.I encourage any readers of mine to view the video by Pastor Hines. His channel is named Toward a Biblical and Christian Worldview.

Pastor Hines seems to truly believe that he can reduce gun violence but provides no evidence to support this idea.

He claims teaching evolutionand natural selection to children will cause them to lash out and act like animals. He claims that teaching the extraterrestrial origin of life (which no one teaches in the United States as far as I know, at least not as the definitive origin of life on this planet) is child abuse. Pastor Hines claims that abortion is murder and that we celebrate sexual filth. Pastor Hines claims its abusive to indoctrinate children into lies. He also claims that he and those in his camp can understand the world in a way that we as evolutionists cannot. Pastor Hines also tries to claim in a roundabout way that there are no Christian school shooters. Not true.

There is no connection between belief in evolution and school shootings in or out of the United States. Thats a blunt statement but its one that can easily be shown to be true. In order to examine this thoroughly and actually see why Ive arrived at this conclusion lets look at Ballotpedias map of school shootings from 1990 to the present. If you look at it carefully youll notice the most religious area, the south, has the most school shootings. That alone is enough to rip apart the claim that a belief in evolution inherently leads to a population of students more likely to engage in school shootings. But if thats not enough to convince you think about this: theres an article on Quartz which compares school shootings in the United States with multiple victims to school shootings in 36 other countries with multiple victims, whose combined total population is around 3.8 billion people.

I do not want people to leave here thinking I believe belief in Christianity leads to an increased likelihood of a student shooting up a school. I dont believe that. I believe that there are a multitude of factors which influence the possibility that a student or outsider might shoot up a school. But the idea that belief in evolution somehow positively correlates with an increase risk of school shootings is unsupported by evidence.

Victims of school shootings are not playthings you can use to make nonsensical points about the importance of your religion. These are both living and dead victims of a tragedy and I cannot fathom how vile a human being Pastor Hines must be to think that this is an acceptable thing to do. I cannot imagine how despicable someone must be to consider this an appropriate action.

Christianity alone will not reduce school shootings or other instances of violence in and out of school. It just wont and pretending that your religion is a universal remedy for very real violence and ignorance is dangerous. We need to find a way to reduce gun violence but I dont believe for a second that encouraging people to convert to any single religion will actually cause a detectable dip in violence. This pastor wants to make his listeners believe that violence can be reduced due to his religious beliefs. It hasnt been.

One of the biggest issues with the claims of Pastor Hines is that he provides no evidence for them. He doesnt even try. He just boldly asserts what he believes the world ought to be like but almost religiously refuses to back his claims. He doesnt deserve a venue with which to make these ignorant claims if he cant even be bothered to pretend to research them.

Another response to Pastor Hines has been created by the excellent YouTuber Essence Of Thought:

We need to have conversations about this backed by evidence. Pastor Hines is not interested in having such a conversation and this can be determined by examining his remarkable focus on a single school shooting, even if its one of the most violent in living memory. If we actually want to prevent more school shootings we need to carefully look at and analyze various school shootings to come across commonalities, and not make ignorant assertions about what we believe the causes are of a single shooting. Pastors like Pastor Hines do not help us move closer to a world with less school shootings.

Read more:

School Shootings And Evolution: A Response To Pastor Hines - Patheos (blog)

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on School Shootings And Evolution: A Response To Pastor Hines – Patheos (blog)

Evolution key as Eddie Jones plots England’s path to World Cup glory – ESPN.co.uk

Posted: at 3:11 am

Eddie Jones says England will need to be the "best prepared team in the world" to return from Japan victorious.

TWICKENHAM -- Fail to prepare, prepare to fail. That is the adage driving England on as Eddie Jones attempts to mastermind 2019 Rugby World Cup glory.

The tournament in Japan does not kick off for another 25 months, but with their Pool C opponents confirmed, England have already begun to plan for their assault on the Webb Ellis Cup.

Eddie Jones believes Manu Tuilagi can "demolish" the All Blacks and branded Leicester's wrecking-ball centre worth every ounce of effort poured into rebuilding his injury-hit England career.

Manu Tuilagi has returned to the England squad for their three-day preseason training session this weekend.

1 Related

Jones is constantly looking to improve his side -- both on and off the field -- and with that in mind he and members of his backroom staff have looked to sports as diverse as football, formula one, cycling and bobsleigh for inspiration.

"We need to be the best prepared team in the world because to win the World Cup is going to take an extraordinary performance," Jones told reporters at a media briefing Friday.

"And to have an extraordinary performance, we have to have an extraordinary preparation."

They will also, more than likely, need to beat New Zealand. Jones hinted that he had spotted a weakness in the back-to-back champions over the summer, suggesting the All Blacks are "experiencing problems with their depth" as squad players head to Europe.

England are not scheduled to play the All Blacks prior to the World Cup, but signs from their own June tour were encouraging as a side shorn of 15 British & Irish Lions players sealed a 2-0 series win in Argentina.

Jones is not one to get carried away, though, and he knows there is plenty of work to do if England are to return from Japan victorious. On Friday, he admitted he did not have any players at his disposal who would strike fear in opponents.

"We're developing players who are going to be like that," he said.

Billy Vunipola, back in the training squad announced Thursday as he continues to recover from the shoulder injury that ended his Lions tour before it had begun, is one who Jones predicts has the potential to become world class.

Then there are the nine debutants from Argentina retained for the camp on the outskirts of London, with Tom Curry and Sam Underhill both receiving praise. "They've got a range of skills, a range of toughness to set them up to play Test rugby."

The inclusion of the opensides hints at an evolution in the back row. James Haskell's performances under Jones mean he has credit in the bank but the fight for the No. 7 jersey is on.

And that is, perhaps, the secret to England's success over the last 18 months. Everyone from captain Dylan Hartley to the coaching staff knows that if their level drops then their place in the group is under threat.

"No one's set in stone apart from myself for the next game," Jones said. "Everyone's got to keep improving. That's the challenge ahead."

On the pitch Jones is determined to see an improvement in how well his side uses the ball. He believes pragmatic rugby, building through phases to put the opposition under pressure, is a thing of the past.

"You've got to be able to crack the opposition in the first three phases," he said. "Find the space, use the ball, keep the ball alive, and be accurate in your skill work.

"So, that would be what we'd like to see. But that's not going to happen overnight. It takes time, it takes effort, it takes application."

It is the type of rugby that sets the All Blacks apart from every other rugby playing nation, and Jones' desire to depose New Zealand as the world's No. 1 side is behind his willingness to gamble on the talent of Manu Tuilagi.

The Leicester centre is still some way short of a return to the Test arena, as Jones himself admitted, but he possesses an irresistible ability to break the gain line and put into practice the type of game plan that the England coach craves.

"I know the kid himself is working as hard as he can to get back on the field," Jones said. "At the moment everything looks pretty positive so we've just got to pray that this positivity keeps going and he has a period where he can be injury-free and show what he's capable of."

The memory might be fading but England fans are well aware what Tuilagi is capable of. In 2012 the centre capped a wonderful performance with a try as the All Blacks were beaten 38-21 at Twickenham.

It was a game Jones alluded to Friday as he said: "No one's ripped them [New Zealand] apart, apart from Manu."

Jones added: "He loves rugby and he wants to play for England. He loves playing for England.

"He's doing everything he can to get ready and I'm impressed by his dedication because he's had a tough time. The amount of injuries he's had would be enough to knock people away."

Originally posted here:

Evolution key as Eddie Jones plots England's path to World Cup glory - ESPN.co.uk

Posted in Evolution | Comments Off on Evolution key as Eddie Jones plots England’s path to World Cup glory – ESPN.co.uk

Fintan O’Toole: There will always be a market for misogyny – Irish Times

Posted: at 3:11 am

Kevin Myers. He told Sen ORourke on RT: Men are driven by urges women dont have. Photograph: RT Radio One/PA Wire

If anything good can come from the painful results of Kevin Myerss now infamous column in last Sundays Sunday Times, it is that many people who take sexist language for granted have been forced to think about it. The column was essentially an attack on the idea that women are equal to men. But this was not in itself seen as a problem by his employers. The Sunday Times, in its two statements on the affair, made no apology for (or even acknowledgment of) this argument. Myers himself, in his subsequent radio interviews, apologised profusely (and with obvious sincerity) for his use of anti-Semitic tropes. But he stood over his broader argument in the column and strongly denied that he is any way misogynistic. This self-belief is also sincere. But it is wrong.

In the column, Myers blew himself up because he strayed off the familiar path of least resistance (insulting those who do not enjoy his own privileges) into the minefield of anti-Semitic stereotypes. This was an accident. But there was nothing accidental about his use of another far-right trope and his application of it to the notion of gender equality.

The central tenet of far-right thought has always been that equality is a degenerate illusion there is only the primal Darwinian struggle in which the weak go to the wall and the fittest survive and triumph. The core of Myerss column is a reiteration of this reality to justify the unequal treatment of women, primarily by the BBC but, by implication, in society as a whole. Women go to the wall because they are no good at the Darwinian game. Men triumph because they play it properly.

All of this is quite explicit. Equality is a unicorn in other words, it does not exist. Inequality in this case the unequal treatment of women is therefore natural and inevitable. Women, instead of wailing and shrieking, should accept the law of the survival of the fittest: Get what you can with whatever talents you have. And, if what you get is the shitty end of the stick, shut up about it.

To understand how misogynistic this is, we have to take it in its own terms. Lets accept, even though it is nonsense, that there is only an endless evolutionary struggle for dominance. How, in Myerss terms, could women ever win it? They couldnt because those terms are nothing but a series of traps designed to catch female ambition while letting the male version pass on to its well-deserved triumph.

The bogus nature of the argument is immediately obvious from its treatment of childbearing. If blind evolutionary drives are to be the main organising principle of society, basic logic would suggest that the primary instinct is the survival of the species. This being so, giving birth to children would be understood as an activity to be rewarded, supported and encouraged. But because it is women who do this, this logic has to be inverted. When it doesnt suit male dominance, the cod-Darwinism that supports the whole thesis goes out the window. Or rather, it is turned back on women: women have only themselves to blame when they are paid less than the men because the men seldom get pregnant. What should we call it when someone upends his own argument purely to justify female biological inferiority? Misogyny seems a good word.

Ploughing on, we encounter the evolutionary characteristics that, according to Myers, fit men better for the eternal struggle. One, that they work harder, is so ludicrous that it need not detain us, except to note the irony of the claim appearing in a column whose author now admits to not thinking very hard about even as he was writing it. The second is that they are more charismatic. But charisma isnt a natural trait it is a matter of perception. And you have to be wilfully blind not to know that charisma in the workplace is a matter of gender. A domineering, self-centred, demanding, entitled man is charismatic. A woman with the same traits is a monstrous harridan.

Which brings us to the most Darwinian term of all: men succeed because they are more driven than women. Can there be a more loaded word? A man who elbows his way to the top and walks over the fallen bodies of his rivals is showing that he has drive. There is a different word for a woman who does the same. She is a bitch. But then this is what this whole linguistic game is about. Myers argues that women can succeed only when they act like men or at least a caricatured version of manhood favoured by a particular variety of creep. But of course he doesnt really believe they can: as he told Sen ORourke on RT: Men are driven by urges women dont have. Hence the trap: the girls can succeed only if they are as driven as the boys, but since they dont have those drives at all, the real message is that they can never succeed at all and should stop whining about it. Men are always going to be better at manning up than women. Its only natural.

The column itself embodies these double standards. It is hysterical to and beyond the point of incoherence . It might fairly be called an extended exercise in wailing and shrieking. But of course those are female characteristics: one of the things Myers wails and shrieks about at the height of his indignation is female columnists indignant words of smouldering mediocrity. When Myers does it, its heroically male truth-telling. If a woman did it (and in fact I cannot think of a female columnist in Ireland who has ever been granted such well-paid licence to rehearse prejudice), it would be proof of female emotional instability.

And if women do succeed in spite of all these traps? There are too bloody many of them. Myers tells women to forget equality and man up but then complains in the column about the ubiquity of Miriam OCallaghan and Claire Byrne on the airwaves, including the weather, the ploughing championships and the Angelus. Presumably they succeeded by being more driven than men and, um, not having babies (or at least keeping it to eight). But in the misogynistic mindset, a woman can never be right even when she does what men like Myers tell her to do.

Prejudice depends on such ludicrous inconsistencies. But it always has a purpose: to make inequalities rooted in centuries of oppression seem entirely natural and to blame the victims for their inferior situation. Those who benefit from these inequalities love nothing better than to be told that they deserve everything they have because the world is a jungle and they are the key predators. Myers may be gone, but so long as this is the case, there will always be a market for misogyny.

Read more from the original source:

Fintan O'Toole: There will always be a market for misogyny - Irish Times

Posted in Darwinism | Comments Off on Fintan O’Toole: There will always be a market for misogyny – Irish Times

FIRST Robotics held areas first competition at UNC Pembroke – WBTW – Myrtle Beach and Florence SC

Posted: at 3:11 am

PEMBROKE, NC(WBTW) FIRST robotics hosted its Thundering Herd Of Robots competition atUNC Pembroke. This is the counties first-ever THOR event.

The event included 13 teams of high school students from around North Carolina who gathered during the off-season to compete Saturday. During the competition students competed by building robots they designed, build, programmed and tested in only six weeks.

They also qualify for scholarships at nearly 200 colleges or universities by participating in the FIRST robotics competitions.

Organizers told News13, the students not only get tolearn team building skills,but they alsogain the skills they need in future careers.

There is multiple sides to this, theres engineering and business, said Joshua Carlile, a competitor from Robeson Early College High School.You learn pretty much everything, electronics, programming quick thinking of course, and actually building added Carlile.

FIRST North Carolina is a nonprofit organization created to inspire youth to pursue careers in science and technology and to help them acquire the skills to compete in a technologically-driven economy.

FIRST robotics is always looking for mentors or sponsors for robotics teams, to learn more about first robotics click here.

See the original post:

FIRST Robotics held areas first competition at UNC Pembroke - WBTW - Myrtle Beach and Florence SC

Posted in Robotics | Comments Off on FIRST Robotics held areas first competition at UNC Pembroke – WBTW – Myrtle Beach and Florence SC

You are the business of the future. – HuffPost

Posted: at 3:11 am

In your speeches you always claim that the best investment is in yourself. Could you please elaborate on that?

We live in uncertain times that is the simple truth. The evolution of technology together with globalization has greatly impacted how we perceive our job and status in our current society. Living in the digital era is like nothing human beings have done before. Everything is changing rapidly around us and all of us must co-create our future in order to not only survive but thrive in these uncertain times. When uncertainty strikes, it is only the creative and adaptable people who will survive. These people will know to invest in themselves (in their education and in their image) and will be eager to work closely with technology. The futurist Thomas Frey predicted that 2 billion jobs will disappear by 2030 and freelancing will be the most profitable profession in the world. And our children will be technologically native to the point that they will not know how to survive without the internet. In such a context it is only natural that the ideas of the businesses of the future to receive a lot of heat. But the truth is, no matter how many people will like to call themselves futurist prophets, most have no idea what the future holds. Thus, your best asset is you and your best investment is in yourself.

Karina, you are a Brand Master. What does a personal brand represent for you?

Andy Warhol predicted correctly that in the future everyone will have their 15 minutes of fame. Andy's future is our now. And with the help of the internet, we can now (if we know how to) sell our products and services and share our message with anyone and everyone who is willing to listen. Did it seem to you that investing in yourselves, brand and image is too big investment? You think you cannot afford it? You cannot afford not having it. Because not having a well crafted online presence is equivalent of being dead. You cannot expect to market and promote as you did 7 years ago and wonder why it is not working. And the business of the future is called personal branding. A personal brand is an ensemble of elements (logo, motto, graphic elements, storyline, image and so on) well crafted in order to create a perception in the mind of your target customer with the intention of selling your products and services and becoming a status symbol.

Why would anyone need a personal brand?

Because people buy people. Just think about it. People buy products and services from someone they like and whom they trust. If Doctor Oz would suddenly move to your neighborhood, everybody will have an appointment. Why? Because people know him and feel that they can trust him. That is the power of a well constructed brand.

Because people do not know what you do until you tell them. Doctors for example, have no shame in showcasing their title in front of their name every time they have the chance. Why should not you do it if you are really good at something?

Because you have a brand even if you do not know it. It might not be a well crafted brand but it is there. Because as you form an opinion about with whom you interact with in real life, so do people form an opinion about you when they interact with your website (or lack of a website) or with any picture of any cousin or any interesting meal you post.

Creating your image as a celebrity expert in your field is crucial if you want to have a secure position as a professional in the future, because a secure image is something no company, no robot, no competitor can take away. And if you construct this brand well enough whether you are a coach, a consultant, entrepreneur, business person, writer, nutritionist, artist, singer or even a manager or a freelancer, you will reach a wider audience, you will be paid more than someone without a well constructed image. Being the CEO and Brand Master at KO by Karina Ochis, the next generation branding and marketing agency, as well as a best-selling author for the book Cracking the Code to Success, co-authored with Bryan Tracy (Chairman of Bryan Tracy International and world renowned development authority), in which I elaborate my formula on elite branding, I dedicated my life to studying these subjects and the people who became celebrity experts in their field.

Can you tell us a few tips and tricks that anyone can implement in their personal branding strategy?

1. Be authentic but do not over share

Telling your story and highlighting the struggles you overtake is one thing and constantly exposing your misfortune is another thing. It can take 20 years to build a reputation and only one wrong photo to ruin it. It can be easy in the internet age to get carried away by the moment to post something that seems like it benefits you short term, and in the long term would be completely disastrous. In my case, I would have gained a much bigger audience quicker, if I would have posted humoristic videos. But because I am a professional who builds a long lasting career and thinks about the long term consequences of the implications of my decisions, I will not do so.

2. Fact sells but story tells

In writing your story you need to be authentic, consistent and keep the story grounded in facts. Sure, you can write your story in a manner to best showcase your abilities, your philosophies and your achievements. However, the internet world is very transparent. Thus writing a fallacy will always be in your detriment for the long run.

A brand book comprises Brand Consultation, Brand Strategy and Visual Identity Handbook. Whatever the situation, you and your team should be able to refer to this brand book at any time to have a clear framework for your brand design and its implementation.

4. Do not have a static website?

When having a website became a trend, individuals as well as companies, had a tendency towards creating a website, uploading it on the internet and leaving it there. But merely having a website on the internet does not guarantee that you will sell more products and services, nor than people will know more about you. You grow as your business grows and implicitly, your website needs to grow together with you. A website is not something of a static nature that you upload once and then just leave it on the internet. It is your main branding and marketing vehicle and you have to upload it constantly with news, information, as well as with expert advice and your expert opinion on your field. Depending on your brand and on your field of activity you should post either every week or on a monthly basis. When you share your opinions and advices on a topic with your audience, when you are naturally perceived as the expert of your domain, and when you give actual real life advice to individuals, they will be more likely to contact you rather than your competition. For example on my blog, I regularly write about branding, entrepreneurship, leadership and lifestyle design, since I am both a coach and a speaker in these subjects.

How should one communicate their personal brand on social media?

You do not behave in the same manner at a football game as you do at the opera. In consequence you should not communicate on Facebook in the same manner you would communicate on Twitter. Every social media platform has its own style of communication and its own framework in which you have to share your story. It is up to each personal brand to figure out how to communicate with their target audience on each platform. Instagram for example is appropriate for showcasing a more personal side of yourself, in contrast to LinkedIn where you want to focus on your CV and on your professional activities. Facebook should play the role of you newspaper, where you aggregate all the main information about you: what you stand for, what your mission is, as well as your latest news. You need to familiarize yourself with the language and abbreviation of every platform, because you cannot speak in an impropriate manner on a platform and expect great results.

What is trending right now when it comes to personal branding?

Documenting is the new marketing. When you build an authentic brand, one that is true to you and to who you are, you can be transparent with your journey. The time of overly creating content is slowly and gradually fading away. Personal branding and marketing is going to be all about documenting your journey and your professional activities.

What do you wish everyone would know about personal branding before they start the branding process?

Firstly, DIY is not always the best option. Not all personal brands are created equal. I am always baffled by how people are willing to invest enormous amounts of money on universities, but when is time to pay for a logo that represents themselves, they try to find the cheapest option. Remember - your brand book, logo and your brand pictures, reflect who you are in the digital world. If you think about it, your website is like your office and your social media is like your car. Sure, there are things you can do yourself and there are things that you should not try to do yourself. That is why, when you build a house, you call an architect.

Secondly, your time will come. Strong personal brands are built in time. Dont expect to be an overnight success. You need to build a strong foundation that you can easily expand. If you are good enough, your time to shine will come. When they invented the saying Everyone is replaceable, they clearly did not count people with a strong brand. Because when you have a strong brand, you become irreplaceable.

Karina Ochis is the CEO and Brand Master at KO by Karina Ochis (next generation branding company), founder of Ana Karina Luxury Concept (company dedicated to the implementation of the businesses of the future), Best Selling Author (for the book she co-wrote with Brian Tracy, Cracking the Code to Success), International Speaker, Life and Brand Coach (accredited by Tony Robbins) and host of the YouTube shows Branding Biz. Club and Weekly K.

Karinas Website: http://www.karinaochis.com

Karinas company website: http://www.kobykarinaochis.com

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

See original here:

You are the business of the future. - HuffPost

Posted in Mind Uploading | Comments Off on You are the business of the future. – HuffPost

How to differentiate between virtual and augmented reality – Computerworld

Posted: at 3:10 am

Words matter. And as a stickler for accuracy in language that describes technology, it pains me to write this column.

I hesitate to expose the truth, because the public is already confused about virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), 360-degree video and heads-up displays. But facts are facts. And the fact is that the technology itself undermines clarity in language to describe it.

Before we get to my grand thesis, let's kill a few myths.

Silicon Valley just produced a mind-blowing new virtual reality product. It's a sci-fi backpack that houses a fast computer to power a high-resolution VR headset. Welcome to the future of VR gaming, right?

Wrong.

While the slightly-heavier-than-10-pound backpack is conceptually similar to existing gaming rigs, it's actually designed for enterprises, as well as healthcare applications. It's called the Z VR Backpack from HP. It works either with HP's new Windows Mixed Reality Headset or with HTC's Vive business edition headset, and houses a Windows 10 Pro PC, complete with an Intel Core i7 processor, 32GB of RAM and, crucially, an Nvidia Quadro PS2000 graphics card. It also has hot-swappable batteries.

Will HP's new enterprise-ready VR backpack deliver mixed reality, augmented reality or virtual reality? The answer is yes!

To me, the biggest news is that HP plans to open 13 customer experience centers around the world to showcase enterprise and business VR applications. If that surprises you, it's because the narrative around VR is that it's all about immersive gaming and other "fun" applications. It's far more likely that professional uses for VR will dwarf the market for consumer uses.

All of these technologies have been around for decades, at least conceptually. Just now, on the brink of mainstream use for both consumer and business applications, it's important to recognize that different people mean different things when they use the labels to describe these new technologies.

A Singapore-based company called Yi Technology this week introduced an apparently innovative mobile gadget called the Yi 360 VR Camera. The camera takes 5.7k video at 30 frames per second, and is capable of 2.5k live streaming.

Impressive! But is 360-degree video "virtual reality"? Some (like Yi) say yes. Others say no. (The correct answer is "yes" more on that later.)

Mixed reality and augmented reality are also contested labels. Everyone agrees that both mixed reality and augmented reality describe the addition of computer-generated objects to a view of the real world.

One opinion about the difference is that mixed reality virtual objects are "anchored" in reality they're placed specifically, and can interact with the real environment. For example, mixed reality objects can stand on or even hide behind a real table.

By contrast, augmented reality objects are not "anchored," but simply float in space, anchored not to physical spaces but instead to the user's field of view. That means Hololens is mixed reality, but Google Glass is augmented reality.

People disagree.

An alternative definition says that mixed reality is a kind of umbrella term for virtual objects placed into a view of the real world, while augmented reality content specifically enhances the understanding of, or "augments," reality. For example, if buildings are labeled or people's faces are recognized and information about them appears when they're in view, that's augmented reality in this definition.

Under this differentiation, Google Glass is neither mixed nor augmented reality, but simply a heads-up display information in the user's field of view that neither interacts with nor refers to real-world objects.

Complicating matters is that the "mixed reality" label is falling out of favor in some circles, with "augmented reality" serving as the umbrella term for all technologies that combine the real with the virtual.

If the use of "augmented reality" bothers you, just wait. That, too, may soon become unfashionable.

And now we get to the confusing bit. Despite clear differences between some familiar applications of, say, mixed reality and virtual reality, other applications blur the boundaries.

Consider new examples on YouTube.

One video shows an app built with Apple's ARKit, where the user is looking at a real scene, with one computer-generated addition: A computer-generated doorway in the middle of the lane creates the illusion of a garden world that isn't really there. The scene is almost entirely real, with one door-size virtual object. But when the user walks through the door, they are immersed in the garden world, and can even look back to see the doorway to the real world. On one side of the door, it's mixed reality. On other side, virtual reality. This simple app is MR and VR at the same time.

A second example is even more subtle. I'm old enough to remember a pop song from the 1980s called Take On Me by a band called A-ha. In the video, a girl in a diner gets pulled into a black-and-white comic book. While inside, she encounters a kind of window with "real life" on one side and "comic book world" on the other.

Someone explicitly created an app that immerses the user in a scenario identical to the "A-ha" video, wherein a tiny window gives a view into a charcoal-sketch comic world clearly "mixed reality" but then the user can step into that world, entering a fully virtual environment, with the exception of a tiny window into the real world.

This scenario is more semantically complicated than the previous one because all the "virtual reality" elements are in fact computer-modified representations of real-world video. It's impossible to accurately describe this app using either "mixed reality" or "virtual reality."

When you look around and see a live, clear view of the room you're in, that's 360-degree video, not virtual reality. But what if you see live 360 video of a room you're not in one on the other side of the world? What if that 360 video is not live, but essentially recorded or mapped as a virtual space? What if your experience of it is like you're tiny, like a mouse in a giant house, or like a giant in a tiny house? What if the lights are manipulated, or multiple rooms from different houses stitched together to create the illusion of the same house? It's impossible to differentiate at some point between 360 video and virtual reality.

Purists might say live, 360 video of, say, an office, is not VR. But what if you change the color of the furniture in software? What if the furniture is changed in software to animals? What if the walls are still there, but suddenly made out of bamboo? Where does the "real" end and the "virtual" begin?

Ultimately, the camera that shows you the "reality" to be augmented is merely a sensor. It can show you what you would see, along with virtual objects in the room, and everybody would be comfortable calling that mixed reality. But what if the app takes the motion and distance data and represents what it sees in a changed form. Instead of your own hands, for example, it could show robot hands in their place, synchronized to your actual movement. Is that MR or VR?

The next version of Apple maps will become a kind of VR experience. You'll be able to insert an iPhone into VR goggles and enter 3D maps mode. As you turn your head, you'll see what a city looks like as if you were Godzilla stomping through the streets. Categorically, what is that? (The 3D maps are "computer generated," but using photography.) It's not 360 photography.

The "blending" of virtual and augmented reality is made possible by two facts. First, all you need is a camera lashed to VR goggles in order to stream "reality" into a virtual reality scenario. Second, computers can augment, modify, tweak, change and distort video in real time to any degree desired by programmers. This leaves us word people confused about what to call something. "Video" and "computer generated" exist on a smooth spectrum. It's not one or the other.

This will be especially confusing for the public later this year, because it all goes mainstream with the introduction of the iPhone 8 (or whatever Apple will call it) and iOS 11, both of which are expected to hit the market within a month or two.

The Apple App Store will be flooded with apps that will not only do VR, AR, MR, 360 video and heads-up display content (when the iPhone is inserted into goggles) but that will creatively blend them in unanticipated combinations. Adding more confusion, some of the most advanced platforms, such as Microsoft Hololens, Magic Leap, Meta 2, Atheer AiR and others, will not be capable of doing virtual reality.

Cheap phones inserted into cardboard goggles can do VR and all the rest. But Microsoft's Hololens cannot.

All these labels are still useful for describing most of these new kinds of media and platforms. Individual apps may in fact offer mixed reality or virtual reality exclusively.

Over time we'll come to see these media in a hierarchy, with heads-up displays at the bottom and virtual reality at the top. Heads-up display devices like Google Glass can do only that. But "mixed reality" platforms can do mixed reality, augmented reality and heads-up display. "Virtual reality" platforms (those with cameras attached) can do it all.

Word meanings evolve and shift over time. At first, alternative word use is "incorrect." Then it's acceptable in some circles, but not others. Eventually, if enough people use the formerly wrong usage, it becomes right. This is how language evolves.

A great example is the word "hacker." Originally, the word referred to an "enthusiastic and skilful computer programmer or user." Through widespread misuse, however, the word has come to primarily mean "a person who uses computers to gain unauthorized access to data."

Prescriptivists and purists argue that the old meaning is still primary or exclusive. But it's not. A word's meaning is decided by how a majority of people use it, not by rules, dictionaries or authority.

I suspect that over time the blurring of media will confuse the public into calling VR, AR, MR, 360 video and heads-up display "virtual reality" as the singular umbrella term that covers it all. At the very least, all these media will be called VR if they're experienced through VR-capable equipment.

And if we're going to pick an umbrella term, that's the best one. It's still close enough to describe all these new media. And in fact only VR devices can do it all.

Welcome to the fluid, flexible multimedia world of heads-up display, 360 video, mixed reality, augmented reality and virtual reality.

It's all one world now. It's all one thing. Just call it "virtual reality."

See the rest here:

How to differentiate between virtual and augmented reality - Computerworld

Posted in Virtual Reality | Comments Off on How to differentiate between virtual and augmented reality – Computerworld

AI is Here To Stay and No, It Won’t Take Away Your Job – Entrepreneur

Posted: at 3:10 am

You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media.

Free Webinar | August 16th

Find out how to optimize your website to give your customers experiences that will have the biggest ROI for your business. Register Now

There are many examples of artificial intelligence technology that are used in our daily lives. Each example shows us how this technology is becoming important to solve our problems. But what concerns many tech leaders is that how humans and robots working together will radically change the way that we react to some of our greatest problems.

At RISE 2017 in Hong Kong, Ritu Marya, editor-in-chief, Franchise India moderated a panel discussion chaired by Michael Kaiser, Executive Director, National Cyber Security Alliance, Elisabeth Hendrickson, VP Engineering, Big Data at Pivotal Software and Adam Burden, Group Technology Office, Accenture.

The discussion addressed certain critical theories on how to see the world which is probably going to see robots and humans working together.

AI Will Make Humans Super Rather Than Being a Super Human

We spend a lot of time thinking about the role of AI in the future because we do business advisory services for clients and strategic thinking about where the businesses are heading? I think there is one fundamental guiding principle that we have that the impact of automation and artificial intelligence is more about making humans super rather than being the super human, said Burden adding that AI enabling people on amplifying their experience is right way to look at it

He feels a lot of companies looking at artificial intelligence and automation as a means of labour savings is a short term view.

Elaborating the role of AI Burden shared an example of his work in the insurance industry where he is implementing AI to save time.

We have trained the AI systems so that onecan add the site of the accident and add the pictures of the vehicle to automatically get the claim against the damage. Your time gets saved in this process and overall the experience and profitability also gets better, he said.

Talking about countries quickly adopting robotic automation in their daily lives, Burden shared that United States and China will use AI technology to the fullest to lower down the increase of labour population. India having an increasing population presents some different set of challenges but AI technology will help in solving those challenges too.

The Integrity Of That Data Becomes Credible

With too much data floating around, cybersecurity is an area where AI can truly show its capability. Kaiser believes AI technology is going to transform cyber security.

The new concept thats been most talked about now a days is the data thats been flowing everywhere. Very few of our systems are self-contained. Take smart city as an example where you have cars moving in the city that must get information from the municipality about traffic flows, accident or other kind of things. That data is collected somewhere and needs to go to the car. When you start looking at the interdependence of that data, the integrity of that data becomes credible, explained Kaiser.

He further suggested that every smart city should have a safe platform where the car knows that what information its getting is true and real.

Robot Will Only Make Human Jobs Better

Robots are doing more number of jobs that once were done by humans. Elisabeth, however, thinks that a robot will only give an ability to make human jobs better and easier by automating pieces that are time-consuming.

We dont talk about howa large number of people dont need help in scheduling because Google Calendar helps us to do that. So when you think about your job, you are not going to get replaced but your job will get easier which is going to free you up to focus on more creative aspects of it, she said.

A self confessed Bollywood Lover, Travel junkie and Food Evangelist.I like travelling and I believe it is very important to take ones mind off the daily monotony .

The rest is here:

AI is Here To Stay and No, It Won't Take Away Your Job - Entrepreneur

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on AI is Here To Stay and No, It Won’t Take Away Your Job – Entrepreneur

How AI could create a world of haves and have nots – VentureBeat

Posted: at 3:10 am

Artificial intelligence is all over the news, with tech titans arguing over whether it will be a force for good or bad. An equally important question is whether AI will stratify society even more, and create a world of haves and have nots.

AI is already impacting multiple industries and will take over many blue collar and white collar jobs in the years to come. The speed and severity with which this happens are what creates the biggest challenges for the US and countries around the world. Add to this the geopolitical implications, recently outlined in an important op ed by Kai Fu Lee, and even weak AI can be seen as a scary thing.

So, we need to be proactive and create alternative career paths as AI impacts jobs and takes away many employment opportunities. Lets look at what this means in the near term (next decade), medium term (10-20 years) and long-term (20-plus years).

As AI grows in the coming years, mostly blue collar jobs will first be impacted. The political reality is that this will likely not cause major policy changes as higher earners remain largely unaffected by job changes and possibly benefit from AIs positives. As autonomous vehicles run by AI take over from taxi drivers (and make transportation more reliable, faster and open up spaces currently occupied by parking garages) and robots with AI take over all but specialized work on factory floors (making production costs lower which hopefully translates into less expensive goods), blue collar workers will have few alternatives to pivot to in their careers.

We will likely see increased polarization in society unless programs are put into place early on to create soft landings through training in careers which cannot be automated easily. For some, this could be jobs with heavy interpersonal interactions, for others learning the basics of working with and programming AI. Overall though, it is likely to be a tough time for those without a strong education base.

By the late 2020s, AI will become commonplace and most blue collar jobs will likely be a shadow of their former selves. In addition, white collar workers in areas including healthcare and financial services will also be under pressure: who needs a lab technician to read your X-ray when an AI can do it faster, cheaper and at least as well? To be sure, white collar workers are going to be under pressure long before this, but it will take some time before the professional class sees their career options change markedly. For better or worse, the time that this does happen is when we are likely to see major societal changes.

More white collar workers will transition to jobs that can only be done by humans, but this, too, will be limited. Low-level programmers who understand coding may be able to quickly learn how to program an AI, but others outside of tech, like lawyers many of whose jobs will be eliminated will face a much more daunting transition to new careers.

There is no consensus, but within the next twenty years, we will likely see the emergence of AI at least as smart as human beings. This could lead to huge benefits for society by allowing a benevolent strong AI to work with and for human beings, a highly classist society where the haves who own the strong AI and have nots who do not live in conflict, or possibly a merging of human and AI such that we become something greater than we currently are.

For the lucky few who own and work for the companies that control the best AI, they may consolidate the wealth, power and insight to dominate society. This brings up a fundamental question of whether AI should be controlled by large tech companies or disseminated more broadly? To complicate things, AI works best by leveraging network effects, so breaking up the Amazons and Baidus of the world into smaller enterprises would be foolish and outmoded. Whoever owns and controls the best AI, the network effects need to be maintained otherwise the benefits of AI are destroyed. To be sure, Google and others have opened up some AI tools to the masses, but clearly, they have and will keep the best tech for themselves.

A number of our best minds believe that the rise and concentration of AI will require tax rates to be increased to fund social welfare for the large part of society that will be displaced. This is certainly one option that has merits (allowing people to perform useful but currently underpaid jobs or freeing them to become lifelong learners), but whether this is done through a Universal Basic Income or another form it may prove difficult to achieve this without open conflict.

Another option is to make the big data that will feed AI and basic AI modules available to all a creative commons of data and AI. This could enable blue collar and white collar professionals alike to innovate and create small and medium sized businesses that leverage the growth of AI. This would require strong government intervention but also empower the private sector rather than taxing it.

A further option is to place the best AI in the hands of the government itself and allow people to pursue their passions while having their basic needs attended to from the wealth generated by government. This is the Star Trek future of science fiction but is a distinct possibility if we get comfortable with everyone receiving a government hand out. Indeed, the concept of money itself would be outmoded in such a society.

Added to all of this are the foreign policy implications of AI, which Kai Fu Lee correctly addresses in his recent writing. So if you are living in the US or China consider yourself lucky: your government has far more choice (and say) when it comes to the rise of AI. At the very least, these two nations will not have to grapple with the limited power that arises from reacting to the technological revolutions of others.

So what does this all mean? Are we on a path to a world of haves and have nots? Maybe but we have several alternate paths we can take if we are honest, thoughtful, and forward-thinking. AI is here to stay and will create many positive outcomes. The negative depictions in science fiction may or may not happen. In the meantime, the tremendous impact on society will happen so be ahead of the curve, be part of the debate, and be proactive in finding equitable solutions.

Ed Sappin is the CEO of Sappin Global Strategies (SGS), a strategy and investment firm dedicated to the innovation economy.

Continued here:

How AI could create a world of haves and have nots - VentureBeat

Posted in Ai | Comments Off on How AI could create a world of haves and have nots – VentureBeat