AVID Technology increases its presence in the US auto industry with key

UK automotive clean tech firm AVID Technology has appointed Mike Dowsett Vice President of Business Development to lead the company’s expansion in North America. Mr. Dowsett will lead the business growth strategy and operations at AVID’s new US office in Michigan.Dowsett has over 30 years of automotive industry experience. He began his career at Ford, and has since worked for a range of global industry players in the UK and the US, including Visteon, FEV, Controlled Power Technologies, YASA and Sevcon. His specialty is electric motors and inverters, along with efficient electrification system design.AVID Technology develops batteries, electric motors and powertrain components for hybrid and electric vehicles. Its customer base includes Tier 1 automotive suppliers and OEMs.“The electric vehicle industry is thriving globally and going through a period of rapid development and innovation,” said Dowsett. “I’m looking forward to building and consolidating the company’s growing customer base in North America; it’s a great time for the right people with the right products and expertise to make an impact.” Source: Electric Vehicles Magazine Source: AVID Technology Group read more

Continue reading

Green Deals Sun Joe 145A Electric Pressure Washer 119 more

The official Snow Joe eBay outlet store offers its SPX3000 14.5A Electric Pressure Washer for $119 shipped. Regularly $139 at retailers like Amazon, today’s deal is a $26 savings and a match of our previous mention. This model sports a 14.5A electric motor and provides 1.76GPM. Rated 4.2/5 stars by over 5,700 reviewers. more…The post Green Deals: Sun Joe 14.5A Electric Pressure Washer $119, more appeared first on Electrek. Source: Charge Forward

Continue reading

England right to stick rather than twist

first_img | Pick 0 1 Please select Personal abuse Off topic Legal issue Trolling Hate speech Offensive/Threatening language Copyright Spam Other Duncan Fletcher Report Share on LinkedIn | Pick “we” dropped Geraint Jones?You mean you were outvoted by the other two selectors, then reinstated him the moment the plane to Australia left the ground. MouthoftheMersey 5 Jun 2008 8:24 Comments 44 Ian Bell has suffered inconsistancy since being moved around in the batting order. Photograph: Neal Simpson/Empics-PA Strange, I would have thought that a higher priority than continuity would be having a middle order that actually scores some runs.Why shouldn’t players be made to keep looking over their shoulders? That’s the sharpness and hunger that makes Australians so much better. They know they have to perform. In contrast, Vaughan has been appointed to sit on a throne at least until the end of Ashes 2009, regardless of his form. The others are undroppable. No-one has the guts to give Pietersen the kick he needs and deserves.Spineless. The Ashes 2009 3-1 to Australia. Since you’re here… … we have a small favour to ask. The Guardian will engage with the most critical issues of our time – from the escalating climate catastrophe to widespread inequality to the influence of big tech on our lives. At a time when factual information is a necessity, we believe that each of us, around the world, deserves access to accurate reporting with integrity at its heart.More people are reading and supporting The Guardian’s independent, investigative journalism than ever before. And unlike many news organisations, we have chosen an approach that allows us to keep our journalism accessible to all, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. But we need your ongoing support to keep working as we do.Our editorial independence means we set our own agenda and voice our own opinions. Guardian journalism is free from commercial and political bias and not influenced by billionaire owners or shareholders. This means we can give a voice to those less heard, explore where others turn away, and rigorously challenge those in power.We need your support to keep delivering quality journalism, to maintain our openness and to protect our precious independence. Every reader contribution, big or small, is so valuable. Support The Guardian from as little as $1 – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Support The Guardian Grabyrdy England cricket team | Pick England v New Zealand 2008 Facebook Reply 5 Jun 2008 16:21 Share Report England cricket team Now I’m scared… Share on Facebook 0 1 Reuse this content,View all comments > comments (44)Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion. Order by oldest Share on Facebook Share on Facebook Report I advocate playing people in form, we’ve been lucky to say the least against New Zealand, so I would advocate three changes.These would be Hoggard (in form again after one bad game) for Anderson (inconsistent and just doesn’t threaten batsman enough) and Shah and Bopara (the latter being in amazing form) for Bell and Collingwood (both out of whom are of form, which means they should return to the county circuit until they redicover their form and confidence to challenge for the test team again.Why wait for South Africa to beat us before making changes for the winter. Duncan Fletcher suggests it is too late to make changes: “England need a settled feel ahead of the South Africa series next month and the Tests this winter.”I would say that players need experience before the Ashes and this is the perfect time to chuck them in. | Pick 0 1 0 1 Reply Threads collapsed Reply Share on Twitter 0 1 Now I’m really scared… Close report comment form Loading comments… Trouble loading? Facebook Twitter Reply Share on Facebook Sportblog Twitter 5 Jun 2008 16:40 Facebook | Pick Share on Facebook Reply Share on Twitter Share on Twitter Report All TheSozz Twitter Share Share on Facebook Facebook 5 Jun 2008 7:49 5 Jun 2008 15:28 5 Jun 2008 16:04 “it is too late to start making serious changes to the line-up. “there ya go, Dunc. That’s a fact, for sure. pepp Facebook England right to stick rather than twist 5 Jun 2008 17:36 expanded Share on Twitter NimrodTroyte Facebook Share on Twitter 5 Jun 2008 19:41 50 Report oldest | Pick 0 1 Share on Twitter Report Share on Facebook Facebook Facebook Agree with many comments above.Bloggers: exactly. We need a pool of ~8 experienced batsmen to draw on, 2 keepers, 2 spinners and ~6 pacemen (all-rounders included under above categories), making 18 in total. These should all have played and succeeded in the preceding couple of years. Sensible selection criteria, treating players as adults not insecure adolescents and including a long period rotation (e.g. ~ 5 Tests) would benefit them all.Take Shah for example: scored 80 in his first Test, came in for one other Test with the implicit message that unless he did something amazing the old guard would be back for the next and failed of course. He should have been given a run of ~5 Tests after his first and only dropped after a string of bad scores, not just because one of the boys was waiting to come back in. Take Strauss: as pointed out already, dropping him was the best move – only question is whether it should have been done earlier. Take Bell: when is he going to play a match-turning innings? Has he got the cojones? Ask the Australians. Never been dropped, in a ridiculous comfort zone.The other way of trying out new players is the ODIs. So what do we have, the same squad as played the last, selected how many weeks in advance? What nonsense is that then? And how are players like Patel (110 and 3 wickets yesterday) going to break into such a cosy clique. The man is 23 I believe, averaging over 40 with the bat and 33 with the ball and should be tried out, as shoudl various others.Selectors, it might be a difficult job balancing continuity/loyalty with hard decisions, but I and I think just about every other blogger know which side you are too firmly sitting on. 0 1 Facebook Cricket professorprofessor 5 Jun 2008 19:06 Report Facebook Share on Twitter 0 1 “Do we really want a guy like Andrew Strauss to begin looking over his shoulder again?”Er… Yes. He had technical flaws that were obvious for twenty odd Tests during which he played like a number 8 (some 40s, but never really set). To his credit, he appears to have worked through them, but it was the mental space (and, perhaps, jolt) of being dropped that did the trick. And it didn’t hurt that long list of Aussie batsmen who were dropped only to return as infinitely superior players.”As for Bell, England simply must stick with him because he is a class batsman. Technically, he was one of the most efficient guys I worked with…” So technically efficient and a class player, but he has had nearly 40 Tests and we’re still talking about his place in the order and whether he can deliver match-turning innings. So there must be another problem. I’d like someone to say to him, “This is it – we want a big contribution in this match or we’re sending you back to the county game”. After three Tests that’s stupid, after ten harsh, but after forty it’s perfectly reasonable. davidhopps Twitter Email (optional) jhad Share on Twitter 0 1 First published on Wed 4 Jun 2008 19.01 EDT 0 1 antipepp Twitter 0 1 Share on Messenger In my view the only players in the team who are undroppable (apart from the captain) are KP, who is in a different class, and Cook, who currently appears on course to become one of the greats (mind you, so did Graeme Smith four years ago.) The others are all subject to the fluctuations of form and as other posters have pointed out, Bell and Collingwood are currently going through a bit of a dip. The object of the exercise is to get a settle line-up for the Ashes. If we can’t experiment against New Zealand, then when exactly can we experiment? Share on Twitter 2 Share on Facebook Sorry there was an error. Please try again later. If the problem persists, please contact Userhelp TheSozz Share on Twitter 0 1 Twitter 5 Jun 2008 12:32 Share Share on Twitter Facebook Reply 5 Jun 2008 16:32 Twitter 0 1 Share on Facebook 1 0 1 Reply Reply Of course if players aren’t performing then the selectors need to be looking for replacements likely to do better. But the assumption, which some people seem to be making, that without the constant threat of being dropped a player has no incentive to perform or improve is just daft. Twitter Facebook | Pick Twitter Share on Twitter recommendations Share collapsed 0 1 Share on Twitter Share unthreaded mclennen, i see an obo slot opening for you. Share on Twitter Report 5 Jun 2008 17:06 Facebook Reply Reply 5 Jun 2008 16:32 | Pick Share on Pinterest Report Sign in or create your Guardian account to recommend a comment Reply Facebook | Pick Share on Facebook Twitter Share on Twitter Twitter So here’s Duncan’s considered view on the two players under the lense at the moment.”In Collingwood’s case, there is an obvious technical issue to address: he has to let the ball come to him. He’s always had a tendency to go at it with hard hands”but, he’s tough, loves playing for England and is well worth sticking with.With Bell, though, it’s different:”…like all class batsmen, he has soft hands”Is it just me, or does this read as a far from ringing endorsement of Paul Collingwood? His words say we shouldn’t rock the boat with the batting order, but reading between the lines, I’m picking up a rather different message: drop Collingwood and keep Bell. There’s also an intriguing mention of Ramps….. Share on WhatsApp Report Reply Share Report Wed 4 Jun 2008 19.01 EDT Share on Twitter Share Report Share on Twitter Reply bertjansch 25 | Pick A really good insight into batting coaching colly really does not wait for the ball, but I also had the same problem at club level it’s a fairly elementary problem that you should not have playing for England. I also had the get out over cow corner! Some how Ravi should be given a shot he does not as DF says have the same defficiencies and has potential like Bell…. Ah Belly there must be a defficiency somewhere, mental or simply he’s a bit of a show pony without the final dash of brilliance needed as this level? Share Share on Facebook Report Share 5 Jun 2008 17:53 5 Jun 2008 12:32 Share on Facebook hardatwork 5 Jun 2008 16:59 Share on Twitter Reply Good column. I’m enjoying these far more than any persiflage and verbiage filtered through Lawrence Booth from any given player. I’d be intrigued which of Owais Shah’s technical deficiences Fletcher thinks preclude him from being successful in Test cricket, because there’s a few, not least that strangulating, tense bottom hand that chokes the life out of all his shots. No soft hands there either. Reply Twitter Share on Facebook Share 0 1 2 Share via Email Topics Share on Facebook 5 Jun 2008 17:42 Facebook | Pick Report Share on Facebook Shares00 0 1 Facebook Share on Twitter Share Share on Facebook Share Share via Email Anyone good enough to hit 206 in Australia, field like a panther and bowl cheap overs that can break partnerships has got to be in the team until it is proven beyond doubt that test form has deserted him permanently. I would also suspect that he is a very important figure in the dressing room.Bell does need to work on producing match-winning contributions instead of hundreds when a cause cannot be won, and he needs to begin to make big hundreds instead on 110s. Nevertheless, he’s young and the best may be to come from him.Pietersen too needs a rocket up his backside – he is giving the impression that he is more concerned with accumulating ££££s rather than with creating one of the best records in the history of test cricket. Up to him I guess.Problem is, apart from Bopara (probably a Collingwood like-for-like) and Shah (Bell’s rival) it is interesting that nobody else seems to be ready to challenge Cook, Vaughan or Pietersen – a tad worrying. 0 1 Share on Facebook Twitter Reply 5 Jun 2008 19:56 Share on Twitter | Pick Linford Facebook Twitter comeoutoftheshade | Pick View more comments Share Facebook Report MouthoftheMersey Share on Facebook Report Reason (optional) Twitter Wow, theres a surprise Duncan doesnt think you should change the side! This part in particular made me laugh: ‘It’s true that very occasionally a side does need a jolt, and we left Geraint Jones out against Pakistan in 2006 when he wasn’t scoring enough runs’ True enough, but he had been crap for 2 years before that and you wouldnt drop him! Granted, England were winning but would we have been even better with a bloke who could a)keep wicket, b) bat? | Pick Share Share on Twitter Show 25 Share on Facebook Mclennan 5 Jun 2008 18:05 Report Share Reply Reply Yeah Mouth, professional athletes love working in an environment of fear and paranoia. There would be nothing better right now than for England to change half the top 6, and tell Strauss he’s next on the chopping block. nevermind all those recent runs. He’d react well to that.And I think I’ve just misintepreted your post by about the same margin that you misintepreted Fletcher’s column, which once again is a bastion of logic and commonsense. The point about players getting better out of the side is particularly pertinent. Can anyone seriously suggest replacing Bell with Shah makes the team better on current form? | Pick Sportblog Reply | Pick Facebook 0 1 Reply Twitter Share on Twitter 5 Jun 2008 17:19 Report 5 Jun 2008 11:35 0 1 | Pick Report Twitter Report Share on Facebook Share Share on Facebook Share on Twitter | Pick I disagree. The England middle-order now appears to be so set in stone that there is absolutely no real pressure on the batsmen to deliver, while people outside of the set-up – notably Shah, Key and Ramprakash – just cannot get in the side no matter how many runs they accumulate in county cricket. It must be absolutely soul-destroying.Vaughan rather than Fletcher is the culprit in my view. He has his favourites, and it is clear that the above named players are not among them. I suspect that part of the reason for their continued exclusion was that he wanted to drop back down the order to 3 and he knew that had one of them nailed down a middle-order place while Strauss was out of the side he’d have been stuck with opening for the remainder of his career. 5 Jun 2008 20:23 Facebook Share Reply Share 0 1 | Pick Share | Pick Share Facebook Share on Twitter Share BloggersUtd I know there’s been a lot of talk about the make-up of England’s middle order, but my view is that there is no need to panic. For one thing, it is too late to start making serious changes to the line-up. England need a settled feel ahead of the South Africa series next month and the Tests this winter. Secondly, I really feel the right men are in place. And, perhaps most crucially of all, people tend to forget when they question the likes of Paul Collingwood and Ian Bell that this can have a destabilising effect on the whole team.Chopping and changing does not just affect the individual in question. It can make others jittery too – they start to wonder whether they’ll be next. Do we really want a guy like Andrew Strauss to begin looking over his shoulder again? It’s true that very occasionally a side does need a jolt, and we left Geraint Jones out against Pakistan in 2006 when he wasn’t scoring enough runs. But England have already made a major change this summer by moving Michael Vaughan down to No3. You need to show confidence in players, not just ditch them because the middle order isn’t dovetailing for the time being. Remember that these are players who have bailed England out in the past.In Collingwood’s case, there is an obvious technical issue to address: he has to let the ball come to him. He’s always had a tendency to go at it with hard hands, so he just has to make sure he doesn’t chase it. That has to be drummed into him, and that will happen if he allows himself to relax a bit more. He’s a tough character but he needs to feel genuinely confident about his methods. He has his routines that we used to work on – he’ll never have the soft hands some of his team-mates have got – and he must remember how he has played when he’s in nick. Being too keen will not help him, however much he loves playing for his country.As for Bell, England simply must stick with him because he is a class batsman. Technically, he was one of the most efficient guys I worked with – right up there with an on-form Vaughan and Mark Ramprakash – and like all class batsmen, he has soft hands. But he’s a classic case of someone who’s been moved around too much in the order. The trouble with Belly when I was in charge was that he was always coming in to fill a gap. He never really settled and that can affect an individual. In the long term, maybe after the next Ashes series, I’d like to see him at No3, because there’s no question he’s good enough to do it. But it all comes down to the players themselves. They can blame other people as much as they like for their failures, but they are the only ones who can ensure they’re superstars by performing consistently.Some people might be reading this and thinking how easy batsmen have it compared with bowlers. It’s been a grumble throughout cricket history, and as a former bowling all-rounder myself, I come at the question from an unbiased point of view. But you must remember that basically batsmen have just one or two chances per game: one good ball and they’re gone. Bowlers sometimes get up to 30 overs to prove themselves.Why do people complain when England’s strike bowlers get dropped with records of seven or eight five-fors in 50 or 60 Tests, and then not bat an eyelid if a guy like Strauss, who scores a hundred every four Tests, often in very difficult circumstances, is left out? Yes, bowlers often take the blame, but sometimes we need to look at the statistics a little more closely.The other point about changing the batting line-up is one that Nasser Hussain made very well. He said that you always become a great player when you’re not in the England side. Some of the players mentioned as possible replacements, such as Rob Key and Owais Shah, had technical inadequacies when I was around, although in Key’s case there is certainly potential because he’s so mentally tough. He relished a battle, but I just wonder whether his fielding has improved sufficiently.I also hope the selectors haven’t forgotten about Ravi Bopara, who has got that exciting quality about him. For now, though, change could be dangerous. Let’s stick with what we’ve got. Pominsydney Linford Facebook Mclennan AndyinBrum Report Twitter lucas Facebook 5 Jun 2008 19:44 100 Share on Facebook Yes, Duncan, you should know that change for no reason is a bad thing. Like when Jones and Giles were re-instated for the Brisbane Test even though others had done well the previous England summer.If only you had listened to your own mantra then.Still, I have forgiven yer. We will choose to remember 05 – your annus miraculis…. Share on Twitter Reply | Pick Share on Twitter Twitter newest Share on Facebook Report Twitter Share on Facebook Share And it’s a bit of a myth to say the Aussies are always looking over their shoulders. The adage here is that it’s harder to get out of the side than into it, and it rings true for the most part.Of the XI for the last test, I’d say 7 of them could have shockers for the next year before being dropped is discussed. Of the other four – one is now retired, one is in for the injured Hayden and has inadvertently put some pressure on the other opener (who would otherwise be safe for a while), and the last probably has half a summer instead of a whole one to prove himself.So the current England selection policy is very much Australian, albeit with less talented cricketers. Twitter Reply | Pick 0 1 Twitter | Pick Facebook “The Ashes 2009 3-1 to Australia.”Which one are the Aussies going to forget to turn up for then ? 5 Jun 2008 20:25 Report Reply Share on Facebook Share Share on Facebook Share Share on Twitter Twitter | Pick Its obvious to everyone that this will be the middle order that will play in the 2009 Ashes. They will either need to be run over by a bus or suffer a collapse of form ie six ducks in a row to be dropped. Even then I still don’t think they will be dropped. The problem is that if one of these batsmen breaks a finger (or cops a bouncer in the face!), what happens then? Do they throw a Bopara or a Shah into the fray, not having tasted test cricket for an eternity? rolleyes Twitter Twitter 1 Report 0 1 Share on Facebook 0 1 Report antipepp NimrodTroyte – not to decry Colly’s achievements, but let’s not forget that Rob Key has a test match 221 to his name (vs West Indies) and also showed an awful lot of phlegm in his first series in Australia when other more experienced players went missing. His face doesn’t fit…. it looks like it barely fits in his batting helmet, but it certainly doesn’t fit into Michael Vaughan’s dressing room.As for Shah – he played magnificently when asked with an innings of 88 under severe pressure in India on debut, and has been given one chance since. Fair crack of the whip? Beefy and his colleagues, when discussing Ambrose the other day, decided that anything less than 10 tests is not a fair crack of the whip….. By my reckoning, based on their last 10 innings, some of the established batting lineup should be under more pressure for their place than they are. It’s true that they have performed in the past, but a test team is all about evolution, and no one should feel they are in the side indefinitely.And whatever Dunc says, batters get more of a crack than bowlers. It’s a batsman’s game. Facebook | Pick Reply hardatwork – It’s that the central contracts mean that a Test batsman out of form has no opportunity to perform. They should play more county cricket. Hey, Mclennan! I’ll have you know that some of that persiflage and verbiage from players has been filtered through me, but only after I have looked up “persiflage”. Incidentally, we are intrigued by something… can you drop your email to Lawrence? Share 0 1 5 Jun 2008 16:12 Mclennan comment Reportlast_img read more

Continue reading

Roar of young lions fails to reach Capello

first_imgEngland Under-21s Share on Messenger Share on Facebook Roar of young lions fails to reach Capello @SachinNakrani Share via Email England Share on Pinterest Share on Twitter Shares00 First published on Thu 4 Sep 2008 19.01 EDT ·England Under-21s, who face Portugal tonight, are making a big noise but may never enjoy graduation Only the cold-hearted could have failed to smile when it was announced Jimmy Bullard had been selected for England. A player of notable talent, application and humour, the midfielder has finally made it to the top having battled through non-league football and a career-threatening injury along the way. But as is the case with the international game, for every player chosen there is at least one who will feel hard done by.In England’s case, however, that could well extend to an entire generation. At Wembley tonight the Under-21 side will play Portugal in a match which, should they avoid defeat, will see them top their qualifying group for next summer’s European Championship in Sweden.The team have been imperious in getting to this stage without defeat in their seven matches, conceding only one goal and scoring 15. It is little wonder, then, that the manager Stuart Pearce believes that should they make it, England can go at least one better in 2009 than they did in 2007, and reach the final.Rewarding as that would be for the most of the squad, ultimately it is not what they are all seeking. Every player at Under-21 level hopes his performance will some day encourage the manager of the senior team to pick him.Since taking over, Fabio Capello has introduced five Under-21 players into his squad – Joe Hart, Joe Lewis, David Wheater, Tom Huddlestone and Gabriel Agbonlahor – but like the rest who have emerged since the 2007 tournament, when England lost on penalties to the hosts and winners Holland, they made little or no impact.Indeed every one of Capello’s full side that started in the 2-2 draw with Czech Republic last month has been a full international for at least four years and while Hart and Theo Walcott, two members of Pearce’s set-up, were on the bench that night, neither played. If they were slightly disheartened that night, the Under-21s could be forgiven for throwing their boots in disgust upon hearing the news that Bullard, a 29-year-old who has never played at any international level, had gone straight into the full squad. “It’s the manager’s decision [to pick Bullard]. Whatever he says, goes,” said Mark Noble yesterday on the eve of earning his 12th cap. “In fairness, Jimmy was fantastic for Fulham last season and has been doing well again this season. If anyone deserves their chance, it is him.”Club form is an obvious route to international recognition but what may well worry Noble and the rest of the squad is that it is seemingly becoming the only way in. Three of the players who will start tonight, James Milner, Huddlestone and Steven Taylor, are on the Under-21s’ all-time appearances list – Milner is top with 36 – but not one has a full cap. The careers of others in that 10, such as Scott Carson, Gareth Barry, Jamie Carragher and Jermain Defoe, would give them hope. On the other hand those of David Prutton, Jermaine Pennant and Nigel Reo-Coker would leave them deeply pessimistic. “For every Under-21 game so far, someone from the senior set-up has been in attendance,” said Pearce. “Fabio [Capello] has even come into the dressing room afterwards, when he has been able to, and spoken to the players. In terms of progressing to the seniors, that has given them a big lift. “Fabio, undoubtedly, has a keen interest in the Under-21 side. I see him at Soho Square all the time and he always wants to know who is doing well for me and who may be ready to step up. Most of the time he already knows who is doing well and is just asking the question to check how much you know about football.”Pearce remains optimistic that some of his current squad will eventually get a chance with the big boys that he arranged for tonight’s match to be played at Wembley. “We don’t want these players to get to the senior side and never have experience of playing there,” he said. The way things are going with Capello’s squad, they may be waiting a long time.Fast track or slow lane?Five players from the 2007 European Championship squad who have been called up to the senior squadScott Carson 23 (age) 29 (caps)Joe Hart 21 12Tom Huddlestone 21 26Ashley Young 23 10David Nugent 23 14…and five who have notLeighton Baines 23 (age) 16 (caps) Steven Taylor 22 25Nigel Reo-Coker 24 23Matt Derbyshire 22 11James Milner 22 36 Topicscenter_img Sachin Nakrani Share on WhatsApp Share on Facebook Fabio Capello Arsenal’s Theo Walcott is one of the few players from the Under-21s to also be involved with the full England squad. Photograph: Shaun Botterill/Getty Images Share via Email Reuse this content Share on Twitter England Share on LinkedIn Thu 4 Sep 2008 19.01 EDT featureslast_img read more

Continue reading

The DOJs Latest Position Regarding The Siemens Monitor Report Is Laughable

first_imgRather than just prosecuting alleged Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violations, the Department of Justice (presumably) wants business organizations to adopt compliance best practices.In resolving the record-setting Siemens FCPA enforcement, the DOJ complimented Siemens on its remedial measures, stating in this sentencing memorandum that the company “set a high standard for multi-national companies to follow.”Yet, in a recent filing in a case seeking release of the Siemens monitor report, the DOJ advances a laughable position.That position – as articulated by the DOJ in seeking to block release of the monitor report – is that “disclosure of confidential information about Siemens’ compliance programs would provide a free roadmap as to what works in international commerce without violating the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws, what activities to avoid, how build an effective compliance program and system of internal controls, etc.”As to relevant background, this March 2016 post highlighted the DOJ’s efforts (along with Siemens and its monitor) to block public release of the Monitor reports.Never mind that high-ranking DOJ officials have stated that “greater transparency benefits everyone [and] the Criminal Division stands to benefit from being more transparent.”Never mind that Siemens’ post-enforcement action monitorship ended long ago and the case is no longer active.The DOJ clearly does not want the Monitor report in the public domain and the previous post detailed the DOJ’s other speculative and specious legal arguments.The DOJ’s recently filed reply reply brief is heavy on certain exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act. Yet, the brief also touches upon the issue of how “disclosure [of the Monitor Report] would cause substantial competitive harm to Siemens.”The DOJ explains:“Release of the document [the Monitor’s Report] would likely cause Siemens substantial competitive harm by allowing its competitors to use its proprietary information to its commercial advantage. Disclosure of confidential information about Siemens’ compliance programs would provide a free roadmap as to what works in international commerce without violating the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws, what activities to avoid, how to build an effective compliance program and system of internal controls, etc. Release of this roadmap would allow competitors to avoid the extraordinary costs Siemens incurred in gaining the information, undercut Siemens’ efforts to deal honestly with foreign governments, and exploit any vulnerabilities in Siemens’ systems to their own advantage.”I argued in the previous post that the DOJ should want the Siemens monitor report in the public domain as it would be a valuable educational resource for corporate counsel and compliance professionals on a variety of topics.The DOJ’s reply brief directly acknowledges this when it states that the Monitor report provides a “roadmap as to what works in international commerce without violating the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws, what activities to avoid, how to build an effective compliance program and systems of internal controls, etc.”The DOJ’s position is laughable given that since resolution of the Siemens FCPA matter, Siemens compliance counsel and personnel have been fixtures at numerous FCPA and related conferences to discuss the company’s compliance policies and procedures. For instance, see here “Re-Engineering Global Compliance Programs: The Case Study of Siemens.” See here for the case study authored by Siemens Chief Compliance Counsel titled “Putting the Siemens House in Order – How Siemens Reorganized its Compliance Function After the Bribery Scandal.” See here for a powerpoint presentation by the same individual on the same general topic. See also here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here for just a few of the numerous other examples that could also be cited. Moreover, the internet is peppered with documents relevant to Siemens’ compliance policies and procedures. For instance, see here for a Siemens document titled “The Siemens Compliance System Prevent – Detect – Respond and Continuous Improvement.” You can even purchase the document here.The DOJ’s position is further laughable, particularly because – as highlighted in the prior post – the DOJ elsewhere in its briefing states that “through his service, the Monitor provided an important benefit to the DOJ and the public by boosting confidence that Siemens was implementing an effective compliance program that significantly reduced the likelihood of recidivism.”How is the public even capable of assessing this issue when the public is completely in the dark about what the monitor did and found?If the DOJ is all for boosting public confidence in law enforcement, there is something the DOJ can do.If the DOJ is all for providing business organizations subject to the FCPA a “roadmap as to what works in international commerce without violating the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws, what activities to avoid, how to build an effective compliance program and systems of internal controls, etc,” there is something the DOJ can do.Advocate for the release of the Siemens monitor report.Yet, the DOJ is doing the exact opposite and I have my own suspicion as to why and its has nothing to do with the issues discussed in the DOJ’s briefs.last_img read more

Continue reading

FCPA Flash – A Conversation With Philip Rohlik Regarding The DOJs SoCalled

first_imgThe FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from the written posts on FCPA Professor.This FCPA Flash episode is a conversation with Philip Rohlik (Debevoise & Plimpton). In the episode, Rohlik elaborates on points previously articulated in the firm’s FCPA Update regarding the DOJ’s recent so-called “declinations” – namely that in none of the recent examples did the companies truly benefit from not being charged with a violation that they did not commit. (For background reading, see prior posts here and here).The term “declination” has certainly become part of the FCPA vocabulary in recent years; however many conversations regarding this topic are muddied because the term lacks a definition. In the episode, Rohlik provides informed insight on recent so-called “declinations” and the episode is a must listen for FCPA practitioners, in-house counsel, and others interested in this important topic.FCPA Flash is sponsored by the Red Flag Group. The Red Flag Group assists companies in developing and maintaining efficient and effective corporate governance and compliance programs, and has a proven track record in providing integrity due diligence investigations in 194 countries.last_img read more

Continue reading

FCPA Flash – A Conversation With Danforth Newcomb Cynthia Urda Kassis Regarding

first_imgThe FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from written posts on FCPA Professor.This FCPA Flash episode is a conversation with Shearman & Sterling attorneys Danforth Newcomb and Cynthia Urda Kassis who recently authored an article titled “Transaction Business During a Corruption Investigation.”During the podcast, Danforth and Cynthia discuss: (i) the origins of the article; (ii) what makes potential legal liability under the FCPA or similar laws different than potential legal liability under other laws; (iii) the gap between corporate FCPA enforcement and individual FCPA enforcement; and (iv) whether a recent DOJ statement that “FCPA investigations [should] be measured in months, not years” is believable.FCPA Flash is sponsored by Kroll. Kroll is trusted by companies and compliance officers worldwide to help prevent, detect, and remediate FCPA challenges with scalable, end-to-end compliance solutions: from high-volume third party screening and automated monitoring, to risk-based due diligence, to complex investigations and monitorships.last_img read more

Continue reading

FCPA Professor Turns 9

first_imgIn 2009, I launched FCPA Professor with this simple mission statement.Nine years and 2,500+ posts later, FCPA Professor is still here and the mission remains the same.What started out in 2009 as a “blog” has turned into a comprehensive website that has been described as “the Wall Street Journal concerning all things FCPA-related,” and “the most authoritative source for those seeking to understand and apply the FCPA.” Along the way, FCPA Professor has been named a Top Law Blog for in-house counsel by Corporate Counsel, a Top 25 Business Law Blog by LexisNexis, and a top 100 Legal Blog by the American Bar Association.Other FCPA information sources often regurgitate what the DOJ or SEC say or serve as proxies for marketing legal and compliance services. FCPA Professor asks the questions that yield a more sophisticated understanding of the FCPA’s modern era. Other FCPA information sources spin narratives with seemingly little regard to actual facts. FCPA Professor publishes real news and real commentary backed by real statistics written by an individual with real FCPA experience.Doing anything every day for nine years straight has its ups and downs and the surprises, rewards and struggles remain the same as those described in this previous anniversary post.Running FCPA Professor takes time, money, and substantial effort, yet the content on FCPA Professor is provided free to readers (hundreds of thousands of readers each year from around the world). If I may ask one thing of readers on this occasion, it is to make this “relationship” more of a two-way street.Thus, if FCPA Professor adds value to your practice or business or otherwise enlightens your day and causes you to contemplate the issues in a more sophisticated way, please consider a donation to FCPA Professor to help celebrate this 9th anniversary.  Yearly subscriptions to other legal publications or sources of information can serve as an appropriate guide for a donation amount.last_img read more

Continue reading

Updated – IRS Hits Wylys with Unprecedented 3 Billion Tax Bill

first_img Remember me Not a subscriber? Sign up for The Texas Lawbook. Username Lost your password?center_img The IRS levied a record-setting $3.2 billion tax bill Wednesday against Dallas entrepreneur and philanthropist Sam Wyly and the estate of his brother, Charles Wyly. The IRS claims Sam Wyly owes $2 billion in back taxes, penalties and interest from income generated from trusts that the brothers established in the Isle of Man more than two decades ago.”The IRS figures are baloney,” Sam Wyly told The Texas Lawbook. “We believe the IRS figures are so absurd as to undermine the credibility of the IRS . . .You must be a subscriber to The Texas Lawbook to access this content. Passwordlast_img read more

Continue reading

Ability to regenerate limbs traces back at least 300 million years

first_imgResearchers have found the earliest evidence for limb regeneration in the fossil record. Rocks unearthed in southwestern Germany have captured 300-million-year-old relatives of the salamander that have one or more regrown limbs. Unlike humans—who can only replace lost fingertips—salamanders are the only modern four-legged animals, or tetrapods, that maintain the ability to regenerate entire limbs throughout their lives. If tissue has been severely damaged or if the wound heals poorly, however, the regrown limb may grow back incorrectly. Such deformities can be quite common, especially if the same limb is repeatedly amputated or injured, leading to regenerated limbs with extra, missing, or fused-together digits in distinctive and unique patterns. In their new paper, published online today in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, the researchers report identifying these same types of deformity in exceptionally well preserved fossils of the early amphibian, Micromelerpeton (pictured, with an extra, partly fused digit, second from the top). The finding shows that the constant ability to regenerate whole limbs is not unique to modern salamanders, contrary to traditional assumptions. The researchers suggest that this process may have a shared genetic basis that evolved early in the amphibian lineage (and was lost or modified in later species with limited or no regenerative ability), and that part of this foundation may even be a primitive characteristic of tetrapods in general.last_img read more

Continue reading

UK wants eyes in the sky to keep watch on its record

first_img Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) The United Kingdom plans to create the world’s largest fully protected marine reserve in South Pacific waters surrounding the Pitcairn Islands—and they are counting on satellites to help police it. Yesterday’s announcement of the 834,334-square-kilometer reserve marks the latest move to create a mega–marine reserve, following similar moves by other nations.  “This is a major development in marine conservation,” says Elliott Norse, chief scientist of the Marine Conservation Institute in Seattle, Washington. “Adding another really big, important, protected area to the world’s pathetically small list of big, imported protected areas—that’s a big thing.”The announcement of the reserve, which will bar commercial fishing, mining, and other extractive uses, came in the U.K. government’s 2015 budget. It states that designation of the reserve “will be dependent upon reaching agreement with [nongovernmental organizations] on satellite monitoring” of reserve users, including fishing fleets, and on reaching deals with regional port authorities “to prevent landing of illegal catch.” The government also wants to identify “a practical naval method of enforcing” sea life protections “at a cost that can be accommodated within existing departmental expenditure limits.” Emailcenter_img Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country According to the Pew Charitable Trusts in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, the designation marks the first time any government has combined the creation of a fully protected marine reserve with a detailed plan for surveillance and enforcement using state-of-the-art technology. The Bertarelli Foundation in Gstaad, Switzerland, announced that it will help pay for real-time satellite monitoring of the reserve for 5 years, in collaboration with the Pew Foundation and a U.K.-based company, Satellite Applications Catapult.The new reserve will begin 12 nautical miles from Pitcairn Islands’ shore, and extend out to the full 200-nautical-mile limit, encompassing 99% of the territory’s exclusive economic zone. The Pitcairn Islands’ roughly 50 inhabitants, descendants of the HMS Bounty’s mutineers, will be allowed to continue traditional subsistence fishing operations.The reserve is roughly 3.5 times the size of the United Kingdom and is home to at least 1249 species of marine mammals, seabirds, and fish. The waters are also hold the 40 Mile Reef, one of the deepest well-developed coral reef communities known. The area is relatively untouched, conservationists say, and “there’s not a lot of places in the world’s oceans at this point that are still relatively pristine,” says Matt Rand, director of Pew’s Global Ocean Legacy project in Washington, D.C. “These places are places that need human protection if the life in them is to survive the hard times that we are headed for—the hard times that human activities are causing,” Norse says.Even with today’s announcement, less than 1% of the world’s oceans are fully protected within reserves.last_img read more

Continue reading

In Canada case spurs concern over misconduct secrecy

first_img Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Email Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) In early 2013, scientists working in a laboratory led by a prominent cancer researcher at the University of British Columbia (UBC) in Vancouver, Canada, were getting worried. They were unable to reproduce results from several of the researcher’s experiments, and suspected some of the original work was fraudulent.An investigation by UBC ultimately confirmed their fears: In 2014, investigators identified 29 instances of scholarly misconduct, 16 of them “serious,” including falsification and fabrication of data, according to university correspondence obtained by Retraction Watch. The tainted work had been included in 12 papers published in six journals between 2005 and 2012, investigators found, and had drawn financial support from more than a dozen government and private funders.To the dismay of some scientists familiar with the case, however, UBC never publicly released the damning report or named the researcher, who has since left the institution. Canadian policy does not require the university or federal funding agencies to disclose the researcher’s name. And a spokesperson for the university says its hands are tied by British Columbia’s privacy laws, which prohibit it from disclosing personal information unless it is “clearly” in the public interest. But critics say the case highlights a troubling lack of transparency in Canada’s system for policing scientific misconduct. Some believe the secrecy allows unreliable papers to remain in circulation, and could enable researchers to continue to raise funds from donors and investors who may not be aware of misconduct findings. [Current practices in Canada are] nothing but a cover-up with the excuse of privacy laid on top of itAmir Attaran, University of OttawaThe university is “obviously trying to limit dissemination of information,” and that is a “huge mistake,” says UBC biochemist Ivan Sadowski, a member of a three-person team that made the misconduct findings. The researcher at the center of the case is Sandra Dunn, according to the UBC documents. (Repeated attempts to contact Dunn were unsuccessful.) For nearly 15 years, Dunn ran a lab at UBC’s Experimental Medicine Program, where she worked on new treatments for aggressive brain and breast cancers. Dunn, once featured as an expert on a panel organized by the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, secured at least CAD$1.1 million in government funding between 2009 and 2015. She left the university in 2015, after UBC concluded its investigation, to run Phoenix Molecular Designs, a company based in Richmond, Canada, that she founded in 2012. The company says it develops cancer therapies, and lists charities—including one supported by the parents of a child who died of cancer—among its “partners and supporters.”Many of Dunn’s past and current private funders may not be aware of UBC’s misconduct findings. The UBC correspondence lists 15 outside funders that directly or indirectly supported Dunn’s work, and recommended that UBC contact them “as necessary.” Retraction Watch tried to contact the funders; of the 10 that responded, only one—the C17 foundation in Edmonton, Canada—said it was aware of UBC’s investigation. Some said they would not expect to be informed, because they had not directly funded Dunn. And one current funder, the Michael Cuccione Foundation in Vancouver, said that UBC had not contacted it about the investigation, but that it was not concerned. The foundation has supported Dunn for years, says Executive Director Gloria Cuccione, and she has done “unbelievable work.”None of the 12 papers identified by investigators has been retracted, but Molecular Pharmacology recently published an “expression of concern” about one of the papers, citing UBC’s investigation. Breast Cancer Research, a journal that published two of the papers, confirmed that UBC had informed it of the findings.Although UBC has no legal obligation to publicly disclose details of its misconduct investigations, it is required to notify federal funding agencies of misconduct findings against researchers that the agencies have supported. The agencies then decide whether releasing the name is in the public interest. In 2011, agencies started requiring all funding applicants to consent to having their names publicized if they commit a serious breach of agency policy. Dunn’s funding predated the 2011 policy, however, and so far the policy has not led to the public naming of any offending scientists (although one agency recently named an offender under a different set of rules).Some Canadian researchers would like to see their funding agencies follow the lead of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Office of Research Integrity, which does name researchers it concludes have committed misconduct. (The U.S. National Science Foundation does not.) Current practices in Canada are “nothing but a cover-up with the excuse of privacy laid on top of it,” argues Amir Attaran, a law professor and biologist at the University of Ottawa.Research institutions face a tricky task in balancing the need for public transparency with the right to privacy, says Paul Hébert of the University of Montreal. Misconduct findings can be “extremely disruptive,” he says, and there’s a danger that colleagues of the offending researcher can be “painted with the same brush.” Still, Hébert would like to see Canada improve its misconduct monitoring system. As it stands, he says, there is too little transparency and “no policing. … Universities as research institutes investigate themselves.”This story is the product of a collaboration between Science and Retraction Watch.last_img read more

Continue reading

NSF reiterates policy on teaching good research habits despite its limitations

first_img Email NSF reiterates policy on teaching good research habits despite its limitations Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) By Jeffrey MervisAug. 17, 2017 , 4:40 PM Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe The National Science Foundation (NSF) in Arlington, Virginia, has decided to double down on its implementation of a congressionally mandated policy aimed at reducing research misconduct among NSF-funded scientists, despite a new report that notes problems with the agency’s approach.In 2007, Congress approved a measure, the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act, that requires every university applying for NSF funding to certify that its students are receiving “appropriate” training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Although NSF gave universities great leeway to decide how to provide that training, its 2010 directive also suggested that schools conduct a “risk assessment” to determine who should be trained and what training they should receive.In 2013 NSF’s Office of Inspector General (OIG), an internal independent watchdog, decided to see how well universities were complying with the requirement. And its new report, based on a survey of 53 institutions, identifies several areas of concern. iT@c/Flickr (CC BY-ND 2.0) For starters, 23% of the schools with NSF research funds had no RCR training plan in place when OIG first contacted them. In addition, OIG found that none of the institutions surveyed had followed NSF’s advice to do a risk assessment.The quality of the RCR training offered at universities is also suspect, the report says. Almost two-thirds of institutions rely solely on a short online program, it notes, even though most of the students OIG contacted said they would welcome a chance for meaningful interaction with faculty members on these thorny issues.There’s also a problem with timing: Half the institutions said they don’t require students to complete RCR training before participating in an NSF-funded research project. “That obviously undermines the goals we are trying to achieve,” asserted Allison Lerner, NSF’s inspector general, in a presentation Tuesday to the agency’s oversight body, the National Science Board.The OIG report also chides NSF for failing to comply with a congressional directive “to promptly develop and provide written guidelines and/or templates for universities to follow” to ensure compliance. “NSF’s awardees could benefit” from such guidance, it states.Prodding the communityNotwithstanding those unresolved issues, NSF today posted what it calls an “important notice” reminding the academic community about its RCR obligations under the law. Previewing the notice for the science board, NSF Director France Cordova reminded members that Congress gave NSF “maximum flexibility in determining the full range of activities that would constitute appropriate [RCR] training.”The notice (no. 140, dated 17 August) reminds universities that they are in the driver’s seat. “It is the responsibility of each institution to determine both the focus and the delivery method for appropriate training,” it states. “The training should be effective and appropriately tailored to the specific needs and circumstances at each university.”The notice cites both the OIG report and a recent report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that highlights exemplary RCR practices by individual universities. And it ends by asserting that “I believe we can all do more to achieve and demonstrate the effectiveness of RCR training.”Cordova told the board that she “loved” the 14-page report by the OIG, which investigates scientific misconduct as well as all manner of waste, fraud, and abuse involving NSF funds. “It is wonderful that the OIG is monitoring RCR,” she told ScienceInsider. “It will serve as a wake-up call to awardess, and I hope my Notice reinforces that message.”How about faculty?Even so, the notice doesn’t embrace any of the OIG report’s suggestions on how NSF could improve its oversight of university RCR plans.One such change would be to broaden the scope of the training beyond the current requirement that applies only to undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers working on NSF-funded projects. “It’s not the worst idea in the world to have faculty take RCR,” Lerner told the science board.To bolster her argument, Lerner noted that 96% of the 70 scientists found guilty of plagiarism since 2012 were principal investigators, not students. That statistic, she said, is in line with the fact that a majority of NSF’s plagiarism cases involve grant applications, which cannot be submitted by students.That idea resonated with a few board members. “Clearly, we should have in our statement that training is for students and faculty,” said Sethuraman “Panch” Panchanathan, executive vice president for research at Arizona State University (ASU) in Tempe and head of the board’s Committee on Strategy. “The culture of the lab is determined by the faculty member, yet somehow we left out the faculty.”But ASU doesn’t require that faculty receive RCR training, Panchanathan admits. Instead, it simply encourages them to participate, on the assumption that the training will eventually diffuse down to their students.None of the board members spoke up for any of the other suggestions in the report. And several expressed concerns about expanding the scope of training or tightening up on enforcement. In particular, they questioned why NSF would want to take such steps, fretted that any new requirements would increase the already heavy burden on institutions to comply with federal rules, and wondered whether greater scrutiny might be an overreaction to a problem that they said affects only a tiny number of researchers.“Why would we want [NSF] to be the point of the spear, when it’s the universities who are responsible for ensuring appropriate behavior?” asked Vinton Cerf, chief internet evangelist for Google. “Somebody else should take up the burden.”NSF already has the authority to reject grants from institutions who fail to certify they have an RCR plan, noted G. P. “Bud” Peterson, president of the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) in Atlanta. (OIG found 45 of 48 eligible institutions had come up with a plan and a process for monitoring RCR training before the study was completed.) “But has NSF ever turned down a proposal for that reason?” he asked. “Does anybody at NSF even pay attention to [the RCR plans]?”Stephen Mayo, a biochemist at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, warned that “there’s a cost to increasing compliance” and that expanding the RCR requirement could further strain the ability to institutions to meet federal obligations. But other board members suggested that the negative publicity from a single incident of misconduct could pose much bigger problems for both their institution and NSF. “It only takes one case” in the headlines “to grab the attention of legislators and the public,” Lerner agreed.NSF’s gentle handNSF’s current approach pays great deference to universities. NSF doesn’t necessarily know what a university is doing, notes medical ethicist Elizabeth Heitman of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, who co-authored a recently published study of how research-intensive universities are implementing the RCR mandate from NSF. In comments submitted before NSF adopted its current policy in 2010, Heitman and a group of professional ethics educators urged NSF to be more proactive, by reviewing RCR plans and offering guidance on how they could be improved. But that plea fell on deaf ears, she says.“Why did Congress mandate RCR training to begin with?” she asks rhetorically. “Because NSF hadn’t acted on its own.”Heitman says that NSF chose to implement the 2007 law in a way “that would be as easy as possible for universities to implement.” And given her own recent research, she isn’t surprised by OIG’s findings. “Most universities have responded in a way that isn’t meeting what NSF knows to be good practice,” she says.The Academies’ report says that senior university administrators must lead the way in making clear to students and faculty that research integrity is a priority at their institution. And Peterson says he has no problem sending that message.Speaking after the meeting, Peterson said it would be easy for Georgia Tech to mandate RCR training for all faculty. “All it would take would be for me to tell [the human resources department] that it is a condition of employment,” he explained. “Every university has things that faculty have to do in order to work here.”At the same time, Peterson said he’d be wary of taking such a step without extensive discussions within the Georgia Tech community. “I’d want to ask my folks about how big this issue is on our campus compared to other issues we face,” he said. And he thinks that the metrics are important.“I’d be reluctant to look just at cases of misconduct,” he said. “I can guarantee you that there have been more than 70 cases of bad mentoring,” he quipped, referencing NSF’s 5-year data on plagiarism cases. “Both are examples of a failure of responsible conduct. So I’d want to spend time looking at the magnitude of the [RCR training] problem and whether we feel what we are doing now is adequate.”Clarification, 8/18/2017, 11:32 a.m.: This item has been updated to include the fact that the Notice has been issued and cite some of its content.last_img read more

Continue reading

US agencies clash over who should regulate genetically engineered livestock

first_img USDA/Scott Bauer Originally published by E&E News.A disease that kills millions of pigs a year may soon meet its match — if two federal agencies can agree on the idea.Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus is one of the latest examples of a condition that scientists believe they can beat with genetic engineering, and one that’s caught up in a disagreement between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over how quickly such methods should be approved, and by whom. I love bacon, but I don’t know that I’m addicted to it, or it’s a drug. It sounds bizarre to me. Representative David Young (R–IA) Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country By Marc Heller, E&E NewsApr. 19, 2018 , 2:25 PMcenter_img A virus that causes illness in pigs could be a target of genetic modification. On one side: FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, whose agency regulates genetically engineered food similarly to a drug. On the other: Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, pushing for faster approvals of a wide range of biotechnology that could block animal diseases and help cows produce more milk, among other benefits.”I think Dr. Gottlieb and I have disagreed about FDA’s position on that,” Perdue said yesterday at a U.S. House of Representatives agriculture appropriations subcommittee hearing.Perdue said he worries that FDA’s regulations on biotech animals could stifle innovation and slow the introduction of animals that could be more productive or resistant to diseases without the use of drugs or hormones. USDA already allows genetic engineering in plants, and Perdue said he sees livestock in a similar way.In its draft guidance, FDA said prior authorization is necessary before introducing any food from such livestock into the food supply. The agency would review any possible health risks, according to the guidance. Authorization would also be needed before shipping any such animals, FDA said.The work on the pig virus is the first step of a partnership between Caribou Biosciences Inc. and Genus PLC, which last year announced a four-year research project that could be extended for an additional three years. Caribou is based in Berkeley, California, and Genus is based in the United Kingdom.Scientists can inactivate a single gene in the pig to stop production of a protein the virus needs to survive, according to the companies. That practice—called gene editing—doesn’t involve inserting genes from another species and isn’t the same as genetic modification.The virus didn’t come up at the hearing, but pigs did, thanks to Rep. David Young (R-IA), whose state leads the country in hog production.Young took issue with FDA’s position that biotech animals should be regulated similarly to drugs, which he called an “onerous” approach.”I love bacon, but I don’t know that I’m addicted to it, or it’s a drug,” Young said. “It sounds bizarre to me.”Advocates for biotechnology say the regulatory regime may put too much restriction on methods that fall short of genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.”Perhaps that system doesn’t work so well,” said Karen Batra, a spokeswoman for the Biotechnology Innovation Organization. “There’s a lot of confusion in the process. It takes an amazing amount of time.”The system might work better, Batra said, if gene editing weren’t regulated like a drug, as GMOs are.The fight over biotech livestock plays out in Congress, as well, where Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) has led a fight against genetically modified salmon, fearing they could undermine the fishing industry in her state (Greenwire, May 19, 2016). U.S. agencies clash over who should regulate genetically engineered livestock Read more… Some lawmakers, including Rep. Ted Yoho (R-FL), have called for switching jurisdiction from FDA to USDA. But USDA doesn’t have regulations written to handle biotech livestock, said Jaydee Hanson, a senior policy analyst at the Center for Food Safety in Washington, D.C., an organization critical of genetic engineering.”They’re saying, ‘We don’t have any regulation, so we’re not going to regulate it,'” Hanson said.Among other measures, the government should require a complete sequencing of the genome for any genetically tweaked animal that might enter the food supply, Hanson said.The issue is likely to be debated in the 2018 farm bill. At a markup yesterday of the House Agriculture Committee’s farm bill, Yoho offered, then withdrew, an amendment requiring a report on moving jurisdiction to USDA.Reprinted from Greenwire with permission from E&E News. Copyright 2018. E&E provides essential news for energy and environment professionals at www.eenews.net Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*)last_img read more

Continue reading

Life rebounded just years after the dinosaurkilling asteroid struck

first_img Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Life rebounded just years after the dinosaur-killing asteroid struck Artist’s depiction of a large asteroid impact. Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Countrycenter_img Joe Tucciarone/Science Source As part of an effort to understand how planets respond to large impacts, a team of scientists in 2016 drilled into the 180-kilometer Chicxulub crater, the only impact structure linked to a global extinction event. The team brought up hundreds of roughly arm-length sediment cores. Some bore the scars of the extreme temperatures and pressures of the event, which drove rocks to behave like a fluid: Mountains the height of the Himalayas rose and fell within the span of minutes. One core, taken from roughly 600 meters below the modern sea floor, contained 76 centimeters of dull brown limestone—not much to look at, but perhaps the most treasured swath of sediment from the entire drilling project, at least to Chris Lowery.Lowery, a paleoceanographer at the University of Texas Institute for Geophysics in Austin, and his colleagues began to analyze the fine grains of sediment that made up the limestone. Relying on equations that describe how long it takes tiny particles to settle through a liquid, they calculated that the grains were deposited on the sea floor rapidly after the impact, in just a few years. When Lowery and his colleagues peered into the layers of limestone, they found numerous fossils and burrows, evidence of small worms, shelled creatures known as foraminifera, and plankton. Life was back.But how did life colonize Chicxulub’s ground zero so quickly? It had nothing to do with the magnitude of the impact or the crater’s size, Lowery says. Instead, the deciding factor may have been the crater’s shape. Chicxulub’s northeastern flank was open to the Gulf of Mexico, which allowed deep, nutrient-carrying water to circulate throughout the crater, the team reports today in Nature. In contrast, the Chesapeake Bay crater was closed, which meant oxygen consumed by decomposing organic matter was not replenished, and aerobic life would have quickly died. “You basically had a dead zone,” Lowery says.Lowery and his colleagues suggest the Chicxulub impact holds lessons for ocean life today, which is threatened by oxygen depletion, ocean acidification, and rising temperatures. “It’s probably the only event that happened faster than modern climate change and pollution,” Lowery says. “It might be an important analog for the recovery of biodiversity after we finally curtail carbon dioxide emissions and pollution.” When a 10-kilometer-wide asteroid hit the Gulf of Mexico 66 million years ago, it drove over 75% of Earth’s species to extinction, including the dinosaurs. But within just a few years, life returned to the submerged impact crater, according to a new analysis of sediments in the crater. Tiny marine creatures flourished thanks to the circulation of nutrient-rich water. That return of life could offer lessons in how marine ecosystems might recover after the dramatic shifts caused by climate change, the researchers suggest.The new findings reveal “how resilient life can be,” says Gareth Collins, a planetary scientist at Imperial College London who was not involved in the research. “Such a rapid recovery … is remarkable.”Some scientists hypothesize that life might slowly creep back into impact craters, perhaps because of toxic metals such as mercury and lead scattered by the impact. Other impact craters tell a tale similar to that idea: The 85-kilometer Chesapeake Bay crater, for instance, was devoid of life for thousands of years after a comet or asteroid hit modern-day Virginia some 35 million years ago. By Katherine KorneiMay. 30, 2018 , 1:00 PMlast_img read more

Continue reading

The Hardened Drill Instructor who also Served as the Voice of…Bambi

first_imgFor a United States Marine recruit, there is little more to be afraid of than the drill instructor (“DI”). Equipped with a hard physique, faultless uniform, his/her famous hat pushed down to the point where the recruit might think he/she can’t see, spotless shoes, and seemingly endless campaign ribbons, the USMC drill instructor seems to be the recruits worst nightmare. Marine drill instructors are not allowed to use corporal punishment in any form. They can add calisthenics, distance to runs and much else (to a certain point), but they are not allowed to strike, etc. This change came about some time ago, but until after the Vietnam War, was not necessarily the most enforced Marine regulation. However – most of the time there was no need for it. The DI had many other tools at their command, including peer pressure, and of course, regulations. Before discipline ever becomes a problem it is usually handled by…A U.S. Marine Senior Drill Instructor supervises the inspection of his platoon“THE VOICE.” An almost impossible combination of sea-lion bark, Southern drawl, and sore throat, Marine DI’s hone their voice into a perfect delivery system for commands, threats and insults. That voice stays with a Marine for a very, very long time.It even comes to some in dreams decades later. What a video online. The best ones show DI’s speaking in their normal voice, and instantly switching to their DI voice. It’s disconcerting.Perhaps the best-known drill instructor was “Gunny” R. Lee Ermey, a former Marine who made a good living in Hollywood after his military career was over. The role that propelled him to fame was that of Drill Instructor Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket.R. Lee Ermey,There was another Hollywood DI long before that of Ermey. His name was Donnie Dunagan, and he retired a major, an awarded Vietnam veteran who was wounded several times in the course of his career.Long before his commission, he was a drill instructor. Just like the thousands that had come before him, he perfected “The Voice.”Donnie Dunagan Photo by Sara Fenwick CC BY-SA 4.0But Dunagan had a secret which he managed to keep from almost everybody until 2005, a secret that no DI would ever want anyone in the Marines to know. Dunagan was…“Bambi.” Well, the voice of Bambi, at least.As a kid in the 1930s, he was discovered at a local talent show in Memphis, Tennessee. He appeared in eight movies in his short Hollywood career, including Son of Frankenstein with Boris Karloff, with whom he took a famous publicity still.Screenshot of Bambi and Faline from the trailer for the film Bambi.When he was eight years old, he and his mother were approached by a man from Disney Studios who told them that Dunagan would be “perfect” for a part Disney had coming up.Donnie worked with other children doing the voice of the characters in the movie, which he says made the film more “real” than having adults imitate child-like voices. He also had to be filmed for the role so the animation artists could capture his face, emotions, and gestures, and incorporate them into the Bambi character.Voice Actor Donnie Dunagan arrives at the 75th Anniversary Screening Of The Oscar-Nominated Animated Film ‘Bambi’ at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences on May 15, 2017 in Beverly Hills, California. (PhotoPsychologists will tell you that people get thrown by voices that seemingly don’t match expectations – such as a DI that has the voice of Bambi. He was filmed as he had a spoonful of castor oil for the moment in the movie when Bambi gets kissed. He was never told about what happened to Bambi’s mom in the movie, he was just asked to cry “Mother, Mother!” as if he wanted his mom.Of course, by the time Dunagan was in the Marines, he had outgrown that voice, but in the Marines of the time, being known as “Sergeant Bambi” would likely have not instilled the proper fear in his recruits.Screenshot of Bambi, Thumper and Flower from the theatrical trailer for the film Bambi.Dunagan managed to keep his secret for decades, but a newspaper was able to track him down. Today he embraces his part in film history, signing autographs and attending functions, and he loves the movie Bambi.When asked whether or not there was something odd about a Marine who liked Bambi, Dunagan replied: “Is there any incongruity in being a tough old Marine and loving Bambi? No, no,”“I’m a sensitive man. When I had my first casualties as a lieutenant, I had a hard time controlling my emotions, but I had a strong sergeant with me who kept me from doing something stupid.Read another story from us: A Love Story with a Hollywood Ending: Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward“I’ve been around some real tough guys, and I promise you on my honor: The strongest guys I’ve known in life would pick up a wounded baby kitty on the side of the road. Yet you wouldn’t want to go against them in combat. That is not inconsistent. It is part of the same ethos.”last_img read more

Continue reading

Uttarakhand Suspended BJP MLA seen dancing with guns in video party issues

first_imgWritten by Lalmani Verma | Dehradun | Published: July 11, 2019 3:07:33 am Advertising Uttarakhand legislator Pranav Singh expelled from BJP for six years over video with guns Advertising Uttarakhand BJP expels ‘Champion’ MLA for 6 years over dancing video with guns Auli weddings: Guptas fined Rs 2.5 lakh for littering, open defecation Related News After the video went viral, Uttarakhand BJP president Ajay Bhatt said in a series of tweets, “The inappropriate language that the MLA has used for Uttarakhand in the video is highly condemnable and the party is ashamed. The party has issued a showcause notice to the MLA, asking why he should not be expelled from the party. The party has sought a reply within 10 days. The party has taken the matter seriously and is committed to stern action.”BJP state media in-charge Devendra Bhasin said, “What is shown in the video is not the BJP’s culture. We cannot support such an act. The party leadership will take cognizance of the video.”Last month, Pranav was suspended from the BJP’s primary membership for three months after his dispute with another party MLA and a complaint of alleged misbehaviour with a journalist, said Bhasin. Kunwar Pranav Singh Champion, BJP MLA Champion dancing video, Kunwar Pranav Singh Champion dancing, bjp mla Champion dancing with guns, indian express Pranav Champion (Source: ANI)BJP MLA from Khanpur, Uttarakhand, Pranav Singh ‘Champion’, currently suspended from the party on grounds of indiscipline, has been issued a showcause notice by the party after he was seen in a video brandishing four guns and dancing to a Bollywood song. In the video, Pranav is seen taking sips of drinks while waving his guns. Other men too are seen dancing with him.Pranav could not be contacted and his associate Dev Vikhyat Bhati said that he was on bed rest because of a leg surgery. Asked about the video, Bhati said, “That video was shot three years back when he was in the Congress. Our political opponents have circulated this video as part of a conspiracy to malign his image. The MLA has carried out a lot of development work in his area and his opponents are upset with that.”He also said Pranav is known as ‘king’ of “Landhaura Riyasat” in Haridwar.A former weightlifter who added “champion” to his name, Pranav won his first assembly election as an Independent in 2002. In 2007 and 2012, he won as a Congress nominee. In 2016, Pranav was among nine lawmakers who revolted against then chief minister Harish Rawat and switched from the Congress to BJP.The Congress has demanded that the BJP take action against Pranav. Congress spokesperson Mathura Dutt Joshi said, “This video shows the real face of the BJP. The BJP MLA in the video can be seen using objectionable language for Uttarakhand. This is a condemnable act by an elected public representative. If the BJP does not take any action against its MLA and gives shelter to him, it will prove that the party is anti-Uttarakhand.” Post Comment(s)last_img read more

Continue reading

Indian man jailed for smuggling Indians as illegal immigrants into US

first_imgUndercover federal agents had been watching Patel since 2013 — some posing as smugglers — and he was finally arrested on December 7, 2018 at Newark Liberty International Airport. Patel had pleaded guilty before US District Judge John Vazquez. Vazquez imposed the sentence Tuesday in Newark federal court in the State of New Jersey.According to documents filed in this case and statements made in court, agents for the Department of Homeland Security Investigations received information that a smuggling operation run by Patel was attempting to find methods to bring people from India into the US. The investigation revealed that the smuggling organisation recruited Indian nationals and others to pay fees in exchange for passage to the US.From October 2013 till his arrest in Newark Liberty International Airport on December 7, 2018, federal officials alleged that Patel arranged for six Indian nationals to be brought to Thailand for smuggling into the US via the Newark airport. Beginning October 2013, an undercover law enforcement officer posing as a smuggler began meeting with Patel in Bangkok. Patel told the undercover law enforcement officer that he wanted to smuggle Indian nationals into the US.On three different occasions, Patel or his conspirator transported the Indian nationals to an airport in Thailand, at which point the undercover law enforcement officer would presumably use his contacts to smuggle them into the US via commercial airline flights. Patel agreed to wire down payments for each individual to be smuggled into the US and to pay a balance of tens of thousands of dollars for each individual once the foreign nationals arrived in America. Related News rann of kutch, gujarat couple convicted, bhuj districts and session court, kutch couple convicted, elderly woman murdered in gujarat, crime news, india news, Indian Express The investigation revealed that the smuggling organisation recruited Indian nationals and others to pay fees in exchange for passage to the US. (Representational Image)An Indian national was sentenced to one year and a day in prison by a US court on Tuesday for his role in an international conspiracy to smuggle people from India. Bhavin Patel, 39, operated a smuggling ring that brought foreign nationals into the US in exchange for fees. The foreign nationals would fly out of Thailand to the US. Enormous potential for growth in ties with India: US US mulls increasing merit-based immigration to 57% Post Comment(s) Facebook should not be trusted with ‘crazy’ cryptocurrency plan – US senators By PTI |Washington | Published: July 10, 2019 12:10:43 am Advertisinglast_img read more

Continue reading

Madhya Pradesh govt tables cow vigilantism bill in state assembly

first_imgThe Kamal Nath government had cleared an amendment to the Madhya Pradesh Gauvansh Vadh Pratishedh Adhiniyam, 2004 — the anti-cow slaughter law passed by the previous BJP government — to include this provision.Additional Chief Secretary (Animal Husbandry) Manoj Shrivastava had told The Indian Express that the punishment will increase to minimum one year and maximum five years if a mob is involved in cow vigilantism. In case of repeat offenders, the jail term will be doubled.The amendment also seeks to punish those who abet cow vigilantism by providing a jail term of one to three years. People who damage property of those charged under the anti-cow slaughter law will also be punished. Post Comment(s) Indore: Cow vigilantes thrash two for allegedly transporting beef The move had come in the wake of an incident near Kachhiwara, under Dundaseoni police station in Seoni district, on May 22, when five people had thrashed three persons, including a Muslim man and woman, on suspicion of carrying beef.Earlier, the state government had decided to ease rules governing the transportation of cows to ensure that farmers and traders are not harassed by cow vigilantes and stopped by police. The government also decided to allow trade of cows between farmers by removing a condition that they could buy bovines only from bazaars or haats.The Supreme Court in July 2018 said “horrendous acts of mobocracy” cannot be allowed to overrun the law of the land and issued a slew of guidelines to deal with mob lynching and cow vigilantism, besides asking the Centre to consider enacting a new law to sternly deal with such cases. The apex court had issued a slew of directions to the Centre to provide “preventive, remedial and punitive measures” to deal with such offences. Advertising Vigilantism 2.0 Madhya Pradesh govt tables cow vigilantism bill in state assembly Additional Chief Secretary (Animal Husbandry) Manoj Shrivastava had told The Indian Express that the punishment will increase to minimum one year and maximum five years.In a bid to crack down on cow vigilantism, the Congress government in Madhya Pradesh on Wednesday tabled the cow vigilantism bill in the state assembly. On June 26, the government had proposed a jail term of six months to three years and a fine of Rs 25,000-50,000 for those who engage in violence against anyone booked under the anti-cow slaughter Act. Law and beyond Related News Advertising By Express Web Desk |New Delhi | Published: July 17, 2019 1:50:32 pmlast_img read more

Continue reading

How Many Ways Might iPhone Xs Face ID Go Wrong

first_imgWhen Apple unveiled its iPhone X on Tuesday, officials highlighted the device’s advanced functionality, including what truly could be a game changing feature, its facial recognition technology.The new handset, which will sell for a whopping US$1,000, allows users to unlock it simply by looking at it.The 10th anniversary edition of Apple’s flagship mobile device is the first Apple handset to utilize Face ID, which works by scanning an owner’s face via an array of cameras. Apple touted it as more secure than passwords or even the fingerprint sensor that was introduced into its iPhone 5s back in 2013.Back in 2011, Google introduced a similar facial recognition technology with the Android 4.0 operating system — dubbed “Face Unlock” — but it hasn’t taken the world by storm.During Tuesday’s unveiling of the device, Phil Schiller, Apple’s senior vice president of worldwide marketing, declared that nothing was more secure or as simple to use as Face ID.That didn’t appear to be the case during the actual reveal of the technology, however. Face ID’s debut was underwhelming, as it failed to work as promised during an onstage demonstration on Tuesday.Craig Federighi, Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering, initially was unable to get the technology to recognize him. Apple later said the glitch was due to another individual having handled the device prior to handing it over to Federighi. Peter Suciu has been an ECT News Network reporter since 2012. His areas of focus include cybersecurity, mobile phones, displays, streaming media, pay TV and autonomous vehicles. He has written and edited for numerous publications and websites, including Newsweek, Wired and FoxNews.com.Email Peter. Beyond frustrations, one of the biggest concerns with facial recognition technology is that systems potentially could be fooled by still photos, and thus might not be as secure as promised.However, a photo or even a 3D model of someone’s face wouldn’t be enough to trick the software behind Face ID, according to Apple.”The technology in the iPhone X is designed to create a 3D image of the face, and it utilizes tracking software that pinpoints the distance between the eyes and the point of the nose,” said IHS Markit’s Fogg.”The handset also works with eye-tracking technology and only works if the person is looking at the phone, so you can’t have an accidental unlock by just holding the device and glancing at it,” he added.Even so, people can look different by wearing makeup, getting a haircut or even having a suntan. It isn’t clear if significant weight loss or gain, along with a different pair of glasses, might be enough to cause the technology to fail to recognize a legitimate user.Illness, such as edema, also could be an issue, suggested Entner. “That makes your face look noticeably different during the course of the day.”Then there is the issue of security.”If someone forcibly holds you and wants to have the access to your phone, they simply have to stick it in your face,” warned Entner. “PINs or fingerprints are much harder to compel in these cases.” Regardless of their cause, the presentation hiccups may have been an ominous sign, as Apple has a lot riding on Face ID and the iPhone X overall.The iPhone X features a TrueDepth camera that allows the Face ID system to ensure that the face looking at the screen is that of the actual owner. It works by sending out 30,000 invisible dots that pinpoint the curves of the head and other facial features.In addition, an infrared camera tracks the patterns of the face, which helps confirm that the face on record is the one belonging to the device’s actual user.”iPhone X will be a big departure from the user interface model that we’ve become used to with Touch ID,” said Wayne Lam, principal analyst for technology, media and telecom at IHS Markit.”Other manufacturers have diversified their biometrics approach — case in point, Samsung adding iris scanning as well as fingerprint [tech] on their Galaxy S8 & Note8 products,” he told TechNewsWorld.”That design philosophy is a bit compromised,” Lam said. “While Samsung offers choice to consumers, it often does not work well, or gets the consumer confused as to which biometric mode to engage with first.”Apple has created something that could be demonstrably better, and it is betting on its success by replacing Touch ID with Face ID in the iPhone X.”On first blush, I watched it in action at the Cupertino event, and it appears to work much more elegantly than the iris scanner on the Samsung Galaxy,” said Lam. “The iris scanning requires the users to line up the phone sensors with the eyes — bring the phone up to your face like you’re looking into the mirror — whereas Face ID projects IR onto the user’s face to create a facial contour map.” Apple’s Face ID technology is built around software developed to track more than just the eyes.”Apple has a whole array of technology built into the iPhone X, and it is all an evolution of technology developed by Prime Sense, a 3D scanning company that Apple acquired back in 2013,” noted Ian Fogg, senior director for mobile and telecoms at IHS Markit.”We have to remember that Prime Sense was the original supplier of the hardware for the Microsoft Kinect, the motion sensing technology for its Xbox platform,” he told TechNewsWorld.However, as Tuesday’s onstage debacle showed, there could be problems in ensuring that the technology is ready for its closeup.”Face ID will be one of those things that when they are good they are really good, and when they are bad they are really bad,” warned Roger Entner, principal analyst at Recon Analytics.”If Face ID works, it is very convenient and users will love it, but if Face ID has problems with recognizing your face it becomes very frustrating,” he told TechNewsWorld. From Game Time to Face Timecenter_img Face of the Future Face ID on the iPhone X might just be the first use of this technology — since Apple acquired a 3D scanning firm, putting one’s best face forward might be in the future.”This is really a question of where Apple could use this technology next,” said Fogg.”It could be in MacBooks to unlock the device, or even in Apple TV where you only have to look at the set-top box to log on. However, we’ve only seen Face ID in demos, and won’t know how it actually works until it ships this fall.” The Face as the Key Depth of Fieldlast_img read more

Continue reading