text:
The Indiana Pacers had the Eastern Conference's best record during the regular season and are in the conference finals, which most had projected would happen. They're currently losing the series 3-1 to the Miami Heat, a team that generally everyone believes is more talented.
So despite this reasonable achievement, why is Indiana regarded as a team in turmoil?
Because the Pacers had one of the strangest, yet most compelling, seasons of any team in recent memory. They exploded to a 33-7 start, then finished 23-19 after a series of on- and off-court events that captivated NBA fans and raised many questions.
Here are some answers about what happened to the Pacers:
Q: Roy Hibbert's line about a lot of selfish people in that locker room brought the team's turmoil to the forefront. What's that about?
A: Hibbert didn't come out and identify the player directly to NBA.com's David Aldridge, but he was talking about Lance Stephenson on March 28 after a loss in Washington, when he said "there's some selfish dudes" in the locker room.
Stephenson was putting together a strong season for the Pacers, racking up triple-doubles and maturing into their second-best talent behind Paul George. But Stephenson felt jilted when the Eastern Conference coaches did not vote him onto the All-Star team in February. He doesn't always appreciate the ramifications of his actions; his recent attempt to "get inside LeBron James' head" with trash talk during the conference finals is a classic example.
After Stephenson missed out on the All-Star team, he changed. He started a bit of a personal vendetta against East coaches, wanting to personally send a message in those games, which took him further out of the flow on some nights, sources said. Overall, the team noticed a shift in Stephenson from a more team-oriented approach to a more self-oriented focus, where he started obsessing about his statistics. People within the team believed his upcoming free agency was also a motivating factor for Stephenson, who wanted to enhance his value, something he believed suffered when he didn't get an All-Star nod.
As a result, Stephenson started annoying his teammates at both ends. Not only did he start dominating the ball more -- his assist rate dropped dramatically in the second half of the season -- but he was robbing numbers from his teammates. He has always had a habit of so-called "stealing rebounds," jumping in front of or over a teammate who had an uncontested rebound to get it for himself. This phenomenon reached a new level in the back half of the regular season. Hibbert, who had his rebound totals heavily analyzed by the media and fans, was often a victim in these friendly-fire rebounds.
Stephenson's act had long worn thin by late March. When the players had meetings to address issues with the sudden struggles, Stephenson sometimes wasn't involved. Occasionally he appeared to be unaware they were even happening. Most players on the team, now that they were losing, shared similar feelings about Stephenson, but did not vocalize their problems publicly.
Q: Did Hibbert's selfish comment have an impact inside the locker room?
A: Yes, and in a negative way. As one person with knowledge of the situation put it: "It divided the locker room big time." The Pacers didn't become one of the best teams in the league on talent alone. Their chemistry -- until about February -- was a strong bond that appeared unbreakable. But Hibbert, according to sources, defied a core belief of the team, which is to keep dirty laundry in-house.
For several games leading up to the "selfish" comment, Hibbert teetered in interviews with the media after losses. Several times he came to the brink of saying something and then bit his tongue. He was struggling and not getting the ball -- seven times in a month, he scored six points or fewer and his touches had dropped. The loss that night was the fourth time in five games the Pacers failed to break 80 points. Hibbert was in his hometown and had just struggled again in his old college arena and he'd finally had enough.
This "selfish dudes" comment, though, broke the trust of his teammates because he didn't come to them to address it first. Already upset with his play, Hibbert's teammates lost some trust in him after those comments, multiple sources said. "Teams that are tied together don't do those types of things," a source said.
Q: There are rumors that the team has been so up and down because of salacious off-court stuff. Is there any truth to that?
A: ESPN has spoken with numerous sources inside and outside of the Pacers organization, and the answer has consistently been that there is no evidence behind the innuendo about off-court interpersonal issues. It was clear the Pacers were dealing with chemistry issues, and their on-court cohesiveness showed a sharp decline after midseason. Some Internet sites and fans, looking for an explanation for this sudden change, searched for answers and some of the void was filled by lascivious rumors. Team and player sources insisted they were false, but they naturally spread as the Pacers continued to struggle.
George had to publicly acknowledge two incidents during the season. He copped to a relationship with a Miami nightclub worker, and debunked another alleged relationship that was splashed across a few blogs. He handled both with grace and accepted this was part of his more visible life as a star player. However, those close to him told ESPN that he was not prepared to handle the distractions, and the noise sent him into a bit of a depression for a short time during the season.
Rumors also had a negative impact on the psyches of other players, especially Hibbert. An active Twitter user, Hibbert became so upset about what fans were sending his way that he pushed to release a statement with a denial. After consulting with his agent, David Falk, and the team, the decision was reached not to do so, sources said.
The rumors, however, did not stop, and by the second round of the playoffs, the players had grown sick of it. They collectively decided to confront them through social media. George posted a photo on his Instagram account of a fishing trip on his boat with Hibbert and George Hill. He wrote the caption: "These rumors have got to stop! Its getting old now and all you that believe them are ignorant! #Brothers" on May 6.
Not all fans understood the reference to the rumors. George, Hill and Hibbert didn't elaborate much to the media. It was an old photo but Hibbert and George did go fishing during the series with the Washington Wizards to clear their minds. The post quelled the rumors to a certain extent, and the Pacers started to play better, winning that series 4-2 after falling behind 1-0.
Q: Lance Stephenson has been both wonderful and evidently selfish -- is it correct he has been a destabilizing force?
A: Stephenson has become one of the most polarizing players in the league and certainly on his own team. The Pacers have nurtured him for four years and constructed an entire support system aimed at nourishing him and controlling him, from hands-on daily encouragement and review from president Larry Bird all the way to the public relations staff trying their best to keep him from putting his foot in his mouth.
In the past two seasons, Stephenson has blossomed as a player, but he's also more comfortable taking liberties and risks. This has pushed the bounds with the players and coaches.
Putting it in Indianapolis terms, Stephenson is like a race car. The performance can be incredible and awe-inspiring. But he requires constant maintenance by the entire operation, and losing focus for one second can lead to various levels of disaster. This, naturally, can and has grown tiresome.
In the past three years, all of the Pacers' core players -- Hill, Hibbert, West, George -- have been signed to long-term deals. Now it is Stephenson's turn. Bird has always supported him. He stuck his neck out to draft him despite Stephenson's checkered past and red flags. Despite Stephenson's tantalizing talents, sources said there are many in the organization who don't think it's a good decision to give him a rich, long-term contract, given the way he has acted during the season.
Q: Hill was a big factor last postseason, but not this time around. What happened to him?
A: From the outside, it looks like Hill has regressed, as his scoring average has dropped four points a game, and his assists are also down. He's had numerous games where he's seemed invisible. In the first round of the playoffs, he was outplayed by the Atlanta Hawks' Jeff Teague, which was not a good look because both players signed $8 million-per-year contracts.
Privately, Hill has told people he's very upset with himself this season and takes the blame for not being more assertive, and he has vowed to change. But it is not all about his game. He also has been upset about the changing nature of his role and his willingness not to challenge that shift. Hill's shooting and rebounding numbers this season are steady, but as the Pacers have turned the keys of the offense to Stephenson, Hill has been marginalized. His role in the offense is often to get out of the way and stand in the corner as a floor spacer, the kind of role he was relegated to in San Antonio early in his career.
Indeed, if you look at the stats, he is averaging 3.5 fewer shots per game this season. Where did those shots go? One possible answer with some symmetrical evidence: Stephenson is averaging about 3.5 more shots than last season.
Like others, he has been frustrated with Stephenson. During a blowout home loss late in the regular season, he and Stephenson got into a verbal altercation on the bench. But his role reduction to allow Stephenson to grow was an organizational decision that also has had some positive benefits, even if it has the side effect of upsetting Hill.
There's little doubt that Hill has not performed at the highest level, but there have been nights when he has been off defensively. However, his length and defensive skill set are a big part of why the Pacers have been an elite defensive team in the past several seasons.
Q: Former assistant coach Brian Shaw's name still comes up around the team as someone the players respect. Do they miss the assistant who is now the head coach of the Nuggets?
A: One person put it this way: "B. Shaw was always straightforward. If there were any problems, he'd speak up, whether it was yelling, cussing us out or just being there for us, and then we'd move on. This is no knock on Nate (McMillan) because this was his first season with us and the last thing he was going to do was ruffle any feathers."
Players gravitated to Shaw because of his knowledge of playing and coaching on championship teams. George and Stephenson, the team's two most talented players, were Shaw's pupils. He was one of the few who could keep Stephenson in line, and Shaw often went fishing with George, when they would spend hours together just talking about basketball and life.
The team has missed having that sounding board this season, especially when things got rough. Pacers coach Frank Vogel has developed a persona where he is often a voice of positivity and reinforcement. Though he is not afraid to get after players, especially during film sessions, Shaw often acted as the bad cop to Vogel's good cop. Facing issues this season the Pacers had not previously encountered -- especially with George and Stephenson -- not having Shaw there to pull them into a corner and re-focus them was missed during the season.
Ironically, Shaw had issues during his first season with the Nuggets because of his personality, and veteran Andre Miller ended up being dealt, largely because of friction with Shaw.
Q: Larry Bird is widely celebrated as one of the best ever to play, coach or run a team. But is some of this turmoil on him?
A: Even though he took a year's hiatus -- during which Hibbert and Vogel were given contract extensions that he didn't have a part of -- this is a team that Bird has built. He drafted Hibbert, George and Stephenson. He traded for Hill. He made the personal sales pitch to get West to sign as a free agent. He was the NBA Executive of the Year in 2012 for excellent reasons.
When he returned to the franchise last year, though, he was concerned about the team's bench, and he aggressively tried to get his starters help so that Vogel wouldn't play them so many minutes together. His moves to get this done have not been so golden and he's continued to tinker with little concern for chemistry, something that was perhaps a fragile quality of the team he built.
Bird pushed to sign Andrew Bynum in midseason despite not having doctors examine his knees and despite the Pacers' research (including the canvassing of acquaintances in Cleveland) producing numerous red flags, sources said. Bird followed the Bynum signing by trading longtime team member Danny Granger for Evan Turner at the deadline.
Granger's prescience as a team leader was a little overblown on the outside, sources said, because he largely had grown apart from the team during his bouts of knee injuries during the past two seasons. Granger, sources said, also had grown wary of playing in the same rotation with Stephenson, which prevented him from getting as many touches as he preferred. However, with the team struggling with its first significant chemistry issues since coming together, the decisions backfired badly. Neither deal worked out, and in Bynum's case, he appears to have had a negative effect on Hibbert and his sometimes delicate outlook on games.
In the two games Bynum played, he was a featured part of the offense, getting 22 shots in 36 total minutes. This season, Hibbert averaged just 11 shots per 36 minutes he played. Turner is a player who has had limited success in his career, but mostly when he has dominated the ball. With George, Hill and Stephenson, there was little room for that type of play from Turner. Vogel briefly tried Turner at backup point guard when C.J. Watson got hurt, but that didn't work either.
No executive has a Midas touch and Bird's hot streak ran out this year, including his decision to sign Chris Copeland to a $6 million deal, only to watch him sit on the bench all season. That happens. But messing midseason with a team he knew to be fragile had far-reaching effects.


text:
Although Luyanda's confidence now beams for all to see, this hasn't always been the case. For years, being surrounded by friends with lighter skin and straighter hair pressured Luyanda into emulating a beauty ideal that wasn't right for her.
Once she noticed her own beautiful features, however, she promised she'd stay true to herself. She got dreadlocks that day and has faced the world with an unstoppable self-confidence almost as beautiful as her natural hair ever since.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
NEW YORK – If shoppers don't show up in stores soon, more '70 percent off' sale signs will.
After a promising start to the holiday shopping season over the four-day Thanksgiving weekend, sales have slowed, according to an analysis of data done for The Associated Press by sales tracker ShopperTrak. Worries about weak U.S. job growth and other concerns are likely to blame for Americans spending less.
That puts pressure on J.C. Penney, Macy's and other stores, which had been offering fewer discounts this season than they did last year, to step up promotions to lure shoppers like Ron Antonette from Long Beach, Calif.
Antonette so far has spent about half of what he planned to spend during this holiday season on gifts such as Legos, a Wii U game console and Apple's iPad Mini tablet computer for his two young children. Antonette stopped shopping after spending $1,000 over fears that Congress and the White House won't reach a budget deal by January. A stalemate would trigger tax increases and spending cuts known as the 'fiscal cliff.'
'I basically stopped moving forward in buying,' said Antonette, 44, who runs a small public relations business and worries that he might not be able to take mortgage deductions on his house next year. 'I feel like we're in financial limbo.'
Antonette isn't the only shopper who feels that way. Major stores don't discuss sales during the holiday shopping season, but Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke said during a speech in New York City on Tuesday that a recent poll of shoppers of the world's largest retailer found that an overwhelming majority are aware of the threat of higher taxes. And some said it would lead them to cut back their holiday buying, he said.
Overall, holiday sales are up 2.2 percent to $659 billion from Nov. 1 through last Saturday, according ShopperTrak, a Chicago-based firm that tracks spending at 40,000 stores across the country. That's slightly below the 2.7 percent increase over the Thanksgiving weekend when shoppers spent $22 billion.
The modest increase means sales for rest of the season will be crucial for stores, which make as much as 40 percent of their annual revenue in November and December. With only about a week and a half left until Christmas, stores have a ways to go in order to reach ShopperTrak's forecast of a 3.3 percent rise in sales during the two-month stretch compared with the same period last year.
It's like the ghost of Christmas past has returned for stores. In order to salvage the season, they may be forced to offer the kind of heavy discounts that helped boost sales last year, but that also ate away at their profits. That's something stores have tried to resist all season: Promotions are down 5 percent so far this season compared with last year, according to BMO Capital, which tracks promotions at about two-thirds of mall stores.
To be sure, there still are plenty of 30, 40 and 50 percent off sale signs in store windows. But stores also have been doing more creative things with pricing to get shoppers to think they're getting a better deal than they really are. Think: Offering jeans for $9 instead of $9.99, hoping round numbers will appeal more to shoppers, or selling two shirts for $20 instead of giving shoppers 20 percent off.
'The retailing nation is trying to get off the discounting habit,' said Paco Underhill, founder of Envirosell, which studies consumer behavior. 'It's just like heroin – the more you do it the more you need to do it.'
The fact that stores are struggling to find the right balance between pricing and profits during the holiday season is no surprise. They've been doing that since the dawn of department stores in the 1800s. Perhaps the biggest change occurred in 1975, when the Consumer Goods Pricing Act repealed state fair trade laws, allowing stores to sell items at whatever price they want instead of what manufacturers dictate.
Prices like '$19.99' instead of '$20' sprang up because as Baba Shiv, a marketing professor at Stanford University who focuses on neuroeconomics, puts it: 'When you see something for $9.99, the brain categorizes that as being $9 rather than $10,' he said. 'Those things are still effective.'
But at a time when shoppers are more price sensitive, some stores have gotten rid of the ubiquitous '99 cents' in prices in favor of flat prices. In fact, Kmart played up flat prices in its advertising and in-store deals on Black Friday with signs that read: 'Experience our $5, $10, $20 Freak Out Pricing.'
'The effort was around being able to communicate clearly to our customer in gift denominations they commonly think within,' said Tom Aiello, Kmart's spokesman. 'Nothing against the '.99.'
Last weekend, tables at Forever 21 in New York's Times Square had clothes with prices that ended with '50 cents' — for example, '$10.50 and up' or '$17.50 and up.' Steve Martin, a 27-year-old resident of Scranton, Pa. who was shopping there, said people aren't fooled by fractional prices.
'I think most people are rounder-uppers,' said Martin, who's looking for a job.
But if the price is right, shoppers will scoop up items. Twenty-somethings Malia and Kyra Bennett were out at Lloyd Center Mall in Portland, Ore., recently when they spotted workout shirts at H&M for $5 that they had to buy. 'We didn't come to buy those, but they are only $5,' Malia Bennett said.
— Candice Choi in New York and Sarah Skidmore in Portland contributed to this story.


text:
Developers across the mobile space struggle to produce intuitive, beautiful apps for the Android platform. Their challenges spring from the plethora of devices available on Google's operating system, as well as inconsistent operating system upgrades. Google's arguably too-democratic vision for mobile development can also be a source of problems. Here's a list of reasons why Android is often the bane of an app developer's existence. Of course, given Android's large and rapidly expanding customer base, figuring out how to develop a great app on Android is a must. Therefore, I also provide some effective workarounds for developers coping with the limitations of the Android platform.
Note: This post was first published in TechRepublic's 10 Things blog on August 10, 2011.
1: Software fragmentation
Simply put, there are too many versions of the Android operating system in circulation. This means that developers can't just focus on the most recent versions of the OS; not everyone has upgraded. It's not easy for users to upgrade their operating systems, and carriers have little incentive to do so. For example, we bought an Android phone in February 2011 that came equipped with Android 2.1. Version 2.2 had been released way back in July of 2010!
Workaround: Learn which operating systems are most popular and develop with the latest widely adopted version in mind. Get to know handsets that are popular among your customers and familiarize yourself with the carriers' upgrade schedules. Another alternative is the lowest common denominator approach: Don't make an app that won't work on the oldest OS that's still in wide circulation.
2: Hardware fragmentation
Developing for the iPhone is easy from the hardware perspective. There are currently only five devices running iOS. By contrast, there are at least 170 running Android, with widely varying features, from keyboards (or lack thereof) to cameras to buttons, plus different screen shapes and sizes. It's a development nightmare.
Workaround: Again, market research. Find out which handsets are most popular with your target audience and develop for those first. Expand from there if and when possible.
3: Lack of software/hardware integration
Button A on Handset 1 does Function X. The problem? Button A on Handset 2 does Function Y. Here's a look at the variety of button configurations. Whoa. So obviously, you can't design an app that relies on Button A to do the same thing for everyone. Users may grow frustrated and give up on an app that doesn't perform intuitively.
Workaround: Once you understand which phones your users prefer and how they use features like touchscreens and keyboards, you can start designing an app that (hopefully) operates intuitively for most of your users. Focus groups or crowdsourcing through social media are two good ways to gather this information, but you will also want to play around with many different Android handsets yourself to get a feel for the user experience.
4: Too many carriers making too many changes to the core OS
Unlike Apple, whose devices are available only on two carriers in the U.S., Android phones are carried by all U.S. cell phone companies. And while Apple is strict when it comes to controlling the features of its phones, Android's carriers have leeway to modify the OS for their purposes, adding, subtracting, and modifying features and libraries at will. This compounds fragmentation problems.
Workaround: Find out which carriers your users gravitate toward and work with their specifications first. At the moment, Verizon and Sprint have the lead, but be sure to keep an eye on the market and shift your development resources accordingly.
5: Google's lack of authority
Google has taken a deliberately hands-off stance when it comes to the Android OS. Open source code provides a low barrier to entry for app developers, which can be a blessing and a curse. A lot of developers (myself included) would like to see Google police the ecosystem better, implementing more rigorous standards and an app review process. If Android provided more universal UI guidelines (and components) like Apple's, we might see better apps as a result.
Workaround: The good news is that Google seems to be moving in the right direction with the upcoming OS update. It claims that the new version will make it easier to produce attractive, user-friendly apps for Android. We'll see.
6: Security issues
Lack of governance in the Android market has led to a proliferation of malware programs that can masquerade as trusted apps. The openness of Android has made it susceptible to attack. To make matters worse, unlike traditional open source software, fragmentation on Android makes it difficult to roll out fixes, so many devices remain vulnerable. It's hard to keep customers happy and retain trust when security problems can't be fixed quickly.
Workaround: Monitor your apps for security issues and stay tuned to the happenings in the platform. When security problems do arise, have a plan to ensure that your users understand the scope of the problem and the extent to which it affects your application.
7: Market research cost
As mentioned, understanding your customer is the key to getting an Android app right. This, of course, requires lots of research into how customers use the software and hardware on their phones. And, yes, that takes time and can therefore be an expensive endeavor for developers to undertake.
Workaround: If you're committed to developing on Android, just dig in. Google does provide some user statistics that can get you started. But the best thing you can do is to use focus groups and customer surveys to understand your user base's behaviors and then allocate development resources appropriately.
8: Patent issues
In light of the recent lawsuits, there is a possibility that certain Android features could be declared in violation of patent law. Manufacturers might also be forced to pay licensing fees. If this happens, it could have a huge impact on the Android platform. It's impossible to guess now how it will turn out, but this litigation is enough to make some people nervous about dedicating development manpower to Android.
Workaround: There's nothing to be done about this now, but mobile app companies would be wise to stay abreast of this litigation and make development decisions accordingly. Google seems to be taking a strong stance against the patent litigation, so there's good reason to believe they won't just roll over on the platform.
9: iPad domination
As of now, Apple's iPad has effectively cornered the market on tablets. That isn't to say that we never will see a strong competitor (or many), but it doesn't exist yet. For a lot of developers, it's just not worth developing for the Android tablet platform yet.
Workaround: For now, just keep an eye on the tablet market. When a strong alternative with a competitive price tag does find its way to market (and they're getting closer), you will want to be ready to develop on it. You should also consider rich, HTML5-based Web apps that work well on tablets until you can develop native apps for Android.
10: The Android Market search engine
The irony is painful. Google's Android marketplace just isn't very searchable. In some cases, even searching for an app by its exact title won't bring it up. There are a lot of apps in the marketplace, and it's hard to be sure yours will be found. The marketplace also doesn't have a recommendation function, forcing customers to choose between apps without any reliable method for separating the wheat from the chaff.
Workaround: The best thing you can do is to understand how the app marketplace works and use search engine optimization techniques that take this into account. For example, while the Apple store seems to favor titles when returning searches, the Android store favors app descriptions. It may also be worth looking into secondary app marketplaces like Evernote's Trunk. This can be a great way to drive potential customers to your app and to increase the likelihood of being found within the Android marketplace.
The upside
Of course, it's worth noting that there are some really cool aspects of developing for Android. The open source nature of the Google operating system means developers have a good amount of leeway, for better or worse. Creative developers with good ideas may find that they can pioneer more interesting apps than they could on the closed iOS. Google also doesn't police apps entering its marketplace, so getting in is as simple as submission. If you can develop an Android app that works intuitively, looks great, and can be found in the marketplace, you stand a strong chance of capitalizing on this strong and growing market.
Anand Rajaram is the cofounder and chief product officer for OfficeDrop, a digital filing cabinet with scan-to-cloud apps for Mac, PC, iPhone, iPad, and Android. Anand has extensive experience developing Web/mobile apps and playing Angry Birds. Shockingly, he prefers iOS.


text:
Lawrence Crowl, firstname.lastname@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.com
This document is a revision of N2325 = 07-0185 - 2007-06-22.
Concurrency introduces potential deadlock or data races in the dynamic initialization and destruction of static-duration objects. Because the opportunity for programmers to manually synchronize such objects is limited by a lack of syntactic handles, the language must introduce new syntax, define synchronization, or limit programs.
This proposal breaks the problem into three reasonably separable parts: initialization of function-local static-duration objects, initialization of non-local static-duration objects, and destruction of all static-duration objects.
This proposal exploits properties of a new algorithm for fast synchronized initialization by Mike Burrows of Google. (See the appendix for an implementation and an argument for its correctness.) The algorithm has three attributes signficant to its use here.
The core problem with function-local static-duration object initialization is that the containing function may be invoked concurrently, and thus the definition may execute concurrently. Failing to synchronize may introduce a race condition. The obvious solution is to synchronize. The problem is that such synchronization may introduce deadlock if the synchronization involves holding a lock while the initializer executes.
The proposal relies on Burrows' algorithm to avoid holding a lock while the initializer executes. Any deadlock that occurs as a result of initialization, must necessarily be a race condition in the absence of synchronization.
The GNU compiler currently implements synchronized function-local variable initialization, though it holds the lock during initialization.
In paragraph 4, edit
Otherwise such an object is initialized the first time control passes through its declaration; such an object is considered initialized upon the completion of its initialization. If the initialization exits by throwing an exception, the initialization is not complete, so it will be tried again the next time control enters the declaration. If control re-enters the declaration
(recursively )while the object is being initialized, the behavior is undefined.
There are two problems with non-local static-duration object initialization. The first problem is that such initialization may occur concurrently. There are two sources to the concurrency, dynamic opening of a shared library in a multi-threaded context and creating of multiple threads in initializers, and hence the potentially implied concurrent execution of other initializers. The second problem is that static-duration object initialization may constitute a large fraction of process time, particularly when users are waiting for program start, and hence may benefit from parallel execution.
The standard currently admits unordered initialization. When initializing one object, reference to a relatively unordered object may result in access before dynamic initialization but after zero initialization. Since the concept of zero initialization has limited utility for many objects, particularly those that require dynamic construction, we consider this feature of the current C++ standard to be of limited utility. Therefore, we propose to make such references undefined.
Making such references undefined
would normally imply that
std::cout and
std::operator new
could not be used by any dynamic initializer.
To resolve this problem,
the standard should provide additional guarantees,
and it currently appears to do so.
In the sequential 2003 standard, unspecified order of initialization essentially required some serial order of initialization. In the parallel proposed standard, the unspecified order of initialization admits concurrent initialization. The necessary additional restriction is that a single object may be initialized at most once. This restriction may require locking. With concurrent initialization, any write (or read in the presence of writes) to statically-initialized objects must be properly locked. An alternate approach, not proposed here, is to require a single global order for all initialization.
The implementation must initialize
static-duration objects before any of their use
main or the functions it calls.
To the best of our knowledge, no compiler synchronizes the initialization of non-local static-duration objects. However, the technical issues are similar to existing function-local initializations, and so present no new challenges.
In paragraph 1, edit
Dynamic initialization of
anobject is either ordered or unordered. Definitions of explicitly specialized class template static data members have ordered initialization. Other class template static data members (i.e., implicitly or explicitly instantiated specializations) have unordered initialization. Other objects defined in namespace scope have ordered initialization. Objectswithin a single translation unit and with ordered initialization shall be initialized in the order of their definitions within the translation unit. The order of initialization is unspecified for objects with unordered initialization and for objects defined in different translation units.
The primary problem with destruction of static-duration objects is access to static-duration objects after their destructors have executed, thus resulting in undefined behavior. To prevent this problem, we require that all user threads finish before destruction begins. For threads that do not naturally finish, mechanisms to terminate threads are proposed in N2320 Multi-threading Library for Standard C++ and its successors.
Destruction also introduces the potential to consume a large fraction of process time. Therefore, similar to initialization, we enable concurrent destruction.
Objects defined at namespace scope with relatively ordered initializations must be destructed in reverse order of their initialization.
The complication to this approach
is destruction of function-local static-duration objects
and calls to functions registered with
Since the order
of initialization of function-local static-duration objects
and of calls to
is defined by execution,
rather than by declaration,
we call these execution-ordered objects.
(For expository purposes, calls to
correspond to initialization of a virtual object.)
Non-local static-duration objects are called declaration-ordered objects.
For execution-ordered objects
initialized from within the dynamic context
of a declaration-ordered initialization,
their destruction
shall occur in reverse order of completion of their initialization
immediately before the destruction of the context object.
To make this approach viable, initialization and destruction of execution-ordered objects must obey the same restrictions as those on declaration-ordered objects. Specifically, the initialization and destruction of an execution-ordered object must not use an object that is relatively unordered with respect to the context object and must synchronize use of objects with trivial destructors.
Finally, execution-ordered objects may be initialized outside the context of initialization of a declaration-ordered object, that is, they may be initialized from ordinary code. These objects are destructed in reverse order of the completion of their initialization before destruction of any declaration-ordered object.
One potential concern is the run-time cost of managing destruction order. To address this issue, we provide an implementation outline below.
In paragraph 1, edit
Destructors (12.4) for initialized objects of static storage duration
(declared at block scope or at namespace scope)are called as a result of returning from
mainand as a result of calling
These objects are destroyed in the reverse order of the completion of their constructor or of the completion of their dynamic initialization.If an object is initialized statically, the object is destroyed in the same order as if the object was dynamically initialized. For an object of array or class type, all subobjects of that object are destroyed before any local object with static storage duration initialized during the construction of the subobjects is destroyed.
In paragraph 2, edit
If a function contains a local object of static storage duration that has been destroyed and the function is called during the destruction of an object with static storage duration, the program has undefined behavior if the flow of control passes through the definition of the previously destroyed local object.
In paragraph 3, edit
If a function is registered with
<cstdlib>, 18.4) then following the call to
std::exit, any objects with static storage duration initialized prior to the registration of that function shall not be destroyed until the registered function is called from the termination process and has completed. For
anobject with static storage duration constructed after a function is registered with
std::atexit, then following the call to
std::exit, the registered function is not called until the execution of the object's destructor has completed. If
std::atexitis called during the construction of an object, the complete object to which it belongs shall be destroyed before the registered function is called.
In paragraph 8, add a new bullet 0
In paragraph 8, existing bullet 1, edit
First,objects with static storage duration are destroyed and functions registered by calling
atexitare called.
Non-local objects with static storage duration are destroyed in the reverse order of the completion of their constructor.(Automatic objects are not destroyed as a result of calling
Functions registered with
atexitare called in the reverse order of their registration, except that a function is called after any previously registered functions that had already been called at the time it was registered.219) A function registered with
atexitbefore a non-local object
obj1of static storage duration is initialized will not be called until
obj1's destruction has completed. A function registered with
atexitafter a non-local object
obj2of static storage duration is initialized will be called before
obj2's destruction starts. A local static object
obj3is destroyed at the same time it would be if a function calling the
obj3destructor were registered with
atexitat the completion of the
Mike Burrows, m3b at Google.
I show a fast form of concurrent synchronized initialization in the form of an alternate implementation of pthread_once.
It is our intent to make the following technique freely available. To that end, some licensing appears to be required.
Copyright (c) 2007, Google Inc.
All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
The header defines the synchronization type, defines a synchronization sentinal values, declares the synchronization function, and defines an inline fast synchronization function.
#ifndef FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_H
#define FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_H
#include <signal.h>
#include <stdint.h>
typedef sig_atomic_t fast_pthread_once_t;
#define FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT SIG_ATOMIC_MAX
extern __thread fast_pthread_once_t _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch;
#ifdef __cplusplus
extern "C" {
extern void fast_pthread_once( pthread_once_t *once, void (*func)(void) );
inline static void fast_pthread_once_inline(
fast_pthread_once_t *once, void (*func)(void) )
fast_pthread_once_t x = *once; /* unprotected access */
if ( x > _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch ) {
fast_pthread_once( once, func );
#ifdef __cplusplus
#endif FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_H
The source is written in C. The lines of the primary function are numbered for reference in the subsequent correctness argument.
#include "fast_pthread_once.h"
#include <pthread.h>
static pthread_mutex_t mu = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
/* protects global_epoch and all fast_pthread_once_t writes */
static pthread_cond_t cv = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
/* signalled whenever a fast_pthread_once_t is finalized */
#define BEING_INITIALIZED (FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT - 1)
static fast_pthread_once_t global_epoch = 0; /* under mu */
__thread fast_pthread_once_t _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch;
static void check( int x )
if ( x == 0 )
void fast_pthread_once( fast_pthread_once_t *once, void (*func)(void) )
/*01*/ fast_pthread_once_t x = *once; /* unprotected access */
/*02*/ if ( x > _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch ) {
/*03*/ check( pthread_mutex_lock(&mu) == 0 );
/*04*/ if ( *once == FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT ) {
/*05*/ *once = BEING_INITIALIZED;
/*06*/ check( pthread_mutex_unlock(&mu) == 0 );
/*07*/ (*func)();
/*08*/ check( pthread_mutex_lock(&mu) == 0 );
/*09*/ global_epoch++;
/*10*/ *once = global_epoch;
/*11*/ check( pthread_cond_broadcast(&cv) == 0 );
/*12*/ } else {
/*13*/ while ( *once == BEING_INITIALIZED ) {
/*14*/ check( pthread_cond_wait(&cv, &mu) == 0 );
/*15*/ }
/*16*/ }
/*17*/ _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch = global_epoch;
/*18*/ check (pthread_mutex_unlock(&mu) == 0);
The above code implements pthread_once() in a way that is both fast (a few simple instructions, no memory barriers) and portable. Careful use of memory atomicity and monotonicity are used in place of a memory barrier.
The fast-path for the inline function in the header has the following code as generated by gcc 3.2.2 on an x86:
mov %gs:(%esi),%eax # access to thread-local storage cmp %eax, pthread_once_t_location # accesses the pthread_once_t variable jg slow_path # decides whether to call the function
This code is one more instruction than a test that is not thread safe. This code touches two cache lines, while an unsafe version would touch only one. However, the additional cache line is thread-specific, and not especially likely to cause misses. As one might expect, repeated calls to the inline version achieve around 1 billion fast-path calls per second on a 2.8GHz processor with a hot cache.
In the sketch proof that follows, assumptions and deductions are given names in square brackets. This sketch will no doubt appear to be overly pedantic to some and sloppy to others. It probably contains errors and misuse of terminology; I hope these faults are not fatal. Its purpose is to convince the reader that with sufficient effort a full proof could be constructed, and perhaps to form the basis for such a proof for anyone eager for such mental exercise.
The portability assumptions beyond those in a straightforward implementation are as follows:
Let us say that every fast_pthread_once variable *once is "finalized" when the associated initialization function "func" returns (line 7 in the code above). We want to argue [correctness] (the combination of [safety] and [liveness]) of the code above, using the assumptions above, plus a few others given below. For [safety], we require [safety_1] that each variable *once is finalized at most once. We also require [safety_2] that any thread that calls fast_pthread_once on *once does not return until *once has been finalized at least once, and all the modifications made by func are visible to that thread. For [liveness], we require that the code does not deadlock or loop forever.
For the code, all variable accesses are consistent, except the load of *once on line 1 because:
[release_consistency] We assume that we have mutexes that provide at least release consistency. We use pthread_mutex_t in the example.
[fairness] We assume that runnable threads eventually run.
[atomicity2] We assume that fast_pthread_once variables are of the type T, from [atomicity].
[initialization] We assume that fast_pthread_once_t variables are originally set to FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT.
[global_epoch_value_range] global_epoch counts the number of *once variables that have been finalized; it is incremented (line 9) each time func is called (line 7) and never modified otherwise. From [*once_bound], we know the value of global_epoch is in {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2}, because global_epoch is initially 0, and FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT is the maximum value for the type of *once.
[*once_value_sequence] Every *once variable is initialized to FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT [initialization]. There are only two places where *once is changed:
The sets {FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT}, {BEING_INITIALIZED}, and {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2} have no intersection because BEING_INITIALIZED==FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-1, and FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT is the maximum value for the type of *once. The first assignment (line 5) to BEING_INITIALIZED is predicated on *once being FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT, and the update is atomic due to the use of a mutex. Therefore, a *once may make the transition from FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT to BEING_INITIALIZED at most once. The second assignment (line 10) occurs only if the executing thread performed the first assignment; therefore the second assignment occurs at most once. So any given *once location takes on a sequence of values that is a prefix of the sequence:
where E < FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT, E < BEING_INITIALIZED, and E is in {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2}.
[safety_1] The function func is called at most once for each *once variable, because it is called only if the executing thread performed the assignment at line 5, which is performed at most once, from [*once_value_sequence]. This shows [safety_1].
[slow_path_safety_2] Any thread W that reaches line 10 has called func; therefore *once is finalized and the modifications from func are visible to W. If W reaches line 18, W either passed through line 10, or passed through line 13 and found *once != BEING_INITIALIZED. We know from [monotonicity] and [*once_value_sequence] that *once cannot be FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT (line 4) or BEING_INITIALIZED (line 13), so it must be some value E, a value in {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2}. The location *once takes on such a value only after being finalized. Moreover, accesses by a thread after line 13 seeing E are ordered after the assignment of E to *once and the modifications made by the call to func. This is from [release_consistency] and the facts that accesses at line 13 occur with the mutex held that the thread that finalized *once released the same mutex after doing so. Thus, if W reaches line 18, it does so after *once has been finalized, and with all modifications made by func visible to it. This shows [safety_2] for the slow path, which we call [slow_path_safety_2].
[fast_path_safety_2] We now need to show that any thread X that takes the fast path (just lines 1 and 2, with a false predicate at line 2), does so only if *once is finalized and func's modifications are visible to X. The value read from *once at line 1 is not read under mu, so the value read may be inconsistent. However, it is known to be one of the values
(where E is in {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2} and E < FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT and E < BEING_INITIALIZED) because of [*once_bound], [atomicity2], and [*once_value_sequence]. Further, we know that X's _fast_pthread_once_per_thread_epoch is in {0, ..., FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT-2} because it is assigned only from global_epoch (line 17) and we have [global_epoch_value_range]. Therefore, X sees the line 2 predicate as false only if both:
From the first of these plus assumptions [*once_bound], [monotonicity], and [*once_value_sequence], we know that for X to take the fast path, some thread Y executed line 10, and therefore Y finalized *once. From the second of these, we know that X must have acquired mu (mu is held at line 17) after Y finalized *once and subsequently released mu. So from [release_consistency], all the values modified by func are visible to X. This gives us [fast_path_safety_2].
[safety] Combining [safety_1], [slow_path_safety_2], and [fast_path_safety_2], we have [safety].
[mu_deadlock_freedom] From the code, while mu is held, no other mutexes are acquired nor any other blocking call made, so mu cannot participate in a deadlock.
[liveness] Liveness comes from these observations
[correctness] We have [safety] and [liveness].
#include <stdio.h>
#include <assert.h>
#include "fast_pthread_once.h"
fast_pthread_once_t once = FAST_PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT;
void run_once(void)
static int run_count = 0;
assert( run_count == 0 );
int main( int argc, char *argv[] )
int use_inline = 0;
int n = 1000 * 1000 * 1000;
int i;
for ( i = 1; i < argc; i++ ) {
const char *arg = argv[i];
if ( strcmp(arg, "-i") == 0 ) {
use_inline = 1;
} else if ( strspn(arg, "0123456789") == strlen(arg) ) {
n = atoi(arg);
} else {
fprintf( stderr, "usage: %s [-i] [number]\n", argv[0] );
return 2;
if ( use_inline ) {
for ( i = 0; i != n; i++ ) {
fast_pthread_once_inline(&once, run_once);
} else {
for ( i = 0; i != n; i++ ) {
fast_pthread_once(&once, run_once);
return 0;
There are two primary sources of inefficiency in code. First, there is a single mutex for maintaining the global epoch. Second, all waiting threads are woken for each completed initialization. We do not believe these inefficiencies will matter in practice, because they become significant only for many threads over many long-running initializations. (Recall that the mutex is not held during the actual initialization.) However, for pathological programs the following improvements should suffice.
*once location into a mutex
and update
global_epoch atomically.
pthread_once_t address.
Unlike having multiple mutexes, this would not affect the fast path,
and could reduce the effect of premature waking by an arbitrary factor.


text:
Natural Gas Fees Charged by Northwestern Energy Likely to Rise After Public Service Commission Approval
Montana's Public Service Commission (PSC) is currently re-assessing the fees charged for transport of natural gas by Northwestern Energy. The adjustments could have a financial impact on many Northwestern Energy users.
Northwestern Energy wants a $15.7 million increase in the fees it is allowed to charge and the PSC came very close to that figure last month when it created a temporary interim fee of $13.2 million.
However, PSC Vice Chair Bob Lake says Northwestern Energy will likely not get the full amount requested.
"It will be a little bit higher," said Lake. "It will not be as high as the interim allowed. The interim allowed about $13.5 million and I think the settlement here comes in at about $10.5 million."
Lake says natural gas rates will likely rise, but they are historically low.
"About ten or maybe twelve years ago, if your memory is running good, you'll remember that natural gas was about an average cost of $100, $110. Today they are about $81. With this latest increase they may go to $85."
The Public Service commission is set to make its final decision sometime in the next six weeks. The PSC typically reassesses about every five years as unforeseen market forces impact the heavily regulated utilities.
Some of the reasons for the increased fees include the need for Northwestern Energy to invest money into infrastructure to transport natural gas. Other cost impacts include new federal regulations.


text:
Just as rumors have said, Apple's (PRODUCT) RED iPod nano has been a smash hit since its introduction last month. Today, Apple announced the availability of an 8GB version of the (PRODUCT) RED nano, available now for $249.
As a reminder, $10 of the sale of each red iPod nano is going towards the (PRODUCT) RED campaign, which donates money to help fight AIDS in Africa. The 4GB version of the nano is $199, which falls in line with the price of other 4GB iPod nanos from Apple.
The price of the 8GB nano is also in line with the other 8GB iPod nano that Apple sells, and it might be interesting to note that this is the only 8GB iPod nano available from Apple that isn't black. As if I hadn't had enough temptation to buy a red nano before, now with the higher capacity, I'm totally screwed. Anyone want to buy me a special Secret Santa gift?


text:
A gentleman's relish is the true water of life. A nice shot of semen allows a man to pass on a genetic code through the ages, offering the closest thing to eternal life humans are ever likely to achieve. But such wonders aren't straightforward. In fact, semen is a wonderfully complex secretion, rich in evolutionary history and packed full of healthy chemicals. And actually, there's far more to it than sperm alone.
In the deep, dark past, physicians of the 18th century thought semen was concentrated from blood. In fact, one famed doctor, Samuel-Auguste Tissot, went as far as suggesting that "losing one ounce of sperm is more debilitating than losing forty ounces of blood." Yikes.
Fortunately, he was wrong. In fact, semen is a particularly complex excretion. It might shock you to find out that only 1 to 5 percent of the average man's ejaculate is actually sperm. The rest is rather delightfully referred to as "seminal plasma", which is made up of over 50 different chemical compounds including, but not limited to, neurotransmitters, endorphins, hormones and immunosuppressant's. Taken as a whole it is, without doubt, the seminal plasma which is both most interesting and most useful. In essence, the sperm is just a passenger.
But the jiz we all know and love isn't held in the testicles. No, the delightful mixture is in fact concocted from a series of sources at the point of ejaculation, and not a moment earlier. First, the sperm—and just the sperm—passes from the testes, through a roller coaster of tubes: first the ejaculatory ducts, and on through the seminal vesicles. This is where the bulk of the seminal plasma joins the ride, shortly before the trusty prostate adds a few key enzymes, acids and lipids. Finally, the bulbourethral glands—what a mouthful—inject a little clear fluid into the urethra, which acts as a lubricant so the semen can spurt out with ease. Glorious, orgasmic ease.
The big wide world
Once released, of course, the semen is left to fend for itself—and the first thing it does is coagulate. In fact, studies have shown that the first fraction of the ejaculate doesn't coagulate as efficiently as the rest of the semen—probably because it's poorly mixed—but that the rest of it forms a thick, gloopy consistency as soon as it leaves the body. Given anywhere from five to thirty minutes, though, antigens present in the semen cause it liquefy again.
The initial coagulation isn't just for fun, of course—it's tied up with the intended evolutionary purpose of the fluid. Most scientists agree that the reason it coagulates is so the semen can remain in place inside the vagina, enabling the sperm to have an easier trip to the cervix. Not just that, though: because it's so thick, it also blocks the path for any previously deposited swimmers that happen to be lingering. In fact, the more often a man ejaculates, the stronger and longer the coagulation—an evolutionary trick which keeps the most prolific lovers on top of the pile. The subsequent liquefaction, in case you were wondering, then allows the sperm to swim more easily in their arduous race to the finish line.
That's no easy journey, either. The female reproductive tract is a harsh environment, mainly because it's rather acidic. Fortunately, semen itself is full of amines—alkali compounds—which prevent the sperm from dying in the vaginal acid bath. There's also rather a lot of fructose within the seminal plasma, which helps give the little swimmers enough energy to reach their final destination.
Taste test
But we're not here to discuss the joys of conception—we're here to get the lowdown on semen. And the female reproductive tract isn't the only place it ends up. Let's be brutally honest: Semen has made it into the mouths of many an individual, with mixed opinions over its taste and texture. Anecdotally, semen has been described as tasting "salty", "bitter", "sweet", "like thick Clorox" or of "whatever the ejaculator ate twelve hours before." But which one's true? I mean, really, really true?
The wonderful scientific fact is: nearly all of them. All those chemical compounds that make it one of the body's most complex excretions also serve to give it a unique flavor profile unlike anything else on earth—and the exact taste is dictated by the subtlest differences, which vary man-to-man, day-to-day. Super-sweet? That'll be the fructose. Salty? Excess sodium. Sharp-tasting? That's the citric acid. Metallic? Ugh, zinc. Kinda detergenty? Blame the amines.
It is worth noting that the idea of eating particular foods to improve the taste of one's semen, often peddled in glossy magazine, has no scientific backing whatsoever. Dr. Debby Herbenick, sexual health educator at The Kinsey Institute and friend of Gizmodo, explains that she is "not aware of any scientific research that has been published in peer-reviewed journals that suggest… [ingestion of any food stuff makes] semen or vaginal fluids taste sweeter or generally more pleasant."
Arguing for ingestion
Taste alone is no reason to go near semen, then. But there is another reason why its ingestion might prove appealing. Amongst its 50 constituent chemicals are some that really can make you happy: cortisol (which increases affection), estrone (which elevates mood), oxytocin (ditto), and even serotonin (an antidepressant neurotransmitter). While that may sound good in theory, experiments also suggest that it has a real, measurable effect in practice.
A study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, for instance, showed that—even after adjusting for frequency and quantity of sex—women who have unprotected sex have fewer depressive symptoms than women that have protected sex, or no sex at all. Another, less rigorous, study hinted at similar effects in gay men who don't use condoms.
Sadly, there's been no scientific research conducted into whether oral ingestion of semen has an anti-depressive effect, though it seems likely that it may have at least some small positive effect. There is, however, genuine scientific evidence that suggests swallowing semen may make a woman's pregnancy safer and more successful because she is absorbing her partner's antigens. Good luck with that one.
A note of caution
Before getting too excited about the possible health benefits of semen though, there is one problem that must be bought to your attention: HIV. You see, some of the protein factors within semen—principally prostatic acid phosphatase—make HIV far, far more potent than when the virus travels by any other means.
In fact, when HIV is carried in sperm it is a staggering 100,000-fold more potent than when it is not carried within seminal plasma. If that number scares you, it should: contact with semen is the single most effective way to transmit HIV. So while there seem to be some strong health benefits associated with direct contact with male ejaculate, caution is encouraged if get it from a stranger.
When you're dealing with semen—a liquid so essential to human life and the endurance of the species—show some respect.
Gizmodo 13 Jul 2012


text:
Seattle Seahawks guard James Carpenter takes part in an NFL football training camp practice drill, Saturday, July 27, 2013, in Renton, Wash. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)
SEATTLE -- After two seasons lost largely to knee injuries, James Carpenter is finally healthy and ready to prove he was worthy of the Seattle Seahawks selecting him with a first-round draft pick.
The potential is obvious.
Listed at 6-foot-5 and 321 pounds, Carpenter offers the kind of size no other lineman on Seattle's roster does. No one can physically impose his will on an opposing player quite like Carpenter can when healthy. But knee injuries have reduced that potential to merely a massive tease through his first two seasons in the league.
"He's quick as a cat. Big dude, too ... strong. But I don't know. It's almost been two years minus a couple snaps last year that he wasn't really healthy for. So we'll see," center Max Unger said.
Carpenter feels he's finally ready to prove what he can be. He says he's 100-percent healthy and no longer has worries over the strength of his injured knee.
"I've been hurt both years so I plan on playing this whole season this year," Carpenter said. "That's all I've got to prove is trying to get my respect from my teammates and stuff back. That's why I'm working hard now."
Carpenter was selected by the Seahawks in the first round in 2011. Seattle originally intended on Carpenter becoming their long-term answer at right tackle. He started 11 games there as a rookie before tearing the ACL in his knee during a non-contract drill in practice.
The injury lingered into last season as Carpenter was placed on the physically unable to perform list prior to training camp. Seattle also decided to change their plans for Carpenter as they elected to move him to left guard. He had been a left tackle at Alabama and felt more comfortable on that side of center. The team also thought he'd be more effective as an in-line blocker than in space on the edge of the line.
Carpenter remained on the PUP list throughout the preseason before somewhat surprisingly being kept on the Seahawks' 53-man roster for the start of the regular season. Carpenter was healthy enough to be back in the lineup by Week 4 and started against the St. Louis Rams at guard. A concussion forced him to miss two more games midseason before another injury to his knee ended his season after just seven games played.
Tom Cable, the Seahawks' offensive line coach, still saw enough from Carpenter last season to feel confident in the switch to guard.
"The issue is getting him -- he's a little bit like the new kids because he's been out so long -- to catch up," Cable said. "He's doing fine. He's doing a really nice job of catching up with the older guys. Now that the injury is behind him it can be all about football again and he should come along pretty quick."
It's the first time in three years Carpenter has been on the field for the start of training camp. He missed the start of his rookie campaign in a brief contract holdout before the knee injury forced him to miss all of last year's camp.
Carpenter has been forced to watch his teammates practice from the sidelines frequently all too often. Just being able to be back out on a football field has been long overdue.
"I felt great out there. Pretty rusty but I'm just glad I'm out here working with the team again," Carpenter said.
Carpenter has been rotating in with the first-team offensive line throughout the first four days of training camp and is battling with Paul McQuistan to earn the starting job. The battle for both guard positions are one of the few battles for starting jobs on the line for the Seahawks in camp.
Head coach Pete Carroll just wants to see consistency -- both in his play and his ability to be on the practice field every day.
"I think that a month from now if he's still working hard he will be a monster coming off of the football," Carroll said. "There's no doubt about him. He's physical, he commands a presence that is exactly what you're looking for, and so if he can fit in and help us that would be a great boost for us."


text:
How bent spaghetti break
Bent dry spaghetti do not break in half but instead in three or more pieces. With the aim to explain this surprising phenomenon, we studied a related problem, namely the dynamics of an elastic rod that is bent quasi-statically and then suddenly set free. Counter-intuitively, we find that the mere release of the rod induces a stress increase. The multiple breaking of bent rods, like dry spaghetti pasta, can then be understood as a cascade of releases (loss of cohesion upon breakings) followed by stress increases leading to new cracks.
Watch movies of the experiments


text:
First, the good news: for companies planning to deploy broadband connectivity to their mobile workforces, the options have never looked better. Initial rollouts of 3G (third-generation) cellular data technology are fulfilling the technology's promise. Sales and field forces can connect to the Internet and corporate applications from virtually anywhere, network speeds are reasonable, and deploying the technology requires only minimal IT investment.
"We didn't run into a single issue," says Randy Cairns, assistant vice president for distributed technology at American Republic Insurance, which has begun a pilot program using Sprint 3G service and expects to roll out the technology to 200 salespeople in the next year. Cairns' comments echo those of other early adopters who have been happy with the ease and low cost of cellular data deployment.
Now for the bad news: Although current 3G offerings are a good start, the path toward a truly ubiquitous, high-speed wireless world is murky. Mobile WiMax, the wireless broadband technology that's touted as offering landline performance to mobile users over wide areas, is at best several years away, and some analysts feel it may never fulfill its promoters' promises.
Exploring 3G options
On the positive side, U.S. cellular carriers are finally offering data services that get the job done. Enterprises can subscribe to 3G technologies from three major companies: Sprint Nextel, Verizon Wireless, and Cingular Wireless. A fourth carrier, T-Mobile, markets data services but only supports GPRS (general packet radio service) technology, which provides dialup speeds rather than true 3G service.
For each of the various cellular technologies deployed today, the actual throughput users can expect depends on geographic location, network load, and distance from the cell tower, among other factors. Each carrier also offers fallback to a slower network for rural locations and other areas where broadband service is unavailable.
That flexibility is critical for American Republic, Cairns says. The insurer's salespeople tend to go to customers' homes, and having online access when talking to prospective customers is a big benefit. With average connection speeds of its Sprint EvDO (evolution, data optimized) service between 480Kbps and 960Kbps, users are happy. Even in smaller areas, where GPRS speeds drop access down to 56Kbps, salespeople appreciate having a convenient connection, Cairns says.
At tax accountancy H&R Block, lead network engineer Kevin Oellien has had a similar experience with Sprint's EvDO service. From the company's headquarters in Overland Park, Kan. -- near Sprint Nextel's headquarters -- Oellien has seen throughput as fast as 1.2Mbps, and he finds that in most areas, users experience speeds from 600Kbps to 800Kbps. He has now begun a broader pilot program with Sprint Nextel's 3G service, in hopes it can provide connectivity at H&R Block's many kiosks and temporary offices during the four-month tax season. By plugging a 3G card into an AirLink Communications Raven Ethernet gateway, Oellien can add a router to almost any location, letting staff members access the Internet and corporate resources without the expense of building out dedicated network and phone lines for the temporary facilities.
The slower speeds of the competing EDGE (enhanced data GSM environment) service used by Cingular have caused early adopters to use it more as an adjunct connection technology rather than as a primary one. For example, users at Halton -- a Pacific Northwest dealer of Caterpillar vehicles -- rely on wired and Wi-Fi connections where possible, but use the roughly 100Kbps Cingular EDGE network when faster networks aren't available. Despite the slower speeds, "they use it wherever they can because it's available wherever they are," says Kip Hewahewa, the company's telecom administrator.
Deploying these technologies is largely effortless, because 3G access to corporate networks involves no special configuration. If you already have VPN clients and other remote-access authentication technologies in place for users who come in through the Internet, your network is ready for 3G users. "You use the same security for wired, 802.11b, cellular, and WiMax Internet connections," says Ed Partenope, vice president of operations at enterprise communications consultancy Innovativ.
Pleased with the service's performance and network stability, Cairns is now considering deploying 3G cards for PC users within American Republic's corporate headquarters because the building's heavy use of steel and concrete will make installing a Wi-Fi network difficult. A key issue will be the cost of monthly 3G data-service subscriptions for each user versus the setup and maintenance costs of an internal Wi-Fi network, Cairns says. He has yet to calculate the actual full cost of each option.
Waiting for WiMax
Many industry observers are hoping that WiMax, a developing wireless broadband technology, will emerge as a third choice. Based on a technique called OFDM (orthogonal frequency division multiplexing), it's more bandwidth-efficient than 3G technology or Wi-Fi. (Two competing, proprietary technologies -- UMTS-TDD and Qualcomm's Flarion Flash OFDM -- also use OFDM.)
But whereas 3G is now a viable option for many enterprises, WiMax is not. Although it's often portrayed as a "super-Wi-Fi" technology that creates citywide hot zones, most users won't access WiMax via cards in their notebooks as they do with 802.11b. WiMax is really an infrastructure technology, like DSL or cable modem service.
When WiMax products become available in 2006, they'll serve the same purpose as a router, providing the backbone access to a location. Individual users will connect to the WiMax modem via a wired Ethernet or Wi-Fi connection. The prospect of mobile users connecting to WiMax hot zones directly is still years away, however, and some analysts urge customers not to hold their collective breath.
"It's a pipe dream," says Innovativ's Partenope. "It will take years to build out the infrastructure, but 3G will be pervasive in about two years."
One problem is that the IEEE 802.16e standard, which enables mobile access to WiMax networks, is still about a year away from approval. Adding to the confusion -- and despite vendor hype -- genuine, standards-compliant hardware has yet to appear, even for fixed WiMax (the approved IEEE 802.16d standard).
When vendors first delivered hardware based on the IEEE 802.11b standard, different products often weren't compatible -- a fatal flaw for a network technology. So an industry consortium, the Wi-Fi Alliance, developed interoperability standards and certified compliance by licensing the Wi-Fi label, giving customers assurance that labeled devices would work together.
As the IEEE 802.16d standard for fixed WiMax neared completion last year, it became clear that history could repeat itself if vendors interpret the standard differently from each other. So a new industry association -- the WiMax Forum -- planned to do the same as the Wi-Fi Alliance, by licensing the official WiMax label for products that passed interoperability testing. Unfortunately, it hasn't worked.
Vendors are already selling products labeled WiMax, even though the WiMax Forum hasn't completed interoperability testing. "All current solutions are pre-standard WiMax," warns Mo Shakouri, the forum's vice president of marketing. Products that pass WiMax testing will bear the label "WiMax Forum Certified," Shakouri says, adding, "WiMax Forum Certified products currently don't exist anywhere in the world."
If you'll come, will they build it?
After the standards have crystallized, WiMax networks could start appearing in select markets. First, though, the carriers will need a reason to deploy it; an unlikely decision, given that their existing 3G networks will offer similar performance, says Roger Entner, an analyst at the telecom research firm Ovum. "WiMax is just another technology doing the same thing as 3G," Entner explains. Deploying comparable WiMax coverage could cost from $5 billion to $15 billion.
"A carrier that has already deployed 3G will probably not deploy WiMax," says Mark Whitton, vice president for WiMax and wireless mesh products at Nortel Networks, which provides both 3G and OFDM equipment to carriers.
Sprint Nextel expects to deploy WiMax or other OFDM technology in the future, according to Peter Cannistra, director of strategy and planning at the company's broadband group, but he says that's because it agreed to do so to satisfy regulators' concerns about Sprint's recent acquisition of Nextel. It's not clear how Sprint Nextel would use such a network or what services it would provide over it, Cannistra says.
SBC Laboratories vice president David Deas says local phone and cable providers are already exploring WiMax as a low-cost way to extend their residential broadband service to rural areas. Deas, however, questions the vision of a national WiMax network through which mobile users move. "802.16e will be third to market," he notes.
One possibility, says Innovativ's Ed Partenope, is that municipalities will deploy WiMax as an Internet utility service for residents in much the same way that cities once provided gas and electric service a century ago. He believes that cities, such as Philadelphia and San Francisco, now looking to build citywide Wi-Fi networks will eventually switch to WiMax.
Already, the District of Columbia has deployed an OFDM public-safety network to link mobile police, firefighters, hazardous-materials teams, and others. It successfully tested the network during the presidential network in January, says the District's CTO, Suzanne Peck.
However the first WiMax networks are deployed, enterprises should not expect to manage their own WiMax zones. Although the standard does permit deployment over public spectrum, that spectrum is shared by Wi-Fi and many other devices, so interference and other issues will likely scuttle its use, says Ovum's Entner. Companies with large campuses may be able to manage spectrum use or buy the licensed spectrum they need. Otherwise, says Nortel's Whitton, "I don't see it as an enterprise technology."
4G and beyond
Sprint Nextel's Cannistra sees OFDM technologies succeeding 3G in a decade or so, because their more efficient spectrum usage means the cost per megabyte is lower. But for now, 3G makes more sense for the carriers because it uses existing hardware and its performance matches that of current OFDM technologies. As the 3G deployment costs are worked off and OFDM performance continues to improve, economics will justify a switch, Cannistra says.
SBC's Deas agrees, but with even more reservation. Whatever happens with WiMax, he says, carriers expect their 3G services to be around for at least a decade. They also expect to improve the throughput of those networks as demand increases, by adding additional radios and upgrading the backbone infrastructure. As 3G networks reach their peak throughput, Deas and Ovum's Entner both expect carriers to use some form of OFDM -- no doubt labeled "4G" -- as the replacement. That OFDM-based 4G network might be based on WiMax, UMTS-TDD, Flarion, or some variation not yet developed. Regardless, IT should expect their mobile users to depend on 3G-based networks for quite some time.


text:
Westlake Village Lighted Signs
If you want your business to stand out, especially at night, you need to have custom lighted signs.
There are a lot of options available for lighted signs, and fortunately, they can be customized to suit your business's needs. Axe Signs & Wayfinding is a trusted Westlake Village, CA sign company known for developing excellent lighted signs for clients who wish to have unique lighted signs that will increase their brand awareness. If you happen to be one of them, work with us!
Our team is always dedicated to providing you with all the assistance you need to customize your signs to your suit budget and requirements, helping you attract more customers and achieve your business goals.
Call Axe Signs & Wayfinding at (805) 424-5228 for your Free Consultation with a Westlake Village Lighted Sign expert!
Traditional Neon Signs
Traditional neon signs have long been used by businesses that want to let customers know that they are available for business. The problem, however, with using these signs is that they are very hard to maintain, and getting them repaired can be very expensive.
Fortunately, LED lights are a modern alternative that can replicate the effect of a neon signs without the cost and in a more energy-efficient and environmentally friendly way. LEDs use much less energy than neon lights, they are long-lasting, and are inexpensive to maintain.
At Axe Signs & Wayfinding, we can help you achieve your dream neon sign look without having to spend a lot of money in the process.
Lighted LED Signs
In addition to mimicking neon, LED lights can be used in all sorts of other sign applications. They can be used to back-light channel letter signs and box signs. They can spotlight panel signs, dimensional letter signs, and even monument signs.
Lighted LED signs are perfect for almost any business with evening or night hours, such as restaurants, clubs, bars, and gas stations. Our LED signs can be customized to fit your requirements, and you can even have them animated if that is your preference.
Indoor Lighted Signs
Westlake Village lighted signs can also be used for indoor purposes, such as promoting key areas of your business like the ordering area, pickup stations, and so on. Having these signs can also help provide information to clients and make it easier for them to navigate around the shop.
Our team can customize your lighted signs to suit your requirements and make sure that they blend well with your overall theme.
Programmable Digital Message Centers
If you want your signs to be high-tech and display all the information you want, we can customize a programmable digital message center for you. These signs can be used on their own or complement your existing signs.
Unlike static signs, programmable digital message centers signs can be customized and upgraded at any time. They can also showcase full graphics and even video in vivid colors.
Full-Service LED Sign Company
At Axe Signs & Wayfinding, we make sure that the Westlake Village lighted signs we make are personalized to fit your needs. During your free consultation, our team will ask everything there is to know about your business and sign requirements to create a draft of your ideal sign. After the design is approved, we will then manufacture it in-house so we can control quality and cost. After it is complete, we'll handle installation and maintenance for your sign.
As your trusted sign company, Axe Signs & Wayfinding will make sure that you will have a stress-free experience and get only the best signs from us.
Free Lighted Sign Consultation
If you're looking for customized Westlake Village lighted signs and support, you won't go wrong with Axe Signs & Wayfinding. Our team is always ready to take on your signage projects, no matter how big or small your signs may be, ensuring that they will make your business stand out from your competition.
Call Axe Signs & Wayfinding at (805) 424-5228 for your Free Consultation with a Westlake Village Lighted Sign expert!


text:
Credit Unions Cling to Free Checking Accounts
If free checking is in decline, someone forgot to tell credit unions.
According to Bankrate's 2012 Credit Union Checking Survey, 72% of credit unions currently offer free checking, down just 4% from last year's study.
Banks are a different story. Only 45% offered free checking in Bankrate's 2011 Checking Account Survey, and that number is likely to drop.
"If you're on the lookout for a free checking account, then credit unions remain a viable alternative to fee-laden or high-balance-requirement checking accounts that are becoming more common in the banking community," says Greg McBride, CFA, senior financial analyst for Bankrate.com.
Credit unions also generally make it less expensive to open an account, with 58% having a minimum deposit of $1 or less.
Why Credit Unions Offer Free Checking
Credit unions might be missing some fee income by sticking with free checking, but it also gives them a key advantage in the highly competitive financial services marketplace, says Ron Shevlin, a senior analyst for Aite Group LLC in Boston.
"I think they're looking at this as competitive differentiation," Shevlin says. "They're saying, 'Hey, if these big guys are going to get rid of their free checking, we're going to keep our free checking account as a way of being able to say we're different.'"
That strategy seems to have paid off. Since last year's "bank transfer day" -- a populist movement to get those alienated by big banks' new fees to switch to a local bank or credit union -- credit unions have signed hundreds of thousands of new customers, says Lydia Cole, director of industry analysis for Callahan & Associates Inc. in Washington, D.C.
The number of credit union checking accounts grew 4.4% between the first quarter of 2011 and the first quarter of this year, and much of that growth came at the expense of big banks, Cole says.
"Anecdotally, that's where (credit unions) are seeing the vast majority of members come from -- the large national banks," Cole says.
So how can you be sure credit unions won't pull a Lucy and snatch the free-checking football as soon as you sign up?
There are a number of reasons why credit unions aren't likely to follow banks and abandon free checking en masse.
It's true that like most financial services providers, credit unions have seen their regulatory burden increase over the last few years. But that burden is lighter by one big brick: the Durbin amendment cap on the "swipe fees" merchants pay banks to process debit card transactions.
Many credit unions are exempt from the amendment because they don't meet the law's threshold of $10 billion in assets, allowing them to continue charging merchants higher fees. That's made a big difference to the viability of free checking at credit unions because customers continue to generate significant revenue by swiping their debit cards, Cole says.
Shevlin says even if executives at your credit union wanted to ditch free checking, they may not be able to. Raising fees is actually much harder for credit unions than it is for banks. Unlike banks, credit unions are controlled by boards of directors elected by and from the credit union's membership, many of whom prize consumer-friendly fees and policies.
"I think there are a lot of CEOs, CFOs and CMOs out there in the credit union marketplace that are looking at the economics of their business and saying, 'This makes no sense. We really should be charging for this.' And the board is saying, 'No, this is what we're all about. We position ourselves as being better and different,'" Shevlin says.
No Such Thing as Free
Still, it's important to remember that just because a credit union checking account is "free" doesn't mean you'll never pay a fee, Shevlin says.
"A free checking account does not mean no fees. It simply means no standard monthly fee," Shevlin says. "But if you overdraw on your accounts, if you need copies of your statement, if you are inactive, if you close out your account, you may very well get hit by a fee just as much from the credit union as you would from a large bank."
In some respects, Bankrate's data bore that out. Credit unions charged an average of $26.65 for overdrawing a checking account. While they are less-than-typical bank fees, penalties can add up quickly with multiple purchases.
Accessing your cash also can be an issue. In most cases, you'll pay a fee of $1 to $1.50 to use an ATM outside your credit union's network. In addition, those credit union networks are generally smaller than the networks operated by large national banks. That out-of-network ATM fee comes in addition to whatever you're charged by the ATM operator -- typically $2 to $3.
Ultimately, McBride says it's up to consumers to do their homework before signing up for a credit union checking account, and they shouldn't assume an institution will work for them just because it has the words "credit union" on the door.
"There's not a one-size-fits-all answer for everybody," McBride says. "You've got to find what type of financial institution fits your financial lifestyle."


text:
Hey, I know he's a billionaire. Owns the Dallas Mavericks. And invested in an HD movie company.
I can still teach him something.
Today he said that it'll be a long time before your PC will connect to an HDTV because your PC doesn't have the right connections.
I say that's poppycock.
Here's how I hooked mine up: Ethernet. Your PC has one of those connectors, right?
My Media Center-run PC hooks up to my Ethernet jack, which hooks up to a Wifi router. My Wifi router sprays its packets down (via 802.11a) to a Wifi antenna on my Xbox 360. Those packets get decoded, and sent from my Xbox 360 over its HD component cables to my Sony 60-inch HDTV. Which displays them for me to watch.
I hear Microsoft is selling something like 15,000 Xbox 360s every day.
Mark, if you want to fly me down to your house I'll be happy to connect a similar system for you. It's easy and it ROCKS.
Once you do that, you can play Rocketboom (or ScobleShow, if you like long and boring videos about the tech industry) from your PC to your HD screen. Plus music. Plus photos.
It's the best way to hook a PC up to an HD screen and has the added benefit of being "wife approved." Why? Cause the ugly PC doesn't sit in your living room with your TV. Just ask Maryam how important this is to getting along with women. You don't want to look like a billionaire geek who has no sense of style, do you?


text:
Should We Shout into the Darkness?
by Larry Klaes, space exploration enthusiast and optimist
An abbreviated version of this article appeared on The Tompkins Weekly on April 14, 2008.
In early February, a 230-foot wide radio antenna in Madrid, Spain transmitted the Beatles song "Across the Universe" into the Milky Way galaxy, aimed specifically at Polaris, the North Star, located 431 light years from Earth. Paul McCartney approved of this event, which was handled by NASA through its Deep Space Network of radio telescopes spread across the planet. John Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono, considered the broadcast of this song to be "the beginning of the new age in which we will communicate with billions of planets across the Universe."
One month later, astronomers in the United Kingdom announced they would be sending their own broadcast to the star 47 Ursae Majoris, namely an advertisement for the snack manufacturer Doritos, with more ads to follow that one to the stars.
While both of these transmissions are mainly publicity stunts – the Beatles song commemorated several simultaneous anniversaries and the Doritos ad will help the UK raise funds to save its threatened astronomy and physics programs — these actions do illuminate an important question that has been part of an increasing debate: How wise is it to announce humanity's presence to the rest of the Universe?
The first SETI attempt, a message beamed toward M13 (the Great Cluster in Hercules) on November 16, 1974, by the Arecibo radio telescope. From left to right are numbers from one to ten, atoms including hydrogen and carbon, some interesting molecules, the DNA double helix, a human with description, basics of our Solar System, and basics of the sending telescope.
Since 1960, when the former Cornell astronomer Frank Drake conducted the first modern Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) project which he named Ozma, scientists have been listening and looking for any signs of alien civilizations in our galaxy and beyond. The hope has been that — since we do not yet have interstellar vessels — someone out there is sending a deliberate radio or optical message to us, or using an omnidirectional beacon, or leaking electromagnetic signals into space just like we have been for the last century with our radio, television, and radar broadcasts.
In the nearly five decades since Drake's Project Ozma, no definite signals of an intelligent alien origin have been found. This does not mean that ETI do not exist, but some have wondered if, in a galaxy with 400 billion stars systems stretched across 100,000 light years of space, it might help the situation to transmit messages into the Milky Way galaxy to facilitate getting the attention of any possible cosmic neighbors to encourage them to let us know they exist.
Scientists such as Drake and the late Cornell astronomer Carl Sagan view finding an intelligent alien civilization as a major boon to humanity in terms of vastly increasing our scientific and technological database. Other experts are rather uneasy about the prospect. They cite historical examples of what happens when an advanced culture encounters a more primitive society as reason to be very cautious about sending electromagnetic greetings into deep space. Some advocate sending no messages at all until we are more developed and better understand who and what inhabit the galaxy.
For good or ill, a few deliberate attempts have been made to signal extraterrestrial intelligences, starting with the Arecibo Message sent from the giant radio telescope to a distant globular star cluster named Messier 13 in 1974. The 1970s also witnessed the first launching of several robot probes that have left the Solar System with engraved messages for any beings who may one day find them drifting through space.
Within the last decade, Professor Alexander L. Zaitsev of the Institute of Radio Engineering and Electronics at the Russian Academy of Science has emerged as a strong advocate of messaging to extraterrestrial intelligences, also known as METI. Zaitsev also orchestrated several METI projects, such as the Cosmic Calls of 1999 and 2003 and the Teen Age Message of 2001, all sent from the 230-foot wide radio telescope at the Evpatoria Deep Space Center in the Ukraine. Moving at light speed (186,000 miles per second), these messages will arrive at their targeted star systems in the latter half of this century.
In a paper Zaitsev published in 2006, the scientist notes that "SETI is meaningless if no one feels the need to transmit." Zaitsev also feels that if there are advanced cultures bent on harming humanity, they will find us eventually, so it is in our best interests to seek them out first. Zaitsev sees the great distances between stars and the physical limits imposed by attempting to attain light speed serve as a natural protective barrier for our species and any other potentially vulnerable beings in the galaxy.
Scientist and science fiction author David Brin feels that in spite of the celestial limitations noted by Zaitsev, any transmissions sent spaceward without first being discussed by a broad range of disciplines is both improperly representative of humanity and poses the danger of attracting beings that may bear us ill will.
"As newcomers in a strangely quiet Cosmos, shall we shout for attention?" asks Brin. "Or is it wiser to continue quiet listening? We propose an interdisciplinary symposium, to be the most eclectic and inclusive forum, by far, to deliberate the METI issue. It is not too much to ask that METI people hold back until the world's open, scientific community can get a chance to examine their proposal."
Paul Gilster of the Tau Zero Foundation (founded by Marc Millis, former head of NASA's Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program) that conducts research into interstellar travel, also recommends restraint. "Two aspects of METI trouble me deeply," he says. "The first is that serious messaging has taken place without any consensus or indeed consultation here on Earth. The various signals sent from Evpatoria in the Crimea were simply announced, yet such messages have implications for our entire species and at the very least should be considered in an international, multi-discipinary forum before being sent.
"The second troubling aspect of all this is that recent messages from NASA and European sources have been treated in the press more or less as larks, the assumption being either that extraterrestrials are benign or that they do not exist in the first place. I favor a moderate, cautious approach to deliberately announcing our presence to the Universe."
Seth Shostak, the Senior Astronomer at the SETI Institute, is not terribly concerned about any kind of alien invasion. Like Zaitsev, Shostak agrees that a technologically sophisticated civilization could find Earth and humanity if they chose to; as one example, our military and planetary radars are among the brightest electromagnetic sources produced by our species.
As the Chair of the International Academy of Astronautics SETI Permanent Study Group, Shostak and his team have been looking into how we should respond to a message from an ETI received on Earth. Brin and others claim that the study group's members are too narrowly focused in their representation of the sciences. Shostak maintains that in addition to their focus being on replying to a received alien transmission, the group has neither the right nor the ability to police the rest of humanity on what they broadcast — an issue that will only grow more complex as our technology becomes more sophisticated.
Personally, I am in the middle. I see the legitimate points of both sides, though I think some of our attempts at contact might be perceived as childish (or at least very basic) by any advanced ETI. Also, I wonder how many galactic cultures are similar to ours at this point in time, if any exist at all. Unless our galaxy is composed of societies and beings a lot like the ones in Star Trek, my feeling is that many of them will be either really behind us (and not even intelligent/aware at all) or so beyond us as to make communication nearly pointless.
Humanity is already sending messages into the galaxy and that is only going to increase, not diminish. So we had better deal with this, rather than hope people restrain themselves when they have the chance to broadcast a message into deep space.
Even if ETI don't understand what we are sending them, they will likely be aware that there is some kind of intelligence on Sol 3 and may want to respond to us. We should ready ourselves for the realization that we are not on some isolated island in the middle of nowhere, but part of a much larger galactic community – even if the community is "just" a lot of star systems with no high level inhabitants – and we should start acting accordingly.
And even if no ETI ever picks up our leakage or broadcasts, our descendants will be heading out into the galaxy one day, so one way or another we will make our presence known – and that is what we need to prepare for: how alien societies, if they exist, will react to us. I think that any society, no matter how advanced now, had to develop much as we did, just as all life on this planet had to evolve and all our ancestors struggled to make it to the present. So maybe they will "get" us and at least know what we are going through, because they were once children, too.
Which begs the question, are there others out there at our level, making lots of noise into the galaxy, wondering where everybody else is? Have we just not gotten their messages yet, or have they been silenced by somebody who preys on such naive behavior? Or are we the only ones like ourselves in the galaxy?
I think we need to be brave and forge ourselves into the galaxy. If we stay at home and hide under the beds, we might live a bit longer, but we won't evolve any.


text:
I mentioned that I would be hosting a giveaway for Sew Grateful week, and now I've gone and missed the day to post! Oh well, I'm sure it's fine to post a day late, and I should hopefully have another post later because today is the day for reflections.
I'm giving away Simplicity 7580, an adorable dress or dress and shorts combo from 1968. It's a size 12, bust 34. The envelope is a little busted, but the pattern itself is in great condition. It's been cut, but all the pieces and the instructions are there. I haven't made it up, but it looks very simple and darling.
To enter:
Leave a comment letting me know that you want it. Simple as that!
For an additional entry, you can follow my blog and leave a comment saying that you do, but that's not necessary.
I'll ship anywhere. Contest ends February 14th at 11:59pm EST.


text:
Former State Secretary for the Slovenian Ministry of Education, Science and Sport and 2019 European Young Leader (EYL40)
Martina is the former Secretary of State for the Slovenian Ministry of Education, Science and Sport. Having long been interested in politics, she began her political career by participating in the Young Democrats Forum towards the end of secondary school. This formative experience led her to pursue and obtain elected office at both the local and national level. At the Slovenia National Assembly, Martina has actively participated in the parliamentary group responsible for the fields of work, family, social affairs, health and human rights. For the past four and a half years, under two Governments, she worked as a state secretary at the Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. As a Council of Europe-certified human rights trainer, she has worked with various non-governmental organisations to promote human rights and gender equality.