text:
JDBC drivers are Java library files with the extension .jar used by all Java applications to connect to the database. Usually, they are provided by the same company which implemented the NuoDb software. DbSchema Tool already includes a NuoDb driver, which is automatically downloaded when you connect to NuoDb.
Each JDBC driver is using a specific URL. The URL is a string (text) with a specific format, containing information about the host where the database is running, the port, username, database name, etc. The format is specific to each driver. Any wrong character in the URL may make the database connectivity fail, therefore we recommend installing DbSchema and try to get connected. Then you can find the right URL directly in the DbSchema connection dialog.
The driver files are compressed in a zip file.
for any issues with the driver, you can write to us.
Installing DbSchema may help to test the database connectivity and the JDBC driver URL. DbSchema can be downloaded and installed for free.
When the download finished please follow this steps:
There are two tabs you can use to connect. 'Compose URL' will ask for the host, port, username, etc. and will create the JDBC URL for you.
The 'Edit URL' will let you directly enter the JDBC URL.
You can use the first tab to connect, and then see the created URL in the second tab.


text:
Created in 2001 as part of the Parliament of Canada Act.
Position of Canadian Parliamentary Poet Laureate 2020-2021 - Nomination process closed
Position of Canadian Parliamentary Poet Laureate 2022-2023 - The call for nomination will be launched in June 2021
Many countries around the world, including the United Kingdom and the United States have appointed official poets laureate to help expand the understanding and appreciation for written poetry. Canada has also recognized this through the creation of this position.
Nominated candidates must meet eligibility and selection criteria. In order to give equal representation to Canada's two official languages, Poets Laureate are selected alternately from each official language community. Literary artists working in oral traditions are also eligible. The Parliament of Canada recognizes the diversity of Canada's literary scene and encourages the participation of poets from all communities.
The Speaker of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Commons choose the final candidate from a list of nominees determined by the Selection Committee which includes;
- the Commissioner of Official Languages
- the Librarian and Archivist of Canada
- Chair, Canada Council for the Arts, represented by the Director and CEO and,
- the Parliamentary Librarian as chair
The poet receives an annual stipend of $20,000, up to $13,000 in travel expenses annually and a budget for programming, administrative expenses and translation/adaptation of works into Canada's second official language.
The Poet Laureate may create work in either official language, and the poetry may be translated/ adapted into the other official language.
The intellectual property of all work published remains with the Parliamentary Poet Laureate.
The Library of Parliament is the steward for the Parliamentary Poet Laureate.
*The Poet determines his or her specific activities within these parameters.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Can a more power efficient mobile processor really extend battery life that much? Even if a next-generation processor like Tegra 3 consumes 61% less power than its predecessor, we know by now that the major source of power consumption in any mobile device is the display technology.
Yesterday at the UBS Global Technology and Services Conference, NVIDIA CEO Jen-Hsun Huang detailed a new technology in Tegra 3 that can actually reduce backlight power by 40%. That translates into longer batter life, like 14 hours of video playback on an Android tablet.
The technology is called DIDIM and Jen-Hsun described how it works. "It's the ability to per pixel, per frame, per scene to modulate the backlight so quickly that we over a long period of time, reduce the amount of backlight intensity and backlight energy by nearly half. We save as much power in the backlight without changing the visual fidelity at all to save, essentially, the entire power used by our chip." NVIDIA says your eyes see the same color temperature, so you can't tell the difference.
In full active mode, the Tegra 3 processor consumes 1-2 watts. A typical display consumes 3-6 watts depending on the brightness, so DIDIM technology actually allows a device to save more power than the Tegra 3 processor consumes.
Overall, we are glad to see NVIDIA continue to focus on improving the battery life of mobile devices. This new DIDIM technology in addition to the stealth 5th-core should offer some of the best battery life we have seen on any Android devices to date. We were never told about DIDIM in any of our Tegra 3 briefings, so I wonder what other surprises NVIDIA has packed inside their quad-core processor.
« Android Wallpaper Review: RLW Live Wallpaper Pro Latest HTC Sync update delivers iTunes sync capability »


text:
Why MPs should not receive a pay rise
Do you want to give people like Gordon Brown a 10 grand pay rise for turning up to two parliamentary debates a year?
"We've got to grit our teeth and get on with it." Perma-tanned Tory MP Mark Field's response to the imminent Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) recommendation for a pay hike for Honourable Members really didn't complement his Cheshire cat smile and holiday-kissed skin.
This week, the body put in charge of setting MPs' pay, after it was decided they couldn't be trusted to do it themselves remember, will bung them a £10,000-a-year raise anyway. This wasn't in the script, and for good reason.
The argument proffered most often by MPs looking to line their pockets -- that they are not paid enough to attract the best talent -- falls flat for three reasons.
Over the last thirty years MPs' earnings have risen from double the average of the population to triple. This year, the basic annual salary for MPs is £66,396, with the average wage for British workers not far from a third of that at £26,500. Add to that their generous expenses budget and it is simply impossible to convince the man on the street they deserve yet more money.
That private sector high-fliers will have to take a pay cut if they run for public office should be no surprise. One well-to-do yet tirelessly assiduous MP tells me his pay is "appalling" compared to his previous life, but insists that did not deter him because he is not doing it for the money. It is people like him we want in Parliament; genuine public servants who see their position as a vocation rather than a career. This constituency-minded Member says there is a strong case for making the job unpaid entirely.
In any case, what difference would an extra £10,000-a-year make when top private sector jobs would have you comfortably in six figures? Not only is the aspiration for better representatives a tacit admission from the current crop that they aren't the best available, it is also utterly disingenuous. Who would ditch their career as a £200,000-a-year barrister to run for Parliament because, after the planned pay rise, they would be paid £76,000 rather than £66,000?
Then there is the suggestion from IPSA-haters such as Nadine Dorries that "Parliament, without reform, will be a place of millionaires or paupers". There is no doubt the existing expenses system is deeply flawed, though banging on that someone earning three times the average wage is a pauper probably isn't the best way to endear yourself to your constituents.
If IPSA were taking the advice of the pro bono crowd that line may have some credence. But with unions, private donors and the taxpayer bankrolling working class candidates, rightly, no one will buy it.
If you still aren't convinced, look no further than the sheer hypocrisy of our unabashed polticians. This Parliament, Tory and Liberal Democrat MPs have voted to freeze public sector pay at one percent.
A policy the Labour Party has confirmed it would not reverse if it were in power. Yet the very people who are telling nurses and teachers their pay will only rise by one percent are asking for an increase of 15 times that for themselves. It doesn't take a PR guru to work out how that looks. A particularly concerned MP tells me there is no way he can justify this to his constituents in the public sector, let alone the former public sector workers laid off under this government.
This all plays into perhaps the most important argument against the pay rise: public perception. Our MPs are despised by the people who vote for them. They are seen as troughers, money-grabbers, corrupt expensers cheats with their snouts in the trough. It is not hard to see why given who the public have had to stomach over the last three years alone: David Laws, Chris Huhne, Denis MacShane, Patrick Mercer and Tim Yeo to name but a few.
Of course not all MPs are like them, but in truth that doesn't matter. If the good eggs have any desire at all to improve the reputation of themselves and their peers amongst those that elect them then accepting a pay rise is out of the question.
Finally, the most convincing argument against the hike can be summed up in two words: Gordon Brown. I bumped into Gordon almost unbelievably on the way to a vote in Portcullis House last night; one shocked Tory MP remarking it was the third time he had seen him this Parliament.
A man seen as guilty for ruining the country's economy, who has spoken in two debates in the last year while he flies around the world making millions, will now pocket an extra £10,000-a-year of our money. Good luck to anyone who wants to have a go at defending that.
Alex Wickham is The Commentator's UK Political Editor and a reporter at the Guido Fawkes website. He is a contributor to their column in The Sun newspaper. He tweets at @WikiGuido
Latest on the blog
- Does socialism work? A classroom experiment
- REVEALED: Claudia Lawrence 'Mystery Man' CCTV enhanced in cold case review
- Lanistar breaks records with 100,000 users in 72 hours FCA scraps warning
- Lanistar unveils world's first polymorphic payment card with a keypad and display
- The EU's betrayal of Britain's fishing industry
We are wholly dependent on the kindness of our readers for our continued work. We thank you in advance for any support you can offer.


text:
ORLANDO, FL – 14 Jul, 2017 – Balloons Over The Rainbow, Inc, a St. Louis based hot air balloon services company, is pleased to announce the acquisition of Vegas Balloon Rides and Orlando Balloon Rides. In addition to its new locations in Orlando Florida and Las Vegas Nevada, Balloons Over The Rainbow also has its home operation in St. Louis Missouri and owns and operations World Balloon in Albuquerque New Mexico, Pueblo Balloon in Taos New Mexico, and Verde Valley Balloons in Cottonwood Arizona.
"The combined operation provides tremendous economy of scale for our companies and will offer significantly streamlined booking and flight services to our guests" reports Keith Fear, the owner of Balloons Over The Rainbow. "We believe that with the addition of Vegas Balloon Rides and Orlando Balloon Rides, that we are the largest Hot Air Balloon company in the US. Having operations in two of the largest tourist destinations in the world, further solidifies Balloons Over the Rainbow, Inc's place as the leading balloon operator in the United States".
No significant changes to the day to day operation for any of the Balloon Over The Rainbow companies are expected during the transition.
"As we transition, its business as usual!" said James Brown, Sales & Marketing Manager for Orlando and Vegas Balloon Rides. "The goal will be to identify best practices from each of our destinations, combine them and then roll them out company-wide over time". "We will be providing an experience to passengers that is unparalleled in this industry".
Key Contacts:
Keith Fear
Balloons Over The Rainbow, Inc.
Orlando – www.orlandoballoonrides.com
James Brown
Sales & Marketing Director
Orlando Balloon Rides & Vegas Balloon Rides
Jacqui Alberto
Sales Manager
Orlando Balloon Rides
Las Vegas – www.vegasballoonrides.com
James Brown
Sales & Marketing Director
Vegas Balloon Rides
St. Louis – www.balloonsovertherainbow.com
Albuquerque New Mexico – www.worldballoon.com
Taos New Mexico – www.puebloballoon.com
Cottonwood Arizona – www.verdevalleyballoons.com
About the Balloons Over The Rainbow Companies:
Orlando Balloon Rides, Orlando Florida
Celebrating thirty five years in operation in 2017, Orlando Balloon Rides continues to make magical memories for those visiting Orlando's world class resorts and attractions. Offering daily sunrise flights in and around the Walt Disney World Resort© area, Orlando Balloon Rides, with the largest capacity in Florida continues to be an industry leader and trusted partner of the vast majority of the world's leading travel and tour companies.
Vegas Balloon Rides, Las Vegas Nevada
Las Vegas' premier hot air balloon operator. Offering daily sunrise flights year-round, with additional afternoon flights from November to February. Vegas Balloon Rides offer visitors to Las Vegas a truly unique way to see the world famous Las Vegas Strip, Red Rock Canyons and neighboring mountain terrains.
Balloons Over The Rainbow, St. Louis Missouri
St. Louis' largest hot air balloon operator. Offering daily sunrise and afternoon flights year-round. While dealing with St. Louis' unique and changing weather, Balloons Over The Rainbow offers guests a completely different perspective of the surround area including vies as varied as the Gateway Arch in the distance and local forests and wildlife.
World Balloon, Albuquerque New Mexico
Albuquerque's original balloon ride. Founded more than 43 years ago but Sid Cutter, one of the founders of the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta, World Balloon is the premier hot air balloon ride company in Albuquerque. We ensure a World Class experience for our guests while ensuring a safe and enjoyable atmosphere.
Pueblo Balloon, Taos New Mexico
Fly the Gorge with Pueblo Balloon. We are permitted to fly in the Rio Grande National Monument which allows us to fly in the unique Rio Grande Gorge. Likely the only place you can fly part of your flight below ground. There is no more unique flight anywhere in the United States.
Verde Valley Balloons, Cottonwood Arizona
Just outside of Sedona Arizona, Cottonwood provides majestic views of the Verde River and the Prescott National Forest, as well as views as far as Jerome, and even as far as the Colorado Plateau some 150 miles away. Join us for your adventure of a lifetime today.
Media Contact
Company Name: Balloons Over The Rainbow
Contact Person: James Brown
Email: email@example.com
Country: United States
Website: http://www.balloonsovertherainbow.com/


text:
Please send me your iPad tips & tricks you have found, and some of those amazing Apps!! I will create iPad App reviews as well a providing free iPad tutorials. gregwest (at) AlternateCloud.com
Filed under: Blogroll, Cloud Computer, computers, iPad, iPhone, seniors online, Social Media, Technology Book Review, tips and tricks, training, tutorials, video | Tagged: applr, edutech, free, hack ios, help, ios, ios7, ipad, ipad classroom, ipad hacks, ipad twitter, online classroom, tech, tech classroom, tutorial | 1 Comment »


text:
Source Capital, Inc. Declares Quarterly Distribution on Common Stock
LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–The Board of Directors of Source Capital, Inc. (NYSE:SOR), today
declared a regular quarterly distribution of 25 cents a common share,
payable March 15, 2019, to shareholders of record as of the close of
business March 1, 2019.
Source Capital, Inc. is a closed-end investment company managed by First
Pacific Advisors, LLC.
About Source Capital, Inc.
The Fund (www.fpa.com)
is a diversified, closed-end management investment company seeking
maximum total return for shareholders from both capital appreciation and
investment income to the extent consistent with protection of invested
capital. Its shares are listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the
symbol "SOR." The Fund is managed by First Pacific Advisors, LP.
You should consider the Fund's investment objectives, risks, and
charges and expenses carefully before you invest. You can obtain
additional information by visiting the website at www.fpa.com,
by email at email@example.com,
toll free by calling 1-800-279-1241 (option 1), or by contacting the
Fund in writing.
Investments in mutual funds carry risks and investors may lose
principal value. Stock markets are volatile and can decline
significantly in response to adverse issuer, political, regulatory,
market, or economic developments. It is important to remember that there
are risks inherent in any investment and there is no assurance that any
investment or asset class will provide positive performance over time.
Value style investing presents the risk that the holdings or
securities may never reach our estimate of intrinsic value because the
market fails to recognize what the portfolio management team considers
the true business value or because the portfolio management team has
misjudged those values. In addition, value style investing may
fall out of favor and underperform growth or other style investing
during given periods. Non-U.S. investing presents additional
risks, such as the potential for adverse political, currency, economic,
social or regulatory developments in a country, including lack of
liquidity, excessive taxation, and differing legal and accounting
standards. Non-U.S. securities, including American Depository
Receipts (ADRs) and other depository receipts, are also subject to
interest rate and currency exchange rate risks.
Fixed income securities are subject to interest rate, inflation and
credit risks. Lower rated bonds, convertible securities, and other types
of debt obligations involve greater risks than higher rated bonds.
Mortgage securities and collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) are
subject to prepayment risk and the risk of default on the underlying
mortgages or other assets; such derivatives may increase volatility.
Convertible securities are generally not investment grade and are
subject to greater credit risk than higher-rated investments. High yield
securities can be volatile and subject to much higher instances of
For investor questions, please contact:
Hewes Communications, Inc.


text:
College students combine many sources of funds to pay for their education, including personal savings, family savings, income from jobs, scholarships and/or student loans. As the percentage of funds from the student's sources increases, parents risk losing the student as a dependent on their tax return. Not only do the parents lose the exemption deduction, but they also lose available higher education tax benefits (Hope scholarship, American opportunity and lifetime learning credits, and tuition deduction). The combined effects can add up to a significant amount.
Taxpayers and tax professionals need to carefully evaluate the impact that the sources of college funding can have on the net tax and financial position of the family unit. Blindly assuming that a student qualifies as a dependent on the parents' tax return can result in noncompliance with tax law and can have other financial implications. With some preparation, tax professionals can plan for the dependency exemption issue and maximize the family's net tax savings.
A dependent is defined under IRC § 152(a) as either a qualifying child or a qualifying relative. To be a qualifying child under section 152(c), a student must meet four tests:
Relationship. The child must be the taxpayer's child or stepchild (whether by blood or adoption), foster child, sibling or stepsibling, or a descendant of any of them.
Age. The child must be under age 19 or a full-time student under age 24 at the end of the year. To be considered a full-time student, the child must be enrolled for the number of hours or courses the school considers to be full time and must be a student for at least five months during the year.
Residency. The child must live with the taxpayer for more than one-half of the year. The child is considered to live with the taxpayer while he or she is temporarily away from home due to education, illness, business, vacation or military service.
Support. The student cannot have provided more than onehalf of his or her own support.
If a student meets these four tests, the parents may claim the exemption if the student meets the general dependency tests under section 152(b). The general tests include:
Marital status. If married, the student did not file a joint tax return for the year, unless the return is filed only to claim a tax refund and no tax liability would exist for either spouse.
Citizen or resident. The student must be either a U.S. citizen, resident or national, or a resident of Canada or Mexico.
Parents and tax professionals cannot assume that a college student will remain a dependent of the parent until he or she graduates. With the variety of funding sources students use to pay for the ever-increasing cost of higher education, many are likely to provide more than one-half of their support at some point during their college years.
The implications of a student no longer qualifying as a dependent extend beyond the parents' and student's tax returns to include, for example, benefits provided through the parents' employers. Taxpayers and tax professionals must approach the dependency issue with prudent planning.
For a detailed discussion of the issues in this area, see "Dependency Exemption Issues for College Students," by Nancy B. Nichols, CPA, Ph.D.; Susan Q. Ferguson, CPA, MSA; and William M. VanDenburgh, Ph.D., in the August 2010 issue of The Tax Adviser.
—Alistair M. Nevius, editor-in-chief
The Tax Adviser
The Tax Adviser is the AICPA's monthly journal of tax planning, trends and techniques. AICPA members can subscribe to The Tax Adviser for a discounted price of $85 per year. Tax Section members can subscribe for a discounted price of $30 per year. Call 800-513-3037 or e-mail email@example.com for a subscription to the magazine or to become a member of the Tax Section.
More from the JofA:
Find us on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter


text:
Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth have called it quits less than a year after tying the knot.
A rep for Cyrus said in a statement: "Liam and Miley have agreed to separate at this time. Ever-evolving, changing as partners and individuals, they have decided this is what's best while they both focus on themselves and careers. They still remain dedicated parents to all of their animals they share while lovingly taking this time apart. Please respect their process and privacy."
Cyrus and Hemsworth met in 2009 on the set of Nicholas Sparks' drama The Last Song and had a rocky, on-again, off-again relationship for years before he proposed in 2012. The two ended their engagement and broke up a year later, before reconciling in 2015.
Editorial credit: DFree / Shutterstock.com


text:
Chris Brown and Frank Ocean Fight at Recording Studio
Chris Brown always has beef with somebody. Remember the club fight between Brown and Drake last year? And let's not even get into his issues with Rihanna. And now it looks like we can add Frank Ocean to the list.
According to TMZ, the two got into an all-out brawl on Sunday night (Jan. 27) over a parking spot located at a recording studio. Ocean reportedly said, "This is my studio, this is my parking spot," after he and his entourage blocked Brown's exit.
When Brown went over to shake Ocean's hand, one of the 'Channel Orange' singer's friends allegedly attacked him, and the fight ensued. By the time police came, Brown already left the scene. Since Ocean stayed behind, police cited him as the victim, especially since Ocean told police that Brown punched him.
The incident is still under investigation. But Ocean took to Twitter to share his side of the story. "got jumped by chris and a couple guys. lol. i only wish everest [his dog] was there. cut my finger now I can't play w two hands at the grammys [sic]," he tweeted.


text:
Click for larger image
- Summary
The original Ember To Inferno album on CD, in a standard jewel case.
- Details
1. Inception, The Bleeding Skies 2. Pillars Of Serpents 3. If I Could Collapse The Masses 4. Fugue (A Revelation) 5. Requiem 6. Ember To Inferno 7. Ashes 8. To Burn The Eye 9. Falling To Grey 10. My Hatred 11. When All Light Dies 12. A View Of Burning Empires
Please visit our FAQs page to see if your question has already been answered.
There is a link to our contact us form at the bottom if you still need your question answered.


text:
Death toll in Bangladesh building collapse rises to at least 87 (photos)
SAVAR, Bangladesh -- An eight-story building housing several garment factories collapsed near Bangladesh's capital on Wednesday, killing at least 87 people and trapping many more under a jumbled mess of concrete. Rescuers tried to cut through the debris with earthmovers, drilling machines and their bare hands.
Less than five months after a factory fire killed 112 people, the disaster again underscored the unsafe conditions in Bangladesh's massive garment industry. Workers said they hesitated to go to work Wednesday because the building had developed such severe cracks the previous day that it had been reported on local news channels.
Abdur Rahim, who worked on the fifth floor, said a factory manager assured them there was no problem, so they went inside.
"We started working. After about an hour or so the building collapsed suddenly," he said. He next remembered regaining consciousness outside the building.
Home Minister Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir told reporters during a visit to the site that the building had violated construction codes and "the culprits would be punished."
Among the businesses in the building were Phantom Apparels Ltd., New Wave Style Ltd., New Wave Bottoms Ltd. and New Wave Brothers Ltd., which make clothing for brands including Benetton, The Children's Place and Dress Barn. Workers said they didn't know what specific clothing brands were being produced in the building because labels are attached after the products are finished.
Sumi, a 25-year-old worker who goes by one name, said she was sewing jeans on the fifth floor with at least 400 others when the building fell. "It collapsed all of a sudden," she said. "No shaking, no indication. It just collapsed on us."
She said she managed to reach a hole in the building through which rescuers pulled her out.
Reports suggested the death toll was likely to rise.
"We sent two people inside the building and we could rescue at least 20 people alive. They also told us that at least 100 to 150 people are injured and about 50 dead people are still trapped inside this floor," said Mohammad Humayun, a supervisor at one of the garment factories.
Tens of thousands of people gathered at the site, some of them weeping survivors, some searching for family members. Firefighters and soldiers using drilling machines and cranes worked with local volunteers in the search for survivors.
An enormous section of the concrete structure appeared to have splintered like twigs. Colorful sheets of fabric were tied to upper floors of the wreckage so those inside could climb or slide down and escape.
An arm jutted out of one section of rubble. The lifeless body of a woman covered in dust could be seen in another. A firefighter carried the body of what appeared to be a teenager from the area.
Rahim said his mother and father, who worked with him in the factory, were trapped inside.
"I have no idea what is going on," he said.
Mosammat Khurshida wailed as she looked for her husband. "He came to work in the morning. I can't find him," she said. "I don't know where he is. He does not pick up his phone."
The building, in the Dhaka suburb of Savar, also housed a bank and shops.
Zahidur Rahman, director of public relations at Enam Medical College and Hospital, said by Wednesday evening 87 people had been confirmed dead. Brig. Gen. Mohammed Siddiqul Alam Shikder said 600 people had been rescued.
At the morgue of the medical college, many wailed as they waited for the bodies of their loved ones. "Where's my mother? Where's my mother? Tell me, tell me, oh Allah, oh Allah," Rana Ahmed cried.
The November fire at the Tazreen garment factory drew international attention to working conditions in Bangladesh's $20 billion-a-year textile industry. The country has about 4,000 garment factories and exports clothes to leading Western retailers. The industry wields vast power in the South Asian nation.
Tazreen lacked emergency exits and its owner said only three floors of the eight-story building were legally built. Surviving employees said gates had been locked and managers had told them to go back to work after the fire alarm went off.
Clothes with Disney, Wal-Mart and other western labels were found at that factory.


text:
Value Line is regarded as the best independent research available. More than just recommendations, Value Line provides the rationale behind its picks for greater understanding.
Dow 30 component Cisco Systems (CSCO - Free Cisco Systems Stock Report) is one of the most admired and successful enterprises to ever emerge from Silicon Valley. The tech icon's breadth of product and correlation to GDP makes it one of the most closely watched stocks in the telecom equipment industry. Management's keen ability to foresee technological trends, coupled with massive cash balances, allow it to make attractive acquisitions and develop leading technologies internally. Highly efficient and innovative operating practices, along with a focus on working with, learning from, and assisting customers are also strengths that contributed to revenues rising from $1.2 billion in 1994 to $43 billion in fiscal 2011 (ended July 30th). The company had an average annual revenue growth rate of 11% over the past decade. Cisco looks to maintain growth with new products in the data center virtualization, cloud computing delivery, videoconferencing, and collaboration markets.
It's been rumored that the idea for Cisco's first product, the router, was motivated by a Stanford University couple's desire to send emails to one another across the university's disparate computer networks. Although any claim of romantic inspiration is an exaggeration, it is true that in the early 1980's Leonard Bosack, director of Stanford's computer science department, along with his wife Sandy Lerner, director of the business school's computer facilities, recognized the need for individual networks located in separate buildings of a campus to transmit data to each other quickly, reliably, and without having to go through large and expensive centralized minicomputers. Acting on this notion, they enlisted the help of other Stanford engineers to come up with a device that could execute such a task. Many contributed, but Stanford researcher William Yeager is known to have developed the crucial operating system and routing code, services Cisco never publicly credited him for even though they eventually licensed the technology from the University in 1987. Regardless, the OS worked well and after the first boxes were built, the team went to work scattering them throughout the campus and connecting them with an infrastructure of coaxial cables. Over several months, a functional wide area network was constructed, allowing information to be transmitted across distances never seen before.
The system went on to become Stanford's official network. Meanwhile, word spread to other research facilitates of its capabilities, resulting in numerous purchase offers. Still, the administration denied the team permission to use University funds to support commercial sale of the technology. Subsequently, the couple quit their jobs and began independently financing their own startup in 1984 using savings and credit cards. The company was first called cisco with a lowercase "c" to signify the end of "San Francisco". Over the next several years the startup made software and hardware improvements until its product (dubbed a "cisco") was commercially viable, and the first multiprotocol router shipped in 1986. This invention essentially created a new section of the IT industry: Internetworking or the practice of using devices and software to route information packets between networks.
It was around this time that venture capital investment became necessary to meet escalating demand. After dozens of failed pitches, Don Valentine of Seqouia Capital saw the vast investment potential in connecting personal computers and agreed to pay $2.5 million for 32% of the company. Although those funds were never used due to the strong initial sales growth, Mr. Valentine provided much needed credibility and corporate knowhow to the startup by establishing an efficient operating structure and hiring a well-seasoned management team. Ms. Lerner stayed on as vice president of customer service, Mr. Bosack got the title of chief technology officer, and they together retained 30% of the company. However, due to the structure of the contracts, much of the power rested in the hands of Mr. Valentine. Eventually, Ms. Lerner's uncompromising approach led to dissension between the founders and the newly appointed VP's leading the latter party to give senior management an ultimatum: us or them. The result was Ms. Lerner being fired from the firm a few months after its IPO in February 1990. Shortly after her exit, Mr. Bosack quit and the two donated most of the $170 million in Cisco stock they received to charity.
With the founders out of the picture, management was free to establish Cisco's primary operating ethos. Leading the effort was CEO John P. Morgridge, a frugal and candid businessman who liked to keep control at the top. One of his greatest contributions to the firm's culture and early success was a dedication to customer service. Instead of selling routers to technicians his team pitched to the upper management of large corporations, a strategy that allowed the firm to collect numerous deep-pocketed clients who were clamoring to connect workers across campuses. Cisco was not only great at winning new customers, but also at keeping them. The engineering staff was told to satisfy complaints and suggestions when creating new products. Innovative web-based applications like a "bug-report database", online ordering, and a message board where clients could post questions and get responses from other customers proved very popular. This gave engineers more time to resolve the most difficult problems and kept technical support staff relatively low. Mr. Morgridge recognized high customer satisfaction as a driving force behind Cisco capturing 80% of the router market by 1996. A few years after that, the company established an entire unit dedicated to assisting customers in running their networks. In 2010, the highly profitable Services segment made $7.6 billion, or 19% of revenue.
Another key element of Cisco's corporate philosophy cultivated by Mr. Morgridge was diversifying the product base. Management correctly believed that the rapid rise of Internet traffic would require new technologies beyond "backbone" infrastructure like routers, and concluded that Cisco would need to provide them in order to keep growing. The company wanted to be a one-stop shop for corporations' networking needs and did not care whether technologies were developed internally or gained through acquisitions. It determined that switching technology was the next big thing and in September, 1993 it bought Crescendo Communications, Inc. That company's Catalyst Operating System would be used for Cisco's Catalyst line of switches which predominately connect computers in single buildings into local area networks. Crescendo was purchased for $92 million when it had less than $10 million in annual revenues. Catalyst products would go on to be a $7 billion-a-year business for the Switching unit.
In January, 1995, current CEO John Chambers took control of the company. Mr. Chambers was more aggressive than his predecessor and chose to dial up the pace of acquisitions, making four in his first year. In 1996, Cisco bought a leading supplier of Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) technology, StrataCom, Inc., for $4.67 billion. This now outdated switching technology directs traffic across long distances without needing routers and reduces latency, making it well suited for voice and video transmissions to branch offices. Too, StrataCom owned Frame Relay switching devices that were heavily demanded by telecom companies looking to connect local area networks into wide area networks. This deal helped Cisco to expand its customer base beyond large corporations, educational institutions, and government agencies to service providers, a group which now makes up approximately one third of sales.
Although management had always been good at predicting which technologies would prove successful, the acquisitions made in the late 1990's were the result of particularly visionary thinking. One was NetSpeed, a company that made digital subscriber line (DSL) equipment for homes and small businesses to access the Internet using existing telephone lines. Cisco was also an early entrant into wireless networking for the home and fiber optic networking used by service providers. John Chambers famously predicted that all phone calls would be transmitted over the Internet, an idea that justified the acquisition of voice-over-IP business LightSpeed International. Mr. Chambers credits talking to customers, and identifying social, economic, or technological shifts for his strong track record of foreseeing "market transitions".
In many regards, Cisco was the quintessential growth stock of the 1990's. Annual top-line growth fluctuated between 30% and 50% and the market capitalization rose from $400 million in 1993 to more than half a trillion dollars at its peak in 2000. However, the stock quickly fell from grace as the dot-com bubble burst and corporations and service providers became much more conservative with IT budgets and capital expenditures. It became apparent that CSCO could no longer maintain historical growth rates. Thus, investors were not willing to pay a premium valuation for the shares. Although growth would never be as high as in the 1990's, Cisco was able to recover nicely during the mid-2000's, as bandwidth demands escalated and it continued to provide cutting-edge technology through acquisitions and internal research and development. Still, at this time, some started to believe that Cisco's massive size would force growth rates and profitability to plateau.
Investors began to question whether Cisco was spread too thin as it was competing in over 30 markets at one point, including virtual healthcare, safety and security, smart communities, consumer camcorders, and stadium-sized TV screens. Additionally, Cisco's managemnt structure was overly complex with an inefficiently high number of teams, "boards", and "councils". This was causing delays in the product approval process, reduced accountability, and less success at anticipating market transitions. Correspondingly, revenues and earnings declined considerably and market share was lost to rivals who proved quick to adapt to changing demand conditions.
In April 2011, CEO John Chambers admitted that unacceptable operational execution had disappointed investors, confused employees, and caused the company to lose credibility with customers. He took action to rightsize the business in 2011, cutting a significant portion of his workforce, divesting some consumer businesses (Flip HD video recorders), and streamlining the management hierarchy. Total annualized savings reached $1 billion in the 2012 January quarter, and the company has returned to double digit revenue growth thanks to its "value engineering" efforts and more competitive pricing. This has come at the expense of margins and it is yet to be determined if gross profits will demonstrate sustainable improvement. Nonetheless, core business have stabilized and the company continues to look for growth in Video products, collaboration and the data center to fuel long term gains.
Fierce competition is nothing new to Cisco. Its dedication to customer service, improving the functionality of its devices, and purchasing any companies that grow big enough to become a threat have allowed it to maintain a strong share in its core markets. The company has around 70% of the Ethernet switch market. Cisco's biggest competitor in the space is Hewlett Packard (HPQ - Free Hewlett Packard Stock Report), which claims around 10% of the market. Overall, we expect this market to grow in the low double digits for the foreseeable future as it continues to mature.
Cisco has been supplying switching technology to data centers for a number of years with its Nexus line, and is now looking to branch out into storage, servers, and virtualization software. Its data center solution, the Unified Computing System, aims to reduce total cost of ownership and improve scalability by integrating the different components into a cohesive platform that can be managed more efficiently as a single unit. Cisco has developed its own blade and rackmount servers that compete head-to-head with computing heavyweights International Business Machines (IBM - Free IBM Stock Report) and Hewlett Packard. The former has an extensive portfolio of servers and previously used Nexus switches for its data center needs. Due to CSCO's move into IBM's turf, we believe much of this switch business will go to Juniper Networks (JNPR) and Voltaire, companies with competing solutions in this space. HP also commands a large presence in the data center market. Its acquisition of 3Com filled out its switching portfolio, but it is still at a disadvantage, as the products are not compatible with other vendors' equipment. We like the alliances Cisco has formed with VMware (VMW) for virtualization software and EMC Corporation (EMC) for storage, as these companies are both leaders in their respective markets. Although it will be difficult to take market share from incumbents, we believe Cisco will continue to find success in the rapidly expanding data center virtualization/consolidation and cloud computing delivery markets.
Service providers account for 80% of worldwide router sales, with the rest going to enterprises. The $11 billion carrier routing market has exhibited strong growth over the past several years thanks to the rapid rise in video transfers from businesses and on Websites like Google (GOOG) owned YouTube and Facebook, as well as streaming TV service Netflix (NFLX). We expect these trends to continue pressuring bandwidth, leading carriers to purchase more core routers. Cisco boasts more than a 50% market share in core routers; Juniper is second with 30%; and emerging market vendor Huawei has around 15%. The market for IP edge and Ethernet aggregation routers are around four times bigger than core routers. These devices are able to identify the type of traffic being transmitted (voice, video, or data) and prioritize it. They help service providers offer video and voice over IP with low latency, and replace legacy ATM and Frame Relay technologies. This subsector should experience mid-teens growth for the next several years as carriers upgrade to next-generation routing technology based on Ethernet and Internet Protocols. Cisco has lost market share over the last several years due to new business in China and other emerging markets going to Huawei.
At the time of this article's writing, the author did not have any positions in the companies mentioned.


text:
And a spectacular explosion it was.
After watching Obama's NOTHING speech last night I had a feeling there was too much hype, too much HOPE, and that did not match the reality. Then Geithner gets up and has NOTHING new to offer. The market was expecting a SPECIFIC plan, but all that was offered was what dire shape we are in and how we must work through the process.
HERE'S THE TRUTH… the people who created this problem are NOT capable of fixing it. THEY ARE THE PROBLEM. They cannot see or admit that the solution is to GET RID OF THEM. They have created an unworkable math situation and they are unwilling to take their losses, they want to push their losses off on us, and that just isn't going to work as they are far, far, too large. Thus DEFAULT of some kind is coming, it's just a matter of who takes it. That's the truth and I know it's hard to acknowledge, no one wants to face that fact willingly.
When Geithner speaks of the financial system needing liquidity, he is DEAD WRONG. The system has too much liquidity and has all along, that's the problem. You can't solve too much liquidity with a flood of liquidity – that does not work. The problem is one of SOLVENCY, not liquidity. The difference being that the debts outweigh the assets. That is not a cash shortage problem, it's a solvency problem. The banks cannot mark to market or that reality is exposed – that's why Geithner's plan didn't come together and won't come together in any form that represents reality.
Geithner Says 'Comprehensive' Bailout to Be CostlyThat's an awful lot of unknowns.
By Rebecca Christie
Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) -- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner laid out what he described as a "comprehensive" attack on the financial crisis, warning that administration's strategy will "cost money, involve risk and take time."
"The financial system is working against recovery, and that's the dangerous dynamic we need to change," Geithner said in excerpts of his prepared remarks for delivery today in Washington. "Without credit, economies cannot grow, and right now, critical parts of our financial system are damaged."
The Treasury chief pledged a further round of capital injections for U.S. banks and an initiative, in partnership with private investors, to address the toxic assets weighing down banks. New taxpayer funds come with tighter restrictions on banks, including limits on dividend payments, acquisitions and executive pay, administration officials said.
Today's overhaul of the Treasury's $700 billion financial- rescue fund is aimed at addressing the failures of the first phase of the program, which has yet to spur a wave of new lending to companies and consumers. Geithner's warning about the cost of the effort followed signals yesterday by President Barack Obama that the administration is open to seeking more money.
The administration's plan is designed to support about $1.5 trillion in new lending and handling of distressed securities, people familiar with the matter said.
Two-Front Campaign
"It is essential for every American to understand that the battle for economic recovery must be fought on two fronts," Geithner said in the excerpted remarks. "We have to both jumpstart job creation and private investment, and we must get credit flowing again to businesses and families."
Stocks fell after Obama yesterday warned the economy is at risk of a "full-blown crisis." The Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index fell 1.4 percent to 857.36 at 10:39 a.m. in New York.
Obama yesterday urged Congress to approve a fiscal stimulus that will cut taxes, boost spending on roads, schools and other infrastructure, and provide aide to state budgets. The Senate may vote on the stimulus today.
Geithner at 11 a.m. will lay out his plans for deploying the second half of the $700 billion bank rescue plan, which has been known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program. The administration plans to rename it the Financial Stability Plan.
"This comprehensive strategy will cost money, involve risk, and take time," Geithner said. The initial bailout effort, which he helped administer in his previous job as head of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, was "essential" while "inadequate" to support the financial system and the secondary-lending market.
Stress Tests
Regulators plan to subject banks to new tests to determine whether they have enough capital, people familiar with the matter said. The Treasury, Fed and other supervisors in the President's Working Group on financial markets will develop guidelines for the examinations, which are aimed at ensuring that the country's largest banks can withstand a worsening economy.
Banks that don't have sufficient capital will be given additional taxpayer funds in the form of convertible preferred securities, people familiar with the matter said.
The new capital will have tougher conditions than the Treasury's first round of as much as $250 billion of bank-stake purchases. Participating banks will have their dividends and political lobbying efforts restricted, along with limits on stock repurchases, acquisitions, executive compensation and so-called golden parachutes. Any luxury spending provisions must also be disclosed, administration officials close to the plan said.
Use of Funds
Firms must also show how government aid will expand lending and how they intend to use the funds, the officials said.
"The American people have lost faith in the leaders of our financial institutions" and are skeptical of the rescue spending so far, Geithner said in the prepared remarks.
"In our financial system, 40 percent of consumer lending has historically been available because people buy loans, put them together and sell them," Geithner said. "Because this vital source of lending has frozen up, no plan will be successful unless it helps restart securitization markets for sound loans made to consumers and businesses -- large and small."
Geithner's package includes $50 billion for measures to stem mortgage foreclosures, administration officials said. Banks receiving federal funds will be required to participate in efforts to mitigate foreclosures. The Treasury and Fed will work to reduce monthly payments and establish loan-modification guidelines, officials said.
Toxic Assets
The administration is also aiming to differentiate the next phase of the financial plan by bringing in private investors. It plans a public-private investment fund to take on older toxic assets. Officials have not yet decided on the specific mechanics of the facility, which will be introduced in lieu of the so- called bad bank of earlier proposals.
The scope of the investment fund is expected to be a range of as much as $500 billion, backed by roughly $50 billion in public funding, people familiar with the matter said.
To kick-start new lending, the Financial Stability Plan will expand a Fed program for consumer and business loans to as much as $1 trillion from the current $200 billion. The Term Asset- Backed Securities Lending Facility will be backed by as much as $100 billion of Treasury funds in case of losses.
Fed officials have yet to start up the TALF, which was intended to be under way this month and could now be renamed. It will lend funds to investors in securities backed by student, credit-card and auto loans. Eligible debt will be expanded today to include commercial mortgage-backed securities, and more types of lending may be added later, people familiar with the matter said.
FDIC Guarantees
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. is also set to expand its debt-guarantee program, created late last year to ensure banks' access to credit markets, the people said. The agency is looking at 10-year guarantees for some kinds of assets.
The new approach comes four months after the start of the $700 billion TARP, which both Democrats and Republicans have criticized as ineffective. The task Geithner faces is reviving a U.S. banking system throttled by $752 billion in credit losses and an economy that lost almost 600,000 jobs last month.
Obama yesterday warned that the ultimate cost of the financial bailout is not yet known.
"We don't know yet whether we're going to need additional money or how much additional money we'll need until we've seen how successful we are at restoring a sense of confidence in the marketplace," Obama said in his news conference last night in Washington.
Is Obama making a clean sweep? I don't see it.
Here's Bloomberg's take on the market's reaction:
U.S. Stocks Drop, Treasuries Gain as Geithner Reveals Bank PlanI'm sorry to say it, but Obama and Geithner do not represent CHANGE in regards to the economy so far – the new boss would seem to be the same as the old boss. Obama is running head on into the reality of math. He is learning that there are not white ponys that expel rainbow colored skittles.
By Jeff Kearns
Feb. 10 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. stocks fell, sending the Standard & Poor's 500 Index to its biggest drop since Barack Obama's inauguration, while Treasuries rallied and the dollar slumped against the yen on skepticism that the government's bank rescue will work.
Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc. lost more than 9 percent after Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said he's still "exploring a range of different structures" to bail out lenders. Principal Financial Group Inc. plunged 27 percent on concern the life insurer needs more capital. Alcoa Inc. slumped 4.9 percent after S&P cut the aluminum producer's credit rating to the lowest investment grade. Gold rallied 2.5 percent to $914.90 an ounce.
The S&P 500 Index dropped 3.4 percent to 840.72 at 12:05 p.m. in New York and lost as much as 4 percent, the most since Jan. 20. The Dow Jones Industrial Average decreased 287.61 points, or 3.5 percent, to 7,983.26. Ten-year Treasury notes rose, driving their yield down by 0.12 percentage point to 2.87 percent. Japan's currency gained 1.1 percent to 90.43 per dollar.
"The initial aspects of it are convoluted, and it's still a work in progress," said Walter "Bucky" Hellwig, who helps oversee $30 billion at Morgan Asset Management in Birmingham, Alabama. "Investors voted with their feet."
Geithner pledged government financing for programs aimed at spurring new lending and addressing banks' toxic assets, an effort that may grow to as much as $2 trillion.
The S&P 500 Financials index lost 7 percent, the most among 10 industries. Bank of America fell 14 percent to $5.92. Citigroup retreated 9.2 percent to $3.59. JPMorgan Chase & Co. slumped 5.2 percent to $25.85.
Money, Risk, Time
Geithner said the government's bank rescue will "cost money, involve risk and take time."
"There are big risks to existing shareholders," said Noman Ali, a portfolio manager at MFC Global Investment Management, which oversees $20 billion of U.S. stocks in Toronto. "We don't think there's any near-term upside for bank stocks."
The benchmark index for U.S. stock options jumped to the highest since Jan. 20 as investors paid more to use options as insurance against stock-market declines. The VIX, as the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index is known, rose 9 percent to 47.57. The index, calculated from prices paid for S&P 500 contracts, averaged 32.65 last year. Options give the right to buy or sell a security at a set price and date.
Oh, I'd like to be positive about the economic situation, unfortunately the only thing I'm positive about is that the math doesn't work and that the people who got us into the situation (Geithner and central bankers) are NOT capable of getting us out. The new boss is surrounded with the same old crowd.
The Who-Won't Get Fooled Again:


text:
Or will you allow the next 365 days to pass by without changing a thing?
If you haven't put any thought into it, then do so now. The fact is that you will age and change in 2014, and next year on 12-31-14 you will be slightly (or dramatically) different than you are today.
The cool thing about a New Year is that it gives us the opportunity to reflect on our life, to acknowledge where we are and where we want to be headed. If you would like to be headed in the direction of improved health, lowered weight and increased strength, here are 17 suggested changes for you to make in 2014:
• Exercise 2 more hours each week than you did in 2013.
• Go to bed and wake up at the same time each day.
• Drink less alcohol.
• Stop thinking about making changes, and take action. One thing, one step in the right direction can make the difference.
• Stop drinking and eating artificial sweeteners.
• Use heavier dumbbells when you train.
• Eat less bread, or even eliminate gluten totally from your diet.
• Train for a 5K, 10K or even for a Obstacle Race like the Warrior Dash!
• Eliminate high fructose corn syrup from your diet.
• Exercise at least four times each week.
• Eat healthy, simple dinners at home. Make sure you are eating plenty of steamed vegetables with that.
• Do not eat fast food.
• Consume less caffeine.
• Eat more protein and fiber.
• Drink water throughout your whole day.
• Do not eat packaged snack foods if you can avoid it.
• You have to live, so plan a cheat day where you can eat some of that bad food.
Now come up with a few of your own. I know there are some ideas that popped into your mind while you were reading my list. Take a minute to jot those down. Step back and re-examine the list. Which of these changes are you going to make your own?
I certainly don't expect you to make all of these changes, though the more you do, the greater your transformation will be. Like I said, it's about taking action on your thoughts. Action leads to more action. On the other hand, inaction leads to more - you guessed it - inaction!
If you want help or advice on nutrition, training and living a healthy lifestyle in future columns, feel free to email me at email@example.com.
Michael Lee Romer is owner of Force Fitness Club in Ridgewood.


text:
By Jason Miks
GPS digital producer Jason Miks sits down with renowned evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, author of the Selfish Gene and An Appetite for Wonder, to discuss readers' questions on religion, its role in society and whether children can be described as "Christian."
A number of readers noting your skepticism over religion's role in society ask whether an absence of religion would leave us without a moral compass?
The very idea that we get a moral compass from religion is horrible. Not only should we not get our moral compass from religion, as a matter of fact we don't. We shouldn't, because if you actually look at the bible or the Koran, and get your moral compass from there, it's horrible – stoning people to death, stoning people for breaking the Sabbath.
Now of course we don't do that anymore, but the reason we don't do it is that we pick out those verses of the bible that we like, and reject those verses we don't like. What criteria do we use to pick out the good ones and reject the bad ones? Non-biblical criteria, non-religious criteria. The same criteria as guide any modern person in their moral compass that has nothing to do with religion.
So the moral compass of any person is very much a part of the century or even the decade in which they happen to live, regardless of their religion. So we live in the early 21st century, and our moral compass in the early 21st century is quite different from 100 years ago, or 200 years ago. We are now much less racist than they were, much less sexist than they were. We are much kinder than non-human animals than they were – all sorts of respects in which we are labeled with a moral compass. So something has changed, and it certainly has nothing to do with religion.
You've been travelling to the States from the U.K. for a number of years. Have you noticed much of a change in the place of religion in the two countries over that time?
Notoriously, the United States is the most religious of the Western advanced nations. It's a bit mysterious why that is. In Britain, Christianity is dying. Islam, unfortunately, isn't. In Western Europe generally, Christianity is dying. Even in America, the figures show that religious adherence is being steadily reduced, and the people who now record themselves as having no religious affiliation is something like 20 percent. Many people don't recognize what a high figure it is, and so politicians here who feel they have to curry favor with religious lobbies should maybe take a look at those statistics and realize that not everyone in this country is religious.
You say it's a bit of a mystery why America is so much more religious than other advanced countries. Do you have any thoughts on why it might be? Tied to that question of disposition, several readers also wondered if there is a genetic predisposition toward faith?
There probably is, but I don't think that really explains why America is so different from Britain. The least implausible suggestion that I've heard is that Britain and Scandinavian countries, which are also very non-religious, have an established church, and that kind of makes religion boring. Whereas in America, there is constitutionally a bar against an established church, and that could be one reason why religion has become so popular – it has become big business, it has become free enterprise, rival churches vie with each other for congregations and especially tax free ties.
Some readers see you as very evangelical in your atheism. Do you feel it a duty, just as some Christians might to share the word of God, to spread an atheist point of view?
Duty is a funny word. But when you say evangelical, I like to think that I don't shout or shriek, but employ a quiet, sober voice of reason. And reason is on our side.
You've talked about feeling uncomfortable with the impact of religion on children. In fact, one reader asked whether you would prefer to see no under-18s at church. What's your take?
I certainly wouldn't wish to prohibit parents influencing their children. However, for the rest of the world, to label a child a Catholic child simply because its parents are Catholic, seems to me to be a form of child abuse. The child is too young to know.
You can see the absurdity of talking about a Catholic child of four when you think what it would be like if we talked about an existentialist child of four, or a logical positivist of four. In other words, we wouldn't accept the labeling of a child based the parents' belief, so why do we accept it when it's religion? Why does religion get a free pass when it comes to labeling children in this way?
Disillusioned, the space and universe we see and know was formed with the big bang. I don't know what was around in the pre-universe, but why wouldn't it also be a froth of particles/anti-particles. This concept of particles forming from nothingness is in agreement with the Big Bang and has been experimentally proven.
From where did this mass of particles come, known as the singularity? To cause the universe? All matter was contained in that, correct? Where did it come from? Clearly it wasn't a
Ways there or the universe would have been way, way older than it is, or had a
Ways been, Amd yet we know it has a definite age. Where did the singularity come from?
The universe is pulsating. When the age of the universe is discussed, it is only the age of this iteration. The Big Bang followed on the Big Shrink and it will go on ad infinitum; perpetual motion. All of the matter and energy in the universe is conserved (there really is no where for it to go). Waht the particles are made of has always been here. In an eternal universe why would creation only happen once? How many times has this occurred? Who knows? It ahs happened uncountable times. Do Christians really have a good understanding of eternal? They are locked up in this historical unfolding of time. In eternity time really has no relevance; no matter how many billions of years of existence, it is still as no more consequence than the life of a fly is to us. God is not in time so He sees, as He is eternal and omnipotent, etc., all that ever was or will ever be. Existence is essentially an illusion; it is all relative. Where do we fit in a universe made up of trillions of galaxies which are comprised of billions of stars? Lighten up.
Human being is curious. Wants to know who we are, who created this universe and what is our relationship with the creator if any. These are followed by other questions such as purpose of this life and our relationships with other creations.
A religion tries to answer these questions which should be logical and consistent. For these it makes certain assumptions, hypothesis. The strength of a religion is as good it's assumption to explain above curiosities.
Most religions go one step forward. They established codes of conduct to control power of human mind. These 'code of conduct' are termed as 'morality' and the means to correct deviation from these morality is by 'punishment'. Both morality and punishments vary from place to place and time to time.
To end the infinite chain of backwards causation, some serious thinkers have proposed an 'impossible' object: an uncaused cause. From there, without justification, many assign intelligence, purpose and even benevolence to this impossible object: as a further stamp of bigotry and foolishness, they said it was identical to a character in a story they contracted from their ancestors. The uncaused cause became the undesigned designer, but certainly no less impossible.
Almost never in these discussions is any real physics! Beyond the infinite backwards causation chain and the uncaused cause is a third option:
There are four ingredients in the universe: energy, mass, space and time. Einstein showed that energy and mass were equivalent, and also unified space and time into a single manifold, and so there are then two ingredients: energy/mass and space/time. In quantum mechanics energy calculations terms with square roots appear, inviting both positive and negative energies. Realizing that the negative solutions are still valid allowed Dirac to predict antimatter.
Negative energy would look like a hole, an extended degree of freedom: a space. Space/time is made of negative energy in modern physics, so now there is just one ingredient to make the entire universe. And if the summation is done across all observed space the energy sum is virtually zero, within measurement error.
Why is there something rather than nothing? On the largest of scales, there is nothing. There has been no creation.
Lamest post ever, even if is sarcastic.
Who needs a moral compass? I have moral GPS.
Sorry, not believing in something doesn't make you anything in and of itself. Try a contribution to society other than bashing what you don't believe. Your moral compass is broken by its very nature of wanting to squash something that's sacred to others. The only thing you have as a group is non belief. It's silly to think you're anything but anti religion activists.
Pass on your moral compass, and that has nothing to do with religion. You're just too self centered.
No, that's just you being a cry-baby.
atheism = self centeredness. Look in the mirror Colin.
"Your moral compass is broken by its very nature of wanting to squash something that's sacred to others."
So by proselytizing to those with other faiths (as Jesus VERY CLEARLY commands you to do) you're demonstrating a broken moral compass. Or do your rules only apply to you? Let's see, what do they call that? Oh yeah! Hypocrisy.
I'm not proselytizing, I'm just a guy with an opinion about an industry of activists and those monetizing atheism trying to sell me well ... nothing. Unless you count trolling against religion as a product, which they do.
Sorry but if you don't believe that it's your duty to proselytize to other faiths then you are definitely not a follower of Jesus Christ. He commanded it several times. Or do you only seek out those parts of the bible that suit your tastes and lifestyle?
Furthermore, I suppose Jesus' moral compass was broken since HE wants to take away others faiths? Right? Or maybe it has nothing to do with a "moral compass" at all and you now realize that you should probably walk back that statement?
Dawkins...the Pope of the new atheist religion.
Dawkins, a rabble rising writer who fancies himself a philosopher. He certainly does not speak for me.
Also false. I've never once seen Dawkins call himself a philosopher. In fact, I think he avoids that label. He is a scientist and that is what he refers to himself as.
Your tone suggests he offends you by talking about his view of religion. You don't just disagree with him; he annoys you. Now, maybe, you understand a little better how we non-believers feel about those of you who refuse to stop talking about your Christianity, and how it should influence society.
I'm atheist. Dawkins is confronting philosophical questions. He may call himself a scientist, but he is trying to do philosophy. I think he does it poorly.
You seem to be misinterpreting the definitions of scientist and philosopher. They are not exclusive. A scientist who theorizes about "big" questions is a philosopher. A scientist, including an evolutionary biologist, who addresses fundamental problems, such as existence, life origins, and development, is a philosopher. And would be a philosopher who is more educated in the realities of the universe than someone who merely majored in philosophy.
There is a reason that PhD= Doctor of Philosophy. It means that are qualified to address the major issues in a given field. Dawkin's field of expertise is life.
Religion has as much to do with morality as it has with how often you touch yourself! Now, go touch yourself! 🙂
False: there is no pope of atheism.
Stop lying bigot.
Peter is a frustrated bully that touches himself daily, just like the Vatican folks!
"We shouldn't, because if you actually look at the bible or the Koran, and get your moral compass from there, it's horrible – stoning people to death, stoning people for breaking the Sabbath."
You can't define other people's religion for them, use that to explain why their religion is bad, and then claim you are being logical. Logic is a means of reaching conclusions based on premises. If you want to logically argue against someone, you must start with the same premises. If you are arguing the merits of religion or religious moral code, defining the religious moral code of that religion is a prerequisite to the debate, and I think most Christians and Muslims would disagree with his premises, thus rendering his logical argument moot.
Everything about religion and god's was created by humans anyway. So why wouldn't there still be a moral compass?
I never heard of a Jew being stoned to death for missing the sabbath can you poin this out to me? as a regular practice, where it says that is the rule...
Google says Exodus 31:14
"Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death; for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people."
Note that in my post above that I take issue with Dawkins interpreting what the bible and Koran mean, but I think this is what Dawkins was referencing. Many Christians today make various good arguments to why this interpretation of the bible is flawed and I think all Christians disagree with Dawkins's interpretation.
Ah, another case of an American dimwit not actually bothering to *read* the ancient fairy tale he puts so much "faith" in ...
I'd court them right out the door...
Sit down and shut up. We aren't going anywhere.
I am proud to be an atheist. No church on this planet will ever brain wash me.
You have decided to remain ignorant. Good for you.
Actually, atheists have a propensity to know more about world religions than adherents.
If you look at the 2010 survey about religious knowledge,. you will see the proof in the pudding.
No dean, he decided to grow up. You decide to be ignorant.
You have that backwards... Organized Religion has been the greatest promoter of ignorance for millenia...
Instead, you let a bunch of old English guys brainwash you with their pseudo-philiosphy!
How can you possibly call encouraging free and rational thought "brainwashing?" It's the *EXACT* opposite of brainwashing. Seriously, what the hell is the matter with you?
I was a non believer before I even knew who Dawkins was. Why? Because I have a brain and can tell the difference between reality and fairy tales. Religion is outdated. We have science now. Enjoy waiting for your zombie lord to return to earth and make us all question our mortality. Until then, some of us have actual work to do.
Yeah, Dawkins simply confirmed for me what I already had come to understand. He didnt really even say anything new to any of us atheists as much as he did just put into perspective the danger of handling religion with kid-gloves.
"stoning people to death, stoning people for breaking the Sabbath".
He obviously didn't read the bible. Ever hear "whoever hasn't sinned cast the first stone".
That's It, cherry pick the bible.
Try Reading Matthew 5:18 and say that with a straight face.
Or my favorite: Matthew 24:34
Let's see a Christian rationalize THAT verse. (because they can't, that's why it's so funny)
For a man that is supposed to be highly intelligent and intuitive, he has the same dumb arguments where the Bible is concerned. He's a fool. Before a person can bring accurate criticism against anything he must first learn something about what it is he is attempting to criticize. Dawkins has demonstrated time and again, that he has no real knowledge of scripture. He is just another atheist.
who made the misguided claim that he is highly intelligent and intuitive?
The article. Did you even read it?
Dawkins is highly intelligent. He was the Charles Simonyi professor for the public understanding of science at Oxford. But I wouldn't expect that to mean anything to you because clearly you are a dope.
He is an elitist like you; a person that thinks that science is the end all and be all of life.
He also postulates that or origin may come from aliens but has no proof, but dismisses God or a creator. You are both fools.
The bible is nothing more than a series of fairy tales... why would anyone take them seriously unless they had no functioning brains?
Science can't answer everything yet. Germ theory was a scientific discovery of the late 19th century. Before germ theory, many people died of infectious diseases and people said I don't know why he died so it must have been God's will. Then there is the watchmaker idea. Something as complex as our universe must have had a creator – God. But that would require another far more superior creator to create God.
I have some major scientific questions;
Where did the universe come from. Yes, we know there was a Big Bang. But how could something be created out of nothing?
Abiogenesis; the natural process by which life arises from simple organic compounds.
I look forward these being solved by science; not faith.
Science never claimed that it could answer all questions. More, it claims that all modern theories will be amended at some point: none of them is final.
I noticed some people are asking why would God let their family be slaughtered by gunmen. First off, you don't just ask God to protect you from gunmen. Its like asking for him to give you a billion dollars, its can't just be given, it has to be earned. He helps you get what you want. If you wanna avoid gunmen, LIVE IN A SAFE COMMUNITY. Want a billion dollars, WORK FOR IT DON'T BE LAZY. Why did a tornado run over your house, its because its a NATURAL disaster, in other words out of Gods power. Why did the terrorists attack and kill everyone, again, its OUR (the human race's) fault for not nuking them when given the chance. Not god's. God can cure you from cancer if you deserve to be cured not just because you ask to be cured. If you smoked, of course you shouldn't be saved, you smoked knowing the risks. Have a heart attack and you are overweight as well, again your fault. People stop blaming God for your problems and bad times, its the human races fault as a whole.
"its because its a NATURAL disaster, in other words out of Gods power." Besides this VERY non-biblical belief (try reading Job sometime) your entire point seems to be that believing in god doesn't make any difference... which is what Dawkins was trying to say... sooo?
"Athiests, tell me how that believing that matter, every million forms of it, that arose spontaneously from a pure nothing in a vacuum is more rational than believing in a power that made it happen."
- My initial response hasn't shown up to this statement, so if it does, disregard this one...
First of all, atheists matter DOES appear out of nothing in a vacuum. It's called a vacuum fluctuation. They have been observed and recorded. It is not a "belief" that matter can come from seemingly nothing, because that's what ACTUALLY happens. The only thing here that IS "belief", and continues to be a belief, is the assertion that there is an intelligent supernatural being behind it...even though you can't provide a single element of evidence to support that statement. None. Nada.
Secondly, we atheists take the default position, which is that of doubt. We don't believe what we are told unless reasonable data can be presented and can be debated, discussed, made sense of, etc... With people who believe in god, conversely, none of these things apply. You guys insist that you have all the proof you need because the Qur'an, or Bible, or whatever else you read says so and that it takes faith. LOL Yes, indeed. There is a REASON it takes much, much, MUCH more effort to have faith in anything than to see things for what they really are.
The IDEA of a god is abstract in it's entirety. There is nothing measurable, verifiable, or testable about it. Therefore, how can an intelligent person take seriously, in a debate about the universe, a person who asserts that there just must be something else behind everything. Do you know how ridiculous that sounds? Yeah, there COULD be, but until you can back it up, we will laugh at you. Furthermore, until you can back it up, we may continue to completely dismiss your views.
Matter does not come from complete absence of no matter. It does not. A vacuum fluctuation still has nothing to form something. There's nothing there. If something for,s something then it's still nothing that formed it. Answer this. Simply. Where did the singularity come from? Secondly. A good scientist keeps an open mind. You cannot prove there is not a god. But yet you will insist absent proof that the higher intent cannot exist. Really? Prove that.
I can laugh at the idea that a plasma of lightning strikes and proteins caused life from rock air amd water, and until you can show the results verifiably in a lab I might say the same. Meanwhile we humans can't even prolong life already existing for eternity, but a mix of the most common elements unaltered produced conscious human life right now. By " chance"". Yeah we can laugh too.
No you can't. Actually. Put up or shut up. The list of things science has explained away from god exceeds even the most fervent believer's imagination.
Do it yourself. Make life come randomly from a pool or pf elements and lightning. Do it. Or shut your flapping hole.
Science does not explain away god. It show what an ultimate scientist he/ shereally is. He/ she the higher intent is THE ultimate scientist.
By the way, it has to happen randomly. Because there is no god or intent, right? So you take a pool of elelments and lightning ands have it magically metamorphasize into life. Writing to see scientists do this. Without outside interference.
Religion has as much to do with morality as it has with how often you touch yourself! 🙂
The very idea that we get a moral compass from atheism is horrible. Not only should we not get our moral compass from atheism, as a matter of fact we don't. We shouldn't, because if you actually look at Stalin and Pol Pot, and get your moral compass from them, it's horrible – mass genocides, destroying history, culture, and civilization.
Now of course we don't do that anymore, but the reason we don't do it is that we pick out those horrible atheists and pick the ones we like, and reject those we don't like. What criteria do we use to pick out the good ones and reject the bad ones?
The same criteria you would use for anyone else – their actions.
Wrong. Replace "Atheist" with its actual definition and you make no sense. You know how you can tell if you are using a word correctly? ^ exactly.
Certainly glad that Dawkins has ALL the answers (as most atheists claim to have), so that I don't have to waste my time with seeking out any further truth than his own. Goodness...what a time saver! 🙂
Atheists don't claim to have all the answers. In fact, such statements are written in nearly every piece of atheist literature I know. I am the most outspoken atheist I know, and I don't make that claim either. Stop fooling yourself.
Kenny you seem to be stuck on the lie that the answer for everything MUST come from one place and only one place.
Atheism is just another faith-based philosophy - Neither Theists nor Atheists can PROVE their ideas so they proceed guided by their FAITH in their ideas. . It is all kind of silly - Either may be right or both may be wrong !
Some agency or other apparently put this all into place - Beyond that we KNOW nothing.
Atheism is the absence of faith in a god. Learn your facts.
Well, that is a point of view,not a a fact. To NOT believe that God exists is a leap of faith in the wrong direction, but that is just me.
To claim you KNOW there is no god(s) would be positive statement. To say you don't believe god(s) exist is a very different matter. It's basically saying – I have a high degree of confidence that god(s) as described probably don't exist but that is not a declaritive statement and is pending new evidence being brought forward.
Because science can't explain something to your satisfaction right now, you don't accept it but you say you don't understand how god works ie. why children get cancer, and you say it's god's will. Religion can use this circular argument for anything. What makes more sense, The universe was created by physical laws we don't fully understand yet or some guy that waves his hand and it's there? It's called the god of the gaps. Any time someone doesn't understand something it must be divine intervention. The problem with religion is it allows people to stop thinking or asking questions.
The problem of evil is often discussed in philosophy and religious literature. The argument goes like this:
premises: God is good, God is omniscient, God is omnipotent, and bad things happen in this world
corollary: God knows bad things happen in this world and is capable of stopping those bad things
conclusion: If such a god existed, he would stop those bad things because he is good.
I don't believe this is a sound argument. The question hinges on what "good" means. Would this world be a better world if God actively intervened to remove all evil? If not, then the question becomes where to draw the line. That makes the argument a lot more complicated.
Yes – it would be a better world if god intervened directly against evil. What you shoud ask is why an all-powerful being couldn't have done it without evil. For instance – is there sin in heaven? If there isn't – do you still have free will? If there is no sin and you still have free will then there's no good reason it can't be done now.
But all of this is fairly abstract – I cannot imagine looking into the face of starving child or a 12 prositute in Thailand and saying "yup – god is in control and everything is going according to plan. Don't worry – things will be better for you in the next life. Oh? You don't believe in my god – then this existence will be nothing compared to the suffering you will endure in the next." Just can't bring myself to do it...
Atheists proclaim that God doesn't exist and challenge believers to prove that s/she/it does. To the atheist I say "prove that God doesn't exist" because religion and science are different in that religion simply requires one to believe in something without necessarily providing empirical evidence, as in the case of science. Existence or not aside, to the atheists I say: "I, for one, as a fence-sitter, am not condemning you, telling you that you are wrong, and no more wish to be told what to believe in or not, can't you do the same with those whose believe in God?"
After all, by its very definition, God is something humans aren't necessarily supposed to fully comprehend, just as the solar eclipse was to early humans thousands of years ago; it is possible that someday we may have a better understanding through science as to what the unproveable is today (seen by some as "God")
You can't prove something doesn't exist; because nobody has been everywhere in time and space and then come back and had proof of the entire journey that could be analyzed by everyone equally.
The burden of proof lies with the person claiming something to be true. Otherwise; I say to you: disprove Atheism.
As I have said before, I find Dawkins's arguments logically flawed.
My issue with Christianity and many religions is the idea of judgement. We are not supposed to judge others: "he who hath not sinned cast the first stone", yet God rewards those who do good and punishes those who commit evil. Shouldn't God live up to his own ideal? One of the plagues that God sent to Egypt was to kill every firstborn child. Isn't the slaughter of innocents morally reprehensible. I admit I am not well versed in the bible, and I understand that many people have different views within the Christian faith, so I am very open to criticism of my interpretation. I guess I don't understand.
You don't get it. All of us deserve external punishment, but by accepting Christ and his atoning death we can have God live within us and learn to love others in a better way.
the ultimate way.
It is not earned, it is a gift.
So I don't have to believe in god to get this gift? No? So I don't have believe in the idea of sin and the Jesus' death was an atonement for that?
Good to know! 🙂
We see that religion is a force for evil in America. For example, while many major Christian and Jewish denominations want to marry same gender couples RIGHT NOW, a few other churches' leaders have committed criminal acts to deny those affirming and welcoming denominations their right to practice their religion. Mormon and Catholic leaders committed criminal acts to throw the 2008 California anti-gay H8te Vote, and the US Supreme Court has an email Catholic bishops wrote that proves that.
Religions have nothing to do with morality! Do the Italian mafia, Mexican drug lords, Islamic terrorists ring a bell?
I feel bad for Dawkins. Look at how sad he always looks 🙁
You've clearly only ever seen pictures of him from religious sources. Usually he is laughing and smiling.
You can't prove a negative. You can't disprove the existence of Thor or the flying tea pot in the sky(Dawkin's Idea). Most atheists would believe in god if there was any proof. The bible is not proof of anything and really isn't much different than other religious teachings.
World would b a happier place without religion.
If you push an idea onto others. Does that make it your "religion"?
You mean like "in dog we trust," or "help me dog?" 🙂
Religions have something to do with morality? Bigots: ask the Vatican folks whether they touch themselves!


text:
Vice President Dan Quayle was on the hot seat again last month. He was the focal point of the late-night talk shows and comedians. Retiring Johnny Carson thanked him for the "going away present" while another TV personality called him "God's gift to comedians." All this was in reaction to Quayle's passing but purposeful comment about Murphy Brown and unwed motherhood.
The Vice President had the audacity to suggest that erosion of individual responsibility and family values was exacting a horrendous toll on American life, and that television programs that make light of or actually promote such trends are part of the problem, not the solution.
Quayle's remarks, though inflammatory to a certain segment of American society, were hardly without supporting evidence. Sociologists from across the political spectrum are citing the pandemic breakup of families as one of the biggest contributors to a host of social ills from violence to poverty to juvenile delinquency. "Deadbeat Dads," to borrow a phrase from a recent Newsweek cover story about fathers who fail to meet their child support obligations, are growing both in number and in their indifference to the wreckage they're leaving behind.
Newsweek writer Marcus Mabry's words are compelling: "The nagging question for those of us abandoned by our fathers--however good their reasons--is, `How could you?'" He writes of a life empty of role models and filled with haunting feelings of rejection.
Bearing further testimony to Quayle's call for intact, two-parent families is a 1990 study from the very liberal Progressive Policy Institute. It noted that intact families function better than fractured families and suggested that America must apply some sort of "braking mechanism" to no-fault divorce.
But if the Vice President was so correct in the substance of his remarks, why all the flap and ridicule? Because, to put it bluntly, being "factually correct" is often not the same as being "politically correct." He ran afoul of the PC crowd, whose perversion of thought and speech to serve radical liberal ends commands substantial attention these days.
Though Quayle was factually correct in suggesting that fathers are "needed," he was politically incorrect to suggest that women "need" anything. Had he spoken of the need for a tender, nurturing female in every family, his remarks might have earned him the description of "sensitive," the highest praise awarded by influential PC people. But, horrors, he was saying that men might be necessary.
The Vice President was factually correct again for going after the lifestyle portrayed by Murphy Brown, who didn't know for a time who the father of her baby was. Casual sex is a substantial contributor to a long list of social ills, including AIDS. But again, Quayle was politically incorrect. The PC frame of mind demands an acceptance of all lifestyles and behaviors, no matter how absurd or dysfunctional, no matter what the consequences.
Quayle was suggesting that there is a right way, or at least a better way, for children to be nurtured--a notion we can accept about raising corn or cows but for some strange reason not children.
Television both mirrors society and creates models for society. Real people, especially young and impressionable ones, are influenced by the values popular personalities present on the screen. Just as young athletes "want to be like Mike!" (i.e, Michael Jordan), so too do lawyers, designers, journalists, and many other Americans have their heros and role models. Quayle never called for censorship, only a heightened awareness of how traditional values are being so cavalierly trashed, why that's breeding disastrous consequences, and what's needed to restore them.
Constance Horner, now the personnel director at the White House, put it well when she was deputy secretary of Health and Human Services: "There are ancient rules about how to live that have worked for millenia and still work where they are applied. We don't teach these rules any more. We have to start teaching them again. Rules like, honor thy father and mother, get married before you have children, don't eat undercooked pork, carry a handkerchief...."
The Vice President cleverly used a popular television show to command widespread public attention to that very same point. A lesser man would have given up on the issue at the first hint of objection; indeed, a lesser man would never have raised it in the first place. He deserves credit for stimulating a debate, whether or not the PC crowd can cope with it.
The Mackinac Center for Public Policy is a nonprofit research and educational institute that advances the principles of free markets and limited government. Through our research and education programs, we challenge government overreach and advocate for a free-market approach to public policy that frees people to realize their potential and dreams.
Please consider contributing to our work to advance a freer and more prosperous state.


text:
Now that Julian Fellowes' "Downton Abbey" has gone from Sunday-night entertainment into cultural lexicon, his niece Jessica is ensuring devotees don't wander.
That seems unlikely, considering nearly eight million Americans tuned in for the first episode of season three on Jan. 6. Nonetheless, she has penned two companion books, "The World of Downton Abbey" and "The Chronicles of Downton Abbey," to keep fans up to speed about the aristocratic Crawleys and their loyal servants. An established writer and editor in her own right, even she has been floored that nearly 500,000 copies of her books are in print. "I always say that I am hitching a ride on the 'Downton Abbey' train and it's a very nice trip to be on," she said. "You never [would] dare to hope that it would be as successful as it has been. To be on The New York Times best-seller list…it just seems you would have to be too full of yourself to think you are going to do that."
While the third season is done and dusted in the U.K., Americans are just tuning in again to see what is underfoot with The Earl of Grantham and his kin at Highclere Castle. Stateside, beyond the viewing parties that have caught on, 110 PBS affiliates hosted their own Downton Abbey-esque events in recent months to welcome the return of Edwardian drama. The younger Fellowes will soon be making the rounds speaking at private events about that period's social history. "The funniest thing is people will tell me they don't want to know what happens and yet they constantly ask me what I can tell them about what happened in season three," she said with a laugh.
And there are plenty of questions to be asked, since more than 120 million viewers around the globe have tuned into "Downton Abbey" at some point, based on ratings drawn from NBC Universal's international client broadcasters.
"The show is very beautiful and lavish, but their world is becoming more difficult. It is really the beginning of modern society," Fellowes said. "This is not Jane Austen, where people are traipsing around with candles and on horseback. There are problems with war and money, and that feels close to us."
As for the public's unwavering interest, Fellowes said, "What's great is there are a lot of characters who are each given equal weight — men and women above stairs and below stairs. My uncle makes sure each is treated with the same amount of attention and care. You are going to find someone in that mix who reminds you of yourself or someone you know or who somehow moved you."
However true to the times that the cast's costumes are, their authenticity has its limits. "The beautiful clothes are meant to be absolutely authentic, but they are meant to appeal to the modern eye. There are not layers and layers of fancy stuff going on. The clothes in the Twenties started to have very clean lines and were all about beautiful fabrics," Fellowes said. "Viewers will notice the Crawley women will have only three evening dresses and they will wear them more than once. And in the second season, Edith wore a jacket that had been her best in the first season, when she drove the tractor on the farm. It is really good for us to watch how wardrobes were watered down. For us in modern times, these things are good to see because we can't fritter away our money buying things."
PBS seems to have taken a liking to the fashion scene. Ralph Lauren remains a Masterpiece Classic sponsor. And in late March, Jeremy Piven will debut in a new series, "Mr. Selfridge," about the American-born, British-bred retail titan Harry Gordon Selfridge. Julian Fellowes, meanwhile, is busy writing "The Gilded Age" pilot for NBC, and his niece is putting the finishing touches on a literary collaboration with Belstaff. Without giving away the story line, she said her short fictional pieces will reference the same time period as "Downton Abbey" and they will be posted online in the next few months. (The prolific mother of one and stepmother of two has another book out now: "Build a Business From Your Kitchen Table.")
And while designers clamor to dress the elder Fellowes and Downton Abbey-ers for Sunday's Golden Globes, Jessica Fellowes has thus far missed out on any fashion graft. "I would love that. Yes, please," she said.


text:
Tangerine Reef
The Painters EP
Painting With is the eleventh full length Animal Collective album. It was recorded in 2015 at EastWest Studios in Hollywood, California and mixed at Gang Recording Studio in Paris, France with Sonny DiPerri.
For fifteen years Animal Collective has been rewriting the musical map, their line-up and aesthetic shifting with each astonishing release as they continue their pursuit of a new psychedelia. The result: Painting With. Warm and personal, dizzying and high definition, concerned with art and the human experience, and the meeting of both - creating something elemental, joyous, and unmistakably Animal Collective.
- Animal Collective announce new audiovisual album Tangerine Reef
- Animal Collective announce "The Painters EP"; watch the "Kinda Bonkers" lyric video
- Animal Collective share 'Hounds of Bairro', UK & European tour underway
- Animal Collective launch Painting With iOS app, listen to "Lying in the Grass"
- Watch Animal Collective's "FloriDada" video
- Animal Collective announce world tour dates
- Animal Collective announce new album 'Painting With'; listen to "FloriDada"
- Animal Collective announce 'Live at 9:30'
- Animal Collective's 'Monkey Riches'
- Animal Collective to release Monkey Been to Burn Town remix EP


text:
We'll never post without your permission
Login facebook
Login google
Forgot your password?
Not yet register?
Service available Monday–Friday, from 9.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m and from 3.30 p.m to 6.00 p.m
* for info and call costs refer to section Contacts
Riga (83)
Jurmala (13)
Sigulda (2)
Adazi (1)
Bauska (1)
Daugavpils (1)
This site uses cookies. For more information click here. If that's all right, continue to browse.
It may take few seconds