text:
The GMC: There is still no convincing argument

The GMC tweeted a link yesterday highlighting its current position on the Medical Innovation Bill. This was a link to this month’s accountability hearing where the GMC provided oral evidence to the Health Committee in the House of Commons.  At this hearing questions were asked about the Medical Innovation Bill and the responses given represent the official and continuing views of the GMC.

The full transcript of this hearing is available here, with the relevant paras at Q66 and 67 provided here in full.

Q66 Chair: Thank you for clarifying that. Another area of interest at the moment is Lord Saatchi’s proposed Medical Innovation Bill. A number of concerns have been expressed from various  quarters about whether the Bill is necessary and whether it would have unintended consequences resulting in potential harm to patients. Some people have argued that we need the GMC to issue clearer guidance to doctors around the limits on when they can innovate and use unlicensed medicines. Is it your view that this should be a matter for the GMC and regulators, or do you feel that stand-alone legislation is necessary?

Professor Stephenson: One of the things the profession is struggling with on this Bill is the problem that it purports to solve. We have just had published in December the research excellence framework that looks at all the research done by UK universities over the last five years. In that report, UK biomedicine and UK medicine did extraordinarily well and probably punch above their weight; the quality and output of research per pound or per dollar probably even eclipses the United States’.

This is a country that has pioneered gene research, monoclonal antibodies, many new drugs and many new cancer treatments. I am a researcher, an academic; I have been researching throughout my career. Many of us are struggling to see that we would be inhibited in our research by fear of litigation. That is also what the Medical Protection Society and the Medical Defence Union say; they do not have records of cases of doctors being sued because of being inhibited from doing research or doing new things. The UK leads the way in high-quality biomedical research. It has a record that it should be justly proud of, so we are struggling a bit to see why the Bill is necessary.

Q67 Chair: So the GMC is opposed to the Bill.

Professor Stephenson: The GMC is waiting to see. There are a number of organisations in the public domain who are quite clearly opposed to the Bill—I was chair of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges and this is in the public domain, so I am not saying anything new—the Academy of Medical Sciences, the Wellcome Trust and the Medical Research Council. The GMC’s position, up to now, has been that it needs to see the final draft of the Bill. It has undergone a huge number of amendments and the devil is in the detail. The GMC reserves judgment until it sees the final version.

Niall Dickson: Just to expand on that, we absolutely, first of all, come at this from, “Why is this Bill necessary?” We still have not heard a convincing argument about why. We had very serious concerns about some of the clauses inserted as so-called safeguards. For example, having to go to a responsible officer beforehand would seem to us absolutely counterproductive, in terms of both putting responsible officers in an impossible position and also being an inhibitor for innovation rather than something that would enhance it. So we were pleased when it seemed to indicate from Lord Saatchi’s amendments that they were going to drop those clauses. We still have concerns that the Bill, as currently drafted, talks about a doctor having another qualified doctor being enough for them to innovate. Our guidance is clear around people looking at expert opinion, people who are expert in that area and using that, of course, as one of the means by which you decide whether a particular treatment is to be taken forward. As Terence said, our position at the moment is, “Let’s see the next iteration of the Bill.” We still have concerns and there is still a question mark over the big picture, as it were: what is it trying to do? I suppose, in response to the final comment in your introduction, that if there is anything the GMC could do that would be helpful in terms of guidance, clarifying guidance or whatever, we would be absolutely happy to consider it.

The position put forward by the GMC is certainly not one of support at this stage. With countless revisions, amendments, references to the GMC by the Dept of Health and bill team, discussion of their involvement in ways that vary from ROs being responsible for innovative decision-making, to GMC policing non-Saatchi confirming doctors on the acute take and his mythical register; they are probably somewhat concerned, bemused and struggling to ascertain what their role is in all of this, and what all of this is anyway, let alone why.  It’s absolutely fair and appropriate for the GMC to be supportive of the principles of encouraging innovation and best practice, yet reserve final comment until they have considered a final version.

When they had a finalised proposal in 2014 they duly responded to the Department of Health’s consultation.

The GMC response  was thorough, carefully considered and clear.

‘We are…concerned that legislation which aims to clarify and encourage good practice in terms of when medical innovation is responsible could have the opposite effect as well as unintentionally weaken the principles which we regard as fundamental to safe, effective patient care. We take the view, therefore, that legislation is both unnecessary and undesirable.’

The GMC raised a number of concerns and points – as discussed here in more detail. These include a lack of clarity in proposals, hindering responsible innovation, substantially changing roles and remits with ‘unwelcome layers of bureaucracy’.  They noted that legislation as proposed would breach core GMC guidance and would be  an unhelpful addition to current practice, adding new areas of uncertainty for doctors and others while removing important safeguards for patients.

Such ‘a lack of clarity in legislation of this kind can only serve to undermine any safeguards aimed at deterring dangerous practice or reducing the risk of exploitation.‘  And while the Lords were still stuck on what the difference is between innovation and research this month, the GMC raised this at the outset;  concerned that the Bill fails to ‘provide a clear enough definition of medical innovation so as to define where the boundary lies between innovation and medical research. Our understanding is that this bill is aimed at doctors innovating to meet the needs of a particular patient. Whereas our understanding would be that innovation for a whole population of patients constitutes medical research.’

Now, following a fanciful passing-the-buck in the Lords at third reading the GMC are left in the frame over the latest amendment for a mandatory ‘register’.  The Lords considered the options for this invisible database, including the GMC’s role on patrol as Saatchi’s FTP henchmen, and passed the Bill despite none of this having been agreed or scrutinised at all (but it sounds good, and capitalises through association on valid concerns about evidence – entirely unrelated to the Bill – and which it would serve to worsen -so scrutiny is the last thing Lord Saatchi would want).    Of course, the workings of such a register, its parameters, applications, data laws and safeguards, operational capacity, everything, apparently haven’t appeared on the Bill team’s agenda, but the GMC have been squarely, potentially saddled with creating a new professional requirement, guidance, an invisible register and the witch from the wardrobe to Narnia.

Prior to the third reading however, the GMC and Dept of Health had been in communication as Nigel Poole QC has established, and the GMC communicated the view to the Dept of Health that fitness to practise proceedings being brought against a doctor for failing in an online  recording requirement under Saatchi’s Bill ‘does not seem to be a proportionate response.’

Nigel Poole QC, cutting through the gaping voids of legal illiteracy, clinical implausibility and grim potential realities of the Bill, neatly illustrates that ‘perception is reality’ has struck once more.    There has been no agreement from the GMC on any of these proposals, and as without making registration of treatment a professional requirement  a mandatory register as per the latest amendment cannot exist:   ‘A vote for the bill on the basis that it will create a mandatory register would be a vote for a chimera’.

The GMC are left questioning not only an unworkable amendment, but the entire premise behind the Bill.

‘What is the problem that it purports to solve?’ ‘What is it trying to do?’

“We had very serious concerns about some of the clauses inserted as so-called safeguards.”   “We still have concerns and there is still a question mark over the big picture”

“Why is this Bill necessary?”   “We still have not heard a convincing argument about why” (Niall Dickson, January 2015).

This Side of the Truth: Wales and the Medical Innovation Bill

Baroness Ilora Finlay, a crossbench peer in the Lords and a very experienced consultant in palliative medicine,  moved an amendment in the House of Lords Committee debate on 24th October:

39: Clause 2, page 2, line 11, at end insert “but shall only come into force in Wales following legislative consent from the Assembly”

She explained that ‘health and healthcare provision is completely devolved’ in Wales, and ‘the experience of patients under the Welsh NHS falls completely within the legislative competence of the Assembly.’  She acknowledged that the Bill amends the law of negligence, however related concern from Wales about the use of resources, and ‘the possibility of practitioners being answerable as regards legislation that covers England and Wales, when the provision of healthcare is something for which they are answerable to the National Assembly.’

‘Sadly, we have had experience of extremely strange medical practices sometimes being put forward in the past. The Assembly is particularly concerned that, with its move toward prudent healthcare, which is a whole policy direction for NHS Wales, the Bill should not inadvertently cut across the principles of prudent healthcare, the first of which is, of course, to do no harm. ‘

The effect of this amendment would have been that the Bill would apply in Wales only once a legislative consent Motion had been passed in the Assembly, but this was rejected by the government, per Earl Howe:

 ‘the operative provisions of the Bill relate entirely to modifying the law of tort, which is a reserved matter. The Bill can fairly and realistically be classified as relating to a non-devolved subject, and therefore not within the competence of the National Assembly for Wales.’

Now, on one side  Earl Howe raised some valid points. The Bill does fundamentally destroy change the law of negligence, and it certainly provides no new access rights to a treatment for any patients in Wales, nor any new powers for them to be funded.   This is no more the truth than declaring a huge bouncy castle to be a flat line after measuring an inch of tarpaulin (insert varying analogies and units of choice) and actually, it’s worse.    The government’s statement clearly ignores the Bill’s obvious stated purpose, its effect and implications, while riding roughshod over the concept of devolution. It would be laughable if it were not such a serious topic.

The Government of Wales Act 2006 extended its predecessor and the remit of the Assembly, with s103 establishing that the Welsh Assembly Government, known as the Welsh Government since 2011, may pass primary legislation in accordance with Part 4, Schedule 7 and s108 if such power were to be approved through a referendum. This referendum took place in March 2011, and the Assembly can now pass legislation without the consent of UK Parliament, within the 20 specified areas of legislative competence listed in Sch.7  GoWA 2006

One of these areas happens to be, as pointed out by Baroness Finlay, health and health care provision under para 9, Pt 1 Sch.7.   Indeed in Wales there are perceptible differences in priorities, agendas, governance, even legislation in relation to the Welsh health service.  The AWMSG can make commissioning decisions and is not bound by NICE, NHS England et al.  Wales approves and pays for drugs not approved by or faster than England where assessed as appropriate, and has its own policies and consultations regarding access to treatment and responsible approaches to orphan drugs. Its decisions are not undermined for political purposes by schemes such as a cancer drugs fund, but it has appropriate schemes in place which conduct evidence reviews and consider individual circumstances. Wales even decided to legislate for presumed consent in relation to organ donation  (rather than continuing the UK system or introducing any alternative such as my preferred one, mandated choice): agree or disagree, this was done.

It’s therefore somewhat specious to assert that the Medical Innovation Bill would have no bearing on an area which is devolved, for it relates to medical practice, commissioning, resources, budgets, treatment, policies, oversight structures and patient care that are all, subject to any exceptions provided, entirely within the legislative, executive and administrative competence of the Welsh Assembly.  A quick glance at the Department of Health’s consultation document from 2014  provides p30:

Who will be affected?

Potentially doctors and patients, both in the NHS and more widely, in England and Wales.

Where Westminster chooses to legislate on an area of devolved competence, or if a Bill includes any provision that falls within or modifies an area of the Assembly’s legislative competence, by convention Ministers must gain the consent of the National Assembly via a Legislative Consent Motion (LCM) as set out within the Standing Orders of the Fourth Assembly.  A Legislative Consent Memorandum must be issued for an LCM to be considered, debated and passed in the National Assembly. A motion may seek to include a relevant provision in the Bill, and if provided in the legislation Wales may subordinately adopt, amend or annul its application.

Such a Legislative Consent Memorandum was laid down under SO 29.2(ii) on 10 December 2014. A consultation ran from 16 Dec 2014 until 9 Jan 2015, albeit rather quietly. Saatchi‘s close to the wire response contained somewhat misleading and truth-contorting PR, although submissions from the MDU, Patients Association and other organisations provide a more accurate perspective.

It was referred to the Health and Social Care Committee which met 21st January, and their report shall inform the debate in Plenary on Tuesday 3rd February.

The Health and Social Care Committee Report– released today- states:

‘It is important that patients are able to benefit from appropriate innovative treatments where it is in their best interests to do so, but on the basis of the evidence available to date, the Committee is not yet persuaded that this Bill would achieve its stated aim of encouraging such innovation. The Committee is therefore not yet persuaded that the Bill is an appropriate legislative vehicle to achieve its stated aims.’

On the subject of legislative competence it confirms:

‘The Supreme Court in its judgment on  Agricultural Sector (Wales) Bill in July 2014, clarified that the test of whether the provisions of a Bill fall within the legislative competence of the Assembly is simply whether those provisions relate to a devolved subject.’

‘In the view of the Committee, the Bill relates to the devolved subject of health, specifically the treatment and alleviation of disease, illness, injury, disability and mental disorder; provision of health services; clinical governance and standards of health. Neither medical innovation nor the law of tort are exceptions under Schedule 7 to the Government of Wales Act 2006, and therefore no relevant exceptions apply.’

The Bill relates to and will serve to significantly impact on large areas within the Assembly’s legislative and administrative competence.  It will affect the provision of health services, clinical governance, standards of health care, authorisation and commissioning of services and resources, the treatment of any patient and patient safety with resultant un-quantified constraint on associated functions.    It would be an unacceptable violation of political, legal and constitutional obligations for the Welsh Assembly to be ignored by Westminster and the Department of Health, due to the far reach and influence of the noble Lord, on this extremely significant potential legislative change that certainly does pertain to areas within the Assembly’s competence.    It’s remarkable that the Bill team and DH were not in more appropriate dialogue with the Wales Office and Welsh Government in time to correctly consider Baroness Finlay’s concerns.

The overwhelming opposition across the UK has continued from all expert bodies and organisations: medical, legal, charitable, research and patient groups are united in opposing this very misguided, unnecessary, unscientific, botched, rushed and dangerous Bill and this opposition is maintained by all key organisations despite attempts to mislead, coerce and force through deeply illegitimate legislation with illusory amendments as political devices.   It would be unthinkably irresponsible for the Assembly to pass the LCM on the 3rd.   It is not in the interests of Wales at all for this rushed, unmandated and unnecessary Bill to go through, a point not lost on the Committee.

The National Assembly must now take heed of its consultation findings and the careful consideration and work of its Committee in Plenary next week and Ministers subsequently in the Commons.

Honestly? patients deserve better

Lord Saatchi, between referencing his bereavement as the motivator for his bill, writes in the Telegraph that honest opposition to his bill has dispersed contentedly. Not so.

I experienced a very bad bereavement, indeed more than 5 significant ones within around 18 months, and it certainly did influence my decisions post-hoc. I had intrusive flashbacks of drawn out and agonising deaths, I was plagued by second guessing what I could have done or said differently, what I could have done to have altered the outcome, did I let them down by allowing them to do that, did I let them down by not insisting on more?  I crumbled entirely, indeed so much that I can never apologise adequately for the extent to which I fell apart. The experiences I went through and the profound and haunting loss had such a detonating influence on me that I tore my previous life to shreds, annihilated my job in a place with good colleagues, polite receptionists, comfy chairs and sensible pension schemes which gave out free cake and drinks and went back to the beginning, to medical school, to become a doctor. I also teach students and health care professionals, help others who have experienced traumatic bereavements and give time I don’t have in my committed work for a national charity.

So, I give a nod of respect to Lord Saatchi’s stated vision and aim and feel protective of his tenacity and drive to make a difference, make it matter and continue his strongest bonds and meaning through these activities, effecting positive, meaningful change.  I am however a firmly opposed critic, which doesn’t sit easily with me.

Why am I critical?   I do not admire how he appears to choose to abuse his power, wealth and political influence to exert control over a legislative catastrophe in his name. I do not admire deliberately falsifying the law, misrepresenting medical practice and nasty spin on his opponents. I couldn’t bear his misuse of grieving and aggrieved relatives as a PR victory.  I find his total lack of mandate from those whose opinions should matter and the lack of legitimacy in the process simply unconstitutional, arrogant, hubristic, chilling, recklessly harmful and misleading.

I’m critical because, with such power and influence, such drive to make a change, I am left wondering just why Lord Saatchi ignores the views of the medical profession who tell him this is unnecessary and undesirable, repeatedly ignores esteemed medical law experts who unanimously tell him he’s wrong on the law, ignores the views of patient groups and charities who are fearful of the consequences and ignores defence unions- whose role is to defend doctors on the front line and provide guidance on best practice.  Overlooking the failure to consult before his bill was ever launched, I can’t get past the failure to listen to an overwhelming body of opinion saying his idea was not based on the right law, was not required and would not help doctors or patients.        For, under his proposal, nobody wins. Doctors aren’t entirely able to be protected from being sued, for such is the likelihood of satellite litigation that many more doctors and their colleagues may be dragged into the churning mill of the legal process. They will also be swamped by his procedural red tape and lose the remaining crumbs of clinical autonomy trying to follow a procedural hoop-athon. It’s written to provide a benefit for only those who are truly negligent or even exploitative of desperation and hope-in-hype, which is precisely why some have termed this a ‘quack’s charter’. This is not however inert for non-quacks. It will have procedural and practical consequences for the vast majority who are committed and excellent doctors,  rendering them handicapped, bureaucratised, pressured yet uncertain of potential liabilities in an array of legally creative and expensive ways; and possibly, if Friday’s musings are to be followed up, it may leave them wide open to GMC fitness to practice investigations, and all in the name of Maurice Saatchi, the PR and advertising legend with no legal or medical background at all.

Patients do not gain any rights of access to a drug under this bill.  All they stand to gain is the knowledge they will have immeasurable difficulty in ever obtaining any form of redress for serious harm and suffering, serious care needs unmet by the health service, caused by defective drugs; for who is liable for these under the bill?; or an entirely negligent decision or unreasonable basis to treat. Their relatives gain the comforting knowledge that they ‘tried everything’, against the best possible knowledge of science, that could easily end in death, suffering and the removal of any quality of life for the patient.  They gain the knowledge that the ‘results’ of such experimentation are meaningless, and will help no future patient. A dehumanising, agonising and barbaric accolade.

Indeed, the bill doesn’t even solely apply to those with cancer, or nearing the end of their lives. This allows full-on experimentation, expressly and entirely unscientifically, and attempts to act as a defence, while simultaneously adding bureaucratic mayhem and managerial mandates for the good doctor, that still don’t combine for any logical purpose.  It does not make sense.  If it made sense, I’d be supportive and the medical defence organisations would be supportive.

It trashes the law and trashes the importance and respect for any scientific integrity and for a patient’s quality of life.  Patients deserve better than this. It’s frustrating, as in his esteemed, powerful position I would listen and put my name to something that might genuinely help others.  I’m still not honestly sure why he won’t.


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Truncated: length

WARC-Type: response

text:
World's Smallest 1/4" Teeny Rainbow Micro Jawbreakers - 5 Lb. Bag

Current stock: 0

World's Smallest Rainbow Microbruisers Jawbreakers.
These soft and fruit-flavored candy rounds in bright colors are soft easy to chew!

They are even smaller than you can imagine!

Jawbreaker Diameter: 1/4".
Sold by the 5 Lb. Bag.
There are approximately 1000 pieces per pound.

Made in the USA by Sconza.

Also available by the 10 Lb. Case >>  Get More, Pay Less!

Ingredients: Sugar, Corn Syrup, Natural & Artificial Flavors, Confectioners Glaze, Carnauba Wax, and Artificial Colors (Titanium Dioxide, FD&C Yellow 5 & 6 Lake, Yellow 6, Red 3 & 40, Red 40 Lake, Blue 1 Lake Blue 2).
Allergy Information: Made on shared equipment with peanuts, tree nuts, milk, soy, sesame seeds and sheat-containing products.

Additional Info

Additional Info

warcinfo:
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-171-10-108.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2017-09
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for February 2017
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf


text:
Reviews: Your will be first City: Basel Views: 5

Ask any Question or submit Review about this place.
Hotels near this place

Place photo  Burgfeldersrasse 5 4055 Basel

Pronails Basel on the map.

Places near me Search Places *

* Move map and press "Search Places"

We send message to your email when someone submit review or ask a question.

Upload Photo of this place

Submit review Post complaint
about Pronails Basel

(please do not use urls)

- You cannot change or delete your post.

- Your review can be removed by moderation team.

- Spam and advertisement will be deleted.

Ask any question about this place


text:
Three Terrorist Bombings Kill 50 Civilians in al-Sayyeda Zainab, Near Damascus

31 January، 2016
Damascus countryside, SANA
terrorist bombing-al-Sayyeda Zainab-Damascus 1

Death toll from three terrorist bombings that rocked l-Sayyeda Zainab town in Damascus Countryside earlier on Sunday has climbed to 45, a source at the Interior Ministry said.

The source earlier put the number of people killed in the attacks at 30, in addition to 110 injured, some of them were reported to be in critical condition.

The attacks, which hit in Koua Soudan area, were caused by a car bomb and two explosive belts, according to the source.

Terrorists detonated the car bomb at the bus station in Koua Soudan area, and after people gathered to help the injured, two suicide bombers with explosive belts blew themselves up at the site, the source explained to SANA.
Massive material damage was caused due to the three bombings, added the source.

The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) claimed on its pages on social media sites responsibility for the three explosions.

The Cabinet condemns the bombings

The Cabinet later condemned the three terrorist bombings, with Premier Wael Halaqi saying in a statement that the aim of such terrorist and “cowardly” crimes is to raise the morale of the defeated terrorist organizations in light of the great victories made by the Syrian Arab Army in different areas.

Al-Halaqi reaffirmed that such terrorist crimes will not deter the Syrians from continuing the process of national reconciliation in different areas, particularly in Damascus countryside.

Terrorism-supporting states are responsible for these terrorist crimes, the premier added, calling for a genuine international will to fight terrorism and that pressure be put on those states to halt supporting such terrorist acts that pose a threat to international stability.

Foreign Ministry: Terrorist bombings in al-Sayyeda Zainab aimed at disrupting Syrian- Syrian dialogue
31 January، 2016
Damascus countryside, SANA

Foreign and Expatriates Ministry addressed two identical letters to the UN Secretary-General and Head of the UN Security Council on the terrorist bombings that targeted al-Sayyeda Zainab area on Sunday.

In its two letters of which SANA received a copy on Sunday, the Ministry stressed that the terrorist attacks which targeted al-Sayyeda Zainab residential area in Damascus countryside come as part of the attempts of the terrorist organizations which are supported by governments of foreign countries such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to disrupt the current attempts to start a Syrian- Syrian dialogue led by Syria.

The Ministry said “Armed terrorist organizations detonated on Sunday afternoon a car bomb at a bus stop at Koah al-Sudan overcrowded neighborhood in al-Sayyeda Zeinab area in Damascus countryside, then the bombing was followed by suicide bombings by two suicide bombers who blew themselves up with explosive belts among medics and civilians who gathered to rescue the victims.

These terrorist attacks caused in an initial toll the death of 50 locals and more than 105 injured persons, some of them are in critical conditions, added the ministry, in addition to causing material damage to the houses and infrastructure in the area.

The Foreign Ministry stressed that these terrorist bombings are part of the attempts by the armed terrorist organizations which are backed by foreign countries’ governments such as Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar to disrupt the current attempts to start a Syrian- Syrian dialogue led by Syria , spread terror among innocent civilians and to raise the morale of the armed terrorist organizations that are being defeated every day due to the great successes achieved by the Syrian Arab army in restoring security and peace to the areas where armed terrorist organizations are active.

The letters added “What caught our attention is that the perpetrator of this crime had said in a statement that the bombing comes in support of the opposition delegation coming from Riyadh to participate in the talks with the government delegation in Geneva”.

The Ministry said that the government of the Syrian Arab Republic reaffirms the need for the Security Council to take deterrent measures against countries that support and fund terrorism in implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions.

The Ministry also stresses the need to move away from politicization and double standards in dealing with combating terrorism, to respect the principles of the international law in this regard and to Support the efforts of the government of the Syrian Arab Republic in combating terrorism.

The Ministry concluded the letters by saying that the government of the Syrian Arab Republic calls on the UN Secretary General and the UN Security Council to condemn today’s bombings and other terrorist bombings that target the safe civilians in some Syrian cities and neighborhoods.

Qabas/ Manal


text:
Second Life to get country based filtering system?

25 06 2007

According to an interview with Linden Lab CEO Philip Rosedale in german magazine “Focus” Second Life is getting a filtering system based on countries.

When they talk about criminality in Second Life Philip claims that the community does govern itself in most cases without any money or other incentives involved. He then explains that Linden Lab is planning a fitering system which allows the government of individual countries to define which laws apply to their residents. As an example he mentions that e.g. Germany could define that only residents older than 18 can get in. He couldn’t tell though when it will be introduced.

Now for me there are some open questions. “which laws” to apply is certainly beyong just limiting access to minors as it also involves limiting what you can see and do in world. Limiting access to Second Life by age and country also would involve a verification mechanism which goes beyond the discussed age verification. It would mean that Linden Lab also needs to verify nationality (which is probably possible with Integrity). Moreover this verification would be mandatory and happen during registration for a Second Life account.

So a lot of questions come up here which “Focus” apparently missed to ask (instead they put again a photo of an ageplay scene next to the article with the caption “Child pornography in Second Life created a world-wide scandal”. Was it that world-wide actually?).

Reading this and having never heard of such plans before and reading the context I wonder if they haven’t mabe misunderstood something. Before that statement he talks about private island and how they can govern their estate themselves and the next sentence begins with “Therefore we want to include a filtering system into our software”. So maybe the english of the reporters wasn’t that good and they have mistaken the plans for a new abuse report system and age verification for a tool for real governments. Then again they have the example of germany and they stress the words “real governments” so maybe it is planned indeed.

In any case, I hope that somebody can clarify because these plans seem to be a bit more than just age verification.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Book Review: Virtual Worlds – Rewiring Your Emotional Future

25 06 2007

It’s time for a book review! Actually this one got sent to me for review and as it’s IMHO a good book here’s a review for you 🙂

I am speaking about the book Virtual Worlds – Rewiring Your Emotional Future by Jack Myers and Jerry Weinstein in which they take a different look towards virtual worlds.

‘Different’ here means that it’s not so much about how technology will evolve (it will of course) but what impact virtual worlds will have in the future (like 25 years from now) and more importantly how they will change us emotionally.

What I found quite refreshing was that it does not start to explain virtual worlds first (of course to some part it explains certain aspects later on) but simply states their existance and jumps directly into the topic. And of course it’s full of Second Life as this is one of the leading virtual worlds right now in many aspects. But also There.com and others are mentioned.

Jack Myers also seems to have understood what virtual worlds are all about (which I am still waiting to happen for the average journalist) and he also qoutes the right people with insightful comments. So they write that virtual worlds are indeed real for residents (and no game) and quotes our well-known James Wagner Au on that and let him also explain that e.g. Sony had a good start but only gives a 30-minute diversion while in the future they have to be more interactive. He also gives some good advice to marketers out there so in order to make use of virtual worlds for them it should be a good read for them, too.

But it’s not a marketing book, it’s sort of about the cultural basis of virtual worlds and how they might affect us.
The main topic of the book is actually emotions. The authors investigate in how we handle our emotions nowadays and how this might change with virtual worlds in the future. They speak of rewiring our emotional DNA. Of course this is a somewhat provoking theory and maybe raises some discussions.

Discussions though is wanted and brings me to another interesting point about this book. The book “Rewiring Your Emotional Future” is a book with audience participation. So comments and insights are welcome and will be published in the quaterly update along with interviews with key figures of virtual worlds.

Moreover the last 2 chapters are the start of a novel and readers are invited to write an additional chapter form which Jack Myers will select one and publish it again. Then the next readers are asked to write chapter 4 and so on. Authors of these chapters will even receive revenue from future movie and game rights (sounds as if this will happen for sure ;-).

Speaking about the story I have a little complaint though. The story introduces Jenny and her avatar Ynnej*# which she built herself. The problem I have with that avatar is that it seems to be a person in itself and this is not really what I see what an avatar is. An avatar for me is more of an extension of myself in the virtual world and when a client someday asked “And you control that figure?” then I wondered what they mean because actually _I am_ that figure. Thus I found it a little strange when Jenny had a little discussion with her avatar. I would think of that more as an intelligent bot. Of course that’s just a detail but maybe an important one.

So all in all a good book in which the authors maybe see it right when they claim that someday virtual worlds have an impact in that they can radically alter politics and society. It might be so or not but to discuss it is certainly interesting.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Philantrophy in Virtual Worlds – Discussion with Linden Lab CEO Philip Rosedale and Jonathan Franton, President of the MacArthur Foundation.

21 06 2007

Jonathan Franton

So if you are interested about philantrophy in virtual worlds you should not miss tomorrows (Friday) event starting at 8am SLT on the Annenberg Public Diplomacy Island (main event starting at 9am SLT).

Philip Rosedale (aka Philip Linden), CEO of Linden Lab and Jonathan Franton, president of the MacArthur Foundation will meet for a discussion.

To quote from the press release:

“One of the key tenets of our mission is to explore how technology can be used to build bridges and understanding between cultures, be they between or within virtual worlds or between countries,” says Joshua Fouts, Director of the USC Center on Public Diplomacy. “We’re delighted to host Jonathan Fanton and Philip Rosedale as the MacArthur Foundation launches a yearlong series of conversations with the Second Life community.”

“What’s key about this conversation is that it will be two-way — not a monologue, but a dialogue,” Fouts adds. “It won’t be a conversation to sell people on a brand, market a new product, or to make money on ideas, but a conversation to ask the residents of virtual worlds a fundamental question: What matters here?”

(Read the full version here).

So here is the schedule for the event:

Pre-Event Mixer 8:00 AM SLT – 9:00 AM SLT
Live DJ Cher Harrington spins original SL music

  • with Etherian Kamaboko, Hep Shepherd, Komuso Tokugawa, Rich Desoto, Ronnie Carr, Sarah Mac Band, Smily Raymaker, Virtual Live Band
  • Free t-shirts and badges
  • Information on MacArthur Foundation program areas and grantmaking
  • Original SL music information displays

Event 9:00 AM SLT – 9:45 AM SLT

  • Join Philip Rosedale and Jonathan Fanton for a conversation about philanthropy in virtual worlds
  • Short recorded video presentation
  • Welcome and introductions
  • Live voice stream
  • Questions from the SL audience

Post-Event Reception 9:45 AM SLT – 10:30 AM SLT

  • Live musician Hep Shepherd
  • Free t-shirts and badges
  • Information on MacArthur Foundation program areas and grantmaking
  • Original SL music information displays

Additionally I will stream this event live to my BlogTV show.

You can find more information on the MacArthur webpage.

Disclaimer: The event location was built by my company COM.lounge in cooperation with Sitearm Madonna and IBM

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

Interview with Eggy Lippmann aka Jorge Lima

16 06 2007

This interview with long-term residen Eggy Lippmann was made a while back, after the SLDEVU in London in December 2006. We talked about the past and future of Second Life and also mentioned the opportunities and problems of an open source client (which wasn’t released back then but was talked about at the SLDEVU event).

Eggy Lippmann interview

[Click here to download the Quicktime version]

(produced by COM.lounge TV)

censorship at flickr (again)

14 06 2007

(Logo by Cem Basman)

Somehow one should seem to get used to censorship on flickr. Has it been NIPSAd accounts regarding Second Life snapshots, so it’s now a safe search which you cannot disable as german resident.

The safe search functionality has been introduced while getting rid of NIPSA as part of the new filtering mechanism. You now have to flag photos which might offend (such as nudity) with appropriate flags. As viewer you can then decide which photos you want to see as result of a search (e.g. if you want photos marked as moderate or restricted, too).

With the advent of the internationalization of flickr, users from Germany, Singapure, Hong Kong and Korea now have a localized version but in turn they are not able to disable the safe search functionality because of the terms of service.

To me it’s still not really clear why they did that but in fact they did (it might have to do with some decision at Yahoo though, maybe somebody can elaborate).

After many protests on some flickr groups (as e.g. here).

After a while Stewart Butterfield of flickr responded with this statement:

We really apologize for the delay in responding to these threads. The whole Flickr team has been in ongoing discussions, trying to hammer out a solution.

We have absolutely no intention of censoring the content on the community’s behalf. It is always been our intention that Flickr members participate to whatever extent they want and are as free as possible create their own experience. Currently, switching the SafeSearch function off is not available for German members. It is a really complex situation — we have been in deliberation on this for a while, and we had to make the decision whether or not to leave Germany and the German language out of the international launch.

The decision came down to the wire, but we decided to include Germany. We’re still hoping that that was the right decision. It definitely was not a decision that was made lightly and there is no intention to annoy, frustrate or inconvenience Flickr members in Germany. Rest assured, we do hear you loud and clearly (painfully loud, even) and are doing our best. We hope to have more to say soon.

So he doesn’t really say something.

Now I wonder

  • why is Germany (and the other countries) so special, why aren’t we allowed to see e.g. photos containing nudity if we choose to do so?
  • why is this bound to the internationalization? If we wouldn’t have e.g. a german version we would still be allowed to see all content?
  • why isn’t this communicated earlier. “german version” sounded cool but a german version with only safe search doesn’t. And we didn’t had a problem before with an english version. It’s definitely worse now than before.

And unfortunately everybody is on flickr which created that great community. I was searching for alternatives back then in the NIPSA-case but there weren’t really that many. Also getting the community to move completely to another service is probably not possible.

Too bad, flickr always makes trouble.. I just bought my pro account for my Tao Takashi account but now I think it was a mistake. Maybe I shouldn’t trust flickr in doing the right thing. So far I got disappointed twice.

(german version here)

Technorati Tags: , , , ,


text:
Greetings from Tara – In Search of Happily-Ever-After…

New from Entangled! Click here to Read an Excerpt or to Purchase Your Copy

I have a confession – I love happy endings. When I settle in to read a good book, I savor the journey to the happily-ever-after. A great love story brings joy to my soul, the sense that I’ve gone along for the ride with a hero and heroine who’ve fallen in love and committed to each other despite the most daunting obstacles in their path.

My new release, The Highlander Who Loved Meis a suspense-filled historical romance set against a backdrop of adventure, treachery, and danger. An American novelist in Victorian Scotland, Johanna Templeton lives her own adventure when she teams with a seductive Scottish rogue to save a kidnapped child. Here’s an introduction to the story:

He may be her fiercest ally…or a scoundrel waiting to betray her.

Johanna Templeton is on a life-and-death quest. Swept into an intrigue that rivals the tales she pens, she joins forces with a Highland rogue to find the treasure that will save her kidnapped niece—a prize the Scot seeks for reasons that have nothing to do with ransom. Engaging the Highlander in a sizzling battle of the sexes, Johanna shields her heart.

Connor MacMasters, spy for Queen Victoria, is a man on a mission—keep a legendary gemstone from an evil man. Trailing an American novelist who holds the key to the treasure should’ve been simple, but Johanna awakens feelings he’d long thought dead. Torn between duty and desire, he wants her in his bed, but loving her would be a fool’s game. Blasted shame his heart doesn’t agree.

Click here to read an excerpt from The Highlander Who Loved Me.

Thank you for stopping by my website. Please subscribe to my newsletter for updates on new releases, contests, sales, and other news. It also goes without saying that I’d love to hear from you. Please connect with me on Facebook or Twitter and let me know what you think of the happy endings I’ve created.


text:
Tax & Accounting Blog

Need to Know

Accounting Firms, Checkpoint, CS Tax & Asset Management Solutions, Technology January 12, 2016

Integrating Checkpoint® with UltraTax CS® Puts the Information You Need Right Where You Need It

Timothy D. Evans, CPA, MS Tax, has been a tax and accounting professional since 1981, so he remembers when online information searches were in their infancy. “They were expensive and rudimentary,” says Evans, the tax partner at Vicenti, Lloyd & Stutzman LLP in Glendora, Calif.

Technology has come a long way since then. Evans has been using Thomson Reuters Checkpoint for years, and considers it a great tool for all the primary source materials and expert analysis he needs.

“If I have a tax question, it’s where I turn first,” he says. “With the Intuitive Search function, you just type in a bunch of words and usually get exactly what you are looking for. Having it all be searchable is much easier than the old paper books we used to have. It’s a fast, easy way to get information.”

When you consider that Vicenti, Lloyd & Stutzman handles about 2,000 tax returns a year, it’s easy to imagine how quickly any time savings can add up.

Checkpoint got even better for Evans about two years ago, when the firm began using UltraTax CS. Checkpoint and related services, including RIA Form/Line Finder, can be integrated with UltraTax CS, providing users with instant access to targeted guidance and analysis.

“It’s seamless, because you don’t have to leave UltraTax CS to look up whatever you need to know,” Evans says.

Evans particularly likes being able to go directly to IRS instructions on a given topic, and also uses Line Finder integration, especially for unusual situations he and his team don’t see every day.

“It saves time,” he says, “and because you don’t have to stop and think about where to find what you need, you don’t lose your train of thought.”

For the same reason, Evans is also a fan of Checkpoint’s built-in help and how-to center.

“It keeps the process going in the preparation and you don’t have to stop, so I love that,” Evans says. “There are so many ways to move around and get things done. The way Checkpoint and UltraTax CS work together is terrific—and it’s fast.”

An integrated solution is the reason Vicenti, Lloyd & Stutzman moved to Thomson Reuters products in the first place, starting with Practice CS. They’re now using it for all their main applications, and have even provided input to UltraTax CS developers—a level of collaboration Evans appreciates. Given the firm’s integrated approach, it’s not surprising that Evans highly recommends using UltraTax CS and Checkpoint in tandem.

“Checkpoint and UltraTax CS are superior to anything else I’ve ever seen,” he says. “I can’t think of a situation where I couldn’t find the information I needed in Checkpoint, and it’s very consistent with how the tax law works. Anyone who is using Checkpoint but isn’t using UltraTax CS is really missing out on a lot of flexibility and integration.”


text:
, , , , , , , , ,

you should come and see it, i love it there. it is new and fresh, you get music and art (ok, yes…music is art, too …) and if you sign up you have the option to design your own profile page (own backround image and so on…) and meet a lot of interresting and art interrested people…including lady strawberry!!!

see you there!!!


text:
Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×
Google Operating Systems Cellphones Handhelds Upgrades Hardware

Google Outlines Feature Set For Android 2.2 305

evdotorrey writes "Google announced new features and improvements for Android 2.2. New features include Flash and HTML 5 support, faster browser performance using the V8 engine, Microsoft Exchange support, a Portable Hotspot feature that makes your phone a Wi-Fi hotspot, and many more exciting features." An anonymous reader adds some more on the new release, codenamed Froyo: "Google claims the operating system will be from two to five times faster thanks to advances made in the compilers and the Dalvik virtual machine it uses, and how it is ported to new processors and platforms. On the enterprise front the new operating system comes with full support for Microsoft Exchange, including access to the global address book and the ability to translate native security features to mobile handsets. APIs have also been added to allow controls such as the automatic wiping of missing handsets and other remote management features. Google is also making its voice translation and search APIs open to developers, and showed off an application developed for the handset that allowed real time translation from English to French."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Outlines Feature Set For Android 2.2

Comments Filter:
  • Anonymous Cow (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2010 @01:56AM (#32289948)

    Even though I've seen these features a hundred times, I can't help but take another peek at what the future without apple in my pocket may hold.

    • Re:Anonymous Cow (Score:5, Interesting)

      by beav007 ( 746004 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:34AM (#32290156) Journal
      I just bought an HTC Desire, which is running Android 2.1. It's absolutely fantastic to use.

      I have but one complaint. The RSS reader is a PITA to put a feed into unless it's a predefined/preapproved feed.

      Dear Google;

      Please, can we have an icon/button somewhere on the browser that shows that there are RSS feeds associated with that web page, and an integrated way to subscribe to them?

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by a.ameri ( 665846 )

        Try NewsRob. It syncs with Google Reader and is just a pleasure to use.

    • Re:Anonymous Cow (Score:5, Insightful)

      by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:53AM (#32290272)

      Even though I've seen these features a hundred times, I can't help but take another peek at what the future without apple in my pocket may hold.

      Every time I to look into my future I find the screen blocked by the sheer amount of cash I have by not having apple in my pocket.

      • by RMH101 ( 636144 )
        This is a fair point - the cost of Apple devices is significantly higher.
        I just got an HTC Desire for £192 on a 24 month contract at £15/month. Compare to Apple, where my 3G cost me similar money, but on a £35/month contract. On the plus side, I sold my 3G for just over £200 second hand, so I'm win-win.
        When I was debating the switch from Apple to Android, I thought "I can wait for the new iPhone release, pay a couple of hundred quid for the handset and be on a £35/month co
  • by Kethinov ( 636034 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @01:59AM (#32289964) Homepage Journal

    I love everything about Android except one thing: Vendor/carrier OS upgrades.

    As someone who wants to switch from iPhone to the HTC Evo 4G in June, I have one message to Sprint/HTC/whoever is responsible: Please make Android 2.2 available as soon as a stable build is out. If it takes months after stable 2.2 is released, I'm gonna be a very vocally dissatisfied customer.

    So please vendors / carriers, do us this courtesy and we'll all love you and happily part with obscene quantities of money for quality service.

    • I thought you could pretty much install whatever you wanted in your Android.

      Are "alternative" OSs so inferior compared to the official upgrades?

      • by Tukz ( 664339 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:19AM (#32290084) Journal

        You can, if you install a generic Android.

        Vendor or carrier specific firmware isn't anything new.
        Symbian has done it for YEARS.

        The carriers custom fit the firmware, either removing certain things or add carrier specific applications.
        It's no different with Android phones.

        Which mean what when a new Android is released, the vendors and/or carriers have to custom fit the new version to their own and then release it to their customers. As you can probably imagine, this can take quite a while.

        Ever since I started with Symbian many years ago, I've reinstalled with generic firmware as fast as possible.
        If HTC is as slow as I've heard, I'm gonna do the same when I get my HTC Desire next month.

        • by RMH101 ( 636144 )
          Data point: the HTC Desire usually ships with a pretty fast ROM. I had the UK T-Mobile one and it was as quick as standard. Only customisation was a T-Mobile boot screen and a "Web and Walk" logo overlaid on the browser icon. It did, however, have a "feature" where the headphone output level was too low. I flashed the vanilla HTC OEM ROM to fix this, but speed isn't normally an issue with the latest HTC devices.
          The HTC Sense UI is actually pretty damn nice, I prefer it to the Nexus One. I accept I'm g
          • by Tim C ( 15259 )

            Data point: the HTC Desire usually ships with a pretty fast ROM. I had the UK T-Mobile one and it was as quick as standard.

            While that's true (I have a Desire on T-Mobile too), I think what the parent poster meant was slow *in releasing updated versions*. I've heard that too, and may go stock Android when 2.2 comes out. (Though I may wait and see if my workmate who also has a Desire does first, to see how he gets on with it...)

            • by Tukz ( 664339 )

              heh, I don't even understand how he could have thought otherwise. I never said the ROM's was slow.

              The guys over at [] had a talk with HTC.

              HTC said phones released this year, will get Froyo in the second half of 2010.

              [...] if your phone was launched this year, we will most likely offer an upgrade for it to the Froyo version. This includes popular models like the Desire and Droid Incredible as well as hotly anticipated phones like the Evo 4G, MyTouch slide and upcoming models. We will announce a full list of phones and dates once we are closer to launching the upgrades. We are working closely with Google and our other partners to ensure we have the earliest access to everything we need to provide a complete and solid Sense experience on Froyo. We expect to release all updates in the second half of this year but can't be more specific yet.

              Source: []

              • by RMH101 ( 636144 )
                that's what comes of reading this via my HTC Desire! Reading comprehension fail...! Good news on the HTC update though. Hopefully this'll mark an improvement in the speed of response.
        • by L4t3r4lu5 ( 1216702 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @03:54AM (#32290610)
          The first thing I did with my Touch Diamond 2 was install a custom ROM. Stock / Vendor ROMs are almost always out of date before shipping, and updates from the vendor are few and far between. I don't expect this to be any different on Android phones.

          There's a good community at xda-developers for Android phones. Check them out.
        • by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 21, 2010 @04:07AM (#32290668)

          You can, if you install a generic Android.

          Not on Motorola Milestone (the european version of Droid). Motorola has locked its bootloader so you can't install a generic Android image, unless you sign it with Motorola's keys.

          There's an online petition about that issue:

        • by ducomputergeek ( 595742 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @04:25AM (#32290766)

          But the real question is how long until carriers start treating Android phones like any phone before it only authorizing their firmware to operate on their network and going to their "Market place"? I see that day coming soon rather than later as most carriers in the US don't want to be turned into dumb pipes. Talking with friends in Australia, it appears this has already happened down there with Android phones. They have to purchase apps through the carrier store, it blocks the Google Market Place.

          The carriers great metric is "Revenue per customer". That is what they want to maximize. They saw how AT&T got pretty much blind sided by the success Apple has had with the iTunes App Store. They would rather see that 30% commission on each app sold than Google or independent developers.

          I've already heard some complaints from friends with different Droid phones not being able to run the same apps. One person downloads an App that works great on a HTC, but a person with a Motorola can't down download the same app due to incompatible hardware.

          As a developer, we're already charging 4x's the amount to develop for Android vs iPhone. Why? Because with Android we have test against 4 software versions and a number of different handsets and that adds a lot of time/cost in the QA phase. Not to mention keeping up with all the hardware is getting to be expensive for a small shop.

          • by Tukz ( 664339 )

            The carriers in my country, let the customers roam pretty free.

            Only one major carrier is still SIM locking the phones, the rest doesn't.

            So I don't see that changing anytime soon.
            Besides, we got laws against this in my country.
            Not allowed to lock a phone permanently to a carrier.

            Sure, the carriers release applications that most likely only work on that carriers network, but that's just a feature if you use that carrier.

            I see the problem with the applications though.
            I didn't know it was that much of a problem

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by hedwards ( 940851 )
            Some already do. If you've got one through AT&T it's fully locked down. That was my only gripe about my backflip. Motorola had their locked down phone in the Milestone. One of the main reasons why I bought my Nexus one was that it would be getting all the updates promptly up until some point in the future when it's discontinued. It's really the only phone that guarantees you that it will be getting prompt updates for things that Google thinks are important.

            I'd expect most other phones to take quite a
      • by RMH101 ( 636144 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:21AM (#32290094)
        The OS is a little different. If you buy a Google handset (G1, G2, Nexus One) then you get the update pushed OTA as it's released. If you buy another vendor's version, you have to wait whilst they customise the latest OS for their handset. Specifically, HTC sell Android handsets with their "Sense" UI. Historically they've been somewhat slow to release updates - HTC need to compile a new build, and they take their sweet time to do this. Whilst you can flash alternate ROMs (waves to to devices - e.g. Cyanogen - you need to be reasonably tech-savvy to do so, and if anything goes wrong you've lost your warranty. Couple this with some vendors taking extra steps to make it deliberately difficult to install third-party ROMs (I'm looking at you, HTC Desire!) and the upshot is that to upgrade safely/easily - wait for the vendor to release an update. To be on the bleeding edge you can take a (small) risk and install third party ROMs.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I got a HTC Hero.
        It still runs Android 1.5 But in the US they got it upgraded to 2.1 a few days ago. And here in Europe we will get the 2.1 Update sometime next month.

        So android 1.6, 2.0, 2.1 and now 2.2 has been released in the time it takes HTC to upgrade from 1.5 to 2.1
        So it will still be a release behind.

        Sure I got a 1.5 phone, but the way that they update softwre today, and develepers develop to the newes OS and not old OS (New API, features etc.)
        Then the OS realy need to be upgraded basic when it's re

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      Just a heads up since you want to buy an Evo - I was considering breaking my contract with AT&T and ditching my iPhone 3GS for an Evo until I found out that there's a $10 / month fine on any Sprint customer who has an Evo. Even in 3G only areas too - you can use the same Android 2.1 on it that you can on the Samsung Moment that Sprint has, run the same apps, and use the same amount of bandwidth, but you pay another $240 over the two year contract. Sprint's BS justification for this is that it has a bi
  • My question: On Android 2.1 and earlier, copy-protected apps are kept in a directory only root has access to, /data/app-private.

    Since apps are now installable on the memory card, are copy-protected apps only able to be put into internal memory, or is there a nasty new DRM mechanism put in to guard the apps that are on the SD card?

    • by w0mprat ( 1317953 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:15AM (#32290052)
      No DRM. Not having root access in stock Android carrier/HTC will sufficiently prevent casual copying of paid apps to another device. After market ROMs or a ROOT access package will most certainly have this restriction lifted. You are not DRM-locked into not being able to copy/backup your paid apps, but you will void your warranty to do so.

      If there is, it will be rather easily removed with superuser permissions.

      By far the best feature of Android is the thriving community of after-market OS builds. It's like upgrading your phone for free. I'm not affiliated, but right now feel obliged to shameless endorse CyanogenMod's G1/G2/Nexus One custom ROMs []
      • by mlts ( 1038732 ) *

        Files stored on the SD are not protected by being root-only, unlike files in main memory. So, either copy-protected apps will not be able to be stored externally, or they will have some form of encryption-based DRM, or varying strength. It could be something as simple as AES-256ing the .APK files and storing the key in a root owned directory with 700 perms, to a system similar to WM-DRM which has yet to see a crack for more than a week or two.

    • by kyz ( 225372 )

      According to []

      * The .apk file is saved on the external storage, but all private user data, databases, optimized .dex files, and extracted native code are saved on the internal device memory.

      * The unique container in which your application is stored is encrypted with a randomly generated key that can be decrypted only by the device that originally installed it. Thus, an application installed on an SD card works for only one device.

      * Only new rel

      • by mlts ( 1038732 ) *

        Thank you. I didn't see that even though I was digging through the Android docs. The encryption is essentially the same method that Windows Mobile 6+ use to encrypt files on the SD card.

        The mechanism is excellent -- a user can move apps from the SD card to the internal memory at will, provided there is enough room.

  • Wifi tethering (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Thanshin ( 1188877 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:11AM (#32290018)

    I wonder what will be the effects of millions of people carrying wifi hotspots.

    If I put my happy optimistic hat, I can imagine a next generation that forgets about ownership of connection and creates a giant web of constant wifi access to the web.

    A world where every little gadget can access the web as you approach, by using your phone.

    • Re:Wifi tethering (Score:5, Interesting)

      by LingNoi ( 1066278 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:43AM (#32290198)

      It's already happening, check out OLSR being ported to the android []. With this your android can connect to an OLSR mesh network.

    • by Troed ( 102527 )

      I wonder what will be the effects of millions of people carrying wifi hotspots.

      It will make location services relying on nearby hotspots instead of GPS and/or cell towers to become much more interesting at least.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by adolf ( 21054 )

      I have real, functional Wifi tethering on my 2.1 Droid, complete with basic or absolute access control, notification of new connections, et cetera. It works well.

      Even though I have all access control and encryption disabled, so that anyone within earshot could use it freely, I leave it turned off unless I'm using it myself. This, despite the fact that I also carry an iPod Touch (which certainly benefits from having an always-on connection), and could easily lock the connection down to just the iPod and my

      • Check out my post futher up about OLSR. It already does this by connecting to a mesh network. Also take a look at MANETs which is what OLSR is.

        The problem isn't the protocols. The software already runs on android! The problem is that not enough people are using it on their routers.

        I doubt that going to change unless someone goes out and installs routers all around town or a manet protocol is installed by default on router firmware.

    • A world where every little gadget can access the web as you approach, by using your phone.

      It is easy to limit access like now with Bluetooth appliances. Just do not accept any new connection without user intervention. Actually I wonder what the advantage of WiFi over BT may be for handsets, considering BT was designed exactly for this purpose: short-range communication between devices.

  • by oldhack ( 1037484 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:12AM (#32290028)

    Have we audited the Android code enough to know that it's not phoning the mothership sending god-knows-what? Do we know there is no other "oops we didn't mean to"? It's one thing to have gov't spooks snooping on you, wholly another to have a private corporation piling dossier on you.

    Paranoid? Pretty damn well justified when we are talking about Google, I say. Ask them about their data collection policy.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by w0mprat ( 1317953 )
      You deserve mod points if I had them because you touch on an important issue that just doesn't seem to be discussed publicly. Is the scrutiny of open source submissions good enough? How are sources gauged for trustworthiness? It's always bothered me how much security is assumed in the million eyes principal.

      Sure Android is open source, but Google's default applications are closed source. In fact developers of after market mods have gotten into trouble for including apps such as Google Maps, Gtalk etc. ht []
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by mjwx ( 966435 )

      Have we audited the Android code enough to know that it's not phoning the mothership sending god-knows-what?

      I'd say so. I pretty much know what my Android phone is sending back by casual observation, my contacts are synced with Gmail, it asks if I want to participate in X program (no) or send my location to google (no).

      But hey, if you don't believe me do an audit yourself []. The thing about secret plots is that the more people you involve in them the harder they are to keep secret.

  • I'm still waiting for 2.0 for my G1. Why should I care about 2.2?

    Yes I know I can root my phone and shoehorn a modded OS on there. I really don't want to hear about your 1337 hax. I want a supported update.

    • Cyanogen has a release of 2.1 for the Dream(G1) and Magic(myTouch 3G). It is currently at version 5.0.7-Test6.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by w0mprat ( 1317953 )

      I'm still waiting for 2.0 for my G1. Why should I care about 2.2?

      Yes I know I can root my phone and shoehorn a modded OS on there. I really don't want to hear about your 1337 hax. I want a supported update.

      I won't badger you about aftermarket ROMs and how awesome I think they are (because I do), but I will say some major mods are actually well supported with frequent updates. Carefully done , you can back up your stock rom, test drive the aftermarket ROM and if need be roll back to the stock software. I also understand that re-flashing the official firmware is sufficient to retain your warranty should you need to make a claim.

  • I don't suppose it will be made available for the G1...
  • TFA!!!!! (Score:5, Funny)

    by adolf ( 21054 ) <> on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:19AM (#32290078) Journal

    First, I read the comments. There were three. I modded them all up, because they all seemed useful within the confines of Slashdot's moderation parameters. I frequently have mod points, apparently because people think my moderation is fair. However, by posting this (I refuse to jump through hoops to post as AC), those moderations were undone. Sorry.

    The reason is simple: After moderating, I read TFA. Therein, I see that about every third sentence ends with an exclamation point! This artificial excitement really annoying!

    For instance:

    With Android 2.2, the Chrome web browser will have full Adobe Flash Player 10.1 support to allow you to view flash-based websites, play flash games, and more! This is something that not even the iPhone is capable of doing!

    See what I mean! It's a very loud article!

    It's like there aren't any there any others [] to pick from!

    That said, I might be qualified to be an Android fanboi! For instance, today at work, I used my phone to help me align and plumb two antenna systems! The day before that, it helped me cook a stew! And on Monday of this week, it even walked my dog!

    But this quantity of exclamatory remarks is unsettling! Please, timothy, given your lineage here, I expect better editing!

  • by Qubit ( 100461 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @02:43AM (#32290202) Homepage Journal

    Okay, sure, Google cuts some deal with Adobe to suck up the Adobe Flash Player code and bake it into builds of Chrome. Or Chromium (whichever one is their proprietary version of the browser).

    But why would they describe that support as existing in Android? I thought that Android was Google's FOSS-licensed, linux-kernel-based OS.

    When Google, HTC, and other people release a phone running Android, they invariably pile all kinds of proprietary stuff on top. Other options would be nice, but they don't seem too interested in that.

    Maybe it's just this particular news site being imprecise, but I'm concerned that Google is trying to peg Flash support via this browser to all Android phones. I mean, it's great for people who want to run the software, but it's shifting Android away from a FOSS project to Yet Another Proprietary Stack.

    C'mon Google, you're chock full of smart engineers who want an open web, so please make sure that Android stays an open stack.

    • by D H NG ( 779318 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @03:23AM (#32290450)
      FYI, Flash support won't be built into Froyo. You download the Flash plug-in from the Marketplace as you would any other app.
    • by Fnkmaster ( 89084 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @07:34AM (#32291654)

      There are other options. You can run Android just fine without any of the Google-branded proprietary apps (Google Maps, Google Earth, Gmail, etc.). They are kind of cool, whiz-bang things but you don't need em.

      Their mail client is Open Source, and there's a fantastic fork called K9mail that is the most used app on my iPhone. The browser is based on Webkit and there's nothing that forces you to download/use/enable the Flash plugin. You can even download Mozilla Fennec (the alpha build at this point, but hey) if you prefer. There are customized versions of the Contacts and Phone apps out there.

      As a matter of fact, there are community-built ROMs out there that don't have the Google stuff built in. Or you can easily enough remove them from your phone if they bother you.

      If you want complete freedom and choice, buy the Nexus One, there are ton of custom ROMs for it. Don't buy the carrier-subsidized locked-down phones. Despite the fact that Google is shifting to a retail distribution model, the Google branded phones aren't going away. The Nexus One is currently the best GSM smartphone on the market in the US (Desire isn't available here, EVO 4G isn't GSM). Get it now, build your own ROMs or use other people's ROMs, hack-away, be happy.

  • by Sockatume ( 732728 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @03:21AM (#32290432)

    I guess you could say that the new compiler arrived... just in time?

    • by Tukz ( 664339 )

    • Yes the iPhone is one of their major competitors. Other posts talk about the iPhone bumped to third place - is that on handset lists of on OS lists? I have the feeling when I look around me that the iPhone is the nr 1 choice for smart phones. I see that one everywhere it seems.

      Google's phones are likely technologically ahead of the iPhone: tethering, being WiFi hotspot, probably faster processor, better screen, and whatnot.

      The one-million-dollar (literally) question remains:

      Is it going to be as user frie

  • First things first (Score:3, Insightful)

    by robinvanleeuwen ( 1009809 ) <> on Friday May 21, 2010 @03:25AM (#32290464) Homepage Journal

    Well great,

    the new android is almost on the shelves, but nowhere i read if they are gonna support setting
    a proxy for WiFi. Up until now you are unable to make use of a proxy. As far as i can tell this feature
    was there in 1.x (with or without the use of 3th-party apps) , but in 2.x it is not possible to set a proxy for

    Despite the 344-and-growing comments on [] ,
    in which the feature was first reported missing on Nov. 12 2008 (Two thousand and eight!!!, we're in 2010 now)
    They have failed to respond or shed some light on this. And looking at:

    Status: New
    Owner: ----

    It doens't give me a lot of convidence that they are really looking into it.

    Don't get me wrong, WiFi thetering is great and all but compared to making use of a proxy for WiFi,
    if you are dependend on a (corporate) proxy due to missing signal from your provider, slow connections
    (3G or even G),are at the whim of corporate policy or you have to pay extra for data per mb to you provider,
    it's pretty insignificant to have WiFi thetering if you are unable to use the internet on droid at all...

    So my 2ct's are first things first, you can't not support proxy for WiFi and push your OS as someting that
    can be used in an corporate enviroment...

  • by trawg ( 308495 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @03:39AM (#32290534) Homepage

    The official Android developers blog post [] is probably more interesting than blogspam

  • Article sucks (Score:4, Insightful)

    by rubypossum ( 693765 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @05:22AM (#32291004)
    on Google's giant hairy man-breasted teat. To quote from TFA:

    >> Android 2.2 will be the first mobile operating system that will have native flash support.

    Excuse me, you mean that Android will finally get Flash, following in the footsteps of the non-corporate bastardized Maemo for Nokia N900 smart phone which has had native flash support for months, if not a year. Obviously this Google fanboi didn't want to pass the word along. After all, somebody might go out and buy a phone you can get flash on TODAY. Instead of in some indefinite time in the future, for a phone that's locked down to the bastards at Sprint. Ehhhh.
  • by tyrione ( 134248 ) on Friday May 21, 2010 @05:42AM (#32291112) Homepage

    One of the many improvements that Android 2.2 will bring is better performance when running applications. They have made improvements to how applications are compiled that allows apps to run more efficiently, which ultimately allows the applications to run faster and smoother than ever before. Android's web browser Chrome, has also been improved with a 2-3x javascript performance boost using the V8 engine which allows web apps to load a lot faster with Android 2.2. During the live demonstration using Sun's standard Spider javascript test, Chrome on Android 2.2 out performed the same phone running Android 2.1 and even outperformed the Apple iPad running Safari!

    I sure hope it outperforms Safari on iPad seeing as it's not remotely near the WebKit nightly that's been in development for nearly a year.

Receiving a million dollars tax free will make you feel better than being flat broke and having a stomach ache. -- Dolph Sharp, "I'm O.K., You're Not So Hot"


text:
Gillmor Gang: The Other Shoe

Next Story

This Week In The Digital Panopticon: Google And The Right To Be Forgotten

The Gillmor Gang — Robert Scoble, Keith Teare, Benedict Evans, Dan Farber, and Steve Gillmor — finally have a full picture of the two major mobile platforms. Google I/O certainly lived up to expectations as a checkoff of the major food groups: wearables, carables, set top boxables, and so on.

Android L and iOS8 conspire to reflect the convergence around the notification bus, each effort spurring the other on to maintain a culture of innovation. The speed with which last year’s model (Glass, Plus, and iPod) is being jettisoned may be difficult for the media to consume, but it sure makes for a protein-packed Gang.

@stevegillmor, @kteare, @scobleizer, @dbfarber, @benedictevans

Produced and directed by Tina Chase Gillmor @tinagillmor

Live chat stream

The Gillmor Gang on Facebook


text:
Crunch Network

A Closer Look At The Silicon Valley Vs. Wall Street Talent War

Next Story

PayNearMe Lays Off Employees as It Forges Into New Territory

Gordon Gekko is but a distant blip in the rear-view mirror for this generation’s best and brightest. In lieu of Wall Street, today’s top graduates are flocking to Silicon Valley and other top technology hubs in droves, drawn in by visions of challenging the status quo with world-changing apps and the opportunity to make a real, lasting impact in the world. Talk of the “Silicon Valley vs. Wall Street Talent War” continues unabated — and popular wisdom suggests that you need to be anchored in Silicon Valley to do meaningful work these days.

While it’s an increasingly common narrative, is it accurate? In a word, no. The “Us vs. Them” mentality that this debate often takes is misleading; the reality is that there is an increasing opportunity for seemingly disparate sectors to unite through the budding opportunities and innovations in fintech.

Before digging into that, though, let’s look at some relevant statistics that fuel the “Silicon Valley vs. Wall Street” debate.

All Roads Lead To Silicon Valley?

The technology sector is experiencing a renaissance that rivals even the frenzied, dot-com-driven heights of the late 1990s and early 2000s. The rate of graduates flocking to technology has steadily increased on an annual basis — as has the number of students enrolling in STEM fields.

The rate of MBAs from the nation’s top universities who go into finance, on the other hand, has been shrinking on an annual basis, even as the sector has largely recovered from the 2008 crisis. Consider, for instance, that 27 percent of graduates from Harvard Business School entered finance in 2013 — a lower rate than during even the depths of the recession in 2008 and 2009.

These numbers obscure the broader marriage between finance and technology, which can be evidenced in the massive growth of investments in financial technology, or fintech; according to a recent Accenture study, global investment in fintech ventures topped $12 billion in 2014 — more than three times the $4.05 billion invested in fintech companies in 2013. This is indicative of the financial service industry’s increasing adoption of emerging technology, fostering a greater interdependence between the tech and financial services industries.

With this in mind, the question shifts to what financial services institutions can do to attract more of the young talent that has recently gravitated toward Silicon Valley startups, and how they can harness the momentum of fintech in particular.

It’s Not About The Money

Simply put, the tech sector is where millennials feel they can make the most impact. It’s where innovation happens and outside-the-box thinking is part of the current zeitgeist. Be it transitioning from an Ivy League campus to the Google campus or joining an up-and-coming startup with a chance to become the next big thing, the tech sector has clearly surpassed finance as the more appealing career path for many graduates of top institutions, even if the average tech salary falls short of those offered by most financial institutions.

Working at a Silicon Valley startup allows people to have a direct impact and “own” results in a meaningful way, whereas Wall Street is traditionally more bureaucratic.

This last point is not to be overlooked. While salaries and associated financial options remain a major recruiting tool, there has undoubtedly been a change in the way talented graduates are approaching the job market.

More than salary, they want to be impactful: a part of building something new, or changing the fundamental nature of a given process. Financial services is generally seen as one of the more traditional, if not lucrative, industries within the broader market — but it’s rare that you see the words “innovative” or “agile” mentioned in context with a large financial institution in the way that you do with a Google, Apple, Facebook or any host of small startups.

This is not meant to say that the key for financial services institutions looking to lure back talent is simply a matter of changing their Casual Friday policies (a practice Wall Street has almost universally rejected, anyway). It’s more a matter of changing the way organizations are structured and operated, and encouraging more agility in terms of technology adoption and an openness to changing long-tenured processes. Technology is and has always been a critical enabler of finance.

Financial institutions are thus increasingly focused on shifting the perception that they are change-averse and embracing the “try and fail and try again” ethos that has permeated Silicon Valley and other high-tech hubs. Working at a Silicon Valley startup allows people to have a direct impact and “own” results in a meaningful way, whereas Wall Street is traditionally more bureaucratic.

When Two Become One

The coming years will see a deepening of the relationship between finance and tech — and a broader acknowledgement that you don’t have to be based in Silicon Valley to do interesting and meaningful work.

The writing is already on the wall. Consider the uptick in traditional financial institutions like J.P. Morgan, Fidelity and T. Rowe Price increasingly participating in high-profile funding rounds for fast-growth private tech companies in addition to (and often in place of) traditional venture capital firms. The rate of IPOs has slowed in recent years, so it makes sense that mutual funds and other institutional investors are increasingly turning to private technology companies as a means to boost returns for investors.

There’s also an increasing trend of Silicon Valley companies that are changing consumer-facing financial services processes and working with, not against, banks to do so. This is most notably happening in the lending, payments and crypto-currencies spaces, with companies like Prosper and Coinbase.

The future leaders of finance have been weaned during the Information Age. They’re an on-demand group accustomed to seeing immediate results. If a change is needed, it can and will be made. If a design is bulky and inefficient, it’s time to blow it up and develop something simpler.

This isn’t the first instance in which financial services have been more change-averse than other industries; just 30 years ago, it was unthinkable that floor trading would be automated (anybody remember the Open outcry system?). Today, you’re hard-pressed to find a floor broker at many of the major exchanges. Likewise, it’s hard to imagine that Wall Street existed before the advent of Bloomberg Terminals — but there was once a time when traders were indeed forced to price bonds with pencil and paper, and trade exclusively over the phone.

The same type of conversations are happening in finance today, and they are becoming louder and louder. A new generation of investors and brokers has penetrated the ranks of financial services organizations, and I expect a similar sea change from the world we’ve known for the past 20 years.

There’s a tremendous opportunity present for those financial institutions willing to push back against the “Us vs. Them” mentality currently ascribed to Silicon Valley and Wall Street, and instead embrace meaningful partnerships where the hoodies and the suits work together in a more impactful, transparent way that fosters increased adoption of new technology.

There’s no doubt that the times are changing; those who are quicker to recognize and adapt to this new reality will be the ones to come out on top.

Featured Image: Bryce Durbin


text:
Is Texas closing in on Daje Johnson

It's been a wild recruiting stretch for Pflugerville Hendrickson ATH Daje Johnson. A long-time TCU commitment, the Texas Longhorns reached out to Johnson last week and quickly set up an official vi...

Premium Content

Subscribe today to read the full article and get everything Rivals has to offer.

  • Member-only message boards
  • Exclusive highlights and recruiting interviews
  • Exclusive coverage of Rivals Camp Series
  • Breaking recruiting news


text:
Tech commits lead Argyle to W

DALLAS -- The most successful high school programs on a yearly basis are those rooted in discipline. Talent on top of discipline makes for a team that can start thinking about the playoffs even tho...

Premium Content

Subscribe today to read the full article and get everything Rivals has to offer.

  • Member-only message boards
  • Exclusive highlights and recruiting interviews
  • Exclusive coverage of Rivals Camp Series
  • Breaking recruiting news


text:
Posts Tagged ‘laws’

Trespass and Occupy

In Current Events, Economics, History on November 15, 2011 at 05:23

Bonus Army Attacked 1936 tekwala-com.jpg

Occupy Oakland Routed 2011 from CBS News

One of the strategies that Occupy Wall Street has used to bring media and political attention to their movement is civil disobedience, namely, through trespass. Trespassing has been used by movements throughout the history of the United States and today it takes on even further significance through permanent trespass called “occupation”. One strategy authorities have used to counter these social movements, as they have the Occupy Movement, has been the use of trespass laws to squelch dissent.

During the depression of the 1890s, Jacob Coxey, an Ohio businessman, led a group of unemployed to D.C. to demand jobs. People marched from all over America, but only about 500 made it to the capital to encamp. However, before Coxey could make his speech, he was arrested for trespass. One statement from the 1892 Progressive Conference seems eerily familiar:

…we meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge of moral, political and material ruin. Corruption dominates the ballot-box…. The people are demoralized;… public opinion silenced…. homes covered with mortgages, labor impoverished, and the land concentrating in the hands of capitalists. The urban workmen are denied the right to organize for self-protection, imported pauperized labor beats down their wages… The fruits of the toils of millions are boldly stolen to build up colossal fortunes for a few, unprecedented in the history of mankind…. From the same prolific womb of governmental injustice we breed the two great classes:  tramps and millionaires. (link)

Those words, uttered over 100 years ago, mirror the economic troubles we are faced with today: record foreclosures, long term unemployment and a widening income gap. The work of millions is stolen for the fortunes of a few.

During the Great Depression, there was another group of trespassers that got the ire of the government, the Bonus Army. In 1924, Congress voted to pay $3.5 billion to veterans of WWI. Congress decided to pay the bonuses over 20 years. However, during the Great Depression, many of the veterans were having difficulty finding work and decided that they needed their WWI bonuses right away. So in 1932, about 10,000 vets marched on Washington, D.C. to ask for their bonuses up front. A bill to pay the veterans was passed in the House on a vote of 209-176. However, the Senate voted it down, 62-18 before it could get to President Hoover who had promised to veto it.

Army Chief of Staff MacArthur was convinced that the march was a communist conspiracy to undermine the government of the United States, and that “the movement was actually far deeper and more dangerous than an effort to secure funds from a nearly depleted federal treasury.” But that was simply not the case.

The government’s response to the occupation of the Anacostia Flats across the Anacostia River from the Capital was to send in the military, under the direction of Douglas MacArthur, and evict the veterans. The demand for their pay was too much for many. Without firing a bullet, but with ample use of tear gas, MacArthur proudly removed the desperate veterans who were asking only for the wages promised them.

Just like the Occupy Movements have been called communist and socialist  by the right, the Bonus Army was called communist by Army Chief of Staff MacArthur:

Army Chief of Staff MacArthur was convinced that the march was a communist conspiracy to undermine the government of the United States, and that “the movement was actually far deeper and more dangerous than an effort to secure funds from a nearly depleted federal treasury.” But that was simply not the case. (link)

In the Flint autoworkers strike of 1936-7, the workers surprised management and took over the Fisher Body Plant on Dec. 30, 1936, trespassing on private property. And they called on the people of Detroit to occupy public space to show their support.

“The union called for supporters to gather at Cadillac Square in Detroit as a show of strength. The overflowing crowd of 150,000 supporters surprised even the union sympathizers and gave the union the self-confidence they needed to show its power and solidarity over its management “oppressors.” Other union workers joined in sympathy strikes, closing plants in other states.”

Many blacks and some whites trespassed in white only lunch counters in the South during the Civil Rights Movement and sit-ins, a popular form of protest in the 60s and 70s, were also utilized by free speech movements. The American Indian Movement occupied Alcatraz Island as a way to protest treatment by the United States government.

Times have changed, and the goals of the protesters are not so obvious today. The current Occupy Movement is not only a fight for a living wage, but for something grander. The economic forces we fight today are as powerful, but they are also more diffuse and harder to understand. The Coxey Army wanted jobs. The Bonus Army wanted the money promised them for their service during WWI. In the Fisher Body Plant in Flint strike of 1936, the workers wanted the eight hour day, a fair and living wage, and job security. Others trespassed for civil, political, social, racial and economic equality. Trespassing is one of the only ways disenfranchised groups of people can get the attention of non-responsive governments and massive corporate controlled media conglomerates.

By trespassing, we are saying that mega-corporate occupation of the power and wealth of this nation is illegitimate. We are here to take our power back and do our best to divest from an economic system that harms us and our fellow citizens. Wealth made through market manipulation, deregulation through legalized bribery of Congress and usury must end. Wealth made on the backs of workers, home owners, students, immigrants, and others who suffer hardships due to this economic usury must end. Wealth accumulation without regard to the economic well being of the people and the nation has to stop if we are ever going to have a sustainable economy that benefits everyone and not just the 1%. Until this happens, the cycle of boom and bust that only benefits those who can manipulate Wall Street and threaten economic collapse to extort bailouts will continue unabated.

Thus, we also fight to repeal Citizens United and tax Wall Street trade as well as making the top tax brackets pay their share in taxes for the services and infrastructure this nation creates for their companies to thrive, among others issues.

The standard counter-social movement strategies are being used to repel the occupy movement today, including labeling the groups communist (tired as that is) or Nazi and using trespass laws to cite, arrest and removal of occupiers.

One reason the brutality of the police in Oakland, Berkeley, Denver, Portland, Tulsa and elsewhere is so shocking is because the protesters have framed their struggle in counter to the excesses of the state and corporations, and the police, as corporate/state operatives, demonstrate these excesses.

If you like the status quo, I ask, why do you support the banks over the people? Do you like paying to bail out the banks thus leading to the lay off of teachers and other public servants? Do you like corporations that give multi-million dollar bonuses and pay zero taxes? Do you prefer corporations buying elections because you weren’t really using your vote anyway?

Think about what you are supporting before stereotyping and dismissing those that obviously care about people and the state of this country. Support an Occupation in your area.  And if you already support the Occupy Movement, spread the word.

Tex Shelters