During a press conference this Tuesday, Pep Guardiola revealed that he doesn’t expect a more mature version of left-back Benjamin Mendy.In football there are players like Benjamin Mendy, who are different from the rest, they have a more jovial demeanor as they can’t seem to have an off switch and manager Pep Guardiola knew this when he first signed the Frenchman from AS Monaco.Ever since he got to Manchester City, this player has always shown a predilection for the more active way of life, the one that isn’t necessarily as private as perhaps the manager would like.Pep Guardiola has learned to separate the player from the public persona with Mandy and other players, but the Frenchman is the one who has given him a more challenging relationship.From the very start at Manchester City, Pep Guardiola repeatedly stated that he never really appreciated the social media life that his defender led, Mendy vowed to slow it down a bit but he never really did it.Now after a couple of years have passed, it appears that the Catalan manager has finally given up on his pursue to stop Mendy from being so public with his life and he has finally accepted the Frenchman for who he is.🗣 | Pep Guardiola: “Benjamin Mendy is in the squad tomorrow (against Burton). Maybe on the bench.”#FPL #FantasyPL #FFScout #GW24 #mcfc pic.twitter.com/6y3xXxq5NU— Fantasy Football Scout (@FFScout) January 22, 2019On Tuesday, when asked about this public persona that Benjamin Mendy has on all his social media accounts, Guardiola explained why he doesn’t have a problem with it anymore.The Catalan manager will be happy as long as the payer responds on training and on the pitch, he doesn’t care about the stuff outside work anymore.“I am delighted with Benjamin,” Guardiola told a news conference via Four Four Two.“I am sad because we were not able to play him because of injuries but that sometimes happens.”“The way he is training, the way he is in the locker room… you cannot imagine how much the people love him. I am delighted – I just want to use him more! That’s all.”“I am not unhappy with Mendy [using social media heavily]. I am not here to change his mentality. His way, the way he lives… is what it is. When we bought him, we knew it.”Liverpool legend Nicol slams Harry Maguire’s Man United form Andrew Smyth – September 14, 2019 Steve Nicol believes Harry Maguire has made some “horrendous mistakes” recently, and has failed to find his best form since joining Manchester United.“So, when we are talking about training sessions, always it’s perfect but he is active on social media. He likes to be. It is what it is.”“We try to convince him, but I’m not his father! [I tell him]: ‘Be focused on your job and what we have to do. You are young, and you can be one of the best left-backs, but it’s up to you,’” he added.Pep Guardiola: Benjamin Mendy ‘needs to be focused’ to achieve potential https://t.co/OYoao9X0Z6 pic.twitter.com/SsCpZHlnCg— Prem Brew (@prembrew) January 23, 2019After hearing Pep Guardiola speak frankly about Benjamin Mendy’s lifestyle, thinking about the poor way in which Jose Mourinho managed this with Paul Pogba at Manchester United is inevitable.The Portuguese manager truly hated this side of the French midfielder, they were always at odds for several reasons but one of the biggest disagreements they had was due to an Instagram story that Pogba posted after Manchester United was eliminated from the FC Cup by Derby County.We could see Paul laughing on a short video right after the Red Devils were eliminated in penalties, this was the origin of the already famous argument between the two of them on next morning’s training session after the infamous defeat.Pep Guardiola takes a very different approach to this with Benjamin Mendy, he prefers to understand his players instead of trying to limit him and this has brought a very peaceful relationship between the two.Even if Pep Guardiola doesn’ like the whole circus that is the social media lifestyle, he understands that times have changed and everybody has to adapt to the new era.‘I’m not his dad’ – Guardiola won’t change much-loved Mendy https://t.co/3P2ThhhBvl pic.twitter.com/KZXk9nDGia— Cleansheet (@Cleansheet) January 22, 2019What’s your take on players who love using social media for everything? Please share your opinion in the comment section down below.
Chelsea striker Olivier Giroud revealed that Gonzalo Higuain’s arrival certainly darkens his future and opened the door towards a potential return to France.The French World Cup winner left his homeland in 2012 for Arsenal after helping Montpellier beat Paris Saint-Germain to the Ligue 1 title.Last year then saw Giroud make a controversial switch to Arsenal’s London rivals Chelsea after a lack of game time at the Emirates Stadium.However, under coach Maurizio Sarri, Giroud has fared little better with just six starts in the Premier League this season.This has led to reports linking Giroud with a return to France with both Marseille and Lyon.Speaking to CANAL Foot Club, prior to Higuain’s arrival last week, Giroud indicated a return to Ligue 1 could happen even if his priority is to remain in England.“I will never make people unanimously satisfied with me,” admitted Giroud.Solskjaer praises Harry Maguire after Man United’s 1-0 win Andrew Smyth – September 14, 2019 Ole Gunnar Solskjaer singled out Harry Maguire for praise after helping Manchester United keep a clean sheet in their 1-0 win over Leicester City.“There is a little part of regret and frustration. The public expects a goalscorer to score goals. I’m the fourth best goalscorer of French football and nobody can take that away from me.“The coach makes [Eden] Hazard play nine which is detrimental to strikers. But he is the best player I’ve ever played with.“If the club decides to get another striker, like Higuain, it will certainly darken my future at Chelsea.“I’ve never said no to a return to France. Lyon and Marseille are two great clubs. My priority is to stay in the Premier League though.”Higuain made his Chelsea debut on Sunday in their 3-0 FA Cup win over Sheffield Wednesday at Stamford Bridge and was replaced by Giroud in the 82nd-minute of the fourth-round clash.The Blues will next take a trip to the Vitality Stadium where they will face Bournemouth in a Premier League match on Wednesday with kick-off set for 20:45 (CET).
Gaurav had been suspended by the university administration last year for his alleged role in the violence that singed the campus in 2017 over the issue of safety of students. He was accused of helping to burn down a bus in the violence, reported NDTV.The police have accessed the CCTV footages to apprehend the accused. “We have arrested four people in this matter. It was a case of personal enmity,” Anil Kumar Singh, Circle Officer, Varanasi Cantonment told a news agency. Gaurav was shot at by unidentified motorcycle-borne miscreants who opened fire at him and fled the spot.FacebookA Banaras Hindu University (BHU) student was shot at outside the gates of his hostel inside the university campus on Tuesday evening. The student, Gaurav Singh, succumbed to his injuries early on Wednesday morning.The incident happened in Uttar Pradesh’s Varanasi. Gaurav was shot at by unidentified motorcycle-borne miscreants who opened fire at him and fled the spot. The BHU student was pursuing his masters and resided in Lal Bahadur Shastri Hostel on the university campus. He was standing outside his hostel and talking to his friends when the mishap occurred. Although he was rushed to the trauma centre of the BHU’s Institute of Medical Sciences after sustaining bullet injuries, his life could not be saved. Rakesh Singh, Gaurav’s father, reportedly works at BHU.
govtThe minster, state minister, deputy minister, secretary and acting secretary each will be entitled to Tk 75,000 for buying a cell phone.And they will enjoy their mobile services without any limit and their bills will be paid from the exchequer.The facilities were endorsed at a cabinet meeting on Monday.The cabinet in fact approved a draft of ‘Government Telephone, Cellular, Set and Internet Policy-2018’.Under the policy, the amount of money fot buying a mobile phone set has been raised from Tk 15,000 to Tk 75,000.After the meeting chaired by prime minister Sheikh Hasina at her office, cabinet secretary Mohammad Shafiul Alam briefed newsmen about the cabinet’s decisions.He said joint secretaries and additional secretaries, who used to get mobile conveyance round the year, will get Tk 1,500 a month, up from Tk 600.It is being provided as per a 2004 policy which has just been updated.The cabinet has also given instructions to include judges of the apex court and state affairs chief at the foreign affairs ministry into the policy, said the cabinet secretary.
Kolkata: Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee will felicitate toppers of different examinations on Monday.Toppers of Madhyamik, Higher Secondary, ICSE, ISC, CBSE and WBJEE examinations will be receiving prizes from the Chief Minister. The programme has been organised at Netaji Indoor Stadium and the felicitation programme is going to start from 4.30 pm. Around 250 students will be felicitated on Monday. Their parents will also be present during the felicitation programme. Also Read – Heavy rain hits traffic, flightsIt may be recalled that the Chief Minister had tweeted on Wednesday morning: “Congratulations to all students who excelled and those who passed the Madhyamik exam. Best wishes for all your future endeavours. Good wishes to your teachers and families.” Similarly, on the day Higher Secondary result was declared, she stated in a tweet: “Congratulations to all students who excelled and those who passed the Higher Secondary Examination. Best wishes for all your future endeavours. Good wishes to your teachers and families.” The Chief Minister had felicitated toppers of the board examinations in 2017 as well and she had assured all sorts of support to the students to carry on with their higher studies. Last year, the programme was organised at Uttirnya. This time it has been given a bigger shape and is going to take place in Netaji Indoor Stadium.
Men may feel threatened by woman bosses and act more assertively towards them than male supervisors, a research says. The study published in the journal Society for Personality and Social Psychology said that such behaviour by male employees working with woman managers could disrupt the workplace with struggles over power dynamics.“The concept of masculinity is becoming more elusive in society as gender roles blur, with more women taking management positions and becoming the major breadwinners for their families,” said researcher Ekaterina Netchaeva, assistant professor of management and technology at the Bocconi University in Milan. Also Read – ‘Playing Jojo was emotionally exhausting’“Even men who support gender equality may see these advances as a threat to their
Don’t be mysterious. You wouldn’t believe how many business websites I’ve scanned where the phone number, address, contact names, product prices and hours of operation are either hard to find or missing altogether. Check your site to see if your vital info can be easily found. Get those contacts in bigger fonts, up higher, and visible on every page of your site, not hidden under a ‘contact’ tab.Have you changed your business website lately? What updating tips did you find useful? Leave a comment and let us know. Refresh the About page. Your About page is usually the second-most visited page of any site, which means it’s an important page that needs to put a friendly ‘face’ on the company. Rewrite it to include fresh company news — awards won, new products introduced, offices opened or new team members who’ve joined. Blog — or don’t. If your business website has a blog that hasn’t been updated in three months or more, it’s time for a serious talk. Blogs can drive new prospects to your site, but a dusty, dated blog doesn’t send a good message. Make a decision to either kick that blog back into gear — posting at least once a week — or get rid of it. min read Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. Growing a business sometimes requires thinking outside the box. Get a makeover. If your site hasn’t gotten a new look in several years, it’s probably starting to look dated, Rusenko notes. Customers become bored and feel nothing new is happening at your company. Consider a redesign that reflects your company’s current direction and attitude. January 13, 2012 When’s the last time you read your own website? No, seriously — the last time you looked at every page, clicked every link and read every word on it.If it’s been a while, it’s probably time to refresh both your site’s content and its look. Here is a seven-step program for giving your site a tune-up — some tips are courtesy of David Rusenko, CEO and co-founder of the site-building platform Weebly, while some are my own: Add news and stories. Want some free media coverage? Start putting out press releases and posting them on your site. When reporters visit, they’ll scan those and get the sense that your business has a lot going on. Each of those releases might spark media interest on their own, too. For extra credit, post a specific media contact name, so reporters know just who to call. Fix the problems. As websites get updated, things tend to get hinky in the design. One page uses a different color or font. Another has different margins or a different template. Links get broken. The next thing you know, the whole site looks chaotic or sloppy. Take the time to check each page, smooth out the bumps and make sure information is accurate and links are working. Free Webinar | Sept. 9: The Entrepreneur’s Playbook for Going Global Simplify. Do you have three sidebars crammed with different widgets? Get back to basics. Look at each page of your site and ask yourself what one action you’d like visitors to take — sign up on your email list? Pick up the phone and call you? Whatever it is, make that the only action to take on that page. Too many choices cause confusion and make prospects leave. Register Now »
M7 Group-owned Czech and Slovak pay TV operator Skylink has re-introduced adult channel Penthouse HD to its line-up of channels.Skylink previously offered Penthouse HD across four of its packages but replaced it in November last year with Hustler HD.Now both channels will be offered to Skylink customers. Penthouse will air daily from 22:00-06:00.
Polish cable operator Vectra has added three new channels to its programming line-up.Movie channel Stopklatka TV will be available to all subscribers, while music channel Stars TV and lifestyle channel TVR Polska Telewizja will be available to Gold and Platinum package subscribers.Stopklatka TV is a new Polish movie channel and is also available on the country’s digital-terrestrial network.Vectra recently ceased broadcasting MTV channels MTV Dance, MTV Hits and MTV Rocks, while adding channels TVP Sport HD, Republika, TVP ABC and Polsat News HD.
Imagine, as Christopher Buckley (son of William F.) did in his clever book, Boomsday, a plan to make the government solvent by offering incentives for people to kill themselves at age 70 and younger. Instead of calling it suicide, it would euphemistically be known as “Voluntary Transitioning.” Now we have Ezekiel Emanuel, Ari and Rahm’s brother, making quite a splash with his article “Why I Hope to Die at 75” in the Atlantic. While he doesn’t plan on suicide, he will stop receiving medical treatment. He says people deteriorate, and are less productive and creative. So why stay around so long? The former White House aid’s article makes Dr. Elizabeth Lee Vliet’s piece on Casey Research last December all the more interesting. She pointed out that Mr. Emanuel has written plenty about “The Complete Lives System” which: makes crystal clear that physicians must not focus on the individual patient. Instead, medical care should be allocated based on the patient’s usefulness to the “collective good.” If you’re too old, or too young, or your ailment is too complicated, society is better off letting you die rather than paying a doctor to heal you. One tenet of the Complete Lives system is that medical care for people under age 15 and over age 45 should be attenuated. “Attenuate” means to ration. Emanuel believes that the very young and the elderly are less valuable to society than those in the middle of the age curve. Mr. Emanuel is likely trying to start a trend and maybe even plant the idea for legislation to stop caring for people at 75—all for the good of the country, of course. Besides ghoulish, it’s a bit ironic, given the unwillingness of Americans to grow up. It’s telling that Obamacare covers children up to 26, as if the mid-20s is the new teenager. There was no such thing as a teenager before 1941; there were children and there were adults, explains Diana West in her book The Death of the Grown-Up. Now, turning 13 brings on the wonderful, entitled world of being a teen instead of taking a small step toward adulthood, and according to West “due to the permanent hold our culture has placed on the maturation process, that’s where they’re likely to find most adults.” For instance, it turns out more adults watch the Cartoon Network than CNN. And while CNN is a low bar, remembering that my old boss, the CEO of a bank, would constantly watch SpongeBob SquarePants, I can believe this. Ms. West writes that the previous generation was “one not yet under the influence of a youth culture of licentious boys (sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll) and petulant girls (women’s lib), shaped [by] that most basic human instinct—survival. Elevated by a maturing belief in duty, honor, loyalty, and forbearance, the instinct to survive wasn’t just a self-concern; it was, it turned out, the saving grace of civilization.” So what’s happened? Why the societal breakdown? We’ve had Republicans and we’ve had Democrats in charge. It doesn’t matter. It’s inflation and democracy. Both shorten people’s time horizons. As a nation, we live for the moment because our money is constantly degraded and our politicians steal from us continuously. In his masterful examination of the Thomas Mann short story Disorder and Early Sorrow, professor Paul Cantor observes, “Mann is as acute in portraying the psychological effects of inflation as he is in portraying the economic, social and political effects.” Mann shows “inflation fundamentally changes the way people think, forcing them to live for the moment.” With everyone’s time horizons shortened during the Weimar hyperinflation, hard work and prudent investing are believed foolish. In Death and Early Sorrow, the older generation lost its authority and youth dominated. The children acted like adults and the adults acted like children. “The young are more adaptable to changing conditions, while the old are set in their ways,” writes Cantor, “Hence the young cope better with inflation.” Mann saw inflation change the dynamic between generations in society. With “the young [having] a huge advantage over the old,” Cantor explains. “Not having experienced economic stability, the youth of Germany are more able to go with the inflationary flow.” Mann’s principal character, Professor Cornelius, has a servant, young Xaver, who is the perfect inflationary child. Xaver, Mann described, “utterly lacks a sense of duty and can as little be trained to the performance of the daily round and common task as some kinds of dog can be taught to jump over a stick.” Xaver has no feeling for the past and lacks the discipline so prized in Germany. Cantor points out that the elderly “become increasingly irrelevant” in an inflationary environment. It’s well known that inflation especially punishes those on fixed incomes. “Mann fills in our sense of the psychological disruptions that accompany the economic ravages of inflation,” writes Cantor. “More than any other factor, inflation discredits the authority of the older generation and turns power over to youth.” With prices soaring, youthful vices look like wisdom; the conservatism and prudence of the elderly are made to look silly. In his epic Democracy: The God That Failed, Hans-Hermann Hoppe explained that democracy increases societal time preference and with democratic rule “contrary to conventional wisdom, the decivilizing forces inherent in any form of government are systematically strengthened.” The private ownership of government (monarchy) is much more long-term oriented. Rulers may pass on a nation’s wealth to their heirs. In a democracy, politicians can only use government resources. A president has every incentive to maximize current income at the expense of capital value. A president being a temporary caretaker, explains Hoppe, “will use up as much of the government resources as quickly as possible, for what he does not consume now, he may never be able to consume.” And since in a democracy anyone can be president or in government, “public resistance against government power is systematically weakened,” Hoppe writes. “While expropriation and taxation before may have appeared clearly oppressive and evil to the public, they seem much less so, mankind being what it is, once anyone may freely enter the ranks of those who are at the receiving end.” Ever oppressive government and increased taxation make saving for the future look futile. One might as well live for today if what you save will only be confiscated by government. As democracy dictates that the haves take care of the have-nots, “there will be less productive activity, self-reliance and future-orientation, and more consumption, parasitism, dependency and shortsightedness,” Professor Hoppe writes. What democracy and government have done is to retard the natural tendency of humanity to build an expanding stock of capital and durable consumer goods. Man, instead of becoming increasingly more farsighted and providing for ever more distant goals, is tending toward decivilization. As Hoppe describes, “formerly provident providers will be turned into drunks or daydreamers, adults into children, civilized men into barbarians, and producers into criminals.” When someone so powerful as Emanuel, leading by example, advocates for the elderly to get out of the way, society has indeed devolved. Too much money and too much government have turned civilized people into barbaric children.
Pollution, much like wealth, is not distributed equally in the United States. Scientists and policymakers have long known that black and Hispanic Americans tend to live in neighborhoods with more pollution of all kinds, than white Americans. And because pollution exposure can cause a range of health problems, this inequity could be a driver of unequal health outcomes across the U.S.A study published Monday in the journal PNAS adds a new twist to the pollution problem by looking at consumption. While we tend to think of factories or power plants as the source of pollution, those polluters wouldn’t exist without consumer demand for their products. The researchers found that air pollution is disproportionately caused by white Americans’ consumption of goods and services, but disproportionately inhaled by black and Hispanic Americans. “This paper is exciting and really quite novel,” says Anjum Hajat, an epidemiologist at the University of Washington who was not involved in the study. “Inequity in exposure to air pollution is well documented, but this study brings in the consumption angle.” Hajat says the study reveals an inherent unfairness: “If you’re contributing less to the problem, why do you have to suffer more from it?”The study, led by engineering professor Jason Hill at the University of Minnesota, took over six years to complete. According to the paper’s first author Christopher Tessum, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Washington, the idea stemmed from a question at a conference.Tessum presented earlier research on how blacks and Hispanics are often more exposed to air pollutants than whites. After he finished, someone asked “if it would be possible to connect exposure to air pollution to who is doing the actual consuming,” says Tessum. According to Tessum, no one had ever tried to answer that question. It’s a big, complicated issue, but studying it could address a fundamental question: Are those who produce pollution, through their consumption of goods and services, fairly sharing in the costs?What kind of data could even answer such a multifaceted question? Let’s break it down:For any given area in the U.S., the researchers would need to know how polluted the air was, what communities were exposed to pollution, and the health effects of that level of exposure.Then, for the same area the researchers would need to identify the sources of that exposure (coal plants, factories, agriculture to name a few), and get a sense of what goods and services stem from those emissions (electricity, transportation, food).Finally, whose consumption of goods and services drives those sectors of the economy? “The different kinds of data, by themselves, aren’t that complicated,” says Tessum. “It’s linking them where things get a little trickier.” The most relevant air pollutant metric for human health is “particulate matter 2.5” or PM2.5. It represents the largest environmental health risk factor in the United States with higher levels linked to more cardiovascular problems, respiratory illness, diabetes and even birth defects. PM2.5 pollution is mostly caused by human activities, like burning fossil fuels or agriculture.The EPA collects these data through the National Emissions Inventory, which collates emissions from specific emitters, like coal plants or factories, measures of mobile polluters like cars or planes, and natural events like wildfires, painting a detailed picture of pollution across the U.S.The researchers generated maps of where different emitters, like agriculture or construction, caused PM2.5 pollution. Coal plants produced pockets of pollution in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, while agricultural emissions were concentrated in the Midwest and California’s central valley. “We then tied in census data to understand where different racial-ethnic groups live to understand exposure patterns,” says Hill. Tessum then used previous research on the health effects of different exposure levels to estimate how many premature deaths per year (out of an estimated 102,000 from domestic human-caused emissions) could be linked to each emitter. “We wanted to take this study further by ascribing responsibility of these premature deaths to different sectors [of the economy], and ultimately to the consumers, and maybe consumers of different racial and ethnic groups,” says Hill.To do that, the researchers actually worked backwards, following consumer spending to different sectors of the economy, and then ultimately to the main emitters of air pollution. Consider one major contributor to emissions: agriculture. Consumer expenditure surveys from the Bureau of Labor Statistics provide detailed data on how much money households spend in various sectors of the economy, including food.These data gave the researchers an idea of how much blacks, Hispanics, and whites spend on food per year. Other expenditures, like energy or entertainment, are also measured. Taken together these data represent the consumption patterns of the three groups.To translate dollars spent on food into air pollution levels, the researchers traced money through the economy. Using data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the researchers can estimate, for example, how much grocery stores or restaurants spend on food. Eventually, these dollars are linked back to the primary emitters — the farms growing the food or the fuel that farmers buy to run their tractors. The researchers have now completed the causal chain, from dollars spent at the grocery story, to the amount of pollution emitted into the atmosphere. Completing this chain for each source of pollution revealed whose consumption drives air pollution, and who suffers from it.After accounting for population size differences, whites experience about 17 percent less air pollution than they produce, through consumption, while blacks and Hispanics bear 56 and 63 percent more air pollution, respectively, than they cause by their consumption, according to the study. “These patterns didn’t seem to be driven by different kinds of consumption,” says Tessum, “but different overall levels.” In other words, whites were just consuming disproportionately more of the same kinds of goods and services resulting in air pollution than minority communities.”These results, as striking as they are, aren’t really surprising,” says Ana Diez Roux, an epidemiologist at Drexel University who was not involved in the study. “But it’s really interesting to see consumption patterns rigorously documented suggesting that minority communities are exposed to pollution that they bear less responsibility for.”Diez Roux thinks this is a good first step. “They certainly make assumptions in their analysis that might be questioned down the line, but I doubt that the overall pattern they found will change,” she says.Tessum points to some hopeful results from the study. PM2.5 exposure by all groups has fallen by about 50 percent from 2002 to 2015, driven in part by regulation and population movement away from polluted areas. But the inequity remains mostly unchanged.While more research is needed to fully understand these differences, the results of this study raise questions about how to address these inequities.Tessum stresses that “we’re not saying that we should take away white people’s money, or that people shouldn’t be able to spend money.” He suggests continuing to strive to make economic activity and consumption less polluting could be a way to manage and lessen the inequities.Diez Roux thinks that stronger measures may be necessary. “If want to ameliorate this inequity, we may need to rethink how we build our cities and how they grow, our dependence on automobile transportation,” says Diez Roux. “These are hard things we have to consider.”Jonathan Lambert is an intern on NPR’s Science Desk. You can follow him on Twitter: @evolambert Copyright 2019 NPR. To see more, visit https://www.npr.org.
A cost-cutting council is set to introduce new policies that will force disabled people with high-cost support packages out of their own homes and into residential and nursing institutions.Labour-run Southampton city council wants to cut its adult social care budget by £1.5 million in 2016-17.As part of those cuts, it wants to increase the use of telecare – such as personal alarms and sensors – so that it can reduce the need for visits from care workers and routine “wellbeing” checks, while also increasing care charges.But it also plans to review the personal budgets of every disabled person with a package of more than £500 a week, and consider if it would be cheaper to fund them for extra care housing, or nursing or residential care.A new council consultation – which ends on 31 January, or 14 January via an online survey – points out that 212 people in the city have care packages of more than £500 per week, which is “much higher” than the standard rate for residential care of £369 per week.If the proposals go ahead, the council would consider if extra care housing, residential or nursing care would be a more “cost effective” way to meet these individuals’ needs.The consultation document says: “If this is the case, we would typically set the personal budget at a level which would fund the identified extra care housing scheme, or appropriate residential or nursing placement.“The service user can then choose to either enter residential or nursing care, or to use their personal budget towards the cost of receiving care and support at home or in an alternative placement.”Ian Loynes (pictured), chief executive of Spectrum Centre for Independent Living, a user-led organisation which campaigns and provides services in Southampton, said the proposals were “deeply concerning” and “pretty bleak”.He said: “We need to fight this assault on people’s liberty and independence.“It’s pretty bleak already, but any prospect of moving people living independently in the community into residential care – it is impossible to see how that would be effectively meeting their needs.”Loynes said that disabled people in Southampton would be unlikely to have any extra resources they could use to top-up the council funding because the council’s charging policy meant that it already takes 100 per cent of their disposable income.He added: “Southampton have a very poor record of consulting and changing anything.“Their results of consultation normally change nothing in the way of policy.”Meanwhile, local media have reported that the council plans to build a £12 million “super care home”, with accommodation for up to 95 disabled people.Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC)*, said: “This is particularly worrying because Southampton have spent so much money building their new ‘super care home’ and it is also against all the principles of independent living to impose an illegal ceiling on the amount of funding people are allowed to have.“We are obviously concerned that if Southampton are able to do this then other local authorities will do the same.”Cllr David Shields, the council’s cabinet member for health and adult social care, said: “It is very important to remember that no decision on this issue has been made.“The council is engaged in an open and meaningful consultation exercise and consequently welcomes all views on the proposal to inform its decision.”But a council spokesman said it was faced with “difficult decisions” in meeting a budget shortfall of £39 million next year and £90 million by 2020-21, while the measure would affect less than five per cent of adults receiving council-funded care, and the council would “consider individual circumstances on a case by case basis”.He added: “The council has to balance an individual’s preferences with its requirement to use its fixed budget to support everyone in Southampton who has eligible adult social care needs and we consider the proposed approach to be more equitable.”He denied that the policy would breach article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which says governments should ensure that disabled people have “the opportunity to choose their place of residence and where and with whom they live on an equal basis with others and are not obliged to live in a particular living arrangement”.And he said that the development described by local media as a “super care home” would in fact provide “extra care housing” and so was not a care or residential home, and would allow individuals “the independence of living in their own flat, but with the reassurance of on-site support and 24 hour care”.He said: “This is consistent with the council’s policy of exploring whether an individual’s needs can be met in appropriate extra care housing before residential or nursing care is considered.”*Anyone from Southampton who thinks they might be affected by the changes and would like to take action to prevent the policy being carried out can email DPAC at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Disabled young people have told MPs how they have been “cheated” by the government’s new system for supporting pupils and students through school and college.MPs on the Commons educationcommittee heard howdisabled pupils were being denied a voice in drawing up their education, healthand care plans (EHCPs), and how they were not receiving what had been promisedin those plans.Thecommittee also heard that EHCPs were too focused on education, rather thanbeing “life focused”.Thecommittee heard from seven disabled young people on Tuesday as part of itsinquiry into the impact of the special educational needs and disabilities(SEND) reforms introduced by the government through its Children and FamiliesAct 2014*.Three of them – Jordan, Ben and Eva (pictured, centre, left and right) – were part of the RIP: STARS research team, a project led by disabled young people and researchers at Coventry University, which also included support from The Alliance for Inclusive Education, and looked at the quality of EHCPs and whether they met disabled children and young people’s rights.Jordan saidsome of their findings had been “stunning”, and that he and many other disabledyoung people “feel we were cheated out of the education system and treatedpoorly by them”.He said theymade the “atrocious” discovery that disabled children “weren’t actually beinginvolved in the process of their EHCPs”, with the main discussions taking place“without talking to the child themselves”.He saidplans were “either being delayed, mistaken, poorly done and they are notmeeting the needs of the child”, and he called for something to be done toensure that plans “are being carried out correctly by staff” and “not justignored and forgotten”.Eva, anothermember of RIP: STARS, said: “We found out that what was written in the plan wasnot being followed through, so many children aren’t receiving the support andthe correct education that they need and they are missing out on theireducation and childhood.”She said theplans were not preparing disabled children and young people for independenceand adulthood.Eva said theplans should use the language of the social model of disability “so childrenare not defined by labels and they are not seen as a problem”. She added:“Disabled children have a right to mainstream education, so they should achievesupport to achieve this and be in mainstream education if they choose to doso.”Ben, a thirddisabled young person from RIP: STARS, said EHCPs were “too educational focusedand not life focused, so children are not receiving the support they need inother important areas such as developing independence, having choice andcontrol, achieving aspirations, life goals, friends, access in the community.”He said itwas not right that disabled pupils who do not fit in with the “norms and rolesand rules of education” were often “shipped off, excluded, offloaded, or hiddenin other places” and “forgotten about”.Francesca,one of two deaf pupils on the National Deaf Children’s Society’s (NDCS) young people’s advisory boardwho gave evidence, told the committee that a lack of support at school meantshe missed out on social situations and on learning “how to be confident andempowered”.She said shehad even been encouraged to use a separate “SEND room” at lunch, which alsomade it harder to build friendships with non-disabled pupils.She said:“It’s showing to the other students that these people need to be kept separate,which I feel is the wrong attitude completely. “It shouldbe about inclusivity and empowering those people.”Francescasaid that meetings about EHCPs sometimes happened without the disabled youngperson being present.She said:“It’s really frustrating because you feel you can make your own decisionsbecause it is your own support.”Anothermember of the NDCS advisory board, Ella, said she was “really struggling” tosecure the support she needed through the EHCP process, with the local councilcurrently refusing to provide her with a plan because it did not think she wasdeaf enough. As a result,she said, her grades were “far below what they should be”.And she saidthe only people the council would listen to were her parents, and not her.Simran, whois studying accountancy and management at Queen Mary University of London and waswith the charity my AFK, said: “As a disabled woman, I have to work harder thaneveryone else to achieve anything.“I thinkit’s a great shame that young people with SEND are left unsupported and theirachievements are unappreciated. “I’m a 21-year-oldstudying accountancy and I want to be an accountant, I want to work, I want tocontribute to the economy and society, but I feel like there’s not very manyopportunities for me to do so.”Kashifa, whois studying at college and was also with my AFK, said she had received “a lotmore support” when she was at school.She said:“Even though we had meetings about me going to college, I’m not sure theyreally understood my needs when I got there. “I thinkpeople make a judgement about what you’re capable of based on your appearance. “I knowpeople mean well and they know you get anxious in certain situations, and theywant to try to protect you, but this just means you won’t be able to tryanything because people think you won’t be able to cope, so the opportunitiesstop.”She added:“I don’t need people to tell me I need to be realistic, either. “I want towork things out for myself and then be able to make the choice. “I don’tneed to be protected all the time, I just need the chance to try differentthings and then I can decide.”*Under government reforms which came into effect in September 2014, local authorities in England had until April 2018 to move all disabled children and young people eligible for support from SEN statements to new EHCPs. The plans last from birth to the age of 25 and set out all the support they should receive across education, health and social care.A note from the editor:Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations. Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009. Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…
Oculus Ordered to Pay $500 Million to ZeniMax This story originally appeared on PCMag Add to Queue 2 min read Learn how to successfully navigate family business dynamics and build businesses that excel. Next Article Free Webinar | July 31: Secrets to Running a Successful Family Business –shares Reporter The spat dates back to 2014 when ZeniMax sued the virtual reality firm for misappropriating trade secrets. Register Now » February 2, 2017 Oculus VR Facebook-owned virtual reality company Oculus has been ordered to pay $500 million in damages to video game publisher ZeniMax Media for failing to comply with a non-disclosure agreement.The decision came back Wednesday after the Dallas jury deliberated for two and a half days on a verdict, according to Polygon. They also said Oculus did not misappropriate ZeniMax trade secrets, as the publisher had claimed.”The heart of this case was about whether Oculus stole ZeniMax’s trade secrets, and the jury found decisively in our favor,” an Oculus spokesperson told PCMag. “We’re obviously disappointed by a few other aspects of today’s verdict, but we are undeterred. Oculus products are built with Oculus technology. Our commitment to the long-term success of VR remains the same, and the entire team will continue the work they’ve done since day one — developing VR technology that will transform the way people interact and communicate. We look forward to filing our appeal and eventually putting this litigation behind us.”The spat dates back to 2014 when ZeniMax sued the virtual reality firm for misappropriating trade secrets, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and unfair competition. According to the complaint, former employee John Carmack started corresponding with Oculus VR founder Palmer Luckey in April 2012, when the Oculus Rift was “a crude prototype.”Luckey gave Carmack an early version of the Rift “and Carmack and other ZeniMax personnel added numerous improvements to the prototype,” the complaint said. “Together, those ZeniMax employees literally transformed the Rift by adding physical hardware components and developing specialized software for its operation.”Oculus later hired Carmack as its CTO, which ZeniMax claimed put its intellectual property — “including trade secrets, copyrighted computer code and technical know-how relating to virtual reality technology that was developed by ZeniMax after years of research and investment” — at risk.Despite the victory, ZeniMax was seeking a lot more: in closing arguments, the company’s lawyer said it should win $4 billion in compensation and punitive damages, Polygon notes. Oculus’s attorney said ZeniMax was just embarrassed and jealous.Facebook and ZeniMax did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Image credit: Shutterstock.com Angela Moscaritolo
Regulations Learn from renowned serial entrepreneur David Meltzer how to find your frequency in order to stand out from your competitors and build a brand that is authentic, lasting and impactful. Next Article New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, under pressure from business groups, citizens and high-profile celebrities and entrepreneurs, has backed off of a plan that would have limited the number of cars Uber could manage in the city.Under an agreement, first reported by The New York Times, New York will instead conduct a four-month study on the effect of Uber and other non-yellow-cab companies on the city’s traffic and environment. A city council bill to impose a cap on the number of Uber cars will be scrapped for now.”We’re pleased to have reached an agreement with Mayor de Blasio’s administration and the City Council to collaborate on a joint transportation study and to work together on ways to continue expanding economic opportunity, mobility and transportation access in the city,” said Josh Mohrer, general manager of Uber NYC, in a statement. “We are pleased new drivers will continue to be free to join the for-hire industry and partner with Uber.”New York wanted what some saw as onerous regulations, capping Uber’s growth, as well as the prospects for rivals like Lyft. Under the proposed plan that has been shelved, Uber would have been required to stay within the city’s limits, which would allow car bases larger than 500 vehicles to increase by only 1 percent each year.Related: What Uber Has Learned About Expansion, Hurdles and Growing PainsDe Blasio had said curbing Uber was necessary for environmental issues. But actual riders balked, saying New York’s yellow (and green) cabs were notoriously unavailable and lacked the convenience of Uber, which has arguably the best ride-sharing and ride-hailing app. De Blasio’s plan was universally unpopular. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a fellow Democrat, was against it. Several celebrities pressured de Blasio, who has earned distrust from the New York entrepreneurial community for what some perceive as an anti-business stance and pro-regulation stance by his administration. Ashton Kutcher, an Uber investor, has been among the loudest critics, but others, like actor Neil Patrick Harris and supermodel Kate Upton have also weighed in.It even became a civil rights issue, as some black residents said Uber solved the problem of cab drivers intentionally avoiding picking up black passengers.Uber has become the symbol of innovation and disruption in an industry, changing the way many people travel in major cities around the world. But that has clashed with entrenched and heavily regulated industries like taxis, who pay cities high fees for licenses to operate. This has caused Uber and its supporters to claim cities are engaging in regulatory capture, where governments protect the special interests of the groups over which they have the most regulation, at the expense of more innovative approaches to solve problems.Related: Chipotle Raises Prices in San Francisco After Minimum Wage Hike Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. Enroll Now for $5 Editor-at-Large Guest Writer Image credit: Shutterstock | Enhanced by Entrepreneur July 22, 2015 –shares 3 min read Add to Queue Fireside Chat | July 25: Three Surprising Ways to Build Your Brand New York City Caves on Plan to Cap Uber Drivers Ray Hennessey
Grindr founder and CEO Joel Simkhai attends an event at Milk Studios in Hollywood, California, in October 2015 ‘Key role’ of appsApproximately 1.1 million people in the United States live with HIV, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention—among them an estimated 166,000 people unaware of their status. The CDC recommends that everyone ages 13 to 64 get routine annual HIV testing, adding that sexually active gay and bisexual men could benefit from more frequent tests. In 24 US states people aware that they are HIV positive are legally mandated to tell partners, according to the health agency.AIDES, a French HIV-advocacy organization, called for boycotting Grindr in light of the news—but emphasized that sharing HIV status on a dating app before meeting can “allow HIV-positive people to avoid a possible rejection when they announce it verbally,” helping to “normalize the perception and image of HIV-positive people.”Dan Wohlfeiler, a public health expert who directs the organization Building Healthy Online Communities, said open conversations about HIV are vital—and “apps play a key role in helping those conversations happen.””We also hope that apps help users make informed decisions as to how their data are being kept safe.”Natasha Babazadeh, a law fellow at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, emphasized that Grindr must be transparent about how it is using the data or risk losing consumer trust.”Just as users have begun deleting their Facebook accounts after the Cambridge Analytica controversy, dating app users will similarly delete or extensively restrict their use of such apps,” she said in a statement to AFP. “If corporations fail to protect their users’ data they will face the ramifications, legally, financially and socially.”For his part, Danny said he “will think twice before using Grindr again.””There are plenty of ones that gay men can use that aren’t sharing our HIV status,” he said. “These are the ones I’d turn to first.” Experts had greeted with enthusiasm efforts from the self-proclaimed world’s largest gay dating app to promote regular HIV testing and status disclosure—but the effort backfired badly with the revelation that Grindr was sharing the data, prompting calls for a boycott. Explore further Citation: Dating app Grindr faces fury for sharing HIV data (Update) (2018, April 3) retrieved 18 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-04-gay-dating-app-grindr-hiv.html This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Grindr, the social networking app, can be an effective way to distribute HIV home-testing kits, study finds © 2018 AFP The West Hollywood, California-based dating app, which claims 3.6 million daily active users globally, confirmed Monday it had been sharing users’ personal data—including HIV status—with third party software vendors.The revelation dovetails with a furor over lax personal data protection at Facebook.The social media giant has come under withering scrutiny since it became known that a British consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, harvested tens of millions of its users’ personal data to create voter profiles for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.Grindr chief technology officer Scott Chen sought to distance the dating app’s public relations mishap from the Facebook scandal, calling the sharing no more than “industry standard practice.” He said Apptimize and Localytics, the companies that used Grindr’s data, were simply tasked with software optimization and “under strict contractual terms that provide for the highest level of confidentiality, data security, and user privacy.”But a wave of advocacy organizations and users say the revelations are a serious violation of trust and privacy—with some worrying the news could undercut recommendations from HIV prevention experts to regularly get tested and disclose HIV status with potential sexual partners.One Grindr user who identified himself as Danny said he originally thought the dating app’s option to disclose HIV status was “great,” also lauding frequent reminders on the app to get tested.”As an HIV negative man, I still had lingering anti-HIV sentiments, but with these blatant disclosures, I was forced to learn,” he told AFP. “I really thought that Grindr cared about the gay community, and was forcing us to have an important dialogue about our health and safety.”He called Grindr’s sharing of the data “a slap in the face.””It’s sad, because I think that it did drive important conversations within our community.”The AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) echoed that sentiment, calling Grindr’s data-sharing “an egregious breach of confidentiality laws,” demanding it “immediately cease and desist the reckless practice.””It is extremely unfortunate that those men who have been courageous enough to share their HIV status, be it positive or negative, on their Grindr profiles, may have now had that most personal data indiscriminately shared by Grindr,” said Michael Weinstein, the AHF president.
Modi and South Korean President Moon Jae-in inaugurated the giant assembling plant—an expansion of an existing Samsung facility—in the city of Noida on the outskirts of New Delhi.”The Noida plant has now become Samsung’s largest smartphone manufacturing unit,” Moon said, as the company announced that it planned to eventually manufacture 120 million smartphones a year at the factory.The decision by Samsung comes at a critical time for the South Korean electronics giant, which is facing a tough battle from Chinese competitors for the control of India’s massive smartphone market.It is also a shot in the arm for Modi’s flagship “Make in India” campaign which is trying to attract foreign investment and drum up much-needed jobs in manufacturing.Modi said the new factory would generate jobs in Uttar Pradesh, an impoverished state of roughly 220 million where his Bharatiya Janata Party won a crucial election last year.”This is an important step towards making India a manufacturing hub,” the prime minister said of the USD$750 million factory investment.”It is a matter of pride for India and Uttar Pradesh.”President Moon will be formally received by India’s President Ram Nath Kovind on Tuesday before holding talks with Modi in the Indian capital. India’s most populous state bans plastic, yet again Citation: Samsung opens world’s biggest smartphone factory in India (2018, July 9) retrieved 18 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-07-samsung-world-biggest-smartphone-factory.html Moon (4L) and Modi (4R) inaugurated the giant assembling plant in the city of Noida Samsung opened the world’s largest smartphone factory in India on Monday, a move Prime Minister Narendra Modi said would help transform Asia’s third-largest economy into a global manufacturing hub. © 2018 AFP Explore further This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
Legal scholar Shawn Bayer has shown that anyone can confer legal personhood on a computer system, by putting it in control of a limited liability corporation in the U.S. If that maneuver is upheld in courts, artificial intelligence systems would be able to own property, sue, hire lawyers and enjoy freedom of speech and other protections under the law. In my view, human rights and dignity would suffer as a result. The corporate loopholeGiving AIs rights similar to humans involves a technical lawyerly maneuver. It starts with one person setting up two limited liability companies and turning over control of each company to a separate autonomous or artificially intelligent system. Then the person would add each company as a member of the other LLC. In the last step, the person would withdraw from both LLCs, leaving each LLC – a corporate entity with legal personhood – governed only by the other’s AI system.That process doesn’t require the computer system to have any particular level of intelligence or capability. It could just be a sequence of “if” statements looking, for example, at the stock market and making decisions to buy and sell based on prices falling or rising. It could even be an algorithm that makes decisions randomly, or an emulation of an amoeba.Reducing human statusGranting human rights to a computer would degrade human dignity. For instance, when Saudi Arabia granted citizenship to a robot called Sophia, human women, including feminist scholars, objected, noting that the robot was given more rights than many Saudi women have. Sophia, a robot granted citizenship in Saudi Arabia. Credit: MSC/wikimedia, CC BY In certain places, some people might have fewer rights than nonintelligent software and robots. In countries that limit citizens’ rights to free speech, free religious practice and expression of sexuality, corporations – potentially including AI-run companies – could have more rights. That would be an enormous indignity. Provided by The Conversation An interview with Sophia, a robot citizen of Saudi Arabia. The risk doesn’t end there: If AI systems became more intelligent than people, humans could be relegated to an inferior role – as workers hired and fired by AI corporate overlords – or even challenged for social dominance.Artificial intelligence systems could be tasked with law enforcement among human populations – acting as judges, jurors, jailers and even executioners. Warrior robots could similarly be assigned to the military and given power to decide on targets and acceptable collateral damage – even in violation of international humanitarian laws. Most legal systems are not set up to punish robots or otherwise hold them accountable for wrongdoing.What about voting?Granting voting rights to systems that can copy themselves would render humans’ votes meaningless. Even without taking that significant step, though, the possibility of AI-controlled corporations with basic human rights poses serious dangers. No current laws would prevent a malevolent AI from operating a corporation that worked to subjugate or exterminate humanity through legal means and political influence. Computer-controlled companies could turn out to be less responsive to public opinion or protests than human-run firms are.Immortal wealthTwo other aspects of corporations make people even more vulnerable to AI systems with human legal rights: They don’t die, and they can give unlimited amounts of money to political candidates and groups. Artificial intelligences could earn money by exploiting workers, using algorithms to price goods and manage investments, and find new ways to automate key business processes. Over long periods of time, that could add up to enormous earnings – which would never be split up among descendants. That wealth could easily be converted into political power. Politicians financially backed by algorithmic entities would be able to take on legislative bodies, impeach presidents and help to get figureheads appointed to the Supreme Court. Those human figureheads could be used to expand corporate rights or even establish new rights specific to artificial intelligence systems – expanding the threats to humanity even more. Explore further Humans aren’t the only people in society – at least according to the law. In the U.S., corporations have been given rights of free speech and religion. Some natural features also have person-like rights. But both of those required changes to the legal system. A new argument has laid a path for artificial intelligence systems to be recognized as people too – without any legislation, court rulings or other revisions to existing law. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Citation: Could an artificial intelligence be considered a person under the law? (2018, October 5) retrieved 17 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-10-artificial-intelligence-person-law.html Why technology puts human rights at risk This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.