It is easily the most depraved little episode of presidential campaign crime in decades, worthy of Nixon’s CREEP or Boris Yeltsin’s goons, and it’s been almost totally ignored by the media—mainstream and otherwise.

Ron and Rand Paul’s top campaign aides, led by the husband of Ron Paul’s granddaughter, bribing and extorting a crooked Tea Party Iowa politician to endorse the “Ron Paul rEVOLution”—which turns out to have been little more than a mirage built on fraud, oligarch cash, and the credulous fantasies of a few thousand pimply college-aged waffendweebs.

And then there’s the specter of the world’s largest private surveillance apparatus, Google, looming over this story—playing a central role in the criminal investigation that is both deeply conflicted, and oddly conflicting.

For over a year now, Google has refused to comply with federal warrants to hand over Gmail accounts of the three indicted Paul campaign managers and operators: Jesse Benton, John Tate, and Dimitrios Kesari, who all have held senior posts in Rand Paul’s various campaigns and PACs. (Many of the legal filings mentioned in this article are embedded below.)

But it goes further: Ron Paul himself is named in a federal subpoena made public last year. Prosecutors want access to the libertarian hero’s emails, as he appears to be a person of interest in the criminal investigation, an investigation that Google has been hindering with legal roadblocks and distractions.

The crimes are bad enough, and I’ll explain them in a minute—but when you have the most powerful Internet company in the world, and one of the largest corporate lobbyists in Washington DC, protecting indicted criminals who run presidential campaigns for politicians—Ron and Rand Paul—which Google has given thousands of dollars to in recent years, and whose libertarian ideology Google has supported in a number of ways and venues. . . . then we’re talking about potentially nightmare-scenario levels of conflicts-of-interest.

Potentially—that’s the key here, because the real story of Google’s role in this sordid crime is a bit more complicated than that, and not entirely evil, much as that might frustrate me and many of our readers. Google’s problem in this case rests in its overwhelming monopoly power—it’s as if the Nixon Tapes were on Google’s servers, along with all of our own personal recordings, and Google had a policy of generally being a pain in the ass about handing over tape recordings so as to keep consumers lured into spending all their babbling moments babbling into their tape recording product...only in this case, Google is also a major campaign donor to Nixon and his political agenda. It’s very problematic, and I’ll save a deeper discussion of Google’s conflicts in fighting government warrants for Ron and Rand Paul’s indicted felons for another article...

But first, the crime. Let’s start with Kent Sorenson, a mean, dumb, thumb-headed prairie bumpkin who so far stands as the only person convicted of a series of felonies involving the Ron Paul 2012 campaign, after Sorenson pled guilty last year to crimes—including filing falsified federal election reports, and obstruction of justice, crimes that could carry a maximum sentence of 25 years behind bars.

Sorenson was, until recently, Iowa state Senator Sorenson, Iowa’s leading firebreathing Tea Party radical who vowed to “burn down” Des Moines when he won his seat in the state’s upper chamber in 2010. Sorenson talked the God-talk, bashed gays, the poor, drug users, and immigrants, which made him a darling among Tea Party libertarians like Ron Paul, who personally endorsed Sorsenson’s run for state senate in 2010.

Among the bills Sorenson pushed—a state Constitutional amendment banning same-sex civil marriages; a “birther” law aimed at Obama, requiring presidential candidates to produce their birth certificates; a law forcing indigent welfare recipients to submit to random drug tests—and denial of benefits if they failed the tests.

Naturally, it was later discovered—after he was elected— that Sorenson had been busted in 1992 delivering a baggie of weed and taking $30 cash from a drug informant, for which the Tea Party firebrand was convicted of an aggravated misdemeanor and sentenced to six months in county jail. He was 20 years old; he served five days. When the story came out in 2011, he blamed another guy and claimed to have mended his ways. But it was also discovered that he’d welched on his child support payments, had his wages garnished, was penalized again for failing again, was charged but cleared of domestic violence, and had declared bankruptcy on his mortgage and student loans debts, which he blamed on usurious interest rates. In other words, a typical mean dumb white lowlife.

Last year, after Sorenson was first convicted of taking bribe money from Ron Paul and lying about it, he was subjected to mandatory drug tests of the sort he voted to impose on Iowa’s poorest residents—and yes, Sorenson failed his own drug tests — not once, but three times.

And just last month, police arrested Sorenson again for allegedly beating his wife.

But in our official narrative, as far as all the media harrumphers and pundits were concerned, Sorenson was a serious Tea Party evangelical, driven by conservative principles, no matter how much those principles might ruffle mainstream two-party Establishment feathers, by gum!—just like Ron Paul. In early 2011, Sorenson’s endorsement was something taken seriously, as a matter of weighty Tea Party principle—and he threw in early for Michele Bachmann. As it turns out, he endorsed her, and became her Iowa campaign co-chairman, on a more familiar principle: Payment in kind. In secret and in violation of Iowa Senate ethics (and federal laws, once those bribes became falsified reports), the Bachmann campaign paid Sen. Sorenson nearly $8,000 per month in a clunky scheme in which Bachmann funds went through a couple of dummy companies and into Sorenson’s pocket.

This is how politics works, folks; it’s not what they teach you in middle school civics classes, but journalists should’ve gotten over that little shocker by now.

In public, Sorenson said his endorsement of Michele Bachmann was all on account of shared deep Christian libertarian principles. Meanwhile, towards the end of 2011, as the Iowa caucuses were drawing near, Ron Paul’s grandson-by-marriage, Jesse Benton, and his fellow staffers, having learned Sorenson was for sale (apparently everyone but the media knew it), opened negotiations to buy Sen. Sorenson’s support by outbidding Bachmann. It helped that Ron Paul was raising money hand over fist compared to Bachmann, thanks to all the Silicon Valley and extraction industry billionaires who love Paul’s vision of government without taxation or regulation or welfare or help of any kind for anyone or anything, but their private property, which is always in need of armed protection...

According to a recently unsealed indictment, in late October 2011, Benton — who also led his uncle Rand Paul’s SuperPAC until just recently, in case I haven’t made this family point clear enough — sent an email to Sorenson and Sorenson’s top aide offering to take over paying Sorenson’s $8,000/month bribes in return for Sorenson switching his allegiance from Bachmann to Dr. Paul. Both Sorenson and Dr. Paul’s people agreed to delay Sorenson’s switch until after a meeting of Iowa Republicans, where he’d strengthen his own position within the party, on the eve of the big caucasus, as a principled Tea Party Christian libertarian.

Then from mid-November 2011 until late December, a Ron Paul operative, Dimitrios Kesari, made numerous calls to Sorenson to negotiate and lobby for the bribe-and-switch deal. A few days before the switch, around Christmas 2011, Sorenson agreed with Ron Paul’s campaign heads to write up a press release in-advance explaining how his Tea Party principles moved him to abandon Bachmann for Ron Paul. Sen. Sorenson then sent his draft statement to the Ron Paul 2012 campaign chiefs for editing—his granddaughter's husband Jesse Benton, his family operative Kesari, and John Tate, the head of a Ron/Rand Paul libertarian organization called Campaign For Liberty, who also served as an officer in Rand Paul’s SuperPAC. And in case Sorenson double-crossed Ron Paul over his planned double-cross of Michelle Bachmann, Dr. Paul’s campaign chiefs had readied a plan to smear Sorenson and ruin his life by leaking select emails of their payoff negotiations.

Sorenson agreed to switch to Ron Paul in exchange for being put on an $8,000 a month under-the-table salary, plus a $100,000 payoff to Sorenson’s personal PAC. Being a thumb-head, Sorenson demanded a $25,000 check, and Dr. Paul’s operative, Kesari, agreed, handing him a check in the name of Kesari’s wife’s jewelry company at an Iowa diner. But as soon as Sorenson got that big fat $25,000 check, he wasn’t sure what he should do with it. So he just held onto it, figuring it would be useful later (and it was useful—to federal prosecutors). Two days after getting the $25,000 check, on December 28, 2011, Sorenson appeared at an early afternoon rally for Bachmann at Pizza Ranch, still playing the role of her campaign’s co-chairman—but he kept silent throughout the Bachmann rally, claiming he couldn’t speak because he’d just had dental work done and his mouth was so numb “he was afraid he would drool on himself,” according to the Des Moines Register.

After the Pizza Ranch rally for Bachmann, Sen. Sorenson skulked away in his car, and showed up to a Ron Paul 2012 rally (“Sorenson said he drove to Paul’s event, called a Paul staffer and asked: ‘Do you guys want me on board?’”—reported the Des Moines Register) and jumped on the stage in a fake-spontaneous Tea Party moment of libertarian passion, announcing that his conscience had compelled him, at the spur of the moment, to switch allegiance to the Ron Paul rEVOLution!

Sen. Sorenson sent the 500 Ron Paul dupes into a placard-waving frenzy, telling them,

“We have a choice where we can elect more of the same … or we can elect someone who’s going to transform this country to get it back to what our founding fathers wanted, and I believe that’s Ron Paul.”

Benton gave statements to the press full of high-minded civics class gravitas:

Congressman Paul is delighted to accept the endorsement of Senator Kent Sorenson, whose blessing and assistance carry a great deal weight in Iowa. The fact that he doesn’t take this decision lightly tells a great deal about the senator and Ron Paul.

Indeed. And if that wasn’t sick farce enough, the Paul campaign released a giant “spontaneous” statement from Sen. Sorenson—heavily edited by Ron Paul’s campaign chiefs and relatives—full of high-minded anti-establishment libertarian blather, air-quotes and all. Here are a few choice quotes::

Since my election, I’ve learned that doing the right thing isn’t always easy. It’s easy to see why so many legislators “sell out” once elected. The pressure to do so is immense. But what America needs now is a President who will not just “go along to get along.” Instead, we must send someone who puts doing what is right above all else to the White House. That candidate is Ron Paul. If you are as frustrated as I am with what's been done by the ruling class, I urge you to join me in supporting Dr. Paul. We can send the national big government political establishment a message they will never forget by voting for Ron Paul for President in the January 3 Iowa Caucuses.

Sorenson’s betrayal was meant to land as a punch to the gut, to shock and awe Bachmann into total submission, losing her co-chair like that. What the Ron Paul hicks didn’t expect was that Bachmann — a prairie hick of a different subspecies of mean-and-dumb, the kind of prairie hick that self-destructs unless under constant 24/7 watch from a slick political minder — would expose the whole scam. Bachmann went straight to the press and spilled the beans, that Sorenson had been bribed by Ron Paul’s campaign, and that Sorenson had even told her that they were going to bribe him. Which was true—Sorenson had been bargaining with her, trying to leverage the Paul campaign’s offer to squeeze a better counter-offer bribe out of Bachmann.

Immediately after Bachmann’s suicidal statement, her top aides ran to the media and said no-no-no-, you know how crazy Michele is, cuckoo! cuckoo!... nothing of the sort was going on, we’re all honorable people here, Ron Paul’s family member included. Because, obviously, there was the fear that if anyone decided to look into the allegations, they’d find that Bachmann’s campaign was guilty of the same crime.

And according to last year’s subpoena, the FBI wants access not only to Ron Paul’s and his campaign staffers’ emails, but to Bachmann’s and her staffers too.

* * * *

Bachmann’s statement about Paul’s bribes caused a brief controversy among the media, which didn’t want to believe such a thing could happen in America, and especially not from the campaign of that real-life 21st C Jimmy Stewart—albeit a hick-fascist Confederate Jimmy Stewart, but earnest and “authentic” all the same, according to the rubes in the media, pushing Paul as the perennial anti-establishment hero. Among the conspirators, however, it caused a real panic, and a brief change of plans.

The next day, December 29, Benton & team had Sen. Sorenson issue a defiant statement that basically said, “You think I get paid for my principles? Wait till you see the FEC filings, then you’ll see that Bachmann is a liar and no one’s paying me anything, by gum!” And then Sorenson and the Paul capos proceeded to forge their FEC filings to funnel their payments to Sorenson through a pair of dummy front companies. Not exactly the sharpest conmen, but brains aren’t much of a requirement for success as a con artist. An empty conscience, some cunning, and the stupid sense that you and your testicles are smarter than everyone else—those are much more important qualities.

And then in January 2012, the payments started rolling: Sen. Sorenson filed an invoice for $33,000 from his dummy company, Grassroots Strategy, to a Ron Paul company called ICT Inc; then the Ron Paul people behind ICT filed an invoice for $38,125 from ICT Inc to the Ron Paul 2012 committee, and that way passed through their first payment. That was in January 2012, while the rubes in the libertarian movement and their fanboys in the progressive media were having high-minded debates about Ron Paul’s principles. More followed throughout that year, ending in June, totaling nearly $80,000. The last payment, for $8,850, elicited an annoyed response from John Tate—who until his recent indictment was president of Rand Paul’s main SuperPAC, America’s Liberty.

When Sen. Sorenson’s last invoice came, Tate emailed Ron Paul operative Kesari:

What is this? What is it for, who is it? Why do we keep paying them? The last payment was supposedly the last.

Kesari responded with two short emails:

This is the last payment for kent Sorenson [sic]. The deal jesse [Benton] agreed to with kent. Is [sic] was for 6 months

By this point, Ron Paul’s people got even lazier and just expensed the last payoffs as “AUDIO/VISUAL EXPENSES” in their FEC filings.

And all this time, for some inexplicable reason, Sorenson clung to that uncashed $25,000 check the way that zombie in Romero’s Dawn of the Dead clung to that pistol as he shuffled around the shopping mall, dimly aware in some twitchy reptilian-zombie way, that the check could be useful.

CUT TO: September, 2013. One of Sorenson’s true-believer Christian aides couldn’t stomach the sleaze, spilled the beans and incriminating emails, and landed Sorenson in an ethics committee investigation that he couldn’t crawl out of. At this point, former Ron-now-Rand Paul operative Kesari jetted to neighboring flat state Nebraska so as to not look suspicious, and gunned it straight to Iowa to get that motherfucking $25,000 check from Sorenson that the lughead never cashed.

According to a federal indictment,

Kesari [the Paul operative] flew to Omaha, Nebraska, backtracked to Senator Sorenson’s home in Iowa, required that he and Senator Sorenson show each other that neither was wearing a recording device, and then asked that Senator Sorenson either return to Kesari or alter the $25,000 check that Kesari previously gave to Senator Sorenson...which Senator Sorenson refused to do.

One thing Sen. Sorenson had some experience with was ratting out others. He ratted out the pot dealer he got busted with and got his sentence reduced to five days and probation, and later, in office, voted to turn up the heat in the War On Drugs (funny how this didn’t bother Ron Paul’s principled people); and last year, after FBI agents raided Sorenson’s home and took his and his family’s computers, Sorenson copped a plea. Now the feds have the very top people in both Ron and Rand Paul’s campaigns for president going back to 2007, campaigns heavily underwritten by Silicon Valley billionaires and true believers...

This past week has been an active one in the government’s case against Jesse Benton, John Tate and Dimitrios Kesari—the Southern Iowa District Court ruled that they were such a risk for leaking confidential documents that they could only view government evidence on CDs stored in their lawyers’ offices.

On Thursday of this week, Jesse Benton and John Tate appeared before the court and pled not guilty on a number counts that mirror the Watergate charges 40 years ago: conspiracy to “knowingly defraud the United States”; “knowingly and willfully falsify, conceal and cover up by a trick, scheme and device a material fact in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch”; “knowingly cause the concealing, covering up, falsification...with the intent to impede obstruct, and influence the investigation...” and so on.

Meanwhile, the Court just sided with Google that it still wasn’t required to comply with the FBI warrant just yet and allow access to all the Gmail accounts that the feds demanded last year. As Google was careful to point out in its filings, the company has made sure to preserve and protect all email communications from those listed on the warrant — including presumably Ron Paul’s emails — to prevent anyone from trying to scrub or alter them. So Google is essentially complying, and they’re going to eventually hand them over, in all likelihood, and it will be some very incriminating material that could drive a barbed stake in the heart of libertarianism’s First Family...

The funny thing is that real libertarians don’t even necessarily believe that bribery and fraud are legitimate crimes, if carried out in self-interest. For the most part, even mainstream libertarians from the CATO Institute argue that bribery should be legal.

And yet—because libertarians have paradoxically transformed in recent years into the most sanctimonious loud-mouthed whiners in the political arena, this is one of those ugly, sleazy, low-rent corruption scandals, going all the way into the Paul family gene pool, that won’t sit well with the young, credulous males who give the libertarian cult its energy.

Most of all, however, this story finally answers the question that all the hundreds of quasi-grizzled, quasi-cynical campaign trail journalists failed to answer: What happened to Rand Paul’s presidential campaign, the most hyped-up, promoted candidacy of anyone’s over the past two years? The liberal media has been drooling over Rand Paul like he’s the second coming, the Confederate with the heart of gold that all middle-class liberals dream of. I heard a lot of suckers claim that the Koch brothers had suddenly decided, after all these years of supporting their pet Pauls, that Rand was not to their liking, too much of a lightweight, or something like that. Because you know the Kochs only go with Very Serious Gravitas-y Heavyweights—the Herman Cains, Michele Bachmanns, Scott Walkers…

I’ve learned since coming back here that American political journalists mistake their sneering for cynicism. Cynicism is what you learn in a place like Russia, which isn’t as far from the US as one would think (or hope). It never crosses a smug sneery journalist’s mind that the politics they’re reporting on is as corrupt as a tinpot dictator’s, that all the cant about principles is capital to be cashed, and cash it they do. Because politics is about dividing up trillions of dollars in wealth and power and privilege, not about high-minded debates in three-pointed hats.

Those campaign donations that all the boring, unreadable nonprofit watchdog sites report on—that’s the dull accounting stuff for public consumption. The real game is the payoff—the check cashed, the dummy company that gets the wire transfer. First you have to be willing to see that it’s there.


Futsal: it might look like a simple game, but playing it well is far from easy. It takes a level of technical and tactical understanding that can take years to develop.

Luckily, there are those out there who already have this knowledge and are generous enough to share it. The following 25 tips for futsal have been put together by elite level futsal players and coaches (credits below), with decades of combined experience in the game.

They’ve distilled down the complexity of the game into simple technical and tactical rules: 25 maxims that you can bank on making you a better player, and improving your team. Learn them, live them, love them.

Attacking Futsal Tactics

Open the court, wingers should play hugging the sidelines to provide maximum width

The 3 second rule: players must be on the move all the time when they don’t have the ball. When your team is attacking you should never stay in the same place without the ball for more than 3 seconds. In a game of 40 minutes you play for 4 minutes with the ball and 36 without it. To find space, occupy the space left free by a teammate. The player with the ball moves closer to the defender (to be able to go past him and force him to turn around), the players without the ball move away from their defenders (to create space and passing options). Help the player who has the ball. Sometimes this means getting closer; other times you need to move away. The aim, every time, is to create a clear passing line between you and your teammates. Never lose sight of the ball nor the eyes of the teammate who has it – sometimes it doesn’t matter if you move if your teammate has not even seen you. Pass and run – like the old motto: ‘pass and move’, but with an emphasis on the urgency of your movement. Be generous with your passing. The game is won by the TEAM who scores more goals; not the player who scores more goals. Separate where you look from where you pass. Do not make obvious passes. Use the element of disguise. Futsal is a sport for “liars”. Good players make it more difficult for the opposition to read them by performing feints when they’re passing, and checking away from their markers before moving in the other direction and losing their marker. (See an example of Sean Garnier do it in his tips for futsal – see tip 2 on his list). Passes must be strong but not carelessly violent. A firm pass doesn’t give defenders any unnecessary time to intercept it, or to close the space on the player receiving it. Be careful with passes from one wing to another when playing close to your own goal, near the “D”. If they’re intercepted they’ll lead to an easy chance for the opposition.

The rule of 5 passes. Patience is often needed in futsal. Where the opponents are set-up behind the ball in a defensive position, expect to pass the ball at least 5 times before shooting to disorganise them. The goalkeeper must know how to deal with the tempo of the game. When their team is losing, goalkeepers should play as quick as possible, but in a winning position they should take their time with the restarts and their throws. The backman or “fix” (or any player for that matter) never dribbles if he is the last man, because if he loses the ball it will be a 1 v 1 against the goalkeeper. Finish the play with a strong shot to avoid a counterattack. A weakly struck shot ends up in the goalkeepers arms and can quickly put the opponents on the front foot.

Defending Futsal Tactics

Aggressiveness: a ball is never given up; fight for every single one. Defending is more about attitude than technique. Players have to want to steal the ball with everything they’ve got and try to be the best defender in the team. Strength in the tackle. Tackle the ball like you mean it but not violently. Do not allow the player with the ball to think. Continuously annoy / disrupt the opponent but without trying to steal the ball, unless they lose control of it. Never lose sight of the ball or the eyes of the player who has it. Exactly the same tip as no.6, but equally crucial in defense. The wing (sideline) is one more defender. Direct the opposition player with the ball towards it. There is no rest when defending and no player should adopt an upright position / stance, as the opposition will exploit the tiniest mistake to score.

All players must defend behind the ball. When you haven’t got the ball all players get back to defend, and all of them should be behind the ball, making it difficult for the opposition to break you down. Never cross over in defence. Talk to each other and change the players being marked. There should be constant communication between defenders

The above list has been reproduced (with small amendments) from “FUTSAL: Technical & Tactical Concepts” by Dr. Daniel Berdejo-del-Fresno, Jonathan Steel and David Jennings. This has been done with the permission of Dr. Daniel Berdejo-del-Fresno, who, among a host of achievements, is Sports Scientist / Strength & Conditioning Coach for the England National Futsal Team and has plenty of experience with elite level futsal players. Daniel has generously made his book available free for download on his blog: http://danielberdejodelfresno.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/book-released-futsal-technical-tactical.html It contains lots of futsal tips, techniques and tactics – definitely worth downloading a copy.

More tips and tactics for futsal

If you’re just starting out on your futsal journey, and you’re craving more tips. Check out our top 10 tips for futsal beginners. Full of very practical tips, it is a useful crib sheet for anyone new to the game.

Share this: Tweet

Email


Android OS version: 8.1.0_r7

8.1.0_r7 For devices: Kenzo

Kenzo Authors build: xyyx

xyyx Source code: https://github.com/nitrogen-project | https://github.com/nitrogen-os-devices

https://github.com/nitrogen-project | https://github.com/nitrogen-os-devices Developers: xyyx

xyyx Thanks: billchen1977 for brilliant work on Kenzo, ezio84, beanstown106, maxwen and etc.

billchen1977 for brilliant work on Kenzo, ezio84, beanstown106, maxwen and etc. Google Apps: opengapps.org

opengapps.org Recovery: TWRP

Attention:

I don't force you to use my ROM. I fix bugs that doesn't require many commits from CAF.

If you don't like something, please, use another ROM and don't write in this thread. Please.

SELinux in permissive mode. It is ready for enforcing. But I like no denies.

Go to your recovery

Wipe Data

Install ROM and Gapps zip.

Reboot - 1st boot takes around 5-10 minutes.

Code: Status Bar: - Network traffic; - Bluetooth device battery level in status bar; - Adjust brightness by sliding across the status bar; - Input method selector notification. Quick Settings: - Number of rows and columns; - Quick pulldown; - No QS on secured lockscreen; - Brightness slider; - Smart pulldown; - Show/hide adaptive brightness icon in QS; - LTE enable/disable tile. - Hiding tile's caption Buttons: For devices with hardware buttons - Enable/disable buttons; - Adjust brightness; - Keys brightness timeout; - Reassignment hardware buttons action; - Volume rocker wake; - Playback control by volume keys; - Allow volume keys to enable/disable “Do Not Disturb” mode. Navigation Bar: - 3 type navigation bar mode: Smartbar (as usual in android) and Fling (navbar from “Dirty Unicorns” rom), AOSP Navbar; - Pulse settings in Fling navbar; - Navbar height control in portrait and landscape orientations; - Context buttons layout position; - Context buttons transparency; - Button touch animation; - Cursor arrows in navbar while typing; - Force show/hide navbar on the bottom side when device is rotated; Gestures: - Open camera by double tap the power button; - Double tap on lockscreen to put the device to sleep; - Double tap status bar to put the device to sleep; Lock Screen: - Lock screen shortcuts; - Show/hide weather on lock screen; - Longpress power button with lock screen turn on torch; Power Menu: - Customizing power menu; - Enable/disable power menu on secure lock screen. Recents apps: - Exclude apps from the recents panel; - Select recents view. - Clear all button positions Miscellaneous: - Screenshot type – fullscreen screenshots or selected area as a screenshots; - Enable MTP instead charging after connect to PC; - Wakelock blocker; - Alarm blocker - App ops; - Wake up device if charger is plugged/unplugged; - Allow signature spoofing (microG). Other: - Quick unlock - Enable/disable dashboard suggestions, conditions;

Pal

Known Bugs:

XDA:DevDB Information

Nitrogen OS, ROM for the Xiaomi Note 3 Pro Standart/Prime

XDA:DevDB Information

[ROM] ► [8.1.0] ► [OTA] ► Nitrogen OS Beta, ROM for the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3

Contributors

Version Information

Based on AOSP xyyx (Max) - main developerCopy the ROM and Gapps in SD card.EnjoyStable builds HERE Testing versions HERE Mirror for SF - HERE If you like my ROM, you can support me.xyyx:- sim detection after boot (random)- VOLTE video call- hidden wifi (need to turn off and on display after adding)8.x OreoLinux 3.10.xAOSP, CM, Pure, DU, OmniROMTesting2017-01-112018-03-04


Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary has rejected suggestions that UK-Israeli relations would suffer if party leader Ed Miliband becomes prime minister in May. She dismissed such claims a bid to “play party politics” with foreign affairs.

Yvette Cooper’s comments were issued in an exclusive interview with the Jewish Chronicle in response to remarks made by Conservative Northern Irish Secretary Theresa Villiers.

Villiers had claimed in January a newly-elected Labour government would have a “chilling” effect on Britain’s relationship with Israel.

Cooper said the suggestion that Britain’s role as a key ally of Israel would be diminished if Labour wins May’s general election is “utter nonsense.”

"It's nonsense to say Labour is anti-Israel", says @YvetteCooperMP. Relationship w/Jewish community “strong as ever” http://t.co/rPe19KKNAy — Marcus Dysch (@MarcusDysch) February 12, 2015

She said Villiers’ bid to play political football with foreign policy issues was “disappointing.”

Cooper acknowledged, however, Miliband’s condemnation of PM David Cameron’s response to the 2014 Gaza conflict was scathing. At the height of the conflict, Miliband had described Israel's military offensive in Gaza as“unacceptable and unjustifiable.”

The Labour chief had also criticized Cameron’s stance on Israel’s actions, accusing the Tory leader of being too ambivalent on the military campaign.

Boycott Divestment & Sanctions: ‘Tactic not principle’

While some backbench Labour MPs have signaled support for Britain’s boycott, divestment and sanctions movement (BDS) against Israel, the campaign has not been endorsed by Miliband or Cooper.

The British arm of the movement is backed by academics, pro-Palestinian campaigners, and politicians across the UK.

READ MORE:UK MP says Bradford doesn’t want Israeli goods, services or visitors

The BDS campaign, which is supported worldwide, says it seeks to “strengthen and spread the culture of boycott as a central form of civil resistance to Israeli occupation, colonialism and apartheid.”

Launched in the Occupied Territories in 2005, it is supported by over 170 Palestinian organizations representing exiled Palestinian refugees, Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and Palestinian’s who suffer discrimination in Israel.

Speaking to the Jewish Chronicle, Cooper said Miliband has made his position on boycotts against Israel clear.

“Ed does defend Israel, but that’s not to say he will support every decision the Israeli government takes. No one could expect that,” she added.

While addressing the UN in October 2014, world renowned linguist and political commentator Noam Chomsky was somewhat critical about the BDS campaign. He argued it is characterized by a set of tactics rather than principles.

“Tactics are not principles. They’re not actions that you undertake no matter what because you think they’re right,” he said.

Decline in neighborhood policing

As part of her role in government, Cooper has worked closely with Jewish groups in an effort to tackle racism and hate crimes in the UK.

Amid a rising climate of anti-Semitism in Britain, the Shadow Home Secretary said government cuts had led to drop in “community-led policing.” Cooper said the decline of a neighborhood police presence in Britain is problematic.

“You need that community-led policing work because people have a right to feel safe on their streets and in their homes,” she added.

A poll conducted in late January indicates Israeli foreign policy has not impacted on the majority of Britons’ resolve that Israel has a right to exist.

Great that PM says antisemitism goes against what UK stands for. Wish politicians would say that for all racism http://t.co/S7WSr1VlpF — rachel shabi (@rachshabi) February 9, 2015

The survey, commissioned by the UK’s All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Anti-Semitism, revealed 89 percent of Britons polled said the Middle Eastern state has a right to exist.

The survey suggested Britain’s current rate of anti-Semitism mirrors that of 2005, hitting 4.6 on a scale of one to 10. According to the scale, one indicates anti-Semitism is “not a problem” in the UK, while 10 indicates it is “a serious problem.”

In the wake of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris, members of the Jewish community in North London’s Stoke Newington told the Shadow Home Secretary they were concerned.

Cooper said high-profile terror attacks and anti-Semitic abuse on the street and on social media platforms can seriously impact people’s day-to-day lives.

“We should never ignore that. We have to take it seriously and provide that reassurance for people,” she said.

The Shadow Home Secretary insisted a newly-elected Labour government would implement measures to counter extremism and the rise of radicalization in Britain. She added a reformed strategy for tackling hate crime in Britain is paramount.

Cooper condemned social media firms for failing to intercept online anti-Semitic abuse, stressing how Labour's Lucia Berger MP was exposed to offensive vitriol from an online troll in 2014.


Dubai startup BitOasis announces its first round of funding

Dubai based bitcoin startup BitOasis has secured a new investment of seed funding for an undisclosed amount led by Wamda Capital.

BitOasis provides bitcoin exchange, wallet, and cross-border payment services in and around the UAE.

According to Wamda Capital, the seed funding round included Barry Silbert’s Digital Currency Group (DCG), Samih Toukan, the serial tech entrepreneur chairman of Jabbar Group, as well as Payfort and other tech angel investors based in New York and Dubai.

“Our aim since launch is to build the largest digital currency exchange and payments infrastructure platform in the Middle East and North Africa,” said Ola Doudin, CEO and cofounder of BitOasis.

Within the next year using the new venture capital, the bitcoin startup plans to grow its team further and expand to other Arab countries around the region to strengthen its presence outside the UAE.

One of the main advantages that BitOasis has over other startups in the space is at this time it’s the only bitcoin business focused on the Middle East.


Get answers from your peers along with millions of IT pros who visit Spiceworks.

Here are some stories we’ve found across the internet from tech support folks we’d love to share.

Each of them is full of fun and drama.

1. Making users liars since 1975

Once, I had a user come in…

User: My MacBook air is really slow.

Me (while opening up terminal and running uptime): Hmm, when was the last time you rebooted?

User: Oh, a few days ago.

Me: According to your compute, it’s been up for 41 days.

User: It’s lying.

She also had 5 Chrome Windows with at least 20 tabs apiece, Spotify, Photoshop, Word, AND Excel.

2. Now you see me, now you don’t.

Customer: Do I have to watch my computer screen to use your app?

Me: It’s considered a best practice. Otherwise you can’t see what people are saying.

Customer: I see…

3. Cat and mouse

Me: Good afternoon, this is Ari. How can I help you?

Lady: My son’s computer is just pissing me off. He is traveling with his new wife. Can you help me?

Me: Sure. Have you started the computer?

Lady: Oh yeah.

Me: I will need to see the configuration. Can you do a left click on the Start button bottom left of your screen with the mouse?

Lady: That arrow thing is acting like a son of a bitch, not moving. The right clicks seems to show me some shit.

Me: Could you please lift the mouse and check that the ball is moving freely and there is no dirt?

Lady: Ah… uh… Now I know where that bloody ball came from. My cat’s been playing with it since yesterday…

4. P as in Peter

Me: Sir, do you see a login screen asking for username and password?

User: Yes.

Me: Type admin as username.

User: Badmi?

Me: No, sir, its admin. A as in alfa, D as in delta, M as in Mike, I as in India, N as in November…

User: Admin, right.

(35 minutes passed. Finally, the user did it.)

Me: Can you type the word password in the password field and click login?

User: Bassword. “Invalid bassword.”

Me: Try again. Type P as in Paul.

User: B as ball?

Me: No sir. It’s P as in Peter or P as in parrot.

User: B as Beter?

Me (trying again): P as papa.

User: B as bapa,

(This next part is my favorite.)

Me (losing my temper): Sir, it’s not AB… it’s abcdefghijklmnop. P. P!

User: Oh so it’s P! Huh!! I’ll try now.

5. My computer is not yours

Me: XYZ technical support, how may I assist you?

User: I have some difficulty in locating some files on my computer, it seems I am not able to open any files

Me: Sir, could you please check whether you are able to get the Desktop screen.

User: Yes, now what?

Me: Can you open My Computer?

User: How can I open your computer?

6. Fix it!

Customer: Fix it!

Me: Fix what, ma’am?

Customer: My Internet connection. Can’t you tell why I’m calling?

Me: No, ma’am, the technology doesn’t work that way.

(I apologize for any inconvenience, and then check her connection. Everything is fine. I even test with ping and packet testing; again, very strong signal to the Internet.)

Me: Ma’am, are you using a router?

Customer: I don’t know. You guys installed it all.

Me: Ma’am, we don’t install routers. Do you know the name of the router you’re using?

Customer: No.

Me: We can test the modem to make sure it’s working. Can you take your laptop into the room with the modem and unplug the modem from the rou—

(Had I finished, I would have asked her to connect the laptop to the modem directly.)

Customer: No. I couldn’t possibly do that! You just need to fix it.

Me: Ma’am, are you suffering from an illness or injury preventing me from helping you today?

Customer: No, and I couldn’t possibly be bothered with that. The modem and the laptop are on different floors. I called you to fix it. Why can’t you just fix it?

7. Push When Ringing

Me: Thank you for calling [Cell Phone Provider]. This is [My Name]. How may I assist you today?

Customer: Yes. Every time my phone rings and I try to answer it, my phone shuts off. It happens every time.

Me: Well, that is pretty odd. Let me see if I can figure out what the issue with your handset is.

(After spending almost an hour trying to look up account info and diagnose what could possibly be wrong with this woman’s phone with no luck, I am about to give up and replace the phone.)

Me: So that I can write up in your account what exactly is happening so we can replace your phone, what button are you pushing when trying to answer the phone?

Customer: The “Push When Ringing” button.

Me: I’m sorry, which button?

Customer: “Push When Ringing.” You know? P-W-R.

Me: I think I know the problem…

What are the funniest tech support stories you’ve ever heard? Share with us.


Recently I was reminded of something I learned ten years ago, while studying in Beijing. It was a month ago, and I was walking into a restaurant in Chengdu, around closing time, with a group of my wife’s friends. It was nearly 9pm and most of the staff were eating their shift meal or clearing tables, waiting for the last diners to finish. I asked a waiter if we could get some food and he responded apologetically that they were closing. Knowing that our dinner options were dwindling, I pleaded our case, asking that they seat us. To deflect my request the waiter said, ‘sorry, we are out of gas’. I knew it was a lie, but I did not take it personally.

It brought to mind the director of my study abroad program in Beijing, who had introduced me to what she dubbed “the social institution of the polite lie.” The polite lie is a lie that a stranger tells a stranger to avoid the discomfort of being direct. She told a story of trying to catch a ride from a cab driver that was playing a game of cards on the street. “I would take you,” he said, but my car is out of gas. She could see that he was playing cards and did not want to leave his game. She could also see the dashboard of his car, and she pointed out that he did in fact have gas in his car. “That gauge is broken,” the driver retorted without looking up from his game.

This phenomenon seemed to pop up frequently after it had been pointed out to me. On one occasion I ran into a group of friends eating at a restaurant. I sat down at a table beside them, not intending to eat. As we chatted, a waiter approached and asked what I wanted to order. “I’ve already eaten, but I would like some tea,” I said. “Sorry, we are out of tea”, the waiter said casually and walked away. I was stunned by the slap of the lie; I felt a mixture of confusion and insult. I see now the waiter was just too busy to serve me. I was announcing that I was not going to be a paying customer, and he was announcing that he was not going to be giving me complimentary tea.

Though it seemed interesting from an anthropological perspective, the polite lie always bugged me. I love China, and this niggling social convention felt like the most disingenuous part of it.

One frustrating encounter happened last year near my apartment. A new toy store had opened at the corner, and I wandered in to peruse their wares, idly chatting with the cashier as I fondled a magnetic floating globe. “So you guys just opened,” I asked. “We’re open every day from morning till night,” she responded. “No, I mean this location,” I clarified, “you just opened this store.” “No, we’ve been here for a few years, you probably just didn’t notice,” she replied matter-of-factly. I was infuriated by her suggestion that the opening of a new toy store near my house could have gone unnoticed by me for so long. I was instantly fuming, and then instantly amused at myself for taking offense at the remark. But I still couldn’t understand why this woman would want to dupe me over something so inconsequential. There had to be a functional purpose for this evasive rhetorical device.

Then it suddenly dawned on me. She wasn’t trying to trick me, she was trying to cover up her own unfamiliarity with the business. I knew the store had just opened – I had seen it under construction – she must have just been hired. Maybe she didn’t even know the store’s history. “How long have you been working here,” I asked. Her face reddened, and she acknowledged that it was her first day.

I brought up the polite lie with an expat friend of mine, another long-time Chengdu resident, and he mentioned that he had often encountered the polite lie with his Chinese friends, though not as its recipient. He told me:

My Chinese friends would invite me to go do something, and I would tell them, ‘sorry, I can’t, I have to watch my kids.’ And that was the truth. And my Chinese friends would say ‘Okay, okay, okay, its okay, I understand. No problem.’ And I could hear in their voice that they thought I was just making up an excuse.

The Chinese friends assumed they were being told a polite lie, happy to accept it. Social pleasantries utilize coded language, and if you are attuned to detect it, the polite lie is not so much an affront, as a form of indirect communication.

There is no question that face plays a role in the perpetuation of the polite lie as a social convention. Rejecting someone outright can cause them to lose face, and a polite lie allows you to avoid that by fabricating an excuse. It is in some ways a gesture of respect, demonstrating a desire to avoid contradicting the other person. A polite lie can be a lifeline, allowing you to deflect the wrath of a social superior. In that way, I can imagine how these micro-doses of mistruth function as a kind of social lubricant, diffusing status conflicts, maintaining norms, and preventing the loss of face.

So when I was recently hit with the explanation that the restaurant was out of gas, I was neither insulted nor dissuaded. Most restaurants in China close pretty early by Western standards, and I had been welcomed and denied by wait staff in similar situations in the past. So while I knew we might not be served, I also knew that the possibility was negotiable.

If you want to overturn a polite lie, directly confronting it is not advisable, since the lie was concocted with the courteous intention to avoid confrontation. The way to diplomatically counter such a lie is to build upon the provided scenario, to give the other person an option to reverse their stance without losing face. You give them a step down (一个台阶下 ) as they say in Chinese, a way to yield without embarrassment.

A Chinese friend repeated the staff’s message for me, “They said they are out of gas. We should go.” I ignored her. “Maybe you have enough gas for just few more dishes?” I said to the waiter. “We have aaaaaall these people – I gestured to our group – I don’t want them to be hungry.” Perhaps sensing oncoming hassle, the staff relented and ushered us upstairs.

Avoidance of hassle can be a key motive for the polite lie. A Dutch friend, newly arrived in Chengdu, asked me to help him find a tailor who could execute some fashions designs that he had. His ideas were pretty straightforward, and he was frustrated that every tailor he visited had told him, “We can’t do that” – it should have been a snap

for any experienced tailor, he reasoned. I explained to him that the reason he was being given was probably not the whole story. When the tailors told him “we can’t do that,” they were really saying, “you look like a big hassle, and I don’t want to deal with you.” They were excusing themselves from the interaction before it even began.

One of the most confounding things about the polite lie is that it is deployed when it seems unnecessary. The lies of the tailors did not even register as lies to my friend – after all, why would anyone even bother lying about something like that? Why do I even care how long a toy store has been open? I can cope with the harsh truth if you just don’t feel like keeping the restaurant open for me. There is part of me that refuses to accept that casually lying to a stranger can be anything other than socially harmful. But then I catch a whiff of my own ethno-centrism.

I remember a Chinese friend who refused to accept my (heartfelt) assertion that an American friend and I graphically joking about each other’s mothers was anything other than disgracefully insulting. The more I joked about my American friend’s mother, the angrier the Chinese friend became, and the funnier it became to me, exacerbating the situation. To me, the suggestion that my American friend could possibly be offended by such remarks was absurd. After all, I would not dare to insult the mother of anyone but my dearest friends. To me, the mother jokes were an expression of fraternity.

If I can embrace the idea of an insult as a form of endearment, I should be able to accept the possibility of a lie as a form of courtesy. Whether it boils down to the interpretation of an insult, or the interpretation of truth, context is the ultimate arbiter of meaning.

I brushed up against the soul of the matter again this past weekend. I had called my water store to order three new jugs of drinking water, and typical of their recent service, an hour and a half had passed without the water being delivered. I called the water dispatch center, irate about the delay. “This happens all of the time,” I said. “ALL-THE-TIME. Every time.” I was verging on belligerent. “The delivery guy was eating lunch,” the voice on the other end of the line shot back reflexively. Was he really at lunch, I wondered. It was around lunchtime. It was impossible to know. Either way, the real reason for the delay was more complicated.

One factor, I learned later, was that the dispatch center number I had been calling was no longer technically correct. The branch was still operational, but it had been supplanted by a newer, closer branch, which was now responsible for delivering to my section of the complex. The old branch was still obliged to field my call, because I had pre-purchased water coupons from them, but now I was out of their delivery zone. The slow delivery time was the result of my order being relayed from one dispatch center to the next, getting de-prioritized along the way.

The water delivery guy explained this all to me, when he finally arrived with my jugs. I could understand why the woman from the old branch would have elided over these details on the phone. It probably seemed a lot simpler to tell me that the delivery guy was eating lunch, than to explain the politics of delivery zone redistricting to an angry foreigner. The efficiency the polite lie must have been alluring – how quickly it could staunch my stream of complaints, how cleanly it could end the phone call.

I am averse to social conventions that perpetuate euphemistic language, so at the end of the day, even after giving consideration to its practical function and cultural context, it is still hard for me to see the polite lie as anything other than a kind of linguistic pathogen. It dilutes communication, and it normalizes a social dynamic in which two people are not always comfortable being completely honest with one another.

But there is an important lesson that I take away from the experience. If I dislike an element of local culture, I should make sure that I dislike it for what it really is, and not what I imagine it to be. In practice, local meaning trumps the pseudo-objective perspective of outsider like myself.

Among denizens of any locale there is a shared familiarity with the contours of social discourse. Language is a map of our collective cognitive landscape, and the polite lie is just one thoroughfare of communication that we navigate to reach one another’s intended meaning. I doubt that the polite lie is unique to China, but it was certainly alien to my upbringing. That makes it anathema to me, but for many others, the idea of a “friendly” insult to someone’s mother is no doubt equally unfathomable. If the people who traffic in the polite lie do not feel deceived, that should factor into how I view the phenomenon.

The polite lie is not evidence of moral failure, or a predisposition for deception, or a culture of untrustworthiness… it is just an anachronistic piece of social etiquette that rubs me the wrong way. A lie is a lie, except when it doesn’t feel like one. A punch in the face is assault, except when it happens in a boxing ring.


U.S. President Barack Obama told Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday that Russia's actions in Ukraine were not conducive to a diplomatic solution of the crisis in that country, and the White House warned that Moscow would suffer further costs for its behavior.

Obama spoke to Putin at the Russians' request, a senior administration official said, describing the call as "frank and direct," a diplomatic construction that usually means tense.

"The president made clear that the diplomatic path was open and our preferred way ahead, but that Russia's actions are neither consistent with or conducive to that," the official said.

Obama told Putin that Kiev had made "real offers" to address concerns about the decentralization of powers to local governments in the country.

"That is a matter for Ukrainians to decide," the official said. "We have always and will continue to support an inclusive process."

Earlier, U.S. officials stopped short of announcing a new set of sanctions against Russia but said they were in consultations with European partners about the prospect.

The European Union agreed on Monday to step up sanctions against Moscow by expanding a list of people subjected to asset freezes and visa bans.

Keep updated: Sign up to our newsletter Email * Please enter a valid email address Sign up Please wait… Thank you for signing up. We've got more newsletters we think you'll find interesting. Click here Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later. Try again Thank you, The email address you have provided is already registered. Close

"Russia continues to engage in provocative actions in eastern Ukraine. The mere presence of the troops, in addition to what else they've done inside Ukraine, creates a threat of destabilization within Ukraine," White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters.

"I can assure you that Russia's provocations - further transgressions and provocations will come with a cost. And I'm not here to specify what cost will come from which specific action, but there have already been costs imposed on Russia; there will be further costs imposed on Russia."

The next round of U.S. sanctions, which would be the fourth imposed since the Ukraine crisis began, is likely to target Russians close to Putin as well as Russian entities, three sources familiar with the discussions said on Sunday.

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki noted that the United States was prepared to impose sanctions on individuals and entities in the financial services, energy, metals, mining, engineering and defense sectors.

The sanctions have been the most visible sign of U.S. anger at Russia's annexation of the Crimea region in southern Ukraine last month, reflecting the deepest plunge in U.S.-Russian relations since the Cold War.

Obama spoke to French President Francois Hollande about the crisis on Monday and praised Ukraine's government for showing "great restraint" and working to unify the country, the White House said.

Carney also confirmed that the director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, John Brennan, had been in Kiev over the weekend and decried what he called "false claims" leveled at the CIA by Russian authorities.

"Senior level visits of intelligence officials are a standard means of fostering mutually beneficial security cooperation including U.S.-Russian intelligence collaboration going back to the beginnings of the post-Cold War era," Carney said.

"U.S. and Russian intelligence officials have met over the years. To imply that U.S. officials meeting with their counterparts (in Kiev) is anything other than in the same spirit is absurd," he said.

According to media reports, Russia has urged Washington to explain what Brennan was doing in Ukraine.


Reading Steiner:

REFERENCE-OGRAPHY

PUNOGRAPHY:

So, when you go back in time in "Life is Strange", you technically bring anyone who died a few seconds ago back from the dead, right? What if those people'sdon't come back with them? What if they just came back as empty husks with a few base instincts, like cannibalism (the basest of all human instincts, of course)? And if souls aren't affected by time-travel, then logically, fungus isn't either, because souls and fungus are in the same biological kingdom (duh), which means that whenever you go back in time in "Life is Strange", fungus is able to evolve more and more until something that used to only be able to infect insects jumps to infecting mammals -- even humans. The evolution would seem so sudden to anyone without the Reading Steiner* as the fungus makes its way into food delivered to the masses and infects the human species on a global scale.So, when you go back in time in "Life is Strange"... what are youdoing?1. An awareness of temporal re-experience2. The ability to recognize that you have undergone a nonstandard passing of time3. Knowing that you have gone back in time, but also retaining your memory from the original timelineThe red-headed girl, Ellie, is from "The Last of Us" which spawned my first parody series, "THE LEAST OF US" (look out for spoilers).The two with the gun, Lee and Clem, are from "The Walking Dead Game", which I've also made cartoons for called "THE WALK-IN DEAD" (also spoilers).The title is a pun on the term "temporal anomaly", which is a disruption in the space-time continuum usually resulting from time-travel or something like that.


In addition to Nintendo 2DS announcement, Nintendo of America announced a $50 dollar price drop for the struggling Wii U console. We've just gotten word from Nintendo Australia will not be following suit. As of this point there are no current plans for a Wii U price drop in Australia or New Zealand.

This also follows news that Nintendo will not be bringing the Wind Waker HD Limited Edition to our shores, or the Wii U Wind Waker HD bundle.

The limited edition for Wind Waker HD was rather snazzy, featuring a Ganondorf figurine, so I find this news rather disappointing.

As for the price drop, the statement coming from Nintendo Australia didn't necessarily rule out any future price drops. I suspect we'll definitely see one, but probably not before Christmas.


Primus :: 6.24.14 :: The Capitol Theatre :: Port Chester, NY

Read Chad’s review after the photo gallery.

Primus is an acquired taste, existing in – or more like occupying – the space where art-rock, metal, funk and jamband meet to forget themselves and rage together for a few hours. That the trio is sometimes inaccessible and occasionally stunty is part of the deal: set the scene, let the casual onlookers hang out nervously around the perimeter and engage front-and-center the fans for whom this odd collection of sounds and grooves holds singular appeal.

It isn’t that the setlists or jams see enormous variation or surprise, or that the expected theatrics – gnarly stage setup, titillating visuals, Les Claypool’s twisted-wiseacre monologues – are all that fresh each and every time. No, what brings you back to Primus – what sells out a show like this typically galvanizing night at the Capitol Theater – is the depth of the experience.

All Les Claypool bands have layers. You start with the carnival atmosphere, commingling with those who have also come for the “show” aspect. This is a place where of course there will be trippy lights, and of course there will be two 15-foot astronaut statues flanking the stage and of course vintage Popeye cartoons will be shown on the projection screen during set break, because why not?

A layer below that is the aural assault: Les’ filthy thump, slaps and grooves, Tim Alexander’s pummeling, yet nimble drumwork, Larry LaLonde’s abrasive guitar runs, stabs and snatches of melodic counterpoint. And a layer below that is the actual songcraft – a catalog of character sketches and incisive, even scathing commentary that asks nothing of the listener but to hang on a little longer before it’s default-described as “wacky,” so often the crutch phrase used to describe Primus’ eccentric approach.

The two sets at the Capitol drew from across the Primus discography, and what was most encouraging was how the best songs from 2011’s Green Naughahyde – particularly the frank, let’s-funk-our-way-through-the-pain “Jilly’s On Smack” and the mutant bounce of “Lee Van Cleef” – have integrated with the expected Primus highs of tunes like “Jerry Was a Race Car Driver.” I don’t share the opinion that “Naughahyde” is any great leap forward for the band, but a solid collection to keep pace – if not quite on par –with the Frizzle Fry era of Primus output and convince us that with all the other things occupying Claypool’s creative space, returning to Primus isn’t just a nostalgia trip.

Maybe that’s the way to think about Primus in 2014. Les turned 50 last year and proved he could leave it behind before, so that it’s back and once again thriving – having not altered its fundamentals – is the reason to keep coming. There’s heart behind Primus; it’s not a mechanical “wacky” for wacky’s sake. Underneath the scary-funky menagerie populating this trio’s world is a band aging with grace.

Primus, 6/24/2014 Setlist:

Set One: Those Damned Blue-Collar Tweekers, The Last Salmon Man, Southbound Pachyderm, Over the Falls, Lee Van Cleef, The Heckler, Wynona’s Big Brown Beaver, Frizzle Fry, Groundhog’s Day

Set Two: Spaghetti Western, Duchess and the Proverbial Mind Spread, Moron TV, American Life, Jilly’s On Smack, Mr. Krinkle, My Name Is Mud, Mrs. Blaileen, Jerry Was a Race Car Driver, Harold of the Rocks

Encore: Too Many Puppies > Hello Skinny > Too Many Puppies

JamBase | Primus Sucks

Go See Live Music!


“They love to engage in revisionist history,” Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) said on the floor of the U.S. Congress, Nov. 19. She was referring to Democrats as she had risen to speak in opposition to an environmental protection measure intended to safeguard a 21-mile segment of Molalla River in Oregon. As she spoke, Foxx set about some blatant revisionism of her own.

Foxx’s began her objection with the bizarre suggestion that the GOP had been the champion of “good” environmental protection laws. Had she stopped there, her floor speech would have justifiably been dismissed as a bit of irony. Instead, Foxx went on to perpetuate the misconception that Republicans were also the champions of civil rights legislation in the 1960s, amid fervent obstruction from Democrats.

Upon the completion of Foxx’s remarks, she was passionately rebuked by Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-CA). “I can’t believe my ears,” Cardoza said, and went on to assign credit for the Civil Rights Act (1964) and the Voting Rights Act (1965) to the efforts to the Democratic administration of Lyndon B. Johnson.

Here is video of the exchange on the House floor from the ThinkProgress.org Nov. 19 post on the subject. (continued below the clip)

While Cardoza’s assessment was factually correct and his tone appropriate, his rebuke of Foxx would have been strengthened by informing her that the Republican Party of which she spoke no longer exists. Indeed, the Republicans whose votes were vital to passing civil rights legislation in the 1960s would be derided as RINOs – Republicans in Name Only – by Foxx and like minded, right-wing ideologues of today’s GOP.

That conservatives have sought to maintain this myth is nothing new. Paul von Hipple addressed it in a 2005 Alternet.org post responding to a taxpayer funded “Republican Freedom Calendar” which presented a one-sided representation of their Party’s historic role as advocates of civil rights. The evidence employed to prop up this argument relies upon the higher proportion of GOP votes for the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

It’s a far too narrow interpretation of history, as von Hipple indicated in his 2005 post:

In fact, Congressional votes on the Civil Rights Act did not break along party lines – they split along regional lines. In the North, both parties supported the Civil Rights Act; in the South, both parties opposed it. The difference was that the Republican Party had very little presence in the South, which had been dominated since the 1870s by the segregationist wing of the Democratic Party.

This period marks a historical turning point for both political parties. President Johnson and liberal Northern Democrats were ill prepared for the Southern white backlash that followed the passage of civil rights legislation. Of course, the legislation wasn’t the only factor, but it was during this time that the Democratic Party set on a path to shedding its racist elements. In doing so, Democrats lost the political grip on the South it had held since the Great Depression.

The path chosen by the Republicans was altogether different. Interestingly, the GOP underwent a schism, not unlike the one presently in progress.

Republican conservatives, sympathetic to the racist backlash among Southern whites, made their first political inroads in the South around this time. The most significant evidence for this trend was the GOP’s 1964 presidential nomination of Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater.

Before Goldwater’s nomination, the GOP’s regional strength was based in the American North-East. Their party leaders were inclined to support government investment in infrastructure. Having been decimated during their initial struggle against Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal (which they decried as “socialist,” sound familiar?) a moderate GOP persisted as a minority party, seeking to improve FDR’s legislation rather than rail against it.

Goldwater lost to LBJ in 1964, but having won his home state and four other Southern states in the contest, the GOP’s course was set. They abandoned their moderate positions — the mantle of which Foxx is presently attempting to claim — in pursuit of the racially divisive “Southern Strategy.”

This political strategy was neatly summarized by Sidney Blumenthal in a 2003 Salon.com post:

With the coming of the civil rights revolution, Democratic presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson deployed the federal government to support social equality. In reaction, Republicans — from Barry Goldwater to Richard Nixon to Ronald Reagan — developed a Southern strategy to win over white voters in the region who felt betrayed. That strategy involved using widely understood code words going back to the Civil War like “states’ rights,” an updating of the well-worn strategy of Southern reactionaries to demagogue on race in order to keep poor and working-class whites divided from blacks on issues of common interest. Thus the party of Lincoln became the party of Reagan.

Indeed, Reagan’s ascendency is instructive. His rise was facilitated by the GOP’s rejection of its moderate voices. Just as Foxx mistakenly claimed the civil rights mantle on Nov. 19, Reagan did also. Yet his true feelings were betrayed by his policies and rhetoric.

From the above mentioned von Hibble Alternet post:

…Ronald Reagan, in his 1966 campaign to become governor of California, endorsed repeal of California’s Fair Housing Act, saying, “If an individual wants to discriminate against Negroes or others in selling or renting his house, it is his right to do so.”

Similarly, Foxx’s own statements over the past year illustrate her departure from the moderate positions of the kinder, gentler GOP of yore. She has more than made herself clear regarding the present-day civil rights issues, most notably in debates over the rights of homosexuals and health care reform.

My Care2 colleague Tracy Viselli understandably called for Foxx’s apology or resignation following her slanderous comments about Matthew Sheppard on the House floor while debating the hate crime legislation that bares his name. More recently, Viselli , rightly, took issue with Foxx’s declaration that the present health care reform proposals pose a bigger threat to America than “any terrorist from any country.” Add to this Foxx’s 2006 vote, along with 33 other Republicans, opposing the extension of the Voters Rights Act, and it becomes clear that any claim of civil rights advocacy exists only in her mind.

Further, these outrageous examples of Foxx’s true beliefs plainly illustrate that the North Carolina congresswoman has absolutely nothing in common with the Republicans who helped advance the cause of civil rights in the 1960s. Rather, Foxx is just another product of the cynical GOP which prospered by exploiting the societal divisions left after their passing.

Related on Care2:

~ Judy Shepard: Grace in the Face of Foxx

Photo used under the Creative Commons Attribution Act; Rep. Virginia Foxx


If Telstra wins the company will get between $100 million and $200 million more than what NBN Co expects to pay over a 10-year period.

It is understood the problem was caused by the lack of a specific year in the contract despite legal teams working on the deal for over two years.

Arguments heard by judge

The problem was discovered after the deal was signed and both sides attempted to plan the timing of the payments. Both sides have already had arguments heard by former Federal Court judge Kevin Lindgren in 2012.

Mr Lindgren found in favour of NBN Co in December 2012 and provided an 11-page explanation as part of the judgement. “I have come to the conclusion that NBN Co is correct," he said. “Telstra’s arguments are akin to the tail wagging the dog."

Telstra has chosen not to accept Mr Lindgren’s judgement and will contest the issue in the NSW Supreme Court. A preliminary hearing is due to begin on November 8 in Sydney.

Telstra spokeswoman Nicole McKechnie said the legal proceedings and their impact would be significant but not material from a investor perspective. “We have commenced legal proceedings with NBN Co over when CPI adjustments should start to apply under the NBN Definitive Agreements," she said. “We have one take on the contract and NBN Co has another." The case has the potential to cause problems for both companies as they enter fresh negotiations over the $11.2 billion contract.

Timing of lawsuit

Where Labor’s $37.4 billion NBN would have replaced Telstra’s copper network, the new Coalition government prefers a fibre-to-the-node approach that will use the copper connections. The Coalition government will now have to buy and use Telstra’s copper network, once valued at up to $17 billion, to build its fibre-to-the-node system which is expected to be cheaper and slower than Labor’s version.

Ms McKechnie said that resolving the issue before negotiations began would “help provide greater certainty and as such may assist future policy discussions." She also insisted the renegotiations of the contract had nothing to do with the timing of the lawsuit.

Telstra’s lead NBN negotiator Tony Warren last week told investors in Sydney that any negotiation would need to add value to the telco’s existing deal. But he also said that positive statements by Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull had helped assure the company a renegotiation could be successful for both sides.


ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The Senate has turned full-force toward repeal, replace, reform, what have you of Obamacare.

And while admitting the way is tough-going, Republicans by and large say: The premiums, and their potential to shred the family finances of households across America, are core to concerns.

Well, that is a core concern. But what’s an even bigger concern is the fact that all these discussions signify one thing, and one overlooked thing only: The free market, on America’s health care, has gone the way of the dodo bird.

“The biggest most notable damage is these skyrocketing premiums,” said Sen. Ron Johnson, CNN reported.

Notice what he didn’t say — that the biggest most notable damage from Obamacare is the fact that it set the government securely in place in America’s health care system.

But even on that — the skyrocketing premiums front — the Senate seems a bit flummoxed about what to do,

Look at these quotes, the first, from Johnson, as CNN noted: “I’m still on the kind of 30,000 foot-level in terms of what are the primary goals of our efforts here.”

And this, from Sen. John Cornyn: “We haven’t made any decisions. We’re just batting around ideas.”

And this, from Sen. Ted Cruz: “This is not going to be easy.”

These are not comforting statements — hardly the sort of rhetoric Americans who voted based on a hatred of Obamacare would like to hear.

In early May, Cornyn told reporters that the Senate was going to be “going through the issues methodically,” scrutinizing funding for Medicaid and trying to cut costs while lowering premiums. But part and parcel of all the discussion is this underlying truth: the reform-repeal-replace campaign still allows for government-run healthcare.

And that right there is the elephant in the room. So long as the government takes the lead on deciding Americans’ health insurance plans, it’s Americans who are out of luck. It’s the Constitution that’ll stand corrupted, the free market that’ll feel the pinch — the individual who’ll lose the freedom.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.


Could a Dutch Volunteer Be Charged with Murder for Killing Islamic State Militants?

When a Dutch man decided to join Kurdish forces in Syria to help them beat back the Islamic State, he probably thought he would return to the Netherlands to a hero’s welcome.

Turns out he returned to murder charges instead.

Dutch prosecutors believe the 47-year-old, whose name has not been released due to the country’s strict privacy laws, killed Islamic State militants in Syria. Although he is a former Dutch soldier, he reportedly traveled there without any instruction from the military. If he did in fact kill Islamic State militants, that could earn him prison time in the Netherlands.

He appeared before an investigating judge in the city of Rotterdam on Friday, but was released after agreeing to turn over his passport, which the judge said would ensure he did not travel back to Syria.

Still, the possibility of a full-fledged criminal trial is very real. Prosecutors said Friday there is “an important difference between Dutch nationals who travel to Syria on their own to fight against IS and Dutch soldiers who train Iraqi and Kurdish forces.”

The Netherlands has backed a campaign against the Islamic State, and even sends Dutch soldiers to train Kurdish forces. But the country does not encourage Dutch nationals to join the Kurds on their own. Still, some 100 Westerners are thought to have joined them in Iraq and Syria in the past two years. In 2015, at least one Canadian and one Briton were killed in battle.

But whoever this 47-year-old is, he’s not the only Dutch committed to backing up the Kurds. In October 2014, members of No Surrender, a Dutch biker gang, announced gang members had traveled to Mosul to fight the Islamic State.

At the time, Dutch public prosecutor spokesman Wim de Bruin defended the bikers.

“Joining a foreign armed force was previously punishable; now it’s no longer forbidden,” he told AFP. “You just can’t join a fight against the Netherlands.”

Photo Credit: Spencer Platt/Getty Images


Notorious Mafia hit man-turned-canary Salvatore “Sammy the Bull” Gravano has been released from an Arizona prison five years early, according to inmate records.

The infamous 72-year-old mob rat, who squealed to help authorities bring down “Dapper Don” John Gotti in exchange for a 1991 plea deal, was let out Sept. 18, Arizona’s Department of Corrections records show.

He’ll remain on federal parole for the rest of his life, as ordered by Brooklyn federal Judge Allyne Ross in 2002 when she locked him up.

“I spoke to him,” the aged wiseguy’s daughter, Karen Gravano, ecstatically told The Post. “He is happy to be out after spending the last 17½ years in prison. He’s in good health, great spirits and he’s anxious to move forward with the next phase of his life.”

“There is no doubt I’m extremely happy,” she said. “I’ve been fighting for this day the whole 17½ years that he’s been in prison, so I’m ecstatic it’s finally here.”

Defense attorney Thomas Farinella echoed Gravano’s comments almost exactly, saying his client was “in good health and great spirits” and “extremely happy to be out.”

He declined to comment on whether the elder Gravano would settle again in Arizona, or if he would continue sketching — a hobby he picked up while incarcerated.

The former Gambino underboss pleaded guilty to running a nearly 50-person, $500,000-a-week ecstasy ring in 2001, and was sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

That conviction followed a sweetheart deal in which Gravano was sentenced to just five years in prison for an admitted 19 murders — in exchange for helping the feds fell 39 mobsters, including his former boss and pal the Teflon Don.

The turncoat consigliere took the stand and spilled the Five Families’ secrets for five days during Gotti’s trial — and then testified in nine more, putting 39 wiseguys and associates in prison.

At the time, he was the highest-ranking member of La Cosa Nostra to turn fed.

After a short stint in the big house followed by an even shorter one in witness protection, he moved to Tempe, Arizona, and lived under the assumed name Jimmy Moran.

While Gravano was living in Arizona, peddling ecstasy and installing pools, he barely escaped his own killing, when the late godfather’s enraged brother, Peter Gotti, sent a team of hitmen to go find him in the Copper State.

The then-Gambino crime boss ordered the hit in retaliation for his brother’s death from cancer at age 61 behind bars.

His latest bid for early release was in 2015, when Ross declined to shave years off his sentence, citing his “longstanding reputation for extreme violence.”


A report from OpenSQLCamp

Did you know...? LWN.net is a subscriber-supported publication; we rely on subscribers to keep the entire operation going. Please help out by buying a subscription and keeping LWN on the net.

What do you get when you put together 80 to 100 hard-core database geeks from ten different open source databases for a weekend? OpenSQLCamp , which was held most recently at MIT. Begun three years ago, OpenSQLCamp is a semi-annual unconference for open source database hackers to meet and collaborate on ideas and theories in the industry. It's held at various locations alternately in Europe and the United States, and organized and run by volunteers. This year's conference was organized by Sheeri Cabral, a MySQL community leader who works for PalominoDB

This year's event included database hackers who work on MySQL, MariaDB, PostgreSQL, VoltDB, Tokutek, and Drizzle. In contrast to the popular perception that the various database systems are in a no-holds barred competition for industry supremacy, most people who develop these systems are more interested in collaborating with their peers than arguing with them. And although it's OpenSQLCamp, programmers from "NoSQL" databases were welcome and present, including MongoDB, Membase, Cassandra, and BerkeleyDB.

While the conference was mainly database engine developers, several high-end users were present, including staff from Rackspace, GoDaddy, VMWare, and WidgetBox. The conference's location meant the participation of a few MIT faculty, including conference co-chair Bradley Kuzsmaul. While few of the students who registered actually turned up, attendees were able to learn informally about the software technologies which are now hot in universities (lots of work on multi-processor scaling, apparently).

Friday

The conference started with a reception at the WorkBar, a shared office space in downtown Boston. After a little drinking and socializing, participants slid immediately into discussing database and database industry topics, including speculation on what Oracle is going to do with all of its open source databases (answer: nobody knows, including the people who work there), recent releases of PostgreSQL and MySQL, and how VoltDB works. Whiteboard markers came out and several people shifted to technical discussions and continued the discussion until 11pm.

Jignesh Shah of VMWare brought up some interesting SSD testing results. In high-transaction environments, it seems that batching database writes actually reduces throughput and increases response times, completely contrary to performance on spinning disks. For example, Jignesh had experimented with asynchronous commit with large buffers, which means that the database returns a success message to the client and fsyncs the data in batches afterward. This reduced database write throughput, whereas on a standard spinning disk RAID it would have increased it up to 30%. There was a great deal of speculation as to why that was.

A second topic of discussion, which shifted to a whiteboard for comprehensibility, was how to put the "consistency" in "eventual consistency" without increasing response time. This became a session on Sunday. This problem, which is basic to distributed databases, is the question of how you can ensure that any write conflict is resolved in exactly the same way on all database nodes for a transactional database which is replicated or partitioned across multiple servers. Historical solutions have included attempting to synchronize timestamps (which is impossible), using centralized transaction counter servers (which become bottlenecks), and using vector clocks (which are insufficiently determinative on a large number of nodes). VoltDB addresses this by a two-phase commit approach in which the node accepting the writes checks modification timestamps on all nodes which could conflict. As with many approaches, this solution maintains consistency and throughput at a substantial sacrifice in response times.

Saturday

The conference days were held at MIT, rather ironically in the William H. Gates building. For those who haven't seen Frank Gehry's sculptural architecture feat, it's as confusing on the inside as it is on the outside outside, so the first day started late. As usual with unconferences, the first task was to organize a schedule; participants proposed sessions and spent a long time rearranging them in an effort to avoid double-scheduling, which led to some "concurrency issues" with different versions of the schedule. Eventually we had four tracks for the four rooms, nicknamed "SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE".

As much as I wanted to attend everything, it wasn't possible, so I'll just write up a few of the talks here. Some of the talks and discussions will also be available as videos from the conference web site later. I attended and ran mostly discussion sessions, which I find to be the most useful events of an unconference.

Monty Taylor of Drizzle talked about their current efforts to add multi-tenancy support, and discussed implementations and tradeoffs with other database developers. Multi-tenancy is another hot topic now that several companies are going into "database as a service" (DaaS); it is the concept that multiple businesses can share the same physical database while having complete logical separation of data and being unaware of each other. The primary implementation difficulty is that there is a harsh tradeoff between security and performance, since the more isolated users are from each other, the less physical resources they share. As a result, no single multi-tenancy implementation can be perfect.

Since it was first described in the early 80's, many databases have implemented Multi-Version Concurrency Control (MVCC). MVCC is a set of methods which allow multiple users to read and modify the same data concurrently while minimizing conflicts and locks, supporting the "Atomicity", "Consistency", and "Isolation" in ACID transactions. While the concept is conventional wisdom at this point, implementations are fairly variable. So, on request, I moderated a panel on MVCC in PostgreSQL, InnoDB, Cassandra, CouchDB and BerkeleyDB. The discussion covered the basic differences in approach as well as the issues with data garbage collection.

Jignesh Shah of VMWare and Tim Callagan of VoltDB presented on current issues in database performance in virtualized environments. The first, mostly solved issue was figuring out degrees of overcommit for virtualized databases sharing the same physical machine. Jignesh had tested with PostgreSQL and found the optimal level in benchmark tests to be around 20% overcommit, meaning five virtual machines (VMs) each entitled to 25% of the server's CPU and RAM.

One work in progress is I/O scheduling. While VMWare engineers have optimized sharing CPU and RAM among multiple VMs running databases on the same machine, sharing I/O without conflicts or severe overallocation still needs work.

The other major unsolved issue is multi-socket scaling. As it turns out, attempting to scale a single VM across multiple sockets is extremely inefficient with current software, resulting in tremendous drops in throughput as soon as the first thread migrates to a second socket. The current workaround is to give the VMs socket affinity and to run one VM per socket, but nobody is satisfied with this.

After lunch, Bradley ran a Q&A panel on indexing with developers from VoltDB, Tokutek, Cassandra, PostgreSQL, and Percona. Panelists answered questions about types of indexes, databases without indexes, performance optimizations, and whether server hardware advances would cause major changes in indexing technology in the near future. The short answer to that one is "no".

As is often the case with "camp" events, the day ended with a hacking session. However, only the Drizzle team really took advantage of it; for most attendees, it was a networking session.

Sunday

Elena Zannoni joined the conference in order to talk about the state of tracing on Linux. Several database geeks were surprised to find out that SystemTap was not going to be included in the Linux kernel, and that there was no expected schedule for release of utrace/uprobes. Many database engineers have been waiting for Linux to provide an alternative to Dtrace, and it seems that we still have longer to wait.

The VoltDB folks, who are local to Boston, showed up in force and did a thorough presentation on their architecture, use case, and goals. VoltDB is a transactional, SQL-compliant distributed database with strong consistency. It's aimed at large companies building new in-house applications for which they need extremely high transaction processing rates and very high availability. VoltDB does this by requiring users to write their applications to address the database, including putting all transactions into stored procedures which are then precompiled and executed in batches on each node. It's an approach which sacrifices response times and general application portability in return for tremendous throughput, into the 100,000's of transactions per second.

Some of the SQL geeks at the conference discussed how to make developers more comfortable with SQL. Currently many application developers not only don't understand SQL, but actively hate and fear it. The round-table discussed why this is and some ideas for improvement, including: teaching university classes, contributing to object-relational mappers (ORMs), explaining SQL in relation to functional languages, doing fun "SQL tricks" demos, and working on improving DBA attitudes towards developers.

In the last track of the day, I mediated a freewheeling discussion on "The Future of Databases", in which participants tried to answer "What databases will we be using and developing in 2020?" While nobody there had a crystal ball, embedded databases with offline synchronization, analytical databases which support real-time calculations, and database-as-a-service featured heavily in the discussion.

Wrap-up

While small, OpenSQLCamp was fascinating due to the caliber of attendee; I learned more about several new databases over lunch than I had in the previous year of blog reading. If you work on open-source database technology, are a high-end user, or are just very interested in databases, you should consider attending next year. Watch the OpenSQLCamp web site for videos to be posted, and for the date and location of next year's conferences in the US and Europe.


New Jersey Governor Chris Christie was called a 'liar' today by thousands of police officers and firefighters at a rally in Trenton today. New Jersey reporter Brian Thompson tells us about the battle between public employee unions and politicians over budget cuts and pension changes. (Published Thursday, March 3, 2011)

Three union workers who called out sick to attend a labor rally at the New Jersey Statehouse last week have been suspended.

The move comes a day after Gov. Christie told NBC New York in an interview that "people who call in sick better be sick." Christie issued his warning ahead of another labor rally that drew thousands on Thursday.

Monmouth County officials said the three employees suspended without pay Thursday work for the county's Senior Citizen Area Transportation service and are members of CWA Local 1038.

The county said the workers were among 14 in the department who called out sick; officials alleged that 174 developmentally disabled adults who depend on the county's services ended up "waiting for buses that never came."

"These employees are being suspended without pay based on the fact that we have evidence to prove that they were not home sick as they had claimed," said Lillian Burry, a county official.

The union representing the workers, the Communications Workers of America(CWA) put out a statement through its District One calling this a "politically-motivated attack on public workers who perform vital services."

Top New York News Photos of 2011

The CWA statement added "When all the facts come out, it will be clear that whatever errors in judgement were made, no one served by the county missed a medical appointment and no one should be fired."

State Sen. Joe Kyrillos (R-Monmouth), who first complained of a "sick-out," applauded officials for the suspension, noting some workers were "caught on camera" at last week's rally.

He wants officials to keep reviewing video to see "if others were absent without proper excuse."

Weird News Photos: Holiday Edition

Meanwhile, thousands more rallied again at the Statehouse -- this time a gathering of police and firefighters protesting job cuts and changes to first responder benefits and pensions.

Labor unions have been riding a wave of national attention on labor contracts and collective bargaining, sparked in part by disputes between Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and public employees there.

Bruce Chester, a Woodbridge police office attending the rally, held up a campaign letter from Christie promising not to touch police officer pensions. When that same letter was shown on a big screen TV, officers and firefighters broke out in the chants of “liar.”

“Enough is enough,” said Tony Weiners, president of the NJ State Policemen’s Benevolent Association.

Irvington Police Officer Jerry Ramos and Irvington firefighter Kevin Franz said they voted for Christie and were experiencing ”buyers remorse.”

At a separate news conference Thursday, Christie called the latest demonstration a "me-first rally" but admitted he made campaign promises he could not keep.

“The situation has gotten significantly worse since I took office,” Christie said “The system could be bankrupt by 2020….I’m not going to let that happen.”

Christie said he tried to meet with the state PBA president and that “the numbers are the numbers.”

Follow Brian Thompson on Twitter @brian4NY and us @NBCNewYork,and on Facebook/NBCNewYork, and sign up for breaking news SMS alerts on your phone by texting “NYBREAKING” to 639710.


As the robot tests alternative movements, it continuously updates it database of options—having used a computer simulation of itself to create a sort of how-to-walk map ahead of time. Researchers call this testing phase a “simulated childhood,” and it’s a little bit like what a baby does when she’s learning how to crawl. Only the robot takes minutes—not weeks or months—to test and determine the movements that will work best.

This is much faster, the authors say, than previous attempts. And that’s in part because although the robot is sifting through about 13,000 possible movements, they are all options that the robot has already deemed potentially useful. “The space of all possible behaviors that is searched to find these 13,000 high-performing behaviors is unimaginably vast,” they wrote. “In fact, it contains 10^47 possible behaviors, which is about how many atoms make up the planet Earth!”

Researchers experimented with both a hexapod robot and a robotic arm, and they believe their algorithm could be used to enable any kind of robot to adapt to damage and complete a mission. Over the course of hundreds of tests, the six-legged robot was able to adapt to at least six different types of damage—including completely losing two legs—and the robot arm was able to adapt to at least 14 kinds of damage, including having two of its motors broken.

Perhaps all this evokes images of Westworld, or of The Terminator, or at least of an assembly line that never breaks down. A robot that can break and keep going anyway is, after all, a robot that doesn’t need people. Or needs them less than its robot predecessors did, anyway. The potential uses for such machines are incredible to imagine. These things could skitter across Mars, or explore an ocean trench, or crawl over rubble to help search for victims after an earthquake.

Scientists and engineers have been working on perfecting such algorithms for more than a decade. And in 2006, when researchers at Cornell built a robot that could teach itself how to limp, one scientist said the behavior was a form of consciousness. "Whether humans or animals are conscious in a similar way—do we also think in terms of a self-image, and rehearse actions in our head before trying them out—is still an open question," researcher Josh Bongard told the university’s news service at the time. Elsewhere, researchers have designed robots with squishy, self-healing muscles, robotic cubes that can apparently clone themselves, tiny robots that can assemble themselves in the first place, and giant robots that can hurl cinder blocks. The fields of robotics, machine learning, and artificial intelligence are making gains so rapidly it can be hard to keep track.

The work that culminated in Wednesday’s Nature paper began in 2011. The intelligent algorithm at the center of the research turned out to be astonishing even to the people who designed it.