Best reporting day ever for "The Babylon Bee". Ten homeruns in one day!
BURBANK, CA—With the launch of Disney’s new streaming service, the entertainment giant found it necessary to warn subscribers that some of their content may contain triggering material involving heterosexual cis-gendered biological white males.
Agile crushes individual innovation. It moves your job to India. My boss Madhu Sundararajan is in India as we speak linking them into our daily scrum. I will be unemployed at FedEx within the next 8 months.
The modern workplace is a combination of people from different generations who have varying workplace ideals. Some people prefer to strongly believe that the traditional method is the best way to work. The younger generation, meanwhile, mostly believes in a flexible work environment that is more inclined towards ‘agile’.
With vast differences in the way of working between individuals, it can be a tough problem to introduce the agile way of working. Before we talk about employee resistance in the workforce to become agile, let’s see how agile benefits the organization.
How Agile Triumphs Over Traditional Way of Working
The traditional team typically consists of a manager under whom you can see different employees with numerous roles like Java developers, analysts, testers, etc. The functioning of this traditional team will follow the hierarchical approach, where the manager sits at the center and has total control of the whole operations.
On the other hand, agile teams are self-managed, where cross-functional working among different teams is the key. Instead of a single person sitting at the top and giving out orders or supervising the work, the team players also take part equally in the decision-making process. They decide who the best fit for the role is and determine the tasks everyone needs to play.
In the end, everyone is involved in the project as a whole instead of just having a partial vision of the project from their working scope. This also improves the accountability of the team members. It will motivate them to get involved better in the project and improve their performance, as well as the project results.
The Need for a Flexible Workforce
According to the workplace trends prediction by Dan Schawbel in Forbes in 2017, he pointed out that there is going to be a high demand for a flexible work environment and that the organizations will face pressure from the young employees to embrace flexibility.
Also, he pointed out the flexibility is the top employee benefit over healthcare in the years 2015 and 2016, but only one-third of the organizations are implementing it seriously. Further, the organizations that do focus on agile systems do so to align their working to match the customer needs.
The reason for some organizations that don’t enforce an agile way of working can be due to the traditional mindset of top management. However, one of the most common reasons is the fear of resistance among employees.
Employee Resistance towards an Agile Approach
While implementing agile in a workforce, things don’t go as planned. Some may face unexpected resistance from certain sections of employees, which could affect the performance at the initial stages. There can be clashes, miscommunications, and issues between employees due to the resistance from some.
This behavior is mainly due to the employee’s misinformed notions about agile practices. The employees may have difficulty in accepting the new changes in the working systems when they don’t understand how they can be benefited from it. For some who are familiar with the same system, it can be difficult to come out from the years of familiar working methods and embrace the new system of agile.
However, such resistance from employees doesn’t mean the end of agile. With a few help from the top management, the employees can be convinced to look at all the advantages agile brings.
Here are a few ideas to overcome employee resistance and bring a coordinated agile way of working in the organization.
• Anticipate and Manage Resistance Before It Crops Up
When you break the news about the changes in working methods, you’ll have an idea of the people who will oppose them the most. There can be a few who are on the fence – not very happy about the change but open to accepting it. But the few who are steadfast against the agile implementation may easily turn those people, too.
To avoid the increased resistance, talk with the managers and identify the few people who are totally against the opposition and address the issue with them first. When you can neutralize these few instances, then you can minimize and manage the resistance from other employees easily.
• Avoid Overnight Transformation
Understandably, you want to incorporate the agile systems as soon as you can. But, asking the employees to wake up one day and suddenly start working the agile way isn’t going to work.
It is necessary to incorporate the agile processes incrementally. Start slow and ask the employees to make a few changes. Once they become familiar with it, proceed to the next level. Break down the agile implementations into different phases and gradually ease the employees into it. This will give them a practical idea of how much an agile system helps them to complete their work efficiently. It’s one way to lessen employee resistance, too.
• Be Open to Address Questions
Employees will have many questions in their minds about how this implementation could influence their work life. It is the responsibility of the organization to answer the questions in the best possible and convincing way. It is their duty to encourage more employees to be open towards agile.
You can have an open session with the employees. Let everyone have their chance to ask questions or even just to talk about how they feel. This is a crucial primary step to show the employees how much you care about them and make them understand that the first people who would benefit from the new system is them – the employees.
If you have any people in the organization who have previously worked in the agile environment, you can also encourage them to talk about its advantages and let the employees see how it can impact their work life.
• Address the Gaps in Technology
You need to provide the employees with the required technologies if you expect them to stick to agile. The agile system depends a lot on the flexibility of the employees to work from anywhere they want and includes the freelance workforce, too. When your technology doesn’t support your intentions, then the employees will crawl back to the only other working system – the traditional way.
When you have decided to implement agile, it is vital to do property research and analysis on the technologies your organization has and the additional ones it may need. You can either slowly start including some before you implement agile or break the news of agile with the good news of the beneficial technologies.
• Include Routine Checks and Weekly Assistance
Not all employees can understand the essence of agile easily. They may get some doubts once they start working. Therefore, there should be someone in the organization they can talk to and clear their doubts.
After implementing agile, make sure to include routine checks to see if everyone is working properly. The checks should also identify employees who are struggling to change their way of working. Offer them unlimited assistance until they are entirely comfortable to work with the agile system.
There are no do-overs when it comes to agile implementation. When you do it, make sure that you are doing it right. Employee resistance is a part of any change. Making the employees see the new system’s advantages lies with the organization. If that’s done successfully, then the agile processes can revolutionize the organizational performance.
Amy Robach complained, on camera, about the network protecting Jeffrey Epstein
An ABC employee had access to the clip of Robach’s complaint, and it made its way to James O’Keefe
That employee, who has since moved to CBS News, has been fired
If you were still under the impression that journalists are in the business of giving you the news, this might come as a surprise. For those of us who’ve been paying attention, it’s just another day. Here, put this on a coffee cup:
More here: “Looks like two media outlets conspired to retaliate against a whistleblower. Meanwhile, they’re claiming Resistance talking point that merely identifying Ukraine leaker — even though he’s protected from retaliation— is unacceptable. Interesting.”
(University of California - Davis) Roughly 85 percent of recently installed HVAC systems in K-12 classrooms investigated in California did not provide adequate ventilation, according to a study from the University of California, Davis, and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) will soon introduce new legislation that aims to dismantle the remaining portions of the Iran nuclear deal by revoking the nuclear sanctions waivers that the Trump administration approved last week. Those sanctions waivers allow Iran to work on the country’s nuclear weapons program while talks continue between Tehran and Washington, D.C.
The Washington Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo reported last week that the sanctions waivers “permit the Islamic Republic to engage in sensitive nuclear work, including at a clandestine military location that has housed the country’s weapons program” and allow “China and Russia to continue performing work at Iranian nuclear facilities, some of which have drawn concerns from the international community for potentially helping Iran gain the know-how to build a functional nuclear weapon.”
In a new report by Kredo on Monday, Cheney told the Free Beacon that the waivers have legitimized Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program.
“These ‘civil nuclear’ waivers legitimize Iran’s illicit nuclear infrastructure and help sustain President Obama’s disastrous nuclear deal,” Cheney said. “Congress is determined to support President Donald Trump’s rightful exit from that deal and his successful maximum pressure campaign against Tehran.”
Cheney continued, “That is why I will soon be introducing legislation that revokes these exceptions and ensures that the nuclear deal is totally and completely dismantled.”
The Trump administration’s shift in policy toward Iran has caused concerned among Trump’s top allies in Washington, as it is a break from his promised “maximum pressure” campaign against the Iran, which is the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.
Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) expressed their frustration with the administration last week over the decision to give Iran its latest waivers.
This is disappointing and another lost opportunity to tear up the catastrophic Obama-Iran nuclear deal once and for all. President Trump should immediately order his administration to stop issuing civil nuclear waivers. These waivers allow Iran to build up its nuclear program, including at their Fordow nuclear bunker, which they dug out of the side of a mountain to build nuclear weapons. Iran is now openly violating the nuclear deal and stockpiling dangerous nuclear material. There is no justification for letting them continue to build up their program. We intend to work with our Congressional colleagues to advance legislation to reverse this misguided decision.
U.S. State Department Spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement last week that the decision would “help preserve oversight of Iran’s civil nuclear program, reduce proliferation risks, constrain Iran’s ability to shorten its ‘breakout time’ to a nuclear weapon, and prevent the regime from reconstituting sites for proliferation-sensitive purposes.”
Kredo further noted that Iran announced today it is moving forward with installing key components that will allow it to quickly enrich uranium — which is a violation of the nuclear deal.
Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, reportedly told Iranian state media, “We have installed 15 new-generation centrifuges in the past two months which is a very big achievement.”
Meanwhile, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei stated this week that Iran “must not engage in negotiations” in order to “prevent and block America from entering [Iran] again.”
Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: We must Not Engage in Negotiations with America in Order to Prevent It from Entering Iran Again pic.twitter.com/0MXlge3ma9
How do you catch a predator in Sarasota, Florida? You create one.
The Sarasota County Sheriff's Office (SCSO) is going to "outrageous lengths" to make law-abiding lonely guys into sex offenders. That's according to Noah Pransky, a fearless journalist who has been covering Florida's addiction to entrapment for years.
In September, SCSO arrested 23 men for allegedly soliciting underage girls for sex. Pransky's most recent piece in Florida Politics chronicles the elaborate back and forth between one of those men and a police officer pretending to be a young female. Pransky writes:
In one example from a 2017 operation, SCSO spent two days trying to seduce a 20-year-old man who showed no interest in having sex with a child. Detectives, who posted an ad for an 18-year-old woman on Tinder, matched with the young man and proceeded to swap "getting-to-know-you" texts for more than an hour; only then did detectives tell the man he was chatting with a 14-year-old girl, not an 18-year-old.
Undercover detectives continued to try and talk about sex with the man the next day; he again rebuffed the attempts, but continued the small talk because he indicated he was bored. Detectives then sent unsolicited, flirty photos to the man; a tactic that violates best practices and ethical standards for this type of stings.
The terrible thing about this case is that the sheriff's office is not trying to save any actual kids. It is just trying to get an easy win.
Most parents who worry about predators online are picturing a creepy guy lurking on some kiddie site where he lures unsuspecting youngsters away to a sordid encounter at the Dairy Queen.
But the SCSO folks flip that scenario entirely. They log onto adult sites, claiming to be adult age. It's only once they establish some kind of bond with an adult who went online hoping to find a legal-age companion that they then confess that they are underage.
Normally, the SCSO destroys the records of these stings, preventing the public from understanding the sordid process that produced the arrest of the supposed sex offender. But in the case highlighted above, the 20-year-old man was actually a civilian employee of the SCSO, and he preserved the chat log:
Even though the man never suggested meeting up with an underage child, never brought up sex during their two full days of online chats, and appeared to be a model employee, he was suspended by the sheriff's office following the exchange. He said he was then pressured to resign to keep the episode private.
I would pressure him to keep it private, too, if I'd been as duplicitous as the SCSO:
The chat log reveals detectives willing to dedicate hours trying to build the trust — and romantic interest — of a man who thinks he is talking to another adult, before informing the man that the woman showing him affection is actually four years younger than she had led him to believe.
Detectives "swiped right" on the Tinder profile of the 20-year-old sheriff's office employee, whose profile read, "literally just want to hang with someone and be able to eat and not feel judged." On Sunday morning, May 20, he introduced himself to 18-year-old "Stephanie," told her he was bored at work, and the two spent the rest of the day texting back and forth.
Their small talk covered the weather, life in Sarasota, and dirt track racing. When "Stephanie" said she would liven up the man's slow workday ("I'll stir up trouble for you"), he steered the conversation back to their mutual hobbies. When detectives suggested talk about drugs, the man steered the conversation back to Sarasota life.
But detectives kept pressing, suggesting they meet up. "Just lookin for a friend to chill with," they wrote the man, then telling him "Stephanie" was only 14 years old.
The pace of the conversation slowed down, but the two continued to talk about work, where they grew up, and a coffee table the man was planning on buying.
Then they sent a fake photo and asked the guy to send one in return. He didn't.
Eventually, they tried to steer the conversation toward sex. "I like older guys … I've never had sex before … I waant," wrote 'Stephanie.'
The mark responded: "You're 14 just relax growing up is not all the hype."
After another day of this aggressive flirting on the detective's part, the 20-year-old cut off the conversation. Had he taken the bait, he could be facing years in prison and registration as a sex offender. Instead, he merely lost his job.
In another article, Pransky profiled a 62-year-old man who did take the bait: Hamid Keshmirian, who went to a site that purported to provide adult escorts. He began talking with someone who claimed to be an adult female, but once a friendship was established, she revealed herself to be 14-year-old prostitute eager to have sex with old men.
The girl was actually a cop. "Deputies went as far as to put a man on the phone with Keshmirian, claiming to be the girl's father, giving permission for the encounter," Pransky writes.
Keshmirian's daughters say their dad had battled depression for eight years. When he went to meet the "girl" on his birthday, September 19, he was immediately arrested and thrown in jail. Two days later a friend bailed him out.
He killed himself that night.
Sarasota Sheriff Tom Knight posted about his team's recent successes at catching predators, writing, "I wish I could say these operations were no longer needed but time and time again, even after we make dozens of arrests, these men keep coming back for more."
Someone keeps coming back for more. But is it "these men," or the cops?
The brain evolved in three parts, from back to front: First, the so-called reptilian brain or spatial brain; then the monkey or social brain; and the most recently evolved section is the frontal lobe, which understands time.
What's so special about this temporal ability? It allows humans to forecast into the future—to consciously plan, dream and strategize. That's a unique trait in the animal kingdom.
Physicist Michio Kaku believes this trait may also define success among our species, as evidenced by the global correlation in the marshmallow test: Those who wait for the second marshmallow tend to be more successful in life. Listen to Kaku explain why that ability to look ahead and not take shortcuts may be an important predictor of success.
The joke’s on those who thought they could sabotage a worthy movie at the box office through carefully crafted whisper campaigns about incel violence in unsuspecting theaters because “Joker” is now the top-grossing R-rated movie of all time.
“The Warner Bros. film has become the top-grossing R-rated film of all time, not adjusted for inflation, with a global box office haul of $788.1 million. It is expected to cross $800 million Friday or Saturday,” reports The Hollywood Reporter (THR). “To date, Joker has earned $258.6 in North America and $529.5 million internationally,” continued THR. “It is expected to ultimately take in close to $900 million globally, with some thinking it has a shot at approaching $1 billion.”
The box office grosses surpass that of “Deadpool,” which surprised audiences and critics alike when it smashed records by earning $783 million worldwide, passing “The Matrix Reloaded.” “Deadpool 2” and “Deadpool” still hold the number 2 and number 3 spots, respectively, followed by “The Matrix Reloaded,” “It,” “Logan,” and “The Passion of the Christ.”
As reported by Emily Zanotti of The Daily Wire, social justice warriors began taking swipes at the film weeks prior to its release for allegedly glorifying “incel violence” and giving such people a platform for empathy:
According to leftists on social media, “Joker,” which has yet to see a global release — meaning most average theatergoers are still waiting to see Joaquin Phoenix’s take on the iconic Arkham Asylum resident — the film glorifies “incel violence” and “paints mass murder as the logical conclusion” of a “neurodivergent white man being failed by the system.”
In other words – words regularly used by people who haven’t wasted money on a gender studies degree – “Joker” allows “incels,” or the movement of mostly young white men who consider themselves “involuntarily celibate,” to relate to a mainstream character, and explains – and even, they say, justifies – a descent into violence.
The controversy over the film became so intense that the film’s director, Todd Phillips, became rather aggressive in his defense, even going so far as to blame the criticism on far-left fanatics.
“I’m surprised,” Phillips told The Wrap. “Isn’t it good to have these discussions? Isn’t it good to have these discussions about these movies, about violence? Why is that a bad thing if the movie does lead to a discourse about it?”
“I think it’s because outrage is a commodity. I think it’s something that has been a commodity for a while,” he added. “What’s outstanding to me in this discourse in this movie is how easily the far-left can sound like the far-right when it suits their agenda. It’s really been eye-opening for me.”
Actor Joaquin Phoenix even walked out of an interview at one point when a reporter questioned him if the film would inspire violence.
When the movie finally came out, critics then shifted the focus away from the film’s violence and more toward some of its alleged underlying messages about white male victimhood. Jeff Yang of CNN, for instance, said the film affirms the straight white male rage that led to President Trump’s success.
“While many reviewers have focused on [Arthur] Fleck as an ‘incel’ hero – his status as a sexless loner who turns to violence – the true nature of the movie’s appeal is actually broader: It’s an insidious validation of the white-male resentment that helped bring President Donald Trump to power,” wrote Yang after the film’s release. “‘Joker,’ at its core, is the story of the ‘forgotten man,’ the metaphoric displaced and disenfranchised white man whose goodwill has been abused and whose status has been reduced. A man who has been crushed underfoot by the elite, dragged down by equality-demanding feminists and climbed over by upstart nonwhite and immigrant masses.”
my job will be gone in 8 months and i am training my indian replacement. Where can I complain?
published 2019-10-24 03:49:48 by Neil Munro
Many millions of Indian graduates should be allowed to take white collar jobs from U.S. college graduates, says a coalition of top U.S. business leaders.
The U.S. India Strategic Partnership Forum is a spin-off of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It is run by the current and former CEOs and presidents of Cisco, Boeing, Deloitte, Adobe, Caterpillar, Dell, FedEx, Medtronic, Marriott, PepsiCo, and other companies. The forum’s 20-page pitch says:
The US-India Strategic Partnership Forum (USISPF) is committed to creating the most powerful strategic partnership between the U.S. and India. Promoting bilateral trade is an important part of our work, but our mission reaches far beyond this. It is about business and government coming together in new ways to create meaningful opportunities that have the power to change the lives of citizens
Amid the corporate blurb, the group admits it wants to allow the free movement of Indian graduates from low-wage India into the high-wage U.S. economy, saying “USISPF’s Workforce Mobility Committee will … continue to make the case for the free flow of skilled labor in both countries.”
“That’s just a fancy way of saying unlimited immigration … [and] is a recipe for a political explosion,” said Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies. He continued:
U.S. computer careers would become completely foreignized … [and] the middle class could well experience the kind of displacement that much of the [Midwest industrial] working class has felt, potentially with similar consequences, like opioid epidemics.
The group is led by former Cisco CEO John Chambers, and it met with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi on October 21.
Had a great interaction with the US India Strategic Partnership Forum. Talked about India’s strides in the world of start-ups, reforms initiated by our Government, steps taken to boost ‘Ease of Living’ and innovation among our citizens. https://t.co/mDfVARCuN6
Chambers’ group is aided by several Washington operatives, including former ambassadors Tim Roemer, Richard Verma, Frank Wisner, and Susan Esserman Partner, former Pentagon chief William Cohen, as well as Henry Kissinger and Condoleezza Rice.
Chamber’s group promises to lobby U.S. and Indian legislators, saying:
USISPF aims to further [the] interests of both nations by engaging with Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate along with the Parliamentarians in India. USISPF believes that our shared democratic values lie at the heart of the growing U.S.-India Strategic Partnership, and will lead through dynamic exchanges on the legislative side.
The group’s desire for Indian college graduate workers is presented as the fix to a claimed shortage of skilled graduates in the United States — despite plentiful evidence that American graduates are being sidelined and fired so that Indian graduates can take more U.S. jobs. The forum’s pitch says:
Trade is a two-way street. U.S. companies are major job creators in India. Likewise, it is important to recognize the contribution Indian companies make here in America. They have made significant moves to hire Americans announcing tens of thousands of new jobs in recent months. In addition to creating well-paid American jobs, Indian companies are addressing the STEM skills gap, and driving innovation across the US economy. These companies are truly deepening the U.S.-India relationship in part by leveraging high skilled visa programs that are widely recognized as benefiting the US economy. Visa holders bring skills that are not easily available, pay taxes, and help drive the US innovation economy. USISPF’s Workforce Mobility Committee will continue to champion the contributions these companies are making to communities across the US, and will continue to make the case for the free flow of skilled labor in both countries.
The group also says U.S. companies can work with Indian companies to cut U.S. healthcare costs — likely via the increased use of cheaper Indian nurses, therapists, managers, and doctors:
The landscape for this sector is shifting dynamically in both nations, with the governments focusing on improving accessibility and quality of care, while lowering costs. Without compromising on innovation, there is a need to explore new partnerships and business models.
Cheap Indian labor would be a massive windfall for U.S. investors. If U.S. healthcare companies could provide just 500,000 Indians for the U.S. healthcare sector, wages would decline, and investors would see a spike in stock prices.
Chamber’s team received a warm welcome from Modi, partly because the government wants to grow the nation’s economy by exporting graduates into the U.S.-India Outsourcing Economy. In February 2019, the Forsyth County News reported:
Ani Agnihotri, program chair of the USA-India Business Summit … said India has a massive and young population that could provide skilled, English-speaking workers ready to relocate “even at a seven-day notice” and said the majority of doctors in the United Kingdom and about 15 percent in America are of Indian descent.
“India has the youngest population in the world. About 25 percent of the population of India, which is 1.25 billion, is below the age of 25,” he said. “We will be the provider of the workforce of the world in about 15 years, after 2035.”
That outsourcing strategy is welcomed by U.S. investors who are now worried about a loss of Chinese imports and exports. The Indian strategy allows them to cut their U.S. payroll costs — and also helps Indians buy U.S. food, energy, services, and products from the growing network of Amazon, Walmart, and Apple stores in India.
India’s population of 20-something men is roughly 127 million. The population of 20-something women is roughly 113 million, for a total 20-something population of 240 million. That supply of labor is 11 times the United States’ 20-something population of 22 million.
Roughly 170 million Indians are enrolled in undergraduate or post-grad university courses, where the quality is extremely uneven, cheating is conventional, and nepotism is normal. But the output of more than 20 million graduates each year Chambers the prospect of importing at least 5 million graduates per year into the U.S. market.
In contrast, U.S. universities now supply U.S. businesses with just roughly 800,000 American graduates with skilled degrees in healthcare, business, engineering, software, science, math, and architecture.
However, the U.S. supply of labor has already been boosted by U.S. visa-worker programs, which keep a population of roughly 1.5 million foreign graduates — including around 800,000 Indians — in U.S. jobs.
In September, the growing Indian population in the United States held a rally for Modi in Texas, where many U.S. politicians applauded him.
The Indians population has grown in the United States, mainly because U.S. companies and Indian managers are importing Indian graduates via the visa worker programs.
During his years at Cisco, Chambers encouraged and allowed Cisco managers to hire Indian graduates via the government-provided H-1B visa program. The policy pushed many Americans out of Cisco and has left many Indian managers throughout the company.
This workforce replacement has coincided with the discovery of significant technical problems in Cisco’s products. In March, Wired magazine reported:
The Cisco 1001-X series router doesn’t look much like the one you have in your home. It’s bigger and much more expensive, responsible for reliable connectivity at stock exchanges, corporate offices, your local mall, and so on. The devices play a pivotal role at institutions, in other words, including some that deal with hypersensitive information. Now, researchers are disclosing a remote attack that would potentially allow a hacker to take over any 1001-X router and compromise all the data and commands that flow through it.
The fact that the researchers have demonstrated a way to bypass [the security lock] indicates that it may be possible, with device-specific modifications, to defeat the Trust Anchor on hundreds of millions of Cisco units around the world. That includes everything from enterprise routers to network switches to firewalls. In practice, this means an attacker could use these techniques to fully compromise the networks these devices are on. Given Cisco’s ubiquity, the potential fallout would be enormous.
More than 80 percent of Cisco’s foreign workers come from India, according to MyVisaJobs.com:
India (1005); China (108); Canada (50); Mexico (23); Brazil (13); United Kingdom (13); Pakistan (10); Australia (9); Israel (9); Egypt (7)
These visa workers used a variety of different visa programs to get U.S jobs, according to the site:
H-1B (937); L-1 (313); F-1 (68); TN (8); E-3 (4); L-2 (4); H-4 (3); Parolee (2); Not in USA (1); J-2 (1)
In March, Cisco was awarded the “Padma Bhushan” award from the government of India,
President Kovind presents Padma Bhushan to Shri @JohnTChambers for Trade & Industry (Technology). Founder of JC2 Ventures, Shri Chambers has served as CEO of Cisco and as Chairman of the US-India Strategic Partnership forum. pic.twitter.com/ruA9DMyRPN
Other business groups are trying to boost the flow of Indians graduates into the U.S-India Outsourcing Economy.
For example, the immigration director at a Koch-funded advocacy group told a House committee that legislators should allow an unlimited inflow of H-1B workers into the U.S. healthcare sector. “The [annual] cap [of 85,000 work visas] should be repealed altogether for the healthcare sector, as it is for the university and non-profit sector already,” Daniel Griswold, the director of trade and immigration issues at the Koch-funded Mercatus Center in Arlington, Va.
Currently, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, and Apple’s Tim Cook are supporting a push by Utah GOP Sen. Mike Lee to allow U.S. and Indian companies to recruit and reward many extra Indian workers. Lee’s bill offers Indians an increased allocation of green cards, up from roughly 10,000 cards per year to 60,000 cards per year.
Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin is blocking Lee’s S.386 plan. But Durbin wants to award Indian workers with up to 100,000 green cards per year if they snatch jobs from American graduates.
The bills by Lee and Durbin would also dramatically raise the incentives for Indian graduates to take sweatshop jobs in the United States via the uncapped B1, OPT, CPT, J-1, and TN visa programs. Those sweatshop jobs are valuable to the Indians because they serve as an on-ramp to the H-1B program, which allows employers to provide green cards to workers and their families.
Watch GOP Sen. Mike Lee publicly urge Indian contract-workers to lobby US Senators for a bill offering fast-track citizenship to Indian grads if they take jobs (at low wages) from US grads. No GOP Sen. has rebuked him & no anti-GOP journos ‘pounce.’ Weird. https://t.co/A5VOsuyOVt
Utah’s Lee has tried and failed to pass his S.386 giveaway bill four times via the fast-track Unanimous Consent process.
The leading technology executive in Utah — Shantanu Narayen, president of Adobe — is an Indian and a member of Chamber’s outsourcing advocacy group.
Adobe is also a significant user of Indian H-1Bs. In 2018, the company filed 583 “Labor Condition Applications” at the Department of Labor to get at least 538 H-1B visas — up from 321 LCAs in 2017. In 2019, Adobe asked for 469 LCAs for H-1B workers.
On October 22, Modi also announced he was meeting with former U.S. and European politicians working with the JP Morgan International Council, which is led by Tony Blair, the former U.K. prime minister. One of the attendees was banker Jamie Dimon, who also is a member of Chambers’ partnership forum.
Very good interaction with the JP Morgan International Council, an illustrious gathering of top policy makers, thinkers, statesmen and stateswomen, captains of industry, innovators among others. Spoke about India’s efforts in health, education and becoming a $5 Trillion economy. pic.twitter.com/vf0bA1C4kS
Roughly 800,000 Indian college graduate visa workers now hold a wide variety of U.S. jobs in technology, health care, accounting, and business. Moreover, these visa workers have helped to move more than one million additional U.S. jobs back to teams of graduates working in India.
This onshore/offshore process is described in a discrimination lawsuit against one of the Indian-owned outsourcing firms, Larson & Toubro Infotech.
The firm won a technology support contract from Iconix Brand Group Inc. in New York. The support was managed by one American employee of Larson & Toubro, according to the lawsuit filed by the D.C. firm of Kotchen & Low. The single American ran a New York team, which consisted of roughly eight Indians who likely arrived with H-1B work visas, the lawsuit says. But the single American also ran a team of 20 Indians in India, and he reported to two Indian managers in India. So the visa programs allowed the Indian company to take roughly 30 good jobs from U.S. white-collar workers with just eight visas, according to the lawsuit.
The lawsuit noted that “from 2013 to 2018, LTI received 9,785 new H-1B visas (or visa amendments) and almost 200 new L-1 visas (or visa amendments) – far more positions than could actually exist given that LTI only employs about 7,500 employees in the U.S.” The surplus of visa workers allows the company to sideline American job seekers and instead hire lower-wage Indian visa workers.
The use of cheaper Indian labor created payroll savings for Iconix and profits for Larson. In turn, those profits boosted the company’s stock values for U.S. investors, including the Vanguard International Stock Index.
This outsourcing economy has helped to deny jobs to millions of American graduates and to cut salaries earned by American graduates, both young and old, just as blue-collar wages crashed when U.S. investors used free-trade rules to transfer factories workers into China. The outsourcing pressure helps to explain why white-collar salaries are growing slower than wages for blue-collar jobs in President Donald Trump’s economy.
In fact, the U.S.-India Outsourcing Economy has grown so much that it has clogged the U.S. immigration system. The clog is forcing many of the contract workers to wait more than a decade to get the green cards they were promised by employers in exchange for taking Americans’ jobs.
That long wait helps the companies by keeping their many contract workers stuck in their jobs, tied to their employers — often at substandard wages.
But the long wait also makes it difficult for outsourcing companies to recruit more Indian workers. After all, fewer Indians will sign up for the outsourcing industry if the companies cannot deliver the fast-track green cards.
That green card clog is also a huge problem for India’s government because its entire economic strategy is built around the export of workers into foreign economies.
Many high-tech companies and investors want India’s government to help them get into Indian’s growing marketplace, especially as the trade war with China heats up. So Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, and Apple’s Tim Cook, and many other corporations are working with GOP Sen. Mike Lee to unclog the outsourcing and the recruiting process by removing the “country caps” that delay the award of green cards to Indian visa workers.
The pipeline of Indian workers into the United States is built on the H-1B program.
The H-1B program is uncapped for non-profit employers, but companies can get 85,000 new H-1B workers into the United States per year. Each H-1B worker must go home after six years, so capping the companies’ workforce of H-1B workers at around roughly 480,000 workers. That workforce provides companies with roughly equal to one Indian worker for every nine Americans who graduate with skilled degrees each year.
Census data shows how huge numbers of American software graduates have been replaced by Indian & Chinese visa-workers in N.J., California, N.C., Georgia, N.Y., Texas, Virginia, Florida, and other states. Next: Healthcare professionals. @S386https://t.co/qH9p4Ynd34
In 1990, Congress decided to let workers in the H-1B program — and in the smaller, lesser-known L-1 program — to apply for green cards. This 1990 decision created the huge citizenship prize, which is pulling many Indians into the H-1B program and ensuring they will brave low wages, tough conditions, and often illegal working conditions to win the prize.
Up to 300,000 additional Indians are working while waiting for green cards, long after their six-year H-1B visa expired.
Few Americans appreciate the huge value of green cards and citizenship. Yet Congress allows U.S. and Indian investors to freely trade this citizenship prize to 10,000 Indian graduates every year in exchange for a decade or more of profitable work. Of course, millions of foreigners will accept that giveaway deal — and millions of foreigners will feel a moral duty to shove Americans out of their jobs, homes, and careers so they can grab the fantastic prize for their spouses, children, grandchildren and fellow nationals.
Lee’s bill will allow companies to make that barter with roughly 60,000 Indian graduates per year, up from 10,000 per year under current “country cap” rules. The 60,000 cards a year would reduce the wait for green cards down to several years, so encouraging more Indians to join the H-1B program.
But the federal government has quietly created many other programs that allow foreigners to easily take jobs in the United States, regardless of whether Americans want those jobs.
Federal law allows an unlimited number of Indians to get jobs in the United States via the B1 visa for foreign workers, the TN program for businesses based in Canada and Mexico, as well as the uncapped “Optional Practical Training” and “Curricular Practical Training” work permit programs for foreign students and graduates at U.S. colleges.
The mass of OPT and CPT workers in the United States have their own sweatshop economy, where they crowd into shared housing while they work as temporary contract workers for the middlemen subcontractors, which are quietly hired by brand-name Fortune 500 firms. But many Indian graduates do not want to join the OPT sweatshop economy — unless they can also get promoted into the L-1 or H-1B program to get green cards.
So if Sen. Lee or Sen. Durbin unclogs the green card pipeline, more Indian graduates will flood into the feeder pipelines created by the B-1, TN, OPT, and CPT programs so they can get green cards after being promoted into the main L-1 and H-1B pipelines.
Current data shows roughly 800,000 Indians work in the United States — including many who are working-and-waiting for more than 15 years to get one of the 10,000 green cards issued to Indians each year.
If companies can offer more green cards each year, then more Indians will get into the pipeline. In turn, that pressure will push more young and old U.S graduates out of jobs, onto the streets — and likely into the voting booths.
Moments with Mr. Kissinger, former Prime Ministers Tony Blair and John Howard, Ms. Condoleezza Rice and Mr. Robert Gates.
we should create a discussion group on this one...
The battle for Bitcoin is very simple, and it goes right back to the days before I launched it. My vision lies in a system that will utterly destroy crime. I designed Bitcoin not to avoid government, but to act within law. It is a system that will bring down activist criminal groups and more mainstream traditional criminals for what they are. As we saw with the collapse of Silk Road and — just the other day — the arrest of hundreds of people involved with child porn rings, Bitcoin enables the tracing of criminal activity, allowing law enforcement to shut such activities down.
If you believe Bitcoin is a system that takes down government and brings about anarchy, you have been sorely deluded. The design of Bitcoin is one that allows individual users — across simplified payment verification (SPV) — to act as peers. It is a system that allows individuals to have privacy. It is a system that artfully removes any trace of anonymity in the manner that some people seem to understand it:
If you purchase drugs using Bitcoin, you will be recorded forever.
If you buy child porn using Bitcoin, your heinous crime will be found out.
If you create ransomware based on Bitcoin, eventually your money will be seized.
In time, governments will understand the true power of Bitcoin. It is not something for the 1 or 2 per cent of outcasts that seek to parasitically benefit from the hard work of others.
Bitcoin is a system designed to ensure that the scenarios of ‘free’ web offerings and tokens developed within the 1990s end with investors having rights against the people who conned them. It is a system where any ICO, which is really just a new name for a web IPO of the 1990s or a pink sheet scam of the previous era, is recorded. In the ‘80s and ‘90s, all of the scams allowed the conmen creating them and saying that they were innovation to get away by destroying records. Bitcoin brings an end to this, and makes the creators of such tokens accountable.
The creation of yet another token is not innovation, and it never will be. It is not the ability to invest in a token that allows the creation of wealth, it is the creation of an industry and goods and services and a company that delivers what it promises that do so. The creation of a simple token to democratise finance is the same catchcry we heard around hundreds of false investment systems in the 1990s, and it is the same con job today. The difference is, in the 1990s people could delete logs and get away with it; today you can be tracked down a decade later.
I created Bitcoin to be honest money. I had envisioned a system that would act to record information, secure data, and allow people to transact through micropayments in a way that has never occurred before. Bitcoin was never about decentralisation for decentralisation’s sake. The call for decentralisation doesn’t even make sense. It’s a religious catchword of a cult based on people saying that government is bad and calling to expel society.
Bitcoin is a system designed to encourage long-term gains rather than short-term misguidance, that we have seen develop as people seek zero-sum games to rip off others. Bitcoin is a system designed to create real capitalism — the way it was meant to be and the way it used to be. Not the form based on fast profits and milking companies, but one built to create long-term value.
Bitcoin is a system of stewardship. It is a system where people improve the land they work on so that they can leave something better for their children. Not one where you take money now, but one where you create a business — designed not to last months or years or even decades, but generations.
People have become disillusioned with what we call capitalism. But what we call capitalism today is moving more towards the system of mercantilism that Adam Smith wrote against. It is the system that cherry-picks misplaced ideas, ones that are taken out of their context, ignoring moral sentiments and the reasons we develop companies. When Henry Ford created his company, he paid people more than the base wage. He did so because it served to have people engaged and to have them love the company they worked for. Today, we have layoffs for no better reason than quarterly gains. Yet, how can you create passion in the industry and company you seek to grow when you cannot have the people that are part of your company see the entire reason for your existence as a mission to improve the world.
And if your business is not based on passion, if you don’t wake up desiring to work harder to leave the world a better place, why have you even bothered waking up? I created Bitcoin to give reason. It allows people to have more purpose than they have from merely collecting likes. It opens up global markets through global micropayments, where people in Third World countries can earn small payments with low fees, enabling them and helping them to help themselves. It opens up new opportunities as people can create new systems that no one ever thought could exist, dreams that I cannot even imagine, because we have a world full of people and the creativity they carry with them.
Bitcoin, in creating a system that captures what people do, allows us to form trust. Bitcoin is not about destroying trust. Bitcoin is about creating trust. If you know that you do not need to fear the person you’re dealing with; if you know that when they commit a crime, they will be captured, that if they defraud you, your money will be taken and returned to you, that if they seek to steal your money, they will lose all that they sought to gain…
…then we can build a world based on trust.
My vision is simple; I do not see Bitcoin as a system that enables criminals to do what they do, I see it as one that undermines everything they do. I see it as a system that empowers the honest people in our society. I see Bitcoin as a system that empowers the creators and developers within our society. It is a system that helps those who act not to create short-term gains, but who work as stewards to develop something to make a better world, a world that our children and our children’s children will want to be a part of.
Bitcoin is not about destroying government. Bitcoin is about destroying corruption. With records and transparency, police and officials cannot commit crime, and they cannot subvert the system that they are meant to support. With records and transparency, Bitcoin enables government that helps the people and undermines that which subverts trust and breeds corruption.
Those, such as James A Donald, who argued with me in 2008 about Bitcoin and centralisation, who seek — as it has been shown he does — a world with paedophilia and child porn will be disappointed to learn that Bitcoin cannot be subverted in such a manner. Bitcoin will never be anonymous, and it will never support such activities.
Those who seek a world that enables dark web drug sites, criminal exchanges, and terrorism will never benefit from Bitcoin. Those who need to know now understand, and they are learning more every day. In the coming years, people will start to see the power of Bitcoin. It is not an asset that cannot be seized by government. It is not an asset that enables crime.
Bitcoin and any derivative, including BTC, is simple to seize, and there is no way around it. In the coming months, we will see both Bitcoin leading to the tracing of crime and the seizure of criminal proceeds. We will see BTC taken away from the criminals.
You will see it not because their keys have been compromised. You will see it because the system was designed to allow such proceedings to occur. Miners enforce the rules, and the rules include the enacting of proceeds of crime legislation and seizing coins when ordered to do so. No UASF hat-based attack means anything. If you don’t like Bitcoin, if you don’t like the fact that it’s designed to stop crime, if you don’t like the fact that it is honest and will enable a free society…
…then you are not the reason I created Bitcoin for.
President Donald Trump said during a wide-ranging impromptu press conference on Monday that he's "bringing our troops back home" and doesn't care if Beltway Republicans or military contractors like Lockheed Martin don't like it.
Young climate strikers I spoke to recently are confused and distressed about the things adults are doing.
It's not just inaction during the worsening climate crisis that bothers them, but the increasingly bizarre criticism many older people throw at striking schoolchildren, in the media and elsewhere. In the absence of any meaningful attempts to restrain global carbon emissions, the direct action of young people should, logically, be applauded. But maybe we're not dealing with an entirely logical problem here.
None of these criticisms acknowledge the urgency of the crisis that climate strikers are drawing attention to. So, why are they being made?
Beneath the thin skin
It's been argued that most of the bullying Thunberg receives is from middle-aged, conservative men who feel threatened by her agency as a young woman, and respond with misogyny. But the criticisms of the strikers aren't only from powerful men like Donald Trump. I've also heard from parents supporting their children on the school strikes that strangers have accused them of manipulating "that poor Greta Thunberg" and betraying their children's right to have a "normal childhood." Some parents were told by passing women that they should be reported to child protection for abusing their children as they stood alongside them on the school picket line. Just to paint a picture of the scene, this was a picket line before school started with children under the age of eight holding their parents' hands, with painted signs urging onlookers to "save the turtles." They went into school afterwards at the normal time.
As an academic and psychotherapist, I study how children are emotionally affected by the climate crisis. But I also want to understand why some adults have reacted the way they have to the young strikers. I find these children inspiring. On September 20, 2019 – the day of the global strike – children in Afghanistan marched through the streets with their banners, flanked by soldiers in full body armor carrying guns. These children were putting their own lives at risk to get their message across to the world. On the other hand, we have these verbal attacks from adults, safe in their offices and homes.
In her UN speech, Thunberg challenged adults the world over to care about the climate crisis. She spoke of the shattered dreams and despair that her generation bears. She also recast inaction as a conscious choice. "If you choose to fail us, we will never forgive you," she said. By making this choice conscious, she left older generations with no more excuses. That challenge was always going to hurt and provoke a backlash. When adults are challenged to behave like adults, by a child, they can go in one of two directions.
One is simply to grow up. The other, is to defend themselves. In psychology, we try to listen through the defenses people make when they feel threatened. For example, when someone says that these young people should be in school instead of on strike, they may be pining for the sense of normality that seemed to exist before the climate crisis gained such prominence in everyday life.
When people complain that children don't understand how complex the problem is and should leave it to the experts, perhaps that's another lament for a time when complex problems could be trusted to authorities such as the state that looked out for their interests.
When people attack Thunberg for not showing emotion or for showing too much of it, perhaps there's an inkling that the severity of the climate crisis demands a great deal of painful and complicated emotions, and they'd rather not think of them.
Generally, the size of the defense mirrors the size of the fear. It may be reasonable to assume many of the people who attack Thunberg and the school strikers are terrified. It's much easier to attack others than to look at ourselves, reflect on our own feelings and start to deal with them, like grown ups.
all coastal areas are liberal with a conservative tootsie roll center. California, Hong Kong, Ukraine. IMHO all borders should include coastland. Like spokes in a wheel. No nation should be denied access to the beach when their neighbor does. Inequity leads to war.
The National Basketball Association found itself in the middle of a political firestorm of its own making when the Houston Rockets’ general manager tweeted something simple and admirable: “Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong.” The NBA’s first statement was cowardly. It began: “We recognize that the views expressed by … Daryl Morey have deeply offended many of our friends and fans in China, which is regrettable.” Morey buckled and deleted his tweet.
The NBA then went overseas to grovel.
A statement posted on the NBA’s Weibo social media network in China stated that they were “extremely disappointed in the inappropriate comment,” and as a result, Morey “has undoubtedly seriously hurt the feelings of Chinese basketball fans.” China is a huge and lucrative market for the NBA. If business means turning your back on freedom while defending one of the most brutally repressive regimes in human history — so be it.
That abject surrender, that spineless concession to a government now shooting pro-democracy protesters in the streets drew near-universal condemnation in America, ranging in Washington from conservative Sen. Ted Cruz to socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. So the NBA commissioner, Adam Silver, readjusted to insist the league would not discourage their athletes or executives from speaking freely. “We are not apologizing for Daryl exercising his freedom of expression” — which is disingenuous. That is exactly what all of their “extremely disappointed” remarks implied.
And the duplicity continued. In Philadelphia, a 76ers fan named Sam Wachs and his wife brought a pair of signs that read “Free Hong Kong” and “Free HK” as the Sixers took on the Guangzhou Loong Lions, a Chinese Basketball Association team. Wachs said he lived in Hong Kong for two years, so he sympathized with the protests. First, security confiscated their signs. When they yelled “Free Hong Kong” during the second quarter, Wachs said, they were removed from the game.
Then the same Chinese team played the Washington Wizards in D.C., and the routine repeated itself. Several fans standing with a sign reading “Free Hong Kong” and “Google: Uighurs” had them confiscated prior to the game. (The Uighurs are a Muslim minority in northwestern China, with an estimated one million people held in concentration camps.)
The NBA now doesn’t want to be political. But it’s been very political on the home front, when it has suited its purposes, which is to say, when it placates the left. The league moved the 2017 All-Star Game out of Charlotte over a North Carolina law that in government offices, transgender people should use the bathroom of their gender “assigned at birth.” The NBA commissioner criticized President Donald Trump’s travel ban from seven Muslim countries as going “against the fundamental values and the fundamental ingredients of what makes for a great NBA.”
The NBA allowed their players to wear “I can’t breathe” shirts to protest police after Eric Garner suffocated while laying down on the sidewalk in New York. National Review’s Jim Geraghty underlined the hypocrisy: “Apparently the NBA is fine with protesting American police brutality, but not Hong Kong police brutality.”
Speaking of American police brutality, nobody’s found Colin Kaepernick saying anything about China’s grip on the NBA. The man with the Nike sneaker-selling slogan of “Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything.” is silent while Nike orders the removal of all the Houston Rockets merchandise from their stories in China. Apparently, America is still the most horrible country in the world that was founded on racism, slavery and genocide.
L. Brent Bozell III is the president of the Media Research Center. Tim Graham is director of media analysis at the Media Research Center and executive editor of the blog NewsBusters.org. To find out more about Brent Bozell III and Tim Graham, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.
jimmy whales says, i cant control the information, but you want to.
We are fed up. After ten years of domination by big social media—which might finally be in decline—we are tired of giant Silicon Valley corporations using us contemptuously. We still remember an Internet in which we charted our own destiny.
It’s not just social media. It’s Wikipedia, too. If you want to participate in the world’s largest encyclopedia, you must collaborate with a shadowy group of anonymous amateurs and paid shills on exactly one article per topic. If you’re new, you won’t be treated very nicely. If you don’t play their strange game, you’ll be summarily dismissed. Like the social media giants, Wikipedia has become an arrogant and controlling oligarchy.
Like Facebook, Wikipedia is also controlling its readers. It feeds them biased articles, exactly one per topic, does not let users give effective, independent feedback on articles (you’re forced to become a participant) or to rate articles. They have in a very real way centralized epistemic authority in the hands of an anonymous mob. This is worse than Facebook. At least with Facebook, Congress can call Mark Zuckerberg to testify. There isn’t anyone who is responsible for Wikipedia’s content. The situation is, in some ways, more dire than with Facebook, because you can’t effectively talk back to Wikipedia.
We don’t have to tolerate this. We don’t have to be at the mercy of these people.
What if all of humanity wrote encyclopedia articles, and rated them, as part of a completely decentralized knowledge network, with no individual, group, corporation, or government in charge of the whole?
We could create a knowledge commons, defined by neutral, open, technical standards and protocols: a network that decentralizes encyclopedias, exactly as the Blogosphere has done for blogs.
If we do this, we won’t create just one website or app. We will create a truly decentralized, leaderless network of the people, by the people, and for the people. A commons, like the Internet itself. As to apps and editorial policies, let a thousand flowers bloom.
But that means we the people need to roll up our sleeves and get to work making it happen.
To this end, I recently tweeted:
As of this writing it was liked over 1,100 times and RTd 360 times, and the new Knowledge Standards Foundation Twitter account, @ks_found, jumped from 60 to 1,441 followers in a few days. Please follow if you haven’t already!
We have been calling for early participants to prepare the site for an upcoming announcement (Oct. 17, rather than Oct. 18 as stated above). We have over 30 volunteers now—and now it’s a matter of getting them (and others who might sign up after this CFP) together building stuff.
Bear in mind this isn’t a for-profit startup, it’s not a coin, there is no ICO, and we’re not building an app. Nobody is going to get rich here (unless they build a for-profit app on top of the resources we’re building, which is totally OK). No, we’re simply launching the discussion, the supporting nonprofit Foundation, starting work on supporting technical tools, and building an open source volunteer-driven movement.
Do you want to be among the very first participants/builders in a completely centerless, leaderless, open source network, like the Blogosphere, that I propose to call the Encyclosphere? The organizing site isn’t public yet, but it is far enough along for our first participants (just not observers or the idle curious—actual participants only, please).
So, what’s going on?
We are now calling for the new network’s first participants. Do not write unless you’re willing to get to work. We don’t want observers, we want motivated participants. If that’s you, please tell me a bit about yourself and which of the following you could put in some time doing in the next few weeks?
Social media managers: share and promote using #Encyclosphere. We need somebody to maintain Knowledge Standards Foundation accounts on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Gab, and Minds; if interested, get in touch.
Reporters, bloggers, podcasters, vloggers: interview me, invite me on your news program, video series, or blog. I promise to be interesting.
Writers or any sufficiently smart person: various stuff.
List all online encyclopedias. Make a massive list. Work with developers on doing any initially needed data about said encyclopedias (one thing I can think of is whether they have an API and if so, where and if there are instructions somewhere).
Help author and keep up-to-date text pages on Encyclosphere.org (such as “Site Map” and “About”).
Developers: start doing exploratory coding. Like what?
Create scrapers to get metadata about encyclopedia articles out of Wikipedia, Everipedia, Britannica, Ballotpedia, etc. Scrape responsibly. Don’t overload servers.
Create a regularly-updated (not too regularly-updated) database (or multiple databases) of encyclopedia articles.
Set up a GitLab group.
Install Matrix (as in Matrix.org) for developer discussions or advise about a better chat app, preferably OSS. I can give you access to an Encyclosphere.org subdomain & subdirectory.
Then let’s share both the code and the data generated (both as a downloadable database and a queryable API). If you’re interested, let’s post on the blog and solicit ideas for requirements. If you already have such a database, please get in touch and let’s talk next steps. There are lots of other potential projects; let’s brainstorm.
Advise us on the legalities involved in the aforementioned scraping.
Advise us on and help us to set up a 501(c)(3).
Connectors of all sorts: outreach to experts. If you know interested people, reach out to them and introduce them to the project (and me).
Experts on anything closely related to our mission: give us advice. When it comes to executing on the early stages of a project, doing the most effective things can spell all the difference to success and failure. We know we don’t have it all figured out, so if you have useful practical advice and ideas we can act on, we’d love to have them.
Encyclopedists and technologists: discuss, discuss, discuss. For all the work we can immediately start doing, when it comes to the standards themselves, I refuse to go off half-cocked. We’re going to do this right. There are many deep, difficult, and important questions about every aspect of this endeavor. For this reason, the main method of extended deliberation about the standards will be via a group blog (as opposed to exploratory coding, which we can organize via the ordinary sort of chat). We’ll have up to eight posts per day, whoever wants to post can submit something; I’ll post a fair bit myself, probably, and I’ll be the lead moderator. Mutual respect and staying on-topic will be requirements.
Foundation volunteers generally: get in touch. Send me your name and strengths; let me know if you’re in central Ohio. I’ll add you to a growing list, and if you help us get useful stuff done, we’ll put you on Foundation’s Team page. Send me your name and strengths here or DM on Twitter here.
Encyclosphere enthusiasts generally: also get in touch. We’ll try to give you some pointers depending on what you might want to do.
Note, the above list is likely to change rapidly as we learn more and get to work. I’ll let you into the “pre-alpha” site (encyclosphere.org) and introduce you to people who are working on similar things.
Also, you must be an alpha tester: that means you’re OK with bugs and rough design (that will, of course, be fixed and prettied up).
The only thing I believe in strongly is the Free-Press. God bless our free press.
ALWAYS THE LAST TO KNOW: “A very large number of Americans don’t have high levels of trust and respect for the government, and they’re generally OK with Trump being the junkyard dog who digs it all out,” CNBC* discovers, to explain “why Trump’s poll numbers are defying the impeachment mess.”
Some blame Watergate for this abrupt collapse of trust in institutions, but not very convincingly. For one thing, the decline in trust begins to appear in the polls as early as 1966, almost a decade before the Watergate was known as anything more than a big hole in the ground alongside the Potomac River. For another, the nation had managed unconcernedly to shrug off Watergate-style events before. Somebody bugged Barry Goldwater’s apartment during the 1964 election without it triggering a national trauma. The Johnson administration tapped the phones of Nixon supporters in 1968, and again nothing happened. John F. Kennedy regaled reporters with intimate details from the tax returns of wealthy Republican donors, and none of the reporters saw anything amiss. FDR used the Federal Bureau of Investigation to spy on opponents of intervention into World War II—and his targets howled without result. If Watergate could so transform the nation’s sense of itself, why did those previous abuses, which were equally well known to the press, not do so? Americans did not lose their faith in institutions because of the Watergate scandal; Watergate became a scandal because Americans were losing faith in their institutions.
(Baylor University) A Baylor University researcher's prototype smartphone app -- designed to help parents detect early signs of various eye diseases in their children such as retinoblastoma, an aggressive pediatric eye cancer -- has passed its first big test.