text:
Ryan Roberts' eighth-inning single brought in the go-ahead run as Tampa Bay rallied past Toronto for an 8-5 decision in the opener of a three-game series from Rogers Centre.
Wil Myers finished with three hits, including a solo home run, and scored twice for the Rays, who remained hot thanks to the 11th win in their last 12 games. Ben Zobrist, Kelly Johnson and Evan Longoria also went deep in the victory.
"This was good to see. We put it down for a couple of days, and picked it right back up with no problems," said Rays manager Joe Maddon.
David Price (4-5) worked seven innings, allowing four runs on seven hits with five strikeouts.
Jose Bautista cranked a two-run homer, while Edwin Encarnacion, Brett Lawrie and J.P. Arencibia hit solo shots for the Blue Jays, who have dropped four of their last five.
Brett Cecil (3-1) was charged with the lead run while recording just one out. Blue Jays starter Esmil Rogers gave up seven hits and four runs while fanning four over his 5 2/3-inning outing.
Johnson started the deciding eighth frame with a base hit and Cecil was pulled for Steve Delabar. Pinch-hitter Sean Rodriguez then sacrificed Johnson to second and after Jose Molina's fly out, Roberts -- recalled from Triple-A Durham before the game -- laced a hit to left for a 5-4 Rays' lead.
Roberts advanced on a wild pitch, then came in when Desmond Jennings followed with a double.
Toronto stranded two in the home half, then the Rays tacked on two more in the ninth. Luke Scott doubled with two down and scored when Jays shortstop Jose Reyes threw high to first on a Myers infield single. Rodriguez later plated Myers with a single for an 8-4 contest.
Lawrie's one-out liner cleared the left-field wall in the ninth to make it 8-5, but Jake McGee recovered to retire the next two batters and end the contest.
"You can't be perfect all year long," said Jays manager John Gibbons. "You don't see it too often, they get a leadoff hit and then a couple off Delabar."We have to put our foot on the gas, or else everyone is going to race past us."
Encarnacion reached the second deck in left field for a two-out solo homer in the bottom of the first to give the hosts an early edge.
Despite a double from Myers and Lawrie's bobble of a Johnson grounder, the Rays left runners on the corners in the second.
Zobrist evened the score on a shot to left center with one out in the third, but Arencibia's blast to dead center to begin the home half put the Jays back on top. Reyes later singled with one out, stole second and came home when Bautista launched a two-run homer to left for a 4-1 game.
Myers started off the fourth with his fourth homer of the season, then Longoria's long blast to kick off the sixth made it a one-run contest. Three batters later, Johnson's two-out homer to center evened the score.
"We were playing our best ball leading up to the All-Star break. This was a big win for us, after being down early in the game," Myers said. "It's the mark of a good team, to be able to come back after a rest and get the win."
Game Notes
Price upped his career mark to 7-0 in eight career starts in Toronto and improved to 13-2 all-time against the Blue Jays ... Tampa Bay assumed a 6-5 season-series edge with its second win in four tries in Toronto this year... Prior to the contest, the Rays placed first baseman James Loney on the paternity list.


text:
Skip to comments.Bomber pilot's son raps Roos' Hiroshima A-bomb day attendance
Posted on 08/06/2010 8:23:00 PM PDT by Christus_Rex
The son of the U.S. Air Force pilot who dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima in 1945 in World War II has criticized the U.S. administration for sending a delegation to Fridays ceremony marking the 65th anniversary of the bombing, a U.S. TV reported Thursday.
Tibbets, whose father died in 2007 at age 92, said of the administration of President Barack Obama, I know its the anniversary, but I dont know what the hell theyre trying to do. It needs to be left alone. The war is over, FoxNews said.
(Excerpt) Read more at japantoday.com ...
Designed by Germans, built by Americans and tested in Japan.
You are so correct!!!
Oh, by the way, I normally call him Bowrama!
Bowrama very apt! He should be tried for treason.
Tibbets son must be retired out of uniform to say this, he was a B2 bomber pilot...
The war might be over, but the surrender is just starting.
"Obama you truly have no respect for this nation. You are a national disgrace and should be tried for treason!"
AGREED!!! (BTW don't forget Stalin would have come in to Japan from the north, and today we'd probably have a North Japan and a South Japan, just like Korea)
Good point.
>Obama, and I very rarely call him Obama, is a total disgrace to this country!
To be totally honest; we as-a-nation probably *deserve* Obama [and those like him] in leadership of our country. What else can you say about a country that sacrifices MILLIONS of its citizens to the god of comfort/convenience? {And, to top it off, prevents the states from protecting those citizens outright.}
>As I recall, he DID bow to the Emperor of Japan!
In that case it was appropriate to bow; in Japan you bow when you meet someone to be polite... however the way he did it was disgraceful and lacking of dignity. {Hell, any "average American" could watch an anime and see how to do it correctly... almost all the "introduce the new boy to the class"-scenes have 'the bow.'}
>Oh, by the way, I normally call him Bowrama!
Bowrama v. Bowman?
He's too busy vacationing to lay a wreath at Arlington on Memorial Day, but he will cruise on over to Japan to apologize for those evil American that dropped atomic bombs on two cities ending the deadliest war in history. This guy is simply not qualified to lead anyone.
Maybe you deserve Obama, but I don't.
The three decades of wanton death allowed and encouraged by abortion is not solely upon the heads of our 'political leaders,' is it?
I think the anniversary of the Hiroshima bombing and the horror of it should be front-and-center every year, with every US President taking a moment on that day to remind the world that if you mess with the US you'll get yer s**t burned so bad you'll still be whining and crying about it 65+ years later.
The only "apology" any US President should give for dropping nukes on Japan is "It is regrettable that the only way to stop mid 20th century Japan's hegemony was to nuke two Japanese cities into smithereens. We hope and pray that it will never be necessary again."
we should have dropped the A Bomb on Tokyo and taken out the Emperor and everything else .
But we needed someone who could actually surrender .
They deserved it though
never forget .......
nip bastards
Tibbets forgot to add: "And WE won."
Kudos to your dad, Mr. Tibbets
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Are there issues regarding access to healthy natural spaces in our community? How can we determine needs and solutions?
This workshop will review some of the latest findings regarding the health benefits of green spaces and near-by nature and how these benefits are unevenly distributed in our community. We will discuss ways to address these disparities in terms of grassroots activities, teaching, therapeutic work, and policy change.
The day will include a series of expert talks, a panel discussion, and a public forum. Speakers include: Geoffrey Donovan, U.S. Forest Service, Portland Forestry Sciences Lab; Gregory Wolley, African American Outdoor Association; and Erica Timm, Neighborhood Trees Specialist, Friends of Trees.
Participants will:
Learn about the latest research on the restorative effects of nature, including the effects of tree cover and neighborhood greenery on outcomes such as children's birth weight and incidence of cardiovascular disease.
Learn about basic health benefits of domestic nature (household plants and pets), nearby nature (i.e., parks and gardens), and managed nature (e.g., forests and natural areas), as well as some benefits of outdoor activities and adventure wilderness-type areas.
Explore issues of social justice and equity associated with access to health-nurturing green spaces, as a general trend and specifically in the Portland Metro area.
Learn about interventions to help improve access to green spaces in Portland through the activities of community groups and nonprofits.
Who should attend?
This workshop is relevant for counselors, educators, activists, conservation and sustainability professionals, and any member of the community concerned about equitable access to nature. Please spread the word about this opportunity among friends, colleagues, and neighbors.
Co-sponsored by African American Outdoor Association, Friends of Trees, Legacy Hospital Healing Garden Program, and the Ecopsychology Certificate program, the Center for Community Engagement, and the Graduate Students of Color Alliance at the Lewis & Clark Graduate School of Education and Counseling.
This workshop is offered through thw Ecopsychology program at Lewis & Clark College.
When: Saturday, June 28, 2014, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.
Where: Lewis & Clark College


text:
Hey, everyone! I was just wondering what you believe would happen if humans became smart enough to abolish religion? Personally, I believe that wars would come to an all-time low or even an end, and it might induce world peace. Since there would be no religion to argue about, I believe that people would be a lot nicer to each other and have a more diverse range of friends. The only downside is that it would make things like racism and sexism a lot more common, since race, sex, and religion are the most discriminated against groups right now. What do you guys think? Is there anything I missed?
Views: 1474
I wasn't trying to say that we would abolish it, I was just asking what you thought would happen if it were abolished. And abolishing violence is a good idea, too, it's just that we would need to fix key problems in societies to help get rid of it. I like that idea, though. Reading through the responses I realize that some people really need religion to get through their lives, and if it weren't there, more bad things could come from it. Thanks for responding!
I really like your point there. Religion has done some good, but has also been a negative force in the world, at least in the western world. But, as far as science and technology are concerned I'm more of the mindset that religion was a set back.
Agreed. Starting over is just starting over. Science stays the same, everything else will find a new form.
Barring every human on Earth having an "AHA!" moment and getting rid of religion and turning to science, it would be a nasty affair. But, I agree, I don't care if people want to believe in purple unicorns that shit leprechauns, as long as they don't infringe on the rights, try to force their beliefs on others and/or use it as justification to harm others.
I heard someone say that violence is committed more in the name of the prince of peace than for any other reason.
You seem to be assuming a few things here.
1) "I was just wondering what you believe would happen if humans became smart enough to abolish religion?"
This assumes that education can lead to a loss of religion, which is not necessarily so. If it was, then are most highest educated members of society would not be religious. While it has been shown that religion is far less important to people the more educated they become, there definitely are still believers among those in who have doctorates. The thing is that many people specialize in only certain branches of knowledge so they don't learn much about the others. So abolish? Probably not, but lessen it's hold certainly.
2) "Personally, I believe that wars would come to an all-time low or even an end, and it might induce world peace."
This assumes that religion is the direct cause of nearly all international and domestic problems that produce violence in the world. Unfortunately, These issues are hardly ever that simple. Many are over resources, land, and policy. Others are simply to further the personal ambitions of group leaders. I've said elsewhere that I think that political power plays far more of a role in many of history's war than religion does. Religion has been incidental and sometimes complementary in starting fights only because religion can so often be a means to control or motivate people. Far fewer battles have strictly been fought over differences in theology and belief vs attempts to control more of a population or territory.
3) "Since there would be no religion to argue about, I believe that people would be a lot nicer to each other and have a more diverse range of friends."
This assumes that religion is the reason for many inter-personal issues as well as isolates those groups from others. While I do agree that religion by being a cultural phenomenon does cause a sort of tribalism where those like mind clump together and those who are different are "outsiders," and I do agree that religion can cause many inter-personal issues, but that doesn't mean that people would suddenly be a lot nicer to each other if they lost religion. People are going to act like they are going to act. Let's face it. If someone's beliefs really made that much of a difference in his or her behavior, then there would be a lot more "saints" in this world then there are. There's also a lot of different aspects to our modern culture for people to group around and create "outsiders." Do they still make you all read the book "Outsiders" by S. E. Hinton in high school? There's an example right there of how people will still form groups and treat each other harshly even if religion plays no part.
4) "The only downside is that it would make things like racism and sexism a lot more common, since race, sex, and religion are the most discriminated against groups right now."
If anything, a more diverse social group makes the discriminatory ills of our society far less common. The more people get to know others outside of their respective groups, the more they realize how alike we all are. It's been noted that the most decisive factor in changing American's minds about homosexuality is knowing someone who is not heterosexual, but just to reiterate, that hinges on having a more diverse range of social members, which does not necessarily having anything to do with being more or less religious.
My personal opinion is that changing people takes time and changing culture takes even longer. The problems that are associated with religion won't instantly disappear if there was no more religious belief, and there are still many reasons why these issues would continue regardless of belief.
You're right in the fact that I was "assuming" things. Those are just my personal opinions and what I believe to be true.
In sentence 1, I think that with a priority being set on education, we might make more discoveries to disprove a deity, but I also know that no matter how much proof is given, some people will still choose to believe. I am perfectly fine with that, since everyone has the right to choose what they believe, I just thought that prioritizing education would help.
In sentence 2, I know that wars are caused by many other things, it's just that with less religion, we wouldn't be starting wars to mass convert smaller countries (which is wrong, anyway).
In sentence 3, the reason I stated this is because, at least where I live, the kids have little cliques. When you don't fit the "criteria", be it race, religion, gender, or looks, they will make fun of you. I know everyone says, "You won't see these people ever again," but bullying can still leave a pretty big scar that is hard to forget about, especially if they bully you for your beliefs.
In sentence 4, I looked at having no religion as a leeway to making fun of other things. Although the way you look at it makes a lot of sense, too. If people really got to know each other, they may just accept one another for who they are.
Thanks a lot for your response. Also, thanks for pointing those things out, I'll have to look into them a little more.
I think that religions will die the "death of a thousand cuts". In general, religions rely on the control of information, and the internet and modern communications remove that as a long term option.
Websites like TA, and many others have made it so that the religious have to protect themselves and their families from facts and information. Over time, perhaps really long periods of time and even generations of families, this protection from facts becomes impossible to maintain. The information will out.
Each person that joins TA, or any science website, or engages in any philosophical interchange with someone who has this type of information, IMO, starts down the path to become an advocate for atheism.
What is known is difficult to become unknown, so as we cite facts and evidence, we win. Each of the tiny little battles we win, collects as a whole. This to me is why the number of non-religious people is growing in the U.S.
Abolishing religion is out of bounds, counterproductive really. But religious thought will die a slow death naturally, and future peoples will remember these times as barbarous and even silly.
The day we're smart enough to rid the world of religion, there won't be any down sides as you describe them. When we're smart enough to rid religion, it's safe to say, we'd be smart enough to say it's stupid the discriminate each other and wage war.
Don't be silly. There are lots of reasons for discrimination and waging war that have nothing to do with religion.
Abolishing such a strong belief system is nearly impossible, it may continue to grow in the shadows. But if it were to happen someday, maybe things would turn to be a little better than before. Women in SA would have equal rights, LGBT rights may be granted, cheating people in the name of religion may be reduced - which is a major problem in the superstitious parts of India.. but we can't guarantee 100% peace. Violence and war-like nature is in human beings innately, it is in inevitable. Maybe there won't be any wars on whose imaginary friend is better but wars for land, resources etc. are certain to transpire.
Maybe people will begin to think more logically in general, one less puppetmaster involved, more freedoms for everyone, but it will still be difficult to stop the influence of the control freaks and war mongers who are looking to profit at everyone else's expense. Some still won't be able to step into the light.
Good comments, but I must point out what no one yet has--which is that a society that would "abolish" (meaning through some kind of legislation) religion would be just as oppressive and tyrannical as the religion many atheists and non-religious people indict. An Orwellian society is no more desireable than a theocratic one. Religion needs to slip away--if it does at all, and I've to agree with a couple of commenters that that isn't necessarily a good thing either--through consentual practices: discussion, debate, all in civil and respectful forums.
As far as religion slipping away, I was once at a collection of Indian booths at a town sponsored public thing in Hempstead town. All kind of Indian stuff for sale. At one booth there was some crystals for sale. As I was looking around, the guy that was running the booth who seemed okay to me came across this woman that he offered a crystal for sale and I heard him throw such a line of crap about it that PT Barnum would be proud, and she was going for it hook line and sinker. I was amazed, I wanted to ask him about it (the BS) but he was busy. Some people will always get sucked in, religion or otherwise, now and in the future.
It's been done in China, in the former Soviet Union, in the former Eastern Block.
The result is secular dictatorship and oppression, every time.
People will look for some other organizing principle. Cult of personality of a leader. Ethnic identity. Nationalism. All of these are far more toxic and responsible for far more violence and oppression than religion.


text:
Next Chapter: Stay Well Exercise
April 26, 2013
Program Locations:
Join us for a free, fun Stay Well exercise session.
Stay Well volunteers certified by the NYC's Department for the Aging will lead participants in a well-balanced series of exercises for seniors of all ability levels. Please wear loose comfortable clothing. Exercise equipment will be provided. Those participating in the exercises must sign an activity release form.
More Info
- Audience: Adults, 50+


text:
complete noob to linux!!! I would like to install gimpshop and im just getting lost with it. If anybody could help id appreciate it.
Ive seen the ebuild at the zugaina page but cant figure what to do with it.
Moderator: Moderators
emerge --sync && layman -S && layman -a zugaina && emerge gimpshop
ddfusion wrote:yeah that didnt work. here is the log:
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking gimpshop-2.2.11.tar.bz2 to /var/tmp/portage/media-gfx/gimpshop-2.2.11/work
[32;01m*[0m Applying gimpshop-2.2.11-libpng-1.2.10.patch ...
[A[72C [34;01m[ [32;01mok[34;01m ][0m
mv: cannot stat `/var/tmp/portage/gimpshop-2.2.11/work/gimp-2.2.11': No such file or directory
/var/tmp/portage/media-gfx/gimpshop-2.2.11/temp/environment: line 2789: cd: /var/tmp/portage/media-gfx/gimpshop-2.2.11/work/gimpshop-2.2.11: No such file or directory
cp: cannot create regular file `/var/tmp/portage/media-gfx/gimpshop-2.2.11/work/gimpshop-2.2.11/plug-ins/pygimp/': No such file or directory
mv ${PORTAGE_TMPDIR}/portage/media-gfx/gimpshop-${PV}/work/gimp-${PV} ${PORTAGE_TMPDIR}/portage/media-$
ebuild gimpshop-2.2.11.ebuild digest
Return to Portage|Emerge Package Managers
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


text:
August 2014
Tiger Lily by Jodi Lynn Anderson – Review by Gina, Teen Blogger
Posted on 29-Aug-14 13:34
The character, Tiger Lily, wasn't my favorite type of person to read about. She was mysterious and didn't say much, so she was hard to relate to, or get to know. I think that's why the author chose to write the book in alternating perspectives, where readers read not only from Tiger Lily's perspective but from her little friend, Tinkerbell's. It was very interesting how...
Read More
The Queen's Thief series — Review by Ashlee, Staff Blogger
Posted on 26-Aug-14 13:50
If there's something I adore in a young adult novel, it's a misunderstood hero. Well, that and great world-building—oh, and perhaps a romantic sub-plot with a wickedly awesome heroine. And maybe throw in a jaw-dropping twist, just for good measure? Fortunately, this series has it all.
Read More
The Girl Who Never Was by Skylar Dorset - Review by Ashlee, Staff Blogger
Posted on 26-Aug-14 13:28
In this young adult fantasy novel, The Girl Who Never Was, Selkie Stewart thinks she's a normal Boston teenager being raised by her eccentric aunts because her father is in a mental institution and her mother abandoned her on the doorstep when she was a baby. When she turns seventeen and goes searching for her long-lost mother, though, things really start getting weird, and Selkie discovers her connection to a magical world of faeries, ogres, wizards, and the dreaded Seelie Court. And meanwhile, there's a very special boy in her life…
Read More
An Abundance of Katherines by John Green – Review by Angela, Teen Blogger
Posted on 26-Aug-14 12:57
Summary: Colin Singleton, a child prodigy but not-yet-a-genius has just been dumped by another Katherine (number 19 or K-19). Heartbroken and devastated, Colin agrees to a road trip with his best friend Hassan to clear his mind. What they did not know is that they would find friendships and maybe even love in a small town named Gutshot, Tennessee. For once, it seemed like Colin wouldn't be dumped by another Katherine...
Read More
The Book Thief by Markus Zusak - Review by Gina, Teen Blogger
Posted on 20-Aug-14 13:20
Summary: The book thief is ten-years-old. She is thirsty for books, so when she sees the pile of books burning on the street, she picks up a small book in the ashes and runs away. Living in Nazi Germany during the Holocaust makes owning books risky but books are precious to the book thief. The Book Thief is a beautiful story of a curious young girl, narrated by Death....
Read More
We Were Liars, by E. Lockhart - Review by Kathleen, Teen Blogger
Posted on 19-Aug-14 15:50
This is a story about a happy group of kids who go to a beach house every year for summer vacation. They laugh and tell ghost stories by the fire. Their parents look on fondly as they reflect on their own childhoods. The grandfather plays chess with the kids, who form healthy bonds with one another. Then, they have a picnic at sunset, and everyone lives happily ever after. The end. I'm lying. You probably guessed that, but here's why:
Read More
Never Let Me Go – Review by Margaret, Teen Blogger
Posted on 06-Aug-14 12:56
Never Let Me Go is a 2005 adult futuristic science fiction novel by Kazuo Ishiguro. If you are into science fiction and dystopian literature, this book is for you. Investigating themes of the human condition, free will, and communication between youth, this book will make you empathize with characters in such a way that very few novels can do with such success.
Read More
Stargirl – Review by Gina, Teen Blogger
Posted on 05-Aug-14 15:00
Summary: Just like her name suggests, the moment Stargirl arrives at Mica High School, she is the center of attention. She sparks up the students with just one cheer. She melts Leo Borlock's heart effortlessly. Everyone is fascinated with her. At first...
Read More


text:
A Master
Eugenio Montale: Selected Poems
Montale made his bow before the English-speaking public in June, 1928, when his first important poem. "Arsenio," appeared in The Criterion in a strange translation by Mario Praz. Now, nearly forty years later, New Directions brings out a pioneer selection designed to introduce him, once again, to the English-speaking public. What happened? Why, outside Italy, is Montale not yet recognized for what he is, a twentieth-century master?
He is "difficult," certainly. Difficult in that he has complicated things to say, and also in the sense that most of us must read him dictionary in hand. We tend to play down the hazards of getting across the language barrier because it would be humiliating to have to confess imperfect access to a writer from an approachable country like Italy. It is nonetheless a fact that oddly few people in the Anglo-American literary community now know Italian well or are familiar with the traditions of Italian literature. Moreover Montale has not had the luck to meet the kind of distinguished sponsor that Cavafy found in E. M. Forster. A good word in the right places opens many doors. There is admittedly Robert Lowell; Imitations contains ten versions from Montale. But Lowell habitually writes so magnificently that the reader of Imitations is inclined to say, not How fine must the original be to prompt such poetry in English; but simply that Lowell has done it again.
THE ITALIAN who set out to write poetry in the second decade of the century had perhaps no harder task than his colleagues in France or America, but it was a different task. The problem was how to lower one's voice without being trivial or shapeless, how to raise it without repeating the gestures of an incommodious rhetoric. Italian was an intractable medium. Inveterately mandarin, weighed down by the almost Chinese burden of a six-hundred-year-old literary tradition, it was not a modern language. Worse, it had become a provincial language. The last great master, Leopardi, could find everything he needed within the Graeco-Roman-Italian tradition. His speech is the Italian dialect of the high language of European poetry. His successors, Carducci, Pascoli, D'Annunzio, are all in different ways provincial, local. The task was to bring Italy back into full commerce with Europe and (it was really the same thing) to create a modern language, a modern poetic. Montale's immediate predecessors, the rather dim figures of the various "schools" that sprouted in the first years of the new century, served at least to fracture the century-old patterns and confuse the categories of words and objects that could be admitted into poetry, but their achievement was meager and it was left to two younger men to build on the ground they had left bare.
THE COURSE FOLLOWED by Ungaretti, Montale's senior by eight years, was in a sense the more predictable one. Ungaretti took the formal elements of poetry, the…
This article is available to online subscribers only.
Please choose from one of the options below to access this article:
Print Premium Subscription — $99.95
Purchase a print premium subscription (20 issues per year) and also receive online access to all content on nybooks.com.
Purchase an Online Edition subscription and receive full access to all articles published by the Review since 1963.
Purchase a trial Online Edition subscription and receive unlimited access for one week to all the content on nybooks.com.
If you already have one of these subscriptions, please be sure you are logged in to your nybooks.com account. If you subscribe to the print edition, you may also need to link your web site account to your print subscription. Click here to link your account services.


text:
Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!
|Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.
We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!
Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!
Holy Cow! ... Three in a DAY! ... (Burnt Ignition Module)
Posted 23 June 2012 - 12:30 AM
Well, we have Stablished a New Record: Three in a Day!... ...Let me Explain a Long Story Short:
I Had a Severe Gout Foot attack again (More info, ~► Here) that lasted a Month, I was somehow forced to Drive my Wife's Car (Details, ~► Here) because it is Automatic; so my BumbleBeast was resting, unused for that Long inside my closed Garage.
Then, the Last Weekend I Felt Much Better and we decided to go in a Travel to Angels' Valley City, which is an Age Old Turistic City, full of Artisans with great craftmanship; (Lots of Pics, ~► Here) the Idea was to have a Nice Weekend Trip and also I Wanted to purchase a Great Honduran Souvenir for a USMB Friend in USA.
So, I Loaded my BumbleBeast with all the "Needed" stuff for a family Weekend travel... it Looked like This:
...then I Started the Weberized engine and took my Wife and my Baby Daughter for the Travel... everything went Fine, but after 45 Minutes, suddenly the Engine Shut off without warning, it felt like if a Timin' Belt had snapped, the tachometer went to Zero readings inmediately... ...
I was Able to use the Vehicle's inertia impulse to pull out to a Side of the Road and then, I Carefully inspected everything on the Engine's Bay...
Everything was Fine.
I Thought it was a Fuel Pump Failure but it Wasn't.
I Tried to Start the Engine without results, it Cranked but didn't came alive, Since the Tachometer stayed Dead at Zero readings even while I Tried to Start the Engine, I Suspected that the Ignition Module died.
So I hasn't another Choice but to use my cellphone to Call to the Insurance Company and ask them for a Tow Truck, it came an hour after I Called:
Posted 23 June 2012 - 12:44 AM
The Tow Truck Driver was very Kind and accepted to leave my Wife & Baby Daughter in Home, Prior to send my Subie to a Repair Shop: The Insurance Company Rules, requires a repair bill.
So, after taking my Subie to a Friend's Repair Shop, I Asked him to leave me in a Gas Station Nearby, because I Wanted to use the ATM to take some Cash and buy Something to Eat.
I Slide my Debit Card on the ATM and asked Lps. 3,000.ºº (Lempiras is our Currency, Equals to ~ $ 150.ºº US Dollars) because I Needed Money to pay many things which includes a Taxi to go back Home and Gasoline for my Wife's car to search for the Needed Parts plus the Parts Price, etc...
The ATM Sounded as Counting money Three times and it took a Whole Minute; after that, it gave me my Receipt: but NO MONEY AT ALL!
... ...
and I Confirmed that it Reduced the requested amount from my account !!!
Posted 23 June 2012 - 12:50 AM
I Used my cellphone again to call to the ATM's emergency Number, but the Operator told me that they can not help me because the Card I Slid wasn't from their Bank, so I Must go to my Bank's office to reclaim my Money.
I Went walking (Very Hungry & Thirsty) to the Nearest Bank office around: a couple Miles away... and after another Hour of Waiting, my Reclaim was in Process and they said it must take "...Six to Ten Days to Resolve..."
Posted 23 June 2012 - 01:15 AM
I Went again to my Friend's Repair Shop and We Confirmed that the Ignition Module was Dead.
Then I Went Home Very Tired, Hungry and Thirsty... I Ate my Lunch and took my Wife's Car to Hunt for that Ignition Module.
Very Few Parts Stores has Subaru Parts, they became Scarse since the Local Subaru Dealer is Fading Away, as I Explained, ~► Here.
I Went to the Local NAPA Store.
My BumbleBeast has the NIPPON DENSO Distribuitor, so I Searched in their Computer for the Ignition Module for that Nippon Denso Disty, on the 1985 / 86 EA82's.
And They're CRAZY! ... ... People at NAPA Asked Lps. 12,984.ºº (Lempiras, our Currency. Equals to ~ $ 650.ºº US Dollars) along to Wait for a Week for the Part because they Don't have it Locally.
Their Price for a Complete (Rebuilt by them) Nippon Denso Distribuitor which includes the Rotor and the Famous ignition module, was Lps. 11,854.ºº (Lempiras, our Currency. Equals to ~ $ 592.ºº US Dollars) Again: along to Wait for a Week for the Part because they Don't have it Locally.
So I Went to do a Hunt for that Part to the Local Junk Yards. (Called here: "Yonkers" ... Many Pictures, ~► Here)
I Went to Six Local Yonkers without Finding any Subaru Part on Them...
Posted 23 June 2012 - 01:28 AM
One of their Distribuitors was damaged already and someone tried to Swap the Ignition Module from the Suzuki Sidekick (a.k.a: Geo / Chevrolet Tracker) which has an Identical Nippon Denso Ignition Module BUT its Wires comes from the Wrong (Other) Side. I Already knew that and Avoided to buy that one.
The Second Disty I Saw was Hitachi... so it was Useless for me.
The Third one was the Right one, it has the Right ignition Module but Someone cutted its Wires from the Root... So I Must use my Soldering Gun to put New Wires on it.
It has missing its Cap and the Rotor was Black, maybe an Aftermarket part.
I Purchased the Whole Disty, Because they didn't wanted to sell me the Ignition Module only... but While I Went to Pay that to the Junk Yard's cashier, I Heard a Loud CRASH! ... ... the Junkyard's employee who was Showing me the Disty, Dropped it to the Concrete Floor and the Rotor plus the Ignition Module's Covers broke in many pieces...
I Couldn't Believe That!
Posted 23 June 2012 - 01:35 AM
But Beside all that, I Was Able to Build one Good Workin' Distribuitor from the Two, at least to move my BumbleBeast Home and Store it in the Garage while I could Find a Brand New Ignition Module.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 02:12 AM
Edited by Loyale 2.7 Turbo, 23 June 2012 - 10:50 PM.
Mispelled word, fixed.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 06:17 AM
Not exactly sure what parts availability is like in your country. Seems completely insane that the dealer and parts stores want over $600 USD for such a part. According to my local parts store website, they want about $110 USD for it. Maybe eBay is your best bet.
If this is what you need, it's only about $40 + some international shipping.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 10:00 AM
Sorry to hear about all your troubles Jeszek, I've had days like that myself.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 10:27 AM
...Not exactly sure what parts availability is like in your country...
You can Find Easily almost ANY Part you might Want for every other ELSE Brand, Except Subaru... ...
... Seems completely insane that the dealer and parts stores want over $600 USD for such a part...
I Agree, Absolutely.
... If this is what you need, it's only about $40 + some international shipping.
Nope, that is Not the Part for the Nippon Denso Distribuitor.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 10:56 AM
Hope your luck gets better!
Posted 23 June 2012 - 11:01 AM
The ignition module on the link posted, is very different, I guess it belongs to the Hitachi distributor, because it is a Single piece Module, but to my knowledge, the Hitachi one looks like a star...
The module on the Nippon Denso Distribuitor is a two pieces Part, it has Two Wires Between them and Two Wires Goin' Out from them on the Distribuitor, to the Ignition Coil.
► The Nippon Denso Part Number is: 1313000500
► The Subaru Part Number is: 22183 AA040
Aftermarket part Number for the Same thing are:
► Transpo (Brand): NM 500
► Mobiletron (Brand): IGT 010
► GoodWay (Brand): GW-M500
This is How it Looks:
(a Web Image, not My Part)
Its two parts goes Hiding inside the Two Black Covers, seen Here:
(My Subie's Distribuitor)
Kind Regards.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 11:10 AM
Posted 23 June 2012 - 10:48 PM
I'm not really Sure, but I Don't Like Hitachi Stuff and I've read that those Hitachi Distribuitors aren't Good.
So, I Preffer to obtain a Brand New Ignition Module for my Nippon Denso Disty.
Does anybody know where I Can Buy that?
Kind Regards.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 11:03 PM
Jeez, I can't find that anywhere...
I Found 'em on e-Bay, but... they show there a Single Piece Module!
Look Here: ~► http://www.ebay.com/...nkw=22183 AA040
Seems like the Single Piece Module is the Module itself only, without the Pick up assy, and it Belongs to the SPFI Models.
EDIT: The Single piece Module seems to have terminals to attach the pick up assy to it, according to the Pictures... So:
Question: ► Could the Single Piece Module Work Fine in my Subie's Disty? ... (if I Attach the Pick up assy to it of Course).
Kind Regards.
Edited by Loyale 2.7 Turbo, 23 June 2012 - 11:22 PM.
Posted 23 June 2012 - 11:26 PM
Look Here: ~► http://www.rockauto....rol_Module.html
I'll Like to Obtain an Original Part to be Sure it won't fail Soon...
Posted 24 June 2012 - 01:06 AM
Posted 24 June 2012 - 01:34 AM
The Original Nippon Denso Ignition Module on my Subie Lasted for 300,000 Miles in 27 complete Years... I Don't Believe that Beck Arnley could achieve such level of Reliability.
But if I Don't have another option soon, I'll Buy the Beck Arnley Replacement.
Kind Regards.
Posted 24 June 2012 - 03:55 AM
Posted 25 June 2012 - 08:33 AM
...and isn't very expensive.
Posted 25 June 2012 - 10:32 AM
Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:04 PM
If the Hitachi will work, and it's easier and cheaper to get, why not use it? Both were made in Japan, at $100, even if it lasts half as long as the Denso, seems like a good deal to me. My 1985 ea82 GL wagon has Hitachi carb and distributor (original) with 169k miles. I understand wanting to keep it original, this is just my opinion.
Good luck!
Posted 25 June 2012 - 12:43 PM
Posted 26 June 2012 - 09:22 AM
I Successfully done one Working Distribuitor, Mixing parts from my Old one and the Broken one found at a Junk Yard, as I Explained in Post Nº 6, so I was Able to Move my BumbleBeast but I am Afraid that the Old Module from the Junk Yard could fail in Any Moment...
So, Yesterday I Sold a Pair of Custom Wooden Enclosures for Speakers that I Built and Spent the Money in the New Ignition Module that I Found online at RockAuto, the one on the Link posted on Post Nº 16, my Idea is to Rebuild the Original Disty on my BumbleBeast and Keep the Mixed one as Spare.
Interesting note: The RockAuto web link Now Doesn't Show the Ignition Module I Purchased, (Cheap) because it was the Last One...
so the Thing is getting Scarse...
i have 6 of those nipon distributors outdated so just sitting some were very low miles i realy good condition
Well... I'm interested in Buying one (or maybe two) of those Ignition Modules, to Keep Spares and also maybe I Could Help another Subaru Owner Locally; So, Please send me a P.M. with Price of those so we can have a Deal.
Kind Regards.
Edited by Loyale 2.7 Turbo, 26 June 2012 - 09:27 AM.
Mispelled Word, Fixed :)
Posted 26 June 2012 - 09:24 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


text:
New Sarah Robertson Artwork is Here
To say the least, our local artist Sarah Robertson has been busy! Drop by and discover her latest works, full of crisp color and and subjects that speak to the heart of every southern belle.
Your home is more than a space to live, it's a place for life. Fill it with items as unique as you. Original art and pottery, frames and furniture, each an expression of your beautiful soul.
Accessories: the true meaning of "the little things in life make you happy." From stylish hats, scarves and belts to handcrafted jewelry and luxurious lotions and candles—life's little treasures are a beautiful thing.
Intimate dinner for two or holiday dinner for 20, set a special space for friends and family with our full lines of dinnerware—Fortunata, Casafina, Good Earth, French Bull— stemware, barware, pitchers, and more.
Simply heavenly, two words that should describe everyone's bed and bath. Drape your intimate spaces with Pine Cone Hill bedding and soft throws and pillows. Then bathe yourself in comfort, lean back, relax—repeat.
Think of it as a gift just for you. We're always adding new collections, new artists and one-of-a-kind items to help make your life beautiful, inside and out.
Regular Price: $4,395.00
Special Price $3,516.99
Housewarming, birthdays, anniversaries… so many reasons to celebrate! Share a piece of your beautiful life with your dear friends by presenting them with a one-of-a-kind gift they won't soon forget.
Lou Ann Datillo Hour of Decision
Vicki Denaburg Colorful Umbrellas
To say the least, our local artist Sarah Robertson has been busy! Drop by and discover her latest works, full of crisp color and and subjects that speak to the heart of every southern belle.
Whether you're looking for a market pad for grocery lists, notepads for quick jots, or cards to express sweet sentiments, our collection of stationery will brighten life's everyday tasks.
Do you love everything about Bella Vita and Itty Bitty Bella? Would you like to earn some extra cash and get incredible discounts on all your favorite products?
Be the first to get the latest at Bella Vita. All the special events, sales, new products, news, and more, right at your fingertips.Sign Up
3670 Houston Levee Road
Suite 101
Collierville, TN 38017
Located on Houston Levee Road, just South of Poplar Avenue. We are next door to Jim's Place Grille.
Monday - Saturday
Sundays (Nov. - Dec.)
Store: 901-850-0892
Web Orders (Closed Sundays): 901-341-0360


text:
Maine transportation museum offers free admission to veterans
OWLS HEAD, Maine (AP) � The Owls Head Transportation Museum in Maine is offering free admission for two days to all veterans of U.S. armed services in recognition of Veteran's Day.
The offer in good Sunday and Monday. Admission for adult non-veterans is $10 and children under 18 are admitted free.
Veteran's Day was originally called Armistice Day in recognition of the end of World War I.
Many of the museum's aircraft on display were developed for use during World War I. Also on display is the museum's featured exhibition called MGs & Microcars showcasing a unique collection of vehicles from the 1920s, 30s and 40s.


text:
Sec. of State Mollis to Speak at Ocean State Small Business Expo
Friday, April 11, 2014
"This is an important expo, which benefits small businesses around Rhode Island," said Mollis. "I encourage everyone to make an effort to come to the Ocean State Small Business expo to learn more about the services and products available to them right here in our home state. I commend Jay White, along with DiscoverYou Events, for creating an event where the public may meet and speak with local business owners, which will hopefully increase local sales, boost small business morale, and stimulate the economy."
Supporting small business in Rhode Island
The office of Secretary of State A. Ralph Mollis will have a booth at the expo from 12:00 noon to 6:00 p.m. Mollis will speak about the importance of supporting small businesses in Rhode Island, and will also discuss the important services our office provides to businesses, with exhibitors and attendees at the event.
"I am so pleased Secretary Mollis will join us for our expo," said Lev Poplow, event organizer. "Secretary Mollis has always been a tremendous supporter of small businesses here in Rhode Island, and he is at the forefront helping entrepreneurs and small businesses start and grow their companies. It is my honor to have him involved."
We mean business
The Secretary of State's annual We Mean Business expo will be held on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2014 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. It will be held at the Convention Center in Providence. Parking is free.
See the video below for more information on the services the Office of Secretary of State A. Ralph Mollis provides entrepreneurs and business owners:
For more information about this year's Ocean State Small Business expo, please visit their website.
Related Slideshow: 13 Biggest Business Stories in RI in 2013
13 Best Biz Cities in RI
GoLocal's examination of the Best Cities and Towns to do business in RI explored new ground for companies looking to relocate or expand.
Our researchers culled municipally-distinct data on tax rates, workforce availability, cost of living index, economic indicators for short term and long-term job growth, even average driving time to TF Green Airport, to quantify a blend of factors that make for a pro-business environment. Because every city and state in RI complies by statewide measures, those metrics weren't included in GoLocal's research.
12 Superman
Our coverage of the Superman building's threatened future started back in 2011, when a news story by GoLocal's News Team first unveiled the threat that Bank of America would leave the building and leave the city with the largest embarrassment.
In the story, The Superman Building: Downtown's Ticking Time Bomb - former Mayor and developer Joe Paolino predicted the demise of the iconic building.
The failure to act by the Taveras Administration created the tallest embarrasment in America - one that has been reported by most every news organization in America.
GoLocal covered the demise of the building throughout the year.
11 JetBlue Factor
JetBlue's arrival to Rhode Island was first announced by GoLocal is the summer of 2012, but no one quite knew the impact of the JetBlue factor, until a promotion by the airline was launched in partnership with the Big Blue Bug, which rocked the internet and sold out $20 tickets in minutes.
The promotion launched on GoLocalProv showed the world of advertising has changed forever.
Launched one minute and thousands sold out nearly instantly.
10 New England's Business
GoLocal's business team loves to collect and breakdown critical data to help Rhode Islander's get a beat on the story or even the bigger story.
One massively wide-read story was one that pivoted off the data of the Milken Institute and its rankings of all the cities in America.
The Best-Performing Cities study is published annually in order to highlight the cities and metropolitan areas in the U.S. that are prospering, and to point out those that are struggling from a structural point of view. By examining job, wage, and technology metrics over a five-year period, the publication utilizes a data-driven approach to provide a comprehensive measure of economic strength.
See which New England cities ranked best overall--both in the 200 largest metros pool and the 176 smallest metros pool.
9 Arcade is Back
GoLocal has been tracking the Arcade since we came online in 2010 - from investigative video reports about the homeless living in the building to restoration and the reopenning.
While the financial district is only a shadow of itself - kudos need to go out Evan Granoff for pouring millions into the restoration of the classic Greek revival edifice.
8 38 Studios Defendants
An exclusive report by GoLocal's Investigative Team unveiled that defendant's in the 38 Studio's lawsuit had filed responses, and they had a very different opinion of what caused the collapse and the loss of $100 million to the State of Rhode Island.
Almost every defendant pinned the blame on Governor Lincoln Chafee for failing to give oversight and then hitting the panic button and forcing the ultimate collapse of the company.
7 Social Media
Social media continues to flex its muscle and demonstrate that it is far more influential than legacy media.
Twitters IPO and the progression of the Facebook model have redefined business.
One article in GoLocal's on going coverage of the metamorphosis of social media was a great guidance article by Johnson & Wales' Sierra Barter which functionally went viral.
Amazingly, one of the biggest stories of 2013, the effort by union leaders to force John DePetro off the air for calling female teacher protestors "WHORES," has been battled almost exclsuively on social media.
6 Alex and Ani Growth
Rhode Island's homegrown Alex and Ani continues at rocket speed growth.
The Cranston-based, Made in America jewelry company continues to bundle the very best of Rhode Island: jewelry design, old school manufacturing and smart marketing.
According to a study by Bryant University:
• Generated $80.04 million in revenue, including $22.06 million in sales in the state of Rhode Island, $51.42 million in sales in other U.S. states, and $6.57 million in exports.
• Supported 1,094 full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs in Rhode Island, from which 296 are direct FTE jobs and 798 are induced FTE jobs.
• Created $35.4 million in income for Rhode Island households. Direct earnings totaled $10.32 million and induced earnings totaled $25.1 million.
5 College Endowments
In Rhode Island, colleges and universities are big business. They are major economic engines and each of the local colleges readily announce the positive impact they have on the local economy and job creation.
GoLocal's look at the top 50 endowments of the college and universities in New England, found that Harvard's $30+ billion endowment overshadowed all other colleges in New England.
Brown ranked ranked 5th in New England and 28th overall with an endowment of more than $2.4 billion.
4 Fastest Growing
While Rhode Island's economy is trailing the rest of the country, there are some bright spots. Throughout 2013, GoLocal featured a number of companies that were fast-growing.
Inc Magazine's fastest growing companies in the US list flagged some real growth engines.
3 Twin River Rebound
Twin River is now a real casino with humans not video tapes dealing black jack.
Under the leadership of John Taylor, the company has rebounded from bankruptcy and become a model for gaming firms.
Now, Twin River is expanding and has made a strategic purchase in Mississippi.
With casinos coming online in Massachusetts sometime in the future, Twin River is doing a better job diversifying and planning for the future than the state of Rhode Island, who is so dependent on the revenue.
2 Unemployment
Rhode Island's unemployment situtation is a national embarrassment, and it is hard to see a governmental strategy designed for its improvement. In the post-38 Studios environment, decision-makers are affraid to champion significant initiatives.
The result is now that Rhode Island is last in America in unemployment and the crisis has gone on without improvement for years and years.
1 Demise of Newspapers
In the past year, the Providence Journal has laid off, demanded buyout or pushed retirements of over 50 reporters, editors and photographers - a staggering percentage of the newsroom.
Many of the those who departed were among the most recognized. Pulitzer Prize winning writer Mike Stanton quit to take a teaching job at UConn and now freelances for the Boston Globe.
Speaking of the Boston Globe, Red Sox owner John Henry bought the Globe from the New York Times for $70 million which represented a 97% loss in value for what the NYTimes had paid for the Globe and other related media.
As GoLocal's Pultizer Prize winning reporter Dean Starkman has written repeatedly about the need for media to invest in content. His words seem to fall on deaf ears.
Related Articles
- Mollis Raises March 31 Business Filing Alert, Offers Web Help
- NEW: Mollis Reminds For-Profit Corporations to File Annual Reports
- PowerPlayer: Secretary of State Ralph Mollis
- NEW: Mollis Reminds RI Non-Profits To File Annual Report By June
- RI HS Seniors Honored by Mollis at 2013 Civic Leadership Awards
- NEW: Chafee, Mollis Honor Heroes for Lifesaving Exploits
- NEW: Mollis Says Rick Santorum Will Remain on Primary Ballot
- Secretary of State A. Ralph Mollis and RIEDC Offer Help Sharpening Your Business Skills
- NEW: Mollis Announces 135 Rhode Islanders File to Run for Presidential Delegate
- NEW: Mollis Warns RI Businesses of Direct Mail Scam
- Taylor and Mollis in Dead Heat, According to Quest Research Poll
- NEW: Mollis Announces Launch of RI State Archives Online Catalog
- NEW: Mollis to Host 'We Mean Business Expo' Tomorrow in Warwick
- UPDATED Mollis Fires Back: Why Hasn't Taylor Released Tax Returns?
- BREAKING NEWS Taylor Concedes Race to Mollis
- NEW: Mollis Lists Last-Minute Voting Options
- NEW: Mollis to Launch Mobile Voter ID Units Tuesday
- UPDATED: Taylor Accuses Mollis of Benefiting from Tainted Donations
- LIVE ELECTION UPDATE Mollis Winning by Razor Thin Margin 11:45 PM
- NEW: Mollis Releases First Quarter Data for New Business Creation
- NEW: NAACP, Mollis to Register Voters, Provide Free Voter IDs Saturday
- We Mean Business Expo Brings Resources to RI Entrepreneurs
- LIVE ELECTION UPDATE Mollis at Campaign HQ 3:28 PM
- NEW: Mollis Releases Third Quarter Data on New Business Creation
- NEW: Secretary of State Mollis Honors RI Businesswoman Cindy Butler


text:
Stop blaming the lawyers and start blaming the people who ask them to file the lawsuits. It is like blaming the engineers that build an M1 tank, rather than the military that buys and operates it.
The lawyer scumbags you are protecting should have the moral fortitude to turn down these bad cases, just like the slime-ball engineers you speak of should refuse to work on said death-machines.
I'll re-troll, since IHBT
...It's like blaming the engineers that build an M1 tank, rather than the president and congress that tells them where and what to shoot.
This would be true if there was limitless work for lawyers, and they could simply choose the most lucrative work. But that's not the case—lawyers, like contractors in any industry whose opportunities are affected by the laws the government writes, have a vested interest in supporting laws that increase demand for their work. Diamond v. Diehr could as easily have been called the Legal Profession Full Employment Act of 1981.
Stop blaming the lawyers is the first step on the road to hell. They are guilty of something, by definition, if there is a law that could be twisted or corrupted for their profit, they will, no matter what comes after, they got their pay. And politicians, of course, that because malice or idiocy do those laws (also, some are lawyers or take lawyers advice, see previous point). In your example, is the difference between designing a gun and using it, the lawyers in this case are the ones using guns, and acti
Stop blaming the lawyers is the first step on the road to hell. They are guilty of something, by definition, if there is a law that could be twisted or corrupted for their profit, they will, no matter what comes after, they got their pay.
I know. Shakespeare definitely had it right! Especially these [splcenter.org] guys! Money grubbing scumbags, the lot!
Stop blaming the lawyers and start blaming the people who ask them to file the lawsuits. It is like blaming the engineers that build an M1 tank, rather than the military that buys and operates it.
Yeah! The lawyers are just exploited innocents! There is a demand for evil, and they are only supplying that demand. Is that so evil? Of course not!
It's the same reason why drug-dealers, car thieves, and human traffickers aren't really evil, they are just supplying a demand.
Stop blaming the lawyers and start blaming the people who ask them to file the lawsuits.
That's the "we were just following orders" argument and it is pretty flimsy. Basically it is arguing that they have no responsibility to consider whether their actions might be harmful before proceeding. While it is probably true that the lawyers are not the proximal cause of the problem, they do bear at least some of the blame even when they aren't the ones filing suit. Lawyers always can decline to accept the case if they believe it lack merit or be unethical.
Furthermore the lawyers themselves are ofte
Give me a fsckin break. It was the scum bag lawyers that wrote the BS patent laws in the first place.
Lawyers write convoluted and complicated laws. Lawyers then interpret those laws in precedent setting arbitrary ways that no reasonable adult would derive from the text of said laws. Then lawyers charge people for interpreting and exploiting those laws. It's a vicious cycle. Every bullshit lawsuit is possible because of lawyers, was advised by a lawyer, executed by a lawyer, and presided over by a lawyer.
As usual, he's right. Cue the morons who ignore him because they don't like him personally.
There was one thing that stuck out at me, though:
Second, the U.S. already has many thousands of computational idea patents, and changing the criteria to prevent issuing more would not get rid of the existing ones. We would have to wait almost 20 years for the problem to be entirely corrected through patent expiration. And legislating the abolition of these existing patents is probably unconstitutional. (Perversely, the Supreme Court has insisted that Congress can extend private privileges at the expense of the publicâ(TM)s rights but that it canâ(TM)t go in the other direction.)
Anyone got a citation for this, that Congress does not have the power to limit patents which already have been granted? AFAIK patent exist completely at the pleasure of Congress.
Well, the main problem with his approach is that it is way too strong. Congress will never vote something like that. It would nullify in practice most patent. I do not think they will vote such a thing.
IANAL by any stretch of the imagination, but I have read about copyrights and patents and what the constitution states about them. My feeling has always been that what we see in so-called "IP" law is well beyond what the stated intent and power given by the constitution.
It's one of those things that prove to me the "strict constitutionalists" are full of it. They're for strong IP law most of the time, but the constitutional purpose of copyright and patents was explicitly limited and was explicitly not put
I'm not so sure - it seems like more and more of the big players are coming to the conclusion that the current state of software patents is a losing proposition for everyone, and they have deeper pockets for lobbying than the patent trolls. More importantly this solution wouldn't tamper with the patent system itself, and so wouldn't threaten the profits of pharma companies, etc. that *do* have deep pockets and a vested interest in preserving the status quo. And as Stallman points out there's already an ex
It's one of those things that prove to me the "strict constitutionalists" are full of it. They're for strong IP law most of the time, but the constitutional purpose of copyright and patents was explicitly limited and was explicitly not put in place to make companies rich but to encourage inventors and artists by letting them profit off of their work for a *limited* amount of time.
I consider myself a strict constitutionalist (or a "textualist" if you want to nitpick). I am in favor of strong IP (and I ought to be---I'm an IP lawyer). In fact, the patent system has stayed pretty true to its constitutional footings. I have plenty of policy complaints about some of the details, but overall it does exactly what it's supposed to: grant a strong, limited-time monopoly to inventors.
Copyrights, on the other hand, are totally out of control. Life of the author +70 years is both too long and (in my opinion) too indefinite to meet the Constitution's "limited times" requirement. And if we're being realistic, there's no way Walt Disney is ever going to let Mickey Mouse go out of copyright. They want a perpetual term, and they will pay whomever they need to pay to make it happen. And revoking works from the public domain? Seriously? And DMCA? And I could go on. Copyright has been tainted by the worst excesses of the lobbying culture.
(These views, of course, are simply my own. If I represent a client whose interests lie in defending the existing copyright regime, I will stand up and extoll the virtues of the existing regime. Now cue the trolling about how unethical it is to advocate for my clients' interests instead of standing up and talking about my personal preferences...)
No, you're not unethical for extolling your client's position - that is after all your job. You're unethical for taking on a client in the first place, knowing that arguing their case will require you to take an unethical position in front of the bench. Would you make less money turning away such clients? Probably. But nobody ever said being "good" was the easy choice - and you'd still likely be making far more than the median income (which was only $44,389 in 2004, and that was *household* income, not
The fact that I disagree with a law does not mean that upholding that law or advising a client how to benefit from the law is unethical. If I have a client with a copyrighted work and the DMCA provides the most generous protection of that work, I will advise him how to use the DMCA for its intended purpose. To fail in doing that would be a gross breach of my professional responsibility. I also owe duties to my firm, and it would be unethical for me to breach those responsibilities by turning away clients be
You say the patent system is doing what it's supposed to.
My impression was that the patent system was supposed to give a strong, limited-time monopoly to inventors--in return for exposing the implementation details rather than keeping it a trade secret.
Do you think software patents do this?
My impression is that software patents (if allowed at all) should include complete source code for the implementation. Also, I see quite a few software patents of the form "do *this* in software" where *this* is a high-l
Anyone got a citation for this, that Congress does not have the power to limit patents which already have been granted? AFAIK patent exist completely at the pleasure of Congress.
Doesn't matter if they have the power - they won't do it. Too many companies have spent too much money on the registration of patents - invalidating them all would piss off far too many constituents. .
Strike "constituents" and replace with "donors."
They are two different things. If election laws were sane they wouldn't be, but right now they are.
Software Patents are a US idea and a US problem, Patents are government granted and so can be taken away or invalidated easily
Software Patents are a US idea and a US problem
They also exist in every other patent system, including Europe's, despite what some people would have you believe. They actually have the same rule as in the US - software per se is unpatentable, but a software method performed by a machine, or a machine executing software, or a DVD including software instructions are all patentable.
Anyone got a citation for this, that Congress does not have the power to limit patents which already have been granted? AFAIK patent exist completely at the pleasure of Congress.
Patents have been held to be property, and are therefore subject to due process rights against seizure by the government (there are also arguments about them being a legal entitlement). While Congress could abolish the patent act tomorrow, they probably couldn't make it retroactive or take away existing patents.
Anyone got a citation for this, that Congress does not have the power to limit patents which already have been granted?
It's a long-standing principle dating back to McClurg v. Kingsland [google.com], 42 US 202 (1843). But even if a patent could be retroactively invalidated by legislative fiat or effectively invalidated by making it (virtually) unenforceable, the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause would likely entitle the patent owner to just compensation.
I've got no citations to support that but it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility. Congress can't make retroactive laws so laws they pass today can't retroactively revoke existing patents that were perfectly legal yesterday. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_post_facto_law [wikipedia.org]
It can however pass a law that would effectively make them unenforceable tomorrow which is what he is suggesting.
My issue with software patents are that inventors have the tools to create just about anything in their own home. Anyone could have created Facebook, JPG rendering, one-click purchase with simply a laptop. If software patents were music, it would be like patenting piano music. Press the keys in a certain way (which anyone will eventually do who plays piano at all) and
There's nothing non-obvious with just about any software. Developers should not have to worry about the dark legal cloud of patents hanging over them for something literally anyone could create with readily available tools in their own home. That very fact should make it obvious why software patents should not exist. People don't accidentally find a cure for cancer in their basement with their Junior Chem Lab Set which is why patents do have a place in general.Even worse is the fact you could be unknowingly violating a patent without even knowing it and the system purposely allows patent holders to wait around until inventors start to actually profit from their inventions and THEN start suing. The fact that patent holders can even have patents without even having a real product simply shows the system isn't about stimulating and rewarding invention but stirring up revenue for government agencies and legal firms.
+1 Agree with you here. Stealing content is bad. Go write your own code, create your own music, whatever. Content creators should not have to worry about whether their METHODS are infringing, but, they should be given pause when attempting to steal someone else's effort instead of creating their own.
Go write your own code, create your own music, whatever.
Say I write my own music. What steps should I take to I make sure that the combination of notes I happen to choose isn't accidentally the same as the hook of some existing song?
There's nothing non-obvious with just about any software.
That's an odd statement. If there's nothing non-obvious in software, then why are there still developers? Why haven't we had 3D UIs with head tracking for decades? Why are people looking for new encryption systems, and why are there any that haven't already been cracked?
Basically, I think you're using a different definition of "non-obvious" than the legal one.
That's a fair point and observation. Development takes time. The reward should be focused on those who actually take the time to develop and market their product for meaningful use in society (or team up with others who can bring a product to market) and not reward those who simply come up with the idea for it and wait to sue someone else who actually spends the time to make it a reality.
Anyone could have created Facebook, JPG rendering, one-click purchase with simply a laptop.
So what? Anyone can create a machined part in their house with a drill press which costs less than most laptops. The fact that the tools are readily available does not have any bearing on whether something made with them should be patentable. Furthermore the mere fact that in theory "anyone could have created Facebook" is belied by the fact that only one person actually did create Facebook. Just because others possess the technical skill to do something doesn't matter at all with regard to the novelty,
I like how you're thinking and appreciate your response.
In fact, I don't believe you should be able to patent the output of a drilling press or a milling machine. In general, as I think out loud, it seems the root problem is allowing the output from a single device or process to be patented. Once a machine or process exists that can produce an output then nobody should be able to hold license to any one particular output of that device or process.
Now, combine multiple outputs from multiple different devic
My issue with software patents are that inventors have the tools to create just about anything in their own home
For the cost of a high-end computer you can also buy a CNC mill or a 3D printer. Should mechanical device patents also be abolished, since just about any device can be designed and built in a person's home?
There's nothing non-obvious with just about any software
Ah, right. That's why computer science had a massive explosion of ideas in the 30s and 40s and then has been completely stagnant ever since. It was all so obvious!
Even worse is the fact you could be unknowingly violating a patent without even knowing it and the system purposely allows patent holders to wait around until inventors start to actually profit from their inventions and THEN start suing
That's not how patent damages work. Damages don't start accruing until after the infringer has notice of the patent (actual or constructive
See my previous response. In a word, yes, the output of a single mechanical device shouldn't be patentable. Combining outputs from multiple unique devices, however, should be something we encourage and reward with legal defense.
That requires voting for people who will create the required legislation. It won't happen with the current crop we reelect now.
Well, most of the folks in Congress are lawyers, by trade, who turned to politics. So I don't think that they have any incentive to limit the lucrative patent lawsuit market.
most of the folks in Congress are lawyers
This is not true and hasn't been for a long time, if it ever was. Lawyers have not been a majority of members of Congress since at least some time before 1945 [wsj.com]. The 92nd Congress (71-73) did have a bare majority of lawyers in the Senate, but that's about it. The percentage of lawyers is presently only around 25% for the House and around 38% for the Senate, and the percentage has been declining for decades, particularly in the House.
This might not be explicitly removing software patents, but in effect that sounds like what would happen. What would the point of software patents be if this made it so nobody could ever infringe on one?
Maybe this kind of indirect approach is exactly what is needed to blend in with other legislation.
It would still permit special purpose software patents that are an integral part of a larger system - embedded software, industrial control systems, self-driving car controllers, etc. would still be covered. i.e. it becomes all about the peripherals and problem domain - only consumer oriented software designed for use on general-purpose hardware would get a pass.
That is to say that while yes, for a theoretical definition of general-purpose computer one Turing-complete architecture is equivalent to any oth
I'm not against it at all, but II really would like to understand how Stallman's proposal would apply to, say, the following example (one I've used before [slashdot.org]):
Suppose we take something like the FM demodulator in a radio. When Edwin Armstrong invented it, back in the stone age of the 1930s, I think we can all agree that (a) it was an "actual physical device," and (b) that it met all the other criteria (novelty, non-obviousness, utility, etc.) needed for a patent. It was implemented with the technology available at the time -- stone knives, bear skins, vacuum tubes (valves), and a transformer.
Skipping over details like the invention of ratio detectors, phase-locked loops, etc., the next change in implementation of FM detectors came when the tubes were replaced with discrete transistors. This required some change in bias methods, impedance levels, etc., but no major redesign. It did save cost, size, and power, though.
The next change was integration. At first, the transformer was still needed for the demodulator, and so it was pinned out of the ICs, which were still analog. This saved cost, size, and power still further.
Later, schemes were found to integrate the function of the transformer, fully integrating the (still analog) demodulator. This saved cost and size still further.
Still later, improvements in integration processes enabled the function of the FM demodulator to be performed digitally, using an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) and a bunch of hard-wired logic gates, emulating the mathematical function performed by the analog demodulator. This saved cost, size, and power still further.
Demodulator designs were next ported into programmable hardware dedicated to signal-processing applications (digital signal processors); this required the ADC, plus the algorithm converted to the DSP's assembly language. This saved cost and size.
After that, demodulator designs were moved into hardware register-transfer languages, like Verilog, providing portability from chip to chip using standard-cell logic families. This saved cost.
Later, the Verilog designs were ported into field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), enabling one to program the hardware in the chip to become, when preceded by the ADC, an FM demodulator. This saved cost.
Finally, technology improved to the point that the FM demodulator could be made by an ADC followed by a microcomputer, programmed with software in a high-level language as part of a much larger system. This saved cost.
At what point in this development do we draw the line and say, "Below this, it's not patentable (or patent infringement)?" Where is "software"?
If the microcomputer is "generally used computing hardware", then it is not patent infringement. FPGA's are not at this time "generally used computing hardware", so the patent still applies to that line and above.
I would prefer a different split, but I think Stallman's proposal is clear and easy to understand. There will be a gray area -- is an iPhone "generally used computing hardware"? Is a Raspberry Pi in general? Is the Raspberry Pi GPU? Case law should make that gray area quite small in no time at all
FPGA's are not at this time "generally used computing hardware", so the patent still applies to that line and above.
I beg to differ -- billions and billions of FPGAs have been sold, over the last 30 years, for just about every computing application one could name. It's hard to think of a more generally-used piece of computing hardware than one that can be programmed to be anything you want.
Or does "generally used computing hardware" mean that it has to be a consumer product? That wouldn't protect the armies of software developers in the world working on industrial or imbedded applications...
Besides, how do DSPs escape
I think an FPGA should fit in the same category personally and be covered by the same anti-liability law. An FPGA is an off the shelf part that's programmable, violating no patents by itself, but suddenly doing so if someone programs it in a way that violates a patent.
If you encode an MP3 decoder in an FPGA you own, then good for you. Likewise if you ship source to such a thing. If you, however, bundle that FPGA into a hardware product, and sell the hardware product, then it's a whole new ballgame. I'd
billions and billions of FPGAs have been sold, over the last 30 years, for just about every computing application one could name.
How many of these FPGAs have been sold in a device where the user is encouraged to control what fusemap runs on the FPGA? The only one I can think of is the PowerPak, a CompactFlash adapter for the Nintendo Entertainment System that uses the FPGA to provide memory mapping and raster timing services to the running NES game.
billions and billions of FPGAs have been sold, over the last 30 years, for just about every computing application one could name
Yes, BUT they have not all been sold as part of a standard board design (eg ATX,
FPGA's are not at this time "generally used computing hardware", so the patent still applies to that line and above.
You've stated a conclusion without giving any reasons. What does "generally used" mean? What does generally mean? A majority of people in the market? What's the market? Used for a long time? How long? What does used mean? Used in a way that would be infringing or used for any purpose? Used by whom? What is "computing hardware?" Is an abacus computing hardware? What about a special-purpose chip that can't be used for general purpose computation? And once you've defined these terms in a rigorous
t what point in this development do we draw the line and say, "Below this, it's not patentable (or patent infringement)?" Where is "software"?
At this point:
Demodulator designs were next ported into programmable hardware dedicated to signal-processing applications (digital signal processors); this required the ADC, plus the algorithm converted to the DSP's assembly language. This saved cost and size.
At the point programmabel hardware was used. From this point on the actual improvements were performed by the people working on improving programable hardware not the people implimenting FM demodulators.
. . . but suppose that the guys working on programmable hardware developed an improved algorithm to use on their programmable hardware, and some other guy took their algorithm, instantiated it in hard-wired logic gates, and sold it. Is your position that the guy who took the improved algorithm and made money off of it owes nothing to those who invented the algorithm?
At the point programmabel hardware was used.
Why? Stallman just talks about "generally used computing hardware." What does that have to do with programmability?
I think Stallman's point is that you can sidestep the issue of what is "software" by just stating that it's not patent infringement running code on standard computer hardware. You don't have to muck with the definition of hardware or software or patents (which can all be gamed by lawyers).
From TFA:
"My suggestion is to change the effect of patents. We should legislate that developing, distributing, or running a program on generally used computing hardware does not constitute patent infringement. This approa
once you move the code to general purpose hardware, it's no longer infringement.
As I have asked elsewhere, suppose that the guys developing code for general purpose hardware developed an improved algorithm, and some other guy took their algorithm, instantiated it in hard-wired logic gates, and sold it as a physical product. Is your position that the guy who took the improved algorithm and made money off of it owes nothing to those who invented the algorithm?
First, this is not "my" position. I'm just attempting to understand what Stallman is saying so don't start an argument with me.
So your hypothetical is: taking a patented algorithm that runs on general purpose hardware (not patent infringement) and moving it to hard-wired logic (not general purpose hardware). I think (if I understand Stallman correctly) that once you move the patent algorithm to hard-wired logic, it would require a patent license.
so don't start an argument with me.
Apologies. That was not my intent. I, too, am trying to understand what Stallman is saying.
[rubs chin] . . . so his proposal would establish a sort of one-way intellectual property door, in which patented hardware could be emulated in software without patent infringement, but patented software algorithms implemented in hardware would infringe.
The implications of that are interesting. On the one hand, it would tend to force implementations of all kinds of things into software (even things that would be b
I think that patent holders could implement their designs in hardware (which might have speed or cost advantages) but "copycats" could implement in software to avoid infringement (or could license the patent and implement in hardware).
It certainly would make software patents less valuable... "one-click" would be worthless.
You don't have to muck with the definition of hardware or software or patents (which can all be gamed by lawyers).
Right, you just have to much with the definition of "a program" and "generally used computing hardware." So you do have to muck with the definitions of software ("programs") and hardware after all, plus whatever "generally used" means.
In your example, once you move the code to general purpose hardware, it's no longer infringement.
Stallman's suggestion has nothing to do with general purpose hardware, only generally used hardware, which may or may not be general purpose.
I don't think that there would be any issues of defining "program" but I do think there could be battles about "generally used computer hardware".
Stallman is clearly on the side of software freedom in his proposal anything that can be reduced to a software program would be free to run. The sticky area is in defining the hardware. I think that once you code something in hardware such as a gate array, it ceases to be in the category of "generally used computer hardware" but there are grey areas. Stallman's
You make a very good set of points. I've made similar points in other places too. The truth is there's no clean line between 'hardware' and 'software', and ANY process who's primary purpose is to consume and transform information is an embodiment of a fundamental numerical/logical algorithm.
Lets just imagine a simple case WRT to Stallman's suggestion. You implement an algorithm in hardware using discrete logic. You patent it. I implement the same algorithm purely in software on a general purpose computer. I
There was no claim of making things not patentable. All of that would still be patentable (assuming it qualifies on the usual criteria). Someone producing a radio using it would need to license the patent. However, someone developing, distributing, or running code that does any of that on a generally used computer hardware would not. Of course we have a very unspecific term there, but that's something law makers love or they could define it more precisely.
It's law, not computer science - there is no hard line. It's all based on the interpretation of the lawyers, judge, and jury - none of which are likely to be competent in interpreting technical nuances. Personally, assuming Stallman's wording was used, I'd say the moment you write a piece of software that does the work on the main CPU of a general-purpose desktop computer/tablet/etc. you qualify for the exemption.
More to the point Armstrong's patent expired in the 50's - decades before anything resembling
If you can unknowingly break some patent without even realizing its there, its a sign of a patent being awarded for something that should not be patentable in the first place.
Patents for a vague idea, or a general approach of implementing it - do not want.
I think this approach gives judges the freedom to apply a basic test on any attempt to enforce a patent... "Is the dispute based on the implementation of a software product and does the software product run on a generic platform where many hundreds of different development shops target for their own products?" If both of these questions can be answered with "Yes" then the dispute is spurious.
With this, I think iPods and Servers remains novel but Smartphones, Tablets, Laptops, and Desktop software will be
The things you cannot patent, universally accepted:
Physical Phenomenon, Natural Law, Abstract Ideas and out of these we also have Mathematical Algorithms. Certainly Software can be proven to not qualify for patent-ability, http://abstractionphysics.net/ [abstractionphysics.net] or add dot net to it for the reality of which the fictional trilogy "the matrix" characters were representations of. In other words, we all use the fundamental actions of which software must make use of in playing back what amounts to nothing more than the physical phenomenon of the natural laws of our creation and use of abstract ideas, which include the well defined abstractions of mathematics. All done on a machine that processes abstraction.
Why has this not come to light? Nature likes 3, as in three primary colors of paint or light, etc. from which you can create all other colors of that media. Software has three user interfaces. The CLI, GUI and the side door port to automating software use, including its creation. However this third user interface is kept from the general user, limiting what the general user can do. For the user to have such access is in analogy like giving users a decimal calculator when the accountants are using roman numerals. A great deal of what software patents cover today would become non-novel and invalid.
Bill Gates said the way to become wealthy is to make people need you. He was also the one to coin the term "software piracy"
And there you have the reason for the fraud of software patents.
1 except in the cases of "separable" claims a patent does not apply unless ALL Claims apply (separable claims are only allowed for Common Sense type things like use in Fixed , Mobile Air , Mobile Water and Mobile Land)
2 in cases where another company has produced a product covered by the patent you have 90 days to start the suit or this product is to be considered "Prior Art" unless 1 you have no way of knowing about the conflicting product 2 You have produced a Product and included a "Covered by The Follo
in cases where another company has produced a product covered by the patent you have 90 days to start the suit or this product is to be considered "Prior Art" unless 1 you have no way of knowing about the conflicting product 2 You have produced a Product and included a "Covered by The Following Patents : %list%" block
I believe this is already covered under laches [wikipedia.org], except that the period beyond which a presumption of intentional harm is imputed longer than that.
Won't Prior art be meaningless when the US changes to a First to File system (like most of the rest of the world) next year?
No - F2F only effects whether the case where two or more inventors apply for what is substantially the same patent. Currently the patent would go to the inventor who could prove that they invented it first - next year it will go to the one who's application was received first. In either case if a similar invention was already patented or published years ago you have prior art and *nobody* gets the new patent (or the patent should be ruled invalid when someone points out the older invention)
Stallman's idea is very compatible with a notion of reversing the reversal of the original intent of patents that has happened in the modern corporate business environment.
The main necessity of patents in the past was specifically the differential between the capabilities of the individual or small company, and the large established company, to take a concept from initial concept/implementation to large-scale production. That differential was, in large part, the reason why the market in itself was not tru
Patents last way too long 20 years from the filing date is what it says
Companies deliberately delay the approval of their patents to take advantage of this loophole. The loophole was made for pharmaceuticals (FDA approval can take a decade), but
"I shall expect a chemical cure for psychopathic behavior by 10 A.M. tomorrow, or I'll have your guts for spaghetti." -- a comic panel by Cotham


text:
Some of the kids like to completely char their little marshmallows. Gross!
I try not to think about it. There's something really unappetizing about a black marshmallow.
Liddy needed help not making a total sticky mess of herself. Look at the ash all over her face. We kept saying: Stay out of line of smoke! (They'd stand right in the path of all the black smoke and look at us, like: "What???")


text:
Related Links
Brooks, a 6-6, 215-pound forward from Santee, Calif., led Dartmouth in scoring at 9.4 points per game, including 10.9 points a night within the Ivy League. He scored in double figures in exactly half of the Big Green's 30 games, more than anyone on the roster, and seven times led the team in scoring. On four occasions, Brooks was honored as the Ivy League Rookie of the Week, and he also registered four double-doubles during his first collegiate season. He poured in a season-high 18 points at Penn and grabbed 13 rebounds — tied for the most by any Dartmouth player this season — the night before at Princeton.
Three other awards were bestowed upon players, beginning with the Alvin F. "Doggie" Julian Award for spirit and enthusiasm which was given to junior Matt LaBove The 6-9 center from Lancaster, Mass., played in every game this season, scoring a season-high 10 points against Vermont. Despite seeing his playing time diminish with the emergence of several freshmen, LaBove continued to push himself and his teammates throughout the season, offering encouragement to all of those around him.
Sophomore Tyler Melville, a 6-2 point guard from Plano, Texas, was rewarded with the John DiIorio '56 Award for hustle, drive and determination. After a slow start to the season, Melville doggedly worked to improve his game and get back into the regular rotation. He offered a glimpse of what was to come once the new year began, scoring 12 points against Bucknell. After playing two solid games off the bench against the eventual Ivy League champion, Harvard, Melville was thrust into the starting lineup for the remainder of the Ivy season, averaging 8.3 points per game in the league.
Finally, the Rudy LaRusso '59 Award went to freshman John Golden as the most improved player. A 6-6 wing from Freehold, N.J., Golden struggled with an inconsistent shot over the first 11 games, hitting just 10-of-40 (.250) from three-point range. But he started to settle in and became a dead-eye marksmen for the last 19 contests, drilling 26-of-54 (.481) from beyond the arc. He finished the year third on the team in rebounding (3.4 rpg) and fourth in scoring (7.3 ppg).


text: Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Advice on getting sorted in Chile. Get TEFL Certified & Start Your Adventure Today! Job Discussion Forums"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!" FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in Advice on getting sorted in Chile. Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Chile View previous topic :: View next topic Author Message shoey_cufcJoined: 01 Oct 2010Posts: 14Location: Plymouth Posted: Sun Oct 03, 2010 7:59 pm Post subject: Advice on getting sorted in Chile. Hello. I am new on this board and new to the TEFL idea. I'm doing a CELTA course in a few weeks and am looking at Chile thereafter to teach. However, I have no idea what would be the best way to do it and wondered if I could glean advice from anyone on previous experience, suggestions etc... I have looked at teachingchile as a possible option, although Im always a bit dubious when a company runs things and charges for placements. Is this sort of thing good value or am I better off just flying out and trying to find a job when I'm there, much like I've heard a few on here do in Argentina? Does anyone have any good suggestions for schools/programs out there that you have used at all? Basically I'm just after as much advice as I can get before I start sorting things. I'm looking at Santiago, and would need paid positions not volounteer work. Any help would be ideal. Thank you ! Back to top Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Chile All times are GMT Page 1 of 1 Jump to: Select a forum Where to Begin----------------General DiscussionNewbie ForumCurrent Events ForumTechnology ForumOnline Teaching Forum Africa Forums----------------General Africa Forum Asia Forums----------------CambodiaChina (Job-related Posts Only)China (Off-Topic)Hong KongIndiaIndonesiaJapanMalaysiaPhilippinesSingaporeTaiwanThailandGeneral Asia ForumVietnam Caribbean Forums----------------General Caribbean Forum Europe Forums----------------Czech RepublicFranceGermanyGreeceItalyMacedonia and the BalkansPolandRomaniaRussia & C.I.S.SpainTurkeyUkraineUnited KingdomGeneral Europe Forum Latin America Forums----------------ArgentinaBrazilChileColombiaCosta RicaMexicoMexico (off-topic)PeruGeneral Latin America Forum The Middle East Forums----------------BahrainEgyptIsraelKuwaitOmanQatarSaudi ArabiaUnited Arab EmiratesGeneral Middle East Forum North America Forums----------------General North America Forum Oceania----------------Australia/New Zealand You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling. Contact Dave's ESL Cafe Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group Teaching Jobs in China


text:
Moms get things done.
Which is why it's going to be up to moms to help solve the gun violence epidemic and keep our kids safe.
Look how moms impacted drunken driving with the success of Mothers Against Drunk Driving.
Any fight becomes a whole lot different when lead by parents who want to do everything we can to protect our kids.
As columnist Lisa Belkin writes in The Huffington Post:
"MADD changed the conversation from the rights of drivers to have a good time on Saturday night to the rights of those they would maim and kill. And that is the only way this next parenting fight can be won. We must hold up photos of children lost to violence, we must say their names and keep it personal. We must make it as unforgivable to irresponsibly handle a gun as it is to drink behind the wheel."
We can do the same with gun violence as MADD did with drunken driving.
Because there is a gun violence epidemic among our kids.
Every day, eight children are killed by guns.
As The Washington Post reported: In 2008 and 2009, 5,740 children were killed by gunfire in America, according to a report by the Children's Defense Fund that analyzed data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That equals about 2,500 kids per year.
What can we do?
Parents of the slain Sandy Hook students created Sandy Hook Promise on the one-month anniversary of the shooting, which claimed 26 lives - 20 of them children, to find common sense solutions to make our communities safer. The goal is to enlist all Americans in supporting comprehensive solutions including a national dialogue around issues such as mental health, school safety and gun responsibility.
Take a moment to visit www.sandyhookpromise.org and Make the Promise. Also visit the Sandy Hook Promise Facebook page (facebook.com/sandyhookpromise), and follow them on Twitter (twitter.com/sandyhook). You can also sign the promise at causes.com/sandyhookpromise.
Another mom who aims to get things done when it comes to ending gun violence in our schools is Shannon Watts of Indiana, who founded One Million Moms for Gun Control, a nonprofit that supports common-sense gun laws, but not taking guns away from law-abiding gun-owners.
Watts started the nonprofit in the immediate aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting. Check out her Facebook page here: www.facebook.com/OneMillionMomsForGunControl.
The goals of One Million Moms for Gun Control:
• Ban assault weapons and ammunition magazines of more than 10 rounds.
• Require background checks for all gun purchasers.
• Report the sale of large quantities of ammunition to the ATF.
• Limit the scope of concealed weapons laws at the state level.
Watts' group has expanded into over 75 branches all over the country including branches in Georgia and South Carolina. No Savannah chapter yet. Anyone interested in starting one? First task could be emailing our politicians asking them to help bring the gun violence prevention bills to the floor.
The hope is that moms will not rest until there is change.
One Million Moms for Gun Control is backing several major events in January to demand action on common-sense gun control laws.
Today the organization kicks off a social media campaign that will allow moms to connect across the country called "How do you wear your heart?"
The campaign gives moms across the country a creative way to express their collective desire for new and stronger gun control laws.
Moms are asked to use a printable template to make your own heart, and to get creative: find those old crayons, markers and fabric and get crafty.
Moms should feel inspired, then should pin it over their heart and wear it publicly in support of One Million Moms for Gun Control. Take pictures of yourselves wearing your pin and email them to firstname.lastname@example.com, or Tweet and Instagram the photos using the hashtags #howdoyouwearyourheart and #1MM4GC.
One Million Moms for Gun Control also is planning rallies around the country including co-sponsoring the March on Washington for Gun Control in Washington, D.C., on Jan 26.
Thank you to all the parents fighting for our kids' safety.
Common sense gun control laws. We can do it.
Contact Anne Hart at email@example.com.