text:
Epiphanies come in many forms. Some are personal, like the one I had after being invited to a hot tub party in Southern California: "I better start going to the gym."
My political epiphany occurred there, too. (No, not at the hot tub party. In California.)
First, some background. In 1994, I was on the staff of the Huffington for U.S. Senate campaign. Michael Huffington was an oil millionaire and Congressman who was married at the time to Arianna. Google him, it's quite the read.
We came awfully close to beating Senator Dianne Feinstein. But something else happened that November. The Republicans won the House of Representatives for the first time in 40 years.
Every young swinging tusk descended on Washington, networking, looking for jobs, and reading Speaker Newt Gingrich's "syllabus" (the Federalist Papers, Democracy in America, Future Shock).
Ultimately, I stayed in California, where I thought about my own political views. Conservatism was ascendant. I was a conservative. So how did my core beliefs translate to practical politics? What made them distinct yet relevant to the times?
My conservative epiphany occurred one day in 1995 while driving on the 405. It can be summed up by three words:
Freedom, family, and fairness.
Republicans, I thought, must be advocates for all three values.
Freedom is the first, the foundation for the others. Indeed, it is why we were founded. Freedom enables us to create wealth and lead the world. It gives us the strength to protect the weak. It is what makes the United States exceptional. As newspaper publisher Eugene C. Pulliam said, "America is great only because America is free."
Freedom, however, can encroach on other rights. When it does, it must be tempered. We are not free to harm another person. We are not free to exploit minors or sell drugs or drive drunk. That is not liberty, that is libertinism.
So the family must be protected. Each family is like a single cell. Millions of them together make up our body politic. When they are healthy and intact, so is the country. When they decay or divide or grow dependent, the country sickens.
Finally, fairness. Americans do not want government to pick winners and losers. But they do expect it to keep the playing field level. Meritocracy must guide democracy. In the free market, capitalism does not mean monopoly. In government, "compassion" does not mean cronyism.
"There are no necessary evils in government," said President Andrew Jackson. "Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing."
If that's the case, then Washington, with its Cornhusker Kickbacks and Louisiana Purchases, its waivers for friends and fines for the little guy, is the most cursed place on Earth.
Fairness is a conservative value. President Ronald Reagan's 1983 State of the Union Address used the term more than any since:
"Our standard here will be fairness, ensuring that the taxpayers' hard-earned dollars go only to the truly needy…"
"We'll continue to study ways to simplify the tax code and make it more fair for all Americans…"
"Our commitment to fairness means that we must assure legal and economic equity for women…"
"Also in the area of fairness and equity, we will ask for extension of the Civil Rights Commission, which is due to expire this year…"
"The path I've outlined is fair, balanced, and realistic."
Since then, however, the word has been captured by Democrats, from President Bill Clinton ("a fair shot at the American dream") to Sen. John Kerry ("fundamental fairness") to President Barack Obama ("We can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot and everyone does their fair share and everyone plays by the same set of rules").
In reaction, many Republicans have given up on fairness. John McCain and Mitt Romney did not use the word once in their nomination speeches. Conservatives have turned it into a punchline, as Democrats once did with "patriotism." Former Club for Growth president Stephen Moore derided "this fairness fetish." Charles Krauthammer jeered Obama as "the leveler."
"Obama's level playing field is not about opportunity," said Rush Limbaugh. "He's talking about outcomes. And he's going to administer the outcomes."
We do not have to accept the Democrats' definition of fairness. But it is vital that we reclaim it.
Some have realized this. Dr. Benjamin Carson, in a celebrated speech at the National Prayer Breakfast, talked about fairness in the form of a proportional tax system. Sen. Ted Cruz recently argued that amnesty would be "profoundly unfair to the millions of legal immigrants who waited years, if not decades, to come to America legally." And in December, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder signed into law a right-to-work bill called the "Workplace Equity and Fairness Act."
Words are important. They crystallize concepts that win arguments. I will be watching the State of the Union Address tonight and the Republican response to see if freedom, family, and fairness are addressed and advanced — or undermined.
To be continued.
John K. Herr is a Washington D.C.-based speechwriter and standup comedian (stage name "Herricane"). He has written for three governors and four Cabinet secretaries, and wrote jokes for President George W. Bush. He can be reached by email (email@example.com), or follow him on Twitter (@jherricane).


text:
The 11th Conference of the Parties to the CBD: a return to normalcy in Hyderabad?
An article on CBD's COP11, which will be the opportunity to take stock of the "Nagoya legacy", and more specifically on three main items: the Access and Benefit Sharing Protocol, the Strategic Plan 2011-2020, and the Strategy for resource mobilisation. The governance of high seas biodiversity will also be examined as it has emerged over the last few years as a real challenge within the CBD, raising key questions about international governance.
The 10th Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which met in October 2010 in Nagoya (Japan), received an unusual amount of attention for a convention whose meetings normally generate limited political and media interest. Less than a year after the disappointment of Copenhagen climate talks, many people saw Nagoya as proof that environmental multilateralism was not dead, and that the UN system was still legitimate and effective, provided certain conditions were met. Indeed— officially at least—the three main goals of Nagoya were achieved: the adoption of a Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (known as the ABS Protocol); the definition of a new Strategic Plan to halt biodiversity loss by 2020; and the development of a strategy for resource mobilisation aimed in particular at increasing current levels of official development assistance (ODA) to support biodiversity protection. Upon returning from Nagoya, we nevertheless noted that "this formal success must not disguise the fact that many uncertainties remain regarding the undertaken commitments (…) [and that] tough decisions at various levels will need to be taken when implementing the bundle of decisions and commitments that have come out of COP10. (…) Above all, the conference enabled progress to be made on some highly technical issues, while the remainder is still to be decided and negotiated not only within the CBD, but also in other fora and at other levels of governance." (Billé et al., 2010).
In this context, it is now important to analyse the challenges for the upcoming COP, which will be held in Hyderabad (India) from 8 to 19 October 2012. Its coverage looks set to be closer to what the CBD has known in the past, but it will nevertheless be a new high point in the life of the convention. The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Rio+20, reinforced the feeling that the major international conferences were unable to initiate the changes needed, but it also left conventions on specialised subjects, such as the CBD, to find specific agreements that cannot be reached under a general heading such as sustainable development. The next CBD COP will be the opportunity to take stock of the "Nagoya legacy", of the way the Parties seize on it and of progress made in the different processes underway. There will be many items on the agenda3, as always, but the three main ones will be the same as in Nagoya: the Access and Benefit Sharing Protocol, the Strategic Plan 2011-2020, and the Strategy for resource mobilisation. We will examine these in turn here, adding to the list the governance of high seas biodiversity, which has emerged over the last few years as a real challenge within the CBD, raising key questions about international governance.
The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising from their Utilization, which was adopted in Nagoya after eight years of tough negotiations, aims at implementing the third objective of the Convention. Central to the relations between countries of the "North" and the "South" within the CBD, this Protocol should help to stop the misappropriation of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge (known as biopiracy), while providing legal certainty for public and private users of such resources (Chiarolla, 2012). Ardently supported by the megadiverse countries (those endowed with very rich biological diversity) such as Brazil, the Protocol proposes an international framework to ensure that the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources by industries or researchers are shared with the country providing such resources, based on prior informed consent and a contract (i.e. mutually agreed terms) signed with the State in question. With a view to linking the three pillars of the Convention, the Protocol also encourages the Parties to direct the benefits generated by this mechanism to promote activities targeting the conservation and the sustainable use of biodiversity. Opened for signature from February 2011, the Nagoya Protocol has only been ratified by six countries to date, whereas 50 ratifications are required for it to enter into force.
As the result of long and difficult negotiations that were only settled at the last minute in Nagoya, the Protocol strikes a compromise that fails to provide clear guidance on some controversial issues, including:
- the extent to which its application will concern "derivatives" of biological or genetic resources, defined as "naturally occurring biochemical compounds (…) even if they do not contain functional units of heredity" (examples include proteins, chemical substances extracted from plants for use in the development of drugs, alkaloids, flavanoids, aromas, resins, and snake venoms, etc.) (Article 2);
- the need for and the modalities of a global multilateral benefit sharing mechanism to address the sharing of benefits derived from the use of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge "that occur in transboundary situations or for which it is not possible to grant or obtain prior informed consent" (Article 10);
- the relationship with other international instruments that concern the exchange of genetic material and benefit sharing, such as the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic influenza preparedness Framework for the sharing of influenza viruses and access to vaccines and other benefits (Article 4.3);
- the possibility to envisage a mechanism to monitor the use of traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources, in order to promote compliance with the applicable domestic ABS legislation (Article 16), in light of the evaluation of the effectiveness of the Protocol, which will take place four years after its entry into force (Article 31) and the negotiations underway within the framework of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (CBD COP Decision X/1, par. 6);
- the ongoing negotiations to establish cooperative procedures and institutional mechanisms to promote compliance with the provisions of the Protocol and to address cases of non-compliance (Article 30).
With only six ratifications of the Nagoya Protocol, domestic implementation efforts do not yet provide a clearer picture of the way in which national laws will flesh out the provisions of the Protocol. However, in Nagoya, CBD Parties were instructed to continue negotiations on certain operational mechanisms, and Hyderabad will provide the opportunity to examine their progress. In this respect, the second meeting of the Intergovernmental Committee for the Nagoya Protocol (ICNP), which was held in July 2012 in New Delhi (India), adopted recommendations concerning the operation of the ABS clearing-house, cooperative procedures and institutional mechanisms to promote compliance with the Protocol, the need for and modalities of a global multilateral benefitsharing mechanism, funding and resource mobilisation for the implementation of the Protocol, and preparations for the first meeting of the governing body of the Protocol, which is linked to its entry into force (thus, at the earliest simultaneously with COP12 in 2014). However, the negotiations expected at COP11 are likely to be primarily focused on procedural rather than substantial issues, such as the possibility of convening a third meeting of the ICNP prior to COP12, and organising further intersessional work. In addition, the cross-cutting discussion about the financial needs of developing countries could condition negotiations on most other issues concerning the ratification and future implementation of the Protocol.
After the failure to meet the goal set in 2002 ("to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level"), a new Strategic Plan was adopted in Nagoya for the 2011-2020 period. Proposing 20 targets (known as the Aichi Targets) to guide national and international efforts to protect biodiversity8, this plan appeared as one of the major outcomes of Nagoya. Indeed, for the first time, it extended the field of action of the CBD beyond its "comfort zone" (protected species and areas, approach based on major ecosystem types, etc.) in an attempt to influence the sectors of activity with the greatest impact (especially agriculture, fisheries, and building and public works) by setting targets that concern them directly.
Two years later, Hyderabad will be the opportunity to examine developments in the implementation of the Strategic Plan, especially through the creation of national targets and the updating of biodiversity national strategies and action plans. For many of the most strategic targets, little progress is expected to have been made, as with target 6, which calls for the sustainable management of all fisheries, or target, which advocates bringing pollution, including from excess nutrients, to levels that are not detrimental to ecosystems functions and biodiversity. The emblematic target, under which economic incentives (including subsidies) harmful to biodiversity must be "eliminated, phased out or reformed", has helped to bring harmful subsidies to centre stage, opening up potential windows of political opportunity for this issue in certain countries. However, the reform of these subsidies has a political cost that few leaders seem willing to shoulder, even in a context of public finance crisis. It also generates systemic changes (to taxation, sectors of activity, equity, etc.) of such complexity that it tends to discourage good intentions. In France, for example, the report of the Centre d'analyse stratégique (Sainteny, 2011) has not yet had any significant political impact. Moreover, at the international level, the final declaration of Rio+20 was unable to reaffirm this goal in its entirety, covering only the fisheries sector (§ 173).
Another emblematic legacy of Nagoya, namely target 11, specifies that "by 2020, at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water, and 10% of coastal and marine areas (…) are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected systems of protected areas and other effective areabased conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes". Examining progress in this matter is likely to be a source of satisfaction in Hyderabad. Indeed, the last two years have seen a new wave of protected areas established throughout the world, especially in the marine environment, where at times, this movement is beginning to resemble a global competition. A recent report now estimates terrestrial and marine protected areas at 12.7% and 1.6% respectively (Bertzky et al., 2012). Satisfaction should only be relative, however, for three reasons. First, this report also highlights a considerable lack of protection for over half of all important sites for biodiversity—including areas beyond national jurisdiction—as well as the management, governance and financial challenges facing many of these protected areas. This is a far cry from an effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well connected system of protected areas—something which the raw numbers will never be able to reflect. Next, as the areas claimed to be protected grow, so the debate intensifies as to what a protected area actually is, and what should be excluded from the statistics. Finally, attention may have focused too hastily on the target concerning protected areas, whereas the reference to "other effective area-based conservation measures" is beginning to be mobilised on an ad hoc basis by some governments in order to justify not meeting the emblematic targets of 17 and 10%.
The third pillar of the Nagoya deal, and its "weakest link", the strategy for resource mobilisation provides for a substantial increase in funding for biodiversity by 2020 for the effective implementation of the Strategic Plan. Following the 10th Conference of the Parties, the total amount of this pledge as well as the modalities of the funding mechanisms remained to be determined. The facts were plain: there was neither a robust evaluation of the amount of funding needed (Feger, Pirard, 2011), nor a reliable estimation of the budgets currently available for biodiversity protection.
Since then, discussions have continued on these subjects. They have moved forward with the definition of a framework to monitor funding indicators related to the quantified commitments expected. Calculating funding requirements, on the other hand, has given rise to the implementation of different methods based on the nature of the action to be undertaken, the absorption capacities of the countries concerned, and historical spending patterns, etc.—all estimations of real needs that are fundamentally impossible to assess. Among others, the calculations made within the framework of the needs assessment for the 6th Global Environment Facility (GEF) replenishment cycle 2014-2018 provides a useful indication: the implementation of initiatives needed to meet the Aichi Targets in developing countries would require a total of 74 to 191 billion dollars over the period.
These discussions are linked to funding mechanisms, which raise difficult, controversial questions. The debates on the types of funding to be set up and the role that the "market" or "rights" should play in these are particularly intense. The terminology used has evolved largely in response to the reservations of certain States, especially members of ALBA, about innovations considered to be inspired by neoliberalism. A consensus is therefore emerging on the use of more neutral terms. It is also likely that development agencies will continue to play a key role in structuring funding in this field, as opposed to funding mechanisms that bring in private actors through market processes. These include mitigation banks, or the widespread implementation of payments for ecosystem services based on principles equivalent to carbon markets.
It is clearly more essential than ever to put these discussions back into their context: one of an economic and financial crisis affecting traditional donor countries and limiting their capacity, or their willingness, to make quantified commitments to international funding—something that was nevertheless required by the Nagoya deal. Concerning, for example, the French pledge to increase its biodiversity funding under official development assistance (ODA) to 200 million euros by 2012, and 500 million by 2014, there are currently no reliable, official figures that can be used to determine whether the first commitment has been met, while positions remain vague for the second. Furthermore, the developed countries can easily justify themselves by the fact that the developing and emerging countries have only very partially fulfilled their own duty of quantifying their national funding requirements, which emerged from Nagoya as a precondition for any quantitative discussion on flows. Hyderabad will above all be an opportunity to take stock of efforts made in terms of both assessments of needs and of resources available, and the monitoring of commitments made in Nagoya.
The challenges of the governance of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction have been under discussion for some 10 years now at the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). Within this arena, States are struggling to agree on whether, in the context of the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the legal instruments in force are enough to guarantee the conservation of this area and the sustainable use of its resources, or whether it is necessary to adopt a new legal instrument. While the negotiations often seem to get bogged down there, it is within the CBD ?which was nevertheless long considered a minor forum for negotiation on this subject—that progress has been made in recent years on the scientific and technical aspects of high seas biodiversity conservation. The lack of a decision at Rio+20 on a possible UNCLOS implementing agreement has served, on the contrary, to reinforce the legitimacy of the CBD to tackle these questions within the limits of its mandate (Druel et al., 2011).
The first and biggest step forward was the launch of a process to identify Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) in need of protection in open-ocean waters and deep-sea habitats. The aim is to establish a common scientific basis enabling States and international organisations to determine which parts of the high seas and of deep sea habitats could be the object of more stringent protective measures. To this end, in 2008 the COP adopted seven scientific criteria to be used in this identification, and in 2010, specified that the process should be conducted through regional workshops involving, inter alia, the competent international organisations, such as regional fisheries organisations or regional seas conventions. The findings of two of these regional workshops, held respectively for the South West Pacific and for the Caribbean and the West Central Atlantic Ocean, will be submitted for approval at the COP in Hyderabad, and then forwarded to the UNGA, while the identification process continues in other parts of the world. What the UNGA will decide to do with the findings of these regional workshops and how it intends to follow up the process are not known at present.
The second major effort concerned the updating of the "Voluntary guidelines for the consideration of biodiversity in environmental impact assessments and strategic environmental assessment in marine and coastal areas" adopted in 2006, in order to include in these the specificities of the high seas. The revision began in 2009, and has led to the introduction of numerous sections concerning the high seas, which will be submitted for approval in Hyderabad and may serve as the basis for the establishment of a more binding legal framework that is currently lacking for environmental impact assessments (EIAs) in the high seas.
Thus limiting their initiatives to scientific and technical aspects, the State Parties to the CBD consider that the adoption of more stringent protective measures for Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas in the high seas or the creation of a new legally binding instrument on environmental impact assessments in this zone are not possible within this forum, as the UNGA is the historical framework for negotiating the law of the sea. Their caution is explained by the reluctance of governments negotiating at the UNGA to take into account progress made within the framework of agreements other than UNCLOS, whether global or regional. Nevertheless, the decisions adopted during the next COP (approval of outcomes of regional workshops, adoption of guidelines on EIAs) will undoubtedly have a considerable influence on purely UN discussions, which could help to give new impetus to negotiations that have been stalled for years.
With no new strategic plan or international treaty to adopt, the 11th Conference of the Parties to be held in Hyderabad marks a certain return to normalcy in the life of the CBD, far from the spotlights that shone on Nagoya—sometimes dazzling certain euphoric observers. But this return to normalcy is inevitably accompanied by numerous difficulties that the Parties must attempt to overcome, whether it be for the ABS Protocol, the 2020 targets, or resource mobilisation. The latter, which was the shakiest point of agreement in Nagoya, is now undermining the whole of the initial deal in a context of crisis that only increases tension on a subject that is still sensitive.
But this return to normalcy does not leave the CBD unchanged. The links that the ABS Protocol has obliged the Convention to forge with other forums dealing with genetic resources and intellectual property rights have given it both more visibility and more potential influence. Likewise, the way in which the Strategic Plan 2011-2020 has addressed the issues linked to the main economic sectors that impact biodiversity, or the interactions between the CBD and the UNGA on the subject of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, have helped to make it increasingly necessary to extend the competence of the Convention. Hyderabad will therefore also be a revealing test of its capacity to assume a new status and to tackle a broader range of subjects than those traditionally found within its remit.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Review: Enemies Of The State by Tal Bauer
Enemies of the State by Tal Bauer
My rating: 4 of 5 stars
Enemies Of The State hit the spot for me nicely, but it's not without its drawbacks. It's a really good "forbidden-love" type romance in which the President happens to fall for his Secret Service bodyguard. There's plot, there's danger and plenty of feels along the way as they fumble their way through being together and not getting caught until of course, circumstances dictate that they reveal their love to the world.
For the feelings it evoked in me alone it probably would have been a 5-star book. This was an amazing comfort read for someone just so sick of toxic politics. A President I can like and admire? Count me in. A Secret Service agent dedicated to his job but also so lonely and a little bit vulnerable? A great recipe. I curled up all weekend with it and ignored the real world.
And that's the thing… For this book, you *do* need to suspend your disbelief just a tad. From the two gallivanting around like lovesick puppies to their absolute lack of discretion as more and more people find out about them (and are all magically cool about it), there was just something that stopped this from feeling entirely real. Jack seems a little too good, honest and sweet for the world of politics. His setup, with the deceased wife, is a little too convenient. And the gay-for-you was a little sigh-worthy, as yet another hero proclaims "I'm not gay/bi, I'm just in love with you and you happen to be a man but hey our desires conveniently gel with our feelings!" which I've always found weird and off-putting. It's not that I need every hero with a previous female partner to immediately acknowledge their bisexuality and start waving the flag around, but a little awkward self-exploration would be cool and would probably help bolster the realism factor a bit in a book that's pushing the boundaries of believability.
Despite these drawbacks, I do want to read the next book and see where it goes. I did find the characters likable and I did enjoy the political intrigue and action mixed with the "oh but we mustn't!" romance and sex. What can I say, I'm a sucker for forbidden love.


text:
Graduate Program Application information
Requirements for Admission
Thank you for considering one of our graduate programs in Biology. For admission to either the M.S. or Ph.D. programs of study, the following requirements must be met.
- 1. The applicant must have a baccalaureate degree with a major in biology, or an acceptable undergraduate degree with coursework as described in the graduate regimen (PDF).
- 2. The applicant must meet the admission standards of the Department of Biology. Generally, these are:
- A. An undergraduate GPA of 3.0 or better
- B. Submission of GRE scores. While there is no minimum requirement for GRE scores, competitive students usually have an average score around the fiftieth percentile or better. Composite MCAT or DAT scores are acceptable alternatives to the GRE.
- C. For foreign students from non-English speaking countries one of the following is required: 1) a TOEFL Examination score of 550 or better on the paper-based exam; or 2) 235 or better on the computer-based test; or 3) at least 83 on the TOEFL iBT (Internet Based Test); or 4) a score of 6.5 or greater on the IELTS exam. Students holding a baccalaureate or advanced degree from an accredited institution in the United States are exempt from this requirement.
- 3. All applicants should review the research specialties of the departmental faculty to ensure that an area compatible with the student's research interest is available. All Ph.D. and M.S. thesis students must have a faculty member agree to serve as a graduate advisor in order to be admitted to the program. M.S. non-thesis students can be admitted without an advisor, but must find an advisor by the end of their first semester in the program.
Special Requirements for Accelerated Master's Degree Program Admission:
- 1. Requirements above and:
2. An undergraduate GPA of 3.35 or better.
3. Completion of Biology 240/242/244, 329, 330/331, and 363 with grades of B or better.
Requirements for Accelerated Master of Arts in Teaching:
- 1. 21 credit hours in biology;
2. An overall and Biology GPA of 3.0 or better;
3. Combined score of at least 1000 on the verbal and quantitative portions of the GRE.
Students interested in the MAT program should contact Dr. Alexander (Email: email@example.com) to have their qualifications verified and to find out more information about this program. Students who meet the above qualifications will need to complete a teacher education application packet and meet other requirements for admission to the College of Education and Human Development before they can register for the MAT courses.
Submitting an Application
Prospective graduate students in the Department of Biology must submit two applications (Biology Department application and Graduate application) to enter the program, as well as other supporting documents. The Departmental application should be submitted before January 15 to receive full consideration for financial support for the fall term. Prospective students in the MAT program will apply through the College of Education and Human Development in their junior year and will be given instructions on how to do so after their qualifications have been verified.
Students interested in the research of a particular faculty member should correspond directly with that individual. Faculty who offer applicants study opportunities in their laboratories will sponsor them for admission.
Components of an application:
A. Fill out two on-line applications and pay application fee:
- 1. Complete Biology Department Application Form.;
2. Complete Graduate School Application form and pay the fee.
B. The following items should be sent to the Graduate Admissions Office, 105 Houchens Building, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292:
- 3. Official transcript(s) of all previous undergraduate and graduate work;
4. Graduate Record Examination Scores (General Test Section), MCAT or DAT scores;
5. Two or more letters of recommendation from persons familiar with your academic performance; and
6. for foreign students, results of the TOEFL Examination.
Key Deadlines
The deadlines for completed applications are as follows:
Conventional M.S. and Ph.D. applications
- July 15 for Fall admission [As noted above, prospective PhD students seeking financial support for the Fall term should apply by Jan. 15 for full consideration.]
- December 1 for Spring admission
- April 15 for Summer admission
If these dates fall on a weekend, the deadline is the next working day.
Accelerated M.S. Program
- Application is usually made in the junior year, and must be done before the end of the junior year or completion of 90 credit hours toward the degree.
Official notification of admission or denial will come from the Graduate School and will be based on a recommendation from the Department of Biology. Notification of acceptance to the Department of Biology Graduate program does not carry with it the promise of financial support. However, all students admitted to the program will be considered for financial support, if they qualify.
Accelerated MAT Program
- Application is usually made in the Junior year.
- Application deadlines follow the current MAT program (March 1, June 1, and October 1).
To be accepted in this program the applicant must be approved by both the Biology Department and the Secondary MAT Screening Committee.
Financial considerations
Financial Support: Qualified applicants to the Biology Department's graduate programs may be eligible for highly competitive University fellowships, teaching assistantships, or minority student assistantships and fellowships. All of these provide salary, tuition remission, and health insurance. Research assistantships are available through grants and contracts held by individual faculty members.
- Graduate Teaching Assistantships. Graduate Teaching Assistantships (GTA) are awarded by the Graduate Committee of the Department of Biology to meet instructional needs of the Department and enhance the educational progress of the student. All applicants initially selected for GTA support by the Department will be notified by letter by June 1.
- University Graduate Fellowships. Ph.D. applicants with exceptional credentials may be nominated by the Department of Biology for a University Fellowship. University Fellowships are awarded from a pool of candidates submitted by all Departments in the University that grant Ph.D. degrees.
- Minority Student Assistantships/Scholarships. The Graduate School is committed to providing financial support for the recruitment and retention of qualified, under-represented ethnic minority students. An award candidate must be currently enrolled in, or have been admitted to, the degree program (M.S. or Ph.D.) and be nominated by the Department Chair and Dean.
- Graduate Research Assistantships. Another source of financial support may be available from individual faculty members who have extramural or intramural funding that provides support for a graduate student as a Graduate Research Assistant. The faculty member holding a grant selects eligible graduate students to fill GRA positions.
Cost of Study:
Tuition Rates: Tuition information is available through the Registrar's web site or by calling the Registrar's office (502-852-7325).
Living and Housing: On-campus housing is available for both married and single graduate students, as well as nearby off-campus housing. Information about housing opportunities and costs can be found through the Student Affairs web site or by calling the Admissions office (502-852-6525).
Accreditation: The University of Louisville is accredited by the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACSCOC.) For more information see www.louisville.edu/accreditation .
Dr. Perri Eason, Director of Graduate Studies
Department of Biology
University of Louisville
Louisville, KY 40292
Telephone: 502-852-6771
Fax: 502-852-0725
Email Dr. Eason
Answers to general questions about graduate school at the University of Louisville may be found at the office of the Graduate School (502-852-6495).


text:
The Minotaur
- Royal Opera House
Prezzo da € 26.60
Harrison Birtwistle's reworking of an ancient myth The Minotaur at the Royal Opera House in London. Tickets for The Minotaur here!
Harrison Birtwistle's reworking of an ancient myth had its premiere at the Royal Opera House in 2008. The opera's dark beauty shows one of our leading composers at the height of his powers.
Prenota biglietti
Informazioni teatro
Informazioni show
7pm and 7.30pm
Prenota da
Fine dispon.
(3 mins) The Royal Opera House is off Covent Garden piazza, which is visible from the tube station exit. There is a revolving door entrance at the piazza.


text:
Looking for a little Upbeet Inspiration?
Get your free digital Cookbook, plus tips, tricks and more recipes delivered straight to your inbox.
Latest from the blog…
Food Truck Favourites
Back by Popular Demand: Food Truck Favourites Come join us in discovering new twists on some ever-popular street food favourites including poutine, Asian noodles, lettuce wraps and much more. Impress your family and friends by mastering some essential kitchen skills...read more
Join our Newsbeet list and get free recipes, news and event announcements delivered straight to your inbox!


text:
Vanderbilt didn't allow itself many opportunities to shoot. When it did get off a shot, the results were less than fortuitous.
The Commodores committed a season-high 25 turnovers and made just 10 field goals as they matched their lowest point total of the season in a 56-33 loss at Arkansas on Saturday.
To say they were sluggish in their first Southeastern Conference road game -- fewer than 48 hours removed from a two-point loss to Kentucky -- was a huge understatement.
Vanderbilt (6-8, 0-2) missed 30 of 40 shots overall and made just two of 16 3-pointers. The Commodores shot 20 percent from the floor (3-for-15) in the first half but made just one field goal over the first 18 minutes. Josh Henderson's layup with 1:24 left in the half was the team's first bucket in 13 minutes. Rod Odom immediately followed with Vanderbilt's first 3-pointer, which cut the halftime deficit to 21-11.
They scored six points in less than three minutes to start the second half but then went cold again.
The Razorbacks (10-5, 1-1), who didn't look sharp in the first half either, stormed away with a 14-0 run. Rashad Madden's jumper with 11:10 left gave Arkansas a 43-17 lead.
The plethora of turnovers did not help Vanderbilt's cause. Though Arkansas is well known for its signature full-court press, most of VU's 13 first-half turnovers came from errant passes in the halfcourt offense.
Freshman Sheldon Jeter led the Commodores with eight points. Marshawn Powell had 17 points and B.J. Young added 14 for Arkansas.
With 6:12 left, Vanderbilt sophomore Kedren Johnson injured his right (shooting) shoulder while trying to snatch away a loose ball. He stayed on the bench the rest of the game, with ice on the joint. Johnson suffered a similar injury – a subluxation or impartial dislocation – to the same shoulder in practice last month. Johnson was the team's second leading scorer with five points.
Vanderbilt also scored 33 points in a loss to Marist in November. That marked the program's fewest points since 1982 – before the shot clock era.
Vanderbilt has ineffective basketball players and an excellent coach in Kevin Stallings. Unfortunately, Kevin Stallings is not the kind of coach that effective basketball players are comfortable with. Who wants to be micro managed in a game as fast paced as basketball.
Most players enjoy playing the game. There is no way that a player can enjoy playing the game with Kevin Stallings as the coach.
If you want run and gun street ball, go watch the game down at the Y in Bordeau and shut the H up.. i like a plan however Hillsboro High School has more offenive talent than this VU bunch. When is he last time you saw a college team any where that regularly scores 33 points a game? Girls high school teams score better than this embarrassment of a team.
Go Dores, Preds, Titans! Go Nashville a great place to live!
I am sure 4GOLD said something, but I am not sure what it was.
I am going to take a guess and say he does not like NBA basketball and the YMCA. He likes Vanderbilt but does not think they can beat the Bordeaux YMCA
Ras72, I think 4gold meant the Shut the H up defense is short for Hurry Up Defense, made famous at the Bordeaux YMCA and implemented by the Hillsboro girls' basketball team.
That game was as boring as watching a marathon.
U nailed it 'courier. my post was not as mystic as you thought. I hate NBA watch ME one on one style basketball. And your right. VU can't beat a grayY team this year. Brown bag firmly on head.
Go Dores, Preds, Titans! Go Nashville a great place to live!


text:
We don't just have old dogs and cats here, we get a number of unwanted puppies and kittens as well as some births on site! A few of our cats are pregnant at the moment, Bella and Minny have big tummies! And Juliet is being a good mum to three kittens. To adopt a kitten, take a look at our kitten page under 'our animals'.
We also have in some puppies, including these three lurcher x collie pups who are now 4 months old. They are needing homes quite desperately now so they can get properly socialised. Bob, Tommy and Harry are available through our puppy file. Look at the puppy page under 'our animals'.


text:
I want to convert one or two of my afghans patterns into a baby blanket. I currently use size 17 needles and use Thick & Chunky yarn. I'm not sure what size needles and type (and amount) of yarn to use.
Is there an easy way to do this? Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Visit Crafty Andy's Blog
Visit Crafty Andy's Blog
Hey buddy. Youtr gauge is important, so I will say just a wild guess that a size 7 to 9 needles with the same yarn will bring the afghan way down. Worsted Weight and dk sport instead of thick and chunky, but not necesarily, it all depends on the look that you are going for the afghan combined with the lowest size needles that you can comfortably work with the yarn to reach a good fabric!
You'll probably want to
You'll probably want to swatch - but I'm willing to bet if you go to a US 10.5 needle and regular worsted yarn you'll end up with a baby blanket.
MMario - I'm not divorced from reality - we're having a trial separation
Yes I agree test swatch,
Yes I agree test swatch, test swatch I can never say that enough, I always thought I was a pretty spot on tension knitter until I test swatched the first time and now find I usually have to increase my needle size anywhere from 1 to 1.5 mm to get a pattern tension. There are charts available to tell you how much yarn you need to have to knit certain sized items using gauge/tension and size. I use it always when substituting yarns. Common sense would tell me by using smaller yarn and needles with the same pattern will decrease the size but I have been caught out by common sense to often lol, to rely on it. Good luck and lets see the finished product, whichever you decide.
Jumping in with my 2 pennies
Jumping in with my 2 pennies worth - I've found that I can go with knitting worsted and a #9 - 10.5 needle and do pretty good for baby afghans. (#7s and baby sport weight yarns do pretty well, also.) As much as I hate to swatch, I have to agree that it is the best option here. I often figure out the pattern repeat and then cast on enough stitches to make a decent size. Another advantage is that you can adjust the stitch count as needed to make a nice size for babies. Another way I have begun to swatch is to cast on enough stitches to make a muffler/neck scarf. (Of course, that only works if you have enough yarn to spare from the main project.) Hope this helps. Books, knitting, cats...Life is Good.
Books, knitting, cats, fountain pens...Life is Good.


text:
Have you ever wondered how to grow your blog? Me too. I continually ask myself, How do I reach the next level of engagement and growth? This week, Jenny and I are reading The Compound Effect, by Darren Hardy. Although I'm only part way thought the book, the wheels in my head are spinning. Darren's compound effect simple. Yet it's also incredibly applicable for writers and bloggers.
In short, the compound effect is the tortoise principle at work. Do you remember the story of the tortoise and the hair? It's the fable with that famous line, "Slow and steady wins the race." The compound effect states that a key to success is consistency over time. As a new writer, and someone with an introverted side, the thought of building a active blogging community, seems daunting. This year, I am learning how to do this in a way that is not overwhelming, and it really does boil down to the compound effect.
The Compound Effect in Action
To get in shape, one could do 3,650 push-ups today. For most of us–myself very much included–this would be an impossible feat. For the few that might be able to accomplish this, the end result would be achy muscles in the days that followed. Another alternative, would be to do ten push-ups a day, over the course of the next year. The person who does 3,650 push-ups in a day, and the one who does ten a day, for the next year, both achieve in the same number of repetitions by the end of the year. One burs out, the other builds up.
How to Grow Your Blog
2016 is my year of teamwork. This month I began connecting with other bloggers on a daily basis. Each morning, I post a few comments, and participate in a handful of link-ups. I wanted to keep track of what the results of this experiment, so at the beginning of 2016, I noted how many comments I had on my own site. The number was close to 400. As we approach the end of January, there are now nearly 800 comments on this site. This means that Coffee Shop Conversations, had as much engagement in the past month, as it did in the previous year-and-a-half.
Of course, this isn't my doing. I want to thank you, for teaming up with me, reading and joining in the conversations! Your thoughtful feedback, and words of encouragement, mean the world to me. The second reason I bring this up, is because I believe that you can grow your blog by using the compound effect principles too. This year, I'm learning that
Compound Effect Strategies to Grow Your Blog
According to the compound effect, an easy way to grow your blog, is to do the following:
- Write one blog post a week.
- Write one guest post a month.
- Engage with 3 bloggers a day.
Now, lets look at the power of these simple actions over time. After one year this would result in:
- 52 new posts added your site.
- 12 guests posts, which I hear is an excellent way to engage and grow you blog.
- 1,095 engagement with other bloggers.
Now, Imagine what your site would look like ten years from now. Sticking to this simple schedule would result in:
- 520 posts on your site!
- 120 guests posts!
- 10,950 blogger engagements!
Questions: What's the best way to eat an elephant?
Answer: One bite at a time.
The Fun Way to Grow Your Blog
The thought of writing 1,000 blog posts feels overwhelming. The idea of posting 2-3 times a week is exhilarating. The compound effect puts the fun back into blogging. It encourages me to relax, instead of burning myself out trying to accomplish all of my goals at once. Darren's wisdom reminds me that it's OK to take my time and to enjoy the ride.
This year, I'm committing myself to slow and steady growth. I'm excited about making new friends, and enjoying the process. I would love to hear your thoughts on this too. If your an experiences blogger, have you put the compound effect into action, and if so, what do you think of this idea? If your newer to writing, how will you put the compound effect into action this week? I look forward to continuing the conversation in the comments below!
P.S. Thank you for sharing your favorite blogging strategies in last weeks post on tips that every blogger needs to know. I heard that Comment-Luv is an excellent way to team-up, and I'm thrilled about trying it out. When you leave a comment, your will now have the option to link back to a recent post on your site. I'm hoping this is one more way that I can cheer you on. Wishing you an incredible week!
Family, Friendship, and Faith Link-Up
This link-up is an excellent place to meet new friends, network, and share your posts. Please feel free to include any family, friendship, and faith related posts. If you have time, please visit some of the other submissions, leave a comment, and make some new connections–after all, this is what teaming-up is all about!
Finally, I'd love it if you would grab a button for your site, or link back to the Family Friendship and Faith Fridays, link-up, in order to make it easy for others to join in!


text:
The editors, In a previous message, I made some comments on the possibility of "dynamic inheritance" of properties from the layout-master-set. <quote> There exists already a model for "dynamic" inheritance, i.e., fo:marker/fo:retrieve-marker, and the newly proposed fo:retrieve-table-marker. It has been the cause of a great deal of anguish, for me and other FOP developers at least, but most XSL developers have found a solution to the problem. What if a subset of traits were defined to inherit directly from properties on their area's controlling simple-page-master? This set would not be extensive, so the inheritance tree would not be particularly cpu or memory intensive. This would entail either a) a change to the manner of inheriting existing properties, or b) the definition of new properties whose inheritance and usage characteristics are so defined. Method b) brings with it the necessity to arbitrate between. e.g., the existing "writing-mode" and the new, say, "area-writing-mode". I lean to using a) in association with a switch that determines whether the old or new mode is in effect. The switch would default to 1.0 behaviour, preserving the layout of existing fo: stylesheets. It seems to me that such a switch could be specified in fo:declarations. </quote> Please consider some further speculation. In developing the properties resolution for project Folio <http://defoe.sourceforge.net/folio/>, Section 3 of the Recommendation has been noted carefully. Properties are resolved in the context of areas generated by the immediate ancestor FOs of any given FO. Taking this approach, it makes sense to generate template pages from the simple-page-masters in the layout-master-set. The properties discovered in descending the FO tree are resolved against these template pages, which can be cloned as required. In some previous communications from the WG, layout-based formatting has been mentioned as a possible future development. Inheriting from the simple-page-masters could be a step in this direction. If a switching mechanism, as mentioned above, in the earlier message, were implemented as a means of preserving backward compatiblity, static-content and flow would inherit directly from the controlling simple-page-master. Only simple-page-masters would be in the inheritance ancestry. Simple-page-master property resolution is "stand-alone"; it proceeds independently of any use to which particular simple-page-masters are put. Note that I am thinking here of switching inheritance in toto from page-sequence to simple-page-master. Resolving inheritance through page-sequence-masters is do-able, along the lines (again) of transplanting marker subtrees into the static-content. However, any properties defined directly on simple-page-masters will take precedence, so it would seem to be of very limited utility. If the approach of layout inheritance were taken, it would be possible to forgo not only from-page-master-region(), but page-sequence-wrapper. Much of the functionality of page-sequence-wrapper would be achieved through simple-page-masters. The relative benefit of each of approach (s-p-m inheritance vs page-sequence-wrapper) would need to be assessed against a range of commonly used document structures. Peter WestReceived on Wednesday, 2 February 2005 03:01:28 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:24 UTC


text:
Federico Fellini at the Jeu de Paume in Paris: La Grande Parade.
Photography, drawings, original movie posters and film excerpts are all brought together in this show to explore the world of Fellini and his creative mechanisms.
October 20, 2009 - January 17, 2010
Federico Fellini at the Jeu de Paume
1 Place de la Concorde
75008 Paris
tel: 01.47.03.12.50
Metro: Concorde
Tu-F: 12pm-7pm (until 9pm on Tuesday)
Sat-Sun: 10am-7pm
(Ticket window closes 30 min before closing time)
Closed on Monday


text:
2012 Pollinator Challenge
Congratulations to the Southwest Region, the 2012 Service Pollinator Champion!
In the Southwest Region, over 20 field stations participated in the Challenge. The Southeast Region and Pacific Southwest Region followed closely behind the Southwest Region in point totals – all earned over 1000 points!!
What is the Pollinator Challenge?
A challenge to USFWS Regions to include pollinator conservation and education in ongoing activities. Each Region earned points during the Challenge period for these activities. The Region with the most points at the end of the Challenge was declared the 2012 Service Pollinator Champion and won recognition as leaders in pollinator conservation and education.
The USFWS is involved because some pollinator populations are declining with the most probable causes being habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation, disease, and misuse of pesticides. The Challenge was a success because we increased our pollinator conservation and education activities in most categories over those reported in 2011.
|Last Updated: Date


text:
< Previous
Next >
The second book of the Chronicles, chapter 14, New English Translation and King James Version
New English Translation
1 (13:23) Abijah passed away and was buried in the City of David. His son Asa replaced him as king. During his reign the land had rest for ten years.
Asa's Religious and Military Accomplishments
2 (14:1) Asa did what the LORD his God desired and approved. 3 He removed the pagan altars and the high places, smashed the sacred pillars, and cut down the Asherah poles. 4 He ordered Judah to seek the LORD God of their ancestors and to observe his law and commands. 5 He removed the high places and the incense altars from all the cities of Judah. The kingdom had rest under his rule.
6 He built fortified cities throughout Judah, for the land was at rest and there was no war during those years; the LORD gave him peace. 7 He said to the people of Judah: "Let's build these cities and fortify them with walls, towers, and barred gates. The land remains ours because we have followed the LORD our God and he has made us secure on all sides." So they built the cities and prospered.
8 Asa had an army of 300,000 men from Judah, equipped with large shields and spears. He also had 280,000 men from Benjamin who carried small shields and were adept archers; they were all skilled warriors. 9 Zerah the Cushite marched against them with an army of 1,000,000 men and 300 chariots. He arrived at Mareshah, 10 and Asa went out to oppose him. They deployed for battle in the Valley of Zephathah near Mareshah.
11 Asa prayed to the LORD his God: "O LORD, there is no one but you who can help the weak when they are vastly outnumbered. Help us, O LORD our God, for we rely on you and have marched on your behalf against this huge army. O LORD our God, don't let men prevail against you!" 12 The LORD struck down the Cushites before Asa and Judah. The Cushites fled, 13 and Asa and his army chased them as far as Gerar. The Cushites were wiped out; they were shattered before the LORD and his army. The men of Judah carried off a huge amount of plunder. 14 They defeated all the cities surrounding Gerar, for the LORD caused them to panic. The men of Judah looted all the cities, for they contained a huge amount of goods. 15 They also attacked the tents of the herdsmen in charge of the livestock. They carried off many sheep and camels and then returned to Jerusalem.
King James Version
1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.
2 And Asa did that which was good and right in the eyes of the LORD his God:
3 For he took away the altars of the strange gods, and the high places, and brake down the images, and cut down the groves:
4 And commanded Judah to seek the LORD God of their fathers, and to do the law and the commandment.
5 Also he took away out of all the cities of Judah the high places and the images: and the kingdom was quiet before him.
6 And he built fenced cities in Judah: for the land had rest, and he had no war in those years; because the LORD had given him rest.
7 Therefore he said unto Judah, Let us build these cities, and make about them walls, and towers, gates, and bars, while the land is yet before us; because we have sought the LORD our God, we have sought him, and he hath given us rest on every side. So they built and prospered.
8 And Asa had an army of men that bare targets and spears, out of Judah three hundred thousand; and out of Benjamin, that bare shields and drew bows, two hundred and fourscore thousand: all these were mighty men of valour.
9 ¶ And there came out against them Zerah the Ethiopian with an host of a thousand thousand, and three hundred chariots; and came unto Mareshah.
10 Then Asa went out against him, and they set the battle in array in the valley of Zephathah at Mareshah.
11 And Asa cried unto the LORD his God, and said, LORD, it is nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power: help us, O LORD our God; for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. O LORD, thou art our God; let not man prevail against thee.
12 So the LORD smote the Ethiopians before Asa, and before Judah; and the Ethiopians fled.
13 And Asa and the people that were with him pursued them unto Gerar: and the Ethiopians were overthrown, that they could not recover themselves; for they were destroyed before the LORD, and before his host; and they carried away very much spoil.
14 And they smote all the cities round about Gerar; for the fear of the LORD came upon them: and they spoiled all the cities; for there was exceeding much spoil in them.
15 They smote also the tents of cattle, and carried away sheep and camels in abundance, and returned to Jerusalem.


text:
NAKIVO Releases v3.9 with Multi-Tenancy, Self-Service, and Dynamic License Allocation
New features enable managed services, cloud, and hosting providers to introduce VM Backup-as-a-Service (BaaS), Replication-as-a-Service (RaaS), and Disaster-Recovery-as-a-Service (DRaaS) to their clients, while enterprises can easily manage VMware ESXi backup, replication, and recovery for multiple sites from a single pane of glass.
Campbell, CA, United States — January 15, 2014
NAKIVO Inc., #1 virtualization data protection software provider, announced today that it has released NAKIVO Backup & Replication v3.9.
Other VM data protection solutions are not tailored to the needs of cloud, service, and hosting providers, as supporting multiple clients requires installing and configuring a new and separate copy of a backup and replication product for each client. This lack of central point for data protection management adds management and maintenance overhead as well as additional compute resources and VM licenses.
NAKIVO introduces the industry-first multi-tenancy feature for VM backup and replication, enabling the creation of multiple isolated tenants within a single product deployment and managed under a single pane of glass. This enables managed services, cloud, and hosting providers to introduce VM BaaS, RaaS, and DRaaS to their clients more easily and cost-effectively.
In the Multi-Tenant mode, tenants can access the self-service portal to offload the ESXi VM backup, replication, and recovery tasks from the service provider. The self-service can be individually enabled or disabled for each tenant, and data protection privileges can be set for each tenant by a master admin.
Dynamic License Allocation
License allocation within NAKIVO Backup & Replication Enterprise Edition supports transferring licenses dynamically from one tenant to another as needed for cloud service providers or from one business unit to another as need for enterprises. In addition, qualified Cloud Providers can license NAKIVO Backup & Replication on the per-VM monthly rental basis.
NAKIVO introduces the Enterprise edition with the v3.9 release. All new features will be available in the Enterprise edition of NAKIVO Backup & Replication priced at $599 per socket. Qualified Cloud Service Providers have an option to license the product on a per-VM monthly rental basis.
"We are proud to introduce the industry-first multi-tenancy and self-service to the VM backup market," said Bruce Talley, CEO and Co-Founder of NAKIVO. "The new features will enable our Cloud Provider partners to protect their clients' VMs more easily and cost-effectively."
"NAKIVO provides a technologically advanced solution to back up, replicate, and recover client's data at a price-point that our clients can afford," said Michael Marchuk, Senior Technical Director at American Data Centers. "The technology is outstanding and the process to implement the solution couldn't be easier or more straightforward. We know because we've tried and tested the leading VM backup solutions!"
- Overview: /vmware-backup/
- Datasheet: nakivo-vm-backup-datasheet.pdf
- Cloud Backup: /partner/cloud-provider-program/backup-as-a-service/
- Success Stories: /customers/success-stories/
- Trial Download: /resources/download/trial-download/
Headquartered in Silicon Valley, NAKIVO is a privately-held software company that has been profitable since founding in 2012. With more than 1500 customers worldwide, NAKIVO develops and markets a line of next generation data protection products for VMware vShpere ESXi virtualized environments with live applications & databases, including Microsoft Active Directory, Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft SQL, and Oracle. NAKIVO provides one of the most affordable, highly reliable and easiest to use VM backup and replication solution for enabling SMBs to protect, encrypt, compress and deduplicate VM data onsite, offsite and in the cloud. NAKIVO also enables hosting, managed, and cloud services providers to create and offer VM Backup-as-a service, Replication-as-a service and DR-as-a service, to their customers. NAKIVO was the first virtualization backup specialist to offer VM backup to public clouds such as Amazon to SMB customers and multi-tenancy to service providers and enterprise customers. For more information, please visit www.nakivo.com.
Follow us on Twitter: @NAKIVO
Connect on Facebook: www.facebook.com/NakivoInc
Join us on LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/nakivo
Contact us: Yana Petrenko, MarCom Manager / email@example.com / +1 408 916 5955