text:
When your favorite film loses the Best Picture Oscar on Sunday night, don't be surprised. While it's no secret Academy voters aren't exactly the most fair or progressive bunch, it's always disheartening to be reminded of the fact that many Oscar voters—like many American voters, really—are bordering on senility, a little bit sexist, a lot a bit racist, and really just looking out for their own sexist, racist, and limited interests.
This year, The Hollywood Reporter is interviewing five "brutally honest" voters about their ballots. The first report, published on Wednesday, highlights a "longtime member" of the Academy's directors branch. Amongst his many opinions, he believes 12 Years a Slave is not a "courageous" movie, that Jared Leto is only nominated because of the "person he's playing," that Woody Allen is facing a lot of "absurd bullshit," and that American Hustle is basically the best thing ever.
Honestly, there's a great chance this "brutally honest" voter is either David O. Russell or David O. Russell's greatest fan.
And while this voter is only one man with one of the 6,028 ballots, it's fair to say he's probably not the only member of the Academy who believes Slave is overrated, that Leto's performance is "pandering," and that poor Allen is being unfairly attacked. If that's the case, does it mean American Hustle, Russell, and Jennifer Lawrence will be taking home more awards? Is 12 Years a Slave just too much for old, white male voters?
Here are some of his votes (with explanations):
Best Picture: American Hustle
Why not 12 Years a Slave, the film many expect to win?
With 12 Years a Slave, you don't even crack a smile, but it was interesting, admirable and well done; I must say, though, that contrary to what some have asserted, it's not as if it required great courage to make that movie — maybe if you made it in Mississippi in 1930.
Best Director: David O. Russell
Why not Alfonso Cuaron, the director many expect to win?
Cuaron was part of a committee of technicians who made that movie, and I have seen things at the planetarium that were at least as impressive.
Best Actor: Christian Bale
Why not Matthew McConaughey, the actor many expect to win?
McConaughey was very good; he's really doing some great stuff now, and I would give it to him for True Detective.
Best Actress: Cate Blanchett
Why not Sandra Bullock, the dark horse in the best actress race?
Bullock is the weak link — she's just OK.
Best Supporting Actor: Bradley Cooper
Why not Jared Leto, the actor who is considered a lock?
Jared Leto was good and will win, but he's getting tremendous points because of the person he's playing more than the way he played it, which is as close to pandering as you can get.
Best Supporting Actress: Jennifer Lawrence
Why not Lupita Nyong'o, the odds-on favorite?
Lupita was very good, but a lot of the commotion over her is attributable to people's tremendous empathy with and sympathy for the role she's playing.
Best Original Screenplay: American Hustle
Why not Blue Jasmine, the film written by your friend Woody Allen?
I often choose personal friendship when I am torn between two almost equally good options, but in this case I'm friends with both David and Woody, so that doesn't help. … I'm going for American Hustle because Woody has already been overwhelmingly rewarded. I feel very badly about the absurd bullshit that's flying Woody's way, but that can't intrude one way or the other on voting.
Best Animated Feature: None
Why would you abstain from the most fun category?
I have seen none of them. I have no interest whatsoever. That ended when I was 6. My son dragged me to a few when he was 6; I would seat him and go outside and make phone calls.
Best Documentary Feature: None
Not even a single one?
Even with its new rules, the documentary category has about as much claim to legitimacy as the Bush-Gore presidential election. It's an incestuous little club.
Best Original Score: None
Why? Do you hate music?
I found all five scores inferior.
Best Original Song: None
There's not even one that's better than the others?
I didn't vote because I regard all four songs as utterly inferior and not worth voting for. To dignify any of them with a vote is to suggest that they're worthy of a nomination, and they're not; they're just bad songs.
Best Visual Effects: Gravity
Why not any of the others?
Four of them are completely without interest of any kind whatsoever on any level, and Gravity's effects, in 3D, anyway, are terrific. So this isn't even a contest.
Best Animated Short, Best Documentary Short, and Best Live-Action Short: None
You don't have any friends who need votes?
I don't watch the shorts. And, if I don't know anybody who made one of them — a friend or an enemy — I just don't vote, which was the case this year.


text:
Message boards :
News :
The connectivity problem noted yesterday turned out to be one of our switches and not the router.
We swapped in a replacement switch today and connectivity was restored.
Message board moderation
SETI News
Send message
Joined: 16 Dec 09
Posts: 387
Credit: 0
The connectivity problem noted yesterday turned out to be one of our switches and not the router.
We swapped in a replacement switch today and connectivity was restored.
Send message
Joined: 8 Jan 07
Posts: 15
Credit: 12,296,855
Send message
Joined: 8 Jan 07
Posts: 15
Credit: 12,296,855
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
Thanks Sten. Yes, I was aware that the previous post was extremely old, but I couldn't find any posts relating to the most recent problem. I appreciate your very helpful reply/explanation. Happy New Year!! :D
Usually the best place for info is to either ask in the Questions and Answers section or in Number Crunching.
Send message
Joined: 30 Sep 09
Posts: 1
Credit: 62,233
your server is very ofen down
you have to sold your problem to be always online
I have my own problem to ( hard disk to much use and sometimes down )
but I find solution to it in few hours/(minutes) I will be online and work for all times
for me this is the deal I manage to work all time
but you must be on line all times
if not I can't lose my time for somethink don't work
and I will close my acces
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
your server is very ofen down
Actually, what you are asking is the exact opposite of what BOINC is trying to do. BOINC is trying to provide our CPU cycles to projects who need them and can't afford their own high end servers.
Since these projects cannot afford expensive servers, there will be times when they are down. Your best solution is to join another project and divvy up your resources between them.
If you refuse to join another project, then you must understand that there will be times when SETI is down and you are without work. If that is unacceptable to you, then BOINC/SETI is not for you and you should probably close your access as soon as you can.
However, I'd rather chance your mind and keep you as a volunteer, but in order to do so we must address the idea that SETI needs to be online more, which simply is not possible.
Send message
Joined: 29 May 99
Posts: 175
Credit: 67,332
I've stayed with SETI off and on for 10 years. When the computer is turned on it is with SETI.
Has anything come of this?
Has anyting promising been found?
Is there a good reason to continue the SETI?
How many of us are still hunting for SETI?
I realize it is a large cosmos, but it is starting to seem as if it is a very large waste of space, as Carl Sagan suggested it might be.
Perhaps we should be content with 'them' at last making their presence known.
Perhaps the cost of electricity and other facilities is not so dear to them.
Perhaps if there is a 'them' they have found it too dear a SETI to continue.
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
Has anything come of this?
Lots of data has been processed. We're still in the data-collecting stage.
Has anyting promising been found?
I'm sure lots of interesting signals have been found, but there's no way to know until we can re-observe those points in the sky. The NTPCKR was designed to help distinguish which signals are the most interesting so we can mark them for re-observation.
Is there a good reason to continue the SETI?
If you're a firm believer in the idea that life is out there and are opposed to the idea that giving up could be the moment before we actually find E.T.I., then yes.
A quote from Thomas Edison comes to mind: "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up."
How many of us are still hunting for SETI?
It shouldn't be measured in how many of us, but how much valid science is being processed. There were far more participants during SETI Classic, back when Contact and Hollywood supported the SETI idea, but the science was immature and lots of re-work was done unnecessarily.
By contrast, since maturing and joining BOINC, SETI has processed more useful data than they ever did during the Classic years with less participants.
I realize it is a large cosmos, but it is starting to seem as if it is a very large waste of space, as Carl Sagan suggested it might be.
Carl Sagan actually said he believe the Universe was teeming with life. It may very well be that our primitive methods for finding ETI are inefficient, but until we can develop better, we have to stick with what we have.
Perhaps we should be content with 'them' at last making their presence known.
For all we know, they have made their presence known, but we haven't been listening properly.
Perhaps the cost of electricity and other facilities is not so dear to them.
It's unknown what types of power sources they would/could use. As long as we don't know, we have to stick with what we do know, even if it is primitive by their standards. It's still better than not looking at all.
Perhaps if there is a 'them' they have found it too dear a SETI to continue.
That's a very large speculative statement for which we do not and cannot know their beliefs/opinions at this time. From a scientific standpoint, we can only continue on.
One last Thomas Edison quote comes to mind through all of this: "I have not failed, I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
Send message
Joined: 3 Jan 10
Posts: 1
Credit: 7,940
Can you please tell me what a good score is.
As of today I had zero but it has jumped significantly in the past few hours and I am unsure of the scoring (credit) system???
Also how does score be obtained, what happens to give me a score at all..
Sorry for my ignorance....
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
Can you please tell me what a good score is.
Questions like this are best asked in the Number Crunching forum.
To give you a brief answer, a good score is relative to what hardware you have. Try not looking at your score so much unless you have a deep pocket and want to complete with the Top Participants or the Top Computers.
Credit is granted only after two workunits match closely. Initially, each workunit (or task) is sent out to two computers to be "crunched". Each computer sends back their result so they can be compared. Since some computers are faster than others, some credit can remain in "Pending" status for a while, while others get granted pretty quickly. Sometimes, some users never finish their work or their was a mistake in sending the workunit (task) and it must reach it's deadline before it can be re-sent. If two results do not match closely enough, another is sent out as a "tie breaker".
For each task you complete successfully, you will receive Credit, which is just a measure of your contribution to BOINC and cannot be spent on anything physical at all. There is also your Recent Average Credit (RAC) which shows how much you contribute, on average, over a period of about a month. Think of your RAC as your speedometer on your car, while your Total Credit is your Odometer displaying your total mileage.
If you have any other questions, feel free to drop in the Number Crunching forum or the Questions and Answers forum.
Send message
Joined: 24 Aug 06
Posts: 6
Credit: 48,250,911
I've stayed with SETI off and on for 10 years. When the computer is turned on it is with SETI.
Let see one more 10 years :)
I'm afraid because of another reason: Nobody still gave me guarantee that we are definately hunting SETI, but not computing something for CIA or another organization. I'm afraid, that SETI and other boinc projects are not just cover for, for instance, military computations.
What u think?
I'm using computers on my work in Scaffolder: Scaffold and towers producer in Russia
Send message
Joined: 20 Aug 02
Posts: 3377
Credit: 20,676,751
Hi Molgao,
I must say your post made me chuckle to myself. I guess the best "proof" that this is not a government conspiracy would be that the CIA and such would have their own super computers dedicated to such things. They wouldn't need us and I'm pretty sure they wouldn't want anything they were working on to be let loose out in the wild like this is. I would guess if we ever do find anything the government spooks would go crazy.
What we are doing is geared more to the scientific community though. SETI also picks up things like pulsars and can be used to locate and study them too. As for other BOINC projects, they are doing many other scientific studies such as a search for a cure for cancer and other diseases. BOINC is designed for projects running on a tight budget. The little guys needing help with whatever it is they may need a lot of computing power for but can't afford to buy or rent time on a super computer.
PROUD MEMBER OF Team Starfire World BOINC
Send message
Joined: 5 Feb 07
Posts: 3
Credit: 206,872
My answer to the server being down at times is to set my preferences to indicate that I want enough work for my computer so that I have AT LEAST FIVE (5) DAYS OF WORK AVAILABLE ON MY COMPUTER. Since I seldom turn my computer off I feel that with that amount of work available I can ignore the server being down for several days without any problem other than completing much of the work and not having it show up on my account as finished but even that is not a problem since my main aim in volunteering my computer time is to give the project more computation time and NOT to run up points or whatever.
Have a great day or night.
Send message
Joined: 2 Oct 99
Posts: 83
Credit: 28,926,603
The whole point of distributed computing is YOU provide your spare computer cycles to a project to use as they see fit. It is NOT a 24/7 gaming platform for your entertanment. Been with SET 10+ yrs, run a 10 day cache and check it once a week. Never had "issues". No need to micro manage this thing on the user side because the user is supplying science with resources, science is not supplying users with a toy.
Send message
Joined: 7 Jun 08
Posts: 10
Credit: 369,794
...and science needs the computing power provided by us all, isn't it?
While there are still a lot packages from 2007 around, I think it can't be
a bad idea to get some extra computing time by extra willing users ;-)
I'd also welcome a preference setting where I can demand more packages on hold
in case the project isn't available, which happens every Tuesday due to the
regular maintainance.
I've noticed that today my amount of owing credits didn't got updated.
Last entries are from Sunday but my real credits were still increasing during the day.
Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 02
Posts: 15691
Credit: 84,761,841
...and science needs the computing power provided by us all, isn't it?
The project is always looking for users. We're only processing 2007 data now because it was too noisy to be processed then. Most of the current stuff has already been processed with MultiBeam. We're still waiting for the database to be fixed before they hand out new AstroPulse.
I'd also welcome a preference setting where I can demand more packages on hold
You can already control extra work through your preferences in your account. Go to your Computing Preferences and under Network Usage, increase the number for "Maintain enough additional work for X days".
I've noticed that today my amount of owing credits didn't got updated.
That's because the Replica database is offline, so nothing in anyone's account will be updated until that is fixed.
Send message
Joined: 18 Jul 07
Posts: 1
Credit: 200,646
Okay if you have replaced the Routers for the current communication problem, why then am I still getting a message stating Communication Defferred?
I still have many Tasks that need to be turned in for the deadline, is the problem going to effect the Tasks that were due during the time that the Processor's were down?
pjs (rude paul)
Send message
Joined: 26 Feb 00
Posts: 1
Credit: 2,676,221
I've have the same problem. The lack of real and useful info has caused me to connect to other projects and move Setiathome to a much lower priority.
Thanks for the consideration and timely info.
the 1derful1
Clark Williams
Send message
Joined: 28 Apr 01
Posts: 2
Credit: 454,643
I'm still not seeing updates nor new downloads.
There may be another problem!
Rasmus Madsen
Send message
Joined: 14 Jul 07
Posts: 4
Credit: 33,524,881
I have had connection problem for a few days now, so it seems that something is still wrong
©2023 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
table of contents
|Linux Programmer's Manual
NAME¶setbuf, setbuffer, setlinebuf, setvbuf - stream buffering operations
SYNOPSIS¶#include <stdio.h>
void setbuf(FILE *stream, char
void setbuffer(FILE *stream, char *buf, size_tsize);
void setlinebuf(FILE *stream);
int setvbuf(FILE *stream, char *buf, int mode , size_t size);
DESCRIPTION¶The three types of buffering available are unbuffered, block buffered, and line buffered. When an output stream is unbuffered, information appears on the destination file or terminal as soon as written; when it is block buffered many characters are saved up and written as a block; when it is line buffered characters are saved up until a newline is output or input is read from any stream attached to a terminal device (typically stdin). The function fflush(3) may be used to force the block out early. (See fclose(3).) Normally all files are block buffered. When the first I/O operation occurs on a file, malloc(3) is called, and a buffer is obtained. If a stream refers to a terminal (as stdout normally does) it is line buffered. The standard error stream stderr is always unbuffered by default.
The setvbuf function may be used at any time on any open stream to change its buffer. The mode parameter must be one of the following three macros:
- unbuffered
- line buffered
- fully buffered
Except for unbuffered files, the buf argument should point to a buffer at least size bytes long; this buffer will be used instead of the current buffer. If the argument buf is NULL, only the mode is affected; a new buffer will be allocated on the next read or write operation. The setvbuf function may be used at any time, but can only change the mode of a stream when it is not ``active'': that is, before any I/O, or immediately after a call to fflush.
The other three calls are, in effect, simply aliases for calls to setvbuf. The setbuf function is exactly equivalent to the call
The setbuffer function is the same, except that the size of the buffer is up to the caller, rather than being determined by the default BUFSIZ. The setlinebuf function is exactly equivalent to the call:
CONFORMING TO¶The setbuf and setvbuf functions conform to ANSI X3.159-1989 (``ANSI C'').
BUGS¶The setbuffer and setlinebuf functions are not portable to versions of BSD before 4.2BSD, and may not be available under Linux. On 4.2BSD and 4.3BSD systems, setbuf always uses a suboptimal buffer size and should be avoided.
You must make sure that both buf and the space it points to still exist by the time stream is closed, which also happens at program termination.
For example, the following is illegal:
#include <stdio.h> int main() { char buf[BUFSIZ]; setbuf(stdin, buf); printf("Hello, world!\n"); return 0; }
SEE ALSO¶fclose(3), fflush(3), fopen(3), fread(3), malloc(3), printf(3), puts(3)
|29 November 1993


text:
Last modified: 2023-07-08 by rick wyatt
Keywords: hawaii | kuhina nui | kanaka maoli |
Links: FOTW homepage | search | disclaimer and copyright | write us | mirrors
See also:
Summarizing the book "The History of the United States Flag", by Quaife, Weig, and Appleman (1961):
The Hawaiian flag is traditionally held to have been commissioned, and possibly designed, by King Kamehameha I, who was, of course, not haole. However, this site at www.hawaiiankingdom.org/national-flag.shtml quotes the following from the "Polynesian Newspaper" of May 31, 1845:
"At the opening of the Legislative Council, May 25, 1845, the new national banner was unfurled, differing little however from the former. It is octo (eight) parted per fess (horizontal band), first, fourth and seventh, argent (silver represented by the color white): second, fifth and eighth, gules (the color red): third and sixth, azure (light purplish blue), for the eight islands under one sovereign, indicated by crosses saltire, of St. Andrew and St. Patrick quarterly, per saltire counter changed, argent (white) and gules (red)."Unfortunately, they don't give any further source citation for this than the name and date noted above. Not that Capt. Hunt is credited with the design of the new (and current) flag, which doesn't preclude the traditional association of the earlier design with King Kamehameha I.
The Hawaiian flag previous to 1845 differed only in the amount of stripes, which was formerly "seven", and also the arranging of the colors. Previous to 1845 the white stripe was at the bottom instead of the present position of at the top. The person accredited with the designing of the new flag, which was unfurled before the 1845 Legislative Assembly, was Captain Hunt of H.B.M.S. (Her British Majesty's Ship) Baselisk. The Union Jack represented the friendly relationship between England and Hawai'i, and also noting that it was England and France that formally recognized the Hawaiian Kingdom as an Independent State and admitted her into the Family of Nations on November 28, 1843."
image by Clay Moss, 22 August 2007
Meyer's Konversations-Lexikon of 1897 had a different version of the Hawaiian flag. The Union Jack is smaller, the height corresponding only to three stripes instead of four.
Andreas Birken, 4 October 2001
I am guessing that this is simply an erroneous illustration as I have seen several photographs of Hawaii's flag from the 1890's and the Hawaiian flags in all of the photos are pretty much what we know as today's Hawaiian state flag. I lived in Haleiwa as a kid and there was once a big colonial type resort near town. I have seen a picture of the resort taken in the late 1890's showing the US and Hawaiian flag flying prominently over the main building. Both flags appear to be between 10x15 feet and 15x25 feet.
Clay Moss, 22 August 2007
image by Clay Moss, 4 October 2006
I think this flag is illustrated in Whitney Smith's state flag book.
Clay Moss, 4 October 2006
Nicholson's 1832 Code of Signals for New South Wales shows a flag for the Sandwich Islands, the name Cook gave to Hawaii, under Proposed Miscellaneous Flags for N.S.Wales and the South Seas. It has four red and three white stripes with the Union resting on the second white stripe.
Siebmacher's 1876 Flaggen has a similar flag for Sandwichs Inseln, but with a fourth white stripe at the top, and also a flag for Hawaische Inseln. This has w/r/b/w/r/b/w/r with the bottom of the Union overlapping two thirds of the second white stripe.
David Prothero, 11 October 2006
1837 The Flags of the Principal Nations in the World issued in Philadelphia USA R.N.Barnes shows w/b/r w/b/r w/b/r nine stripes with the Union on the second red.
1842 The Maritime Flags of All Nations issued in London Richard H Laurie shows r/w/r/w/r/w/r/w/r nine stripes with the Union on the 3rd red
1862 Bromme Flag Chart issued in Germany shows w/r/b w/r/b w/r/b nine stripes same as 1837 chart
1880 Flags chart issued in Spain shows w/r/b w/r/b w/r eight stripes with the Union on 2nd white stripe
1896 Flag Chart issued in USA shows eight stripes same as 1880
1897 The Flags of All nations issued in UK shows r/w/r/w/r/w/r/w/r nine stripes same as 1842
Nozomi Kariyasu, 12 October 2006
image modified from the State Governor's Flag image by Clay Moss, 25 December 2006
The Wikipedia article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Hawaii shows the flag of the Hawaii Governor from the pre-1959 period.
Valentin Poposki, 5 January 2011
The Hawaii Territorial Governor's Flag is a horizontal bicolor, very dark blue (B++) over dark red (R+) with eight equal distance white stars. The stars represent the main islands of the Hawaii State. This flag was designed by an adjutant general of the Territorial Governor.
Source: "About Hawaii". Hawaii Public Library Systems, hspls.org/hp/Bibliographies/AboutHawaii.pdf
Steve Shumaker, 6 January 2011
image located by Bill Garrison, 4 August 2008
The Hawaiian Crown flag of King Kamehameha III 1833, said to be first flag of the Monarchy which hung at the Kings home in Nuuanu, Oahu. The flag is one sided, center is hand sewn; one (blue) strip is torn. Flag was kept in a family of the kings and has never been revealed. Flag dimensions 6 feet by 17 feet. Flag was listed for sale on EBay by Kahanamoku Estate Foundation. At point of identification on EBay, it was listed at $900,000.
Bill Garrison, 4 August 2008
See also: Flag design in quilt
image by Randy Young, 11 October 2004
This flag is from the book "Flags to Color, Washington to Lincoln," and is on page 30. It's listed as "Kuhina Nui's flag, 1850s."
Quoted from the book:
"Colors: Crown, letters, comma and period red; field white."Randy Young, 11 October 2004
"Hawaii is the only part of the United States which was previously a separate monarchy. In the 1850s one of the important advisors to the king was the Kuhina Nui; her flag is shown here and incorporates the distinctive royal crown of Hawaii. American settlers overthrew the monarchy in 1893 in the hope that the islands would be annexed by the United States, but this did not happen until 1898 when concern was raised about way-stations for ships heading to newly acquired territories in the Far East."
image by Darrell Neuman, 24 February 2007
A flag like this, but with a white field only, is described and shown at kaiwakiloumoku.ksbe.edu/makalii/royalstandard.php. The Royal Standard of King Kalākaua was displayed in 1881.
Mohamed Hossam el Din, 4 April 2006
I had purchased a flag from a retail store located in Honolulu, Oahu, Hawaii. The store merchant indicated that the flag unofficially represented the Hawaiian Monarchy and was displayed during the rule of King David Kalakaua who reigned
over the Kingdom of Hawaii from February 12, 1874 until his death on January 20,1891.
Darrell Neuman, 24 February 2007
image by Pete Loeser, 19 June 2023
based on photo located by Bill Garrison, 18 June 2023
An important flag and documents related to Queen Liliuokalani are on their way home.
"Queen Liliuokalani's Royal Standard", her personal flag that flew over her Washington Place home on the day [Jan. 1893] the Hawaiian Kingdom was overthrown. This flag was seized on 22 Jan 1893 by Col. John Soper. "On the 20th of January 1893, the queen was flying the standard in front of Washington Place. He [Col. John Soper] dispatched his troops to go tell her to not do that. Two days later, it was back up again," Jansen said. "He dispatched an officer to go seize the flag and keep it and that is something that stayed in the Soper family." https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/the-conversation
Bill Garrison, 18 June 2023
My drawing of the Hae Kalaunu of Queen Lili'uokalani - the one
that she refused to take down at her home on Washington Street. She actually did
take it down at first, but as things began to go badly re-flew it several days
later when it was seized by Col. Soper. I have it on my website at:
Pete Loeser, 19 June 2023
image by Kazutaka Nishiura, 21 July 2010
When I visited Honolulu Hawaii last month I found a photo of Queen Liliuokalani's Royal Standard in a book on the Hawaii Kingdom (History of the Hawaiian Kingdom by Norris W. Potter, Lawrence M. Kasdon and Ann Rayson (Apr 2003)). The flag is not 1:2 but 7:10.5 in proportion. Her flag is the Hawaii Kingdom flag with her emblem of a crown and yellow shield having her initial and motto of ONIPAA in red in the fly. They say ONIPAA means Straight Forward.
Nozomi Kariyasu, 21 July 2010
image by Eugene Ipavec, 22 April 2012
The Kanaka Maoli flag has green, red, yellow stripes. At the center of the flag is a green ornamental, protective shield that bears the coat of arms that is composed of a Kahili in front of two crossed, pointed paddles.
Lil Morris, 6 July 2002
A copy of this flag can be viewed at the.honoluluadvertiser.com/2001/Feb/12/212localnews29.html. It is alleged to predate the current red/white/blue Kingdom of Hawaii, later State of Hawaii, flag.
Ned Smith, 8 July 2002
In "Hawai'i Today", 21 October 2008, Chris Bailey presents the flag as follows:
"The Kanaka Maoli - or "native Hawaiian" - flag is said to have been Kamehameha's personal flag long before the modern Hawaiian flag. British navy Captain Lord George Paulet destroyed it when he took control of Hawaii for five months in 1843. At the flag's center is a green shield bearing a coat of arms, which include a kahili, the original Hawaiian royal standard, and two paddles, meant to represent the voyaging tradition of the Native Hawaiians. The flag's color scheme is red, yellow and green, meant to represent different groups within Hawaiian society. The yellow is symbolic of the alii, the powerful royal class. Red represents the konohiki, the landed caste that served the alii. Green signifies the makaainana, or commoners. You may have noticed the Kanaka Maoli flag on recent trips to the islands. It has become popular in the community in recent years and can be found on everything from t-shirts to bumper stickers."
The information given above seems to come from "The Honolulu Advertiser", 12 February 2001, in which Yasmin Anwar describes the "resurrection" of the "original flag". This source is given above but not developed. Since "Hawai'i Today" shows an image of the flag that resembles a lot the image above, they probably also import material from the original article via FOTW. Therefore, it seems better to develop the original source, "The Honolulu Advertiser", than its sequel, in the FOTW website.
Quoting Yasmin Anwar, "The Honolulu Advertiser", 12 February 2001:
"Gene Simeona of Honolulu [...] says he's resurrected the 'original' Hawaiian green, red and yellow striped flag, destroyed by British navy Capt. Lord George Paulet when he seized Hawai'i for five months in 1843. To Simeona, his newly unearthed flag says, "We are not British. We are kanaka maoli." Simeona says he ran into a descendant of Lord Paulet on the grounds of 'Iolani Palace in 1999 who told him the present Hawaiian flag is not the original. That provoked Simeona to scour the Hawai'i State Archives, where he found the design, then reproduced it. Since then, he and his business partner Stan Fonseca have been churning the emblem out in hopes that it'll catch on as a fresh, non-colonial symbol of the restored Hawaiian kingdom. According to Fonseca, the green in the flag represents the maka'ainana (commoner) caste, the land and goodness; the red represents the landed konohiki who served the ali'i, genealogy and strength; and the yellow represents the ali'i, spirituality and alertness to danger. At the center of the flag is a green shield bearing a coat of arms of the kanaka maoli, made up of kahili and crossed, pointed paddles that represent the voyaging history of Hawaiians.
Anna Marie Kahunahana, founder of A Call for Unity, which seeks to restore the independent Hawaiian nation, wholeheartedly endorses the flag. "It represents who we are as a people and a nation," she said. Others aren't so sure about the design. "I had it up for a while, but I took it down. It's too reggae for me," said Aopohakuku Rodenhurst of the Nation of Ku spiritual group. Still, Simeona and Fonseca are selling and giving away the flags faster than they can make them. On Feb. 25, they will fly the "Hawaiian people's flag" on the grounds of 'Iolani Palace to commemorate "the crime" of Paulet's fleeting takeover of Hawai'i. "Please leave your Union Jacks at home," said a recent notice announcing the event in the Hawaiian News.
Kekuni Blaisdell, a physician and leader of the independence group Ka Pakaukau, said perhaps it's time for a flag that is void of colonial symbols. But others say Hawaiians shouldn't be in a rush to embrace the new flag without establishing its authenticity. Peter Umialiloa Sai, a spokesman for the Council of Regency of the Hawaiian Kingdom, says when his organization first learned about Simeona's flag a year ago, they conducted research to try to pinpoint its origin, but found no clues. In the meantime, Sai said, they amassed extensive documentation validating the traditional Hawaiian flag as the official emblem of the former Hawaiian kingdom.
Ivan Sache, 22 October 2008
At NAVA 47 in Salt Lake City Hawaiian flag scholar Patrick Ka'ano'i presented evidence debunking the Kanaka Maoli (native Hawaiian) flag which is said to have been Kamehameha's personal flag long before the modern Hawaiian flag. According to this controversial story, British Navy Captain Lord George Paulet destroyed it when he took control of Hawaii for five months in 1843. However, the popular Kanaka Maoli flag appears to be a modern commercial invention hoping to appeal to those supporting a modern Hawaiian sovereignty movement. The Kanaka Maoli Flag was created in 2001 by Gene Simeona and produced by his business partner Stan Fonseca. There is no historical evidence of the flags existence before this time.
A long and detailed article on the flag of the Kingdom (and now State) of Hawaii was published in Crux Australis Volume 25.1 No 101 January-March 2011.
The flag that Paulet confiscated was the red, white and blue striped Hawaiian flag devised around 1816 for Kamehameha I and of which the modern US State flag is directly descended.
Pete Loeser, 16 October 2013
This is a work of native Hawaiian folk art dating from the pre-American period; the coat or arms is that of the Kingdom of Hawaii, I believe, and as such some of the colors are extremely faded. However, I think it is a very striking piece:
Ron Lahav, 25 March 2008


text:
Business Technology Summit 2010 – India's First, Largest and Single-most Inspirational Technology Show
As the world slowly but surely emerges out of one of the worst global slow down in recent times, and learns to grapple with a dynamic and ever changing economy, our enterprises present us with even more challenges and requirements to become agile, service-oriented, customer-oriented, cloud enabled, business intelligent and socially connected. Centered on the theme Shaping Your Enterprise for New Business Realities, the third edition of India's annual summit for business technologies features some of the most important and relevant tracks that will empower you with all the necessary know-how required for your applications and your company to prosper in this climate, now and into the future. Business Technology Summit 2010 will take place November 11 and 12 in Bangalore, India.
The first day of the summit, 'Code in the Cloud', covers the entire scope of the cloud including cloud development, cloud workshops, cloud case studies and cloud governance. The second day, 'SOA In a Day', focuses on SOA case studies, SOA integration, SOA deployment and management, and BPM in practice.
Following is more detail about the tracks covered:
• Cloud Development: This track focuses on development patterns and best practices, looking at what's different about clouds and what computing paradigms work best. You will not only learn key lessons from seasoned cloud computing developers, but also hear from leading cloud platform vendors.
• Cloud Workshops: Expert speakers from the leading cloud computing platforms will hold forth on building different type of cloud applications for different clouds. Intensive, Interactive and Inspirational, these workshops are all you need to build exciting apps on the cloud.
• Cloud Case Studies: This track is flush with case studies and real world lessons from experts who have been there, done it. You will find out real world reasons for why companies decided to move to the cloud or stay back with on-premise IT. You will discover what worked best, how the costs stacked up, how they secured their piece of the cloud, whether performance got better or worse, and much more.
• Cloud Governance: You will learn about the risks, the regulations, the unknowns. You will also learn about compliance and mitigating Risks to hedge Against uncertainty. The tradeoffs, challenges, security issues, and all that you need to effectively govern your cloud.
• SOA Case Studies: You will learn from the wisdom, experience and passion of expert SOA practitioners who have been there and done it all too well. If you believe there is no alternative for actual experience, this is the track for you.
• SOA Integration: This track discusses how SOA and related technologies – middleware, application integration, BPM, BAM, governance technology, application platforms, application development tools, data integration, MDM, multienterprise B2B tools and services, Web 2.0, cloud and others – can help your organization efficiently support the challenges and leverage the opportunities ahead.
• SOA Deployment & Management: Successful SOA Deployment Requires Effective SOA Management. In this track you will learn about balancing flexibility and control within an SOA, managing SOA application service levels, performance and availability, among others. You will also learn how combining SOA governance with time tested techniques of managing applications enables you to achieve the increased flexibility and decreased cost that you need from your SOA initiative.
• BPM in Practice: In this track, learn how to harness BPM as an essential part of an overall strategy that touches both the IT function and the operational imperative. You will learn about Process Discovery and Modelling, Process Execution, Process Monitoring and Optimisation, among others.
Business Technology Summit is the single most inspirational, informative and valuable event of the year for those recognise that the overall business network benefits when business technologies are made integral to the overall value equation. It offer the best chance to refresh, pick up new tips and techniques, and network with your peers to find solutions to the most pressing business technology issues today. To register, please visit http://www.btsummit.com/registerOnline. Follow the summit on Twitter, here: http://twitter.com/btsummit.
Business Technology Summit is India's first, largest and single-most inspirational technology show attended by a serious audience of over thousand lively and thought-provoking IT practitioners and business leaders. With outstanding education sessions, powerhouse speakers, and demand-driven content BTS 2010 offers cloud and SOA vendors a great way to maximize their company's visibility and maintain a heightened profile, before during and after the summit. For details on attendee demographics, products and services invited for participation, and expo floor plan, please visit http://www.btsummit.com/sponsorship.html.
A Saltmarch Media
E: email@example.com
Ph: +91 80 4005 1000


text:
Compiling Python bindings with MSVC
What you need
This tutorial explains you, how you can build cspython, _cspace, and CEL blpython plugins with MSVC. First, I assume, you successfully compiled CS (and optionally CEL). You can find the complete guide to do this in the manual. Get python packages from the official site, and download a Windows binary package. Install it. Finally, download the correct cs_pyth.cpp from here. Extract the zip file, and copy int your CS/plugins/cscript/csypthon directory. Yes, rewrite the original file. Preparation finished.
Setting up MSVC IDE
1. Run MSVC IDE.
2. Go to the Tools->Options->Projects and Solutions->VC++ Directories Select Include files above. Click to New Line icon, and type or select your Python"2X/Include directory.
3. Select Library files Click to New Line icon, and type or select your Python"2X/libs directory.
From now MSVC will find Python related headers and directories.
Adding projects to CS solution
There are VC projects for cspython and _cspace.pyd shipped with Crystal Space; however, they're not contained in the default solutions since Python may not be present on the user's machine, and the default solutions shouldn't produce build errors.
Open up the Crystal Space solution you normally use.
Right click on the Solution item and choose Add->Existing Project....
Navigate to the directory with the Crystal Space Visual C++ projects for your version of VC (e.g. mk/msvc8). Add the libcrystalspace_python project. Repeat for plgcspython and plg_cspace.
Once they have been added, the dependencies must be set correctly. Right click plg_cspace, choose Project Dependencies.... Tick libcrystalspace and libcrystalspace_python in the Depends On list. Repeat for plg_cspace.
If you now hit F7 to build the solution, the three projects added should be built, with the Python module (_cspace.pyd) and the Python CS plugin (cspython.dll) as the result.
Creating _cspace.pyd
When you want to write CS applications with Python, you need to compile _cspace.pyd. This is easy. You need to compile:
in one project. All project settings are the same, like in the previous, but you don't need any rc file. Additional settings are here: manual. When you copy cspace.pyd in your CS/scripts/python directory, you can run tutorial1,2,3 python scripts. Try them.
You can download my build from here.


text:
We didn't find city in
See ratings af China , Do you have rice or praise for this Bed and Breakfast, Write your review
China, officially the People´s Republic of China, is a sovereign state located in
East Asia.
China is the world´s most populous country, with a population of over 1.35 billion.
The PRC is a single-party state governed by the Communist Party, with its
seat of government in the capital city of Beijing.
The PRC exercises jurisdiction over 22 provinces, five autonomous regions,
four direct-controlled municipalities (Beijing,
Shanghai, and
Chongqing), and two mostly self-governing special administrative regions (Hong
Kong and Macau).
The PRC also claims Taiwan – which is controlled by the Republic of
China (ROC), a separate political entity – as its 23rd province, a claim which
is controversial due to the complex political status of Taiwan. Covering
approximately 9.6 million square kilometers, China is the world´s
second-largest country by land area, and either the third or fourth-largest by
total area, depending on the method of measurement. China´s landscape is vast
and diverse, ranging from forest steppes and the Gobi and Taklamakan deserts in
the arid north to subtropical forests in the south.
This is the 31 provincial-level divisions of the People´s Republic of China grouped by its former administrative areas from 1949 to 1952, which are now known as six traditional regions.
The Himalaya, Karakoram, Pamir and Tian Shan mountain ranges separate China from South and Central Asia.
The Yangtze and Yellow Rivers, the third- and sixth-longest in the world, run from the Tibetan Plateau to the densely populated eastern seaboard. China´s coastline along the Pacific Ocean is 14,500 kilometres (9,000 mi) long, and is bounded by the Bohai, Yellow, East and South China Seas.
The history of China goes back to the ancient civilization – one of the world´s earliest – that flourished in the fertile basin of the Yellow River in the North China Plain.
For millennia, China´s political system was based on hereditary monarchies, known as dynasties, beginning with the semi-mythological Xia of the Yellow River basin
. Since 221 BCE, when the Qin Dynasty
first conquered several states to form a Chinese empire, the country has expanded, fractured and been reformed numerous times.
The Republic of China (ROC) overthrew the last dynasty in 1911, and ruled the Chinese mainland until 1949. After the defeat of the Empire of Japan in World War II, the Communist Party defeated the nationalist Kuomintang in mainland China and established the People´s Republic of China in Beijing on 1 October 1949, while the Kuomintang relocated the ROC government to its present capital of Taipei.
Since the introduction of economic reforms in 1978, China has become one of the world´s fastest-growing major economies. As of 2013, it is the world´s second-largest economy by both nominal total GDP and purchasing power parity (PPP), and is also the world´s largest exporter and importer of goods. China is a recognized nuclear weapons state and has the world´s largest standing army, with the second-largest defense budget.
The PRC has been a United Nations member since 1971, when it replaced the ROC as a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council. China is also a member of numerous formal and informal multilateral organizations, including the WTO, APEC, BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the BCIM and the G-20. China is a regional power within Asia and has been characterized as a potential superpower by a number of commentators.
The Chinese wedding culture in modern and contemporary times has been
undergone constant evolvements and innovations, presenting the characteristics
of a rich combination of western and eastern cultures and both traditions and
Read more about Chinese
Anhui is a province of the People's Republic of China, and is part of the
East China
region. Anhui is located across the basins of the Yangtze River and the Huai River, and borders
Jiangsu to the east,
Zhejiang to the southeast,
Jiangxi to the south,
Hubei to the southwest,
Henan to the northwest, and
Shandong for a tiny section in the north.
Anhui is Covering an area of 139,600 square kilometers (about 53,900 square
miles) and is a Major Economic and Technological Development Zones with a total population of 60,300,000 (2013)


text:
Innovating our Way out of Poverty
Despite the many great examples of community transformation highlighted in Investing in What Works for America's Communities, deep poverty persists—20.4 million Americans live below half the poverty line—in neighborhoods across the United States. In my view, this is partially because we have become too conservative with our approach, too afraid to try new things for fear of losing scarce public (and even scarcer, private) funds. Instead, we should encourage bold prototyping, supported by a public-private finance system that emphasizes innovation, lifts up strategies that work best, and jettisons those that don't. Specifically, we need an approach that rewards positive outcomes and encourages reasonable risk taking and experimentation among social sector service providers.
Consider the social impact bond (SIB).The SIB is a new funding structure designed to save government money (in the prison system, for example) by paying for successful improvements in social outcomes (such as reducing gang violence). The SIB's "Pay for Success" model has two main components: 1) a performance-based contract; and 2) bridge financing. The performance-based contract commits a funder (usually government), to reward a service provider (usually a nonprofit), for delivering a verifiable social outcome. Then, on the basis of that potential reward, the service provider secures an investment from a foundation, bank, or impact fund—the bridge financing—to pay for its operations until the outcome is achieved and the reward is secured, at which point the investor is repaid with interest. The rest (mostly) is left up to the service provider, including identifying what partners they need to succeed, their strategy for achieving the goal, what it will cost, and how to raise the money to fund it for the duration of the agreed-upon timeframe. The result: a system that uses private-sector financing to support service delivery innovation driven by performance-based contracts tied to public sector payouts for success.
"Paying for success" isn't new. In fact, it has been used many times in the past to catalyze technological innovation. For example, the X-Prize Foundation used this approach in 1996 to develop suborbital commercial spaceflight. The foundation committed to pay $10 million to the first company to send three people to the edge of space (100 Kilometers) twice in two weeks and bring them home safely. Twenty-six companies from seven countries competed for the prize, with Scaled Composites (SpaceShipOne) eventually capturing it eight years later. But the story doesn't end there. Incredibly, the competing companies collectively spent $100 million to win the $10 million prize. That innovation was the true goal of the prize and is now the basis of a $1.5 billion public-private space travel industry.
Likewise, we should reward social sector organizations for solving difficult poverty-related challenges, such as closing the academic achievement gap, shrinking over-crowded prisons, reducing neighborhood violence, and increasing employment. Such an approach—paying for an outcome instead of a promising program or a theory of change—would unlock enormous creativity and innovation in the social sector, just as the X-Prize did for the aerospace industry. Community organizations would compete for public contracts tied to measurable social outcomes enforced by impact auditors and underwritten by socially-motivated investors. Entrepreneurial, results-based organizations would rise to the top and funding would, over time, flow towards success and away from failure.
Understandably, market-based solutions (even a quasi-market solution, like this one) raise caution flags—and for good reason. Like many others in the community development industry, I would much prefer to just pick "proven" organizations/approaches/models, etc. and scale them successfully all over the country. But we've tried that before with disappointing results (consider the tired trope: there are no silver bullets). Every low-income community faces its own unique set of challenges. Innovation and adaptation will be, by necessity, the only way to address these challenges everywhere. Pay for Success approaches scale good ideas and put us in a position to innovate our way out of poverty.
Would you like to be notified as new publications and resources become available? Want to stay in the loop on upcoming conferences and events? Join our mailing list.


text:
Phillip R. Clark '70, a partner in the Denver law firm of Bryan Cave LLP, has been elected Vice President of the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation by its Trustees for 2014-2015. Phil is a partner in the Denver office and practices with the Energy and Natural Resources Client Service Group.
After Wabash, Phil earned his JD from Harvard Law School. He is recognized in the Best Lawyers in America and Colorado Super Lawyers publications.
Congratulations, Phil!
Photo courtesy of
Bryan Cave LLP.


text:
Joe Linta: Ravens were dumb not to sign Flacco last year
There's been some talk this offseason that the Ravens were forced to part ways with players like Dannell Ellerbe, Ed Reed and Anquan Boldin because the contract extension given to quarterback Joe Flacco ate up too much cap space.
That may be true, but Flacco's agent says that the blame should go to the Ravens rather than Flacco. Joe Linta told Jim Corbett of USA Today that contract extension talks with the Ravens broke down in 2012 over a difference of $1 million in non-guaranteed base salary in the final year of what would have been a six-year deal. Linta said that wound up costing the Ravens $35 million over the life of the deal and he wasn't shy about sharing his thoughts about the Ravens' decision-making.
"I've never in my life seen a dumber move. I guess people can say, 'Well, Joe was dumb, too.' It could have been (dumb), God forbid, if he got hurt. But $1 million to Steve Bisciotti six years from now? That's like 100 bucks for you or me today," Linta said.
Linta also isn't sympathetic about the fact that the Ravens will almost certainly have to restructure the deal in three years to avoid a cap number of $28.55 million for Flacco in the 2016 season.
"I'm not apologetic for the fact this is really a three-year deal, there's no way they can afford $29 million a couple of years from now,'' Linta said. "I'm not apologetic. They chose to walk away."
Now that the dust has settled on a busy offseason for the Ravens, the moves they made haven't left the team looking too much worse than they would have if everyone returned from the championship team. Things likely would have played out differently if Flacco had signed last year, but it will be some time before we can know whether their "dumb" move hurt the team in the long run.


text:
You won't be idle until your first harvest. You must not let the new plants set berries in their first year. They will try to fruit, but you must pick off the blossoms as they appear. This way, instead of fruiting, the mother plants will produce vigorous daughters that will yield well the following year.Keep Weeds Away
Keep the bed weed-free throughout the growing season. Some people use a sheet of black plastic to smother weeds, leaving holes for the strawberry plants, but that's more work than weeding when it comes time to position the runners and the daughter plants.Training the Runners
After 5 or 6 weeks in the ground, your plants will begin to "run." A first daughter plant will form and root, then the runners will set more daughters. Keep only the first daughter of each runner. It will bear better than a second or third daughter on the same runner. When most mothers have produced daughters that are ready to take root, it's time for you to establish the 9-by-9-inch spaced row system. Although it's more work, it's more berries. Let five strong daughters from each mother plant take root; clip off all others. (If you don't have five daughters on a plant, make do with what you have.) As these daughters grow, space them around the mother at 9-inch intervals. Weigh the runners down with soil, stones, or hairpins to hold the daughters in place; they'll root by themselves.
It will take two or three passes over the course of the summer to arrange the plants correctly and get rid of unwanted runners. While the arrangement may not look quite as tidy in your strawberry patch as it does on paper, you will have created three parallel rows with plants spaced roughly 9 inches apart in each one. Unlike other systems in which all plants are permitted to run freely, this system discourages sibling rivalry and gives each selected plant plenty of room to grow. The result is more and bigger berries. When the first bearing season is over, you'll do best to till in all the plants and start again. Each successive year you prolong their lives will yield fewer berries - and more weeds and disease.Two Berry Beds
To have strawberries every year, you should maintain two beds: one to bear fruit and one to produce next year's fruit-bearers. After the harvest, plant a short-season vegetable where the berries were, if you like, then a winter cover crop like buckwheat or rye. Crop rotation has many advantages: the roots of the strawberry plants don't have a chance to get bound up, infestations of diseases are less likely, and rotation is an effective method of weed control. The following spring, you'll set new strawberry plants in that bed and begin the cycle again. Many gardeners prefer to renovate their beds, thinning out most of the plants and leaving some strong ones to produce runners and daughter plants for the third year. If you've enjoyed a productive, disease-free season, you may decide to renovate at least part of the bed for another year or two before cleaning out the whole bed entirely:Renovating the Bed
Here are the basics in renovating an existing strawberry bed.
1. Just after harvest, cut off all the leaves with a scythe, sickle, or lawnmower set high enough not to hit the crowns.
2. Turn under the two daughter plants on either side of each mother row (preferably with a tiller), which should leave a 6-inch- wide row.
3. Add a complete fertilizer such as 5-10-10 (1/2 pound per 25-foot row) to the bed and get rid of all weeds. Thin the plants to stand 9 inches apart, leaving only the strongest ones.
4. Allow only two runners from each plant; set each runner 9 inches from the mother plant on either side.
5. Side-dress with 2 1/2 pounds of 5-10-10 or its equivalent per 100 feet of row.
6. Apply winter mulch as before. Await spring and your second - and somewhat smaller - harvest.Harvesting Your Berries
In the second year, the berries will ripen about 1 month after the plants bloom, with the bigger berries developing at the center of each cluster. To harvest, don't squeeze a ripe berry; pinch the stem behind it with your thumbnail. Every 2 or 3 days, pick all the ripe berries. Avoid picking green-tipped berries - they're not fully ripe. They'll taste much better in a day or two. Don't leave berry remnants on the plants because they encourage plant rot. You can expect 2 to 3 weeks of harvesting for each variety. If you find yourself deluged by berries, you can make them into jam or freeze them.
For 25 years, the family-owned Victory Seed Company has provided the highest quality vegetable, herb and flower seeds to families across the country. We are passionate about providing you the best seeds available that give excellent germination, robust plants, and the harvest you want. With a catalog of over a thousand varieties, we have everything, and our prices are the kinds that we'd want to pay. We have hundreds of yesterday's heirloom vegetables, as well as today's award winning hybrid selections. Get to know us by visiting our website and browsing through our online vegetable seed catalog.
|1. Strawberry Essentials
|2. Getting Ready for Strawberries
|3. Buying Strawberry Plants
|4. Planting Strawberries
|5. Care and Harvest of Strawberries ← you're on this article right now
|1. Strawberry Essentials
|2. Getting Ready for Strawberries
|3. Buying Strawberry Plants
|4. Planting Strawberries
|5. Care and Harvest of Strawberries ← you're on this article right now
( No account? Join now! )


text:
Recently, a now-famous beta carotene-cancer study from Finland hit the front pages of many newspapers and magazines. The newspaper articles warned that beta carotene might cause cancer and that people should not be so willing to take nutritional supplements because they may be dangerous. These newspaper reports and magazine articles were based on a study published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine on April 14, 1994. The study was entitled "The Effect of Vitamin E and Beta Carotene on the Incidence of Lung Cancer and Other Cancers in Male Smokers." Although carried out in Finland, the study was co-sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and paid for largely with your tax dollars.
In this study, more than 29,000 middle-aged men, who smoked over a pack a day for an average of 36 years each, were divided into four groups and followed for five to eight years. One group received daily dosages of 20mg (or 33,000 units) of synthetic beta carotene. A second group received 50mg of synthetic vitamin E, in the form of dl-alpha tocopherol acetate. A third group received both of these supplements. And, finally, a fourth group received a placebo.
The results of the study indicated a significant 18% increase in incidence of lung cancer in the participants receiving beta carotene. Although, fewer cases of prostate cancer were diagnosed among those who received vitamin E than those who did not, this point was not emphasized in the news accounts.
What were the flaws in the study? There were many. The study used only 1/8th to 1/40th the dosage of Vitamin E shown by more than 20 previous studies to lower the risk of lung cancer in smokers. It used only 1/10th the dosage of beta-carotene recommended by other experts for the prevention of lung cancer in smokers. It used as subjects people from Finland despite the fact that both the British Medical Journal and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition consider Finland one of the worst countries in the world for cancer/nutrition studies since: (1) Finns have one of the world's highest rates of per capita alcohol consumption by smokers, and alcohol interferes with the utilization of Vitamin E and beta carotene, and (2) Finland has an extremely low level of the essential mineral selenium in the soil, and selenium works together with vitamin E in promoting cancer prevention.
A previous, much less publicized recent study, carried out in China with National Cancer Institute cooperation, included 50 micrograms of selenium, along with 30 mg of vitamin E and 15mg of beta carotene. This study involved 30,000 people over the age of 40, who were either healthy or suffered from the premalignant lesion, esophageal dysplasia. Those who received the combination of these three nutrients had a significantly lower risk of dying from cancer and other diseases.
Other criticisms of the study include the fact that the study started immediately after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, which occurred in 1986, and Finland was one of the first areas to receive heavy fallout. This variable increases cancer risk and makes the jobs of these low levels of antioxidants more difficult. The form of vitamin E was the less potent synthetic dl-alpha tocopherol rather than the physiologic d-alpha tocopherol form. And all of the supplements were colored with quiniline yellow, a substance with known carcinogenic properties.
The authors themselves were careful to point out that no other studies have ever shown any harm from taking beta carotene, whereas many studies have shown beneficial effects. In addition, there are no known mechanisms for toxic effects of beta carotene. There overall conclusion was: "In spite of its formal statistical significance, therefore, this finding may well be due to chance."
You would never know this from the media circus accounts of the study. The universal message, received by many of my patients and the general population, was that vitamins, particularly beta carotene, cause cancer. I hope that this information clears up some of the confusion.


text:
In my previous post I explained how many utf-8 related issues are now fixed in the latest DBD::mysql development release, and I asked for feedback and testing from our users.
Even better utf-8 handling
I'm happy to inform you that, thanks to your feedback, we've now released yet another development version, with even more UTF8 issues fixed. Tanabe Yoshinori reported that column names and database warnings were not properly encoded and prolific contributor Pali Rohár fixed that issue, and much more.
Serialization issue under taint mode
One other issue which was reported by amavisd users has to do with how perl stores values internally under taint mode, which is the default way amavisd is run. This is now fixed, see for more information https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/issues/78.
Extreme CI testing setup
And Pali also modified our Travis setup so we now do continuous integration testing not only on many different perl versions, but also using many different MySQL and MariaDB versions. This uncovered many smaller and larger issues and we can compile again all the way back with MySQL against version 4 if you would want that (and we had multiple people wanting that and filing bug reports for this in the past).
This also lead to Pali discovering a use-after-free security issue (CVE-2017-3302) in libmysqlclient which was fixed in MySQL 5.6 and up but still present in 5.5 and also in MariaDB. See for more info this thread on oss-security.
Your feedback is welcome!
Find the full change log below; when all is well on Wednesday 8th of March we'll release the stable version 4.042, including all these changes, as well as the changes from the previous post.
You can leave your feedback via the DBI-users mailing list, or using our GitHub page.
2017-02-28 change log of version 4.041_2)
- Statement handle now also has
mysql_sockattribute, just as database handle. (by Pali)
- Fix type conversions for magic types. Issue reported by Dmitriy Yatsenko and Giovanni Bechis, fix by Pali. https://lists.amavis.org/pipermail/amavis-users/2016-December/004674.html, https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/issues/78
- Fix UTF8-encoding of table names, field names, warnings and error messages. Reported by Tanabe Yoshinori, fix by Pali. https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=120141
- Fix
mysql_auto_reconnectwhen using
mysql_server_prepare(pali). Reported by Vladimir Marek. https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/pull/95
- Improve regex for removing database from dsn (pali) https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=118837
- Locate MySQL libs using Devel::CheckLib (pali)
- Support async on Windows (pali)
- Fix test suite on range of older and newer MySQL and MariaDB versions https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/pull/87
- Fix compilation on MySQL 4.1 (pali)
- Do not leak dangling pointer to mysql result (pali)
- Fix logic when assigning to variable
mysql_fd()still returned file descriptor after closing connection. Reported by Larry Leszczynski, fixed by Pali Rohár. https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=110983
- Fix parsing configure libs from
mysql_config --libsoutput in
Makefile.PLLibraries in
mysql_config --libsoutput can be specified by library name with the
-lprefix or by absolute path to library name without any prefix. Parameters must start with a hyphen, so treat all options without leading hyphen in
mysql_config --libsoutput as libraries with full path. Partially fixes bug https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=100898 Fix by Pali Rohár.
- Fix support for magic scalars (pali) https://github.com/perl5-dbi/DBD-mysql/pull/76


text:
Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
[ Footnote * ] Together with No. 73-795, National Labor Relations Board v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, et al., also on certiorari to the same court.
A union does not commit an unfair labor practice under 8 (b) (1) (B) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) when it disciplines supervisor-members for crossing a picket line and performing rank-and-file struck work during a lawful economic strike against the employer. Pp. 798-813.
STEWART, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which DOUGLAS, BRENNAN, MARSHALL, and POWELL, JJ., joined. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BURGER, C. J., and BLACKMUN and REHNQUIST, JJ., joined, post, p. 813.
Ray C. Muller argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner in No. 73-556. Norton J. Come argued the cause for petitioner in No. 73-795 and for respondent National Labor Relations Board in No. 73-556. With him on the brief were Solicitor General Bork, Peter G. Nash, John S. Irving, and Patrick Hardin.
Laurence J. Cohen argued the cause for respondent unions in both cases. With him on the brief were Robert E. Fitzgerald and Seymour A. Gopman.
Laurence Gold argued the cause for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations as amicus curiae urging affirmance. With him on the brief were J. Albert Woll and Thomas E. Harris.Fn
Fn [417 U.S. 790, 791] Lawrence T. Zimmerman filed a brief for the Graphic Arts Union Employers of America, a Division of the Printing Industries of America, Inc., as amicus curiae urging reversal.
MR. JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court.
Section 8 (b) (1) (B) of the National Labor Relations Act, 61 Stat. 141, 29 U.S.C. 158 (b) (1) (B), makes it an unfair labor practice for a union "to restrain or coerce . . . an employer in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances." The respondent unions in these consolidated cases called economic strikes against the employer companies. During the strikes, supervisory employees of the companies, some of whom were members of bargaining units and some of whom were not, but all of whom were union members, crossed [417 U.S. 790, 792] the picket lines and performed rank-and-file struck work, i. e., work normally performed by the nonsupervisory employees then on strike. The unions later disciplined these supervisors for so doing. The question to be decided is whether the unions committed unfair labor practices under 8 (b) (1) (B) when they disciplined their supervisor-members for crossing the picket lines and performing rank-and-file struck work during lawful economic strikes against the companies.
Since 1909, Local 134, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, one of the respondents in No. 73-795, has been recognized by the Illinois Bell Telephone Co. (Illinois Bell) and its predecessors as the exclusive bargaining representative for both rank-and-file and certain supervisory personnel, including general foremen, P. B. X. installation foremen, and building cable foremen. Rather than exercise its right to refuse to hire union members as supervisors, the company agreed to the inclusion of a union security clause in the collective-bargaining agreement which required that these supervisors, like the rank-and-file employees, maintain membership in Local 134. In addition, the bargaining agreement in effect at the time of this dispute contained provisions for the conditions of employment and certain wages of these foremen.
Other higher ranking supervisors, however, were neither represented by the union for collective-bargaining purposes nor covered by the agreement, although they were permitted to maintain their union membership. 1 [417 U.S. 790, 793] By virtue of that membership, these supervisors, like those within the bargaining units, received substantial benefits, including participation in the International's pension and death-benefit plans and in group life insurance and old-age-benefit plans sponsored by Local 134.
Under the International's constitution, all union members could be penalized for committing any of 23 enumerated offenses, including "[w]orking in the interest of any organization or cause which is detrimental to, or opposed to, the I. B. E. W.," App. 76, and "[w]orking for any individual or company declared in difficulty with a [local union] or the I. B. E. W." Id., at 77.
Between May 8, 1968, and September 20, 1968, Local 134 engaged in an economic strike against the company. At the inception of the strike, Illinois Bell informed its supervisory personnel that it would like to have them come to work during the stoppage but that the decision whether or not to do so would be left to each individual, and that those who chose not to work would not be penalized. Local 134, on the other hand, warned its supervisor-members that they would be subject to disciplinary action if they performed rank-and-file work during the strike. Some of the supervisor-members crossed the union picket lines to perform rank-and-file struck work. Local 134 thereupon initiated disciplinary proceedings against these supervisors, and those found guilty were [417 U.S. 790, 794] fined $500 each. 2 Charges were then filed with the NLRB by the Bell Supervisors Protective Association, an association formed by five supervisors to obtain counsel for and otherwise protect the supervisors who worked during the strike. The Board, one member dissenting, held that in thus disciplining the supervisory personnel, the union had violated 8 (b) (1) (B) of the Act, 3 in accord with its decision of the same day in Local 2150, IBEW (Wisconsin Electric Power Co.), 192 N. L. R. B. 77 (1971), enforced, 486 F.2d 602 (CA7 1973), cert. pending No. 73-877, holding:
The Florida Power & Light Co. (Florida Power), the petitioner in No. 73-556, has maintained a collective-bargaining agreement with the International [417 U.S. 790, 795] Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO and Locals 641, 622, 759, 820, and 1263, represented by the System Council U-4, 4 since 1953. That agreement does not require employees to become union members as a condition of employment, but many of its supervisory personnel have in fact joined the union. The company has elected to recognize the union as the exclusive bargaining representative of these supervisors, and certain aspects of their wages and conditions of employment are provided for in the agreement. 5 In addition, other higher supervisory personnel not covered by the agreement were allowed to maintain union membership, 6 and, although not represented by the union for collective-bargaining purposes, received substantial benefits as a result of their union membership, including pension, disability, and death benefits under the terms of the International's constitution. [417 U.S. 790, 796]
Since the same International union was involved in both No. 73-556 and No. 73-795, the union members of Florida Power bore the same obligations under the International's constitution as did the union members of Illinois Bell. See supra, at 793. With respect to union discipline of supervisor members, however, the Florida Power collective-bargaining agreement itself provided:
The Illinois Bell case was first heard by a panel of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 242, 487 F.2d 1113 (1973), and then on rehearing was consolidated with Florida Power and considered en banc. In a 5-4 decision, the court held that "[s]ection 8 (b) (1) (B) cannot reasonably be read to prohibit discipline of union members - supervisors though they be - for performance of rank-and-file struck work," 159 U.S. App. D.C. 272, 300, 487 F.2d 1143, 1171 (1973), and accordingly refused to enforce the Board's orders. 8 Section 8 (b) (1) (B), the court held, was intended to proscribe only union efforts to discipline supervisors for their actions in representing management in collective bargaining and the adjustment of grievances. It was the court's view that when a supervisor forsakes his supervisory role to do work normally performed by nonsupervisory employees, he no longer acts as a managerial representative and hence "no longer merits any immunity from discipline." Id., at 286, 487 F.2d, at 1157. We granted [417 U.S. 790, 798] certiorari, 414 U.S. 1156 , to consider an important and novel question of federal labor law.
Section 8 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act provides in pertinent part:
In 1968, however, the Board significantly expanded the reach of 8 (b) (1) (B), with its decision in San Francisco-Oakland [417 U.S. 790, 800] Mailers' Union No. 18 (Northwest Publications, Inc.), 172 N. L. R. B. 2173. In that case, three union-member foremen were expelled from the union for allegedly assigning bargaining unit work in violation of the collective-bargaining agreement. Despite the absence of union pressure or coercion aimed at securing the replacement of the foremen, the Board held that the union had violated 8 (b) (1) (B) by seeking to influence the manner in which the foremen interpreted the contract:
These decisions reflected a further evolution of the Oakland Mailers doctrine. In Oakland Mailers, the union had disciplined its supervisor-members for an alleged misinterpretation or misapplication of the collective-bargaining agreement, and the Board had reasoned that the natural and foreseeable effect of such discipline was that in interpreting the agreement in the future, the supervisor would be reluctant to take a position adverse to that of the union. In the subsequent cases, [417 U.S. 790, 802] however, the Board held that the same coercive effect was likely to arise from the disciplining of a supervisor whenever he was engaged in management or supervisory activities, even though his collective-bargaining or grievance-adjustment duties were not involved. Through the course of these decisions, 8 (b) (1) (B) thus began to evolve in the view of the Board and the courts "as a general prohibition of a union's disciplining supervisor-members for their conduct in the course of representing the interests of their employers." Toledo Locals Nos. 15-P & 272, Lithographers & Photoengravers International, 175 N. L. R. B., at 1080, or for acts "performed in the course of [their] management duties," Meat Cutters Union Local 81 v. NLRB, 147 U.S. App. D.C., at 377, 458 F.2d, at 796. 12
In the present cases, the Board has extended that doctrine to hold that 8 (b) (1) (B) forbids union discipline of supervisors for performance of rank-and-file work on the theory that the performance of such work during a strike is an activity furthering management's interests. 13 [417 U.S. 790, 803] We agree with the Court of Appeals that 8 (b) (1) (B) cannot be so broadly read. Both the language and the legislative history of 8 (b) (1) (B) reflect a clearly focused congressional concern with the protection of employers in the selection of representatives to engage in two particular and explicitly stated activities, namely collective bargaining and the adjustment of grievances. By its terms, the statute proscribes only union restraint or coercion of an employer "in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances," and the legislative history makes clear that in enacting the provision Congress was exclusively concerned with union attempts to dictate to employers who would represent them in collective bargaining and grievance adjustment.
The specific concern of Congress was to prevent unions from trying to force employers into or out of multi-employer bargaining units. 14 As Senator Taft, cosponsor of the legislation, explained:
We may assume without deciding that the Board's Oakland Mailers decision fell within the outer limits of this test, but its decisions in the present cases clearly do not. For it is certain that these supervisors were not engaged in collective bargaining or grievance adjustment, or in any activities related thereto, when they crossed union picket lines during an economic strike to engage in rank-and-file struck work. 16
It is strenuously asserted, however, that to permit a union to discipline supervisor-members for performing [417 U.S. 790, 806] rank-and-file work during an economic strike will deprive the employer of the full loyalty of those supervisors. Indeed, it is precisely that concern that is reflected in these and other recent decisions of the Board holding that the statutory language "restrain or coerce . . . an employer in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances" is not confined to situations in which the union's object is to force a change in the identity of the employer's representatives, but may properly be read to encompass any situation in which the union's actions are likely to deprive the employer of the undivided loyalty of his supervisory employees. As the Board stated in Wisconsin Electric:
The concern expressed in this argument is a very real one, but the problem is one that Congress addressed, not through 8 (b) (1) (B), but through a completely different legislative route. Specifically, Congress in 1947 amended the definition of "employee" in 2 (3), 29 U.S.C. 152 (3), to exclude those denominated supervisors under 2 (11), 29 U.S.C. 152 (11), thereby excluding them from the coverage of the Act. 17 See [417 U.S. 790, 808] NLRB v. Bell Aerospace Co., 416 U.S. 267 (1974). Further, Congress enacted 14 (a), 29 U.S.C. 164 (a), explicitly providing:
The legislative history of 2 (3) and 14 (a) of the Act clearly indicates that those provisions were enacted in response to the decision in Packard Motor Car Co. v. NLRB, 330 U.S. 485 (1947), in which this Court upheld the Board's finding that the statutory definition of "employee" included foremen, and that they were therefore entitled to the coverage of the Act in the absence of a decision by Congress to exclude them. 19 In recommending passage of this legislation, the Senate Report noted:
Congress' solution was essentially one of providing the employer with an option. On the one hand, he is at liberty to demand absolute loyalty from his supervisory personnel by insisting, on pain of discharge, that they neither participate in, nor retain membership in, a labor union, see Beasley v. Food Fair of North Carolina, Inc., [417 U.S. 790, 813] supra. Alternatively, an employer who wishes to do so can permit his supervisors to join or retain their membership in labor unions, resolving such conflicts as arise through the traditional procedures of collective bargaining. 23 But it is quite apparent, given the statutory language and the particular concerns that the legislative history shows were what motivated Congress to enact 8 (b) (1) (B), that it did not intend to make that provision any part of the solution to the generalized problem of supervisor-member conflict of loyalties.
For these reasons, we hold that the respondent unions did not violate 8 (b) (1) (B) of the Act when they disciplined their supervisor-members for performing rank-and-file struck work. Accordingly, the judgment is
[ Footnote 2 ] Local 134 also imposed fines of $1,000 upon each of the five supervisors who had formed the Bell Supervisors Protective Association.
[ Footnote 3 ] International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, and Local 134, 192 N. L. R. B. 85 (1971) (hereinafter Illinois Bell).
[ Footnote 4 ] System Council U-4 was named as a respondent in the complaint, but the Board dismissed all charges against it and entered an order only against the local unions.
[ Footnote 5 ] Supervisory employees thus included are district supervisors, assistant district supervisors, assistant supervisors, plant superintendents, plant supervisors, assistant plant superintendents, distribution assistants, results assistants, assistant plant engineers, and subsection supervisors.
[ Footnote 6 ] In both Illinois Bell and this case, some of the supervisors involved, though union members, did not actively participate in union affairs and paid no dues. This was because they held "honorary" withdrawal cards, permitting them to return to active membership without paying normal initiation fees in the event they returned to rank-and-file work. These cards also permitted their holders to continue participation in the International's death-benefit fund. Other supervisors held "participating" withdrawal cards under which they continued to pay a fee equal to the monthly dues and remained eligible for pension, death, and disability benefits. The holders of these cards were also not permitted to participate in other union affairs.
[ Footnote 7 ] International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers System Council U-4, 193 N. L. R. B. 30, 31 (1971) (hereinafter Florida Power).
[ Footnote 8 ] 159 U.S. App. D.C. 272, 487 F.2d 1143 (1973).
[ Footnote 9 ] S. Rep. No. 105, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (hereinafter Senate Report), pt. 1, p. 21 (1947).
[ Footnote 10 ] The Haverhill Gazette case was typical. There the union had demanded the inclusion of a "foreman clause" providing that the composing room foreman, who had the power to hire, fire, and process grievances, must be a member of the union, although he would be exempted from union discipline in certain circumstances for activities on behalf of management. As the Court of Appeals pointed out: "Not only would the clause . . . limit the employers' choice of foremen to union members, but it would also give the unions power to force the discharge or demotion of a foreman by expelling him from the union." 278 F.2d, at 12.
[ Footnote 11 ] In Toledo Blade, two supervisors were disciplined by the union for working in a crew smaller than the contractually prescribed minimum and for doing production work in excess of the contractually permitted maximum. These activities occurred during an economic strike. The Trial Examiner, in a holding which foreshadowed the cases now before us, noted that such discipline is an unwarranted interference with the employer's control over its own representatives and
[ Footnote 12 ] Indeed, in its original panel decision in the instant Illinois Bell case, the Court of Appeals spoke of 8 (b) (1) (B) as prohibiting union discipline of supervisory employees "for actions performed by them within the general scope of their supervisory or managerial responsibilities." 159 U.S. App. D.C. 242, 248, 487 F.2d 1113, 1119.
[ Footnote 13 ] As the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reasoned in enforcing the Board's order in Wisconsin Electric:
[ Footnote 14 ] Section 8 (b) (1) (B) was in fact a more restrained solution to the problem of multi-employer bargaining than originally proposed. Proposed 9 (f) (i) of the House bill, H. R. 3020, would have prohibited multi-employer bargaining altogether, see H. R. Rep. No. 245, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (hereinafter House Report), 8-9, 56 (1947).
[ Footnote 15 ] In a similar vein, Senator Ellender observed:
[ Footnote 16 ] To hold that union discipline of supervisor-members for performing rank-and-file struck work is not proscribed by 8 (b) (1) (B) of the Act is not to hold that such discipline is expressly permitted by 8 (b) (1) (A) of the Act, as construed in NLRB v. Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co., 388 U.S. 175 (1967). The decision in that case is inapposite where the union seeks to fine not employee-members but supervisor-members, who are explicitly excluded from the definition of "employee" by 2 (3), 29 U.S.C. 152 (3), and hence from the coverage of 8 (b) (1) (A). See Beasley v. Food Fair of North Carolina, Inc., 416 U.S. 653 (1974). The Act, therefore, neither protects nor prohibits union discipline of supervisor-members for engaging in rank-and-file struck work. In light of the fact that "Congress has been rather specific when it has come to outlaw particular economic weapons on the part of unions," NLRB v. Drivers Local Union No. 639, 362 U.S. 274, 282 -283 (1960), the admonition against regulation of the choice of economic weapons that may be used as part of collective bargaining absent a particularized statutory mandate is particularly apt in this context. NLRB v. Insurance Agents, 361 U.S. 477, 490 (1960). See Summers, Disciplinary Powers of Unions, 3 Ind. & Lab. Rel. Rev. 483 (1950); Summers, Legal Limitations on Union Discipline, 64 Harv. L. Rev. 1049 (1951); Wellington, Union Democracy and Fair Representation: Federal Responsibility in a Federal System, 67 Yale L. J. 1327 (1958); Cox, Internal Affairs of Labor Unions Under the Labor Reform Act of 1959, 58 Mich. L. Rev. 819 (1960).
[ Footnote 17 ] Title 29 U.S.C. 152 (3) provides in pertinent part:
[ Footnote 18 ] It has been held that this right is limited to the extent that an employer cannot discharge supervisory personnel for participation in the union where the discharge is found to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of their protected rights, see NLRB v. Talladega Cotton Factory, Inc., 213 F.2d 209 (CA5 1954), or where it is prompted by the supervisors' refusal to engage in unlawful activity, see NLRB v. Lowe, 406 F.2d 1033 (CA6 1969).
[ Footnote 19 ] Prior to the passage of the National Labor Relations Act in 1935, foremen and rank-and-file workers were often members of the same bargaining unit, and such conflict-of-interest problems as arose were dealt with through the collective-bargaining process. After first holding that supervisors could organize in independent or affiliated unions in Union Collieries Coal Co., 41 N. L. R. B. 961 (1942) and Godchaux Sugars, Inc., 44 N. L. R. B. 874 (1942), the Board, concerned by the conflict of interests created thereby, reversed its position in Maryland Drydock Co., 49 N. L. R. B. 733 (1943), and held that except where foremen had been organized in 1935 when the Act was passed, supervisory units were not appropriate collective-bargaining units under the Wagner Act. The Board then reversed its position again in Packard Motor Car Co., 61 N. L. R. B. 4, enforced, 157 F.2d 80 (CA6), aff'd, 330 U.S. 485 (1947), holding that supervisory employees as a class were entitled to the rights of self-organization and collective bargaining. See NLRB v. Bell Aerospace Co., 416 U.S. 267, 277 (1974); Beasley v. Food Fair of North Carolina, Inc., 416 U.S., at 658 n. 4. See also House Report 13-14. In discussing the proposed legislation dealing with supervisory personnel, the Senate Report stated:
[ Footnote 20 ] Instructive as well is the fact that 2 (3) and 14 (a) were both slightly modified versions of 9 (a) and (c) of the Case bill, H. R. 4908, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946), which was passed by Congress in 1946 but vetoed by President Truman. See Senate Report 5. That earlier bill, however, contained no provision bearing any resemblance to 8 (b) (1) (B), which first appeared in S. 1126, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (1947).
[ Footnote 21 ] Further support for the proposition that 8 (b) (1) (B) was addressed to a separate and far more limited problem than that of conflict of loyalties dealt with in 2 (3), 2 (11), and 14 (a) is found in the differing scope of the provisions themselves. Section 8 (b) (1) (B) purports to cover only those selected as the employer's representative "for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances," whereas the class of supervisors excluded from the definition of employees in 2 (3) is defined by 2 (11) to include individuals engaged in a substantially broader range of activities. See supra, n. 17; NLRB v. Bell Aerospace Co., supra. The two groups coincide only with respect to the function of grievance adjustment.
[ Footnote 22 ] There can be no denying that the supervisors involved in the present cases found themselves in something of a dilemma, and were pulled by conflicting loyalties. But inherent in the option afforded the employer by Congress, must be the recognition that supervisors permitted by their employers to maintain union membership will necessarily incur obligations to the union. See Nassau & Suffolk Contractors' Assn., Inc., 118 N. L. R. B. 174, 182 (1957). See Summers, Legal Limitations on Union Discipline, 64 Harv. L. Rev. 1049 (1951). And, while both the employer and the union may have conflicting but nonetheless legitimate expectations of loyalty from supervisor-members during a strike, the fact that the supervisor will in some measure be the beneficiary of any advantages secured by the union through the strike makes it inherently inequitable that he be allowed to function as a strikebreaker without incurring union sanctions.
The supervisor-member is, of course, not bound to retain his union membership absent a union security clause, and if, for whatever reason, he chooses to resign from the union, thereby relinquishing his union benefits, he could no longer be disciplined by the union for working during a strike. NLRB v. Textile Workers, 409 U.S. 213 (1972); Booster Lodge 405 v. NLRB, 412 U.S. 84 (1973).
In these cases, the supervisors' dilemma has been somewhat exaggerated by the petitioners. In Illinois Bell, the company did not command its supervisors to work during the strike and expressly left the decision to each individual. Those who chose not to work were not penalized, and some were in fact promoted by their employer after the strike had ended. Those who did work during the strike but performed only their regular duties were not disciplined by the union. In Florida Power, the record does not disclose whether the supervisors crossed the picket lines at the company's request or not, but in any event, the union did not discipline those who did so only to perform their normal supervisory functions.
[ Footnote 23 ] Thus, while a union violates 8 (b) (1) (B) by striking to force an employer to agree to hire only union members as foremen, International Typographical Union Local 38 v. NLRB, 278 F.2d 6 (CA1 1960), aff'd by an equally divided Court, 365 U.S. 705 (1961), see n. 7, supra, it can propose that supervisors be covered by the collective-bargaining agreement, Sakrete of Northern California, Inc. v. NLRB, 332 F.2d 902 (CA9 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 961 (1965). Similarly, it is clear that an employer may request that supervisors be excluded from the bargaining unit, Federal Compress & Warehouse Co. v. NLRB, 398 F.2d 631 (CA6 1968); NLRB v. Corral Sportswear Co., 383 F.2d 961 (CA10 1967).
The parties in Florida Power in fact agreed to the inclusion in the collective-bargaining agreement of provisions governing the disciplining by the union of supervisory personnel, basically providing that such matters were to be dealt with through the grievance adjustment and arbitration provisions of the agreement. See supra, at 796.
MR. JUSTICE WHITE, with whom THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, and MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST join, dissenting.
Believing that the majority has improperly substituted its judgment for a fair and reasonable interpretation by [417 U.S. 790, 814] the Board of 8 (b) (1) (B) in light of the statutory language and legislative history of that provision and other provisions dealing with supervisors, I must dissent substantially for the reasons expressed by the dissent below.
While it might be unreasonable for the Board to interpret 8 (b) (1) (B) to permit an employer to require absolute loyalty from a supervisor-member in all circumstances, it is certainly apparent that during an economic strike, the supervisor's performance of rank-and-file struck work, which represents a classic "use of economic pressure by the parties to a labor dispute . . . [,] is part and parcel of the process of collective bargaining." NLRB v. Insurance Agents' International Union, 361 U.S. 477, 495 (1960). 1 "As management representatives, supervisory personnel may be requested by management to enhance the bargaining position of their employer during a dispute between it and the particular union involved." 159 U.S. App. D.C. 272, 304, 487 F.2d 1143, 1175 (1973) (en banc) (dissenting opinion) (footnote omitted). Moreover, these union sanctions would unavoidably decrease a supervisor's loyalty to his employer and thereby materially interfere with the performance of those responsibilities which the employer quite properly demands of him. Local Union No. 2150, IBEW (Wisconsin Electric Power Co.), 192 N. L. R. B. 77, 78 (1971), enforced, 486 F.2d 602 (CA7 1973). Nothing in [417 U.S. 790, 815] the language or legislative history of the statute contradicts the conclusion that
[ Footnote 1 ] The court below acknowledged the practical realities of the use of supervisors during a strike: "in the highly automated public utility industries involved in these cases a small work force composed of strikebreakers and non-union management personnel can evidently provide sufficient manpower to continue vital services in a strike, thereby cutting into the strike's effectiveness." 159 U.S. App. D.C. 272, 290 n. 21, 487 F.2d 1143, 1161 n. 21 (1973) (en banc).
[ Footnote 2 ] I do not read the Court to say that 8 (b) (1) (B) would allow a union to discipline supervisor-members for performing supervisory or management functions, as opposed to customary rank-and-file work, during a labor dispute. [417 U.S. 790, 817]
Was this helpful?
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw's Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you're ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)