text:
I've been having a little argument with five-years-ago me. The question is this:
Five-years-ago me? Throw his drink in your face. He'd tell you that rote thinking is the bane of his working days, that deep understanding is the whole point of learning mathematics. He'd tell you: No black boxes, ever.
Today-me is less convinced. Don't working mathematicians, from the ground floor all the way up to Andrew Wiles, sometimes use black boxes? Isn't it common sense that sometimes you need to use tools that you can't build for yourself?
I'm still wary of equipping students with black boxes, but these days I'm willing to do it, so long as three conditions are met. I hesitate to share this crude checklist, knowing my colleagues out there in the profession will have wiser ways to frame the tradeoffs. (After all, aren't checklists too binary, too black-and-white, for an idea as elusive and shaded as "understanding"?)
Nevertheless, my checklist goes something like this:
When I taught my 17-year-olds the product rule for derivatives last year, I didn't give them a proof. We talked through a few examples, and that was it.
"How do you think we'd prove this?" I asked later.
"Limit definition?" they said.
I nodded, and we left it at that. The proof I know is a clever algebraic trick; satisfying, but not terribly illuminating. I don't really care whether students know the product rule's origin story, so long as they know that it has an origin story.
By contrast, take my 11- year-old students as they begin secondary school. Many know lots of impressive "maths" (as they adorably say): they can divide fractions by fractions, subtract negatives, and state the nth term of an arithmetic sequence.
And if you ask them to explain why a technique works, they just describe the technique again.
In their view, mathematical methods aren't rooted in reason, emerging by natural processes of logic. They're plastic flowers popping out of the pavement like magic. It's not just that they don't know why these methods work; they're fundamentally unaware that "why" and "how" are different things.
To use a black box safely, a student needs to know there's something they don't know. If that isn't happening, then I shun black boxes like I shun black bears.
Some techniques are not that enlightening—but you need them anyway.
I'm thinking of a three-act lesson where students estimate the number of pennies used to build a massive pyramid. Working from first principles, they can mentally dissect the pyramid, breaking it down into layers of various sizes. But once they've done that, they still won't know how to total the number of pennies.
They need a formula: the one for the square pyramidal numbers.
Deriving it would be an impossible chore in the confines of a short lesson, and wouldn't play to the learning goals. We're left with two choices: (1) Deny students the formula, thereby forcing them through a long, tedious, repetitive computation, or (2) Supply students with the formula, a handy shortcut they don't totally understand.
I'm comfortable choosing Door #2. After all, part of being a mathematician is tapping into the wisdom of those who came before.
This year, in an ambitious move, I tried to teach my 12-year-old students about square roots. In particular, I hoped they could learn to flexibly employ the rule √ab = √a√b, to simplify expressions like √300, or √72/√2 or √20 + √45 + √180.
In the immortal words of Rick Perry: Oops.
I pushed them too quickly into technique, and then watched them rehearse a rule they didn't understand. All struggled; many rage-quit. They came to see square roots like an Old Testament plague. Luckily, there's a simple solution:
Don't make them simplify square roots.
They have no practical or intellectual need for this technique right now. They need to build numerical and geometric intuition about square roots first. No reason to thrust them into the deep end of this quasi-algebraic pool.
This is a surprisingly common tale in mathematics education. We rush headlong into technique, trying to outrun an imaginary time-monster. So I'm always reminding myself: Be patient. Build context. Go concrete before you go abstract.
To recap, I'm comfortable with students using a technique they can't justify only if all three of these conditions are met:
Now the real question: when are these conditions met?
If you ask me: Almost never. Basically, it occurs when you're teaching sophisticated students a piece of mathematics not for its own sake, but for its applications. Engineers, psychologists, and environmental scientists don't necessarily need to trace the derivatives of sin(x) and cos(x) back to the squeeze theorem.
But I know this isn't how most black boxes get deployed.
More often, it happens when your back is against the wall: Students arrive at your door unprepared for an immovable high-stakes exam. The shortcut to decent scores leads away from understanding. You face two repugnant paths: forsake the students' learning to preserve their economic opportunities, or vice versa.
Many of us seek a middle way. We try to carry both treasures up the steep mountainside. But all too often, we arrive at the top to find that the learning is gone, vanished from our hands. We look back and see it scattered along the path. Step by step, we let it slip from our fingers, not even realizing.
To the teacher on that lonely mountaintop, I offer neither applause nor condemnation. Just sympathy.
I've been there.


text:
Here's a novel idea: write before you can act.
Tina Fey became famous for her brain and her sense of humour stands today as the most respected woman in the business.
Do parent pimps look to Tina Fey for inspiration? Do they enroll their kids in creative writing instead of Star Search?
But maybe this morning, the morning after Tina's big wins, maybe they'll want to be like Tina.
Who wouldn't want to be like Tina?
I would choose Tina over Gwyneth. And Gwyneth would understand.
Photos from Wenn.com
Best Emmy: Tina Fey
Here's a novel idea: write before you can act.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Microsoft released a total of seven new security bulletins for May's Patch Tuesday. Four are rated as Important, and the other three are Critical, but two in particular are getting the most attention: MS12-034 and MS12-029.
MS12-034 fixes 10 separate vulnerabilities spanning a range of Microsoft products including Windows, Office, .NET Framework, and Silverlight. It's unusual for Microsoft to lump so many products together in a single security bulletin or patch.
Wolfgang Kandek, CTO of Qualys, provides some background to explain the unusual patch in a blog post. MS12-034 is the result of an effort by Microsoft to seek out other products using the same flawed code exploited by Duqu. This patch knocks out all of the other instances, and addresses a variety of other security issues in the affected products at the same time.
Andrew Storms, director of security operations for nCircle, isn't impressed by the bundled patch. Storms says, "The core of this bug fix is related to the vulnerabilities leveraged by Duqu–a problem Microsoft fixed last year–so this bulletin also replaces a half dozen previously released bulletins. This is going to give the patch management folks some serious heartburn."
Tyler Reguly, technical manager security research and development at nCircle agrees. "MS12-034 is sheer craziness—it's going to be the most interesting and most painful part of the day for most IT security teams. There are multiple Office and .NET patches due to the overlap of products in this bulletin.
Storms recommends IT admins not spend too much time scratching their heads analyzing or trying to understand MS12-034. "Just install the patch as soon as you can, and then move on."
As urgent as MS12-034 is, MS12-029 is also crucial. Kandek explains, "The bulletin provides a patch for a vulnerability in the RTF file format that can be exploited through Microsoft Office 2003 and 2007. It is rated critical because simply viewing an attached file in the preview pane of Microsoft Outlook is sufficient to trigger the exploit."
Of course, the rest of the security bulletins and patches should be addressed as well. The remaining five security bulletins fix flaws related to elevation of privileges and remote code execution, and should not be ignored or taken lightly.
Prioritize implementing the updates in MS12-034 and MS12-029, but be sure to review the other security bulletins and apply the patches as soon as possible.


text:
Hosted by gunter|gunter's page
olt! is a way station and oasis on the ancient road from Bedlam to Bellevue, dedicated to free and open discussion of topics moving heart and spirit.
1720 messages in -23 discussions
Latest Oct-3 by bshmr
Latest Oct-3 by gunter
Latest Sep-27 by gunter
4253 messages in 558 discussions
32317 messages in 4754 discussions
3939 messages in 336 discussions
How's my photoshopping?
Michigan Rep. Justin Amash announced Thursday that he is leaving the Republican Party, saying he is disenchanted and "frightened" by party politics -- and called for others to join him in rejecting "partisan loyalties and rhetoric."Read more from Fox News
Great news for the Republican Party as one of the dumbest & most disloyal men in Congress is "quitting" the Party. No Collusion, No Obstruction! Knew he couldn't get the nomination to run again in the Great State of Michigan. Already being challenged for his seat. A total loser!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 4, 2019
Alitalia initially defended the video by saying the actor was not Caucasian and that "makeup was applied to highlight features." It later apologized.
A Betsy Ross flag was spotted flying as part of an 18-flag display outside San Francisco City Hall Thursday.Read more from dailycaller.com
Some parishioners donated gold coins. Some fervent believers even had gold fillings removed from their mouths for the greater glory of Christ.Read more from Laughing in Disbelief
you staying dry I hope ...
We'll have the latest on Barry's track and its impacts as new data comes in, LIVE on Channel 2 Action News at Noon.Read more from WSBTV
Thank you! Learned a lot since Katrina, so we were pretty much prepared before the storm. Generator included. However, this time the water may be an issue, even though the wind right now is nothin' nice. Mostly being hit by the squalls. Eventually a limb or two will break from a tree and hit a line, there goes our power. For now, enjoying the day off. :D
Turned out to be more hype then anything. It was just a regular swamp land storm, nothing that Louisianians aren't already used to. I did enjoy the cool weather and a day of relaxation. :)
... while keeping fingers crossed for the rest of the season ...


text:
Fitment: Ford Mustang S197 GT-500 / GT-500KR 2007-2009
The GT-R Widebody aerodynamic Kit for the S197 Mustang gives an aggressive look while enhancing the smooth and subtle lines. This 10 piece kit helps to improve overall handling and traction. This aerodynamic kit increases the front stance by +45mm per front fender and +50mm per rear fender. It allows installation of massive front wheel sizes of 20"x9.5" with 285/30/20 profile tires and rear wheel sizes of 20"x 12.5" with 345/25/20 profile tires.
To enhance stability, the Mustang Widebody Aerodynamic Kit includes a carbon fiber front wind splitter that is designed as a front undertray. The optional 70" (1,778mm) GTC-500 Mustang Spec adjustable rear wing adds downforce on the rear wheels to increase rear-end stability.
This Aerodynamic Kit Includes:
- Widebody Front Bumper
- Carbon Fiber Wind Splitter/Undertray
- Widebody Front Fenders (45mm)
- Widebody Side Skirt
- Widebody Rear Fenders and Gas Door (50mm)
- Widebody Rear Bumper
Lead Time: This kit is made to order. 5-Weeks roughly before shipping out


text:
Tom Spurgeon's Web site of comics news, reviews, interviews and commentary
Quick Links
Find Your Local Comic Shop
Find an Indy/Alt-Comic Shop
General Industry Data and Analysis
Characters, Titles, Publishers, and Creators Database
Buy My Book (2003)
Syndicate This Site (RSS 1.0)
Syndicate This Site (FeedBurner)
> CR Interviews
A Short Interview With David Glanzer
posted December 23, 2008
I am aware that many hardcore comics industry followers and most of the casual ones are very, very tired of hearing about 2008's
Comic-Con International
, now two weeks in the rear view mirror and the recipient of an enormous amount of build-up and post-game for about a solid month there. I feel your pain, and if it's too much for you right now to get into one more piece, I won't be upset if you click away. I hope you'll bookmark it, though, for later perusal -- I think it's a pretty good one.
Even as the news cycle heats up so that comics events of all kinds get processed more quickly than ever, my yearly post-con interview with CCI's David Glanzer seems doomed to remain scheduled a week or two after the show itself. One reason is that a slight delay allows me to take the temperature of other pieces spinning out of the show and ask questions about subjects that aren't part of my personal experience --
Chuck Rozanski's claim that comics retailers are losing ground at the show
being a prime example this year -- and so that I can see how Glanzer answers some of the questions put to him by reporters during and just after the show and hopefully tease more out of him at this later time period.
Mostly, though, I like doing this yearly interview the same reason I like doing all the interviews that appear here: I'm curious about the issues involved. Glanzer is a bright and articulate guy with an interesting job at a fascinating and important comics institution, one that I will follow every year I continue to cover comics, so I want him on the record. Among the subjects discussed: how Comic-Con worked with certain emphases in pre-con coverage so as not to instigate further demand in a show that required advanced ticketing already sold-out, whether or not the show will consider raising costs for attendees in 2009, and how they feel about the growing specter of off-site events taking place concurrently with events at the Convention Center.
I greatly appreciate David Glanzer's time, the care with which he answered the following and the patience he displayed with some of the more difficult and/or repetitive lines of inquiry.
Talk to me about the crush of pre-publicity for the show from your end. How was this year different from the last few in terms of pre-show publicity? How much work on your end was it for something like the
Entertainment Weekly
special issue, and what would that work entail?
I think we have a pretty good relationship with a variety of trade and magazine publishers. Though we made a concerted effort to limit pre-show advertising and tried to limit pre-show publicity, there are some things that will happen regardless.
Because we limited attendance this year we were confronted with the problem of letting people know the show was around the corner, but we tried not to hype it too much as there is nothing worse than advertising a show people can't actually attend.
In fact, one network television show was amazingly kind and asked to run a special commercial featuring Comic-Con, but we, while very grateful, asked if the spot could be tailored in such a way as to not utilize our logo or name. And they did, and I would say I think it had a better impact for their show so it worked out well.
Where are you in your post-Con process? If I remember right, you guys do a lot of self-examination and meetings that go over the con just past.
This is true. Right now we're in the process of trying to get everything back in our offices. The week of the show we physically move to the center, so now it's trying to catch up on old emails, making sure the computers are connected correctly and things of that nature.
Is there a picture of this year's show developing from Comic-Con's end?
I don't know that we look at it in those terms. There are always things that worked and things that didn't. This year is no exception. There is much to go over and we're in the process of discussing those issues in the next few weeks.
I have a hard time believing that this year's Comic-Con has yet to make a unique impression. Can you give me any example of something that worked well this year, or any example of a specific area of concern? If you can't, when will this begin to take shape from your perspective?
Oh, I think it has made a unique impression. But we really do spend the entire week putting out fires, so our impression of the show may be different than it actually was. In the coming weeks as we have our debriefings we'll get a better overall picture.
Is there an example of something about the show where Comic-Con's perspective on how things went might be different from maybe the conventional wisdom about how that aspect of that show turned out? Is there an insider perspective on the show to which we're not privy?
No doubt there is an insider's view that the public doesn't see. The week of the show, and quite honestly, a few weeks before, is spent trying to make sure the show happens as smoothly as possible. We're literally trying to put out fires here and there. I'm sure our task is similar, in a smaller way, to an amusement park; the fun is in attending and having a good time. The "behind the scenes" aspect shouldn't impose upon that fun. Granted, sometimes it does, but we really do try to prevent that from happening.
Could you provide an example of how these views might diverge, say from a past show?
Well in regard to press this year, we were inundated with a large number of people wanting to register on-site, more than in past years. So while we were prepared for some on-site registration, I don't think we were as prepared as we could have been. We augmented our staff a bit to try and accommodate that.
How did selling out in advance change how the show operated on the ground during the four days plus one? Did knowing ahead of time you were sold out actually relieve the pressure in a certain sense? How much demand was there for tickets from exhibitors, studios and the general populace and how did you deal with those extra demands so late in the game?
Knowing we were going to run out of tickets was an incredibly frustrating development for everyone. One mainstream newspaper characterized the running out of tickets as "That was good for the event's planners..." which couldn't be further from the truth.
Having a show that people cannot attend is never a good thing. And the demand from exhibitors, studios, press and professionals for additional tickets was more than any of us could have imagined.
With limited attendance, we will need to look at how badges are allocated to certain segments of our attendee base. I have no doubt this will be a major topic for discussion.
How many people were at the show at any one given time, do you think?
With the exception of Wednesday night, there were probably about 60,000 people in the facility at any given time.
What about Wednesday night?
We don't have official numbers yet so I really don't know about Wednesday night. The 60,000 number for the other days is based on past numbers which should be about right for this year I imagine.
Speaking of Wednesday, will there be any changes to what is now an exhausting addition to the con calendar? It hardly feels like the bonus to four-day con supporters that it was once presented as being. Will you give any thought to regulating exclusives on Wednesday or in general? Is the con happy with the way Wednesday nights have developed?
Preview Night served an important purpose for us. It was a way to reward, and hopefully entice, people who register early. I don't know that regulating exclusives is on the schedule for discussion, but I know Wednesday has become much bigger of a night than any of us had originally imagined, and this too will be discussed in the coming weeks.
It seemed that except for some of the upstairs programming areas flow was greatly improved over previous shows. Can you talk about what you might have done to improve those kinds of issues? Were the aisles wider? Was security employed at potential bottlenecks?
Some aisles were increased in size, and we hired even more personnel to troubleshoot line issues. This is something we began last year and then augmented it this year. Again, there is room for improvement and I think we learned some things this year that will help us deal with line issues next year. Again, something that will require a complete debriefing.
Speaking of the security, they seemed different than past years. Is it true that they supplemented their normal staff with military personnel this year? Was the performance of security markedly different this year?
Security is always a paramount concern for us. We talk about security in only the most general of terms. It's difficult with a show of our size, even some staff aren't fully apprised of last minute changes and I'm sure the same can be said of some members of the security team. But we are trying to make it work much better and I hope this year saw some improvement.
Was security supplemented by military personnel this year? I'm told that this is true. Beyond a vague wishing that things went well and improved, does the show hold security to a standard of performance? How is this ensured? Since you brought it up, is communicating with security a concern?
I'm sorry, I don't feel comfortable discussing who or how security is hired. But my understanding is that hiring practices were not changed this year from any other year.
Do we hold them to a standard of performance? Of course we do, and we do so with anyone we pay to provide a service to us and our attendees.
I didn't mean to imply communicating with security is a concern. My comment was simply to illustrate that sometimes I, myself, am unaware of a room change or a line change and the same could be true for security. With their bright red shirts they are oftentimes the first people attendees go to for directions or information. If some program changes elude me from time to time, I would imagine the same might be true for some members of the security team.
Talk to me about your relationship with the City of San Diego right now. There seems to be a lot of noise out there that it's somehow lacking: that you're impatiently waiting on promises to be kept for 2013 and beyond, and/or that you might not get the respect in terms of dollars spent you think you deserve. Is either perception true? How would you describe your relationship now that you've had another successful year?
I think our relationship with the city is a good one. I certainly hope it is. We have been in San Diego since our beginning and we hope to stay. We have tried to be a good neighbor and, quite honestly, I think we've gone out of our way to make that point.
When we extended our contract a couple of years back, we did so knowing we were, at some point, going to have to forgo growth. This wasn't an easy choice for us as we had been approached by other cities wanting our business. We heard very loudly that our attendee base didn't want us to leave San Diego and we didn't want to leave either. At about this time we learned that the convention center was hoping to expand its facility. This was great news for us.
We are still hoping the expansion will occur. We haven't seen movement on that, but that doesn't mean it isn't happening, we just aren't privy to any insider information on that at this point.
In regard to dollars spent; the city has figures based on an economic impact study that shows Comic-Con spending at roughly $40,000,000. I'm not sure of their formulation, but our own survey, showed that attendee spending alone (this does not include our own expenditures for center rental etc., or exhibitor expenditures) topped $60,000,000. And that was just for attendee lodging, food, and purchases. Again, that figure does not include exhibitor expenditures, movie studio expenditure, or our own expenditures in putting on the show.
Since this is likely to be an item of contention, can you tell me how your survey was generated? If this was something you did, or supervised, or caused to be done, why on earth wouldn't you include things like your own expenditures in putting on the show?
Ours was not an economic impact study. Ours was a survey, conducted by an outside organization that we hired. We survey our attendees, from time to time, to gather information to help us better run the show. And among the questions last time was money spent and where.
Let's talk about the decision you'll be making in the next couple of years to extend past 2012 with San Diego... or not. First of all, when do you expect to make that decision? Second, what factors are you looking at in terms of movement between now and then? What would constitute enough progress in terms of the show's space needs for you to re-up with San Diego? Is there any make or break factor that hasn't been discussed openly?
Typically we negotiate our contracts about two years out. This last time we were asked to sign for a four year deal I think because someone was challenging our dates for 2011 or 2012. So I would assume right around 2010 we'll be looking to see where things are with the city. If the expansion is underway, I think the decision would be a simple one. If there is no expansion underway, then we'd have to look at all options once again.
When was the last time you heard from the Anaheim or Las Vegas city/convention officials? When do you expect to hear from them again, or do you?
I don't mean to be coy or evasive, but any discussions or negotiations wouldn't be served well by discussing them in public. This is not to say that there are discussions going on, but I would hate for anyone, whether it be the City of San Diego, or any other city to think there are discussions going on and they were not a part of them. Again, I don't expect much movement will happen before 2010.
Is operating within a morass of rumors and speculation a bad thing in and of itself? Does Comic-Con feel the effect of operating with so many people thinking you might leave, for instance?
Well, to be honest we don't want to move. I mean I think you and a few other journalists who give me a ring and ask, point blank, "are you leaving" get the correct answer. No, we're here until 2012. Do we want to move? No.
We have tried to limit attendance this year and while it might have worked on some levels, I think it was problematic on other levels.
Let me be very clear about this; we want to stay in San Diego. We were even willing to forego growth to do so, so I think our dedication is well documented. We just need to be sure that any decisions made about the future of the event take into consideration the attendees of our event and the costs associated with it.
Inflation alone will increase costs of doing business in San Diego, we expect that, but limited attendance and limited exhibitors means we're going to soon be flat in income.
That isn't a prospect any business is happy about.
How much does the convention worry about a continued recession and the impact of high oil prices on the ability of exhibitors and attendees to come to the show in the next couple of years?
We're all very concerned. I spoke with one family who had come to Comic-Con from Minnesota. This was their yearly vacation. The woman I spoke with -- mother of two -- said they typically had three trips a year; two very small three-day weekend trips and one big vacation. They opted out of the two smaller trips and made Comic-Con their annual trip.
We certainly are concerned.
Is the convention planning at all for 1) this run of fantasy movies that love Comic-Con as a place to promote to cycle out, which admittedly seems less likely than it might have a few years back, or, 2) for changes in the way that the big media companies use Comic-Con that might not be as generous as they are right now as they get used to what works and what doesn't at the show? In other words, is the Con ready if suddenly there's not the same crush of interest from Hollywood?
I think we need to be prepared for anything. We have a team that is really very practical.
In terms of generosity, we are both lucky and grateful for the presentations by major studios at our show. And while some companies spend a lot of money while in San Diego, it isn't always with us. I think the city and local businesses do very well with large off-site displays, parking lot buyouts, parties, street teams hired to promote a project, actors dressed in costume and carrying signs and things of that nature. The revenue generated is a plus for the local economy. Of course we don't charge for program presentations or panel time, so in most cases the revenue generated from companies are limited to the cost of booth space. I will say, however, that this year we did try to tap into that revenue stream a bit by making additional onsite signage available.
I should also point out that when we decided to convert Hall H into a 6500-seat meeting room, we consciously gave up the revenue that would be generated by selling that space as exhibit space. It made more sense for us to try to accommodate our attendees as best as possible. Obviously if there were no longer a need for that space as a meeting space I would imagine we would make it available to exhibitors.
But it's obvious that many attendees enjoy these presentations and certainly for their sake I wouldn't want to see it end anytime soon.
Have you been in contact with IDW given Ted Adams' statement
they might not be back
I hope you don't mind if I take a pass on this question. I don't think it would be good to discuss specifics of individuals or companies. But I can certainly speak in generalities.
What do you say to the general notion that the convention simply doesn't work for a lot of publishers, that the costs outweigh the benefits. Before
became a movie studio it wasn't showing, and several smaller publishers have stopped attending --
spring to mind, although AdHouse may return, and I think
might be out after this year. How much is this a concern for you, a slow squeeze of these quality publishers?
Well I think to say that Marvel wasn't at Comic-Con until they became a movie studio isn't remembering the long history of Comic-Con and Marvel.
Of course we would love to accommodate everyone who would like to exhibit at the show. This isn't always the case. Sometimes there isn't enough floor space; sometimes an exhibitor makes the decision to sit out a year. The reasons for an exhibitor not exhibiting can be many fold. If it is a decision based on costs outweighing benefits, that's a difficult one to argue.
I would ask first, what is the goal of attending the show? Is it to have the biggest presence possible? Is it to sell product? Is it to market to the public? Is it to interact with press? There are any number of scenarios that I can see being worked out if a company is not meeting their needs. But, in this economy, I also understand that sometimes hard money costs are a factor. And that is something we, too, have to deal with. But I would hope any exhibitor who has issues with the show knows they can contact us and, perhaps, together we can come up with a scenario that works best for everyone.
Are you telling me there's no special, specific concern for 1) comics publishers and 2) quality comics publishers leaving the show? Are you in effect saying there's little difference between the issues facing those exhibitors or your concern for them and, say, the issues facing and your concern for a company offering a computer program or selling t-shirts? As much as your answer on Marvel cites their history at the show, many folks to whom I've spoken believe that Marvel wouldn't exhibit right now if it weren't for the changes in their profile brought about by the increased role of movies at the company -- that as a comics publisher, they might not do the show. Does the departure of publishing companies indicate that no scenario is possible for them?
I am not saying there is no special concern for those companies. What I was trying to say is that each company, publishers, and retailers included, may have different reasons for attending the show.
A imagine the reason for a retailer to be at the show will differ from a publisher who has no retail outlet. It doesn't mean one is more important than the other, it simply means they might have a different criteria by which they must judge the success of their presence at the show.
In 2006 we had 155 booths dedicated to comics (Golden/Silver/New Comics), in 2008 we had 173 booths. In regard publishers, in 2006 we had 363 booths that were taken by publishers and in 2008 that number increased to 403 booths. And we still have publishers and retailers that are on our wait list for space.
Yes, they are very important to us, and as I mentioned earlier, I wish we had the space to accommodate all of those who would like to exhibit at the show.
In reference to Marvel, I don't doubt that people you have spoken with have an opinion of why Marvel is back at the show. Based on our long business history, I just don't agree with that opinion.
Chuck Rozanski asserts
in one of his convention reports
that the show may have lost its traditional role as a place for high-end comics collectors to shop, and may be slowly losing the dealers in general. First, is his characterization that the number of comics sellers has declined in the past few years true? Second, is the con making this an area of special concern, and what can they do to reach out to this traditional area of exhibitors at the show?
Well as I mentioned earlier, our retailer exhibitor space continues to grow, so, I would disagree with that characterization. In regard to high-end buyers, well I imagine the economy may have a factor in that, or it may simply be one exhibitors product over another. Last year one exhibitor sold a very high-end comic, and this year sold one or more in the $3000 to $5000 range, so I'm not sure if that characterization is entirely accurate either.
Exhibitors tell me you're raising prices. Can you characterize the extent of that raise, perhaps in terms of percentage points? What led you to that decision?
The standard price for a booth at Comic-Con will be $2,200 this year, an increase of about 9.25 percent.
However, if an exhibitor chose to sign up at the show, they would have received a $600 discount, so the amount would have been $1,600.
I would also point out that most booths are taken up on site and very few exhibitors ever pay the final price. We are usually sold out months in advance of the show and, obviously, months before the last price point.
We also offer multi-show discounts for those exhibitors who choose to exhibit at
and Comic-Con.
In the past we could count on a large segment of the exhibitor base purchasing their booths closer to the show. This is really no longer the case. The decision to raise exhibitor prices wasn't an easy one, but because of the prospect of limited attendance and limited exhibitors, the decision was made to move forward with this scenario.
Will prices rise for attendees as well? And if not, why not, considering the massive demand? When will you know what the prices will be for 2009?
There are no plans to raise prices for attendees in 2009. While I can see an argument for raising prices as a way to decrease attendance, we need to keep in mind that exhibitors at our show count on attendees. Whether they are retailers, publishers, independent or small press, all rely on traffic flow to meet their needs. So if we can continue to meet their needs in this regard, and at the same time meet our budgetary requirements, I think we'll be okay.
This is not to suggest that we will never raise attendee prices, but for now I think we can operate with the steps we've taken so far so that attendee prices for 2009 should mirror 2008.
I have to admit, that's a little baffling to me given your issues with limited attendance. Are you suggesting that demand is soft enough that raising prices, say, 10 percent, would risk a severe attendance drop even considering how demand outstrips available tickets? How can you negotiate with city officials or, really, anyone else from a position that you are "flat in income" when you're offering your tickets at a price that seems obviously lower than market demand?
I think, given the current state of the economy, asking a kid to shell out more money to attend Comic-Con may not be the wisest decision, especially if we can meet our budgetary needs without having to do so. Again, this does not mean we will never raise prices, I just don't think we needed to do it this year.
You have a massive number of press on hand now. You've always admirably been really loose with your press policy. Will there be any refinement of that policy? Will you consider steps such as publications showing past coverage for past years of attendance?
We actually started being a little stricter with press beginning the year before last. While we still consider online press our mainstream press, and welcome nearly 3000 members of the media. We will have discussions in the next few weeks of how best to limit press without inhibiting reporting.
Requirements for press access are listed on our website. While we have made no formal decisions as of yet, I imagine, because of capacity concerns at the center, that we will only have pre-registered press next year, and will probably have to limit the number of badges issued to press guests.
A number of press folks complained about the fact that the press pass does not grant special access to areas of coverage. Now in past years, this always seemed to come from comics people that couldn't attend their favorite TV show panel, but I'm hearing it from people that actually cover the area they're trying to get into. Are you considering reform of the press access situation? Is closed circuit viewing possible in the next few years? Pooled coverage? A separate press track for access? How do you ensure that press will be able to cover the events you're presenting to them?
I think pooled coverage is an excellent idea and while it might work for some I don't know that it would work for all.
Closed circuit viewing is certainly an idea, and one we've discussed. It is, however, still logistically a challenge, not to mention the potential cost involved. As we are completely out of space at the center, it really is a challenge.
I might add that with so many hours of programming I think it is impossible for one reporter to catch all it is they want to report. I know one major newspaper sent a team of reporters this year for that very reason, which is something many online sites have been doing for some time.
I should point out in the case of Hollywood programming; our press list is made available to each studio before the show. It is they who pick who it is they want covering their program and give special access. We have nothing to do with that.
While we're on the subject, it seems as if there's an enormous amount of complaining about the ability of attendees to access panels. Now, if we consider that part of the risk/reward system of the show, could there be something done so that people don't stand in line and then not get into an event? Have you considered an advanced ticket system? How will you work on this growing area of dissatisfaction in future years?
In the past we have implemented ticketing for some events. However we have to be aware of, and never want to be in a situation where people begin selling their tickets to a panel or program. We would then be faced with a scalper issue that already seems to be rearing its ugly head in other areas. I'm not sure if there is a clear answer, but we'll surely be discussing it in the coming weeks.
Since you've brought it up, how bad was the scalper situation and what might the con do about it?
I think all of us thought it was really bad. No one wants to see that type of thing go on, especially when some people were selling counterfeits. This is an area we will be discussing in the coming weeks.
Now that a number of professionals in different industries are attending, there seems to be more of a discussion of the laxity of the professional designation. One longtime comics professional once looked at the professional registration line, decided they didn't qualify, and walked to the front of the line. Will there be any changes to that way of folks attending the show?
No doubt professional registration will see some changes next year. What those changes are is unclear at the moment, but there were a number of issues that need to be addressed, and we are committed to trying to find those solutions.
Might there be a processing fee added, for instance?
I don't think we ever want to overburden professionals, many of whom give of their time and expertise on panels and programs, with making it more difficult for them to attend. But something does have to be done, and it's one of the areas that I know will be discussed.
A new area of concern for some this year is that the traffic flow of the show is such that by placing, say, artists and illustrators and the comics/small press at different ends of the show, that instead of encouraging a flow you're actually having people not even making the attempt to cross the big media areas. Is there any thought to gathering all of the publishing into one area?
We have configured the floor in a variety of different ways over the years. This seems to be working out best, though best doesn't necessarily mean perfect. I might point out that each exhibit hall has doors to the lobby. Those not wanting to wade through the media areas can walk to the lobby and avoid the lines and enter another hall from there which a lot of people seem to be doing.
As someone who likes comics of all types, I reject outright the notion that the only exhibitors from non-comics media should be those that reflect some sort of fantasy element in what they're exhibiting. That being said, how do you answer the concern from people that things like
The Office
doesn't have a place at the show? And how do you make those decisions as a show what to allow to exhibit and not exhibit?
I think it was in 1970 that we screened
Orson Welles'
. I would imagine if we held a screening or a panel on that film today we would meet the same sort of objections.
While I am not comparing
The Office
, many people feel that we shouldn't allow any panel, guest or exhibitor that doesn't have a direct tie to comics. And while I appreciate that point of view, I would have hated to turn someone away like
Ray Bradbury
George Clayton Johnson
Frank Capra
or any other geniuses in their field because they didn't have a comics tie in.
Again, people forget that while comics are at our core, we have always been about film and literature as well. As comics audience have embraced games and toys, so have we.
panel -- which was well attended -- was to feature writers and producers -- and one star -- of that show, and is a great example of good writing, and good storytelling.
I have no doubt in ten years that it will be looked upon as a classic of good television. If we were to use the litmus test that fantasy or comics need to be at the foundation for any guest or presentation, then we would have missed Capra, and would never have screened
How does the Con feel about the growing number of social events and meet-ups that take place during show hours off site?
Events that happen off site during show hours aren't a bad thing. Sometimes that can make for better movement in the hall if an off-site event occurs during our busiest time. We usually like to be aware of those things as sometimes they may conflict with a special program or event we may have. But in general, we would love to work with people on exploring off-site activities for attendees.
There was a lot of discussion among indy/alt types that they're at a specific disadvantage because the success of the show keeps a natural audience for their work out. In other words, the people that want to buzz down from LA and shop for t-shirts and get
Robert Williams
' autograph aren't the plan six months ahead crowd. One solution that's been floated is the possibility of doing an alt-show in conjunction with Comic-Con, the way that film festivals sometimes crop up outside of other film festivals. Would the con object to this happening for alt-comics, or maybe other industries that wanted to set up shop near the big show?
I think some of those Indy and alternative creators can benefit from the sheer number of people at the event. Hopefully their work will be visible to an audience that might not normally be aware of their work.
Were we to separate them, then their audience would be limited. Granted it would be a dedicated audience, but the opportunity to attract a new audience, I feel, would be diminished considerably.
No one wishes more than I, that people could just come down from Los Angeles, or even locally, and walk right up and buy a badge to the show. But whether it was the traffic accident of three years ago that blocked the major freeway between LA and San Diego, the major traffic accident on that same freeway this year, or limited ticket sales. I think most people realize that coming to the show has to be planned out a bit. And I think that's been true for a couple of years now.
Having said that, we do make ticket giveaways available to local radio stations in San Diego and Los Angeles the week before and the week of the show. While it certainly doesn't take the place of just being able to walk up to the show, we hope that at least those who are die hard attendees but haven't purchased a pass, can still have a chance to attend last minute.
Unlike previous years when Comic-Con was the last convention on the calendar, you still have the
Alternative Press Expo (APE)
to go this year. What are your hopes for APE, particularly now that you're in the Fall season where the big alt-show
has traditionally ruled the roost? Where would you like for APE to be this year, and where would you like to see it in five years?
I don't think there is much crossover in attendance with APE and SPX, so I don't think attendance will be affected by that. I would like to see a successful show for APE which means good crowds and good sales for exhibitors. In five years I would love to see even more Indy exhibitors at the show, enough so that we could take the entire Concourse center. Not because we would make more money because it would actually cost us more to rent the entire facility than we could ever recoup in exhibitor or attendee sales, but that's okay. APE will never make a profit and it isn't supposed to. It's good for the industry and having more people able to exhibit means more people making comics and, hopefully more people being exposed to them, and that's always a good thing.
Finally, David, what did you enjoy seeing or doing at the show?
Sadly I didn't have a chance to see much of anything at the show this year. Though I enjoyed running into
the giant Brian from
Family Guy
walking through the lobby
. I actually ran, yes I said ran, to have my photo taken with him.
One thing I did do, for the first time in years, was manage to venture out at night to spend a few moments at a party where I accepted an award on behalf of Comic-Con that the party organizers were very kind in presenting.
And I stopped by another party; a glitzy Hollywood gathering, on my way back to the hotel. Or at least I'm told it was glitzy. I couldn't get in. [laughs]
photos by me, 2007-2008: convention center, Ralph Bakshi, Darwyn Cooke, Joe Casey and Steven T. Seagle, Black Manta, the 2008 Ba/Moon Eisner array at the Image Booth
please note that Comic-Con is an advertiser on this site
CR Reviews
Frontier #18 (Tiffany Ford)
A Fistful Of Drawings
Heroes For Hire #5
The Beagle Boys #36
CR News
Do You Know Me? TCAF 2017 Exhibitors In Unidentified Photos
The Collected Notes From The Comic-Con International Floor, 2013
Ongoing Link List To Publishing News Stories From San Diego's Comic-Con International 2013
Kim Thompson, 1956-2013
Albert Weinberg, 1922-2011
CR Interviews
News Interview: Matthew James-Wilson
CR Sunday Interview: Eric Reynolds
CR Sunday Interview: Joe Decie
CR Letters
Michael Grabowski On Laundry Land As A Habit-Changer For Alt-Comics Consumers
Jim Salicrup On Russ Heath's Last Comics Works
Brad Bartkus On People Having Beefs With The Lenticular Process
Mike Catron On TCJ's Long Ago Coverage Of Wally Wood's Passing
Ivan Brunetti On His Informal Lecture In Chicago, March 28
Send e-mail to
CR Commentary
Welcome To Nerd Vegas: A Guide To Visiting Comic-Con International 2014 (The Placeholder Edition)
The Comics Reporter Planned Convention And Festival Schedule For 2014
The Comics Reporter Group-Facilitated Reconsideration List, 2013
Comic-Con Coping Guide 2013—180 Tips To Survive And Thrive San Diego Con Weekend!
Photos From The Matt Fraction Hawkguy Sandy-Relief Signing At House Of Secrets In Burbank
Bart Beaty's Conversational
Conversational Euro-Comics: Bart Beaty On The Angouleme 2012 Program Sent Out This Week
Conversational Euro-Comics: Bart Beaty On Kolor Klimax
Conversational Euro-Comics: Bart Beaty On The Recent, Slyly Revealing Diary Comics Of David B.
Conversational Euro-Comics: Bart Beaty On Recent Work From Lewis Trondheim
Conversational Euro-Comics: Bart Beaty On Jean-Christophe Menu Leaving L'Association
CR Calendar, Dates, Events
Forthcoming Comics-Related Events For January 2020 And Beyond
List Of Columbus (Ohio) Comics Shops
Crystal Ball: Scheduled Books and Major Releases
CR Comics 101
A Brief Overview
Buying Comics
Getting Published—Comic Books
Making Mini-Comics
Getting Published—Comic Strips
Reading Mini-Comics
test post
Collective Memory
Ted Stearn, 1961-2019
Batton Lash, 1953-2019
Best Comics And Graphic Novels Lists For 2018
Marie Severin, 1929-2018
Harlan Ellison, 1934-2018
Lists and Links
Books About Comics
The Comics Registry
Comics Creators And Related, All On Patreon
North American Comics Shows (Plus)
Original content ©2023 Tom Spurgeon. All rights reserved.
All bylined articles and art/statements utilized through Fair Use and are
©2023 their respective copyright holders.
Portrait of "Spurge" by
Sam Henderson
Logo courtesy of Eric Reynolds.


text:
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — For a mother who lost her son to violence, Illinois' decision to abolish the death penalty is a betrayal. But to a father who lost two daughters and a grandson, it's simply the Christian thing to do.
And to a man who was sentenced to die for a crime he didn't commit, it's a civilized step that may inspire other states to halt executions.
Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn's signature on legislation getting rid of the death penalty provoked an extraordinary array of emotions Wednesday — almost all of them intense.
A Chicago woman whose teenage son was gunned down in 2006 said the killer, who has never been caught, should not be allowed to breathe the same air she breathes.
"I am a Christian. I never believed in killing nobody else," Pam Bosley said, explaining her change of heart after her son was shot outside a church. "But the pain you suffer every single day, I say take them out."
Charles Simmons knows that pain. The Peoria resident lost three relatives in a house fire that prosecutors say was arson. But Simmons said his religious beliefs argue against executing the killer — plus, he considers life in prison a harsher punishment.
"He knows he's not getting off easy," Simmons said. "He's not going to leave us, you know. He's got to walk every day in jail, eat, face people in there."
When the abolition law takes effect July 1, Illinois becomes the 16th state without a death penalty.
Most nations, including virtually all of Europe, have abandoned the death penalty. Among the 58 that still use it, according to Amnesty International, are the United States, China, Thailand, Egypt, Iran, Iraq and Japan.
Quinn's action capped two decades of argument and soul-searching over the possibility that Illinois would wind up executing an innocent person.
Twenty people have been freed from death row after evidence surfaced to show they were innocent or had been convicted improperly. Then-Gov. George Ryan halted executions in 2000 rather than risk killing an innocent man. The state's last execution took place in 1999.
Quinn called this the hardest decision he has had to make as governor, but one he felt was required.
"If the system can't be guaranteed 100 percent error-free, then we shouldn't have the system," Quinn said. "It cannot stand."
He also said capital punishment was too arbitrary. A prosecutor in one county might seek the death penalty, while another prosecutor dealing with a similar crime might not, he said. And death sentences might be imposed on minorities and poor people more often than on wealthy, white defendants.
Quinn commuted the sentences of all 15 men remaining on death row. They will now serve life in prison with no hope of parole.
The governor sought to console those whose loved ones had been slain, saying the "family of Illinois" was with them. He said he understands victims will never be healed.
Death penalty opponents hailed Illinois' decision and said it will carry more weight than abolition in states that rarely used the death penalty.
"Illinois stands out because it was a state that used it, reconsidered it and now rejected it," said Richard Dieter of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington.
Gary Gauger, who was sentenced to die for killing his parents before ultimately being proven innocent, said other states will follow Illinois' example in the long run.
"The death penalty is a throwback to a time when society did not have the ability to hold homicidal maniacs ... for the rest of their lives," Gauger said.
New Jersey eliminated its death penalty in 2007. New Mexico followed in 2009, although new Republican Gov. Susana Martinez wants to reinstate it. In New York, a court declared the state's law unconstitutional in 2004.
Quinn's decision incensed many prosecutors and relatives of crime victims.
Robert Berlin, the state's attorney in DuPage County, west of Chicago, called it a "victory for murderers."
On Wednesday, Republican lawmakers immediately began discussing legislation for a new, narrower death penalty. They said safeguards added to the system — negotiated in part by President Barack Obama when he was a state senator — eliminated any real danger of executing an innocent person.
Republican Rep. Jim Durkin of Westchester predicted Quinn will pay a political price if he seeks re-election in four years. Some terrible murder that cries out for the death penalty is bound to occur and grab voters' attention, he said.
Quinn said he would oppose any attempt to reinstate a new version of the death penalty. He also promised to commute the sentence of anyone who might receive a death sentence between now and when the measure takes effect on July 1, a spokeswoman said.
The governor reflected on the issue for two months after the Democratic Legislature passed the abolition bill.
Quinn said he spoke with prosecutors, crime victims' families, death penalty opponents and religious leaders. He consulted retired Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa and met with Sister Helen Prejean, the inspiration for the movie "Dead Man Walking.
A Gallup poll in October found that 64 percent of Americans favored the death penalty for someone convicted of murder, while 30 percent opposed it. The poll's margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
The high point of death penalty support, according to Gallup, was in 1994, when 80 percent were in favor. That's when doubts about Illinois' death penalty were growing steadily with each revelation of a person wrongly sentenced to die — people like Anthony Porter.
Porter had ordered his last meal and even been fitted for burial clothes when, just 48 hours before his execution, lawyers won a stay to study the question of whether he was mentally capable of killing. That provided time for a group of Northwestern University students to gather information proving Porter's innocence.
Ryan, the state's Republican governor at the time, wound up clearing death row in 2003 by commuting 167 death sentences to life in prison and pardoning four people.
Chicago attorney Enrico J. Mirabelli, whose cousin Sheri Coleman and her two young sons were slain in 2009, said he has mixed emotions about Illinois abolishing the death penalty altogether.
"The primitive emotion says an 'eye for an eye,'" Mirabelli said. "But when you think about it, whether he dies or spends life in prison doesn't bring my cousin back."


text:
The world of meat-eaters got a rude awakening earlier this year when it was found that meat passed off as beef in the U.K. was actually horse meat. But, if you thought meat in the U.S. was safe from secret ingredients, the bliss of your ignorance may soon be shattered. A recent analysis into several different fast food hamburgers found relatively little meat, and a whole host of other "stuff".
According to GreenMedInfo, the study was to determine what exactly Americans are eating when they consume their 5 billion hamburgers annually. The burgers, from 8 different fast food establishments, were analyzed by weight and then microscopically for tissue types.
Their analysis found that water constituted about half of the weight of the burgers, with water content ranging from 37.7% to 62.4%, with an average of 49%. Meat, what you'd expect to make up the majority of the burgers, was found to be as low as 2.1% in some cases, to the maximum of 14.8% in others.
If you think that those providing the least meat did so to cut costs and deliver savings to you, you'd be wrong. The researchers found that the cost per gram of hamburger ranged from $0.02 to $0.16 and was not related to the meat content of the burger. In other words, the cost was likely related to what was on the burger, the packaging, the fast-food company's greed, or the name on the greasy bag.
In addition to a whole lot of water and a little meat (muscle tissue), the burgers contained connective tissue, blood vessels, peripheral nerves, adipose tissue, plant materials, bone, and cartilage. In other words, the burgers were a slew of animal parts with only brain tissue missing.
In two of the studied hamburgers, intracellular (Sarcocystis) parasites were found. Also present, ammonia—used in sterilizing the meat and creating what is known as "pink slime."
If you really thought your value menu burger contained mostly meat, you haven't been paying attention. Though this is an interesting study to be sure, it isn't the first of its kind and it won't be the last. Fast food makers are interested in profit. Any seeming thought to your health is purely done to increase their bottom line. Your best bet: to avoid these messengers of death altogether.


text:
The Adidas China Masters 2013 heralds the resumption of the OSIM BWF World Superseries tour tomorrow after a two-month break.
The last Superseries event was the Li-Ning Singapore Open in mid-June which was followed by an eventful period. First there was the BWF World Championships that saw Indonesia and China win two titles each and thereafter the inaugural Indian Badminton League (IBL). Now the focus shifts to familiar territory once more.
The Adidas China Masters will be a test of sorts for the home team. The Chinese suffered some unexpected losses at the World Championships in Guangzhou and will be keen to make a statement. The draw in all five events has a number of promising Chinese youngsters and this tournament could well throw up some bright prospects for the future.
Given the absence of the biggest non-Chinese name in Men's Singles – Malaysia's Lee Chong Wei – the top seed is local star, Chen Long (right). A clutch of other Chinese contenders flood the draw, including Du Pengyu (2), Wang Zhengming (7) and Chen Yuekun. Apart from these, other emerging players such as Tian Houwei, Gao Huan, Song Xue, Qiao Bin, and Zhou Wenlong (qualifying) will be eager to impress.
Of the non-Chinese, Indonesians Tommy Sugiarto (4) and Dionysius Hayom Rumbaka and Jan O Jorgensen (Denmark, 6) are expected to figure at the business end of the tournament. Talents like Viktor Axelsen (Denmark), Kasumasa Sakai (Japan), Kento Momota (Japan) and Lee Dong Keun (Korea) will sense a great opportunity to cause upsets, as there should be less pressure on them.
The Women's Singles too is packed with established and promising Chinese. Leading the way is Olympic champion Li Xuerui (1), who suffered an unexpected loss in the BWF World Championships final. Wang Yihan (3), Wang Shixian (5), Han Li, Yu Sun, Yao Xue, Xuan Deng, Liu Xin and Jiang Yanjiao will also be in the mix.
Among those capable of upsetting the Chinese applecart are newly-crowned World champion Ratchanok Intanon (Thailand, 2; at left), Tai Tzu Ying (Chinese Taipei, 6) and Sung Ji Hyun (Korea, 4). Thailand has turned out in full strength in Women's Singles – Intanon is accompanied by Busanan Ongbumrungpan, Sapsiree Taerattanachai, Porntip Buranaprasertsuk and Nichaon Jindapon; all keen to prove a point or two.
* In Men's Doubles, the contest is essentially between China and Korea. The Chinese will be led by the legendary Cai Yun/Fu Haifeng (5) and All England champions Liu Xiaolong/Qiu Zihan (4), while the Koreans will look to top seeds Lee Yong Dae/Ko Sung Hyun (centre below); Kim Ki Jung/Kim Sa Rang (3) and Shin Baek Choel/Yoo Yeon Seong (6) to challenge the hosts. Japan's Hiroyuki Endo/Kenichi Hayakawa (2) are the other likely contenders.
* The prominent pair missing in the Women's Doubles draw is World Championships silver medallists Eom Hye Won/Jang Ye Na (Korea). Their compatriots, Jang Ye Na and Kim So Young, will play together. World champions Yu Yang/Wang Xiaoli are favourites but a number of other Chinese pairs –Bao Yixin/Zhong Qianxin (5), Cheng Shu/Zhao Yunlei or Ma Jin/Tang Jinhua (2) – could thwart them. Japan's Misaki Matsutomo/Ayaka Takahashi (3) may also be in the reckoning.
* The Mixed Doubles will see former Olympic champion Lee Yong Dae (Korea) in a new partnership with Shin Seung Chan and attempting to qualify. World champions Tontowi Ahmad/Liliyana Natsir of Indonesia are missing so the favourites are Olympic champions Zhang Nan/Zhao Yunlei (2) and Xu Chen/Ma Jin (1), both of China. Ko Sung Hyun/Kim Ha Na (Korea, 5) – who beat Zhang/Zhao in the Badminton Asia Championships final – could spoil things for the hosts. Other pairs, such as Kim Ki Jung/Kim So Young and Yoo Yeon Seong/Eom Hye Won (both Korea), Anders Kristiansen/Julie Houmann (Denmark, 8), and Kenichi Hayakawa/Misaki Matsutomo (Japan) could prove a handful for their more fancied rivals.
Text by Dev Sukumar | Badmintonphoto


text:
Play Half-Life with friends! Players fight computer-controlled monsters through the original Half-Life storyline or hundreds of available co-operative scenarios. Also includes a plethora of new weapons, enemies, visuals and gameplay systems. Customization features allow each map to use its own unique weapons and enemies.
The media you are trying to view has been deleted and is no longer available. This may have occurred at the uploaders request, or it may have occurred because it violated the sites Terms of Use. If this is a mistake and you would like it re-activated, please contact us with the details.
If you would like to view other media in this gallery click here.


text:
Native Plants
Welcome to the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center's collection of 82,857 plant images.
This site is not designed for commercial use
or publication. All images are copyrighted and are the property
of the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center and the photographers. Back to Image Gallery
About the Image Gallery Contribute Images Image Use Policy Image Request Form How to Link to the Images
rate this image
Gaillardia pulchella
Gaillardia pulchella Foug.
Indian Blanket, Firewheel, Girasol Rojo
Asteraceae (Aster Family)
USDA Symbol: GAPU
Image InformationPhotographer: Yarbrough, Kim
City: Austin
County: Travis
State: TX
Location Notes: Shoal Creek Blvd
Accession date: 2012-06-01
Filename: KTY_IMG0015.JPG
Slide Index: TWC Image 15
Restrictions: Unrestricted
Collection: Wildflower Center Digital Library
Original Format: digital
Orientation: landscape
Shot: Close-up of capitula.
Date Taken: 2012-04-26
NPIN Image Id: 31143
Image VerificationThis image has been verified.
By: Joseph A. Marcus
Date: 2012-05-31
From the Image Gallery
Additional resourcesUSDA: Find Gaillardia pulchella images in USDA Plants
Google: Search Google Images for Gaillardia pulchella


text:
Fundamentally solved agriculture, rural areas and farmers',Drum dryer 'thinking and policy innovation is." The National People's Congress, and head of the provincial water resources bureau LvZhenLin think, to the produce price,Impact crusher for sale we can't put a very high, that that might produce social unstable factors. But, establish a steadily improving agricultural prices direction is very important, at least shall establish agricultural prices with the GDP price index rising or of the rise of the mechanism. "Farmers can benefit the stable growth of farming, will attract more social investment in agriculture, to speed up the development of efficient agriculture, making agriculture modernization faster." The proposal of the central zanu-pf is called for increased agricultural subsidies strength.Concentrator table Specific include: expand the food straight fill scale, start implementing grain subsidy policy of large, to achieve a certain scale of farmers give appropriate allowance; Expanding the scope of implementation crops thoroughbred allowance, the main crops a thoroughbred allowance full coverage, an appropriate increase crops and natural rubber thoroughbred allowance standard;Cement rotary kiln Agricultural subsidies, agricultural production means perfect buying machine comprehensive straight up, gradually establish and agricultural production material prices of agricultural production means linked integrated allowance dynamic adjustment mechanism;China impact crusher Improve the fishery diesel subsidies standards, explore to establish the fishing boat management and fishery oil subsidies hook mechanism. >
The National People's Congress, and put forward the academy ChenPing xuzhou city, jiangsu agriculture to transformation, it must accelerate the transformation of agricultural science and technology achievements, expedite and farmers docking "last mile". She said, at present agricultural science and technology achievements transformation difficulty is bigger, agricultural science and technology promotion system "China dryers;line broken network break" status is not completely reverse, short of the regulations of the state every ten thousand mu of land with a scientific and technological personnel requirements.
Results the farmers to technology hand, some new standardized cultivation technology, pollution-free cultivation technology on the shelfClassifiers. ChenPing for example, now have accounted for the random rice planting area of the larger proportion, this is a kind of cultivation techniques of backsliding. "New technology promotion is facing two questions: one is the promotion cost is higher; the second is the most working out, leaving young labor to accept the new technology of the capacity is low." To improve the present situation, the ChenPing advice, can combine with the needs of the production of the modern agriculture, farming of high school students to return to NongJiao accept directional free training, three years after the training to college degree, and then let them return service local agriculture, this is long term; Short line, can put the laid off workers in agricultural rise, to farmers with technical service.
Raw material mill:www.hxjqcrusher.com/crusher/Ore-separating-line.html
Vibrating feeder:www.hxjqcrusher.com/crusher/China-vibrating-feeder.html
Cement machinery:www.hxjqcrusher.com/Cement-mill.html


text:
I purchased a small container (8 oz) of frozen crabmeat. I do not know if it is cooked or not. The contents appear to be grey (it's a clear plastic tub).
The container reads: Wild Caught Special Crabmeat Small Pieces of White Meat Perishable; Pasteurized
There's other writing on the container as well, but I don't think it's relevant.


text:
Ever dream of zipping around Central Park in a 1920s sedan? If one animal-rights group gets its way, you just might.
NYCLASS (New Yorkers for Clean, Livable and Safe Streets), a nonprofit organization lobbying to do away with carriage horses in New York City, announced on Monday that it is commissioning the construction of the prototype vehicle it hopes will bring the carriage industry into the 21st century -- or at least the 20th.
The vehicle, an electric-powered replica of a 1920s automobile, is being custom built by the Creative Workshop, an automotive restoration company based in Dania Beach, Fla. A miniature version of the vehicle already exists, but creating a full-scale prototype has long been a goal for NYCLASS, which has been lobbying the City Council to agree to a pilot program to test the automobile in Central Park. The program, if approved, would allow passengers to take rides along the same route currently used by the horse-drawn carriages.
NYCLASS has proposed replacing horse-drawn carriages with electric vehicles. In a phone interview, Allie Feldman, the group's lead organizer, said the idea behind the pilot program is to offer Central Park visitors a chance to see for themselves how such a system would work.
"We just want to compare apples to apples," she said.
Feldman said she believes that park visitors would opt for the more animal-friendly choice if they were given the chance to see a side-by-side comparison. The problem, she said, is that horse-drawn carriages are granted exclusive passageway through much of the park's scenic routes, meaning a pilot program cannot happen without the city's permission.
In the meantime, NYCLASS volunteers have been lobbying members of the City Council in all five boroughs, and Feldman said they've so far gained the support of 32 out of 51. Other supporters include Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer, public advocate and mayoral hopeful Bill de Blasio and celebrities such as Miley Cyrus, Alec Baldwin, Kate Winslet and Bo Derek.
But Christine Quinn, the City Council speaker and early mayoral frontrunner, has opposed the idea. A vocal supporter of the carriage-horse industry, Quinn has been at odds with NYCLASS for some time. Feldman said Quinn's opposition is frustrating given that the program could be implemented at no cost to the city.
"We don't know why she won't support it," she said. "Maybe she has no heart for animals. All we're asking to do is try out this one prototype."
At the same time, NYCLASS has been equally critical of Quinn, saying she has a dismal record when it comes to animal welfare in New York City. Shortly after Quinn announced her candidacy for mayor in March, the group seized upon her reputation as an opportunistic tyrant by launching a satirical meme campaign featuring famous bullies holding Quinn campaign signs.
"We've been focused on making sure she doesn't become our next mayor," Feldman said.
Despite Quinn's lack of support, NYCLASS is confident that the pilot program will go forward, so confident in fact that it is putting up the $450,000 it needs to build the prototype vehicle. The group has even capitalized on the upcoming release of Baz Luhrmann's "The Great Gatsby," promoting the vehicle as a charming throwback to the stylish era immortalized in F. Scott Fitzgerald's seminal American novel. Feldman said the Creative Workshop's president and founder, Jason Wenig, has the artistic chops and technical know-how to bring that vision into fruition. In a statement, Wenig said the replica automobile will infuse 21st-century technology with 1920s charm.
"Even though passengers will feel like they are being transmitted to the Gatsby era, the electric car will have cutting-edge battery and EV technology," he said.
Feldman said she expects the prototype to be completed by February 2014. While such an "If you build it" outlook might seem overly optimistic considering that the city has not yet agreed to allow a test run, Feldman said she believes that interest in the idea will only grow as support for the status quo continues to wane.
"The carriage horse is a tradition that needs to go," she said. "We just need to make enough noise until it does."


text:
What do you mean by "usability"?
The first rule of fight club is, you do not talk about fight club.Tyler Durden, Fight club
Every so often, in a software project's mailing list, bug tracker, or wiki, I see someone suggest a change they claim will "improve usability". This is an unhelpful choice of words.
It's unhelpful because usability has multiple components:
- Learnability — how easily a beginner can use the system, and how easily they can become an expert.
- Efficiency — how quickly people can achieve what they want.
- Memorability — how easily people can remember how to use the system or feature, after not using it for a while.
- Safety — how rarely people experience errors, and how easy it is to fix any errors.
- Satisfaction — how pleased people are with the overall experience.
Sometimes a design change may be entirely beneficial. Other times, the change improves one or more of these usability components at the expense of others.
For example, introducing an assistant to guide people through a particular task would usually increase learnability and safety, but reduce efficiency, because even people who knew exactly what they wanted would still need to navigate through the assistant. (And if you tried to make the assistant optional, that option itself would be difficult to understand, reducing learnability.) That doesn't mean it's a bad idea, just that you should compare the costs and benefits.
As another example, adding more keyboard equivalents for menu commands may increase efficiency, but reduce memorability (because people try to remember too many) and reduce safety (because an accidental keypress is more likely to do something surprising).
So, when making a usability suggestion, don't talk about "usability". Instead describe which usability component it would improve, and for who. For example, "This would be more learnable for people who have previously used program X". Or, "This would reduce errors for people using a pointing device". Then if there is any component that would worsen, you can discuss that too, comparing the number of potential users and how much they'd be affected.
Being precise like this also helps avoid common misconceptions about usability.
For example, people who think that usability means "dumbing down" software think it's all about improving learnability at the expense of efficiency. They are mistaken: learnability is important, but it's only one of the components of usability.
Similarly, people who think that usability means making software "pretty" think it's all about improving satisfaction by changing the visual appearance. They are mistaken too: satisfaction is important, but it's only one of the components of usability.
Other software qualities overlap with usability, such as usefulness, accessibility, reliability, and performance. And there are techniques for improving usability, such as simplicity, consistency, metaphor, responsiveness, and commensurate effort. But those are topics for another day.
Further reading
- "Usability 101: introduction to usability" by Jakob Nielsen


text:
Leafy greens industry still reeling from E. coli-spinach outbreak 250177Leafy greens industry still reeling from E. coli-spinach outbreak
The Western leafy greens industry continues to rebuild food safety record from the E. coli 0157:H7-California spinach contamination in September 2006;California leafy greens executive Scott Horsfall says food safety is now Job One on the farm;Food safety incidents are a "black eye" on agricultural sectors, says Scott Hood of General Mills;New federal Food Safety Modernization Act will target more regulations on leafy greens and other commodities deemed by the Food and Drug Administration as higher risks for pathogen contamination.
March 2, 2011
The long-term damage to the western leafy greens industry from E. coli 0157:H7 contamination of California-grown romaine lettuce four years ago simulates the impact heavyweight boxing champion Muhammad Ali left on his opponents: black eyes and lingering scars.
Three food safety experts revisited the September 2006 E. coli-spinach foodborne illness outbreak during a food safety seminar at World Ag Expo and talked about how the leafy greens industry from farm-to-fork continues to rebuild.
The E. coli outbreak brought the leafy greens industry to its knees, sank consumer confidence in their food supply to Titanic depths, and still today has a target drawn squarely on its back with federal bureaucrats poised to impose even stricter federal regulations on the industry.
"Any time there is a food safety incident it really is a black eye on the industry," Scott Hood told the crowd. Hood is the senior manager for microbiology and thermal processing for General Mills.
California leafy greens executive Scott Horsfall added, "The biggest change in our industry over the last four years is that culture has changed significantly to where food safety is really job one on the farm."
Hood, Horsfall, and Barry Eisenberg of the United Fresh Produce Association discussed food safety problems and solutions during the seminar held in Tulare, Calif. in February.
Today, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports one in six Americans get a foodborne illness each year; most are minor cases. The foodborne illness-spinach outbreak four years ago sickened 205 people nationwide. Four people died.
Horsfall, chief executive officer with the California Leafy Green Products Handler Marketing Agreement, LGMA for short, showed a PowerPoint photo of two-year-old Kyle Algood of Idaho who died from consuming tainted spinach. Horsfall has been instrumental in rebuilding food safety and consumer confidence in leafy greens.
"As an industry it's important to remember why we're so committed to food safety," Horsfall said. "We're not doing it because the industry lost $100 million (in reduced leafy green sales after the E. coli event). We're doing this because it has very real repercussions when the products we produce and sell have these consequences."
The leafy greens industry has worked feverishly for decades to provide nutritious and safe vegetables for consumers. The 2006 food safety breach shoved the Western leafy greens industry toward enhanced leafy green production and handling standards through the development of the California LGMA program to improve food safety practices during planting, cultivating, harvesting, and packing.
LGMA covers 14 leafy greens
The California LGMA was implemented in April 2007 and covers 14 leafy greens grown in conventional and organic fields and on small and large California farms. The crops include argula, baby leaf lettuce, butter lettuce, cabbage (green, red, and savoy), chard, endive, escarole, green leaf lettuce, iceberg lettuce, kale, red leaf lettuce, romaine lettuce, spinach, and spring mix.
Today, about 90 percent of the U.S. leafy green production is grown in California and Arizona; 75 percent in California and 15 percent in Arizona. Arizona's winter-grown leafy greens industry implemented an almost carbon copy LGMA program in 2008.
"For nearly four years we've held the industry to this higher standard," Horsfall said. "We have completed over 2,000 inspections (announced and unannounced audits) on farms in California. A compliance program requires corrective actions. We have, when necessary, punished our members including de-certification."
Since the California LGMA was enacted, Horsfall says more than 100 billion servings of leafy greens have been grown. Today, 99 percent of California commercial leafy green production is grown under the LGMA program which is a signed contract with handlers. With the handler's signature, 100 percent participation in the LGMA standards including "good agricultural practices" is required.
"The heart of our program is government oversight," Horsfall said. "We use state agricultural inspectors (for audits) who are overseen, trained, and licensed by the USDA."
Many LGMA standards were developed according to science-based standards, when available, from industry experts and land-grant university scientists, and reviewed by USDA and other regulatory agencies. Other standards were developed with foodborne illness at the forefront with hopes that science would later prove or demonstrate a needed change.
"LGMA is a living document," said Horsfall. "There is a lot of research underway so the standards are continuously updated as we learn how pathogens get into the product and the food supply."
Part of the ongoing research is on the actual source of E. coli and salmonella pathogens. Neither spontaneously grows in a vegetable field but can be introduced from the environment through wildlife, water, and other potential sources.
At General Mills, food safety is a 24-7 top priority, says Hood, senior manager for microbiology and thermal processing. The company manufactures a plethora of food products including cereal, yogurt, and the Betty Crocker and Old El Paso brands. General Mills markets products to 100 countries worldwide.
Hood says General Mills has three top concerns on food safety for the company: raw food ingredients, the processing step, and physical environment inside the production plant. Hood acknowledged the top concern is raw food.
"General Mills buys about 5,000 ingredients from 1,000 production locations," Hood told the crowd. "Each location is potentially an issue if things are not done right. If there are microorganisms in the ingredients coming into our plant then they could potentially be in our food products. We are very diligent with the ingredients."
Sanitation critical
Sanitation is critical at General Mills' processing facilities with most cleaning during the third work shift. Environmental monitoring of the plant helps ensure pathogens are nonexistent. Salmonella is hard to kill in dry food formulations, Hood says. Even a low pathogen level can cause illness. The listeria monocytogenes pathogen can exist in wet food formulations.
"The reality is in today's world the scrutiny of regulators and consumers is if listeria is present in the product it may be deemed adulterated," Hood said.
Tremendous strides have been reached industry wide, he says, to track down sources of foodborne illnesses.
"Twenty years ago if two people got sick, one in California and one in Minnesota, there was no way to link the illnesses," Hood explained. Foodborne illness findings were based on people who became sick at the same church picnic or buffet.
Advances in epidemiology, the study of health and illness patterns, have empowered programs including PulseNet to develop DNA fingerprinting of foodborne bacteria using pulse-field gel electrophoresis technology.
"Epidemiology is a very powerful tool," Hood said.
The technology distinguishes organism strains including E. coli 0157:H7, salmonella, shigella listeria, and campylobacter. This enables health professionals to create and search databases for specific pathogen identification in the United States, even worldwide in the future.
Barry Eisenberg, United Fresh's vice president of food safety services, discussed how the FDA Food Modernization Act signed into law by President Obama in January will impact agriculture. The law will take three years to implement.
The law, designed to improve the safety of the U.S. food supply, gives new powers to the Food and Drug Administration, including the authority to mandate a recall.
"It's coming down the road; (the law) will change your life," Eisenberg said. "As long as associations stay in contact with the government hopefully we'll get something sensible to come out of it."
The FDA will prioritize food safety regulations based on the commodities deemed at the greatest risk of foodborne illness. Ranked high on FDA's high risk list, Eisenberg says, are leafy greens, green onions, and tomatoes.
The law will require food processors and wholesalers to register with the FDA and submit a food safety plan, which Eisenberg explains most companies already have in place. He suggests submitting simple plans without much detail to the agency – just standard operating procedures.
The question is, how many teeth will the law actually have? Federal budget dollars to fund the new law were approved yet no funds have been released. Will the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives, all abuzz with talk of slashing federal spending, actually fund the food safety law?
"The mood right now in D.C. is not to put any new monies into different programs," Eisenberg said.
The United Fresh executive says FDA jobs under the act would require new employees, not a shift of existing employees.
About the Author(s)
You May Also Like
Current Conditions for
Boone, IA
Day 91º
Night 64º
Enter a zip code to see the weather conditions for a different location.
Will Hoosiers recognize farmland loss as an issue?Sep 28, 2023
Stocks data, shutdown threat pressures pricesOct 02, 2023
New England's best dairiesSep 28, 2023
Farmers look to repeat successful 2022 selling strategies in 2023Oct 02, 2023
When to harvest lodged cornOct 02, 2023
Importance of reproductive efficiencyOct 02, 2023
Farm Progress America, October 3, 2023Oct 02, 2023


text:
Keidel: Mayweather, Despite Age, Should Handle McGregor Saturday Night
By Jason Keidel
Fight Night is nigh upon us. Just 24 hours until Floyd Mayweather Jr. and Conor McGregor duck under the ropes and finally face each other, sans microphones, posses and safe distances between them.
After all the gaseous monologues, bluster and bombast, maybe a breakdown is in order.
Punch stats show that Mayweather is easily the hardest fighter to hit, by the greatest boxers in the world. So it's hard to imagine McGregor, who is in his first prizefight under Queensbury rules, landing combinations with ease or impunity.
Unless Mayweather has gotten old, older than he realizes, older than he's allowed during his interviews over the last month. By the time he steps in the ring, it will be nearly two years since Mayweather has boxed professionally - 714 days, to be precise. That's an epic hiatus for a 30-year-old, much less 40, Mayweather's age on fight night.
Even somewhat diminished by age, Manny Pacquiao was still one of the five-best fighters on the planet when he fought Mayweather. Yet according to official CompuBox numbers, Pacquiao landed 81 of his 429 total punches, connecting just 19 percent of the time, including nine - nine! - percent of his jabs. (Mayweather landed 34 percent of his total punches.)
If you'd rather dismiss Pac Man as old and injured, then let's look at a younger, stronger, healthier opponent who many thought would give Mayweather more than he could handle. Saul "Canelo" Alvarez, who is fighting Gennady Golovkin for boxing's pound-for-pound throne, faced Mayweather four years ago, and the Mexican icon didn't fare much better than the Filipino legend.
Indeed, Alvarez - widely known as a complete fighter, equal parts power and precision - landed 117 of 526 total punches, connecting on 22 percent of his jabs. Canelo found Mayweather's face on just 15 percent of his jabs, and 31 percent of power punches. Mayweather dominated the younger, naturally larger Alvarez even more profoundly, landing 232 of 505 punches (48 percent), including 93 of his 175 power punches (53 percent).
No matter your revisionist version of Pacquiao or Canelo, both will wind up in Boxing's Hall of Fame. And Mayweather handled them with relative ease.
Boxing purists give McGregor no shot to win the fight. Fine. But it's unfair to suggest he can't take a punch, particularly one from Floyd Mayweather Jr, who hasn't knocked anyone out in over nine years.
Indeed, McGregor enters an octagon for a living, takes thunderous kicks, fists, and elbows to his face from the toughest martial artists in the world, but can't take a few jabs from a 40-year-old who hasn't truly stopped someone in 11 fights, since Ricky Hatton, in 2009? (Don't count Victor Ortiz, who had his hands down and wasn't expecting the punch that floored him in 2011.)
Another fact, one that seems lost on the public and pundits, could play a major role on Saturday night. Out of thousands of opinions and soundbites, not one pundit has pondered this. Stamina. Not that McGregor is out of shape, but there's one sound he's never heard in a fight...
A bell for round six. Or seven. Or eight.
So, it's stamina, conditioning, and pacing that will separate these two fighters. As wonderfully fit as McGregor clearly is, you can't prepare for a long fight without being in long fights. There's no roadwork, heavy bag or sparring sessions that condition you for the sweaty, gasping minutes of double-digit rounds. It's hard to imagine a fresh-faced, stoic McGregor, not gasping for oxygen, as he enters Round 10.
For all his faults and foibles - and they are myriad and troubling - Mayweather has his mail forwarded to the speed bag. Renowned for ad hoc, midnight jaunts to the gym, Mayweather is 24/7 fit. While many iconic fighters are known for ballooning bellies between fights, Mayweather is never corpulent or careless when it comes to his physique. Perhaps he doesn't always respect people, or the law, but he respects his sport. The greatest homage to your sport is preparation and performance.
Though I don't profess to be Bon Vivant, Burt Sugar, I made my bones as a boxing writer, back when it still owned the back page and your Saturday night. And while it's lost some of its heft, boxing still has historical prerogatives, more than a few fans and fugitives from the old days. Even today, nothing drains the adrenal gland like Fight Night. Say what you will about the merits of this fight, no one questions the talent of these fighters.
A resounding salute to Conor McGregor for entering a ring instead of octagon, for conceding every advantage he would have in his realm and agreeing to fight the best boxer of this young century on his turf and terms. But while we give the nod to McGregor for courage, he should be nodding deep into a 12-round fight. Maybe he won't be floored by the old man's power, but Floyd Mayweather Jr has enough jabs and counter rights in his quiver of punches.
Expect both fighters to feel each other out for a few rounds, before easing into the styles that made them stars and champions. Expect the classic bull to charge the quintessential matador. Then expect an endless assault of jabs and lead rights to pop McGregor's face, watch his eyebrows balloon, then slowly leak blood into his wide eyes until his sight will be questioned by the media, the masses, and then the referee.
Count on McGregor to be tough and talented. But expect Mayweather to be better.
Mayweather by TKO in 9th round.
Jason writes a weekly column for CBS Local Sports. He is a native New Yorker, sans the elitist sensibilities, and believes there's a world west of the Hudson River. A Yankees devotee and Steelers groupie, he has been scouring the forest of fertile NYC sports sections since the 1970s. He has written over 500 columns for WFAN/CBS NY, and also worked as a freelance writer for Sports Illustrated and Newsday subsidiary amNew York. He made his bones as a boxing writer, occasionally covering fights in Las Vegas, Atlantic City, but mostly inside Madison Square Garden. Follow him on Twitter @JasonKeidel.
Thanks for reading CBS NEWS.
Create your free account or log in
for more features.
for more features.