text:
The six-month-long Guadalcanal campaign, from 7 August 1942 to 9 February 1943, tested the U.S. Navy as no other in its long and illustrious history. This span was marked by seven major naval battles, scores of encounters of ships and aircraft, and almost countless skirmishes between surface vessels ranging from battleships to PT boats—not to mention submarine encounters.
The cost was extremely severe. Some 4,911 men of the U.S. and Allied navies perished. This represented almost three times the losses ashore. As a proportion of the naval personnel committed, it represented a far higher toll than the Okinawa campaign, which apparently produced the Navy's highest numeric casualty list. Only the gallant fight of the hugely outnumbered Asiatic Fleet in the opening months of the Pacific war produced proportionately higher human losses.1 The Guadalcanal campaign administered a searing audit of the Navy's leadership, hardware, and doctrine, ruthlessly exposing failure and weakness.
American Commanders Roll the Dice
There is no gainsaying the boldness of the decision of Admiral Ernest J. King, the commander-in-chief, U.S. Fleet—the immortal COMINCH—in catapulting his forces into the Guadalcanal campaign. One of the pre-eminent maxims of modern war is that the party on the offensive should enjoy superiority, at least in overall combat power, if not by measures of implements of war. In the Pacific on 7 August 1942, however, the Japanese Navy had more ships in every major surface class than did the U.S. Navy.
A comparison of available troops and aircraft presents a more difficult problem since it involves more subjective judgments about what level of commitment to the South Pacific each side could pursue effectively. Events demonstrated, however, that the Japanese could attain at least a margin of numerical superiority in the air and the capability for parity or better ashore. In the face of these odds, without King's forceful advocacy, there would have been no Guadalcanal campaign. But it careened very close to disaster, a disaster that almost certainly would have prompted King's dismissal.
What saved the campaign and King's career were the actions of his key subordinates, and Japanese mistakes. First among his lieutenants was Admiral Chester Nimitz, the commander-in-chief, Pacific Fleet. King forced him into the campaign, overruling Nimitz's initial instinct to pause after the 3-6 June Battle of Midway and gather strength. But once the struggle began, Nimitz quietly but resolutely took ever greater risks in stripping other areas, including Hawaii, of forces to bolster Guadalcanal operations. Moreover, he intervened crucially in October to replace the faltering South Pacific Area commander, Vice Admiral Robert Ghormley. Despite well-founded misgivings about Vice Admiral William F. Halsey Jr.'s suitability to higher-level command, Nimitz sent him south to take charge with the campaign in desperate crisis.2
Halsey's fairly won reputation for aggressiveness immediately lifted morale. But he lurched beyond bold to rash in sending his two remaining fleet carriers to take on four Japanese counterparts at the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands on 26 October. The action proved a tactical reverse with the loss of the USS Hornet (CV-8) and lurched perilously close to a calamity when the Enterprise (CV-6) barely escaped a similar fate. Two Japanese carriers were damaged; none was sunk. But the Japanese carrier air groups sustained devastating losses. The 148 lost Imperial Japanese Navy air crewmen not only substantially exceeded deaths at Midway (110), but also included most of the leadership of dive and torpedo bomber units. (By contrast, the U.S. Navy sustained only 20 dead airmen and four prisoners of war.)
The action left the Japanese Navy in November with only the hybrid carrier Junyo and her modest air group to face the partially repaired Enterprise with a large air group. In the mid-November Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, Halsey's coordination of the American effort was flawed, but not nearly so flawed as the Japanese direction. In the end, Halsey fought all out and committed everything he had. The Japanese temporized and lost.3
Admiral Halsey earned and received vast public acclaim, but he and Nimitz were not the only key naval leaders. Rear Admiral Richmond Kelly Turner, commander Amphibious Force, South Pacific, loomed large in the eventual American victory. His indispensable contribution rested in his grasp of the essentials. From the withdrawal of U.S. carriers on 8 August to the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, the campaign produced the singular spectacle of a mutual siege with sea control around Guadalcanal changing at sunrise and sunset.
The Americans, thanks to an ad hoc consortium of Marine, Navy, and Army Air Forces units dubbed the Cactus Air Force after the code name for the island, ruled the Guadalcanal skies by day. By night, when those U.S. planes were largely grounded, the Japanese "Tokyo Express" of sweeps by destroyers and occasionally cruisers dominated the adjacent body of water, known as Iron Bottom Sound for all the ships lost there. The efforts of each side to break this cycle produced an unmatched level of battle on land, sea, and in the air that provides the backbone for any account of the campaign.
The reputation of Vice Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher, the original expeditionary force commander, took a beating after the war. But a new study by John B. Lundstrom demonstrates how sound Fletcher really was and how a great many charges against him were unfounded. Fletcher provides an enduring lesson on how a senior leader can adjust to vast technological change beyond his personal experience. It is easily overlooked today that the first year of the Pacific war coincided almost exactly with the first year of widespread fleet use of radar. Moreover, the capabilities of carrier air groups evolved rapidly with new generations of aircraft.
Fletcher, a nonaviator, recognized he needed advice from officers with practical experience and knowledge. What earned him many enemies, however, was that he correctly perceived that the officers best fitted to provide that advice were far junior to those normally consulted by an admiral at his level. Fletcher reached down to squadron and air group commanders, lieutenant commanders, and even lieutenants. The naval aviator captains and commanders he passed over for advice became bitter critics.4
Different Approaches to Supply
Looking below the surface narrative of battles, however, rests another story. In the end, American triumph ashore arose from a primal factor: the U.S. Marines and Soldiers ate (though not well, it must be acknowledged); Emperor Hirohito's warriors far too often did not. These outcomes directly arose from choices by naval commanders. Admiral Turner proved tenacious and resourceful in providing a steady stream of resupply efforts. The absence of port facilities at Guadalcanal mandated the human handling of supplies. The extravagant demand this placed on manpower, in turn, meant that the Marines could only accommodate two or three supply ships at a time. Consequently, Turner found himself constantly shuffling his limited number of cruisers and destroyers into small escort formations to sustain the supply system. This arrangement destroyed the integrity of U.S. cruiser and destroyer divisions, with detrimental effect on their combat efficiency.
Japanese naval commanders by contrast displayed malign indifference to the suffering of their country's forces on Guadalcanal. To be sure, U.S. air units forced the Japanese into using swift destroyers as their primary supply platform because they could make high-speed runs that minimized their exposure to American planes in daylight. But almost immediately, it was evident that this means could not logistically sustain a large Japanese garrison. Even in the face of dire messages describing the desperate straits of soldiers on what the Japanese Army pointedly called "Starvation Island," Japanese naval commanders continued to shuttle down men, but failed to keep pace with adequate food supplies.5
Keeping the Ships Sailing
The conventional discussion of opposing warships addresses such obvious features as armament, fire control, protection, and speed. These critical elements all can be seen in one fashion or another as affecting episodes at Guadalcanal. But a further technical factor cast a shadow over the campaign. The long years of preparations for a transpacific campaign instilled an understanding of the importance of fuel endurance. This was a function not only of fuel capacity and power-plant efficiency of individual ships, but also of replenishment. Beneath the conventional story of the campaign punctuated with a series of named sea fights rests a submerged history of logistical factors.
The U.S. Navy had moved to high-pressure boilers and double-reduction gearing for propulsion systems. This gave it superiority in fuel efficiency that materially modulated the strain on the service's logistical system. The construction of barely adequate numbers of fast fleet oilers with an ever-more refined ability at underway replenishment permitted the U.S. Navy to keep its ships available for commitment. During the opening two months of the campaign, the loss of a fleet oiler would have exerted an effect on the American position far more powerful than the loss of any combatant short of a fleet carrier.
The Imperial Japanese Navy, however, not only suffered from the higher demands of less-efficient power plants, it also had prepared far less comprehensively for sustaining their forces in the South Pacific. Hence, during the campaign, the Japanese suffered a significant diminishment of combat power when they found themselves compelled to use battleships as fuel farms rather than as combatants.6
Radar's Mixed Record
If fuel provides the most important submerged factor in the naval campaign, the comparative achievements of Japanese visual sightings versus American radar represents the most startling obvious factor. Prewar exercises to test a doctrine of night torpedo attacks prompted the Japanese to develop very large and powerful binoculars and to place great emphasis on selecting men who excelled as lookouts. This combination of refined technology and human excellence provided their navy with a huge advantage.
For example, Japanese lookouts detected Rear Admiral Willis Lee's task force on 14 November about 50 minutes before U.S. radar issued the first hints of the presence of enemy vessels. Of the campaign's five major surface actions, the Japanese located their opponents first visually at the Battle of Savo Island and the second phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal. The Japanese won the first and lost the second of these. By contrast, American radar detected the enemy first at the Battle of Cape Esperance, the first phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, and the Battle of Tassafaronga. Despite this advantage, the U.S. Navy won only at Cape Esperance; it lost badly at Tassafaronga and sustained very severe losses in a tactical defeat at the opening phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal.7
Two lessons are to be learned from this record. The first is that technological superiority may not secure as large an advantage as it might at first appear. Radar was in its infancy. For practical Sailors, the demonstrated characteristics of the most common early-war search radar, SC, was that it was subject to breakdowns and phantom contacts. It also exhibited an alarming inability to detect targets within its nominal effective range. This latter failure was commonly traced to the masking effect of land that surrounded the battle arena. The fire-control radars proved valuable when they worked, but highly vulnerable to shock damage caused by firing the ship's gunnery armament.
Compounding these technical difficulties was the influence of faulty intelligence. Intelligence officers relayed their fears that the Japanese might have developed detectors that could pick up transmissions on the frequencies used by SC radars to Rear Admiral Norman Scott, commander of Task Force 64, before the Battle of Cape Esperance. Consequently, Scott issued an order banning the use of the radars. This order was ignored by Captain Ernest Small of the heavy cruiser Salt Lake City (CA-25). That ship's SC radar picked up the approaching Japanese task force, but Small doubted the authenticity of the radar finding and failed to pass it on to Scott.8
The second great lesson about radar from the Guadalcanal campaign is that the new technology had to be integrated into the command and control system to provide full effect. The lack of appreciation for the brand-new radars, and particularly the superiority of the microwave SG radar over the metric wave SC, is a fault of the Navy as an institution, not the lack of intelligence of individual flag officers. Had Scott and Rear Admiral Daniel Callaghan, the U.S. commander in the first phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, possessed adequate understanding of the importance of SG radar, they may well have discarded older principles about making the most powerful ship in the task force the flagship and instead adopted the new principle that the ship with the most advanced sensors was the proper choice for a flagship. Very fortunately, Admiral Lee was the one officer who grasped this and further understood the superiority of SG radar. The effectiveness of the radar suite in his flagship, the USS Washington (BB-56), and Lee's ability to extract the full measure of this advantage, afforded the margin of victory in the second phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, which proved to be the decisive action of the campaign.
The preferred weapon of the U.S. Navy was gunfire, which American officers presumed would outrange torpedoes. The Imperial Japanese Navy was no slouch when it came to gunfire but prided itself on its torpedoes, as well it should as it boasted the famous 24-inch, oxygen-propelled "Long Lance" Type 93. Packing twice the explosive power as their American counterparts, these deadly devices had vastly superior speed and range abilities—and were wakeless to boot. The U.S. Navy could rightly claim to possess technological superiority over its adversaries (as well as its key ally the Royal Navy) almost across the board, but this pride blinded the service to the possibility that in a few areas it lagged. It took fully a year of combat with the Japanese Navy in the Solomons before the U.S. Navy reconciled itself to the fact that its adversary had better torpedoes in their surface vessels.
Tactical Advantages and Disadvantages
Both the Japanese and the U.S. navies developed doctrine around the concept of a decisive battle, like Jutland in World War I, to determine the winner of a Pacific war. Finding itself in a position of numerical inferiority as a result of naval treaties, the Japanese Navy planned to preface the decisive battle with an attrition phase. After submarines and land-based aircraft exacted a toll, shortly before the day of the decisive battle, Japanese destroyer flotillas, supported by cruisers and the fast battleships of the Kongo class, would launch massive night torpedo attacks on the U.S. battle fleet. In fleet exercises, the Japanese worked out tactics for their destroyers and cruisers that emphasized their independent operation by divisions, rather than trying to maintain a miniature version of a battle line. This combination of doctrine and tactics left the Japanese extremely well prepared for the sort of night gunfire and torpedo surface actions that marked the struggle in the Solomons.
The U.S. Navy anticipated the general thrust of Japanese doctrine and likely tactics, but the service never devoted as much attention and comprehensive effort to night fighting. As Thomas C. Hone and Trent Hone point out in their recent book Battleline, the U.S. Navy envisioned cruisers supporting destroyers in attacking the Japanese battle fleet or defending the American battle fleet, but never worked out a practical set of doctrine and tactics.
It was commonplace to condemn American tactical arrangements in the series of night surface actions in the Solomons in 1942-43 for their rigid adherence to an inflexible column formation of cruisers and destroyers. The fault, however, stemmed not from deficient tactical arrangements chosen by individual American commanders, but rested in the absence of a viable set of tactics and training developed in peacetime that would have permitted the open, independent maneuvering employed by the Japanese. Ironically, the last annual report of the commander-in-chief, Pacific Fleet, before the attack on Pearl Harbor, observed that fleet tactical boards were currently studying "with a view to establishing doctrine and standard procedures" for "coordinated cruiser-destroyer action in night search and attack." Thus, it appears that the deficiency had been identified, but the attempt at corrective action that might have spared the Navy enormous grief in the Solomons came too late.9
Further exacerbating the problem were the effects of Fleet expansion and the commitment to a "short-of-war" policy in the Atlantic. Legislation passed in 1940 that promised a huge expansion of the Fleet by the end of 1943 began producing new construction in earnest in 1942. Finding crews for the new construction diluted the experience level of the Navy as a whole over the short run. (For example, 83 percent of the Imperial Japanese Navy destroyers participating in actions around Guadalcanal had trained prewar versus only 60 percent of their U.S. counterparts.)
Moreover, during 1941 and into 1942, the Pacific Fleet was stripped of almost half its strength for the Atlantic. These units patrolled a neutrality zone stretching halfway across the ocean to the United Kingdom. Atlantic patrolling demanded an operational tempo that cut into training opportunities, particularly those involving gunnery and night-battle practice. At Guadalcanal, the Japanese found themselves executing doctrine and tactics they had long practiced with experienced crews. The Americans found themselves groping to develop doctrine and tactics with crews that were not on average as experienced as their adversaries.
In view of these circumstances, it may be concluded not that the U.S. Navy's Guadalcanal record was poor, but that given the enormous handicaps it operated under, it did remarkably well.
1. Richard B. Frank, Guadalcanal (New York: Random House, 1990), Appendix 3. This tally of 4,911 includes 49 Marines and 92 members of Allied navies. If the Marine and Allied navy numbers are dropped and the 130 Navy aviators included, the total is 4,900. One authority sets Navy fatalities at Okinawa at 4,911. Roy E. Appleman, James M. Burns, Russell A Gugeler, and John Stevens, Untied States Army in World War II, The War in the Pacific: Okinawa: The Last Battle (Washington, DC: Historical Division, Department of the Army, 1948), p. 473. An official Navy publication gives Navy losses at Okinawa as 4,022, but also includes a category of "bombardment of Kyushu Island and Japan" with another 970 fatalities. Presumably, the second category includes some losses incurred supporting the Okinawa operation. The History of the Medical Department of the United States Navy in World War II, The Statistics of Disease and Injury. NAVmed P-1318, Vol. 3, United States Navy, Government Printing Office, 1950 [hereafter The Statistics of Disease and Injury] p. 173.
2. Frank, Guadalcanal, pp. 333-4, 599, 605.
3. Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully, Shatttered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway (Dulles, VA: Potomac Books, 2005), p. 476; Frank Guadalcanal, pp. 399-403, 489-93.
4. John B. Lundstrom, Black Shoe Carrier Admiral (Annapoli, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2006), pp. 54, 68, 79, 180, 249-51, 363-64.
5. Frank, Guadalcanal, pp. 60, 135-8, 252-5, 408, 500, 518-9, 526-7.
6. Norman Friedman, U.S. Destroyers: An Illustrated Design History (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 1982 ), pp. 88, 95, 97, 113; Lundstrom, Black Shoe Carrier Admiral, pp. 25-6, 134-5, 340-2, 346-9, 376-81, 386; Frank, Guadalcanal, p. 370.
7. Frank, Guadalcanal, pp. 103-4, 298-300, 438, 473-4, 507.
8. Commander Task Group 64.2, Serial 0014, October 22, 1942; Salt Lake City (CA-25), Serial 0140, 19 October 1942.
9. Thomas C. Hone and Trent Hone, Battleline: The United States Navy 1919-1939 (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2006) pp. 87-89; Annual Report of the Commander in Chief United States Pacific Fleet for the Period 1 July 1940 to 30 June 1941, CINCPAC File No. A9/FF12/(05), Serial 01275 A.
First Shots of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal
By Vice Admiral Lloyd M. Mustin, U.S. Navy (Retired)
At 0141 on 13 November 1942, Lieutenant Commander Lloyd Mustin, assistant gunnery officer in the USS Atlanta (CL-51), was standing at the foot of the cruiser's after gunfire director peering through a pair of binoculars. The Atlanta, which featured eight 5-inch gun mounts, was fifth in a line of 13 U.S. destroyers and cruisers approaching a strong force of Japanese warships off Guadalcanal. Admiral Mustin's recollections of the subsequent first phase of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal are adapted from his U.S. Naval Institute oral history.
There in the starlight, I saw the target that I believe the after director had been following. Here came into view the very familiar silhouette of the Japanese light cruiser, fairly old design, very low hull, three or four stacks. There was one such light cruiser in that force, the Nagara. There were a couple of destroyers ahead of her. When the Nagara came into my view, our computer solution on her had a 6,000-yard range. Six thousand yards is nearly point blank for modern gunnery. But it was at about this time that having sighted the Japs, our own destroyers in the van began having to take evasive action to avoid actual collision.
I saw the port side of one of our destroyers that supposedly had been in column ahead of us. Obviously she had turned hard to port. We had a collision situation facing us unmistakably to the eye. The Atlanta put her rudder hard over.
Well, it seems to me that the Atlanta had barely gotten swung around when we were illuminated brilliantly by a searchlight from somewhere abaft our port beam as we swung around to our left. I ordered "action port." Here we were, gun batteries trained out by now on the starboard bow on this Japanese light cruiser. Suddenly we slew around to roughly on the port beam with the searchlight source as our target.
While it was swinging, I gave the plotting room an estimated range, 2,000 yards. As soon as the directors said "On target," I ordered "Commence firing," and we did. I remember quite vividly that although this ship had illuminated us, no shots had been fired by us or by anybody else visible or audible to me or anybody else until the Atlanta commenced firing at that searchlight.
We got out from the after group something like 10 or 12 rounds per gun at that target. We fired out there on my estimated range, and I saw the shells hit the water, some of them at least, short of the searchlight, because I could see them rise in the searchlight beam. Of course, the spotter in the director had control of the fire from there on. He moved them up, and I am sure they began hitting.
The position of the forces was such that one or two of their destroyers were to the south of Atlanta as we turned left in this emergency maneuver. One or both of them got off their torpedoes. These were those magnificent torpedoes of the Japs with the 24-inch diameter and 1,200-pound warhead. One of them hit the Atlanta in pretty close to the bulkhead between the forward fireroom and the forward engine room. Actually, another one hit us and did not go off. It penetrated the ship's side and stuck there.
Anyway, one torpedo hit Atlanta and blew. It was a shattering blow. A monstrous column of water and oil rose on our port side and cascaded down all over the ship, drenching all of the topside. People were thrown to their knees, including me, by the shock of the explosion. The after fireroom crew releasing steam just made further voice talk impossible. The smoke from our stacks and the spray and so on, interfered tremendously with visibility. But in the meantime we were getting shot at as well, and we were getting hit.
Somehow or other, later as we lay there dead in the water in a westerly heading, the San Francisco (CA-38) opened fire on us from fairly close aboard, just slightly abaft our port beam at a range that I would estimate to be not much more than 2,000 yards.
Well, Captain Samuel Jenkins commented later that he and Rear Admiral Norman Scott had been standing outside the Atlanta's pilothouse on the starboard bridge wing looking to the north, which was where the battle seemed to have gone, when there was some alarm on the port side. Captain Jenkins went around the catwalk to the port side to see what was going on. When he came back, there was no starboard bridge wing. This San Francisco salvo going through there had just removed it. Admiral Scott died in the Atlanta in that battle, and I have a feeling that it was that salvo that did it. A couple of his staff officers were standing with him, and they simply vanished. There was no burial at sea. There was nothing to bury. They were just gone.
Flying in the Cactus Air Force
By Brigadier General Robert E. Galer, U.S. Marine Corps (Retired)
The commander of Marine Fighter Squadron 224, Major Robert Galer, arrived at Henderson Field in August 1942. Flying an F4F Wildcat fighter, he went on to shoot down at least 13 Japanese planes during the Guadalcanal campaign and to earn the Medal of Honor. The following recollections are adapted from an interview Dr. Fred Allison of the Marine Corps History Division conducted with him in 1999.
We organized the Cactus Air Force—any airplane that could fly. In fact the Navy helped more than they're given credit for. A carrier would get hit, and their pilots would all come in and join the Cactus Air Force until the next reassignment, and they made a real contribution. The Coast Watchers (natives and sometimes Australians who lived in the bush throughout the Solomon Island chain) also made a real contribution. They would warn you of Japanese raids coming down and also get you back when shot down.
Some days we couldn't get airborne because of Japanese fire. When we did get airborne we would strafe and bomb. You would get over the ridge and hit anything you saw. Anybody that hollered for help, and we thought we could help, we would do it.
An Army Air Forces squadron flying P-39 fighters couldn't go to altitude, so they did practically all the close support. The Marine SBD squadrons were bombing all the time. Not a real lot of close support because they were too busy bombing Japanese ships. The Japs were trying to reinforce all the time.
About three different times Tokyo Rose claimed the Japanese had taken the airfield. They had superior numbers of airplanes and personnel. But we had no choice; we were going to win. We had to do it. My squadron, we lay out on the runway one night with .45s in our hands in case the Japs got through. They had a couple of artillery pieces that could hit the field anytime, and they did so every night. Somebody said they fired 785 shells from battleships into the perimeter. I was taxiing one night that we had been bombed and shelled. It had rained like hell, and I taxied right back the same way I had taxied earlier but hit a bomb hole full of water. It didn't help the airplane.
Sometimes there would be 18 or 20 enemy bombers and 20 fighters coming, and we would try to find them. We would mix with them over Henderson Field. In one battle three of us made dead stick landings onto Henderson Field. We had armor protection, protected fuel tanks. Our planes were heavier and weren't as maneuverable as theirs, but we could get away from them. Being able to take the punishment was very important.
We fundamentally used wingman tactics. Your wingman would help protect your fanny. We also tried to maintain close section integrity. Two months after the campaign started the Japanese were getting new pilots, and basically they weren't trained as well as the original pilots. You could really tell the difference.
I was shot down three times, I think all by air-to-air action. Hell, our antiaircraft was shooting at us some of the time. They were shooting at the bombers, and I could have been hit by fire aimed at them.
My leadership philosophy was wherever I sent the guys, I was going to go. I took the lead, flew every day, and had lots of targets.


text:
The scientists, companies and "soundscapers" on a quest to make our society quieter and less stressful.
Like many musicians, Andrew Flintham had trouble making that difficult second album.
Two decades ago, the record producer completed The Brecklands Dawn Chorus, a one and a half hour recording of early morning bird song. It went on to become the biggest-selling wildlife recording of the 1990s. But 15 years later, whilst trying to make a follow-up, he hit an impasse. The problem was not a lack of creativity, but a paucity of available content. From the mountains of Scotland to deepest Wales, he was unable to find an uninterrupted dawn chorus anywhere in the UK.
"The most I could gather was about five minutes," he says. "When I played back all the recordings there was always a hum of noise that drowned out the birds. It was either the drone of traffic, civilian aircraft, military jets, electricity sub-stations or even mobile phone masts and that was in 2008. I've tried in several places since then and it's become worse."
Flintham's tale, which many will find tragic, reminds us just how rapidly societies are changing. He believes that we live in a constant rush-hour, having replaced Monday to Friday, nine to five working patterns and leisurely weekends with 24/seven shift working and its accompanying constant din. For Flintham, it has made life worse. And, he is by no means alone. Campaigners and health organisations point to a growing body of evidence that noise can profoundly affect our health and emotions. The World Health organisation, for example, says that persistent sounds of just 30 decibels, equivalent to someone whispering in a library, are enough to disturb sleep patterns. As a result, politicians are starting to take note, and as the public starts to react against the ever-growing cacophony, businesses are responding with products designed to bring back the peace and quiet of years gone by.
Actress Poppy Elliott is one of those (quietly) leading the charge. The granddaughter of John Connell, the founder of the UK's Noise Abatement Society, launched Quiet Mark earlier this year. The charity's premise is that the reason products are noisy is because it is cheaper to make them that way. It campaigns for quieter products, whether they are airlines, trains, hair-dryers, food-mixers or even musical instruments. The initiative then awards a striking purple Q stamp of approval to products or schemes designed to be sensitive to the ears of those around them.
"Even the inclinations of the sound of our voices can make or break our day," says Elliott over coffee in a busy café near her home in Brighton, in the south of England. As we speak, a blender roars into action in support of her cause. "Life revolves around the sensitivity of sound. It's a fundamental pillar of our existence, as important as light."
Quiet Marks are awarded to encourage companies to produce less noisy products whether they are aeroplanes, trains, hair dryers, food mixers or even musical instruments. Early winners include the Corinthia Hotel in London for providing a quiet haven away from the "urban buzz", Stihl for its range of quiet lawn movers and hedge trimmers, as well as Yamaha for its range of silent instruments, including a violin that allow headphone-wearing musicians to practice without disturbing others. The construction firm Temple Mace and the London borough of Southwark also recently received one for reducing disruption and noise disturbance during the building of the Shard, the capital's new landmark tower - particularly important because of the proximity to a prominent hospital.
The Shard's Quiet Mark award is unique, but it echoes similar moves around the world. In New York, for example, the city's department of environmental protection rewards contractors who use tools and machinery that are designed to reduce noise. The city even issues guidance to help construction firms buy quiet versions of necessary kit.
Back in the UK, Quiet Mark's initiatives have been welcomed by some UK politicians, while it has also received support from a cast of companies that have pledged to build quieter products. That includes the car maker Lexus, which underscored its commitment in 2011 when it launched its "Shhhh" television advertisement for the CT200h compact hybrid, featuring pop singer Kylie Minogue. "Quietness is at the heart of our engineering philosophy," says a Lexus spokesperson, who backs up the claim by revealing how its engineers listen to its cars' engines "through a stethoscope" to ensure that noise is at an optimum level. "Quietness appears to be an appealing feature to today's car buyer," they add.
But Jamie Weaden, industrial design leader at the home appliance maker Kenwood, says it is not just premium products, like cars, where consumers are demanding more. "Historically the noise of products wasn't as high on the agenda when it came to design of small domestic appliances," he says. "But modern consumers, including myself, now rightly demand products with lower and better noise quality without this requirement being reflected adversely in price."
It would be tempting to think reducing noise is just a marketing gimmick used by firms to differentiate themselves in crowded markets. But, according to Elliott, it is more than that. "Sound profoundly affects our emotions and health," she says, adding that she has plans to follow Quiet Mark with Quiet Bark – involving sound-proofed kennels and tips from dog trainers in how to reduce barking humanely. "We're creating a melody of brands to bring the people new, easy-listening, lifestyle choices. Like John Lennon, all we are saying is give peace (and quiet) a chance."
'Buy quiet'
Elliott's claims about the harmful impacts of environmental noise are backed by a growing body of evidence. One study, published in the European Heart Journal in 2005, found that long-term exposure to high noise levels was linked to a tripling of the risk of heart attack for women and a 50% increase for men. German scientists who carried out the research said they believed loud sounds were largely to blame for the effects; however associated stress and annoyance could also play a role thanks to elevated levels of hormones and brain messaging chemicals such as adrenaline and noradrenaline.
A report published by the World Health Organisation (WHO) concluded environmental noise was responsible for thousands of cases of heart attacks and cases of tinnitus in European Union member states per year. It also backed the findings of other previous studies showing high noise levels can undermine reading, memory, language and attention in children with life-long knock on effects on educational attainment.
Such findings have meant that everyone from governments to employers are now taking the effects of noise more seriously. For example, the US space agency Nasa, where you might think the roar of a rocket taking off was an occupational hazard, has an entire programme dedicated to what it calls "hearing conservation". In addition it has introduced a "buy quiet" procurement policy, aimed at reducing workplace noise where possible.
Forward thinking as these schemes are, they are of no help to the hundreds of thousands of people who live – and try to sleep – amidst the noise of our modern cities. Over the years, engineering has led to better sound proofing and glazing of newer buildings in these areas, but they do not tackle the problem at source. As a result, nearly ten years ago, the European Union launched its environmental noise directive that requires member states to produce maps of noise levels in large urban areas. The ultimate goal is to help politicians and officials reduce their populations' excessive exposure to loud noises, which, despite numerous efforts over the past 40 years to reduce them, have continued to rise.
"This is by far the most significant international attempt to reduce environmental noise impact that there has ever been," says Dr Mike Goldsmith, previously of Keele University in the UK, who led Dreamsys, a three-year project for the British government to build low-cost measurement systems into noise maps based on reality, not prediction. They were produced using figures from arrays of low-cost microphones placed around urban areas rather than the traffic flow and flight timetable data previously used in the UK.
"Historically there have been two trends which are relevant here," adds Dr Goldsmith, whose book Discord: The Story of Noise, is published late September. "One is the use of zoning to restrict areas affected by noise and to define quiet areas on different scales. The other is the slow but steady development of the perception by individuals that they have a right not to be exposed to significant noise."
Dawning thought
Not all those in the field are working to turn down the volume. Sounds ability to change behavior can also be used in a positive way.
Canadian transport managers were the first to combat vandalism and other anti-social behaviour by playing classical music at remote stations in order to deter teenage gangs. The tactic has been used by transport and supermarket managers in the UK.
Dr Harry Witchel, an expert on physiology and acoustics, and lecturer at the Brighton and Sussex Medical School in the UK, has experimented with playing relaxing music in a lively clubbing district in Brighton in an attempt to dampen the raucous atmosphere on Saturday nights. Although his efforts have so far proved inconclusive, he believes "soundscape" design can be used to change behaviour.
"Soundscapes are about making the sound appropriate for the space, and the people and animals that share the space," he says. "Some spaces should ideally be peaceful, while other spaces should be vibrant.
Dr Witchel is working with Soundscapes of European Cities and Landscapes, an EU-funded project that promotes the view that managing noise should not be just about reducing sound levels. His book You Are What You Hear, published last year, seeks to answer tricky questions such as why some prefer Beethoven and others rap, why aggressive young men in cars play their music so loud and why music can enhance sexual pleasure.
Another proponent of soundscaping is Martyn Ware, founder member and keyboard player of the pop group Heaven 17. When he is not touring, he runs the Illustrious Company, a 3D sound installation company. He turned London's Millennium Bridge into a 3D sound system during the Olympics in a project called Tales From The Bridge.
Ware has also been working with the Noise Abatement Society on pilot schemes involving creating immersive, calming soundscapes in troublesome urban areas. However he does not believe all the problems caused by noise can be solved by soundscaping.
"I'm not sure that overall it's possible to do so. However, with intelligent and considerate design as well as sensitively curated urban sound curation, the negative effects can be ameliorated. I think we need to acknowledge the multiplicity and complexity of the soundscapes we encounter daily, and look at ways of changing them for the better."
If the efforts of campaigners, politicians, businesses and artists to re-introduce some peace and quiet to our lives are successful, Andrew Flintham will perhaps one day be able to complete his mission to record another uninterrupted dawn chorus.
"There is probably a dawn chorus somewhere in the UK, but I don't know where it is, and even then it probably doesn't last very long," he says. "Nature's natural relaxant is birdsong and it's something I'd really like to hear again without any interference."
If you would like to comment on this article or anything else you have seen on Future, head over to our Facebook page or message us on Twitter.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Serie A: Inter 2 Bologna 2
Diego Milito saw a late penalty saved as Inter's poor run of form continued with a 2-2 home draw against Bologna on Saturday.
Mauro Icardi twice put Inter ahead, with a predatory early goal preceding a magnificent second-half strike, but Michele Pazienza and Panagiotis Kone both dispatched rebounds to earn struggling Bologna a share of the spoils.
The result lifts Davide Ballardini's side two points clear of the Serie A relegation zone ahead of Sunday's matches, while Inter are two points behind fourth-placed Fiorentina and without a win in four games, heaping further pressure on coach Walter Mazzarri.
Milito was given a golden chance to win the game with six minutes remaining after Andrea Mantovani was penalised for tugging down Rodrigo Palacio, but Bologna goalkeeper Gianluca Curci dived to his right to repel the striker's spot-kick.
Yuto Nagatomo was one of three players restored to the Inter team and took just five minutes to justify his inclusion. The Japan full-back delivered a low cross from the left, allowing Icardi to get in front of his marker and stab the ball home. It was the 10th Inter goal Nagatomo has been involved in this season.
Another player recalled to the home line-up, Esteban Cambiasso, then saw an acrobatic, goal-bound volley blocked, before Andrea Rannochia - the other man brought in by Mazzarri - headed just wide.
Bologna gave their hosts a scare on 17 minutes when Mantovani's header went just wide, while Palacio cut inside two defenders midway through the first half and unleashed a drive from the edge of the box, which went narrowly past the post.
Ten minutes before half-time, Bologna equalised against the run of play. Gyorgy Garics produced an exquisite back-heeled nutmeg on the right and cut the ball back for Lazaros Christodoulopoulos.
Inter goalkeeper Samir Handanovic did well to repel the Greece midfielder's shot with his feet, but Pazienza drove the rebound down the middle of the goal and the Slovenian was unable to make a second save.
Shortly after the restart, Danilo D'Ambrosio broke down the right and fired a low cross across Curci's goal that Palacio, sliding in at the back post, was just short of making contact with.
Garics broke away from the Inter defence just after the hour mark, but his shot from the edge of the box failed to trouble Handanovic.
Almost immediately, Icardi showed him how to score from 20 yards, masterfully curling the ball beyond the despairing dive of Curci and in off the inside of the post.
Inter's lead nevertheless lasted just 10 minutes. Mikael Antonsson swung a high cross into the box from the left, which Cambiasso and Rolando failed to deal with, and when the ball bounced off the latter's chest, Kone fired the loose ball home.
The Albania-born Greece international had scored Bologna's goal in the 1-1 draw with Inter earlier this season.
After 83 minutes, Mantovani brought down Palacio, who had his back to goal, in the area and the hosts had the chance to win it from the spot. However, Curci came to Bologna's rescue.
Substitute Robert Acquafresca could even have snatched a dramatic winner for the visitors, only to be denied by a fine double save from Handanovic right at the end.


text:
About this item
- The Stencil1® Airplane - Stencil 8.5" x 11" contains one 8.5" x 11" mylar stencil
- Easy to use with paint, markers, etc.
- Washable, resuable, and durable
- Ideal for art projects, t-shirts, and more
This Stencil1 Airplane stencil is great for painting walls, t-shirts, mixed media or craft projects. These laser-cut stencils will give your projects great, detailed results. Made of durable mylar, they can be used again and again! Our stencils can be applied to most surfaces including wood, paper, fabric, metal, ceramic, concrete and glass.
Material: Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
Dimensions (Overall): 11 inches (L) x .0 inches (W) x 8.5 inches (H)
Weight: 2 ounces
Recommended Use: Fabric, Paper, Walls
Package Quantity: 1
Item Number (DPCI): 081-22-3878
If the item details above aren't accurate or complete, we want to know about it. Report incorrect product info.
In stock - free standard shipping with REDcard
Not in stores
Prices, promotions, styles and availability may vary by store & online. See our price match guarantee. See how a store is chosen for you.


text:
You have some really great ideas on the edge rate problem that I am immediately
going to try.
First, I'm working on a complex bi-directional backplane bus where we would like
to increase the daughter card stub lengths a little. Simulation shows that the
IBIS "Max" selection (Cadence = "Fast") on the supplier's model is just a hair
too fast in that we start failing Noise Margin on a few slot/driver
I will clone the model provided, slow down the V-T curve and/or edit the V-I
curves for a slightly lower Vol. Re-simulation will then tell me if my Noise
Margin problem is fixed. I can then go to my supplier(s) with a max edge rate
specification that they can respond to in a businesslike manner.
This kind of interactive proposal - counterproposal testing of design
feasibility is just what early simulation and reality checking should be doing
for both supplier and user. And, obviously, not just for edge rates.
Best Regards,
"D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]> on 07/13/99 04:12:06 PM
Please respond to [email protected]
Sent by: "D. C. Sessions" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
cc: (Roy Leventhal/MW/US/3Com)
Subject: Re: [SI-LIST] : Some Semiconductors are Unnecessarily Fast
Roy Leventhal wrote:
> Some additional thoughts & questions:
> I use Cadence's SpecctraQuest/SigExplore to simulate the boards. Those tools
> IBIS I/O cell models. SPICE models would cause me lots of extra time and
> to get into IBIS format. We have found topology simulation, timing guided
> placement, impedance guided routing, etc. to be all very helpful.
> I STRONGLY advocate sanity checks very early in the process. For such checks
> we get "+/-20%" models early on?
No prob. The standard-cell libraries have been IBIS-characterized since 0.6
We've had some rough spots with model quality but we've taken them as
to improve the modelling process. Customer feedback on matters like that is
extremely critical (and on that I think I can safely speak for the other Si
of the IBIS committee.)
Other companies may be different. After all, why should they go to the
trouble? Unless, of course, your components acquisition team gets brutal
with "no IBIS models? Don't bother bidding."
Better yet, though, why don't you (plural: meaning customers) take charge of the
process and start specifying device I/O with IBIS models in the first place?
YOU know your application better than we do (or blinking well *should*!)
That way our sales force, who are of course clueless, *have* to come to the
Geek Force to make sense of things. As it is, they (mistakenly) think that
they know what they're talking about with nonsense such as "4x driver" and
"8 mA driver."
Demand the moon, stars, and Aurora Borealis. You won't get them, of course,
but at least we'll be talking -- and the engineers will actually be dialed
in for a change. Sure beats hearing about it later.
Oh, and BTW: make the IBIS model part of the purchase contract. If you get
a batch of parts that are outside of the envelope, make the vendor eat 'em.
It's long past time that my colleagues got religion in the only sure way.
> There are several caveats. Of course we don't want to get into "you said - - -
> finger pointing of early, first cut models. Then too, I would guess that IBIS
> models give you no process control information feedback. Lastly, more complex
> topologies need more accurate, worst case models not usually avilable early
> Unless you're designing into a standard process.
> What's your ideas on dealing with these issues?
Love it. Keep in mind that we *are* using a standard process, so I can get you
some pretty good models very early in the game. Better yet, as above, YOU do
the IBIS models. It's not like SPICE, after all; you don't need access to
burn-before-reading process tables. Don't take OUR word for what the limits
are; we'll push them out as far as we think we can get away with it so that
the yield points are better and we can be sloppier about the design granularity.
One of our people put it very well recently. He pointed out that semiconductor
companies don't make 'product'. We make 'parts', and YOU make 'product'.
Until YOUR _products_ ship to revenue customers WE haven't succeeded. Making
you get by with some silly library modeled after thirty-year-old
parts that were doing well to get two flip-flops into a 14-pin package and
hold the clock-to-Q times to a few hundred nanoseconds -- now THAT is really
dumb. It's also exactly what's going to keep on happening until customers
start demanding real, meets-our-needs technology instead of data sheet
templates copied off of French cave walls.
-- D. C. Sessions [email protected]
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected] In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****
**** To unsubscribe from si-list: send e-mail to [email protected] In the BODY of message put: UNSUBSCRIBE si-list, for more help, put HELP. si-list archives are accessible at http://www.qsl.net/wb6tpu/si-list ****


text:
Thursday, May 07, 2009
On National Unity
I've lived in British Columbia on two seperate occasions, a fact I mention often for a reason, which I'll address later. I've lived in Vancouver, and I've lived in Invermere, the latter also afforded me considerable exposure to Albertans, whether it be frequency of their presence in this town, the exposure to Calgary media, or my many sojourns to the province, based on proximity. My wife was born in Calgary, and we've made many visits since I left the interior. We've also spent time in places like Sundre and High River, the Crowsnest pass. I've been to the Yukon, up and down every mountain range in British Columbia. I've spent time in Newfoundland and other eastern jewels. What's your point? The "name" dropping is nothing more than a counter to the Ontario mentality, because I see myself as a Canadian, capable of processing all the diversity at play, not handicapped by regional sentiment.
During the Convention, we were in a pub (shocking I know) and someone in our party mentioned they were from Toronto to a "local". Over the years, I've trained myself to note the response, because it's fairly typical and you see if often- the eyes rolled with a sense of mild disgust. It's here where my resume comes to the fore, because this perception highlights a basic ignorance or intolerance. To be fair, the lack of tolerance is a two way street, because I've seen the Ontario response in reverse.
When Ignatieff speaks about national unity, strengthening the "spine" of the country towards common interest, maybe I hear what I want, but it translates to something more than the usual angst. I love every region of this country, each brings its own character, natural and social, that all congeals to form the Canadian identity. In truth, people who live in Vancouver have more in common with people that live in Toronto, than they do with people who live in Prince George. However, rather than embrace certain affinities, Canadians spend far too much effort denoting their own tribal sentiments and in so doing belittle other circumstances. I find this to be a waste of energy, because in my experience, I've never felt like a "foreigner" or uncomfortable anywhere in this country. As a matter of fact, I'm generally stunned by the uniformity, more a question of rural/urban divide than regional geography.
If there is one hope I have moving forward, the new technologies that make the world smaller, will manifest to the point that Canadians don't sneer at other Canadians, but instead we feel some common bond that denotes mutual respect. I don't see the call for unity as exclusive to the English/French interplay, but something broader that gets us past combative perceptions throughout the country. Naive perhaps, but not necessarily misguided or without merit in the grand scheme.
4 comments:
- Jesse said...
Good one.
- 10:43 AM, May 07, 2009
- Anonymous said...
Agree with Jesse . . . good post.
Now that you know me a bit better it probably won't surprise you to hear that one observation as a relative newcomer to Canada is my surprise at how sweeping and fierce the opinions are of Canadians towards their fellow countrymen from different regions. Everyone from a given geographical boundary gets painted with the same brush it seems, the perceptions of different segments being so strong towards one another.
I find that strange simply because even in the US, where I've lived several places and regions, no one assumes they understand any individual's behaviour or political leanings based solely upon the region from which they hail.
Though demographically and electorally, you could conclude some stark, stark splits in sections of the US, there is a general acceptance (which happens to match reality) that staunch conservatives live in Boston and ultra-progressives reside in rural Alabama. There also seems to be a general acceptance that, regardless of how one votes and how bitter disagreements may be (particularly on social issues), at the end of the day everyone is "American." Heck, even staunch "close the border" acquaintances I have known will acknowledge that illegal immigrants are in some fashion pursuing the American dream as individuals even as they push for policies that would send those industrious individuals and their US-raised children back to the countries from which they came.
When Americans greet each other from different regions, the typical discussion that follows begins with a complimentary exchange on how "beautiful" their respective regions are or how nice the residents are or how good the food is, all of which is some form of national bonding and "reaching across." Though my exposure is more limited in Canada, on more than one occasion, I have too seen the "rolling eyes" reaction of Canadians to one another, which sort of belies the notion of the friendly Canadian to say the least ;).
It throws me off each time I observe it. I am not an ultra-nationalist sort, but I do think Canada has much to be proud of, including having an amazingly diverse population spread across a vast and universally grand and sweeping backdrop.
I would love to see a leader embrace that diversity in a real and genuine fashion and encourage Canadians to embrace that strength. It warmed my heart to see Ignatieff address the need for bringing the nation together. For an "academic," I've noted it also brings out the strongest emotions in his presentations. Quite a contrast to Harper, for whom exploiting division is always his clutch position.
- 1:51 PM, May 07, 2009
- Steve V said...
That's an interesting perspective. I think it's fair to say that Canadians suffer from a inferiority complex. In Toronto, they beg, then brag about any attention from America, desperate to be viewed as a world class city. Anytime a "star" or band, or some international figure visits, within a nanosecond, the first question asked is "how do you like here?". People need this validation, even though the truth is self-evident.
Within Canada, slagging a place like Toronto is almost required sport. Instead of celebrating a city that is internationally recognized, we cut it to shreds. Instead of just being proud of Vancouver, it always comes with the requisite compare and contrast, which again denotes a level of insecurity. I think Canada will truly reach its potential when it speaks confidently, without needing to tear down other regions to highlight relative positives. Sorry, that's a bit rambly, but I don't care how we stack up relative to our southern neighbors, nor do I see the need to shit on fellow citizens as a way to define self-identity. It's a maddening country sometimes.
- 6:20 PM, May 07, 2009
- ottlib said...
I get the feeling when he talks about national unity he is not talking about the "two solitudes".
I think his time in the US has given him a different perspective on what unity means.
As Joseph states, American look at unity as all citizens being Americans regardless of place of birth or language or any other difference. That attitude often leads to hyper-patriotism and arrogance and ignorance towards the rest of the world.
However, if Mr. Ignatieff can bring that kind of unity to the country tempered with Canadian values of tolerance and balance then Canadians could see a new way of looking at their country and its citizens.
It will be interesting to see how things unfold going forward.
- 7:38 PM, May 07, 2009


text:
Former Executives of Stanford Financial Group Entities Convicted for Roles in Fraud Scheme
WASHINGTON – A Houston federal jury has convicted Gilbert T. Lopez Jr., the former chief accounting officer of Stanford Financial Group Company, and Mark J. Kuhrt, the former global controller of Stanford Financial Group Global Management, for their roles in helping Robert Allen Stanford perpetrate a fraud scheme involving Stanford International Bank (SIB).
The guilty verdict was announced by Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Justice Department's Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Kenneth Magidson of the Southern District of Texas; FBI Assistant Director Kevin Perkins of the Criminal Investigative Division; Assistant Secretary of Labor for the Employee Benefits Security Administration Phyllis C. Borzi; Chief Postal Inspector Guy J. Cottrell; and Special Agent in Charge Lucy Cruz of IRS-Criminal Investigation.
Stanford, who was convicted in a separate trial held earlier this year, illegally used billions of dollars of SIB's assets to fund his personal business ventures, to live a lavish lifestyle, and for other improper purposes.
The evidence presented at the trial of Lopez and Kuhrt established that they were aware of and tracked Stanford's misuse of SIB's assets, kept the misuse hidden from the public and from almost all of Stanford's other employees, and worked behind the scenes to prevent the misuse from being discovered.
The trial against Lopez and Kuhrt spanned five weeks. After approximately three days of deliberations, the jury found both Lopez, 70, and Kuhrt, 40, both of Houston, guilty of 10 of 11 counts in the indictment. Each defendant was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and nine counts of wire fraud. Each was found not guilty on one wire fraud count.
Both defendants were immediately remanded into custody.
U.S. District Judge David Hittner, who presided over the trial, has set sentencing for Feb. 14, 2013. At sentencing, Lopez and Kuhrt will each face a maximum of 20 years in prison on each count of conviction.
The investigation was conducted by the FBI, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, IRS-CI and the U.S. Department of Labor, Employee Benefits Security Administration. The case was prosecuted by Deputy Chief Jeffrey Goldberg and Trial Attorney Andrew Warren of the Criminal Division's Fraud Section, and by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Varnado of the Southern District of Texas.


text:
The Evil Within Trailer: Seeking Asylum from Evil
The official Tokyo Game Show trailer for The Evil Within just arrived, presenting us with scenes that might seem a little familiar, perhaps in an attempt to keep the mystery of the game alive.
The TGS trailer, like the trailer that preceded it, seems to feature a lot of the same areas and characters from the Prologue video. We see our protagonist, Detective Sebastian Castellanos, as he's joined by a small group of officers when entering the asylum. Mysterious figures whoosh by and officers are killed before Sebastian is knocked out by a shadowy, supernatural assailant.
What ensues is a horrific romp through the asylum, which is apparently filled with demonic beings and many-limbed creatures ripped straight out of our nightmares. With Shinji Mikami, the twisted mind behind Resident Evil, at the helm, there's no doubt that we'll lose plenty of sleep because of this game.
Watch the trailer above and look forward to (or dread), its release on PC, PlayStation 3, PlayStation 4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One in 2014.


text:
We have partnered with Zazzle.com who holds the collegiate license for this product. Just click on the buy link above to place your order on their site. Want to add Class of 2017 or I'm On My Way...no problem. Just customize this design on Zazzle's site.
A Tassel Topper is the ultimate form of self expression and is the professional way to decorate your graduation cap. We print your design on a durable sheet of plastic that fits directly on top of your graduation cap with the help of our adhesives. The Tassel Topper won't damage your grad cap in any way and is a sure way to stand out in the crowd at your graduation ceremony. They leave room for the turning of the tassel part of the ceremony and they can be removed or reattached as many times as needed. They also last forever as the perfect graduation keepsake that can framed or displayed. (displays sold separately).
- Measures 8.5" by 8.5" (fits all standard graduation caps)
- Made of durable plastic
- Waterproof
- Rounded corners
- Comes with instructions and easy-to-apply adhesives
- Lasts forever and makes a great graduation keepsake
- Won't damage grad cap
- Doesn't interfere with the turning of the tassel
- Cap not included
- US Patent #9,241,526


text:
Tag: parties
Limo Hire in Cumbria
Looking to Hire a Hummer in Cumbria? The Hummer limo is the ideal limo for hen parties, children's parties, weddings and special occasions where travelling in the comfort and style of a limousine is a must.
The pink limousine captures the imagination and gets noticed!
We operate Hummer limo hire in Cumbria including Carlisle, Penrith, Workington, Whitehaven and all over the region. Contact us to book your pink limousine.
Features you can expect in our luxurious 8, 13 & 16 seater limousines are:
- Disco Floor – a Pink Hummer special
- VIP lounge area
- Stargazer cocktail bar
- Karaoke and DVD player
- Tinted Windows
- Mirrored fibreoptics ceiling
- Aircon
- LCD TV screens
- Decanters and Ice buckets supplied with ice – perfect to accompany your champagne!
These are just some of the features available for limo hire in Carlisle and throughout Cumbria.
You can also find us on Facebook


text:
The moves forecasted by the COT signals make them very adaptable to commodity based ETFs, writes And...
Low-Volatility ETFs: 'The New Black'
02/26/2013 9:00 am EST
Focus: ETFs
John Spence and Tom Lydon of ETF Trends provide two disparate insights on the current trend toward low-volatility ETFs, and each discuss two new offerings they are watching.
John Spence:
Investors are buying ETFs that follow specialized low-volatility benchmarks at a much faster pace so far this year, as they hunt for funds that provide exposure to stocks but with less risk.
"'Min Vol' strategies are 'the new black' for many in the industry—products which hold their relevance through a market cycle," ConvergEx Group market strategists said in a note Tuesday. "While there are many quantitative methods to dampen portfolio volatility, the two most widely used among ETF sponsors are dividend-focused funds and those products that choose investments based on historical price volatility."
Dividend ETFs have pulled in close to $4 billion so far in 2013, compared with $9 billion of inflows the entire past year. Meanwhile, funds that focus on stocks with less price volatility have gathered $1.5 billion year-to-date, as compared to the $4.6 billion in new capital over the past year, according to ConvergEx.
ETFs in the latter category include PowerShares S&P 500 Low Volatility Portfolio (SPLV) and iShares MSCI Emerging Markets Minimum Volatility Index (EEMV).
SPLV is the largest low-volatility ETF by assets, with about $3.7 billion. The tracking index consists of the 100 stocks from the S&P 500 with the lowest realized volatility over the past 12 months. Volatility measures the tendency of a security to fluctuate in price.
Two new ETFs, PowerShares S&P MidCap Low Volatility (XMLV) and PowerShares S&P SmallCap Low Volatility Portfolio (XSLV), also began trading recently.
"In several conversations with ETF sponsors over the last year about Min Vol products, it has become clear...that the industry views these products as highly relevant for both retail and institutional investors," the ConvergEx analysts said. "They are essentially a crossover offering, with appeal for equity-heavy portfolios anxious to reduce risk in the fourth year of a rally, as well as bond investors who need to add equity exposure."
Tom Lydon:
State Street Global Advisors is the latest exchange traded fund provider to roll out low-volatility ETFs, which have been very popular with investors who want stock exposure with some downside cushion.
The SPDR Russell 2000 Low Volatility ETF (SMLV) and the SPDR Russell 1000 Low Volatility ETF (LGLV) began trading on February 21.
SMLV tries to reflect the performance of the Russell 2000 Low Volatility Index, which is comprised of small-cap stocks with the least volatility over the last 252 trading days. The fund has 170 holdings, and the largest holding makes up 2.11% of the overall portfolio. SMLV comes with a 0.25% expense ratio.
Sector allocations include financials, 31.2%; utilities, 16.4%; industrials, 15.5%; consumer discretionary, 10.2%; information technology, 9.7%; health care, 6.0%; consumer staples, 5.0%; materials, 4.3%; and energy, 1.8%.
LGLV tries to reflect the performance of the Russell 1000 Low Volatility Index, which holds large-cap stocks with the least volatility over the previous 252 trading days. The fund has 92 holdings, and the largest component is 2.4% of the portfolio. LGLV has a 0.2% expense ratio.
Sector allocations include consumer staples, 20.5%; health care, 16.1%; industrials, 13.8%; utilities, 12.8%; financials, 10.2%; consumer discretionary, 8.4%; information technology, 7.3%; energy, 5.8%; telecom services, 3.7%; and materials, 1.5%.
"Our new low volatility SPDR ETFs were developed in response to increasing demand from investors looking to improve the risk-adjusted returns of their portfolio, increase their equity allocation while maintaining downside protection, or tactically take a more defensive approach to the US large cap or small cap markets," James Ross, global head of SPDR Exchange Traded Funds, said in a press release.
However, low-volatility Russell index ETFs did not grab investors' attention last year. The Russell 1000 Low Volatility ETF (former ticker LVOL) and Russell 2000 Low Volatility ETF (former ticker SLVY) closed last October 24.
Read more from ETF Trends here...
Related Articles:
What to Do In Low-Volatility Markets
Related Articles on ETFs
The WisdomTree Europe Hedged Equity Fund (HEDJ) is an exchange-traded fund that provides investors w...
Funds that stick to a specific style make good core holdings — they establish your asset alloc...
The S&P 500 SPDR (SPY) has eked out a new high this week, notes Marvin Appel...


text:
Lee T needed a new logo design and created a contest on 99designs.
A winner was selected from 141 designs submitted by 29 freelance designers.
Black Canyon Coffee Australia
Black Canyon coffee Australia is brand new to Australia and we already have our stores up and running in various locations. But we are looking to go bigger and re brand ourselves.
When someone comes to one of our stores they are guaranteed an experience unlike any other coffee shop. Beautiful comfortable decor, friendly staff... seriously friendly, and smooth rich tasting coffee. Stay as long as you like, enjoy. Our food goes beyond the cakes and muffins in your average coffee shop.
We really do aim to give our customers something to remember.
Coffee drinkers around Australia - pretty much everyone.
The logo has to be modern and sharp, it has to strike the attention of anyone who sees it without being offensive to the eye.
Please be creative, I will let people know when I see something I like.
I don't want anything that is to cliche' Australian.
Find out how a design contest works or learn more about our logo design services.


text:
The UC Irvine men's volleyball team received all 16 first-place votes to top the American Volleyball Coaches' Assn. national preseason poll released Friday.
It's the first time the Anteaters, who won their third NCAA title in the last six seasons in 2012, have begun the season in the No. 1 spot. They opened at No. 2 each of the last three seasons.
UCI received 240 points in the poll, followed by BYU (222), Stanford (191), Pepperdine (183), Lewis (162), UCLA (154), Long Beach State (139), Penn State (124), USC (109) and Loyola-Chicago (101).
Coming off a 26-5 campaign, UCI will play host to Concordia in an exhibition match on Tuesday at 7 p.m. at Crawford Court.
UCI, under first-year coach David Kniffin, opens the regular season at the UC Santa Barbara Invitational on Jan. 4-5.
— From staff reports


text:
Winning five live tournaments is very difficult. According to the Hendon Mob database, Eugene Katchalov won his fifth tournament just last year at the 2011 World Series of Poker. Andrew Lichtenberger has four live tournament wins. Erik Cajelais has two live tournament wins. And Kyle Julius, who's earned nearly $2.2 million in 2012 has never won a live tournament.
So, if winning five live tournaments is difficult, then winning five in one year must be impossible, right?
Don't tell "King" Dan Smith that.
Smith started 2012 off with a bang, winning the Aussie Millions $100,000 Challenge, and taking home $1 million. Then, at the end of April, he went on one of the most impressive runs in the history of tournament poker, winning three €5,000 side events at the PokerStars and Monte-Carlo® Casino European Poker Tour Grand Final.
King Dan was unable to capture his first WSOP bracelet during the summer but recorded five cashes, including three top-17 finishes and a third-place finish in Event #50: $5,000 No Limit Hold'em ($368,943).
Smith didn't have to wait too long for his next victory however, because on Sunday he took down the EPT Barcelona €50,000 Super High Roller, earning $1,183,100 and his fifth victory of the year.
When Smith reached heads-up play against JC Alvarado, Jonathan Aguiar tweeted the following:
JonAguiar Jonathan Aguiar
If Dan wins 2 super high rollers for 100k, 3 consecutive 5ks, +his absurd WSOP runs in huge fields, greatest year in poker history? August 19, 2012
Let's take a look at that in our first thought.
1. 2012 Dan Smith vs. 2011 Erik Seidel
Like Smith, Erik Seidel's insane year began down under at the 2011 Aussie Millions. Unlike Smith, Seidel didn't win the $100,000 Challenge, but he did finish third.
Oh yeah, and then he won the $250,000 Super High Roller.
Here are Smith and Seidel's top-20 finishes in their respective years of dominance:
2011 Erik Seidel
|Field Size
|Prize (USD)
|Aussie Millions $100,000 Challenge
|38 players
|Aussie Millions $250,000 Super High Roller
|20 players
|L.A. Poker Classic $5,100 Heads-Up Championship
|48 players
|L.A. Poker Classic $25,100 High Roller Event
|18 players
|$25,000 NBC National Heads-Up Championship
|64 players
|WPT Hollywood Park Open $9,600 Main Event
|97 players
|WPT Five Star World Poker Classic $100,000 Super High Roller
|29 players
|WSOP $5,000 No Limit Hold'em Shootout
|387 players
|WSOP $10,000 Seven Card Stud Hi-Lo Championship
|168 players
|Epic Poker League $20,000 No Limit Hold'em Six-Handed
|137 players
|Epic Poker League $20,000 No Limit Hold'em Eight-Handed
|97 players
|WSOPE €10,000 Mixed No Limit Hold'em
|125 players
|Averages/Total Money Won
|102.3 players / event
|5.2 average finish
2012 Dan Smith
|Field Size
|Prize (USD)
|Aussie Millions $100,000 Challenge
|22 players
|EPT Berlin €1,000 No Limit Hold'em
|270 players
|Monte-Carlo® Casino EPT Grand Final €5,000 No Limit Hold'em Six-Handed Turbo
|101 players
|Monte-Carlo® Casino EPT Grand Final €5,000 No Limit Hold'em
|175 players
|Monte-Carlo® Casino EPT Grand Final €5,000 No Limit Hold'em Six-Handed
|98 players
|WSOP $1,500 No Limit Hold'em
|2,101 players
|WSOP $1,000 No Limit Hold'em
|2,799 players
|WSOP $5,000 No Limit Hold'em
|1,001 players
|EPT Barcelona €50,000 Super High Roller Event
|55 players*
|Averages/Total Money Won
|735.8 players / event
|4.8 average finish
* Denotes that there were nine rebuys
It's easy to look at total money won and say that Seidel's 2011 run was more impressive, but Smith conquered much bigger field sizes en route to his nine top-20 cashes. In fact, on average, the field sizes Smith competed in were 7.79 times larger than Seidel's, and Smith's average finish was still higher. Likewise, Seidel never finished in the top 20 of a four-figure field, while Smith finished 17th, 10th, and third against four-figure fields.
It's also important to remember that Smith has four more months to improve his 2012 résumé, and at the rate he's going there's no telling what event he's going to win next.
Seidel's run in 2011 was insane, and if you asked me to back either Smith or Seidel in the long run, I'd take Seidel because he's a much better mixed games player and he's proven that he can adapt as the game changes, but Smith's 2012 run has been more impressive thus far.
What do you think? Vote below and leave us a comment!
2. Final table deals
A new rule was created for Season 9 of the PokerStars EPT, and it states the following:
42. You acknowledge and agree that Finalists are only permitted to discuss any form of settlement deal or redistribution of any remaining prize pool whilst seated at the Final Table, and that an appointed tournament representative must be present during any discussions and subsequent decisions related to prize-pool redistribution.
You can find this and every other rule on the EuropeanPokerTour.com website.
If you've ever watched EPT Live over on PokerStars.tv — which I suggest that you do because James Hartigan, Joe Stapleton and the production crew are fantastic — then you've probably seen players make deals on air. Neil Johnson, PokerStars' Live Poker Specialist, told me at the 2012 PokerStars Caribbean Adventure that he prefers that the deal-making process takes place in the open for two reasons: 1) it's an essential part of tournament poker, and 2) PokerStars can adjust the payouts if a deal is made and protect their customers from being cheated or scammed.
Johnson is spot on.
Deal making and the ability to strike a good deal is paramount in tournament poker. In May, I praised Nick "GripDsNutz" Grippo because he made a great deal in the $10,000 SCOOP Main Event. In a spot where Grippo could've easily caved and accepted a chip-chop, he stood his ground and was basically gifted $128,000 from his two opponents. If there wasn't a proper deal-making process established by PokerStars, Grippo could've taken two bad beats and finished in third place, costing him hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Unlike the EPT, and other PokerStars sponsored events, the WSOP doesn't even allow deal making. Whether it's to protect the prestige of bracelet events or avoid tax conflicts, the WSOP has no interest in facilitating chops, forcing players to take "unscheduled breaks" and possibly make deals on their own. This is both bad for the game and potentially dangerous for the players. Very few major tournaments are completed without some sort of a deal being made at the final table, so to force players at the WSOP to battle astronomically high amounts of variance is unfair. It's also unfair to force players, some of whom are amateurs, to make deals in back hallways or away from the table where they are vulnerable. I'm all in favor of a player driving a hard bargain, but it's a lot safer for deals to be made at the table with dealers, floor staff and media members watching.
To no one's surprise, PokerStars has taken the initiative to improve its tournaments and protect its players. Johnson and his staff are exemplary, and should be emulated by others.
3. One for the thumb
On Monday, Kyle Cartwright won the World Series of Poker Circuit IP Biloxi Main Event presented by Southern Comfort 100 Proof. Cartwright earned $107,992, a seat in the 2012 National Championship, and his fifth-career WSOPC gold ring.
Cartwright is now tied with Mark "Pegasus" Smith for the all-time ring record. Smith won his first ring in October 2006 at Harrah's Tunica Casino and Cartwright's first circuit victory was in February 2011 at the same venue. Cartwright won a second ring eight days later.
Jessica Welman, the managing editor of WSOP.com, tweeted a fun fact after Cartwright's win was announced:
jesswelman Jessica Welman
Just learned Kyle Cartwright has shipped five @WSOP Circuit rings in 16 months. That is roughly 1 ring every 96 days. August 21, 2012
This win was only Cartwright's second career six-figure score. The first came in April 2011 when he won the $1,600 WSOPC Main Event at Harrah's St. Louis. Cartwright now has over half-a-million dollars in live tournament career earnings and seven live tournament wins.
2010 November Niner John Dolan finished third in Biloxi. Dolan won a ring in a $365 preliminary event earlier in the series ($12,265), and has two six-figure scores in 2012. Dolan won a $5,000 event in Biloxi in January ($336,105), and finished second in the $10,000 WPT Seminole Hard Rock Showdown in April ($459,360). Dolan lost a race against Cartwright when play was three-handed, earning $48,429 for third place.
We expect that Cartwright will be looking for ring number six at the next circuit stop at Horseshoe Bossier City, which beings on Sept. 13.
4. Blom and PokerStars split
Last Tuesday, Viktor "Isildur1" Blom and PokerStars parted ways. By all accounts it was amicable — Eric Hollresier, PokerStars' head of corporate communications called it a "mutual agreement," and Blom admitted "I just want to concentrate on playing poker."
The speculation on TwoPlusTwo began immediately, and the consensus seems to be that Blom could potentially be a member of the new Full Tilt Poker once it re-launches on Nov. 6. Personally, I highly doubt that Blom will become a member of Team Full Tilt or be a "Red Pro," because PokerStars has no incentive to pay Blom, and Blom doesn't want the responsibility.
When Full Tilt returns to the market, and the Ivey Thunderdome beckons the hyper-aggressive, once mysterious ninja from Sweden to grind the nose-bleediest nose bleeds once again, he's going to play. Immediately. Blom needs no incentive — although he could make a mint in rakeback because he plays so many tables — and PokerStars is going to get his business because there's no where else to play such high stakes. There's no need to pay Blom to do what he already does and nothing more.
And when I mean nothing more, I mean nothing more.
When Blom was "unveiled" at the 2011 PCA, it was anticlimactic. Had Bill Clinton or Tupac Shakur showed up in a navy blue PokerStars hoodie, then there would've been a story, but everybody knew it was going to Blom thanks to Tony G and others. Blom proceeded to play a silent, uneventful heads-up session with Bertrand "ElkY" Grospellier, then seemingly never said a single word for the better part of two years. Sure, there was the SuperStar Showdown, but you don't need to give Blom a sponsorship deal for him to play four or more tables of heads-up poker against great players.
Blom had no interest in speaking to the media — we were told that he was "camera shy." He frequently played the "can't speak English card," even though Luke Schwartz appears to be one of his best friends. And finally, he rarely (if ever) interacts with his fans.
You can't be a Team PokerStars Pro if you don't care about being a Team PokerStars Pro.
Blom deserves all the credit it the world for acknowledging this, because I'd much rather him admit that he just wants to play poker than half-ass being a pro. Thanks for being honest, Mr. Blom, and good luck in the Thunderdome come November.
5. Juanda talks Full Tilt Poker
On Day 2 of the EPT Barcelona €50,000 Super High Roller, Kristy Arnett got a chance to talk with former Team Full Tilt member John Juanda. Juanda told Arnett that though he wasn't involved with the management of the company, he felt bad for the people who had money frozen on Full Tilt.
At the beginning of the 2011 WSOP, Juanda was verbally assaulted by James Bord, who reportedly had a lot of money frozen on Full Tilt. Bord called Juanda a "thieving prick," a "disgrace," and threatened to "beat his ass" in the parking lot. Juanda quickly called the floor, and Bord was removed from the Amazon Room.
From watching his interview with Arnett, Juanda appears to be speaking both candidly and truthfully. The anecdote about him having to play super satellites to gain entry into the Main Event is a bit over the top, but there was a time when he, Allen Cunningham, Phil Ivey, and Daniel Negreanu were the "young crew" in Vegas, and were forced to grind their way to the top. All four obviously succeeded, and have since established themselves as top professionals in the game.
Juanda is very bright, and like a professional athlete, he said all of the right things to Arnett. This is a skill that's definitely helped him play in the biggest games in Macau, and it's probably helped him at the poker table once or twice.
We look forward to hearing from more members of Team Full Tilt in the wake of PokerStars' settlement with the Department of Justice, especially Tom Dwan who promised to write a blog several weeks ago, but has yet to do so.
Follow PokerNews on Twitter for up-to-the-minute news.
No comments yet. Be the first to post one!
PokerNetwork is home to one of the most active poker forums online. With all the latest online poker news from both Australia and around the world, PokerNetwork is your home for the latest and greatest offers.Follow us on other sites
|Online Poker Linux Poker RoomsMac Friendly RoomsLeagues
|News Poker Tweets
|Poker Rules Poker Tournament RulesTexas HoldemPoker Glossary
|Live Reporting 2014 WSOPAussie Millions
|Hall of Fame Information and NomineesList Of ChampionsAustralian Poker Hall of Fame 2009Australian Poker Hall of Fame 2010Australian Poker Hall of Fame 2011
© 2015 PokerNews Ltd. All rights reserved.SitemapContact UsPrivacy PolicyDisclaimerCareer


text:
Some U.S. media figures call Trump racist after profane remarks
President's reference to African "shithole" countries has sparked backlash from around the world
Donald Trump ignored the stunning question at a White House appearance on Friday — "Mr. President, are you a racist?" — but there's no getting around that more people in the media are willing to use that label.
The president's reference to African "shithole" countries and reported resistance to more immigration from Haiti felt like a tipping point in the number of people willing to call Trump a racist, rather than say his words or actions exhibited racism.
Calling someone a bigot is not a step to be taken lightly, but now "the arguments for being reticent seem absurd," wrote John Cassidy of The New Yorker. "The obvious truth can no longer be avoided or sugarcoated: we have a racist in the Oval Office."
'Disturbing pattern'
An emotional Sunny Hostin on The View Friday, noting that her husband's family is from Haiti, said she's always resisted labeling Trump because she couldn't look into his heart. "I can say now, Donald Trump is a racist," she said. "I hate saying that, but I can say that now."
MSNBC's Rachel Maddow called him "an openly racist president." In using the same label, CNN's Don Lemon asked, "How many examples do you need of this?" CNN's White House correspondent Jim Acosta said that "it's a disturbing pattern because it seems to come back to one truth here and that is that this president deep down may just be a racist."
"Guys, I don't know how to break this to you," Trevor Noah said at the opening of Comedy Central's The Daily Show. "But I think the president might be a racist."
Before he was president, Trump once called civil rights activist Al Sharpton to complain that he called him a racist and Sharpton said he corrected him — he was speaking about his actions and not him. The distinction is important to Sharpton. But Trump's long effort into questioning former President Barack Obama's birth certificate convinced Sharpton that there might be a deep-seated problem.
Careful wording
"You don't want to just call people names that you can't back up," he said in an interview. "You don't want to call a guy a thief. But if he keeps stealing things, he's a thief."
The Associated Press might quote someone calling another a racist, "but would not make the accusation on our own absent incontestable proof," said John Daniszewski, the AP's vice president for standards. A group might be labeled racist if it proclaims racial superiority.
Words or actions could be characterized as racist, but the AP would have to show in its reporting that they are overtly based on race, he said.
Not all who were offended by what Trump said took the step to call him a racist. CNN's Anderson Cooper said the words were clearly racist, but he stopped there. Trump's former election opponent, Hillary Clinton, tweeted opposition to the president's "ignorant, racist views."
Historian Ibram X. Kendi, author of Stamped From the Beginning: The Definitive History or Racist Ideas in America, said he notices a reluctance to use the term. He believes it stems from people considering it a fixed identity, when that's not necessarily the case. He'd have no more trouble calling someone a racist as noting that it's a rainy day.
"A racist is not who a person is," he said. "A racist is what a person is saying or doing."
No one at the Trump-friendly Fox News Channel has called Trump a racist. But he has gotten some blow-back there. Brian Kilmeade, co-host of Trump's favourite morning show, Fox & Friends, said that "the president made a mistake in making those comments, no question."
Conservatives expressed concern more about the weapon Trump had given to his opponents than what he said. Former Fox anchor Bill O'Reilly wrote that the "Trump-loathing media" is dancing in the streets over his words.
Maintaining objectivity
Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the Media Research Center, said the term "racist" is as fashionable now to use as people who put "hashtag resistance" on Twitter.
"It's too much for an objective journalist to call the president a racist," Graham said. "Journalists can, and probably will, note that 'critics say' his remarks have a racist connotation."
Some of Graham's ideological opposites, however, are well beyond him. Liberal filmmaker Michael Moore tweeted, for example, that journalists "from now on, when referring to Trump, must use the word 'racist' as a factual description of him."
MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell wondered where some of his colleagues had been.
"To every news anchor and commentator who discovered yesterday that Trump is a racist, please explain why you didn't say that six years ago he was lying about the Obama birth certificate," O'Donnell tweeted. "I called him a racist and pathological liar then. You kept booking him for more interviews."


text:
Express. Home of the Daily and Sunday Express.
Johnson returns to U21 fold
Manchester City midfielder Michael Johnson has been recalled to the England Under-21 squad for clashes against Portugal and Lithuania but Theo Walcott and Jack Wilshere look set to miss at least the first qualifier of the double header.
Coach Stuart Pearce has left out injured Arsenal duo Walcott and Wilshere from the squad that defeated Macedonia last month, although their fitness will be monitored and they could still figure during the international break.
Pearce, ahead of the European Championship qualifiers against Portugal at Wembley on November 14 and Lithuania three days later, said: "Jack came in at the start of this season with a substitute appearance in Holland and has since had a couple of starts doing very well in each game, so he'll be disappointed he's missed this one that's for sure."
He added: "I'd think anyone that's unfortunate enough to miss out in this squad will be very disappointed. But we'll be monitoring Jack and Theo's situations. If they recover a little bit quicker than expected, then we might review the squad, but it's a shame for them.
"On the other side of things, Michael Johnson has had a massive absence from injury for a long, long time, so being in the squad will be a big lift for him."
Aston Villa youngster Fabien Delph has been included after missing out previously, while Johnson's call-up comes after the 21-year-old recovered from a long-term abdominal problem that limited him to eight City appearances last term.
He could make his third appearance for the Under-21s, 15 months after his last cap.


text:
Debian: A Brief Retrospective
Debian a Decade Ago
Ten years ago, I posted a message announcing a new Linux project:
From: Ian A Murdock (email@example.com) Date: August 16, 1993 6:09:59 PST Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development Subject: New release under development; suggestions requested Fellow Linuxers, This is just to announce the imminent completion of a brand-new Linux release, which I'm calling the Debian Linux Release. This is a release that I have put together basically from scratch; in other words, I didn't simply make some changes to SLS and call it a new release. I was inspired to put together this release after running SLS and generally being dissatisfied with much of it, and after much altering of SLS I decided that it would be easier to start from scratch. The base system is now virtually complete (though I'm still looking around to make sure that I grabbed the most recent sources for everything), and I'd like to get some feedback before I add the "fancy" stuff. [...]
(Full post available here.)
When I posted this message a decade ago, Linux was in use by maybe a few tens of thousands of people around the world, and most of those people were either running their own homebrew Linux system or Peter MacDonald's SLS, the Softlanding Linux System. Red Hat Software was but a twinkle in Marc Ewing's eye.
I had been using Linux for several months, since January of 1993. Not long after, I was hooked. Like most other early Linux enthusiasts, what hooked me was not Linux itself, but rather the community that had formed around it.
It's difficult to remember, because open source and open development projects are commonplace now, but in 1993, what I saw happening seemed completely illogical. How could people without any master plan, from different parts of the world, speaking different languages and not getting paid, come together to build something as complex as an operating system? The fascinating thing was that it worked.
The software coming from the GNU project was well-known and similar in many ways. It was also free and it lived on the Internet. But GNU software was developed the old fashioned way, with small, closely-knit teams behind closed doors (as Eric Raymond famously noted years later in his essay "The Cathedral and the Bazaar"). Linux was developed in a strikingly different and seemingly haphazard manner.
After a few weeks of dipping the proverbial toe in the water, I was swept away by all that was happening, and the power of what I had stumbled across quickly became clear. Invariably, a college kid such as myself would run across Linux (often in search of a way to run UNIX at home to save winter treks to the computer lab), take a look, register astonishment at what was happening, and then give it a try. Often, that was all it took.
The instinct to give back, to contribute to the community that didn't know you but that had already given you so much, was palpable. In mid-1993, I found my niche: I saw a need for a nicely packaged Linux "distribution," although from my initial post on August 16, 1993, it appears that this term wasn't in widespread use yet.
As briefly mentioned earlier, in those days people generally bootstrapped their own Linux systems from the ground up or used the SLS distribution. A few other distributions were available, notably MCC Interim from the Manchester Computing Centre and TAMU from Texas A&M University, but these efforts were mostly dormant by the time I found Linux. In early 1993, SLS was king.
I had harsh words for it at the time, but I cannot emphasize this enough: SLS was a breakthrough achievement, because it represented the first time Linux had been packaged for an audience broader than its own developers. Previous distributions tended to stop at the kernel, the basic utilities, and the development toolchain. SLS included a window system, document formatting tools, games, and other tools that a broader user community could appreciate.
Breakthrough though it was, SLS had many shortcomings, and to my mind these problems got in the way of making Linux suitable for the broader audience that SLS was attempting to reach. So I set out to fix these problems, first as a series of patches to SLS, then from the ground up, which became Debian. This was around the time I posted my initial message on August 16. Slackware had similar beginnings at around the same time.
Being the 20-year-old that I was, I figured that building a better distribution would be no challenge for my superior intellect and skill. This is apparent from some of my early blusters, like "imminent completion" (which, as far as I know, is still true 10 years later). Several "almost done" posts later, I came to the humbling realization that I couldn't possibly do it all myself. At the same time, I began to appreciate that Peter MacDonald was having the same problem. Recalling my initial impressions of the power of open, distributed development, I decided to adopt the open development idea for my distribution project. Why not?
On August 27, I posted another message:
From: Ian A Murdock (email@example.com) Date: August 27, 1993 8:22:14 PST Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development Subject: Debian: a brief status report [...] I would like to point out here that I would like this distribution to develop in the same way as much of the rest of Linux has developed. In other words, I want everyone to *contribute* to this effort and not simply use something that one man or team has put together. This distribution will be improved by the Linux community as a whole, and I will simply serve as the coordinator of the effort. [...]
(Full post available here.)
- Skip Ahead
- 1. Debian a Decade Ago
- 2. Debian a Decade Ago
- 3. Debian a Decade Ago


text:
The manhunt for Christopher Dorner in one sense ended successfully: Assuming that the body recovered from the burnt-out home in Big Bear is his, Dorner's rampage is over, and he won't harm anyone again. Yet it's hard to cheer an episode that left four people dead and that featured police officers firing wildly on innocent civilians in their determination to eradicate a man who had threatened them.
It's understandable that police would be enraged by Dorner. He openly declared war on all law enforcement officers and embarked on a killing spree specifically aimed at his former colleagues. But how does that justify the actions of the officers who shot into a truck driven by two newspaper carriers, Maggie Carranza and Emma Hernandez? Carranza is a 47-year-old Latina who was driving a blue Toyota with Hernandez, her 71-year-old mother; officers somehow mistook those two women for a burly African American man driving a gray Nissan. And, in their zeal or under the impression that any force would be tolerated in these circumstances, officers fired away, hitting Hernandez twice in the back. Both women lived, testament to the poor aim, not the good judgment, of the officers.
To be clear: Their actions would be worrisome even if Dorner had been behind the wheel of that truck. Force, including lethal force, is a necessary part of police work, but it may be used only to protect officers or others from harm. It is to be wielded to ensure safety, not to exact vengeance. While it is especially offensive to have that force used against innocent people, it's even improper to use it in this fashion against the guilty.