text:
1st titles of 2008, for reference:
WTA Gold Coast: LI Na d. Victoria AZARENKA 4-6 6-3 6-4
WTA Auckland: Lindsay DAVENPORT d. Aravane REZAÏ 6-2 6-2
ATP Doha: Andy MURRAY d. Stanislas Wawrinka 6-4 4-6 6-2
ATP Adelaide: Michaël LLODRA d. Jarkko NIEMINEN 6-3 6-4
ATP Chennai: Mikhail YOUZHNY d. Rafael NADAL 6-0 6-1
― anatol_merklich, Wednesday, 9 January 2008 16:06 (6 years ago) Permalink
go davenport!!
― Surmounter, Wednesday, 9 January 2008 16:42 (6 years ago) Permalink
Week 2/2008, with all eyes on the AO anyway:
WTA Sydney: Justine HENIN d. Svetlana KUZNETSOVA 4-6 6-2 6-4
WTA Hobart: Eleni DANIILIDOU walk-over vs Vera ZVONAREVA
ATP Sydney: Dmitry TURSUNOV d. Chris GUCCIONE 7-6(3) 7-6(4)
ATP Auckland: Philipp KOHLSCHREIBER d. Juan Carlos FERRERO 7-6(4) 7-5
― anatol_merklich, Monday, 14 January 2008 07:40 (6 years ago) Permalink
Watching Sharapova vs Obziler in the Israel-Russia Fed Cup tie now, and wow is the crowd noisy! Rapturous cheering on every serve fault by Maria, tauntingly SCREAMING along with her on every shot etc. Umpire totally unable to silence them haha!
― anatol_merklich, Saturday, 2 February 2008 12:50 (6 years ago) Permalink
fuck what channel? we need to sign up for the tennis channle, i can't be missing stuff like this
― Surmounter, Sunday, 3 February 2008 02:45 (6 years ago) Permalink
I just go to myp2p.eu and check whether anything is available ("Live Sports" tab -> "Tennis" button). Note: playing stuff may in general entail installing various Chinese tv apps (sopcast, tvants, uusee...). That particular tie, however, is on some Israeli sports station showing through Windows Media Player or I guess any other .wmv-showing app.
― anatol_merklich, Sunday, 3 February 2008 10:09 (6 years ago) Permalink
How useful it is if you're not using Windows I've no idea. Also, quality unsurprisingly varies wildly; this Israeli broadcast is pretty decent.
Pe'er was double-breadsticked by the Shazbot right now, making it 2-1 to Russia. Elsewhere, France vs China will be decided by the doubles.
― anatol_merklich, Sunday, 3 February 2008 10:28 (6 years ago) Permalink
Murray knocks out Federer in the first round of the Dubai tournament.
nice one you unpatriotic little shit.
― Upt0eleven, Monday, 3 March 2008 17:15 (6 years ago) Permalink
he was wearing a saltire cap when he was playing, which doesn't seem desperately unpatriotic to me.
― ailsa, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:01 (6 years ago) Permalink
Federer was too busy not thinking about yesterday
― Matt, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:05 (6 years ago) Permalink
i was only referring to his disinclination to play davis cup.
and i was kidding about that anyway - i care no more about it than he does.
still, 'unpatriotic' was probably a poor choice of word. well done young man!
― Upt0eleven, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:35 (6 years ago) Permalink
It was more the "little shit" that you coupled it with, to be fair.
Anyway, yes, two out of three won against Federer now.
― ailsa, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:37 (6 years ago) Permalink
God knows why he'd want to play the Davis Cup. Who else is going to be on the team? I wouldn't want to be winning matches and carrying a team full of useless people in a tournament that has long since lost its cachet and relevance except in the eyes of really, really old tennis commentators.
― edwardo, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:38 (6 years ago) Permalink
x-post take umbrage wherever you like it was all meant in jest, apart from the congratulatory bit. internet does not do deadpan.
But I genuinely like Murray. I also agree with the above post. I can't be arsed to even watch Davis Cup so I can't blame him if he's rather not play in it.
― Upt0eleven, Monday, 3 March 2008 22:45 (6 years ago) Permalink
Andy Murray wins something
― Herman G. Neuname, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:42 (6 years ago) Permalink
He has won about 4-5 career titles before...but yes, its his biggest win
― xyzzzz__, Sunday, 3 August 2008 21:45 (6 years ago) Permalink
this is his third title of 2008 alone. by far the biggest though! wish i could've seen it, sounds like a fantastic match, and it's good to see him encroaching on THE TRIVALRY even if i do like nole more (lol the way fed's playing, nadal/djokovic/murray is the real trivalry).
on the WTA, dinara safina has won two big titles in a row! she is the only woman out there who is stepping up to fill the void at the top. jankovic is going to be world no 1 next week, that is embarrassing. the WTA is probably in the worst shape i've ever witnessed.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:08 (6 years ago) Permalink
also i didn't know this thread existed!
― lex pretend, Sunday, 3 August 2008 22:09 (6 years ago) Permalink
Oh I know he's won stuff before but not a big tourney. It was a good match. He looks so much fitter and stronger than he was a year or 2 ago.
― Herman G. Neuname, Sunday, 3 August 2008 23:53 (6 years ago) Permalink
Nadal will be #1 on 18/8. Can't quite believe Fed's slump post-SW19; loss to Simon, near-loss to Ginepri, loss to Karlovic. Thought he might have at least made a fight of the #1 ranking (his form was fine for 18 of 19 matches in Paris, Halle and London); I had this romantic notion of the baton being passed as Fed beat Nadal at Flushing Meadow (Nadal's points surge taking him past the repeating champ despite the loss). Fed will be lucky to get out of the sixteens in NYC. Does Beijing have any ranking points?
― Michael Jones, Monday, 4 August 2008 00:04 (6 years ago) Permalink
yeah, it does. i think a few less than a masters event for the dudes, a few more than a tier ii for the chicas.
GOD that feels ridiculous looking at it! thinking about how much the olympics mean to, like, track&fielders and rowers and the like, and in tennis it's like...a TIER II.
anyway in other news, THIS is the 15-year-old saviour of the WTA who in the past month has taken sets from both serena and sweta, michelle larcher de brito: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kxaLo1riGo&feature=related
she makes sharapova sound like a trappist. seriously i can't believe she hasn't been asked to stop that bullshit yet, or like MURDERED ON COURT by a deafened opponent. that's not a grunt, that's a scream with a sustain pedal on. i'm not sure i'm going to be able to actually watch any of her matches.
oh and in other news silliams has pissed on her phone at the beach: http://serenawilliams.com/home/
sometimes you just long for the days before celebrities discovered how to work the internet themselves :(
(also note "enuf boring stuff" LIKE TENNIS)
― lex pretend, Tuesday, 5 August 2008 20:19 (6 years ago) Permalink
you know, i used to watch all the nonslams cuz my stepdad taped them. then i didn't speak to him anymore. i wish i knew when they were on -- i think i'm gonna have to get on top of that!
― Surmounter, Tuesday, 5 August 2008 20:20 (6 years ago) Permalink
they're on every week! televised or not is another qn
― lex pretend, Tuesday, 5 August 2008 20:22 (6 years ago) Permalink
exactly, that's the thing.
― Surmounter, Tuesday, 5 August 2008 20:23 (6 years ago) Permalink
Blake was asked about the partisan crowd before today's final and reminded everyone he's half English :)
BBC giving it "Blake is just happy to be here" bollocks - dude isn't here to make the numbers up. I think I'll be pro-Blake today, as he does things like this
― SB "A Good Story" (onimo), Sunday, 14 June 2009 13:17 (5 years ago) Permalink
Well done Andy!
― ailsa, Sunday, 14 June 2009 15:02 (5 years ago) Permalink
Bit of a dull game lit up by a few stunning forehands. Shoddy line calls all day, none of which helped Blake. Well done to Murray on being the first Brit in yonks to win Queen's, which I'm sure won't lead to even more Wimbledon hype.
― SB "A Good Story" (onimo), Sunday, 14 June 2009 15:08 (5 years ago) Permalink
I predict Murray will cave under the pressure and be out by round 3.
― ailsa, Sunday, 14 June 2009 15:09 (5 years ago) Permalink
he doesn't seem to be the sort to cave under pressure. but a friendly first-week draw would certainly be nice...
didn't watch the Queen's, but watched the Edgbaston SFs (Li d. Sharapova and Rybarikova d. Mirza) and a bit of the final today - Magdalena Rybarikova is a real discovery, such a classic grass-court game! Slices and volleys and good serving! she looks weirdly like Samantha Morton, too. i remember seeing a photo of her from her junior days when she lost some random final - she was posing w/the trophy and seriously looked like she was about to go bowling for columbine. so it was lucky for Edgbaston that she won today!
Haas beat Djokovic in the Halle final this week too.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 14 June 2009 15:25 (5 years ago) Permalink
in other news, larcher de screamo gets a wildcard to wimbledon. FUN.
― Roz, Sunday, 14 June 2009 15:56 (5 years ago) Permalink
The weird transatlantification of Murray's pan loaf accent has meant I can't actually hear what he's saying - it's just a series of droning noises that makes my ears stop working.
― SB "A Good Story" (onimo), Sunday, 14 June 2009 16:04 (5 years ago) Permalink
pan loaf accent
is that how you talk with your mouth full of bread?
― Beth Parker, Sunday, 14 June 2009 16:17 (5 years ago) Permalink
It was once more expensive and regarded as more fashionable than the then more common plain loaf. Hence, to speak with a pan loafy voice is to speak in a posh or affected manner.
― SB "A Good Story" (onimo), Sunday, 14 June 2009 16:19 (5 years ago) Permalink
How on earth does Murray speak with an affected accent?! He just mumbles.
I found that picture of Rybarikova looking like she's ready to go bowling for Columbine after losing the Wimbledon juniors final!
Fortunately today was more to her liking.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 14 June 2009 16:41 (5 years ago) Permalink
!!! interesting result for sure. fed dropped out?
― Lamp, Sunday, 14 June 2009 17:22 (5 years ago) Permalink
yeah...Djokovic was lucky to be in the final at all, he had to come back from 5-7, 2-5 down and save 5 match points against Florent Serra (!) in the 2nd round.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 14 June 2009 17:26 (5 years ago) Permalink
French tennis player banned for betting found dead
Natural causes apparently.
RIP Mathieu
― anatol_merklich, Wednesday, 8 July 2009 15:55 (5 years ago) Permalink
Fuckin' hell. (Though my initial shock was because I thought you meant Paul-Henri Mathieu...)
― Michael Jones, Wednesday, 8 July 2009 16:00 (5 years ago) Permalink
Oh right, sorry! To avoid confusion to others: it's Mathieu Montcourt.
― anatol_merklich, Wednesday, 8 July 2009 16:08 (5 years ago) Permalink
The Lex's favourite choker, Richard Gasquet avoids getting suspended after testing positive for coke.
The full findings are here (pdf): pretty lol-worthy just for the kissing descriptions and finding out that he was allegedly "contaminated" at a Bob Sinclar event.
― Roz, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 20:32 (5 years ago) Permalink
hingis should've found a french waiter of her own to blame. or maybe just one of the 9494439 atp players she'd slept with.
― lex pretend, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 20:42 (5 years ago) Permalink
her ban ends in january right? think she'll come back?
― Roz, Wednesday, 15 July 2009 21:03 (5 years ago) Permalink
wtf federer?! 5-2 up in the final set, somehow fails to serve it out twice and then DFs on match point in the tie-break to give Tsonga the win.
all credit to Jo-W for stepping it up right at the end, but still... that was some breakdown.
― Roz, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:25 (5 years ago) Permalink
5-1 up in the third! :o
at the same time I was watching Flavia Pennetta try to choke away her match - she beat Venus in the last round, and winning this would mean a top 10 debut. 6 match points came and went, double faults on at least two of them, but her opponent was Hantuchova so it was OK in the end.
btw, Serena's post-Wimbledon record = QF loss in Stanford to Stosur and 3R loss in Cincinnati to Bammer, who now owns a 2-0 record over her. The Real Number 1!
am endeavouring to pretend the horrific Clijsters comeback isn't happening. never liked her.
best recent press conference = Marat defending baby sis by telling the press to "go fuck themselves" <3
― lex pretend, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:32 (5 years ago) Permalink
obv didn't see the Fed match but am guessing that J-W just started going even more for broke than usual when down 1-5, and everything began going in.
― lex pretend, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:33 (5 years ago) Permalink
yep and suddenly firing aces as well when he hadn't been able to get a good first serve in since like the end of the first set. meanwhile fed's serve just went to pieces after that.
also yay dinara fighting back a break in both sets to beat kimmy. would've hated it if she lost this one.
― Roz, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:39 (5 years ago) Permalink
best recent press conference = Marat defending baby sis by telling the press to "go fuck themselves" <3
this whole presser was fucking classic.
Q. Now that you stopped, what about coaching her?
MARAT SAFIN: Oh, you want me to hang myself? (laughter.)
― Roz, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:41 (5 years ago) Permalink
<3 <3 <3
― lex pretend, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:43 (5 years ago) Permalink
Wow, Pennetta will be Italy's FIRST EVER top 10 woman! Both Schiavone and, before her, Farina Elia peaked at 11.
― lex pretend, Friday, 14 August 2009 21:45 (5 years ago) Permalink
Meanwhile, Andy Murray becomes the first man not named Roger or Rafa to hold a spot in the top two since forever. More importantly, Del Potro beat Roddick.
― Michael Jones, Sunday, 16 August 2009 09:25 (5 years ago) Permalink
Felt like first serve % was pretty low for most of the players at this event, or that might just be going on some of those early horrorfests.
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Sunday, 26 October 2014 13:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
― polyphonic, Sunday, 26 October 2014 19:25 (1 month ago) Permalink
ferrer/nishi 3rd set could be p good
― johnny crunch, Friday, 31 October 2014 22:52 (1 month ago) Permalink
great comeback here by nishi if he can close it out
― johnny crunch, Friday, 31 October 2014 23:35 (1 month ago) Permalink
KEI :D :D Shame about that other SF :( I take most of Federer's losses with the knowledge that he's like my age and can't win everything but losing to Raonic is the sort of thing that still hurts.
LOL at Pironkova going 0-3 in her group in Sofia in a year where she actually had a half decent case of being wildcarded beyond nationality in that she at least won a biggish tournament. The semis for it might actually be quite decent - Suarez, Pennetta, Muguruza, Petkovic.
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 1 November 2014 00:50 (1 month ago) Permalink
LOL at yesterday's tennis. 6-1, 6-1, 6-1, 6-1. Two days, five breadsticks. On the ATP, everyone is Bouchard! #goldenage
― lex pretend, Tuesday, 11 November 2014 13:30 (1 month ago) Permalink
Nishikori just going for slightly too much throughout that set
― lex pretend, Tuesday, 11 November 2014 14:50 (1 month ago) Permalink
Well, at least the doubles has been competitive.
Though I do fancy Murray-Raonic to go the distance.
― Michael Jones, Tuesday, 11 November 2014 15:53 (1 month ago) Permalink
Berdych and Cilic picking up exactly where they left off. First 8 points all UEs
― lex pretend, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 14:18 (1 month ago) Permalink
11 UEs out of 12 points in that game. Berdych broke, then immediately bounced the ball on his foot, then smacked a drive volley into the stands
― lex pretend, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 14:23 (1 month ago) Permalink
It didn't get any better. Not even possible to sugarcoat this tournament. Imagine being told during the Murray/Nishikori mess that opened it that, 3.5 days in, no other match would have approached its quality
― lex pretend, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 15:23 (1 month ago) Permalink
Hopefully Stan vs. Nole will be at least somewhat competitive. I didn't know that Stan has only won 36 matches this year which seems insane for a slam champion.
― groovemaaan, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 16:46 (1 month ago) Permalink
Nole's response to going 0-2 down is to win 17 of 18 points. Could be another blow out.
― Michael Jones, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 20:53 (1 month ago) Permalink
Yep. This is getting daft now. Can we just have the Fed-Djokovic final extended to best of five to make up for some of this?
― Michael Jones, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 21:28 (1 month ago) Permalink
From 0-2, Wawrinka won 4 more points in set one, and 7 points in set 2.
― lex pretend, Wednesday, 12 November 2014 23:45 (1 month ago) Permalink
And the Bryans recovered from 0-4 in a champions' t/b to win and stay in the tournament. So, not a great day.
― Michael Jones, Thursday, 13 November 2014 10:00 (1 month ago) Permalink
Raonic pulls out, saves the WTF. Nishikori/Ferrer is better quality than anything else so far
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 14:48 (1 month ago) Permalink
Looking good for Kei. I don't suppose Fed is in the mood to lose in two and hence give up the top spot in the group to Murray.
― Michael Jones, Thursday, 13 November 2014 16:06 (1 month ago) Permalink
Kei's dropshots <3
Kei's BH <3
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 16:15 (1 month ago) Permalink
Decent match, though lol that we finally get a three-setter and a) the third set was a breadstick b) it should really have been straight sets if Kei hadn't inexplicably mini-choked in the first set
I p much assume the organisers encouraged Raonic to gtfo bc they knew Ferrer would provide a better match
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 16:19 (1 month ago) Permalink
Impressive stat: Nishikori is 21-2 in deciding sets in 2014.
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 16:28 (1 month ago) Permalink
fed is teeing the fuck off on murrays 2nd serve
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 13 November 2014 20:48 (1 month ago) Permalink
Way to end the year, Andy.
― Michael Jones, Thursday, 13 November 2014 20:58 (1 month ago) Permalink
lol this is amazing
― groovemaaan, Thursday, 13 November 2014 21:01 (1 month ago) Permalink
― johnny crunch, Thursday, 13 November 2014 21:01 (1 month ago) Permalink
bloody hell
― cerealbar, Thursday, 13 November 2014 21:03 (1 month ago) Permalink
i was rooting for the double bagel by the end :(
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 21:18 (1 month ago) Permalink
i look forward to waving this tournament in the faces of anyone who starts whinging about equal pay tho
― lex pretend, Thursday, 13 November 2014 21:20 (1 month ago) Permalink
this Nole/Kei match is the first one I've bothered to stay up for, it had better be good.
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 14:15 (1 month ago) Permalink
Haha oh man, if you watch just one point from this, 6-1 3-4, break point to Kei.
(Novak just put on a total clinic in set one, broke to open set 2, then his serve went to shit.)
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 15:12 (1 month ago) Permalink
And after failing to convert two break points in the opening game, Kei has just collapsed himself. More ill-advised drop shots, barely any first serves..
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 15:39 (1 month ago) Permalink
And of course, ends on a DF.
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 15:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
this game stan tryna close out rog is crazy
― johnny crunch, Saturday, 15 November 2014 22:37 (1 month ago) Permalink
Crazy shot selection from STan, in a bad way. Stop S-V-ing!
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 22:40 (1 month ago) Permalink
yea it was sweet how rog hit a drop return to force stan in also
― johnny crunch, Saturday, 15 November 2014 22:41 (1 month ago) Permalink
wtf that was in?
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Saturday, 15 November 2014 22:56 (1 month ago) Permalink
That was proper.
― Michael Jones, Saturday, 15 November 2014 23:02 (1 month ago) Permalink
feel badly for stan but that s/v on every match pt was bzarre so
― johnny crunch, Saturday, 15 November 2014 23:05 (1 month ago) Permalink
typical that i miss the only classic! tennis twitter was doing its nut, my bf was texting me point by point updates and i was stuck on a train that resembled a circle of hell. selfishly rooted for fed from afar for a better chance of a good final, which i'm looking fwd to a lot. what a choke by stan tho.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 16 November 2014 11:10 (1 month ago) Permalink
really with those serving stats i'll be surprised if this is closer than like 6-4 6-3.
― oh, boy, .GIF! That's where I'm a Viking! (edwardo), Sunday, 16 November 2014 13:37 (1 month ago) Permalink
First walkover in the history of the ATP YEC. Shame for Fed, appropriate end to the tournament.
― lex pretend, Sunday, 16 November 2014 17:45 (1 month ago) Permalink
damn was looking fwd to this
― johnny crunch, Sunday, 16 November 2014 17:47 (1 month ago) Permalink
Radwanska's hired Navratilova as her new coach! And this after declaring she'd bulk up in the off-season. Props, she's had a couple of disappointing seasons where she looked like she was just coasting in the top 10 but getting further away from a Slam. Good to see she's serious about changing things up at least.
― lex pretend, Tuesday, 9 December 2014 08:58 (1 week ago) Permalink


text:
I am working on a school project where we have to implement a polymorphic binary search tree that instead of using null references to "empty" parts of the tree, uses two classes (NonEmptyTree and EmptyTree) that you are supposed to use polymorphism to work out when certain actions should take place.
For example, if I want to insert a particular key value in a non-polymorphic Binary Search Tree, typically you could just recursively compare against null as you move through your tree, sticking in your value whenever you get a compareTo value of 0. However in this case, because of the design of this EmptyTree class (there is only one instance of it), you are essentially forbidden from actively comparing against "EmptyTree.getInstance()" which "frees up" the single instance of EmptyTree. (getInstance() is a static method).
I am attaching a link to the two classes with the code I have written so far. I think Pastebin's syntax highlighting is much easier to read than inserting all my code in here, so hopefully this is OK.
I am not looking for solutions or any major giveaways, but I am extremely frustrated because it seems illogical to implement the tree this way. (I have already implemented a fairly complete BST with null references, but it seems this exercise was pointless as I have no idea how to move forward). In addition, this is not due until next Sunday so my anger is not at all the result of procrastination but rather intellectual frustration at my sense of personal inadequacy.
Any insight is appreciated.
The NonEmptyTree class: http://pastebin.com/
The EmptyTree class: http://pastebin.com/
As you can see, I make extensive use of the EmptyTree.getInstance() method as it seems like a more or less efficient way to check whether or not I should instantiate a new NonEmptyList to stick in that place. However, the Professor's words in the project specification specifically state: "You are expected to use polymorphism (and exception handling, where appropriate) to handle the differences between empty and nonempty trees. Failure to do so will result in a large negative adjustment to your project grade."
However, I feel like these instructions contradict his lectures last semester where the message was "never ever EVER use exception handling for "control-flow", i.e. misusing catching exceptions as a way to control the behavior of the code." Even the single method that I wrote which uses a try-catch block to return a Tree feels like blasphemy.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You had just what I was looking for and it was delivered on a tight schedule just for when I needed them. I will be using your web site in the future. Keep up the good work.
More Testimonials »
Artists' Canvas
Winsor & Newton
Up to 70% Off
Artists' Deep Edge Canvas
Red Label Black Stretched Cotton Canvas
From $2.61
Red Label Stretched Cotton Canvas
Up to 65% Off


text:
Mon, 13 Aug 2012
Post a comment
William Basinski's highly regarded The Disintegration Loops has been re-released as a mammoth 9LP, 5CD, DVD and book box set with a price to match.
Mon, 15 Sep 2014
The experimental titans will play for The Church Off York in October.
Wed, 3 Sep 2014
The UK outfit join Ben Frost, Tim Hecker and Raime on the bill for the Utrecht event.
Mon, 20 Jan 2014
20 comments
Laurel Halo, Charlemagne Palestine and William Basinski are also lined up to perform at the London church venue in 2014.
Mon, 21 Oct 2013
1 comment
The experimental series, which takes place in an 18th Century church in East London, will resume next month.
Mon, 8 Jul 2013
39 comments
Software will release the Kansas City producer's debut album in September.
Fri, 24 May 2013
6 comments
Vessel, William Basinski and Tim Hecker will also perform at the new Thursday night event series.
Tue, 19 Mar 2013
Thomas Köner, Tim Hecker and Andy Stott are among the artists booked for the festival's new Berlin and London editions this April.
Fri, 8 Feb 2013
Electronic music at the intersection of dance and experimental features at the ninth edition of the event in Krems, Austria this spring.


text:
If you haven't noticed him yet, then maybe it's time to open your eyes and get with upcoming ATL rapper and DJBooth Freestyle alum Donnis. Fresh off the XXL Freshman Top 10 list, Donnis is continuing to make big moves in hopes of turning 2010 into his takeover year. With both an EP and a mixtape dropping on June 22, the world is about to get a whole lot of Donnis. From the aforementioned EP, entitled Fashionably Late, Donnis brings us his new single Yup. The banging production is compliments of veteran producer Needlz, and features heavy drums and some appealing synthesizers that will get your head bobbin. The only thing missing is a Rihanna sample…oh wait, it has that too. As far as Donnis' flow, those familiar with his work won't be disappointed. He comes in hungry and determined, and with a few punch lines to seal the deal, this is a solid single to represent the forthcoming project. So I like the track? "Yup, you know this," but what do y'all think?
Written by JRTheWriter on 05/20/10
Submit your Rating
Fool's Gold
First DJ Booth Appearance:
"Smoke n' Drive ft. Big Sean, Donnis & Jackie Chain" (2009)
You Might Like...
Commentsblog comments powered by Disqus
- The Hip-Hop Albums I Need to Hear in 2015
- 4 Fresh Songs (& An Album) You Might Have Missed (12/15)
- Meet Fanesha Fabre, the Voice Behind the "La Musica De Harry Fraud" Drop
- 1 Listen Album Review: Nicki Minaj's (Kinda Boring) "The Pinkprint"
- Mike WiLL Made-It - Ransom
- All 93 People Named on J. Cole's "Note To Self" Outro
- 1 Listen Album Review: J. Cole's "2014 Forest Hills Drive" (aka F*cking Up Hip-Hop)
- The Most Sampled Rapper Voices in Hip-Hop History
- Your Favorite Indie Rapper is Secretly Signed to a Major Label
- The DJBooth - Top Prospects EP (Vol. 2)
- The Best Hip-Hop & R&B Songs of 2014 (Ongoing)
DJBooth TV
Discover the best new songs, videos, and albums added to the Booth.


text:
locker roomDivisión en sílabas: lock·er room
Definición de locker room en inglés:
sustantivochiefly North American
A room containing lockers for the storage of personal belongings, especially in schools or gymnasiums.
Example sentences
- He also is a strong influence in the locker room and an excellent student of the game.
- He was there at the top of the tunnel as I was coming back to the locker room after stretching.
- He wants to make sure he has a locker room full of players who believe the Cardinals can win.
adjetivoVolver al principio
Regarded as characteristic of or suited to a men's locker room, especially as being coarse or ribald: locker-room humor
Más ejemplos en oraciones
- Nearby, science fair-style exhibits tackle the delicate subject of anatomy with raunchy male locker-room touches.
- It is a laddish, locker-room badinage that I remember with indulgent nostalgia from my days playing college rugby; we, too, thought we were a great team but I'm not sure that the future of the country ought to have been entrusted to us.
- In this locker-room environment, he's the likable team captain.
Definición de locker room en:
- Inglés británico e internacional dictionary
¿Qué te llama la atención de esta palabra o frase?
Comments that don't adhere to our Community Guidelines may be moderated or removed.
Obtenga más de Oxford Dictionaries
Suscribirse para eliminar anuncios y acceder a los recursos premium
Most popular
Most popular in the US
Most popular in the UK
Most popular in Canada
Most popular in Australia
Most popular in Spain
Most popular in Malaysia
= trending
Most popular inAustralia Canada India Malaysia Pakistan Spain United Kingdom United States All
Palabra del día orthoepy
Pronunciación: ˈɔːθəʊɛpi
the correct or accepted pronunciation of words


text: Energy X/Sandbox Edit History Talk0 9,189pages on this wiki < User:Energy X Contents[show] Festival of Battle - {{{Region}}}, Part {{{Part}}} Welcome, welcome, to the first annual fight of the Pokémon Wiki, the Festival of Battle! I'm [[User:{{{User}}}|{{{User}}}]] and I will be your host of the Festival this week! The Festival, as you have read, features the battles of Pokémon in a specific region. Each weekend you can taste some of the battles these Pokémon will have, so give a big support for ones you like! {{{Catch}}} Now, let's hear for the commentators! [[User:{{{Commentator1}}}|{{{Commentator1short}}}]]: [[User:{{{Commentator2}}}|{{{Commentator2short}}}]]: [[File:{{{Poke1Image}}}|{{{Poke1Size}}}px]][[{{{Poke1}}}]] Vs. [[File:{{{Poke2Image}}}|{{{Poke2Size}}}px]][[{{{Poke2}}}]] Votes {{{Poll}}} Winners of the Festival Battles Generation Pokémon [[File:|center|150px]] : : 0x150px –: – –: – 0x150px –: – –: – 0x150px –: – –: – 0x150px –: – –: – 0x150px –: – –: – Add a photo to this gallery Retrieved from "http://pokemon.wikia.com/wiki/User:Energy_X/Sandbox?oldid=596362" Related Categories Category: Pages with broken file links


text:
RNC 2012 Topics
Democracy Now! reports live from the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida.
Ron Paul Supporters Seek to Assert Presence at RNC in Tampa and Influence Long-Term Direction of GOPAt the "Paul Fest" for supporters of Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul in Tampa, Democracy Now! producer Mike Burke speaks with Brian Doherty, author of the new book, "Ron Paul's rEVOLution: The Man and the Movement He Inspired." Doherty discusses the role Paul delegates will have at this week's Republican National Convention and, looking ahead, in the future of the Republican Party. [includes rush...August 27, 2012 | Story
Despite Tropical Storm Isaac and Massive Security, Activists Plan Protest March Outside RNC in TampaEven as Tropical Storm Isaac bears down on the Gulf Coast, hundreds are expected to protest this morning in Tampa against the Republican National Convention. Today's official RNC events were canceled due to the storm. But organizers from the Coalition to March on the RNC spent the night encasing their picket signs in plastic. Thousands of law enforcement officers from the local police and sheriff departments, as well as the National...August 27, 2012 | Story
- Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker survived a historic recall election in June, one year after he launched a controversial effort to slash bargaining rights for the state's public sector workers and reduce their benefits. The recall effort was the first election since the Citizens United ruling, which opened the floodgates for unlimited corporate spending on election campaigns. Analysts say the ruling helped Walker outspend his opponent,...August 27, 2012 | Story
"The Real Romney": Veteran Reporter Michael Kranish on Mitt Romney's Embrace of GOP's Rightward TurnBoston Globe reporter Michael Kranish is the co-author of the recent book, "The Real Romney," which examines the political trajectory of presumptive presidential candidate Mitt Romney and of the party from the time his father, George Romney, walked out of the 1964 Republican National Convention in protest at the party's sharp turn rightward and its attitude toward civil rights. Unlike his father, Kranish writes, Mitt Romney is...August 27, 2012 | Story
- On Sunday, former House speaker and former 2012 Republican presidential contender Newt Gingrich called President Obama "the most extreme pro-abortion president in U.S. history." Earlier in the day, Democracy Now!'s Deena Guzder and Amy Littlefield caught up with Gingrich at the Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Tampa, where he attended Sunday mass. They asked Gingrich about his recent comments calling Obama a "food stamp...August 27, 2012 | Story
- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker both spoke on Sunday at a celebration of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, which has launched a massive push to get conservative religious voters to the polls in November. We discuss the religious right and its impact on elections with Adele Stan, longtime political reporter and Washington bureau chief for AlterNet. [includes rush transcript]August 27, 2012 | Story
- Set up for the Republican National Convention in Tampa, the "Romneyville" encampment is similar to Hoovervilles of the 1930s Great Depression. Residents of Romneyville are calling for an end to foreclosures, homelessness and the criminalization of poverty. We hear from Shamako Noble, a Romneyville resident and executive director of the Hip Hop Congress. And we speak to Cheri Honkala, the Green Party's vice-presidential nominee...August 27, 2012 | Story
Show for Dec 19, 2014
U.S. General: Turning Point Against ISIS Will Take At Least 3 Years
Iraq: Kurdish Forces Break Siege of Yazidis on Mount Sinjar
Syria: 230 Islamic State Victims Found in Mass Grave
ISIS Leaders Killed as WikiLeaks Publishes Docs on CIA Doubts About "High-Value" Assassinations
Nigeria: Boko Haram Kills 30, Kidnaps 200 in Village of Gumsuri
Report: Attorney Sought to Free U.S. Hostage in FBI-Backed Bid
Pakistan Kills 67 Militants, Revives Death Penalty After School Massacre
New Jersey Hopes Cuba Thaw Will Bring Capture of Black Panther Assata Shakur
U.S. Prosecutors Sue New York City over Abuse of Teens at Rikers Jail
Colombia Rejects Terms of FARC Ceasefire Offer
Obama Signs Sanctions Bills on Venezuela, Russia
U.S. Strengthens Protections for Transgender Workers
Obama Signs Measure Ending Social Security Payments to Nazis
U.S. Would Veto Resolution to End Occupation of Palestinian Territories
Chevron Halts Plans to Drill for Oil in the Arctic
Peru: Environmental Defender Wins Court Victory Against U.S. Mining Firm
ACLU Sues Ferguson-Florissant School District over Biased Elections
Nebraska, Oklahoma Sue Colorado over Pot Legalization
Australia: 8 Children Dead, Woman Injured in Mass Stabbing
Report: Gap Between Rich and Poor Hits New High


text:
Welcome to the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures (NELC) at Indiana University, Bloomington. The founding father of this department is Dr. Wadie Elias Jwaideh, a native of Iraq, who joined the faculty at IU in 1960 and served as chair of the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Literatures, as it was called at that time, with exemplary dedication for over two decades. We are thus justifiably proud of belonging to one of the oldest and most venerable departments of its kind in the nation. Our distinguished and world-renowned faculty teach diverse courses on the languages, literatures, religions, history, and cultures of the Arab world and the Middle East. Many of our undergraduate majors go on to pursue graduate degrees in Middle Eastern studies and related fields or obtain professional degrees in law and business, among other areas of specialization. Graduates of the masters and doctoral programs enter careers in academia, foreign service, public and business administration.
Professor Asma Afsaruddin, Chair
Job Announcement
Assistant Professor in Modern Arabic Literature and Culture
The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures in the School of Global and International Studies at Indiana University, Bloomington invites applications for a tenure-track position as assistant professor in Modern Arabic Literature and Culture (19th century-present).
Research specialization can be in any field of modern Arabic literary studies or other forms of cultural production, such as theater, visual arts, music, film, and social media, on such contemporary topics as modernity, political and social reform, gender issues, and religious movements in the Arab world. The appointment begins August 1, 2015. Prior teaching experience and evidence of an active research agenda are required. The successful candidate must possess a native or near-native command of Modern Standard Arabic and English and must be prepared to teach a variety of undergraduate courses on modern Arabic literature in translation, as well as upper level undergraduate and graduate courses in Arabic. A functional knowledge of the classical Arabic literary tradition is expected. Candidates must have the Ph.D. at time of appointment and demonstrate a commitment to research, teaching, public engagement, and program development with Indiana University's Department of Near Eastern Languages and Cultures, as well as the School of Global and International Studies. Indiana University is an equal employment and affirmative action employer and a provider of ADA services. All qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to age, ethnicity, color, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or identity, national origin, disability status or protected veteran status. Application materials, including a cover letter, curriculum vitae, graduate transcripts, statement of research interests and teaching philosophy, teaching evaluations, syllabi of representative courses, a writing sample, and three academic letters of reference should be submitted online here.
Inquiries and any hard copy submissions can be directed to Connie Sue May, Goodbody Hall Room 214, 1011 East Third Street, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405.
Applications received by January 20, 2015 are assured full consideration, but we will accept applications until the position is filled.
Congratulations to professor emeritus Salih Altoma, who was awarded the 2014 Mentoring Award from the Middle East Studies Association at its last annual meeting in Washington DC! This is an award of great distinction conferred by the largest and most prestigious association of Middle East Studies in the world. The award was in recognition of his service as "an outstanding mentor who has introduced so many to the joys of scholarship and who, through his generous sharing of knowledge, continues to encourage the careers of generations of students and colleagues." For more details on this richly-deserved accolade, please click here.
Upcoming Events
The Arabic Language Program is presenting its first Arabic Poetry Night on Wednesday, November 19, 2014. Faculty and students will be reciting modern and classical Arabic poetry, and students will also perform classic and modern Arabic dance. Please join us at 600 E. Atwater Avenue, OP 105 from 6:00pm to 10:00pm for a night of Arabic culture and fun!
The thirteenth annual Danner Lecture will be presented by Dr. Yahya Michot, Professor of Islamic Studies and Christian-Muslim Relations. He is also the current editor of the journal "The Muslim World" edited by the Seminary. Professor Michot will speak on "Mamluks, Qalandars, Rafidis, and the 'Other' Ibn Taymiyya" on Wednesday, April 15, 2014 in the President's Room in the University Club at the Indiana Memorial Union at 7:00pm. A light reception will follow the lecture. Open to the public.
Read the 2014 NELC Newsletter


text:
It's this week – RAGNAR… More on that later though :)
For now… join Team Sparkle on Twitter this Wednesday!
Join us next Wednesday, April 17th at 5pm PST (6pm MST, 7pm CST & 8pm EST) for a #TeamSparkle Twitter Party.
There will be lots of prizes so I hear!
If you want to take part in the Twitter party, just log onto twitter and search the tag #TeamSparkle! You will see a feed of everyone who is posting using the #TeamSparkle tag. During the party, the host (@runTeamSparkle) will be asking lots of questions about rocking the sparkle & running. Questions will be in this form:
Q1: What's your favorite thing about rocking a sparkle running skirt? #TeamSparkle
That's your cue to answer! Just tweet something like this:
"I love passing guys while rocking my sparkle skirt!" #TeamSparkle
Twitter Party Tips & Tricks:
* Include #TeamSparkle in each tweet, otherwise no one will see it in their feed
* Make sure you're "following" our twitter party host @runTeamSparkle & our panelists @thisiscarrie , @cupcakeactivist & @according2kelly
AND this is where I'll be this weekend… Another post coming up soon about what's happening here :)
Team Sparkle NEWS:
Once again Team Sparkle is running the SoCal Ragnar next weekend, April 19th & 20th. Follow our ULTRA runners on twitter
I'll try to head into the chat for a little bit between work! :) And yes, Team Sparkle emailed me this awesome photo and great info on how to join the party ~ I just wanted to share the fun with you.


text:
sigh, doesn't look like WOTF is taking off. well here is my wall, and i don't think i'll be able to make another wall or sig in a while, i got 2 much stuff goin on now.
so here my last piece of work for a while, and yea, it is rushed, i wish i could spend more time on it..
well its better than nothing i guess.


text:
Latest smartphones Stories
After a period defined by market softness and uncertainty, the rugged market is rebounding, with positive year-on-year performance across all form factors to reach an overall market of more than
Updated System Offers Even More Simplicity and Expanded Access to 4K Content ENGLEWOOD CLIFFS, N.J., Dec.
Study Revealed that 8 out of Every 10 Native Apps Experienced Performance Problems During Peak Usage Times SAN MATEO, Calif., Dec.
App Automatically Negotiates the Best Price on the Perfect Room in Real Time, Providing Savings Over Listed Online Rates NEW YORK, Dec.
"CoolReaper" potentially affects 24 Android phone models and over 10 million users SANTA CLARA, Calif., Dec.
Malicious actors target mobile devices; Attacks install remote access Trojans to phish for login credentials CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Dec. 17, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- Akamai Technologies, Inc.
MIAMI, Dec.
Remcom announces Projected Capacitive Touch Capability in XFdtd 3D Electromagnetic Simulation Software.
HUB IT, the world's fastest and most customizable all-in-one sync and charge station, adds another string to its bow with Qi wireless charger functionality Modena,
Patent Claims Validity And VPN On-Demand Infringement Remain Intact ZEPHYR COVE, Nev., Dec.
Latest smartphones Reference Libraries
Smartphones and feature phones are as common now as traditional landline phones were for decades. These handheld devices are so popular that many homes now only use mobile phones, increasingly pushing landline devices into the obsolete category. But while the popularity of mobile connectivity is vast today, it is still a very young technology when compared to its landline counterparts, which have been in existence since the mid-1800s. To be clear, the history of the mobile phone focuses on...
The N-Gage QD is a mobile phone, handheld game console combination released by Nokia on May 26, 2004. It was redesigned from the original N-Gage to be smaller and rounder. A few flaws from the original N-Gage were corrected. The cartridge slot was in a more convenient place located on the bottom of the device and the earpiece was moved to the face of the unit. Other changes in the unit were MP3 playback, FM radio and a USB connection were removed. However, MP3s could still be played...
The N-Gage device is a combination mobile phone and handheld game system. It was produced by Nokia and released on October 7, 2003. The N-Gage QD replaced the original in 2004. The buttons were designed for a phone which made the unit difficult for game play and the cost was twice that of the Game Boy Advance, both reasons contributing to the system's unsuccessful run in the market. Nokia shipped 400,000 units to retailers in the first two weeks of release, but independent market research...
The LePad is a line of tablet computers sold by Lenovo in China. It was released in China in 2011. The LePad uses the Android 2.2 operating system, with either a Wi-Fi or 3G connection. The display features a 10.1-inch screen with a front facing camera for video calling, and has a battery life of eight hours. Outside china, in 2012, Lenovo released other versions of the LePad, under the name IdeaTab, A1, Yoga, and ThinkPad. The ThinkPad's operating system was upgraded to the Android...
The Kobo Arc is a tablet computer produced and released by Kobo Inc. in November, 2012. It has a 7-inch screen and uses Android Ice Cream Sandwich operating system. It is the second model produced by Kobo, the first was the Kobo Vox. It comes in black or white with Wi-Fi, a micro USB port, a headphone jack, and dual speakers. It has a dual core CPU, 1 GB Ram, and 16, 32, or 64 GB of storage. It has a rechargeable battery with ten hours of reading and two weeks stand by. It is capable of...
- a meat pie that is usually eaten at Christmas in Quebec


text:
US $1.2-5 / Piece ( FOB Price)
500 Pieces (Min. Order)
100000 Piece/Pieces per Month (Supply Ability)
Verified Supplier - Jiaxing Guangtai Lighting Co., Ltd.
China (Mainland) Contact Details
China (Mainland) Contact Details
1.Semi sealed beam 2.It is used for car ,HALOGEN , CRYATAL WITH H4 Bulb , 3pin and removable rubber seat in the back
Haven't found the right supplier yet ?
1 request,multiple quotations
1-click quotation comparison
OEM,ODM & multi-category buying
Want product and industry knowledge for "seal beam" ?
Trade Alerts are FREE updates on topics such as trending hot products, buying requests and supplier information - sent directly to your email inbox!


text:
User reviews
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
No eBook available
Pedagogy, Praxis, Ulysses: Using Joyce's Text to Transform the Classroomedited by Robert D. Newman
Get Textbooks on Google Play
Rent and save from the world's largest eBookstore. Read, highlight, and take notes, across web, tablet, and phone.
Go to Google Play Now »
©2012 Google


text:
@pzettler creepy
— ¯_(ツ)_/¯ (@haplito) December 10, 2014
But is it creepy? Or, at least, is it any creepier than how our other purchases are tracked?
Anyone who buys something online – or looks at something online – and then constantly sees ads for that product, should know our shopping is tracked quite closely. And it's not limited to online shopping, brick and mortar shopping is tracked too. A couple of years ago, there was a really interesting New York Times piece about how Target, and other major retailers, collect (online and in-store) data on their shoppers, and use that data to sell shoppers more products. One of the most salient anecdotes from the story was that Target figured out that a teenager was pregnant – and started sending her baby-related coupons – before her dad knew.
This suggests two things to me.
First, pharmacy records may not provide information that is significantly more sensitive than information derived from records of other kinds of purchases. Bloomberg's piece says "a prescription for, say, Viagra or Prozac isn't the same as grocery receipt." And maybe that's right in some sense. Maybe there's something really special about health information. But I bet companies can tell a heck of a lot about you from your grocery receipts.
And second, it's completely unsurprising that drugmakers are using pharmacy records data to target ads. In fact, it's a little surprising to me that this is the first we're hearing about it, and that Bloomberg reported that the Department of Health and Human Services's Office for Civil Rights, which enforces HIPAA, was not aware of this practice until Bloomberg contacted them.
According to a Federal Trade Commission attorney quoted in the Bloomberg story, the third-party companies performing the matchbacks may violate privacy laws if they don't notify consumers that their data is being used for matchbacks. But assuming this matchback practice is legal, I'm not sure it's more troubling, from a privacy perspective, than other kinds of shopping surveillance.
That said, there may be some public health concerns here. Scholars and commentators have long been concerned about direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising of prescription drugs doing things like driving overuse of medications, driving inappropriate use of medications, and increasing health care spending (see, e.g., this 2007 New England Journal of Medicine piece). I could imagine tailored ads increasing the problems associated with DTC ads, by increasing the effectiveness of promotional campaigns. But I could also imagine tailored ads decreasing problems associated with DTC ads, by limiting advertising to patients who are more likely to legitimately need a particular drug (based on those patients' pharmacy records). It will be interesting to see if tailored ads heighten or mitigate concerns about DTC ads in general, and what regulators choose to do about it, in either scenario.
But living and working in the microcosm I do, it's easy to suffer from distorted perception—specifically, to make certain incorrect assumptions about how others process the topics I think about daily. I recognize that not everyone shares my position on a particular issue. But this recognition, in itself, overlooks a third option: that many simply may not care about the issue as much as I do. Or maybe even at all.
The point was driven home to me by a couple of recent findings. The first comes from a study by a U.K. group, published in Science Communication, that examined how the public at large thinks about neuroscience. Conclusion: they don't think about it at all, because they believe it's irrelevant. This, as the study points out, despite a spike in media coverage of brain research in the past few years.
The exception to this general finding was for people diagnosed with neurological or psychiatric disorders, who do pay attention to neuroscience research that might shed light on their conditions. But even for these people, the study found that neuroscience findings were used "flexibly and instrumentally, selectively marshaled when [it] serve[d] social and self-identity needs."
The second finding comes from a poll conducted by NPR and Truven Health Analytics. In the age of electronic medical records and data theft, the poll asked people how concerned they are with the privacy of their medical information. Its main finding is summed up in the accompanying article by Larry Ponemon, a researcher who also studies data privacy: "People are just not worried about privacy [of their medical records]. They're worried about other things."
At least according to these two findings, then, it looks like the general public may not be too concerned with research findings and science/technology-and-society-type issues that I personally believe to be pretty important. So what does this mean for the academics, journalists, commentators, etc. who spend their time studying these issues and communicating their conclusions? Are we wasting our time worrying and writing about things that the larger community just doesn't care that much about?
Well, not necessarily. A closer look at the two findings I've discussed gives a hint as to why.
First, there's the exception to the U.K. group's general finding that the public believes neuroscience to be largely irrelevant. People do pay attention to this research when they have (or worry about having) a neurological or psychiatric disorder—in other words, when the world of neuroscience personally affects them. And they use the information they gain in ways that help them in their daily lives.
Likewise, though the NPR/Truven poll found that only 14% of respondents worry about the privacy of their hospital-held medical records, only 4.9% of respondents have ever been notified that their records have been compromised or accessed without their permission. Just as the participants in the U.K. study think about neuroscience only when it affects them personally, it is not surprising, given the lack of personal impact, that the majority of data-privacy poll respondents don't spend much time thinking about the safety of their medical records. Gladly, they have no reason to—their cows are safely in their barns.
But just because a large-scale medical data breach hasn't yet occurred doesn't mean that it won't occur. If it did, I would guess that the results of the NPR/Truven poll might be quite different. The guess is supported by the results of a survey published in the Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. Survey respondents had been asked for consent before their genetic data was submitted to a national database. Almost 70% of respondents reported that it was very important that they had been asked for this consent. If they had not been asked and later found out about the misuse, the issue of health-data privacy would likely assume a new and personal significance as individuals realized, too late, that their proverbial barns were empty.
And that's where I believe the academics, journalists, and commentators come in. It is their job to worry, debate, and write about the potential negative consequences of scientific and technological advances before they happen. Ideally, this process will result in robust policies that will prevent the nastiest potential outcomes from ever occurring, or at least give us a well-thought-out path to mitigation if one of these outcomes does take place.
This preemptive approach might be particularly important given that, when the moment of crisis is upon us, the "experts" may be no more level-headed than the rest of us. One study found that when perceived risks are low, health care professionals' attitudes towards vaccines reflect their training, but when risks are high, their attitudes, like those of the general public, reflect emotion and personal experience. By thinking about and planning for possible concerns now, when most people don't care, we may prevent a situation where people care so deeply that no one can think clearly.
In the meantime, SPINS and CLB will keep blogging.
* Thanks to Dmitry Karshtedt for bringing my attention to this Swedish proverb. There is a Russian version of the saying, but apparently (unlike Dostoyevsky) it does not translate well.]]>
Chiang explains that, once one strips away the cost-benefit rhetoric of cases like Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics and Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, the Supreme Court's decisions in these cases can be understood as reflecting moral concerns. As an initial matter, though, Chiang notes that the excessive monopoly cost theory provides an attractive justification for the exclusion of laws and products of nature, abstract ideas, and the like from patentability. Because terms like "law of nature" are not self-defining, it makes intuitive sense to understand them as labels for patent claims that fail the cost-benefit balancing test. In Chiang's view, though, close inspection of the Court's opinions shows that the utilitarian theory does not do the work that the Court's rhetoric about disproportionate rewards to would-be patentees and preemption of downstream research might lead one to believe.
One clue that Chiang points to is the Court's rejection of Prometheus' argument that, even if the claim at issue—directed to determining whether dosages of a particular drug should be adjusted in response to the measured amount of a probe molecule in the patient's blood—appropriated a law of nature, it is such a narrow law that the claim would not preempt much of anything. Once the Court attached the "law of nature" label to the claim, though, it was game over for Prometheus. Even if the claim passed the cost-benefit balancing test, it would still be unpatentable because, in Chiang's words, it belongs to "a preexisting non-economic category of things known as 'laws of nature.'" To be sure, the Court notes in the opinion that the "law of nature" designation is a proxy for the utilitarian "building-block" concern about ownership of artifacts of basic research. But because the Court did not articulate any test for determining what a "law of nature" is, we do not know whether the rule that excludes laws of nature from patentability actually serves the consequentialist goal of promoting innovation. More importantly, Chiang argues that economic theory alone cannot provide a definition for the "law of nature" category that does not reduce to a case-by-case cost-benefit balancing test. But if this is the case, the patentable subject matter (PSM) requirement loses its purpose as a threshold inquiry and becomes redundant—because other doctrines (e.g., nonobviousness and enablement) already provide, or are supposed to provide, for the sorts of fact-incentive tests that get at the costs and benefits of patents. (It might be interesting to compare this point with Professor Sean Seymore's proposal to eliminate the utility doctrine and replace it with enablement and nonobviousness inquiries.)
Where does this leave us? Chiang argues that moral values, like human dignity and the inviolability of nature, help explain the results of Myriad and Mayo. Certainly, the public interest in the Myriad case largely reflected the moral concern over the patenting of human genes, not the utilitarian worry that downstream research might be preempted by claims to isolated genomic DNA. Although it is difficult to find evidence for this in the decisions themselves, Chiang's point is that the failure of the economic explanations—and other subtle clues like the very formulation of the Question Presented in Myriad ("Are human genes patentable?")—lead to this conclusion.
Chiang further illustrates his point by comparing the reasoning in Parke-Davis v. H.K Mulford, which he views as a strong example of a court's utilitarian focus on the commercial value of an isolated product of nature as a justification for patentability, with Myriad, which he takes to stand for the proposition that that even valuable, newly discovered products are unpatentable per se if they are insufficiently altered from their respective natural states. Chiang reiterates that it is, at best, unclear how the doctrine holding products of nature unpatentable serves economic goals. He argues that the result in Myriad might instead be justified by the moral positions that artifacts of nature that preexisted human intervention are not proper subject matter for appropriation and that the patenting of genes compromises human dignity. Chiang further suggests that Lockean labor-desert theory, which justifies appropriation only when an individual applied his or her labor to the preexisting state of nature, might also explain the natural-artificial distinction that courts appear to be drawing in cases like Myriad. Chiang's overarching point is that, if courts do take moral considerations into account, they should be honest that this is what they are really doing. The payoffs of the greater clarity include a sharper focus on the natural-artificial distinction in the caselaw and improved quality of the scholarly debate.
I think that Chiang's article gets at many important aspects of the PSM doctrine that have not been explored in prior literature. I agree with Chiang's initial premise that the PSM requirement might not reflect utilitarian goals. Consider, for example, the products of nature doctrine. Leaving aside the well-documented difficulties in determining what a law of nature is and drawing the line between "natural" and "artificial," it is not clear whether prohibiting patents on artifacts that are natural rather than artificial will serve the constitutional goal of promoting the progress of useful arts. Suppose, for example, that courts interpret Myriad to hold patent-ineligible claims on chemical compounds isolated from natural sources—like adrenaline in Parke-Davis—because they are not markedly different from products of nature. Although empirical data on the point is probably not available, it is a good bet that this rule might disserve innovation. Natural products chemistry is a time- and resource-intensive industry, and the fruits of the discoveries are often large and unusual chemical compounds—nothing like the ubiquitous genes. Indeed, I doubt that patent claims to such products would threaten diverse avenues of downstream research. If this is correct, those who are committed to the utilitarian justification of patent law would need to rethink the products of nature doctrine. I think that other commentators—for example, the authors who argued that the rule excluding abstract ideas from patent eligibility should be reformulated to police overbroad claiming—would also agree with Chiang's general point that there is a disconnect between the rules of PSM and patent law's purported utilitarian goals.
If utilitarian explanations fail, then Chiang must be right that moral considerations must be at play in some way, even if through the process of elimination. The result in Mayo seems difficult to rationalize any other way. In addition, the cases provide direct clues that validate Chiang's "inviolability of nature" explanation. For example, the statements in Funk Brothers v. Kalo Inoculant that the features of the invention at issue are "the handiwork of nature" and "serve the ends nature originally provided and act quite independently of any effort of the patentee" quite clearly support Chiang's thesis.
More generally, I note that even though utilitarian cost-balancing may be the aspirational goal of patent law, existing doctrine in areas other than PSM does not seem to reflect it in a consistent manner. Consider nonobviousness: Professors Michael Abramowicz and John Duffy and Judge Richard Posner have all argued that nonobvoiusness doctrine in its current form does not clearly serve the goal of inducing innovation that would not have been produced in the absence of the patent incentive. Perhaps, as suggested by Merges, nonobviousness doctrine relies mainly on the mid-level principle of "nonremoval" from the public domain, which might reflect but does not directly engage larger normative questions. The PSM doctrine, too, has this feature—according to Chiang, the mid-level "artificiality principle" underlies the outcomes of the cases like Myriad, Mayo, and even Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. And I would further argue that another mid-level principle—that of prohibiting patents on basic research—might explain the results of some PSM (and other) cases, and might reflect a mix of moral and utilitarian concerns.
There is a wide agreement that the PSM doctrine is quite muddled. The courts have had a great deal of trouble in coming up with tests for identifying laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas, and have relied mostly on gut instinct and comparisons with patents invalidated in prior cases. But then, the concepts of "principle patents" and "scientific property" have always been elusive. We may be able to do better someday. For now, though, we are left with utilitarian rhetoric that can be contrasted with case outcomes whose utilitarian grounding is less than clear. The major contribution of Chiang's article is placing this problem into sharp focus.
Note: Cross-posted on the Written Description Blog
I regularly read, enjoy, and respect SLS grad Dahlia's work and I hope she and Professor Friedman (of NYU) are right. And they are clearly right that panic is a not good reaction. Panic is the worst emotion: never useful and never even enjoyable. I recommend in this case concern and righteous anger.
Cases do get taken without circuit splits, sometimes in situations of overwhelming importance, sometimes when the Court thinks a lower court decision is just blatantly wrong. These subsidies don't seem, to me at least, to fit the first category. I worry, a lot, that at least four and maybe five justices think they fit the second.
Friedman and Lithwick argue that this is a case that is important to decide quickly because of the disruption a negative ruling would cause. But why, exactly, would finding out in June 2015 that you won't have health insurance be less disruptive than finding out in, say, February 2016?
The precedent they cite for the Court taking a case without a circuit split and upholding the constitutionality of the statute is not encouraging. In Bond v. U.S. the Court held the Act was constitutional but reversed its application in that case: i.e., held the lower court was wrong. There's no constitutional issue in King; why should I find this precedent encouraging?
They further point out that people may be wrong in their guess about Chief Justice Roberts. That's true, but in this case those "people" would probably include Justices Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito. My guess is that they've got better information than the rest of us. And, frankly, if the Chief Justice wanted to get rid of Obamacare, doing it now, as a statutory interpretation, just after a sweeping GOP victory, probably makes it less visible and less politically harmful to the Court than the 2012 case would have.
That justices are lawyers, too, and will almost always try to reach a legally justifiable result is also a good point, and one I've made, from time to time. But they aren't just lawyers, not in intensely political cases. And although I think the case for the government's reading is convincing, I don't think it is "slam-dunk convincing". There is wiggle room, I think, for a justice who wants to go the other way. And, when the political stakes are high, even justices I almost always respect may go a legally very weak way. (Bush v. Gore being exhibit 1.)
I do think it is not entirely clear that stripping people of health coverage is good politics for the Republicans in the long run but I also think those justices just don't care. They just want it gone. And I'd rather have it in place than hope that its demise will somehow prompt a backlash against the GOP that will lead to the second coming of a Democratic ability to pass something vaguely close to universal health coverage. So far, they've been able to do that once in 66 years of trying. Want to roll the dice that that option will be open again soon? I don't.
And, frankly, I don't think their "federalism" respecting argument makes sense. The idea is that some federalism-respecting justices (you know who) will find it hard to vote against the status quo, where the fact that the federal government will provide exchanges whether or not a state does takes the pressure off states to set up their own exchanges. But isn't the stronger "federalism" respecting position one in which states that don't want Obamacare are able to avoid it, or at least avoid any subsidies for it.
Overall, though, my main reaction had nothing to do with any of this. It is anger. I am angry that at least four justices of the Supreme Court granted cert in a highly political case where they had to know it would be read, as it largely has been read, as a naked political move. My conclusion: they don't care. They've got the votes, their side has political momentum, and they don't care what Democrats – or people who are both paying attention and want to believe in a non-partisan Supreme Court – think.
Personally, I think it stinks. And though I'm not panicking, I am not happy. And you shouldn't be either.
On Friday, November 7, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear (granted the petitioner's writ of certiorari) in King v. Burwell. In King, a panel of the Fourth Circuit unanimously rejected the argument that the federal government cannot, under the Affordable Care Act, subsidize low income consumers who buy health plans in the 36 states where the federal government, and not the states, runs the system's "health exchanges."
As a fan of this expanded health coverage, I think that's bad because it puts that expansion at risk based on a drafting glitch in the Act. More broadly, though, I think it is bad because the Court's decision to take a case like this now, with only one appellate court decision on the topic, looks unnecessary, political, and, indeed, partisan. And that, too, is bad for the country – and the Court.
The argument against the subsidies hinges on a small textual point. The provisions authorizing and, in some other respects involving, the subsidies refer to "exchanges established by the States," not to federally-run exchanges. Similar problems exist in other sections of the rapidly cobbled together final bill and to (almost) everyone, it clearly makes no sense that Congress would intend to provide subsidies to consumers in states that ran their own exchanges but not in states that chose to let the federal government provide the exchanges. It's fundamentally a silly argument, calling for a strict interpretation of a few words of statutory language in a way that would profoundly contradict the legislature's intent.
But this isn't "legislation." This is Obamacare, known in some circles as the Apocalypse (or at least one of its horsemen).
And here's what makes the Court's decision to hear this appeal so scary. There's only one reason for the Court to grant that review right now – to overturn a decision the Court, or at least the minimum of four justices who voted to grant cert, thinks is both important and wrong.
Usually the Court, which (lazily?) hears only about 80 cases a year compared with about 160 a year before the late 1980s, waits until it has to take a case because of a conflict in authority below. If a decision of the Secord Circuit, covering Connecticut, New York, and Vermont, squarely disagrees on the meaning and application of, say, the Fourth Amendment with the Ninth Circuit, covering California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Arizona, Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, and the Northern Marianas Islands, the Court usually decides it needs to intervene. It is, after all, a bad thing for the Constitution to mean one thing for the FBI (and citizens) in one state and but to mean something else entirely in another. These so-called circuit splits can also arise when the highest court of a state disagrees about federal law with another state's high court or a federal circuit.
Just witness the dance the Court has been doing to avoid having to decide whether state bans on same sex marriage are constitutional. Although it does not have to give – and has not given – reasons for these decisions, it has so far consistently refused to hear same sex marriage cases. These involve very important questions of constitutional law, but until November 6,[1] there was no circuit split.[2]
Just as, in the Obamacare case, there is no circuit split. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals did hear a parallel case and decided it, by a 2-1 vote, against the government, creating a circuit split. But in that case the government sought what is called rehearing en banc from the D.C. Circuit, a procedure in which all the active members of the court and senior judges who participated in the panel decision (a total of 13 judges in this case) rehear the case. The D.C. Circuit granted the request, which eliminated the panel decision and made the split go away, at least temporarily. And, given both the strength of the government's case and the political and ideological make-up of the en banc D.C. Circuit, it seems as likely as any court decision can be that the en banc court will overturn the panel decision. Thus, no split exists – at least, unless and until another circuit court holds against the government on this point. At least two other challenges are pending, one from Indiana and one from Oklahoma. [3]
But still, why worry? Surely, the Supreme Court will make the right decision, or, at least, a fair and impartial one. Alas, on an issue with the political, and partisan, resonance of Obamacare, such an outcome can be hoped for, but not expected.
The great 2012 Affordable Care Act cases led to highly political alignments, both on the Commerce Clause issue that had seemed to be at the cases' heart, and on the "tax clause" work-around by which Chief Justice Roberts prevented his Court from completely striking down a president's major accomplishment – and possibly provoking major public unhappiness with a Court perceived as too political.
I hope I will be proven wrong, but it seems very likely to me that Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy – all vociferous dissenters in the original Obamacare case – will vote to strike down the subsidies. Similarly, I would be shocked if justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan didn't vote to uphold them. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the statute-saving majority opinion. How will he vote now? Three years later, with the president in question near the end of his terms and much less popular and a much narrower legal issue, the Chief Justice may well not feel the need to be so politically careful.
At least the first case involved some big, constitutional issues where no precedents were squarely on point. Personally I thought the majority got the Commerce Clause issue wrong and the state sovereignty (Medicaid) issues wrong (in ways less consistent with precedent and logic than one would like from an unbiased court) and may have gotten the Tax Clause issue wrong. But those were big legal and constitutional questions that, as a result of circuit splits and the importance of the statute, the Court had to decide. The question here of what "exchanges established by the States" means in a few clause of a huge statute is not of that stature, except in its possible consequences.
So why not at least wait to see if there's a circuit split? Because, I can only assume, Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy or Roberts (or both) want to take the case, overturn this important provision of Obamacare, and, dare I say it, save the Republican Party from the need actually to elect a President as well as a House and Senate to get rid of the clear and present danger of the federal government expanding health coverage to more Americans. Perhaps they fear there won't be a circuit split and the more Courts of Appeal that rule for the government, the harder their case. More likely, they just don't care in this case.
Of course, in a better world, having the Court make a mistake in interpreting legislation is not a big problem. The legislature can just pass it again, making clearer its intent. But the 2009 Congress no longer exists; its Democratic majorities in both houses gone in part because of its passage of Obamacare energized its Republican opponents. The GOP House and Senate do not have the power to kill Obamacare by action because of the prospect of a presidential veto. But they surely have, and equally surely can use, the power of inaction, which is invulnerable to the veto, to bring down Obamacare. (Kind of ironic that the action/inaction dichotomy that featured heavily in the Commerce Clause analysis in the original Obamacare cases would come back in terms of the difference between Congress's action and inaction. Kind of ironic. Maybe?)
So what now? There is, I suppose, a chance that the conservative justices will take a count heads, see they are likely to lose, and, after the D.C. Circuit panel decision is reversed en banc, seek to have the case dismissed as improvidently granted. More likely, the case will be argued in late winter (the SCOTUS blog suggests the first week of March) and the decision announced in late June. And the fate of Obamacare subsidies, and hence health coverage, for millions of people in 36 states, will hinge on just how partisan Chief Justice Roberts and perhaps Justice Kennedy feel in late June – or how well they are able to convince themselves that they are not acting in a partisan fashion but from neutral principles.[4] I am not sanguine, for the Obamacare subsidies or for a Supreme Court that at least appears, to those paying attention, to consist primarily of judges and not primarily of partisan politicians in black robes.
I am not sanguine, but we live in hope. Because we must.
One last note. What happens if the subsidies are struck down? Presumably, people in the 14 states (plus the District of Columbia) that established their own state-run systems keep getting subsidies, and hence affordable health care, and people in the other 36 states don't. In some of the latter states, state governments will quickly set up state health exchanges, or perhaps state health exchange authorities that then contract with the federal government to administer these "state" exchanges. But some more ideologically pure state governments will happily let the subsidies lapse and return their citizens to the nirvana of the health insurance "free market". This almost certainly includes the 23 states ideologically pure enough to have rejected the Act's Medicaid expansion money and thus to have allowed their citizens to pay federal income taxes that provide expanded healthcare for other states' poor but not their own.
But might not the millions of people who, as a result, lose their health care be annoyed? Might not they vote out the Republicans, at state and federal levels, who brought about their loss of health coverage? Oops – I forgot. The GOP assault on voting rights, aided and abetted by the Supreme Court, should protect the Republicans from the wrath of their (relatively voteless) constituents.
Hank Greely
P.S. Here's some more coverage of this issue for those interested:
SCOTUS Blog, New York Times, Washington Post, VOX, and Slate
[1] On that day a divided panel of the Sixth Circuit upheld laws against same sex marriage in several states in DeBoer v. Snyder and related cases. The Supreme Court may no longer be able to duck that issue.
[2] Of course, even when there is a circuit split, the Court doesn't have to do anything about it. No one can make it take a case. And, indeed, on some usually minor issues, the Court has allowed circuit splits, on less important issues, go to unresolved for years.
[3] The Indiana case, Indiana v. I.R.S. is in the Southern District of Indiana, where it survived a motion to dismiss on grounds of lack of standing. That case is a long way from a circuit decision on the merits. The plaintiffs in Oklahoma, Pruitt v. Burwell, won summary judgment in the Eastern District of Oklahoma at the end of September 2014. The trial judge stayed his judgment pending appeal to the Tenth Circuit. Presumably, a 10th Circuit decision could come in sometime in 2015.
In theory a state Supreme Court could rule against the federal government and create a split, but it is very hard to see how they would get such a case.
[4] One speculative aside: Justice Kennedy is not always on the same side as Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito. Notably, they disagree, strongly, on same sex marriage and, more broadly, on the constitutional protections for gays and lesbians. The very recent Sixth Circuit decision creating a circuit split on that issue means the Court is likely to decide it in late June as well. Might open war between those justices and Justice Kennedy on same sex marriage (and Justice Scalia does open war very well) affect the outcome of this Obamacare case? Stranger things have happened.]]>
If you're familiar with FDA's expanded access regulations and their history, you might be underwhelmed by this news. There have been many efforts aimed at reforming expanded access – from litigation to proposed federal legislation to recently enacted state legislation – which generally have focused on the government allowing patients access earlier in drug development and with fewer safeguards (or obstacles, depending on your perspective). Usually, these proposals haven't focused on what many identify as the real barrier to access: industry's understandable reluctance to provide unapproved drugs outside of clinical trials.*
Rep. McCaul's proposal, however, sounds somewhat different than past reform efforts.
In a white paper – which, according to Pharmalot, Rep. McCaul recently submitted to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's 21st Century Cures Initiative – Rep. McCaul makes 4 recommendations for reforming expanded access:
The stories about terminally-ill patients and their families seeking access are often heart-wrenching—the desire to do everything possible when you or your loved one is facing a terminal, incurable illness is entirely understandable. That said, I'm a bit skeptical of the value of spending time and resources on reforming expanded access. It's not clear to me that our current expanded access system is underperforming, and I fear that the focus on reforming expanded access may distract from what will ultimately help the most patients—encouraging and hastening the development of treatments that are shown to be safe and effective.
But, regardless of what you think about expanded access and the various reform efforts, I think it's sensible of Rep. McCaul to point out that there is a lot of information that we don't know about how the expanded access process currently functions. We know that FDA authorizes almost all requests for expanded access that it receives, but we don't know how often expanded access requests don't reach FDA at all because a drug company isn't willing or able to provide a drug. We also don't necessarily know what drug companies' expanded access policies are. If that information can be obtained without unreasonable cost to patients, industry, or FDA, I don't see a downside in making it available. We also might want even more information than Rep. McCaul is calling for—for example, we might want to know how often patients who obtain expanded access receive drugs that are ultimately approved for their condition or otherwise seem to be helped by the drugs, or why FDA rejects certain expanded access requests. More information would hopefully lead to a better understanding of expanded access, and better reform proposals. And, frankly, it would be really interesting to learn more about what happens on the industry side of the expanded access equation, and what kinds of patients do and don't receive expanded access.
*Although FDA authorization is required for expanded access, that authorization is not sufficient for a patient to obtain access because FDA cannot compel a company to provide its drug via expanded access.]]>
One of the most important developments in the history of transcranial direct current stimulation (a non-pharmacological cognitive enhancement technology I have covered in previous posts) has been the advent of commercially available brain stimulation devices. The most widely used mass-market device is foc.us, which is advertised as a brain-boosting device for competitive video gaming. A forthcoming empirical study from one of my Stanford Law colleagues has found that the practice of do-it-yourself brain stimulation changed significantly when foc.us became available. No surprise — many curious would-be brain-zappers, suddenly spared the challenge of tinkering together a homemade tDCS device, were suddenly provided with the opportunity to purchase one ready-made. An influx of neophyte users to online DIY communities followed.
We might be poised for another such influx. Businessweek has reported that a startup with the so-Silicon-Valley-it-hurts moniker Thync has drummed up $13 million in venture capital funding (from the firm of notorious and legally beleaguered beach-blockading tycoon Vinod Khosla). Their goal? To bring a tDCS device to market for end-users within a year. Now, $13 million may sound like hardly a sneeze here in the Valley's biotech sector, but as capital for medical technology goes, it is substantial. Given the well-established nature of the underlying technology, I do not think there is much reason to doubt that Thync will deliver on its promise to create and sell this product.
The interesting question, from my perspective, is what will result from the arrival of a new player in the direct-to-consumer tDCS space. For one thing, foc.us may be in for a sales dip. It has never been all that clear how many people actually purchase it for the specific use that the company has in mind — I certainly haven't seen any League of Legends pros wearing the telltale crown to get juiced on sweet, sweet voltage (though every time I play I suspect the entire opposing team is illicitly amped). Probably much of the purchasing behavior springs from less recreational cognitive enhancement aspirations. With a device more explicitly targeting the general enhancement market, foc.us will have to adapt or dig deeper for its niche market.
Very likely there will be a spike in overall tDCS interest when Thync hits the scene. But will it last? And how will regulators respond? The former is really anyone's guess. As the director of the Center that runs this blog is fond of pointing out, prediction is difficult, especially when it's about the future. But if the bump has some staying power — or even if it proves a flash in the pan, but manages to generate media attention or (heaven forbid) a highly visible adverse event — Thync could be the device that changes the regulatory paradigm for tDCS. Heretofore, the FDA has entirely declined to exercise its regulatory jurisdiction over this technology (in stark contrast to its approach to a nearly indistinguishable intervention, CES). If Thync succeeds too visibly, it might — in true Silicon Valley fashion — "disrupt" the FDA's forbearance.
Of course, it sounds like Thync doesn't want that to happen. The Businessweek article notes that they are being good citizens as they head to market, in at least two ways: first, they are conducting pre-market clinical trials of their device, and second, they are actively conferring with the FDA to make sure that they are in compliance with the agency's wishes. Of course, unless the rules have very quietly changed (or are about to change … ?), there are no regulatory guidelines for Thync to comply with in the first place. But good on them for being proactive anyhow; we know what happens to companies that neglect to return the government's phone calls. The same goes for the clinical trials: they are supererogatory in a legal sense, and brownie-points-worthy in the ethics sense. Of course, as with so much research, the proof is in the details. (Or is it the devil that's in the pudding?) Study design, sample size, confounding factors — their pre-market trials could miss the mark in any number of ways, and we won't know if their results are meaningful or meaningless until someone can scrutinize the work.
One thing is for certain: the growth of tDCS is about to accelerate, to some extent. This makes it all the more urgent for sound, sensible policy to emerge quickly. This doesn't necessarily mean top-down, command-and-control regulation either. (There's a Command and Conquer joke to be made here about foc.us, but it's not coming together for me …) What we need is a constructive, cooperative, harm-reduction-oriented approach.
If only some enterprising neuroethicists had provided some suggestions on that very score …
Roland Nadler is in the Stanford Law School class of 2015, 2013-14 CLB student fellow]]>


text:
HOME NHL Philadelphia Flyers Gear Philadelphia Flyers Mens Philadelphia Flyers Mens Hats $20 to $40 (120 items) Product ID: 625895
Main Content
Order today, receive no later than Friday, January 2nd. Some limitations apply.
$4.99 3-day shipping. Need it faster?
Get the edge on the competition with the 9FIFTY Still Anglin' snapback hat from New Era. With its embroidered team name and logo set against multi-shade angled lines on the crown, this hat exudes style, so you can turn heads while rooting on your Flyers.
- 100% Cotton fabric
- Flat bill
- Imported
- Officially licensed NHL product
- Quality embroidery
- Six panels with four eyelets
- Structured fit
Reviewed by 1 customer
- Authentic Look
Best Uses
- Anytime
Comments about New Era Philadelphia Flyers Black-Orange 9FIFTY Still Anglin' Snapback Adjustable Hat:
Would buy again. No problems !!
Special event items are produced by manufacturers only after the outcome of a game or event. These are advanced sale items and will ship immediately after they are received in our warehouse.
Manufacturer direct items are shipped directly from the manufacturer. These items are not available for international or expedited shipping.
Customized items can be personalized with options such as your name, your favorite number, and/or designs. Some options may be limited by league rules.


text:
Working over Christmas
Your rights if you are asked to work on bank holidays during Christmas and New Year.
Water charges changes for customers of Welsh Water and Dee Valley Water
New rules about providing information about the people who occupy a property.
NHS low income scheme error
You may be entitled to a payment if you applied between October 2003 and September 2008.
Civil partners get option to convert to marriage
Same-sex couples will have the option to convert their civil partnership into a marriage, from 10 December.
The Chancellor's Autumn Statement
Government plans for benefits, tax and national insurance.
Parcel delivery scams – calling a premium rate number
How to avoid postal delivery scams which ask you to call a premium rate number.
Shared parental leave
Sharing parental leave and pay with your partner on or after 5 April 2015.
State Pension is changing
Outlines how state pension will change from 6 April 2016 and who will be affected.
Drink drive limit to be lowered before Christmas
Drink drive blood alcohol limit being lowered in Scotland, from 5 Dec.
Getting help from a Citizens Advice Bureau
Citizens Advice Bureaux offer free, confidential, and impartial advice from over 3,500 locations.
Citizens Advice consumer service
Help and advice on consumer problems on the web and over the phone.
Advice for the future
For 75 years, the Citizens Advice service has provided free, confidential advice and influenced decision makers. We need your support for our work to continue.
Use our sample letters
Use our easy-to-complete interactive letters when you want to complain about a consumer, debt or employment problem.
Personal budget planner
Plan your weekly budget and then work out how much money you will have left to pay back your debts.
Fair play for prepay
Do you prepay for your gas or electricity? We want to know how you heat your home.
Share with your friends
It's easy to let your friends and family know about our advice. You can share Adviceguide through:
About Citizens Advice
Every year our advice helps over two million people, and our campaigns for better policies benefit even more. 21,500 volunteers make our work possible. Volunteering is both rewarding and fun.
Fact sheets
Other languages
Some of our popular pages have been translated.


text:
Win a Signed Copy of Lady Antebellum's 'Live: On This Winter's Night' DVD
Lady Antebellum will release their 'Live: On This Winter's Night' DVD next week (Oct. 29), but Taste of Country readers have a chance to win a copy today -- signed!
Lady Antebellum will release their 'Live: On This Winter's Night' DVD next week (Oct. 29), but Taste of Country readers have a chance to win a copy today -- signed!
Here's another chance to get to Nashville to watch the CMA Awards LIVE on November 6th!
Get in to win a spot for you and a guest at our sneak-peek screening of Jason Aldean's brand-new concert DVD, Night Train To Georgia, courtesy of Broken Bow Records!
Thanks again for entering WYRK's pro football pick 'em! Week one is now officially behind us -- time to gear up for week two!
This is just a friendly reminder to make your week two picks if you haven't already
Are you a PIONEER in the WNY community? Do you know someone who is a PIONEER?
It's time to vote for our Live & Loud From Your Living Room winner!
It's time to get "Live & Loud" with Rascal Flatts by getting "Live & Loud From Your Living Room"! You could win a VIP experience with Rascal Flatts when they come to Darien Lake on September 7.
I was invited to participate Chef's Media Meatball Eating Contest yesterday! The room was FULL of media -- about 21 of us were ready to throw down some meatballs. We were given 90 seconds and 30 meatballs. The idea of 30 meatballs in 90 seconds is obviously disturbing...so, what happened?
Think you're the top football expert in Buffalo?
This is your chance to crash Luke Bryan's party! We're flying two people to Palm Beach, FL this fall to see Luke's final show of 2013 and meet the country superstar backstage. Enter below!
Here's another chance to score tickets to the Jason Aldean show at Darien Lake and a chance at VIP access to Thomas Rhett!
Make sure you're listening to the Breakfast Club every morning for the rest of the week (August 7-9) for your chance to win tickets to see Jason Aldean and have VIP access to Thomas Rhett!


text:
OT: Meet your fellow Pens fans
View Single Post
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Fort Lauderdale
Posts: 488
vCash: 500
(Real) Name: Alan
Age: 24 next week
Age you act: 21?
Sex: M
Birthplace: Pittsburgh
Where you live: Fort Lauderdale
Distinguishing Physical Characteristic: I'm 6'8
Nationality: Italian
Mode of Transportation: Impala
Job: Grad Student
College Attended/Attending: Point Park then Nova Southeastern
How you became a Penguins fan: I was born into it. My parents are huge fans
Favorite Penguins Player: Crosby
Favorite Penguins prospect: Despres
Favorite NON Penguins Player: Jakob Markstrom/Huberdeau
Favorite piece of Penguins paraphernalia (souvenir): Mario Lemieux O-pee-chee rookie card, Picture of Lemieux and Crosby in the locker room with the cup, Lemieux replica 91-92 championship ring.
Hockey Jerseys In Wardrobe: Penguins: Crosby rookie home, Crosby rookie away, Crosby 1st winter classic, Crosby 2nd winter classic, Crosby blue alternate, Malkin rookie home, Letang home, Lemieux 90s home. Florida Panthers: Old school red jersey, Markstrom red, Blank red (soon to be Huberdeau or Gudbranson). Mighty Ducks: Fulton Reed
Video Game Systems Owned: Pretty much everything except Wii and anything Sega
Favorite Game(s): NHL series, Call of Duty series, Madden series,
Music/Bands You Like: Carly Rae Jepsen
Favorite Movie(s): October Sky
Favorite TV Show: How I Met Your Mother, Married with Children, The League
Favorite Food: Spider Rolls sushi
Most Interesting/Unusual Person/Entity You Follow on Twitter: Biz Nasty?
View Public Profile
goosecrosby's albums
Find More Posts by goosecrosby


text:
A staticfunction retUnique() return me a unique value. My question is that if there are many users who are using the same function at a given point of time, what happens? Is there a best practice to make sure that each users accessing this static function simultaneously get a unique value and also do not face threading issues.
Can one give me an example.


text:
Golden, Colo., has become something of a distilling hot spot, with Golden Moon Distillery and State 38 Distilling both setting up shop in the city. State 38 launched six weeks ago, and Golden Moon recently opened up a cocktail bar where patrons can taste its products.
View Full Article in:Denver Post, The
Published in Brief:


text:
Posted by CharMarBoBarThis is the first recipe I ever ventured out to make on my own...and boy am I glad I did! I dubbed these "Rehabilitation Cookies" as I tried them out the first time in occupational therapy at Rehab after an accident in March. The other patient's on my floor were glad to try them out for me!
Charlie's Chocolate Chip Cookies
- 2/3 cup margarine 2 eggs 2 tsp vanilla 2/3 cup white sugar 2/3 cup brown sugar 1/2 tsp baking soda 1/2 tsp salt 1 3/4 cup flour chocolate chips to taste (I usually use about 1 cup)
- 1. Pre-heat oven to 375 degrees.
- 2. Cream margarine by hand till smooth. Add egg and vanilla and beat by hand for about 1 minute.
- 3. Add sugars and mix till blended.
- 4. Add flour, baking soda and salt to cream mixture. Beat until smooth.
- 5. Stir in chips.
- 6. Bake 12-15 minutes (or until browned). Hehe....