text:
Adult Residency Training
Welcome to Residency Education!
The Department of Psychiatry at the University of Illinois at Chicago is committed to providing unsurpassed training opportunities for our students, residents and professionals seeking continuing medical education.
Through a combination of innovative learning opportunities, a nationally acclaimed mentoring program, hands-on experience, cutting-edge research opportunities and a commitment to develop future leaders in the field, the department has earned the reputation as one of the premier programs in the country.
Enter our site by choosing from menu at the left and learn more about our psychiatry residency, research opportunities and fellowship training programs!
Robert W. Marvin, MD
Director, Education and Training Program
This is a particularly exciting time in our department and in the field of psychiatry as a whole. With the advances in neuroscience, the field is evolving rapidly. Our department is well positioned on the forefront of this change given the nationally recognized clinical research program. We are ranked 24th in the nation and 1st in Illinois for NIMH funding. Combined with outstanding clinical services and diverse patient populations, our residents have a front-row seat in this defining period. At UIC, we aim to provide a solid foundation onto which continued acquisition of knowledge can be built. Today learning does not stop at the end of residency but continues throughout the careers of our trainees.
Our basic approach to understanding human behavior and psychopathology relies on a core theoretical base derived from our understanding of biological, psychological and sociological forces interacting in a dynamic fashion to shape individual behavior. In our efforts to address the clinical implications of these forces, we rely on biological, psychoanalytical, cognitive-behavioral, socio-anthropological, and systems theory principles. These principles are the building blocks for constructing diagnostic formulations, developing treatment strategies, and making disposition plans for our diverse clinical population. Our eclecticism is a strength and is made possible by an internationally known faculty numbering over 200 members with diverse clinical and research interests. All our faculty members are dedicated to the mission of teaching residents and medical students of the UIC College of Medicine.
It is our philosophy that any psychiatry curriculum needs to be designed around a set of core psychiatric principles, philosophies, basic skills, and attitudes to provide a solid basis in evidence-based psychiatry. The curriculum of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Illinois meets this standard and is divided over four years.
Brief Curriculum Overview
For complete curriculum information, please see the Curriculum section on the left.
During the first year of training (PGY-1), emphasis is on attaining competency in evaluative, diagnostic, and treatment skills. The year is divided into two six-month blocks. One block consists of primary care and neurology rotations. The other block is composed of inpatient, emergency psychiatry, and consult-liaison rotations.
The second year (PGY-2), emphasizes psychiatric phenomenology, diagnosis, treatment and disposition of patients. This is primarily an inpatient year, with rotations on the adult inpatient unit, child/adolescent services, and the consultation-liaison service at diverse sites in the Chicago area.
The third and fourth years (PGY-3 and PGY-4) of training are primarily ambulatory care experiences. We've chosen to emphasize public sector (community) psychiatry, research psychiatry, and multi-specialty psychiatry. These are not subspecialties, but rather represent differing educational experiences that reflect the growing emphasis on service delivery systems in contemporary psychiatric practice. It is also expected that during the PGY-3 and PGY-4 years of training, all trainees will further refine basic clinical skills, increase leadership and teaching skills, and participate in educational activities.
We look forward to hearing from you and ultimately meeting you.
Robert W. Marvin, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry
Director, Residency Training and Education
University of Illinois at Chicago - Department of Psychiatry


text:
You won't be able to dismiss this by usual means (escape or click button), but you can close it programatically based on user choices or actions.
"As always, wedding paper divas NEVER disappoints! These cards were absolutely perfect! I cant wait to send them out for everyone to see!!"
"These Save The Dates are absolutely gorgeous. We ordered them in blaze, and the colors are just lovely. My fiance and I couldn't be happier with the design and the quality of the paper. Special shout-out to the Design Team for taking the time to proof my prints, and to Heldana at Customer Service for changing the quantity to my order. WPD is wonderful!"
"Recently purchased in Cream. I really love it! The only thing that is disappointing is the gold part is not metallic but just printed gold. Still looks good but would be better with actual foil. But Overall we love it!"
"I love the quality of the cards and the envelopes. The size of the cards are almost 4 1/2 x 5 1/2. A perfect size to realize that it's something important in your mailbox. It looks great on my refrigerator with a magnet and in my curio on display. I highly recommend the black and gold border."
"Very beautiful & sophisticated. Timeless & classic design. Beautiful colours that match similar real flowers. The font is great & easy to read. Highly recommend."

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Samsung Explains The Firmware Bug Causing The Failures of SSD 840/840 Proby Kristian Vättö on 12/7/2012 1:05 PM EST
- Posted in
- Storage
- SSDs
- Samsung
- Samsung SSD 840
56 Comments
Back to Article
niva - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkLogged in expecting some real damage to Samsung and instead this was a positive article. Maybe you should consider revising the title to something less negative. Reply
Iketh - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkI was quite relieved since I've owned the 840 since release... No problems here BTW, been flawless. Reply
SlyNine - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkYes, they need to change the title. Not everyone takes the time to actually read through articles. Someone might just see the headline and stay away from, what is an otherwise good SSD. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkBetter now? Reply
SlyNine - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkMuch, thank you. Reply
jmke - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linkchange title indeed :)
"Samsung Explains The Pre-Release Firmware Bug Causing The Failures of SSD 840/840 Pro" Reply
just4U - Saturday, January 05, 2013 - linkI like the old title better.. CHANGE IT BACK!!! err... what was the old title anyway? :/ Reply
phil13 - Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - linkI have one that failed, only show 0.9GB, SN: 000000000, Firmware: DXT06BO0, even samsung Magician software can see it, but say that there is no samsung SSD drive. Reply
phil13 - Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - linkIt does look the firmware problem, all feel ok. Reply
phil13 - Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - linkAny solution? appreciate, thanks. Reply
benson95 - Saturday, December 21, 2013 - linkHi Phil13, My 840PRO also failed a few day ago. A check also shows only 0.93GB, SN: nil and Firmware: IE'. And when you go to do the performance test on magician, it says "no volumes found on selected drive". I lost all my past 8 months worth of travel pics. Is there anyone who can help? What are the chances of recovering my data? Reply
Impulses - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkI was like "uh oh" when I read that title too... Reply
chedrz - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkI pulled the trigger on an 840 a couple weeks ago and only found out about the failing issue the day after I placed my order (by my own fault, I skimmed the article about the 840/840 Pro). I did immediately check the firmware on my drive and all is well. I haven't had any issues with my drive, and I'm glad to know Samsung is willing to disclose the exact nature of the issue for all to know. Reply
erple2 - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkSo is this problem fixable by an end user (not that it should affect end users anyway)? I don't know if it's even possible to fix faulty firmware that's caused the drive to hang. Reply
kmmatney - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkThe end user should be able to just update the firmware themselves (in the case that end users were affected). Most end users wouldn't do a secure-erase either.. I would sure check the firmware version if I bought one, though. I'm still using several 830s, but good to know this problem has been fixed. Reply
Lepton87 - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkSo when it comes to samsung's SSDs, the best is 840pro followed by 830 and then vanilla TLC based 840? Reply
Impulses - Friday, December 07, 2012 - link830/840 trade blows depending on what you're doing, tho the 830's probably the better investment if they're both priced similarly... They're going out of stock quick tho, and were being cleared out at pretty sweet prices well before Black Friday ($0.55 - $0.65 per GB). The 840 Pro carries a huge premium right now just for being the fastest drive out there... Reply
HisDivineOrder - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkYeah, I wish they were still selling the 830. I find the 840 to be a poor value for what they're asking, but the 840 Pro is way, way overpriced.
The 830 hits a middle of the road in performance and price, a perfect spot really, but Samsung has thrown all that away to fleece everyone either with the crap drive at a higher price than it deserves or the great drive again at a much higher price than it deserves.
It's a shame. They had it perfect with the 830. I wish they hadn't taken it off the market. Even before the clearing prices, it was still well below the 840 Pro's cost. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkThe only reason why the 840 seems like a poor value is because the 830 sold for so cheap. If Samsung had not released the 840 series, the 830 would not have been such a bargain because Samsung would not have had a need to get rid of their 830s.
From what I have seen by following the prices, the 840 is actually a fairly good deal compared to other SSDs. I just did a pricing table to an upcoming review a few days ago and the 840 was the cheapest of them all. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkI agree, people are being way too harsh on the 840... Even if the 830 never existed, the 840 would still be a good buy compared to similar drives like the Crucial M4, Plextor M5S, etc. Some people are just mad they missed out on deals for what was basically a clearance item, if you're pinching pennies that strongly then just wait for the next similar scenario (for instance, I'm sure there'll be an M4 replacement eventually). Reply
Death666Angel - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkIn Anandtechs light workload benchmark, the 840 is faster than the 830, in the heavy benchmark it's the other way around. In the read/write benchmarks they trade blows with the 840 being a lot better in random r/w benchmarks.
It also dropped price from ~195€ for 250GB at introduction to 155€ right now. The lowest the 830 256GB got was 145€ and it is now at 165€. I don't think there is anything wrong with these prices and I expect the 840 to drop even lower.
Now, the 840 Pro is really too expensive for normal desktop consumer users. But if the extra speed will increase your work productivity, it will probably be worth it.
I'll be looking forward to a 250 GB 840 for my system and down the road another 500 GB one for my games. :D
And the new headline is much better and less confusing, thanks for that.
Also, is there a chance that the spare area test will be done with a 840 non-pro? I'd really be interested in the IO latency @ stock and with 25% spare area. :) Reply
Kristian Vättö - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkI don't have a working 840 sample at the moment but I'll be sure to test IO latency once I get a new sample. I'll probably include it in our review of all the capacities of 840/840 Pro. Reply
Beenthere - Friday, December 07, 2012 - linkI wonder how many tweaks the "Reviewer" firmware had to get good numbers, that the "Shipping" firmware doesn't have? If this is Samsung's idea of quality control and proper validation of an SSD before releasing it to the meida for review, I'd say they failed miserably. Reply
Death666Angel - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkIf they had waited to release it with the shipping firmware to reviewers, thus delaying any credible reviews until after it was available in retail, I'm sure people would say that they were afraid of bad reviews and wanted to cash in before they started to appear. I don't see the big deal here, pre-retail samples die all the time in every category. That's why they are pre-retail. Reply
Impulses - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkThat's kind of a cynical point of view, though a valid one I guess, I'm sure Anandtech will re-run tests on a different capacity 840/840 Pro at some point though. The bug, as explained in this news article, wouldn't really affect performance, so it doesn't support your theory...
I'd say the better question would be whether they discovered this bug on their own and fixed it before drives shipped out, or whether they were only made aware of it once Anand/Kristian and others reported drive failures w/the review samples...
If it's the former, I'd say that speaks highly of Samsung's validation (they were testing it even after review samples were sent out), if it's the latter then I guess it's a bit of black eye on their part but they still deserve credit for a really quick turnaround on the fix. Reply
Henk Poley - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkThat's why even for a tiny embedded system inside a harddisk, it's smarter to put the boot disk on another storage device. Reply
Azethoth - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linkHuh what? How does doubling the number of storage systems used lead to a smaller failure rate? Reply
longtom - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkI just created an account to say that they haven't fixed it yet.
I bought two of these last week (both with the newest firmware - verified) to test under RAID0 for benchmarking and as far as BIOS or Windows is concerned, they don't exist at all when paired in RAID on the AMD SB950 (with newest BIOS firmware).
I know this is a problem with the 840 because, to confirm my suspicions, I pulled several SSDs out of my pile to put on RAID, and they all worked flawlessly.
I am still very disgruntled with this product. "Buyer Beware" until they come out with yet another firmware revision. Reply
frief - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkHi longtom,
did you do a secure erase at some time? (I'm a little shy as I've been burnt by Indilinx, Crucial M4 and Seagate Momentus and if I don't learn from that when will I ever learn?) Reply
Kristian Vättö - Saturday, December 08, 2012 - linkIs the problem just when you're RAIDing them (i.e. do they show up normally when not in RAID)? Reply
longtom - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkBoth of these drives did not work straight out of the packaging. Yes, they only do not work when in a RAID. When out of RAID they work fine. However, when in any form of RAID configuration on the AMD SB950 Southbridge (990FX, a popular chip right now) the drive is INVISIBLE to both BIOS and Windows, even after all drivers are installed.
I have confirmed that this is the fault of the drive, as several other SSDs that I have work fine in RAID, thus ruling out any board, BIOS, or chipset problem.
Are you suggesting that somehow a secure erase will make the drive work, or are you wondering if I have tried a secure erase to see if it shuts down the drive, as it has with previous models? In case of the latter, I have not attempted a secure erase at all.
I can understand a mistake in development, so therefore I will be contacting Samsung to see if I can get either confirmation that they know about the issue and are working on a fix, a replacement drive of a different model, or my money back. How they answer will determine whether they are up to snuff as a reliable company or not. I will post results back when I get them. Reply
frief - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkHi longtom,
> In case of the latter, I have not attempted a secure erase at all.
Yes, the latter. It's good if these can be kept separate issues. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkDefinitely contact Samsung then. Validation is always limited to certain setups, so it's possible that not so common setups face a bug (unfortunately this usually means AMD). Especially RAID is probably not tested on every possible setup that exists given that the regular 840 is mainly meant for mainstream users (who don't even know what RAID is). This happens a lot with laptops because the OEMs often customize BIOS which can cause issues.
If you can't get any proper help through the regular customer service, drop me an email (kristian[AT]anandtech[DOT]com) and I'll forward it to the right people. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linklongtom,
Can you email me at email@example.com? I contacted Samsung and they are looking into the issue but would like your contact information for possible further questions about your issue/setup. Reply
longtom - Saturday, December 22, 2012 - linkHere is the end of the story:
After nearly a week on the phone with Samsung technical support, I learned that their entire tech support department is actually outsourced to another company. They are kept in the dark about a lot of issues, and are also not given the power to make important decisions about returns. I was told that turn-around time for an issue like mine could be several days to weeks before permission is granted.
If a customer has a ten to thirty day return window on a product, this is unacceptable.
On the very first day, I was told to return the drives to the retailer where I got them, and even after I explained that I had a "replace only" purchase, they still balked about taking care of me. I felt that it was their issue, and trying to be a good customer, I VERY GENEROUSLY asked if I could downgrade my drives to some known working models, such as the 830 for NO MONEY ACROSS THE TABLE. After all, their product did not do what they claimed it would do. I was instead tasked with 5 days worth of troubleshooting before they would consider writing a letter to their parent company in Korea to "ask" for permission to return the items. In those five days, THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY NEVER GOT AROUND TO SENDING THAT EMAIL.
On evening three, I learned ON MY OWN that Samsung had VERY QUIETLY rolled out a firmware update. On day four of negotiating with their outsourced tech support department, I asked about the firmware update. I was told that it was only for issues with the Trim. This was also not true. I will go into that more in a minute.
I was asked to try to flash the firmware, anyway. The flash from my motherboard failed, and Samsung tech support responded by asking me to find another computer to try it on. Luckily, I have several around the house. I tried the firmware update on my wife's computer, and it would not work. I then went out to my workshop, where I have some older motherboards. I had to scrounge together a power supply, memory, and a hard drive, installed windows and Magician, and it worked.
As an aside, part of the problem was that the Samsung Magician software is not functioning as it should. It gives three options to attempt to flash your firmware. The first is within Windows, using Magician its self, and the other two use a bootable usb flash drive, and a bootable CDROM option. The thumb drive and CDROM both use FreeDos as an operating environment to run their software. The problem with the USB drive option was that Samsung coded the FreeDos boot procedures wrong, and it tried to load its kernel from the wrong drive letter that it had assigned itself. The CDROM, on the other hand, told me that there was no firmware found on the disk which Magician burned. That left me with only the Windows option.
These are grave errors on the part of Samsung. One problem I can understand, but every single option firmware option in the Magician software is broken in some way. On the upside, I've been informed that Samsung has plans to re-design Magician from the ground up. This is a positive note. At least they're working hard to fix known issues.
For right now, though, their maintenance software is junk.
Back to the lying. Even though I was told that the firmware fixes were small TRIM adjustments, both of my drives exhibited the same problems before the firmware update, refused to update on the same motherboards, and then exhibited the same behavior AFTER the updates.
They lied to me, and to their own customer service people. It WAS INDEED a fix. I did not like being misled, and I will not be purchasing any more Samsung products in the future. I will vote with my wallet, and try to support a company that has customer satisfaction as the number one concern.
Ah, the joys of a free market. I can take my business elsewhere, thereby encouraging healthy competition.
There is a gentleman out there at Samsung tech support named Jose. Jose bent over backwards to try to make me happy, and he needs a commendation for his excellence in service, but he was being stonewalled by Samsung at every pass. THANK YOU, Jose. I can not tell you enough how much I appreciated your hard work. You need a raise and possibly a promotion. Merry Christmas, Jose. I wish the best for you and for your family.
Basically, even though Samsung tells them nothing, the guys in their tech support company are finding fixes for themselves through trial and error (and dissatisfied customers). They're trying to satisfy their contract from Samsung and do a good job anyway. That is a sad situation, right there, Samsung. FIX IT.
Because if it, they lost a customer. Reply
TemjinGold - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkWell good for you. Would you like a medal? Reply
Azethoth - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linkYes, he needs everyone to send him a tiny medal. He then melts it down and makes money on the recycled metal. The metal is then used to make more medals. Reply
EJ257 - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkAlthough I'm surprise Samsung didn't find this in their internal testing and fix the bug before sending out your review samples. Maybe they already found it and were working on the fix when they sent out your drives. Anyway good to know it won't affect production units. Reply
Brahmzy - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkNo data lost as I don't put anything critical on my R0 arrays, but I lost the whole thing.
My ASUS board would not boot to bios with both drives connected - the boot device LED would light up solid and Id have s black screen. If I unplugged one, it would boot up fine, and of course the OROM would show my I had a failed array. Took me a while to figure this out.
I then booted off another W7 SSD I have for maintenance and both drives appeared healthy in RST when I plugged them both back in, while not running as a system disk. The array verified fine. As soon as I would reboot and the bios would try to read the array (which it does even before posting) I'd get a black screen. Nothing. Unplug either of the two drives and it would post.
After dicking around for an hour trying everything, I destroyed the array (1 disk at a time) boot off the other SSD, secure erased both Pros and rebuilt the array. It boots fine again and I installed a base OS without issues. I'm not happy - I have never seen this behavior before in 30+ SSD RAID 0 setups.
It's like the array's metadata got corrupted or something. I do not trust these drives right now and am a step away from returning them.
A couple points:
*drives ran fine without a hitch for a 1.5 weeks in RAID0
*both drives have been secure erased probably 6-8 times each
*drives never actually died. They were recoverable with a secure erase. The bios refused to post with them in a R0 array.
*both drives are on the latest firmware
*this sucks because I've got a total of 4 of these drives on my systems and am not feeling real confident right now
-Anandtech, please send this info to Samsung if you have a fast channel to their SSA tech group, thanks. Reply
Brahmzy - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkSo I know weird things happen and I was going to chalk this up as a fluke because I absolutely despise when people spread/feed FUD on these kinda of things. However, the poster above me with the AMD setup is what has me worried. His drives are fine until they are put into an array. That is similar to what I experienced, the difference is mine we're fine for almost 2 weeks and are running in another array, again, right now. For how long? Nobody knows. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkWhat chipset do you have? Or better yet, what exact motherboard? The more specs I have, the easier it is for me to inform Samsung. I don't have two 840/840 Pros at the moment so I can't try to recreate the issue, but I'll definitely drop them a note once I have the specs I need. Reply
Brahmzy - Sunday, December 09, 2012 - linkHi Kristian, thanks for the quick response.
System is an ASUS P8P67 Deluxe B3, BIOS 3509 (modded OROM 11.6.x.x for TRIM, which works fabulously, btw). 128k stripe. I will note I swapped cables and even switched both drives to 2 spare intel SATA2 ports - still would not post until I unplugged one of the drives. Once I broke the array, system posted fine with both drives plugged in. As stated earlier, I was able to recreate the array and load up an OS. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linkBrahmzy,
Can you email me at firstname.lastname@example.com? I contacted Samsung and they are looking into the issue but would like your contact information for possible further questions about your issue/setup. Reply
Brahmzy - Thursday, December 13, 2012 - linkEmail sent - sorry about the delay. My newly built array is still running fine after the rebuild, so we'll see. Curious about the new firmware! Reply
crimson117 - Monday, December 10, 2012 - linkDid you update the benchmarks using the consumer firmware?
Curious whether the fix compromises performance at all. Reply
fronzel - Wednesday, December 12, 2012 - linkYou guys should put two drives like the 840s in RAID0 on a z77 board and run it through your storage bench! It seems like a popular setup, and i'm considering it myself. TRIM should work okay with the new drivers, but i'm curious how it scales and if there are any quirks or drawbacks with on-board raid with these SSD drives. Reply
Tommyv2 - Friday, December 14, 2012 - linkThere's a new firmware for the 840 Pro at least... just came out today! Reply
CDJay - Thursday, December 27, 2012 - linkI got a 512gb 840 Pro a few weeks back. I performed the latest firmware upgrade just over a week ago.
Two days ago, the drive wasn't detected when the PC was turned on. As it's a drive dedicated to Steam, it wasn't too catastrophic, fixed with a simple power cycle.
Same again today, except I can't resurrect it. I've swapped all cables, tried a different controller, moved over to another PC and done the same there. It is, officially, dead.
I'll get it returned, but I'm fairly happy it's my Steam drive (which I'd backed up to NAS when I installed the drive) as I can recover easily. However, I was testing the drive with a view to using as an O/s drive as well, not to mention rolling out in my fiancées studio PC and other PCs I'll build for people going forward. This gives me pause, unsurprisingly! Reply
longtom - Sunday, December 30, 2012 - linkThe new firmware (DXM04B0Q) causes the 840 Pro to read/write at half speed on the AMD SB950 chipset.
I get 250MB/s and 230MB/s Write.
I find it fishy that this firmware is release 4, yet the Samsung Website states that it is 1.0.
I am done with this junk. I will call tomorrow for the 6th time and demand a full refund.
I will instead buy Intel's new drives. Reply
ZipTang - Friday, January 04, 2013 - linkMy first 840 Pro started disappearing randomly, often long after the computer had been booted. Rebooting usually brought it back.
Then it didn't. CheckDisk ran, and when it was done, half my files were gone. (But backed up, so I didn't freak.)
Samsung swapped it for a drive with DXM04B0Q firmware on December 17.
That drive is starting to go. It started disappearing. CheckDisk just ran. No files seem to be missing, but this is beyond frustrating. Do I swap it for another? Is there any hope that another one will be better, or is there something bigger wrong? The two 830 drives in the same machine seem fine. Got them on sale when the 840 pro was being released. Reply
Entropy512 - Wednesday, January 30, 2013 - linkHow did this even make it into a preproduction firmware for a device in late 2012?
This is the exact same issue that a large variety of Samsung eMMC flash chips made in 2011. They fixed the issue in late 2011.
At the very least: VYL00M, KYL00M, MAG4FA fwrev 0x19 all had this EXACT same bug. VYL00M fwrev 0x25 (present in the Galaxy Nexus) did not. They were aware of this early enough that the mainline Linux kernel was patched to avoid this issue in early September:
I can tell you that Samsung was fully aware that secure erase was an issue in many of their flash chip firmwares in June 2012 - so how was it that even preproduction firmware had not been properly tested with secure erase in late September 2012, nearly a year after they had fixed the same firmware bug in their eMMC chips.
I would not be surprised if one of Samsung's SSDs released late in 2013 starts dying after a few months of usage just like VTU00M fwrev 0xF1 (found in many GT-I9300 phones) did, considering how mobile device eMMC bugs seem to show up in their desktop products after about a year. Reply
midijamm - Saturday, June 01, 2013 - linkI have been trying to update the firmware in my 840 in my macbook pro. It seems to be a bit complicated. It works fine as it is except you cam't close the lid as it will not wake up. (I have seen this before with a kingston) Also in reading this and other forums I have repeatedly seem testimonies that it is a fast drive, but that is not so in my Mac. It boots in 30 seconds which is twice as fast as a spinner but OWC and Crucial drives boot in 10. Is this a firmware issue or is the 840 really that much slower? Anyone know? Reply
hakkiro - Friday, June 28, 2013 - linkHello !
I had one of my two 840 Pros die (?) this week.
Here's the story, and a plea for help (see the end of message) from someone knowledgeable :
I bought two 840 Pro (256Gb) in mid February 2013.
Both came with DXM03B0Q firmware.
As I purchased after reading through all relevant 840 Pro AnandTech articles I was aware of the firmware issues and the first thing I've done was upgrading (from bootable ISO created with Samsung Magician) to version DXM04B0Q.
One of the drives was setup as system drive with Win 8 Pro.
That drive has been going since and hasn't thrown any problems at all.
The other drive was setup as storage for my video work.
Both were formatted NTFS (with default cluster sizes) and connected to native Intel SATA III ports on my Asus P8P67 Mobo.
As I said the system drive is going strong (fingers crossed) so the rest of the story concerns the other (storage) drive.
All was well for a while.
After a couple of months the drive started "disappearing" from SATA bus.
This behaviour was random and I could never recreate it at will (technician's nightmare).
A reboot or a Cold Boot would always bring it back, though.
In the process, I eliminated SATA cables and ports by replacing cables and running the drive from a different port.
The other day the drive has gone for good.
It appears dead.
Well, almost - read on.
Almost all symptoms I'm having are same or similar to other tales of 840 Pro woes I, since, read.
Drive does not show inside BIOS nor on the POST screen readouts.
When connected to SATA bus it is preventing my machine from booting to desktop.
The machine's HDD access LED stays firmly lit during boot-up process and the screen never gets to desktop.
If I physically disconnect the drive during the boot-up the said HDD access LED resumes the usual random flashes indicating reading from System Drive and System loading and, seconds later the boot completes and I get to the desktop.
If I now connect the faulty drive again - (My MoBo supports HotPlugging) the HDD access LED lights up solid but no drive appears in Windows explorer or Windows Disk Management console.
The drive appears in Device manager, however, but under a generic name, ie : "SAMSUNG SATA SSD" (caps intentional) as opposed to "Samsung SSD 840 PRO Series" (which is how my System drive appears next to it under Device Manager). My "Safely Remove Hardware" green icon also appears in the System tray and lists the drive (under "SAMSUNG SATA SSD").
If I attempt to click on it - nothing happens (ie : no usual message "Safe to Remove", etc ...).
All the while, from the moment of hot-plugging the drive the HDD access LED stays firmly lit.
Neither Windows Explorer nor Disk Management Console nor Samsung Magician utility see the drive.
If I leave the drive connected and proceed to shut down the machine I get the same behaviour as the one described during the start-up, ie :
HDD access LED stays lit while the machine remains in "Shutting Down" screen yet never actually shuts down until I physically pull the drive out from the HotPlug bay. At this point HDD access LED resumes the familiar flashing pattern indicating read/write processes on System Drive and the machine eventually shuts down after a few seconds.
I eliminated further variables by connecting it as an external drive using a SATA->USB3 enclosure.
No play :(
As I have some data on this drive I'd hate to loose (surprise, surprise ...) - here's my $1000000 question :
Since the drive entry appears in Device Manager after hot-plugging the drive - is there any Windows-based (not DOS) software that will allow me to access the drive to perform either a firmware re-flash (a new DXM05B0Q firmware is now available) or data recovery ?
To recap : the drive does not appear in BIOS nor Windows Explorer nor Windows Disk Management Console nor is it seen by Samsung Magician nor any other Windows (or DOS - I tried SpinRite) utilities I know of.
Please advise.
(I have obtained an RMA from the original retailer - Ebuyer, here in UK but I'd like to exploit all possible data recovery options before I send it off). Reply
FullForce - Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - linkI purchased my Samsung 840 Pro 256gb in March of 2013. I have been experiencing the same problems as yourself and today it finally seems to of died. I can't figure out how to try updating firmware like yourself and it seems impossible. Parted Magic can't see the drive as well. Exactly the same symptoms as yourself though.. Reply
hokeren - Sunday, August 25, 2013 - linkLooks like I am in the same boat as you guys, now with a broken 840 Pro 256GB drive!
Mine just died today.
It does not show up in BIOS any longer, and when trying to find i hooked up to a USB cradle, it shows a 100MB uninitialized.
If I try to initialize it as MBR, WIndows reports an I/O error has occured.
No luck so far getting any data from the drive :( Reply
benson95 - Saturday, December 21, 2013 - linkCan anyone help? My 840PRO failed a few days ago. A check also shows only 0.93GB, SN: nil and Firmware: IE'. And when you go to do the performance test on magician, it says "no volumes found on selected drive". Windows fails to boot. I get "media failure, check plug" message. I lost all my past 8 months worth of travel pics. Is there anyone who can help? What are the chances of recovering my data? Reply


text:
Southern California High Tech Event Calendar
|View By:
|View By:
|PortTech Forum: Environmental Report Card
|Date: January 08, 2013
|Location:Los Angeles
|PortTech Forum: Environmental Report Card. In the first PortTech Forum of 2013, representatives from both the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach will focus on key environmental issues in the San Pedro Bay area. Invited speakers include Chris Cannon, Director of Environmental Management for the Port of Los Angeles and Richard Cameron, Director of Environmental Planning for the Port of Long Beach. See http://www.porttechla.org/events/calendar-details.asp?id=36
|More information: http://www.porttechla.org/events/calendar-details.asp?id=36
|Download to Calendar


text:
Breanna & Jack
June 22
Estes Park, Colorado
Q & A with the Bride:
1. What was the one thing about your venue that made you know it was the one?
Estes Park is in the base of the Rocky Mountain National Park (one of our favorite places in Colorado), and the ceremony location is breathtaking. The moment we walked underneath the pavilion,we just knew it was the place.
2. Which three details from your wedding were your favorites?
1. Beer growlers instead of table numbers
2. Hanging flowers behind our sweetheart table
3. Bridesmaid's bouquets
3. Give us the one moment in your wedding day you can't stop thinking about.
Jack and I did our "first look" in the Rocky Mountain National Park (same place we got engaged). Seeing him for the first time, while being in the mountains, was my favorite moment of the day. Also, I didn't walk down the aisle to any music. Last minute, I realized I hadn't chose a song to walk to (crazy, I know), so I let nature choose my music for me. It was completely peaceful and quiet, and I wouldn't have wanted it any other way. Many of our guests approached me after the ceremony and commented about how wonderful they thought it was that I didn't play music because you could hear the rain in the distance over the mountains, the wind in the trees, and the birds singing to each other. It was truly calming and beautiful.


text:
If the vehicle develops an annoying, clunking sound when driving over bumps it is usually the struts and strut bearing plates. These may need replacing at 100,000-125,000 miles or sooner. If the noise is a more of a squeak or groan, it can be usually be eliminated by spraying a light lubricant on the suspension bushings 1-2 times per year.
Problem Description and Possible Solution
Problem Data
RepairPal Verified
Average mileage: 143,298 (38,000–252,000)
29 people reported this problem


text:
Welcome to Dragon Cave! Dragon Cave is an online adoptables game. Collect eggs, raise them to adulthood, and then breed them to create interesting lineages. New types of dragons are added regularly!
Day Glory drakes are radiant and friendly creatures that love the company of humans. They are so friendly, in fact, that they will eat food and treats right from a person's palm. Despite their friendliness, they aren't an easy target for predators due to their excellent flying abilities; when danger approaches, they are able to vanish within seconds. Breeding only occurs during the day when the sun is warm.
Dragons are creatures with nearly unlimited life spans. They can survive for long periods of time, and no one has found a dragon that has died of old age. Adolescence is usually marked by the growth of a hatchling's wings, although not all breeds of dragons grow wings and some breeds have other traits that indicate the beginning of maturation. Once they hit adolescence, hatchlings change quickly, maturing to their full forms in only 2 years.
Dragons don't communicate with each other verbally, but they will growl to scare off predators and frighten prey. Young dragons will emit an extremely high-pitched squeal when they are frightened. To communicate, they use telepathy with each other and to speak to other creatures.


text:
Nail Files
"This braided updo is one of my favorite looks I've ever done with Jennifer!" Said Townsend. "It's fresh and young and very easy to do."
"I started by running a nickel-size amount of Dove Color Care Leave On Conditioner through her hair to keep it looking shiny and vibrant. Then I parted it down the middle and divided it into two sections on the right and left side. Starting behind her ears on each side, I did a traditional braid leaving two inches as the bottom after securing it with an elastic." Pro Tip: Use clear elastics so they're camouflaged.
"Once the braids were done, I flipped them up on top of her head and secured them with bobby pins every few inches from Jennifer's hairline. I like to run a bobby pin through the elastics at the end of the braids. Make sure to cover the ends of one of the braids with the other one and tuck any stray pieces into the braid, securing with a bobby pin. I finished by spraying Oribe Dry Texture Spray all over for extra texture."
8 Products for Stronger Hair


text:
Mahalakshmi Vrata and puja, dedicated to Goddess Lakshmi, is observed for 16-days starting from the eighth day of the Shukla Paksha (waxing phase of moon) of Bhadrapad Month (August – September) as per traditional Hindu calendar followed in
North India. Mahalakshmi Vrata 2017 begins on August 29 and ends on September 13. Mahalaxmi Puja and Vrata dates are based on the North Indian calendar and is only observed mainly in North India.
The 16-day Mahalakshmi Vrata ends on the eighth day of the Krishna Paksha of Aswhin month (on the Ashtami day of waning phase of moon).
The Vrata is observed mainly by women but in some communities men also observe the rules associated with the Vrata.
Non-vegetarian food is avoided during the Vrata period. The popular belief is that Goddess Lakshmi blesses devotees with wealth and prosperity during the period.
Tying the sacred thread having sixteen knots after traditional puja is an important ritual during the period.
A specifically prepared Kalash symbolizing Goddess Lakshmi is worshipped on the last day of Mahalakshmi Vrata.


text:
At UW Bothell, we're always looking at our day-to-day activities to see how they can be more efficient and sustainable. Here are some of the things we're doing:
Only organic methods are used to fertilize grass, plants & flowers and for weed control.
We have limited use of lowest toxicity pesticides, and have completely phased out the use of herbicides and pesticides in our gardening. The campus uses goats, composting and a host of other solutions to create a beautiful campus.
Learn more by watching our video:
See our real-time campus energy dashboard here.
© University of Washington Bothell Privacy | Terms


text:
New York City, New York 10103
United States
|Areas of Practice
|1) Patents, 2) Intellectual Property, 3) Litigation and 4) Arbitration
|Law School
|The George Washington University Law School
|Fordham University (B.A., Computer Science and Eng
|Most recent firm
|Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.
|Relevant Jobs
Personal Injury Litigation Paralegal
USA-NY-New York City
Downtown Manhattan AV rated personal injury defense firm seeks Litigation Paralegal to assist attorneys. Excellent opportunity and training especially for night law school students seeking hands on ...
Apply now
Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Associate
USA-NY-New York City
Downtown manhattan AV rated Personal Injury Defense firm with varied practice seeks admitted attorney with up to two years of experience for complex motion practice, depositions, court appearances, ...
Apply now
Intellectual Property Paralegal
USA-NY-New York City
Intellectual Property Paralegal The candidate will work on all phases of litigations (from complaint to trial) involving patents and trademarks. Will report to the IP Partners. Provide the IP practice...
Apply now
|+ View more jobs
A. Harrison Barnes is a well-known attorney throughout the United States. As a member of the Malibu community, Harrison is committed to serving the needs of Malibu residents and businesses in legal matters.
Benjamin P. Smith is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Litigation Practice. He is a trial lawyer with a particular focus on high-stakes disputes in the biotechnology, medical device, and internet industries.


text:
:: Computing Literacy & Application
Fall 2013
@Leeward CC
|53251, 53252
|Credit Hours:
Vincent Lee
455-0512 (Ph)
455-0509 (Fax)
|Course URL:
|Instructional Mode:
|08/26/2013 - 12/12/2013
|Course Requirements:
|Students will be contacted by their instructor by UH email before the first day of instruction. Students must check their UH email for course correspondence before the first day of instruction.
|Course Prerequisites:
|ENG 21 or 22
AND Math 73
|Course Description:
|An introductory survey of computers and their role in the modern world. Emphasis is on computer terminology and hardware and software. Opportunities for hands-on experience using micro-computer applications software may include spreadsheets, word processing, graphics and database management systems.
|Technology in Action"bundled with MyITlab" , Introduction; Prentice Hall, 2005; Evans, Martin and Poatsy
Books may be purchased at the Leeward CC bookstore or ordered online at http://www.bookstore.hawaii.edu/lcc/home.aspx. If you do not have access to the Internet or unable to travel to the bookstore, you may also order by phone at 1-800-UHBOOKS
|Technical Requirements:
|The Internet allows students to take a course at home using a personal computer. Familiarity with using a computer and basic Internet skills (browsing, sending e-mail, saving/sending files) is required. Students must have a computer with Internet access. Depending on the online course, students may be required to log in at a specific day and time or at anytime. Students taking an online course should always contact their instructor after registration or prior to the first day of class to get detailed information regarding the course.
Minimum Computer Hardware/Software Requirements:
It is also required that you obtain a UH Email account. Please go to the following URL for more information: http://www.hawaii.edu/askus/563
Laulima Help
|Additional Notes:
|Alternate Technology Access Plan: In registering for a Distance Education course (Cable or Web) the student is responsible for finding immediate alternate access to a computer with Internet connectivity or cable television should that student experience technical difficulties. Technical difficulties can include but are not limited to problems with a student's computer hardware/software; inoperability of a student's VCR or DVR; or lack of service by a student's Internet Service Provider (ISP) or Cable Provider. Technical issues do not constitute the extension of an assignment, project, quiz or exam deadline unless agreed upon by the instructor.
An Alternate Technology Access Plan will be made by the student prior to the start of the semester and should be implemented immediately upon encountering technical difficulties. The student is required to continue course work as a result of having an alternate plan of access while independently resolving any technical issues with hardware/software, VCR/DVD, ISP, or Cable Provider.
|Friday, March 15, 2013 15:31:21


text:
Does Cybercrime Really Cost $1 Trillion?
As the Senate considers a bill to strengthen the nation's cybersecurity, some questionable numbers keep creeping into the discussion.
Gen. Keith Alexander is the director of the National Security Agency and oversees U.S. Cyber Command, which means he leads the government's effort to protect America from cyberattacks. Due to the secretive nature of his job, he maintains a relatively low profile, so when he does speak, people listen closely. On July 9, Alexander addressed a crowded room at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., and though he started with a few jokes — his mother said he had a face for radio, behind every general is a stunned father-in-law — he soon got down to business.
Alexander warned that cyberattacks are causing "the greatest transfer of wealth in history," and he cited statistics from, among other sources, Symantec Corp. and McAfee Inc., which both sell software to protect computers from hackers. Crediting Symantec, he said the theft of intellectual property costs American companies $250 billion a year. He also mentioned a McAfee estimate that the global cost of cybercrime is $1 trillion. "That's our future disappearing in front of us," he said, urging Congress to enact legislation to improve America's cyberdefenses.
These estimates have been cited on many occasions by government officials, who portray them as evidence of the threat against America. They are hardly the only cyberstatistics used by officials, but they are recurring ones that get a lot of attention. In his first major cybersecurity speech in 2009, President Obama prominently referred to McAfee's $1 trillion estimate. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, the main sponsors of the Cybersecurity Act of 2012 that is expected to be voted on this week, have also mentioned $1 trillion in cybercrime costs. Last week, arguing on the Senate floor in favor of putting their bill up for a vote, they both referenced the $250 billion estimate and repeated Alexander's warning about the greatest transfer of wealth in history.
A handful of media stories, blog posts and academic studies have previously expressed skepticism about these attention-getting estimates, but this has not stopped an array of government officials and politicians from continuing to publicly cite them as authoritative. Now, an examination of their origins by ProPublica has found new grounds to question the data and methods used to generate these numbers, which McAfee and Symantec say they stand behind.
One of the figures Alexander attributed to Symantec — the $250 billion in annual losses from intellectual property theft — was indeed mentioned in a Symantec report, but it is not a Symantec number and its source remains a mystery.
McAfee's trillion-dollar estimate is questioned even by the three independent researchers from Purdue University whom McAfee credits with analyzing the raw data from which the estimate was derived. "I was really kind of appalled when the number came out in news reports, the trillion dollars, because that was just way, way large," said Eugene Spafford, a computer science professor at Purdue.
Spafford was a key contributor to McAfee's 2009 report, "Unsecured Economies: Protecting Vital Information" (PDF). The trillion-dollar estimate was first published in a news release that McAfee issued to announce the report; the number does not appear in the report itself. A McAfee spokesman told ProPublica the estimate was an extrapolation by the company, based on data from the report. McAfee executives have mentioned the trillion-dollar figure on a number of occasions, and in 2011 McAfee published it once more in a new report, "Underground Economies: Intellectual Capital and Sensitive Corporate Data Now the Latest Cybercrime Currency" (PDF).
In addition to the three Purdue researchers who were the report's key contributors, 17 other researchers and experts were listed as contributors to the original 2009 report, though at least some of them were only interviewed by the Purdue researchers. Among them was Ross Anderson, a security engineering professor at University of Cambridge, who told ProPublica that he did not know about the $1 trillion estimate before it was announced. "I would have objected at the time had I known about it," he said. "The intellectual quality of this ($1 trillion number) is below abysmal."
The use of these estimates comes amid increased debate about cyberattacks; warnings of a digital Pearl Harbor are becoming almost routine. "A cyberattack could stop our society in its tracks," Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said earlier this year. Bloomberg reported just last week that a group of Chinese hackers, whom U.S. intelligence agencies referred to as "Byzantine Candor," have stolen sensitive or classified information from 20 organizations, including Halliburton Inc., and a prominent Washington law firm, Wiley Rein LLP.
There is little doubt that a lot of cybercrime, cyberespionage and even acts of cyberwar are occurring, but the exact scale is unclear and the financial costs are difficult to calculate because solid data is hard to get. Relying on inaccurate or unverifiable estimates is perilous, experts say, because it can tilt the country's spending priorities and its relations with foreign nations. The costs could be worse than the most dire estimates — but they could be less, too.
Computer security companies like McAfee and Symantec have stepped into the data void. Both sell anti-virus software to consumers, and McAfee also sells a range of network security products for government agencies and private companies, including operators of critical infrastructure like power plants and pipelines. Both firms conduct and publish cybercrime research, too. "Symantec is doing outstanding work on threat analysis," said Thomas Rid, a cybersecurity expert at Kings College London. "But still, of course they have a vested interest in portraying a more dangerous environment because they stand to gain for it."
The companies disagree. Sal Viveros, a McAfee public relations official who oversaw the 2009 report, said in an email to ProPublica, "We work with think tanks and universities to make sure our reports are non-biased and as accurate as possible. The goal of our papers [is] to really educate on the issues and risks facing businesses. Our customers look to us to provide them with our expert knowledge."
Symantec said its estimates are developed with standard methods used by governments and businesses to conduct consumer surveys and come from "one of the few, large, multi-country studies on cybercrime that asks consumers what forms of cybercrime they have actually experienced and what it cost them."
* * *
Cyberattacks come in many flavors. There are everyday crimes in which hackers access personal or financial information, such as credit card numbers. There are industrial crimes and espionage in which the attacker — perhaps a foreign country or company — breaks into a corporate or government network to obtain blueprints or classified information; sometimes the attacker gets inside a network and lurks there for months or years, scooping up whatever is of interest. One of the biggest categories of cybercrime is one of the least discussed — insider theft, by disgruntled or ex-employees. There's also a category of attacks that do not have overt financial motives and that can constitute acts of war: Attempts to create havoc in computer systems that control nuclear power plants, dams and the electrical grid. This category is of the greatest concern to national security officials.
One reason it's a challenge to measure the financial costs of cybercrimes is that the victims often don't know they've been attacked. When intellectual property is stolen, the original can remain in place, seemingly untouched. Even when the breach is known, how do you put a dollar value on a Social Security number, a formula for a new drug, the blueprints for a new car, or the bidding strategy of an oil firm? It may be impossible to know whether an attacker uses intellectual property in a way that causes economic harm to the victim; maybe the data isn't of much use to the attacker, or maybe the attacker, though using the data to quickly bring out a new product, is not successful in gaining market share.
There's an added complication in some attacks: Companies can be reluctant to admit they have been hacked because they fear a loss in confidence from consumers or clients. This can lead to underreporting of the problem.
"How do you even start to measure the monetary damages?" asked Nick Akerman, a partner at the law firm of Dorsey & Whitney LLP who specializes in computer cases — and one of the contributors to the McAfee report. "I would argue it is impossible. Not to say the problem isn't enormous. It is enormous. But I don't see how you can adequately come up with dollar figures."
Companies that sell security software are not bound by the same professional practices as academics, whose studies tend to refrain from sweeping estimates. Even when corporate reports involve academic researchers, the results can be suspect. Industry-sponsored studies — pharmaceuticals are an example, according to a 2003 study published by BMJ (formerly known as the British Medical Journal) — can have a bias toward the industry's economic interests. Unlike academic journals, which use a peer review process, there's no formal system of oversight for studies published by industry. The economic interest of security companies is clear: The greater the apparent threat, the greater the reason to buy their anti-intruder software. Norton, which is owned by Symantec and sells a popular suite of anti-virus software, advises in its latest cybercrime report: "Don't get angry. Get Norton."
Computer scientists Dinei Florencio and Cormac Herley, who work at Microsoft Research, the software giant's computer science lab, recently wrote a paper, "Sex, Lies and Cyber-crime Surveys," (PDF) that sharply criticized these sorts of surveys. "Our assessment of the quality of cyber-crime surveys is harsh: they are so compromised and biased that no faith whatever can be placed in their findings," their report said. "We are not alone in this judgement. Most research teams who have looked at the survey data on cyber-crime have reached similarly negative conclusions."
Julie Ryan, a professor of engineering management and systems engineering at George Washington University, co-authored a paper, "The Use, Misuse, and Abuse of Statistics in Information Security Research" (PDF). In an interview with ProPublica, she said: "From what I've seen of the big commercial surveys, they all suffer from major weaknesses, which means the data is worthless, scientifically worthless. But it's very valuable from a marketing perspective."
Yet corporate cybersurveys are repeatedly invoked; the NSA's Alexander is merely among the most prominent senior officials to do it. ProPublica provided the NSA's media office with links to critical studies, stories and blog posts about the Symantec and McAfee numbers and asked whether Alexander or the agency was aware of them or, alternately, had other data to support the numbers he cited. The NSA media office responded: "The information is publicly available and was appropriately sourced."
* * *
McAfee was founded by John McAfee, a software engineer who wrote some of the first anti-virus software in the 1980s. The company grew quickly, thanks in part to a novel marketing strategy in those days — McAfee gave away its software, charging only for tech support. The company went public in 1992 and remained a leader in its field; last year it was acquired by Intel Corp. for $7.68 billion. "We have had just one mission: to help our customers stay safe," McAfee says on its website. "We achieve this by creating proactive security solutions for securing your digital world."
In 2008, McAfee decided to commission a report that would look at how the global economic downturn was affecting data theft against companies. McAfee put one of its public relations officials, Viveros, in charge of the project. Viveros, in a phone interview, said a technology marketing company was hired to create and distribute a survey to about 1,000 information and technology executives across the globe. Purdue University's Center for Education and Research in Information Assurance and Security, headed by Spafford, analyzed the survey results, conducted follow-up interviews and helped write the report. McAfee confirmed that it helped steer $30,000 from a foundation to Purdue for the work.
The 31-page report found that the companies surveyed had an average of $12 million worth of sensitive information stored in offshore computer systems in 2008, and that each lost an average $4.6 million worth of intellectual property in 2008. The report was released on Jan. 29, 2009, in Davos, Switzerland, during a meeting of the World Economic Forum. McAfee issued a news release to announce it, and the release included dramatic numbers that were not in the report.
"The companies surveyed estimated they lost a combined $4.6 billion worth of intellectual property last year alone, and spent approximately $600 million repairing damage from data breaches," the release said. "Based on these numbers, McAfee projects that companies worldwide lost more than $1 trillion last year." The release contained a quote from McAfee's then-president and chief executive David DeWalt, in which he repeated the $1 trillion estimate. The headline of the news release was "Businesses Lose More than $1 Trillion in Intellectual Property Due to Data Theft and Cybercrime."
The trillion-dollar estimate was picked up by the media, including Bloomberg and CNET, which expressed no skepticism. But at least one observer had immediate doubts. Amrit Williams, a security consultant, wrote on his blog a few days later, "$1 trillion a year? Seriously? Where the hell did the figure come from? To give you some perspective of size the total US GDP is about 14 trillion and that includes EVERYTHING."
The news stories got the worried attention of some of the report's contributors because McAfee was connecting their names to an estimate they had no previous knowledge of and were skeptical about. One of the contributors, Augusto Paes de Barros, a Brazilian security consultant, blogged a week after the news release that although he was glad to have been involved in the report, "I could not find any data in that report that could lead into that number. … I'd like to see how they found this number."
When the number was announced in 2009, McAfee provided no public explanation of how it was derived. "Initially we were just going to do the report, but a lot of people were asking us what was the total number, so we worked on a model," said McAfee's Viveros. This week, in response to queries from ProPublica, he disclosed details about the methodology. He said the calculations were done by a group of technology, marketing and sales officials at McAfee and were based on the survey responses.
"McAfee extrapolated the $1 trillion … based on the average data loss per company, multiplied by the number of similar companies in the countries we studied," Viveros said in an email.
The company's method did not meet the standards of the Purdue researchers whom it had engaged to analyze the survey responses and help write the report. In phone interviews and emails to ProPublica, associate professor Jackie Rees Ulmer said she was disconcerted when, a few days before the report's unveiling, she received a draft of the news release that contained the $1 trillion figure. "I expressed my concern with the number as we did not generate it," Rees Ulmer said in an email. She added that although she couldn't recall the particulars of the phone conversation in which she made her concerns known, "It is almost certainly the case that I would have told them the number was unsupportable."
Viveros said McAfee was never told by Purdue that the number could not be supported by the survey data. The company moved ahead with the news release and, Viveros noted, the trillion-dollar estimate "got a life of its own."
In February 2009, President Obama ordered a 60-day cybersecurity review to look into ways to better protect the country from cyberattacks, and he appointed Melissa Hathaway, who served as a cybersecurity adviser in the Bush administration, to oversee the effort. On May 29, Obama unveiled the review and delivered his first major cybersecurity speech. The second page of the 38-page review cited McAfee's trillion-dollar figure, and the president used it in his speech, saying, "It's been estimated that last year alone cybercriminals stole intellectual property from businesses worldwide worth up to $1 trillion."
The administration's Cyberspace Policy Review (PDF) includes footnotes, and the one for the $1 trillion estimate directs readers to McAfee's news release. It is not an ordinary occurrence that a president relies on the contents of a corporate news release to warn Americans of a major threat to the homeland's economic and national security, but Hathaway, now a security consultant, told ProPublica that at the time of the president's speech she was comfortable with McAfee's estimate because it appeared to be associated with Purdue researchers. However, she became wary of it once she began making more inquiries after the speech. "I tend not to use that number anymore," she said. "I was surprised that there wasn't proved methodology behind the number."
In March 2011, McAfee published its "Underground Economies" report, which repeated the $1 trillion estimate. Criticism of it continued, too. Robert Richardson, then director of the Computer Security Institute, skeptically wrote on the group's website in the spring of 2011 that "The trillion dollar number is just too good to kill." Later in 2011, Wired's British edition reported that "if true, the figure amounts to a massive 1.6 percent of global GDP." This year, Microsoft Research's Florencio and Herley wrote an opinion piece in The New York Times that described widely circulated cybercrime estimates as "generated using absurdly bad statistical methods, making them wholly unreliable."
These critiques have now taken on added importance because government officials are citing a variety of industry-generated numbers in their efforts to bolster support for major cybersecurity legislation. The House passed its version of a cybersecurity bill this spring; the pending Senate bill, known as the Cybersecurity Act of 2012, would enable the U.S. government and private companies to more easily share information about cyberthreats and create a set of voluntary cybersecurity standards for operators of critical infrastructure.
* * *
In his speech at the American Enterprise Institute, Gen. Alexander said Symantec placed the cost of intellectual property theft to the U.S. at $250 billion a year. Tracing the origins of this statistic — as both the U.S. Government Accountability Office (PDF) and technology writer Julian Sanchez have attempted before — is not unlike pulling a piece of yarn to unravel an old sweater. Although Symantec mentioned the $250 billion estimate in a 2011 report, "Behavioral Risk Indicators of IP Theft," the estimate is not Symantec's.
The report mentions the figure in passing, sourcing it in a footnote to a legal paper, where, as it turns out, the $250 billion number is not mentioned at all. Eric Shaw, one of two forensic psychologists Symantec retained to research the "Behavioral Risk" report, told ProPublica the footnote was a mistake. Instead, it should have referred to a different paper that points to a 2003 speech by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller. The figure is also cited in old FBI news releases available via the Internet Archive.
An agency spokeswoman said that although she believed FBI officials used a reliable source for the number, the FBI had neither developed the number nor claimed to have done so. She pointed to another document (PDF), from the U.S. Department of Justice, attributing the $250 billion figure to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.
Then-Commerce Secretary Gary Locke used the $250 billion number in a 2010 speech. Like Locke, the trade representative is a member of the president's cabinet; a spokeswoman for the office said the figure was not from them. "Your inquiry appears to refer to an industry-reported figure," the spokeswoman told ProPublica, pointing to a U.S. Chamber of Commerce paper on intellectual property theft. Sure enough, there's the $250 billion again — this time attributed to none other than the FBI.
There are other concerns about Symantec estimates cited by Alexander. Drawing from the 2011 Norton Cybercrime Report, Alexander put the direct cost of cybercrime at $114 billion and cybercrime's total cost, factoring in time lost, at $388 billion. The report was not actually researched by Norton employees; it was outsourced to a market research firm, StrategyOne, which is owned by the public relations giant Edelman.
StrategyOne surveyed almost 20,000 people in 24 countries, asking them to report whether they had experienced cybercrime and how much it had cost them. The company said it used "standard research practice for online surveys" to obtain a representative sample of Internet users. To calculate a total cost, it multiplied the estimated number of victims by the average cost of cybercrime in each country.
But that still leaves room for uncertainty, several researchers told ProPublica. For example, if responses came mainly from those most concerned about cybercrime or from those who suffered the biggest losses, it could inflate the average cost. And one person's estimate of the financial damage from a cybercrime might be completely different from the next person's guess, even if both suffered the same crime and the same amount of lost time.
A StrategyOne spokesman, asked if the Symantec estimates could be called scientific, responded, "Yes, as much as any survey or poll that relies on consumers to estimate their losses based on recall."
Some experts say that's not good enough. "Nobody can really assess the true impact of cybercrime," said Franz-Stefan Gady, an analyst at a security-focused think tank called the EastWest Institute. "It's really the self-reporting — because we can't verify it. It's just as simple as that."
In their 2011 paper, Florencio and Herley of Microsoft Research did not specifically mention the Symantec or McAfee numbers. But they observed, "Far from being broadly-based estimates of losses across the population, the cyber-crime estimates that we have appear to be largely the answers of a handful of people extrapolated to the whole population."
Sen. Collins added another layer of confusion about the mysterious $250 billion figure when she spoke last week in support of the cybersecurity bill. In remarks on the Senate floor, she mentioned Gen. Alexander and said, "He believes American companies have lost about $250 billion a year through intellectual property theft."
Collins' office declined several requests for comment. A spokeswoman for Lieberman, who similarly cited Alexander and the $250 billion figure, replied, "Senator Lieberman and his staff believe that McAfee, Symantec, and General Alexander are reputable sources of information about cybersecurity."
21 comments
There are a couple of problems when dealing with (ugh) "cybercrime."
The first is that "Intellectual Property" damage number is basically whatever Hollywood says it is. It's how much income they CLAIM they've lost because someone watched a movie without paying for it. Usually, it's based on statutory copyright infringement damages—the amount they might get if they sue you for downloading. In the United States, willful infringement is a $150,000 award (per item), so they're talking about a million and a half downloads. That number doesn't sound out of whack, considering the fraction of the population that feels entitled to entertainment, people who can't afford it and would never have paid money, and people who wanted to see if they liked the material before they bought it. (Most studies I've seen—granting it's hard to track the whole picture—suggest that the last category is the largest, and giving material away for free is better for business than hiding behind pay-walls.)
But…by contrast, about ten times that went to the theater to pay to just see "The Dark Knight Rises" on its opening weekend. So scale your expectations accordingly and keep the numbers in perspective. A million people listening to a song or watching a TV episode without paying is a very small fraction of the people paying.
Also by contrast, rather than the 150K award for downloading grandmothers, when you hear music on the radio, the station paid a "mechanical license" for the year, which set them back a whopping fifty bucks. When you buy music from a cover band, they paid about two cents per minute for you.
So the "real" damage in Intellectual Property (assuming that every free listen is equal to one lost sale, and nobody listened who wouldn't have purchased, and that all value is worth money) is about eighty thousand bucks. It's not good, but it's not exactly going to tank the economy. It's about as much damage as one guy stealing a Lexus, basically.
(The real damage to the economy is after the lawsuits and the studios/labels get their blood money. By wiping out people's bank accounts for daring to enjoy something without paying a dollar, that creates someone who can't buy things unless they absolutely need them. And it causes people to turn away from the industry and spend their money elsewhere.)
The trillion dollars…that may well be a decent ballpark. For example, Sony's PlayStation Network has ninety million users, according to Wikipedia. Just causing each of them about ten thousand bucks worth of grief (theft, credit damage, and so forth—hard, but not impossible) would hit the trillion mark. And that's just one breach. The more companies involved, the easier that target would be to hit.
However, the lion's share of the damage damage is usually done by the companies, not the attackers. When that Sony network was hacked, it turned out they hadn't updated their software in at least five years, ignoring serious security patches; their relaunch used systematically guessable passwords. In Australia, it was Telstra that posted close to a million full customer records to a public website, not some shadowy criminal. When Sarah Palin's e-mail was hacked, it was because Yahoo! uses your birthdate as a "security" question and she used her well-documented date of birth. Spam comes from "botnets" of millions of people worldwide who are or were all running an old, unpatched version of Windows.
That's not always the case. Sometimes, hackers use "exploits" that nobody else knows about, known as "zero-days" (how much time there's been to patch them). But you know what? It's not illegal to buy, sell, or use them! A good one (lots of control with little work) can be sold to a perfectly-legal broker for about a quarter-million bucks. Stuxnet used at least a few, though I haven't heard anything about whether they were bought or found. But that's not exactly the point, the point is that you're allowed to sell information that a criminal can use to commit theft and vandalism, and potentially endanger lives.
Worse, if you're a security researcher who finds an exploit, the company will use parts of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act to sue you for copyright infringement, ensuring that only the bad guys can find the flaws.
Basically, the problem is real, but the proposed solutions—surveillance and tracking, treating the world's population like criminals while giving known abusive corporations broad immunity—are not going to work at all. What will work is making companies responsible for updating their software and banning traffic in exploits.
Ooh. Bad math. My estimate for IP damage should be eighty MILLION dollars, not eighty thousand. Worse (not "just a Lexus"), but still a bit shy of hundreds of billions.
If you count electronic vote shifting to switch Presidential election results in favor of a neocon administration that would pursue wars of choice and financial deregulation, the cost of cybercrime must be a multiple of a trillion dollars.
President Truman was advised by his military top brass to use the nuke against Japan to send a warning to USSR. He did exactly that. Ike, our most pragmatic of all presidents, sensed the danger and reminded us of the forces in Washington DC and the military industrial complex. He predicted that "Trend is troublesome. It has a potential to foster future wars". Well Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan proved he was right.
Now, we are putting trillions in our war industry enterprise at the cost of our education systems, economy, health, energy, and arts in order to defeat our cyberspace enemies: Russia, China, Pakistan, Cuba, Iran, India and the list can go on and on… We have become of a nation fearful of all that we do not approve, or like. Wait until we support Israel in her preemptive strike against Iran and then another episode.
$60 billion per year of that figure is attributable to the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). They pulled it out of their ****, If the F.B.I. took their word for it it wouldn't surprise any of us, would it? The MPAA documentation reference is on the image in the link at the bottom of this post.
Can we distinguish between cybercrime and cyberpiracy?
The address at the end of this post is to a bar chart image. It graphically illustrates the cyberpiracy losses claimed by the motion picture, music, and software industries, and contrasts them with the actual losses, as reported by them in their own documents (sources are at the bottom of the image. In summary, no evidence was provided to support their claims of losses to cybercrime.
Despite the lack of evidence, the government, industry, and academia, jumped to the front to lead the fear-mongering witch-hunt of these alleged criminals. The dip in sales of the American music industry that took place immediately before these claims corresponded to their own drastic cuts in the number of artists, and the variety of music, that they produced.
The motion picture industry profits grew predictably over the years in question before leveling off in the last 2 years. In light of the economy, and market shifts that have helped Netflix blossom in the soil of decayed and bankrupt Blockbuster, that is an outstanding performance. No matter how many imaginary numbers they throw around, or how much credibility they attempt to cloak themselves with, the entire cyberpiracy threat is a huge hoax, and the majority of the public knows it, because of the freedom of information inherent in the Internet.
So, if the cyberpiracy threat was a hoax perpetrated on the American people, and it (obviously) failed to provide a means of restricting access to information through SOPA, PIPA, etal., it shouldn't be overlooked that whoever or whatever motivated the amount of money, time, and manpower that went into that attempt, would not be likely to walk away with their tail between their legs.
And so, here we are, after the dog and pony circus rash of "cybercrime" that miraculously swelled as SOPA and PIPA ebbed, confronting, conveniently, the same questions, and promoting the same kind of restrictions on the public sphere of information and encroachment on civil liberties. We all, of course, would love to see businesses and individuals thrive in a safe online world, but when that security for business comes at the price of access to information upon which our informed votes depend, and at the price of freedom and privacy for individuals to speak out against corporate "intelligence" overseers, we should all be highly cynical.
I smell WMDs, aluminum tubes and yellow cake. Anybody got a knife?
Any quoted figure must be measured based on the benefit to be gained by the people who produced, and the people quoting it.
In this case, the figures are being produced by companies that want people to buy their products (or in the case of the content industry want laws to force everyone to pay an annual subscription just for living on the same planet as a movie is produced). They're being quoted by someone who wants to get more money and more power for his agency. How does he do that? Persuade people that there's a threat out there.
It's something that's been happening in the west for decades. Sell a threat, keep people docile and complicit, democracy really isn't that important when you're terrified about terrorists/communists/fascists/drug lords…
Does the $1T include alleged cybercrime by wall street?
Glad you investigated these estimates, but is it fair to cite Microsoft researchers on the scale of cybercrime without mentioning that they have an economic interest in proving that systems—or at least their systems—are generally secure?
Since Victoria brought up laws, it's worth mentioning that today would be a good day to contact your Senators. The Cybersecurity Act is ending debate today. Basically, there are three issues.
1. The Act itself is overbroad and harmful to anything regarding due process, civil rights, and so forth. The SOPA- and PIPA-like parts have been removed, though.
2. Al Franken grew a backbone and proposed amendments that would eliminate corporate immunity (and "affirmative authority") for spying on you and blocking your traffic, "just in case." This is a good step, and if the Act MUST pass, this needs to be in it.
3. John McCain has proposed his own amendments that would put the NSA (military) in charge. I can't imagine anything worse than pervasive military surveillance of Americans.
As I suggested above, though, there's nothing in that bill that will stop an attack. What will stop attacks is keeping software up to date and finding (and fixing) security holes before the criminals do. That's what the law needs to encourage, not watching what you read and send; the draconian measures are going to catch whistleblowers, not vandals or identity thieves.
In any case, my understanding is that switchboards are overloaded, so the staff aren't registering nuances like "this amendment is good, that one's bad," but rather are just noting whether the caller supports the bill. If you call, make sure you're clear and make sure the person you're talking to is clear in his reporting. Otherwise, Twitter and Facebook are immediate and somewhat better-monitored, so those might be better routes.
Misha Glenny: Why you can't trust the cybercrime stats !
And…the Cybersecurity Act failed. Great news, but only by a narrow margin, and no thanks to Senators who swear up and down they'll never pass a bill that harms American liberty.
(My guess is that there's a second definition of "liberty" used in Congress, to which we're not privy…)
Bertrand, that's a fairly good overview. Thanks for it.
A basic rule in business is: "If you want to sell a solution, you first have to sell the problem".
This strategy isn't just limited to companies in the private sector like McAfee and Symantec. It also works if you are a government agency trying to get Congress to spend money on your budgetary wish-list.
Well if you trust Symantec or McAfee then you need your head examined. I think they create most of the viruses just to stay in business! Wonder how much they rob corporations every year?
Aside from doubts about the accuracy of McAfee's "answer", we can't
even tell what the question means. It suffers from the confusion that
the incoherent concept of "intellectual property" generally spreads,
because that term lumps together ten or more unrelated laws. When
they say "intellectual property theft", it is not clear activities
they are talking about.
>From the substance of the article, I would guess that the term refers
in this context mainly to trade secrets, and that the "theft" referred
to in the article means obtaining those secrets. However, publishers
refer to sharing copies as "intellectual property theft", even though
legally copyright infringement is not theft. Can we be sure which of
these the number in Symantec's report is was supposed to measure?
Whatever it was, they should have stated it clearly. The only route
to clear thinking about any of the various issues that "intellectual
property" blurs and confuses is to reject that term, and use terms
that are properly specific.
The 2012 CSA needs to include provisions to address the unregulated pornography all over the internet, cyberbullying and abuse of legacy court computer systems which is explained on the home page of http://carolinacrimereport.com.
At the end of the day, what matter does it make if the figure is $1 million, $1 billion, or $1 trillion? The US Congress is doing nothing to prevent these thefts, principally on account of politics. Meanwhile, the enemies of the US engorge themselves on our inability to do anything constructive. Carry that into education, the financial markets, etc., and the picture is far more grim than it need be.
To give readers an idea of acceptable methods, the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey is a representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries in the US. It paints a picture of health spending, demographics, health status, and a lot of other cool stuff. The survey does ask people to self-report medical events like going to a doctor or to the hospital - but it checks every one of those with Medicare's database of actual claims filed by providers. And people in the survey are interviewed three times a year - any longer and people's memory about specific medical events will start to decay and become unreliable.
The Consumer Expenditures Survey paints a picture of what US consumers spend on daily necessities like food, housing, transport. It is entirely-self reported, because there's no other way to do it. But again, the lookback period is four month.
In the case of any government-sponsored survey that is supposed to represent the entire country, the sample is randomly selected - but there are adjustments to ensure that certain demographic groups, or certain geographic regions, or a number of other factors are not over- or under-represented - otherwise that could skew the survey. They don't just pick out a phone book and pick a random number of people. The 'random' sample has to be carefully constructed to ensure that it's actually random, and we have no idea if this cyber crime survey did that (almost certainly not).
And at least CES asks you about concrete expenses that are more or less rememberable. I know what I spent on rent last month. I know what I sent to the power company. I know about what I spent on groceries and alcohol. Those are all common items. If I had been a cybercrime victim, I would almost certainly not remember it precisely. I would not remember it well if it had occurred earlier.
And the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey has about 13,000 or 14,000 people in it, and it's just for the United States. This cyber crime survey has 24,000 people for the entire world. That's far too few for a good estimate, as it raises the margin of error for the entire survey.
Musashi, from the entrepreneurs I know, our "inability to do anything constructive" has nothing to do with mysterious cyber-attacks. It has more to do with China biasing its economy to make it a more attractive (read as: more lax) place to do manufacturing and the aggressive (and probably bogus, in the final analysis) litigation of companies like Apple, pounding any product that has a chance of competing with the almighty established market.
To be more specific and direct, marketplaces that seem unfair are keeping people out of business, across the board.
It boils down to fear. Entrepreneurs fear that they're going to get sued and/or that they're not going to be able to compete against someone who outsources jobs and doesn't need to care about environmental damage. Add in insecurity over energy prices (only an idiot runs a business if he can't guess how much it'll cost to turn on the lights in six months), and cyberattacks are a distant competitor, analogous to worrying about not liking a movie because you might get carjacked on the way there.
As to the cost, it's very important when the government uses our money to fight it. If it costs a trillion dollars to prevent a million dollars in crime, it's a better use of resources to allow the crime to happen, unless you think that the business profits are worth substantially more than taxpayer money.
(There's also a smaller issue that centralization is starting to strain as a core, organizing principle of business as an indirect result of the economic problems we've seen. People are starting to look to repairing things instead of replacing them. What they do buy, they often want custom. An increasing number of designs are produced by volunteers. Employees and customers have the ability to keep a full computer system in their pockets and they want the independence. You CAN compete with this using the old Industrial Revolution models of top-down authority, but it's an uphill battle. Focusing on distributed collaboration might be a smarter direction, for at least the next few years. Longer, if 3D printers and similar fabrication tools become more common.)
How interesting that Chinese cybertheft and spy-theft of major German industries is hardly mentioned.
Read the following stories about how China and/or Chinese companies have stolen massive amounts of German technology, especially railway technology. While doing that, ask yourself: what is the cost of an entire industry?
A flaw in this article is that it does not discuss how cybercrime can actually increase the GDP. For example (and I hate this example) if 100 people steal a copy of Photoshop the GDP has actually increased $100K (GDP is a measure of all goods and services in the economy). If Google steals a technology that Baidu has already invested $100 million - well let your imagination do the math but lets not forget that door swings both ways. Cybercrime can be both a positive and negative to the economy we aren't always the victims.
On another note I found it interesting that the US GDP is actually substantially smaller than it was in 1984 when Jobs first introduced the Mac. Seems counter-intuitive, yes?
Commenting on this story is closed.
Dragnets: Tracking Censorship and Surveillance
ProPublica investigates the threats to privacy in an era of cellphones, data mining and cyberwar.


text:
Data center managers must provide faster data storage and access without incurring data corruption or loss. They must also achieve this while juggling tight IT budgets and managing highly complex system environments. Designed for the enterprise, the Pulsar.2 drive is the first MLC-enabled SSD from an enterprise storage company to deliver the price-performance benefits with the data integrity and drive endurance needed for demanding enterprise environments.
Electronics, Computer & Photo > Computers & Accessories > Storage Components > Flash Devices


text:
Jump to Navigation
Jump to Content
minutes, seconds remaining to complete purchase.
January 30, 2012 | Posted by LA Phil Staff in Los Angeles
Photo of Gustavo Dudamel and Martin Chalifour courtesy of the LA Times
Well, here we are.
We've entered a sort of "endgame" for The Mahler Project here in LA. The Project will roll on for two more weeks in Venezuela after the final, haunting notes of Mahler 9 fade into the warm afternoon air on FEB 5 - but after next Sunday, the grand effort we know as The Mahler Project is over in the United States.
That is, until FEB 18, when people around the country will be able to walk, drive, bike or skip to their local movie theaters, order a large popcorn and sit back to enjoy the "Symphony of a Thousand" live from Caracas, Venezuela as party of LA Phil LIVE.
That said, there's still plenty of Mahler to be had this week. Here's what's happening, Mahler-wise:
Read More…


text:
Contact Information
219 Bryant Street
Buffalo, NY 14222
Pediatric Grand Rounds CME Information
Follow these steps to receive CME credit for participating in Pediatric Grand Rounds:
- Sign on to the Talent Management System.
If you do not have an Network ID/Password for Talent Management, obtain one by clicking the
New Users Start Here button below.
Please note - Processing new user IDs will be completed in 5 to 6 business days.
- In the Search field at the top of the window, type WCHOB Grand Rounds and press the Enter key on your keyboard.
- If you want to put the course on your Learning Plan for viewing at a later time, click the Add to Learning Plan Button.
- To view the course immediately, click on the Go to Content button to launch the video you wish to view.
- View the video in its entirety, which will take approximately 45 to 60 minutes to complete.
- After viewing the Grand Rounds video, click the Exit button at the top of the screen.
- Completed courses will display in your Learning History.
For technical assistance, please contact the Technology Assistance Center at (716) 859-7777.
Information regarding CME Credits
This program has been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and Policies of the Accreditation Council for CME (ACCME) through joint sponsorship with the University at Buffalo School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences and Women & Children's Hospital of Buffalo. The University at Buffalo is accredited by the ACCME to sponsor CME for physicians.The UB School of Medicine & Biomedical Sciences designates this educational activity for a maximum of 1.0 AMA PRA Category 1 Credit(s)TM. Physicians should only claim credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.


text:
Nathan Tinkler's Patinack Farm thoroughbred stud has come up with the more than $240,000 it was required to pay in unpaid wages today and assured workers it hopes to keep their jobs, settle all debts in full, and will apply to terminate the liquidation begun last week.
Adelaide-based liquidator Anthony Matthews and Associates was appointed by the Federal Court last week to wind-up Patinack Farm Administration after it failed to pay a $17,000 debt to South Australia's WorkCover agency.
At the time a spokesman for Mr Tinkler said the failure was due to an ''administrative error''. The company was the main employer at Patinack and it is believed to have total liabilities - outstanding super, wages, taxes and workers compensation premiums - of between $5-6 million.
In a statement today the liquidator Anthony Matthews said the directors of Patinack Farm Administration - one of at least a dozen private companies involved in Mr Tinkler's racing operation - had confirmed they ''wish to preserve the employment of all staff and to provide funds to meet their ongoing wages and entitlements.
''I have been further advised by the directors that it is their intention to discharge all debts owed to creditors.''
It is understood Patinack Farm Administration has paid $270,000 in wages and other entitlements plus about $50,000 in liquidator's fees. Raymond Nolan from the liquidator's office said: ''all the funds we've asked him to pay to date have been paid''.


text:
Not a member? Join now
Husband / Wife
Added by yeshuanmyhrt378 29 Dec 2012
Wife of August P. Weinkauf
Connect me or another page to Onida Weinkauf?
There are no stories about Onida. Add a story
Add a photo or record for Onida Weinkauf
Search through millions of records to find out more. Find more records
Wife of: August Peter Weinkauf b. Aug 31, 1879 d. July 3, 1952.
Anyone can contribute to this page. Please sign in or sign up—it's free.
Added by yeshuanmyhrt378 29 Dec 2012


text: Clinical Trials Patients who meet certain research guidelines may be good candidates for participation in a clinical trial. A clinical trial is an investigative study conducted with cancer patients to evaluate a new form of treatment. Clinical trials provide researchers with valuable information about treatments that are not in general use; and, they provide patients with access to the newest drugs. Most standard cancer treatments used today were first tested in clinical trials. Please feel free to take a look at our list of available clinical studies currently offered through the FRHS Regional Cancer Therapy Center Oncology Care Consultants, a group of physicians practicing at the FRHS Regional Cancer Therapy Center, offer multiple clinical trials to their patients. These physicians were honored by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) with one of nine awards designed to recognize community oncology practices that actively participate in clinical trials. When should participation in a clinical trial be considered? A cancer patient may decide to participate in a clinical trial in the hope of improving his or her chances of recovery, prolonging his or her life, or even helping other cancer victims in the future. The results of some trials are disappointing, while others have proven to be even more effective than standard treatments. How is a clinical trial conducted? Before a new treatment is tried with patients in a clinical trial, its promise for safe, effective use is evaluated as thoroughly as possible in a laboratory setting. Volunteers in clinical trials are fully informed about possible risks and benefits. They receive a strict protocol of treatment and are carefully evaluated for side effects and complications. Trials are repeated, the results are scientifically compared, and the research is published for review and critique in established medical journals. The Regional Cancer Therapy Center currently conducts clinical trials in association with the National Cancer Institute, Johns Hopkins University and a cooperative group of medical professionals from around the world. If you have questions about clinical trials, please email us at firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
10 Holiday Entertaining Tips by Erica Domesek
When Rachel McAdams starred in The Notebook alongside Ryan Gosling in 2004, she immediately gained her place on the A-list. Since then, the Canadian actress has graced the June 2011 cover of ELLE and starred in highly lauded films such as 2011's Midnight in Paris. In honor of her 34th birthday, we take a look at her most stylish looks.
Here, she wears Emilio Pucci to the premiere of Passion at the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival.
The star steps out in an Elie Saab gown at the To The Wonder premiere during the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival.
Women in Art 2012


text: Remember how Angelina Jolie's character, Fox, was shot in the head at the end of 2008's not-exactly-supernatural Wanted? Apparently, the (silly) idea had been floating around to bring her back from the dead for the sequel. But now, screenwriter Derek Haas has confirmed that in fact Fox will not suddenly be alive again for the sequel. This, I think, is a pretty smart move, considering how she was a) shot in the head on-screen, and b) Jolie has said she's not interested in coming back, anyway. Rather than try to resurrect a dead character with a different actress, they will instead be revisiting James McAvoy's character, Wesley, four years after the events of the first movie and introducing the new young woman he'll be recruiting -- when he's stepped into Fox's role. Progress! (via Screen Rant) Read the rest