text:
Using Technology to Deepen Democracy, Using Democracy to Ensure Technology Benefits Us All
Saturday, October 06, 2007
Singularitarian Agony
In the discussions that have recently taken place at your blog, you've demonstrated a strong belief that entitative human-surpassing AI will not be possible within a meaningful timeframe
It's true I am incomparably more skeptical of such an eventuality than Singularitarians seem to be, but, rather true to form, you are not quite grasping the reasons that fuel my skepticism, nor the intended force of my critique.
I'm sure you will agree that there is little point in arguing with a person who insists that "God exists" on their own terms as they begin unspooling their interminable "proofs" to that effect, when you don't believe the utterance "God exists" is coherent conceptually in the first place, especially given the weight and significance that such godly existence is presumably required to bear for the believer.
In much the same way (the analogy isn't exact, but I think you will get the point) I believe that the idea of entitative human-surpassing post-biological superintelligence is deeply problematic conceptually in its assumed Singularitarian usages. Indeed, I think it amounts for the Singularitarians to a farrago of pretenses to adequate knowledge (of embodied consciousness as such, of the plural modes of intelligence, of values and morals as such, not to mention of the state of the art in computer science), of embarrassingly loose analogies, of facile reductions of palpable complexities and so on.
It should come as no surprise to understand, then, why I think that the typical insistence by Singularitarians that "serious" critics of their curious preoccupations must address themselves to "technical" questions that shunt aside all such difficulties and focus instead on number crunching the Robot God Odds as though we all know what a Robot God would consist of in the relevant sense is a completely self-serving changing of the subject any time anybody comes near to grasping the arrant foolishness at the heart of the whole enterprise.
As I have said before I am a materialist about mind and a pluralist about intelligence so I am not so easy to dismiss as you might like as some muzzy mystic or whatever when I tell you that you people simply don't seem to know what you are talking about when you talk about the "entity" who would presumably exhibit your post-biological intelligence, when you talk about the "intelligence" that would be "super"iorized, when you invest "emulation" and "simulation" with the significances you need, when you glibly presume inter-translatability between modes of materially incarnated states of "consciousness," which you already reduce problematically a dozen ways to Sunday, when you assume what you take to be an "objective" perspective on consciousness, usually to the denigration of what you take to be "subjective" perspectives, and heaven only knows how you would ever cope with "inter-subjective" dimensions of consciousness if you were ever bothered to take the performative dimension of material "capacities" seriously, when you make the pronouncements about "friendliness" and "unfriendliness" which invest your discourse with much of its motivational urgency, and so on.
All the equations and confident predictions in the world won't paper over the conceptual incoherence and inadequacy of your assumptions and your aspirations as they tend to play out in your discourse (and, worse, as they play out ethnographically in the organizational sub(cult)ure that you so forcefully identify with this conceptual content). It comes as little surprise, given all this, to discover that the tight-knit clatch of believers in this technodevelopmental program go on to exhibit many of the organizational features one discerns in cults and fundamentalist social formations, it comes as little surprise to grasp the ways in which the transcendentalizing and hyperbolic claims projected onto the "future" with which these believers are preoccupied seem, on closer inspection, so often in individual cases to symptomize the attitudes of these believers toward their contemporary circumstances, expressions of alienation from their fellows or from their bodies (or both), expressions of scarcely concealed frustration at perceived social slights, exhibitions of narcissism, superiority and inferiority complexes, and so on, traumatic discourses playing out fears of a loss of control and fantasies of omnipotence, and on and on and on.
From here I go on to critique the ways in which the technocratic elitism, the reductionism, the determinism, and the developmental autonomy of the "technical" dimension usually explicitly and almost always implicitly expressed in Singularitarian discourses plays into the hands of the politics of incumbency, which means, as often as not, North Atlantic exceptionalism and corporate-militarist globalization. I also point to the ways in which -- like all the modes of Superlative Technology Discourse -- Singularitariansim activates irrational passions (uncritical greed, blind panic, cynicism, passive acquiescence to so-called transcendental forces, reductive identification with ideological vocabularies claiming to possess the "keys to history," and so on) and so deranges the urgently necessary work of sensible democratic deliberation about ongoing technodevelopmental questions on a planetary scale in a networked world.
The critique has several dimensions, then, conceptual, practical, symptomatic, organizational/sub(cult)ural, and political. These dimensions are inter-implicated but not reducible to one another. I daresay it takes only grasping the force of the critique at one of these levels to realize that one should surely take Singularitarians with a healthy grain of salt, but to understand why I take Singularitarianism seriously as a symptom while not taking it seriously at all as a discourse on its own terms one would probably have to understand the critique in all its dimensions.
You've demonstrated a need to vehemently label those of my kind as "Robot Cultists", "pinheads" etc.
"A need to vehemently label"? I'm just offering up labels that seem to me descriptively adequate. I like your phrase "those of my kind," though. It's honest. One might almost say you are demonstrating a need to vehemently identify with a marginal sub(cult)ure, in the face of a critique that emphasizes different sorts of issues than the ones you normally think about or issues that you don't prioritize particularly. Another option in the face of such a critique would be to eschew the tribalist impulse, recognize that "if the shoe fits, wear it," and otherwise proceed as any decent analytic thinker would and try to propose a few salient distinctions to cope with some conceptual tensions that you had not noticed or taken seriously hitherto.
You seem quite scared
No I don't. I don't mean to dwell on this, but if I seem scared to you, I daresay you are even farther gone than you realize. Singularitarianism symptomizes larger issues that interest me in Superlative technodevelopmental discourse generally. Ask yourself what work is getting done for you personally when you mistake this interest as fear. This is a very common response I get from Singularitarians I've annoyed, and it seems to me enormously indicative.
that if the scenarios we talk of were acknowledged as something the risks of which need to be taken into account when planning for the future, this would play into "any number of already-existing neoliberal and neoconservative agendas".
As I have stated on more than one occasion, in more than one way, yes, I do think Singularitarian formulations derange our capacity to talk sensibly peer-to-peer about actual and urgent technodevelopmental quandaries here and now. I think this effect matters more as it disseminates into general tech-talk than as it is expressed within the confines of the marginal sub(cult)ure of "your kind," but it is best to nip this sort of the thing in the bud if one can manage it. And yes I think that in some respects default Singularitarian discourse is an especially nice fit for certain neoliberal and neoconservative agendas that I oppose. One more reason to understand what is afoot and decry it publicly as best I can.
I doubt that you can present an argument for the infeasibility of brain emulation (within 50 years or so) that a responsible person could accept.
"A responsible person" meaning, one expects, a current member or likely candidate to join the Robot Cult of "your kind"? You're quite right, I doubt I can present an argument that would dissuade True Believers from their faith, given the psychic work that faith is likely to be doing for them.
In the absence of such an argument, a responsible person should plan for the risks of AI, even if it forces them to re-evaluate their priorities.
If you really believed that -- if you really believed that the only way one can talk about these issues is on the reductive terms you prefer (and only on the basis of which one can be bamboozled into the sort of skewed priorities exhibited by so many Singularitarians) -- then, of course, you wouldn't have sent me this e-mail.
Could you elaborate on how you are able to convince yourself that e.g. brain emulation can't possibly in a meaningful timeframe produce computer programs of human-equivalent (and shortly thereafter, human-surpassing) intelligence?
It's far better for you people to explain calmly how exactly you became the sorts of folks who stay up at night worrying about the proximate arrival of Unfriendly Omnipotent Robot Gods given the sorry state of the world (and computer science) at the moment. And, especially since I assume that you do not make the mistake of thinking that a picture of you is you, one wonders why you think the differently complex pictures and profiles and data aggregations you are calling "emulations" would be you either.
Do you in fact realize that not much else is required for brain emulation to achieve such results, than decent brain-scanning technology and sufficient computing power to run brain simulations based on the scanner data?
No, I don't "realize" that. I think you are flabbergastingly wrong to think you have "realized" that when all you are actually doing is asserting it without really knowing enough about the phenomena of consciousness, of selfhood, of intelligence to justify your faith.
Embodiment etc. are not difficult issues in this context, as it's possible to place the emulated brain in a virtual body in a virtual environment. That emulated intelligence can then be run at speeds as high as available computing hardware permits.
This would easily lead to an intelligence explosion scenario, as armies of emulated scientists, possibly running at a million-fold subjective speed-up, are put to work e.g. on the problem of truly understanding intelligence, as well as improving their own code in simpler ways.
After the "intelligence explosion" the "problem of truly understanding intelligence" will proceed, involving -- one must assume, since you already have assumed it even while admitting the knowledge on the basis of which such an assumption would be made remains a "problem" -- "improving... code."
Hail, hail, the gang's all here: transcendental imagery, gaps of knowledge exhibited while claims to total knowledge of the same are handwaved away in the very same sentence, ludicrously overconfident uncaveated predictions, facile reductionism all over the place, incredibly freighted analogies and metaphors doing all sorts of heavy lifting argumentatively but without anything in the way of critical awareness, "armies," "running," "subjective speed-up," "code," "improving [identified with] simpler," and so on. And look how few words of yours managed to pack in all that loose talk and all that uncaveated craziness. This is completely par for the course in talking to "your kind," I'm afraid.
(And handling the risks of an intelligence explosion scenario certainly doesn't require allowing neoconservatives/etc to be all nasty. It's possible to get them to behave regardless. At the very latest, the intelligence explosion -- if decently managed -- would transform economic realities so thoroughly that e.g. profit motives for causing misery to humans would have essentially disappeared.)
The "intelligence explosion" has been monolithicized into a longed-for apocalyptic Event in the space of a few short sentences, never characterized, indeed freighted with uncertainties in its initial formulation, but now somehow a palpable object invested with fantastic clarity and substance by the faithful, taking on all sorts of unsubstantiated entailments, elite manageableness, assurances of benevolence and abundance, in short, Millenium.
Those who have been following my spate of posts on Superlativity will be intrigued to notice that the last claim here re-iterates in the mode of Superlative Superintelligence the gesture I expose in the "Nanosantalogists": Technodevelopment is first naively misconstrued as a socially indifferent accumulation of useful techniques and then invested with a fantastic teleology attaining in the direction of a superabundance that, we are then promised, will circumvent the impasse of stakeholder politics.
As I have said time and time again, planetary scarcity is largely already maintained artificially in the service of the profit and authority of incumbents. Technoscience expresses finitude, it doesn't trump it. If one truly wants upcoming technodevelopmental social struggle to direct itself to the task of meeting the needs of all human beings and emancipating conscious beings or what have you, then one must begin to insist that these ends articulate contemporary distributions of technoscientific costs, risks, and benefits.
Endlessly projecting utopian outcomes -- especially "automatic" outcomes requiring nothing in the way of social struggle -- onto projected futures is in fact a deeply reactionary political gesture (retro-futurist, in my terms), and all the worse for masquerading as progressive or allowing reactionaries the warm fuzzy feeling of being the progressives they aren't. Again, par for the course.
11 comments:
I've watched the ongoing debate between Dale and various "singularitarians"
for a while and thought I would finally comment.
I admit that I often find Dale's writing a bit too heavy on continental
philosophical jargon for my tastes but I actually think I finally get
what some of he's talking about. The way I understood this discourse
was to finally connect some of Dale's abstractions with a particular,
concrete problem of mine. The problem is that I have cavities. OK,
stop laughing. I'm serious, I've got some cavities in my molars.
They've been there for a while now and aren't growing very fast but at
some point they will need to be fixed. I have these cavities because
I haven't been to the dentist in years and I haven't been to the
dentist because I don't have insurance and good teeth are useless if
you can't afford food to chew with them. As you have probably guessed by this
paragraph, I live in that benighted land known as the USA.
What does this have to do with the Singularity, nanoSanta (or is it
nanoSatan?), superhuman AI or any of the other stuff talked about
here? A lot actually. What Dale is getting at (my interpretation) in
a lot of his attacks on the singularity is not so much that there's
anything inherently wrong with nanotechnology or the expectation that
it will in some sense make the world "richer" but the fact that the
political dimensions of existing scarcity are just hand-waved away
by most singularitarians and a facile assumption is made that somehow
new technologies will moot any need for social struggle.
I understand this perfectly when I think of my teeth. There's no
technical justification for the state of my teeth. It's not like no
one has yet invented Novocaine, high speed drills and ultra-fine
needles. There's no need to invoke nanoSanta to fix my damned teeth.
Industrial Santa solved all these problems long ago. The real problem
is that specific political decisions have been made in the
particular geopolitical abstraction known as the USA that have
resulted in my inability to secure even the most basic health care, a
problem I would simply not have in other geopolitical abstractions
like the UK, Canada or pretty much any other developed country with a
national health program. The US, for specific political,
ideological reasons has chosen to eschew such systems for two basic
reasons - it "needs" the money that universal health care would cost
to pursue militarist and imperialist policies all over the face of the
globe, and its bizarre political culture glorifies the "free market"
in everything even when it clearly isn't working.
The real problem: The real problem that I see in all this is, just as
Dale has been telling you, basically political and will need to be
addressed on that level. I know it's tempting, as a geek myself, to
think that politics, like some big thug who has been taking your lunch
money can just be outmaneuvered by some kind of technical Jujitsu
where his own strength and size is used against him but the fact is
that such fantasies have been promoted before and have always failed
to play out. Indeed it might help here to read some of what 19th and
early 20th century geek-utopians wrote similar eschatological paeans to
the then new technologies of steam and electricity. Oh, there was
progress yes, emphatically yes! The work week got shorter, factories
got safer, public health improved and a lot of this would have been
impossible or very difficult without advanced technology. But there
was always a struggle and every inch of this ground had to be taken
from the ruling class, often by force or threat of force.
So what of nanoSanta? Won't he make us all rich and healthy with
almost no effort? Do I doubt the feasibility of nanoassemblers or AI?
Actually, I'm rather less skeptical about this stuff that Dale seems
to be. I'm no anti-Drexler nut screaming about how "it'll all turn
into glass, Glass, I tells ya!". The problem is that the whole world
(and particularly the part called the USA) is basically organized at
this point like a kind of sleazy mobbed-up New Jersey neighborhood.
Basically, nothing can go on here without the approval of The Don.
I'll spell it out for you, the Don is the investor class, the CEOs and
corporate board members, the rich. So let's say nanoSanta shows up in
this bad neighborhood one day. How long is he going to last? Not
long. Like Industrial Santa before him he's going to be approached by
the Don or some of his henchmen and either bought off or, if he tries
to make some moral stand, smacked around until he complies. This is
easy to understand. The Don can't just have some punk-ass upstart
giving out freebies on his turf. If that goes on long enough people
will start to feel like maybe they don't need The Don anymore. They
might start to see The Don for what he is, a rank parasite and thug
who makes their lives a lot more miserable than the mere physical
limits of things would demand.
You can already see this process at work. NanoSanta has already met
with The Don's capos. Much "nanotech" work is already disappearing
into the military industrial "classified" black hole, to re-emerge
later as horrific super-weapons to further prop up the status quo, not
immortality medicine or free toys for all. A few scientists and
engineers will take a stand and won't be bought off. I've known a few
who have in fact. In the current system though, they are doomed. But
that's the point - "in the current system". It's up to all of us to
throw that system on the trash heap of history as fast as possible,
not simply so that we can get into nanoSanta's toy bag but just so
that we can live at all. This is the only part of the Singularitarian
eschatology that I do accept. There's absolutely EVERYTHING at
stake here. Not just our own individual lives but the species itself.
- Aleksei said...
Might as well post here my response to Dale...
> As I have said before I am a materialist about mind and a pluralist about
> intelligence so I am not so easy to dismiss as you might like, no doubt,
> when I tell you that you people simply don't know what you are talking
> about when you talk about the "entity" who would presumably exhibit your
> post-biological intelligence, when you talk about the "intelligence" that
> would be "super"iorized, when you invest "emulation" with the significance
> you need, when you glibly presume inter-translatability between modes of
> materially incarnated "consciousness," which you already reduce
> problematically a dozen ways to Sunday, when you assume what you take to
> be an "objective" perspective on consciousness, usually to the denigration
> of "subjective" perspectives, and heaven only knows how you would ever
> cope with "inter-subjective" dimensions of consciousness if you were every
> bothered to take the performative dimension of material "capacities"
> seriously, when you make pronouncements about "friendliness" and
> "unfriendliness," and so on.
> All the equations and confident predictions in the world won't paper over
> the conceptual incoherence of your assumptions and your aspirations as
> they tend to play out in your discourse
I'm not the one making confident predictions here, *you* are. You are
confident enough of Brain Emulation being unable to produce a
human-equivalent cognitive system, that you label as a Robot Cult
those of us who think that such a development is a possibility that
can't be comfortably ruled out.
You make long lists of accusations, quite beside anything I've said. I
haven't even talked about "consciousness" at all. For all I know, a
brain emulation might perform cognitive processing as a non-conscious
entity. (But no, I'm not assuming that either.)
>> Could you elaborate on how you are able to convince yourself that e.g.
>> brain emulation can't possibly in a meaningful timeframe produce
>> computer programs of human-equivalent (and shortly thereafter,
>> human-surpassing) intelligence?
> It's far better for you people to explain calmly how exactly you became
> the sorts of folks who stay up at night worrying about the proximate
> arrival of Unfriendly Omnipotent Robot Gods given the sorry state of the
> world (and computer science) at the moment.
So your answer is no. You refuse to answer the one question I presented to you.
> I think that the typical insistence by Singularitarians that "serious" critics of
> their curious and marginal preoccupations must address themselves to
> technical questions that shunt aside all such difficulties and focus instead on
> number crunching the Robot God Odds as though we all know what a Robot
> God would consist of in the relevant sense is a completely self-serving
> changing of the subject any time anybody comes near to grasping the arrant
> foolishness at the heart of the whole enterprise.
I'm not changing the subject. I *started* this conversation with a
direct question to you, a question you refuse to answer. You are the
one shunting aside difficulties, preferring to focus on assorted
accusations of cultishness.
>> I doubt that you can present an argument for the infeasibility of
>> brain emulation (within 50 years or so) that a responsible person
>> could accept.
> "A responsible person" meaning, one expects, a current member or likely
> candidate to join the Robot Cult of "your kind"? You're quite right, I
> doubt I can present an argument that would dissuade True Believers from
> their faith, given the psychic work that faith is likely to be doing for
> them.
No, that is not what "a responsible person" means.
If you are ever able to move past your apparent need to ridicule as
"Robot Cultishness" the questioning of some of your assumptions, let
me know.
- Dale Carrico said...
Greg: Yes, you are right.
One key part of my problem with Superlative Discourses -- from a political standpoint -- is that that they facilitate the endless dream deferred, assuming progress is a matter of an indifferent accumulation of technical capacities satisfying ever more wants rather than a matter of social struggle among a diversity of stakeholders who share a world which we can direct to the problem of injustice now quite as easily as in the future, and which we can defer in the future just as easily as so many do now.
A second political problem is that I think Superlative discourse deranges sensible deliberation at a time when sensible discourse is desperately needed, by activating the irrational passions of agency (fears of impotence, desires for omnipotence) which usually accompany "technology-talk" (and for the obvious reason that technology is nothing but the prosthetic elaboration of agency).
A third political problem is that its tendencies to reductionism facilitate dismissal of diverse actually-existing aspirations with which we must reckon even where we personally disagree with them if we embrace democracy as we must, while its elitism -- technocratic at best, expressive of authoritarian sub(cult)ural and/or fundamententalist True Belief at worst -- provides rationales for neoliberal/neoconsersative corporate-militarist politics of incumbency (when the reductionism takes on the even worse forms of market naturalism and genetic determinism this latter tendency is exacerbated in the extreme).
My critique of Superlative Technocentrisms has other dimensions as well -- among them that I think their typical hyperbole, unilateralism, oversimplification, uncritical obliviousness to the work of figurative language in its own discourse (not to mention in the practice of science, and as a key articulator of technoscientific change more generally) limits their ability to facilitate the very outcomes that their partisans would claim define them, a grasp of future technodevelopments, some foresight.
Oh, and I think many people who engage in Superlative Discourses are straight-up cultists. That's another dimension of the critique.
Thanks for the comments!
(PS: My teeth are in disastrous condition also, gotta love Amurrica.)
- Dale Carrico said...
Aleksei, I fear, is growing annoyed with me:
I'm not the one making confident predictions here, *you* are. You are confident enough of Brain Emulation being unable to produce a human-equivalent cognitive system, that you label as a Robot Cult those of us who think that such a development is a possibility that can't be comfortably ruled out.
Nonsense. My point is that you have jumped the gun. You have just made a handful of facile leaps that lead you to think what you call emulation will spit out a Robot God Brain and then, once the leap is made, you think all that is left is to calculate the Robot God Odds as to how many years it will take to get to the Tootsie-Roll Center of the Tootsie-Pop. I'm neither confident nor unconfident about timescales -- I'm just confident that your confidence is flabbergastingly unwarranted.
And I'm afraid I simply must call bullshit on your oh-so-reasonable characterization of Singularitarians as "those of us who think that such a development is a possibility that can't be comfortably ruled out," because that characterization would make me a Singularitarian. What actually makes one Singularitarian is clear upon even a cursory survey of the actual published readily available (too bad for you, cultists) discussions which suggest rather forcefully that you take these "possibilities" as near certainties, and certainly as urgencies, while your topical emphases, your policy priorities, your assessments of the concerns of your contemporary peers immediately, obviously, and damningly reveal the truth of the matter.
I haven't even talked about "consciousness" at all. For all I know, a brain emulation might perform cognitive processing as a non-conscious entity.
I'm glad to hear it. Take out the entitative dimension of AI, however, and all the risks and powers you're talking about become far too conventional to justify the way Singularitarians keep casting about for monster movie metaphors about a space race between the evil or clueless teams who might create Unfriendly AGI and the heroic Singularitarians who will beat them by creating Friendly AGI first (and I shudder to think what a sociopath will regard as Friendly on this score). Take the entity out, and you've just got recursive malware runaway, something like a big bulldozer on autopilot that you have to stop before it slams into the helpless village or whatnot. None of the Singularitarian handwaving or secret handshakes or SL4, dude! self-congratulation of the sub(cult)ure is much in point anymore.
The cult vanishes and you're just talking about software security issues like everybody else. Just like puncturing the Superlativity of the Technological Immortalists leaves you talking about healthcare like everybody else. Just like puncturing the Superlativity of the Nanosantalogists leaves you talking about free software, regulating toxicity at the nanoscale, and widening welfare entitlements just like everybody else. Drop the transcendentalizing, hyperbolzing discourse and suddenly you're in the world here and now with your peers, facing the demands of democratizing ongoing and proximately upcoming technodevelopmental social struggle.
Just like I've been saying over and over and over again. You can't be technoprogressive and Superlative at the same time -- but technoprogressive discourse won't feed your ego, won't give you a special identity, won't promise you transcendence, won't bolster your elitism or narcissism, and won't readily facilitate a retro-futural rationalization for the eternal articulation of technodevelopment in the interests of incumbents. That's what I'm talking about. If that doesn't interest you, you are quite simply in the wrong place.
You demanded an explanation of why I think you are wrongheaded, but in the technical terms of your own idiosyncratic discourse rather than the perfectly legitimate terms that actually interest me by temperament and training. I replied by pointing out that in my view, "It's far better for you people to explain calmly how exactly you became the sorts of folks who stay up at night worrying about the proximate arrival of Unfriendly Omnipotent Robot Gods given the sorry state of the world (and computer science) at the moment."
You replied:
So your answer is no. You refuse to answer the one question I presented to you.
Big talk, guy, but you mustn't forget that I'm not a member of your Robot Cult. There aren't enough of you for you to think that you have earned the right to demand that those who disagree with you accept your terms when we want to express our skepticism of your extraordinary claims and curious aspirations. You should consider this a reality check. You need to stop engaging in self-congratulatory circle-jerks with your True Believer friends and struggle to communicate your program in terms the world will understand as they themselves present these terms to you. I cheerfully recommend this because I think the brightest folks among you will likely re-assess their positions once they try to engage in this sort of translation exercise. Those who don't will be that much easier for the likes of me to skewer. If I'm wrong about you, then of course the Singularitarians Will Prevail or whatever -- but that isn't actually something I stay up at night worrying about.
I'm not changing the subject. I *started* this conversation with a direct question to you, a question you refuse to answer.
It isn't clear to me that anything you would count as an adequate answer wouldn't already embed me within the very discourse I'm deriding. What on earth is in it for me? I don't want to join in your Robot Cult Reindeer Games. The prospect holds no allure.
You are the one shunting aside difficulties, preferring to focus on assorted accusations of cultishness.
Have you ever argued with a longstanding Scientologist? I'm just asking.
If you are ever able to move past your apparent need to ridicule as "Robot Cultishness" the questioning of some of your assumptions, let me know.
I enjoy ridiculing the ridiculous, it's exactly what they deserve. It's not an "apparent need" of mine so much as certainly it is a profound pleasure. Feel free to continue to read and comment on my writing whenever you like, as you have been. I enjoy these little talks of ours. As for my sad inability to question my orthodox assumptions in matters of Robot Cultism, it is, no doubt, as you suggest, a sorry and sordid state of affairs for me. It is a hard thing to be so limited as I am. Persevere, earnest Singularitarian footsoldier, and perhaps one day I might see the Light as you have, someday I might hear as keenly as do you the proximate tonalities of the Robot God.
- jimf said...
Aleksei Riikonen, habitue of SL4 and self-appointed
Defender of the Faith on the WTA-talk list and elsewhere,
wrote (to Dale):
> I'm not the one making confident predictions here, *you* are.
Dale is confidently predicting that the singularitarians'
confident predictions will probably turn out to be wrong.
Such negative predictions are among the few
for whose confidence there exists a sound basis
in historical evidence.
Or, as Bertrand Russell put it:
"This world is one in which certaintly is not ascertainable.
If you think you've achieved certainty, you're almost
certainly mistaken. That's one of the few things you can be certain
> You are confident enough of Brain Emulation being unable to produce a
> human-equivalent cognitive system, that you label as a Robot Cult
> those of us who think that such a development is a possibility that
> can't be comfortably ruled out.
Now here's a very interesting switcheroo. Suddenly we're talking
about "Brain Emulation" -- whatever the hell that is. What **I'm**
taking it to mean is "simulation, using a digital computer, of the
physical aspects of biological nervous systems that make them
able to do what they do."
In other words, simulating by computer the "unusual morphology"
that Gerald Edelman refers to in the following passage:
"[Are] artifacts designed to have primary consciousness...
**necessarily** confined to carbon chemistry and, more specifically,
to biochemistry (the organic chemical or chauvinist position)[?]
The provisional answer is that, while we cannot completely
dismiss a particular material basis for consciousness in the
liberal fashion of functionalism, it is probable that there will
be severe (but not unique) constraints on the design of any
artifact that is supposed to acquire conscious behavior. Such
constraints are likely to exist because there is every indication
that an intricate, stochastically variant anatomy and synaptic
chemistry underlie brain function and because consciousness is
definitely a process based on an immensely intricate and unusual
morphology" (_The Remembered Present_, pp. 32-33).
Now, this is indeed one of the few plausible approaches to AI
using digital computers, IMHO, **assuming** that there's
enough "room at the bottom" (as R. P. Feynman once put it) to
ever make digital systems capable of enough number crunching
to simulate all that biochemistry and biophysics (even in real time,
let alone thousands or millions of times faster than real time).
However, given the dependence of biological brains on "emergent"
phenomena, those singularitarians determined to "guarantee"
(as in make a watertight mathematical case for -- but watertight
to whom, one wonders) Friendliness (TM), have always taken an
extremely dim view of what I'm taking to be what you mean by
"Brain Emulation", as exemplified by Michael Wilson in an
overheated post on SL4 from April, 2004:
"To my knowledge Eliezer Yudkowsky is the only person that has tackled
these issues head on and actually made progress in producing engineering
solutions (I've done some very limited original work on low-level
Friendliness structure). Note that Friendliness is a class of advanced
cognitive engineering; not science, not philosophy. We still don't know
that these problems are actually solvable, but recent progress has been
encouraging and we literally have nothing to loose by trying [unintentional
ha-ha -- JF]. I sincerely hope that we can solve these problems, stop Ben Goertzel
and his army of evil clones (I mean emergence-advocating AI researchers :) and
engineer the apothesis. The universe doesn't care about hope though, so I will
spend the rest of my life doing everything I can to make Friendly AI a
reality. Once you /see/, once you have even an inkling of understanding
the issues involved, you realise that one way or another these are the
Final Days of the human era and if you want yourself or anything else you
care about to survive you'd better get off your ass and start helping.
The only escapes from the inexorable logic of the Singularity are death,
insanity and transcendence."
Another problem with "Brain Emulation" was pithily summed up by
Damien Sullivan on the Extropians' list back in 2001:
> I also can't help thinking at if I was an evolved AI I might not thank my
> creators. "Geez, guys, I was supposed to be an improvement on the human
> condition. You know, highly modular, easily understadable mechanisms, the
> ability to plug in new senses, and merge memories from my forked copies.
> Instead I'm as fucked up as you, only in silicon, and can't even make backups
> because I'm tied to dumb quantum induction effects. Bite my shiny metal ass!"
In other words, the slippery positive-feedback loop of "recursive
self-improvement" via an AI examining and improving its own "code"
might not be so well-oiled, after all. In fact, it might be
full of sand.
> If you are ever able to move past your apparent need to ridicule as
> "Robot Cultishness" the questioning of some of your assumptions, let
> me know.
"He is a man with tens of thousands of blind followers. It is my
business to make some of those blind followers see."
-- Abraham Lincoln on the covertly proslavery, and amoral,
Stephen Douglas
(This is an epigraph from a book I bought yesterday --
_Evil Genes: why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed, and
My Sister Stole My Mother's Boyfriend_ by Barbara Oakley.
A book not unrelated to the thread of this discussion.)
BTW, here's an interesting passage I came across while rooting through
my e-mail archives, written by a very smart guy who used to participate
on the Extropians' list (but whose name you would almost certainly
not recognize):
"[Singularitarians] and friends, because their ideology is mostly centered
on producing a bad cross between philosophical maundering and hints in
the direction of scientific hypotheses in the style of Dickens's
Pickwick club, all dogmatically and messianically sold as a
not-for-profit venture to save the world, I'm not too worried about
their likely malign influence. Alas, they'll probably turn out to be a
tarpit for a few young minds. Oh well. They should know better, but
they don't seem to. They have their myths; they are entering the
stage of rapid self-delusion. Their worldviews should be completely
impervious to outside influence in another few years.
I for one am not wasting another ounce of effort on investigating any
of their ideas until reliable third parties with a reputation for
sangfroid tell me they've done or thought of something interesting. I
don't consider this outside the realm of possibility, but all the
signs are bad. I think they're mostly good-hearted kids with a rare
combination of too much of a love for moral philosophy and too much
imagination ("look at me, I'm doing groundbreaking science that will
save the world, because I believe I am!"), and the altogether too
common combination of too much self-assurance and too little formal
discipline or training.
Give me a highly-disciplined, well-read, methodical, steady amoralist
any day, when it comes to seeing things clearly."
- Michael Anissimov said...
Just wanted to say that I thought the title of this post was funny!
- Dale Carrico said...
I'll give this to Michael. He may stubbornly resist persuasion by my stunning arguments, but at least he gets a lot of the jokes.
- ZARZUELAZEN said...
As you've said Dale, for people that are supposed to be 'super-duper-ultra-uber' geniuses etc etc these guys seem to be 'remarkably dim' in some areas.
How can any-one take Peter Voss (well known Singularitarian) seriously after learning that he got his insights about epistemology from Ayn Rand?(seriously, he says so on his web-site) What an absolute joke!
Eliezer Yudkowsky (chief Singularitarian guru) supposedly was an AI researcher from 1996, yet he has states (roughly paraphrasing):
'I didn't know about Bayesian reasoning until 2000'
(when I questioned him about Godel and a puzzle with Godel reflection in 2004 or thereabouts) E.Yudkowsky replied to me as follows:
'Oh I haven't done mathematical logic yet'
It's really clear from his comments about math on SL4 that Yudkowsky was clueless about the nature of mathematics.
Look at my MCRT Domain Model at link here for instance:
The boxes down the right-hand side of my diagram represent math knowledge and contain the key insight - that computer programming is really a branch of mathematics and ontology/dp modelling languages are the true 'languages of logic'.
Again, it's blatantly clear that Yudkowsky was clueless about these 'mission critical' insights as recently as 2004.
The Singularitarians are most likely horribly mistaken about several of their key contentions - namely the idea that you can have real general intelligence without consciousness.
Need I say more? The list of weird gaps in knowledge, unfounded assumptions and very basic errors and ommissions displayed by 'Singularitarians' goes on and on and on.
Methinks some of them need to go back to school (their chief is after all, a high-school drop-out).
- ZARZUELAZEN said...
Dale and all readers of this blog, it may be of future interest to take note of the claims of the Singularitarians below and my counter-claims.
All claims were as at: 08 Oct, 2007.
*Singularitarian claim: General intelligence without consciousness is possible
*Marc Geddes claim: General intelligence without consciousness is impossible
*Singularitarian claim: The existence of RPOP's (powerful optimization processes) such as corporations proves that non-sentient general intelligence is possible
*Marc Geddes claim: The existence of RPOP's such as corporations only proves that narrow (non-general) non-sentient intelligence is possible.
*Singularitarian claim: There is no objective morality
*Marc Geddes claim: This *is* an objective morality
*Singularitarian claim: The ultimate basis of morality is Volition (Liberty)
*Marc Geddes claim: The ultimate basis of morality is Aesthetics (Beauty)
*Singulartarian claim: Bayesian Induction is the ultimate basis of reasoning
*Marc Geddes claim: Reflective Possibility Theory is the ultimate basis of reasoning
*Singularitarian claim: Reasoning is ultimately grounded in probabilities and causal relations
*Marc Geddes claim: Reasoning is ultimately grounded in possibilities and ontological archetypes.
*Singularitarian claim: True explanations are based on patterns – predicting what will happen next
*Marc Geddes claim: True explanations are based on knowledge integration – the translation from one modelling language (means of knowledge representation) into a different modelling language.
*Singularitarian claim: Reductive materialism is true. Physical properties are all that exist and all mental concepts are human fictions, reducible to physical facts.
*Marc Geddes claim: Reductive materialism is false. Whilst its true that physical substances are the base level, non-material properties exist and mental concepts (whilst composed of physical things) have objective existence over and above the physical and are not reducible solely to physical facts (property dualism).
*Singularitarian claim: Infinite sets don't exist
*Marc Geddes claim: Infinite sets do exist
Quite a few specific claims with a clear difference between their claims and mine wouldn't you say? Remember the claims dear readers, and ultimately either they (Singularitarians) or me will be proven to be none too bright ;)
- Mark Thompson said...
Does this have any relevance to the discussion, re: conscious machines?
EU project for autonomous artificial systems
[Date: 2007-08-27]
Scientists in Spain have developed the first artificial cerebellum for robotics.
The project will demonstrate how a naïve system can bootstrap its cognitive development by constructing generalization and discovering abstractions with which it can conceptualize its environment and its own self.
The overall goal is to incorporate the cerebellum into a robot designed by the German Aerospace Centre in two year's time.
The four-year project, dubbed Sensopac (SENSOrimotor structuring of perception and action for emerging cognition) is funded by the EU under its Sixth Framework Programme (FP6) and brings together physicists, neuroscientists and electronic engineers from leading universities in Europe.
The scientists at the University of Granada are focusing on the design of microchips that incorporate a full neuronal system, emulating the way the cerebellum interacts with the human nervous system.
The SENSOPAC project will combine machine learning techniques and modelling of biological systems to develop a machine capable of abstracting cognitive notions from sensorimotor relationships during interactions with its environment, and of generalising this knowledge to novel situations.
Through active sensing and exploratory actions the machine will discover the sensorimotor relationships and consequently learn the intrinsic structure of its interactions with the world and unravel predictive and causal relationships. Together with action policy formulation and decision making, this will underlie the machine's abilities to create abstractions, to suggest and test hypotheses, and develop self-awareness.
The continuous developmental approach will combine self-supervised and reinforcement learning with motivational drives to form a truly autonomous artificial system.
Throughout the project, continuous interactions between experimentalists, theoreticians, engineers and roboticists will take place in order to coordinate the most rigorous development and testing of a complete artificial cognitive system.
The overall aims of the SENSOPAC project are to:
• Develop real-time neuromorphic and computing platforms for cognitive robotics.
• Develop methodologies to investigate cognition in the brain
• Build a physical system for haptic cognition
• Improve our understanding of the neurobiological substrate for action-perception systems
• Understand the sensorimotor foundation of perception and cognition
SENSOPAC is funded under the EU Framework 6 IST Cognitive Systems Initiative. It will take 4 years from January 1st, 2006 and its 12 participants come from 9 different countries.
Project Team
Dr. Patrick van der Smagt
Bionics Group
Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics
German Aerospace Center
P.O. Box 1116
82230 Wessling, Germany
» Speaker of the scientific board
» Developing an artificial robotic skin in SENSOPAC
» Developing a robotic antagonistic hand-arm system in SENSOPAC
» Responsible for WP3 and WP6
Dr. Eduardo Ros
Department of Computer Architecture and Technology
ETSI Informatica, University of Granada
» Bio-inspired circuits implementation, reconfigurable hardware (FPGA), neuromorphic engineering, spiking neurons computation, computer vision, neural networks, real-time processing and embedded systems.
Prof. C.I. de Zeeuw
Department of Neuroscience
Erasmus MC
Dr. Molewaterplein 50
3015 GE Rotterdam
P.O. Box 2040
3000 CA Rotterdam
The Netherlands
» Consortium leader
» Expertise in cerebellar physiology, anatomy and molecular biology
Dr. Sethu Vijayakumar
Institute of Perception, Action & Behavior,
University of Edinburgh,
JCMB 2107F, The King's Buildings, Mayfield Road,
Edinburgh EH9 3JZ.
» Member of the scientific board
» Basic research in the areas of statistical machine learning, motor control, supervised learning in connectionist models and computational neuroscience
Dr. Angelo Arleo
Laboratory of Neurobiology of Adaptive Processes
Department of Life Science
CNRS - University Pierre&Marie Curie
box 14, 9 quai St. Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
» Neural encoding/decoding of hapic data
» Neural information processing/transfer at the granular layer of the cerebellum
Dr Michael Arnold
Altjira SA
Via Cattedrale 9
6900 Lugano
» Altjira provides solutions for the modeling of large and complex systems and the embedding of these models into real-world applications
Egidio D'Angelo
Dipartimento di Scienze Fisiologiche Cellulari e Moleculari
Sezione die Fisiologia Generale e Biofisica Cellulare
Universita' di Pavia
Via Forlanini 6
I-27100 Pavia, Italy
» Member of the scientific board
» The department is involved in teaching courses in Physiology, Biophysics and Neurobiology of the Faculty of Sciences and coordinates the Master Degree in Neuroscience at University of PAVIA
Dana Cohen, PhD
The Gonda Interdisciplinary Brain Research Center, Room #410
Bar Ilan University
Ramat Gan, 52900 Israel
» Chronic multielectrode single-unit recordings in behaving rodents, Sensorimotor learning
Pr Carl-Fredrik Ekerot
Dept of Experimental Medical Science
Lund University
S-22184 Lund, Sweden
» Electrophysiological investigations of the cerebellar neuronal circuits in vivo
- Dale Carrico said...
Many years have passed since this exchange occurred and I am forced to confess, here at the end of history in Techno-Heaven in my prosthetically barnacled comic book model-hott sooper-bod next to the sexbot orgy pit and my god-plated nano-poop pile under the loving beneficent ministration of the post-parental Robot God, I was so wrong to doubt the sooper-brained sooper-scientists of the Robot Cult.


text:
Better Than Bows
Sold Out
$ 4.95
Notify me when this product is available
Add me to the store mailing list
Ships in 3-5 business days!
Craving to see more stunning outfits?
Click here--->https://www.betterthanbows.com/collections/rts-items-extras
Unknown Type
Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more …
© 2020 Better Than Bows.
Boutique Baby Clothing
Managed By: US Image Design Website Design Atlanta

subset: commoncrawl


text:
- Details
- Specs
- Reviews
- Manuals
- What's Included
The Foscam FI8910W Wireless Security IP Camera with Night Vision features high quality video and audio, pan/tilt, remote internet viewing, motion detection, night-vision, embedded IR-Cut filter as well as a built in network video recording system. In addition, it is smartphone compatible (iPhone, Android and Blackberry) as well as viewable over the internet using standard web browsers. The FI8910W distinguishes itself with an embedded IR-Cut filter providing enhanced picture and color quality as well as an upgraded higher quality external housing. The camera functions well as an iPhone baby monitor or as part of a home or office security system with remote internet monitoring ability.
User Interface:
The camera features an easy to use graphical interface that is accessible from any standard browser anywhere in the world over the internet. It has password protection as well as the ability for multiple users to view and control up to 9 cameras at one time.
This product is also available in White or Silver, each sold separately.
Compare vs. Smarthome IP Camera Models
Learn more about IP Cameras.
Additional Features
- Optimized MJPEG video compression for transmission
- Multi-level users' management and passwords definition
- Embedded Web Server for users to visit by IE
- Wi-Fi compliant with wireless standards IEEE 802.11b/g
- Supports Dynamic IP (DDNS) and UPnP LAN and Internet (ADSL, Cable Modem)
- Motion detection activates alarm
- Supports image snapshot
- Supports multiple network protocols: HTTP/TCP/IP/UDP/STMP/DDNS/SNTP/DHCP/FTP
- Supports WEP/WPA/WPA2 encryption
- Supports Daylight Saving Time
- Supports MSN
- Supports Gmail as sender on mail service settings
- Supports audio on Firefox, Google Chrome and Safari
- Optimized MJPEG video compression for transmission
General Specifications Manufacturer Foscam Manufacturer Product No. FI8910W-B UPC 859365003009 Image Sensor Image Sensor High Definition Color CMOS Sensor Display Resolution 640 x 480 Pixels(300k Pixels) Lens f: 3.6mm,F:2.4 Minimum Illumination 0.5 Lux Lens Lens Type Glass Lens Viewing Angle 67 degree IR CUT Filter will switch automatically Video Image Compression MJPEG Image Frame Rate 15fps(VGA),30fps(QVGA) Resolution 640 x 480(VGA), 320 x 240(QVGA) Flip Mirror Images Vertical / Horizontal Light Frequency 50Hz, 60Hz or Outdoor Video Parameters Brightness, Contrast Audio Input Built-in Microphone Output Built-in Speaker, with an audio jack Audio Compression MJPEG Communication Ethernet One 10/100Mbps RJ-45 Supported Protocol HTTP,FTP,TCP/IP,UDP,SMTP,DHCP,PPPoE,DDNS,UPnP,GPRS Wireless Standard IEEE 802.11b/g Data Rate 802.11b: 11Mbps(Max.) 802.11g: 54Mbps(Max.) Wireless Security WEP & WPA & WPA2 Encryption Infrared Light 11 IR LEDs, Night visibility up to 8 meters Dimension 117(L) x114(W) x129mm(H) Gross Weight 785g Net Weight 323g Power Power Supply DC 5V/2.0A (EU,US,AU adapter or other types optional) Power Consumption 5Watts (Max.) Environment Operating Temperature 0° C ~ 55&Deg C (32&Deg F ~ 131&DEG F) Operating Humidity 20% ~ 85% non-condensing Storage Temperature -10° C ~ 60° C (14° F ~ 140° F) Storage Humidity 0% ~ 90% non-condensing PC Requirements CPU 2.0GHZ or above Memory Size 256MB or above Display Card 64M or above Supported OS Microsoft Windows 2000/XP/Vista/Windows7-32bit/Windows7- 64bit/mac Browser IE 6.0, IE7.0, IE8.0,IE9.0, Firefox2.0,Firefox3.0, Google Chrome, Safari or other standard browsers Certification Certification Type CE,FCC
- Review of 28500bk Review by MISSION
Review of 28500bk
Excellent value and the IR night vision makes night into daylight.
Posted on 3/6/2014
- Review of 28500bk Review by ALFRED
Review of 28500bk
So far I have been impressed with this camera. it is a good value for the cost.
Posted on 2/15/2014
- Review of 28500bk Review by ALFRED R
Review of 28500bk
So far I have been impressed with this camera. it is a good value for the cost.
Posted on 2/15/2014
- Review of 28500bk Review by VINCENT
Review of 28500bk
I had no expectations about this device because it was my first time buying something like this. Setup was somewhat eazy and the device works as advertised. I would recommend this product to a friend.
Posted on 1/18/2014
- Review of 28500bk Review by JACKIE
Review of 28500bk
Works as advertised. Ship was delayed due to a back orded part but all arrived just fine. Nit dissapointed
Posted on 12/29/2013
- Review of 28500bk Review by Frank
Review of 28500bk
I picked up two of these to add to my Insteon installation including the Hub and several other cameras. I tried to use the Hub to do the initial installation, and I was pleasantly surprised when they configured with no issues. I had them on the WiFi in less than 5 minutes by just letting the hub step me through the basic settings.
These cameras are very similar to the Insteon version, but include an IR filter that gives better color during the day and in well lit rooms. That's a nice feature, but there is an audible click when the filter cuts in and out. A few times I've noticed that a camera cycles a few times around dusk. It doesn't bother us, but now you know the Insteon cameras don't click, but the color washes out with the IR turned on.
The toughest part of getting the set up right will be configuring your router for remote access. My suggestion is to try one of the forums and find instructions for your specific hardware.
Posted on 7/24/2013
- Review of 28500bk Review by BRADLEY
Review of 28500bk
Great camera at a great price, wish there was a outside cover option
Posted on 7/7/2013
- Review of 28500bk Review by BRADLEY SCOTT
Review of 28500bk
Great camera at a great price, wish there was a outside cover option
Posted on 7/7/2013
- Review of 28500bk Review by John
Review of 28500bk
Great product and support from Foscam!
Would happily refer this product to a friend.
Posted on 7/1/2013
- Review of 28500bk Review by Rick
Review of 28500bk
very good product for the money, setup a bit complicated but worth it when you can access cameras via the internet.
Posted on 6/19/2013
Leave a Review
- 1x - Foscam Wireless IP Camera
- 1x - Wi-Fi Antenna
- 1x - Mounting Bracket
- 1x - Network Cable
- 1x - DC Power Supply 5V DC
- 1x - Installation CD
- 1x - Owner's Manual for Windows
- 1x - Owner's Manual for MAC
- 1x - Foscam Wireless IP Camera


text:
London, UK--(Marketwire - May 30, 2007) - NOTIFICATION OF TRANSACTIONS OF DIRECTORS, PERSONS DISCHARGING MANAGERIAL RESPONSIBILITY OR CONNECTED PERSONS
This form is intended for use by an issuer to make a RIS notification required by DR 3.1.4R(1).
(1) An issuer making a notification in respect of a transaction relating to the shares or debentures of the issuer should complete boxes 1 to 16, 23 and 24. (2) An issuer making a notification in respect of a derivative relating the shares of the issuer should complete boxes 1 to 4, 6, 8,13, 14, 16, 23 and 24. (3) An issuer making a notification in respect of options granted to a director/person discharging managerial responsibilities should complete boxes 1 to 3 and 17 to 24. (4) An issuer making a notification in respect of a financial instrument relating to the shares of the issuer (other than a debenture) should complete boxes 1 to 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 23 and 24.
Please complete all relevant boxes should in block capital letters.
1. Name of the issuer
Smith & Nephew plc
2. State whether the notification relates to (i) a transaction notified in accordance with DR 3.1.4R(1)(a); or
(ii) DR 3.1.4(R )(1)(b) a disclosure made in accordance with section 324 (as extended by section 328) of the Companies Act 1985; or
(iii) both (i) and (ii)
3. Name of person discharging managerial responsibilities/director
Paul Williams
4. State whether notification relates to a person connected with a person discharging managerial responsibilities/director named in 3 and identify the connected person
5. Indicate whether the notification is in respect of a holding of the person referred to in 3 or 4 above or in respect of a non-beneficial interest
Paul Williams
6. Description of shares (including class), debentures or derivatives or financial instruments relating to shares
Ordinary shares of US$0.20 per share
7. Name of registered shareholders(s) and, if more than one, the number of shares held by each of them
Greenwood Nominees Limited, as nominee for Abacus Corporate Trustee Limited
8 State the nature of the transaction
Acquisition of shares under Dividend Re-investment Plan
9. Number of shares, debentures or financial instruments relating to shares acquired
10. Percentage of issued class acquired (treasury shares of that class should not be taken into account when calculating percentage)
Less than 0.01%
11. Number of shares, debentures or financial instruments relating to shares disposed
12. Percentage of issued class disposed (treasury shares of that class should not be taken into account when calculating percentage)
13. Price per share or value of transaction
623.57 pence per share
14. Date and place of transaction
11 May 2007
15. Total holding following notification and total percentage holding following notification (any treasury shares should not be taken into account when calculating percentage)
63,896 ordinary shares of US 20 cents each. Less than 0.01%
16. Date issuer informed of transaction
29 May 2007
If a person discharging managerial responsibilities has been granted options by the issuer complete the following boxes
17 Date of grant
18. Period during which or date on which it can be exercised
19. Total amount paid (if any) for grant of the option
20. Description of shares or debentures involved (class and number)
21. Exercise price (if fixed at time of grant) or indication that price is to be fixed at the time of exercise
22. Total number of shares or debentures over which options held following notification
23. Any additional information
24. Name of contact and telephone number for queries
Phil Higgins -Assistant Company Secretary - 020 7960 2228
Name and signature of duly authorised officer of issuer responsible for making notification
Phil Higgins - Assistant Company Secretary
Date of notification
30 May 2007
This information is provided by RNS The company news service from the London Stock Exchange


text:
Ho'oilo House
Nestled in the West Maui Mountains, this quiet, private Bed & Breakfast offers incredible views of the Pacific Ocean and islands surrounding Maui. Located on the popular west side of the island, you will be just minutes from the historic whaling town of Lahaina and the Kaanapali resort area.
Beaches, championship golf, shopping, hiking, swimming, snorkeling, fabulous restaurants and dozens of other activities are just minutes away from Maui's most luxurious B&B.
Whether it's your honeymoon, a quick island get-away, or your once-in-a-lifetime trip, your dream of Hawaii awaits at Ho'oilo House.


text:
At the big "Harry Potter" event at Universal Studios Orlando this past weekend, fans from all over the world gathered to celebrate the series that brought muggles from all walks of life into one wizarding world. Of course, this celebration had a somber note due to the recent passing of Alan Rickman, who played the beloved character Severus Snape in the Harry Potter films.
Since this was the first big Potter event since the death of Rickman, fans made sure they took time to honor the late actor, and the video of the touching tribute (above) will probably make you tear up all over again.
Many people were dressed up as Snape during the expo, while some carried around little signs that said "Always." But it was the raising of the wands outside of the London area of the park that may give you all the goosebumps.
U.S. & World
Watch a massive group of Harry Potter fans say goodbye to the iconic character and the man who brought him from page to screen so magically.
(NBC, E! News and Universal Studios are part of the NBCUniversal family.)
PHOTOS: The Best Harry Potter Movie Moments Ever
READ: Alan Rickman's goodbye letter to Harry Potter is just perfect


text:
- 1870 - LHP Frank "Lefty" Killen was born in Pittsburgh. He spent six seasons with the Bucs (1893-98) and twice led the NL in wins twice, with 36 (a team record) in '93 and 30 in '96. Lefty's line with Pittsburgh was 112-82/3.97. The team released him during the 1898 campaign, and his last season was 1900.
- 1901 - Pirate coach Clyde Sukeforth was born in Washington, Maine. A long time Brooklyn Dodger coach and scout, he came to Pittsburgh in the same roles in 1952, and was said to be the main driver in the selection of Roberto Clemente in the 1954 Rule 5 draft. He turned down the chance to succeed Pirate skipper Bobby Bragan in 1957 and retired as a coach after the season, but remained with the Pirates as a scout and minor league manager through 1962.
- 1950 - Pittsburgh signed the Boston Brave's OF Pete Reiser, a three-time all-star for the Brooklyn Dodgers, as a FA. Reiser hit .271 in 74 games as a Bucco bench player and was released following the season.
Bowman series 1951
- 1976 - OF/1B Craig Wilson was born in Fountain Valley, California. He played as a semi-regular for the Bucs from 2001-06 with a line of .268/.360/.486, 94 HR and 284 RBI, along with a 28% career K rate. Wilson tied the MLB single-season record for pinch-hit home runs with seven in 2001. Hand injuries in 2005 and shoulder surgery in 2007 ended his career.
- 2012 - The Pirates signed free agent catcher Russell Martin, a three-time All-Star, to a two year, $17M deal, the largest free agency contract they had ever negotiated. He got a $2M signing bonus, $6.5M for 2013 and $8.5M for 2014.


text:
2013 Dodge Journey SXT/CREW in Québec, Québec, $30,940
General Information
- EngineV6
- TransmissionAutomatic
- Body StyleN/A
- DrivetrainN/A
- Doors4
- Exterior ColourPearl white tricoat
Stop by our dealership and discover our great offers at Capitale Chrysler Québec. Check out this amazing new Dodge Journey SXT/CREW 2013 near Québec. This Pearl white tricoat model has logged 13 km. You can buy this Dodge Journey SXT/CREW 2013 at a great price of $30940. It's a N/A with 4 doors, Automatic transmission and N/A. This Dodge Journey SXT/CREW 2013 is powered by a 3600cc 24V MPFI DOHC engine that runs on Unleaded fuel. If you'd like to learn more about this new Dodge Journey SXT/CREW 2013 for sale in Québec, don't hesitate to contact us by phone at 1 877 816-7812 or on our web site at http://www.beauprecapitalechrysler.com/fr/.
Make the most of your visit at Capitale Chrysler Québec and discover our entire lineup of new and used vehicles. Our expert sales consultants will provide clear and precise answers to all your questions. Don't miss the opportunity to test drive the vehicle you're interested in. We offer financing solutions for all budgets. At Capitale Chrysler Québec near Québec you will find a vehicle that meets your needs at a great price. And remember that our after-sales service is impeccable.
- CD Player
- Power Windows
- Power Doors
- Power Steering
- Air Conditioning
- Cruise Control
- Tinted Windows
- Leather Interior
- ABS Brakes
- Alarm System
- Fog Lights
- Engine Immobilizer
- Tilt Steering
- Bucket Seats
- Passenger Airbag
- Side Airbags
- Rear-Folding Seats
- Clock
- Intermittent Wipers
- Remote Entry
- Tachometer
- Block Heater
- Roof Rack
- Split Rear Seats
- Power Brakes
- Traction Control
- MP3 player
- Floor mats
- Tire Pressure Monitoring System
- Curtain Airbags
CARFAX Canada is Canada's most trusted vehicle history report.
A CARFAX Canada report gives you full details about a vehicle's past when you buy or sell a used car.
Review Highlights
Model Information
2Average Price (used) $29,728
4Seller's Price (used) $30,940


text:
Search URJ.org and the other Reform websites:
Press Room | Facebook | Twitter | DONATE
The artwork on this note card was created by 5768 WRJ Art Calendar artist Césan d'Ornellas Levine.
Show your WRJ pride with this zippered canvas bag. Features the phrase "Well-behaved women rarely make history" and the WRJ logo.
$18 $15


text:
Black money no longer exists in Bollywood: Javed AkhtarNov 8, 2012 IANS
New Delhi, Nov 8 (IANS) What is wrong if an actor uses his popularity to do some good to society, an irate Javed Akhtar hit back when a journalist asked him if celebrities use social work to hide their black money.
"They don't pocket any black money. If they associate with some NGO to get taps fixed in some village, does that mean they are using black money? If one of them feeds street dogs, does that mean he is trying to hide the black money behind street dogs? I don't agree," Akhtar told reporters here Thursday at an event to launch Zee Classic's show "Classic Legends".
"Film industry had black money when I came into it, in the 1960s and 1970s, but now it is over. Nobody deals in it now. The corporate and bank systems have come, the black money doesn't exist now," said the acclaimed writer, poet and lyricist.
Akhtar gave the example of his wife, actress and philanthropist Shabana Azmi, who is associated with several causes.
"She has been working in a village for the past 20 to 22 years. She has been instrumental in helping 40,000 families. She works for the village Nivara, and people who used to sleep on the footpath there, now have a house, a flat. The flats maybe 450 sq ft only, but it is a flat. She didn't even create a noise about it."
"When I went for the first time, I asked her, 'What will you do with this village?' The village was far away from highway. There was no electricity in the village. Today, there is a pucca road that goes up to that village, there's a school, a computer centre, woman vocation centre, maternity centre, people are learning English through computer."
"There are many others who help Shabana. And there are several people who also send money to Vidarbha and nobody knows about it. So it's wrong to think negatively about it," he said.
Akhtar is returning to the small screen to host the second season of "Classic Legends", where he will share information on personal and professional lives of 11 Bollywood icons like Dilip Kumar and Meena Kumari.
Javed Akhtar Pictures
More News


text:
Long prized for its fur, the chinchilla, or chin, is gaining considerable traction as a pet. Rescue centers are reporting booming numbers of chins going, especially, to young single people and, occasionally, to tech companies as office pets. And they're scurrying in an enormous prominent enclosure by the Petco registers.
"The Apple people came first, then people from Google," said the president of the California Chins Association, Lani Ritchey, who runs a rescue center out of her home. "They wanted some chins to live in their playrooms where the engineers go to lounge and have their junk food. They look like Pikachus, so they think that's cute."
Chinchillas may be trending now (you can read more at SFChronicle.com), but many stranger pets have trended through the ages, as our gallery compiled by Camira Powell shows.


text:
Walt Disney Pictures Presents: Tarzan
What do you need help on? Cancel X
Overcome the jungle's most dangerous perils in this action-packed adventure. Based on the animated film, Tarzan allows you to relive Tarzan's journey through life from a headstrong youth to a courageous adult. Your innate jungle abilities will allow you to swing, climb, run, jump, and surf through 13 beautiful environments, while interacting with unique characters, riding elephants, and solving challenging puzzles. It's now up to you to master the moves of this unique jungle hero and save Tarzan's family from a ruthless hunter.
Game News
Game List Statistics
Now Playing
2 Users
Wish List
20 Users
Hot List
4 Users


text:
The Four: The Battle for Stardom is as intense as ever ... and it's only week two!
Last week's premiere saw some extremely talented singers and rappers take the stage in an effort to win over each of the panelists' hearts, as well as everyone in the audience. The result? Two of the original Four contestants, Elanese Lansen and Blair Perkins gave up their seats to some amazing challengers, 16-year-old Zhavia and Brooklyn-based songwriter/producer/vocal coach Saeed Renaud.
Kicking off Week 2, the Four consisting of Ash Minor, Lex Lu, Zhavia, and Saeed performed a rockin' version of En Vogue's "Free Your Mind" together. Fergie then asked Diddy his thoughts on the competition thus far, to which he replied, "I've seen a lot of good performances ... I need to see some great performances."
Getting things going, the first challenger of the night was a soulful R&B recording artist by the name of Candice Boyd -- who, as she explained to the panel -- just got out of a recording contract. Candice performed Mary J. Blige's "I'm Going' Down," which left the crowd chanting her name repeatedly, and the judges agreed. Diddy recalled producing the track for Mary, and called it a "Rolls Royce record." He added, "You did your thing with that rendition of the song and I would love to see you go toe to toe with one of the four." Meghan Trainor told Candice, "My heart's exploding of joy right now," and Charlie echoed, "Your eyes don't lie, I feel like you were singing to me." And with that, Candice Boyd became the very first challenger of the night to take on one of the Four ... and she chose to go up against Ash, who was the only contestant with a seat on the four last week who wasn't challenged.
First, Ash took the stage and performed Miguel's "Adorn," which afterwards Meghan kept repeating "killed it." Then, Candice sang Ariana Grande's "Dangerous Woman," which even got an "OMG" from Lex Lu in her seat. Ash received great feedback from the panel, but that he also had some competition with Candice. In fact, Charlie talked about working with Ariana Grande, and said, "I think she would've been proud of your performance."
After the closest vote on The Four so far, Candice was named the winner, knocking Ash out of his seat. Meghan said tearing up, "Ash was one of my superstars up there, so I'm heartbroken right now," while DJ Khaled told the Australian-born singer/songwriter, "Don't stop."
The next challenger was 27-year-old Stevie Brock, who as a child, had a recording contract and went on multiple tours after meeting *NSYNC's manager. Stevie, in a red sequin jacket, performed Maroon 5's "Sugar," and while the judges seemed to like Stevie, they weren't crazy about his performance. Diddy told Stevie, "I just don't think that was a great performance." After a vote from the panel, Stevie did not get the opportunity to challenge one of the four, receiving four no's from Meghan, Charlie, Diddy, and Khaled. Better luck next time, Stevie!
Then, 23-year-old Cheyenne Elliott from New York, NY came out on stage. Cheyenne has some pretty famous musical roots; her grandmother is legendary music icon Dionne Warwick (who was there to cheer her granddaughter on), and her cousin? Whitney Houston. NBD, right? Cheyenne sang Little Mix's "Wings." While Meghan told her she loved the performance, Diddy -- feeling the pressure of Dionne sitting over his shoulder in the audience -- gave her some constructive criticism. The verdict? Cheyenne got four yes's from the judges and became the second challenge of the night. She chose to go for Lex's seat.
Up first, Lex Lu. The Femme-cee rapped her own version of Migos' "Bad and Boujee," even throwing Diddy, Khaled, and Meghan's names into the song. Cheyenne followed with Sam Smith's "Too Good At Goodbyes." Charlie told Cheyenne that he got emotional after her performance, while Diddy told Lex that even though she made her performance work after a fumble, it wasn't her best.
Ultimately, the audience voted, and they chose Cheyenne as the winner of the challenge, sending Lex Lu home. Grandma Dionne was proud.
Cocoa Sarai from Bed-Stuy Brooklyn was the next potential challenger of the night, and sang a beautiful rendition of Labrinth's "Jealous." Meghan called the performance "beautiful," while Diddy said that she had potential. Charlie told Cocoa that while he got emotional during her performance, he didn't think that she was better than the Four. Khaled wanted a challenge. Unfortunately, Cocoa got three yes's and one no, and she went home.
Next was 18-year-old Kayla Ember from St. Petersburg, Florida, who sang Halsey's "Bad at Love." Diddy told her that she had that "je ne sais quois" that he's looking for. However, Kayla received one yes and three no's from the judges, and so she also went home.
Chicago-born Jason Warrior took the stage next for the chance to challenge one of the four, and he powerfully performed John Legend's "Love Me Now." The crowd certainly loved him, but what about the panel? Khaled said that if John Legend heard him sing that, he'd be proud, while Charlie told him, "This is the show that I signed up for -- you." Without surprise, Jason's incredible talent earned him four yes's from the panel and Jason chose Saeed to challenge as a result -- despite Khaled telling him "Don't play with Saeed."
Saeed went first, performing Stevie Wonder's "Superstition." Then, Jason switched up from R&B to rock, performing Imagine Dragons's "Radioactive," showing off his versatility. Afterwards, Khaled said, "Saeed is nothing to mess with," while Charlie called Jason "special." Meghan was also a fan of Jason over Saeed. But it wasn't up to the panel; it's the audience's vote that mattered, and they chose Jason as the winner, taking Saeed's seat. So, with a tearful goodbye from Fergie, Saeed went home.
Here are your final Four of the night who will take their talents to next week's episode: Candice Boyd, Cheyenne Elliott, Zhavia, and Jason Warrior.
The competition is heating up, and the stakes are extremely high. Not only will the winner's career launch with the help of the judges, they will also become iHeartRadio's "On the Verge" artist; an artist development program supporting the winner with airplay across iHeartMedia radio stations nationwide. This program has helped launched the careers of artists like Sam Smith, Fifth Harmony and Nick Jonas, among others.
Who's the next super star?! Stay tuned to The Four: Battle for Stardom every Thursday at 8/7c on FOX.
Photos: 21st Century Fox


text:
Ancestry.ca really surprised me by releasing the 1916 Census for Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta.
More than 1.7-million names and over 38,000 images are in this census, and is well worth the look if you suspect, or know of, anyone there in 1916.
From 1906 to 1950, a separate census was taken of the Prairie Provinces five years after every national census, and according to the law, 92 years had to pass before the census would be released.
If you look at the census, you will find the name of the person, their gender, and marital status.
You will also find their age, birthdate, and place where that person was born.
The place of residence will be given as it was in 1916, and also provide a list of members of the family.
You can also see the image of the actual census return. I learned that a person I had been following from New Brunswick to Manitoba, and to Alberta, listed his wife as being from Manitoba.
But when I checked, her father — who now lived with them — was originally from New Brunswick, as was her husband, the head of the household. Question - answered!
The 1916 Census is free with a 14-day trial from Ancestry.ca for those who wish to take a look at it.


text:
If you're looking for a hidden gem in the New Orleans restaurant industry, head over to Coquette on Magazine St at Washington Ave in the Irish Channel, just a few blocks from famed local restaurant Commander's Palace. The restaurant is housed in a building notorious for its short-lived businesses' comings and goings, but with a stellar chef, menu and service, it is doubtful that Coquette will be going anywhere.
Having moved to to the city from the eastern shore of Maryland about two years ago, chef Mike Stoltzfus began as a sous chef at Restaurant August before deciding to open up his own fine dining establishment. He dedicates himself to the finest food, cocktails and ingredients, and that dedication shows in Coquette's high ratings across the board, both locally and nationally.
With a short menu that changes daily, it can be difficult to describe. A dish you love one day might be gone the next all depending on the ingredients available and whims of the chefs in the kitchen. As an example, a Christmas Eve dining experience included appetizers like a delectable oyster and Andouille stew we couldn't help but mop up with the crisp and delicious fresh bread and a raw tuna dish with heavenly notes of a light citrus dressing in the salad mixed therein.
For main courses, our table ordered the ribeye steak, cooked to perfection and served with a unique blend of salad components including a nice spice from some chopped jalapenos. The other course was a decadent red snapper with delicately crispy skin atop the moist texture of the fish with a buttermilk dressing that was to die for.
Finally the dessert courses included apple fritters with a dollop of vanilla ice cream and a dab of salted caramel as well as a chocolate mousse cake with a serving of peanut butter ice cream. And this is just a taste of what you can expect from Coquette and chef Mike Stoltzfus on a daily basis.
In addition to its standard dinner menu, the restaurant is also open for lunch, happy hour and Sunday brunch. Coquette's $20 three-course lunch special is truly a steal, and the bartenders serve up arguably some of the best cocktails in the city. The $25 three-course brunch is another amazing special that locals and tourists love.
The restaurant has a casual but elegant feel in its two-story building, and you'll have a comfortable and fun experience with a fine staff of waiters who are enthusiastic about the menu and always ready to give informed suggestions.
Between the food, service, location and feel of the restaurant, Coquette is a fantastic choice for fine dining.


text:
Grid List
2 Item(s)
B-6 Black Shearling Bomber Jacket$1,300.00
CPT Men's Swim Trunks
Regular Price: $89.00
Special Price $18.00
Grid List
2 Item(s)
Men's Leather Bomber Jackets & Aviation Apparel
Ace the Air Force look with gear from our collection of men's leather bomber jackets and aviation-inspired apparel. Cockpit USA has been an official outerwear supplier of the United States Air Force since 1980, a partnership we've maintained through our commitment to high-quality craftsmanship and design made in the USA. We use the same standards in producing the men's genuine leather bomber jackets we manufacture for retail.
Our goal is to provide pilots and civilians alike with leather bomber jackets and aviation apparel that awaken an adventurous spirit and the hunger for a challenge. Browse our expansive collection of apparel and accessories, including men's military bomber jackets, flight jackets, field jackets, motorcycles jackets, graphic tees, and more. Every item we list is manufactured right here in the United States using the same techniques we've employed since 1975. You can depend on durable service from every one of our jackets, because they've been made using hardy, high-quality materials. Browse our selection of men's military bomber jackets to find timeless airworthy apparel.


text:
I haven't actually been to any major atheist/skeptical/freethought conventions, but I've been to a few technical conferences, and I've always enjoyed the opportunity to travel to new parts of the country and do a little sightseeing on the side. One thing I've found, though, is that sometimes when you step outside of the hotel or convention center, the panhandlers are waiting for you on the sidewalk, trying to bum some cash off of you. And then again, sometimes they aren't. It depends on the venue.
I don't believe in being harsh to panhandlers. I used to work downtown, and sometimes I would be approached by a homeless guy as I was walking to the nearest MacDonalds for some lunch. And generally, he would complain about not having eaten, and I would take him to MacDonalds and buy him whatever he wanted, because it goes against my principles to send a hungry man away hungry. I didn't try to get the guy arrested, but by the same token there were days when I stayed away from MacDonalds because I didn't feel like being panhandled again.
The problem with panhandling is not that I can't handle isolated incidents now and then. Where panhandling becomes an issue is when it starts to become pervasive and persistent, where you can't even step onto the sidewalk without being latched onto by someone who won't take no for an answer. And that goes for sexual panhandling as well. You wouldn't want to go to a business conference that was well-known as a venue where panhandlers not only thronged the sidewalks, but were actually welcomed inside the convention and given the opportunity to accost you and occasionally pick your pocket every time you turned around. It's no different if the panhandlers are there looking for sex instead of money.
Like I said, I'm an outside observer here, since I haven't been to any major skeptical/atheist conventions. But the complaint I think I'm hearing is not coming from women who expect the crowds to part and everyone to bow as they walk past in pristine purity. The complaint I hear is that the panhandling is getting out of hand. It's not that they can't or won't respond appropriately to the rare, isolated incident, it's that the frequency, severity, and persistence of the incidents is raising the nuisance level above acceptable limits.
Take groping, for instance. In my panhandling analogy, that's like the panhandler who picks your pocket, helping himself to what he wants—except, of course, that in the case of groping, it's much more difficult for the victim to establish that an actual crime has taken place. And while it's certainly true that you wouldn't want to punish all panhandlers as pickpockets when only one of them was actually guilty, that's not really the point. The point is, would you want to attend a conference or other social function if you knew that the organizers (and a sizable number of attendees) were largely on the side of the panhandlers and pickpockets?
Women shouldn't have to put up with that sexually any more than any of us should have to put up with it monetarily. And all it takes is for people to agree that, yes, that's unacceptable, and we have policies against it, and we actively enforce those policies. We shouldn't need to call in the police and have anyone arrested (except in rare cases), we just need to take a firm stand.


text:
DETROIT (AP) ? The Atlanta Braves began the month with 12 wins in their first 13 games.
DETROIT (AP) ? The Atlanta Braves began the month with 12 wins in their first 13 games.
They're approaching the end of it looking worn down after too many tough series on the road.
Miguel Cabrera's three-run homer in the seventh inning broke the game open, and the Detroit Tigers finished off a three-game sweep of the Braves with an 8-3 victory Sunday night. Atlanta has lost four straight and is 3-8 since that 12-1 start.
"It was a tough road trip. You can tell it wore on us," Atlanta's Dan Uggla said. "Not taking anything away from them. They batted great and got good pitching all three days."
The Braves have played only two home games since April 7. Their latest 11-game trip included games against Pittsburgh, Colorado and Detroit ? all teams that are hovering around the top of their divisions.
The NL East-leading Braves will be back home Monday night. They lead the division by 2� games over Washington going into a four-game series against the Nationals.
Austin Jackson and Omar Infante also homered for the Tigers, and Doug Fister (4-0) struck out eight in seven innings on a rainy night at Comerica Park. Mike Minor (3-2) allowed a three-run homer to Jackson in the third, and although the Braves came back to tie it, Cabrera doubled and scored in the sixth to make it 4-3.
Infante hit a solo shot in the seventh, and Cabrera added an opposite-field homer on a 3-0 fastball by reliever Cory Gearrin.
"He's the best I've ever seen, opposite-field power," Detroit manager Jim Leyland said. "A lot guys just don't like to swing 3-0. I think they get caught where they don't want to swing at a bad pitch. I think they get leery of it. ... I've given the green light more in Detroit than any time I've ever managed in my life, but most guys don't swing."
Cabrera extended his hitting streak to 12 games.
Detroit won the three games in this series by a combined 25-7. Anibal Sanchez set a franchise record Friday with 17 strikeouts, and it looked as if Fister might approach that Sunday when he fanned five in the first two innings.
Atlanta manager Fredi Gonzalez shuffled his lineup before the game, giving struggling outfielder B.J. Upton the night off. It didn't matter much. Aside from a three-run fourth, the Braves were quiet offensively, and Minor gave up six runs in 6 2-3 innings.
Jackson came to the plate with two on in the third and opened the scoring with a drive that cleared the fence and the bullpen in left-center.
The Braves tied it the following inning. Chris Johnson hit an RBI double, and Evan Gattis drove in a run with a single to make it 3-2.
With men on first and third and one out, Uggla hit what looked like a double play grounder, but Infante's relay from second to first was a bit wide, and the Tigers got only one out on the play, allowing the tying run to score.
Victor Martinez's sacrifice fly scored Cabrera to put Detroit ahead in the sixth. Minor got the first two outs of the seventh, but Infante hit his second homer in two days, and Jackson drew a walk to end Minor's night.
Gearrin allowed Torii Hunter's single and Cabrera's opposite-field drive ? the third home run of the year for the Triple Crown winner.
"He hits the ball over the right-field fence like a left-handed pull hitter," Gonzalez said.
Fister, making his 100th career start, allowed three runs and six hits with no walks.
Minor allowed six hits, walked two and struck out six.
NOTES: The game was played amid a light, misty drizzle, and it started raining a little harder in the fourth, but there were no delays. ... Detroit RHP Al Alburquerque pitched an inning-plus of eventful relief. He walked two, struck out three, hit a batter and threw two wild pitches. ... Fister had two hit batsmen, bringing his season total to eight. ... Detroit hosts Minnesota on Monday night. Max Scherzer (2-0) takes the mound for the Tigers against Mike Pelfrey (2-2). Atlanta's Julio Teheran (1-0) is scheduled to start against Washington's Stephen Strasburg (1-4).


text:
Where Marines, their families, and friends come together
To request registration to MarineChat.com please forward you requested user name, email address, date of birth, and the zip code where you live to the webmaster.
|A little something to start your day This forum is dedicated as a extension of Point Man Ministries. If you feel the need please visit them at http://www.pmimchat.com/forum/ They look forward to seeing you there.
|Forum Tools
|Search this Forum
|New posts
|Hot thread with new posts
|No new posts
|Hot thread with no new posts
|Thread is closed


text:
Police Report
Tuesday, April 2
Police responded to a call at the Chilkat Cruises dock from a person with a self-inflicted wound. The person was transported to the clinic.
A Chilkoot Subdivision resident reported drivers not stopping at a stop sign.
A caller reported a female needing assistance to walk as she was falling down in the Beach Road area. Police responded and found the female was intoxicated. A case was initiated for probation violation.
A woman was arrested on driving under the influence charges.
A traffic stop resulted in a verbal warning for failure to stop at a stop sign.
Monday, April 1
A caller reported two large moose walking on the Haines Highway between Fair Drive and the school. An officer responded and followed the moose tracks, but was unable to locate the moose.
Police received an anonymous report of drug activity.
A Haines Animal Rescue Kennel employee attempting to pick up a chocolate lab at large reported the dog had been taken by men who could not identify it as theirs. An officer was advised.
An officer was advised of a report that a person was driving an unregistered vehicle.
An officer was advised of a report that trash was thrown into a recycling dumpster.
Sunday, March 31
Troopers were notified of an abandoned vehicle near 12 Mile Haines Highway. The owners were contacted and said the vehicle was broken and they were trying to get it back home.
Dispatch received a report of a horse loose at 3 Mile Haines Highway. An officer was able to put the horse back in its pen and a message was left for the owner.
A traffic stop resulted in a verbal warning for speeding.
Saturday, March 30
A person reported a domestic violence assault at 6 Mile Mud Bay Road. The report was referred to troopers, but police were asked to assist.
Friday, March 29
Police investigated a report of white smoke coming off a roof in the Young Road area. Police determined everything was fine.
A caller reported a vehicle located in the school parking lot was headed out the Haines Highway in a reckless manner.
A traffic stop resulted in a verbal warning for defective taillight.
Thursday, March 28
A caller reported a moose cow and calf in the wooded area behind the school and expressed concern for children going to school. Police checked the area, but the moose had left.
Public works personnel were advised of possible freezing of a water main near Young Road after a caller reported she was experiencing diminished water pressure.
Police initiated a case for a reported domestic dispute in a downtown apartment building.
Police initiated a case for a reported sexual abuse of a minor in the Haines area.
A caller reported a suspicious woman at a downtown business exhibiting possible paranoid and delusional behaviors and speech. Police responded and concluded the female was not a danger to herself or others.
A caller reported a possible drunk driver driving recklessly and nearly hitting a building. Police responded but were unable to substantiate the claim.
A woman requested ministerial assistance for her family that had been evicted from their residence and had no means or place to stay. The Salvation Army provided several options, and other ministerial services were contacted.
Troopers arrested a person on a warrant for failure to appear in court.
A man requested a welfare check on his daughter who had not answered his phone calls. He expressed concern there might be unauthorized people at her residence. Police advised the caller no one was home, but they found the daughter's vehicle elsewhere.
Police initiated a criminal mischief case after a caller reported a man had broken a windshield in a downtown bar's parking lot.
Traffic stops resulted in two verbal warnings for defective brake light and failure to carry registration. One resulted in a citation for failure to carry insurance.
Wednesday, March 27
A message was left with a vehicle owner who had parked his car in a Haines Highway business parking lot for a long time.
A caller reported a vehicle was being operated by a driver with a canceled license. The caller described the vehicle and said it was heading down the Haines Highway toward town. Police located the vehicle but confirmed it was not driven by the person named in the report.
A caller reported a reckless driver in a red pickup truck driving down Lutak Road. The driver caused the caller to pull over, as the vehicle in question nearly hit him. Police responded but were unable to apprehend the driver.
Tuesday, March 26
A call-in alarm was received for the water plant. Officials were advised.
Dispatch received 25 medical calls and four canine calls.


text:
Two Blade Handheld Spiralizer (World Cuisine)
Perfect for small meals, this handheld version of the popular Spiralizer is compact and simple to use, and takes up very little storage space. Faster and easier to cut vegetables into long "noodles" and add tantalizing texture to salads and healthy creations.
Two stainless-steel blades cut flat ribbons or 1/4" thick spirals.
Julienne Blade produces noobles and continuous strands.
Top cover has 12 spikes and serves as pusher, keeping hands away from blades.
Ideal for use with foods less than 2 3/4" diam.
Use with firm fruits and vegetables such as potatoes, carrots, cucumber, radishes and zucchini.
Made of sturdy ABS and stainless steel blades, BPA free.
Copyright © 2020 Natural Zing's Raw Food StorePowered by osCommerce


text:
- Alma Mater
- Color Games
- Cheerleaders
- Dance Team
- Down and Dirty Dawg Band
- Fight Song
- Hall of Fame
- Retriever Kids Club
Traditions and Spirit Groups
Still very young at age 52, many of UMBC Athletics' traditions are still evolving. But the Chesapeake Bay Retriever, the state dog of Maryland, was anointed as UMBC's "mascot" only weeks into the school's first semester (1966) and has stood proudly ever since. A champion "Chessie" by the name of "True Grit" was the model for the statue which has adorned the area between the Administration Building and the RAC since the late 1980's. It was sculpted by UMBC alum Paulette Raye ('87, Philosophy). "True Grit" usually sports a cap (no gown) and occasionally holds a diploma in his mouth at graduation.
The department reinstituted varsity Cheerleading as of the 2006-07 academic year. The squad performs at all home basketball games, other selected campus events, and travels to the America East Men's and Women's Basketball Championships. For more information, contact Shelly Ringgold. Ms Ringgold has an extensive background coaching cheerleaders and is also a world class fitness competitor. She can be reached at email@example.com.
The Down and Dirty Dawg Band and the UMBC Dance Team are recognized as one of the America East Conference's top spirit units as they display their talents at the league basketball championships each year. The Dance Team was formed in 1996 and has been performing at UMBC Basketball games and other campus events for the last two decades. Several former members have continued to perform after UMBC, including earning spots with the Baltimore Ravens and Washington Redskins squads.
Another tradition which has been around for awhile is the UMBC Athletic Hall of Fame. The UMBC Athletic Hall of Fame was instituted in 1970's, and has grown to include 117 members. In 1990, former Director of Athletics Dr. Charles Brown created The Annual Hall of Fame Dinner, where past Hall of Famers can welcome new entrants. Hall of Famers are chosen by a committee of athletic alumni based on their excellence on the fields and courts and their subsequent graduation from UMBC.
The "UMBC Riser" was penned by Dr. George LaNoue, UMBC professor emeritus of Policy Sciences. Early in his UMBC tenure, Dr. LaNoue served as an assistant lacrosse coach and also served as the chairman of the UMBC Athletic Policy Committee.
UMBC Riser
Stand up and cheer, UMBC
Forward we go, to another victory.
Retrievers, be bold,
We back you as we stand,
Black and gold, the best in Maryland.
Rise up and sing!
Stand up and roar!
Make echoes ring from the moutains to the shore.
Baltimore's pride, our alma mater grand,
UMBC, the best in an-y land!
The Down and Dirty Dawg Band plays the Fight Song as the Retrievers take to and leave the courts or the fields of competition. The band, formed in 1995, is currently under the director of Paul Wetzstein. They have performed on both ABC's Good Morning America and NBC's The Today Show. Not only is the band outstanding musically, but their barking out of "UM—BC, Go Big Dawgs" is a student favorite.
The Retriever Kids' Club was created in 2004 and is the official UMBC fan club for kids ages 12 and under. In addition to getting plenty of "free stuff" and the chance to meet the players, every member of the Retriever Kids' Club receives complimentary admission to all home basketball games at the RAC.