text:
When they know they're "going to the doctor," many kids worry a bit about the visit. Whether they're going to see their primary care doctor or a specialist for a routine exam, illness, or special problem, kids are likely to have fears, and some may even feel guilty.
Some fears and guilty feelings surface easily, so that kids can talk about them. Others are kept secret and remain unspoken. Here's how to help your child express these fears and overcome them.
Common Fears and Concerns About Medical Exams
Things that often top kids' lists of concerns about going to the doctor include:
- Separation. Kids often fear that their parents may leave them in the exam room and wait in another room. The fear of separation from the parent during mysterious examinations is most common in kids under 7 years old, but can be frightening to older kids through ages 12 or 13.
- Pain. Kids may worry that a part of the exam or a medical procedure will hurt. They especially fear they may need an injection, particularly kids ages 6 through 12.
- The doctor. Some kids' concerns may be about the doctor's manner. A kid may misinterpret qualities such as speed, efficiency, or a detached attitude and view them as sternness, dislike, or rejection.
- The unknown. Kids sometimes worry that a medical problem is much worse than their parents are telling them. Some who have simple problems suspect they may need surgery or hospitalization; some who are ill worry that they may die.
Also, kids often have feelings of guilt: They may believe that their illness or condition is punishment for something they've done or neglected to do. Kids who feel guilty also might believe that examinations and medical procedures are part of their punishment.
How to Help
Encourage your kids to express their fears, and then address them in words that they understand and aren't likely to misinterpret. Here are some practical ways to do this:
Explain the Purpose of the Visit
If the upcoming appointment is for a regular health checkup, explain that it's "a well-child visit. The doctor will check on how you're growing and developing, and also ask questions and examine you to make sure that your body is healthy. And you'll get a chance to ask any questions you want to about your body and your health." Also, stress that all healthy kids go to the doctor for such visits.
If the visit is to diagnose and treat an illness or other condition, explain — in very non-scary language — that the doctor "needs to examine you to find out how to fix this and help you get better."
It's wise to prepare kids by giving them advance notice of a visit so it's not a surprise. When explaining the purpose of the visit, talk about the doctor in a positive way to help promote the relationship between your child and the doctor.
Address Any Guilty Feelings
A child who is going to the doctor because of an illness or other condition might have unspoken feelings of guilt about it. Discuss the illness or condition in neutral language and reassure your child: "This isn't caused by anything you did or forgot to do. Illnesses like this happen to many kids. Aren't we lucky to have doctors who can find the causes and who know how to help us get well?"
If you, your spouse, other relatives, or friends had (or have) the same condition, share this information. Knowing that others have been through the same thing can help ease a child's guilt and fear.
If your child needs a doctor's attention because of a condition that resulted in ridicule or rejection by other kids (or even by adults), you'll need to double your efforts to relieve shame and blame. Head lice, embarrassing scratching caused by pinworm, and involuntary daytime wetting or bedwetting are examples of conditions that are often misunderstood by others.
Even if you've been very supportive, reassure your child again, before the visit to the doctor, that the condition is not his or her fault and that many kids have had it.
Of course, if your child has suffered an injury after disregarding safety rules, it's wise to point out (as matter-of-factly as possible) the cause-and-effect relationship between the action and the injury. However, you should still try to relieve guilt. You could say, "You probably didn't understand the danger involved in doing that, but I'm sure you understand now, and I know you won't do it that way again."
If your child repeatedly disobeys rules and becomes injured, speak to your doctor. This sort of worrisome behavior pattern needs a closer look.
In any of these cases, though, be sure to explain, especially to young kids, that going to the doctor for an examination is not a punishment. Help your kids understand that adults go to doctors just like kids do and that the doctor's job is to help people stay healthy and fix any problems.
Tell Kids What to Expect During a Routine Exam
Children learn best during play, and this may be a time when they feel most comfortable asking any questions regarding fears they may have. You can use a doll or teddy bear to show a young child how the nurse will measure height and weight or demonstrate parts of the routine exam.
Many children's books are available to help illustrate the doctor visit. It also helps to use role-playing to show how the doctor might:
- use a blood pressure cuff to "hug the arm"
- look in the mouth (and will need to hold the tongue down with a special stick for just a few seconds to see the throat)
- look at the eyes and into the ears
- listen to the chest and back with a stethoscope
- tap or press on the tummy to listen to or feel what's inside
- look quickly to see that the "private areas" are healthy
- tap on the knees
- look at the feet
It's important for parents to let their kids know that what they've taught them about the privacy of their bodies is still true, but that doctors, nurses, and parents must sometimes examine all parts of the body. Emphasize, though, that these people are the only exceptions. And reassure your child that you will be in the exam room with him or her.
Tell Kids What to Expect During Other Exams
If your child is going to the doctor because of an illness or medical condition or is going to visit a specialist, you might not even know what to expect during the exam.
When you're calling to make the appointment, you can ask to speak to the doctor or a nurse to find out, in a general way, what will take place during the office visit and exam. Then you can explain some of the procedures and their purpose in gentle language, appropriate to your child's age level. Your child will feel more secure understanding what's going to take place and why it's necessary.
Be honest, but not brutally honest. Let your child know if a procedure is going to be somewhat embarrassing, uncomfortable, or even painful, but don't go into alarming detail.
Reassure your child that you'll be there and that the procedure is truly necessary to fix — or find out how to fix — the problem. (Adolescents may prefer to be examined without a parent or with only a same-sex parent or same-sex chaperone present. That preference should be honored.)
Kids can cope with discomfort or pain more easily if they're forewarned, and they'll learn to trust you if you're honest with them. If you don't know much about the illness or condition, admit that but reassure your child that you'll both be able to ask the doctor questions about it. Write down your child's questions.
If a blood sample will be taken during or after the examination, be careful how you explain this. Some young kids worry that "taking blood" means that all their blood will be taken. Let your child know that the body contains a great deal of blood and that only a very little bit of it (usually no more than 1 or 2 teaspoons [about 10 milliliters]) will be taken for testing.
Again, make certain that your child understands that the visit, with its embarrassing or uncomfortable procedures, is not a punishment for any misbehavior or disobedience.
Involve Your Child in the Process
- Gathering information for the doctor. If the situation isn't an emergency, let your child contribute to a list of symptoms that you create for the doctor. Include all symptoms you've observed, no matter how unrelated they may seem to the problem at hand. Also, before the visit, prepare a list of your child's previous illnesses and medical conditions and a history of illnesses and medical conditions among close members of the family (parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts, and uncles).
- Writing down questions. Ask your child to think of questions to ask the doctor. Write them down and give them to the doctor. Or, if kids are old enough, they can write down and ask the questions themselves. If the problem has happened before, list the things that have worked and the things that haven't worked in previous treatment. Kids will be reassured by your active role in their medical care and will learn from your example. And you'll be prepared to give the doctor information vital to making an informed diagnosis.
Choose a Doctor Who Relates Well to Kids
Because your doctor is your best ally in helping your kids cope with health examinations, it's important to carefully select a doctor. Of course, you want one who's knowledgeable and competent. However, you also want a doctor who understands kids' needs and fears and who communicates easily with them in a friendly manner, without talking down to them.
In the course of a physical exam, the doctor inspects, taps, and probes various parts of the body — procedures that may be embarrassing (or even physically uncomfortable) for kids. A good relationship between doctor and patient can minimize these feelings.
If your child's doctor seems critical, uncommunicative, disinterested, or unsympathetic, do not be afraid to change doctors. Ask for recommendations from other parents in your area or from other doctors whose opinions you trust.
If your child's illness or condition requires a specialist, ask your doctor to recommend someone who's knowledgeable, experienced, and friendly. After all, adults want these characteristics in their own doctors, so as a parent you should be your child's advocate in seeking medical care.


text:
Couldn't resist buying this cute little plant (Ginko biloba). A reminder of spring even if it's both cold and windy outside today. Photo: Mia Linnman.
Monday 23 March 2015
Friday 13 March 2015
Bedroom view
A few weeks ago I painted the wall behind the bed with Kalklitir, an ecological and VOC free lime paint (chalk and pigment mixed together). The grey really makes the room feel calm and peaceful. Anyway, soon we might change bedroom again, I'll let you know. Happy weekend!
Photo: Mia Linnman.
My pictures
Thursday 12 March 2015
Found this beautiful box of wine in a small wine shop on Kensington Church Street. Happy thursday! Photo: Mia Linnman.
My pictures
Saturday 7 March 2015
Kensington style
Last weekend was spent in dear friends Kensington apartment. Totally renovated in airy and light scandinavian style. Very comfortable sofa by Flexform and Mega Toledo lamp from Artemide, not to mention George Clooney, head of the table. Photo: Mia Linnman.
My pictures
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Download Guide Updated
For those new to MixtapeTorrent.com, or existing members that need some help with downloading from the site, I've updated the download guide (which was almost a year old) with new screenshots & information to make it as easy as possible for ya.
Check it out : How To Download/FAQ/Info
- Guide: How To Download
- How To Upload Mixtapes
- ANNOUNCEMENT: Mixtapes are BACK!
- Hood Life 2 (The Documentary Continues) (DVD)
- Hood 2 Hood - The Blockumentary 2 (DVD)
- DJ Headbussa - Supply & Demand Vol 12
- SMACK DVD Magazine Vol 14
- French Montana & Max B - Coke Wave (DVD)
- Sean Falyon – SFBE2: West Philly 2 The World
- Death To The Ringtone Rapper
- Grind House Media Presents Frontiers Hearing Kolor Instrumixtape
- DJ Fletch , DJ Scream And Shawty Lo - Shawty Balboa (DVD)


text:
In the finale of the first season of the revamped Dr. Who, we see Rose absorb the Time Vortex of the TARDIS and uses this power to not only evaporate the Daleks, but revive Jack.
Due to this process, Jack becomes immortal.
The question is, what was it about this resurrection that allowed him to be immortal rather than just giving him another chance at life?


text:
Penn Twp
History of Penn Township
Source: History of St. Joseph County, Indiana
Hon. John V. Hadley, Editor in Chief.
Chas. C. Chapman & Co.,
Chiago 1880
Much doubt and uncertainty envelope many of the events which go to make up the early history of a new country. The solitary wilds of an unexplored region afford few opportunities for making those notes and records which as time advances become valuable to the seeker after historical truths; and as a general thing the explorers and settlers of our great West have been men little accustomed to literary pursuits, and less desirous of literary honors. Besides, the arduous labors and engrossing duties of pioneer life leave little room or opportunity for that quiet and leisure indispensable to scholarly habits. Thus it is that a large portion of interesting events and reminiscences of our first settlements have faded from the memory of man, or are only handed down as traditions distorted by this uncertain medium, or mystified by the lapse of time. So it is with the pioneer history of Penn township; for we have found conflicting statements in some particulars regarding pioneer days and events; but by interviewing the most reliable authorities, the pioneers themselves, we are enabled to give a sketch which we hope will meet the approbation of all.
Trustee Information
Doris Portolese (R)
210 E. Russ St.
Mishawaka, IN. 46545
(574) 256-6213
Website: http://penntownship-sjcin.org/
*Four Year Term- Next Election 2022
Penn township is a timbered country, and in the pioneer days when there were no railroads, telegraph wires, or even wagon roads, it was difficult for the settlers to go from one cabin to another without becoming lost. On one occasion a gentleman had gone some distance from home to a near neighbor's on an errand, and night overtaking him on his return he got lost, and wandered in the dense forest all night, while the wild lightnings flashed around him in a threatening manner. He was not found until late the following day. If the thick timber had been the only barrier to a rapid growth of settlement and improvement in this township, the obstacle would have soon been overcome; but there was a large amount of marsh land in the township, and it was almost impossible to traverse the marshes with a team; and the traveling was done by circuitous routes to avoid these marshy tracts of land. Many of these marshes have been drained, and now constitute a portion of the most fertile land in Penn township. The same land that now yields abundant crops was then a quagmire and a pit for explorers to fall into. It would be in keeping here to remark that there is a large marsh extending from the St. Joseph river near South Bend toward the southeast, almost the entire length of the township, or to within a half mile of the eastern line of the township. This marsh varies from three fourths of a mile to two miles in width. Near its center is an elevated, oblong tract of land consisting of 200 to 300 acres, which is tinder cultivation and known as the "Island." This peculiarly shaped marsh is regarded by the citizens of this township as once forming an arm of Lake Michigan. This is perhaps truce, as the indications are such as to lead any thinking person to such conclusions.
During the first settlement of the township the pioneers got their mail at Edwardsville, Cass Co., Mich., which was carried on horseback from Fort Wayne to that point. It here intersected the mail route between Detroit and Chicago. The residences of the pioneers consisted of log huts, and some were so poor that they made bedsteads of round poles. They did their cooking by the fireplace. A stick was fastened across the chimney at some distance above the fire, and the kettles were suspended from this by means of iron hooks or chains. The bread was baked in a "Dutch oven."
Although these sturdy pioneers of the forest had to undergo many privations, they were a jovial class of people, and had their amusements and enjoyments, though in a rustic way, as do the people of the present day. The mill at which they first got their wheat ground was located below Niles, Mich.


text:
CARLSBAD, Ca. (April 02, 2014) – Upper Deck and Pressman Film, led by veteran producer Edward R. Pressman, are joining forces to bring the popular franchise The Crow to fans via trading cards, board games, limited edition posters, miniature figurines, collectible art and more.
The first product that Upper Deck is working on under the new multi-year agreement is a brand new game experience based on the new franchise release in March 2015. The company is planning to offer a full portfolio of products based not only on the original film, but from the movie sequels, TV series and comic books as well.
"We're thrilled to be working with Upper Deck on the new line of products surrounding The Crow franchise and engaging our fans in a way they haven't experienced before," said Pressman.
Upper Deck Authenticated, the company's memorabilia division, is planning to produce limited edition posters for The Crow that will be available later this year. The company also plans to produce The Crow trading card set, which will release in 2015. More details and release dates for The Crow products are expected to be announced at Comic-Con International this summer.
"The Crow franchise is an exciting new addition to our game and collectibles portfolio," said Jason Masherah, president of Upper Deck. "At Upper Deck we believe in quality over quantity, and have carefully selected The Crow as an investment that we know our collectors and gaming fans will enjoy for years to come."
From the original film to 3 movie sequels, a TV series and an extensive line of comics, there seems to be an unlimited amount of content for new Upper Deck products surrounding The Crow.
"There is a very hard core and passionate fan base for The Crow, which we greatly appreciate," said Jason Brenner, Upper Deck's Entertainment Brand Manager. "We will be taking great care to keep true to the movie and comic characters, and plan to uphold this legacy to its fullest."
The deal between Upper Deck and Pressman Films was brokered by Dan Kletzky of Entertainment Licensing Associates.
Upper Deck, headquartered in Carlsbad, Calif., is a worldwide sports and entertainment company built on the pillars of quality craftsmanship, authenticity and innovation with a dedication to creating products that turn memorable moments into collectibles. Upper Deck revolutionized the sports trading card experience with anti-counterfeit holograms, high quality card stock and stunning photography in its inaugural 1989 baseball set, and since then its mission has been to capture the excitement of the game and deliver it to fans of all ages. The cornerstone of Upper Deck's business, which opened in 1989, is based on sports trading cards. As its brand has evolved to include other products over the years, the company now creates exclusive memorabilia, gaming products, collectible cards and a wide array of sports trading cards.
Find more information at www.upperdeck.com, www.UpperDeckBlog.com or follow us on Facebook (UpperDeck), Twitter (@UpperDeckSports), and YouTube (udvids).
Founded in 1969, Pressman Film has produced more than 80 world-class motion pictures and helped launch the careers of many of the most prominent figures in the movie industry. The company's extensive body of work includes groundbreaking films by directors such as Oliver Stone, Terrence Malick, Sam Raimi, David Byrne, Kathryn Bigelow, Alex Proyas, Brian De Palma, David Mamet, Charles Burnett, Abel Ferrara, Wayne Kramer, Mary Harron, Jason Reitman, and Werner Herzog. Led by true industry veteran, Edward R. Pressman, the company is dedicated to producing quality theatrical motion pictures and will continue its 40-year tradition, forging new territory in both the independent and Hollywood arenas. For more information on Pressman Film, please visit www.pressman.com.
Web Design by Jacob Tyler


text:
Syrian opposition groups have signed an initial agreement to form a new coalition of forces fighting to end the rule of President Bashar al-Assad, a Syrian delegate at talks in Doha said on Sunday.
"An initial deal has been signed. The evening session will be for electing the president of the body and his deputy," Ali Sadreddine al-Bayanouni, a Muslim Brotherhood delegate at the talks, told reporters.
The new body, made up of groups inside and outside Syria, would be called the National Coalition for Opposition Forces and the Syrian Revolution, ( NCOFSR) he added.


text:
Today's restaurant customers don't want to wait in line. To address the industry's need for speed, HM Electronics Inc. (HME) introduces the new ION IQ NDT, an innovative internal communication system specifically designed to move restaurant lines faster and reduce the wait time for customers.
HME Unveils New ION IQ NDT Internal Communication System
A technological advancement over two-way radios, the ION IQ NDT creates a smoother, more efficient internal communication process that speeds up service, improves sales, and enhances the customer experience.
"When in-store lines get long, restaurants lose business," says Daren Haas, VP of marketing and new business development at HME. "The ION IQ NDT acts as a 'line-buster,' allowing restaurant employees to take orders from customers anywhere in line for faster and more efficient service."
Using multiple channel technology, the ION IQ NDT allows restaurant staff to simultaneously hold separate conversations among team members. This "split kitchen" concept enables employees to take and process several orders at the same time for faster service and increased profitability. The system's state-of-the-art features include superior sound quality, hands-free operation, and a groundbreaking message center that can deliver important reminders and alerts. Employees can also use the optional telephone interface to answer phone calls through their headsets.
"Restaurants depend on fast, private, and secure internal communications to serve their patrons in a timely manner and improve employee productivity," says Haas. "The ION IQ NDT is the latest in our line of innovative products designed to help our customers operate at maximum efficiency."
Subscribe to A.M. Jolt
Get daily updates on quick-serve industry news, tips, and events.
"*" indicates required fields


text:
Dodgers Pitcher Clayton Kershaw Shares His Faith Testimony
The producers of the "I am Second" Christian video testimonies debuted Cy Young Award-winning pitcher of the Los Angeles Dodgers Clayton Kershaw's story about his Christian faith on Thursday – the opening day of Major League Baseball season.
Kershaw joins a team of celebrities who have shared their stories of struggle, transformation and hope as part of the I am Second movement.
I am Second is a website that features short films related to a variety of personal struggles, including abuse, addictions, pride, eating disorders, broken families and the search for success and meaning in life. Its mission is "to inspire people of all kinds to live for God and for others. Actors. Athletes. Musicians. Business leaders. Drug addicts. Your next-door neighbor. People like you."
In the latest film, Kershaw tells of how his parents were divorced when he was 10 and he was consumed by anxiety for much of his childhood. He worried about things that he couldn't control.
He and his single mom struggled to figure out how they could afford to send him to college. In the end, he turned down a scholarship from Texas A&M to sign with the Dodgers after being drafted seventh overall in the 2006 Major League Baseball Draft.
"It was just amazing providence that God had in my life," Kershaw said on the film shot in a black room with him sitting on a large sofa-like chair under a bright light, in the style of the I am Second videos.
"God was there the whole time; I just didn't bother to look. I never thought in a million years I'd get to play professional baseball, get to play in the major leagues, get to live out my dream. Since I was a kid that was all I wanted to do," he said.
Although he has been showered with honors in his short career, the most important thing to him is using his God-given influence to help others. "For me it's about the legacy you leave off the field," he said.
He and his wife, Ellen, are working with a ministry called "Arise Africa" to build an orphanage in Zambia. Hope's Home, named after a child who lost both her parents to AIDS, will house 12 kids when construction is completed.
"We're just doing the part that God gave us," Kershaw said. "You can't think that we can change the whole country by ourselves, but God can."
During the 2011 season, Kershaw also donated $100 for each of his strikeouts – a total of $24,800 – to his ministry, Kershaw's Challenge: Strikeout to Serve. Over $100,000 has been raised for the orphanage, reaching the goal needed for construction, including contributions from the Dodgers and private citizens.
He said in the video that when he goes out on the mound to pitch he always prays for God to be with him. "Whether it be pitching on a baseball mound, or living my life outside of the baseball field, it's giving up my life to God that really puts my life in control," he stressed.
For Kershaw, being a Christian means you "have to keep reminding yourself that you're supposed to stand out, you're supposed to be different, you're supposed to act boldly in your faith. It's not easy, but it's worth the fight."
Kershaw became the second high-profile Los Angeles athlete to have his film released on I am Second. USC quarterback and Heisman Trophy hopeful Matt Barkley provided a film last November as the Trojans made a return to the national limelight. It is expected that other Southern California personalities will be featured in coming months.
Celebrities featured on the site include Texas Ranger Josh Hamilton, country musician Josh Turner, actress Bailee Madison, Dallas Cowboy Bradie James, NASCAR driver Trevor Bayne, Olympic figure skater Scott Hamilton and surfer Bethany Hamilton.
Kershaw's video and other I Am Second videos can be seen here.


text:
Daniel Markovitz's A Factory of One
Imagine you're a performance coach or consultant who wants to write a book. You're aware of the "competition" in the form of well-known efficiency experts including David Allen, Julie Morgenstern, and Tony Schwartz. You also know that the basic advice of scheduling rather than constantly checking email and keeping your desk organized has been done to death. What can you contribute to the conversation that's not only new – but truly transformative for the reader?
What would you do when faced with that challenge? Throw in the towel?
Not necessarily. You could do what Daniel Markovitz has so deftly done in A Factory of One: Applying Lean Principles to Banish Waste and Improve Your Personal Performance (CRC Press, 2012). You could turn your topic on its head and ask: If it were that easy, why aren't we all more efficient? Maybe it's not more tools that people need, but a different strategy? One that's focused on the root cause of poor performance, not just its effects.
Markovitz has successfully illustrated one of the approaches every nonfiction author needs to consider today, unless you're content to languish among the "me-too" authors whose books are gracing the remainder tables; combine your core topic with something no one else would think of associating with it.
In the case of A Factory of One, it's Lean principles, a concept that originated in Japanese manufacturing to "dramatically boost quality by reducing waste and errors." As the back cover of Markovitz's book states, "(U)ntil now, few have recognized how relevant these powerful ideas are to individuals and their daily work."
By cleverly combining personal performance, Lean principles, and self-awareness exercises inspired by the Japanese concept of gemba, this author has succeeded in offering a compelling read that actually works. Shortly after closing this quick and entertaining book I was eagerly on the hunt to spot "waste" in my own working day. And, yes, there was plenty – which otherwise would have remained invisible had I not reviewed this book.
You may already be familiar with the international best seller, Blue Ocean Strategy, which focuses on ways to make the competition irrelevant. This is an issue for all thoughtful authors, many of whom worry that with so many books being published these days it's becoming harder to produce anything truly unique.
Not so! For a start, most authors (self-published or otherwise) have no clue how to market themselves, so their books don't even come to their target audience's attention, which reduces the competition somewhat. But by taking the approach that Markovitz so powerfully illustrates, you need never worry ever again about someone else duplicating or even "stealing" your book idea.
This question is part of my 7-step book development process: What other idea(s) could you combine with your basic concept to strengthen your book and make it uniquely yours? When you think of the permutations, you'll realize there are endless opportunities for anyone creative enough to do this.
Just think of the ways in which this approach has produced innovations in daily life:
- Journaling + computer technology = blogging.
- Coffee + Italian café culture = Starbucks.
- Wizards + school + and childhood rites of passage = Harry Potter series.
- Ginger + chocolate + wasabi peas = Terry's Toffee Asian Accent.™
- The Roman republic + Montesquieu's checks & balances + John Locke's philosophy + English common law (Magna Carta) = The US Constitution.
If you want to avoid worrying about whether someone, in your industry or field, is writing a book identical to yours, you need to adopt a "Blue Ocean Strategy." Which means going that extra mental distance to come up with unusual concepts – as Daniel Markovitz and others have done – that will make your book uniquely yours.
Next Up: The Teenager's Folly: The author who only thought he had something new to say, and how to avoid making the same mistake.
To read interviews with many of the authors I've reviewed for this Thought Readership column, please go to my Articles page.


text:
Naturex doubles US food & beverage operations with Vegetable Juices Inc acquisition
Naturex has agreed to acquire 100% of the capital of Vegetable Juices Inc., a company with a broad variety of vegetables available in multiple formats, and a developer of natural ingredients with nutritional and organoleptic qualities for a variety of applications, including smoothies, ready meals, and sauces.
"This acquisition is perfectly aligned with our strategy and will allow us to significantly strengthen our position in the United States, the world's largest food industry market," said Naturex's CEO, Thierry Lambert. "It will also offer us an excellent complementarity in terms of products to provide new momentum to our offering of fruit and vegetable-based ingredients (NAT F&V range) across our sales network."
Elizabeth Doyle, CEO of Vegetable Juices Inc. added that the value of the two companies are aligned. "This acquisition will ensure business continuity, growth of the company and advancement of the values and work fostered by the Garvy family for so many years."


text:
Series 7 Part 2 – What Did You Think?
I cant beleive how it ended. I'm so upset! Its going to ruin their merchandising, seeing as how many things are labeled with each doctors number. I thought the episode up until the last one or two minutes was very good though, but the last part…
AWESOME! There were so many ways to disappoint or frustrate, and Moffatt didn't do it. There was a cliff-hanging hook to the 50th, but not at the expense of destroying the story. Cliffhangers almost always tick me off, because I hate having to wait for ANY resolution. In fact, more often than not, I'll hold off watching "part 1" of a story until part 2 airs. Moffatt, though, knows how to satisfy while you wait, a bit more comfortably but still curious, on the cliff.
And we get to see "Sexy" in the early days!
What the HECK? Did you see the Name of the Doctor? If not, don't read ahead…. spoilers.
So, are they having a new doctor, or still Matt Smith?
thought the 2nd part was brilliant – which is why I was mystified by rumours and reports that ratings for the show had falled dramatically. I've not been a huge fan of Moffat since he too up the reins, but he has certainly showed moments of genius. This last half of this last series has been my favorite of the whole of Matt Smiths 11th Doctor – a superb actor who gradually grew into the role. I really hope Neil Gaiman takes over and Moffat goes of to write Sherlock full time and goes back to doing the odd episode for Doctor Who rather than running the show.
1. The Name of the Doctor
2. Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS
3. The Crimson Horror
4. Nightmare in Silver
5. Hide
6. Cold War
7. The Bells of St. John
8. The Rings of Akhaten -
I'm not entirely sure I can answer that – it may take a while to sort out my feelings on these last eight episodes. I have absolutely loved one or two episodes and felt curiously detached from others. But overall, I think this series as a whole was more cohesive than series 6 (which had some stellar episodes, some absolute dross and what I felt was a terribly dissatisfying finale). While I enjoyed JLC as Clara, I didn't feel that attached to her, and her 'twist' in TNotD was utterly predictable. But Matt Smith was phenomenal, and his Victorian-era buddies were great throughout. And the special guest stars were brilliant 🙂
Not sure how I feel about who anymore. Do not enjoy it like i used to.
I think Series 7b was mostly entertaining with some really cool moments, but on the other hand had some awful clunker moments.
The new title sequence introduced at Christmas is excellent and I love the return of the face, but still not satisfied with the theme tune. Matt continues to excel in the role, imo opinion managing to channel troughton's impishness and Tom Baker's alien angst. Jenna put in a solid performance too although I still miss the Amy/Rory partnership 🙁 . As for the eps themselvesThe Bells – Excellent "opener", to reintroduce contemporary Clara.
Rings – Awful – who thought songs of praise would be a good idea. The only redeeming feature of this ep is Clara's backstory.
Cold War – Mostly brilliant, but the end felt a bit rushed
Hide – Excellent, loved the whole haunted house vibe, the acting and the general creepiness.
Centre of the Tardis – this ep had lovely moments like the library and the eye of harmony. I can cope with the reset button but the sub plot about the brothers making the 3rd think he's a robot, ruined it. It is in a series about unbelievable things this was too far. The human body would overrule what he thought – robots don't need to eat, sleep or pee, but a human body will. They could have dropped that bit altogether or made them think he was adopted to alienate him from the other two.
Crimson Horror – Another good one, but still unsure on the whole experimented on the daughter without her know – not explained but could fall under the same sin as the non robot brother.
Nightmare in Silver – Entertaining loved the end, instead of causing a feedback loop or some such to defeat them all in one go they blew up the planet instead. Warwick Davis as porridge was a very engaging character.
The Name of the Doctor – Can I just say WOW, geek-fest all the way through and I loved every second of it.I can't wait for November 🙂
10/10 – Maybe Moff's best episode.
All episodes bar Akhatan were at least good!
Moffat: Should look into RTD's season endings, especially 2, 3, 4. There was something at stake, and not only the Doctor himself.
Matt: Should continue being awesome, although I hated it when he took over, I have to say my opinion completely changed. He's a brilliant actor, who can actually convey emotion (although at times it seems artificial still)
Jenna: Oh she's a rocket. Despite the flat character, Jenna manages to play an awesome role. I was weary at first, because at the end of Amy and Rory, I had just gotten used to Amy, and it was a bit of a "Oh god a new girl" momemnt, but now, I am convinced by the acting! (not so much by the writing…)
Alex Kingston: Was what made me cry last night. Always been a fan of River Song, and even more so of Alex. You continue being awesome!
Overall plot of finale: Anti-climactic. No one cares, and Clara's explanation is disappointing to say the least, and rather boring. There were better theories about her at oswintheories.tumblr.com
The hatred toward Moffat by some baffles me! Complaints of not knowing what's going to happen. Time lines being corrupted etc! It's sci fi. Deal with it! The old show became formulaic and predictable which is why it ended! I love unpredictability and new directions! It's what makes the show great! Star trek fans haven't complained about the previous era being wiped in the new movies because they realise it needed refreshing! This is what new Who has done but I'm my opinion has also shown great respect for what has come before. They could easily have just done a complete reboot and had Eccleston as the first Doctor. The fans are the best and at times the worst thing about doctor who!
I thought it was awesome and it was well produced, i think every single episode was well acted and well produced.
The Bells of St. John 7/10
The Rings of Akhaten 2/10
Cold War 6/10
Hide 7/10
JourneytotheCentreoftheTARDIS 7/10
The Crimson Horror 8/10
Nightmare in Silver 8/10
The Name of the Doctor 10/10 -
Thought it was enjoyable overall, expectations possibly too high, with the talk of movie-like episodes. This was possibly the downfall to some eps, writers told to big up their eps but still only had 45 mins to squeeze in.
Still, many exciting moments, cliffhanger to 50th good, except kinda spoilt by the internets. Don't really know why the John Hurt Doctor was ment to be a massive secret, we know the Doctor killed both the Time Lords and Daleks, Time Lords because they were going to perform the Ultimate Sanction. Interesting to see what the 50th entails.
St. John – 6/10
Akhaten – 9/10 ( yes I really liked this episode. Got a problem with it, then get over it.)
Cold War -7/10
Hide – 8/10
Crimson – 7/10
Nightmare – 6/10
Name – 10/10-
Snowmen-9/10-felt original and led into Clara and the great intelligence. Hindsight rating. I thought it was the best Matt Smith Christmas episode.
Bells-5/10-the spoon people didn't do it for me. The plot seemed cliche
Akhaten-1/10-oxygen, sun God villains defeated by love. Awful. underused glass cage villain. Boo.
Cold war-8/10-I thought this was a will done episode. The complementary characters were good and the villain was fresh and well used.
Hide-7/10-just a little weaker than cold war in my opinion but still good.
crimson horror-0.5/10-unwatchable episode. I hate how much strax and Vestra have been used. I would rather see clone Jenny than mistress Jenny. The villains were weak and easily beaten. Yawn.
Nightmare in silver-7/10-this one underachieved for me. On the one hand, you had one off companions, a nice reimagining of the cybermen, and a good happy ending, but on the other hand, it felt like Clara shrank. Amy, Donna, or Rose would have been great and made this story the best of the season. Matt has his best episode as an actor.
The name of the doctor-12/10-everything and more than I could have expected. I wish river would have come back in physical form, but what can you do? I just don't want to wait until November to see if John is doctor 12/valeyard or doctor 8.5. I do hope Christopher Eccleston and Paul Mcgann have been lying about their involvement in the fiftieth anniversary episode, though.
just a thought
what if before the Doctor died at Trenzalore for real, one of the Claras saved him to the Library database so that he could finally be with River?
i have been watching dr who since the 4th doctor and i have to say the last 3 people who have played the doctor have nailed it completly…matt smith i commend you for takeing the doctor and makein him yours. now for the ending this new evil part of the doctor is in my mind is the part of the doctor when the 8th doctor who was the most passive of all of the doctors had to make the choice when he was dieing to end the time war and kill everyone. and not only did he survive but the guilt in the 9th doctors attitude could be seen all the way till the end, even once in awile you could see it in the 10th doctor.
Extremely uneven and largely disappointing. Love Matt! Like Jenna! Love the Paternoster Gang! Hide was my favorite overall. Too many endings were too abrupt. Finale was weak. Sick of women whose entire lives even when not traveling with the Doctor revolve entirely around the Doctor. Love Moffat when he writes one-off episodes or two parters, very disappointed with him as show runner.
Excellent as usual. Some great name-droppers (Valeyard) and flashbacks for long-time viewers but not enough to disrupt the newbies.
All the episodes were good, even the rings, which is simply being panned because it's "different". Time will tell.
Excellent acting on Matt's part. Some brilliant stuff that Tennant, great though he was, could not do with his character.
Great season ending. Nice sense of dread…. btw: would it have killed the moff to have just one yeti and/or a silver sphere?
Lewis said …"which is why I was mystified by rumours and reports that ratings for the show had falled dramatically."
I think the over-night's might be down a little but when you add in all the time-delayed and repeat viewing then it's still getting the same numbers as it always did. ie around 8m.
I thought the ep was brilliant and no, Smiley Sarah, there's no reason to think that we're getting a new Doctor permanently. Not sure the BBC could afford him, for a start 😀
I think this episode was amazing, really good, worth getting excited for after the majority of series 7 being a bit of a let down but this episode as well as one or two others were really good, the name of the doctor left a lovely subtle cliffhanger….less is more.
Fantastic episode, loved it and a very very decent setup to the 50th.
I'm actually glad it's John Hurt who is playing "part of the Doctor" although never having taken the name. This won't screw up the numbering on the Doctors either Matt is still the 11th incarnation of the Doctor.
Not sure about how much this will relate to the time war but I'm sure it will be interesting. I can see David Tennant running past Matt and JLC, Matt grabbing him by the arm and asking if he could help them while in the Doctors timeline.
I'm also thinking that something will happen which redeems John Hurts character, still not making him the "Doctor" but in part making up for what he has done.
Are we ever going to find out who was the woman who gave Clara the TARDIS' phone number?!
And why did the first gravestone we see when the Doctor steps out on to Trenzalore read Clemency Bunn?
(I googled the name and it's a prop maker on DRW! LOL!) -
I have enjoyed 7b immensely. Especially once Cold War aired. Bells and Akhaten felt a little off for me, but I still enjoyed them. I love all of the classic references and characters.
I absolutely loved the pre-credits scene for The Name of the Doctor. I got really excited when I saw that ugly red jacket and curly blond hair. -
Bells of St John 7/10
Rings of Akhaten 3/10
Cold war 7/10
Hide 5/10
Journey 6/10
Crimson Horror 6/10
Nightmare in Silver 2/10
Name Of The Doctor 9/10 -
I think the problem is that the show has been on an upward curve for so long that sooner or later it had to take a dip and that's what has happened in S7b. It's probably now on a par with episodes from 4-5 years ago and back then I was raving about it.
I will be interested to see where it goes from here. A weak end to one series and a poor beginning to the next (ignoring the 50th anniversary) and I might start to pass on it. Strong start to S8 and
I'm sure I'll get back in the groove -
So I guessed that Clara was a Meme. Which I feel was kinda close to the truth. I have an idea about John Hurt being The Other. For those of you who don't know it goes back to the classic who. You can find the Other mentioned in Lungbarrow, which is a book about the house the doctor is from. I was a little upset that they put Clara as going all the way back to the first episode of Doctor Who. Moffat has done a lot of things we are just suppose to accept. For instance when Amy remembers him and brings him back. She would only remember him as she knew him so all the adventures he had before her would have been voided out because she isn't aware of them at this point in their history. So the fact Clara basically has changed the Doctor Who as I know and love, (both the classic and the reboot) has upset me. However i did notice something that I haven't seen anyone comment on about the episode. Moffat saw how everyone trying to figure out who clara is had every one talking and has given us another mystery about her. I was wondering if any one else saw it. River Song mentions she was connected to Clara by a mental link and it was still working even though she went into the Doctors time stream. So how was it working? the Doctor asks River and she says Spoilers. We know that the Doctor gives back the leaf to Clara how'd he get it? Perhaps Its the original leaf? Over all the episode was fantastic for what it was. However I feel that Moffat has kind of smacked the classic who writers in the face a bit. He has turned Clara into a bit of a Goddess that has shaped the doctors life. In essence she is what she's always been the doctors nanny.
I haven't been impressed with the Moffat Era. I want Russell back. Moffat has been trying to hard I think.
Had stopped watching completely after BELLS; I just can't stand what passes for storytelling in Moffat's world. Did tune in for the finale though and kind of liked it. Will watch the anniversary special and then will probably be done until Moffat is.
I thought Series 7 part 2 was much the same as part 1: a bunch of random "stuff" that happens with almost nothing connecting it. Although at least nothing sunk as low as the crapfest that was "Dinosaurs on a Spaceship." The one standout was "Hide" which made me wish they had put that kind of effort into everything this season. As for the finale, it lacked the excitement of previous seasons by a large measure. Remember the Utopia-to-Last of the Timelords Trilogy? There was NOTHING in Season 7 that came close to that. Moffat needs to up his game and abandon his love of B-Movie Marquee episodes because it is not working. Between lacklustre episodes and LONG delays between parts of the season, Moffat did succeed at one thing however: alienating the KIDS in my house. Only the wife and I were present for the finale. Good job Moffat…not that listening to feedback that doesn't praise you is something you're accustomed to. Not looking forward to the 50th anymore since Moffat has already stated it won't be a "fanfest" (whatever that's supposed to mean…if the 50th anniversary isn't a time to blow your own horn, nothing is).
There were some fun moments in the second part of season 7. However, I do have a very important question. Where is the character development in the Moffatt era? Clara could be a great character if they actually spent time to develop her. Amy had a similar issue with a lot of throw away lines that hinted at things but were never explained. Davies would always tie up those loose ends but Moffatt doesn't seem to care one bit. Donna Noble was a much better developed character in her one year run than Amy Pond was over a longer period. I think the best thing Moffatt does is have nods to the classic series but he needs to work more on making the people on screen 3 dimensional and not just people running to save the day from the problem of the week. It's got the character development of Scooby Doo.
For the whole season I was waiting for something that would make me reconnect with Doctor Who, but I was disappointed, again. I loved Moffat as a writer of scary episodes but ever since he became show runner he alienated me. I think it's mostly because good storytelling is not there anymore…
Flashy, "cool" things happen for no reason at all (wifi routers decide they want to look like creepy people and everyone will be fooled by their spoon heads. It's creepy, yeah, but it doesn't move the plot along! Also, it's been done a lot before, with Teselecta, gangers and what not), and we don't know about the consequences (what happens to the uploaded people? Why does the Doctor say it's like a living hell? When does he find that out? Oh, right, he's an omniscient God now… But most importantly, why doesn't he even try to save them?). Moffat leaves loose threads hanging all over the place. It's great to keep people guessing but NOT the way it's done now, where it's just handwaved later, dropped entirely, or we're told it never happened anyway. To cite only one example, what are the Silence doing now that the question has been asked, and answered as well? Weren't they trying to prevent that? And how did they know what would happen when the question is asked? And why exactly (and how, since we were never shown) do they explode the TARDIS?
Rest of my previous comment:
Characters are just plot devices: good guys just react to the terrible situation at hand, and bad guys create bad situation but we have no ideas of their motivations (well they're bad guys, of course they're gonna do bad things, duh). Hence no character development whatsoever (they just do what the plot requires, and to hell with character consistency). The Doctor does not solve anything these days, he just shows up, knows things all of a sudden (yes this is a parasite god in the form of a giant sun, who feeds off people's emotions. Ok, great. Did you pull that out of your arse? Is your arse bigger on the inside as well?), waves the sonic screwdriver at everything (yes it works on everything now), and most often than not, just scares the bad guys away. Cause he's just that awesome. Oh, and the companion hardly does anything to solve the mystery these days (although it seems a bit better with Clara).
I'm not connecting dramatically or emotionally and I'm not scared, because nothing matters anymore in Doctor Who. Someone dies? Meh, they'll come back in no time (Jenny, anyone?) Good, cause characters are showing no emotional trauma whatsoever. The situation is dire and everybody's gonna die? Meh, timey wimey will solve it all (what clever writers do is put the characters in a really tricky situations, because of actual reasons, and then get them out with a cleverer solution. Big friendly reset button is not that). Oh no, the bad guy is doing something bad, and badness will ensue, it's terrible! Wait, why is it scary? How does this work? What exactly does "rewrite" the entire timeline of the doctor entail? What will happen next if he doesn't do anything? And then why is it bad for Clara to go there? (River seems to know it's bad, but how about she shares a bit of that knowledge?) Do all of her versions live normal lives before dying? Is it the same Clara or not, ie when she's inevitably saved by the Doctor, will she have lived all those lives? And why the hell does she save the doctor (or help him solve the mystery of the week? Not sure) for his entire life? Isn't she supposed to go in there to thwart the Great Intelligence's rewriting of history? Why does the GI disappear from the story from this point on then? Oh right, because Moffat, in lieu of resolution of all these things, just tries to distract us by waving the next shiny thing in our faces. Why?? It's lazy writing and my attention span is longer than that of a goldfish. Don't get me wrong, I think that using the doctor's own timeline to revisit some events (even as a way of entering the Time Lock), and learning about an extra regeneration who did things "not in the name of the Doctor" is cool. Thrilling, even! (and it's a clever way of playing off the "threat" of revealing the name of the Doctor). But the better the idea, the worse I feel when it stays just that: an idea. Moffat is too busy thinking up the next cool thing that he forgots to tell the story. Any story. And that really pisses me off because Matt Smith is such a brilliant actor: in the few moments when the scripts allow it, he really shines. Gee, what a waste.
final part of my comment:
I'm not connecting dramatically or emotionally and I'm not scared, because nothing matters anymore in Doctor Who. Someone dies? Meh, they'll come back in no time (Jenny, anyone?) Good, cause characters are showing no emotional trauma whatsoever. The situation is dire and everybody's gonna die? Meh, timey wimey will solve it all (what clever writers do is put the characters in a really tricky situations, because of actual reasons, and then get them out with a cleverer solution. Big friendly reset button is not that). Oh no, the bad guy is doing something bad, and badness will ensue, it's terrible! Wait, why is it scary? How does this work? What exactly does "rewrite" the entire timeline of the doctor entail? What will happen next if he doesn't do anything? And then why is it bad for Clara to go there? (River seems to know it's bad, but how about she shares a bit of that knowledge?) Do all of her versions live normal lives before dying? Is it the same Clara or not, ie when she's inevitably saved by the Doctor, will she have lived all those lives? And why the hell does she save the doctor (or help him solve the mystery of the week? Not sure) for his entire life? Isn't she supposed to go in there to thwart the Great Intelligence's rewriting of history? Why does the GI disappear from the story from this point on then? Oh right, because Moffat, in lieu of resolution of all these things, just tries to distract us by waving the next shiny thing in our faces. Why?? It's lazy writing and my attention span is longer than that of a goldfish. Don't get me wrong, I think that using the doctor's own timeline to revisit some events (even as a way of entering the Time Lock), and learning about an extra regeneration who did things "not in the name of the Doctor" is cool. Thrilling, even! (and it's a clever way of playing off the "threat" of revealing the name of the Doctor). But the better the idea, the worse I feel when it stays just that: an idea. Moffat is too busy thinking up the next cool thing that he forgots to tell the story. Any story. And that really pisses me off because Matt Smith is such a brilliant actor: in the few moments when the scripts allow it, he really shines. Gee, what a waste.
I've felt thatvthe season suffered from a lack of cohesiveness in both characterisation and quality control. Many scripts, especially Nightmare, Journey, Snowmen and Bells felt underdeveloped – almost as though they were filmed at an advanced but not final draft stage. For me the strongest episodes were Hide, Crimson Horror and Cold War which mostly tied theme, mood and characterisation together most tightly.
Secondary characters have been poorly handled – the worst examples being the ridiculous brothers in Journey, the father in Snowmen, REG' s woefully underused villan, the commander in Nightmare and David Warner in Cold War.
Episode resolutions were also mostly poorly handled as if time had run out in filming. Rings, Bells, Journey being examples of cramming in the final scenes. Writers know that they are limited to 45 minutes and the execuitives should insist on the discipline of adhering to that timeframe. Not enough time is not an excuse. Steven Moffat himself is often guilty of this – too many competing ideas to allow them all to breathe.
The biggest issue I had though was the poorly handled character of Clara. The writers across the episodes have given the actress wildly inconsistent characterisations and in the finale lumbered her with now being the most special ever ever companion in The Doctor's existence. I simply don't know where the companion can now go.
Positives continue to be the beautiful design and cimematograpy, excellent new titles and (mostly) teriffic performance of Matt Smith. Although I continue to really dislike the childishly imbecillic side of the character, Matt has shone in the quieter and more reflective moments. Unlike pretty much everyone I disliked the big speech in Rings and the duality face off in Nightmare (both overwritten and overplayed) but Matt continues to impress as the most accomplished actor to play The Doctor. With Hollywood at his beck and call I am certain he'll be off as soon as he overtakes David Tennant' s tenure, which will be a pity but IMO the sow desperately needs new blood both on and off the screen.
Whew! So my ranking of the eps?
1. Horror
2. Hide
3. Cold War4. Bells
5. Name6. Snowmen
7. Rings8. Journey
9. Nightmare –
both truly dire. Only episode disliked more in NuWho is Beast Below (although I never made it all the way through series 6 so may need to revise my opinion if I can bring myself to watch any episodes after Doctor' s Wife.Eileen
Sorry for the double post, this is the end of my comment…
Finally, it looks like Steven Moffat has no respect for continuity (since when do the Nazis-from-space Daleks have a parliamentary system? And how did they escape the Time War?!? If you want to keep people guessing you should a) have a darn clever explanation in the end and b) have your characters find it weird, because from their personal history they absolutely should. Or have they been replaced by robots again?) and he's kind of arrogant to retconn everything all the time: humanity with the Silence, the whole universe in Big Bang, and now the whole show?
So yeah, at that point I'm not even really thrilled about the new companion (I miss normal people who became extraordinary in contact with the doctor and actually got some shit done), or the 50th. Meh.
Funny series!
Highlights were stupendous. I loved Hide, to bits – Journey to the Centre of the TARDIS wasn't far behind. Great two episodes.
Funnily, I seem to have broadly loved the episodes fans didn't, and had reservations about the episodes everyone else unreservedly loved. The Name of the Doctor was spine-chilling, utterly thrilling as a fan, the thing Steven Moffat said about thinking the show's birthday had come six months early was absolutely right. Seeing the older Doctors, Gallifrey, the TARDIS sailing through the vortex pre-police box. But it was also… kind of a lot of standing around explaining the things that were happening on screen? I didn't think the plot was up to much! Lots of thankless dialogue – "You'll be scattered. Like confetti." Well, yes!
Conversely, I loved Nightmare in Silver to bits, and people had such a downer on that. I like it more than The Doctor's Wife, some days. Wonderful ideas, great acting – didn't like the kids, but I thought the story ascended way past them.
What else? Loved The Snowmen, didn't think much of either of Gatiss' episodes – which is a shame, cos I love Gatiss's writing so much everywhere else. Great at Sherlock, great in The League of Gentlemen, but The Unquiet Dead's the only time I've loved his writing.
Such a mixed bag. I said, last time, that there's been something missing since 2011 that I can't quite put my finger on. S7P2 occasionally got that something back… but not often. Thanks for Hide, thanks for Journey, thanks for Nightmare and the Snowmen, but after such a long wait between series, I think S7 had a lot of expectation resting on its shoulders, and I don't think it carried that burden nearly as well as the utterly marvellous series five. The two series had different jobs, and S5's was arguably easier, as it had excitement and newness built in, but I can now quite easily pinpoint 2010 as the height of my Doctor Who fannishness.


text:
On Aug. 30, a Japanese mathematician named Shinichi Mochizuki posted four papers to his faculty website at Kyoto University. Rumors had been spreading all summer that Mochizuki was onto something big, and in the abstract to the fourth paper Mochizuki explained that, indeed, his project was as grand as people had suspected. Over 512 pages of dense mathematical reasoning, he claimed to have discovered a proof of one of the most legendary unsolved problems in math.
The problem is called the ABC conjecture, a 27-year-old proposition considered so impossible that few mathematicians even dared to take it on. Most people who might have claimed a proof of ABC would have been dismissed as cranks. But Mochizuki was a widely respected mathematician who'd solved hard problems before. His work had to be taken seriously.
Even so, it raised an immediate problem. As a contributor named James Taylor wrote in a post to Math Overflow, a discussion board popular in the tightknit world of higher mathematics, the question amounted to this: Could anyone explain the philosophy behind Mochizuki's work? The answer was a resounding "no."
In most fields, including math, researchers move together. They build on one another's work and cluster around solving big problems, the way physicists did in recent years with the search for the Higgs boson.
Mochizuki was different. Depending on how you calculate it, he'd been working on a proof of ABC entirely by himself for nearly 20 years. During that time, he'd constructed his own mathematical universe and populated it with arcane terms like "inter-universal Teichmüller theory" and "alien arithmetic holomorphic structures."
Other mathematicians knew he was inventing some exotic and potentially brilliant mathematical machinery, but they had largely ignored his work, deeming it too abstruse and not worth the effort to try and understand.
Now the normally ordered world of higher mathematics is about to do something extremely unusual, plunging into a realm of abstraction and logic that even specialists don't understand. It's possible they'll be stumbling down a colossal blind alley. It's also possible that the exploration of Mochizuki's work will change mathematics forever. If Mochizuki is right, he will have done much more than proven the ABC conjecture: This quiet, 43-year-old native of Tokyo will have invented a whole new branch of math and transformed the way we understand numbers.
T he ABC conjecture is a young problem in mathematics, first proposed in 1985 by the mathematicians Joseph Oesterlé and David Masser to describe the relationship between three numbers: a, b, and their sum, c. The conjecture says that if those three numbers don't have any factors in common apart from 1, then the product of their distinct prime factors (when raised to a power slightly greater than one), is almost always going to be greater than c.
The conjecture intrigues mathematicians because, according to traditional thinking, there shouldn't be any connection between the prime factors of a and b and the prime factors of their sum. If the ABC conjecture is true, it suggests there's some hidden property of prime numbers that extends down deeper than we've been able to perceive. With his proof, Mochizuki claims to have put his finger on a previously imperceptible thread running through the ordinary operations of addition and multiplication.
"The ABC conjecture is somewhat mysterious," says Minhyong Kim, a professor at the University of Oxford and the Pohang University of Science and Technology and a longtime acquaintance of Mochizuki. "It is really saying that the process of adding and multiplying ordinary numbers constrains each other in a subtle but precise way. How can there be something new to say about the relation between addition and multiplication? But there seems to be."
At the time Mochizuki began working intently on ABC, the problem was barely a decade old and little progress had been made, meaning Mochizuki was essentially cutting his own trail. The most notable work on ABC had come from another well-regarded Japanese mathematician, Yoichi Miyaoka, who in 1988 claimed to have proven the conjecture. Miyaoka's mathematics were considered beautiful and elegant, but ultimately the proof collapsed when other mathematicians checked his work and found serious flaws. Mochizuki's work amounts to only the third serious attempt to prove the conjecture since then.
In order to understand why Mochizuki's situation is unusual, it's useful to compare it to the two biggest discoveries in math in the last 20 years: the British number theorist Sir Andrew Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem (he was knighted for his accomplishment) in 1995 and Russian mathematician Grigori Perelman's proof of the Poincaré conjecture in 2003. Hailed as singular discoveries, these proofs transformed their authors into the two most famous mathematicians in the world (alongside, perhaps, John Nash of "A Beautiful Mind" fame). But their work built from a base of well-understood mathematics, following routes that others had already speculated could lead to proofs. As a result, the mathematical community was able to verify Wiles's and Perelman's proofs in relatively short order.
Not so with Mochizuki's proof.
Mochizuki made a name for himself in his 20s based on a number of significant contributions to a relatively new, complex subfield of arithmetic geometry known as anabelian geometry. In 1998 he received one of the highest honors in math—an invitation to address the quadrennial International Congress of Mathematicians. He gave his talk in August 1998 in Berlin, then effectively went to ground, disappearing for 14 years to work on ABC.
"I guess he wanted to work on a problem worthy of putting his full powers on," says Jeffrey Lagarias, a professor of math at the University of Michigan, "and the ABC conjecture fit beautifully."
Before mathematicians can even start to read the proof, or understand his four papers, they need to wade through 750 pages of Mochizuki's incredibly complicated foundational work in anabelian geometry. At the moment, there are only about 50 people in the world who know anabelian geometry well enough to understand this preliminary work. Then, the proof itself is written in an entirely different branch of mathematics called "inter-universal geometry" that Mochizuki—who refers to himself as an "inter-universal Geometer"—invented and of which, at least so far, he is the sole practitioner.
"Mathematics is very painful to read, even for mathematicians," says Kim, explaining why vetting Mochizuki's proof poses such a formidable task. "Most mathematicians, even people who have the necessary background knowledge in general arithmetic geometry, it's hard to convince them to put in the energy and time to read the paper."
Mochizuki is known as an uncommonly clear and poetic writer for a mathematician, but well-established mathematicians don't have much incentive to put in the years it would take to understand his work: Their research programs are set and unlikely to change dramatically in response. But a handful of up-and-coming mathematicians have seized on Mochizuki's potential proof as a chance to get in on the ground floor of a possible new field.
Jordan Ellenberg, a professor of mathematics at the University of Wisconsin, is one of them. He's spent the last two months trying to absorb Mochizuki's ideas. He's far from convinced that the proof works, but he's intrigued by its immense possibility.
"When Wiles proved Fermat," Ellenberg says, "people were energized to understand his work because they knew he could only have done that if he had understood something true and new about arithmetic. A whole field of mathematics and dozens of people's careers blossomed out of Wiles's original paper. That's the best case scenario with Mochizuki; that's the hope."
Vesselin Dimitrov, a graduate student at Yale University, has been concentrating on reading Mochizuki's preliminary writing as preparation for reading the proof. In a series of e-mails, he explained that he's drawn by both the challenge of the ABC conjecture and the elegance of Mochizuki's thinking. "Reading through Mochizuki's world," Dimitrov writes, "I am much impressed by the unity and structural coherence that it exhibits. "
Dimitrov stressed that it's too early to predict whether Mochizuki's proof will stand up to the intense scrutiny coming its way. In October he and a collaborator, Akshay Venkatesh at Stanford University, sent a letter to Mochizuki about an error they found in the third and fourth papers of the proof. In response, Mochizuki posted a reply to his website acknowledging the error but explaining that it was minor and didn't affect his conclusions. He is expected to post a corrected version of his proof by January.
Th e math community has reacted to Mochizuki's proof with equal parts hope and skepticism, though few mathematicians are willing to discuss their doubts on the record out of respect for Mochizuki and a desire not to prejudge the vetting process.
Mathematicians speak of a "brick wall" in mathematical reasoning that has thwarted previous attempts to solve ABC. "Before Mochizuki came along, this problem was viewed as utterly, hopelessly intractable and out of reach, like an out-of-the-solar-system kind of situation," says Lagarias. In that light, any supposed proof was bound to be greeted with some doubt.
Another source of skepticism is the potential expansiveness of Mochizuki's accomplishment. It has long been understood by mathematicians that any proof of ABC would have the effect of simultaneously proving four other theorems (the work of Roth, Baker, Faltings, and Wiles) that stand among the most celebrated achievements in math in the last half-century. If Mochizuki has found a way to subsume those monumental results into a single formula, his work would take its place alongside equations like Einstein's E=mc2 and the inequality behind Heisenberg's uncertainty principle in terms of its sheer explanatory power. To many, such a discovery seems too good to be possible.
Minhyong Kim thinks that the initial reaction to Mochizuki's work owes to something else. "Frankly, there are many people who express skepticism because they look at it and they can't understand what's going on, and of course when you can't understand something the most natural initial response is to be skeptical."
In the coming weeks mathematicians are hoping Mochizuki will provide a kind of "executive summary" of his work—a 20- or 30-page template that traces the pivot points in his logic. Meanwhile, mathematicians like Ellenberg and Dimitrov will continue to poke at Mochizuki's proof, looking for openings, raising questions, and translating Mochizuki's ideas into terms that a wider circle of mathematicians can understand.
If Mochizuki's work makes it through these informal early checks, work groups and conferences will be organized around his ideas. The Clay Mathematics Institute at Oxford has already expressed interest in sponsoring one such workshop. Further down the line—perhaps a year from now, if Mochizuki is able to build up sufficient trust with his peers—Mochizuki will submit his work for journal publication and it will be sent out for peer review.
Mochizuki's reputation as a gifted mathematician will survive even if his proof turns out to be wrong. But the same cannot be said for his work of the last decade. Mathematicians are tantalized by the possibility of a proof of ABC, but if an error is found early in the vetting process, the math world will likely move on without bothering to explore the rest of the mathematical universe Mochizuki has created. Mochizuki has almost certainly made significant discoveries—but without the allure of a proof, it's possible no one will take the time to understand them.
Mochizuki, who is known as a shy person and has declined interview requests since publishing the proof in August, will have an important role to play in all of this, answering queries and explaining his work to a math community from which he long ago parted ways.
And this, Kim thinks, might pose the greatest challenge of all. "When you've been wrapped up in your own research program for a long time sometimes you lose a sense of what it is that other people don't understand," he says. "Other people feel quite mystified as to what he's doing and part of him, I suspect, doesn't quite understand why."
Kevin Hartnett, a freelance writer, lives in Ann Arbor, Mich.
Correction: Because of an editing error, an earlier headline on this story about a mathematics proof gave the wrong city for the scholar who produced it. He works in Kyoto.


text:
CHICAGO (AP) -- How to sell a Lincoln in 2013: Make the dealership smell like luxury. And lay out some wine and cheese.
After decades of selling hulking Town Cars to retirees, Ford Motor Co. wants the Lincoln brand to appeal to younger, more discerning buyers. Lincoln unveiled the sleek MKZ sedan this spring, and six more models will follow. It purged underperforming dealerships and is prodding the rest to make expensive updates.
Now, Lincoln is teaching its dealers how to appeal to the $4 latte crowd.
This summer, Ford brought 60 Lincoln salespeople to a boutique hotel in Chicago to learn about the likes (art museums) and dislikes (stuffy old steakhouses) of the so-called "progressive luxury" buyer. It was the third of five regional trainings sessions.
Lincoln's target buyers — hipper, more affluent, better educated and more female than its current customers — are a mystery to many dealerships, some of which have been selling Lincolns since the 1930s. When a trainer in Chicago asks dealers the average age of their customers, one shouts out, "85." Their source of income? "Social Security."
One salesman puzzles over his choices when asked which Los Angeles hotel would appeal to the progressive customer: the Ritz-Carlton, the Palomar, W or Loew's?
"The only Lowe's I know sells hardware," he mutters.
Lincoln was one of the top-selling U.S. luxury brands for decades, but was neglected after 2000 as Ford bought other luxury brands like Jaguar. Luxury buyers flocked to competitors like Lexus and Mercedes-Benz, while Lincoln became a car for airport limo fleets.
Everything changed seven years ago, when Ford narrowly avoided bankruptcy and embarked on a major restructuring. It sold or shuttered its other luxury brands, including Aston Martin, Volvo and Mercury, and poured millions of dollars into Lincoln. And while Lincoln makes up just 3 percent of Ford's U.S. sales, it's still an important contributor to the bottom line because Ford charges a premium for the brand. The starting price of the Lincoln Navigator SUV, for example, is $17,000 higher than the base price of its Ford counterpart, the Expedition.
But it won't be easy to win back customers. In the first six months of this year, Mercedes-Benz —the top selling U.S. luxury brand right now — sold 151,452 vehicles in the U.S.; Lincoln sold just 38,288.
Ford believes new cars like the MKZ can lure young luxury buyers. With a $40,000 starting price tag, it's comparable to the Mercedes C-Class but has high-tech features like a touch-screen dashboard, automatic parallel parking and a panoramic glass roof. Ford's research shows that young luxury buyers are independent thinkers who are willing to take a look at Lincoln. To them, luxury means personalized service and small delights, like the animal-print bathrobes the Lincoln dealers found in their Chicago hotel rooms.
"Distinctive service is where these folks live," says Doug Fiedler, a trainer at the Chicago session who has worked for hotel chains like the Four Seasons. "They don't go to Nordstrom and see dirty counters."
Ford has issued specific guidelines for dealers to follow as they renovate their showrooms, right down to the specially developed Lincoln scent — a fresh-smelling blend of Earl Grey tea, jasmine and orange flowers — that should waft through the dealership.
The dictates have irritated some dealers, who don't want to spend the money until Lincoln has a full lineup of competitive vehicles. Ford is putting particular pressure on the 300 dealerships in the country's 130 largest metropolitan areas; so far, 70 percent of them have agreed to the renovations. In total, there are 923 U.S. dealerships selling Lincolns.
The company could try to shut down dealerships that don't agree to the million-dollar renovations. But this training isn't heavy handed. Instead of issuing demands, Ford wants to raise dealers' awareness to the level of their sophisticated new buyers.
In one room, dealers try to identify a dozen different scents, like pine and lemon. Luxury buyers, they learn, are used to custom scents in hotels and stores and might be put off by a dealership that smells like motor oil.
In another room, dealers sit on chairs of various comfort levels and learn that customers often opt to spend more money when they're sitting in a more luxurious chair. In the hotel's restaurant, the head chef has them sample three kinds of salt to spark a discussion of the flavors they're providing in their dealerships. Instead of grilled hot dogs, their trainers gently suggest, dealers might offer a wine and cheese night. The chef recommends an aged cheddar.
Although new to Lincoln, this kind of training isn't unusual in the auto industry. At Audi, it's called Kundenbigeisterung, German for "inspiring customer delight." Jeri Ward, director of customer experience for Audi in the U.S., says her brand has been down this same road, with dealer renovations starting five or six years ago and a big push for dealerships to move upmarket when the new A8 sedan arrived in 2011. Last fall, over a four-month time frame, Audi hosted various events for all of its 12,000 U.S. employees.
Ford won't say what it's spending on the Lincoln training or on incentives to remodel its dealerships. But Mercedes and its dealers spent $1.6 billion over the last five years upgrading its 360 U.S. dealerships, said Harry Hynekamp, Mercedes' general manager of customer experience in the U.S.
"This work is literally never done. A box of chocolates isn't going to do it," Hynekamp said.
At Lincoln, the training has more urgency. Luxury buyers don't need to be convinced that Mercedes and Audi are luxury brands. But the Lincoln training begins with a stark warning: If you can't sell Lincolns to younger buyers, the business is at risk.
The training is already having an impact. A few weeks after the Chicago session, attendee Ryan Kolb greets a longtime customer coming in for service at Hines Park Lincoln in Plymouth, Mich. When the customer mentions he likes Kolb's Lincoln polo shirt, Kolb strolls into the dealership and gets him one.
Kolb's dealership — started by his grandfather — has been at this location since 1973, and so have many of his customers. Among the cars on the lot is a powder blue 1978 Lincoln Continental coupe, recently traded in for a new MKS sedan.
The dealership was remodeled last year according to Ford's specifications. It's light and airy, with private offices behind dark wood panels and small clusters of seating with sumptuous white leather furniture. There are fresh orchids at the reception desk and fresh cookies in the small cafe. The Lincoln scent is there, as well as 60 noise cancelling speakers hidden in the ceiling that drown out the noise from numerous flat-screen TVs showing golf and news. It looks like a luxury hotel, especially compared with the dated Cadillac dealer next door, where gaudy sale signs and stuffed animals dangle from the ceilings.
Kolb won't divulge what he spent on the renovations, but says the furniture cost more than his house. That irks some longtime customers, who have told him that he should have offered more discounts instead of redecorating. But other customers like the new space so much they come and meet friends here. Service appointments are growing.
"The best thing I hear people say is, 'It doesn't feel like a car dealership,'" he says.
More from MBTMag.com
Inventor Musk To Share Plans For High-speed Travel
BlackBerry Weighs Putting Itself Up For Sale
Car Company's Big Plans Haven't Come To Fruition


text:
Call of Duty: Black Ops
Call of Duty downloadable add-ons coming to Xbox first till 2012.
LOS ANGELES, June 14, 2010 -- Activision Publishing, Inc. (Nasdaq: ATVI) and Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) announced today a multi-year agreement that will continue to bring Call of Duty ® game add ons and map packs first to Xbox LIVE online entertainment network. The news was revealed today to a capacity-crowd at Microsoft's Xbox 360 E3 press conference in Los Angeles. The agreement which began in 2009 now extends for all add ons and map packs from the mega-blockbuster Call of Duty ® franchise through 2012, including Call of Duty ® : Black Ops, the follow up to the largest entertainment launch in history and one of the most-anticipated titles of the year set for release Nov. 9th.
"Our Treyarch Studio is doing something special with Call of Duty: Black Ops, which is why we're thrilled to announce this Xbox LIVE agreement," said Philip Earl, Executive Vice President & General Manager of Activision's Call of Duty Business Unit. "This agreement reflects our shared and continued focus on creating the most compelling and exciting content releases for fans around the world."
With billions of hours logged online, Call of Duty titles consistently rank atop Xbox LIVE's most-played charts, making it the largest Call of Duty community of any entertainment system.
"With 25 million members, Xbox LIVE is the industry's premier online gaming service that establishes the best in cooperative and multiplayer online play for blockbuster franchises like Call of Duty," said Marc Whitten, Microsoft's corporate vice president of Xbox LIVE. "With the release of game add ons and map packs coming first to Xbox 360, Xbox LIVE is the place to play Call of Duty for years to come."
For more information about Call of Duty: Black Ops, visit www.CallofDuty.com/BlackOps.
About Activision Publishing, Inc.
Headquartered in Santa Monica, California, Activision Publishing, Inc. is a leading worldwide developer, publisher and distributor of interactive entertainment and leisure products.
Activision maintains operations in the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Sweden, Spain, Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Australia, South Korea, China and the region of Taiwan. More information about Activision and its products can be found on the company's website, www.activision.com.
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-looking Statements: Information in this press release that involves Activision Publishing's expectations, plans, intentions or strategies regarding the future are forward-looking statements that are not facts and involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Activision Publishing generally uses words such as "outlook," "will," "could," "would," "might," "remains," "to be," "plans," "believes," "may," "expects," "intends," "anticipates," "estimate," future," "plan," "positioned," "potential," "project," "remain," "scheduled," "set to," "subject to," "upcoming" and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause Activision Publishing's actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements set forth in this release include, but are not limited to, sales levels of Activision Publishing's titles, shifts in consumer spending trends, the impact of the current macroeconomic environment, the seasonal and cyclical nature of the interactive game market, Activision Publishing's ability to predict consumer preferences among competing hardware platforms, declines in software pricing, product returns and price protection, product delays, retail acceptance of Activision Publishing's products, adoption rate and availability of new hardware (including peripherals) and related software, industry competition, rapid changes in technology, industry standards and consumer preferences, protection of proprietary rights, litigation against Activision Publishing, maintenance of relationships with key personnel, customers, licensees, licensors, vendors and third-party developers, counterparty risks relating to customers, licensees, licensors and manufacturers, domestic and international economic, financial and political conditions and policies, foreign exchange rates and tax rates, integration of recent acquisitions and the identification of suitable future acquisition opportunities, and the other factors identified in the risk factors section of Activision Blizzard's most recent annual report on Form 10-K and any subsequent quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. The forward-looking statements in this release are based upon information available to Activision Publishing and Activision Blizzard as of the date of this release, and neither Activision Publishing nor Activision Blizzard assumes any obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements believed to be true when made may ultimately prove to be incorrect. These statements are not guarantees of the future performance of Activision Publishing or Activision Blizzard and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond its control and may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations.
Call of Duty and Activision are registered trademarks of Activision Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. All other trademarks and trade names are the properties of their respective owners. Xbox 360, Xbox LIVE, and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of the Microsoft Corporation


text:
Geologists tell us crude oil is the product of prehistoric organic material subjected to compression and heating over geological time. Once produced, crude oil undergoes refining to create such widely-used products as gasoline, diesel, and heating oil.
Due to its high energy density, easy transportability, and relative abundance, oil has been the world's leading source of energy since the mid-1950s. Much like coal's contribution to the Industrial Revolution, oil's transformation into useful products brought incredible advancements in personal transportation and the portable application of energy to the vastness of America first, and then to the world.
Today, oil meets 36 percent of US energy demand [i], with 71 percent directed to fuels used in transportation – gasoline, diesel and jet fuel. Another 24 percent is used in industry and manufacturing, almost 5 percent is used in the commercial and residential sectors, and less than 1 percent is used to generate electricity. [ii]Petroleum is the main mover of our nation's commerce and its use for transportation has made our world more intimate. It is the transportation fuel, as almost all of our nation's transportation is dependent upon its concentrated liquid form.
Today, the EIA estimates U.S. proven oil reserves to be about 39.9 billion barrels. [iii] States leading American oil production are, in order of their volume: Texas, North Dakota, California, Alaska, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming and Louisiana.[iv] However, only Texas produces more oil than produced in the Federal offshore.
The U.S. had become increasingly dependent on foreign oil to meet its growing energy needs, until recently, as the share of imported oil on a net basis has dropped from 60% in 2005 to 24% in 2015. Major sources of imported oil are Canada, Mexico, and OPEC, particularly Saudi Arabia, and include 16 percent coming from the Persian Gulf on a gross basis.[v]
The United States' dependence on foreign sources of energy was intensified by federal government restrictions on oil and natural gas production in certain energy-rich locations here at home. Since 1982, these policies have closed about half the waters in the Gulf of Mexico to oil and gas exploration. Most of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) on the East and West coasts was off limits to energy exploration, and lack of infrastructure and opposition to Alaska's OCS has forestalled access to the area's enormous energy potential.
However, Congress allowed the moratoria to most of the offshore areas to expire on September 30, 2008, providing an estimated resource of 18 billion barrels of additional crude oil. This estimate is considered extremely conservative by most petroleum experts because, historically, oil discoveries are not made until one is allowed to look. The issue, however, is far from over, particularly since the Obama Administration put a moratorium on offshore drilling after the BP oil spill from the Macondo well in the Gulf of Mexico in April 2010. While the moratorium has been rescinded, the pace of oil drilling permits approved by the Department of Interior has been extremely slow and the new offshore areas that were to be opened based on Congressional action in 2008 have essentially been put on hold. They are not included in the Department of Interior's offshore lease plan for 2012 to 2017. Similarly, an estimated 10.4 billion barrels of oil in a small portion of Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) has been placed off limits to energy production until US government policy allows it. While the offshore lease plan for 2017-2022 had some new OCS areas proposed, the Obama administration has modified the plan to remove the Atlantic coast OCS. [vi]
American Energy Potential
Contrary to the notion that we are "running out" of oil, the U.S. continues to be rich in petroleum potential. Certain sources of oil have been too expensive to produce in the past, but are now economic. Shale oil, for instance, has undergone the same renaissance as shale gas due to hydraulic fracturing and directional drilling. The increased production of oil has taken place primarily on private and state lands. Oil production on public lands has been declining primarily due to actions by the Obama administration that have increased the processing time for permits and restricted access to public lands rich in petroleum. Oil on these lands and waters can be accessed with new technologies and remain abundant, awaiting only government approval and/or private investment to become additional sources of new domestic energy.
One massive potential American energy resource is known as oil shale. In fact, no other nation in the world is as rich in oil shale as the U.S. The largest deposits of American oil shale are located in Colorado, Utah, New Mexico and Wyoming. And though extraction poses some technical challenges, US oil shale in-place resources contain the energy equivalent of over 2 trillion barrels of oil.
To put this figure in perspective, the world has used slightly more than 1 trillion barrels of oil since the first oil well was successfully drilled in Pennsylvania in 1859. As such, the United States' 2.6 trillion barrels of oil shale is a potentially huge new source of oil, and must be central to any discussion of our continental energy security. Shale and other new sources of oil, like oil sands currently being developed in Canada, offer important new North American energy supply options.
[i] Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, March 2016, http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec1_7.pdf.
[ii] Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, March 2016, http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/#petroleum .
[iii] Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_crd_cplc_dcu_NUS_a.htm
[iv] Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.gov/state/state-energy-rankings.cfm?keyid=28&orderid=1
[v] Energy Information Administration, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_
ep00_im0_mbblpd_a.htm .
[vi] Institute for Energy Research, https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/analysis/europeans-award-oil-exploration-licenses-obama-limits-opportunities-u-s/


text:
Terms: March 2009 – March 2013 March 2013 – March 2017 March 2017 – March 2022 June 2022 - June 2026 |
Councilmember John A. Mirisch was elected to the Beverly Hills City Council in 2009, 2013, 2017 and 2022. He also served as mayor in 2013, 2016 and 2019. A fourth generation Beverly Hills resident, Councilmember Mirisch lived abroad for a number of years, working as a film executive in marketing and distribution, before returning to his hometown. Prior to his devoting the past few years to public service, Councilmember Mirisch worked as an executive at Paramount Pictures, one of the world's leading film companies, where he ran the International theatrical sales department. Before that, he oversaw international distribution for IMAX, the world's most well-known premium movie-going experience. In addition, he worked with United International Pictures as the Managing Director of its Swedish and Austrian offices. While in Europe, he was selected to serve on the boards of the Austrian and Swedish Film Distributors' Associations, as well as the Swedish Academy Awards Selection Committee. During his first term as mayor, he formed the Sunshine Task Force, aimed at making Beverly Hills into a model for local governmental transparency and public participation. The Sunshine Task Force has become a permanent fixture within City government, having recently authored a new lobbyist ordinance which the Council passed into law. Councilmember Mirisch also was the architect of the City's Cultural Heritage Commission, which was created in 2012 to honor the City's rich history and architectural legacy. During his second term as mayor, Councilmember Mirisch created the City's pioneering autonomous vehicle project, unanimously approved by the Council; the vision of this initiative is to incorporate autonomous vehicle technology within public transportation and to develop a municipal autonomous shuttle system to provide on demand, point-to-point transportation throughout Beverly Hills. Together with his colleague, the Honorable Lili Bosse, he also personally negotiated the largest development agreement in the City's history, worth an estimated $820 million in municipal revenue over 30 years. A firm believer that local government, when done right, is the best form of democracy, as it is closest to the people, Councilmember Mirisch works with other likeminded elected officials throughout the state to vigorously safeguard communities statewide by protecting local rights from the incursions of Sacramento politicians and special interest groups. Councilmember Mirisch attended Hawthorne Elementary and Beverly Hills High School. There he followed in a tradition started by his mother Wendy Goldberg, who attended public school in Beverly Hills, as did his brother Richard Mirisch and his sister Amanda Goldberg. He also graduated magna cum laude from Yale University. In addition to being a film enthusiast, Councilmember Mirisch enjoys traveling and spending time with his family. Together with his brother Richard, he has three fantasy baseball championships to his credit, having won the Showbiz Baseball league in 2006, 2008 and 2009. Councilmember Mirisch, a dual Swedish-American citizen, is the first Swedish national to serve as mayor of Beverly Hills. He can be reached at email@example.com. |


text:
PayScale.com has just published its 2008 College Salary report. It really only covers the most popular diplomas at some of the most popular schools (nothing on intel studies) but I thought it was worth passing on. The chart below shows an interesting relationship between intelligence analysis and political science, however.
Methodology Jobs ranked by popularity among graduates. Annual pay for Bachelors graduates without higher degrees from all colleges. See full methodology for more. |


text:
Happy birthday 1
Product code: C1057
Sign up here for wholesale account
Already have an account? Log in here
Editor's note
Bursts of colour and a celebration of in-bloom wild flowers are in abundance in this design. With hand lettering and floral illustration by Leah Quinn.
- Envelope: Vellum White
- Print: 300gsm GF Smith
- Collection: In-Bloom
- Artist: Leah Quinn
Barcode: 5060517680497


text:
Ventech has been around for 20 years, which is the equivalent of 80 years in tech time. And the VC firm is still going strong as it just announced the initial closing of a new fund. The firm has raised $170 million (€140 million) and wants to reach the $250 million hard cap (€200 million) within a few months.
And Ventech isn't going to reinvent the wheel. The firm plans to do more of the same with seed and Series A investments in Europe. As the name suggest, Ventech is looking for tech investments in general. You can expect investments that range between €0.5 million and €15 million ($18.6 million).
Recent notable investments include StickyADS.tv, Vestiaire Collective and Webedia. Over the past 20 years, the firm has handled 120 investments, which led to 60 exits including 15 IPOs. That's quite a good ratio.
Ventech Capital V represents the fifth European fund for the firm. Ventech has also raised multiple funds in China.
Behind the scene, Ventech relies exclusively on European institutional investors and family offices. You won't find any big industrial company in the list of limited partners.
Ventech Europe has partners in Paris, Munich and Helsinki. If you're creating a startup in one of those areas, chances are they want to hear from you. Many portfolio companies have opened offices in the U.S., so the firm knows how to enter the U.S. market too.