text:
NetWellness is a global, community service providing quality, unbiased health information from our partners. NetWellness is commercial-free and does not accept advertising.
Sunday, September 6, 2015
NetWellness experts receive many questions about weight gain. It is important for all people to maintain a healthy weight, but it is particularly important for women for several reasons.
1. Women have the greatest burden of overweight and obesity in the US.
2. It is more difficult for women to lose and maintain their weight compared to men because of their hormones and body make up (tend to have less muscle mass and more fat tissue).
3. Living at an unhealthy weight increases a woman's chances of getting heart disease, which is the number one killer of women in the United States.
Gaining weight is a natural part of the life cycle for all women. Women tend to experience major weight gain :
Weight gain in women is complex and caused by a variety of reasons including:
It is important to note that not all weight gain is unhealthy, such as building lean muscle. Some weight gain is healthy and expected, such as for growth and development (in children and pregnancy). There is a recommended amount of weight that should be gained during pregnancy to ensure a healthy birth and healthy mother ([Include link to the IOM 2009 Pregnancy weight gain guidelines]). Weight gain becomes abnormal or unhealthy when there is excess fat being stored, thus being "over fat" is the problem, not necessarily "over weight."
Knowing your ideal healthy weight is the first step in setting your weight loss goal. The Healthy Body Calculator and BMI Calculator from the National Heart, Blood and Lung Institute are tools that use formulas and tables which can help you figure out:
Each of these measurements can be used to guide you towards a healthy lifestyle.
Exercise and Diet - A Proven Weight Loss Formula
The old mantra, "exercise and eat a healthy diet" is often the advice given for achieving and maintaining a healthy weight. In fact, it is the only time tested and scientifically proven safe way to lose weight.
Portion Sizes
The site http://www.choosemyplate.gov/ has tools that help you determine appropriate portion sizes based on your gender, age, and activity level. For example, a 19-30 year old woman compared with a 31-50 year old man has different requirements:[ED1]
Food Groups
Women 19-35
Men 31-50
2.5 cups
3 cups
2 cups
2 cups
Dairy (low or fat free)
3 oz
3 oz
Protein (meat & beans)
5.5 oz
6 oz
Grains (50% whole)
6 oz
7 oz
6 tsp
6 tsp
8 - 8oz glasses
8 - 8oz glasses
Physical Activity
Physical activity can be any movement that uses energy. It can range from sports or housework to dancing or climbing the stairs at home. To gain any health benefit, activity should be moderate and add up to at least 30 minutes a day. This should be done most days and preferably every day in addition to your regular daily activities. Increasing the intensity of or time spent with physical activity can help control body weight.
For more information about exercise and weight gain, check out the NetWellness Exercise and Fitness topic where our experts are available to answer your questions. In addition, the Physical Activity topic found on the http://www.choosemyplate.gov/ site is an excellent resource for more information.
As mentioned before, it may be helpful to visit The United States Department of Agriculture's site http://www.choosemyplate.gov/, which contains information about diet and exercise, as well as a calculator to help you design an eating plant that is tailored to your individual needs.
To help you keep track of your dietary intake and exercise, use the Choose My Plate Super Tracker. It will keep track of your energy balance (calorie intake and usage) history, which you can view for up to one year.
Registered Dietitians (R.D.) are nutrition professionals who can provide you with more individualized help with your weight loss goals. The Association can help you find a nutrition professional in your area.
[ED1]I would probably use a example that is alittle more dramatic to drive home the point. The requirement here are essentially the same. Also would use a more similar comparision such as either a younger vs older women. Or if comparing gender then at least make them about the same age.
This article is a NetWellness exclusive.
Last Reviewed: Sep 27, 2013
Adjunct Assistant Professor of Family Medicine
School of Medicine
Case Western Reserve University
Senior Instructor of Nutrition
School of Medicine
Case Western Reserve University


text:
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Deus ambulans inter homines
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Casino cash: $19440
Actually totally worth a view, and not terribly long.
The NFL Schedule Is A Joke: http://youtu.be/sATyhrRKLjI
Easiest schedule for upcoming season:
(Though this is skewed because everyone else in the division made the playoffs - including the team with the easiest schedule for 2013 - the )
Anyway, watch it.
There goes my heroes
Watch them as they GO ROYALS!
Posts: 14,863
A huge dick
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Where the hell is SNR
Casino cash: $55849
Normally I wouldn't care to watch that Olberman video, but then you mentioned how the Colts are going to benefit with a shit ass easy schedule, and now I'm ****ing pissed off.
Those assholes are probably going to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl now.
**** Indy. Forever and ever. Amen.
Posts: 73,381
Deus ambulans inter homines
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Casino cash: $19440
It's not just so much the schedule but also the looming question with a sizable number of guys signed by other teams and relatively at fire sale pace upon the start of FA.
Individually, none of these guys give me cause for concern because they are gone, but as a collective whole that's a good portion of turnover and law of averages dictates it's not even probable that we will maintain at least equal levels of performance from the guys taking over their spots.
I don't have anyone that comes to mind that I can bank on saying we have a clear upgrade taking over. I am expecting FS couldn't possibly be worse, and the TE position will yield more.
Of course we haven't seen how our draft goes, and I'm definitely not down on this team or its direction. I feel like our play on the field could very easily be improved and we can stay competitive no matter who we face, but that may not be reflected in this year's record.
So, it's not all doom and gloom from my perspective.
There goes my heroes
Watch them as they GO ROYALS!
Posts: 14,863
Shaken. Not stirred.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Casino cash: $35326VARSITY
Tell me, what lunatic asylum did they let you out of?
Posts: 60,402
Deus ambulans inter homines
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Casino cash: $19440
There goes my heroes
Watch them as they GO ROYALS!
Posts: 14,863
"You like to drink?"
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "I like to drink."
Casino cash: $42423
A 12 (soon to be 14) team bracket, split into two conferences with preference given to eight division winners and four "wild cards" with seedings based on league record.
There's no consistency in the logic. Either give me a playoff with the 12 best teams regardless of conference affiliation and division rankings, or actually make the playoffs two true conference tournaments with the best six teams determined solely by conference record rather than weight division winners by overall league win/loss record if such a system allows a division champion to have a non-winning record against teams in their own division.
Chiefs 2016 Opponents:
Home: JAX, TEN, NO, TB, NYJ. Away: HOU, IND, ATL, CAR, PIT
Chiefs 2017 Opponents:
Home: BUF, MIA, PHI, WSH, AFC North. Away: NE, NYJ, NYG, DAL, AFC South
Posts: 25,087
In Search of a Life
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central Valley, Cali
Casino cash: $28096
10/5 Chiefs vs Niners I get to trash talk all them ****ing Niner fans over here! Alex better not let me down! lol Imma go into troll mode.
Posts: 27,795
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Shrewsbury England
Casino cash: $5690
I have gone through the schedule 3 times and recoiled in horror at least twice each time.
Posts: 1,154
Admitted Planet Junky
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Moving state to state
Casino cash: $21727
So I am thinking 10-6 or 11-5 should be possible.
Adopt a Chief for 2017, 2018, 2019 Patrick Mahomes II
Posts: 11,884
Beloved & Awesome CP Celebrity
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Florida
Casino cash: $15052
Posts: 34,944
Join Date: Mar 2009
Casino cash: $15426
How the 2014 Schedule Was Made
At NFL headquarters, four men and 40 computers work for 70 days, sifting through a half-million possibilities. The MMQB pulls back the curtain on the process, the roadblocks they had to navigate and why Seattle dodged a road swing from hell.
NEW YORK — On the fifth floor of the NFL's Park Avenue offices in Manhattan, there is a small, rectangular room with frosted glass. You cannot see inside with the stainless-steel VAL PINCHBECK ROOM sign on the outside, and you cannot enter without a keycard. With good reason: This is where four men assigned to sift through more than 500,000 schedule possibilities worked almost every day (including from 4 p.m. to 1 a.m. on Easter Sunday) for the past 10 weeks until completing the 2014 NFL schedule Tuesday night. No one without permission enters but them.
Not even the cleaning people at night. Three hours before the schedule was announced Wednesday, there was a garbage can in one corner of the room overflowing with Vitamin Water bottles, Pepsi cans and Starbucks cups. Across the room: an industrial-strength shredder with the remnants of the schedules that didn't make the cut. The NFL offices are white-glove tidy, but this place … not so much. As the four men of the schedule did their post-mortem, and shared it with The MMQB, it was a little gamey in the room. That's what happens when four men and 40 computers work for 70 days to invent what they hope will be a 256-game masterpiece—but which they know will bring charges of favoritism and cronyism from teams, TV networks and stadium operators.
This year, NFL senior vice president of broadcasting Howard Katz and his team had the following roadblocks to the schedule you've bitched and moaned about since last night: a combined 17 games in non-traditional slots—Thursday CBS/NFL Network games, Saturday NFL Network games, and a Sunday morning FOX game (Detroit-Atlanta, from London)—as well as six One Direction concerts at NFL venues in the fall, New Zealand rugby team the All Blacks playing at Soldier Field on Saturday of Week 9 (the NFL won't risk a bad-weather rugby game ruining an already-iffy field for a Bears game the next day), and baseball. The joke in the room late Wednesday was the NFL would have to root against the Phillies all summer, because the Eagles are home on potential baseball playoff weekends on Oct. 5 and 12. Lord help the league if the Pirates get hot in October—because the Steelers are home Oct. 20 and 26. And it's not neighborly to fool with the World Series.
The rubric this year is even a crazier quilt than normal because of San Francisco and Minnesota. The Niners are a marquee team, but the NFL cannot play non-holiday weeknight games in Santa Clara, site of the 49ers' new stadium, because the team and local authorities want to have a year to figure out how to accommodate weeknight traffic flow at the stadium. "We could not play the 49ers on a Monday or Thursday at home, with the exception of Thanksgiving," said Katz. That's how the Seahawks-at-Niners turkey day game got made. After years of freely scheduling the Vikings, now the restrictions in Minnesota are major because they're playing on campus at the University of Minnesota while the new Vikings stadium gets built. So no home games Monday. No home games Thursday. No home games on Gopher football weekends.
After plugging in restriction after restriction, the magic schedule emerged from one of those 40 computers April 16, at precisely 4:20 p.m. In the six days that followed, 175 other schedules were analyzed as competitors, and 24 emerged as serious contenders, but none could beat the April 16 winner.
The late Pinchbeck used to make the schedule by hand, by filling in first the national TV games and all the others around it. Today, NFL senior director of broadcasting Michael North, the computer geek of the crew and the only one with a direct link to Pinchbeck (who died in 2004), plugged in 4,400 "seed schedules" to the 40 computers, with different permutations for all 46 national TV games, and he let the computers spit out tens of thousands of schedules.
"We threw away probably 175 schedules that we'd have played without batting an eye five years ago," Katz said.
Said North: "Any one of these 4,400 seeds might be the one that leads you to the finished schedule. Any one might be a dead end. You've got to play all of them out. But on April 16, this finished schedule popped out, and we couldn't find one after that to beat it."
There almost was one. Before I tell you about the schedule that won the beauty contest, let me tell you about the schedule that finished in second place. If that one had won, the Seattle Seahawks would have been steamed.
The runner-up schedule had two major Seattle glitches that NFL hates to hand teams: a three-game road trip, and a road game after a Monday night road game. And they would have happened in the same three-game stretch. In mid-season, Seattle would have played at St. Louis on a Sunday, at Washington on a Monday night, and at Kansas City on a Sunday.
Anyplace east of Spokane is far from Seattle, obviously. But this schedule would have been a killer. First a 1,787-mile flight to St. Louis, and back after the game. Then a 2,311-mile flight to Baltimore-Washington Airport, and back after the game. Then a 1,407-mile flight to Kansas City, and back after the game. That's 11,010 air miles in 15 days … unless, of course, the Seahawks spent a week in the Midwest or East to minimize one of the back-and-forths. Commissioner Roger Goodell is the final approver-in-chief of the schedule, and I wondered whether he'd have approved one that had the Super Bowl champion with such a brutal 15-day stretch.
"Would you have played that schedule?" I asked Katz.
"Yeah, I think so," he said. "We didn't want to. We were hopeful that we'd find a better one. I think we would have, and we did. If we had to play it, I think we would have had an interesting discussion with Roger about it. We had many interesting discussions in this room about it—whether it was a fatal flaw or not. I didn't deem it fatal, but we were hoping we could find a way out of it."
North chimed in then. "So it turns into a robbing Peter to pay Paul scenario," he said. "If you want to fix this Seattle problem, who do you want to break in exchange? This was a schedule that we gave serious consideration to—look at this start for Kansas City."
North put a schedule on the monitor in the room with a dreadful opening for Kansas City: five road games in the first seven weeks. "Would we have played a schedule, if everything else was good, with five of Kansas City's first seven on the road, including a three-game road trip—left coast, right coast, left coast?" North said.
"The answer was no," Katz said.
"That schedule fixed Seattle, but it broke Kansas City worse than what we were doing with Seattle," North said.
"You fix one team," said Katz, "and 12 more problems come up."
From left: NFL VP/broadcasting Onnie Bose, NFL senior manager of broadcasting Jonathan Payne, NFL senior VP/broadcasting Howard Katz and NFL senior director of broadcasting Michael North in front of the old-fashioned schedule board, long a staple of the schedule process but outmoded today.
What else the group of four—Katz, North, vice president of broadcasting Onnie Bose and senior manager of broadcasting Jonathan Payne—had to contend with:
A different Thanksgiving. Three games, six NFC teams, three rivalries: Chicago at Detroit, Philadelphia at Dallas and, in the nightcap from California, Seattle at San Francisco. "We decided to make a statement on Thanksgiving," Katz said. "It sounds corny, but it's our most traditional national holiday. Let's play great traditional rivalries game on Thanksgiving. So we took Chicago-Detroit and made that our CBS game." Which leads us to …
A new NFL word: "crossflexing." If you're an NFL TV nerd, you know Chicago and Detroit, as NFC teams, should be on FOX if the game's not a prime-time Thursday, Sunday or Monday game. But the new NFL TV contract calls for the league to be able to move up to seven FOX games to CBS annually, and up to seven games from CBS to FOX for the good of the overall Sunday schedule as the season goes on. One proviso: There must be an equal number of games flexed from one network to the other. Right now, four FOX games are going to CBS, and only two are slated to go from CBS to FOX. So Katz must come up with at least two more to migrate away from CBS.
Here's how it helped this year's slate: Look at Week 4. CBS was weak in the early 1 p.m. Eastern Time slot with Buffalo-Houston, Tennessee-Indianapolis and Miami-Oakland. Meanwhile, FOX had a gangbuster early schedule: Green Bay-Chicago, Detroit-New York Jets, Tampa Bay-Pittsburgh and Carolina-Baltimore. "We looked at it and said wait a second," Katz said. "FOX has Green Bay-Chicago at 1, and they could take that game to a lot of places. That's a huge game. They had two other good games. Then Carolina-Baltimore … Steve Smith playing his old team, a big storyline there. What kind of distribution will Carolina-Baltimore get if it stayed on FOX?" Katz estimated 15 to 18 percent of the country would see that game. "So we crossflexed," he said. On CBS, Katz believes 40 percent of the country will see Carolina and Baltimore. "That's better for our fans," he said. Obviously, the NFC is the stronger conference now, with more attractive teams. It helps the NFL to have more attractive games move from FOX to CBS.
Here's another one: Washington-San Francisco will be the CBS doubleheader game (the late Sunday afternoon national game on CBS) in Week 12. Why? FOX already has a slew of strong games, including Green Bay-Minnesota and Detroit-New England, and the late game would be seen only in home markets because it's not a FOX doubleheader week. The Washington-San Francisco game might be seen by 70 percent of the country now, instead of 20 percent.
A better Thursday schedule. There was pressure on Katz's crew to make Thursday a strong night for football, with CBS showing eight Thursday night games starting in Week 2. The league didn't want a bottom-feeder stinker, as sometimes happened in the past on NFL Network. The CBS package is strong, starting with Steelers-Ravens on Sept. 15, the Giants at Washington in Week 4 (the week when the CBS fall season kicks off, an important slot for CBS), Jets-Pats in Week 7, Saints-Panthers in Week 9.
The league obviously thought a Denver-Seattle opener was risky—based on the outcome of the Super Bowl. Those are my words, not theirs. "We thought there were three likely possibilities for the opener: San Francisco, Denver and Green Bay," Katz said. "I guess we could've played Dallas, but we really liked Dallas for the FOX doubleheader for Week 1. Dallas also had Texas Rangers conflicts the first month of the season. Putting them on the road in Week 1 might have doomed them for four or five road games in first few weeks. I thought we had a better place to use the San Francisco-Seattle game, because it has become such an incredibly great rivalry game. It seemed to us that saving that game for later in the season on NBC was probably a smarter move. Green Bay felt right." The move also left Peyton Manning to kick off the Sunday night season with the Broncos. Against Andrew Luck and his old friends, the Colts
A conscious effort to play more division games late. For the past two seasons the league has played all 16 games on the final regular-season Sunday within the division. This year, the last three weeks will be heavy on division games—33 out of 48 played, up from 26 in the final three weeks last year. "A heavy dose of division games late in the season usually leads to great things," Katz said. Five of Seattle's final six games are within the NFC West—including both Niners games (Week 13 and 15).
Don't cry for ESPN. Even with more quality games siphoned off to CBS on Thursday, the Monday slate doesn't look bad at all. Check out the quarterbacks in the first five Monday games: Matthew Stafford, Philip Rivers, Luck, Jay Cutler, Tom Brady—and in the sixth, it's a Russell Wilson-Robert Griffin III matchup.
More flexing for NBC, though it's a long shot to be used. The new TV deal allows the league to flex out of no more than two Sunday night games in six additional weeks, Weeks 5 through 10. This, basically, is insurance against a huge injury to a quarterback. Hard to imagine the NFL, and NBC not wanting any of the slated games, with Brady (Week 5), Giants-Eagles (6), Niners-Broncos (7), Aaron Rodgers-Drew Brees (8), Ravens-Steelers (9) and Bears-Packers (10). It'd likely take a stunning reversal by one of the teams, or a quarterback going down, to flex in those weeks.
A very strange NFL first. Have two teams ever played back-to-back Thursday games? This year, Chicago and Dallas will. Each plays on Thanksgiving, and the NFL has matched them against each other at Soldier Field the following week, on Dec. 4. Huh? "We have a rule that says each team can only play one short week Thursday game," Katz said. "It's about player health and safety. Week 1 doesn't count. So if you take three games on Thanksgiving, we can play 13 other Thursdays. That's 16 Thursday games; with 32 teams, everyone plays one. In this new package, we had to figure out how to create one more. So we took two of the six teams playing on Thanksgiving and played them against each other the following Thursday. They're playing on full rest, and then 10 days after that." Now you see why this process took 10 weeks, and 500,000 schedule permutations.
There are problems. The world champs have only one prime-time home game and it's the enforced one that kicks off the season; that rankles the Pacific Northwest. The Bears went 8-8 last year, but they're being treated like the '85 Bears, with the maximum five prime-time games, plus the Thanksgiving matinee at Detroit. Chicago had better be good—really good. Oakland flies to New Jersey, New England and London, all in September. FOX wanted its annual doubleheader leading into its Sunday night World Series game in October, but that weekend, for many reasons, had to be a CBS doubleheader weekend.
But no schedule makes 32 teams, and the TV networks universally happy. The computerization of the process makes sure Katz' crew at least sees every possibility. About a month ago, before one of the computers spit out the magic schedule, North saw a schedulehe liked during a sleep-deprived night. He was home. It was about 3 a.m. He screen-grabbed the slate, and fired off an email to Katz with the schedule. Just one problem: One version of it included a three-game road trip for the Giants, including one to Seattle; another version of it included a three-game road trip for the Giants, all against division foes. Weird, playing all three division roadies in a row.
"Howard," North wrote in an email, "what do you think?"
He thought Katz would be asleep. Katz wasn't.
"Call my cell," Katz wrote back.
They chatted for a few minutes, and Katz eliminated the option including the Seattle trip; too many other good schedules out there. But he said he'd consider the one with three straight road division games. Luckily, they found better schedules. They went to bed that night knowing they could do better.
At the end of the process Wednesday evening, an hour before the schedule was unveiled on NFL Network, the four men looked tired. Pleased with their work, but tired.
"This schedule," said Katz, "has the best television without putting really any unfair burden on any club."
One more thing. Rugby in Chicago. At one point, the schedulemeisters called the Bears and said they might have to move or call off the rugby match, because they had a very good schedule that called for Chicago to be home on Sunday, Nov. 2, the day after the game.
"Really cool, right?" said North. "The U.S. rugby team playing the New Zealand All Blacks. It's on a Saturday. What happens if it pours rain on Saturday and these huge men playing rugby tear up Soldier Field, and we've got a Bears game scheduled for Sunday? That would have been a problem. Then you look at the Bears schedule—they've got a rugby game in week nine, the city has a marathon in week six—where the start-finish line is in the parking lot [of Soldier Field]—and in week two they have a NASCAR race, and I believe also a PGA golf tournament. So there's three weekends in the first nine that the Bears can't be home. So what's the net result? Even if you use the bye strategically to cover up something, that's still a lot of road games early in the season."
Rugby will happen Nov. 1. The Bears will be on their bye Nov. 2. Crisis averted by computer, like so many others.
Posts: 8,416
Negro Diablo
Join Date: Sep 2003
Casino cash: $32762
Posts: 39,524
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: KC North
Casino cash: $8486
Predicting 9-7
Posts: 3,107
Deus ambulans inter homines
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Casino cash: $19440
In all honesty, it seems about as planned out or justifiably logical as what you'd get when starting a new season on that game.
10 seconds > some 70 day conclave bullshit.
Damn, now I wanna play Super Techmo Bowl!
There goes my heroes
Watch them as they GO ROYALS!
Posts: 14,863
In Search of a Life
Join Date: Jul 2009
Casino cash: $54164
Looks pretty tough at this point. Although, we've been thru this before. Just impossible to tell right now how it will play out.
Posts: 53,240
|Thread Tools
|Display Modes
Linear Mode

subset: commoncrawl


text:
These days it appears the mere presence of noted short seller David Einhorn can drive a stock price down.
Herbalife , whose shares have been trading near 52-week highs, found that out Tuesday.
Shares of the vitamin supplement provider tanked 20% to $56.30 Tuesday, following an appearance by Einhorn on Herbalife\'s first-quarter earnings call.
Einhorn seemed to want to make clear what percentage of Herbalife products are actually purchased by consumers vs. distributors and incentives for distributors to sign up new distributors.
He also inquired why Herbalife didn\'t break out the different types of distributors in its 10-K anymore. Herbalife CFO John DeSimone said he had no problem getting that information to Einhorn after the conference call and to other investors.
It\'s not clear if Einhorn even owns Herbalife shares or if he\'s sold the stock short. A short seller is one who makes a bet against a company\'s stock price rising. Shares of Green Mountain Coffee Roasters haven\'t recovered since Einhorn last October publicly criticized the Keurig maker\'s accounting and transparency to investors.
In a press release after the market closed, Herbalife said Einhorn raised no new questions or concerns.
\"They were elementary questions usually asked by investors new to our industry,\" the company said. \"We believe the drop in Herbalife\'s stock price today is a buying opportunity given the strong business fundamentals.\"
Einhorn\'s appearance undercut what looked like a decent first-quarter report. Herbalife raised its 2012 forecast after topping Wall Street\'s expectations for the first quarter.
\"This was an excellent quarter from an excellent company with high ethics and strong accounting,\" D.A. Davidson analyst Tim Ramey wrote in a research note. \"We have no problem remaining bullish no matter who is asking the questions.\"
Ramey, who reiterated his buy rating and $90 stock-price target, added: \"If anyone else had asked the question we would have wondered why time was being devoted to such basic inquiries.\"
-Matt Andrejczak
Follow me on Twitter @MarketwatchMatt
Follow The Tell blog on Twitter @thetellblog


text:
8 brand new screens from PS4's Driveclub
Whoa! Most impressive!
Where'd these come from, what the hell.
I'm really excited to see where Evolution goes with this. Their games have always been insanely destructible and chaotic so I'm wondering how these beautiful cars will look when they're wrecked to pieces.
Knowing Evolution, expect motion blur, gorgeous environments, crazy-ass soundtrack, massive tracks, and probably bikes with ridiculous ragdoll physics.
E3 needs to be today.
bossbattlecoming.pl - new polish video games site
enjoy :)
Just wow, this really looks amazing, can this really be in-game...
I mean wow look at that dash... OMG! that's stunning...
This game is going to set the bar on PS4... I can't wait.. Looks Amazing..
||.........___||............ ||
Evolution is great, but I think their goal with this game is not so much race and smash and more "this is how it feels".
Back to screenshots...this is my favorite: http://bossbattlecoming.pl/...
I'm not a big racing fan, but this game is so pretty, I may buy it just to check out the tech.
I love the pic with the two Mercs.
I knew there was something special about Drive Club from when they first showed some footage at the Playstation Conference earlier this year. Stunning looking game and it gives me all the more reason to buy a PS4. Sony have learnt a lot from the PS3 launch (which wasn't great).
I just can't wait for E3.
insane graphics!!!
if this comes out this year i will not buy gt6
They are different kind of games... GT6 will be purely SIMULATION
I'm a huge GT fan, I think this game looks stunning and I will get both.
GT6 should be awesome, ultra realistic and loads of fun.
Drive Club I would expect to also be realistic (though not as much as GT6), superior graphics and bags of fun.
I think SonyWarrior, wait till E3 and I'm sure they'll both show off awesome gameplay which will tempt you to get both :D
If this is an arcadey smash em up like Motorstorm then i'll be grabbing it day 1.
You might be just a tad disappointed.
Unfortunately I doubt that's what it is, but if it is I will fall in love or maybe that'll be their next game since it seems Sony wants all it's studios to have 2 teams working on 2 different IP's.
Naughty Dog: Uncharted / Last of Us
Guerilla Games: Killzone / New IP
and the trend is supposedly hitting every team.
The talent on this new Evolution is insane. They have people who worked on every major racing game for the PS360 now all under one roof (Evolution, some Polyphony guys, Bizarre Creations (Project Gotham & Blur), Need 4 Speed, and Sony Liverpool (Wipeout)). I expect nothing, but greatness from them.
Well it could be more arcade like than the GT series. I am thinking Driveclub's ambition is to be all about fun in racing and competition. Kinda like GRID, but with its own flavor.
So will this game have a massive livery customization to cooperate with the share button on the ps4?
A launch title, can you imagine how good the games will look 3 to 4 years down the line. It boggles the mind
great car model but awful textures on scenery and the people.
hopefully fix up environments as looking outdated. driveclub will be put to sleep by Forza.
gt already put to sleep flopza but hey if u want bash a sony racing game to make a judgment sure take drive club but hey keep your answer till THE FINAL PRODUCT is out until then enjoy horizon which is a pile of crap btw
cant wait for gt6 which will put forza to shame again with sales and gameplay and ofc drive club final product.
did anyone think that motorstorm 1 looked better than motorstorm 2? it was a very nice looking game. but these look amazing.
i think ps4 and next xbox games will have to be seen in motion to really notice the difference between early-next gen and ps360. I couldnt tell these screen from forza 4 or GT5 screens
i can tell the difference and its a huge difference......
That's because you're thinking from memory rather than looking side by side.
Drive Club is way ahead of GT5 and Forza 4. Look at the environment, the reflections on the cars, the car models all look much better. Drive Club in-game models look as good as the Photo Mode in GT and Forza.
Drive Club: http://bossbattlecoming.pl/...
GT5: http://gigglehd.com/zbxe/so...
Forza 4: http://www.gametactics.com/...
Mountain Environment
Drive Club: http://bossbattlecoming.pl/...
GT ? could be HD Concept: http://ps3media.ign.com/ps3...
Forza 4: http://oxcgn.com/wp-content...
Drive Club: http://bossbattlecoming.pl/...
Driveclub Car Models vs. Photo-Mode & Kinect View
Drive Club: http://bossbattlecoming.pl/...
GT5: http://i2.ytimg.com/vi/-XEU...
GT5 5k: http://luxfon.com/images/20...
GT6: http://www.autoblog.gr/wp-c...
Forza 4: http://img3.cache.netease.c...
Drive Club is a leap up from the PS360 car games.
Thanks for the comparison my friend, looks really good and cannot wait!! :D
Theres another thing yet, driveclub has much more detail and the mountain environment is real as in 3D unlike forza 4 and gt5 theyre just background pics.
Those reflections, that lighting! the little details really do make the biggest difference.
DC looks downright photorealistic to me. If those are ingame photos I'm impressed.
Thanks for the comparison, gave you a helpful bubble
Click on the images so you get a better view.
You'll certainly notice the difference then.
@SlavisH2 Then you my friend, need glasses.
gt5 looks wayyyyyyyyyyyy better than forza 4
Killzone shadow fall and driveclub day 1!
Jesus Christ, I mean, Far out!! That looks crazyyy! :O
Is that my Audi R8 in that pic!!! Heck yea
Oh boy this is insane! a lot of amazing games ( Killzone Mercenary, Gran Turismo 6, Last of Us, Infamous, Destiny, Metal Gear V, GTA V, Battlefield 4, Beyond, Drive Club, The Witcher 3, Thief, Watchdogs, deep Down) I have much hype but few time and money.
I'm building a time machine to go ahead of time, who wants to help me build it?
We need the DOCTOR for this.
Trust your Doctor.
If thats in game then Im in day one. The sunset, skylines, car models...wow.
Also, AMG Mercedes? Didnt GT6 say they had AMGs in their game and that it was the first time AMGs had been in any game?
AMGs had been in games long before GT6 e.g Forza 2
Driveclub does look mindblowingly amazing.
GT6, Driveclub, Forza 5 and maybe even PGR5 :'D
Looks good, imagine what GTA6 would've look like if a PS4 version built-from-the-ground-up on PS4 hardware existed.
I'd imagine GT6 and DC would look very similar if they launched at the same time on PS4.
Evolution Studios is arguably the best and most talented Racing Developer in the industry with all the new talent they hired.
They have guys from Polyphony (GT6), BIzarre Creations (Project Gotham & Blur), Sony Liverpool (Wipeout), and a few from Need 4 Speed team (not sure if it's Criterion or the other team). Regardless Evolution has potentially earned it's place among the top of the PlayStation Crop if Drive Club turns out to be as good as I hope.
They must have been working on this for awhile.
I have GT5, played forza4, and have project cars on PC.
But if those screenshots are truly in game example of what's to come. I think you'll be seeing a lot of people moving over to the PS4.
holy shit i just cant wait for this! day 1 buy
Amazing I look forward to this and the PS4. I am excited
point to point racing. me like
Is it confirmed point to point? Or is it a mixture of circuit and point to point? Anyone know?
i LOVE what i'm seeing but i would really REALLY like it if it didn't have only inside camera... this First Person Driving feels kinda weird for me.
Bandwidth Limit Exceeded
The server is temporarily unable to service your request due to the site owner reaching his/her bandwidth limit. Please try again later.
Anywhere else to see them?
Depending how GTA and Drive club release around the PS4 launch, if this game has good mechanics, gameplay and looks as good as they hype it. It could be a good challenge for GTA6 when it comes to PS4.
Can somebody tell me what is so wow-ish in these sceenshots? I'm not trolling, just want to hear an adequate opinions, not the fanboys' ones.
Well, they do look gorgeous, though I have my doubts about these being in-game shots.
I still plan on buying GT6 over this since I need my race sim fix! But I may also get this along the road at some point if it ends up being a good game on its own and not just a pretty one.
looks good butt im not impressed now a video would help i wanna see how they get passed popup
Looks very good. Now I would like to see it running at 60fps. I hope the game supports the current GT wheel, and that the controls are somewhere in between MotorStorm and Gran Turismo (that can be a lot) but not like Grid.
ok ..... i am now officially hyped. Day 1 ... wooooooooooooaaaaaaaaa
Can't freaking wait to see Forza 5.This games looks really good and who knows what will follow in the next gen.
Amazing. :)
Day 1 along with Watch Dogs, KZ:SF, and Deep Down :)
screenshot and trailer's graphic always looks better than the actual graphic of the game. Can't tell anything for now.
Very impressive. Really interested in seeing what PS4 can do in the future, I mean this is only the beginning. Hopefully some gameplay is shown at E3.
Why is Polyphony Digital so slow in developing games?, this DRIVECLUB IP is new but it seems that the development has just started a year ago and they hasted it like other 1st party games. Which is good btw.
While Gran Turismo franchise takes 2-3 years before the successor come. I would say that I'm not really impressed with GT6, only few maps were added, nothing much. That is the only improvement they've done in the part 3 years.. Sorry to say but it's true.


text:
Error creating thumbnail
|This article describes a concept which could impact a variety of companies, countries or industries. To see what companies and articles reference this concept page, click here.
This article details the fallout within the Financial industry in 2008. For a definition of the term "credit crunch," see Credit Crunch (definition). For information on the 2007 Credit Crunch, see 2007 Credit Crunch
In 2008, a series of bank and insurance company failures triggered a financial crisis that effectively halted global credit markets and required unprecedented government intervention. Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE) were both taken over by the government. Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy on September 14th after failing to find a buyer. Bank of America agreed to purchase Merrill Lynch (MER), and American International Group (AIG) was saved by an $85 billion capital injection by the federal government.[1] Shortly after, on September 25th, J P Morgan Chase (JPM) agreed to purchase the assets of Washington Mutual (WM) in what was the biggest bank failure in history.[2] In fact, by September 17, 2008, more public corporations had filed for bankruptcy in the U.S. than in all of 2007.[3] These failures caused a crisis of confidence that made banks reluctant to lend money amongst themselves, or for that matter, to anyone.
The crisis has its roots in real estate and the subprime lending crisis. Commercial and residential properties saw their values increase precipitously in a real estate boom that began in the 1990s and increased uninterrupted for nearly a decade. Increases in housing prices coincided with the investment and banking industry lowering lending standards to market mortgages to unqualified buyers allowing them to take out mortgages while at the same time government deregulation blended the lines between traditional investment banks and mortgage lenders. Real estate loans were spread throughout the financial system in the form of CDOs and other complex derivatives in order to disperse risk; however, when home values failed to rise and home owners failed to keep up with their payments, banks were forced to acknowledge huge write downs and write offs on these products. These write downs found several institutions at the brink of insolvency with many being forced to raise capital or go bankrupt.
For 50 years after WWII, the U.S. housing market grew steadily with just a few set backs as prices increased. The government policies during this era had their roots in the agencies and government entities created in reaction to the massive mortgage foreclosures that occurred during the great depression. During 1930's Great Depression the US had experienced a greater mortgage crisis than the one we are experiencing now. 1933, about half of mortgage debt was in default, the unemployment rate had reached about 25 percent. Thousands of banks and savings and loans had failed. The amount of annual mortgage lending had dropped about 80 percent, as had private residential construction. States were enacting moratoriums on foreclosures. In response to this, the Home Owners Lending Corporation (HOLC) was created in 1933. The average borrower that the HOLC eventually refinanced was two years' delinquent on the original mortgage and about three years behind on property taxes. The HOLC was a created to handle the immediate problem of mortgage foreclosures. Congress created the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) in 1933 as a long term solution for stabilizing and managing the housing market and it chartered Fannie Mae in 1938 to facilitate the home mortgage lending market. In the post WWII era government policies continued to encourage homeownership. Primary among these policies to facilitate home lending was establishment of two Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs). The U.S. Federal Government chartered two leading mortgage institutions crisis, Fannie Mae (created as a government agency in 1938) which was charted as a private corporation in 1968 and Freddie Mac 1970.[4] 6 Fannie Mae operates in the U.S. secondary mortgage market. Rather than making home loans directly with consumers, Fannie works with mortgage bankers, brokers, and other primary mortgage market partners to help ensure they have funds to lend to home buyers at affordable rates. Fannie funds mortgage investments primarily by issuing debt securities in the domestic and international capital markets. Freddie Mac was charted by Congress in 1970 by the "Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation Act." Freddie Mac's purpose is: (1) to provide stability in the secondary market for residential mortgages; (2) to respond appropriately to the private capital market; (3) to provide ongoing assistance to the secondary market for residential mortgages (including activities relating to mortgages on housing for low- and moderate-income families involving a reasonable economic return that may be less than the return earned on other activities) by increasing the liquidity of mortgage investments and improving the distribution of investment capital available for residential mortgage financing; and (4) to promote access to mortgage credit throughout the Nation (including central cities, rural areas, and underserved areas) by increasing the liquidity of mortgage investments and improving the distribution of investment capital available for residential mortgage financing. 7
In the 1990s Congress urged the GSEs, particularly Fannie and Freddie, to acquire documented loans made to borrowers that were considered a bit more risky. By doing this it was hoped than an additional 3% of borrowers could qualify for a Fannie and Freddie loan. The objective was to take home ownership in the US from 66% of the populace to 70%. [4] Originally backed by the Democrats and the Clinton Administration this goal was further embraced by the Bush Administration which continually emphasized that we were now an "Ownership Society". The Fed (under Alan Greenspan) abetted the availability of cheap money in the 2003-2006 time-frame by keeping the Fed Funds rate relatively low. As this environment developed, it should be noted that the foreclosure rate on a conforming Fannie and Freddie insured loan barely increased. Fannie and Freddie's impact on the financial market was significant. As they acquired more and more mortgages, they increased the securitization of the mortgages into AAA rated mortgage backed securities (MBS). The cash received from this securitization was used to support the purchase of even more mortgages, and more MBS. By the end of 2008 Fannie and Freddie held or guaranteed 5 trillion or about half the US mortgage market.
The market for debt securitization was massive and the investment banking community (Goldman Sachs, Bear Stearns, Lehmann Brothers, Citicorp, Merrill Lynch) was competing hard with the GSE's. The investment bankers believed that securitization reflects innovation in the financial markets at its best. Pooling assets and using the cash flows to back securities allows originators to unlock the value of illiquid assets and provide consumers lower borrowing costs at the same time. MBS and ABS securities offer investors with an array of high quality fixed-income products with attractive yields. The popularity of this market among issuers and investors has grown dramatically since its inception 30 years ago to $6.6 trillion in outstanding MBS/ABS in 2003. By 2008 it was at 14 trillion. The success of the securitization industry has helped many individuals with subprime credit histories obtain credit. The Investment community believes securitization allowed more subprime loans to be made because it provides lenders an efficient way to manage credit risk. Secondary market purchasers of loans, traders of securitized bonds and investors are not in a position to control origination practices loan-by-loan. The investment community in 2003 urged Congress to move with great care as it addressed the problem of predatory lending. They believed the secondary markets were a tremendous success story that helped democratize credit. [5]
As securitization of mortgages increased the Investment banks urged the mortgage lending industry (Countrywide, Washington Mutual, New Century Financial, Wells Fargo, Household Finance, Quikloans and many others), to increase their loan volumes. They did this by embracing the sub-prime borrower and issuing Alt-A (limited documentation) loans. And why not? The investment banks appetite for loans to securitize was ravenous. [6]
The mortgage and investment banking community continued to believe in securitization as way to reduce risk. The share of MBSs backed by subprime and Alt-A loans increased dramatically in the last decade. From 1996 to 2006 the share of subprime and Alt-A MBSs rose from 47% to 71% of total private sector MBS issuances. [7]
Mortgages were further dispersed into securitization structures called Collateral Debt Obligations (CDO's). These were complicated securities designed to further reduce the risk of mortgage debt as well as consumer credit debt into slices of securities called "tranches". A description of a CDO in a 2004 article describes the complicated nature of CDO's: "Even though the motives behind the creation of each CDO differ widely, the principles underlying the structuring of a transaction remain similar. At the heart of these principles is the division or slicing of the credit risk of the reference portfolio into different classes, known as tranches. In accordance with its seniority, each tranche enjoys rights and priorities concerning payments generated by its collateral. Alternatively known as a waterfall structure, this is the process whereby in bankruptcy the proceeds from liquidated cash CDO assets will first be used to meet the claims of the most senior, triple-A rated debt tranche. Only then will proceeds flow to the next most senior tranche of notes, and so on. The most junior tranche within this waterfall structure is the equity piece, sometimes referred to as the 'first-loss piece', which is generally unrated and will account for anything between 2% and 15% of a CDO's total capital structure. To compensate for their subordination within the cash waterfall, investors in the equity class of CDOs generally look for returns of between 15% and 20%. Equity tranches of CDOs can be placed with investors attracted by the high returns available. Indeed, a Fitch report published in February 2004 comments: "As markets have developed and the number of potential investors has grown, the markets have become more capable of absorbing the riskier pieces of an issue." In practice, however, the equity tranches of CDOs are still often bought and held by originators. A key component of the tranching structure of CDOs is the use of coverage tests embedded into the covenants of deals and aimed at maintaining a minimum level of credit quality and therefore protection for note-holders. Coverage tests can include rate coverage ratios, over-collateralisation (OC) ratios and par ratios. In the event of these thresholds not being maintained on a payment date, the manager would generally be required to liquidate sufficient collateral to ensure that the ratios are satisfied. There are no predetermined rules on how many tranches an individual CDO may contain. The minimum is usually three, and although there is no maximum, the Aria CDO launched in June 2004 by Axa Investment Managers, which references a pool of 140 corporate names, is exceptional in that it is divided into 28 tranches denominated in five currencies – Swiss francs, sterling, dollars, euros and yen – and incorporating fixed, floating and inflation-linked tranches. "
The article also provided the above graphic to illustrate the structure of a typical CDO. Of interest is that the "AAA" rated tranche of the CDO was no doubt comprised of a significant amount of sub-prime and Alt-A mortgages.
A key question in the securitization process was how did almost all the securities being issued get rated AAA? Particularly, when as cited previously, 71% of all mortgages issued by the private mortgage industry in 2006 were sub-prime or Alt-A loans. The debt rating companies such as Moody's, McGraw Hill's Standard and Poor's and Fitch were the leading agencies providing the ratings on the various asset backed securities being produced by the investment banks. And high rated securities were essential to the entire system: For every dollar of equity that financial companies are required to hold for bonds rated AAA, $3 is needed for bonds rated BBB, and $11 is needed for bonds rated just below investment grade (BB). For banks, the sensitivity of capital requirements to ratings is generally even more extreme. Since the ratings determine required capital, they have a profound influence on how financial institutions invest. And every actor in the financial system has every incentive to group and slice assets in ways that maximize not their fundamental soundness but their rating. Indeed, that is the entire rationale behind the $6 trillion structured-finance business. Subprime mortgages (and all manner of other risky loans) held directly by financial institutions are questionable assets with high associated capital charges. Each one alone would deserve a "junk" rating. Structured finance simply piles such risky assets into bundles and slices the bundles into tranches. The rating agencies deemed some 85% of the tranches by value as AAA, and nearly 99% as investment grade. [9] By their own admission the ratings companies have an inherent contradiction in their business model: they have a need to accomplish accurate ratings but they also have a need to gain and maintain market share. If their ratings came in consistently low (not AAA) for an issuer's credit securities they would be in danger of losing that issuer as a customer. In other words, there is an inherent conflict of interest between bond issuers (who pay to get their issues rated) and the ratings agencies (who receive fees from the issuer to rate the issuers bonds). The problem was further exacerbated by the fact that the ratings agencies frequently had to evaluate an issue based on data provided by the issuer. The securitization process had become so complicated and opaque that the ratings agency had to rely on the issuer's data. There was also the fact that the mortgage securitization process was so successful. As housing prices kept rising through the 1990's into the 2000's, mortgages rarely went into foreclosure and when they did their impact inside an MBS or CDO was mitigated thereby "proving" the ratings were accurate.
This system worked as long as housing prices increased. Systemic risk was ignored as more and more sub-prime and Alt A loans were securitized. The "triple A" securities were purchased by many diverse institutions with debt as if they were AAA bonds (they were, that is how they were rated). As long as the security's mortgage interest cash flow was maintained this was a successful strategy but as more and more mortgages went into foreclosure, the value of the securities dropped requiring assets to be sold to maintain capital ratios while at the same time cash flows that paid the debt dropped, placing the owners of the securities close to or in default. It first hit Bear Stearns, then Lehmann Brothers
The housing bubble fueled by the success of the mortgage securitization process soon got another boost due to a major change in the leverage rules. At a key meeting of the SEC in 2004, at the request of the investment banking industry, debt to capital ratios were increased. Until then Investment Banks as well as regular banks were allowed to use 1 dollar of capital to borrow 10 dollars. Banks are still limited to 10 to 1. The decision allowed the brokerage entities of the largest investment banks (Bear Stearns, Lehmann Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Citicorp, Goldman Sachs) as well as many large hedge funds to use 1 dollar of capital to accumulate up to 40 dollars of debt. [11] At the end of 2007, Lehman Brothers was leveraged 31:1. Bear Stearns turned $1 into $33 through the magic of leverage. What this meant that was that with the advent of mark to market accounting (for a discussion of mark to market accounting see the following: [12]), on a mark to market basis, every bank with exposure to MBS, complex CDO and derivatives was prone to an amazing loss of value at staggering speeds. While the housing market bubble inflated (starting in the 1990's, the investment banks and stock market participants valued portfolios of mortgage securities and other derivatives far greater than their book value. The mortgage backed securities process worked extremely as well as long as the underlying mortgages were primarily prime loans. The risk significantly increased in the early 2000s as sub-prime loans became the primary mortgage used in securitization. As the housing bubble deflated, many portfolios of these securities fell below book value. Since the big investment banks and large hedge funds were allowed to borrow excessively on the huge margin described in the previous paragraph, the drop in value due to mark to market accounting forced the investment banks to write down the value of the security or portfolio as a defensive measure against even greater losses. The rapid drop in value of securitized assets also forced margin calls as some hedge funds, for example, did not have sufficient additional collateral to protect against the margin call. Creditors who lent money to investment banks required certain margin and capital ratios and refused to extend additional credit to funds or investment banks as the value of their assets dwindled. This is what happened to Bear Stearns (it had to be taken over by JP Morgan with the assistance of the government) and to Lehmann Brothers (which was forced into bankruptcy). It's also what forced Merrill Lynch to merge with Bank of America and Goldman Sachs and Citigroup to cease to exist as Investment Banks. The credit crisis dramatically collapsed the market cap values of many of the key players in the mortgage industry (whether they made risky loans or not) and in the investment banking community which had successfully securitized all forms of credit for so long. As the following table illustrates investors in these stockss lost over $1 trillion of market cap value (these stocks dropped 92% from their mid 2000 value) as a result of the mortgage securitization process based on securitizing risky loans and allowing excessive leverage to acquire such assets.
Mortgage Companies mid 2000s early 2009 Company Price Shares (millions) Mkt Cap millions Price Mkt Cap millions Fannie Mae $80.00 1000 $80,000 $0.40 $400 Freddie Mac $50.00 1400 $70,000 $0.17 $238 WAMU $45.00 1700 $76,500 $0.05 $85 Countrywide $52.00 580 $30,160 $6.00 $3,480 New Century $1,750 $55
Investment Bankers Goldman Sachs $240.00 460 $110,400 $100.00 $46,000 Bear Stearns $133.00 135 $17,955 $2.00 $270 Citigroup $52.00 5450 $283,400 $2.00 $10,900 Merrill Lynch $92.00 2000 $184,000 $6.00 $12,000 Lehmann Brothers $60.00 689 41,340 .04 27
Other Financial Institutions Bank of America $52.00 5000 $260,000 $6.00 $30,000 AIG $72.00 2500 $180,000 $0.35 $875
$1,294,165 $104,303
Excellent summary reviews of this cycle of risky lending followed by securitization of sub-prime debt in conjunction with the use of excessive leverage can viewed in the CNBC documentary "House of Cards" [13] and the Wall Street Journal's video series "The End of Wall Street", January 2009 [14] .
The concept of subprime lending (providing loans to borrowers with low credit ratings or poor loan repayment histories) has been around for as long as lending has been around. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac led mortgage industry in the 1990s facilitating home ownership by acquiring and insuring conforming loans. In the 90's congress directed the GSE's to lower the income requirement amongst lower income borrowers. The GSEs lowered the standards on the loans they acquired but they continued to only acquire prime or conforming loans. The commercial mortgage industry in order to keep loan volume up responed to this change by making more and more sub-prime loans. [15] For decades banks engaged in a practice called "redlining" or not loaning to anyone in a "low-income" neighborhood. Many believed this unfairly discouraged home ownership for low income citizens. The passage and subsequent revision of the Community Reinvestment Act (which required banks to offer credit to their entire market area -- not just the affluent parts) was instrumental in prompting bank lending reform.[16]. As noted on the Wikipedia CRA page, the purpose of the act was to disallow the practice of "redlining" or denying loans to individuals who lived in certain neighborhoods (usually low income, minority neighborhoods). Some have believed the CRA encourage sub-prime lending. There is scant evidence this is the case. The CRA did not direct banks to make sub-prime lending but emphasized that loans should be made to those individuals who otherwise qualified but lived in low-income neighborhoods. The mortgage industry, however, did originally make a majority of their sub-prime loans in minority communities to individuals who had little or no experience with mortgage financing. This led to accusations of "predatory lending" by government housing authorities. [17] Lenders argued, however, that to account for lending to this higher risk group, they had to structure loans with higher interest rates to make up for their increase in risk. Approximately 80% of these loans have adjustable-rate mortgages that started out with a teaser interest rate, which would increase significantly after an introductory period. [18]From 2004 to 2006, 21% of all mortgage originations were subprime, up from 9% from 1996 through 2004.[19] As of December 2007, subprime ARMs represented 43% of all mortgage foreclosures in the U.S., and there was still an estimated $1.3 trillion in subprime mortgages outstanding.[20][21] Sub-prime loans by themselves were not the prime mover of the 2008 Financial crisis. It was the securitization of these loans into supposedly AAA rated securities.
The 2008 financial crisis has exposed flaws in both the credit rating procedures and the incentives model for credit rating agencies. Credit rating agencies assign ratings to bonds and other debt instruments (such as the pooled subprime loans that were at the root of mortgage-backed securities). Credit rating agencies like Moody's and Standard & Poor's evaluate the likelihood that the debt will be paid back and assigns a letter ranking on a scale of AAA to B, CC, etc. Anything below BBB is considered speculative while a AAA rating is the highest credit rating available.[22]
With the mortgage-backed securities created by investment banks, however, credit ratings agencies' ratings were off the mark as they assigned AAA ratings to what were by definition subprime and high risk loans. Ratings on these products were based on flawed mathematical models, which depended heavily on assumptions derived from historical data and the diversification of risk. With subprime loans and their pooled securities, however, very little data exists on which to make sound assumptions.[23] As of July 2008, credit rating agencies had downgraded $1.9 trillion in mortgage backed securities to account for the lower repayment rates on subprime securities. Many of these securities were even downgraded to speculative grade ratings.[24][25]
Another part of the reason credit ratings performed poorly in assessing the risk of mortgage-backed securities was a conflict of interest in their incentive system. These agencies earn revenues for the amount of securities they can rate, not the quality of their ratings. In 2005, more than 40% of Moody's (MCO) ratings revenue came from rating securitized debt.[26]
In the aftermath of the savings and loans crisis, mortgaged backed securities, pools of residential and commercial loans sold in the capital markets as bonds, provided firms with a more profitable strategy than traditional balance sheet lending (where banks held mortgages they originated to maturity). Lenders transferred loans into special purpose investment vehicles and sold these securities to other banks and institutional investors like pension funds, endowments, and governments thus off-setting long term risk exposure.
These securities were structured into debt tranches and assigned credit ratings so that investors could evaluate their risk and in turn demand an appropriate rate of return for buying it. Because credit rating (Standard & Poors, Fitch, and Moodys) were independent to the banks, investors believed their classifications could be trusted to accurately assess pool level risks. Also, despite the fact that each pool had some risky loans, the overall portfolio should benefit from the diversified mix of loan sizes, asset types, geographic locations, and borrowers. Even in the event of unforeseen losses, it was unlikely purchasers of the highest rated tranches would lose their principal invested (and purchasers of lower rated tranches would receive a higher yield for assuming more risk).
As the model gained popularity, European banks utilized it to varying degrees, with some firms such as UBS, Deutsche Bank, and Credit Suisse originating and selling loans in the United States through their American banking arms while others focused on regional markets, which catered to a more localized investor base. In both cases, banking institutions suffered when sub-prime loan defaults prompted a crisis of confidence in the global investment community, calling lending standards and credit ratings associated with structured debt instruments into question. The sub-prime losses led many to believe that ratings connect not only to structured products but corporate and sovereign debt could not be relied upon.
The precipitous decline in investor faith led to a "flight to quality," where investors either discontinued purchasing asset-backed bonds or demanded significantly higher returns for the perceived increase in risk, forcing banks to reluctantly realize significant write-downs when they "marked," or recorded, unsold securities to their current market value. Many of these marks have been called into question as critics argue that banks are assigning unrealistically high values to products without significant demand. The succession of billion dollar write-downs, which total more than half a trillion dollars globally, has prompted a financial avalanche of sorts, causing wary fund managers, businesses, and even individuals to withdraw capital or close their accounts (which banks largely rely upon to fund lending operations and proprietary investments). After sustaining significant losses in value, many banks have found themselves hard pressed to fund daily operations and have had to raise equity in the private markets. These firms have pursued debt and common stock issuances and cut dividends, all in the name of adding capital to their balance sheets.[27]
On Monday, September 29 2008, an "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act" was put to the House of Representatives. Known as the "bailout bill," the act was put together by a host of federal government officials. The legislation would give Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson authority over $700 billion to buy failing financial assets such as mortgage backed securities, whose plummeting values caused credit markets to freeze.
The bill was overturned in its original form. The bill's supporters argued it would stave off a collapse of the U.S. economy, but its opponents argued it was hastily drafted, placed too great a burden on taxpayers who were not responsible for Wall Street's irresponsibility, and was not popular with the nation at large (politicians took this into special consideration given the proximity of November's elections).[28]In the aftermath of the bill's failure, $1.2 trillion was erased from the market value of American stocks as frightened investors fled for the safety of gold and government Treasury bonds. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 777 points, the largest one day decline since the index was first published in 1896. The S&P 500 fell almost 9%, a drop not seen in two decades.
After the failure in the House, the Senate acted, amending the bill and passing it by a 74 to 25 margin on Wednesday, October 1 2008. The bill was amended to include over $150 billion in tax breaks to individuals and businesses. These additions were designed to help win the twelve additional votes needed to get the bailout plan through the House of Representatives. Other additions included a temporary increase in the amount of bank deposits covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), to $250,000 from $100,000, and legislation requiring insurers to treat mental health conditions more like general health problems.[29]
On Friday, October 3rd 2008, the House of Representatives passed the amended version of the bill by a wide margin. The vote tally was:
|House of Representatives Vote 10-03-08
Within an hour of the Congressional passage of the act, it was signed into law by President George W. Bush.[30]
Details of the proposal included:[31]
The credit crisis has had a staggering impact on the financial services sector globally, leaving many foreign banks especially vulnerable to collapse and challenging local governments to respond quickly to the rapid de-stabilization of their economies. Like their American counterparts, these banking institutions have generally experienced erosion of value as investors become increasingly concerned about their over-exposure to complex securitized mortgage products in the wake of sub-prime defaults in the United States.
The first bank to experience such a collapse was the UK based Northern Rock, which was nationalized in February 2008 [32] by the British government after failing to raise sufficient capital to meet its borrowing requirements. [33] Nationalization was viewed reluctantly by officials as the only way to avoid bankruptcy after negotiations to buy the beleaguered institution failed to gain enough traction in the private sector (private equity firm J.C. Flowers and a consortium lead by billionaire Richard Branson both considered purchasing the bank). The government assumed all of Northern Rock's debt obligations (approximately $90 billion pounds), signaling the first major UK bank intervention since the 1970s.
Since then, local governments throughout the Euro Zone have taken aggressive measures to provide a lifeline to beleaguered institutions, fearing the failure of one could lead to successive collapses not just in their countries but throughout the continent. Bradford & Bingley, another UK lender and Glitnir (the third largest lender in Iceland), were both nationalized by their respective governments. The governments of Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands partially nationalized financial conglomerate Fortis, buying major interests in the subsidiaries domiciled in their respective countries. [34] Similarly, the Belgian and French governments infused approximately $9 billion in Dexia with the German government (along with a collective of banks and insurers) agreeing to a $68 billion bailout for Hypo Real Estate, the large lender.[35]
In what may be the most ambitious attempt to restore normalcy to the European markets, the government of Ireland announced that it would guarantee payments on as much as $563 billion in bank debt (including securities, short-term borrowings, and individual deposits), which represents twice the country's gross domestic product. [36] Such bold moves have raised concerns amongst officials elsewhere, particularly in the UK, who fear guarantees of this magnitude incentivize investors (currently lacking such guarantees) to transfer money out of their countries and into Ireland. The German government responded by guaranteeing all private saving accounts in the country but declined to insure other bank liabilities.[37]
These issues have spawned ongoing debates on the extent to which European countries should develop a more holistic approach to government intervention in financial markets. In an effort to establish a more unified front, leaders from France, Britain, Germany, and Italy held a financial summit in October, 2008 hosted by the President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy. [38] Though committed to informal coordination, European leaders (particularly in Germany) have made it clear that they do not intend to establish a pan-European fund mirroring the US government bailout or a new governing body to manage the process.
I see, I spupose that would have to be the case.
The erosion of confidence in global markets has led to a massive sell off of Russian stocks as investors withdraw capital from the country. Economic uncertainty compounded already existing concerns that surfaced after Russia invaded Georgia in August 2008. [39] Since then, over $63 billion dollars of investment capital has left the country. Regulators stopped trading on September 17th on the country's main exchanges after equities saw their biggest drop since 1998 (the Micex fell nearly 18% the day before and as of October 2008 was 68% off its peak). [40]The Central Bank subsequently injected $14 billion into the financial system and set aside approximately $50 billion dollars to provide support to cash strapped businesses that have seen their values plummet rapidly. Wealthy oligarchs (who in many cases, made their money by utilizing freely available credit) have been particularly hard hit as borrowing costs increase. $48 billion dollars of debt obligations are due by the end 2008. Bloomberg News calculated that the richest 25 Russians lost a collective $230 billion since the market's peak.
Asian financial institutions had little exposure to the esoteric financial instruments that have sent the world markets into spiral. This is largely due to the fact that having experienced their own financial crisis ten years earlier, firms learned to take a more measured risk management approach, relying less on leverage and maintaining higher liquidity ratios. As a result, Asian firms (particular in Japan) have been well positioned to make strategic investments in the finance industry (with Mitsubishi UFJ buying a 21% stake in Morgan Stanley and Nomura Holdings Inc ADR (NMR) purchasing Lehman's Asia platform).[41]
Even so, Asian governments are aware that their countries are not immune to general market dynamics and witnessed their stock markets dip as banks, fearful of counterparty risk, constricted credit. [42]Moving in lock step with Europe, the governments of Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore then responded by guaranteeing all bank deposits in their respective countries to prevent runs on the banking system. The government of South Korea, Asia's fourth largest economy, unveiled a $130 billion bailout plan designed to help its banks pay international debts. Such measures were considered necessary because the won has fallen to a 10 year low, placing strains on local institutions that borrow in dollars from international institutions.[43]
Political unrest and ongoing security concerns in the midst of a global economic crisis has led to a significant flight of capital out of Pakistan despite the central bank's efforts to restore faith by pumping cash into the system and despite new rules prohibiting a sell-off in the Karachi stock market. As a result, the country has seen a severe deduction of foreign-exchange reserves (approximately half of November 2007 reserves). Without access to additional capital, the government may be vulnerable to a default and has actively sought out support from China and Saudi Arabia (in the form of oil concessions). In October 2008, the World Bank and Asian Development Bank committed $1.5 billion dollars worth of financing while The Islamic Development Bank and the UK's Department for International Development each pledged $1 billion, respectively. Without additional aid, analysts believe Pakistan will have to turn to the IMF as a source of capital. [44]
Bank Lending The perceived failure of banks to manage risk has led to a massive sell-off of their stocks, further draining them of liquidity, and leading many to the brink of insolvency. Even as Central Banks inject cash into the global economy (by providing large short-term loans to financial institutions), interbank lending has come to a grinding halt because banks are fearful of dispensing capital to unstable counterparties or over-extending themselves while experiencing losses at their own firms. [45]
Their reluctance to lend, even amongst each other, freezes the credit markets, making it difficult for corporations and individuals, even those with a consistent track record of repayment or strong credit scores, to use debt to finance purchases of everything from equipment to auto loans. The decision of the US and European governments to take major stakes in financial institutions, a sign they will not let them fail, may be a catalyst in convincing the finance industry it is again safe to lend.
Real Estate In the case of real estate, there is significant downward pressure on commercial and residential values. Housing supply, especially in secondary and tertiary markets, has increased significantly in 2008 due not only to the increase in foreclosures but the inability of developers and property owners to sell or refinance projects in the midst of the credit freeze. This is particularly troubling considering the average American's largest investment is in their home. If real estate prices continue to decline, homeowner equity will be eroded and in some cases wiped out altogether. In the event credit does not become more available in the near future, as owners' debt obligations come to maturity (especially in high leverage interest only deals), many will default due to their inability to make the balloon payment. It appears US policymakers are taking proactive measures to prevent a pricing free fall and are exploring a second bailout to explicitly address the real estate market. One key element of such a plan would involve re-negotiating mortgage terms to stem the number of foreclosures. But the extent of involvement of banks and borrowers will have to be negotiated by legislative bodies. [46]
Credit Default Swaps The credit default swap market, a loosely regulated body of financial firms that buy and sell insurance to protect against losses on instruments such as collateralized debt obligations and asset-backed securities will receive more scrutiny from governmental authorities as the size and impact of these contracts on the larger financial markets comes into better focus. Though the exact size of the market is up for debate, there is no question that it is in the trillions (aggressive estimates put the market at $62 trillion, far larger than the securities it insures). The CDS market, much like the general insurance industry, was created so that financial institutions could offset exposure to securities by having their losses insured. Firms paid premiums to counterparties that would cover loses on the face value of instruments such as bonds. But since the cost of these premiums varied depending on the perceived likelihood of default and extent of loss, they were traded and viewed as an indicator of each bank's stability. In some cases, investment vehicles shorted financial stocks (betting on a decline in value) even as they provided CDS protection to the same firms (which in turn became more expensive as bank stability was called into question). What's worse, banks were both buyers and sellers of CDS, meaning the failure of one institution could be enough to send ripple effects to several other firms that sold protection to it. After the collapse of firms like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, providers of CDS protection demanded more collateral from their respective counterparties to execute contracts. Federal prosecutors and New York's Attorney General are coordinating a joint effort to further investigate the market and any abuses that occurred in the sale of swaps. Though findings of the investigation have not been released, parties involved expect significant regulatory reform to follow shortly thereafter. [47].
Retail Sales Retail sales are estimated to have declined by 2 to 3% for the 2008 holiday season relative to the previous year as a result of falling consumer spending, winter storms keeping shoppers away, and the effect of deep discounting. Retail sales figures will continue to fall as household budgets are constrained by lower disposable incomes. Not all retailers have been negatively affected – big box retailers have seen their sales increase as consumers look for lower prices, and the Used Goods Stores industry currently has quite low risk. Tax rate cuts to lower and middle income families should support the gradual recovery of household spending in the second half of 2009, and are expected to help turn the tide in retail sales later this year. [48]
Housing Starts The dramatic drop in housing starts since 2006 may have gone too far, with housing starts dropping to the lowest levels since records began by the end of 2008. A very moderate recovery is expected in the second half of 2009. (indicating a recession) in August 2000, seven months before the official beginning of the recession and five months after the burst of the dot.com bubble was reflected in stock markets. Though the recession did not officially end until November 2001, the index hit its trough in May of the year, before heading back above 50 in February 2002. Th "housing Starts" led to the mass liquidifaction process of ambiguity. the profit and loss esector of the high power banks.
The December 2008 reading of 32.4, the lowest since June 1980, may not be the lowest of the current business cycle as orders from Europe and Asia have stalled, forcing manufacturers to shed capacity and reduce inventories. However, it is probable that the trough will be reached in the first quarter of 2009, particularly as fiscal stimulus, both domestically and in China, will spur industrial production.[49]


text:
MTN81 needed a new button or icon design and created a contest on 99designs.
A winner was selected from 95 designs submitted by 10 freelance designers.
Routis Gilbert & Swafford
We are a legal firm located in Reno Nevada
People in need of a lawyer.
Basically I just need some alterations of some existing images. Our site is http://www.chicagoschoice.com
1.) For image.png & image(2).png I need the man in the middle of the picture to be put on the left and if at all possible try and make them close to the same height with the man on the left a little bit more pronounced.
2.) For Guideaz.jpg, imprisoned.jpg, reno.jpg I need a thin border placed a round them and for it to say learn more with an arrow on the logo. I need to keep these the same dimensions.
3.) For picture1.gif this is the current company logo. I need to have the logo reworked a bit with a transparent background and Routis Gilbert & Swafford to the right of RGS. Please look at our site http://www.chicagoschoice.com and come up with a color that works. We are going for a red/maroon and gold theme. I am open to ideas on this, they are a legal firm.


text:
|2007-04-01, 09:43
|Link #61
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
|2007-04-01, 18:01
|Link #62
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 32
I don't mean for this to sound rude, but why does it really matter how long it'll take? Your PC's security is vital, not only to your own protection from things like identity theft, but for people's inboxes (like mine) from needless spam sent out by people whose computers were compromised. If you're running a corporate network, then I could understand that you'd need an estimate for downtime.
If you want to know how long it should take so that you can gauge whether an error occurred or not, then I'll let you know that there's really no exact time estimate: there are too many factors. If something goes wrong, you won't know it until you reboot. Don't worry about it - millions (if not billions) of people have run through these updates with no problems. If you have a problem, we'll help you sort it out.
|2007-04-01, 21:48
|Link #64
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
|2007-04-09, 21:19
|Link #65
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 37
(and lets not hijack the other thread... we can use this one )
Last edited by Jinto; 2007-04-09 at 23:52.
|2007-04-10, 01:35
|Link #67
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
and yeah hijack is baddd...
Edit: The program you mentioned I can't seem to download it...It says you need bit torrent to download this blabla like the program but I dropped already because I can't download it.....I was suppose to pm you about it but I forgot...
How do you download it?
Oh yeah about hard drive defragment I think I should do it because I analyzed the disk and it said that I have to defrag it....but I'm to paranoid to do it..ehe
Edit x2: I think the source of my pc crashing is either the ram or the hard drive.......you think so???
Last edited by toru310; 2007-04-10 at 06:11.
|2007-04-10, 10:51
|Link #68
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 37
Usually I don't like hotlinking, but you can try the mirrors on this page. I am sure one of these mirrors allows you to download Aida.
Once you downloaded Aida, look into Motherboard->SPD. There will be the Serial Presence Detect EEPROMs information of the RAM modules. Very important for further investigation.
this is an example of my system memory (so you know how the information looks like)
Memory Module Properties
Module Name MDT512M PC400 CL2.
Serial Number 2B2A2007h
Manufacture Date Week 40 / 2004
Module Size 512 MB (1 rows, 4 banks)
Module Type Unbuffered
Memory Type DDR SDRAM
Memory Speed PC3200 (200 MHz)
Module Width 64 bit
Module Voltage SSTL 2.5
Error Detection Method None
Refresh Rate Reduced (7.8 us), Self-Refresh
Highest CAS Latency 2.5 (5.0 ns @ 200 MHz)
2nd Highest CAS Latency 2.0 (6.0 ns @ 166 MHz)
Memory Module Features
Early RAS# Precharge Not Supported
Auto-Precharge Not Supported
Precharge All Not Supported
Write1/Read Burst Not Supported
Buffered Address/Control Inputs Not Supported
Registered Address/Control Inputs Not Supported
On-Card PLL (Clock) Not Supported
Buffered DQMB Inputs Not Supported
Registered DQMB Inputs Not Supported
Differential Clock Input Supported
Redundant Row Address Not Supported
Another interesting read will be Motherboard->Motherboard. If you have an onboard graphics card, it should be listed there. At least the exact ID of the board is provided, which helps too. Well I wish you success for this.
To answer your concern if the RAM and the hdd are responsible for the instabilities....
At the moment its very propably your RAM, since the Video you send me of memtest86 had these red error prints (bit errors). Also it appeared (I could not clearly identify) that memtest recognized 584Mbyte of RAM. Which is a pretty odd number. You said you have 720 Mbyte RAM and an 128 vga. Lets assume your 720 is actually 768Mbyte. Lets further assume that the vga maybe uses 100% shared memory (means all the 128Mbyte). Then 768-128 = 640. Since 640 is not equal to 584, there must be a serious problem somewhere.
Your hdd is innocent until proven guilty (so lets assume it is okay for now). Once the RAM problem is fixed, and if there are still problems then, we can re-evaluate the situation. (atm. one cannot know if the RAM is masking errors... because every processed data is propagated to/from the RAM)
|2007-04-11, 04:07
|Link #69
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
Edit: Ermm sorry to break this to you but about the video that was not me memtesting...."gulp" I was just asking how can that happen to me....you must have thought about this so much(if I were in your shoes)...Im really really sorry....
|2007-04-11, 04:23
|Link #70
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 37
I see. Well that can happen if you have bad RAM (or wrong timings for the RAM) or several brands of RAM mixed together which do not get along with each other or the mainboard. RAM is a buffer component, that is meant to be stressed. So stress usually does not have any impcat on the RAM (in contrast to e.g. hdds).
|2007-04-11, 05:13
|Link #71
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
|2007-04-11, 05:14
|Link #72
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
Side topic: you also mention before that when a pc crash it does not affect read only files....so how about a folder with mp3 files will it alternate the file or something because of the crash?
The funny thing here when my pc crash sometimes I always undergo a little trauma for about 30mins or so.hehe pretty weird got to get a psychologies..hehe
Edit: Something weird happen I was surfing the net and suddenly some windows pop out came out and I think I clicked it and this came out.
Also when I went to paint where I usually make screen shots to document the errors...and suddenly the desktop theme turned to classic and back to windows xp again.. and that happened when I was pasting something in paint..cause I usually print screen first and paste it in pain...
My weird problems are now turning in to a habit..ouch!
Last edited by toru310; 2007-04-11 at 06:46.
|2007-04-11, 08:47
|Link #73
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 37
However, all the names of the files, and the according mapping of data blocks are stored in a look up table on the drive. (each filename points to a set of datablocks on the drive. Those data blocks make up the file. The mapping information of filename to datablocks is stored in a look up table on the drive). When your PC crashes while the drive is writing something to this look up table, severe damage can be done to the file system. E.g. whole folders can suddenly be corrupt. That means the data blocks of the files are still okay after the crash, but you don't know which data block belongs to which filename, thus your files are lost (scandisk tries to recover such files, usually naming them with generic names in the order it found them e.g. file0001, file0002 ... not particulary useful, if you do not know whats inside the file).
|2007-04-11, 10:45
|Link #74
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
Oh yeah thanks by the way got the program you asked me to download so how to install it's in rar format?
Edit: I'm sorry for the trouble..This is quite to much..
Last edited by toru310; 2007-04-11 at 11:03.
|2007-04-11, 23:52
|Link #76
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
|2007-04-12, 08:16
|Link #78
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Philippines
Many things have happened and I think by day my condition is getting worse...I mean I'm experiencing great amount of worry, trauma and I'm beginning to cry...because today was so hell for me... This torture happened while I was surfing the net like what I always do and just did some searching with some other forums mostly computer related so that I can gather information to enhance my capabilities. Anyway while I was surfing the net it crashed for some reason pretty weird..after the crash I print the screen so that I can post it in some customer help..and I rebooted it so that It can be refreshed..Now after the reboot I typed my password and waited for windows to boot and yeah so waiting for the programs to load and suddenly it crashed....I mean it should be atleast 1 crash per day but today I got 2 crashes...I didn't even done anything yet..no surfing net..or what so ever..it went out by it's own...Now after some hours later thought it might be a cause of malware..or something..so I scanned waited "hmm" "hmm" after I scanned the pc this came out.(currently using avast and Im wondering why so manyfiles was not scanned?? pretty weird..)
Moving on decided to analyze my disk to see if it needs to be defragmented and it says I should not but yesterday it says I should..this was before I scan my pc using avast! and after I scan with avast I want to analyze it one more time to see if I need to defrag but it showed this.
Afterwards it made the check disk I think which is not normal I mean it does not happened frequently I think...
It did this if I can remember CHKDSK is verifying files stage 1 of 3 truncating badly linked attribute records form file record segment 21688. etc I get write that fast..
Edit:about the scan this is like this It think is a bad sign..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTbeqbq0nOk go to 1:45 and at that point that's how the scan looked like pretty scary...Im scared..
It's actually pretty scary because I think my time will stop again just because of this...
Im sorry if I can't explain it well because I can't think straight right now..I can't even download some anime because of the risk that it might crash again..Im just so scared..huhu sob
Last edited by toru310; 2007-04-12 at 09:08.
|2007-04-12, 13:38
|Link #79
Asuki-tan Kairin ↓
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Fürth (GER)
Age: 37
Hm, strange actually chkdsk should happen more or less frequently after BSODs occured (especially if you get severe errors like the one where the registry files where recovered). I suppose you have set a setting, that supresses chkdsk at startup (could this be?).
Btw. fixing wrong records is essential for having a sane drive. Thus chkdsk fixing any errors like this is actually a good thing. Its only bad, if the drive is still marked/scheduled for chkdsk even if the whole chkdsk ran through. Then you might have real problems with your drive (or a nasty virus).
Judging from the size, that C:\ drive could be quite old (does C:\ represent one stand alone physical drive or do you have a drive partitioned in C:\ and D:\ ?)... you said something about a 3 month old drive (I guess that is D:\ ) correct me if I am wrong.
|2007-04-12, 18:13
|Link #80
Love Yourself
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northeast USA
Age: 32
I remember, back when I was relatively new to computers, how traumatic it was when things didn't go well. The major trauma was when I'd have to format, and lose everything I had. I definitely know what you're going through. I haven't suffered anything like that in the past 5-7 years, though. You reach a point where you know enough and are confident enough, and also where you have enough hardware that you can easily respond to issues.
I just finished cleaning my roommate's laptop of a virus (maybe...), but the entire time I just wanted to do a clean install of Windows. Cleaning viruses and such is a pain in the butt. The saying of "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" is incredibly true for computers.
First, about the chkdsk: don't worry about it. If your computer crashes, you should see a scandisk or chkdsk screen that would appear after the initial Windows loading screen, but before the login screen. During a crash, a lot of things can happen. I believe Jinto Lin explained it here or somewhere else, about open reading handles and how corruption can occur. Scandisk/Chkdsk fixes problems like that. If you suspect that your drive may have issues, it's usually also better to run Scandisk before running a defragmentation program (supposedly this is a good practice to get into on a regular basis, but I'll admit that I don't do it).
But why are you experiencing all these crashes? Did we ever determine if your RAM was bad? Aren't you working with a clean install of Windows? You seem to have security software installed (including a firewall, right?)... did you put on the security software before connecting your computer to the internet?
|Thread Tools


text:
|Sony Releases Two More High-Powered LCD Projectors
|Wednesday, 28 November 2007
Sony is expanding its line of video projection systems for commercial applications with two new LCD models for larger-venues.
The new VPL-FW300L (7,000 lumens) and the VPL-FH300L (6,000 lumens) projector models are designed to deliver outstanding images while in the same room as the audience. This makes them ideal for smaller auditoriums, large classrooms and meeting rooms, museum exhibits, event centers, ballrooms and movie theaters for displaying pre-show content. "There's no 'one size fits all' option for large-venue projection needs," said John Kaloukian, director of Sony Electronics' professional display group. "For example, museums are featuring more full HD content in their exhibits and need HD capable projectors that show this footage quietly and effectively."
"Conversely, more movie theaters are incorporating pre-show content, including local advertisements and regional promotions, and they're turning to LCD projectors that offer the necessary brightness, color accuracy and widescreen capabilities to fill a multiplex screen."
Kaloukian added that although these new projectors use 3LCD technology, they are a perfect complement to Sony's 4K large-venue projection systems, and fill an important niche in between current business projectors and the 4K large-venue systems.
The VPL-FW300L projector has a WXGA+ resolution of 1366 x 800, while the VPL-FH300L unit delivers resolution of 2048 x 1080. Both models are housed in the same chassis, and share the same type of lenses, lamps, and filters as well as the same connections and network functions.
The projectors feature Sony's BrightEra™ imaging technology, which is based on an inorganic substrate and alignment layer to produce a stronger bonding of molecules. This makes the panel more resistant to damage from UV energy while allowing for an increased aperture ratio. As a result, Kaloukian said the brightness, resolution and panel reliability are all increased.
The projectors' innovative round design also includes large-diameter fans and high-flow cooling air ductwork that lets the projector run cool while fan noise is decreased. These characteristics are the key reasons that these models can be effectively placed in the room with the audience without distracting from the event.
Users have a choice of five different standard lenses for excellent placement flexibility, and both models have a locking bayonet mount mechanism for easy lens changes.
Both models use dual 275W lamps to essentially eliminate the risk of a blackout in the event of lamp failure. Their opposing design configuration allows for projector tilting for mirror or other uses. The lamps have an expected life of 1500 (high) or 2500 (standard) hours. This use of low wattage lamps saves energy and running costs, which in turn helps the projector run cooler and quieter when compared with other offerings.
Different lamp modes are available: both lamps can be used simultaneously or only one at a time can be active, and in "auto lamp" mode, the projector automatically selects the lamp that has the fewest usage hours.
A design enhancement over previous models places the memory for the lamp timer on the lamp itself, reducing the need to manually reset lamp timers. Also, lamps that are moved will retain accurate time readings.
The projectors' control panels are located on the sides for easy installation and maintenance. Cable management is simpler, with routing channels carrying cabling to the mounting point. Both projectors are also compatible with cable-hiding mounting systems.
The VPL-FW300L and the VPL-FH300L projectors are planned to be available in January, at suggested list prices of $27,000 and $40,000, respectively.