I really can't believe that this is the last challenge in Photo101. Its been such an excellent way of meeting new bloggers, improving my photo skills and has certainly made me think very hard about some of the topics.
This is the final challenge " Triumph". I was completely stuck until Rob asked if there was a particular plant in the garden which was rare or hard to grow. This photo is of a plant called a "Molland Lily". Many of the remote hedgerows within the parish contain isolated clumps of Lilium Pyrenaicum which is native to the Pyrenees Mountains. The plant is thought by some to have been introduced by members of a religious community, possibly when local monks brought back seeds from Spain in medieval times. This year I managed to grow just the one plant and here it is .
You can't live on Exmoor without seeing sheep everywhere. Here are a pair of twins, double trouble for their mum, but she looks calm enough !
This was taken at Greenway which is a National Trust property in Devon. Greenway was once the home of the famous mystery writer, Agatha Christie. I would love to think she sat here and was inspired by the view through the window.
A lesson have we learnt?
Never! Still we send soldiers to be burnt.
In a war to end all wars.
Of dead eyes that no longer gleam.
We send to a war to end all wars.
about a war to end all wars.
And engage in a war to end all wars.
This a "thumbstick". A country walking stick made from a natural fork in a straight stick. Normally made from Hazel. I am lucky enough to live in a village where these sticks are made by local craftsmen. It was leaning up against my front wall when I noticed the angular shape it made with its shadow.


KbPort™ has a long history of customizing and integrating sophisticated video systems for mobile applications. Some of our earliest audio-visual integration projects involved mobile simulation trailers and emergency vehicles. Today, at the core of most of our products, is our flagship event triggered camera recorder or ETC™. While optimized to handle the rigors and unique challenges of the medical simulation environment, our robust digital recorder is engineered to deliver high-quality audio, video, and data capture within a variety of contexts and situations. With this in mind, KbPort continually challenges itself to explore the capabilities of our software and hardware solutions. One such challenge arose out of our CEO's fondness for one of America's most iconic brands: Harley-Davidson®.
In order to further expand the capabilities and applications of KbPort™ recording technology, we worked on the Harley® Project. The Harley® Project consists of KbPort™ recording technology linked to the data coming from the motorcycle's on-board computer. Through our ETC (event triggered camera system), we were able to link and merge audio and video to the data collected from the on-board computer, creating the ability to track events.
Many Harley-Davidson® stores rent bikes. With the capacity to collect audio, video, and data, Harley-Davidson® would then be able to keep track of how customers take care of the motorcycles during riding experiences. Our technology can track abuse or even be used in the case of accidents. ETC technology in this case is like the "Black Box" for motorcycles.
Data collected can be used in other scenarios as well. Often motorcyclists modify their bikes with different performance parts, such as exhaust systems, tuning modules, or tires, and can use the data generated to track differences in performance before, during, and after the modification process.


text:
Demetrio el Bello (en griego antiguo, Δημήτριος ὁ καλός) fue un príncipe Antigónida, rey de Cirene.

Hijo de Demetrio Poliorcetes, rey de Macedonia, y de su quinta esposa, Ptolemais, fue designado para reinar en Cirene al casarse con Berenice II, hija del rey Magas, muerto en el año 250 a. C..

Seguramente fue este Demetrio el que dirigió el ejército macedonio para detener una de las invasiones de Pirro, rey de Epiro.

Berenice le hizo asesinar en 248 a. C., cuando descubrió que era amante de su madre Apama.

De una primera unión con una tal Olimpia de Larisa, tuvo un hijo, el futuro rey de Macedonia Antígono III.

Enlaces externos

Reyes de Cirene
Reyes  del siglo III a. C.
Monarcas asesinados
Antiguos griegos del siglo III a. C.
Dinastía antigónida

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


These offer romantic getaways of all types. Large romance inspired suites will create a scene for any cupid loving couple. Frolicking in the sea or horse back riding on the beach will create the dream getaway for any couple at a price that won't break the bank. The best all inclusive resorts for couples can help you celebrate your anniversary in style as well as create a fantasy honey moon to remember.
These will make your family vacation a memorable escape that your children will always remember.
Amusement parks are just a tip of the ice burg when it comes to creating a child friendly vacation your children will love. The best all inclusive resorts for families offer amazing Florida resorts packages such as the Nickelodeon Suite, World Quest, Disney World and Liki Tiki Village. Most resorts have indoor and outdoor pools for your little ones in between activities.


The last thorough review of λ DNA replication was written by Dale Kaiser for the "Lambda Book" in 1971. At this time most of the phage functions (e.g., N, O and P) and some of the bacterial functions (e.g., dnaR) essential for λ replication had been identified. Many structural details concerning circle replication had been elucidated and its origin and bidirectional nature determined electron microscopically. The reader is referred to that article for details and references to the earlier studies on which this knowledge was based. The ensuing years have provided a fuller understanding of many aspects of replication first alluded to in that review, some of them summarized in a general context by Yarmolinsky (1975). This chapter summarizes the basic findings since that time, with particular emphasis on the relationship between early (circle) and late (rolling circle) λ replication, a topic that has been central to the interest of our laboratory for the past several years.
"…To understand a phenomenon is to understand a category of phenomena or it is nothing. Understanding is reached through creative acts.


For many different reasons, lots of people are choosing to remain single these days. With so many men and women living alone, there is a large demand for recipes that are healthy and easy to prepare.
Because more men than ever before are cooking their own meals, the demand for simple recipes for bachelors is great. While the flavors of the foods they cook are indeed important to them, an increasing number of single men are also looking up healthy recipes for bachelors. In addition to providing necessary calories and nutrients, cooking for bachelors should also be fun. You might even find these recipes work great at your next bachelor party, instead of junk food, and much cheaper than all out catering.
Here are a few easy bachelor meals that are quite flavorful.
A cool and refreshing dish that can be served as a main course or as a side dish, tuna macaroni salad is a particularly great meal to eat on a hot summer night. This dish is one of the types of healthy recipes for bachelors that is also very tasty.
Combine all of the ingredients and chill in refrigerator for at least one hour before serving.
Basically, you are preparing tuna salad that is combined with any type of pasta. The combination of flavors and textures is very good and the dish is nice and light.
When it comes to simple recipes for bachelors, baked boneless chicken breasts would have to be near the top of the list.
If desired, other seasonings can be rubbed into the chicken breasts.
Place the chicken breasts in a baking dish, coat them with oil and apply the seasonings. Bake the chicken for 15 minutes, then turn the breasts over and cook for an additional 10-15 minutes.
If desired, other seasonings such as curry powder, chili powder, crushed red pepper flakes or garlic powder can be added.
Place the potatoes and seasonings in a large bowl, and drizzle the oil over the potatoes. Coat the potatoes evenly with the oil, then place them in a single layer on a sheet pan or other type of baking dish. Place the potatoes in the oven about five minutes ahead of the chicken, to allow for more even cooking. Bake in the oven at the same time as the chicken. Both dishes should be at roughly the same time.
This method of making beef pot roast has been very popular for several decades now. The flavor of the cooked meat is absolutely delicious and the aroma that fills the kitchen is incredibly appetizing.
You do not need to purchase an expensive cut of meat to make a wonderful pot roast. Virtually any type of London broil steak that is approximately one pound in size will work just fine.
With this method of preparing pot roast, the only ingredients you really need are the piece of beef, one envelope of dry onion soup mix and some water. The pot roast can be cooked in a conventional oven, or on the stove top in a large frying pan or skillet.
To make this scrumptious pot roast, simply brown both sides of the steak in a large frying pan or skillet. Drain any excess fat, then add the contents of the onion soup mix envelope to the pan. Next, add enough water to the pan so that the steak is covered. At least four cups of water should be used. Stir the onion soup mix and water together, and cover the pan with a lid or aluminum foil.
Let the covered meat cook on medium-low heat for at least three hours. While the meat is cooking, you could bake a potato or two in either a conventional or microwave oven, or maybe prepare some instant rice or mashed potatoes to go with the pot roast. The pot roast is done when the meat is completely soft and you can easily cut it with a spoon.
Hopefully, you will enjoy preparing and eating these easy bachelor meals.


text:
7:00 a.m. Breakfast and Registration
8:00 a.m. Welcome and Introductions
Anne Vernez-Moudon, Dr. es Sc., Program Committee Chair
James Sallis, Ph.D., Director, Active Living Research
M. Katherine Kraft, Ph.D., Senior Program Officer, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Opening Address:
Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, M.D., M.B.A., President and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
8:30 a.m. Active Living Research -- Round 1 Grantee Presentations
Environmental Assessment of Public Recreational Space, Brian E. Saelens, Ph.D., Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center
Environmental Characteristics of Recreational Areas: Study Update, Ariane R. Bedimo-Rung, Ph.D., Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center
Developing and Evaluating Objective Measures of Outdoor Recreational Areas, Philip Troped, Ph.D., M.S., Harvard School of Public Health
9:15 a.m. Overall Discussion
9:30 a.m. Active Living Research -- Round 1 Grantee Presentations and Discussion
Development and Validation of an E-diary System for Assessing Physical Activity and Travel Behaviors, Weimo Zhu, Ph.D., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Evaluation of Automated Systems for Assessing Physical Activity in Specific Environments, Patricia A. Sharpe, Ph.D., M.P.H., University of South Carolina; presented by Regina Fields, M.S., C.H.E.S.
10:00 a.m. Overall Discussion
10:15 a.m. Break
10:30 a.m. Active Living Research -- Round 1 Grantee Presentations and Discussion
Assessing Built Environment Features Linked to Physical Activity, Marlon G. Boarnet, Ph.D. and Kristen Day, Ph.D., University of California, Irvine
Identifying and Measuring Environmental Determinants of Physical Activity, Reid Ewing, Ph.D., University of Maryland, Ross Brownson, Ph.D., and Susan Handy, Ph.D.
Measuring Connectivity for Bicycling and Walking, Jennifer Dill, Ph.D., Portland State University
11:30 a.m. Wrap-Up
11:45 a.m. Lunch and Physical Activity Time
Activited included:
•	Shuttle to Torrey Pines Reserve
•	Walking tour of Del Mar
•	Walk/lunch on the beach
1:45 p.m. Afternoon Session Introduction
2:00 p.m. Paper Presentation:
Application of the 'Ecometrics' Approach to Validate Neighborhood-Level Measures of Walkability, Lise Gauvin, Ph.D., University of Montreal
Using a Quasi-Experiment to Learn about Urban Form and Physical Activity: The California Safe Routes to Schools Program, Marlon G. Boarnet, Ph.D., University of California, Irvine
3:00 p.m. Commissioned Paper Presentation:
Strategic Directions in Environmental and Policy Research on Physical Inactivity and on Preventing Youth Obesity, Thomas Robinson, M.D., M.P.H., and John Sirard, Ph.D., Stanford University
3:35 p.m. Break
4:00 p.m. Keynote Address
Applying the Diffusion Model to Active Living Innovations, Everett M. Rogers, Ph.D., Regent's Professor, Department of Communication and Journalism, The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM
5:00 p.m. Wrap-Up and Announcements
5:30 p.m. Cocktail Reception and Poster Session
7:00 p.m. Dinner on your own
8:30 p.m. Live Rock 'n' Roll Music and Dancing
Featuring Forgotten Space with Jim Sallis

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Jaws / **** (1975)
The key image in Steven Spielberg's "Jaws" is not the first time we see the shark toss its head above water but one in which a little boy named Michael is seen settling into shock, just having witnessed a nearby swimmer swallowed by the mammoth predator. That moment, by all facets of an effective thriller, is the bridge that joins the terror unfolding to the relatability of it: suddenly the movie is no longer just about a horrifying danger lurking beneath the dark waters, it has become a working laboratory of personal fears projected into situations that could happen to us. A less farsighted movie would have ignored the inclusion of such a moment, or shamelessly tacked it into the crevice of a minor subplot. But even as a novice in the scene of Hollywood's evolving machine Spielberg had the stimulus of a well-trained emotional conductor, and the plight of his young star – the son of the movie's heroic center – was a shrewd maneuver that reverbed powerfully in the tense hearts of the audience. The clarity of an intention had seldom been so strong in the thick of so much ambiguous fright, and here is a man who made the moment seem as effortless as the delivery of a mere musical cue or establishing shot.
Now in its 41st year as a stubborn presence in the cinematic zeitgeist, "Jaws" is a movie that has earned its place among the trendsetters of a generation – surely the first of what we know as the summer blockbuster, and an archetype in the ambitious intentions of a new breed of filmmakers that saw the screen as rip in the fabric of procedure. And yet even as its nearest cousins wear the scars of age, here is a film that seems just as fresh with each new viewing as the first time you saw it: relentless and intense, with characters that are the accurate realizations of their behaviors and special effects that dwarf the limits of the time. Along with "Star Wars," most now look at it as the dividing line between the modern eras of the industry, a watershed that brought audiences out in the sorts of droves normally reserved for sporting events and political rallies. Strange to imagine that a fictional shark picking off swimmers along the coast of a small New England town would be the premise to incite so much enthusiasm, let alone reinvent the filmgoeing wheel.
No miniscule part of that comes down to the nearly flawless technical execution. Assembled together by a team whose enthusiasm (novice or skilled) was pitched at a high intent, there is scarcely a scene contained in the 124-minute running time that is without some level of cautious methodology. Think, as a prime example, about the famous opening sequence. On a beach in Amity at night during the roar of a party, two teenagers wander away from the light of the campfire and engage in a flirtatious chase towards the shore. Clothes are flung on the sand, and she wanders into the water; his heavy intoxication, unfortunately, means that he will never make it as far as his pursuit. As she swims alone enthusiastically among the waves, occasionally shooting back seductive stares towards the man still on the beach, an ominous chord (courtesy of John Williams) escalates in the soundtrack. Beneath the surface, the camera lingers like a voyeur, taking unshaking interest in her naked flesh. And just as it begins to approach from underneath, our concern is manifested in a rather sensational display of attack, in which the girl is flung left and right by unseen shark teeth holding onto her beneath the surface before it finally drags her below the water.
Such descriptions of this scene have been commonplace in the four decades that "Jaws" has been a subject of study, but they remain a necessary observation, perhaps, because of how distinct they were in the context of their time. By the mid-1970s, nearly all of the contemporaries of Alfred Hitchcock had abandoned his informative teachings and settled on violence as a driving factor for dread in horror movies; there was scarcely a need for subtlety anymore, especially in the mainstream, where audiences had graduated to the expectation of open wounds and severed limbs. Yet Spielberg's panache – a slow and steady progression that only gave details away in sporadic increments – followed the master's doctrine so specifically that it was almost mystical, like a piece of his consciousness had been downloaded within. If we were brought to fright in the way that audiences had been during the famous shower sequence in "Psycho," it's because there was a sense of temperament driving the momentum of the horror – a discussion of it rather than an outright display of it. The shark is only ever seen in full in the final act of a lengthy dialogue-driven consideration, after the characters have exhausted their individual hysteria and grown restless by the sight of a flailing victim begging for help while blood filled their vision. How many of today's viewers expect that, or indeed have the patience?
The overreaching appeal of the picture is that it occupies us in between the attacks with rather stimulating episodes. The hero is Brody (Roy Scheider), the police chief of a small community known as Amity, whose mild-mannered temperament is tested by alarming gut feelings after the discovery of human remains on the beach outside of town. Fearing that a shark may be responsible, Brody appeals to mayor Vaughn (Murray Hamilton) for the beaches to close, but to little success; there is no way to be sure that a shark was responsible for the death without an outside source of confirmation, and Amity is heading into the summer holidays when the beach is the town's primary attraction; shutting it down would prove disastrous for tourism and the local economy. That perspective – as stubborn as the thirst of the shark itself – persists even as new attacks transpire, including a rather public one involving a little boy who is tossed around in the middle of a group of kids before being devoured in plain sight. The final shot of that sequence is sobering: as the dead boy's mother calls out his name in terror, the boy's deflated raft washes ashore, half-eaten and soaked in blood.
Town hysteria, needless to say, escalates. Something is clearly out there threatening the safety of swimmers, but what exactly? A shark, or something else? The residents of Amity seem displaced from knowledge of the outside world. When Brody calls in a skilled oceanographer named Hooper (Richard Dreyfuss) to analyze the remains of the dead girl, his feeling is as conclusive as it is frenzied. There are calls to hunt the predator down for a handsome sum. A lone Irish drinker – and skilled seaman – named Quint (Robert Shaw) paints a bleak portrait for inexperienced ocean hunters, but volunteers his own services for a much steeper price than what is offered ("For ten thousand dollars, I'll get you the head, the tail, the whole god damn thing.") The locals catch and kill a tiger shark, and there are brief celebrations – Hooper argues that the bite radius on the fish doesn't match the nature of the wounds of the found remains, leading him and Brody into a side adventure where they cut open the carcass to investigate. But as is the nature of greedy politicians to look the other way, Vaughn is not cooperative in supporting the continued concerns of either his police chief or the visiting expert, both of whom are convinced that the actual shark still roams nearby. And inevitably the beaches remain open just as the community moves into the 4th of July weekend, where fireworks are destined to go off again on the open waters.
There is some level of comical irony in the shark's minimal presence in front of the camera. The screenplay by Carl Gottlieb (a newcomer to feature films) and Peter Benchley (the scribe who authored the book) does a glorious job of talking about the villainous beast as part of its devious strategy to generate underlying dread, but in truth there would have probably been no possibility of the studio giving the animal significantly more screen time. Legends arose that the shark itself – an ambitious mechanical creation – was almost never fully operational, and during several field tests it sank to the bottom of a lake at Martha's Vineyard (Spielberg and his visual effects supervisor Robert A. Mattey have vouched for this story in several interviews, including a rather informative one that appeared on the 35th anniversary DVD edition). That forced an increased production timeline that conflicted with the demeanors of several of the film's key participants – particularly Robert Shaw, who frequently drank on set and got into rather lively arguments with co-star Richard Dreyfuss (the two would later admit mutual respect).
If that reality adds perspective to what winds up on the screen, it's the notion that under increased tension and constraints a movie artist – on screen or off – is capable of delivering some of the best work of their lives. Spielberg clearly knew this was happening as filming began on the legendary third act, where the three component characters are on the open seas hunting their nemesis; there are exchanges of ambitious conviction, scenes of startling twists, and a monologue by Shaw so perceptive that it's a wonder so much of it was adlibbed on the spot (or, indeed, that much of it was in fact an actual document of the truth). If the shark itself is physically convincing as a force of reckoning, our fear of it is escalated by the synergy of the production crew and their focused actors, all of whom seem to be staring back as if they are waiting for their own moment to be pulled beneath the waves.
These are not exactly minor agreements. At the time of its highly anticipated release in the summer of 1975, "Jaws" became one of the first movies to open wide (in nearly 1000 screens simultaneously), and was the first to pass the coveted $100 million mark in domestic earnings during the first run. The term "blockbuster" originates from the endearments showered down by critics and audiences, both of whom walked away never in doubt that they were seeing one of the marvels of their time. John Williams, still young and relatively unknown, became the defining sound of modern motion pictures (he would go onto score virtually hundreds of important compositions, including Lucas' "Star Wars" franchise). What usually remains key in the mind so long after a film has settled is the root cause of its filmmaker; in this case, it was the realization that Spielberg, still new and inexperienced, possessed a voice that was as pure and giving as the greats that preceded him. But while other films have become relics of those declarations, his have remained timeless wonders – really, epithets of the humanly fears and desires that are passed down with each new generation. Here was the first among many important endeavors to announce the creation of a cinematic mastermind, and it lingers in thought as one of the textbook prototypes of how meaningful a thrill can be when put into motion by the right hands.
Written by DAVID KEYES
Drama/Thriller (US); 1975; Rated PG; Running Time: 124 Minutes
Roy Scheider: Chief Brody
Robert Shaw: Quint
Richard Dreyfuss: Hooper
Lorraine Gary: Lorraine Gary
Murray Hamilton: Vaughn
Produced by David Brown and Richard D. Zanuck; Directed by Steven Spielberg; Written by Peter Benchley and Carl Gottlieb; based on the novel by Peter Benchley
Labels: ****, 1975, ACTION, ADVENTURE, DRAMA, ESSENTIAL CINEMA, SIGNATURE SERIES, THRILLER
Embrace of the Serpent / **** (2015)
Into the Abyss (2011)
The Conjuring 2 / ***1/2 (2016)
The Shallows / *** (2016)
The Secret Life of Pets / ** (2016)
The Purge: Election Year / **1/2 (2016)
Independence Day: Resurgence / ** (2016)


Matt joined TRP Consulting in 2016 as a structural technician and has been working closely with senior technicians and engineers on numerous projects within the sports, healthcare and industrial sectors for a range of clients including BAE Systems and Belong.
Matt is working steadily to improve his knowledge of BIM and assist TRP Consulting in achieving BIM accreditation.
TRP Consulting co-founder, Tim has more than 30 years' experience in the field of civil and structural engineering design and delivery.
During this period, he has worked on a variety of major sports, commercial and healthcare projects including hospitals, offices, banks, industrial and retail developments and sports stadiums.
His work alongside aerospace and defence group BAE Systems team in developing a new approach to the design of specialist machine bases received a BAE Chairman's Award for innovation in 2010.
Chartered Engineer Tim has considerable experience of long span structures, particularly in the field of sports and stadium design.
He has specialist experience in the use of wind tunnel testing for the assessment of wind loads on building structures and in relation to microclimate investigations. Work in this field included Wembley Stadium Olympic Gallery and the 26,000 seat North Stand at Old Trafford.
Tim has developed specialist expertise in the dynamic analysis of structures and is currently one of only five engineers listed by the Institution of Structural Engineers for the dynamic assessment of grandstands subject to crowd action.
Rik has experience in a wide range of projects in a variety of sectors. In addition to his project work he is responsible for the development and training of technicians and Graduate Engineers in the use of AutoCAD and REVIT.
In his role of lead conceptual modeller working closely with the directors he has assisted in developing structural designs and concepts for projects for a range of clients including BAE Systems.
Dan is a civil and structural Autocad and REVIT technician. He gained a BSc in Civil Engineering at University of Bolton in 2014.
He is proficient in the use of AutoCAD Revit 3D drafting software and is trained in the use of Autocad Infrastructure software. He is fully conversant with industrial standard design software Microdrainage and has been involved in a wide range of projects.
Zahid graduated from the University of Salford with a Masters degree in Civil Engineering in 2011.
Since joining TRP Consulting In July 2016 he worked on the development of new hotels at Doncaster and Royal Windsor Racecourses.
Other projects include Newbury Racecourse and a purpose built care home complex which combines newly constructed apartments and leisure facilities within a grade II listed building.
Lynda has over 10 years' experience in engineering appraisal and investigation of development sites and in the geo-environmental assessment of potentially contaminated sites.
She also has considerable experience in preparation of Flood Risk Assessments assessed to satisfy PPS 25 and the National Planning Policy Framework.
Lynda has worked on a range of projects including stadium redevelopment at Leicester Tigers, Oldham Athletic and Peterborough United.
Lynda also performs the roles of Office Manager, Finance Manager and Internal Auditor within the practice.
Vladimir graduated from the University of Bolton with a BSc in Civil Engineering in 2013, having achieved the IStructE Lancashire and Cheshire Regional Group Student Prize for 2012-2013. He was awarded his MSc in 2017.
Vladimir has worked as a structural engineer on a range of industrial, airport, public utilities, healthcare and educational projects. Since joining TRP Consulting In July 2016 he has been working on developments in the sports, healthcare and commercial sectors.
Will has over a decade's experience in working as a civil and structural Autocad and REVIT technician. He has achieved City and Guild CAD 2D and 3D qualifications at level 3 and an HNC in Civil Engineering. Will recently received his EngTech certificate from ICE, the globally-recognised professional association for civil engineers.
Will is proficient in the use of AutoCAD, Civils 3D and REVIT 3D drafting software and has acted as structural technician on a number of major projects.
Chartered Engineer Geoff, who co-founded TRP Consulting, has more than 30 years' experience working on major civil and structural engineering projects.
During his career he has worked on major commercial and regeneration projects across the UK including shopping centres, hospitals and industrial developments.
He was also involved in the redevelopment of Manchester United Football Club's stadium at Old Trafford.
Between 1993 and 2000 he formed and managed the growth of a multidisciplinary professional practice bases in East Africa, offering architectural and engineering design.
It provided consulting services in all major sectors including petrochemical industry, health and education, commercial and housing.
Since returning to the UK and forming TRP Consulting in November 2000 he has worked to develop the practice and to maintain personal involvement in project works.


When I agreed to write a blog post sharing my intern experience at Focus Lab this summer, one of the first things Cléa said to me was that I don't have to write about how awesome everyone is.
The one and only Shayna Flangian.
Well, that's going to be difficult, because everyone IS awesome at Focus: whether it's Erik's lessons on Wednesdays, John's ability to always find the perfect GIF for any situation, or the fact that nearly everything that comes out of Wilyo's mouth is absolutely hilarious.
There is something awesome about every person who works there. I couldn't have asked for a better group of people to spend my Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays with. And though my time as an intern was relatively short, I learned more about a professional creative environment in two months than I have during my entire time at SCAD.
Don't get me wrong: in no way am I bashing what SCAD has taught me so far. SCAD taught me the fundamentals of becoming a creative professional.
But there are some things that cannot be taught in a classroom.
The most obvious of those things is the experience of having to think creatively while adhering to a strict timeline. Yes, at SCAD I am required to crank out a concept or project by a certain date. But if I'm really struggling to come up with an A+ idea, I can usually b.s. a mediocre concept in a way that works out in my favor. I found out very quickly at Focus Lab that I had to break that habit. Business—even when it's creative—doesn't work when an artist is static in his or her creative process. Only those who are actively striving for the bigger and better ideas will be productive and ultimately successful in their craft. With that in mind, I also learned what it's like to be in a genuinely collaborative environment. SCAD constantly pushes collaboration among peers and among majors, but there's always competition. I'm reminded on a regular basis by my professors and other students that the creative job market is cutthroat. It's always about being the best in your respective field or being the best at marketing yourself as an artist.
It wasn't until I interned at Focus Lab that I experienced what it's like to be in an environment where everyone supports each other.
Honestly, it took me a while to get comfortable being vulnerable with my ideas, concepts, and opinions, because it was relatively new to me. Alicja pushed me in that regard and I cannot thank her enough for that.
Speaking of Alicja, I'm so grateful for the time we spent together this summer. Even though the majority of our work was internal, I gleaned so much knowledge and experience from her that I couldn't have gotten anywhere else. The amount of passion she has for the work she produces, and for photography in general, is beyond inspiring.
Shayna's still-life for a Sidecar article.
Alicja taught me what it's like being a photographer and a graphic designer at the same time. Since graphic design is my minor and photography my major, I was curious to see how the two coexist. Alicja taught me to photograph through the eyes of a designer, which was totally new to me. The past year at SCAD, I've been immersed in the fine art/avant garde side of photography, so switching gears to a more calculated and, in a sense, formulaic style was a huge change for me.
Thankfully, Alicja was patient with me. During my last few days with the Focus Lab team, I had to put all she taught me about concept development, pre-production, styling, and still life set production to the test. I could go into detail about that shoot and all the pre-production that went into it, or the iterations I made that ultimately came together to form the final shot… but to me, that doesn't show what I learned during my time at Focus Lab.
Seeing my photos on the Focus' Instagram/website/Dribbble was a great feeling, because I knew that I delivered what was expected of me, and other people were enjoying it!
I couldn't get that at SCAD, that's for sure.
Looking back on my time interning with the Focus Lab gang under Alicja's wing, I would say I learned how to be a part of a team. It's something SCAD can't really teach; SCAD gave me the tools and design foundation upon which I can build, but Focus gave me the experience of utilizing those tools. And I'll be forever grateful for that opportunity.


text:
Reading the Office of Legal Counsel on Emoluments: Do Super-Rich Presidents Get a Pass?
By Jane Chong
Saturday, July 1, 2017, 3:00 PM
Aegis: Security Policy in Depth
Protest at Trump International Hotel, Washington D.C. (Slowking)
I wrote last November that the Foreign Emoluments Clause "is on its face a national security provision designed to protect the country from officers too enmeshed with foreign interests." If the Justice Department's recent court filing is to be believed, that protection is exceedingly limited. This new position marks a decisive break from the more conscientious approach long espoused by both the Comptroller General and the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC).
At the heart of the emoluments controversy is President Trump's refusal to liquidate his business holdings. He has instead maintained ownership of the Trump Organization, a multibillion-dollar umbrella company with thousands of domestic and international investments, and placed the assets in a revocable trust managed by his sons Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump. Trump now faces three lawsuits alleging that he is profiting from his business empire in violation of the Constitution. Three days after his inauguration, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a government accountability watchdog group, filed the first suit in the Southern District of New York. This month, two more complaints were filed by the attorneys general of Washington D.C. and Maryland and 196 congressional Democrats, in federal district courts in Maryland and the District of Columbia, respectively.
All three suits center on the meaning and scope of the Foreign Emoluments Clause, which provides that "no person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office or Title of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign state" (U.S. Const. art. I, § 9, cl. 8). Citing Trump's business dealings with state governments and federal agencies, such as its lease on the Old Post Office Building that now houses the Trump International Hotel, two of the suits also allege violations of the Domestic Emoluments Clause. This provision applies specifically to the president and provides that he shall receive "for his Services" a fixed compensation during his tenure and not "any other Emolument from the United States, or any of [the states]" (U.S. Const. art. II, § 1, cl. 7).
Serious procedural challenges like standing notwithstanding, given the House and Senate's failure to address head-on the risks posed by Trump's financial conflicts pose, the lawsuits could prove important in forcing a much-needed conversation: Is Trump taking in profits in violation of the Constitution? And just as critically, are future presidents entitled to pull a Trump—or does the Constitution dictate that they, like Jimmy Carter, must give up their family peanut farms as a condition of taking office?
No Article III court has ever rendered an opinion on how either Emoluments Clause should be interpreted, though the Supreme Court has offered interpretations of the term "emoluments" as it appears in Foreign Emoluments Clause-related statutes periodically enacted by Congress since 1881. Because of the limited judicial precedent, the internal memoranda from the Comptroller General and the Office of Legal Counsel that have been made public over the years are among the most important sources of guidance we have on emoluments issues. And though these memoranda do not directly address the question posed by the Trump business empire, making some amount of inference and legwork necessary, in critical respects they quite clearly contradict the sweeping defense that the Justice Department put forward this month in its 70-page motion to dismiss the CREW case against Trump.
The key issue in these suits—once you get behind a set of justiciability questions that may prove dispositive—is what constitutes an emolument (though with respect to the Foreign Emoluments Clause there's also some disagreement about what kind of entity constitutes a "foreign state"). In plain English, we are looking at an exotic presidential twist on the biggest and oldest challenge to enforcing any anticorruption law: What counts? Do the forbidden "emoluments" cover only goodie boxes, blatant quid pro quo arrangements, and employment-related compensation? Or are the profits that Trump enjoys by way of his business transactions also prohibited when they come from foreign states and domestic government entities? And if the latter, more expansive definition is the appropriate one, are the profits prohibited only when the take is in excess of "fair-market-value"—and if so, does that definition serve as a meaningful limitation when at issue are luxury goods whose value or sales may be inflated by the fact that Trump is president and the products are prominently branded with his name?
Predictably, the dispute has taken the form of a battle for the original meaning of "emoluments." An array of historical materials support both a limited and broad definition. The two possible interpretations are well summed up by the Oxford English Dictionary, which provides two definitions dating back to the Founding: "1. Profit or gain arising from station, office, or employment . . . . 2. Advantage, benefit, comfort."
The Justice Department, like Trump's lawyers at Morgan Lewis, latches onto the first definition to argue that "the Emoluments Clauses apply only to the receipt of compensation for personal services and to the receipt of honors and gifts based on official position." That is, President Trump is precluded only from receiving benefits in exchange for services provided to a foreign state in his official capacity as president, or—and this is crucial, given the subject matter of the OLC opinions—services provided "in a capacity akin to an employee of a foreign state."
The plaintiffs in the three suits, on the other hand, argue for the much more expansive definition. Marshaling its own set of historical evidence, CREW asserts that emoluments are "anything of value, including money, permits, approvals, tax benefits, any other benefits, and anything else monetary or nonmonetary, regardless of whether it is given in exchange for goods or services, and regardless of whether it is part of a transaction at, above, or below market rates."
A close examination of the relevant Comptroller and OLC opinions reveals that the current Justice Department is reading the Emoluments Clauses too narrowly, while CREW and the other plaintiffs are reading them too broadly. None of the opinions approves the receipt of benefits that can even arguably be attributed to the prestige or influence conferred by an office, and together they do not support the Justice Department's claim that presidents may, as a categorical matter, collect profits from business transactions with foreign entities and domestic government entities as long as fair value is extracted on both sides. But notwithstanding the plaintiffs' hard pull in the other direction, the opinions also suggest that presidents may in limited cases accept certain fixed benefits—as I will explain, these might be pensions from the U.S. state that used to employ them or money damages from a foreign country against which, in a past life, they successfully won a judgment. The key is that those benefits cannot be subject to foreign or domestic government manipulation or adjustment in connection with the presidential office.
This happens to be a sensible position that accords with what the opinions repeatedly underscore as the purpose of the Emoluments Clauses and the ultimate touchstone for interpreting their meaning: "to prevent corruption and foreign influence" and to bar "payments which have a potential of influencing or corrupting the integrity of the recipient."
Why Language About Emoluments Is Easily Misused
A threshold issue before turning to the OLC literature is the confusion created by cherry-picking historical materials without consideration of their factual context. For example, in its motion to dismiss, the Justice Department followed the lead of some scholars in pulling some Supreme Court language that suggests the term "emoluments" applies only to salary and other duty-related benefits. Most notably, in Hoyt v. United States, 51 U.S. 109 (1850), the Court defines emoluments as "every species of compensation or pecuniary profit derived for a discharge of the duties of office" (emphasis added).
But in Hoyt, the Supreme Court was specifically asked to decide what constitutes an "emolument of office" per a statute governing Treasury Department collectors in their official capacity; the case did not require the Court to consider or rule on the existence of emoluments of other kinds. This is a key point for purposes of properly construing any Comptroller or OLC opinion that cites Hoyt and regurgitates its definition of "emoluments." These opinions, like Hoyt, have to be read with an eye to their facts: they do not assert that "emoluments" must derive directly from discharge of duty; rather, the kind of emoluments at issue in those opinions was the kind derived for discharge of duty. As a consequence, the reliance on Hoyt in these opinions does not serve as evidence of a limiting principle for emoluments in general.
In short, as pointed out by the plaintiffs and by assorted scholars, the proper question for purposes of discerning the historical scope of "emoluments" is not whether the term could be interpreted in a restricted way, to refer only to benefits derived from discharging the duties of an office, but whether it was necessarily so interpreted at the time the Emoluments Clauses were drafted. As John Mikhail has painstakingly documented, the answer is no—and we don't have to look at secondary sources, however authoritative (e.g., Black's Dictionary) to draw that conclusion. Consider, for example, some of the constitutions ratified during the first of two major waves of state constitution-making in the Founding decade. Several included "common benefits clauses" that used the word "emoluments" in a way that simply defies narrow interpretation. The Pennsylvania Constitution (1776) provides: "That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection and security of the people, nation or community; and not for the particular emolument of advantage of any single man, family or sett [sic] of men, who are a part only of that community[.]" Very similar language appears in the Virginia (1776), Vermont (1777), and New Hampshire (1784) constitutions. Far more elaborate historical arguments demonstrating the broad uses of the term have been presented elsewhere: see here, here and here. The bottom line is that there is an abundance of primary Founding-era material making use of the broad definition of emoluments, so it is wrong to use language from fact-bound case law to assert that the term is an inherently limited one.
The Plaintiffs Define "Emoluments" Too Broadly
Does that mean, as plaintiffs assert, that all types of benefits conferred on the president by foreign countries and U.S. states are prohibited emoluments? According to the Comptroller and OLC opinions, clearly not.
A number of opinions explain that officers do not need to forego fixed benefits to which they are entitled for reasons manifestly unrelated to and uninfluenced by their office. This is a common-sense interpretation of the Clauses that avoids rigidity for rigidity's sake, where denial of benefits would do nothing to serve the Clauses' anti-corruption, anti-influence purpose.
For instance, the Comptroller and the OLC each independently concluded that President Ronald Reagan could collect ordinary retirement benefits from California, where he had served as the state governor, without violating the Domestic Emoluments Clause's prohibition against the receipt of "emoluments" from a State. In its 1983 opinion, the Comptroller determined that President Reagan's pension from California "cannot be construed as being in any manner received in consequence of his possession of the Presidency." Coming to the same conclusion in its earlier 1981 opinion, the OLC also noted that "those [retirement] benefits are not emoluments in the constitutional sense" and their receipt does not "violate the spirit of the Constitution." To support its reasoning, the OLC in turn relied on a 1964 opinion (not published) where it similarly decided the estate of President Kennedy was entitled to the naval retirement pay that had accrued during his presidency. Interpreting the Foreign Emoluments Clause "in the light of its basic purposes and principles," it concluded he could receive payments to which he was entitled as a matter of law "prior to his taking office."
The same principles support allowing officers to collect on certain kinds of money judgments, even from foreign powers. In a 1955 opinion, the Comptroller decided that an attorney in the Justice Department could receive a lump sum payment and lifetime annuity from the German government for his wrongful removal from the judgeship he held before he emigrated to the United States, as provided by German indemnification legislation. The Comptroller reasoned that those payments did not constitute emoluments from his former office, but rather "represent damages payable as a direct result of a moral and legal wrong." Turning to its "spirit of the Constitution" analysis, the Comptroller had no trouble determining the payments were not problematic: they were "obviously . . . not intended to influence him as an officer of the United States," were made under laws not specific to him, and were not payments voluntarily made by the German government but rather mandatory indemnification required by the Allied powers. In a 1954 opinion on the same matter, the OLC came to a slightly different place—the payments were not permitted to the extent they amounted to German retiree benefits—but like the Comptroller, it found that damages intended to redress injury were not prohibited emoluments.
Note what these opinions have in common: they generally allow the officer in question to collect payments or benefits that, patently, have nothing to do with and cannot possibly have been affected by his U.S. office. That 1983 Comptroller opinion put it best, and contains a line worth repeating: President Reagan was entitled to his pension because it "c[ouldn't] be construed as being in any manner received in consequence of his possession of the Presidency."
Applying this general rule, it makes sense that presidents are permitted to invest in U.S. Treasury bonds; and the rule also explains why wealth management solutions like blind trusts have long been accepted as workable resolutions to problems of conflict of interest. But it certainly doesn't provide clearance for all profits derived from discretionary, "fair-market-value" transactions where the president is obviously and individually on one end of the sale.
The Justice Department Defines "Emoluments" Too Narrowly
A key move in the Justice Department's brief is to rely heavily on a point of dubious significance: it asserts that "in every published OLC or Comptroller General opinion in which proposed conduct was determined to involve prohibited emoluments, the determination involved an employment relationship (or a relationship akin to an employment relationship) with the foreign government."
If you think about it, there's at least one common-sense explanation for the limited precedent: In general, the government employees on whose behalf these opinions were sought probably didn't own hotel chains, lucrative licensing agreements, or hundreds of trademarks from which they derived significant foreign-based or domestic government-based income. Their thing of value, as civil servants, was their skill set, and thus the relevant question was whether they were constitutionally permitted to lend out that skill set to foreign governments or organizations with foreign state ties for payment.
A 1986 OLC opinion written by then-Deputy Assistant Attorney General Samuel Alito cuts against the assertion that whether the profit in question is derived from employment or personal services should be, by itself, dispositive. There, Alito determined that a NASA employee could indeed accept a fee for reviewing a PhD candidate's thesis for an Australian university. To get to this conclusion, Alito made two significant moves. First, uncertain as to whether a public university should be regarded a "foreign state," Alito instead decided to turn to the features of the proposed consultancy and consider whether they "raise[d] the kind of concern . . . that motivated" the prohibition's enactment. This marks a functional, purpose-driven approach to the question of permissible benefits. Second, he suggested the following facts weigh against finding the fee a prohibited emolument: (1) the NASA scientist was not selected because of his position with the U.S. government, (2) the fee was an ordinary amount given the service to be rendered, (3) there was no reason for the officer to have "direct contact" with the university officials, and (4) the consultancy was "limited both in time and in substantive scope," and no "continuing relationship" was anticipated.
Note that the fact the scientist would be acting in an employment or personal services capacity did not automatically render the payment an emolument. This is the key takeaway from this opinion, and it is at odds with the Justice Department's claim that employment is the make-or-break issue when it comes to determining whether a benefit or payment is an emolument. Second, consider the implications of the first and fourth points Alito highlighted. The scientist's selection for the job and associated payment had nothing to do with his U.S. office, which is not a conclusion that can be readily drawn about the services purchased by foreign and state government employees newly flocking to Trump International Hotel. It may suggest the permissibility of accepting profits from truly routine transactions by truly routine hotel customers, including some government diplomats—but this possibility is undercut by Alito's reference to the extremely limited nature of the permitted relationship and transaction in question.
The Justice Department is understandably leaning hard on the idea that an emolument must be received specifically as a function of office or employment. After all, without this very specific qualification, its argument for the permissibility of accepting profits from ordinary transactions falls apart. Two OLC opinions make this clear.
A 1982 OLC opinion determined that the Foreign Emoluments Clause barred an employee of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from working on his leave time for an American firm contracted by a Mexican government agency to review the design of a government-owned nuclear power plant. And a 1993 OLC opinion concluded that law firm partners serving as non-government advisors on the Administrative Conference of the United States could not accept partnership earnings "where some portion of that share is derived from the partnership's representation of a foreign government" without triggering the constitutional prohibition. In the 1993 opinion, the OLC actually dismissed the argument that the conference member was not subject to the foreign government's "control" as "not decisive." Instead, the OLC concluded that the portion of partnership profits the conference member would receive "would be a function of the amount paid to the firm by the foreign government," such that "the partnership would in effect be a conduit for that government." Acceptance of that portion of income was therefore a prohibited emolument (OLC reconsidered this opinion in 2010, but only with respect to whether the members held an "Office of . . . Trust" for purposes of the Foreign Emoluments Clause).
In these opinions, the OLC simply did not care that there was nothing out of the ordinary about the payments in these cases from a transactional or fair-market perspective. This runs contrary to the crux of the Justice Department's argument for the innocuousness of Trump's business-related foreign and domestic government income.
The textual kicker in all this is that even accepting the Justice Department's insistence that "emolument" is best read to mean "profit arising from an office or employ" (Barclay's A Complete and Universal English Dictionary on a New Plan (1774)), it doesn't follow that all ordinary business transactions are okay: What if those transactions are, in number or value, enhanced by the prestige of the president's office? Couldn't the profit thereby derived then constitute "profit arising from an office or employ"? [Update, 5:17 pm: This is a line of argument that Marty Lederman compellingly and more thoroughly details here.]
It is to prevent this reading that the Justice Department argues that prohibited benefits must arise not just from the office but from the provision of services pursuant to that office. But this argument relies on a stunted conception of the power that an "Office of Profit or Trust" confers. To lift an example wholesale from Ben Wittes: If Trump owned a nondescript hotdog truck outside the White House that charged the same price for hotdogs as any other foodtruck and sold them to some incidental foreign customers, that would not be problematic under this definition of emoluments. If the truck were Trump-branded and either charged inflated prices or enjoyed inflated sales because Trump is president, and Saudi potentates lined up to put cash in his register, that would seem to constitute impermissible "profit arising from an office," as a textual matter and in view of the historic Comptroller and OLC perspective.
At base, this is what plaintiffs are claiming—that the profits Trump is enjoying "aris[e] from" his office—so "aris[e] from" may be a definitional phrase the Justice Department is interpreting too narrowly. Trump's status as the most powerful man in the world affects his business transactions, which are self-branded to boot. Not only is he enjoying booming business at his exclusive properties, in part thanks to foreign guests reportedly seeking to get in the president's good graces, but he has also won Chinese trademark protection that, according to plaintiffs, he would not have received had he not become president.
Finally, on a practical note, notice the perverse upshot of the Justice Department's fixation on employment and personal services as the place where the river divides. This assertion—that payment for goods and business-related services is permissible but payment for employment and "personal services" is not—means that a president can't profit off his own brain or body when it comes to cash from foreign sources or U.S. government entities, but can, almost without limitation, profit off the brains and bodies of those he can afford to employ in his private capacity. It's what you might call a constitutional free pass for super-rich presidents.
The Comptroller and OLC opinions do not support such a result. They repudiate it.
Ultimately, the Justice Department's view of emoluments marks a departure from the public Comptroller and OLC opinions in at least two critical respects. First, the new position is a clear abrogation of the practical "spirit of the Constitution" analysis on which the Comptroller and OLC have consistently relied to ensure a stringent rather than forgiving interpretation of what constitutes an impermissible benefit or undue influence (see, e.g., 1955 Comptroller Opinion, 1981 OLC Opinion, 1983 Comptroller Opinion; see also OLC 1962, noting "the sweeping nature of the constitutional prohibition"; OLC 1980, citing 1902 Attorney General Opinion stating the Foreign Emoluments Clause is "directed against every kind of influence by foreign governments upon officers of the United States" and the "prohibition should be given the broadest possible scope and application"). Second, the Justice Department's quite specific argument that the president can profit from employing people to do business with foreign countries and government entities in the United States amounts to a strange carve-out, one that allows extremely wealthy officers with people in their employ to cash out as they wish on the advantages that the prestige of their office confers, without any consideration whatsoever of the sources of that cash. This interpretation is flatly at odds with executive branch tradition: I have yet to see a single opinion that has permitted an officer to collect profits even arguably enhanced by the power of his office, much less categorically benefit from discretionary, price-indeterminant transactions that foreign governments and U.S. government entities may enter into at will.
Note the issues I did not address here. What is not (yet) a point of debate in these particular lawsuits is whether these constitutional provisions apply to the president at all. The Domestic Emoluments Clause applies to the president by its express terms, and in its recent motion, the Justice Department doesn't dispute CREW's claim, or the OLC's preexisting determination, that the more obliquely phrased Foreign Emoluments Clause applies to the president as well (and notwithstanding the occasional argument to the contrary).
In addition, as the suits proceed in federal court, we can expect much of the legal discussion to focus on jurisdictional hurdles. There's a strong argument that the courts don't have a role to play, and that presidential corruption rising to the level of an emoluments violation is a political question whose resolution properly lies with Congress. Though the congressional suit spearheaded by Senator Richard Blumenthal and Representative John Conyers, Jr. alleges that Trump has failed to come to Congress for requisite permission in accepting foreign emoluments, Congress's best recourse could be impeachment proceedings. (Or if it so chose, Congress could avail itself of a lot of options short of impeachment, but in the words of Charles Black, Jr., circa 1974, "what an enormous if." Recall that the House of Representatives has the power to demand Trump's tax returns and has not exercised it.)
But as for the substantive question of whether the Comptroller and OLC of yore would have signed off on the Justice Department's blessing of all monies flowing into Trump's coffers by way of business transactions, the answer is "no."
Aegis,
emoluments,
Foreign Emoluments Clause,
Domestic Emoluments Clause,
Office of Legal Counsel (OLC),
Comptroller General
Jane Chong is former deputy managing editor of Lawfare. She served as a law clerk on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and is a graduate of Yale Law School and Duke University.
chongathon
Cyberattack Attribution as Empowerment and Constraint
Kristen Eichensehr Fri, Jan 15, 2021, 10:15 AM
U.S. Cyber Command's First Decade
Michael Warner Tue, Dec 8, 2020, 10:53 AM
Cyberattacks and the Constitution
Matthew Waxman Thu, Nov 12, 2020, 8:01 AM
Due Diligence and the U.S. Defend Forward Cyber Strategy
Eric Talbot Jensen, Sean Watts Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 11:06 AM
Covert Deception, Strategic Fraud, and the Rule of Prohibited Intervention
Gary Corn Thu, Sep 24, 2020, 12:15 PM


Drue Cappawana is in his senior year at MASH. This is his first year with The Torch, and he serves as the opinion editor for the paper. Drue also represents as co-leader of MASH's Gay-Straight Alliance and the President of the Diversity Club. Drue finds passion in history and politics, as he plans on majoring in political science when he moves on to higher education. He is a fan of the Colorado Avalanche hockey team and the Denver Broncos football team.


Punctured paper, candle, pinhole camera box, bouncing ball, mirror, periscope box, kaleidoscope box etc. What can you do with these?
Using different theorems of light like Reflection, Refraction etc you can do 25 experiments with them. For example, lit a paper without fire, discovering vanished coin, making rainbows with mirror, seeing difficult things with periscope, entering the colorful world of kaleidoscope etc.
Mainly three theorem of light are used in this science box. Reflection,Refraction and Total internal reflection. It might sound hard, but many interesting experiment can be done with these theorem. And for the most part, day to day objects like glass, papers, light are enough to do these experiments. There's no better way to see the beauty of science other than light as a medium. So much beauty and mazement is hidden within light. That's why "color of light" will induce curiosity about science to children and also color their minds.
This box is full of joy! Things are very simple, but the results are outstanding! You can make rainbow, see stuffs beyond your eyesight, can produce new color and much more! Here we are going to show you the apparatus of Color of light box. Hope you will enjoy.
Periscope! Are you familiar with this name? Periscope is a wonder of science. A mind blowing creation by applying a simple scientific innovation-the reflection of light. Sometimes in a stadium or any crowded place, kids like you can't see what is happening in the front. Periscope will make it possible. You will be the smartest kid on the block!
Here is a gift from one of the greatest scientist of all time Sir Isaac Newton. He invented a color wheel which can produce new color by mixing some other colors. This is so simple. All you need to do this experiment is a battery casing, motor and some color wheels. For example, take the red and blue wheel. Connect it to the motor and battery. It will start moving, and the color will change! It will amuse you!
Science box is such type of box through which children can learn science practically by doing experiments themselves. The box Color Of Light contains 20 experiment about light. All necessary materials, a manual book and a video tutorial is also available in this box to do the experiments.


While visiting the city of Udaipur, it is hard to miss the famous locality of Subhash Nagar Udaipur. It is a beautiful area in Udaipur, Udaipur City Railway Station and Udaipur Bus Stand are some of the major landmarks associated with Subhash Nagar Udaipur.
The nearest station to Subhash Nagar Udaipur is Udaipur City. Some other popular localities near this place are City Palace and Fatehpura.
Due to its charming appeal, a high number of tourists visit Subhash Nagar Udaipur. And, this is the reason that the area is brimmed with top-notch hotels. Some of the premium 5-star hotels you will find in Subhash Nagar Udaipur are juSTa Sajjangarh Resort & Spa, The Leela Palace Udaipur, and Spectrum by 1589 Hotels. If these seem too heavy for your pockets, then you may check out some of the popular 4-star hotels in the locality. These include Mewargarh - Red Tullip Hotels, Udaipur, Fateh Niwas, and Bhairavgarh By Zennia.
The 4-star and 5-star hotels in Subhash Nagar Udaipur give you the taste of luxury. They are equipped with a lot of amenities to make your stay a comfortable one. Some of the amenities you will find in these hotels are Wifi, Coffe Shop, and 24 Hour Checkin.


The Synchronous-Serial-Interface (SSI) is a digital interface which is mostly used in length and angle measuring systems. It is especially suitable for applications where reliability and signal robustness is very important. The Max Stegmann GmbH, which is now a part of the company group SICK, was the developer of the SSI. Meanwhile, SSI is also used by other manufacturers. Unlike a parallel interface, where the bits are transmitted in various lines, transmission here is serial – which means successively.
Internship report: Every end is a new beginning!
After one year the practical training of our intern Mareike is going to end this week. Immediately after this she will start the studies in information management at the University of Applied Sciences Kaiserslautern at the campus of Zweibrücken. In order to give you an insight into the working life of an intern at the Robot Makers GmbH, we asked Mareike to summarize her working life for us. Finally, we thank Mareike for her commitment and dedication for the Robot Makers GmbH and we wish her much success and fun for the upcoming studies and her later professional life.
In the current issue (03/2015) of the UNI SPECTRUM, our company is presented in a short portrait. The UNI SPECTRUM is a magazine of the Technical University of Kaiserslautern which is published every three months with a print run of 7000 to 9000 copies. The magazine can be downloaded here. The article about our company can be found on page 45.


text:
LinkedIn Talent Blog Talent Blog
Search... Clear Search Input
{{authorName}} {{publishDate}}
No one likes popups. But you'll like our newsletter.
Get remarkable recruiting strategies, tips, and trends right in your inbox.
Do not show me this again.
Andy Cohen's Secret to Recruiting (and Life): Passion
Paul Petrone
Andy Cohen, at his keynote address at Talent Connect Anaheim this Thursday, described his career journey as "lucky", "unconventional" and "circuitous." He talked about how fortunate he was getting a break at CBS News, or how unusual it is that a television executive would all-of-a-sudden become the host of a late night talk show on Bravo.
And yet, when he peeled back the onion a bit, you realize luck might have helped a bit, and his journey was certainly a bit unconventional. But the real driver to all his success was one thing: passion.
"The keyword that has served as the organizing force in my career is passion," Cohen told thousands of talent professionals in his keynote speech. "I always had a passion for television, which I wanted to always do."
Cohen is currently the head of talent and development at Bravo and also is the host of Watch What Happens Live, a nightly talk show on the network. To succeed at both jobs, he has had to build a strong team.
So what does he look for when hiring? Well, unsurprisingly, it is the same thing that propelled his own career: passion. He wants people who love what they do and will go above and beyond what's required.
"I screen for passion," he said. "I want people who love what they do."
The career of Andy Cohen: A long path to fulfilling a childhood dream
When Cohen was growing up in St. Louis, all he wanted to do was be on TV. Particularly, he loved TV news, and his dream was to be a famous media personality some day.
So, naturally, he pursued it by completing several internships, the last of which was at CBS News in New York City. However, after it was done, there was no spot to hire him at the news channel and he had a choice: go home to Missouri or wait tables in New York City and wait for a position at CBS to open up.
Rather than give up on his dream, he decided to wait tables in New York City and wait. A week later, low and behold, someone quit and he got a full-time job at CBS News as a desk assistant.
For 10 years, Cohen worked at CBS, "loving every minute of it." He worked long hours with limitless enthusiasm - "I'm sure I was so annoying to be around I loved it so much" he said - eventually rising to the role of senior producer.
In 2000, he got an offer from legendary television executive Barry Diller to become vice president of original programming at Trio, a pop culture network. After a few years, the network, despite critical acclaim, was cancelled, and Cohen landed a position as executive vice president of talent and development at Bravo.
He flourished there for years, starting shows like Millionaire Matchmaker and Top Chef, but there was a still a constant in his career: he was always behind the camera. Despite his lifelong dream of being on TV and exceptional success in television, he had never actually been on television.
That said, he was happy with his career and continued to enjoy producing engaging television. Although, one of his favorite past times was sending emails to Bravo Network executive Lauren Zalaznick about all the drama going on off the set on shows.
Zalaznick enjoyed the emails and encouraged Cohen to do something no network executive had done before – start blogging about the backstage gossip publicly, as a way to market the shows. Cohen reluctantly agreed, and soon the blogs became among the most popular pieces of content Bravo was producing.
That led to him hosting a reunion show online, and then a web show and, eventually, Watch What Happens Live. So, despite no real intention of being on TV, his goal was achieved anyway. Now Cohen – hired by Bravo to be a man behind the scenes – was the public face of the company.
"It just doesn't happen that network executives go on air, and become stars on their own network," Cohen said. "But it happened to me."
Cohen's message to recruiters
Several times throughout his keynote address, Cohen praised the staff at Bravo and talked about the importance of building a great team. Additionally, he said a big part of his job is finding the right people to put on television.
So how does he do it? Again, it comes down to passion. For reality stars, as an example, he wants people who are truly passionate about what they're on the show for, instead of being obsessed with being TV. Specifically, for his show Top Chef, he doesn't want chefs who have a strong desire to be a reality star; he wants chefs who have a strong desire to be great chefs.
He encouraged the crowd of 4,000 talent professionals watching on to put the same emphasis on passion when they're hiring. But he also encouraged all of them to follow their own dreams as well, no matter how outrageous they might seem.
"We should be excited to be doing what we are doing, because we spend so much time doing it," Cohen said. "So really do something you love."
To receive blog posts like this one straight in your inbox, subscribe to the blog newsletter.
Talent Connect,
Photo Recap: Highlights from Talent Connect Sydney 2015
The Remarkable Life of 'Hidden Figure' Katherine Johnson — and Its Lessons for Talent Leaders
LinkedIn Corporation © 2021


text:
Q: Retrieve all user all recent tweets from past 7 days and then retrieve all users who replied to those tweets What I want to do is to learn which is better way to get all tweets from a user profile URL and then get all users who replied to those tweets and remove duplicates from list before adding them in to csv or excel file. I found this Git project but its not what I want
https://github.com/nirholas/Get-Tweet-Replies-With-Python-Tweepy
Could anyone guide me to a better library or idea?

A: Tweepy is a very good library for interacting with Twitter in Python.
I'd suggest taking a look at Tweepy's documentation and starter guide. It's quite simple to work with once you understand what functions are available.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Q: How can I allow thrown errors to bubble up? When I require a module that throws an error, it ends up returning an empty module instead of allowing that error to bubble up.
My code looks like:
var module = require("./path/to/the-module");
doSomethingWithComponent(module.mainComponent);

When there is no error thrown the module looks something like:
{
  getters: []
  actions: []
  mainComponent: <TheComponent />
}

When there is an error it ends up like:
{}

An example of something that breaks the component looks like so:
var TheComponent = React.createClass({
  getDefaultProps() {
    return { x: this.props.x };
  }
});

Using Chrome's "Pause On Caught Exceptions" option I've tracked down that the exception is happening but it being caught. I'm unable to track down where it's being caught at.
Here's a screenshot of the error happening:

Here's a screenshot highlighting how it gets set to an empty object:

My webpack config looks like:
var _ = require('lodash');
var path = require('path');
var fs = require('fs');
var webpack = require('webpack');
var ExtractTextPlugin = require('extract-text-webpack-plugin');
var vendorLibs = {
  _: 'lodash',
  $: 'jquery',
  jQuery: 'jquery',
  bootstrap: 'bootstrap',
  key: 'mousetrap',
  React: 'react/addons',
  debug: 'debug',
  cx: 'classnames',
  Immutable: 'immutable',
  immstruct: 'immstruct',
  interact: 'interact.js'
};
var providePlugin = {
  Mixins: path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'app', 'mixins', 'index.js'),
  Util: path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'app', 'lib', 'Util.js'),
  reactor: path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'app', 'reactor.js')
};

var config = {
  entry: {
    app: './src/app/components/App.jsx',
    vendor: _.values(vendorLibs)
  },
  output: {
    path: './src/compiled/js',
    filename: 'app.js'
  },
  module: {
    loaders: [{
      test: /^(?!.*node_modules)+.+\.jsx?$/,
      loader: 'babel'
    }, {
      test: /\.json5$/,
      loader: 'json5-loader'
    }, {
      test: /\.css$/,
      loader: ExtractTextPlugin.extract('style-loader', 'css-loader!autoprefixer-loader')
    }, {
      test: /\.less$/,
      loader: ExtractTextPlugin.extract('style-loader', 'css-loader!autoprefixer-loader!less-loader')
    }, {
      test: /\.png$/,
      loader: 'file'
    }, {
      test: /\.(ttf|eot|svg|woff2?)(\?v=(\d|\.)+)?$/,
      loader: 'file?name=../fonts/[hash].[ext]'
    }]
  },
  resolve: {
    root: [
      path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'app'),
      path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'app', 'components'),
      path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'less'),
      path.join(__dirname, 'src', 'icons')
    ],
    extensions: [
      '', '.jsx', '.js'
    ]
  },
  plugins: [
    new webpack.optimize.CommonsChunkPlugin('vendor', 'vendor.js'),
    new webpack.ResolverPlugin(
      new webpack.ResolverPlugin.DirectoryDescriptionFilePlugin(['main'])
    ),
    new webpack.ProvidePlugin(_.extend({}, vendorLibs, providePlugin)),
    new ExtractTextPlugin('../css/app.css', { allChunks: true })
  ]
};

module.exports = config;

This app is also using NuclearJS and this component being required is a result of an action being dispatched so it's possible it could also be catching it there.
I'd like this error to not be caught so that I can spot it and resolve it without diving into the debugger. Does anyone know how I can make that happen?

A: Turns out there was a section of code with a try/catch that looked pretty innocent but led to this issue. After I found that I can address the problem. It looked like so:
    try {
      require(`modules/${variableValue}/index`);
    } catch (err) {
      dbg(`Cannot load module ${variableValue}`);
    }

The dbg was not logging in the browser thus I didn't see it.