Found 61 related files. Current in page 1
Eleven days after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, Congress passed the Air Transportation Safety and Stabilization Act (hereinafter “Act” or “Stabilization Act”)1 to protect air carriers from tort lawsuits that threatened to cripple air travel in America. The Act capped tort lawsuits against the airlines at their pre-existing liability insurance limits and limited jurisdiction for tort claims to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Moreover, the Act established the September 11th Compensation Fund of 2001 (hereinafter “Fund” or “9/11 Fund”), in which victims of the attacks could opt to waive all federal and state tort claims and receive administrative relief through a predetermined formula, under the discretion of the Fund administrator. That the airlines were so concerned about their liability exposure, and the Congress so willing to act promptly upon that concern, is a testament to the mess our modern civil justice system has become.2 This paper will: (1) outline the contours of the “litigation explosion” in the United States, and the problems it creates; (2) examine briefly the historical precedents for administrative remedies designed to replace common law tort actions; (3) expand this analysis to survey the 9/11 Fund experience; and (4) discuss the implications of this experience for possible policy solutions to the liability crisis.
Okay, so what is a robot? Per definition of en.wikipedia.org, the Holder of All Human Knowledge, a robot is: a mechanical device that can perform physical tasks. A robot may act under the direct control of a human (eg. the robotic arm of the space shuttle) or autonomously under the control of a pre-programmed computer. In the context of Science Olympiad and other small engineering competitions, we are looking at the first type, human control. There are plenty of opportunities to put autonomous features into a Science Olympiad robot, but if you are reading this for content, it is likely beyond your scope and unnecessary. Therefore, for the purposes of this text only, a robot will be defined as: A mechanical device, operated under the direct control of a human, that is engineered to perform a specific task or accomplish a goal. In this case, the goal is to compete in Science Olympiad's Robot Ramble event. And win. More on that later. I'm not smart enough to build a robot! Yes you are. Modern technology has developed to the point at which it permeates our lives. One side effect of this is that it is much easier to learn and try out than in years past. The hobby robotics market is only increasing, and there are a number of companies that specifically make products catered to robots and their builders. Full directions and kits are available to build or program small robots. In some cases, they're even premade, and all you have to do is mess with them. This is often the best way to go about learning.
Asked by SixfootJames on 2012-10-24T11:49:33-04:00 I've been given an old bag of Ricoh camera and lenses and I find that it would be such a waste not to be able to use in some way all this again for something. Can you give me some suggestions as to how to use this kind of equipment with a newer camera like a Canon 600D? Archives Arts Questions and Answers Photography Questions and Answers Oct 24th, 2012 Archives Week 43, 2012 Archives October, 2012 Archives Tags Lens Dslr Old Lenses Best Answer Answered by John Cavan on 2012-10-24T23:11:20-04:00 Ricoh, historically, used the Pentax K-mount for their film SLR cameras, but with a slight and important modification: they added a pin that's used to indicate the aperture is in auto mode for shutter priority use. With some careful work, you can http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/25959708 for use on K-mount bodies made by Pentax or Samsung or with a http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/B003Y3EJMU for Canon EOS digital and film variants. Nevertheless, if you have Ricoh K-mount lenses, that pin has to go. You can confirm if you have these based on this helpful bit of info from Wikipedia: The R-K mount is used on Rikenon P lenses, Ricoh bodies that include the letter 'P' in their model number, and some non-Ricoh lenses. Now, it's also possible that the Ricoh lenses are M42 screw-mount lenses also known, funny enough, as the Pentax mount when most film cameras had it and Pentax was the SLR king. If that is the case, and it's easy to tell by just looking for threads on the lens mount, then you can easily get...
The Horde 4 PHP framework. Gunnar Wrobel firstname.lastname@example.org. May, 13th 2011 . Gunnar Wrobel (email@example.com). Horde 4. May, 13th 2011. 1 / 44 ... The Horde 4 PHP framework Gunnar Wrobel firstname.lastname@example.org May, 13th 2011 Gunnar Wrobel (email@example.com) Horde 4 May, 13th 2011 1 / 44 Components Components = Modules = Libraries = Packages = ... Photo: Rudolf Ammann [http://www.flickr.com/photos/rka/1415516/] Gunnar Wrobel (firstname.lastname@example.org) Horde 4 May, 13th 2011 2 / 44 The Horde 4 PHP framework There are more than 90 components available from http://pear.horde.org. Photo: Aaron Merriﬁeld [http://www.flickr.com/photos/spammt/4823025103/] Gunnar Wrobel (email@example.com) Horde 4 May, 13th 2011 3 / 44 Groupware Photo: Denise Chan [http://www.flickr.com/photos/denn/5005046/] Gunnar Wrobel (firstname.lastname@example.org) Horde 4 May, 13th 2011 4 / 44 Groupware Deﬁnition “[...] groupware [...] is computer software designed to help people involved in a common task achieve their goals [...].”a a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupware Remote It is usually associated with team members not physically co-located. Asynchronous Communication between team members is primarily asynchronous. Gunnar Wrobel (email@example.com) Horde 4 May, 13th 2011 5 / 44
Emerging online collaboration platforms such as Wikipedia, Twitter, or Facebook provide the foundation for socio-technical systems where humans have become both content consumer and provider. Existing software engineering tools and techniques support the system engineer in designing and assessing the technical infrastructure. Little research, however, addresses the engineer’s need for understanding the overall socio-technical system behavior. The eﬀect of fundamental design decisions becomes quickly unpredictable as multiple collaboration patterns become integrated into a single system. We propose the simulation of human and software elements at the collaboration level. We aim for detecting and evaluating undesirable system behavior such as users experiencing repeated update conﬂicts or software components becoming overloaded. To this end, this paper contributes (i) a language and (ii) methodology for specifying and simulating large-scale collaboration structures, (iii) example individual and aggregated pattern simulations, and (iv) evaluation of the overall approach. Keywords: Design Tools and Techniques, System Simulation, Collaboration Patterns, Large-scale Socio-Technical Systems
For a Criminal Investigation of the Events of September 11th, 2001 The worst single criminal act ever committed on US soil, the attacks of September 11th, 2001 have served as justiﬁcation for: US invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq; a new doctrine of preventive war; the USA PATRIOT Act and Department of Homeland Security; torture and indeﬁnite detention of “enemy combatants”; surveillance of citizens without a court warrant; and shifting trillions of dollars in public spending priorities. Surveys by Zogby and Scripps-Howard found that signiﬁcant proportions of US citizens believe their own government had “actionable foreknowledge” of the attacks and “consciously failed to act” (Zogby 2004), or even that elements of the state were involved in orchestrating the attacks. The widespread disbelief in the ofﬁcial story indicates a deep crisis of trust in government, one that only an exhaustive and fearless criminal investigation can address. We ﬁrmly believe there is probable cause for such an investigation. The case for investigation is based on three pillars: 1) evidence of cover-up and a lack of serious investigation after the fact; 2) evidence of misconduct on the day of 9/11 3) evidence of foreknowledge and preparation before September 11th. Undertaking a full-scale, truly independent investigation is imperative, not only because there must be justice for the victims, but also because of the role 9/11 has played in justifying policies of aggression supposedly justifed by 9/11 must be halted, and a shattered public trust must be repaired. The 9/11 Cover-up 1 • During their 2002 inquiry, the Congressional joint intelligence committees (who redacted 1/4 of their report) were scrutinized by an FBI counter-investigation, which invaded the Senate in search of an alleged leak. It was widely believed that the FBI investigation may have been intended to have a chilling effect on the conduct of the Congressional Joint Inquiry. • The Congressional investigation failed to pursue solid evidence of a money trail to the alleged hijackers from the US-allied Pakistani intelligence agency (ISI). The ISI chief was removed from his post when strong evidence of his connection to the plot surfaced in early October 2001, but no serious punitive action was taken against him. • Evidence was destroyed or withheld, including suppression of the discovery of black boxes from the two ﬂights at Ground Zero and the destruction of tapes made by the air trafﬁc controllers who handled the same ﬂights.2 • Whistleblowers such as FBI translator Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer of “Able Danger” were disciplined or ﬁred, even as FBI, CIA, and military ofﬁcials who were blamed for failures received promotions and medals. • The September 11th relatives who lobbied for the 9/11 Commission (after 14 months of White House resistance) submitted 400 questions that Commissioners accepted as a “roadmap.” 70 percent of the questions were fully ignored in The 9/11 Commission Report. Many of the relatives later declared the Report a whitewash.3 • 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned in late 2003, calling the panel a whitewash and saying, “Bush is scamming America.” There • Philip Zelikow, the 9/11 Commission executive director who oversaw the panel’s activities, refused to step down after the September 11th families called for his resignation due to grave conﬂicts of interest (close association with Condoleezza Rice, member of White House national security staff both before 9/11 and in 2002, member of Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board). • Rice may have committed perjury in her April 2004 Commission testimony that an August 2001 Presidential Daily Brieﬁng to Bush was only of “historical signiﬁcance,” when in fact it detailed current intelligence. • The 9/11 Commission Report claimed the ﬁnancial background of the attacks was unknown, but dismissed the question as being of “little practical signiﬁcance” (page 172). Since when doesn’t an investigation “follow the money”? • Large sections of the report are based on the confessions of “enemy combatants” such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, as provided in the form of transcripts by the government. The 9/11 Commission staff was not allowed to see or interview any of these “enemy combatants.” • Over a period of several years, NORAD, FAA, White House and military ofﬁcials gave widely divergent and conﬂicting accounts of the air defense response to 9/11, but no one was ever held accountable for upholding falsehoods. The 9/11 Commission chairs later admitted they considered a criminal investigation of NORAD’s statements, but preferred instead to present a unanimous report. • The focus of the Commission will be on the future. We’re not interested in trying to assess blame. We do not consider that part of the Commission’s responsibility. – Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission vice-chairman.
Welcome to the COMPASS Sample Mathematics Test! You are about to look at some sample test questions as you prepare to take the actual COMPASS test. The examples in this booklet are similar to the kinds of test questions you are likely to see when you take the actual COMPASS test. Since this is a practice exercise, you will answer just a few questions and you won’t receive a real test score. The answer key follows the sample questions. Once you are ready to take the actual COMPASS test, you need to know that the test is computer delivered and untimed— that is, you may work at your own pace. After you complete the test, you can get a score report to help you make good choices when you register for college classes. We hope you benefit from these sample questions, and we wish you success as you pursue your education and career goals! Note to Parents The test questions in this sample set are similar to the kinds of test questions your son or daughter will encounter when they take the actual COMPASS test. Since these questions are only for practice, they do not produce a test score; students answer more questions on the actual test. The aim of this booklet is to give a sense of the kinds of questions examinees will face and their level of difficulty. There is an answer key at the end. COMPASS Mathematics Tests The COMPASS Mathematics Tests are organized around five principal content domains: numerical skills/prealgebra, algebra, college algebra, geometry, and trigonometry. To ensure variety in the content and complexity of items within each domain, COMPASS includes mathematics items of three general levels of cognitive complexity: basic skills, application, and analysis. A basic skills item can be solved by performing a sequence of basic operations. An application item involves applying sequences of basic operations to novel settings or in complex ways. An analysis item requires students to demonstrate a conceptual understanding of the principles and relationships relevant to particular mathematical operations. Items in each of the content domains sample extensively from these three cognitive levels. Students are permitted to use calculators on all current Windows® and Internet versions of COMPASS Mathematics Tests. Calculators must, however, meet ACT’s specifications, which are the same for COMPASS and the ACT Assessment. These specifications are updated periodically and can be found at ACT’s website at http://www.act.org/aap/taking/calculator.html
Tech City UK has named Global Personals Ltd in the second wave of 25 companies to join the Future Fifty programme, which matches high potential growth-stage businesses with bespoke public and private sector support. Visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhiteLabelDating
Global Personals provide social discovery and dating networks to countries on no less than four continents across the globe. Members of a Global Personals website can choose to focus their searches on people in their local area with a view to meeting personally once a relationship has been established. Visit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Personals