1851465 items (1851465 unread) in 479 feeds
Sångerskan Pernilla Wahlgren ställde till med en rejäl tabbe under lördagen. En främling fick ingripa när "Wahlgrens värld"-stjärnan glömt en viktig detalj.
"Vi skrattade gott när en dam påpekade att prislappen hängde kvar på min tröja…!" skriver Pernilla Wahlgren på sin blogg.
Melania Trump, with her big sunglasses, belted ensembles, and face-framing brown mane, has what you might call a signature look, one that wouldn’t be all that hard to re-create on another woman of similar height and build if, for some reason, another Melania were required. At least, that’s the rationale online sleuths and jokesters are using to argue that the first lady is using a body double.
After President Trump made an appearance with his wife on Friday in Maryland, speculation started bubbling up that actually the woman by his side wasn’t Melania, but some kind of stand-in. Paper magazine pointed to a Facebook post by Andrea Wagner Barton as the originator of the theory: “Is it me or during his speech today a decoy ‘stood in’ for Melania?? And.... Why would the moron say ‘my wife, Melania, who happens to be right here…’ ” That post has gathered more than 100,000 shares, which on Facebook makes it roughly as credible as the Encyclopedia Britannica was considered in the before times.* In the images from Friday, “Melania” has her face hidden by her usual big sunglasses, and a strange outline appears around her nose that makes it look, if you squint, like one of those fake noses on a pair of Groucho glasses with the eyebrows and mustache attached. Plus, the weather rendered Melania’s blowout a little less perfect than usual, revealing layers that usually aren’t visible, which is to say rare cracks in the smooth-surfaced exterior she usually boasts.
It took a few days, but in that wacky way social media mobs have of seizing on something and fixating on it regardless of evidence or reason, “fake Melania” became a Twitter obsession on Wednesday. Why are otherwise levelheaded people willing to make this leap? First of all, it’s pretty funny, and we all could use a little laughter. Where do these fake Melanias come from? What does that NDA look like? Nice to have a controversy that doesn’t involve people being kicked out of their countries or having their rights taken away. As far as we know!
But there’s also the Trump administration’s long record of ridiculous antics, which have conditioned us to believe that just about anything is possible. The man uses Scotch tape on his ties and owns a fake Renoir. A fake Time magazine with him on the cover as well as a plaque for a Civil War battle that never took place adorn his golf clubs. At this point, we don’t trust anything these people do. The idea of pulling a stunt like having a body double for the first lady and then ostentatiously lying about is just about as Trumpian as it gets.
And if anybody in the Trump administration had a body double, it would be Melania. The first lady didn’t seem particularly enthusiastic to move to Washington, to accompany her husband as his presidency was beginning, and her slowness to fill out her staff could also indicate a reluctance to participate in official White House activities. On social media, critics of Donald Trump have taken special glee in dissecting the moments when Melania seems to reject her husband’s hand or forget to hide the despair on her face. So the thought that maybe, just maybe, the real Melania is lying in a spa somewhere with cucumbers on her eyes, Barron by her side, binge-watching The Real Housewives of Ljubljana, waiting for 2021? It’s simply too delicious to resist.
*Correction, Oct. 18, 2017: This post originally misspelled Encyclopedia Britannica. (Return.)
J.P. Morgan has created what is arguably one of the largest blockchain payments networks to date.
The financial services company announced that the Royal Bank of Canada and Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd. are the first two banks to join the blockchain network, "representing significant cross-border payment volumes."
J.P. Morgan created the Interbank Information Network (IIN), which it said will significantly reduce the number of participants needed to respond to compliance and other data-related inquiries that delay payments.
To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here
Degerfors Volley är nykomlingar i årets elitserie för damer och laget stärker upp den redan volleyboll-täta regionen, men på planen är det lågt kvar till toppen för laget.
Trots en setseger mot hemmalaget Örebro Volley blev Degerfors helt överkörda i kvällens historiska volleyderby i idrottshuset.
Örebro spände musklerna direktDet blev ingen rolig start för Degerfors, Örebro vann första set med förkrossande 25-7. Dessutom valde coach Brendan Garlick att vila några av nyckelspelarna under första set.
Detta påverkade dock spelet under andra set där ett piggare Degerfors kunde utnyttja ett passivt Örebro. Örebro tappade många bollar och kom aldrig tillbaka trots att Garlick toppade laget mot slutet av setet. Setsiffrorna blev 21-25 till bortalaget.
Enkel seger för ÖrebroI de två sista seten tog återigen Örebro kommandot i matchen och krossade Degerfors. Setsiffrorna blev 25-10 och 25-6, Örebro vann alltså sista set med en marginal på 19 poäng. Totalt kunde Örebro vinna med 96-48.
Brendan Garlick satte i slutet av andra set in sina toppar Diana Lundvall, Emmy Andersson och Josephine Tegenfalk. Detta coachdrag klarade inte Degerfors av att hantera då de redan hade svårt med Kristen Besselsen som efter matchen blev utsedd till Örebros bäste spelare ikväll.
För Örebro väntar en ny match redan på Söndag, då tar man emot Lund. Den matchen spelas i Idrottshuset klockan 15.00.
Since starting this pop-up blog, I have received and read many comments from people who are convinced that it exists solely as an excuse to gratuitously bash Fox News. This is not true! I only bash Fox News when the network deserves it, and it is not my fault that the network deserves it so often. But there are things to like about Fox News, too. One of those things was an excellent discussion segment on Wednesday afternoon’s edition of Outnumbered Overtime with Harris Faulkner.
Faulkner is a regular host on Fox News’ weird midday show, Outnumbered, which features four recurring female panelists and one rotating male panelist deemed “#OneLuckyGuy.” The show really ought to be called Interrupted, since every time I watch it the network seems to end up cutting away to some live hearing or press conference. (This fate seems a bit on-the-nose for the network’s designated “lady” program.) She also hosts the network’s 1:00 p.m. show, Outnumbered Overtime, which often suffers the same fate as its predecessor. She is smart and competent and deserves better than relegation to the day’s two most pre-emptible hours, but what can you do?
Anyway! The segment I’m referring to came about two-thirds of the way through Wednesday’s program in response to a clip of President Trump addressing the Heritage Foundation. “NO APOLOGIES. Trump talks up ‘God, Christmas’ in speech,” read the Fox News chyron. Faulkner turned to two guests—Republican strategist Evan Siegfried and Outnumbered panelist and former State Department spokesperson Marie Harf—for a conversation about “political red meat,” prompting them to address Trump’s Christmas comments and his views on NFL players kneeling during the national anthem.
I was not expecting much from this discussion. Harf is Outnumbered’s designated liberal and is rarely able to complete a sentence on that program without being talked over or patronized by one or more of her colleagues. Moreover, liberal Fox guests rarely fare well when they are asked to weigh in on the culture wars because they are inevitably forced into defensive postures against their counterparts’ emotional volleys. But the Outnumbered Overtime segment turned out to be that rarest of things, not just for Fox News but for cable news in general: a calm, productive, mutually respectful political discussion between ideological opposites, moderated by a host who seemed interested in bringing out the best, rather than the worst, in her guests. The segment was refreshingly free from obviously tendentious claims, belligerent interruptions, and disingenuousness. This was Fox News at its best. Let’s break it down.
Faulkner directed her first question to Siegfried, the Republican strategist. When Fox News hosts start with their Republican panelists, they’re typically looking for a hot take that will set the tone for the segment. Siegfried, instead, started with some reasonable observations. “He’s talking about issues that many Americans feel very strongly about,” he said. “And at the same time it is a very smart trap he’s laid for Democrats, because Democrats go out and reflexively oppose Trump at anything and everything he does. And when they’re making the argument that ‘No, you should be able to kneel,’ it translates to some voters as, ‘They’re against people standing for the national anthem.’ ”
Nothing to argue with there! Harf then noted that Trump is fixated on the culture wars “in part because he hasn’t had a lot of success on the traditional legislative agenda he laid out as promises he would keep,” such as health care and tax reform. Again, hard to dispute those points. “I don’t think it’s going to grow his numbers beyond that base support,” Harf continued, “and his numbers are still at historical lows for a president in the first year. I think he’s trying to solidify the base. What will be interesting is whether that works in 2018, when he’s not on the ballot but his party is.”
“There are a lot of people who are dissatisfied with the president,” conceded Siegfried. “And when [Democrats] go out and they defend people doing things that are offensive to many Americans, when Democrats defend that, that does not offer an alternative. Democrats haven’t come out with a message. … Their message is, ‘No, you can kneel for the national anthem. No, you shouldn’t say Merry Christmas,’ or that freedom might not even be a God-given right. It actually makes Democrats shoot themselves in the foot by defending it.”
OK, that Merry Christmas point was disingenuous and dumb. But hey, nobody’s perfect, not even Evan Siegfried on Outnumbered Overtime. Anyway, Faulkner didn’t let that one assertion derail the segment. Instead, she brought the discussion back to a place of consensus. “I saw you nodding when Evan was talking,” said Faulkner to Harf. Good work! A moderator who pays attention to her panelists is a moderator who is best equipped to get the best from her panelists.
“What I agree with is the Democrats need a positive message and a positive agenda, it can’t just be anti-Trump. Didn’t work in 2016, it’s not going to work next year, and it’s certainly not going to work in 2020,” said Harf. “But it’s so interesting to me. Donald Trump throughout his life has never been someone to use this kind of overtly—”
“How do you know that?” said Faulkner—not in a condemnatory way, just asking.
“He’s been a public figure for decades and decades,” said Harf. Good response! And both Faulkner and Siegfried accepted Harf’s logic without trying to shout her down or, say, claiming that Trump has actually been a secret churchgoer since boyhood. This is a very rare thing for Fox News! And it’s also rare for a Fox News segment to wrap up as respectfully as this one did.
“I’m not saying, ‘Don’t say Merry Christmas.’ I think that’s a gross overgeneralization of what Democrats are saying,” Harf continued. “We are saying, ‘You can’t call people protesting racial issues in this country unpatriotic. You can’t question the right of people to use their First Amendment. That’s not fair.’ That’s the argument Democrats are making.”
“The problem with the argument that Democrats are making,” said Siegfried, “is that the argument takes longer than a bumper-sticker slogan to make. And Americans’ attention spans have gotten much shorter, and when you say ‘No, they should be able to,’ that’s what people extrapolate, they don’t extrapolate the very long and lengthy…”
“I agree,” said Harf, getting the last word for once. “And that’s partly how we got Donald Trump.” And then Faulkner, sensing the natural end of the segment, deftly pivoted to something else.
That “something else” was the NFL, of course, because this is still Fox News. But the entire segment between Harf and Siegfried was proof that Fox News can be a forum for informed, intelligent debate between Democrats and Republicans—when it wants to be. I just wish that it wanted to be more often.
For months, President Trump rejected the idea of a bipartisan bill to stabilize Obamacare in the near term. On Monday, though, he saw a way through which he could pretend to take credit for such a bill and came to support it. Conservatives treated the deal skeptically when Tennessee Sen. Lamar Alexander and Washington Sen. Patty Murray announced it Tuesday afternoon, prompting Trump to throw cold water on it during a Tuesday night speech. He formalized that opposition in a Wednesday morning tweet. By late Wednesday morning, though, Trump was sounding less fatalistic about it.
“We’ll see the bipartisan. We're going to see the bipartisan. And Lamar Alexander is working on it very hard from our side,” Trump said during a Wednesday meeting with Senate Finance Committee members. “And if something can happen, that's fine. But I won’t do anything to enrich the insurance companies because right now the insurance companies are being enriched.”
By the time you read this, Trump will likely have changed his position two or three more times. He could have signed an executive order rendering all people with pre-existing conditions to Guantánamo Bay and personally walked a single-payer bill to the steps of the Capitol, all within a couple of hours.
It just may be the case that Trump is playing both sides: wanting credit for prompting bipartisan discussions but unwilling to sign the product of those discussions that upsets his right-wing base. If that’s the case, then this bill isn’t going anywhere. It’s not just a question of him not signing it, either. If he’s wishy-washy on it, he’s not willing to put the muscle necessary behind it to usher it through both chambers of Congress.
But there could be a narrative to construct that, while very stupid, would appeal to his ego just enough to get him onboard. It would be a narrative in which the bill was bad, until Trump stepped in to “fix” it.
The only consistent thread running through Trump’s many contrasting positions on this bill is that he can’t support a “bailout” of the insurance industries or that he “won’t do anything to enrich the insurance companies.”
As my colleague Jordan Weissmann explains, this is very much a nonsense view of cost-sharing reduction payments. But there is a tricky issue regarding 2018 insurance rates that Alexander-Murray grapples with. Since most insurers filed their 2018 rates at the end of September, and those rates were higher given the uncertainty surrounding the future of CSR payments, the bill devises a system to ensure that carriers wouldn’t leave those inflated rates as is and pocket the CSR checks once the government resumes sending them. The discussion draft of Alexander-Murray, released late Tuesday night, requires states to explain how insurers would use those resumed payments to provide a “direct financial benefit” to consumers in 2018. Insurers could, for example, offer rebates to customers who enrolled in plans with inflated rates.
The section dealing with this in the draft is in brackets, which means Murray and Alexander have not yet finalized it. Should Murray and Alexander choose to tighten the language further—superfluously, even—Trump could come around to supporting the bill, arguing that they only changed it because he demanded they take a tougher line with insurers.
This is a game that Lamar Alexander is willing to play. “[Trump] and I absolutely agree that CSRs should benefit consumers and not insurance companies,” Alexander tweeted Wednesday morning. “The Alexander-Murray agreement has strong language to do that, and I will work with the president to see if we can make it even stronger.”
"The goal is to make that language as strong as possible," a Republican aide involved in the negotiations says, "so that consumers and taxpayers get the benefit of the payments, not insurance companies, which is clearly the president’s top concern."
Democrats, understandably enough, roll their eyes at this. Democratic aides I spoke with argued that they were the ones who wanted stronger language, only to face resistance from the Trump administration itself. Among other things, they claim, Democrats suggested delaying enrollment to allow insurers to refile 2018 rates that reflected continued CSR payments. If insurers could start anew, they wouldn’t have to bother with this workaround rebate process. Democrats claim that the Trump administration, including Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator Seema Verma, rejected this. (One top Republican aide's "understanding," though, is that "the decision not to push for open enrollment delay did not involve the White House.")
Of course Democrats tire of dealing with the superficial whims of a president perpetually in need of fabricated, self-glorying narratives. But if there’s any business to be done, such temporary self-abasement may be the cost. And if it doesn't take? Democrats know where to place the blame.
Americans have gotten accustomed to the idea that there won’t be any victory parades in the war on terrorism. When you’re fighting against an ideology and set of tactics rather than a specific group, the enemy is never defeated; it just transforms. Still, it’s striking how little fanfare has accompanied the capture of Raqqa by U.S.–backed forces.
Raqqa was once ISIS’s de facto capital and the last major city under its control. Capturing it has been a major goal of two U.S. administrations for three years now, ever since President Obama told the country in Sept. 2014 that he was committing the U.S. military to “degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL.” President Trump also vowed to “utterly destroy” ISIS and suggested during his campaign that he had a new strategy for doing so that he couldn’t talk about. The strategy turned out to be pretty much the same as Obama’s—a combination of air power and support for Kurdish and Arab fighters on the ground—but with less micromanagement or attention to avoiding civilian casualties. The strategy pursued by both administrations has culminated in the retaking of ISIS’s capital city by its allies this week. The group now holds just a small pocket of territory in Eastern Syria and on the Iraqi border, where it is also losing ground.
Trump loves to brag, and has frequently talked up the progress made against ISIS under his watch, most recently boasting, nonsensically, at the United Nations, that “our country has achieved more against ISIS in the last eight months than it has in many, many years combined.” So it’s a little weird that he hasn’t made more out of the capture of the enemy’s capital. It may be that he’s just distracted. Or too busy tweeting. Or perhaps, in a rare moment of foresight, he or his advisors realize that dancing on the grave of the caliphate would be a profoundly bad idea.
On Nov. 12, 2015, Obama declared that thanks to U.S. efforts, ISIS had been “contained.” The next day, gunmen loyal to the group killed 120 people in Paris. Obama had been referring to the group’s territorial gains, but the remark still stung: The U.S. public is ultimately less concerned with how much Iraqi real estate ISIS controls than by whether their cities are at risk of attack. This may be part of the reason why the U.S. response to Raqqa has been subdued. A declaration of victory would ring pretty hollow the next time one of ISIS’s supporters blows himself up or opens fire on a crowd somewhere in the United States or Europe. And there’s every reason to believe that will happen again, caliphate or no. As a New York Times feature noted today, ISIS leaders have been preparing for a loss of their territorial base for some time now and will likely return to an emphasis on guerilla tactics and terrorist attacks.
There are a few more reasons why it’s hard to celebrate the end of ISIS as a territorial power. First, the utter devastation inflicted by four months of warfare on Raqqa—like Mosul before it—makes any talk of “liberation” ring a bit hollow.
Second, ISIS has gone global, with active franchises in Libya, Sinai, Yemen, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, somewhat reducing the importance of its original core in Syria.
Third, we’ve been here before. U.S. “surge” troops working with local Sunni tribes ousted al-Qaida in Iraq from the areas it controlled a decade ago, only to see the group re-emerged under a new name—the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria—after the Americans pulled out.
Fourth, events of recent days have underlined the extent to which the larger conflict in Syria and Iraq is not ending, but just entering a new phase. Iraq could be on the brink of a new civil war as government forces seize territory, including the city of Kirkuk, from Kurdish forces, sending thousands of Kurdish civilians fleeing. On the Syrian side of the border, there’s risk of violence between Turkish-backed forces and the Kurdish YPG, who make up the bulk of the force that retook Raqqa. And the presence of Hezbollah and other Iran-backed Shiite militias also threatens to antagonize local Sunnis and draw Israel further into the conflict. Meanwhile, al-Qaida–linked insurgents have consolidated control of Syria’s Idlib province and may be in position to make something of a comeback, having benefited from several years of ISIS taking the heat off them.
All this is to say that we may soon look back on the last three years as a relatively simple period in which the mutually antagonistic actors in Syria and Iraq were at least united by one common enemy: ISIS.
A final reason why the culmination of the territorial war against ISIS feels so anticlimactic can be found in a story that has gotten far more attention this week: Trump’s ham-handed response to the killing of four Green Berets by al-Qaida–linked militants in Niger—a place that most Americans were probably unaware that U.S. troops were operating in until this month. The fact that the timing and tenor of the president’s call to the men’s families has gotten far more attention than what U.S. troops were doing fighting in Niger in the first place is a good indication of the extent to which Americans have simply come to assume that their military is engaged in an endless, ongoing battle with terrorists in dozens of countries around the world.
At its height, ISIS controlled a wide swath of Iraq and Syria that was home to around 10 million people—a population the size of Sweden. Within that territory, the group enforced its austere brand of Islamic law through beheadings, stonings, and crucifixion. It carried out genocide against religious minorities and institutionalized the practice of sex slavery, including of children. The fact that large civilian populations are no longer living under ISIS rule is undoubtedly a good thing. But U.S. troops are going to remain in Iraq—and probably to a lesser and more secretive extent in Syria too—even if ISIS eventually loses its last inch of territory. Given that, the recapture of this city doesn’t feel like much of a milestone.
Japan has a syphilis problem. The United States has its own set of STD troubles, too. But Japan is experiencing a meteoric rise when it comes to complications from syphilis in the country, […]
The post Japan Is Enlisting Sailor Moon To Help Ward Off Syphilis appeared first on Geek.com.
Mikael Ymer hade 3–0 i tredje och avgörande set.
Då tappade han.
Tysken Mischa Zverev vände och vann – och därmed är samtliga svenskar utslagna i Stockholm open.
Jonathan Mann of ‘Song a Day’ fame has a new hit on his hands. “I Am Pressing The Spacebar and Nothing Is Happening” is his latest jingle, and it’s a brilliant tune about keys on the MacBook keyboard having a tendency to get stuck when exposed to debris or crumbs or, well, in some cases, air.
This episode of Whistlestop travels back to mid-September 1955, when a presidential heart attack, kept secret for a short time, changed the relationship between the press and the presidency.
Whistlestop is Slate’s podcast about presidential history. Hosted by Political Gabfest panelist John Dickerson, each installment will revisit memorable moments from America’s presidential carnival.
Love Slate podcasts? Listen longer with Slate Plus! Members get bonus segments, ad-free versions, exclusive podcasts, and more. Start your two-week free trial at slate.com/podcastplus.
Email: whistlestop@slate.com
Podcast production by Jocelyn Frank. Research by Brian Rosenwald.
Deppigt, dystert, desperat.
Och samtidigt väldigt dynamiskt och passionerat.
Nick Cave är fortfarande strålande i huvudrollen som rockens dovaste trubadur.
Following his nomination to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch was packaged by his wealthy benefactors as the judicial equivalent of a carrot cake: mild and wholesome with the occasional hint of spice. Now that the justice has been safely installed on the court for life, he has revealed himself to be more akin to melted sorbet: sickly sweet and insubstantial with a tangy finish that induces slight nausea. Gorsuch’s abrupt pivot to arrogance has been on full display in his bumptious opinions and questions from the bench. But it also appears to be infecting his interactions with justices behind the scenes. Whispers emerging from the court indicate Gorsuch is more likely to alienate than influence even his conservative colleagues.
The latest sign of trouble comes from NPR’s Nina Totenberg, who dropped in on the indispensable Supreme Court podcast First Mondays to dish some gossip about the newest justice. Totenberg, a renowned court reporter who is friendly with several justices, noted that Gorsuch “ticks off some members of the court—and I don’t think it’s just the liberals.” Without exposing her sources—“you talk to former law clerks, you talk to friends, you talk to some of the justices”—Totenberg then dropped a bombshell:
My surmise, from what I’m hearing, is that Justice [Elena] Kagan really has taken [Gorsuch] on in conference. And that it’s a pretty tough battle and it’s going to get tougher. And she is about as tough as they come, and I am not sure he’s as tough—or dare I say it, maybe not as smart. I always thought he was very smart, but he has a tin ear somehow, and he doesn’t seem to bring anything new to the conversation.
Why is Totenberg’s reporting here so extraordinary? Because it’s astonishing that any reporter would hear details from conference, let alone score some genuinely juicy scuttlebutt. Conference is famously sacrosanct: It’s where the justices gather to cast their votes in the cases of the week, with each explaining his or her reasoning in order of seniority. Nobody else is allowed to attend. If rumors leak about a justice’s behavior in conference—and they basically never do—it is almost certainly a justice who leaked them. And when justices leak—which again, happens very rarely—they do so on purpose. The fact that we know about the “battle” in conference between Gorsuch and Kagan suggests that someone on the court wants us to know.
The substance of the leak is also startling since conference is not intended to foster the kind of arguments that Totenberg described. Sixty years ago, some justices did engage in ferocious debate during conference. But Chief Justice John Roberts, like William Rehnquist before him, prides himself on presiding over civil orderly discussions. By all accounts, Kagan has adhered to this tradition throughout her seven years on the bench. Gorsuch, it seems, has disrupted it. Is he needling Kagan to the point that she explodes? Or is he expounding his opinion so obnoxiously or condescendingly that she feels compelled to speak out?
A clue comes in the form of a recent article by CNN’s Joan Biskupic, another well-connected, widely respected Supreme Court reporter. Biskupic notes that Gorsuch has “shaken relations at the high court,” creating “personal tensions” at a formerly placid workplace. (The justices do get cranky toward the end of each term, and snippy at tense oral arguments, but they typically make up quickly.) In one ambiguously sourced yet tantalizing passage, Biskupic confirms what the rest of us have long suspected—that Gorsuch is irritating his colleagues:
It can be difficult for people outside the marble walls to know truly the relationships among the nine in their private chambers. But word seeps out, through clerks and other staff, through the justices’ friends, and through the justices themselves. Such communications make clear that Gorsuch has generated some ill will among justices. Signs have emerged from the bench, too, as Gorsuch has been on the receiving end of a few retorts.
Kagan is cool-headed and pragmatic, but she does not suffer fools gladly. She does enjoy sparring with Justice Samuel Alito, but Alito is a brilliant intellect with a misanthropic wit. Gorsuch, by comparison, is a Fox News anchor’s idea of a first-rate justice: an insipid ideologue peddling warmed-over dogmas. Kagan just might find him exasperating enough to merit a rebuttal, drawing her into the ongoing “battle” that Totenberg described.
We’ll get a better sense of this burgeoning feud once the justices begin issuing opinions later this term. (The ever-voluble Gorsuch will surely spill much ink detailing his penetrating insights and repudiating those who contradict him.) For now it is safe to say that, in Gorsuch, the justices did not get the deal they were promised. Justice Antonin Scalia could be a grouch, but he developed warm friendships with many of his colleagues, including those to his left. Gorsuch is a pale imitation of his predecessor, boasting a bratty attitude that has nettled justices across the ideological spectrum. He was supposed to build a new conservative consensus. Instead, it seems, his haughty demeanor has given his colleagues something they can agree on.
En majoritet i kommunfullmäktige i Laxå kommun röstade på onsdagskvällen för att stanna kvar i Vätternvattenprojektet och bilda bolaget Vätternvatten AB. Men Moderaterna yrkade på avslag med hänvisning till att det blir billigare med egen vattenförsörjning.
Torbjörn Gehrke var glad och lättad över den tredje raka segern, men sa också:
– Uppsala var precis så svårt att spela mot som vi trodde, men vi behöver analysera den här matchen, sa Jämtlandscoachen efter segern med 66–59.
The Impeach-O-Meter is a wildly subjective and speculative daily estimate of the likelihood that Donald Trump leaves office before his term ends, whether by being impeached (and convicted) or by resigning under threat of same.
Well, this one is a doozy even by current standards. Stung by criticism of the way he’s handled the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Niger, the president claimed earlier this week that he makes more calls to the families of soldiers who are killed in action than previous presidents have made. The Washington Post attempted to check this assertion by contacting the families of the 20-plus service members who’ve died in action during Trump's term—and not only did they find a number of families that never heard from him, they found one father who says the president promised him a personal $25,000 check that never arrived:
President Trump, in a personal phone call to a grieving military father, offered him $25,000 and said he would direct his staff to establish an online fundraiser for the family, but neither happened, the father said.
Chris Baldridge, the father of Army Cpl. Dillon Baldridge, told The Washington Post that Trump called him at his home in Zebulon, N.C., a few weeks after his 22-year-old son and two fellow soldiers were gunned down by an Afghan police officer in a suspected insider attack June 10.
Baldridge says he has not subsequently received anything from the White House except a “condolence letter.”
The White House’s official response to the Post story is amazing:
The check has been sent. It’s disgusting that the media is taking something that should be recognized as a generous and sincere gesture, made privately by the President, and using it to advance the media’s biased agenda.
Did you catch that? The check “has been sent.” But Baldridge hasn’t gotten it, which means it may well not have been sent until the Post made inquiries. In other words, the check’s in the mail.
Please impeach this doofus.
Nötbonden Fredrik Leandersson kärleksjakt är över. Nu hoppar han av programmet meddelar bonden i onsdagens avsnitt av "Bonde söker fru".
– Det känns nästan som om man grep sista halmstrået. Men fyfasen - hon har kvalitéer! säger Fredrik om kärleken Yvonne i kvällens program.
Östersunds IK blev straffat av en före detta ÖIK:are i bortamatchen mot Vännäs.
– Årets skönaste seger, säger Petter Segersten, som gjorde tre (!) mål i den avgörande straffläggningen när Vännäs vann med 3–2.
It’s hard enough navigating the hectic streets of Manhattan on foot. Why would anyone want to let loose self-driving cars in the city? Ask New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, whose recent legislation allows […]
The post Can GM Turn the City That Never Sleeps Into the City That Never Drives? appeared first on Geek.com.
Apple last month debuted the Apple Watch Series 3, bringing support for cellular connectivity to its wearable for the first time. Despite early reviews that highlighted some since-fixed connectivity issues, a new analyst note from GBH Insights says the Apple Watch Series 3 is a hit among consumers thus far…
Executive privilege was a running theme during Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday.
Sessions began by saying that he’d received a letter from minority members of the committee asking him to state whether the president would be asserting executive privilege at this time. He then refused to answer the question—a de facto no—while declaring that he also wouldn’t be answering questions about his conversations with the president … based on the possibility the president might eventually assert executive privilege. This is important for so many reasons.
The critical question is whether Sessions and other Trump administration officials are allowed to indefinitely stonewall congressional interlocutors on issues that might be pertinent to possible high crimes committed by this president. Sessions wants to make Americans think this issue is very complicated. It’s not.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse demonstrated how the Trump administration is using obfuscation, “nonassertion assertions” of executive privilege, and Republican control of the Senate to evade the truth.
In June, Sen. Kamala Harris had the starring moment during Sessions’ appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee when she was shushed for attempting to get the attorney general to say under what legal basis he was refusing to answer his former colleagues’ questions. Whitehouse on Wednesday finally got Sessions to acknowledge that legal basis: A 1982 executive memo from President Ronald Reagan.
Here’s a transcript of that moment:
Whitehouse: Let me ask if the Nov. 4, 1982, letter by President Reagan is still the guideline under which the department operates or have you changed that guideline.
Sessions: That is a part of the principles under which we operate under, yes.
Whitehouse: It is the document that describes how the executive branch will respond to executive privilege, correct?
Sessions: Well it’s that and case law and other executive documents that have been issued over the years.
Whitehouse: Let me know if any of this has changed. That rules says that “executive privilege will be asserted only in the most compelling circumstances and shall not be invoked without specific presidential authorization.” Is that still the rule?
Sessions: Executive privilege cannot be invoked except by the president.
Whitehouse: “Congressional requests for information shall be complied with as promptly and as fully as possible, unless it is determined that compliance raises a substantial question of executive privilege.” Is that still the rule?
Sessions: That’s a good, good rule.
As Whitehouse pointed out, that guideline—the one under which Sessions conceded he’s operating—allows for a period of abeyance during which executive branch departments can hold off on responding to congressional inquiries to determine whether the president wants to invoke executive privilege. The president should then assert executive privilege, or the departments should provide the requested information. That period of abeyance has extended months with no end in sight.
During testimony in June, Sessions and other administration officials refused to answer questions about reported presidential behavior that could be evidence of obstruction of justice. These questions included whether Trump was considering pardoning former campaign officials under investigation in the Russia probe and whether he was asking officials to intervene against that probe. Again, these are questions about whether the president of the United States may have committed a felony. Trump officials’ blanket response was that they couldn’t answer because he might one day assert executive privilege (but not today).
The reason for this dance is this: If executive privilege is asserted, it can be challenged in court. The Supreme Court has never ruled on whether Congress can compel testimony about private conversations with the president. But the major precedent on executive privilege was a unanimous opinion titled United States v. Nixon in which the court held that the president does not have the right to an unlimited assertion of executive privilege. In that case, President Richard Nixon was trying to use his executive privilege to conceal evidence that he had committed obstruction of justice. Almost immediately after the court forced that evidence to light, he resigned.
Again, this is all very simple and Sessions was doing his best to make it seem complex. During Whitehouse’s second round of questioning, he meticulously laid out the key issue of abeyance:
What I’m worried about is that this administration is de facto rewriting Ronald Reagan’s executive order about executive privilege so that the period of abeyance has no end to it and Congress is stonewalled on information without ever getting an assertion of executive privilege, an assertion to which I believe we are entitled if we’re going to be prevented from getting information.
To this very simple statement, Sessions snickered and said, “As you’ve indicated, you have quite the ability to work your way through the complexities of this.”
He then claimed that the president hadn’t reached the point of asserting executive privilege. According to Sessions, this was because before the president could assert privilege he had to know specifically what he was asserting it for. Of course, these questions were first raised in Senate hearings in June and some of them were repeated to Sessions by Whitehouse on Wednesday. Sessions also invented a new rule about executive privilege seemingly on the spot and out of whole cloth.
“He also has a right to be informed as to why his privilege—[it] is of high value—and why it should be waived in exchange for the request and the reason the request is made,” the attorney general said in one of the least coherent answers of the entire session.
The reason the president is able to get away with preventing the truth about his possible obstruction of justice from becoming a matter public record—these issues have been reported in numerous anonymously sourced press accounts that Trump has deemed “fake news”—is also simple. Republicans control the Senate and Republican committee chairmen such as Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr control these committee hearings. Without them issuing subpoenas for this information and threatening to hold those who refuse to answer in contempt of Congress, President Trump can stall indefinitely without ever actually asserting an executive privilege that might be struck down in court.
As the New York Times noted in June, he wouldn’t be the first president to do this: The CIA refused to turn over the potentially privileged communications of President George W. Bush during the Obama administration, and Congress just ended up letting it go. As the Times also pointed out, it has been executive branch policy since 1989 that “only when … a subpoena is issued does it become necessary for the president to consider asserting executive privilege.”
As long as Burr is in charge of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Grassley is in charge of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the Republicans control the United States Senate, the American people may never get these answers.
Vid klockan 22.13 på onsdagskvällen larmade SOS Alarm om en misstänkt brand i ett flerfamiljshus i Södertälje.
“Low-code” technology is certainly receiving its fair share of press recently. So much so that even leading analyst firms are weighing in with their opinions on the trend; in fact, Forrester predicts more than a 68 percent revenue growth in low-code, making the overall market size $15.5 billion by 2020.
So why are low-code solutions getting so much attention lately? And is it warranted?
These days it’s difficult to cut through the constant buzz to determine which technological trends are worth paying attention to. Often when you take a step back to understand why a trend or movement is occurring, its value (and the level of corresponding attention it has been receiving) becomes much clearer. When it comes to low-code, the answer is twofold:
To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here
Inför storpublik bjöd fem kända författare på samtal kring litteratur och berättande när Bokens dag arrangerades i Östersund.
On Monday, scientists announced they had detected gravitational waves emitted by the violent collision of an ultra-dense pair of neutron stars 130 million light-years away, complemented by observations of the light emissions ejected by the incendiary event. While the first four gravitational wave detections made since February 2016 have all resulted from black holes slamming into one another, this new one, first observed on Aug. 17, is the first time scientists have observed such signals created by a kilonova: a supernova formed by the cosmic crash of two neutron stars.
There are a lot of fascinating things about this arguably quite technical discovery. For one thing, this type of collision is responsible for forging the very same gold, platinum, and other precious metals we wear and use every day. The stars that collided, neutron stars, are 10 to 29 times the mass of the sun, but size out to a measly six miles in diameter—technically speaking, they’re actually the dead collapsed aftermaths of once-living stars that have undergone a supernova explosion.
All of these things make this discovery easy to marvel at and somewhat impossible to picture. Luckily, artists have taken up the task of imagining it for us, which you’ve likely seen if you’ve already stumbled on coverage of the discovery. Two bright, furious spheres of light and gas spiraling quickly into one another, resulting in a massive swell of lit-up matter along with light and gravitational waves rippling off speedily in all directions, towards parts unknown. These illustrations aren’t just alluring interpretations of a rare phenomenon; they are, to some extent, the translation of raw data and numbers into a tangible visual that gives scientists and nonscientists alike some way of grasping what just happened. But are these visualizations realistic? Is this what it actually looked like? No one has any idea. Which is what makes the scientific illustrators’ work all the more fascinating.
“My goal is to represent what the scientists found,” says Aurore Simmonet, a scientific illustrator based at Sonoma State University in Rohnert Park, California. Even though she said she doesn’t have a rigorous science background (she certainly didn’t know what a kilonova was before being tasked to illustrate one), she also doesn’t believe that type of experience is an absolute necessity. More critical, she says, is for the artist to have an interest in the subject matter and in learning new things, as well as a capacity to speak directly to scientists about their work.
Illustrators like Simmonet usually start off work on an illustration by asking the scientist what’s the biggest takeaway a viewer should grasp when looking at a visual. Unfortunately, this latest discovery yielded a multitude of papers emphasizing different conclusions and highlights. With so many scientific angles, there’s a stark challenge in trying to cram every important thing into a single drawing.
Clearly, however, the illustrations needed to center around the kilonova. Simmonet loves colors, so she began by discussing with the researchers what kind of color scheme would work best. The smash of two neutron stars lends itself well to deep, vibrant hues. Simmonet and Robin Dienel at the Carnegie Institution for Science elected to use a wide array of colors and drew bright cracking to show pressure forming at the merging. Others, like Luis Calcada at the European Southern Observatory, limited the color scheme in favor of emphasizing the bright moment of collision and the signal waves created by the kilonova.
Animators have even more freedom to show the event, since they have much more than a single frame to play with. The Conceptual Image Lab at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center created a short video about the new findings, and lead animator Brian Monroe says the video he and his colleagues designed shows off the evolution of the entire process: the rising action, climax, and resolution of the kilonova event.
The illustrators try to adhere to what the likely physics of the event entailed, soliciting feedback from the scientists to make sure they’re getting it right. The swirling of gas, the direction of ejected matter upon impact, the reflection of light, the proportions of the objects—all of these things are deliberately framed such that they make scientific sense. Although the kilonova is the focal point for the artwork, a closer look shows off all the softer details that take precision and care to finesse.
Nevertheless, the incredible artwork that stems from these discoveries are still just an amalgamation of numbers and hypotheses injected with imagination. There is no optical telescope powerful enough to watch and record kilonovas occurring 130 million light-years away. Nobody, not even the smartest scientists in the world, know exactly what these things look like. Perhaps that’s not necessarily a bad thing: If space is infinite, it makes sense our dreamy wonderings about what it looks like would be infinite as well.
Three former Tesla factory workers filed a lawsuit Monday in a California state court alleging that the company’s Fremont factory was a “hotbed for racist behavior.”
The plaintiffs, who are black, say that racist slurs and Jim Crow–era imagery were pronounced in the factory, yet upper management failed to respond to their complaints. The company told the Verge that “none of these individuals has ever brought a claim about their time at Tesla until now, in some cases years after they were last at Tesla.”
The suit claims that racist insults, particularly the n-word, were commonplace among supervisors and fellow employees. One of the alleged incidents involved a supervisor verbally abusing two of the plaintiffs, who are father and son. The father, Owen Diaz, says he tried to intervene in a quarrel between the supervisor and his son, Demetric Diaz. According to the complaint, the supervisor swore and spat a racial epithet. The third plaintiff, Lamar Patterson, similarly claims that he had to endure racist comments and hostility.
Owen Diaz further alleges that he found a Jim Crow–era caricature of a black child drawn on a cardboard bale in the factory. (The Mercury News published a picture from Diaz of what appears to be the cartoon.) He says he argued with the supervisor who supposedly drew it and then began getting abysmal work evaluations. Tesla acknowledges that the company received an email complaint from Diaz in Oct. 2015, but asserts there was no mention of racist language in it.
The lawsuit alleges that Diaz’s son faced similar retaliation. According to the complaint, Demetric Diaz says that less than a week after he complained to the staffing agency and a supervisor about the racist language, he was dismissed. His father left the company less than a year later, in 2016.
Tesla provided reporters with the following statement: “No employee should ever feel harassed or mistreated based on their race, gender, beliefs or anything else. There are over 33,000 people working at Tesla, and given our size, we recognize that unfortunately at times there will be cases of harassment or discrimination in corners of the company. For there to be zero cases in a global workforce of 33,000 would be impossible for any company, no matter how much we care. And we care a lot, particularly given how hard everyone at Tesla works to do what most regard as impossible.” The company also pointed out that the men were only employed for a “short time” through staffing agencies.
This isn’t the first time that Tesla has faced allegations of harboring an unwelcome work environment. In March, the California Civil Rights Law Group, which is also representing the Diaz’s and Patterson, filed a suit claiming that a black employee, DeWitt Lambert, received racial insults on the assembly line. Several women have also come forward with stories of gender discrimination and harassment at the company. One of the women filed a lawsuit in 2016.
Both the National Association of Broadcasters and the Federal Communications Commission have been pushing Apple on making the iPhone work with FM radio during natural disasters and emergencies, although Apple says it’s not even possible with newer iPhones. The NAB isn’t backing down from its position, however, and it’s using the now discontinued iPod nano (and Tim Cook’s hometown) to bolster its argument.
När Nikkarinen, Paul och Puidet var närmast iskalla – ja, då klev en stekhet Preston Purifoy fram och räddade Jämtland mot Uppsala.
– Förmodligen min bästa match i Jämtland, sa amerikanen på presskonferensen.
General Electric outfitted 650 British Petroleum (BP) oil rigs with sensors and software that report operational data to a central GE platform that analyzes it to optimize how the rigs run – making them 2 to 4% more efficient than before.
Jim Fowler, CIO, General Electric
GE CIO Jim Fowler credits most of the improvement not with workers, but with machines. “Machines are telling people what to do more than people are telling machines what to do,” Fowler said at a meeting of the Open Networking User Group (ONUG) this week in New York. The sensors and accompanying software platform helped create incremental improvements in production and avoidance of downtime. He calls it the merging of information technology and operational technology to create value.
To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here
Here’s our recap of what happened in online marketing today, as reported on Marketing Land and other places across the web.
From Marketing Land:Tredje raka segern för Jämtland Basket, men matchen mot Uppsala var inte en enkel sådan.
– Vi gör för många misstag, säger tränaren Torbjörn Gehrke.
Tilde Johansson från IFK Värnamo har fått fortsatt förtroende i det svenska landslaget.
Inlägget Tilde till landslagsläger dök först upp på Skillingaryd.
Frågor om olika planinstrument och hur kommunen kan påverka och inte påverka ett planlagt område var i fokus när Lannas framtid diskuterades under onsdagskvällen.
Studie visar att influensavaccin försvagar människors immunförsvar åren efter vaccination och ökar därmed risken för att insjukna i influensa senare.
Inlägget Lars Bern: Influensavaccin ger ökad influensarisk dök först upp på NewsVoice.
After seven years on the up, the U.S. economy took a big hit in September. Some 33,000 jobs were lost, according to the latest monthly report issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While there are plenty of factors at play, from the man in the White House to the insistent specter of nuclear war, experts attribute part of the autumnal dip to extreme weather.
Because of natural disasters like Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, the government reported, a whopping 1.5 million Americans were unable to work in September. Business owners in Texas, Florida, and elsewhere put new hiring on hold, and many industrial plants in storm-ravaged communities are still offline. But economists say the take-home message is clear: Things will return to normal. As the New York Times reported, economists are certain the U.S. labor market is fundamentally strong.
Some climate change researchers aren’t so certain, though. As “normal” grows nebulous and once-rare weather events become stronger and more frequent, it’s hard not to wonder if September’s inclement job numbers are not a fluke, but a preview.
Moustapha Kamal Gueye of the U.N.’s International Labour Organization says it’s looking like a bit of both. “The question is, ‘How frequent will [external shocks] be in the future?’” he said. “If these happen once in a year, then one could discount it… But if they happen twice, five times a year, in many places around the world?” Well, then they’re not aberrations, they’re a new reality.
Depending on where you live and what kind of work you do, Gueye says this brave new world could look rather different. People who depend heavily on natural resources will be the hardest hit. In fact, they already are. In the Caribbean, at least 2.3 million people work in the $35 billion tourism industry, which largely relies on, well, a natural resource of sorts. This hurricane season has totally upended this crucial sector of the economy, causing cancelled reservations and ravaging infrastructure. Senegal, a coastal African nation which similar relies on tourism dollars, is also seeing a decline in its tourism, due to the diminishment of its major tourist attraction—its beaches—thanks to sea level rise, erosion, and resource mismanagement, as Reuters reported.
Agriculture is also threatened by the both the slow creep and sudden debilitating outbursts of climate change. Many jobs were burned to a crisp in the recent California wine country wildfires, which are increasing in frequency as the West warms. And as overfishing, ocean acidification, and swelling dead zones destroy fish populations, the fishing industry is increasingly imperiled. Because neither the fisherman nor the farmer lives in a vacuum, the other people in their economic ecosystems are threatened. Gone are the bait and tackle salesman, the boat builder, and the shore-side restaurateur. Gone, too, could be a source of protein that 1 billion people rely on.
While nothing looks good, it doesn't actually look all bad. In areas that will be more regularly affected by natural disasters, we could see the rise of a rebuilding gig economy. After Hurricane Katrina, the Times reported, the job market took some time to rebound, but the task of putting New Orleans back together eventually stimulated employment:
Employment gains averaged 249,000 in the six months before the storm. After New Orleans found itself underwater, gains averaged 76,000 over the next couple of months before soaring to 341,000 in November 2005.
These aren’t as desirable as more permanent positions, but remaking damaged cities and disaster-proofing could become big business. As many people slowly trickle out of communities besieged by extreme weather, more resilient communities could see immense growth, stimulating their own climate-caused construction boom.
There’s also the question of the jobs “lost” to a greening economy. Trump campaigned in part on the premise the Paris Climate Accord were a “bad deal” for the country. This framing, that greening the economy is a job killer, is false: There are jobs lost in the fossil fuel industry, but the jobs gained in the renewable energy sector more than make up for that. As of September, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, just 52,000 Americans made up the entire coal industry. By contrast, Slate’s Dan Gross reported in June, Tesla was seeking to fill almost 2,000 jobs—and that was just one company. (As of May 2017, more than 800,000 Americans were employed in the renewable energy sector.) Last month, PRI’s The World reported that West Virginia, where many young people thought they’d grow up to be coal miners, are actually finding work in the booming solar energy industry.
As the evidence and cost of climate change is piling up, our president may be willing to put his head in the sand, but ordinary Americans are starting to take notice: A recent poll suggested that 85 percent of Americans say they believe manmade climate change played some role in Hurricanes Harvey and Irma. Connecting the dots between climate change, natural disasters, and a depressed economy might take time, but as it becomes increasingly apparent, there will be an anxiety to follow. Trump ran on saving our economy—is he willing to acknowledge one of the major threats to it?
One of the prime differences between humans and robots is our ability to feel—emotionally and physically. A team of engineers from the University of Washington and UCLA, however, are working to bridge that […]
The post Flexible ‘Skin’ Gives Robots Sense of Touch appeared first on Geek.com.
Polisen stoppade en misstänkt rattfull person i Jomala på onsdagen efter att ett tips inkommit från allmänheten. Föraren testade positivt för amfetamin och metamfetamin och misstänks därför för rattfylleri och straffbart bruk av narkotika. Polisen utreder ärendet.
Under dagen delgav polisen även en förare i Lemland böter efter att denne kört i 91 kilometer i timmen på en 70-sträcka och samtidigt pratat i telefon. Föraren misstänks för äventyrande av trafiksäkerheten och trafikförseelse.
I stan fick ytterligare en förare böter för trafikförseelse efter att ha kört på en enkelriktad gata.
Polisen utförde även en nykterhetskontroll på Ytternäsvägen i Mariehamn. Totalt kontrollerades 77 förare och samtliga var nyktra och laglydiga.
Under onsdagen inträffade också en rådjursolycka i Jomala. Inga personer skadades, men en polispatrull tvingades avliva det skadade djuret på plats. (ck) Carin Karlsson carin.karlsson@nyan.ax Tillbaka till startsidan Tipsa Nyan
Let's mix ourselves up some Dumb American News Story Stew, shall we? Ingredient No. 1 is the Trump-led demagoguery campaign against the NFL players who have been protesting police brutality by kneeling during the national anthem. Ingredient No. 2 is Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore, the provocateur who carries a gun during campaign events and thinks there are cities in Illinois that operate under Sharia law. Let's see if these two great tastes taste great together:
In an interview with TIME magazine, the Alabama Republican argued that NFL players and others who have protested police violence are violating a section of the U.S. code which outlines how people should conduct themselves when the anthem is played. ... "It’s against the law, you know that?" he said. "It was a act of Congress that every man stand and put their hand over their heart. That’s the law."
The protests against racial injustice are thus an attack on "the rule of law," explains Moore.
For the record, Moore is referring to a real section of U.S. code:
There's a big caveat, though, which is that the code says that standing for the anthem is what people "should" do rather than what they must do; it also doesn't delineate penalties against those who don't stand. In the words of the Congressional Research Service, U.S. courts have "concluded that the Flag Code does not proscribe conduct, but is merely declaratory and advisory." In short, Moore—a hyperconservative former judge who was removed from office twice for refusing to abide by relatively liberal rulings made by higher courts—appears to be once again confusing what he wishes the law said with what it actually says. Delicious!
Amerikanska spikern Kristen Besselsen har tränat med Örebro Volley i fyra veckor – men först på onsdagsförmiddagen blev hon spelklar.
Åtta timmar senare klev hon fram och satte 18 poäng, flest av alla, i överlägsna derbysegern mot Degerfors.
– Klart det var frustrerande att inte få vara med när säsongen startade, säger hon.
27 år gammal gjorde Jim Genberg sitt första SSL-mål i karriären.
Men efteråt kände han bara frustration – sedan Örebro Innebandy tappat 4–3-ledning till 7–4-förlust på 5.18 i tredje perioden borta mot tabelljumbon TTG Innebandy.
– Vi tappade vår lägstanivå, säger han.
Bellmanstafetten byter namn och expanderar nationellt enligt ett femårigt samarbete. Syftet är att Sveriges största serie av företagsevenemang med idrottsfokus ska bli ännu större.
Funnits i 32 årMed grund i Bellmanstafetten som arrangerats av Marathongruppen i 32 år skapas arrangemang i fyra
eller fem städer redan 2018. Bellmanstafetten, som hittills endast genomförts i Stockholm, etableras i och med det nya samarbetet på flera orter och får ett nytt namn. Det nya namnet fastställs under hösten 2017.
En kvinna från Falun har dömts till en månads fängelse för grovt rattfylleri.
Hon hade 1,81 promille alkohol när hon testades kort efter en bilfärd i Hosjö.
Kvinnan har erkänt brott. Hon har bland annat förklarat sig med att hon hade använt öl i matlagningen före bilfärden.
ISHOCKEY: HOCKEYETTAN
Helsingborgs HC – Hanhals Kings 2 – 3
Lagkaptenen från i fjol, Ludvig Rantanen, fick förtroendet från tränarparet Niclas Högberg/Emanuel Åström att kliva in i förstafemman. Högerskytten levererade.
Han började med två assist innan han placerade tre poäng i poängkolumnen för Kungsbackalaget.
Men lite drygt fyra minuter kvar skottpassade Kim Jonsson och Ludvig Rantanen vinklade in segerpucken i nättaket.
– Ett riktigt fint hockeymål. Ludde kan spela på alla positioner och i dag klev han verkligen fram. Det är en riktigt ledare som betyder enormt mycket för oss. Han jobbar även stenhårt i boxen, säger assisterande tränaren Emanuel Åström.
Hanhals Kings, som är hårt skadedrabbade, kom till start med 17 utespelare. Då var det två lån från Troja-Ljungby IF. Trots manfallet kunde gästerna föra det mesta av spelet men hemmalaget var vassa i sina omställningar.
– Vi gör en bra hockeymatch där vi håller i pucken fint och spelar oss till många bra anfall, säger den assisterande tränaren.
På ett av dem såg inlånade Lukas Wahlberg, 19, som är fostrad i Hanhalsdressen, till att sätta dit ledningen till 2–1 i mitten av den andra perioden.
– En riktigt självförtroendeboost att komma från J20 elit och upp till ettan som är ett par snäpp högre och göra mål direkt, säger Emanuel Åström.
Varför vinner ni?
– Vi är puckskickligare och har en bättre spets än vad de har. Vi fick mer utdelning på vårt spel och alla tre kedjor gjorde det bra.
För Hanhals Kings väntar en ny match på lördag. Ingen av de skadade spelarna beräknas vara tillbaka och klubben för därför en dialog med Troja-Ljungby IF om att få låna Lukas Wahlberg och Linus Söderberg-Stridh även till matchen mot serieledande Kallinge-Ronneby IF.
Matchfakta:
Helsingborgs HC – Hanhals Kings 2–3
1–0 (02.36), 1–1 (20.08) David Stenbacka, 1–2 (28.49) Lukas Wahlberg, 2–2 (33.27), 2–3 (55.41) Ludvig Rantanen
Skotten: 27–27
Bilarna var parkerade i långa led utanför Forsa kyrka när det under onsdagskvällen skulle bli konsert med utvalda bitar från succéförställningarna som går under samlingsnamnet "Vår historia".
The drive to digital transformation is causing the world to move faster than ever. And it seems businesses are experiencing a huge case of “fear of missing out” (FOMO) and adopting new technologies at a dizzying pace.
A few years ago, only a few companies had invested in the Internet of Things (IoT), software-defined networking (SDN), cloud services and DevOps. Today, they’re rapidly becoming the norm, and it’s difficult, if not impossible, for IT to maintain the current environment.
Doing things manually no longer works. An experienced engineer used to be able to look at router logs, TCP dumps or other data and figure out what was going on and find the source of a problem. But now, so much data is being generated from so many sources that even the best engineers can’t keep up and know the network like they used to.
To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here