Agregador de canales de noticias

Pandemic has accelerated the adoption of machine learning as a tool for education

Pandemic has accelerated the adoption of machine learning as a tool for education

Pandemic has accelerated the adoption of machine learning as a tool for education

In 2019, my business partner and I attended a “virtual reality meal” at James Beard House. At the time, we wrote it off as a novelty. While these kinds of events offered innovative one-off experiences, it wasn’t yet clear how emerging technologies would add consistent value to the wider arts industry. Mass adaptation felt a long way off.

We didn’t know then, of course, that the demand for experiential tech was about to explode as people found themselves locked down at home and desperate to access cultural experiences as distractions, comforts, and life rafts amid the chaotic isolation of 2020.

Emerging tech became a lifeline for the arts, and for people seeking connection and distraction.

But now, as the IRL (in real life) world starts to reopen, albeit haltingly, arts organizations face a choice: Will reopening return them to the old normal’s status quo, or will they commit, for the long term, to use emerging tech and digital experiences as a connecting lifeline to audiences who previously weren’t able to access them?

Window on the world

With the closure of museums, events spaces, and restaurants, the arts industry faced an undeniably steep challenge—the effects of which were felt most keenly by working artists. But amid the wreckage, we also witnessed promising innovations from savvy brands and organizations. Well-designed digital offerings not only kept their content accessible to their core audience but also expanded their reach and impact exponentially.

Virtual experiences became a desperately needed window on the world, and to stave off isolation, everyone—from grandmas to toddlers—had to become technologically literate in a very short amount of time.

So while brick-and-mortar doors stayed shut through lockdown, virtual doors flung wide open: You could visit the Louvre from your living room or attend a performance of Hamilton anywhere in the world. Britain’s National Theatre welcomed audiences around the globe to view its cinematically recorded NT Live archive for free during England’s first lockdown, ultimately leading to the launch of a subscription service that will serve those far-flung viewers for years to come.

Virtual reality and augmented reality finally found the direction they were lacking in those halcyon novelty days: Frieze offered users a chance to hang famous paintings on their wall through an augmented reality app, and Spanish artist Felipe Pantone created an Instagram exhibition using a VR graffiti simulator.

Of course, none of this means that live experiences are dead. Just a couple of weeks ago, I took my kids to an Olaf Breuning show, and their wonder at seeing art up close in situ was completely life-affirming. After two years cooped up at home, it was clearer to me than ever before just how powerful and crucial experiencing the arts in real life can be.

Going forward, it shouldn’t be about pitting digital and in-person experiences against each other. Smart organizations will have a foot in each stream. We’ll forevermore need to think about virtual and in-person experiences as two halves of a whole.

London’s Serpentine Galleries and Washington, D.C.’s AFI Docs Festival have taken this new truth to heart: Both are moving forward into the “new normal” with robust hybrid programming strategies to ensure audiences can connect comfortably with their exhibitions in a variety of ways.

Opening doors

Thinking about virtual and IRL experiences isn’t just a matter of abiding by restrictions and playing to audiences’ new preferences and comfort levels—it’s so much more important than that. It’s about inclusivity, diversity, and accessibility, for consumers as well as for creators.

A thoughtfully designed digital offering can level previously steep playing fields, making a range of experiences available to audiences who previously couldn’t afford or physically attend location-based experiences. The knock-on effect here could potentially open doors too long shut to minority creators.

Arts and culture organizations could learn from the wider creative industries in this regard; as a result of the long-standing accessibility challenges highlighted by COVID-19, design and advertising coalitions have launched programs like .movtogether and the Design Community Hub to address the disparity.

Added value

The bridging of digital and physical experiences may be relatively new to mainstream cultural organizations, but retailers have been greasing the wheels on this transformational approach for years now. Think Ikea’s augmented reality Home app, or HP Reveal’s contribution to bridging the gap between home and school for students. An American Institute of Graphic Arts report on design futures aptly observes that in these cases, digital elements add value to the overall experience, rather than simply funneling audiences to some main live event.

And now we’re seeing this same “add-on” approach emerge from more high-end brands. Celebrated fashion designer Thom Browne launched his 2021 collection in a virtual 3D showroom—and while the experience was developed due to COVID-19 restrictions, it certainly doesn’t feel like a forced substitute. Never before have audiences at a runway show had such in-depth access to the details of Browne’s work. In this iteration, viewers can take their sweet time experiencing each piece in 360-degree, high-definition glory. Browne now intends to include a virtual element in future launches, as a valuable component alongside live showings.

Building a bridge

But well-designed digital experiences don’t necessarily have to be slick and expensive. Yes, emerging VR and AR tech has a new, more urgent lease on life, and luxury brands are leading the way for many exciting and important innovations. But organizations without the budget or resources for flashy experiences needn’t feel like they’re doomed to the “old normal.”

One of the biggest successes in digital experience innovations during COVID-19 was the Frick Collection’s Cocktails With a Curator series. Low-tech videos filmed inside curators’ homes generated millions of views, proving, as The New York Times observed, that “online audiences don’t expect a simulation of a gallery visit on-screen. They want a museum experience native to the web—and that can be a little faster, a little less polished, a little more direct.”

At the end of the day, arts and culture organizations need to keep their focus where it’s always been: human connection. And they need to design their experiences—online or in person—with that humanity at the core.

What we have now is an opportunity to expand the definition of what connection with the arts means and who gets to participate in it. We have a chance to design the future of the industry in a way that makes a notable difference for the mental and emotional health of our global community—a priority that should have taken center stage a long time ago.

Amy Globus is the cofounder and creative director at Team, working with clients like Pfizer, the Bronx Museum, and Red Bull Arts.

Did greed just save the day? That’s what British Prime Minister Boris Johnson claimed recently. “The reason we have the vaccine success,” he said in a private call to Conservative members of Parliament, “is because of capitalism, because of greed.”

Despite later backpedaling, Johnson’s remark reflects a widely influential but wildly incoherent view of innovation: that greed—the unfettered pursuit of profit above all else—is a necessary driver of technological progress. Call it the need-greed theory.

Among the pandemic’s many lessons, however, is that greed can easily work against the common good. We rightly celebrate the near-miraculous development of effective vaccines, which have been widely deployed in rich nations. But the global picture reveals not even a semblance of justice: As of May, low-income nations received just 0.3 percent of the global vaccine supply. At this rate it would take 57 years for them to achieve full vaccination.

This disparity has been dubbed “vaccine apartheid,” and it’s exacerbated by greed. A year after the launch of the World Health Organization’s COVID-19 Technology Access Pool—a program aimed at encouraging the collaborative exchange of intellectual property, knowledge, and data—”not a single company has donated its technical knowhow,” wrote politicians from India, Kenya, and Bolivia in a June essay for The Guardian. As of that month, the U.N.-backed COVAX initiative, a vaccine sharing scheme established to provide developing countries equitable access, had delivered only about 90 million out of a promised 2 billion doses. Currently, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists, and conservative lawmakers continue to oppose proposals for patent waivers that would allow local drug makers to manufacture the vaccines without legal jeopardy. They claim the waivers would slow down existing production, “foster the proliferation of counterfeit vaccines,” and, as North Carolina Republican Sen. Richard Burr said, “undermine the very innovation we are relying on to bring this pandemic to an end.”

All these views echo the idea that patents and high drug prices are necessary motivators for biomedical innovation. But examine that logic closely, and it quickly begins to fall apart.

A great deal of difficult, innovative work is done in industries and fields that lack patents. Has the lack of patent protections for recipes led to any dearth of innovation in restaurants? An irritating irony here is that economists who espouse the need-greed theory themselves innovate for comparative peanuts. For instance, in 2018, the median compensation for economists was about $104,000. The typical pharmaceutical CEO, meanwhile, earned a whopping $5.7 million in total compensation that year. (The hands-on innovators aren’t the need-greeders here; the median compensation for pharmaceutical employees—including benefits—was about $177,000 in 2018.) Even in Silicon Valley, writes ever-astute technology insider Tim O’Reilly, “the notion that entrepreneurs will stop innovating if they aren’t rewarded with billions is a pernicious fantasy.”

To be sure, it was not greed but rather a vast collaborative effort—funded largely with public dollars—that generated effective coronavirus vaccines. The technology behind mRNA vaccines such as those produced by Pfizer and Moderna took decades of work by University of Pennsylvania scientists you’ve likely never heard of. According to The New York Times, one of those scientists, Katalin Kariko, “never made more than $60,000 a year” while doing her innovative foundational research. The researchers at Oxford University who developed the technology behind AstraZeneca’s vaccine, which was mostly publicly funded, initially set out with the intention of “non-exclusive, royalty-free” licensing for their vaccine. Only after pressure from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation did they renege and license the technology solely to AstraZeneca.

It was astonishing, then, when Pascal Soriot, AstraZeneca’s CEO, said that intellectual property, or IP, “is a fundamental part of our industry and if you don’t protect IP, then essentially there is no incentive for anybody to innovate.” The Oxford scientists whose work AstraZeneca licensed literally just innovated without the incentives Soriot claimed are essential. Why do journalists present need-greeder claims, such as Soriot’s, without holding the specific role of profit seeking to account?

It’s no secret that innovators (and people generally) often aren’t necessarily greed-driven. For instance, as Walter Isaacson notes in his book about superstar biochemist Jennifer Doudna’s work on Crispr gene manipulation technology, she was never motivated primarily by money. In fact, he reports that corporate maneuvering over her work made her “physically ill.” Countless cases like hers show that innovations in science and technology typically aren’t the result of genius lightning strikes but rather of field-wide efforts with multiple teams circling the same goal. If anyone withdraws for lack of greed-gratifying incentives, no problem: They’re welcome to write themselves out of history. Others will gladly grasp the glory. And we, the public, lose nothing.

Perhaps Soriot meant, more generally, that reduced revenues would cut AstraZeneca’s overall research and development (R&D) spending. But even that claim is detectably dubious. When drug makers claim that high prices are essential for innovation, they are “flat out lying” financial expert Yves Smith wrote in 2019. Smith cited data published with the Institute for New Economic Thinking showing that, between 2009 and 2018, 18 drug makers listed in the S&P 500 spent 14 percent more on stock buybacks and dividends than they did on R&D. These companies could easily ramp up investments in innovative drugs, the authors wrote, simply by reining in distributions to shareholders. (Don’t forget that share buybacks were effectively classified as illegal market manipulation until the Securities and Exchange Commission, under Reagan, relaxed the rules in 1982.)

Of the money that drug companies do invest in R&D, a significant amount for many goes not toward innovative research but to “finding ways to suppress generic and biosimilar competition while continuing to raise prices,” according to a recent report from the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform. In these cases, executive and investor greed demonstrably impede innovation. A recent Congressional hearing dramatized this issue when Rep. Katie Porter, a California Democrat, grilled the CEO of AbbVie, a biopharmaceutical company which she said spent $2.45 billion on research and development, $4.71 billion a year on marketing and advertising, and $50 billion on shareholder payouts between 2013 and 2018. She characterized the idea that R&D justified astronomical prices as “the Big Pharma fairy tale.”

Even if greed makes sense for some for-profit ventures, it would be unwise for us to rely only on for-profit enterprise to harness innovation for social goals. There are many things that we must do whether they are profitable or not, and the horrific fiasco over vaccine patents has shown us that biotech executives and other members of the “thinkerati” are not above putting profits ahead of saving lives. As White House adviser Anthony Fauci noted to The Hill earlier this year, America has a “moral obligation” to “make sure that the rest of the world does not suffer and die” from something that we can help to prevent. Our government is failing in its duty to act in the public interest if it allows “your money or your life” to pass as an acceptable business model.

As an open letter signed by more than a hundred intellectual property scholars recently stated, IP rights (which includes patents) “are not, and have never been, absolute rights and are granted and recognized under the condition that they serve the public interest.” The scholars noted precedents like last year’s use of the Defense Production Act to increase production of medical supplies, and the U.S.’s commandeering of penicillin production during World War II. If COVID-19 vaccine makers refuse to make life-saving technology publicly available, governments should enact mandatory licensing or similar measures.

There are also compelling reasons to develop a standing, publicly operated rapid-response vaccine manufacturing capability. Pfizer’s CFO suggested that prices on vaccines will go up once we are out of the “pandemic-pricing environment,” noting that the company can charge nearly nine times more than they have been (“$150, $175 per dose,” the CFO said, versus the $19.50 Pfizer is charging the U.S. in one supply deal). Even if those who haven’t received a single dose of the vaccine never do, that could mean roughly a $30 billion bonanza from U.S. booster shots alone. Patient advocates estimate that it would cost just $4 billion for the U.S. to set up a public-private operation capable of manufacturing enough mRNA vaccines to immunize the whole planet, with each shot costing $2. This would be a great way for America to show global leadership, and would surely be way cheaper, both individually and collectively, than being annually “Pfizered.” Plus, the usefulness of such a facility would long outlast the current pandemic, with climate change making zoonotic spillover events more likely (not to mention the risks of weaponized viruses). COVID-19 was our “starter pandemic,” as Ed Yong usefully dubbed it.

If greed-driven companies fail to exercise their powers responsibly, they should face competition from the public sector. President Biden let the cat out of the bag when he said that “capitalism without competition isn’t capitalism; it’s exploitation.” While many people applauded his sentiment, stop and think about the implication: The president was, in essence, saying that we expect corporations to exploit us if given half a chance.

We pay a huge price in blood and treasure when we give the need-greeders free rein to lie to and exploit the public with impunity. We must be clear-eyed about exactly when greed can help our collective interests and when it hinders them. During a crisis as dire as a global pandemic, greed won’t save us.

Jag Bhalla is a writer and entrepreneur.

This article was originally published on Undark. Read the original article.

Shocking & Dehumanizing Discrimination Against The Unvaxx'd Is About To Make Life Very Difficult

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper,

All over the world, the hot-button subject of the moment is the Covid vaccination. Many governments discuss making it mandatory, a terrifying concept for people who believe that the vaccine is unsafe. But perhaps even more appalling are the shocking things that people are saying about those who are unvaccinated.

This article isn’t about whether the vaccine is safe or not. I’m not urging anyone to get the vaccine, nor am I urging anyone to avoid it. I believe that my health decisions are my choice, and yours are your choice.

I hope that when you read these comments, whatever side of the debate you are on, you stop and think about your humanity. If this were done to any other group of people, it would be considered hate speech. Because the mainstream media and the narrative are tightly controlled right now, this isn’t just thought of as acceptable but a signal of superior virtue.

The danger of “othering”

We already talked about how people would be “encouraged” to get the vaccine through a loss of liberty “privileges.” By now, those eager to get the vaccine have done so. Also, those with valid reasons (like loss of income) have also gotten the jab. Therefore, holdouts who remain adamant they won’t get the vaccine are now being exposed to a whole new level of “encouragement” via extreme social pressure.

A phenomenon called “othering” is used in both the violence dynamics world and in brainwashing. Othering is when a person determines that another person is unworthy, threatening, or all-around inadequate and hardly even the same species.

Othering is a process whereby a group of people is made to seem fundamentally different, even to the point of making that group seem less than human. This process can trigger instinctive emotional reactions towards members of that group. In many instances, othering has been used to degrade, isolate, and render possible a group’s discrimination, abuse, or persecution. (source)

Those who don’t learn from history…

It has happened many times in history: when human beings were used as slaves and property, when human beings were the subject of horrific experiments when the media and people in power deliberately manipulated human beings to believe that other humans weren’t like them, and therefore, it was permissible to mistreat or abuse them.

As the saying goes, those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And repeat it, they are. I think, regardless of our stance, we can all agree that fervently wishing for bad things to happen to those who believe differently and dehumanizing them for their beliefs is pretty awful.

People have come out with appalling suggestions for those who aren’t vaccinated.

Don Lemon of CNN believes the unvaccinated should not be allowed to buy food or work. Does this mean he believes that they should starve to death?

If you had any doubt, Lemon also thinks people who are unvaccinated are idiots.

“How many people have to die,” Lemon asked, saying “if behavior is idiotic and nonsensical, I think that you need to tell people that their behavior is idiotic and nonsensical.” (source)

CNN medical analyst Dr. Jonathan Reiner says that unvaccinated people shouldn’t go to bars and restaurants. A doctor pondered the ethics of whether he could refuse to see unvaccinated patients in The New York Times.

It’s becoming popular to blame the unvaccinated for all future cases of Covid

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s Big Kahuna of Covid, blames those not vaccinated for a new spike in cases.

“We have 100 million people in this country … who are eligible to be vaccinated, who are not vaccinated,” Fauci said in an interview with “Face the Nation.”

“We’ve really got to get those people to change their minds, make it easy for them, convince them, do something to get them to be vaccinated because they are the ones that are propagating this outbreak.” (source)

Columnist Leana Wen of Washington Post believes the unvaccinated are dishonorable. Wen called upon the CDC to mandate masks for everyone because of it.

We need a return to indoor mask mandates not because the vaccinated are suddenly a problem, but because we don’t trust the unvaccinated to do the right thing voluntarily. It’s not a commentary about the effectiveness of the vaccine or even the trickiness of the delta variant, but rather about the failure of unvaccinated Americans to fulfill their societal obligation to act in the interest of everyone’s health.

When the CDC issued its mask guidance two months ago, it got the science right but got the policy and communication wrong. And it has happened again. The Biden administration should clarify that the backsliding of the United States’ pandemic progress necessitated the return of indoor masking. This has happened because of those who choose to remain unvaccinated, and the vaccinated are now paying the price. (source)

Alabama Governor Kay Ivey wants everyone to blame the unvaccinated for any cases of Covid that happen to occur.

“Folks are supposed to have common sense. But it’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks, not the regular folks. It’s the unvaccinated folks that are letting us down,” Ivey told reporters in Birmingham. (source)

That’ll really be helpful if someone unhinged loses a loved one to Covid and decides to seek vengeance on some “unvaccinated folk.” After all, the governor said it was their fault.

How far should “blame” be allowed to go?

Speaking of which, Nick Cohen of The Guardian said that it was only a matter of time before “we turn on the unvaccinated.”

The vindictive will start to describe Covid as a sickness of choice. Its victims will be victims of their own stupidity. They might have accepted vaccination. They might have protected themselves and others if, as seems likely, vaccines limit infections.

Rational people will ask why they should continue to accept restrictions on their freedoms because of ignorant delusions. Employers will demand to know what possible argument there is against allowing the owners of pubs, airlines, restaurants, hotels or holiday homes to demand proof of protection when immunity passports might save their business. To make it personal, how would you feel come the autumn if someone you love contracted cancer and the NHS delayed treatment because it had to look after needlessly ill Covid patients? (source)

Dr. William Schaffner, a professor in the Division of Infectious Diseases at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, says that unvaccinated people are “variant factories.”

People want to impose financial penalties

Andy Slavitt, a former medical advisor for President Biden, believes that anyone unvaccinated should be required to be tested daily at their own expense until they finally give in.

“Look, if people say they don’t want to be vaccinated, which some people might say, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to say that’s fine,” Slavitt told Anderson Cooper. “We want you to show up every morning an hour before work and get a negative test. Maybe even at your own expense.”

Slavitt continued, “Until the point where people will say, you know what? It makes more sense to actually get vaccinated. If you give people that option, I think you’re going to see more and more people take the option to get vaccinated.” (source)

Some employers are docking peoples’ paychecks, according to Forbes.

…But the carrot approach is about to be joined by a stick that could cost employees up to $50 a month, according to Mercer, the large employee benefits consultancy that works with thousands of employers around the world.

“Employers have tried encouraging employees to get vaccinated through offering incentives like paid time off and cash, but with the Delta variant driving up infections and hospitalizations throughout the country – at the same time that vaccination rates have stalled – we have received inquiries from at least 20 employers over the past few weeks who are giving consideration to adding health coverage surcharges for the unvaccinated as a way to drive up vaccination rates in their workforce,” said Wade Symons, Mercer’s regulatory resources group leader.  (source)

Wesleyan College in West Virginia is charging an even more outrageous amount.

The college recently released it’s [sic] campus arrival guidance for the fall. It states that students who aren’t vaccinated will be charged a non-refundable $750 COVID fee for the Fall 2021 semester. It also states that students who get COVID-19 and are unable to quarantine off campus will be charged $250 to finish their quarantine on campus. (source)

And, in the UK…

Sanctimonious pundit Piers Morgan of England tweeted that people who don’t get the vaccine should be denied medical care.

“Those who refuse to be vaccinated, with no medical reason not to, should be refused NHS care if they then catch covid. I’m hearing of anti-vaxxers using up ICU beds in London at vast expense to the taxpayer. Let them pay for their own stupidity & selfishness.”

Those who refuse to be vaccinated, with no medical reason not to, should be refused NHS care if they then catch covid. I’m hearing of anti-vaxxers using up ICU beds in London at vast expense to the taxpayer. Let them pay for their own stupidity & selfishness.

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) July 27, 2021

Umm…considering that the UK has government healthcare – it’s already at their own expense, Piers.

They want to literally ruin the lives of the unvaccinated.

The only reason employers cannot (yet) legally force people to be vaccinated as a term of employment is that none of the vaccines have gained more than temporary FDA approval. None of them. Once the vaccines are FDA-approved, you can bet your sweet bootie it will be a requirement in many workplaces.

Pam Keith, an attorney from Florida suggests that the unvaccinated be denied access to any federal benefits…including things they’ve paid into their entire working lives like Social Security.

“Here’s a good way to move people into getting vaccinated: Condition all federal benefits on proof of vaccination. That includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, military pensions, VA benefits, fed subsidized housing… ALL OF IT! I bet THAT will move things along.”

Here’s a good way to move people into getting vaccinated:

Condition all federal benefits on proof of vaccination.

That includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, military pensions, VA benefits, fed subsidized housing… ALL OF IT!

I bet THAT will move things along.

— Pam Keith, Esq. (@PamKeithFL) July 31, 2021 Wow. What a lovely lady.

Other “tolerant” people chimed in eagerly with replies containing all sorts of other ideas for punishing the unvaccinated:

• Or even better, deny any Medicare, Medicaid, or private insurance coverage for Covid treatments or meds for unvaccinated. Set a date, say 9/11/21, for vaccination coverage or no insurance. (source)

• That’s a great idea! Also, add employment, suspension of gun and driving licenses, access to loans. Sporting events, dining out concerts should also require proof of vaccine. It will not be popular, but it is the only way to get people vaccinated. (source)

• I still love the idea that every unvaxed person that gets the disease is held personally financially responsible for all testing & if they contract Covid. Not private insurance or Medicare/Medicaid. Only excuse: documented allergy to vaccines/components. (source)

• How about if all the health insurance companies just said we’ll raise your premiums by, say, $5000/year for each unvaccinated adult on a policy? The chances of getting sick if someone is unvaccinated are much greater than those that are. Make it a financial decision. (source)

• I’d rather see their health care suspended for all covid-related treatments. (source)

What a bunch of stellar human beings. Imagine walking around thinking these things are justified. Imagine having that much hatred and disdain for those who don’t share your opinion.

What are your thoughts?

Seeing our country at each other’s throats yet again is heartbreaking. The rabid contempt for those who think differently can lead nowhere good.

*  *  *

Author of Be Ready for Anything and The Prepper’s Workbook

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/16/2021 - 05:00

Una nueva compañía ocupa el primer puesto del podio de rentabilidad del Ibex este año. Este campeón bursátil toca máximos históricos hoy y vive un rally en los últimos años. Varias firmas de inversión confían en que siga su escalada. Leer

Una nueva compañía ocupa el primer puesto del podio de rentabilidad del Ibex este año. Este campeón bursátil toca máximos históricos hoy y vive un rally en los últimos años. Varias firmas de inversión confían en que siga su escalada. Leer

El grupo farmacéutico Almirall registra hoy avances en Bolsa tras los resultados positivos obtenidos por un fármaco contra la dermatitis atópica que desarrolla la compañía estadounidense Lilly y que la empresa española comercializará en Europa. Leer

Oil and mining stocks dragged the FTSE 100 lower as fears of further lockdowns and restrictions concerned investors as the the Covid-19 delta variant continues to spread through Asia.

Watch: 100s Of US Citizens Scramble Aboard C-17 As Taliban Ready To Declare "Islamic Emirate Of Afghanistan"

Update (1310ET): The situation in Kabul (well all of Afghanistan) has gone from bad to worst case scenario as a Taliban official says they will soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from the presidential palace in Kabul, the Associated Press reported, after reports of the insurgents entering the premises and taking control of it

The level of mismanagement is astonishing. With no military background, I could have told you to 1) Ship all military equipment home, 2) Establish a plan to get US civilians & embassy members out in advance & 3) Offer asylum to all of the natives who assisted us during that time.

— Political Prostitution (@PoliticalPol) August 15, 2021

 As this is unfolding, 100s of US citizens are scrambling aboard C-17s as the Biden admin evacuates the country...

This is happening in Kabul right now.

Biden has allowed the Taliban to regain control.

Now civilians are fleeing the country.

Watch as they stampede onto an evacuation flight.

Biden did this. pic.twitter.com/GDdNDNjGPQ

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) August 15, 2021

We give the last word for this latest update to FT op-ed writer Gideon Rachman who presciently notes: 

If Donald Trump were presiding over the debacle in Afghanistan, the US foreign policy establishment would be loudly condemning the irresponsibility and immorality of American strategy. Since it is Joe Biden in the White House there is instead, largely, an embarrassed silence.

One thing of note - which we are sure Fauci and Biden will quickly clamp down on - none of the evacuees appear to be wearing masks!!

*  *  *

Update (1200ET): The Taliban are now in charge.

• TALIBAN FIGHTERS ENTER AFGHAN PRESIDENTIAL PALACE - TWO SENIOR TALIBAN COMMANDERS IN KABUL
• TALIBAN SAYS THEY HAVE CONTROL OF PRESIDENTIAL PALACE: REUTERS

Meanwhile the US embassy in Kabul is also about to fall to the Taliban who are set to return to power after 20 years...

• U.S. EMBASSY IN AFGHANISTAN SAYS REPORTS OF KABUL AIRPORT TAKING FIRE, INSTRUCTS U.S. CITIZENS TO SHELTER IN PLACE

Security Alert - U. S. Embassy Kabul, Afghanistan (August 15, 2021) 

Location: Kabul

Event: The security situation in Kabul is changing quickly and the situation at the airport is deteriorating rapidly. There are reports of the airport taking fire and we are instructing U.S. citizens to shelter in place. The U.S. Embassy in Afghanistan has suspended consular operations effective immediately. Do not come to the Embassy or airport at this time.

U.S. citizens needing assistance in departing the country should register for any option that might be identified to return to the United States, by completing this Repatriation Assistance Request for each traveler in their group. Spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens in Afghanistan who are awaiting immigrant visas should also complete this form if they wish to depart. Please do so as soon as possible. You must complete this form even if you've previously submitted your information to the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.

Do not call the U.S. Embassy in Kabul for details or updates about the flight. This form is the only way to communicate interest in flight options.

... having retaken Kabul in less than 8 hours.

The Taliban conquered Kabul in less than 8hours. https://t.co/8Y2R2FY3el

— Anna Ahronheim (@AAhronheim) August 15, 2021

Are we about to have another Libya on our hands, with one or more embassy staffers about to die as Taliban hostages?

potential hostages all over the place.... https://t.co/Pk4AlZv6Od

— NEWS MAKER (@NEWS_MAKER) August 15, 2021

NBC is reporting that the US Ambassador has left the embassy. He and the flag are at the airport. And perhaps even more notably, NBC News appears to be turning against the Biden admin...

More on intel failure. How did the US get duped into thinking there was ever a peace process with the Taliban? Outfoxed by the Taliban? I’d say that’s embarrassing but shameful is closer

— Richard Engel (@RichardEngel) August 15, 2021

Meanwhile, according to the AP, a Taliban official says they will soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from the presidential palace in Kabul.

BREAKING: The Taliban will soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from the presidential palace in Kabul, an official for the militant group says. That was the name of the country under the Taliban government ousted by U.S.-led forces in 2001. https://t.co/c3qO1s3vMY

— The Associated Press (@AP) August 15, 2021

And as Afghanistan falls, expect much more humiliation for SecState Blinken and Joe Biden in the coming days and years.

On #SundayTODAY: @RichardEngel is in Kabul, Afghanistan, with the latest on the Taliban’s advance as U.S. troops race to get embassy workers out. pic.twitter.com/2YSPqtUERD

— TODAY (@TODAYshow) August 15, 2021

* * *

Update (1005ET): "Run Away!"

Reuters is reporting that Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has fled the country as the Taliban enter the capital Kabul. Ghani is reportedly in Tajikistan.

A SENIOR INTERIOR MINISTRY OFFICIAL SAYS AFGHANISTAN'S ASHRAF GHANI HAS LEFT FOR TAJIKISTAN

— Guy Faulconbridge (@GuyReuters) August 15, 2021

The president left the country accompanied by his “close aides,” TOLO, an Afghan news channel, reported, citing two sources familiar with the matter.

A source told Russia’s RIA-Novosti news agency that Ghani had fled to Tajikistan and would soon travel from there to a third country.

The Taliban is claiming it has engaged in talks with the government about a “peaceful surrender” of the city to the group.

“Until the completion of the transition process, the responsibility for the security of Kabul is with the other side [the Afghan government],” the Taliban wrote in a statement posted online.

Afghanistan’s acting interior minister, Abdul Sattar Mirzakwal, said that a transfer of power will happen peacefully, while security forces will remain in the streets to “ensure Kabul’s security.”

“A transitional administration” will be formed in Afghanistan, the minister said, as quoted by Reuters.

The Taliban is expecting a “peaceful transfer of power” from the Afghan government “in the next few days,” the radical group’s spokesman, Suhail Shaheen, told the BBC.

“We assure the people, particularly in the city of Kabul, that their properties, their lives are safe,” Shaheen said, adding that the Taliban also intends to protect the rights of women and media freedom in the country.

The group noted that Kabul is a large and densely populated city, and it won’t enter “by force or war,” suggesting that fighting to capture the capital would result in heavy losses and damage.

*  *  *

US intelligence services - by now fully woke and focused on the existential threat to the country's future that are white, middle-class American males - had predicted just 4 days ago that Kabul could fall in 90 days. It turned out to be less than 90 hours.

In a grotesque repeat of the Fall of Saigon, on Sunday, the Taliban - having reclaimed the country at an unprecedented pace - entered Kabul, freeing inmates at the city’s main prison and triggering a massive effort to airlift Western diplomats and civilians as the country’s demoralized security forces offered no resistance. Meanwhile, the US - cementing its humiliation on the international arena - was busy evacuating diplomats from the embassy in Kabul to the airport.

Taliban fighters and residents congregated around an Afghan army vehicle in Jalalabad on Sunday.; Photo: AFP

Cementing its renewed grip on the country two decades after the U.S. ousted it from power, the Taliban in a statement said that they wouldn’t take Kabul by force. The insurgent group added that it had ordered its fighters to wait and not penetrate the Afghan capital, home to six million people, and that it was in talks with “the other side” to discuss entering the city without harming its residents, the WSJ reported.

“The Islamic Emirate instructs all its forces to stand at the gates of Kabul, not to try to enter the city,” the Taliban said in a statement on Sunday, referring to the group’s formal name. “Negotiations are under way to ensure that the transition process is completed safely and securely, without putting the lives, property and honor of anyone in danger.”

Until the transition of power is done, the current Afghan government would remain responsible for the security of the capital, it said, while adding that a general amnesty was announced for all government officials and soldiers.

A senior Afghan official said President Ashraf Ghani was at the U.S. Embassy to consult with the U.S. envoy. Both the U.S. and Afghan government have asked the Taliban to hold off for two weeks until a transitional government could be agreed to, he said. “I do not think the Taliban will accept the offer,” he said.

Despite the Taliban's promises of a peaceful transition, sporadic gunfire erupted in central Kabul in the late morning as the administration of Ghani told all employees to go home.

#BREAKING: Kabul in complete blackout, heavy fighting going on. pic.twitter.com/EHYuh0TNfs

— Amichai Stein (@AmichaiStein1) August 14, 2021

Soon after, checkpoints were abandoned as panicked residents clogged the streets. By early afternoon, the Taliban took over Kabul’s main Pul-e-Charkhi prison, freeing thousands of inmates, videos on social media showed.

VIDEO from Pul-e-Charkhi prison shortly before prisoners were released. #Afghanistan #Kabul pic.twitter.com/g3TB72YINs

— FJ (@Natsecjeff) August 15, 2021

Having spent trillions of dollars over two decades to "modernize" the Afghan army so it can stand up against the Taliban, it took just hours to see that this money has been completely wasted as the terrified army scattered and handed over its weapons to the advancing Taliban. As a result, over at the US embassy on Sunday afternoon helicopters ferried American and Western diplomats and civilians to the military side of Kabul airport. One after another, Chinooks and Black Hawks took off from the landing zone, spraying dust.

The U.S. will completely pull out all embassy personnel within three days, CNN reported. It added that a core of U.S. officials would remain at Kabul airport, currently the only route out of the country rushed to withdraw their cash before the Taliban takeover.

A Person familiar tells @NBCNews the US Embassy in Kabul will be closing once all personnel are transferred out and here have been intense negotiations with the Taliban for safe passage.

— Richard Engel (@RichardEngel) August 15, 2021

An official said military helicopters were shuttling between the embassy compound and the airport, where a core presence will remain for as long as possible given security conditions.

A helicopter flying near the U.S. Embassy in Kabul on Sunday; Photo: AP

Below them was a city of traffic jams and roundabouts choked by cars—many of them filled with Afghans trying to reach the airport’s relative safety.

Panic and desperate in kabul City Traffic-jam .. Kabulis terrified about what will happened tonight .. probably last say before fall of kabul .
I wish I couldn’t see 4 fall of kabul 1992-1996-2001 and 2021 pic.twitter.com/b69CrqiHiw

— Sami Yousafzai (@Samiyousafzai) August 15, 2021

Dark smoke, presumably from burning documents, rose from the presidential palace.

In the airport, dozens of gray U.S. Air Force and British transport planes awaited their passengers, the landing strip secured by some of the newly arrived American troops, who will also be evacuated shortly.

Some of the evacuating Westerners relaxed on cardboard boxes marked with the words “non-Pork MRE,” or meal-ready-to-eat. Others—including Afghan dual citizens—nervously waited their turn for the shuttle bus that would take them to their planes, away from the city they would be unlikely to see again anytime soon.

In Kabul, long lines formed outside banks and at the city’s few functioning ATMs as residents rushed  to withdraw their cash before the Taliban takeover.

In addition to seizing Kabul, Taliban forces now hold all of Afghanistan’s border crossings, the Associated Press said. The news agency added that Afghan forces had surrendered Bagram Air Base, north of Kabul, which the U.S. handed over to Afghanistan last month after nearly 20 years.

Seeking to avoid a mass exodus, late on Saturday the Taliban released a lengthy statement seeking to reassure Afghans and the international community. It denied reports that it had killed prisoners and forced villagers to hand over their daughters to marry Taliban soldiers, while adding that the group would respect public property, redeploy bureaucrats and military officers, and provide amnesty for anyone who “helped the invaders.”

The Taliban also said it would avoid seizing private property and create “a safe and conducive environment” for business. It also said neighboring countries should have confidence: “We assure all our neighbors that we will not create any problems for them.”

“No one should leave their area and country,” the Taliban statement said, referring to those areas it had seized. “They shall live a normal life; our nation and country need services, and Afghanistan is our joint home that we will build and serve together."

We doubt anyone actually believes this.

* * *

The stunning meltdown of the Afghan state "left the city in shock", the WSJ reports as the Taliban, who controlled none of Afghanistan’s 34 provincial capitals just over a week ago, have seized the bulk of the country and are now readying to assume power, either directly or by controlling a new transitional administration.

In a message to followers Sunday, the Taliban’s leader, Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, urged his fighters to treat conquered cities with a benevolent hand. “The victories are coming, do not be arrogant and conceited, do not betray the spoils of war, and treat well those who surrender to you,” he said. “Do your best to avoid civilian casualties.”

On Saturday, Biden rushed 5,000 troops to Kabul in an attempt to ensure an “orderly and safe drawdown", to secure the airport and help evacuate American diplomatic personnel. The authorization added about 1,000 U.S. personnel to the deployment of 3,000 Marines and soldiers announced this week and 1,000 troops already at the airport and the embassy, according to a defense official. Helicopters landed at the American embassy compound in Kabul early Sunday, the AP reported.

On Sunday, the Green Zone that contained much of the foreign presence emptied out as embassies closed or relocated to the military base in the airport. The U.S., which is in constant contact with the Taliban’s political leadership in Doha, Qatar, has urged the insurgents to hold off on taking Kabul until after the evacuation is complete and all Americans have left the city, according to people familiar with the talks.

Also on Sunday, there was no sign of the U.S. military in the city itself. Residents rushed to put their affairs in order and people from areas that have fallen to the insurgents sought refuge in the capital. “We have no idea what will happen from one moment to the next in this situation,” said Mohammad Nasim, a worker at a nongovernment organization. “But what can we do? There is nowhere for us to go. There is no chance to leave the city anymore.”

Afghans also mobbed Kabul’s passport offices, seeking to secure valuable travel documents while an internationally recognized Afghan government still exists—and while the airport continues operations. Not many were lucky. According to the Journal, Milad Anwari, a 38-year-old businessman at the passport line, said he had already managed to move part of his family to Turkey, but several others were stuck in Kabul. “I never expected that Taliban will come again. Now everything is going to collapse,” he said. “In the presence of Taliban I don’t have any hope for the future of my country.”

Shortly thereafter, an announcement rang out that the passport office was closing because the Taliban had entered Kabul.

In the line that snaked past blast barriers outside Afghanistan’s central bank, opinions were divided over who was to blame. Poet Samdel Banwa, originally from the eastern Kunar province, said President Biden’s April decision to withdraw all American forces was the reason for the country’s unfolding tragedy.

He wasn't alone: according to multiple reports on the ground, "people not just sad, but angry, blaming the US for abandoning the country to war, chaos, and the Taliban."

Walking around kabul. Hard stares. Mood changing. People not just sad, but angry, blaming the US for abandoning the country to war, chaos, and the Taliban

— Richard Engel (@RichardEngel) August 15, 2021

A Kabul schoolteacher who stood in the same line, Mirwais, vented his anger at the infighting and incompetence within the Afghan government. “The government has betrayed the people,” he said. “This is why I am standing here today.”

Meanwhile, in a sign of the total chaos facing the city - and nation - NBC reported Richard Engel said that according to witnesses people, not Taliban, were rushing police in two Kabul districts and stealing their weapons. "a sign of how completely the security forces have collapsed."

Witnesses say people, not Taliban, rushing police in two Kabul districts and stealing their weapons. A sign of how completely the security forces have collapsed

— Richard Engel (@RichardEngel) August 15, 2021

For the U.S., the priority now is to persuade the Taliban to hold off until the evacuation of Americans and other foreigners from Kabul is complete. Mr. Biden on Saturday said the U.S. has told Taliban representatives in Doha that any action on the ground in Afghanistan against U.S. personnel “will be met with a swift and strong U.S. military response.”

The Afghan military began to unravel soon after Biden’s April decision to pull out U.S. troops, taking away the logistical and air support on which Afghan soldiers depended. Biden said that the withdrawal, which was required under the February 2020 Doha agreement between the Taliban and the Trump administration, was the right decision.

“One more year, or five more years, of U.S. military presence would not have made a difference if the Afghan military cannot or will not hold its own country,” he said.

Biden, who’s spending the weekend at Camp David, again defended his decision to withdraw troops from Afghanistan after 20 years -- America’s longest war.

“I was the fourth president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan -- two Republicans, two Democrats,” Biden said. “I would not, and will not, pass this war onto a fifth.”

Just last month, Biden - who is now busy blaming Trump for the biggest US foreign policy disaster since Vietnam - assured the world that the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan is not inevitable. Reading teleprompted notes prepared by the Deep State, he said that
"you have 300,000 well-equipped Afghan troops and an air force against something like 75,000 Taliban." Little did either Biden, or the Deep State know just how much those 75,000 Taliban can achieve.

This may become the most infamous — and devastating — press conference ever held by an American President. pic.twitter.com/j4kKwyPDVm

— BDW (@BryanDeanWright) August 15, 2021

Biden has faced mounting criticism from human rights groups and some members of his own party, as reports emerge the Taliban is already bringing a return to attacks on women and other abuses reminiscent of its earlier rule. His administration has argued the Afghan army must take the reins while the U.S. provides military and financial support.

“They’ve got to fight for themselves, fight for their nation,” Biden told reporters last week.

And while Biden will do everything in his power to deflect and blame the ensuing debacle on Donald Trump, it's now too late because when you have lost both the ultra-liberal NBC

Lots of blame to go around for Afghanistan on the US side. Trump made a terrible deal with the Taliban, effectively promising them the country and empowering them. But Biden then implemented the deal, so the buck stops with him.

— Richard Engel (@RichardEngel) August 15, 2021

... as well as Financial Times it's over:

Sensing that the fall of Kabul under Joe Biden also marks a tipping point of US standing on the international arena, China has pushed the propaganda engine into overdrive with the editor in chief of the state-owned nationalist tabloid Global Times writing that "the Afghan government does not have the ability to resist and was completely defeated so quickly. This is the failure of the US and the West. A big, direct slap on the face of the Biden administration."

The Afghan government does not have the ability to resist and was completely defeated so quicky. This is the failure of the US and the West. A big, direct slap on the face of the Biden administration. pic.twitter.com/XwZQ6S5rEH

— Hu Xijin 胡锡进 (@HuXijin_GT) August 15, 2021

Expect many more such mocking statements from America's global foes in the coming days. After today, it certainly has many.

Tyler Durden Mon, 08/16/2021 - 04:55

The Taliban’s defeat of the US will be a boost to jihadis across the globe

The Taliban’s defeat of the US will be a boost to jihadis across the globe

Un vídeo muy ilustrativo Guille! Gracias por currártelo y compartirlo.Gracias Capitán, hay que tener en cuenta que en el vídeo hay caídas de tensión en vacío por así decirlo, en el momento que esté en vuelo la superficies de mando ya sea un alerón de avión un una pala de heli, sería una carga mayor para el servo y aumentaría más el consumo sin necesidad de tener que llegar a los extremos del servo para ocasionar la caída de tensión. Desde que descubrí esto, no vuelo por debajo de 3s nunca, solo uso 2s en el encendido de los motores.


Enviado desde mi iPhone utilizando Tapatalk

Estadísticas: Publicado por GuilleKraken — Lun, 16 Ago 2021 10:50

Creo que eso es lo que trata de decir @Aredhel.

Si tienen las mismas empresas en cartera desde inicio y las empresas ganan lo mismo que ganaban cuando se compraron, así debería de ser.

Es decir, ceteris paribus, una cartera a VL 80 debería estar a P/E más bajo que una cartera a VL 120.

Obviamente es un gran ceteris paribus, ya que hay muchos factores en juego.