Яndex - забота или пропаганда?

Часто замечаю, что неприятные новости Яndex прячет и в топы не выводит. Конечно же, интереснее всего задаться вопросом - кому эти новости "неприятны"? Но не тратить же на бесплодные спекуляции утро понедельника?

Судите сами, на картинке принтскрин заголовков из раздела Спорт страницы новостей, сделанный в 7 утра (мск) 18 мая 2015 г:

Поясняю, вчера 17 мая, хоккейная сборная России в финале ЧМ крупно уступила канадцам (1:6). 

Новость о том, как они же в субботу выиграли крупно американцев висела в топах с яркими заголовками. Как и вовсе околоспортивная новость о том, что президент РФ В.В.Путин забросил сколько-то шайб в каком-то шоу-матче. 

Для примера google:

Вот бы сделать автоматический сканер заголовков основных служб новостей и оценить освещение ими наиболее важных для страны заголовков. Сколько интересного можно было бы увидеть.

Девочки, мальчики, песни и скрытое

Ну, друзья, случилось тут со мной на днях забавное происшествие.
Я как в какую-нибудь претенциозную кафешку захожу, сразу Shazam настраиваю. Там ведь музыка обычно еще более претенциозная, мало ли что услышишь. 

Вот так и наткнулся на группу Chairlift. Нашел песни и начал по тихой западать, как это бывает в тех самых случаях. Ну страсть у меня к женским голосам вроде Энни Леннокс, а тут еще доносится то Тори Эмос, то французская Niagara, а то и вовсе Роберт Смит из Cure. Разумеется речь не о песнях вроде Bruises (Apple только подтвердили свой дурной вкус), а песни вроде Take it out on me.

Cтало мне любопытно посмотреть видео и первым я открыл клип Never Let you go (см. ниже). Я там как-будто слова про "глупую, испорченную дрянь" разобрал. Я и другие слова разобрал, но смысла песни так и не понял. Нашел слова, прочел на два раза, все равно не понимаю. 
И с первого кадра накрывает шиза. Ну не может эта девочка петь таким голосом. Здесь в голосе столько ментального и физиологического здоровья (ну вспомнить Эни Леннокс? Это ж ... !), а в клипе непонятно что.
Потом по сюжету другая девица появляется, за руки держутся, страсти всякие. Ну это ясно, вроде как лесб*****во, но голос, голос-то откуда берется?  

Ну дальше меня ждали открытия. Много про себя узнал нового.

Во-первых, я не знаю ту персону, что я принял за певицу. А весь мир, похоже, знает. Хм!

Во-вторых, мальчуковые девочки и женоподобные мальчики у меня вызывают совсем разные эмоции. На второй раз (после просветления) клип смотреть стало неприятно. 

В-третьих, коллектив Chairlift/Violens - гении. Написать новую песню к другому клипу, да так, что движения губ совпали. Ай-да!

В-четвертых, интуиция и физиология у меня работают без сбоев, за себя можно быть спокойным. Главное, продолжать слушать песни, спетые до 2000-х.

В-пятых, теперь будет неприятно смотреть на Кокорина в форме сборной России. Впрочем, раньше тоже не особо радовал глаз.

Берегите себя.

Видео: 

Chairlift/Violens - Never Let You Go [ SGINNED ] from flatluigi on Vimeo.

Sanctions & criticism for Russia

Obama condemns Russia..., Cameron blames Russia... for backing the rebelians in Ukraine who allegedly used a missile to hit a plane.
What is the US role in backing Kyiv (using the missiles against people in Luhansk & Slavyansk) or Israel (who recently used their one (a missile) to kill Palestinian kids?
Where are the sanctions against Israel?
Who's to issue the ones against US?

The rhetoric of US/UK officials provokes worldwide blaming Russians for being too tolerant to Putin.
Mostly those who favors oinking and watching the epic fails @ youtube.

Let me tell you this - Russian will blame Mr.Putin enough themselves, but ... not for his being too authoritative (which is a myth). He will be blamed for doing nothing while new UA government (backed by US support & inspiration) brought a terror for our brothers & sisters in Southern Ukraine.

The differences in currency, passport, TV programs or taxes are negligible. Culture, religion & historical relations matter more. That's why most Russians support protesters and condemns Ukrainian Nazi arriving from the Western regions.

p.s. for an occasional reader who's about to call me a victim of Putin's propaganda, I intently do not watch any TV for last 15 years, relying only on the reports from observers and world wide web with no preferences towards any particular newspaper/media.

Налог на предателей Родины

Взято у Дмитрия Рябых: Налог на предателей Родины:

В процессе изучения методов управления капиталом частных лиц натолкнулся на замечательную информацию. Оказывается в США для борьбы с теми, кто для снижения налогов меняет гражданство, ввели специальный «выходной налог» (exit tax). Суть его в следующем.

Если богатый гражданин (такой, у которого больше $2 млн. капитала или который платит больше $150 тыс. налогов в год) решил отказаться от американского гражданства, то он обязан оценить все свои активы по рыночной цене и заплатить с них налоги. Причем ставка налога варьируется для разных ситуаций от 30% до 51%, налогом облагаются все активы уезжающего, в какой бы стране они не находились. Надо также заплатить налог и на любые подарки, сделанные вами в последнее время перед отъездом, по наивысшей ставке, существующей на момент отъезда.

А если налог не уплачен в течение 3 месяцев после отказа от гражданства, то для начала государство заберет активы, находящиеся на территории США, а потом будет стараться добраться и до иностранных активов. То есть покинуть навсегда США – это что-то похожее на отъезд из СССР.

Shavarsh Karapetyan / Yerevan (1976)

There was a tragic accident in Yerevan on September 16, 1976. A trolley bus fell into the water with a lot of passengers in it when crossing the Bridge of Yerevan Lake. The 92 passengers inside the trolley-bus could have died because the weather was cold then and they were stuck in the trolley-bus because they couldn’t break the windows. The big trolley bus was being covered by water fast and it could bring to a big tragedy.

UK: junk food vs.healthcare

The British Heart Foundation (BHF) and the Children’s Food Campaign (CFC) released the report  highlighting what it calls the ‘manipulative tactics’ used by junk food manufacturers [1]. The report notes that the advertisements for a lot of these products aren’t allowed during children’s television programmes because they fail the Food Standards Agency and Ofcom nutrient profiling test. However, due to what it refers to as a ‘loophole in advertising regulations’, companies are allowed to market these products and brands freely online [2].

On the back of report, the NHF launched a rather sardonic online tool which sought to expose how junk food manufacturers are ‘preying’ on children online (see the image above).

Apparently, in the lack of real drivers to go for harder actions, a satire remains the only available tactics. Where are those who are supposed to react?

Пятая колонна - кто они?

Вчера по Москве прошли митинги в поддержку партии власти, выигравшей выборы. Толпы молодых людей выразили свою преданность делу партии и все тому подобное...

Лучше всего суть происходивщего, на мой взгляд, отражают две фотографии:

во время митинга

после митинга

Ибо, как точно выразились в блогосфере: Всё пофиг, кроме обещанных ништяков.

О фундаментальном различии между СССР и Россией, или Что конкретно потеряли советские люди.

взято у strejndzher

«Труднее всего отвечать на тот вопрос, ответ на который очевиден» © Бернард Шоу.

Последняя тема вызвала жаркую дискуссию, продолжающуюся по сей день. Там прозвучала одна важная мысль, которую я просто обязан извлечь и развить отдельно, т.к. вижу, что эта проблема вызывает самоё настоящее замешательство.

Сейчас наступило время, когда абсолютно разные люди (вне зависимости от возраста и места в обществе) – начинают рассказывать, вспоминать, или даже домысливать (если лично не застали) – разные, безусловно, положительные вещи, существовавшие при СССР. Вот только наброски у них получаются слишком однобокими и хаотичными. Сами того не желая, все они описывают Советский Союз – как царство глобальной «халявы».

Бесплатное жильё и образование, бесплатная медицина и путёвки на море, копеечные цены на ЖКХ, транспорт и продукты… и так далее и тому подобное. Некоторые заходят так далеко, что пытаются пересчитать всё это на современные деньги, и получают огромные цифры.

Правда ли всё вышеперечисленное, или это выдумки?
Правда. Вот только это не вся правда.

Более того – это вообще мишура, на фоне той части «айсберга», что сокрыта под всем перечисленным. И о чем принципиально умалчивают те кто «в теме», а остальные упорствуют в своем нежелании докопаться до сути. Так что я возьму этот труд на себя.

Разница между социализмом в СССР и капитализмом в России – примерно такая же, как между Закрытым акционерным обществом и Обществом с ограниченной ответственностью. Где у ООО Россия, есть несколько ключевых собственников (получающих дивиденды от прибыли «компании», в зависимости от количества своих «акций»), а у ЗАО СССР – каждый гражданин являлся акционером (с равным пакетом акций» (и равными правами на дивиденды – которые прямо зависели от роста «капитализации» общего ЗАО СССР) ).

Базовое равенство советских людей состояло в том, что и вы (директор завода или простой водитель), и колхозник, и Генсек, и учитель, и геолог – равны в своём праве на «дивиденды», которые формируются благодаря отточенной работе всего государства.

И это было фундаментальное, неотчуждаемое право каждого гражданина Советского Союза. Право – получаемое им при рождении.

Food industry Robin Hoods & Microsoft – looking for an innovative charity?

Have just watched Microsoft’s vision of the mobile future at YouTube

and was struck with the scene of the benefit concert (1m 45s : 2m). There’s an old man on the silver screen in traditional Arabic-like wearing, who plays music, and a mobile-armed youngster making his decision to donate between 500$ and 1000$.

And it comes to me whether the technologies do help us to meet the problem of someone’s being indigent in more responsible and effective way.

Imagine the residents of one city decided one day to splash out the coins at the railway station, wouldn’t that attract more beggars to the place and produce a competition which actually endangers the positions of those who are desperately in need. Likewise the uncontrolled energy flows contribute to the growth of entropy an irresponsible charity fosters the fraud.

Many people give to charity – even (and especially) the ambivalent Americans who rank The Atlas Shrugged next after The Bible [link],[link]. Only few people do this directly, most prefer to be protected from seeing the eyes of the unfortunates, using the mediators (orphanages, food banks, religious orders, hospitals, etc). Let’s leave the psychological analysis of such behavior to the fans of Ayn Rand’s novel, but we can’t ignore the resemblance of charitable giving with the indulgences collected by early Roman Catholic church.

To me, what mobile technology provides to that guy in the advertisement is a mean to apologize for his fortune. More innovative way, but what about its efficacy? Young man seems not to give a toss about it.

I would like to show you few instances of more responsible charity requiring not much of technology to work.

A Saudi restaurant in Damam city, the capital of the Eastern Province in Saudi Arabia, has started charging costumers who do not finish their meals. By doing that they hope to encourage people to order only the food they need and to donate the penalties to the food charities (watch BBC video). All they needed to make this were a plastic container and a gentle disclaimer.

In the cafés of Naples there was a tradition of a caffè sospeso – literally, a coffee "in suspense". When a sospeso is ordered, the customer pays for two coffees, but only receives one. That way, when a person who is homeless or otherwise down on their luck walks into the café, the person can ask if there are any coffees held in suspense, and can have one as a courtesy of the first customer. Though the custom has been a part of Neapolitan society for many years, it is somewhat less common today (Wiki).

These examples are especially good as they emerged in the restaurants – food industry faces both the needs of unfortunate people and the redundant appetites of the great. They have been doing that for a long time and hopefull will keep doing that, all technologies notwithstanding. And being demanded with such a moral pressure (of having to leave some people starving behind the gate while feeding the others) they have always had to be innovative with the charity, caring about its efficacy of the charity they could afford. I guess more often they preferred to act like Robin Hood, charging the rich to feed the poor. 

I can't find the reason why this shouldn't be so. 

Somewhere in Siberia..

...there was a master who created such incredible things.

Watch other photos in E.Roizman's livejournal (in Russian).

If Air Travel Worked Like Health Care

A thought-provoking video to all those who like to argue over US healthcare system.

Offline by Richard Horton

The present EiC of The Lancet produced an incredibly arrogant remark in his overview of university rankings:    

The intellectual footprint of the world, for good or ill, is still dominated by western nations. (Offline: Everything has gone mad. The Lancet, Volume 378, Issue 9800, Page 1366, 15 October 2011)

Yes, indeed, everything has gone mad, if such rankings has something to do with the value created by the universities around the world today and its contribution to the development of every nation.

I wonder, hadn't those noble guys, who signed The Treaty of Nanking, been the graduates of the top-ranked universities. Lord Palmerston was at the University of Edinburgh (1800–1803), where he learnt political economy. He later described his time at Edinburgh as producing "whatever useful knowledge and habits of mind I possess". 

Leadership or …I know it when I see it!

The excerpts from Chris Stevenson's article published at pharmaphorum.

We are living through one of those occasional periods when the simple extrapolation of events to predict the future is no longer valid; the future is very different and it takes bold and powerful leadership to create the future that you want. ....an exciting time for business and a fantastic opportunity for leaders to step forward and make their mark.

In a management world dominated by focus groups, advisory boards and consensus it takes a leader to state that they are going to do something that no one else has done, and that market research cannot define.

Henry Ford, an amazing business leader, said that if he had asked his customers what they wanted they would have asked for a faster horse. This is a great example of the limitations of research; it cannot predict things that it doesn’t know about. 

We have considered a couple of examples of leadership, and it is clear that a number of crucial aspects of leadership are belief in what you are doing, a disregard for the extrapolator view of the future, or perhaps a strongly held vision of a different future and a willingness to make mistakes, learn from them and move forward, as well as a constant hunger for improvement, better products and services, better client satisfaction and new solutions.

Let’s be specific and ask what leadership looks like in the marketing services and medical education world. Perhaps it is best to take a pragmatic view, just as US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart did when asked to define obscenity (or pornography) in the movie The Lovers. Instead of trying to provide a detailed description he is widely quoted as saying “…..I know it when I see it…”. Let’s apply this approach to leadership and describe what we should look for in managers that might help differentiate them as leaders.

• Firstly, we might expect them to be difficult people to deal with. They present a view of the world that challenges the status quo and this will make many other managers uneasy. They often talk about intangible things, such as visions of the future, that make the data driven managers struggle to understand or measure the validity of what is being said. They spend time looking forward not backwards at numbers and charts. 

• Secondly, they may often be frustrated by the pace of change in their organisation. They may even become angry, intolerant, even belligerent and demanding, and other managers may describe them as unreasonable.

• Thirdly, they will not spend time on internal matters such as administration, or internal discussions unless they can help them achieve their vision. They are more likely to be with customers, at external meetings and may even be described as being neglectful of the internal operations of your business.  

• Fourthly, they may have a reputation for making mistakes. They might have had an idea or two that didn’t work, as well as a couple that did. Other managers might perceive them as somewhat reckless with resources, even negligent in their management role, and perhaps as irresponsible. In many cases the leadership person will be described as a bad manager. 

• Finally, and perhaps most importantly, they make things happen. They don’t sit in meetings talking about change; they drive change, they don’t allow obstacles to get in their way and they are impatient for change.

The description above illustrates that leaders are not always easy to work with. They are intolerant, often argumentative, demanding and impatient. Of course, they are also often exciting, inspirational, amazingly energetic, enthusiastic and positive about the future.

Accept the disappointments in the knowledge that to give up is not an option. Your business needs you today, more than it has ever done, and the opportunities are greater than they have ever been. 

Full article may be found here.

Nice said. Old story. Much has been written on the subject "Leadership vs. Management", but the author should have refrained from comparing the Outstanding Leaders with the Brilliant Managers. 

How many of those sparkle around you? 

Much less than those who mimic it, I presume.

And what type is dominating, I wonder, idiotic "blabbers" or meticulous "pedants"?

EU Commission toughens its plans on Rx drug info

The European Commission has adopted revised proposals clarifying the information that drugmakers may supply to the public on prescription-only medicines (article).

The Commission comments that patients are increasingly interested in learning more about they medicines they take, and they want more of a say in how they are treated. But at the same time, they are confronted with a growing volume of information from a variety of sources, and often find it difficult to identify which information is reliable. Increased use of the internet make the need for clarity even more important, it adds; online information on medicines must be accurate and reliable.

"The revised proposals put rights, interests and safety of patients first," said John Dalli, the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy. They "oblige industry to provide certain key information to patients and set clear rules for additional voluntary information on prescription medicines," and they "further strengthen the control of authorised medicines," he said.

The European Public Health Alliance (EPHA), which had dismissed the Commission's previous proposal as "a disguised way of giving pharmaceutical companies enough flexibility to promote their products directly to the public, in order to boost the sector's growth," said it "cautiously" welcomed the new version, describing it as "controversial and long-awaited."

EPHA secretary general Monika Kosinska: "it is of the utmost importance that this is regulated by law and not by the pharmaceutical industry themselves, despite the opt-outs that we can see built in to this draft."

Moreover, she said the role of the internet should be limited to providing access to the patient information leaflet and safety information from a single portal, and that providing it on pharmaceutical company websites "would  be misleading, confusing and inappropriate."

Ha! They make no bones about it.

The Commission’s revised proposals will now be debated by both the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers.

Potemkin numbers - what a wisecrack!

PharmaGuy (full profile) wrote:

I just started reading the book "Proofiness: The Dark Arts of Mathematical Deception" by Charles Seife. The book promises to "conduct a thorough investigation into why so many of us find it so easy to believe things that are patently ridiculous. Why, for example, does anyone take seriously the idea that some vaccines can cause autism..."

I only read the first few pages of the introduction last night, but immediately realized that what I learn from it will help me interpret the BS I often hear from pharmaceutical marketers and spokespeople.

The author defines "proofiness" as "the art of using bogus mathematical arguments to prove something that you know in your heart is true - even when it is not." One tool used by masters of this art is fabricated statistics, which Seife calls Potemkin numbers in analogy to Potemkin villages (fake settlements purportedly erected at the direction of Russian minister Grigory Potemkin to fool Empress Catherine II during her visit to Crimea in 1787).

Full article can be found here