WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Hackers sympathetic to the late computer prodigy Aaron Swartz claimed on Saturday to have infiltrated the website of the U.S. Justice Department’s Sentencing Commission, and said they planned to release government data.
The Sentencing Commission site, www.ussc.gov , was shut down early Saturday.
Identifying themselves as Anonymous, a loosely organized group of unknown provenance associated with a range of recent online actions, the hackers voiced outrage over Swartz’ suicide on January 11.
In a video posted online, the hackers criticized the government’s prosecution of Swartz, who had been facing trial on charges that he used the Massachusetts Institute of Technology‘s computer networks to steal more than 4 million articles from JSTOR, an online archive and journal distribution service.
Swartz had faced a maximum sentence of 31 years in prison and fines of up to $ 1 million.
The FBI is investigating the attack, according to Richard McFeely, of the bureau’s Criminal, Cyber, Response, and Services Branch.
“We were aware as soon as it happened and are handling it as a criminal investigation,” McFeely said in an emailed statement. “We are always concerned when someone illegally accesses another person’s or government agency’s network.”
(Reporting by Deborah Zabarenko; Editing by Vicki Allen)
Tech News Headlines – Yahoo! News
ST. LOUIS (AP) — Stan Musial was remembered as a Hall of Famer on and off the field during a 2-hour funeral Mass.
Broadcaster Bob Costas, his voice cracking at times, pointed out during Saturday's lengthy tribute that in 92 years of life, Musial never let anyone down.
Among those in attendance were baseball Commissioner Bud Selig, former St. Louis standout Albert Pujols and Hall of Famers Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Bruce Sutter and Red Schoendienst.
The 90-year-old Schoendienst once roomed with Musial.
Shawn Thew/European Pressphoto Agency
President Obama, with his health secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, offering a compromise on the contraception mandate last year.
In a flood of lawsuits, Roman Catholics, evangelicals and Mennonites are challenging a provision in the new health care law that requires employers to cover birth control in employee health plans — a high-stakes clash between religious freedom and health care access that appears headed to the Supreme Court.
In recent months, federal courts have seen dozens of lawsuits brought not only by religious institutions like Catholic dioceses but also by private employers ranging from a pizza mogul to produce transporters who say the government is forcing them to violate core tenets of their faith. Some have been turned away by judges convinced that access to contraception is a vital health need and a compelling state interest. Others have been told that their beliefs appear to outweigh any state interest and that they may hold off complying with the law until their cases have been judged. New suits are filed nearly weekly.
“This is highly likely to end up at the Supreme Court,” said Douglas Laycock, a law professor at the University of Virginia and one of the country’s top scholars on church-state conflicts. “There are so many cases, and we are already getting strong disagreements among the circuit courts.”
President Obama’s health care law, known as the Affordable Care Act, was the most fought-over piece of legislation in his first term and was the focus of a highly contentious Supreme Court decision last year that found it to be constitutional.
But a provision requiring the full coverage of contraception remains a matter of fierce controversy. The law says that companies must fully cover all “contraceptive methods and sterilization procedures” approved by the Food and Drug Administration, including “morning-after pills” and intrauterine devices whose effects some contend are akin to abortion.
As applied by the Health and Human Services Department, the law offers an exemption for “religious employers,” meaning those who meet a four-part test: that their purpose is to inculcate religious values, that they primarily employ and serve people who share their religious tenets, and that they are nonprofit groups under federal tax law.
But many institutions, including religious schools and colleges, do not meet those criteria because they employ and teach members of other religions and have a broader purpose than inculcating religious values.
“We represent a Catholic college founded by Benedictine monks,” said Kyle Duncan, general counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which has brought a number of the cases to court. “They don’t qualify as a house of worship and don’t turn away people in hiring or as students because they are not Catholic.”
In that case, involving Belmont Abbey College in North Carolina, a federal appeals court panel in Washington told the college last month that it could hold off on complying with the law while the federal government works on a promised exemption for religiously-affiliated institutions. The court told the government that it wanted an update by mid-February.
Defenders of the provision say employers may not be permitted to impose their views on employees, especially when something so central as health care is concerned.
“Ninety-nine percent of women use contraceptives at some time in their lives,” said Judy Waxman, a vice president of the National Women’s Law Center, which filed a brief supporting the government in one of the cases. “There is a strong and legitimate government interest because it affects the health of women and babies.”
She added, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Contraception was declared by the C.D.C. to be one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century.”
Officials at the Justice Department and the Health and Human Services Department declined to comment, saying the cases were pending.
A compromise for religious institutions may be worked out. The government hopes that by placing the burden on insurance companies rather than on the organizations, the objections will be overcome. Even more challenging cases involve private companies run by people who reject all or many forms of contraception.
The Alliance Defending Freedom — like Becket, a conservative group — has brought a case on behalf of Hercules Industries, a company in Denver that makes sheet metal products. It was granted an injunction by a judge in Colorado who said the religious values of the family owners were infringed by the law.
“Two-thirds of the cases have had injunctions against Obamacare, and most are headed to courts of appeals,” said Matt Bowman, senior legal counsel for the alliance. “It is clear that a substantial number of these cases will vindicate religious freedom over Obamacare. But it seems likely that the Supreme Court will ultimately resolve the dispute.”
The timing of these cases remains in flux. Half a dozen will probably be argued by this summer, perhaps in time for inclusion on the Supreme Court’s docket next term. So far, two- and three-judge panels on four federal appeals courts have weighed in, granting some injunctions while denying others.
One of the biggest cases involves Hobby Lobby, which started as a picture framing shop in an Oklahoma City garage with $600 and is now one of the country’s largest arts and crafts retailers, with more than 500 stores in 41 states.
David Green, the company’s founder, is an evangelical Christian who says he runs his company on biblical principles, including closing on Sunday so employees can be with their families, paying nearly double the minimum wage and providing employees with comprehensive health insurance.
Mr. Green does not object to covering contraception but considers morning-after pills to be abortion-inducing and therefore wrong.
“Our family is now being forced to choose between following the laws of the land that we love or maintaining the religious beliefs that have made our business successful and have supported our family and thousands of our employees and their families,” Mr. Green said in a statement. “We simply cannot abandon our religious beliefs to comply with this mandate.”
The United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit last month turned down his family’s request for a preliminary injunction, but the company has found a legal way to delay compliance for some months.
PepsiCo announced on Friday that it would no longer use an ingredient in Gatorade after consumers complained.
The ingredient, brominated vegetable oil, which was used in citrus versions of the sports drink to prevent the flavorings from separating, was the object of a petition started on Change.org by Sarah Kavanagh, a 15-year-old from Hattiesburg, Miss., who became concerned about the ingredient after reading about it online. Studies have suggested there are possible side effects, including neurological disorders and altered thyroid hormones.
The petition attracted more than 200,000 signatures, and this week, Ms. Kavanagh was in New York City to tape a segment for “The Dr. Oz Show.” She visited The New York Times on Wednesday and while there said, “I just don’t understand why they can’t use something else instead of B.V.O.”
“I was in algebra class and one of my friends kicked me and said, ‘Have you seen this on Twitter?’ ” Ms. Kavanagh said in a phone interview on Friday evening. “I asked the teacher if I could slip out to the bathroom, and I called my mom and said, ‘Mom, we won.’ ”
Molly Carter, a spokeswoman for Gatorade, said the company had been testing alternatives to the chemical for roughly a year “due to customer feedback.” She said Gatorade initially was not going to make an announcement, “since we don’t find a health and safety risk with B.V.O.”
Because of the petition, though, Ms. Carter said the company had changed its mind, and an unidentified executive there gave Beverage Digest, a trade publication, the news for its Jan. 25 issue.
Previously, a spokesman for PepsiCo had said in an e-mail, “We appreciate Sarah as a fan of Gatorade, and her concern has been heard.”
Brominated vegetable oil will be replaced by sucrose acetate isobutyrate, an emulsifier that is “generally recognized as safe” as a food additive by the Food and Drug Administration. The new ingredient will be added to orange, citrus cooler and lemonade Gatorade, as well Gatorade X-Factor orange, Gatorade Xtremo citrus cooler and a powdered form of the drink called “glacier freeze.”
Ms. Carter said consumers would start seeing the new ingredient over the next few months as existing supplies of Gatorade sell out and are replaced.
Health advocates applauded the company’s move. “Kudos to PepsiCo for doing the responsible thing on its own and not waiting for the F.D.A. to force it to,” said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Mr. Jacobson has championed the removal of brominated vegetable oil from foods and beverages for the last several decades, but the F.D.A. has left it in a sort of limbo, citing budgetary constraints that it says keep it from going through the process needed to formally ban the chemical or declare it safe once and for all.
Brominated vegetable oil is banned as a food ingredient in Japan and the European Union. About 10 percent of drinks sold in the United States contain it, including Mountain Dew, which is also made by PepsiCo; some flavors of Powerade and Fresca from Coca-Cola; and Squirt and Sunkist Peach Soda, made by the Dr Pepper Snapple Group.
PepsiCo said it had no plans to remove the ingredient from Mountain Dew and Diet Mountain Dew, both of which generate more than $1 billion in annual sales.
Heather White, executive director at the Environmental Working Group, said of PepsiCo’s decision, “We can only hope that other companies will follow suit.” She added, “We need to overhaul how F.D.A. keeps up with the latest science on food additives to better protect public health.”
Ms. Kavanagh agreed. “I’ve been thinking about ways to take this to the next level, and I’m thinking about taking it to the F.D.A. and asking them why they aren’t doing something about it,” she said. “I’m not sure yet, but I think that’s where I’d like to go with this.”
This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: January 26, 2013
An earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of the 15-year-old who started a petition on Change.org to end the use of brominated vegetable oil in Gatorade. She is Sarah Kavanagh, not Kavanaugh.
BEIJING — The young women met the officials for illicit trysts with video cameras hidden in their purses. Every detail of the encounters was recorded. Then a group of men confronted the officials with the video recordings and made demands.
China’s state news media reported on Friday details of a sex extortion ring that brazenly operated “honey traps” in the southwest metropolis of Chongqing for several years. The widening scandal, which first emerged late last year, has led to the dismissals of at least 11 officials of the Communist Party, government or state-owned companies for having sex with women in the ring and then being blackmailed by the men who had set up the snares.
Xi Jinping, China’s new top leader, has vowed to root out official corruption and said this week that “flies,” or relatively low-level bureaucrats, as well as top officials he referred to as “tigers,” must be brought down.
The most famous victim of the sex ring scandal has been Lei Zhengfu, a middle-aged district party chief who was secretly filmed having sex in a hotel room in 2008 with a young woman. In late November, the leaked video of Mr. Lei began circulating on the Internet and he became the poster boy for a series of low-level or midlevel officials who have been brought down by scandals, often sexual in nature, across the nation. Mr. Lei was removed from his job and placed under investigation soon after the video appeared online. Now, according to Xinhua, the state news agency, 10 other officials have been removed as well for falling prey to the sex ring. Five of them were executives in state-owned companies.
The sex scandal might have come out earlier but Bo Xilai, the Chongqing party chief at the time, and Wang Lijun, his police chief, buried the results of an investigation into the ring. Mr. Bo and Mr. Wang were both felled last year by the fallout from the murder of a British business executive arranged by Mr. Bo’s wife; Mr. Bo is expected to be tried soon on a wide range of criminal charges. While the two scandals are unrelated, the airing of the blackmail ring at this time could reflect a decision by the Chinese leadership to highlight other problems in Chongqing under Mr. Bo’s rule.
The ring’s mastermind was a man named Xiao Ye, according to a report by Southern Metropolis Daily on Wednesday that was cited by Xinhua in its Friday article. Three women were used as bait. The state media reports did not say exactly what the officials gave the men in return for keeping their involvement secret, but one report said that a company run by Mr. Xiao was involved in a real estate development project in the district governed by Mr. Lei.
Mr. Xiao gave the women a list of Chongqing officials whom the women were to contact, Xinhua reported. The women sent text messages to the officials. They would tell the officials they worked for a local real estate company and had met the official at a banquet.
“Hope we can stay in touch a lot,” they wrote. If the officials said they had no memory of the meeting, the women would invoke the name of a chief executive and pretend to be angry that the official had forgotten the woman already. If the official bit, the woman would continue flirting by text or transmit seductive photos of themselves, Xinhua said.
A woman would then meet with the official in an upscale hotel to have tea, coffee or a snack. The official would hand her gifts, such as jewelry. Eventually, when the two were ready to have sex, the woman would make sure to show up at the hotel room with a hidden camera. The official would rarely stay the entire night, but the video caught all the action.
This happened over and over until the video was clear enough, Xinhua reported. Then at a later tryst, several men in the ring would show up while the official and the woman were in the middle of having sex. One of the men would pretend to be the woman’s boyfriend and throw a fit. Behind him would be another man pretending to be a private detective. A third man would then show up and say he was a member of a gang.
They would beat up the official and show him the video. Mr. Xiao entered the scene afterward to work out an agreement with the official and assure him that the video would remain buried, as long as the demands were met.
Of the victims, Mr. Lei was the one who tried to fight back most vigorously, one report said. He assumed the video would eventually come out, and so he went to senior Chongqing officials to explain his plight. Wang Lijun, who was then the police chief of Chongqing, took charge of the case. By 2009, the investigation was done and Mr. Wang and Mr. Bo had the results. But they decided to quash the case or ignored it, and the officials who were found to have been victims of the ring were eventually promoted.
The Xinhua article on Friday said people have been especially surprised that one district party chief in particular, Peng Zhiyong, who holds a doctorate, fell victim to the honey trap.
“He was spoken highly of by the people and enjoyed a reputation for being talented, smart, eloquent and outstanding in all ways,” Xinhua said. In addition, the report said, he “was widely regarded as having enormous political potential.”
Click here to view the gallery: Hands On With Mega
Mega — the long-anticipated file sharing and cloud storage site from Kim Dotcom — is now open to the public.
[More from Mashable: Google Glasses Spotted and Two Other Stories You Need to Know]
Thanks to its association with the now-defunct Megaupload — and the legal issues facing its founder Kim Dotcom — the amount of press, user interest and hype surrounding Mega is greater than any file hosting/cloud storage launch in recent memory.
According to Dotcom, more than 1 million users signed up for Mega in the first 24 hours. On Twitter, the larger-than-life entrepreneur has continued to share usage stats and traffic graphs that compare Mega with perennial cloud favorite, Dropbox.
[More from Mashable: 9 Fresh YouTube Shows You’ll Love]
If you’re curious about the inner workings of Mega, how it works and how it handles security, we’ve got you covered.
Mega is the spiritual successor to Kim Dotcom’s last business, the insanely popular file-hosting service Megaupload. Last year, the U.S. Department of Justice shut down Megaupload and pursued criminal charges against Dotcom. Dotcom, a New Zealand citizen, is actively fighting U.S. extradition orders.
Megaupload was targeted by the DoJ because of its role in illegally distributing copyright material — including digital copies of movies, TV shows, books, music and software.
Rather than try to start a new service eschewing the potential for copyright material to be uploaded and shared, Dotcom is positioning Mega as a service that cares about and protects its user’s privacy. In fact, Mega’s tagline is “the privacy company.”
On the surface, Mega is a bare-bones cloud storage host. After signing up for accounts, users can upload files and folders of all types to the service. Those files can then be shared with others.
The free plan gives users 50GB of file storage. There are no hard limits on file size, meaning users can use Mega as a way to back up photos, documents and other data. Obviously, this means users can use Mega as a way to store media content — video files, music, DVD images — as well.
For now, Mega is optimized to work on desktop web browsers. Mega strongly encourages users to use Google Chrome. And while Mega has big plans for developers and client-side apps, for now, the only way to access files is via the web browser.
Files can be uploaded to the service using drag and drop or a file-upload menu. Users can create folders in the file manager.
Uploads and downloads take place in parallel. If you upload a large number of files at once, each file uploads one at a time. In the future, Mega says users will be able to change the upload order. If you need to upload or download multiple files at once, simply open a new Mega tab in your browser and select that file.
You can upgrade to a higher-tiered storage plan from within your account. Mega doesn’t sell these plans itself; instead it has resellers who sell vouchers for a service. A 500GB storage plan with 1TB of enhanced bandwidth is 9.99 euros a month or 99 euros a year (a little over $ 110 U.S. dollars). That’s cheaper than most of its competitors.
It’s very important to remember the password you select when setting up your Mega account. The password is a big part of how Mega encrypts data on both ends.
During the sign-up process, Mega uses your password to create a 2,048-bit RSA key. This is the key that tells the system you are who you say you are. If you forget your password, you’re not going to be able to get into your account.
Right now, Mega doesn’t even have a password reset or recovery feature. In the future, Mega says it will have a reset mechanism but it will only allow users access to files or folders they have file keys for (more on file keys below). Users won’t be able to access other files until or unless they remember their password.
Because your Mega password is also your master encryption key, it’s important that users choose a secure password. We recommend using a password manager and printing a copy of the password to store in a safe place.
Mega is focused on end-to-end encryption. This means that files are encrypted both on upload and on download. With most traditional file hosts or cloud storage lockers, a public link to a file also includes a file path. With Dropbox, for example, the public or shared link includes the file name.
With Mega, things are a bit different. While users can share specific files to other Mega users or via email, the URL to a file doesn’t contain a file name; instead, a cryptographic key is appended to the URL. Without this key, you can’t access the file. Once decrypted by the server, a user has the option to download the linked file.
Mega’s promise, in other words, is that users control who has access to their files and accounts and no one else.
For important files or folders, users might want to make a note of the file key and keep it in a safe place — if they are worried about getting locked out of their account.
Since Mega is touting itself as “the privacy company,” it’s important to look at how the company stores files and content.
The end-to-end encryption scheme is only part of how Mega secures data. Still, some are already criticizing the service, noting that it’s not as secure as it says it is. An article for Forbes cites two professionals who have problems with Mega’s security.
Matthew Green, a cryptography professor at John Hopkins University, is particularly critical of the way Mega uses JavaScript to verify its encryption method telling Forbes that “it makes no sense.”
Mega has responded to Green’s claims on its own blog, noting that its scheme “basically enables us to host the extremely integrity-sensitive static content on a large number of geographically diverse servers without worrying about security.”
Meanwhile, at Ars Technia Lee Hutchinson raises concerns about how Mega comes up with its crypto key at sign-up, as well as how the company handles deduplication, or how it eliminates duplicate copies of data.
Again, Mega has taken to its blog to attempt to clarify its policies and the way it handles data.
While Mega’s crypto system certainly doesn’t seem any less secure than any other file locker, we do agree with critics who note that the system might be more about giving Mega culpability against claims that it knows infringing content is on its servers, rather than about protecting that data itself.
The service is still in beta and much of its code is available via open source, so security purists might want to watch how Mega’s system evolves before trusting it with important, sensitive data.
While security experts can quibble and argue over the way Mega uses cryptography and how it stores data on its array of servers, the bigger issue, for us, is long-term survival.
While I would argue that most users who actively used Megaupload were not using it as a traditional cloud service, the fact remains that when the service was shut down, user files went with it.
Already anti-piracy groups are campaigning to shut down payment processors to Mega’s resellers. One of the reasons Mega isn’t taking payments itself and is instead using resellers is to prevent those groups from shutting down payment processors or trying to seize funds.
This is worrisome because in addition to outside capital, Mega needs professional accounts to keep its site working.
It’s too early to say if Mega will be around for the long haul or not, but our advice is not to use Mega as your only file storage solution. Keep backups of crucial files on disk or other cloud-based services.
What do you think of Mega? Let us know in the comments.
This story originally published on Mashable here.
Linux/Open Source News Headlines – Yahoo! News
SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Wool instead of synthetic fleece, carbon skis and a spoon-shaped sleeping bag are among the hottest products at the world's largest expo for outdoor equipment and apparel, where vendors are vying for a share of the $289 billion Americans spend every year on outdoor gear, travel and services.
The Outdoor Retailer Winter Market show that runs through Saturday is a merchandise bazaar for a lifestyle of outdoor adventure. Bringing together 1,000 of the world's manufacturers and distributors, it is a showcase for the latest gear and fashions before they hit the mainstream.
One hardware company, Salt Lake City-based Black Diamond, put models on stage late Thursday for its inaugural 24-piece line of jackets and stretch-woven pants. It plans to jump into wool a year from now.
Wool was rubbed out by fleece decades ago, but many exhibitors said it's back without the itch, still warm and quick to dry and it doesn't hold body odors, a big drawback of fleece.
"Natural fibers is where it's at," said Matt Skousen, of Everest Designs. "It's the real deal. Wool has had millions of years to figure itself out."
Skousen founded Everest Designs with his Nepalese wife, Choti Sherpa. They hire workers in Nepal to stitch beanies from New Zealand wool, run the company out of Missoula, Mont., and were hoping for a sales boost at a trade show also crowded with Merino wool sweaters, undergarments and socks.
Shoppers aren't allowed inside the expo and no cash sales are conducted. Instead, the four-day show brings together retailers making orders for next year's inventory. Suppliers range from industry giants like Patagonia and Mountain Hardwear to perhaps the smallest player, a former Army Ranger hawking "Combat FlipFlops" from his duffel bag.
Matthew Griffin, who calls himself a micro-manufacturer, didn't have a booth of his own.
New products range from sunglasses with magnetic pop-out lenses to a thermo-electric camp stove that does double duty boiling water and charging electronic devices.
Another company showed off a line of sleeping bags with a roomy hourglass shape for camper comfort.
"Nobody sleeps like a mummy," said Kate Ketschek of New Hampshire-based NEMO Equipment Inc., which is receiving industry attention for its extra-wide Spoon Series of sleeping bags, an alternative to mummy and rectangular bags. She called it a "completely new category" of sleeping bags, made for side sleepers.
The jam-packed expo underscores a thriving corner of the economy. Outdoor-gear sales grew 5 percent annually throughout recent years of recession, analysts said.
The show favors Utah, a place of rugged mountains and canyons and a cottage industry for innovators like DPS, a maker of expensive carbon-fiber skis that recently shifted production from China to safeguard and refine its technology.
Stephen Drake was an English major from New York in 2005 when he launched DPS with $100,000, a trip to China and a design for a featherweight carbon ski.
"Man, we were in over our head," said Drake, 36, who teamed up with an engineer. "It's almost ridiculous what we tried to do with so little money, building carbon skis with new technology." DPS now handcrafts several thousand pairs a year for retail prices up to $1,300 from a factory in Ogden.
That's too much for a ski, said Mark Wariakois, founder of Voile, which sells a hybrid-carbon model for $600 adopted by backcountry professionals in the Rocky Mountains. Voile laminates 3,000 skis and snowboards a year at a factory in a Salt Lake City suburb.
"Everybody is trying to figure out how we make these big skis" for that price, said Wariakois. "We make all of our own tools. That's probably the biggest secret to our success."
Attendance is up 40 percent since 2006, with more than 20,000 flocking to Winter Market, said Nielsen Expo Outdoor Group, the organizer. A twin show in August brings out a larger crowd and is dominated by equipment for water sports.
Nielsen announced Tuesday it was keeping the shows in Salt Lake City through August 2016. The decision suspended a political standoff that had the Outdoor Industry Association threatening to leave over Gov. Gary Herbert's policies. Herbert, a Republican, unveiled a 59-page "vision" for outdoor recreation in the state, which calls for the creation of a state office devoted to the $5.8 billion economic sector.
The Outdoor Retailer show has taken place in Utah since 1996 and pours $40 million annually into the local economy.
Trying to stem the scourge of prescription drug abuse in the United States, an advisory panel of experts to the Food and Drug Administration plans to vote Friday on whether to toughen restrictions on hydrocodone products like Vicodin, the most widely used narcotic painkillers in the country.
The recommendation, which the F.D.A. would likely follow, would limit access to the drugs by making them harder to prescribe, a major policy change that advocates said could help ease the growing problem of addiction to painkillers.
The change would have sweeping consequences for doctors, pharmacists and patients. Under the new rules, refills without a new prescription would be forbidden, as would faxed prescriptions and those called in by phone. Only written prescriptions from a doctor would be allowed and pharmacists and distributors would be required to store the drugs in special vaults. The vote comes after similar legislation in Congress failed last year, after intense lobbying by pharmacists and drugstores.
Prescription drugs account for about three-quarters of all drug overdoses in the United States, with the number of deaths more than tripling since 1999, according to federal data. Since 2008, deaths from overdoses have outpaced deaths from car accidents.
The F.D.A. convened the panel, made up of scientists and other experts, after a request by the Drug Enforcement Administration, which contends that the drugs are among the most frequently abused painkillers in the country.
“This is the federal government saying, ‘we need to tighten the reins on this drug,'” said Scott R. Drab, associate professor of pharmacy and therapeutics at the University of Pittsburgh. “Pulling in the rope is a way to rein in abuse, and consequently, addiction.”
At a two-day hearing at F.D.A. headquarters in Silver Spring, Md., many speakers opposed the change, including advocates for nursing home patients, who said older, frail residents needing pain medication would be required to make the arduous trip to a doctor’s office to continue using hydrocodone products. Other experts questioned how effective the change would be. Oxycodone, another highly abused painkiller, has been in the more restrictive category since it came on the market, but the limited access does not seem to have stemmed abuse, they said.
But others including parents who had lost their children to prescription drug abuse, as well as doctors and pharmacists, testified, sometimes emotionally. . Senator Joe Manchin, a Democrat of West Virginia, where the scourge has been particularly deadly, made an impassioned plea for tougher restrictions.
“When I go back to West Virginia, I hear how easy it is for anybody to get their hands on hydrocodone drugs,” Mr. Manchin said on Friday. “For underage children, these drugs are easier to get than beer or cigarettes.”
He added that the current, less restrictive status “is fueling the prescription drug epidemic today.”
Dr. James P. Rathmell, chief of the division of pain medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital, said hydrocodone products have similar biological effects as oxycodone products, and should unquestionably be in the same category of restrictiveness.
“Knowing what we know today, it was a mistake,” Dr. Rathmell said, referring to hydrocodone products being placed in the looser category when they came to market. “It should be corrected.”
Dr. Timothy Deer, chief doctor at the Center for Pain Relief in Charleston, W.Va., said that he feared for older patients, particularly in rural areas, who would have to drive great distances to get prescriptions renewed. But, he said, hydrocodone products have been by far the most widely prescribed painkiller because the restrictions were so loose. And on balance, particularly in a hard-hit state like his, the public health benefits of a recommendation to toughen restrictions on the drug probably outweigh the harm of additional burdens on legitimate pain patients.
“At the end of the day, the benefits of reducing abuse will outweigh the harm to legitimate pain patients,” he said. “This will likely reduce the amount of drug falling into the wrong hands.”
For about 15 minutes on Friday afternoon, all of Wall Street was tuned into the battle that everyone wanted to see: William A. Ackman taking on Carl C. Icahn, live on air.
And the battle proved even stranger than anyone would have expected: Profanities were dropped; old battles were refought; taunts were slung.
Years of bad blood between the two hedge fund magnates spilled publicly onto CNBC’s airwaves, with Mr. Icahn deriding his younger counterpart as a “crybaby,” and Mr. Ackman declaring the veteran investor a “bully.” It was a smackdown that regularly prompted whoops from traders on the New York Stock Exchange floor, especially on the occasions that Mr. Icahn flung an occasional reference to bovine excrement.
Nominally, the two were set to talk about Herbalife, the health supplements company in which Mr. Ackman has publicly bet against. Speculation has ripped across Wall Street that Mr. Icahn has taken a contrary bullish bet on the company.
Of course, that’s not all that they argued about.
Instead, the two men squabbled over a nearly decade-old court case involving a real estate company, where Mr. Ackman sold his investment to Mr. Icahn. (You can read all about the lengthy battle here.) Mr. Ackman to this day alleges that Mr. Icahn reneged on a deal to share profits from a stock sale; the elder investor sees things differently.
How did that shape the battle between the two rich men? It became perhaps the financial world’s most-watched schoolyard match, in which Mr. Icahn shouted repeatedly and Mr. Ackman passionately argued his position at length.
Mr. Icahn dubbed Mr. Ackman “the crybaby in the schoolyard” and called his opponent “the quintessential example of on Wall Street, if you want a friend get a dog.” Clearly the more inflamed combatant, Mr. Icahn declared to his foe, “I wouldn’t want to invest with you if you were the last man on Earth.” He even picked a fight with CNBC host Scott Wapner, declaring him the bully. “I don’t give a damn what you want to know, I came on to talk about what I want to talk about,” the investor thundered, refusing to declare his position on Herbalife. [That said, Mr. Icahn mused that Herbalife could be "the mother of all short squeezes."]
For his part, Mr. Ackman repeatedly argued that Mr. Icahn was a bully who had taken advantage of a young investor stumbling in the early part of his career. The younger hedge fund manager repeatedly defended his bet against Herbalife, positing himself as the target of a major campaign by the health products marketer.
“He’s not an honest guy, he doesn’t live up to his word, and he takes advantage of little people,” Mr. Ackman flatly declared of Mr. Icahn.
Later in the exchange, Mr. Icahn sneered to his opponent, “I appreciate you called me a great investor.” Then he added, “I can’t say the same about you.”
The trial of five men accused in the gang rape of a 23-year-old woman in a moving bus in New Delhi is being watched closely as a symbol of India’s commitment to justice for women, but information about the ongoing court proceedings may be scarce.
As court proceedings began Thursday, the presiding judge said there would be a blanket ban on reporting on the trial. The judge, Yogesh Khanna, also warned defense lawyers, who have been openly speaking about the case, not to provide information about the proceedings to the press.
The five men accused in the Dec. 16 rape and murder of a physiotherapy student were ushered into the special fast-track court in South Delhi on Thursday at noon, flanked by policemen, with their faces were covered with gray woolen caps. During the two-hour court proceedings, the prosecution used the opening arguments to lay out charges against the men, which include gang rape, murder, robbery and destruction of evidence.
The police allege that the five accused men and a sixth teenager, who is being tried as a juvenile, committed a premeditated, vicious crime that included plans to kill their victim. The woman died nearly two weeks after the rape from injuries suffered during the attack, which included an assault with an iron rod. Her companion, a 29-year-old man, was also beaten, and is expected to testify at the trial.
The court proceedings took place in room 305 of the Saket District Court complex, a small wood-paneled chamber. The next hearing will be on Monday, when the defendants’ lawyers will respond to the charges the prosecution has laid out.
Separately on Thursday, India’s Juvenile Justice Board rejected a plea that the juvenile, who according to school records is 17 years old, be tried as an adult. The petition, filed by Subramanian Swamy, president of the Janata Party, claimed that the extreme malice of the alleged actions of the juvenile showed that he was not of the “tender age and mind” of a juvenile.
Indian law requires that rape cases be held “in-camera,” allowing only those directly connected with the case to be present in the courtroom, to protect the victim’s identity, and bans publishing of information about the proceedings. The victim has not been named by the media, but her family has spoken openly to the press about her life and their willingness to let her name be used if it were for something that benefitted the public, like new legislation to protect women.
Some are agitating for the proceedings of this trial to be made public, because of the high profile nature of the case. “In this case, what is on trial is the criminal justice system — investigating agencies, the administration and the judiciary,” said Meenakshi Lekhi, a Delhi-based lawyer who has filed a petition in the Delhi High Court challenging the media ban. The case has “brought women’s rights to the center stage of public discourse,” she said. “This would not have been possible without the media,” she said.
The High Court will hear the petition on February 13.
The new fast-track court will try only cases related to crimes against women, and once trials have started, they will not adjourn for weeks or months, as is common in other courts. Several fast-track courts have already been set up in Delhi to hear crimes against women in the wake of the Delhi gang rape, which brought thousands of protesters to the streets demanding justice for the victim and other victims of sexual assault.
Judge Khanna ordered Monday that all court proceedings in ths current case would take place “in camera,” allowing only those directly connected with the case to be present in the courtroom, reiterating an earlier magistrate’s order on the case. He also renewed a blanket ban Monday on the printing or publishing of any information relating to the case’s proceedings.
Defense lawyers were instructed by the court during the proceedings to “honor the spirit” of the gag order, they said, after the special public prosecutor Dayan Krishnan said he would file a petition of contempt of court if lawyers for the defendants continued to brief the media on developments.
V. K. Anand, the lawyer for Ram Singh, one of the accused, confirmed Thursday that he would now also represent Mr. Singh’s brother Mukesh. Mr. Anand and Vivek Sharma, a second lawyer for accused, told the media after Thursday’s court proceedings that they could not answer any further questions.
The Pentagon’s decision to allow women in combat has elicited some strong and controversial words from opponents of the move.
First, Tucker Carlson. Last night, the Daily Caller publisher tweeted: “Feminism’s latest victory: the right to get your limbs blown off in war. Congratulations.”
This drew some swift criticism on Twitter, and a counterpoint from The Week’s Marc Ambinder, who noted that one woman who lost limbs in combat, Tammy Duckworth, is now serving as a Democrat in the House of Representatives.
Then, Politico reported that Allen West, the former GOP congressman and Army lieutenant colonel, tweeted this morning: “Women in combat billets? Another misconceived lib vision of fairness and equality.”
West is already getting trashed on Twitter by users who took offense. After the controversial remarks made by Newt Gingrich in the mid-1990s and Rick Santorum last year, it’s no surprise that the Pentagon’s decision is stirring debate.
Also Read
Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Sloane Stephens sat for nine minutes, mostly staring at the court and trying to forget the curious timing of Victoria Azarenka's medical timeout. She may have been the only one trying to ignore it.
The 19-year-old American had just saved five match points and broken Azarenka. But she knew she had to hold serve to stay in her first Grand Slam semifinal whenever Azarenka — the No. 1 player and defending Australian Open champion — returned to Rod Laver Arena.
The restless murmuring in the crowd gave way to slow claps. Why had Azarenka chosen that very moment for a medical break?
Azarenka eventually hustled onto the court, and Stephens won only three more points, losing 6-1, 6-4.
"I almost did the choke of the year," Azarenka said in a frank admission during an on-court interview. "At 5-3, having so many chances, I couldn't close it out."
The crowd that had cheered wildly for Stephens, only 25 hours after she ousted an injured Serena Williams, gave Azarenka tepid applause as she left the court. She'll face 2011 finalist Li Na in the final Saturday night. Given the support Li enjoyed in her 6-2, 6-2 win over No. 2-ranked Maria Sharapova, there's no question which player the crowd will favor in the title match.
Azarenka's immediate post-match remarks suggest she panicked after failing to convert five match points, her forehand misfiring. She had little trouble finishing the match after she came back, and the No. 29-seeded Stephens had cooled off.
"I just felt a little bit overwhelmed. I realized I'm one step away from the final and nerves got into me for sure," Azarenka said.
The 23-year-old Belarusian said she was later compelled to explain that she misunderstood the question in the on-court interview, and she wanted to dispel the perception that her medical timeout amounted to little more than gamesmanship.
"I understand the point of people maybe not understanding what I said; me not understanding what I've been asked," she said during an official news conference more than two-thirds devoted to questions on her medical timeout. "So I'm just glad that I'm here, you know, to make everything clear.
"You know, I think you cannot really judge by (a) few words. The situation had to be explained."
Medical staff said Azarenka had timeouts for treatment of left knee and rib injuries. The rib needed to be manipulated because it was affecting her breathing. Tournament director Craig Tiley said Azarenka hadn't broken any rules.
Azarenka hadn't helped herself in a second television interview after the match when she said she couldn't breathe.
"I had chest pains," she said. "It was like I was getting a heart attack."
She tried to allay any negative perception with her explanation that the choking was related to shortness of breath from the rib injury, not her faltering game.
"When you cannot breathe you start to panic," she said. "I was really panicking, not because I couldn't convert my match point. That's not the case. I mean, I'm experienced enough to go over those emotions. But when you cannot breathe, when something's really blocking you, the stress — that was the stress I was talking about.
"What I said — that I was stressed out and choked — was not because I couldn't finish my shot. It was just so stressing me out the pain that I had that, maybe it was overreaction, but I just really couldn't breathe."
Azarenka had retired during previous Grand Slam matches, including a fourth-round match against Serena Williams at the 2009 Australian Open. But with a second major title so close, and the fact she needed to reach the final to retain the No. 1 ranking, she desperately didn't want to quit this time.
For her part, Stephens seemed sympathetic. She had to wait through a medical timeout Wednesday when Williams received treatment for a sore back — the 15-time major winner injured herself after leading by a set and a break. Another rival earlier in the tournament took a long break between sets for other reasons.
"I mean, when you take a medical break or timeout, obviously it's for a reason," she said. "I mean, just another something else that happens. If it was one of my friends, I would say, 'Oh, my God, that sounds like a PP, which is a personal problem. Other than that, it's just unfortunate."
Besides, Stephens said, it didn't affect the outcome of the match.
"No, not at all. She played obviously a really good match," she said. "First set she played awesome; got close in the second. It didn't go my way, but I wouldn't say at all what happened affected the match."
Novak Djokovic dispensed with No. 4-seeded David Ferrer 6-2, 6-2, 6-1 in the night match, saying he "played perfectly" to reach his third consecutive Australian Open title match. Then he dispensed some medical advice of his own.
The Serb, who won the Australian titles in 2008, 2011 and 2012, wore a white shirt with a red cross on the back, pretending to be a doctor to treat Henri Leconte during a legends doubles match at Rod Laver Arena.
He's relaxed now that he has an extra day to prepare for Sunday's final. Djokovic will next play the winner of Friday's semifinal between No. 2 Roger Federer, a four-time Australian Open champion, and No. 3 Andy Murray, the U.S. Open champion.
Djokovic lost only seven points in 11 service games against Ferrer, and hit 30 crisp, clean winners in an almost flawless performance.
"I cannot remember the last time I played so well," Djokovic said. "I've played many great matches, but this one stands out. Hopefully, I can play the same level on Sunday."
He played confidently in the first two sets, and was sublime in the third. Even Ferrer, who has now lost five Grand Slam semifinals and never reached a championship match, was surprised.
After hitting a forehand a fraction wide of the line and losing his challenge in a review, Ferrer double-faulted to give Djokovic match point. The errors were a measure of just how much pressure Djokovic was applying.
Right after his semifinal, Djokovic started playing mind games leading to the final.
"Federer-Murray, when they're playing it's always very close," he said, confirming he'd be closely watching the match. "I wouldn't give the role of the favorite to either of them. I expect to enjoy it. Whoever I play against, I'm going to be ready."
In a leap forward in understanding the basic science of one of the most lethal cancers, two groups of researchers have found mutations in most melanomas that are unlike any they have seen before in cancer. The changes are in regions that control genes, not in the genes themselves. The mutations are exactly the type caused by exposure to ultraviolet light, indicating they might be among the first DNA changes in a cell’s path to melanoma.
The discoveries, published online Thursday in two papers in the journal Science Express, do not immediately suggest new treatments or ways to prevent melanoma, researchers said. But the findings help explain how melanomas — and, possibly, other cancers — develop and what drives their growth, insights that may be critical to long-term efforts to develop ways to prevent or stop the cancer.
For years, cancer researchers have searched for mutations in genes, but this time, they looked for — and found — mutations in a region that regulates genes. They did it by examining the entire DNA of multiple tumors, studying not just genes but also what has been called the dark matter, the 99 percent of the DNA that includes regions that control genes.
“You could think of this as one glimmer in what has been called cancer’s dark matter,” said Dr. Levi A. Garraway of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and the Broad Institute of Harvard and M.I.T.
The complete DNA sequences of 70 malignant melanomas led to the new discovery. A small control region was mutated in 7 out of 10 of the tumors, and also, the investigators found, in liver and bladder cancers. The cancer cells had one of two tiny changes that together were more common than any mutation ever found in the genes of melanoma.
A team led by Rajiv Kumar of the German Cancer Research Center in Heidelberg and Dirk Schadendorf of the University of Essen looked for the mutations in a family whose members tended to get melanoma. Four relatives who developed melanoma had inherited one of them, while four who remained melanoma-free did not have it. They also found the mutation in a 36-year-old member of the family who had not developed melanoma but had had many moles, often a sign of risk in families prone to melanoma.
Their findings indicate that those who inherit the mutations might be born with cells that have taken a first step toward cancer.
The mutations spur cells to make an enzyme, telomerase, that keeps cells immortal by preventing them from gradually losing the ends of their chromosome, the telomeres. When telomeres erode, a cell dies. But the enzyme also has other, poorly understood functions that are thought to keep cancer cells alive, said Robert Weinberg, an M.I.T. researcher who studies telomerase and cancer and was not involved with the research. “The paradigm that it does nothing but extend telomeres is a gross oversimplification,” he said.
Abundant telomerase is so important to cancers that it occurs in 90 percent of them, said Immaculata De Vivo, a Harvard Medical School researcher who studies telomerase and cancer and directs a DNA sequencing program. She, too, was not involved with the research.
The results of the two studies presented in the papers “are like a court of law — it’s the preponderance of the evidence,” she said. “We all knew telomerase was important for cancer, but now we are finding the mechanisms, the machinery.”
Scientists were surprised that the mutations in the dark matter of melanoma tumors were so commonplace. Dr. Garraway and his colleagues had the entire DNA sequences for a collection of melanomas — genes as well as the rest of the DNA including areas that turn genes on and off.
“We said, ‘Let’s just take a look and see if there are any mutations in a regulatory region,” Dr. Garraway said.
At first, they looked at the DNA sequences of 19 tumors. They were amazed to find one or the other of the two mutations in 17 of them. So the researchers decided to look at 51 additional melanomas and a handful of bladder and liver cancers. The mutations popped up again.
“It was really quite striking,” Dr. Garraway said.
But it’s not clear how to reverse the mutations’ cancer-causing effects, Dr. Garraway said. And although people have long wanted to block telomerase production in cancer cells, they have not found a drug to do it.
Still, the findings are highly significant, experts said.
“We have always known that just looking at genes alone would provide a limited number of answers about why cancer develops,” said Elaine Mardis of Washington University, who was not involved with the research. “The brakes or the gas that control the genes that cause cancer are as important as gene mutations,” she said. The new papers, Dr. Mardis added, “show where additional answers may lie.”
2:48 p.m. | Updated President Obama tapped Mary Jo White, a former United States attorney turned white-collar defense lawyer, to be the next chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Mr. Obama announced the nomination at the White House on Thursday afternoon. As part of the event, the White House also renominated Richard Cordray to lead the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a role he has held for the last year under a recess appointment.
In its choice of Ms. White and Mr. Cordray, the White House is sending a signal about the importance of holding Wall Street accountable for wrongdoing. Both picks are former prosecutors.
Regulatory chiefs are often market experts or academics. But Ms. White spent nearly a decade as United States attorney in New York, the first woman named to this post. Among her prominent cases, she oversaw the prosecution of the mafia boss John Gotti as well as the people responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. She is now working the other side, defending Wall Street firms and executives as a partner at Debevoise & Plimpton.
As the attorney general of Ohio, Mr. Cordray made a name for himself suing Wall Street companies in the wake of the financial crisis. He undertook a series of prominent lawsuits against big names in the finance world, including Bank of America and the American International Group.
The White House expects Ms. White, 65, and Mr. Cordray, 53, to draw on their prosecutorial backgrounds while carrying out a broad regulatory agenda under the Dodd-Frank Act. Congress enacted the law, which mandates a regulatory overhaul, in response to the 2008 financial crisis.
Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, said Ms. White has “an incredibly impressive resume” and that her appointment along with the renomination of Mr. Cordray sends an important signal.
“The president believes that appointment and the renomination he’s making today demonstrate the commitment he has to carrying out Wall Street reform, making sure we have the rules of the road that are necessary and that are being enforced in a way” to avoid a crisis like that of 2008, Mr. Carney said.
Another White House official added that Ms. White and Mr. Cordray will “serve in top enforcement roles” in part so that “Wall Street is held accountable and middle-class Americans never again are harmed by the abuses of a few.”
Ms. White will succeed Elisse B. Walter, a longtime S.E.C. official, who took over as chairwoman after Mary L. Schapiro stepped down as the agency’s leader in December. Mr. Cordray joined the consumer bureau in 2011 as its enforcement director.
The nominations could face a mixed reception in Congress. The Senate already declined to confirm Mr. Cordray, with Republicans vowing to block any candidate for the consumer bureau, a new agency created to rein in the financial industry’s excesses. It is unclear whether the White House and Mr. Cordray will face another standoff the second time around.
Mr. Carney argued that there were no substantive objections to Mr. Cordray’s confirmation, only political ones. “He is absolutely the right person for the job,” Mr. Carney said.
Ms. White is expected to receive broader support on Capitol Hill. Senator Charles E. Schumer, a New York Democrat, declared that Ms. White was a “tough-as-nails prosecutor” who “will not shy away from enforcing the laws to ensure that markets operate fairly.”
But she could face questions about her command of arcane financial minutiae. She was a director of the Nasdaq stock market, but has otherwise built her career on the law-and-order side of the securities industry.
People close to the S.E.C. note, however, that her husband, John W. White, is a veteran of the agency. From 2006 through 2008, he was head of the S.E.C.’s division of corporation finance, which oversees public companies’ disclosures and reporting.
Some Democrats also might question her path through the revolving door, in and out of government. While seen as a strong enforcer as a United States attorney, she went on in private practice to defend some of Wall Street’s biggest names, including Kenneth D. Lewis, a former head of Bank of America. She also represented JPMorgan Chase and the board of Morgan Stanley. Last year, the N.F.L. hired her to investigate allegations that the New Orleans Saints carried out a bounty system for hurting opponents.
Consumer advocates generally praised her appointment on Thursday. “Mary Jo White was a tough, smart, no-nonsense, broadly experienced and highly accomplished prosecutor,” said Dennis Kelleher, head of Better Markets, the nonprofit advocacy group. “She knew who the bad guys were, went after them and put them in prison when they broke the law.”
The appointment comes after the departure of Ms. Schapiro, who announced she would step down from the S.E.C. in late 2012. In a four-year tenure, she overhauled the agency after it was blamed for missing the warning signs of the crisis.
Since her exit, Washington and Wall Street have been abuzz with speculation about the next S.E.C. chief. President Obama quickly named Ms. Walter, then a Democratic commissioner at the agency, but her appointment was seen as a short-term solution. It is unclear if she will shift back to the commissioner role if Ms. White is confirmed.
In the wake of Ms. Schapiro’s exit, several other contenders surfaced, including Sallie L. Krawcheck, a longtime Wall Street executive. Richard G. Ketchum, chairman and chief executive of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Wall Street’s internal policing organization, was also briefly mentioned as a long-shot contender.
Peter Baker and Kitty Bennett contributed reporting
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
The Lede is following Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s testimony Wednesday before the House Foreign Affairs Committee about the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on the American Consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Earlier today, she testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee .
At a House Committee hearing last October investigating the attack, as reported on The Lede, State Department officials and security experts who served on the ground offered conflicting assessments about what resources were requested and made available to deal with growing security concerns in Tripoli and Benghazi.
Mrs. Clinton had been scheduled to testify before Congress last month, but an illness, a concussion and a blood clot near her brain forced her to postpone her appearance.
As our colleagues Michael R. Gordon and Eric Schmitt reported, four State Department officials were removed from their posts on last month after an independent panel criticized the “grossly inadequate” security at a diplomatic compound in Benghazi.
As content providers continue to intimidate tech companies with a seemingly endless couch-potato conundrum, the latest innovation in the war to win your living room isn’t some new gadget from Apple or Netflix, or even that exciting à la carte content delivery system from Intel — it’s a protocol that helps our screens better communicate with one another. YouTube and Netflix have teamed up to create something called DIAL, a competitor of sorts to Apple’s AirPlay, which, as GigaOm’s Janko Roettgers describes it, ”helps developers of second-screen apps to discover and launch applications on smart TVs and connected devices.” Basically, it turns your phone into a kind of wireless super-remote for your TV, as Roettgers explains:
With DIAL, the Netflix app on your phone will automatically discover that there is a device with a Netflix app connected to your TV. It will fire up that app, and then the two apps are free to do whatever they want — which presumably involves some healthy binge-viewing.
This solves a “big problem” because it makes using those apps on your smart television a lot easier. As of right now, controlling the Netflix app on a PlayStation still requires the console remote to open up the app on your television before controlling it from a phone or tablet. This eliminates a step — and that, ladies and gents, is the biggest thing actually happening in TV tech right now. Instead of letting us pay just for the content we want, the cable industry’s aging model is still forcing tech companies to help us sift through all the extras were forced to buy. Because with the big media companies refusing to budge on innovative content deals so far this year, “content discovery” tools like GIAL and AirPlay remain one of the only ways everyone can get along.
RELATED: Netflix Is Winning the Internet
It wasn’t supposed to be this way, of course. Many expected hardware like a supped-up Apple TV or the Roku streaming stick to “fix” television — instead of some protocol that makes finding stuff on our TVs easier. But, as Netflix discovered when it tried to get in the hardware business, the total package can alienate the other key players. Back in 2007, the streaming company had a set-top box in the works that would transform Netflix into a cable competitor, reports Fast Company’s Austin Carr. But CEO Reid Hastings scrapped the idea because it was too competitive. “We could not be competing against Sony, LG, and Samsung,” says Steve Swasey, then the company’s VP of communications. On top of the potential loss of support from hardware makers, this separate Netflix box scared away the content owners, with which Netflix has worked so hard to get streaming TV deals.
RELATED: The Future of Streaming Video Looks Like TV Reruns
The old-school media industry’s fear of tech-world competition has driven the future of television in a spiraling direction. When one of the too-many entities gets offended, the future falls apart, as we saw with Google TV in an experiment that ultimately scared off content providers as well. A protocol like DIAL is the politically correct solution: It doesn’t change how we pay for content — but it sure does work within the comfortable way we’re used to sitting down and watching TV!
Gadgets News Headlines – Yahoo! News
The family of Junior Seau has sued the NFL, claiming the former linebacker's suicide was the result of brain disease caused by violent hits he sustained while playing football.
The wrongful death lawsuit, filed Wednesday in California Superior Court in San Diego, blames the NFL for its "acts or omissions" that hid the dangers of repetitive blows to the head. It says Seau developed chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) from those hits, and accuses the NFL of deliberately ignoring and concealing evidence of the risks associated with traumatic brain injuries.
Seau died at age 43 of a self-inflicted gunshot in May. He was diagnosed with CTE, based on posthumous tests, earlier this month.
An Associated Press review in November found that more than 3,800 players have sued the NFL over head injuries in at least 175 cases as the concussion issue has gained attention in recent years. More than 100 of the concussion lawsuits have been brought together before U.S. District Judge Anita B. Brody in Philadelphia.
"Our attorneys will review it and respond to the claims appropriately through the court," the NFL said in a statement Wednesday.
Helmet manufacturer Riddell Inc., also is being sued by the Seaus, who say Riddell was "negligent in their design, testing, assembly, manufacture, marketing, and engineering of the helmets" used by NFL players. The suit says the helmets were unreasonably dangerous and unsafe.
Seau was one of the best linebackers during his 20 seasons in the NFL. He retired in 2009.
"We were saddened to learn that Junior, a loving father and teammate, suffered from CTE," the family said in a statement released to the AP. "While Junior always expected to have aches and pains from his playing days, none of us ever fathomed that he would suffer a debilitating brain disease that would cause him to leave us too soon.
"We know this lawsuit will not bring back Junior. But it will send a message that the NFL needs to care for its former players, acknowledge its decades of deception on the issue of head injuries and player safety, and make the game safer for future generations."
Plaintiffs are listed as Gina Seau, Junior's ex-wife; Junior's children Tyler, Sydney, Jake and Hunter, and Bette Hoffman, trustee of Seau's estate.
The lawsuit accuses the league of glorifying the violence in pro football, and creating the impression that delivering big hits "is a badge of courage which does not seriously threaten one's health."
It singles out NFL Films and some of its videos for promoting the brutality of the game.
"In 1993's 'NFL Rocks,' Junior Seau offered his opinion on the measure of a punishing hit: 'If I can feel some dizziness, I know that guy is feeling double (that)," the suit says.
The NFL consistently has denied allegations similar to those in the lawsuit.
"The NFL, both directly and in partnership with the NIH, Centers for Disease Control and other leading organizations, is committed to supporting a wide range of independent medical and scientific research that will both address CTE and promote the long-term health and safety of athletes at all levels," the league told the AP after it was revealed Seau had CTE.
The lawsuit claims money was behind the NFL's actions.
"The NFL knew or suspected that any rule changes that sought to recognize that link (to brain disease) and the health risk to NFL players would impose an economic cost that would significantly and adversely change the profit margins enjoyed by the NFL and its teams," the Seaus said in the suit.
The National Institutes of Health, based in Bethesda, Md., studied three unidentified brains, one of which was Seau's, and said the findings on Seau were similar to autopsies of people "with exposure to repetitive head injuries."
"It was important to us to get to the bottom of this, the truth," Gina Seau told the AP then. "And now that it has been conclusively determined from every expert that he had obviously had CTE, we just hope it is taken more seriously. You can't deny it exists, and it is hard to deny there is a link between head trauma and CTE. There's such strong evidence correlating head trauma and collisions and CTE."
In the final years of his life, Seau went through wild behavior swings, according to Gina and to 23-year-old son, Tyler. There also were signs of irrationality, forgetfulness, insomnia and depression.
"He emotionally detached himself and would kind of 'go away' for a little bit," Tyler Seau said. "And then the depression and things like that. It started to progressively get worse."
Picture a tennis player in the moment he scores a critical point and wins a tournament. Now picture his opponent in the instant he loses the point that narrowly cost him the title. Can you tell one facial expression from the other, the look of defeat from the face of victory?
Try your hand at the images below, of professional tennis players at competitive tournaments. All were included in a new study that suggests that the more intense an emotion, the harder it is to distinguish it in a facial expression.
The researchers found that when overwhelming feelings set in, the subtle cues that convey emotion are lost, and facial expressions tend to blur. The face of joy and celebration often appears no different from the look of grief and devastation. Winning looks like losing. Pain resembles pleasure.
But that is not the case when it comes to body language. In fact, the new study found, people are better able to identify extreme emotions by reading body language than by looking solely at facial expressions. But even though we pick up on cues from the neck down to interpret emotion, we instinctively assume that it is the face that tells us everything, said Hillel Aviezer, a psychologist who carried out the new research with colleagues at Princeton University.
“When emotions run high, the face becomes more malleable: it’s not clear if there’s positivity or negativity going on there,” he said. “People have this illusion that they’re reading all this information in the face. We found that the face is ambiguous in these situations and the body is critical.”
Dr. Aviezer and his colleagues, who published their work in the journal Science, carried out four experiments in which subjects were asked to identify emotions by looking at photographs of people in various situations. In some cases, the subjects were shown facial expressions alone. In others, they looked at body language, either alone or in combination with faces. The researchers chose photographs taken in moments when emotions were running high – as professional tennis players celebrated or agonized, as loved ones grieved at funerals, as needles punctured skin during painful body piercings.
According to classic behavioral theories, facial expressions are universal indicators of mood and emotion. So the more intense a particular emotion, the easier it should be to identify in the face. But the study showed the exact opposite. As emotions peaked in intensity, expressions became distorted, similar to the way cranking up the volume on a stereo makes the music unrecognizable.
“When emotions are extremely high, it’s as if the speakers are blaring and the signal is degraded,” said Dr. Aviezer, who is now at Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “When the volume is that high, it’s hard to tell what song is playing.”
In one experiment, three groups of 15 people were shown photographs of professional tennis players winning and losing points in critical matches. When the subjects were shown the players’ expressions alone — separated from their bodies — they correctly identified their emotion only half of the time, which was no better than chance. When they looked at images of just the body with the face removed — or the body with the face intact — they were far more accurate at identifying emotions. Yet when asked, 80 percent said they were relying on the facial expressions alone. Twenty percent said they were going by body and facial cues together, and not a single one said they were looking only for gestures from the neck down.
Then, the researchers scrambled the photos, mixing faces and bodies together. The upset faces of players were randomly spliced onto the bodies of celebrating players, and vice versa.
When asked to judge the emotions, the subjects answered according to the body language. The facial expression did not seem to matter. If a losing face was spliced onto a celebrating body, the subjects tended to guess victory and jubilation. If they were looking at the face of an exuberant player placed on the body of an anguished player, the subjects guessed defeat and disappointment.
Although they were not aware of it, the subjects were clearly looking at body language, Dr. Aviezer said. Clenched fists, for example, suggested victory and celebration, while open or outstretched hands indicated a player’s disappointment.
In another experiment, the researchers looked at four other emotional “peaks.” For pain, they used the faces of men and women undergoing piercings. Grief was captured in images of mourners at a funeral. For joy, they used images of people on the reality television show “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition,” capturing their impassioned faces at the very moment they were shown their beautiful, brand new homes. And for pleasure, they went with a rather risqué option: images from an erotic Web site that showed faces at the height of orgasm.
Once again, the subjects could not correctly guess the emotions by looking at facial expressions alone. In fact, they were more likely to interpret “positive” faces as being “negative” more than the actual negative ones. When faces showing pleasure were spliced onto the body of someone in pain, for example, the subjects relied on body language and were often unaware that the facial expression was conveying the opposite emotion.
“There’s this point on ‘Extreme Makeover’ where people see their new house for the first time and the camera is on their face, so we have these wonderful photos of their expressions,” Dr. Aviezer said. “At that moment, they look like the most miserable people in the world. For a few seconds, it’s as if they are seeing their house burn down. They don’t look like you would expect.”
The researchers noted that they were not suggesting that facial expressions never indicate specific feelings – only that when the emotion is intense and at its peak, for those first few seconds, the expression is ambiguous. Dr. Aviezer said the facial musculature simply might not be suited for accurately conveying extremely intense feelings – in part because in the real world, so much of that is conveyed through situational context.
And this may not be limited to facial cues.
“Consider intense vocal expressions of grief versus joy or pleasure versus pain,” the researchers wrote in their paper. For example, imagine sitting in a coffee shop and hearing someone behind you shriek. Is it immediately obvious whether the emotion is a positive or negative one?
“When people are experiencing a very high level of excitation,” Dr. Aviezer said, “then we see this overlap in expressions.”
On Tuesday, “Frontline” investigated why the leaders of Wall Street had escaped prosecution for their role in the country’s financial crisis.
Peter Eavis of DealBook is moderating a conversation beginning at 2 p.m. Eastern time with the show’s producer, Martin Smith. Watch the show above and submit your questions now.
When a hooded assailant flung acid in the face of Sergei Filin, the director of the Bolshoi Ballet, late on Thursday night in Moscow, the attack almost instantly made headlines worldwide.
Although doctors have now said that Mr. Filin will not lose his sight in both eyes, the extent of the damage to his vision and face is not yet known. The viciousness of the intention — blindness, disfigurement, pain — behind the attack has left the ballet world (and journalists) groping for explanations. Some have been quick to link the incident to the byzantine politics and history of infighting that has long characterized the Bolshoi theater.
The Bolshoi’s general director, Anatoly Iksanov, immediately said that he believed the attack was linked to the theater, and Mr. Filin, in an interview with the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda, published Tuesday, said “he believed he was attacked because of his work at the ballet company,” wrote Ellen Barry, who has been covering the events from Moscow for The New York Times.
Reports in European and American news media have almost all mentioned the simmering hostility between the director and the flamboyant principal dancer, Nikolai Tsiskaridze, who has made no secret of his belief that he should head the company, nor of his criticism of Mr. Filin’s artistic policy. Mr. Tsiskaridze is said to inspire fanatical devotion in his fans, who sent a petition to President Vladimir V. Putin in November demanding that their hero replace Mr. Filin as head of the ballet company. But commentators have stopped short of suggesting that the dancer himself might have had something to do with the attack.
“As ruthless as the ballet world might be, it’s hard to imagine Tsiskaridze committing such a crime,” wrote Ariane Bavelier in Le Figaro.
That ruthlessness has been repeatedly alluded to, with, naturally, Darren Aronofsky’s 2010 film, “Black Swan,” and its lurid portrayal of the ballet world, repeatedly invoked. “An acid attack on the artistic director of the Bolshoi ballet has shone the spotlight on the fierce “Black Swan”-like competition for starring roles at the famed Russian dance company,” wrote Lynn Berry and Nataliya Vasileva on the Huffington Post Web site.
Hearing about the persecution that preceded the physical attack on Mr. Filin in previous months — his car tires were slashed, his phones, email and Facebook page hacked, and he received numerous threatening phone calls — makes the fictional events of the film “Black Swan” and Natalie Portman’s psychotic ballerina seem rather less far-fetched.
Many have placed the attack on Mr. Filin in the context of a long history of internecine war at the Bolshoi, linked to the polarizing figure of Yuri Grigorivich, who headed the ballet company for three mostly Soviet-era decades, until his dismissal in 1995.
“Just turned 86, he retains almost godlike status for his supporters, who include many veteran Bolshoi coaches as well as some celebrated dance stars such as Tsiskaridze, who share a suspicion of modernizers,” wrote Ismene Brown on the Artsdesk web site.
Grigorovich supporters criticize what they see as an overly Westernized approach on the part of subsequent directors. Several commentators have suggested that the departure of Alexei Ratmansky, who is widely seen as having revitalized the company during his 2004-2008 tenure, was due at least in part to pressure from this group.
Although Mr. Ratmansky has always been tactful about his reasons for leaving the Bolshoi, his feelings were clear in a Facebook post after the attack: “Many of the illnesses of the Bolshoi are one snowball,” he wrote, “that disgusting claque which is friendly with artists, ticket speculators and scalpers, half-crazy fans who are ready to slit the throats of their idol’s competitors, cynical hackers, lies in the press and scandalous interviews of people working there.”
And the departure of Gennady Yanin, who resigned in 2011 after sexually explicit photographs resembling him were posted on the Internet, has also been described by Mr. Yanin’s supporters as the result of a crude smear campaign.
It was announced Tuesday that Galina Stepanenko, a former principal dancer and the first woman to hold a senior position at the Bolshoi, will run the company during Mr. Filin’s absence.
What is clear from the media coverage is that ballet has a political status in Russia that is very different from that in the west.
“Shocking as it might seem to western observers, politics in the Bolshoi and other Russian companies are often just as turbulent and murky as those in the outside world – and no less locked in a struggle between cold war-style conservatives and liberal modernisers than Russia itself,” Judith Mackrell wrote in The Guardian.
It’s not impossible to imagine that artistic directors in London or Paris or Berlin might be subject to threats or intimidation, as might be the case for any powerful head of a large organization. But it’s harder to envisage a culture in which ballet is as powerful a symbol of political prestige and national brand as government itself.
“Ballet in Russia is more politics than art,” wrote the New York-based impresario Sergei Danilian, who represents a number of major Russian ballet dancers, in an email message.
“Would that ballet ignited such passion here,” wrote a New York resident on Twitter.
Well, not really, but you know what she means.
Kantar Worldpanel’s December smartphone market share numbers are out. And they are as fascinating as ever. Kantar pegs the BlackBerry market share in America as 1.1% last month, down from 1.4% in November. Surprisingly, Windows Phone’s market share also ticked down to 2.6% in December from 2.7% in November. That might be a statistical artifact, but it is surprising not to see a substantial boost in Windows share considering the marketing support and new devices from AT&T (T).
[More from BGR: BlackBerry 10 OS walkthrough, BlackBerry Z10 pricing]
In Europe, Windows Phone is rapidly picking up steam. Its market share soared to 13.9% in Italy from 11.8% in November. In the UK, Windows Phone’s share moved to 5.9% from 5.1% in a month.The EU average share of Windows Phone bloomed to 5.4% from 4.7% between November and December.
[More from BGR: Verizon Q4 loss doubles to nearly $ 2 billion despite record subscriber adds]
At the same time, BlackBerry dipped to 4.0% from 4.4%. The stage is set for the spring battle between Windows Phone and BlackBerry camps.
Interestingly, Apple’s (AAPL) share in the UK slipped to 32.4% in December from 36.1% in November. The massive popularity of Samsung (005930) models in the British market was undoubtedly the main reason; Android’s share hit 54.4% in the UK.
This is the latest sign that Apple’s market share problems outside the U.S. market are not limited to emerging markets and Southern Europe. The UK has traditionally been the second most loyal market to the Apple brand, right after the United States. According to Kantar, Apple slipped 2.1 percentage points in America between November and December, ending up with 51.2% share of the smartphone market.
This article was originally published on BGR.com
Gadgets News Headlines – Yahoo! News
Copyright © Crime News. All rights reserved.
Design 
And Business Directories
