What good is an OS update without some software that can take full advantage of all its fancy new features? Naturally, Apple’s got your back, and today you’ll be getting some spiffy new versions of iTunes and iWork to compliment that fearsome Lion upgrade. iTunes 10.4 finally ushers the music management app into the 64-bit era, and adds support for OS X 10.7′s full-screen windows. The iWork Update 6 also brings along the distraction-free functionality, as well as resume, auto-save, and versioning for all your important docs. Not everyone is seeing the updates just yet, so be patient, it shouldn’t be much longer before your interrupted by that slightly annoying, but oh so satisfying, Software Update window. iTunes and iWork updated for Lion, add full-screen support, and resume originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 20 Jul 2011 13:38:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink
Continue reading …
CapitalistForum says: NYC sets lottery for first gay weddings: As thousands of requests pour… http://goo.gl/fb/uRXrn http://ccf.lmsoc.com
Continue reading …
Communications regulator says BT must charge other ISPs less for using its networks Up to 3m homes and businesses in rural parts of the UK could receive better value broadband services by the end of the year, following an Ofcom decision to force BT Wholesale to reduce the amount it charges other internet service providers (ISPs) to use its networks. The communications regulator has ruled that BT must reduce its charge to ISPs each year, by a rate of at least 12 percentage points below inflation. For example, if the RPI inflation rate is 5%, BT will have to cut its charges by 7%. The ruling is to take effect by mid-August 2011 and remain in force until 31 March 2014, and paves the way for cheaper broadband prices for millions of consumers and businesses in less densely populated areas across the UK. The rural areas set to benefit from the change include parts of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as Norfolk, Yorkshire, Cumbria, Northumberland, the south-west of England and other areas. These are predominantly areas lacking in competition among ISPs. Ofcom said the price change will boost competition and may lead to either cheaper or better quality services – if ISPs do not pass on the savings, they may decide instead to invest in faster broadband services. The regulator hopes its pricing intervention will help narrow the gap between the prices consumers in rural regions pay for broadband services and those in urban areas. Ernest Doku, technology expert at uSwitch.com, said: “This move could wipe out the postcode lottery that has seen rural householders treated as second class broadband citizens. It has the potential to ultimately cut the costs of the bills of those living in rural areas. “By increasing competition, Ofcom is making sure that consumers will end up the real winners as they will now have a greater choice of providers. This means the ISPs can look to offer the best deals possible to win new customers over and, now that they can access BT’s infrastructure at a lower cost, it could only be a matter of time until they pass these savings on.The ball is firmly in the court of other providers.” But Michael Phillips of BroadbandChoices.co.uk was sceptical about whether the 12 percentage point reduction would have a lasting impact. He said: “Ofcom’s recent broadband map of the UK highlighted how huge swathes of the UK countryside are enduring poor connection speeds. If the UK is to be taken seriously as a tech economy, the government needs to dedicate time and resource to bringing the whole of the UK into the online age.” Ofcom has also published a map (PDF) showing where in the UK the charge controls will apply. The regulator said its December 2010 action to lift wholesale regulation in other areas of the country had resulted in 78% of UK households in mainly urban or densely populated areas now seeing effective competition among ISPs. Consumer affairs Household bills Telecommunications industry Broadband Internet Ofcom Television industry Mark King guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Enda Kenny says Cloyne report on child sex abuse by priests highlights dysfunction and elitism in Rome Ireland’s prime minister has launched an unprecedented attack on the Vatican, accusing it of downplaying the rape and torture of Irish children by clerical sex abusers. Enda Kenny said in parliament that the Cloyne report, released on 13 July, had exposed the Vatican’s attempt to frustrate the inquiry into child sex abuse. During a debate on the fallout from the Cloyne findings, the taoiseach said the report had illuminated the dysfunction and elitism still dominant in the Vatican. Kenny told the Dáil on Wednesday that Rome seemed more interested in upholding the church’s power and reputation than confronting the abuse of Irish children by its priests and religious orders. The Vatican’s attitude to investigations in Cloyne, which covers County Cork, was the “polar opposite of the radicalism, the humility and the compassion that the church had been founded on”, he said. Kenny said the rape and torture of children had been downplayed or “managed” to uphold the institution’s power and reputation. The all-party motion being debated in the Dáil “deplores the Vatican’s intervention which contributed to the undermining of child protection frameworks and guidelines of the Irish state and the Irish bishops”. One of the most damning findings of the Cloyne report was that the diocese failed to report nine out of 15 complaints made against priests, which “very clearly should have been reported”. The report, coming after a string of inquiries into Catholic clerical sex abuse across Ireland, has set the Irish government on a collision course with the church. Earlier on Wednesday a Vatican spokesman, Fr Federico Lombardi, speaking in a personal capacity, said nothing in the advice given by the papal nuncio to Ireland in 1997 encouraged bishops to break Irish laws. The Vatican’s advice to Irish bishops on child protection policies could not be interpreted as an invitation to cover up abuse cases, he said. Ireland’s justice minister, Alan Shatter, described the Vatican spokesman’s argument as disingenuous. Some Irish parliamentarians have called on the Fine Gael-Labour coalition to expel the papal nuncio from Ireland in protest over the Vatican’s attitude to the allegations in the Cloyne diocese. Ireland Vatican Child protection Europe Catholicism Religion Christianity Henry McDonald guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Barnet council challenged after denying help to girl who spent childhood in Congolese brothel before being trafficked to London A girl who spent her childhood imprisoned in a brothel before being trafficked into the UK for sexual exploitation should not be treated as an adult, her lawyer argued on Wednesday. Officials from Barnet council, in north London, deemed that the girl was an adult and should not be able to benefit from its services in May 2009, but the girl’s carer – who took her in after finding her wandering the streets – argues that she is still a child and should be treated as such. A judge is being asked to determine the girl’s age and decide if she should be able to claim services under the 1989 Children Act. The girl, referred to only as KN for legal reasons, cannot recall anything of her childhood, other than that she was kept in a brothel in Goma in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the high court in London heard. Christopher Buttler, appearing for KN and her carer, told Judge Pearl, a deputy high court judge, that from a young age the girl had been sold to strangers for sex and had had a baby taken from her when she was around 12 or 13. In 2008 she was trafficked to the UK for sexual exploitation but was abandoned on the streets. She was found wandering the streets by a woman who took her into her care and has looked after her ever since. Buttler told the judge that KN had been diagnosed with chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder, and that the Home Office accepted her account of her early life and had granted her five years leave to remain in the UK. She was described by her clinical psychologist as “one of the most vulnerable persons she had assessed in a decade”. Following an assessment in May 2009 Barnet council judged that KN was an adult and denied her access to services, which can include financial and educational help. Buttler said those who had worked with KN for more than two years believed she was still eligible for help. Immigration officials, the NSPCC, her carer, an independent social worker, an independent paediatrician and the child trafficking officer at Africans Unite Against Child Abuse were among those who considered her to be under 18 when she entered the UK. According to the lawyer, KN had been told by the woman who ran the brothel in Goma that she was born on 23 August 1993, which means that would still be currently eligible for help under the Children Act. The hearing continues. Human trafficking Prostitution Child protection Social care Children Local government Alexandra Topping guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
A review of the BBC’s science coverage has concluded that its drive for impartiality lends too much credence to maverick views on MMR, climate change and GM The BBC is to revamp its science coverage after an independent review highlighted weaknesses and concluded that journalists boosted the apparent controversy of scientific news stories such as climate change, GM crops and the MMR vaccine by giving too much weight to fringe scientific viewpoints. The wide-ranging review found the network’s science reporting was generally of high quality, and praised the BBC for its breadth, depth and accuracy, but urged the broadcaster to tackle several areas of concern. Commissioned last year to assess impartiality and accuracy in BBC science coverage across television, radio and the internet, the review said the network was at times so determined to be impartial that it put fringe views on a par with well-established fact: a strategy that made some scientific debates appear more controversial than they were. The criticism was particularly relevant to stories on issues such as global warming, GM and the MMR vaccine, where minority views were sometimes given equal weighting to broad scientific consensus, creating what the report describes as “false balance”. The review comprised an independent report by Professor Steve Jones, emeritus professor of genetics at University College London , and an in-depth analysis by researchers at Imperial College London of science coverage across the BBC in May, June and July of 2009 and 2010. In his report, Jones lamented the narrow range of sources that reporters used for stories, poor communication between journalists in different parts of the organisation, and a lack of knowledge of the breadth of science. “The most important aspect is a vote of confidence in what BBC science is doing. It is head and shoulders above other broadcasters. As always, though, there is a but,” Jones told reporters on Wednesday. Jones likened the BBC’s approach to oppositional debates to asking a mathematician and maverick biologist what two plus two equals. When the mathematician says four and the maverick says five, the public are left to conclude the answer is somewhere in between. The report will disappoint some climate change sceptics who hoped it would find the BBC at fault for promoting a green agenda. “There is a consensus in the scientific community that anthropogenic climate change exists,” Jones said. By failing to move the debate on, the BBC was missing other stories, he added. Alison Hastings of the BBC Trust said the corporation must avoid “bias by elimination” and include dissenting voices in debates over science issues. But she added that clearer identification of individuals’ expertise and agendas would help audiences judge their comments. In further criticisms, Jones called on the BBC to be more proactive in finding stories. Many came from the south-east of England and some 75% were based on press releases, he said. “Simply by the BBC feeding rather than hunting, it is missing large amounts of scientific information,” he said. Another concern was the lack of women who either covered or appeared in stories. The BBC Trust welcomed the review and announced a raft of changes, approved by the BBC executive, to address the concerns raised. Journalists will be offered training on impartiality, and a forum will be set up within the corporation to foster better links between science journalists working in different parts of the organisation. The BBC executive said it would also appoint a new science editor to raise the profile of science in BBC news and oversee the other planned initiatives. Sir Mark Walport, director of the Wellcome Trust, said the report “highlights the issue that, from time to time, a drive for ‘impartiality at any cost’ by the BBC can lead to a highly misleading presentation of science in situations where the evidence points overwhelmingly in one direction rather than another. It is encouraging that the BBC executive and BBC Trust accept this criticism and will work with programme makers to improve their understanding of this issue.” Sir Paul Nurse, president of the Royal Society , said: “The BBC has played a significant part in creating the current surge of interest in science. The way in which it covers science is generally of a very high quality. It is, however, important that the need to separate opinion from evidence in coverage of some topics has been recognised. It is important to have debate, but marginal opinion – prominently expressed but not well based on evidence – can mislead the audience. The BBC usually respects this but the challenge is to get it right all of the time.” Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics , said it was crucial for the BBC to “challenge inaccurate and misleading claims made by bloggers, campaigners and politicians who ‘reject and deny the findings of mainstream science for ideological reasons.’ “The BBC is required by law not to sacrifice accuracy for impartiality in the coverage of controversial scientific issues such as climate change. Yet it is well known that there are particular BBC presenters and editors who allow self-proclaimed climate change ‘sceptics’ to mislead the public with unsubstantiated and inaccurate statements,” he said. Climate change Genetics Agriculture Medical research BBC Climate change scepticism Climate change GM MMR Ian Sample guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
enlarge Credit: Green Bay Press Gazette Governor Scott Walker and the Koch brothers have managed to rally Democrats and Independents in Wisconsin like virtually no other person in recent history. Their attempts to destroy the middle class and vilify public employees woke people up across the nation, sparking 9 recall elections of state politicians – 6 of which are Republicans. The state GOP is scared to death, unsurprisingly trying all kinds of hackery to muddy the waters. If Tuesday’s result is a foreshadowing of the future, Walker and his fellow Wisconsin Republicans are in for a summer of pain : One down, eight to go. The summer of recalls had its first definitive outcome Tuesday night when Sen. Dave Hansen, D-Green Bay, handily defeated Republican David VanderLeest with 66 percent of the vote. But the margin of victory and the turnout by voters were a first-round demonstration of the Democratic Party’s ground game going into August, when six Republicans and two more Democrats face recall elections with control of state government hanging in the balance. If Democrats can net three seats, they will win back the Senate and provide a check to Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s virtually unchallenged agenda. Republicans are fighting to guarantee control of the state through 2012. Granted, Hansen was expected to win, but the high Democratic turnout is wonderful to see. I applaud the people of Wisconsin for getting out and making a real difference in their state. Let’s hope they serve as an inspiration to people in other states who are infested with Tea Party pols to get out and vote them out of office!
Continue reading … Rep. Joe Walsh’s weird, bullying, argumentative appearance on Hardball left me a little confused. Actually, Joe Walsh confuses me, and I’m thinking that’s probably intentional. In addition to his, um, spirited defense of the odious cut, cap, mangle bill that passed yesterday, he is pimping a letter to his colleagues encouraging them not, under any circumstances to take the McConnell deal. Politico: Freshman Illinois Rep. Joe Walsh circulated a letter he said was signed by roughly 50 members asking the House GOP leadership to “publicly disavow” the last-ditch debt-limit proposal pitched by Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, vowing not to bring it up for a floor vote “in any form.” So, C&L readers, riddle me this, assuming the following facts: Wall Street does not gain anything from a US Bond default. In fact, it will send markets into the tank yet again. While it’s true that bear markets are a time to pick up some bargains, it’s equally true that if the US defaults, we’re going to be looking for bargain bread heels, not stocks. Business does not gain anything from a US Bond default. If our bonds are downgraded, interest rates go up, US Treasury bonds become higher-risk investments, rocking the entire bond market. Business won’t be exempt. Their rates go up. Rep. Walsh and those others he’s gathering signatures from were heavily funded by Wall Street and still are. Walsh took in a haul in June, much of it from the financial services industry. Paul Ryan is one of their darlings, along with Eric Cantor, John Boehner and Spencer Bacchus . Tea Party candidates weren’t exempt, either. Michelle Bachmann, Louie Gohmert, and Paul Broun all received sizable contributions from the financial sector With that in mind, what incentive is there for these TeaBirchers to turn on Wall Street? Or flipping the question, what benefit to Wall Street is there in having rogue politicians that they’re funding as recently as June 30th threatening to blow up the US economy? This is the question I’ve been struggling to answer, and it seems to be one I haven’t seen asked in the mainstream. While everyone is calling the horserace and wondering whether Obama will wreck Social Security, Medicare and the like, no one is asking why on earth Congressmen who Wall Street helped elect would seemingly be biting their master on the ass. Here are a couple of thoughts I had, but take them for what they are, just thoughts. I’d be interested to hear what yours are on it. Fulfilling Grover Norquist’s ideal of killing government entirely Forbes: There are two things investors consider when buying government bonds. They are essentially making two bets. One bet is on the government’s ability to pay that debt within the maturity of the bond, so whether it is 10 or 30 years, investors are betting that the government will make good on its promise to service its debt and pay it in full throughout the life of the bond. The second bet is political. Investors are hoping that the government doesn’t suddenly change its political and economic system entirely and, as a result, opt out on paying bondholders. When it comes to the US, investors know they are investing in a political system that will remain sound. In Greece, they are buying bonds at a steep discount and speculating that the 50 they paid will one day be worth 65. Political risk has never been in play in the US. Until now. Is it possible that this is actually an intentional effort to make the US government appear to be unstable, or to destabilize confidence in the US government in order to kill it, a la Norquist’s dream? If it is, then we also have to consider the consequences of such an action from a political standpoint, which would be a scenario where, after destabilizing everything, Republicans claim to be the only ones who can re-stabilize it. That was a favorite strategy of Jack Abramoff’s after all. Lobby to kill one tribe’s casino so they could get paid by that tribe to reinstate it. This strategy could also play into the dominionists’ rise in the form of Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann, who claim to be God-called to ‘save the United States.’ Outright bald, naked, out of control hate for Barack Obama After all, we do have McConnell claiming their number one goal is to defeat Obama in 2012. Is it really possible they could tank the entire economy for the sole purpose of gaining politically? And if so, it would appear to be backfiring on them in a big way, given the amount of political capital they’ve spent and lost in this battle. Or maybe, it’s just “how the hell did I get boxed into this corner?” Greg Sargent: Here’s how this may play out: The House passes “cut cap and balance” today, it fails in the Senate over the weekend; and by Monday everyone finally realizes that there’s no way the White House and Congressional leaders will ever reach a deal exchanging spending cuts for revenue hikes. At that point, the aide predicts, everyone may throw up their arms and say, “what now?” It’s only then that House Republicans — who got their chance to vote Yes on spending caps and a balanced budget amendment — will realize that they have no choice but to pass the McConnell proposal. The McConnell proposal is, in my mind, the very worst outcome other than default because (repeat after me) there will be no deal. What needs to happen, and what should happen, is that Republicans peel off their 60 rebellious freshman teenagers, join with Democrats and pass the damn debt ceiling increase clean and pretty. Here’s one more factor to consider. Some of these vocal freshmen (like Walsh) are about to be redistricted out of office . That makes me wonder if Walsh is just the mouthpiece for what will, in the end, be a losing proposition but serves as a distraction to try and get Democrats and the President to cave. It bothers me that wingnuts like Walsh are given this kind of time on cable TV without asking these questions. It bothers me that Walsh is still receiving so many Wall Street donations while playing the “blow the whole thing up” game. It bothers me that he and Pat Toomey are both Club for Growth Republicans and threatening to blow it up. It makes me feel like there’s more to the strategy than has been discussed. So start discussing. 