Home » Archives by category » News (Page 5169)
Dirk Nowitzki

Mavericks Come From Behind Steal Game 1 From Lakers 5/03/2011 Mavericks vs. Lakers Western Conference Semi-Finals 2011 NBA Playoffs Game 1 HD Lakers lose Game 1 live video NBA Playoffs 2011: Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki Duel, Lakers Lose … NBA Playoffs 2011: Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki Duel, Lakers Lose to MavericksThe first ever playoff matchup between Kobe Bryant’s Lakers and and Dirk Nowitzki’s Mavericks certainly lived up to its billing.Bryant and Nowitzki may be … dirk nowitzki – May 3, 2011 | Submit Digital Tue, 03 May 2011 06:26:28 GMT – NBA Playoffs 2011: Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki Duel, Lakers Lose to MavericksThe first ever playoff matchup between Kobe Bryant’s Lakers and and Dirk Nowitzki’s Mavericks certainly lived up to its … Dirk Nowitzki : Mavericks Beat Lakers in Game 1, Why Nowitzki Needs … Dirk Nowitzki’s Window May Be Closing The Dallas Mavericks and star player Dirk Nowitzki have seen their share of heartbreaking losses sine the German power forward emerged as one of the best power forwards in the NBA. Dirk Nowitzki : Is Nowitzki Better Than Kobe Bryant Right Now … Dirk Nowitzki Looking tο Thwart Kobe Bryant’s Quest fοr a Third Straight NBA Title Former NBA legend аnd TNT analyst Charles Barkley ѕаіd аn fаѕсіnаtіng thing during halftime οf Game 1 featuring thе Los Angeles Lakers аnd Dallas … NBA Playoffs 2011: Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki Duel, Lakers Lose … NBA Playoffs 2011: Kobe Bryant and Dirk Nowitzki Duel, Lakers Lose to MavericksThe first ever playoff matchup between Kobe Bryant’s Lakers and and Dirk. Pamelaesbml says: http://t.co/JXqpoEY What are the chances Dirk Nowitzki and the Mavs choke again in the playoffs? bench

Continue reading …
Ancient Greece 101: The Animated TextVook

Type: eBooks Title: Ancient Greece 101: The Animated TextVook See all customer reviews Product Description: Archimedes said: “Give me a lever long enough and a fulcrum on which to place it, and I shall move the world.” Welcome to Ancient Greece! Whether you’re a history buff or always wanted to know more about this fascinating period of history, “Ancient Greece 101: The TextVook” is the newest, most engaging way to learn it all. This Vook presents Ancient Greece in an exciting and easy-to-follow format that combines text AND video. Download it now and experience the enduring influence of Ancient Greece in a whole new light! Ancient Greece was home to some of the most influential rulers, warriors, and thinkers the world has ever known. In “Ancient Greece 101: The TextVook,” Dr. Vook, Ph.D, covers the key places, figures and events in eight chapters that will leave you inspired and help you retain all that you’ve learned. Take a leap back to the birth of Western Civilization’s roots with Dr. Vook, and explore the bravery, artistry, innovation, and romance of Ancient Greece. You’ll encounter the incredible personalities, cultures and wars that influence today’s great societies, and all in a format that’s easy to follow and never boring. Download this Vook now and become an expert in Ancient Greece – the easy way! See the details

Continue reading …
LG Optimus Black vs. Galaxy S II and Xperia Arc… fight!

It’s time for us to welcome yet another contender in the battle for world’s slimmest Android phone: the LG Optimus Black . This 9.2mm-thick handset made its debut to oohs and aahs of admiration at CES earlier in the year, and is now on the very precipice of a global release. Admittedly, it’s not quite slender enough to knock the 7.7mm-thick NEC MEDIAS N-04C off its perch as the absolute thinnest, but it is sufficiently slender to give Samsung’s Galaxy S II and Sony Ericsson’s Xperia Arc a good fright. That pair of smartphones offer thinner proportions on the spec sheet, but when rested on a flat surface they sit ever so slightly higher than the Optimus Black. This is because, unlike its tricky contemporaries, the Optimus Black keeps to the same thickness along its full length (don’t laugh), which, technically speaking, makes it the thinnest Android handset on the European market. Check it out in the gallery below or video after the break — and hold tight, we’ll have a full review for you in the coming days! Gallery: LG Optimus Black vs. Galaxy S II and Xperia Arc… fight! Continue reading LG Optimus Black vs. Galaxy S II and Xperia Arc… fight! LG Optimus Black vs. Galaxy S II and Xperia Arc… fight! originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 03 May 2011 12:30:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds . Permalink

Continue reading …

The fish had barely begun to nibble on Osama bin Laden before wild conspiracy theories about his demise—or lack of—began to circulate. The US government is considering releasing photos and video of the dead al-Qaeda kingpin, but in the meantime, conspiracy theorists are having a field day: Radio…

Continue reading …
Can I quit without hurting others?

• How can I leave my charity job without letting everyone down? • Lack of training leaves me struggling in my new technical role At the start of each week, we publish the problems that will feature in this Saturday’s Dear Jeremy advice column in the Guardian Work supplement, so readers can offer their own advice and suggestions. We then print the best of your comments alongside Jeremy’s own insights. Here are this week’s dilemmas – what are your thoughts? Problem one: How can I leave my charity job without letting everyone down? I work for a small charity/membership organisation that is in turmoil, particularly as several managers have left and not yet been replaced. I am doing extra work for which I am not being paid, and am thinking about leaving for something else (although what that might be is a whole other question). Working has made me increasingly unhappy, to the point where I have had to go to the doctor for advice on depression. My question is, in a small organisation, where you know that your leaving will cause more work for others, is there any way to minimise this, particularly with a lack of leadership? I am desperate for a way out but feel tied by not wanting to let the rest of the staff down by going. Problem two: Lack of training leaves me struggling in my new role I recently changed jobs, moving departments within the company into a computer programming role. I’ve always wanted to do this and was really excited when I started. I am well suited to the work and have an academic background, so I wasn’t expecting to find the transition too difficult. However, since joining a year ago I have received no training since my initial three-day induction. The computer language used in my job is outdated and there is only one book available about it, which was written for experienced programmers. I have struggled since day one to do the work by asking other members of the team to teach me. They are all under pressure as they are overworked and have not really got time to help. Also I am quite shy and it makes me feel uncomfortable to put pressure on the other members of the team, who not all keen to help either. I have since discovered that this also happened to the previous two people who joined the team. I am finding it extremely stressful and often go home in tears. I have continually brought it to my manager’s notice that I am finding it very difficult to contribute to the team, and have asked for more training only to be told it’s too expensive and “not considered necessary”. At my first review (after six months) I was told I was progressing as expected and that it just takes time and not to worry. I have just had my second review where I was told I hadn’t progressed at all since my last review and so my pay has been frozen. I am baffled by this and demoralised. When I manage to complete some of the work I really enjoy it, but it’s so important to me to be good at my job that I am feeling a failure. Should I just accept that this isn’t the job for me? I can’t afford to start again from the bottom somewhere else but I really don’t want to go back to my old job. What are your thoughts? • For Jeremy’s and readers’ advice on a work issue, send a brief email to dear.jeremy@guardian.co.uk . Please note that he is unable to answer questions of a legal nature or reply personally Work & careers Graham Snowdon guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Can I quit without hurting others?

• How can I leave my charity job without letting everyone down? • Lack of training leaves me struggling in my new technical role At the start of each week, we publish the problems that will feature in this Saturday’s Dear Jeremy advice column in the Guardian Work supplement, so readers can offer their own advice and suggestions. We then print the best of your comments alongside Jeremy’s own insights. Here are this week’s dilemmas – what are your thoughts? Problem one: How can I leave my charity job without letting everyone down? I work for a small charity/membership organisation that is in turmoil, particularly as several managers have left and not yet been replaced. I am doing extra work for which I am not being paid, and am thinking about leaving for something else (although what that might be is a whole other question). Working has made me increasingly unhappy, to the point where I have had to go to the doctor for advice on depression. My question is, in a small organisation, where you know that your leaving will cause more work for others, is there any way to minimise this, particularly with a lack of leadership? I am desperate for a way out but feel tied by not wanting to let the rest of the staff down by going. Problem two: Lack of training leaves me struggling in my new role I recently changed jobs, moving departments within the company into a computer programming role. I’ve always wanted to do this and was really excited when I started. I am well suited to the work and have an academic background, so I wasn’t expecting to find the transition too difficult. However, since joining a year ago I have received no training since my initial three-day induction. The computer language used in my job is outdated and there is only one book available about it, which was written for experienced programmers. I have struggled since day one to do the work by asking other members of the team to teach me. They are all under pressure as they are overworked and have not really got time to help. Also I am quite shy and it makes me feel uncomfortable to put pressure on the other members of the team, who not all keen to help either. I have since discovered that this also happened to the previous two people who joined the team. I am finding it extremely stressful and often go home in tears. I have continually brought it to my manager’s notice that I am finding it very difficult to contribute to the team, and have asked for more training only to be told it’s too expensive and “not considered necessary”. At my first review (after six months) I was told I was progressing as expected and that it just takes time and not to worry. I have just had my second review where I was told I hadn’t progressed at all since my last review and so my pay has been frozen. I am baffled by this and demoralised. When I manage to complete some of the work I really enjoy it, but it’s so important to me to be good at my job that I am feeling a failure. Should I just accept that this isn’t the job for me? I can’t afford to start again from the bottom somewhere else but I really don’t want to go back to my old job. What are your thoughts? • For Jeremy’s and readers’ advice on a work issue, send a brief email to dear.jeremy@guardian.co.uk . Please note that he is unable to answer questions of a legal nature or reply personally Work & careers Graham Snowdon guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Canada’s new political landscape

Stephen Harper’s Conservatives won a majority, but the historic losses of the Liberals and Bloc Québécois are more startling For all its faults (and I’m in favour of electoral reform, for what it’s worth), at least you think you know where you stand with the first past the post system. You get majority governments, with the executive dominating the legislature, and stable (or stagnant) two-party systems, concentrating power overwhelmingly in the hands of the few. But just as the UK prepares for a referendum on our electoral system this week, Canada’s elections Monday – in which Stephen Harper’s Conservatives gained a majority , and the official opposition party changed from the Liberals to the New Democratic party – shows perhaps more than ever the surprises this system can still throw up when traditional voting patterns shift. Stephen Harper’s Conservative rule up until this point was already something of an anomaly, with his previous terms in office under a minority government. In retrospect, it’s astonishing that Harper dominated the political landscape through much of the 2000s despite the fact that the Conservative party hadn’t won a majority since 1988. In March, when the government was found to be in contempt of parliament – another precedent in the Commonwealth parliamentary system – Harper’s government fell, forcing the 2 May elections . The results of the election now give him four years of full-blown Conservative rule, a fact that hasn’t been welcomed by those who see him as Canada’s George Bush: Naomi Klein tweeted that a “hair-raising shock doctrine is coming our way”, as Harper now has the mandate to pursue his cuts to welfare provision and what many see as his support of environmental destruction (bear in mind that one of Harper’s milder actions on the environment was to dismiss the Kyoto protocol a “socialist scheme” . But as Harper assumes office as the leader of a majority government, the composition of the parliament looks almost unrecognisable. Not only have the Liberals lost their position as the main party of opposition, but the party leader, the once seemingly indomitable Michael Ignatieff lost his own seat in what’s being described as an ‘historical collapse’ of the Liberals, previously one of Canada’s two main parties. In a strange parallel to this collapse of the Liberals, the Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe is resigning after losing his own riding , while the Bloc Québécois’ support has imploded to the point where it is hard to image the Québec sovereignty movement resurfacing as a national issue (can you be a “bloc” when you only have four seats in parliament?). This unprecedented shift in voting patterns is largely due to the ascendancy of the New Democratic party. The rise of “Jack Mania” – at least, in Québec – for the NDP’s leader Jack Layton could be seen in some ways as Canada’s 2011 “I agree with Nick” moment: the Conservatives focused most of their campaigning energies on attacking the Liberals and Ignatieff , with the NDP poised to position themselves as the new viable alternative to the Conservatives, as well as sweeping up protest votes to the Bloc Quebecois . One of the key points of the Conservative campaign to finally secure a majority was built on the premise that another Conservative minority government – which looked possible in the early stages of the campaign – would create a cumbersome coalition of opposition parties . This doesn’t sound much like the rhetoric used in first past the post system election campaigns: citing the spectre of unwieldy coalitions to implore the voters to – this time round, please – elect a majority government. Perhaps the most optimistic parallel between last year’s UK election and the sudden reshaping of Canada’s political landscape this week is the rise of Elizabeth May, who has just become the first Green MP to be elected to Canadian parliament – and who, like Caroline Lucas, was not invited to the televised campaign debate . May’s voice will be sorely needed in opposition to Harper’s conservative vision, and her victory, like Caroline Lucas’s, was a triumph over the first past the post system under which parties like the Green party lose out. Although the UK’s 2010 election and Canada’s 2011 election produced vastly different outcomes – one a period of coalition government, the other ending a of minority government rule – the two elections show that first past the post doesn’t ensure a stable two-party system; actual votes still bend the structure in dynamic ways. On his day of legitimate victory under Canada’s electoral system, perhaps Harper would prefer it if we didn’t notice that one of the interesting parallels is that, for most of his rule so far, Harper’s Conservative party, like David Cameron’s Conservative party now, didn’t have a majority. In any case, now Harper finally has his majority, the image of Canada as America’s liberal, progressive neighbour might – like Ignatieff and the Bloc Québécois – also suddenly drop off the political radar. Canada Stephen Harper Michael Ignatieff United States Liberal-Conservative coalition David Cameron Nick Clegg Electoral reform First past the post AV referendum Heather McRobie guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
Canada’s new political landscape

Stephen Harper’s Conservatives won a majority, but the historic losses of the Liberals and Bloc Québécois are more startling For all its faults (and I’m in favour of electoral reform, for what it’s worth), at least you think you know where you stand with the first past the post system. You get majority governments, with the executive dominating the legislature, and stable (or stagnant) two-party systems, concentrating power overwhelmingly in the hands of the few. But just as the UK prepares for a referendum on our electoral system this week, Canada’s elections Monday – in which Stephen Harper’s Conservatives gained a majority , and the official opposition party changed from the Liberals to the New Democratic party – shows perhaps more than ever the surprises this system can still throw up when traditional voting patterns shift. Stephen Harper’s Conservative rule up until this point was already something of an anomaly, with his previous terms in office under a minority government. In retrospect, it’s astonishing that Harper dominated the political landscape through much of the 2000s despite the fact that the Conservative party hadn’t won a majority since 1988. In March, when the government was found to be in contempt of parliament – another precedent in the Commonwealth parliamentary system – Harper’s government fell, forcing the 2 May elections . The results of the election now give him four years of full-blown Conservative rule, a fact that hasn’t been welcomed by those who see him as Canada’s George Bush: Naomi Klein tweeted that a “hair-raising shock doctrine is coming our way”, as Harper now has the mandate to pursue his cuts to welfare provision and what many see as his support of environmental destruction (bear in mind that one of Harper’s milder actions on the environment was to dismiss the Kyoto protocol a “socialist scheme” . But as Harper assumes office as the leader of a majority government, the composition of the parliament looks almost unrecognisable. Not only have the Liberals lost their position as the main party of opposition, but the party leader, the once seemingly indomitable Michael Ignatieff lost his own seat in what’s being described as an ‘historical collapse’ of the Liberals, previously one of Canada’s two main parties. In a strange parallel to this collapse of the Liberals, the Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe is resigning after losing his own riding , while the Bloc Québécois’ support has imploded to the point where it is hard to image the Québec sovereignty movement resurfacing as a national issue (can you be a “bloc” when you only have four seats in parliament?). This unprecedented shift in voting patterns is largely due to the ascendancy of the New Democratic party. The rise of “Jack Mania” – at least, in Québec – for the NDP’s leader Jack Layton could be seen in some ways as Canada’s 2011 “I agree with Nick” moment: the Conservatives focused most of their campaigning energies on attacking the Liberals and Ignatieff , with the NDP poised to position themselves as the new viable alternative to the Conservatives, as well as sweeping up protest votes to the Bloc Quebecois . One of the key points of the Conservative campaign to finally secure a majority was built on the premise that another Conservative minority government – which looked possible in the early stages of the campaign – would create a cumbersome coalition of opposition parties . This doesn’t sound much like the rhetoric used in first past the post system election campaigns: citing the spectre of unwieldy coalitions to implore the voters to – this time round, please – elect a majority government. Perhaps the most optimistic parallel between last year’s UK election and the sudden reshaping of Canada’s political landscape this week is the rise of Elizabeth May, who has just become the first Green MP to be elected to Canadian parliament – and who, like Caroline Lucas, was not invited to the televised campaign debate . May’s voice will be sorely needed in opposition to Harper’s conservative vision, and her victory, like Caroline Lucas’s, was a triumph over the first past the post system under which parties like the Green party lose out. Although the UK’s 2010 election and Canada’s 2011 election produced vastly different outcomes – one a period of coalition government, the other ending a of minority government rule – the two elections show that first past the post doesn’t ensure a stable two-party system; actual votes still bend the structure in dynamic ways. On his day of legitimate victory under Canada’s electoral system, perhaps Harper would prefer it if we didn’t notice that one of the interesting parallels is that, for most of his rule so far, Harper’s Conservative party, like David Cameron’s Conservative party now, didn’t have a majority. In any case, now Harper finally has his majority, the image of Canada as America’s liberal, progressive neighbour might – like Ignatieff and the Bloc Québécois – also suddenly drop off the political radar. Canada Stephen Harper Michael Ignatieff United States Liberal-Conservative coalition David Cameron Nick Clegg Electoral reform First past the post AV referendum Heather McRobie guardian.co.uk

Continue reading …
How to Feel Better When You’re Feeling Down

“What do you do when you feel sad?” people often ask me. (Some even ask, “Do you ever get sad?”) Yes, of course my kids and I both feel sadness, anger, anxiety — sometimes downright misery — just like everyone else. Leading a joyful life does not mean always trying to be happy. At the same time, I’m not really one for rumination. Meaning: My kids and I feel our feelings — often deeply — and then, if the feelings are negative, we try to move on. If the feelings are positive, we try to savor them, to hang on to them. When people hear that I encourage my kids to move on from unpleasant feelings, many of them worry. “Well, make sure you aren’t denying their negative emotions,” I’ve been warned, “or sending the message that bad feelings are bad and should be avoided.” Rest assured: My kids do know that all feelings, good or bad, are okay. They know that I see emotions like sadness, frustration, anxiety and jealousy as windows into their world, and that I love to hear about everything that’s happening with them, whether positive or negative. I do not encourage them to buck up, or stuff it down; I do not say things to them like, “You’re fine.” But I do encourage my kids to move on from bad feelings, because rumination is bad for you. As psychologist Sonja Lyubomirsky explains in her great book “The How of Happiness”: Overthinking ushers in a host of adverse consequences: It sustains or worsens sadness, fosters negatively biased thinking, impairs a person’s ability to solve problems, saps motivation, and interferes with concentration and initiative. Moreover, although people have a strong sense that they are gaining insight into themselves and their problems during their ruminations, this is rarely the case. What they do gain is a distorted, pessimistic perspective on their lives. Suffice it to say, in my household when something negative happens we practice the skills that we need to be able to let go of a grudge and not ruminate. I’ve written before about teaching kids how to forgive. Today I’d like to expand a little on how I help my kids feel better after they’ve been feeling badly. 1) Accept the negative feelings. The key to this is not to deny what we are feeling, but rather to lean into our feelings, even if they are painful. Take a moment to be mindful and narrate: “I’m feeling anxious right now,” or, “This situation is making me tense.” Hang in there with unpleasant feelings at least long enough to acknowledge them. This is the gist of emotion coaching kids: We help them label what they are feeling, and we validate that their feelings are okay. With younger kids, the challenge is helping them understand that while bad feelings are always all right, bad behavior never is. Be crystal clear about this. For example, it is totally okay that your child is feeling jealous and hateful toward her sister. At the same time, it is never okay to hit her. 2) Problem solve. What did you learn from that embarrassing situation? What can you do to improve a difficult situation tomorrow? Who else can help? Who do you need to forgive before you’ll feel better? Put a plan into place. 3) Let go. Move on. Try to feel better. This means that we make a genuine effort to cultivate happiness, gratitude, hope or any other positive emotion; researchers call this “deep acting.” Faking a smile or other pleasantries to cover our negative emotions (what researchers call “surface acting”) without actually trying to change our underlying negative emotions will often make us feel worse rather than better. But when we genuinely try to feel more positive — when we do try to change our underlying feelings — we usually end up feeling fewer negative emotions and more positive emotions. Most often, moving on means distracting ourselves or our children from the situation. We need to leave the scene of the crime, so to speak. In my next post, I’m going to give you a nice long list of techniques that my kids and I use to keep ourselves from overthinking difficult situations, and to move on when we want to feel better. What negative situations do you find yourself overthinking? Do you notice your children ruminating about certain situations?

Continue reading …

Parents outraged by the Japanese government’s decision to raise the acceptable radiation exposure for children 20-fold presented government ministers in Tokyo with a bag of radioactive dirt from a school playground. The government says the move to increase the safety level from 1 to 20 millisieverts per year is necessary…

Continue reading …