Human behavior is the most complicated thing on the planet. The only thing more complicated than human behavior is string theory, Leslie Lowe said.

After a full 40-year career in marriage and family counseling and mediation, she is retiring this month.

H&N sat down with Lowe to hear about the journey her life has taken her on, and to glean some of the universal truths shes learned about how people can better relate to each other.

I guess what I will miss most is what drove me into getting licensed the opportunity to help people have better lives and relieve them of some of their personal pain, she said.

Lowe is originally from Los Angeles and San Fernando Valley.

I was raised in a very dysfunctional family. And thats why a lot of people go into counseling is their own personal experience, and wanting to try to understand and cope with it, she said.

I did not grow up with healthy self-esteem. I didnt have healthy conflict management skills. I certainly didnt have control of my emotions, because in my family screaming was the way everybody worked, she said.

Lowe explained that problems in relationships often stem from childhood problems, and one of the most important parts of learning how to get along with other people is to understand where your hang-ups come from.

Before you can talk about how to have a good relationship with somebody, you have to talk about how to manage your own brain and be in control of your own emotional stuff, she said.

If youre not in control of your emotional stuff, you lay that on the other person and that frequently creates conflict, she said.

Lowe began her higher education at UC Santa Barbara in 1964, where she studied psychology, but the program wasnt all she hoped it would be.

They were not doing the kind of psychology I wanted to do, she said.

I switched over to religious studies. The reason I did that is that looking at the structure of religious groups gave me more information about human dynamics. I learned a lot about human dynamics by studying religious studies, she explained.

After a year and a half of religious studies, a divorce caused Lowe to move to Berkeley and drop out of school.

When I decided a year and a half later to go back to school, they didnt have a religious studies department, they only had a theology department, which I didnt want, because Im an atheist, she said.

Lowe recalled with some pride that she was able to negotiate a major that suited her. It was technically an independent study and religious studies major, although she said on paper it was more of a literature degree.

Lowe ended up going back to school a few times, picking up degrees in English, teaching and finally in marriage and family counseling.

Her personal life has been just as interesting and dynamic as her path to becoming a marriage counselor.

Shes had her fair share of romance. Lowe has been married five times, an irony that isnt lost on her. She recalled the tales of her past marriages, sharing a few lessons she learned along the way. The man she is married to now she is very in love with.

Were going to celebrate 31 blessed years, she said with a smile.

100 years ago, people were so focused on just surviving, getting food, having shelter. The whole concept of marriage was completely different back then, she mused.

People, for the most part, in human history did not marry for love. For the most part, they married in order to be able to raise a family, which was the cultural expectation. Thats not whats going on today.

People get together because the other person is supposed to make them feel good. And if the other person stops making them feel good, because those emotional bank accounts have been withdrawn till they leave. So people are ping-ponging in and out of relationships, just like I did, she said frankly.

The emotional bank account is a concept widely used in psychology which Lowe explained.

An emotional bank account is opened whenever you develop a relationship of any kind with anybody. And you each engage in some kind of behaviors that make each other feel good, those are deposits.

And then frequently, relationships get to a point where the honeymoon is sort of over. And then people start showing their true colors. At that point, the withdrawals occur.

When the withdrawals start happening, if they as a couple dont catch those withdrawals and turn them around to the kind of problem-solving that prevents those withdrawals from drawing down the bank account, suddenly someone is bankrupt, there just isnt anything left.

Thats usually the point at which the other person wants credit. Because they wake up and go Oh, give me another chance. But at that point, the other persons kind of drained out. There isnt another chance, she explained.

Lowe reflected on some of the common avoidable mistakes that many make as married people.

What happens to a lot of couples is they wait too long to come to counseling. And so they come in as a last-ditch effort to show that theyve tried everything and its too late, she said. The first time they start having problems that are tough to resolve is when they should come in for therapy.

She said many people dont know the difference between healthy fears and healthy worries in their lives.

Healthy fear is future based. You see something that could potentially be harmful and you problem solve the best you can to take care of yourself. Healthy worry is backward based.

Something has been happening that bothers you. And you have to do some problem solving so that it doesnt pop up in the future, she said.

I think thats the biggest problem that I see today is that people are stuck in their fears.

When youre in the middle of emotional conflict, and it has to do with how your brain works, your brain is in fight or flight mode, youre really in animal survival. Versus your frontal lobe, which has the ability to more calmly look at all the choices available to you evaluate data and make better choices. People spend far too much time in that [survival] part of their brain, she said.

Lowes career in Klamath Falls has been full, and shes been active in many groups, including the League of Women Voters, Klamath Wingwatchers, Klamath Sustainable Communities and more.

She says shell continue her leadership efforts in those other organizations, but her time as a marriage and family counselor is drawing to a close.

I have loved working with people to help them have a better way of feeling about themselves and relating to other people. Ive loved that work, she said.

Im at a point where there are a number of factors that are emerging that tell me its time to stop. I dont hear as well as I used to. I dont process information as fast as I used to. But I think the really big thing is I dont have the patience with people I used to have, she said.

Through the hardship and heartbreak that shes experienced, Lowe said one of the most important things shes learned is to be grateful for the good things.

Life is a gift and too many people dont count their blessings. And I dont mean that in a religious sense. Theres far more good happening to most of us than bad and yet we tend to focus on the horrible stuff.

Visit link:
End of an era: Leslie Lowe finds truths during a career in marriage therapy - Herald and News

The progressive concept of cultural appropriation has become an increasingly mainstream idea. Do a Google search on, say, yoga is cultural appropriation, and youll see for yourself. What does cultural appropriation mean, though? According to law professor Susan Scafaldi, author of Who Owns Culture? Appropriation and Authenticity in American Law, cultural appropriation consists of taking intellectual property, traditional knowledge, cultural expressions, or artifacts from someone elses culture without permission. This can include unauthorized use of another cultures dance, dress, music, language, folklore, cuisine, traditional medicine, religious symbols, etc. Its most likely to be harmful when the source community is a minority group that has been oppressed or exploited in other ways.

Even if one takes this dubious definition seriously, thoughwhat would constitute unauthorized use?policing cultural appropriation quickly falls apart when applied to actual human behavior. A group of students at Pitzer College, for example, declared that hoop earrings should be off-limits to white women. But how can any culture lay claim to determining the size and shape of acceptable jewelry for individuals to wear?

Critics should never assume, though, that bad ideas will die a natural death. In 1991, Antioch College gained national fameand ridiculeby mandating that each step of a sexual encounter receive express permission from the participants. Lawyerly protocol replaced spontaneity, and process replaced passion. Saturday Night Live mocked the school, showing hormonal undergraduates uttering stilted authorizations. But what was once fodder for comedy is now law, at least in California and New York. Progressive goals have a way of becoming mainstream edicts.

In Salem, Massachusetts, the Peabody Essex Museum offers a case study in the mainstreaming of cultural appropriation. Cross-cultural appreciation has sustained the museum for centuries. Americas oldest continuously operating museum, PEM has long displayed exotic artifacts associated with the maritime tradebut patrons must now read a guilt-ridden disclaimer when visiting the museums exhibits. Cultural appreciation and exchange are vital parts of any society, but appropriation is complicated and tied up with complex power dynamics and histories of oppression, the message reads. Cultural appropriation occurs when appreciation becomes theft, when exchange is one-sided, or when marginalized cultures are reduced to stereotypes.

As with other definitions of cultural appropriation, the PEM statement does not offer any guidelines on how to know when appreciation becomes theft or when exchange is one-sided. The best it can offer is a statement from Jezebel founder Anna Holmes: You cant always prove appropriation. But you usually know it when you see it.

No well-intentioned person favors marginalized cultures being reduced to stereotypes, but cultural-appropriation watchdogs see these offenses everywhere, even in instances where harm was clearly not intended. Consider the case of high school senior Keziah Daum, who wore a cheongsam to her prom, setting off a Twitterstorm of condemnation. Daum chose the dress because she thought that it was beautiful and would set her apart on a special night. But activists admonished Daum, who is white, for wearing a traditional Chinese garment. Her defenders, including some Chinese-Americans and native Chinese, argued that her selection complimented Chinese culture. Critics attacked them in turn as inauthentic, orin the case of Chinese nationalslacking the social authority to speak about American minorities. To Daums woke critics, every ethnic group must stay in its own lane.

Another puzzling aspect of the cultural-appropriation focus is that it seems clearly to clash with another progressive imperative: the need to nurture multicultural appreciation. Multiculturalism has been a prominent cause among progressives for more than a generation, but today, admiration for other cultures apparently comes with a warning sign: look, but dont adopt, lest you face accusations of theft or insensitivity.

Most reasonable people have no trouble understanding that to adopt an artifact or practice doesnt diminish the culture from which it originates. You cant steal a culture, as Columbia University linguist John McWhorter has observed. Cultural exchange is enriching, not impoverishing, and imitation remains, as in the old formulation, the sincerest form of flattery. Its time for progressives to decide between embracing multiculturalism or policing cultural appropriation. They cant have it both ways.

Matthew Stewart is associate professor of humanities and rhetoric at Boston University and the author of Modernism and Tradition in Ernest Hemingways In Our Time.

Photo: monkeybusinessimages/iStock

Originally posted here:
Multiculturalism, or Cultural Appropriation? Progressives Can't Have It Both Ways. - City Journal

This article was submitted in response to the call for ideas issued by the co-chairs of the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, Eric Schmidt and Robert Work. It addresses the first question (part a.), which asks how will artificial intelligence affect the character and/or the nature of war.

***

Will artificial intelligence (AI) change warfare? Its hard to say. AI itself is not new the first AI neural network was designed in 1943. But AI as a critical factor in competitions is relatively novel and, as a result, theres not much data to draw from. However, the data that does exist is striking. Perhaps the most interesting examples are in the world of chess. The game has been teaching military strategists the ways of war for hundreds of years and has been a testbed for AI development for decades.

Military officials have been paying attention. Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work famously used freestyle (or Centaur) chess to promote the third offset strategy, where humans and computers work together, combining human strategy and computer speed to eliminate blunders while allowing humans to focus on the big picture. Since then, AI and supercomputers have continued to reshape how chess is played. Technology has helped to level the playing field the side with the weaker starting position is no longer at such a disadvantage. Likewise, intimidation from the threat of superhuman computers has occasionally led to some unorthodox behaviors, even in human-only matches.

The experience of AI in the chess world should be instructive for defense strategists. As AI enters combat, it will first be used just in training and in identifying mistakes before they are made. Next, improvements will make it a legitimate teammate, and if it advances to superhuman ability in even narrow domains of warfighting, as it has in chess then it could steer combat in directions that are unpredictable for both humans and machines.

What Does Chess Say About AI-Human Interaction?

Will AI replace soldiers in war? The experience of using AI and machine learning in chess suggests not. Even though the best chess today is played by computers alone, humans remain the focus of the chess world. The world computer chess championship at the International Conference on Machine Learning in Stockholm attracted a crowd of only three when I strolled by last year. In contrast, the human championship was streamed around the globe to millions. In human-only chess though, AI features heavily in the planning process, the results of which are called prep. Militaries are anticipating a similar planning role for AI, and even automated systems without humans rely on a planning process to provide prep for the machines. The shift toward AI for that process will affect how wars are fought.

To start, computers are likely to have an equalizing effect on combat as they have had in chess. The difference in ability among the top competitors in chess has grown smaller, and the advantage of moving first has become less advantageous. That was evident in last years human-only chess championship where competitors had the closest ratings ever in a championship, and the best-of-12 match had 12 straight draws for the first time. There have been more draws than wins in every championship since 2005, and though it is not exactly known why, many believe it is due to the influence of superhuman computers aiding underdogs, teaching defensive play, or simply perfecting the game.

AI is likely to level the military playing field because progress is being driven by commercial industry and academia which will likely disseminate their developments more widely than militaries. That does not guarantee all militaries will benefit equally. Perhaps some countries could have better computers or will be able to pay for more of them, or have superior data to train with. But the open nature of computing resources makes cutting-edge technology available to all, even if that is not the only reason for equalization.

AI Favors the Underdog and Increases Uncertainty

AI seems to confer a distinct benefit to the underdog. In chess, black goes second and is at a significant disadvantage as a result. Fabiano Caruana, a well-known American chess player, claimed that computers are benefiting black. He added that computer analysis helps reveal many playable variations and moves that were once considered dubious or unplayable. In a military context, the ways to exert an advantage can be relatively obvious, but AI planning tools could be adept at searching and evaluating the large space of possible courses of action for the weaker side. This would be an unwelcome change for the United States, which has benefited from many years of military superiority.

Other theories exist for explaining the underdogs improvement in chess. It may be that computers are simply driving chess toward its optimum outcome, which some argue is a tie. In war it could instead be that perfect play leads to victory rather than a draw. Unlike chess, the competitors are not constrained to the same pieces or set of moves. Then again, in a limited war where mass destruction is off the table, both sides aim to impose their will while restricting their own pieces and moves. If perfect play in managing escalation does lead to stalemate, then AI-enhanced planning or decision-making could drive toward that outcome.

However, superhuman computers do not always drive humans toward perfect play and can in fact drive them away from it. This happened in a bizarre turn in last years chess world championship, held in London. The Queens Gambit Declined, one of the most famous openings that players memorize, was used to kick off the second of the 12 games in the London match, but on the tenth move, the challenger, Caruana, playing as black, didnt choose either of the standard next moves in the progression. During planning, his computers helped him find a move that past centuries had all but ignored. When the champion Magnus Carlsen, who is now the highest-rated player in history, was asked how he felt upon seeing the move, he recounted being so worried that his actual response cant be reproduced here.

It is not so much that Caruana had found a new move that was stronger than the standard options. In fact, it may have even been weaker. But it rattled Carlsen because, as he said, The difference now is that Im facing not only the analytical team of Fabiano himself and his helpers but also his computer help. That makes the situation quite a bit different. Carlsen suddenly found himself in a theater without the aid of electrical devices, having only his analytical might against what had become essentially a superhuman computer opponent.

His response might presage things to come in warfare. The strongest moves available to Carlsen were ones that the computer would have certainly analyzed and his challenger would have prepared for. Therefore, Carlsens best options were either ones that were certainly safe or ones that were strange enough that they would not have been studied by the computer.

When asked afterward if he had considered a relatively obvious option that he didnt chose seven moves later in the game, Carlsen joked that Yeah, I have some instincts I figured that [Caruana] was still in prep and that was the perfect combination. Fear of the computer drove the champion, arguably historys best chess player, to forego a move that appeared to be the perfect combination in favor of a safer defensive position, a wise move if Caruana was in fact still in prep.

In war, there will be many options for avoiding the superhuman computing abilities of an adversary. A combatant without the aid of advanced technology may choose to withdraw or retreat upon observing the adversary doing something unexpected. Alternatively, the out-computed combatant might drive the conflict toward unforeseen situations where data is limited or does not exist, so as to nullify the role of the computer. That increases uncertainty for everyone involved.

How Will the U.S. Military Fare in a Future AI World?

The advantage may not always go the competitor with the most conventional capabilities or even the one that has made the most computing investment. Imagine the United States fighting against an adversary that can jam or otherwise interfere with communications to those supercomputers. Warfighters may find themselves, like Carlsen, in a theater without the aid of their powerful AI, up against the full analytical might of the adversary and their team of computers. Any unexpected action taken by the adversary at that point (e.g., repositioning their ground troops or launching missile strikes against unlikely locations) would be cause for panic. The natural assumption would be that adversary computers found a superior course of action that had accounted for the most likely American responses many moves into the future. The best options then, from the U.S. perspective, become those that are either extremely cautious, or those that are so unpredictable that they would not have been accounted for by either side.

AI-enabled computers might be an equalizer to help underdogs find new playable options. However, this isnt the only lesson that chess can teach us about the impact of AI-enabled supercomputers and war. For now, while humans still dominate strategy, there will still be times where the computer provides advantages in speed or in avoiding blunders. When the computer overmatch becomes significant and apparent, though, strange behaviors should be expected from the humans.

Ideally, humans deprived of their computer assistants would retreat or switch to safe and conservative decisions only. But the rules of war are not as strict as the rules of chess. If an enemy turns out to be someone aided by feckless computers, instead of superhuman computers aided by feckless humans, it may be wise to anticipate more inventive perhaps even reckless human behavior.

Andrew Lohn is a senior information scientist at the nonprofit, nonpartisan RAND Corporation. His research topics have included military applications of AI and machine learning. He is also co-author of How Might Artificial Intelligence Affect the Risk of Nuclear War? (RAND, 2018).

Image: U.S. Marine Corps (Photo by Lance Cpl. Scott Jenkins)

See the original post here:
What Chess Can Teach Us About the Future of AI and War - War on the Rocks

It can be useful and instructive to observe the turning of a decade by looking back on what life was like in America a mere 100 years ago.

On Jan. 2, 1920, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was 108.76. Today it is over 28,000 points.

In 1920, the United States had become an economic power, which is remarkable considering the bloody "war to end all wars" that ended just two years earlier. Republican presidents shifted their attention from foreign entanglements to economic growth (sound familiar?).

The beginning of the Roaring 20s featured new rights for women, including the right to vote, daring flapper outfits and cigarette smoking. It also included Prohibition, which led to the rise of Al Capone and the Mafia. People should have been convinced that attempts to regulate human behavior by government fiat only work if the public is willing to obey the law, which in the case of liquor it clearly was not.

The one thing that hasn't changed in the past 100 years and for that matter since the first humans walked the earth is human nature. One can change styles of clothing and hair, change modes of transportation, even change politicians, but human nature never changes. Greed, lust and the quest for power are embedded in each of us in every generation.

The impact of the Industrial Revolution found more people living in big cities than on farms for the first time beginning in 1920. That year also launched what we today call the "consumer society." America's total wealth more than doubled between 1920 and 1929.

As the website history.com notes: People from coast to coast bought the same goods (thanks to nationwide advertising and the spread of chain stores), listened to the same music, did the same dances and even used the same slang. Many Americans were uncomfortable with this urban, sometimes racy mass culture, and for many people in the United States, the 1920s brought more conflict than celebration.

Isn't it the same today? Have we learned nothing? The tension between people with opposing political and social views and religious beliefs has increased these past 100 years because of contemporary social media and the 24/7 news cycle in which revolution sells better than resolution.

Cars, washing machines, new forms of birth control and other creations gave especially women new freedoms. Radio united the nation and phonograph records, which sold 100 million in 1927 alone, created a common culture, even if some older people didn't like the "modern" music.

As with Frank Sinatra and Elvis Presley in the 1940s and 50s, some older folks in the 1920s rejected the dance hall lifestyle and what they saw as the vulgarity and depravity of jazz music and the moral erosion they claimed it caused. But for the younger generation, it was a new world in which the future looked bright.

What will America be like in 2120? In 1920 no one could have foreseen a Great Depression, or a second World War, much less the prosperity and cultural changes that would come, or the threat of nuclear annihilation.

The saying that "the more things change, the more they remain the same" has never seemed more accurate and providential.

Read more from the original source:
CAL THOMAS: As we move into new decade, at look at life 100 years ago - SCNow

Tim Stonor, managing director of Space Syntax, speaking at the ULI Asia Pacific Leadership Convivium in Singapore.

Improved connectivity leads to better cities and more profitable buildings, and data can play a crucial role in analyzing that connectivity and planning to maximize it. Speaking at the ULI Asia Pacific Leadership Convivium in Singapore, Tim Stonor, managing director of Space Syntax, a London-based urban planning and design company, describing how his company uses data to analyze human behavior patterns and applies the resulting insights to urban spaces.

Stonor also serves asa visiting professor at The Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London, and is a former Harvard Loeb Fellow.

Space Syntax builds algorithms and models that measure the connectivity of street networks. The companys models analyze pedestrian, cycle, and vehicle movement networks; its algorithm identifies the most-connected and the least-connected streets.

The more connected the street, the more people flow down it. Not just in Shanghai but also in London, in every town and city weve ever looked at. [That] one variable influences 60 to 70 percent of what then happens, he said. For example, in London, 80 percent of the citys shops are located on the 20 percent most spatially connected streets.

The percentages might vary from city to city, but this is a rule of nature we find again and again, he said. No matter how good you are, you cant drag people to you. Youve got to go to the people. The people go to the connectivity, so build connected places.

This model doesnt take account of what the buildings are, Stonor added. It doesnt take account of how tall they are, what they look like, the quality of their managementall of these things matter. However, the connectivity of the street grid seems to matter most.

Data analysis is increasingly entering the field of architecture and urban planning, said Stonor. Place really matters because it is in places where people come together and do lots of very basic things which drive innovation. The city offers the greatest density of opportunities for people to trade socially and economically.

Data analysis demonstrates that connectivity affects value. Linking footfall to the value of existing real estate enables developers to see the potential difference in value of the lifetime of a project that being better connected creates.

Space Syntaxs analysis also suggests a link between connectivity and health. Healthier people live in the more-connected places, certainly from the work weve done so far in England, said Stonor. Knowing this, we can work with public health professionals. The more disconnected and car dependent you are, the more likely you are to be lonely with enormous consequences for public health budgets: prescribing tranquilizers and pick-me-ups to people who are depressed because of the results of planning.

He would like to see cities working to increase or restore connectivity that has been lost because of highways dividing parts of the city. We are now fragmenting and dividing our cities where once they used to be connected and integrated, he said.

If I could do one thing quickly, I would slow the traffic down in every city and make it easier to cross the street.

Stonor also outlined a few Space Syntax projects, including a new central business district master plan for Darwin, Australia. Here, the company could demonstrate that a master plan that focused on connectivity would add value, connecting design with the money.

On a smaller scale, the company has worked with owners of shopping malls to show how increasing connectivity within the malls and between the malls and the city can add value. Getting inside shopping centers, making very small changes to the performance of a shopping center, you can open up sight lines, open up visibility, open up flow to make the place trade better.

In the future, using data in planning will lead to new business models and require architects, the public sector, data scientists, and investors to work together to create the best places.

The adoption of digital technologies will change the face of cities as surely as any previous technology, whether the railway, the car, or the skyscraper, he concluded.

Link:
Linking Connectivity to Livability and Better-Planned Cities - Urban Land

As a society, we have come to expect instant gratification in almost every component of our lives so, why would we treat websites any differently? Why is there a need for things to be done at the snap of a finger?

The impulsivity and shortened attention span of today's consumer has become increasingly tricky in the grand scheme of the user experience. But it's not all our fault. This restlessness is in our DNA. There is psychological discomfort associated with self-denial. From an evolutionary perspective, resisting our instinct to seize the reward at hand is a difficult test, according to an article on Psychology Today.Human behavior tells us that we want things now, rather than later.

Instant Gratification

The desire to receive things as instantly as we request them has become more relevant over the years, and it's reflected every which way. From food delivery services to online shopping and even dating, consumers have become so invested in instant accessibility. Long gone are the days of waiting for services. Slogans like "Freaky Fast" (Jimmy John's) and "The World on Time" (FedEx), along with almost every fashion retailer's overnight delivery promises, are a microcosm of consumers' expectations in the purchasing cycle.

This sentiment remains the same when users interact with a website. There are standards that users uphold when considering speed, including how it impacts access to information and organization of specific conversion points. Instant gratification has become a theme of the consumer purchasing journey, and brands continue to compete over how to best position their speed services or discounted rates to satisfy needs.

User Retention Rates

More than 3.5 billion Google searches take place each day, indicating an unfathomable amount of people searching for answers, products and services on the internet. Implementing best practices for SEO (search engine optimization) is just one component to elevating website visibility. If a particular webpage delays loading after a user lands on the site, the user is likely to navigate away within a matter of seconds in favor of a competitors site.

According to research, 47% of consumers expect a page to load in two seconds or less. Analytics claim that 40% of consumers will abandon a website that takes more than three seconds to load. Thus, there's not much room for error as brands set their sights on seamless website usability. Fortunately, tools exist for improving website speed.

Popular Tools To Increase Speed

At my agency, we often use CDN services (content delivery networks) like Cloudflare and Amazon CloudFront that duplicate content in different geographic areas. So, when a user clicks on a link, the webpage loads quicker. CDN services work well with pretty much any website and can be implemented to improve the overall user experience.

Additionally, static website tools such as Hugo,Gatsby and Jekyll prepare content ahead of time into static files, increasing the speed of content that appears for the user because there's no need to run assembly code on the server. These tools work best for informational websites containing few call-to-actions, conversions or interactions (e.g., AldiandPepsi), but might not be the best fit for a picture-sharing platform or forum (e.g., PinterestorReddit).

Fast Might Not Always Be Best

With even more advanced technologies paving the way as we head into 2020 (like 5G internet speeds), the question remains: Is faster always better?

In theory, the better the code is, the faster a website will load. Companies like T-Mobile and AT&T are rolling out 5G more quickly and efficiently than ever before, but that comes at a price. Social economics factor into who will have faster internet accessibility, further increasing the digital divide.

At my agency, we feel it is essential that any website we develop can be accessed anywhere, regardless of internet speed. That is the primary goal of user experience to keep every kind of user in mind. It is critical to design for everyone and think about various types of users who will come in contact with websites. Otherwise, you are not designing for inclusivity. There is a balance between designing for the extreme user versus designing for the average user.

"In design, again and again, we see that looking to the average does not produce cutting-edge innovations," said inclusive design strategist and human rights advocate Elise Roy. "Instead, we should be looking to extremes. What gets forgotten is that people with disabilities are great examples of extreme users. We experience the world in such a different way. They are a gold mine for helping us to think differently."

Conclusion: 2020 Speed

As we approach 2020 and a new decade of speed, it is an exciting time for web design and development. It's imperative to innovate and experiment with a variety of strategies to engage users in an inclusive and elevated way that encourages conversion.

Whether or not speed is your primary focus in improving the user experience, it will certainly loom large in terms of how the average global consumer will perceive your brand.

The rest is here:
Next-Gen Speed And The Influence On User Experience - Forbes

Movie box office. TV ratings. Say what you will about the reliability of entertainment consumption metrics, but for decades, what people watched was hardly hush-hush. Then subscription video streamers came along. Now, massive data is collected about viewing habits but is disclosed only at the discretion of the companies sucking it up. Netflix says it will become more transparent in 2020. But will it? And who knows if the numbers it releases are inaccurate or misleading? How much should the rest of Hollywood care about transparency?

Well, consider that less than two years ago, Time Warner's then-CEO Jeff Bewkes took the witness stand during a trial where the U.S. government attempted to block his company's merger with AT&T. Bewkes pointed to Amazon, Netflix, YouTube and Facebook before explaining that these companies "know more about our consumers than we do." The merger was justified, he explained, because digital giants possessed something that one of Hollywood's biggest media companies sorely needed data. "The more you know about viewers, the more it informs your programming," he said. "It helps you understand how to optimize."

Hollywood is catching up. Disney has launched its data-sucking streaming service Disney+ while others including AT&T's HBO Max will be running soon enough. With a 21st century operation, though, comes a 21st century problem: the potential for regulation. Government intervention could drop a bomb on the so-called streaming wars.

Only in the past few years have academics begun discussing whether Big Data presents antitrust issues, and if so, what to do about it. Spurred by frustration at the might of companies like Google and Facebook, lawmakers and regulators on both sides of the political aisle have in recent months openly endorsed the scrutinizing of companies that are leveraging their inside knowledge about consumer habits to the disadvantage of third parties.

On Nov. 8, Department of Justice antitrust chief Makan Delrahim sounded his own alarm in a speech at Harvard. Delrahim said that the aggregation of data can create avenues for abuse especially for companies in the business of predicting human behavior (for advertising, yes, but perhaps also what entertainment programming you might want to see if you just watched The Irishman). He also responded to those who see such concerns as overstated because data collection has been happening for decades. (His example was grocery stores collecting information about consumer purchasing patterns through loyalty cards. Nielsen ratings would have worked just as well.) Something has changed, Delrahim warned.

"Antitrust enforcers must examine carefully whether greater competitive harms are threatened given today's market realities," he said. "For example, enforcers might consider whether the scale of the data collected has increased by several magnitudes; the type of data collected; and what it means when companies collect usage data, which cannot be easily replicated, in addition to user data. Most notably, enforcers must confront the reality that data insights in the digital economy are combined across the ecosystem of the internet sometimes in ways that transcend product improvement and impact consumer choice altogether."

It's happening slowly, but antitrust regulators like Delrahim are now being urged to look beyond Google and Facebook and review how data is being leveraged as a competitive weapon in the digital entertainment space. And the expressed openness by conservative legal thinkers (including Attorney General William Barr in a Dec. 10 speech) to analyze the non-price effects of competition is a remarkable development that bears watching.

While some privacy advocates have expressed concern about allowing data collection to happen in the first place, there are others who seem frustrated by the inequality presented by data collection and the potential for marketplace exclusion. For example, during the recent DOJ review of the Paramount Consent Decrees, the decades-old rules governing the relationship between movie studios and theater chains, Michigan State University law professor Adam Candeub submitted a comment critical of Netflix to the antitrust office. "Netflix does everything in its power to prevent third parties from learning its viewing data," he wrote. "Netflix encrypts its data to prevent ISPs and web browsers from tracking the use, and it does not share any data with third parties, even the studios whose material it licenses and who naturally want information on [their] own show[s]. While Netflix has a right to its own data Netflix goes a step too far by using its market power in the [online video] market to require that connected devices not use available data."

Similarly, in a July 31 letter from the Artist Rights Alliance to the DOJ and the House Judiciary Committee, the musicians' group laid out a number of concerns about specific tech companies, including Amazon. "The antitrust problems created by Amazon's role as both a distributor in its own right and a platform for other sellers and services are well understood," stated the letter. "The company's massive data stockpiles and ability to monitor its competitors from 'inside' their own transactions and operations threaten genuine competition in virtually every sector of the U.S. economy. Amazon's ongoing efforts to launch a streaming music service as part of its Prime family of products should be carefully scrutinized as part of your review. While more competition is always welcome and Amazon Music is a royalty-paying service, we are concerned about the dangers of predatory/sub-market pricing in a service that Amazon operates as a 'loss leader.' "

If regulators decide to crack down, a side squabble would erupt over how to remedy the competitive harms arising from data collection. Among the possibilities is that data aggregation could become a significant issue when companies seek approval for mergers. Reuters reported Dec. 10 that the DOJ is examining whether to block Google's proposed acquisition of Fitbit on the grounds that it would give Google too much data about American consumers. Regulators also could look to force data-sharing in some instances. A separate Reuters story reported that the Financial Stability Board, an international body that monitors the global financial system, would soon recommend that big tech firms be required to promote sharing of data.

Now imagine if the DOJ ever dared to stop two streaming video companies from merging on grounds of having too much information about what Americans watched. Or picture a scenario in which Netflix and Disney+ were forced to share audited consumption data with the creative talents that produce and star in their shows.

Some observers, noting a lack of legal precedent and any empirical evidence about the competitive harms from data hoarding, are urging regulators to be cautious. A recent law review article by University of Florida professor D. Daniel Sokol addressed the debate over whether antitrust law has a role to play, with the conclusion that "antitrust intervention over market forces threatens consumer welfare, especially in fast-moving markets, and proposed remedies, such as limiting the collection and use of Big Data or forcing large firms to share with rivals, are likely to harm competition and innovation, and in fact may raise privacy concerns."

Truth be told, there's no indication yet that regulators are prepared to do anything more than conduct a review of data collection. Time will tell whether the talk about getting tough is really just frustration at not being able to do more to punish tech companies for other perceived sins (i.e., an indifference to privacy, ideological biases or sheer chutzpah).

But as Hollywood launches new digital platforms amid an appetite to police data collection, comments like those from Candeub and the Artist Rights Alliance may best be viewed as demonstrating the types of complaints that could become more commonplace in the years ahead for the streaming economy. As such, the industry is advised to think hard about the answer to these two questions: When it comes to measuring how individuals are consuming entertainment, would the data collection be less likely to occur if such data wasn't a secret and could be used by business partners and corporate rivals? If transparency presents a problem, why is that?

This story first appeared in the Jan. 3 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine. To receive the magazine, click here to subscribe.

View original post here:
Big Data in Hollywood: The Brewing Antitrust Battle of the Streaming Era - Hollywood Reporter

To kick off the 21st century's version of the Roaring Twenties this month, the Tarrant Actors Regional Theatre will present Noel Coward's classic 1920's British farce, Hay Fever, performed in the Sanders Theatre at the Fort Worth Community Arts Center, 1300 Gendy Street, Fort Worth TX 76107. The production is directed by TART Artistic Director Allen Walker.

In this fast-paced display of Coward's legendary verbal wit, retired British actress Judith Bliss and her author husband, David, long for a quiet weekend with some guests in their English country manor-but find quiet an impossible dream when their high-spirited children, Simon and Sorel, appear with guests of their own. As the weekend progresses, a houseful of drama waits to be ignited as tempers flare and misunderstandings abound. With Judith's new flame and David's newest literary inspiration keeping company as the children follow suit, the Bliss family lives up to its name as the quiet weekend comes to an exhausting and hilarious finale worth of Feydeau.

The cast features Laura M. Jones as Judith Bliss, Evan Faris as David Bliss, Karen Matheny as Sorel Bliss, Nicholas Zebrun as Simon Bliss, Jorge Martin Lara as Sandy Tyrell, Hannah Bell as Myra Arundel, Eric Dobbins as Richard Greatham, Laura Lester as Jackie Coryton, and Erika L. Durham as Clara. Olivia Dickerson serves as assistant director/stage manager, with technical direction by Bryan S. Douglas, scenic design by Ellen Mizener, lighting design by Branson White, costume design by Hannah Bell, properties design by Don Gwynne, and sound design by Allen Walker.

"Hay Fever has been delighting audiences for nearly a century," said Walker. "It is a wonderful romp through the foibles of human behavior, and is one of Noel Coward's most beloved scripts-largely due to his masterful use of verbal warfare and his subtle commentaries on societal norms and manners. I am incredibly honored to work with this outstanding cast and crew who have done an amazing job with this story, and have put together a production of which I feel Noel Coward would be proud."

Tickets are available now via TART's website, by calling the box office at (682) 231-0082 from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. Monday through Friday, or by phone 24/7 with Brown Paper Tickets at (800) 838-3006. The play runs January 10-26, with performances Friday and Saturday evenings at 8 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday matinees at 2 p.m. There will be an opening night gala reception after the performance on Friday, Jan. 10, featuring complimentary hors d'oeuvres along with champagne, beer and wine for guests age 21 and older.

For more information, visit http://www.thetart.org, or call (682) 231-0082.

See the original post:
The Tarrant Actors Regional Theatre Kicks Off The New Year With Noel Coward's HAY FEVER - Broadway World

Preliminary reports indicate that North Dakota had 98 motor vehicle fatalities in 2019 a total that, if it goes unchanged, would be the first time in 17 years the state has recorded fewer than 100 traffic fatalities. Gov. Doug Burgum thanked the agencies involved in theVision Zerotraffic safety initiative for making a difference and expanding their efforts during the past year.

Since the comprehensive Vision Zero initiative was launched in 2018 by the North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT), Highway Patrol and Department of Health, traffic fatalities in the state have decreased from 116 in 2017 to 105 in 2018 to a preliminary total of 98 in 2019, which would be the lowest total since 97 traffic fatalities were recorded in 2002. It will take up to 30 days to finalize the 2019 total as crash reports and investigations are completed.

The only acceptable number of deaths on North Dakota roads is zero, and every year that we move closer to that goal represents important progress, because these arent just numbers theyre peoples lives, and every life matters, Burgum said. Were grateful to our Vision Zero partners for their dedication to keeping everyone safe and secure, and to the traveling public who have heeded the initiatives emphasison personal responsibility, including driving sober and distraction-free, buckling up and slowing down.

This past year, Vision Zero was expanded with additional safety measures including more highway safety engineering systems, law enforcement equipment and programs; the establishment of highway safety corridors; crash data improvements and dashboards; and Vision Zero Schools, a new peer-to-peer program in high schools.

We must keep in mind that lives lost on North Dakota roads are family, friends and community members, NDDOT Director Bill Panos said. Of the 98 fatalities, approximately 47% were not wearing their seat belt. Seat belts are the single most effective safety device to prevent death and injury in a motor vehicle crash. We are working to establish a culture of personal responsibility where motor vehicle fatalities are recognized as preventable and not tolerated, because when it comes to those we love, zero is the only acceptable number of lives to lose.

Of the 98 motor vehicle fatalities in 2019, 42% were alcohol-related and 25% were speed-related. Victims ranged in age from 3 years old to 93 years old, and 83% were North Dakota residents. By mode of transportation, 74 of the fatalities were in a passenger vehicle, 11 were motorcyclists, five were pedestrians, four were on all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) and two were bicyclists. One fatality involved a train and 14 involved commercial motor vehicles.

Vision Zeros ongoing success requires strong partnerships and buy-in from the public, said Col. Brandon Solberg, superintendent of the Highway Patrol. If every driver and passenger chooses to buckle up, and every driver obeys speed limits and traffic laws and drives sober, the vast majority of traffic fatalities would be eliminated. Preventable human behavior contributes to 94% of motor vehicle crashes. Personal responsibility is the foundation of Vision Zero.

Vision Zero continues to educate through various mediums about the importance of passenger safety and dangers of speeding, distracted driving and impaired driving, including a new Not Funny campaign that stresses the importance of always driving sober or finding a sober ride.

Parents play a vital role in keeping their children safe on the road, no matter the age, State Health Officer Mylynn Tufte said. Parents should talk often with their young drivers about alcohol, lack of seat belt use, distracted driving, speeding, and driving with passengers. Young children should always be buckled in a car seat that is installed correctly and appropriate for their age and size.

For more information, visithttps://visionzero.nd.gov/.

Read more here:
North Dakota ends 2019 with fewer than 100 reported traffic fatalities as Vision Zero safety effort expands - AM 1100 The Flag WZFG

Market Perspective by SunTrust Advisory Services Jan. 2: Global markets surpassed most investors expectations in 2019. The MSCI All Country World Index jumped 26.6%, while the S&P 500 rose 31.5% on a total return basis, its best gain in six years. With investor fears elevated and valuations depressed entering 2019, better-than-expected news went a long way toward bolstering stocks. Kicking off 2020, the backdrop has shifted dramatically:

The S&P 500 is up 37% on a price return basis since the December 2018 low, but is compounding at a more pedestrian annual growth rate of 6% since the January 2018 peak. Stocks have also tended to add to gains after big up years.

The price-to-earnings ratio for the S&P 500 is nearing a cycle high. However, the sharp decline in interest rates has left relative valuations at a level that has historically been associated with average 12-month forward stock gains of almost 13%.

Investor sentiment, used as a contrarian indicator at extremes, is at the polar opposite from late 2018. Many short-term measures show investor complacency and suggest stocks are vulnerable to unexpected bad news in the first quarter.

While shorter-term sentiment measures show a degree of complacency, equity fund outflowswhich reached the most negative extreme in more than 20 years during 2019still reflect nervousness from investors.

Global liquidity, a key market support, should remain abundant in 2020.

Technology was the only sector to meaningfully outperform the S&P 500 in 2019. This suggests a challenging environment for fund managers who were underweight the sector. In 2020, we expect leadership will broaden out and hold a positive outlook on financials and industrials.

Keith Lerner

Mack Tracks by Mack Investment Securities January: Some comparisons, one year ago and today: CNN has an emotion-based measurement, the Fear & Greed Index. One year ago, on a scale of 1-100, the index was at 12, indicating intense fearand reduced risk. One year later, at the end of December, 2019, with stocks finishing with a great run, the index exhibited extreme greed at 94. Yesrisk is now elevated.

According to the American Association of Individual Investors, its subscribers average cash balance today is near 14%. This nearly matches the lowest amount of cash (13%) in 20 years and preceding the dot-com top of 2000. By the way, cash reached 45% at the market low in 2009. Yesrisk is now elevated.

[In December 2018, a majority of] stock-market newsletter writers] said sell (when stocks were at the lows) and risk was reduced. Historically, when this group is saying sell to the extreme, stocks rise. Conversely, in December 2019, a majority of newsletter writers [gave] buy recommendations. Historically, at these levels of recommendations, stocks have routinely fallen. Yesrisk is now elevated.

--Stephen W. Mack

Market Commentary by Gorilla Trades Dec. 30: Wildly bullish technicals predict a major rally following two years of consolidation, with a base-case target above 3,500 in the S&P 500.

The volatile pullbacks [in 2019], together with the widespread recessionary fears, provide a Wall of Worry for the rally to feed on

The global economy is sluggish, but U.S. growth remains stable, and election years in the U.S. are usually bullish.

Markets have the support of central banks, with the Fed and the majority of the global central banks already in easing cycles. Besides the monetary stimulus, further fiscal measures in the U.S. are expected ahead of the election, and Europe might also resort to massive stimulus.

While valuations are rich by historic measures, interest rates are lower than ever in modern history, and the cheap funding will continue to boost stocks through buybacks.

Corporate earnings remain resilient in the face of the global gloom. Further, since balance sheets are still healthy, even a small uptick in economic activity could result in significant earnings growth.

--Ken Berman

Martin Prings InterMarket Review by Pring Research January: Our [market] barometers remained unchanged in December, with bullish bond and equity models accompanying a negative commodity one.

That combination continues to signal a Stage II environment. The stellar equity performance in December certainly kept up with the Stage II reputation of being the best phase of the cycle for stocks. Not surprisingly, the Stock Barometer rallied to a 100% bullish reading. Other indicators also support characteristics typical of Stage II.

One example is the emergence of the economy from a recession or slowdown. Evidence in this direction is not yet conclusive, but housing starts, and new home sales are expanding.The 18-month slowdown is most probably in its terminal phase.

Stocks are clearly in the process of discounting the good news.

November saw the world stock exchange-traded fund, the iShares MSCI ACWI, break out from its approximate two-year consolidation. In December, Europe followed suit, as the DJ Stoxx 50 broke out from a 20-year consolidation pattern.

--Martin Pring

Weekly Technical Review by Macro Tides Dec. 30: The coming decade is the culmination of the 80-year cycle that has marked significant turning points in our nations history, i.e., 1781, 1861, 1941, and potentially 2021. Each of the prior turning-point decades included major changes and upheaval, so we should be prepared.

The S&P 500 has rallied since the low on Oct. 7 without taking a breath. Markets are a reflection of human behavior and the normal process is to inhale and then exhale, so the recent behavior is simply not normal.

The S&P 500 has become overbought, and sentiment is universally bullish. The S&P will be vulnerable to at least a modest correction in the first part of January. With bullish sentiment so widespread, and momentum strong, the initial pullback is likely to be shallow as investors buy the dip.

A better feel for how the S&P 500 will trade in the first quarter wont really be possible until we see how it rebounds after any setback.

Initial support should be the red trend near 3170. The more significant level of support is 3070. If and when 3070 is tested, how the S&P 500 responds will reveal much about what to expect in coming months.

--Jim Welsh

To be considered for this section, material, with the author's name and address, should be sent to MarketWatch@barrons.com.

Read more here:
The Outlook for Stocks, Bonds, Commodities, and the Economy - Barron's