Wednesday, January 30, 2013

Senate Hearing Focuses on Gun Violence - NYTimes.com

 

WASHINGTON — Speaking slowly but with discernible passion, former Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who was critically injured in a mass shooting in Arizona in 2011, addressed the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday in its first hearing since the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn., last month.

Lady Gaga's YouTube Views Stripped: Singer Loses 156 Million Views

 

The development comes one month after the YouTube pages of Sony and Universal lost 2 billion YouTube views, largely because YouTube decided that videos migrated to the company's VEVO pages were "dead videos". While a small portion of the views stripped from Sony and Universal were due to what YouTube calls "de-spamming the data," the vast majority were taken away as a result of Sony, Universal and EMI's decision to bet on VEVO. As NME notes, VEVO is owned by Sony and Universal Music Group. Other artists affected by YouTube's housekeeping include Beyonce, Michael Jackson and Chris Brown. At the time of the original clean-up, singer Leona Lewis lost 24 million views. In July 2011, Lady Gaga's YouTube account was suspended and promptly restored. Though Google (which owns YouTube) declined to comment, a notice on her channel read that it was guilty of "multiple or severe violations of YouTube's copyright policy."

Step-Grandchildren Of Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister, Are Billionaires: Report

 

Four step-grandchildren of Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels are worth $1.2 billion each, according to an investigation by Bloomberg. That's largely thanks to an inheritance from their biological grandfather, Guenther Quandt. Harald Quandt, Goebbels' step-son, and his half-brother Herbert inherited and rebuilt their father's industrial conglomerate, which produced guns and missiles for Nazi Germany's war effort, Bloomberg reports. One of the most lucrative parts of the conglomerate turned into a stake in BMW, and Herbert's widow and two children now own nearly half of the company. You can read Bloomberg's full report here. Goebbels played a key role in implementing Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler's agenda. Goebbels authorized violence against Jews, banned Jews from making cultural contributions, regulated the news media and led the creation of Nazi propaganda films. Goebbels killed himself, his wife, and his six biological children the day after Hitler committed suicide in 1945. The profits that companies made in Nazi Germany remain controversial. Some descendants of Holocaust victims have sued European banks for allegedly hoarding their relatives' money during and after the Holocaust. And Deutsche Bank allegedly bought gold stolen from Jewish Holocaust victims and helped finance the construction of the Auschwitz concentration camp, according to research cited by the New York Times. Check out the Goebbels family photo below:

Bill Lucey: Super Bowl 47: Feats, Facts and Historic Firsts

The opening kickoff of the Super Bowl is so near, I can almost hear ESPN's Chris Berman ("The Swami'') in my ear, saying: `"Tick... tick... tick tick tick... '' On Sunday, February 3, the Baltimore Ravens and the San Francisco 49ers, this year's home team, take to the field in Super Bowl XLVII at the Mercedes-Benz Superdome in New Orleans. Not that this annual clash needs any added buildup, but Super Bowl 47 will feature a historic family feud in that it marks the first time in Super Bowl history that brothers (Baltimore's John and San Francisco's Jim Harbaugh ) lock horns as opposing head coaches. CBS officially kicks off its coverage at 6:30 p.m., EST live on the CBS Television Network. Super Bowl XLVII, will be the network's 18th Super Bowl broadcast overall. Jim Nantz and Phil Simms will call the action, and will be joined by analysts Steve Tasker and Solomon Wilcots, serving as sideline reporters. Both NFL.com and SuperBowl.com will link to Super Bowl on CBSSports.com, CBS Sports' live stream of Super Bowl XLVII, which will include a host of unique and interactive online and social features. Of particular note is that during the 4th quarter of Super Bowl XLVII, fans will be able to vote for the Super Bowl XLVII MVP on NFL.com, either online or on web-enabled mobile devices. The fan vote counts as 20 percent of the overall vote, with the remaining 80 percent determined by the media. In addition to the Super Bowl coverage and analysis on CBS and at NFL.com, ESPN [See complete Super Bowl coverage ] will offer more than 120 hours of TV and radio programming throughout Super Bowl with more than 35 ESPN commentators (hosts, analysts, reporters and contributors) in New Orleans -- as well as a star-studded analyst team of former players and coaches with a combined 18 Super Bowl rings in 28 appearances, including Hall of Famer Steve Young, SB XXIX) and Ravens (Trent Dilfer, SB XXXV) as well as Hall of Famer and former Chicago Bears head coach Mike Ditka, winner of Super Bowl XX in New Orleans and a former coach of the 49ers' Jim Harbaugh. So before the Ravens and 49ers exchange blows on Sunday evening before millions of energized and anxious fans worldwide, this might be the perfect time to review some feats, facts and historic firsts about Super Bowl Sunday. • To date, 3,581,385 have attended Super Bowl games. The largest crowd was 103,985, at Super Bowl XIV (Jan. 1980), which was played at the Rose Bowl in Pasadena, California. • Player shares in 2013 include: $88,000 to each member of the winning team; $44,000 to each member of the losing team. • The Vince Lombardi trophy stands 20.75 inches tall, weighs 107.3 ounces, and is valued in excess of $25,000. The words Vince Lombardi and Super Bowl XLVII are engraved on the base along with the NFL shield. • For this year's Super Bowl, American singer, songwriter, dancer and actress Beyoncé will perform at halftime. In Super Bowl I, the halftime entertainment consisted of the Universities of Arizona and Michigan Bands. • The Bridgestone Super Bowl XLVI halftime show last year featuring Madonna was watched by an average of 112.6 million viewers, making it the most-watched Super Bowl halftime ever, surpassing Michael Jackson's halftime performance in 1993. • Head coach Don Shula has won 6 Super Bowls, an NFL record: 1 with Baltimore and 5 with Miami. • Tom Brady's 127 pass completions over five Super Bowl games is an NFL record. • Joe Montana threw the most touchdown passes (4 games) in Super Bowl history with 11 perfect strikes. • Pittsburgh's Franco Harris rushed for a league record 354 yards over 4 Super Bowl games. • Minnesota, Denver, Buffalo and New England have all lost 4 Super Bowls. • San Francisco scored 8 touchdowns in Super Bowl XXIV (Jan. 1990) over Denver, the most by any team in Super Bowl history. • Buffalo turned the ball over 9 times in Super Bowl XXVII (Jan. 1993) against Dallas, the most in Super Bowl history. • 23 NFL head coaches have won Super Bowls with more than one team. • 18 individuals have won Super Bowls both as a player and as a coach. • 14 fathers and sons have reached the Super Bowl. • 22 sets of brothers have reached the Super Bowl. • 6 NFL head coaches led their team to the Super Bowl in their first season, the last being Jim Caldwell of the Indianapolis Colts in 2009. • Based on Nielsen record figures, Super Bowl XLV (Feb. 2011) was watched by 162,900,000 viewers on FOX, the most in Super Bowl history. • The oldest winning coach in Super Bowl history was Tom Coughlin, 65, in Super Bowl XLVI (Feb, 2012); while the youngest was Mike Tomlin, 36, in Super Bowl XLIII (Feb. 2009) • The ticket prices for Super Bowl I (Jan. 1967) in Los Angeles were $6, $10 and $12. • The ticket prices for XLVI (Feb. 2012) in Indianapolis were $600, $800, $900 and $1,200. • On average, 10,000 tweets were sent per second during the final three minutes of the New York Giants' 21-17 defeat of the New England Patriots last year in Super Bowl XLVI, according to a Twitter spokesperson. • More than 2.1 million people turned on the live Internet stream of Super Bowl XLVI on Sunday, February 5, 2012, according to an NBC spokesperson. • Super Bowl XLVII will be the 10th Super Bowl held in New Orleans since 1970, putting the city into a tie with South Florida for the most by any single location. • There were 338 credentials issued to media at Super Bowl I in Los Angeles; last year in Super Bowl XLVI, there were 5,156 accredited members of the media, the most in the history of the game. • The use of Roman numerals to designate Super Bowls began with game V (Jan. 1971), won by the Baltimore Colts over the Dallas Cowboys, 16-13. • The price of a 30-second commercial for Super Bowl I in 1967 was $42,000. This year, by comparison, for Super Bowl XVII, a 30-second commercial will run $3,800,000. • According to a new survey by the Retail Advertising and Marketing Association, a division of the National Retail Federation, conducted by BIGinsight, more than 179.1 million people will watch the game Sunday, February 3, the most in the survey's nine-year history and up from an estimated 172.5 million last year. • The NRF survey additionally found nearly three-quarters (74.0 percent) of those watching the game will buy wings, pizza, chips, soda. Additionally, 3.9 million households will buy new furniture items, such as entertainment centers, chairs and couches, while 7.5 million will buy decorations. • Americans will consume 1.23 billion chicken wings during the Super Bowl this year, a 1 percent decline from last year, according to the National Chicken Council. • Mexico will be the largest supplier of avocados for the Super Bowl, according to the Henry Avocado Corp. • According to the Nevada Gaming Control Board, $93.90 million was wagered on the Super Bowl last year in the state of Nevada. • There are approximately 22,000 hotel rooms in downtown New Orleans and another 37,000 in the metropolitan area; and all are but officially sold out, according to the NFL. • According to the New Orleans Convention and Visitor's Bureau, approximately 150,000 tourists will have stormed New Orleans for Super Bowl 47 this year. • According to an economic study conducted by the University of New Orleans, Super Bowl 47 will have a $432 million impact on the city. Source: NFL

Saintsations prepare for their Super Bowl halftime show | WGNO

 

The Saints may not be playing in the Super Bowl, but their dance team – the Saintsations – will definitely be on the field at halftime. They’re getting ready to strut their stuff for football fans around the world, and WGNO’s Vanessa Bolano reports, all of New Orleans will be cheering them on. Meet the 2012-2013 Saintsations. While the season may be over for the boys in black & gold, that’s not the case for these ladies. The Saintsations will play host as all eyes are on new orleans for Super Bowl XLVII. These women, 32 in all, hail from Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas. They practice twice a week, learning 30 dances a season. And for the super bowl they’re learning additional 10, but don’t worry! Most of these girls started dancing before they could walk! “I’ve danced my whole life since I was two,” says Chastity Sorrels. “I’ve been dancing for a very long time since i was like three,” Baton Rouge native Heidi Walker tells us. As we inch closer to the big game these girls are going to be busy going from one event to the next. And then for the big game, Super Bowl Sunday, they’ll be performing around the ‘Dome, and they’ll be at the halftime show with Beyonce! “I can’t imagine how it could get much louder in there,” says Walker. “I think the Saints have the loudest fans, so I’m wondering if they can top it when we have different fans in there.” Being a Saintsation is basically a full time job that takes courage, determination and major skills. “I knew that I always wanted to do that and after I graduated from college I was looking for a job and trying to figure out what I was going to do with my life and I figured that that was the perfect time to make my dreams come true,” Sorrels says. Rookie Nicole Wall says, “Going on the field in the Superdome the first time was just an eye-opening experience to see how big and how great the whole ‘dome was. Just everything about it is great.” Another rookie, Kolbie Lawrence tells us, “It was a really good year, my first year. I was featured in the calendar. I thought that was pretty cool, but meeting all these new girls, they’re like sisters.” “I have had a pretty good ride as a Saintsation,” says veteran Danielle Daray. “My first year being the Super Bowl, and the next year I was able to travel to Iraq to visit some of the troops, and then last year I was picked as the Pro Bowl cheerleader, and now Super Bowl in New Orleans. I don’t think that anybody could have had a better 4 years as a Saintsation.” For many of these women, being a Saintsation is the opportunity of a lifetime: week after week cheering on the Saints, and now hosting the Super Bowl on their home turf.

Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Beatrix of the Netherlands

Beatrix (Beatrix Wilhelmina Armgard, Dutch pronunciation: [ˈbeːjaˌtrɪks ˌʋɪlɦɛlˈmina ˈɑrmɣɑrt] ( listen); born 31 January 1938) is the queen regnant of theKingdom of the Netherlands comprising the NetherlandsCuraçaoSint Maarten, and Aruba.

Beatrix was born in Baarn, Netherlands. She is the eldest daughter of Queen Juliana and Prince Bernhard of Lippe-Biesterfeld. In 1948, she becameheiress presumptive to the throne of the Netherlands. When her mother Juliana abdicated on 30 April 1980, Beatrix succeeded her as queen of the Netherlands.

She attended public primary and secondary schools in Canada, during World War II, and in the Netherlands. In 1961, she received her law degree fromLeiden University. In 1966, Beatrix married Claus von Amsberg, with whom she had three children: Prince Willem-Alexander (1967), Prince Friso(1968) and Prince Constantijn (1969). Prince Claus died in 2002. Queen Beatrix is the longest-lived reigning monarch of the Netherlands.[1]

On 28 January 2013, Beatrix announced that she would abdicate on 30 April 2013, on Koninginnedag (Queen's Day),[2] in favour of her eldest son

Monday, January 28, 2013

TurboTax SnapTax (iOS, Android; free, but filing fees vary)

Using a smartphone to file your taxes may sound tedious, but it's not, thanks to the SnapTax app from TurboTax. Instead of entering your information using your phone’s virtual keyboard, all you have to do is use the app to snap a photo of your W-2 and the app automatically fills in your data for you. Answer a few additional questions, and your state and federal returns are ready to be filed, directly from SnapTax -- no computer necessary. The app is designed for 1040-EZ or 1040A filers with relatively simple tax situations.

Read more: 6 Awesome Apps to Help You Do Your Taxes | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/slideshow_12251224_awesome-apps-taxes.html#ixzz2JRMuhhCX

Apple, cross-promotion, Discovery Engineering, eCPA, Electronic Arts, Europe, Facebook, Fantasy Sports, guano, iPhone, potato, sheep, South America, SPI, whales, wolves

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 10

After doubling European farming output with the potato, there was a further tripling of value from another South American import: the bird droppings known as guano. Let’s apply the fertilizer metaphor to how we can make games better with a new technical discipline that I’ll call Discovery Engineering. In short, how do we start with the same game but add engineering and technology that brings in much more new daily traffic as well as more frequent return visits?

Our gaming guano starts with my very old concept that great games must be Simple, Hot and Deep. I’ve been saying this since I founded Electronic Arts in 1982 and it remains true nearly 30 years later. Consider the ocean, which is simple enough in concept and access that everyone likes to go to the beach. The babies are playing in the sand and puddles while the kids that can walk are getting wet and letting the lapping waves chase them. It’s hot and the graphics and sound are fantastic; everyone is enthralled by the spectacle and can’t get enough. And no matter how far you go it just keeps getting deeper until you need a surfboard or scuba gear and have to worry about sharks. The analogy I used earlier was how the depth satisfies the whales, also known as wolves, who generate your revenue. The wolves need to conquer the sheep that are represented by the casual players. Hence the game must appeal to everyone like the ocean. You cannot even begin to make this work if the game is not Simple, Hot and Deep.

There are additional things that can now be embodied in the game itself that will drive more traffic and return visits. Game mechanics that are very satisfying to play by yourself are of less value than mechanics that engage you in competition and contact with other players, which provokes both viral spread and higher return rates. Repeatable game mechanics that are driven more by algebra and stats, like Fantasy Sports, are not only more efficient to build than a content treadmill, but they provoke endless competitive comparisons leading to higher return rates and more spending.

Independent of the game, additional technology layers can be wrapped around it to generate more free traffic. The APIs of an SNS like Facebook are one great example. Apple makes it easy to send an email invitation but any of these ideas is going to be more effective if the game is not limited to one platform. Everyone that is looking at email or Facebook is but one click away from the browser, regardless of his or her preferred game platform. If your game runs in the browser without requiring any plug-ins, installs or memberships you have a better chance of getting the recipient of an invitation to try it right now. If they like a short trial session, they may later become a Facebook member or buy an iPhone but even if they don’t they can play your game in any case.

My favorite example of Discovery Engineering is how we do cross-promotion. Many people dislike this idea because they don’t understand it and are clinging to the past. Old School thinking says that customers go to destinations and that you would be crazy to distract them or let them exit prematurely once you have gone to all the trouble to bring them to your game. But if your game is in the browser, the player only invested in one simple click to get to you. Not only was the “investment” nothing, he’s busy right now, possibly at work or at school, and he’s going to be leaving your website within seconds regardless of how you treat him.

The principle of cross-promotion is to get something of value when, inevitably, he leaves. Hence we show a display ad banner offering a few other games to try. If the current game is no longer holding his attention, he’s a goner anyway. But if he clicks on a game in the banner, he goes to a competitor’s game for a free trial, and that competitor now owes our company a return click from one of their customers that we don’t already have. If your product is lousy this will only make you fail faster. But if you make a superior game you will double your customers this way, because your game is good enough that your departing player will remember to come back to your game again. And your competitor is giving you a new customer who will also like your game, so you’ll have two good customers instead of just one. Voila, your eCPA just dropped in half, which dramatically increases the chance that the game’s lifetime value will be profitable.

It is for the same reason that auto dealerships cluster together on the same street. But many game developers are too paranoid and distrusting to do this kind of cross-promotion. They’re afraid to help a competitor or they’re insecure or overly protective about their game. But we know this works for us; it’s the best guano we’ve got.

Apple, cross-promotion, Discovery Engineering, eCPA, Electronic Arts, Europe, Facebook, Fantasy Sports, guano, iPhone, potato, sheep, South America, SPI, whales, wolves

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 10

After doubling European farming output with the potato, there was a further tripling of value from another South American import: the bird droppings known as guano. Let’s apply the fertilizer metaphor to how we can make games better with a new technical discipline that I’ll call Discovery Engineering. In short, how do we start with the same game but add engineering and technology that brings in much more new daily traffic as well as more frequent return visits?

Our gaming guano starts with my very old concept that great games must be Simple, Hot and Deep. I’ve been saying this since I founded Electronic Arts in 1982 and it remains true nearly 30 years later. Consider the ocean, which is simple enough in concept and access that everyone likes to go to the beach. The babies are playing in the sand and puddles while the kids that can walk are getting wet and letting the lapping waves chase them. It’s hot and the graphics and sound are fantastic; everyone is enthralled by the spectacle and can’t get enough. And no matter how far you go it just keeps getting deeper until you need a surfboard or scuba gear and have to worry about sharks. The analogy I used earlier was how the depth satisfies the whales, also known as wolves, who generate your revenue. The wolves need to conquer the sheep that are represented by the casual players. Hence the game must appeal to everyone like the ocean. You cannot even begin to make this work if the game is not Simple, Hot and Deep.

There are additional things that can now be embodied in the game itself that will drive more traffic and return visits. Game mechanics that are very satisfying to play by yourself are of less value than mechanics that engage you in competition and contact with other players, which provokes both viral spread and higher return rates. Repeatable game mechanics that are driven more by algebra and stats, like Fantasy Sports, are not only more efficient to build than a content treadmill, but they provoke endless competitive comparisons leading to higher return rates and more spending.

Independent of the game, additional technology layers can be wrapped around it to generate more free traffic. The APIs of an SNS like Facebook are one great example. Apple makes it easy to send an email invitation but any of these ideas is going to be more effective if the game is not limited to one platform. Everyone that is looking at email or Facebook is but one click away from the browser, regardless of his or her preferred game platform. If your game runs in the browser without requiring any plug-ins, installs or memberships you have a better chance of getting the recipient of an invitation to try it right now. If they like a short trial session, they may later become a Facebook member or buy an iPhone but even if they don’t they can play your game in any case.

My favorite example of Discovery Engineering is how we do cross-promotion. Many people dislike this idea because they don’t understand it and are clinging to the past. Old School thinking says that customers go to destinations and that you would be crazy to distract them or let them exit prematurely once you have gone to all the trouble to bring them to your game. But if your game is in the browser, the player only invested in one simple click to get to you. Not only was the “investment” nothing, he’s busy right now, possibly at work or at school, and he’s going to be leaving your website within seconds regardless of how you treat him.

The principle of cross-promotion is to get something of value when, inevitably, he leaves. Hence we show a display ad banner offering a few other games to try. If the current game is no longer holding his attention, he’s a goner anyway. But if he clicks on a game in the banner, he goes to a competitor’s game for a free trial, and that competitor now owes our company a return click from one of their customers that we don’t already have. If your product is lousy this will only make you fail faster. But if you make a superior game you will double your customers this way, because your game is good enough that your departing player will remember to come back to your game again. And your competitor is giving you a new customer who will also like your game, so you’ll have two good customers instead of just one. Voila, your eCPA just dropped in half, which dramatically increases the chance that the game’s lifetime value will be profitable.

It is for the same reason that auto dealerships cluster together on the same street. But many game developers are too paranoid and distrusting to do this kind of cross-promotion. They’re afraid to help a competitor or they’re insecure or overly protective about their game. But we know this works for us; it’s the best guano we’ve got.

BUILDING CULTURE LIKE PIXAR

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 11

Historically most films have been live action shot by independent production teams, while most video games have been made by independent third-party developers under a similar kind of contract with a publisher. Pixar is radically different because they are a technology company that systematically leverages tools. We do something similar and like Pixar, have found that it is easier to implement under your own roof with your own staff. Just for starters this eliminates questions about direction, ownership and sharing. But there is much more to it.

To create a systematic competitive advantage a game developer needs to be building a system, not a game. The organization must become part of this system. It begins with corporate culture and values and you want people that have the desire and confidence to innovate and collaborate. Strategically you are going to be better off if your people believe they can make a great, new original game because you’ll get less market share in a clone war and less revenue share if you are always licensing other people’s brands. It will also make an enormous difference if you can convince everyone to use the same tools and to collaborate on a technology roadmap and the sharing of Best Practices. This way everyone can learn from internal experts about how to use tools and metrics to make games that drive traffic, retain customers and monetize better.

These kinds of things beg for a centralized organization with everyone in the same building to improve communications and management. However, I will instead argue for a global organization with several medium-sized offices. The market is global and if your employees aren’t global you’ll remain too foreign for many potential customers. Our office in Finland is an interesting melting pot all by itself because people born in 35 different countries have worked there. They have a good idea of global tastes because it is in the building. Costs are also much more competitive when you are global, as compared to only being in an expensive city like San Francisco or London. In many of our seven locations the turnover rate and organizational churn are also lower because we’re the best game company in town – simply because there are fewer competitors of note.

To make such a structure work we ask everyone to communicate in English, we make extensive use of tools like email, IM and Skype and we gratefully get people to participate in conference calls that have to span a lot of time zones. We are respectful and courteous about the demands and it works because everyone is learning much faster and advancing in their career. It seems like every office has some big brother offices that they aspire to follow, and some little brother offices that they are training and managing on some projects. This process allows the most advanced people to take on exciting new work by enabling them to hand down mastered categories to a new owner for whom it is a chance to advance and grow. Pixar continues to be a great role model for us. Harvard Business School was sufficiently fascinated by how we do it that they wrote a case study about Digital Chocolate: http://hbr.org/product/digital-chocolate/an/410049-PDF-ENG.

BUILDING CULTURE LIKE PIXAR

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 11

Historically most films have been live action shot by independent production teams, while most video games have been made by independent third-party developers under a similar kind of contract with a publisher. Pixar is radically different because they are a technology company that systematically leverages tools. We do something similar and like Pixar, have found that it is easier to implement under your own roof with your own staff. Just for starters this eliminates questions about direction, ownership and sharing. But there is much more to it.

To create a systematic competitive advantage a game developer needs to be building a system, not a game. The organization must become part of this system. It begins with corporate culture and values and you want people that have the desire and confidence to innovate and collaborate. Strategically you are going to be better off if your people believe they can make a great, new original game because you’ll get less market share in a clone war and less revenue share if you are always licensing other people’s brands. It will also make an enormous difference if you can convince everyone to use the same tools and to collaborate on a technology roadmap and the sharing of Best Practices. This way everyone can learn from internal experts about how to use tools and metrics to make games that drive traffic, retain customers and monetize better.

These kinds of things beg for a centralized organization with everyone in the same building to improve communications and management. However, I will instead argue for a global organization with several medium-sized offices. The market is global and if your employees aren’t global you’ll remain too foreign for many potential customers. Our office in Finland is an interesting melting pot all by itself because people born in 35 different countries have worked there. They have a good idea of global tastes because it is in the building. Costs are also much more competitive when you are global, as compared to only being in an expensive city like San Francisco or London. In many of our seven locations the turnover rate and organizational churn are also lower because we’re the best game company in town – simply because there are fewer competitors of note.

To make such a structure work we ask everyone to communicate in English, we make extensive use of tools like email, IM and Skype and we gratefully get people to participate in conference calls that have to span a lot of time zones. We are respectful and courteous about the demands and it works because everyone is learning much faster and advancing in their career. It seems like every office has some big brother offices that they aspire to follow, and some little brother offices that they are training and managing on some projects. This process allows the most advanced people to take on exciting new work by enabling them to hand down mastered categories to a new owner for whom it is a chance to advance and grow. Pixar continues to be a great role model for us. Harvard Business School was sufficiently fascinated by how we do it that they wrote a case study about Digital Chocolate: http://hbr.org/product/digital-chocolate/an/410049-PDF-ENG.

WE’RE CHASING DOLPHINS

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 14

The industry has worn out old terms like, “hardcore gamer”, “casual gamer” and “whale”. None of them perfectly explains the nature of the emerging digital gamer. Let’s call them dolphins. Why?

Dolphins love to play. They’re curious and intelligent.

Dolphins are social, and happy to play with both friends and strangers.

Dolphins are competitive. They’re carnivores. They’ll kill rivals in fights for territory, just like gamers.

They’re early Internet adopters (they call it “echolocation”).

They prefer casual, short sessions before they come up for air.

As for whales, they are actually just really big dolphins. Or you could say that dolphins are whales that have migrated to Hawaii because it is more casual and convenient. So dolphins may be whales that became more “streamlined” when they decided to join the revolution and play on the web and with their mobile phone.

The dolphin market is going to be huge!

WE’RE CHASING DOLPHINS

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 14

The industry has worn out old terms like, “hardcore gamer”, “casual gamer” and “whale”. None of them perfectly explains the nature of the emerging digital gamer. Let’s call them dolphins. Why?

Dolphins love to play. They’re curious and intelligent.

Dolphins are social, and happy to play with both friends and strangers.

Dolphins are competitive. They’re carnivores. They’ll kill rivals in fights for territory, just like gamers.

They’re early Internet adopters (they call it “echolocation”).

They prefer casual, short sessions before they come up for air.

As for whales, they are actually just really big dolphins. Or you could say that dolphins are whales that have migrated to Hawaii because it is more casual and convenient. So dolphins may be whales that became more “streamlined” when they decided to join the revolution and play on the web and with their mobile phone.

The dolphin market is going to be huge!

YOUR HEART IS FREE, HAVE THE COURAGE TO FOLLOW IT

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 15

I’ve made the argument that game developers should build tools that allow them to support all platforms and screens from the same R&D thrust.  Among these platforms the open browser is the most critical because it is the one that is not controlled by a giant corporation with a profit motive.

It is always tempting to align with the titans because they are big, powerful, influential and know how to market themselves and their business propositions.  But historically, closed platforms don’t work any better for game developers than the Berlin Wall.  Prior to Nintendo there were many open media platforms including print, painting, photography, film, video, music.  While Philips invented the CD player they widely licensed their patents and charged a mere 6 cents per disc, and allowed complete freedom of operations and expression.  More recently, the World Wide Web was a gift to the public and we’ve seen again how a free, open, competitive platform can flourish.  But Nintendo ushered in a new generation of closed platforms with unappealing license terms for third-parties.  It has always been great for Nintendo, but there isn’t a single great game software company today that was built on the back of Nintendo.  In general, these licenses in the console industry drove up costs, crippled innovation and despite industry growth more than 90% of publishers that bore these costs were wiped out.

Rather than operating like the web or CD, Nintendo has been the reference point for many new closed platforms.  Digital licenses have gotten even worse because the licensors all reserve the right to constantly make unilateral changes, thereby creating a slippery slope for third-party game developers who are at the end of the whip.  Hot new digital platforms with high growth have been as alluring as the Pied Piper, promising developers liberation from publishers and retailers and a chance to be first-movers.  Thousands of developers followed because it seemed reasonable at the time.  Apple, for example seemed generous initially to be raking only 30% of the pot, because Western mobile carriers had been taking 50-75%.  But not enough science or even study of history went into the choice of 30% that has become a de facto standard.  The mobile carriers had failed, so that was not a good reference point.  DoCoMo succeeded by charging only 9%.  Other huge platform successes like the CD and the web were essentially free.  Where is the analysis or evidence that a 30% fee is viable for a third-party industry?  There isn’t any.  Instead we have many examples to the contrary.

Consider that for games, it will cost up to 30% of revenue for the cost of acquisition (also known as advertising, even after averaging this cost down to eCPA as a result of other free traffic sources).  Sales or VAT tax can be another 10% or more.  Server overhead to operate free client-server games can also be 10% or more.  If there is a 30% platform fee a game developer is now looking at variable costs eating up 80% or more of revenue, and they still have to cover product development and overhead costs.  From what I can tell from published industry stats, on many platforms these other costs are 50% or more of revenue so now we’re at 130% for a median performing app.  Given a bell curve distribution and 200,000 apps you’ll still have outliers like Angry Birds and Millionaire City but overall this is not a healthy economic picture for game developers.

Many other companies have simply copied the 30% rate from Apple, justifying it on the simple argument that Apple had set the standard.  Well, I guarantee you that Steve Jobs did not envision the cost structure and business model of today’s games and arrive at the 30% number based on a clear understanding of a win-win scenario that would create a healthy value system for game developers.  Steve Jobs may have been a genius but he never liked the game industry and he never understood it, nor did he care about the needs of game developers.  While we’re currently stuck with the number he made up, there are signs of increasing platform competition as Windows 8 will charge a reduced rate of 20% and Google+ launched at only a 5% fee.  But history has shown that as developers invest and help platform owners become strong, the rates go up.

Game developers need to wake up now and realize that they have too often been willing serfs in feudal kingdoms where they don’t own the soil that they till.  The open browser is the next big game platform.  But even if it wasn’t, it is the one, only and best place for a developer to plant their flag and invest in their future.  Because it is open and free!  Being strong in the browser will create even more synergy if you are also extending your reach with Facebook, Apple, Android and other platforms that you can branch to from the browser.  We can even tolerate their 30% tariffs if our technology leverages product investments to reach all screens and to provide more sources of free traffic.  But freedom for game developers must come first.  If we are free, we can consider a flanking move on a closed platform from a position of strength and we can negotiate with some bargaining power, perhaps even with a collective viewpoint.

There have been other freedom fights in game industry history and we’ve had our William Wallaces.  Activision’s founders were sued by their former bosses at Atari but their bid for independence survived.  Tengen challenged Nintendo but suffered a fatal loss.  I founded Electronic Arts to create a better business model for game developers.  The most important single thing I did at EA was to push my team to reverse-engineer the Sega Genesis so that EA could be liberated from the draconian license agreements that were offered in those days.  I founded 3DO as a bold attempt to help developers and improve the value chain, but 3DO was outflanked by Sony’s deeper pockets.  3DO reduced industry standard console license fees by 70% but Sony put them right back where they had been.  More than 900 companies signed 3DO licenses but they fled to Sony when Sony proved willing to take big losses to build their hardware installed base.  Sony executives did tell me later that they copied many business practices and licensing philosophies from 3DO, which made things better for developers.  With Steampowered.com, Valve pioneered digital distribution at a time when none of the PC game publishers would touch it.  Bigpoint and GameForge pioneered browser games when the mainstream didn’t care.  In every one of these cases, game developers took risks and ventured into unknown territory for the betterment of game developers and the public.  The courage of a few did help grow an industry that can now support a vastly larger number of global game developers.  Today, the open browser gives all game developers a chance to be courageous and help the industry reach for a new age that could be truly golden for game developers, not just for Apple, Facebook and Zynga.

The browser is worth fighting for.  We need to be free.  We are all William Wallaces.  Let’s follow our hearts.

YOUR HEART IS FREE, HAVE THE COURAGE TO FOLLOW IT

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 15

I’ve made the argument that game developers should build tools that allow them to support all platforms and screens from the same R&D thrust.  Among these platforms the open browser is the most critical because it is the one that is not controlled by a giant corporation with a profit motive.

It is always tempting to align with the titans because they are big, powerful, influential and know how to market themselves and their business propositions.  But historically, closed platforms don’t work any better for game developers than the Berlin Wall.  Prior to Nintendo there were many open media platforms including print, painting, photography, film, video, music.  While Philips invented the CD player they widely licensed their patents and charged a mere 6 cents per disc, and allowed complete freedom of operations and expression.  More recently, the World Wide Web was a gift to the public and we’ve seen again how a free, open, competitive platform can flourish.  But Nintendo ushered in a new generation of closed platforms with unappealing license terms for third-parties.  It has always been great for Nintendo, but there isn’t a single great game software company today that was built on the back of Nintendo.  In general, these licenses in the console industry drove up costs, crippled innovation and despite industry growth more than 90% of publishers that bore these costs were wiped out.

Rather than operating like the web or CD, Nintendo has been the reference point for many new closed platforms.  Digital licenses have gotten even worse because the licensors all reserve the right to constantly make unilateral changes, thereby creating a slippery slope for third-party game developers who are at the end of the whip.  Hot new digital platforms with high growth have been as alluring as the Pied Piper, promising developers liberation from publishers and retailers and a chance to be first-movers.  Thousands of developers followed because it seemed reasonable at the time.  Apple, for example seemed generous initially to be raking only 30% of the pot, because Western mobile carriers had been taking 50-75%.  But not enough science or even study of history went into the choice of 30% that has become a de facto standard.  The mobile carriers had failed, so that was not a good reference point.  DoCoMo succeeded by charging only 9%.  Other huge platform successes like the CD and the web were essentially free.  Where is the analysis or evidence that a 30% fee is viable for a third-party industry?  There isn’t any.  Instead we have many examples to the contrary.

Consider that for games, it will cost up to 30% of revenue for the cost of acquisition (also known as advertising, even after averaging this cost down to eCPA as a result of other free traffic sources).  Sales or VAT tax can be another 10% or more.  Server overhead to operate free client-server games can also be 10% or more.  If there is a 30% platform fee a game developer is now looking at variable costs eating up 80% or more of revenue, and they still have to cover product development and overhead costs.  From what I can tell from published industry stats, on many platforms these other costs are 50% or more of revenue so now we’re at 130% for a median performing app.  Given a bell curve distribution and 200,000 apps you’ll still have outliers like Angry Birds and Millionaire City but overall this is not a healthy economic picture for game developers.

Many other companies have simply copied the 30% rate from Apple, justifying it on the simple argument that Apple had set the standard.  Well, I guarantee you that Steve Jobs did not envision the cost structure and business model of today’s games and arrive at the 30% number based on a clear understanding of a win-win scenario that would create a healthy value system for game developers.  Steve Jobs may have been a genius but he never liked the game industry and he never understood it, nor did he care about the needs of game developers.  While we’re currently stuck with the number he made up, there are signs of increasing platform competition as Windows 8 will charge a reduced rate of 20% and Google+ launched at only a 5% fee.  But history has shown that as developers invest and help platform owners become strong, the rates go up.

Game developers need to wake up now and realize that they have too often been willing serfs in feudal kingdoms where they don’t own the soil that they till.  The open browser is the next big game platform.  But even if it wasn’t, it is the one, only and best place for a developer to plant their flag and invest in their future.  Because it is open and free!  Being strong in the browser will create even more synergy if you are also extending your reach with Facebook, Apple, Android and other platforms that you can branch to from the browser.  We can even tolerate their 30% tariffs if our technology leverages product investments to reach all screens and to provide more sources of free traffic.  But freedom for game developers must come first.  If we are free, we can consider a flanking move on a closed platform from a position of strength and we can negotiate with some bargaining power, perhaps even with a collective viewpoint.

There have been other freedom fights in game industry history and we’ve had our William Wallaces.  Activision’s founders were sued by their former bosses at Atari but their bid for independence survived.  Tengen challenged Nintendo but suffered a fatal loss.  I founded Electronic Arts to create a better business model for game developers.  The most important single thing I did at EA was to push my team to reverse-engineer the Sega Genesis so that EA could be liberated from the draconian license agreements that were offered in those days.  I founded 3DO as a bold attempt to help developers and improve the value chain, but 3DO was outflanked by Sony’s deeper pockets.  3DO reduced industry standard console license fees by 70% but Sony put them right back where they had been.  More than 900 companies signed 3DO licenses but they fled to Sony when Sony proved willing to take big losses to build their hardware installed base.  Sony executives did tell me later that they copied many business practices and licensing philosophies from 3DO, which made things better for developers.  With Steampowered.com, Valve pioneered digital distribution at a time when none of the PC game publishers would touch it.  Bigpoint and GameForge pioneered browser games when the mainstream didn’t care.  In every one of these cases, game developers took risks and ventured into unknown territory for the betterment of game developers and the public.  The courage of a few did help grow an industry that can now support a vastly larger number of global game developers.  Today, the open browser gives all game developers a chance to be courageous and help the industry reach for a new age that could be truly golden for game developers, not just for Apple, Facebook and Zynga.

The browser is worth fighting for.  We need to be free.  We are all William Wallaces.  Let’s follow our hearts.

THE REPUBLIC OF GAMING

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 16

THE REPUBLIC OF GAMING

This blog post completes The Browser Manifesto with the notion that Indie game developers can collectively have the power of Zynga if we collaborate to create The Republic of Gaming. United, we are as strong as anyone.

We are entering the age of convenient computing. The browser will become the next big game platform. Core gamers, or whales, will migrate by the millions to this new model and drive a $100 billion market based on free to play games with virtual goods. Distribution principles will be disrupted and some big players will fall while many newcomers succeed on the basis of great new games that use the Discovery business model. There is potential greatness in every game developer that will now have a chance to flourish and stand on its own, if we work together.

We need only recognize the benefits of collaboration and trust each other. We trust the World Wide Web and need to master how we leverage it. The same can be said for Google search, Facebook friends, email lists, ad networks, offer networks, affiliate networks, development tools and innovative partnerships like FreeGameLeaders.Com.

Your heart is free. Have the courage to follow it.

THE REPUBLIC OF GAMING

A BROWSER MANIFESTO – PART 16

THE REPUBLIC OF GAMING

This blog post completes The Browser Manifesto with the notion that Indie game developers can collectively have the power of Zynga if we collaborate to create The Republic of Gaming. United, we are as strong as anyone.

We are entering the age of convenient computing. The browser will become the next big game platform. Core gamers, or whales, will migrate by the millions to this new model and drive a $100 billion market based on free to play games with virtual goods. Distribution principles will be disrupted and some big players will fall while many newcomers succeed on the basis of great new games that use the Discovery business model. There is potential greatness in every game developer that will now have a chance to flourish and stand on its own, if we work together.

We need only recognize the benefits of collaboration and trust each other. We trust the World Wide Web and need to master how we leverage it. The same can be said for Google search, Facebook friends, email lists, ad networks, offer networks, affiliate networks, development tools and innovative partnerships like FreeGameLeaders.Com.

Your heart is free. Have the courage to follow it.

THE DAU IS DOWN

We are in the middle of a tremendous growth phase in the history of the game business and advancement requires astute analysis and brutal honesty.

While an otherwise good overview of 2010, this recent article from Inside Network missed the bigger picture and elements of cause and effect, which led to invalid conclusions.
They try to explain a shift in market share away from the early 2010 Big 5 as the result of the “rise of the Indies” and their “superior game design”. In fact, the entire shift in share is explained byFacebook moving their focus to adding new, 2nd tier Credits partners and nourishing them with free installs.  Many of the companies that got these installs did indeed rise, but fell later when the free traffic ran out.  I’m not saying it was the Indies fault, it’s just a false conclusion to say the Indies are winning or that game design is the cause. The market declined for everyone, but free installs covered the problem for a period of time. Overall, the “other 175” games in the story’s sample have in fact declined in total DAU audience in the last 3 months, from a peak of 48M DAU back in November. It’s even worse if you dig deeper and look at the Top 1,000 games from the Top 200 publishers, which goes well beyond the article’s sample into true Indie territory.  Frankly, since conventional game design thinking does not apply well to Facebook, the results of the Top 200 game publishers have been both random and disappointing with a disturbingly high failure rate that should be scaring the crud out of everyone. Case in point:  Zynga’s biggest 4 rivals from early 2010, despite spending more money and launching more games that were also, presumably, “better designed”, and made with “more experience”, collectively declined from 26M DAU to 13M DAU. This despite the fact that these companies made several acquisitions. Among these “leaders” the only new game gaining any ground recently is Crowdstar’s It Girl which, again, happens to be getting more free Facebook installs than any game in Facebook history.

It is better if we are objective about what is going on, and honestly, about how challenging it is regardless of size. A healthy industry is one in which the ecosystem is fundamentally growing (outside of marketing and exceptional cases), R&D is easily amortized from revenue, margins are good, and marketing investments are positive ROI. Right now, all of these are major challenges. Do not underestimate any of them. Jus’ sayin’. We all have a ton of opportunity ahead but even a Titanic can find an iceberg if there is not enough humble and vigilant attention to detail.

THE DAU IS DOWN

We are in the middle of a tremendous growth phase in the history of the game business and advancement requires astute analysis and brutal honesty.

While an otherwise good overview of 2010, this recent article from Inside Network missed the bigger picture and elements of cause and effect, which led to invalid conclusions.
They try to explain a shift in market share away from the early 2010 Big 5 as the result of the “rise of the Indies” and their “superior game design”. In fact, the entire shift in share is explained byFacebook moving their focus to adding new, 2nd tier Credits partners and nourishing them with free installs.  Many of the companies that got these installs did indeed rise, but fell later when the free traffic ran out.  I’m not saying it was the Indies fault, it’s just a false conclusion to say the Indies are winning or that game design is the cause. The market declined for everyone, but free installs covered the problem for a period of time. Overall, the “other 175” games in the story’s sample have in fact declined in total DAU audience in the last 3 months, from a peak of 48M DAU back in November. It’s even worse if you dig deeper and look at the Top 1,000 games from the Top 200 publishers, which goes well beyond the article’s sample into true Indie territory.  Frankly, since conventional game design thinking does not apply well to Facebook, the results of the Top 200 game publishers have been both random and disappointing with a disturbingly high failure rate that should be scaring the crud out of everyone. Case in point:  Zynga’s biggest 4 rivals from early 2010, despite spending more money and launching more games that were also, presumably, “better designed”, and made with “more experience”, collectively declined from 26M DAU to 13M DAU. This despite the fact that these companies made several acquisitions. Among these “leaders” the only new game gaining any ground recently is Crowdstar’s It Girl which, again, happens to be getting more free Facebook installs than any game in Facebook history.

It is better if we are objective about what is going on, and honestly, about how challenging it is regardless of size. A healthy industry is one in which the ecosystem is fundamentally growing (outside of marketing and exceptional cases), R&D is easily amortized from revenue, margins are good, and marketing investments are positive ROI. Right now, all of these are major challenges. Do not underestimate any of them. Jus’ sayin’. We all have a ton of opportunity ahead but even a Titanic can find an iceberg if there is not enough humble and vigilant attention to detail.

THE DAU IS DOWN

We are in the middle of a tremendous growth phase in the history of the game business and advancement requires astute analysis and brutal honesty.

While an otherwise good overview of 2010, this recent article from Inside Network missed the bigger picture and elements of cause and effect, which led to invalid conclusions.
They try to explain a shift in market share away from the early 2010 Big 5 as the result of the “rise of the Indies” and their “superior game design”. In fact, the entire shift in share is explained byFacebook moving their focus to adding new, 2nd tier Credits partners and nourishing them with free installs.  Many of the companies that got these installs did indeed rise, but fell later when the free traffic ran out.  I’m not saying it was the Indies fault, it’s just a false conclusion to say the Indies are winning or that game design is the cause. The market declined for everyone, but free installs covered the problem for a period of time. Overall, the “other 175” games in the story’s sample have in fact declined in total DAU audience in the last 3 months, from a peak of 48M DAU back in November. It’s even worse if you dig deeper and look at the Top 1,000 games from the Top 200 publishers, which goes well beyond the article’s sample into true Indie territory.  Frankly, since conventional game design thinking does not apply well to Facebook, the results of the Top 200 game publishers have been both random and disappointing with a disturbingly high failure rate that should be scaring the crud out of everyone. Case in point:  Zynga’s biggest 4 rivals from early 2010, despite spending more money and launching more games that were also, presumably, “better designed”, and made with “more experience”, collectively declined from 26M DAU to 13M DAU. This despite the fact that these companies made several acquisitions. Among these “leaders” the only new game gaining any ground recently is Crowdstar’s It Girl which, again, happens to be getting more free Facebook installs than any game in Facebook history.

It is better if we are objective about what is going on, and honestly, about how challenging it is regardless of size. A healthy industry is one in which the ecosystem is fundamentally growing (outside of marketing and exceptional cases), R&D is easily amortized from revenue, margins are good, and marketing investments are positive ROI. Right now, all of these are major challenges. Do not underestimate any of them. Jus’ sayin’. We all have a ton of opportunity ahead but even a Titanic can find an iceberg if there is not enough humble and vigilant attention to detail.

Reception history of Jane Austen

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="450"]Portrait of Jane Austen, from the memoir by J.... Portrait of Jane Austen, from the memoir by J. E. Austen-Leigh. All other portraits of Austen are generally based on this, which is itself based on a sketch by Cassandra Austen (Photo credit: Wikipedia)[/caption]

The reception history of Jane Austen follows a path from modest fame to wild popularity. Jane Austen (1775–1817), the author of such works asPride and Prejudice (1813) and Emma (1815), has become one of the best-known and widely read novelists in the English language.[1] Her novels are the subject of intense scholarly study and the centre of a diverse fan culture.

During her lifetime, Austen's novels brought her little personal fame. Like many women writers, she chose to publish anonymously and it was only among members of the aristocracy that her authorship was an open secret. At the time they were published, Austen's works were considered fashionable by members of high society but received few positive reviews. By the mid-19th century, her novels were admired by members of the literary elite who viewed their appreciation of her works as a mark of cultivation. The publication in 1870 of her nephew's Memoir of Jane Austenintroduced her to a wider public as an appealing personality—dear, quiet aunt Jane—and her works were republished in popular editions. By the start of the 20th century, competing groups had sprung up—some to worship her and some to defend her from the "teeming masses"—but all claiming to be the true Janeites, or those who properly appreciated Austen.

Early in the 20th century, scholars produced a carefully edited collection of her works—the first for any British novelist—but it was not until the 1940s that Austen was widely accepted in academia as a "great English novelist". The second half of the 20th century saw a proliferation of Austen scholarship, which explored numerous aspects of her works: artistic, ideological, and historical. With the growing professionalisation of university English departments in the first half of the 20th century, criticism of Austen became progressively more esoteric and, as a result, appreciation of Austen splintered into distinctive high culture and popular culture trends. In the late 20th century, fans founded Jane Austen societies and clubs to celebrate the author, her time, and her works. As of the early 21st century, Austen fandom supports an industry of printed sequels and prequels as well as television and film adaptations, which started with the 1940 Pride and Prejudice and evolved to include the 2004 Bollywood-style productionBride and Prejudice.

Background


Jane Austen lived her entire life as part of a large and close-knit family on the lower fringes of the English gentry.[2] Her family's steadfast support was critical to Austen's development as a professional writer.[3] Austen read draft versions of all of her novels to her family, receiving feedback and encouragement,[4] and it was her father who sent out her first publication bid.[5] Austen's artistic apprenticeship lasted from her teenage years until she was about thirty-five. During this period, she experimented with various literary forms, including the epistolary novel which she tried and then abandoned, and wrote and extensively revised three major novels and began a fourth. With the release of Sense and Sensibility (1811), Pride and Prejudice (1813),Mansfield Park (1814) and Emma (1815), she achieved success as a published writer.

Novel-writing was a suspect occupation for women in the early 19th century, because it imperiled their social reputation by bringing them publicity viewed as unfeminine. Therefore, like many other female writers, Austen published anonymously.[6] Eventually, though, her novels' authorship became an open secret among the aristocracy.[7] During one of her visits to London, the Prince Regent invited her, through his librarian, James Stanier Clarke,[8]to view his library at Carlton House; his librarian mentioned that the Regent admired her novels and that "if Miss Austen had any other Novel forthcoming, she was quite at liberty to dedicate it to the Prince".[9] Austen, who disapproved of the prince's extravagant lifestyle, did not want to follow this suggestion, but her friends convinced her otherwise: in short order, Emma was dedicated to him. Austen turned down the librarian's further hint to write a historical romance in honor of the prince's daughter's marriage.[10]

A sketch of a woman from the back sitting beneath a tree and wearing early 19th-century British clothing and a bonnet


A watercolour sketch of Jane Austen by her sister Cassandra(c. 1804)




In the last year of her life, Austen revised Northanger Abbey (1817), wrote Persuasion (1817), and began another novel, eventually titled Sanditon, which was left unfinished at her death. Austen did not have time to see Northanger Abbey or Persuasion through the press, but her family published them as one volume after her death and her brother Henry included a "Biographical Notice of the Author".[11] This short biography sowed the seeds for the myth of Austen as a quiet, retiring aunt who wrote during her spare time: "Neither the hope of fame nor profit mixed with her early motives ... [S]o much did she shrink from notoriety, that no accumulation of fame would have induced her, had she lived, to affix her name to any productions of her pen ... in public she turned away from any allusion to the character of an authoress."[12] However, this description is in direct contrast to the excitement Austen shows in her letters regarding publication and profit: Austen was a professional writer.[13]

Austen's works are noted for their realism, biting social commentary, and masterful use of free indirect speech, burlesque and irony.[14] They critique the novels of sensibility of the second half of the 18th century and are part of the transition to 19th-century realism.[15] As Susan Gubar and Sandra Gilbert explain, Austen makes fun of "such novelistic clichés as love at first sight, the primacy of passion over all other emotions and/or duties, the chivalric exploits of the hero, the vulnerable sensitivity of the heroine, the lovers' proclaimed indifference to financial considerations, and the cruel crudity of parents".[16] Austen's plots, though comic,[17] highlight the way women depend on marriage to secure social standing and economic security.[18] Like the writings of Samuel Johnson, a strong influence on her, her works are fundamentally concerned with moral issues

1812–1821: Individual reactions and contemporary reviews


Austen's novels quickly became fashionable among opinion-makers, namely, those aristocrats who often dictated fashion and taste. Lady Bessborough, sister to the notorious Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, commented on Sense and Sensibility in a letter to a friend: "it is a clever novel.  ... tho' it ends stupidly, I was much amused by it."[20] The fifteen-year-old daughter of the Prince Regent, Princess Charlotte Augusta, compared herself to one of the book's heroines: "I think Marianne & me are very like in disposition, that certainly I am not so good, the same imprudence, &tc".[21] After reading Pride and Prejudice, playwright Richard Sheridan advised a friend to "[b]uy it immediately" for it "was one of the cleverest things" he had ever read.[22] Anne Milbanke, future wife of the Romantic poet Lord Byron, wrote that "I have finished the Novel called Pride and Prejudice, which I think a very superior work." She commented that the novel "is the most probable fiction I have ever read" and had become "at present the fashionable novel".[23] The Dowager Lady Vernon told a friend thatMansfield Park was "[n]ot much of a novel, more the history of a family party in the country, very natural"—as if, comments one Austen scholar, "Lady Vernon's parties mostly featured adultery."[24] Lady Anne Romilly told her friend, the novelist Maria Edgeworth, that "[Mansfield Park] has been pretty generally admired here" and Edgeworth commented later that "we have been much entertained with Mansfield Park".[24]

Despite these positive reactions from the elite, Austen's novels received relatively few reviews during her lifetime:[25] two for Sense and Sensibility, three for Pride and Prejudice, none for Mansfield Park, and seven for Emma. Most of the reviews were short and on balance favourable, although superficial and cautious.[26] They most often focused on the moral lessons of the novels.[27]Moreover, as Brian Southam, who has edited the definitive volumes on Austen's reception, writes in his description of these reviewers, "their job was merely to provide brief notices, extended with quotations, for the benefit of women readers compiling their library lists and interested only in knowing whether they would like a book for its story, its characters and moral".[28] Asked by publisher John Murray to review Emma, famed historical novelist Walter Scott wrote the longest and most thoughtful of these reviews, which was published anonymously in the March 1816 issue of the Quarterly Review. Using the review as a platform from which to defend the then disreputable genre of the novel, Scott praised Austen's works, celebrating her ability to copy "from nature as she really exists in the common walks of life, and presenting to the reader ... a correct and striking representation of that which is daily taking place around him".[29] Modern Austen scholar William Galperin has noted that "unlike some of Austen's lay readers, who recognized her divergence from realistic practice as it had been prescribed and defined at the time, Walter Scott may well have been the first to install Austen as the realist par excellence".[30] Scott wrote in his private journal in 1826, in what later became a widely quoted comparison:

Also read again and for the third time at least Miss Austen's very finely written novel of Pride and Prejudice. That young lady had a talent for describing the involvement and feelings and characters of ordinary life which is to me the most wonderful I ever met with. The Big Bow-wow strain I can do myself like any now going, but the exquisite touch which renders ordinary commonplace things and characters interesting from the truth of the description and the sentiment is denied to me. What a pity such a gifted creature died so early![31][32]


Half-length portrait of a man in a black suit with a mustard vest and wispy blonde hair.


Novelist Walter Scott praised Austen's "exquisite touch which renders ordinary commonplace things ... interesting".[31]




Northanger Abbey and Persuasion, published together posthumously in December 1817, were reviewed in the British Critic in March 1818 and in theEdinburgh Review and Literary Miscellany in May 1818. The reviewer for the British Critic felt that Austen's exclusive dependence on realism was evidence of a deficient imagination. The reviewer for the Edinburgh Review disagreed, praising Austen for her "exhaustless invention" and the combination of the familiar and the surprising in her plots.[33] Overall, Austen scholars have pointed out that these early reviewers did not know what to make of her novels—for example, they misunderstood her use of irony. Reviewers reduced Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice to didactic tales of virtue prevailing over vice.[34]

In the Quarterly Review in 1821, the English writer and theologian Richard Whately published the most serious and enthusiastic early posthumous review of Austen's work. Whately drew favourable comparisons between Austen and such acknowledged greats as Homer and Shakespeare, praising the dramatic qualities of her narrative. He also affirmed the respectability and legitimacy of the novel as a genre, arguing that imaginative literature, especially narrative, was more valuable than history or biography. When it was properly done, as in Austen, Whately said, imaginative literature concerned itself with generalised human experience from which the reader could gain important insights into human nature; in other words, it was moral.[35] Whately also addressed Austen's position as a female writer, writing: "we suspect one of Miss Austin's [sic] great merits in our eyes to be, the insight she gives us into the peculiarities of female characters. ... Her heroines are what one knows women must be, though one never can get them to acknowledge it."[36] No more significant, original Austen criticism was published until the late 19th century: Whately and Scott had set the tone for the Victorian era's view of Austen
Enhanced by Zemanta

Saturday, January 26, 2013

LG enV2 (VX9100)

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="500"]LG enV touch cell phone. LG enV touch cell phone. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)[/caption]

The LG enV² is a Verizon Wireless digital messaging feature phone manufactured by LG. It is available in standard black as well as maroon (pomegranate, in Canada). Both the colors are available at Verizon Wireless (Telus Stores and Koodo stores, in Canada) stores, and were released on the same date. It is also capable of installing VZ Navigator. The original price of the phone at release was $129 after a $50 mail-in-rebate. It had dropped to $79.99, and then to $49.99, but as of February 2009, the price has returned to $129.99. Best Buy stores also offer the enV² for a price of $49.99 with a 2 year contract. As of June 2012, a data plan for the phone is optional. [3]

It succeeded both the LG enV (VX9900) and the original LG The V (VX9800). The phone's successor, the LG enV3 (VX9200) was released in 2009.

The styling of this phone has been updated from the previous versions. It's slimmer (40% slimmer than original enV), lighter (30% lighter than original enV), and more pocketable than the previous versions. Its styling is made more comfortable and easier to handle and text, its shaped like a rectangle with both front and back of phone being a flat surface (unlike the original enV). The back of the phone is painted in SoftTouch paint in the phone's respective color (a smooth and grippy paint) making it more comfortable to handle. Its styling follows that of the LG Voyager (VX10000), which is the other successor to the LG enV (VX9900) and the LG The V (VX9800) phones. The Env2 was released in Canada in August, 2008 as the LG Keybo from Telus. Its successor, the enV3, was released on May 29, 2009.

Features


The enV² has several features, such as the QWERTY keyboard and a 2.0 megapixel camera with up to 10x zoom. It is Bluetooth-compatible and supports V CAST, Verizon's music and video service, as well as VZ Navigator, Verizon's map service. The phone has a microSD memory card port for storing music and video from a computer and is enabled to set videos under 5MB as wallpaper. It can store up to 300 text messages, has an "auto text readout" functionality(phone reads texts outloud for you), and message sorter. The phone supports FOTA, which allows for new firmware updates to be sent to the device without needing to make a trip to a retail store to receive the update.

The phone also has the capability to display four different themes which may change button styles, background colors, and general style of the phone. These themes are the Classic view, having the red and white menu screen when the OK button is pressed, the Slick Black theme, with a more digital, and of course, black look. There is also the Wall theme, with the menu and other features looking like a concrete wall. The last theme is the wave, a rounded and dark look.

The phone supports up to 8GB of storage via the MicroSD port on the right side of the phone. The forms of media able to be stored on this card include: Photos ("PIX"), Music, Sounds, and Videos ("FLIX"). This phone supports the Bluetooth profile A2DP which supports the listening of music through wireless headphones. The phone also has a "Standalone Mode" which allows one to take advantage of the phone's multimedia capabilities (Music, Photos, Videos, Games) without sending or receiving RF signals. This mode is most useful while on an airplane.

The phone has a full QWERTY keyboard optimized for text messaging, and comes in the alternate colors maroon and black.

Specific ringtones may be set for individual callers on the phone's contact list. However, unlike many previous LG models, it is not possible to set individual ringers for incoming TXT messages.

Specifications


The following are the specifications for the LG enV2



































































































TypeSpecification
Backlit KeypadYes
Battery TypeLithium-Ion
CalculatorYes
CalendarYes
Changeable Faceplate CapableNo
Customizable Ring TonesBuilt-In, Downloadable
Data CapabilitiesYes
Extras2.0MP Camera, Bluetooth, MP3 Player
GamesYes, Downloadable
Hands-free SpeakerphoneYes
Included in BoxAC Charger Rechargeable Battery
Keypad LockYes
Number of Display Lines320 x 240 Pixels
Number of Modes/BandsDual band
Phone Book Capacity1000
Product Dimensions10.2(W) x 5.4(H) x 1.65(D) cm
Product Weight120g
Standby TimeUp To 216 Hours
Supports Caller IDYes
Talk TimeUp to 5 hours
Vibrate ModeBuilt-in
Web BrowserYes
MemoryInternal/External, USB Mass Storage

Enhanced by Zemanta

HTRA1

HTRA1

Serine protease HTRA1 is an enzyme that in humans is encoded by the HTRA1 gene.[1][2] The HTRA1 protein is composed of four distinctprotein domains. They are from amino-terminus to carboxyl-terminus an Insulin-like growth factor binding domain, a kazal domain, a trypsin-like peptidase domain and a PDZ domain.

 

This gene encodes a member of the trypsin family of serine proteases. This protein is a secreted enzyme that is proposed to regulate the availability of insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) by cleaving IGF-binding proteins. It has also been suggested to be a regulator of cell growth

 
Enhanced by Zemanta