Issue 324 of TRB's magazine (November-December 2019) focuses on climate change resilience. Along with several explorations within that topic, a short history of TRB is offered as well as all the usual standing features of the magazine. TR News is TRB's bimonthly magazine featuring timely articles on innovative and state-of-the-art research and practice in all modes of transportation. It also includes brief news items of interest to the transportation community, research pays off articles , profiles of tr...

Within the academic aviation world, good textbooks can be hard to come by. Not only do few aviation textbook publishers exist, but the aviation industry is constantly changing. The TRB Airport Cooperative Research Program's latest Impacts on Practice brief, ACRP in the Classroom: Reimagining the Textbook at the University of North Dakota Department of Aviation , details how Dr. Kim Kenville uses ACRP Research Report 16, Second Edition: Guidebook for Managing Small Airports , in her classes. “This publica...

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Research Report 199: Climate Resilience and Benefit–Cost Analysis: A Handbook for Airports provides information on how to apply benefit–cost analysis tools and techniques to improve decision making affecting resilience of airport infrastructure projects in response to potential long-term impacts of climate change and extreme weather events. The handbook is designed to improve the process by which infrastructure investment strategies are evaluated, with an...

Руководитель Delivery Club Гюванч Донмез считает, что пандемия ускорила выполнение планов компании

University of California Pavement Research and National Center for Sustainable Transport have postponed the International Symposium on Pavement Life Cycle Assessment from June 3-6, 2020 to January 13-15, 2021 in Sacramento, CA. TRB is pleased to cosponsor this event. The symposium will focus on the implementation of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) for pavements. The workshop address the implementation of LCA in pavement operations at the network and project levels.

Issue 324 of TRB's magazine (November-December 2019) focuses on climate change resilience. Along with several explorations within that topic, a short history of TRB is offered as well as all the usual standing features of the magazine. TR News is TRB's bimonthly magazine featuring timely articles on innovative and state-of-the-art research and practice in all modes of transportation. It also includes brief news items of interest to the transportation community, research pays off articles , profiles of tr...

Additional new series for the 2020-2021 season will be announced at a later date.

Myappsclub[.]net redirect removal instructions

What is myappsclub[.]net?

Myappsclub.net is the address of a fake search engine. Such illegitimate web searching tools typically cannot generate search results and record information relating to browsing activity. Fake search engines are usually promoted by PUAs (Potentially Unwanted Applications), called browser hijackers. They do so by making modifications to browsers and often monitor users' browsing habits.

Find Local Classifieds browser hijacker removal instructions

What is Find Local Classifieds?

Find Local Classifieds browser hijacker is designed to promote the findlocalclassifiedstab.com address, a fake search engine. Like most apps of this type, it promotes it by changing certain browser's settings. Usually, browser hijackers not only modify settings but also collect various (mostly browsing-related) information. Since users often download and install apps like Find Local Classifieds unintentionally, unknowingly, they are categorized as potentially unwanted applications (PUAs).

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, face masks have been in high demand. One company decided to take an eco-friendly approach to manufacturing and supplying the public with protective masks. The Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI) partnered with the sustainable sportswear company Rash’r to turn plastic pollution found in the ocean into face masks.

All proceeds from the masks go directly back into the manufacturing of more masks to help recycle plastics from the ocean. The masks feature a number of ocean-themed designs and include special sizes for kids. The company has received more than 15,000 mask pre-orders in just a few weeks—which has helped recycle more than 1,300 pounds (590 kg) of ocean pollution. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) now recommends that people wear cloth face masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in public places. The masks made by PADI offer a sustainable alternative to the N95 respirator masks being reserved for health care workers.

privind aprobarea Acordului de parteneriat intre UAT Municipiul Timişoara şi Direcţia de Asistenţă Socială a Municipiului Timişoara pentru depunerea şi implementarea proiectului „Clădire in regim de inalţime P+2E cu funcţiunea centru cultural şi educaţional Kuncz" Timişoara prin POR 2014-2020

People who cycle to work have a lower risk of dying, a New Zealand study has found.

Giant-scale physics experiments are increasingly reliant on big data and complex algorithms fed into powerful computers, and managing this multiplying mass of data presents its own unique challenges. To better prepare for this data deluge posed by next-generation upgrades and new experiments, physicists are turning to the fledgling field of quantum computing.

Most nuclear data measurements are performed at accelerators large enough to occupy a geologic formation a kilometer wide. But a portable device that can reveal the composition of materials quickly on-site would greatly benefit cases such as in archaeology and nuclear arms treaty verification. Research published this week in AIP Advances used computational simulations to show that with the right geometric adjustments, it is possible to perform accurate neutron resonance transmission analysis in a device just 5 meters long.

EPISODE SUMMARY Today's show is brought to you by Wacom — makers of the incredible Wacom One! This week, the ComicLab guys talk shop with Gale Galligan, creator of the bestselling Babysitter's Club graphic novels. See all of Gale's latest at Galesaur.com. EPISODE NOTES Today's show is brought to you by Wacom — makers of the incredible Wacom One! This week, the ComicLab guys talk shop with Gale Galligan, creator of the bestselling Babysitter's Club graphic novels.

EPISODE SUMMARY This week, Dave and Brad talk about the best Content Management System (CMS) for publishing webcomics. Toocheke is brand new, and Brad's a big fan. EPISODE NOTES Today's show is brought to you by Wacom — makers of the incredible Wacom One! This week, Dave and Brad talk about the best Content Management System (CMS) for publishing webcomics. Toocheke is brand new, and Brad's a big fan. Questions asked and topics covered... Toocheke i

  I am looking for someone who can help me find and clear out excess data on one of my...

Platform.sh removes a major pain point for developers: having to invest time in managing servers, virtual machines, or containers. Instead, Platform.sh enables developers to focus 100% of their time on their code. Since the beginning, Platform.sh has provided instant cloning capability, so dev teams can work on perfect copies of their production sites in the cloud for every Git branch. Now, in partnership with Lando, we’re extending that capability to the desktop.

Given all we know about facial recognition tech, it is literally jaw-dropping that anyone could make this claim… especially without being vetted independently.

A group of Harrisburg University professors and a PhD student have developed an automated computer facial recognition software capable of predicting whether someone is likely to be a criminal.

The software is able to predict if someone is a criminal with 80% accuracy and with no racial bias. The prediction is calculated solely based on a picture of their face.

There's a whole lot of "what even the fuck" in CBS 21's reprint of a press release, but let's start with the claim about "no racial bias." That's a lot to swallow when the underlying research hasn't been released yet. Let's see what the National Institute of Standards and Technology has to say on the subject. This is the result of the NIST's examination of 189 facial recognition AI programs -- all far more established than whatever it is Harrisburg researchers have cooked up.

Asian and African American people were up to 100 times more likely to be misidentified than white men, depending on the particular algorithm and type of search. Native Americans had the highest false-positive rate of all ethnicities, according to the study, which found that systems varied widely in their accuracy.

The faces of African American women were falsely identified more often in the kinds of searches used by police investigators where an image is compared to thousands or millions of others in hopes of identifying a suspect.

Why is this acceptable? The report inadvertently supplies the answer:

Middle-aged white men generally benefited from the highest accuracy rates.

Yep. And guess who's making laws or running police departments or marketing AI to cops or telling people on Twitter not to break the law or etc. etc. etc.

To craft a terrible pun, the researchers' claim of "no racial bias" is absurd on its face. Per se stupid af to use legal terminology.

Moving on from that, there's the 80% accuracy, which is apparently good enough since it will only threaten the life and liberty of 20% of the people it's inflicted on. I guess if it's the FBI's gold standard, it's good enough for everyone.

Maybe this is just bad reporting. Maybe something got copy-pasted wrong from the spammed press release. Let's go to the source… one that somehow still doesn't include a link to any underlying research documents.

What does any of this mean? Are we ready to embrace a bit of pre-crime eugenics? Or is this just the most hamfisted phrasing Harrisburg researchers could come up with?

A group of Harrisburg University professors and a Ph.D. student have developed automated computer facial recognition software capable of predicting whether someone is likely going to be a criminal.

The most charitable interpretation of this statement is that the wrong-20%-of-the-time AI is going to be applied to the super-sketchy "predictive policing" field. Predictive policing -- a theory that says it's ok to treat people like criminals if they live and work in an area where criminals live -- is its own biased mess, relying on garbage data generated by biased policing to turn racist policing into an AI-blessed "work smarter not harder" LEO equivalent.

The question about "likely" is answered in the next paragraph, somewhat assuring readers the AI won't be applied to ultrasound images.

With 80 percent accuracy and with no racial bias, the software can predict if someone is a criminal based solely on a picture of their face. The software is intended to help law enforcement prevent crime.

There's a big difference between "going to be" and "is," and researchers using actual science should know better than to use both phrases to describe their AI efforts. One means scanning someone's face to determine whether they might eventually engage in criminal acts. The other means matching faces to images of known criminals. They are far from interchangeable terms.

If you think the above quotes are, at best, disjointed, brace yourself for this jargon-fest which clarifies nothing and suggests the AI itself wrote the pullquote:

“We already know machine learning techniques can outperform humans on a variety of tasks related to facial recognition and emotion detection,” Sadeghian said. “This research indicates just how powerful these tools are by showing they can extract minute features in an image that are highly predictive of criminality.”

"Minute features in an image that are highly predictive of criminality." And what, pray tell, are those "minute features?" Skin tone? "I AM A CRIMINAL IN THE MAKING" forehead tattoos? Bullshit on top of bullshit? Come on. This is word salad, but a salad pretending to be a law enforcement tool with actual utility. Nothing about this suggests Harrisburg has come up with anything better than the shitty "tools" already being inflicted on us by law enforcement's early adopters.

I wish we could dig deeper into this but we'll all have to wait until this excitable group of clueless researchers decide to publish their findings. According to this site, the research is being sealed inside a "research book," which means it will take a lot of money to actually prove this isn't any better than anything that's been offered before. This could be the next Clearview, but we won't know if it is until the research is published. If we're lucky, it will be before Harrisburg patents this awful product and starts selling it to all and sundry. Don't hold your breath.

You may recall in the early days of the pandemic, that pharma giant Gilead Sciences -- which has been accused of price gouging and (just last year!) charging exorbitant prices on drug breakthroughs developed with US taxpayer funds -- was able to sneak through an orphan works designation for its drug remdesevir for COVID-19 treatment. As we pointed out, everything about this was insane, given that orphan works designations, which give extra monopoly rights to the holders (beyond patent exclusivity), are meant for diseases that don't impact a large population. Gilead used a loophole: since the ceiling for infected people to qualify for orphan drug status is 200,000, Gilead got in its application bright and early, before there were 200,000 confirmed cases (we currently have over 1.3 million). After the story went, er... viral, Gilead agreed to drop the orphan status, realizing the bad publicity it was receiving.

After a brief dalliance with chloroquine, remdesivir has suddenly been back in demand as the new hotness of possible COVID-19 treatments. Still, a close reading of the research might give one pause. There have been multiple conflicting studies, and Gilead's own messaging has been a mess.

On April 23, 2020, news of the study’s failure began to circulate. It seems that the World Health Organization (WHO) had posted a draft report about the trial on their clinical trials database, which indicated that the scientists terminated the study prematurely due to high levels of adverse side effects.

The WHO withdrew the report, and the researchers published their results in The Lancet on April 29, 2020.

The number of people who experienced adverse side effects was roughly similar between those receiving remdesivir and those receiving a placebo. In 18 participants, the researchers stopped the drug treatment due to adverse reactions.

But then...

However, also on April 29, 2020, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) announced that their NIH trial showed that remdesivir treatment led to faster recovery in hospital patients with COVID-19, compared with placebo treatment.

“Preliminary results indicate that patients who received remdesivir had a 31% faster time to recovery than those who received placebo,” according to the press release. “Specifically, the median time to recovery was 11 days for patients treated with remdesivir compared with 15 days for those who received placebo.”

The mortality rate in the remdesivir treatment group was 8%, compared with 11.6% in the placebo group, indicating that the drug could improve a person’s chances of survival. These data were close to achieving statistical significance.

And then...

“In addition, there is another Chinese trial, also stopped because the numbers of new patients with COVID-19 had fallen in China so they were unable to recruit, which has not yet published its data,” Prof. Evans continues. “There are other trials where remdesivir is compared with non-remdesivir treatments currently [being] done and results from some of these should appear soon.”

Gilead also put out its own press release about another clinical trial, which seems more focused on determining the optimal length of remdesivir treatment. Suffice it to say, there's still a lot of conflicting data and no clear information on whether or not remdesevir actually helps.

Still, that hasn't stopped people from trying to figure out just how much Gilead will price gouge going forward:

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), which assesses effectiveness of drugs to determine appropriate prices, suggested a maximum price of $4,500 per 10-day treatment course based on the preliminary evidence of how much patients benefited in a clinical trial. Consumer advocacy group Public Citizen on Monday said remdesivir should be priced at $1 per day of treatment, since “that is more than the cost of manufacturing at scale with a reasonable profit to Gilead.”

Some Wall Street investors expect Gilead to come in at $4,000 per patient or higher to make a profit above remdesivir’s development cost, which Gilead estimates at about $1 billion.

So... we've got a range of $10 to $4,500 on a treatment that we don't yet know works, and which may or may not save lives. But, given that we're in the midst of a giant debate concerning things like "reopening the economy" -- something that can really only be done if the public is not afraid of dying (or at least becoming deathly ill) -- the value to the overall economy seems much greater than whatever amount Gilead wants to charge. It seems the right thing to do -- again, if it's shown that remdesevir actually helps -- is to just hand over a bunch of money to Gilead, say "thank you very much" and get the drug distributed as widely as possible. Though, again, it should be noted that a decent chunk of the research around remdesevir was not done or paid for by Gilead, but (yet again) via public funds to public universities, which did the necessary research. The idea that it's Gilead that should get to reap massive rewards for that seems sketchy at best. But the absolute worst outcome is one in which Gilead sticks to its standard operating procedure and prices the drug in a way that millions of Americans can't afford it, and it leads to a prolonging/expanding of the pandemic.