Biden’s Thanksgiving holiday is part of a longer farewell as Trump’s return to White House nearsTrump offers support for dockworkers union by saying ports shouldn’t install more automated systemsLarson Financial Group LLC Sells 156 Shares of PACCAR Inc (NASDAQ:PCAR)
United States women’s head coach Emma Hayes admitted she initially grappled with how best to behave during ‘God Save The King’ ahead of her side’s goalless draw with England in their Wembley friendly. The billing of London-born former Chelsea boss Hayes against England’s Dutch manager Sarina Wiegman – arguably the best two bosses in the women’s game – had generated more buzz in the build-up than the players on the pitch, despite it being a rare encounter between the two top-ranked sides in the world. Hayes enjoyed her return to familiar shores but felt the US lacked the “killer piece” after they looked the likelier side to make the breakthrough. Elite meeting of the minds 🌟 pic.twitter.com/R4d8EArqTp — U.S. Women's National Soccer Team (@USWNT) November 30, 2024 Asked what was going through her mind during the national anthem, Hayes said: “I was definitely mouthing (it), and Naomi (Girma) and Lynn (Williams) could see that I was struggling with where to be and all that. “I got to the end of the anthems and I thought, ‘that’s so ridiculous. I’m proud to be English and I’m proud of our national anthem, and I’m also really proud to coach America’. “Two things are possible all at once. I don’t want to fuel a nationalist debate around it. The realities are both countries are really dear to me for lots of reasons, and I’m really proud to represent both of them.” The Lionesses did not register a shot on target in the first half but grew into the game in the second. US captain Lindsey Horan had the ball in the net after the break but the flag was up, while Hayes’ side had a penalty award for a handball reversed after a VAR check determined substitute Yazmeen Ryan’s shot hit Alex Greenwood’s chest. Hayes, who left Chelsea after 12 trophy-packed years this summer, said: “I’ve been privileged to coach a lot of top-level games, including here, so there’s a familiarity to being here for me. “It’s not new to me, and because of that there was a whole sense of I’m coming back to a place I know. I have a really healthy perspective, and I want to have a really healthy perspective on my profession. “I give everything I possibly can for a team that I really, really enjoy coaching, and I thrive, not just under pressure, but I like these opportunities, I like being in these situations. They bring out the best in me. “You’ve got two top teams now, Sarina is an amazing coach, I thought it was a good tactical match-up, and I just enjoy coaching a high-level football match, to be honest with you. I don’t think too much about it.” Hayes had travelled to London without her entire Olympic gold medal-winning ‘Triple Espresso’ forward line of Trinity Rodman, Mallory Swanson and Sophia Smith, all nursing niggling injuries. Before the match, the 48-year-old was spotted chatting with Wiegman and her US men’s counterpart, fellow ex-Chelsea boss Mauricio Pochettino, who was also in attendance. England were also missing a number of key attackers for the friendly including Lauren Hemp, Lauren James and Ella Toone, all ruled out with injury. "This shows where we are at and we need to keep improving. It is November now. This is good but we want to be better again. We have to be better again." 👊 Reaction from the boss ⬇️ — Lionesses (@Lionesses) November 30, 2024 Wiegman brushed aside suggestions from some pundits that her side were content to settle for a draw. She said: “I think we were really defending as a team, very strong. We got momentum in the second half, we did better, and of course both teams went for the win. “So many things happened in this game, also in front of the goal, so I don’t think it was boring. “We wanted to go for the win, but it was such a high-intensity game, you have to deal with a very good opponent, so you can’t just say, ‘Now we’re going to go and score that goal’. “We tried, of course, to do that. We didn’t slow down to keep it 0-0. I think that was just how the game went.”It looked like a recipe for disaster. So, when his country's swimmers were being accused of doping earlier this year, one Chinese official cooked up something fast. He blamed it on contaminated noodles. In fact, he argued, it could have been a culinary conspiracy concocted by criminals, whose actions led to the cooking wine used to prepare the noodles being laced with a banned heart drug that found its way into an athlete's system. This theory was spelled out to international anti-doping officials during a meeting and, after weeks of wrangling, finally made it into the thousands of pages of data handed over to the lawyer who investigated the case involving 23 Chinese swimmers who had tested positive for that same drug. The attorney, appointed by the World Anti-Doping Agency, refused to consider that scenario as he sifted through the evidence. In spelling out his reasoning, lawyer Eric Cottier paid heed to the half-baked nature of the theory. "The Investigator considers this scenario, which he has described in the conditional tense, to be possible, no less, no more," Cottier wrote. Even without the contaminated-noodles theory, Cottier found problems with the way WADA and the Chinese handled the case but ultimately determined WADA had acted reasonably in not appealing China's conclusion that its athletes had been inadvertently contaminated. Critics of the way the China case was handled can't help but wonder if a wider exploration of the noodle theory, details of which were discovered by The Associated Press via notes and emails from after the meeting where it was delivered, might have lent a different flavor to Cottier's conclusions. "There are more story twists to the ways the Chinese explain the TMZ case than a James Bond movie," said Rob Koehler, the director general of the advocacy group Global Athlete. "And all of it is complete fiction." In April, reporting from the New York Times and the German broadcaster ARD revealed that the 23 Chinese swimmers had tested positive for the banned heart medication trimetazidine, also known as TMZ. China's anti-doping agency determined the athletes had been contaminated, and so, did not sanction them. WADA accepted that explanation, did not press the case further, and China was never made to deliver a public notice about the "no-fault findings," as is often seen in similar cases. The stock explanation for the contamination was that traces of TMZ were found in the kitchen of a hotel where the swimmers were staying. In his 58-page report, Cottier relayed some suspicions about the feasibility of that chain of events — noting that WADA's chief scientist "saw no other solution than to accept it, even if he continued to have doubts about the reality of contamination as described by the Chinese authorities." But without evidence to support pursuing the case, and with the chance of winning an appeal at almost nil, Cottier determined WADA's "decision not to appeal appears indisputably reasonable." A mystery remained: How did those traces of TMZ get into the kitchen? Shortly after the doping positives were revealed, the Institute of National Anti-Doping Organizations held a meeting on April 30 where it heard from the leader of China's agency, Li Zhiquan. Li's presentation was mostly filled with the same talking points that have been delivered throughout the saga — that the positive tests resulted from contamination from the kitchen. But he expanded on one way the kitchen might have become contaminated, harkening to another case in China involving a low-level TMZ positive. A pharmaceutical factory, he explained, had used industrial alcohol in the distillation process for producing TMZ. The industrial alcohol laced with the drug "then entered the market through illegal channels," he said. The alcohol "was re-used by the perpetrators to process and produce cooking wine, which is an important seasoning used locally to make beef noodles," Li said. "The contaminated beef noodles were consumed by that athlete, resulting in an extremely low concentration of TMZ in the positive sample. "The wrongdoers involved have been brought to justice." This new information raised eyebrows among the anti-doping leaders listening to Li's report. So much so that over the next month, several emails ensued to make sure the details about the noodles and wine made their way to WADA lawyers, who could then pass it onto Cottier. Eventually, Li did pass on the information to WADA general counsel Ross Wenzel and, just to be sure, one of the anti-doping leaders forwarded it, as well, according to the emails seen by the AP. All this came with Li's request that the noodles story be kept confidential. Turns out, it made it into Cottier's report, though he took the information with a grain of salt. "Indeed, giving it more attention would have required it to be documented, then scientifically verified and validated," he wrote. Neither Wenzel nor officials at the Chinese anti-doping agency returned messages from AP asking about the noodles conspiracy and the other athlete who Li suggested had been contaminated by them. Meanwhile, 11 of the swimmers who originally tested positive competed at the Paris Games earlier this year in a meet held under the cloud of the Chinese doping case. Though WADA considers the case closed, Koehler and others point to situations like this as one of many reasons that an investigation by someone other than Cottier, who was hired by WADA, is still needed. "It gives the appearance that people are just making things up as they go along on this, and hoping the story just goes away," Koehler said. "Which clearly it has not." Be the first to know Get local news delivered to your inbox!Beyon Cyber Launches Innovative Cybersecurity Products
It is an ambitious social experiment of our moment in history — one that experts say could accomplish something that parents, schools and other governments have attempted with varying degrees of success: keeping kids off social media until they turn 16 . Australia's new law, approved by its Parliament last week, is an attempt to swim against many tides of modern life — formidable forces like technology, marketing, globalization and, of course, the iron will of a teenager. And like efforts of the past to protect kids from things that parents believe they're not ready for, the nation's move is both ambitious and not exactly simple, particularly in a world where young people are often shaped, defined and judged by the online company they keep. The ban won't go into effect for another year. But how will Australia be able to enforce it? That's not clear, nor will it be easy. TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram have become so ingrained in young people's lives that going cold turkey will be difficult. Other questions loom. Does the ban limit kids' free expression and — especially for those in vulnerable groups — isolate them and curtail their opportunity to connect with members of their community? And how will social sites verify people's ages, anyway? Can't kids just get around such technicalities, as they so often do? This is, after all, the 21st century — an era when social media is the primary communications tool for most of those born in the past 25 years who, in a fragmented world, seek the common cultures of trends, music and memes. What happens when big swaths of that fall away? Is Australia's initiative a good, long-time-coming development that will protect the vulnerable, or could it become a well-meaning experiment with unintended consequences? The law will make platforms including TikTok, Facebook, Snapchat, Reddit, X and Instagram liable for fines of up to 50 million Australian dollars ($33 million) for systemic failures to prevent children younger than 16 from holding accounts. “It’s clear that social media companies have to be held accountable, which is what Australia is trying to do,” said Jim Steyer, president and CEO of the nonprofit Common Sense Media. Leaders and parents in countries around the world are watching Australia’s policy closely as many seek to protect young kids from the internet's dangerous corners — and, not incidentally, from each other. Most nations have taken different routes, from parental consent requirements to minimum age limits. Many child safety experts, parents and even teens who have waited to get on social media consider Australia's move a positive step. They say there’s ample reason to ensure that children wait. “What’s most important for kids, just like adults, is real human connection. Less time alone on the screen means more time to connect, not less," said Julie Scelfo, the founder of Mothers Against Media Addiction, or MAMA, a grassroots group of parents aimed at combatting the harms of social media to children. “I’m confident we can support our kids in interacting in any number of ways aside from sharing the latest meme.” The harms to children from social media have been well documented in the two decades since Facebook’s launch ushered in a new era in how the world communicates. Kids who spend more time on social media, especially as tweens or young teenagers, are more likely to experience depression and anxiety, according to multiple studies — though it is not yet clear if there is a causal relationship. What's more, many are exposed to content that is not appropriate for their age, including pornography and violence, as well as social pressures about body image and makeup . They also face bullying, sexual harassment and unwanted advances from their peers as well as adult strangers. Because their brains are not fully developed, teenagers, especially younger ones the law is focused on, are also more affected by social comparisons than adults, so even happy posts from friends can send them into a negative spiral. Many major initiatives, particularly those aimed at social engineering, can produce side effects — often unintended. Could that happen here? What, if anything, do kids stand to lose by separating kids and the networks in which they participate? Paul Taske, associate director of litigation at the tech lobbying group NetChoice, says he considers the ban “one of the most extreme violations of free speech on the world stage today" even as he expressed relief that the First Amendment prevents such law in the United States "These restrictions would create a massive cultural shift,” Taske said. “Not only is the Australian government preventing young people from engaging with issues they’re passionate about, but they’re also doing so even if their parents are ok with them using digital services," he said. "Parents know their children and their needs the best, and they should be making these decisions for their families — not big government. That kind of forcible control over families inevitably will have downstream cultural impacts.” David Inserra, a fellow for Free Expression and Technology, Cato Institute, called the bill “about as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike” in a recent blog post . While Australia's law doesn't require “hard verification” such as an uploaded ID, he said, it calls for effective “age assurance.” He said no verification system can ensure accuracy while also protecting privacy and not impacting adults in the process. Privacy advocates have also raised concerns about the law's effect on online anonymity, a cornerstone of online communications — and something that can protect teens on social platforms. “Whether it be religious minorities and dissidents, LGBTQ youth, those in abusive situations, whistleblowers, or countless other speakers in tricky situations, anonymous speech is a critical tool to safely challenge authority and express controversial opinions,” Inserra said. A spot check of kids at one mall in the Australian city of Brisbane on Wednesday didn't turn up a great deal of worry, though. “Social media is still important because you get to talk to people, but I think it’s still good that they’re like limiting it,” said Swan Son, a 13-year-old student at Brisbane State High School. She said she has had limited exposure to social media and wouldn’t really miss it for a couple of years. Her parents already enforce a daily one-hour limit. And as for her friends? “I see them at school every day, so I think I’ll be fine.” Conor Negric, 16, said he felt he’d dodged a bullet because of his age. Still, he considers the law reasonable. “I think 16 is fine. Some kids, I know some kids like 10 who’re on Instagram, Snapchat. I only got Instagram when I was 14." His mom, Sive Negric, who has two teenage sons, said she was happy for her boys to avoid exposure to social media too early: “That aspect of the internet, it’s a bit `meanland.'" Parents in Britain and across Europe earlier this year organized on platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram to promise not to buy smartphones for children younger than 12 or 13. This approach costs almost no money and requires no government enforcement. In the United States, some parents are keeping kids off social media either informally or as part of an organized campaign such as Wait Until 8th, a group that helps parents delay kids' access to social media and phones. This fall, Norway announced plans to ban kids under 15 from using social media, while France is testing a smartphone ban for kids under 15 in a limited number of schools — a policy that could be rolled out nationwide if successful. U.S. lawmakers have held multiple congressional hearings — most recently in January — on child online safety. Still, the last federal law aimed at protecting children online was enacted in 1998, six years before Facebook’s founding. In July, the U.S. Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation designed to protect children from dangerous online content , pushing forward with what would be the first major effort by Congress in decades to hold tech companies more accountable. But the Kids Online Safety Act has since stalled in the House. While several states have passed laws requiring age verification, those are stuck in court. Utah became the first state to pass laws regulating children’s social media use in 2023. In September, a judge issued the preliminary injunction against the law, which would have required social media companies to verify the ages of users, apply privacy settings and limit some features. NetChoice has also obtained injunctions temporarily halting similar laws in several other states. And last May, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy said there is insufficient evidence to show social media is safe for kids. He urged policymakers to treat social media like car seats, baby formula, medication and other products children use. “Why should social media products be any different? Scelfo said. “Parents cannot possibly bear the entire responsibility of keeping children safe online, because the problems are baked into the design of the products.” Associated Press Writers John Pye in Brisbane, Australia and Laurie Kellman in London contributed to this story.India News | 3 Dead, 9 Injured in Road Accident in Karnataka's KalaburagiNandan Nilekani BENGALURU: Nandan Nilekani said he stands by his view that India need not spend resources building another large language model (LLM). He was responding to a question from us on the view expressed recently by Google Research India director Manish Gupta that India will benefit from building a foundation model . "Foundation models are not the best use of your money. If India has $50 billion to spend, it should use that to build compute, infrastructure, and AI cloud. These are the raw materials and engines of this game," he said. Foundation models like the ones that OpenAI and Meta are building often cost billions of dollars because they are being trained on vast amounts of data using very expensive infrastructure. Nilekani has in the past stressed that India should focus on building use cases for AI on top of the LLMs that are available globally. Last month, Gupta had said at the Bengaluru Tech Summit that he "respectfully disagreed" with Nilekani's advice on prioritising use case building over building foundation models around AI. "He is not preaching what he practised. He revolutionised India's technology landscape by starting with the basics. With Aadhaar, he did not start with use cases, he started with building foundations. We too must, using our constraints as ingredients for innovation," he said. Ready to Master Stock Valuation? ET’s Workshop is just around the corner!The 50-year-old executive was shot at about 6.45am as he walked alone to the New York Hilton Midtown from a nearby hotel, police said. The gunman appeared to be “lying in wait for several minutes” before approaching Mr Thompson from behind and opening fire, New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said. Police have not yet established a motive. “Many people passed the suspect, but he appeared to wait for his intended target,” Ms Tisch said, adding that the shooting “does not appear to be a random act of violence”. Mr Thompson was struck at least once in the back and once in the calf, Ms Tisch said. He was taken to a hospital, where he was pronounced dead. The suspect, dressed in a hooded sweatshirt and carrying a grey backpack, then fled on foot down an alleyway before pedalling an e-bike into Central Park a few blocks away. The shooter was at large, sparking a search that included police drones, helicopters and dogs. “We are deeply saddened and shocked at the passing of our dear friend and colleague Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare,” the insurer’s parent company, UnitedHealth Group, said in a statement. “Brian was a highly respected colleague and friend to all who worked with him,” the company said. “We are working closely with the New York Police Department and ask for your patience and understanding during this difficult time.” Police issued a poster showing a surveillance image of the suspect pointing what appeared to be a gun and another image that appeared to show the same person on a bicycle. Police offered a reward of up to 10,000 US dollars (£7,860) for information leading to an arrest and conviction. The killing shook a part of New York City that is normally quiet at that hour, happening about four blocks from where tens of thousands of people are set to gather on Wednesday night for the annual Rockefeller Centre Christmas tree lighting. Mr Thompson’s wife, Paulette Thompson, told NBC News that the executive told her “there were some people that had been threatening him”. She said she did not have details, but suggested they may have involved issues with insurance coverage. UnitedHealthcare is the insurance arm of the health care giant UnitedHealth Group. The group was holding its annual meeting with investors to update Wall Street on the company’s direction and expectations for the coming year. The company ended the conference early in the wake of Mr Thompson’s death. “I’m afraid that we – some of you may know we’re dealing with a very serious medical situation with one of our team members,” a company official told attendees, according to a transcript. “And as a result, I’m afraid we’re going to have to bring to a close the event today. I’m sure you’ll understand.” Mr Thompson, a father of two sons, had been with the company since 2004 and served as chief executive for more than three years. UnitedHealthcare is the largest provider of Medicare Advantage plans in the US and manages health insurance coverage for employers and state-and federally funded Medicaid programmes. Minnesota governor Tim Walz posted on the social platform X that the state is “sending our prayers to Brian’s family and the UnitedHealthcare team”. “This is horrifying news and a terrible loss for the business and health care community in Minnesota,” the Democrat wrote.
Tech rally, Powell comments boost indexes to record closing highs
By JOSH BOAK WASHINGTON (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday voiced his support for the dockworkers union before their contract expires next month at Eastern and Gulf Coast ports, saying that any further “automation” of the ports would harm workers. Related Articles National Politics | Will Kamala Harris run for California governor in 2026? The question is already swirling National Politics | Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people National Politics | Trump taps immigration hard-liner Kari Lake as head of Voice of America National Politics | Trump extends unprecedented invites to China’s Xi and other world leaders for his inauguration National Politics | Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump The incoming president posted on social media that he met Harold Daggett, the president of the International Longshoreman’s Association, and Dennis Daggett, the union’s executive vice president. “I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it,” Trump posted. “The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen. Foreign companies have made a fortune in the U.S. by giving them access to our markets. They shouldn’t be looking for every last penny knowing how many families are hurt.” The International Longshoremen’s Association has until Jan. 15 to negotiate a new contract with the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which represents ports and shipping companies. At the heart of the dispute is whether ports can install automated gates, cranes and container-moving trucks that could make it faster to unload and load ships. The union argues that automation would lead to fewer jobs, even though higher levels of productivity could do more to boost the salaries of remaining workers. The Maritime Alliance said in a statement that the contract goes beyond ports to “supporting American consumers and giving American businesses access to the global marketplace – from farmers, to manufacturers, to small businesses, and innovative start-ups looking for new markets to sell their products.” “To achieve this, we need modern technology that is proven to improve worker safety, boost port efficiency, increase port capacity, and strengthen our supply chains,” said the alliance, adding that it looks forward to working with Trump. In October, the union representing 45,000 dockworkers went on strike for three days, raising the risk that a prolonged shutdown could push up inflation by making it difficult to unload container ships and export American products overseas. The issue pits an incoming president who won November’s election on the promise of bringing down prices against commitments to support blue-collar workers along with the kinds of advanced technology that drew him support from Silicon Valley elite such as billionaire Elon Musk. Trump sought to portray the dispute as being between U.S. workers and foreign companies, but advanced ports are also key for staying globally competitive. China is opening a $1.3 billion port in Peru that could accommodate ships too large for the Panama Canal. There is a risk that shippers could move to other ports, which could also lead to job losses. Mexico is constructing a port that is highly automated, while Dubai, Singapore and Rotterdam already have more advanced ports. Instead, Trump said that ports and shipping companies should eschew “machinery, which is expensive, and which will constantly have to be replaced.” “For the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible American Workers, instead of laying them off, and sending those profits back to foreign countries,” Trump posted. “It is time to put AMERICA FIRST!”Purdue vs. Indiana FREE LIVE STREAM (11/30/24): Watch college football, Week 14 online | Time, TV, channel - NJ.com
Trump offers support for dockworkers union by saying ports shouldn’t install more automated systemsBy JOSH BOAK WASHINGTON (AP) — President-elect Donald Trump on Thursday voiced his support for the dockworkers union before their contract expires next month at Eastern and Gulf Coast ports, saying that any further “automation” of the ports would harm workers. Related Articles National Politics | Will Kamala Harris run for California governor in 2026? The question is already swirling National Politics | Senate begins final push to expand Social Security benefits for millions of people National Politics | Trump taps immigration hard-liner Kari Lake as head of Voice of America National Politics | Trump extends unprecedented invites to China’s Xi and other world leaders for his inauguration National Politics | Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump The incoming president posted on social media that he met Harold Daggett, the president of the International Longshoreman’s Association, and Dennis Daggett, the union’s executive vice president. “I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it,” Trump posted. “The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen. Foreign companies have made a fortune in the U.S. by giving them access to our markets. They shouldn’t be looking for every last penny knowing how many families are hurt.” The International Longshoremen’s Association has until Jan. 15 to negotiate a new contract with the U.S. Maritime Alliance, which represents ports and shipping companies. At the heart of the dispute is whether ports can install automated gates, cranes and container-moving trucks that could make it faster to unload and load ships. The union argues that automation would lead to fewer jobs, even though higher levels of productivity could do more to boost the salaries of remaining workers. The Maritime Alliance said in a statement that the contract goes beyond ports to “supporting American consumers and giving American businesses access to the global marketplace – from farmers, to manufacturers, to small businesses, and innovative start-ups looking for new markets to sell their products.” “To achieve this, we need modern technology that is proven to improve worker safety, boost port efficiency, increase port capacity, and strengthen our supply chains,” said the alliance, adding that it looks forward to working with Trump. In October, the union representing 45,000 dockworkers went on strike for three days, raising the risk that a prolonged shutdown could push up inflation by making it difficult to unload container ships and export American products overseas. The issue pits an incoming president who won November’s election on the promise of bringing down prices against commitments to support blue-collar workers along with the kinds of advanced technology that drew him support from Silicon Valley elite such as billionaire Elon Musk. Trump sought to portray the dispute as being between U.S. workers and foreign companies, but advanced ports are also key for staying globally competitive. China is opening a $1.3 billion port in Peru that could accommodate ships too large for the Panama Canal. There is a risk that shippers could move to other ports, which could also lead to job losses. Mexico is constructing a port that is highly automated, while Dubai, Singapore and Rotterdam already have more advanced ports. Instead, Trump said that ports and shipping companies should eschew “machinery, which is expensive, and which will constantly have to be replaced.” “For the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible American Workers, instead of laying them off, and sending those profits back to foreign countries,” Trump posted. “It is time to put AMERICA FIRST!”
NoneCASIO Scientific Calculators Receive SONCAP Certification for Quality and Reliability
What's Going On?Global Laparoscopic Instruments Market Poised for Tremendous Growth from 2024 to 2032
NoneWelltower Inc. stock rises Wednesday, still underperforms market