2 99-20

2 99-20

LOVE Island star Laura Anderson has hit back on social media with a cryptic Instagram post, just days after rival Olivia Attwood made copying claims. Scottish star Laura Anderson appeared on the fourth series of Love Island and has now spoken to fans about 'healing' in a cryptic post. 2 Laura Anderson has appeared to hit back at Olivia Attwood with a cryptic post to fans about 'healing' Credit: Instagram 2 Laura's post comes just days after Olivia Attwood's savage rant online Credit: Instagram/@olivia_attwood Writing across a video on Instagram, the star said: "Once you let go and decide you want a good life, the universe will start moving things to make it happen. "The people you need will appear, the healing will happen, and the doors you need will open. "Once you decide you truly are worthy, miracles will flood in." The post comes just days after fellow Love Island star Olivia Attwood teased fans with a cryptic post on Monday, claiming she had a secret that would "blow your f***ing mind." More on Laura Anderson MAKING MOVES Love Island’s Laura Anderson reveals surprise way she met her new boyfriend SCARY ORDEAL Laura Anderson rushes baby daughter to hospital after terrifying incident She also accused someone of copying her, with sources close to the star claiming she was talking about Laura Anderson. Initial thoughts were that Olivia meant Maura Higgins , who is currently in the jungle for I'm A Celebrity , but in fact they mean Laura as Olivia claimed someone had been 'copying her and her life' in a savage rant. An insider said: "The idea that this is about Maura Higgins is absolute rubbish. Olivia’s got no issue with Maura at all. "The truth is, this is about Laura Anderson, and people have totally got the wrong end of the stick." Most read in Celebrity SPEAKING UP Nice police break silence on Rangers fan chaos as they say Uefa must act ROAD TRAGEDY Woman dies after two-vehicle crash in town as emergency crews race to scene FOOTIE 'SHAME' Bayern Munich footballer 'is caught drink-driving after partying at club' STAR GONE My Chemical Romance star Bob Bryar dead aged 44 & 'lay undiscovered for weeks' The source added: " Laura recently asked for the same hand tattoos as Olivia and the guy refused point-blank. "She's even been seeing Olivia's aesthetic doctor, Dr. Saleena Zimri, travelling down from Scotland just for it. Olivia Attwood: Chic Evolution from Grid Girl to Influencer "It’s obvious that she's trying to mimic Olivia’s look and it hasn’t gone unnoticed. Olivia feels like this crosses a line.” The feud between the pair is thought to go all the way back to 2018, as Olivia accused Laura of copying her style on Love Island. Olivia, who appeared the year before, later claimed Laura was trying to "steal her life ". In her latest post, Olivia failed to admit who she was talking about in her latest message, which read: "One day I'm going to write a book and some of the stuff I have managed to keep [zipped mouth emoji] on over the years. "It will blow your f***ing mind. "You can try to hire all the same people, regurgitate my stories as your own, study the playbook, follow the recipe blah blah blah, but it will NEVER taste the same. That's all." OLIVIA VS LAURA: A FEUD TIMELINE A LONG-RUNNING feud between Olivia Attwood and Laura Anderson has been reignited, with Olivia taking aim at someone she feels has been copying her look and life. From hairstyling to tattoos, the tensions between the two have simmered for years, with Olivia’s latest cryptic posts shedding new light on their rivalry. 2018 : Olivia accuses Laura of copying her style, tweeting from New Look’s account, “Wait, is Laura wearing MY hairdo?” She further claimed Laura had mimicked her exact outfit when entering the Love Island villa. Olivia jokingly mentions needing “protection” as Laura adopts her signature half ponytail hairstyle. Despite the jabs, she later claims she “quite likes” Laura. Olivia later expresses frustration over Laura trying to “steal her life,” feeling that Laura was imitating her look and aligning with Olivia’s Love Island friends. Laura also joined Olivia’s former management. 2019 : Olivia’s annoyance grows when Laura uses the same photographer for her 2019 calendar. Olivia retaliates with a cryptic post about “someone copying her”. 2021 : Olivia reignited the feud with a social media rant aimed at celebrities holidaying in Dubai, criticising influencers who justified their trips as "work". Her comments were widely seen as a dig at Laura, who had defended her own Dubai travel during the UK lockdown. 2024 : Olivia posts a cryptic message hinting at the feud, claiming someone is copying her look and life. Laura mimics Olivia’s fringe haircut in a behind-the-scenes photoshoot video, further fuelling tensions. Sources confirm that the feud is directed at Laura, following speculation it was about Maura Higgins.Thanksgiving Travel Latest: Airport strike, staff shortages and weather could impact holiday travel

PM looks to ‘brighter future’ at Christmas and ‘wishes for peace in Middle East’

C omplex issues and phenomena such as global warming and climate change, poverty, migration and displacement cannot be addressed by a single discipline. They need to be studied from an interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary perspective so that we can grapple with them comprehensively and meaningfully. Global warming and climate change, for instance, need to be addressed by experts drawn from different disciplines such as Glaciology, Hydrology, Oceanography, Geology, Geography, Geoinformatics, and Engineering and Technology. Similarly, migration and displacement need to be discussed by experts from Political Science, Geopolitics, Economics, Sociology, Ecology, Human Rights, and Literature. Unfortunately, academia is subtly biased in favour of “academic tribes and territories” (Becher and Trowler 2001). Against this backdrop, we need to highlight the ongoing debate between ‘generalists’ and ‘specialists’. While the generalists, even as they are grounded in their respective disciplines, strive to strike a conversation with their counterparts in other departments to promote interdisciplinary thinking and collaboration, the specialists prefer to confine themselves to their respective areas and guard their territory. Disciplinary boundary crossing is an anathema to them. In Academic Tribes and Territories, Becher and Trowler address the issue and point out that “the tribes of academe ... define their own identities and defend their own patches of intellectual ground by employing a variety of devices geared to the exclusion of illegal immigrants.” But academicians should shed their silos syndrome as a fragmented and piecemeal approach to the pursuit of knowledge will not produce tangible results. Subtle differences At this juncture, we need clarity about what exactly is meant by interdisciplinarity and the reasons to embrace it. We also need to distinguish it from its cognate: multidisciplinarity. There are subtle but crucial differences between the two. Both call for the presence of various disciplines but the level of integration between them is differential. While the integration of different disciplines is quite high in interdisciplinary programmes and projects, it is limited in the case of multidisciplinary endeavours. The former aims at amalgamation and synthesis of ideas and theories and the latter is rather reluctant to shed its disciplinary character. In short, while interdisciplinarity insists on integration of ideas, multidisciplinarity focuses on juxtaposition with limited space for integration. In Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Practice, Klein points out that the coming together of different disciplines in multidisciplinary endeavours is “essentially additive, not integrative”. Why are academicians reluctant to undertake interdisciplinary projects? There are five major reasons. First, the epistemological clash, sometimes incompatible, between different disciplinary perspectives is a hurdle and a challenge. Second, getting to know a new discipline involves time and energy, and many prefer to expend their energies in their own disciplines and territories where they already have a foothold. Third, there is hardly any incentive for undertaking innovative interdisciplinary projects. Fourth, when it comes to research projects and publications, editors are inclined towards papers in conventional disciplines. As a result, interdisciplinary projects get sidelined. Finally, interpersonal issues crop up while undertaking interdisciplinary projects with issues relating to seniority and ownership of the project occasionally rearing their heads. Fostering interdisciplinarity What should be done to shed academic tribalism and foster interdisciplinarity? First, higher educational institutions should, under the Choice-Based Credit System, offer interdisciplinary courses in domains such as AI, Nanotechnology, and Digital Humanities. Teaching pedagogy too could be interdisciplinary. A course like Philosophy and Literature could be co-taught by faculty from the two departments. Second, allied departments could come together and organise interdisciplinary seminars and conferences. For instance, Chemistry and Life Sciences could come together and explore common topics such as enzyme catalysis, kinetics, energy and metabolism. English and Political Science could organise a conference on a topic like language and ideology. Language departments such as Tamil, Hindi, French, and English can pool their resources and explore themes in comparative literature and translation. Third, research scholars and postgraduate students should be motivated to explore interdisciplinary topics for their projects. Finally, border-crossing leading to interdepartmental networking. So interdisciplinary collaboration should be recognised and incentivised. Academic tribalism breeds a culture of hierarchy, insularity and traditionalism. Therefore, academia should ensure that the curriculum is innovative, interdisciplinary and holistic and encourage and help shape our students into multifaceted individuals. The writer is Emeritus Professor, Gandhigram Rural Institute, Gandhigram, Tamil Nadu. Email: josephdorairaj@gmail.com Published - November 30, 2024 03:00 pm IST Copy link Email Facebook Twitter Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit The Hindu Education Plus / higher education / careers / students / university / universities and collegesGEELONG, Australia, Dec. 23, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Carbon Revolution plc (Nasdaq: CREV) (the "Company"), a Tier 1 OEM supplier and the leading global manufacturer of lightweight advanced technology automotive carbon fiber wheels, today announced that it has reached an agreement with Orion Infrastructure Capital ("OIC") for a further US$25 million financing, which will be released in five tranches, each equal to US$5 million, subject to satisfying certain release conditions. In connection with the release of each of the five tranches of US$5 million, the Company will issue to OIC and the lenders under the US$60 million PIUS loan entered into in May 2023 ("Existing Noteholders"), penny warrants to purchase an aggregate number of shares equal to 5.0% of the Company's shares outstanding. The original US$110 million funding agreement with OIC included the US$70 million previously drawn and provided for up to US$40 million of additional funding by OIC, of which this US$25 million has now been secured. In connection with this further US$25 million, Existing Noteholders have also agreed to release up to US$2 million of existing loan reserves in five equal tranches of US$400,000 concurrent with the five OIC funding tranches. Following this combined US$27 million of additional funding, both OIC and the Existing Noteholders have also agreed to partial payment in kind, in lieu of cash, for certain interest payments. The first of these five funding tranches closed on Friday December 20, 2024. The incremental $25 million of capital, reserve release and changes to interest terms, are intended to support the ongoing liquidity of the business and fund the Company as it works to satisfy the demand from Carbon Revolution's OEM customers. The Company is making substantial investments in capacity and throughput and has a number of new programs entering, or expected to enter, production in the near-term. "OIC continues to be a great funding partner for Carbon Revolution, sharing our vision for our world-leading technology," said Jake Dingle, CEO of Carbon Revolution. "This capital supports the ongoing liquidity of the business and underpins the continued delivery of our production capacity increase and the near-term launch of a number of new OEM programs." "We are firm believers in Carbon Revolution and the transformative impact of their lightweighting value proposition," said Chris Leary, Investment Partner & Head of Infra Equity at OIC. "The progress made by the Company on its capacity investments and increasing the efficiency of its production, as the only company capable of producing carbon fiber wheels at scale, has further demonstrated the unparalleled value to automotive OEMs as they modernize their product portfolios." The terms and conditions of the financing are summarized in the Company's filing with the SEC, which can be accessed here . The Company continues to work diligently to file its Annual Report as promptly as practical to regain compliance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5250(c)(1) as described here . About Carbon Revolution plc Carbon Revolution plc (Nasdaq: CREV) (the "Company" or "Carbon Revolution") is the parent of Carbon Revolution Pty Ltd, an early-stage growth company which has successfully innovated, commercialized and industrialized the advanced manufacture of carbon fiber wheels for the global automotive industry. The Company has progressed from single prototypes to designing and manufacturing lightweight wheels for cars and SUVs in the high performance, premium and luxury segments, for the world's most prestigious automotive brands. Carbon Revolution is creating a significant and sustainable advanced technology business that supplies its lightweight wheel technology to automotive manufacturers around the world. For more information, visit carbonrev.com . Forward-Looking Statements All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this communication are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may generally be identified by the use of words such as "believe," "may," "will," "estimate," "continue," "anticipate," "intend," "expect," "should," "would," "plan," "project," "forecast," "predict," "potential," "seem," "seek," "future," "outlook," "target" or other similar expressions (or the negative versions of such words or expressions) that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical matters. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the expectation of continued listing of Carbon Revolution's ordinary shares and warrants on Nasdaq, the Company's ability to file its Annual Report and promptly regain compliance with Nasdaq Listing Rule 5250(c)(1), the future financial performance, business strategies, financings and expectations for the Company's business. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not identified in this communication, and on the current expectations of Carbon Revolution's management and are not predictions of actual performance. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to serve as, and must not be relied on by any investor as a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and may differ from such assumptions, and such differences may be material. Many actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of Carbon Revolution. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including (i) the ability to maintain the listing of Carbon Revolution's securities on Nasdaq or any other exchange on which such securities may be listed in the future; (ii) the failure to realize the benefits of being listed on a U.S. securities exchange and publicly-traded in the United States; (iii) Carbon Revolution's liquidity, including its ability to pay its obligations and to issue equity, refinance its indebtedness or otherwise obtain financing at all or on acceptable terms, (iv) risks related to its ability to meet financial covenants and other key covenants under existing financing arrangements or to obtain waivers or forbearance from compliance with such covenants, which could result in the acceleration of outstanding indebtedness, (v) changes in domestic and foreign business, market, financial, political and legal conditions; (vi) risks related to the rollout of Carbon Revolution's business strategy and the timing of expected business milestones; (vii) the effects of competition on Carbon Revolution's future business and the ability of the combined company to grow and manage growth, establish and maintain relationships with customers and retain its management and key employees; (viii) risks related to domestic and international political and macroeconomic uncertainty, including the Russia-Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East; (ix) the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against Carbon Revolution; (x) the impact of pandemic and governmental responses on any of the foregoing risks; (xi) risks related to Carbon Revolution's industry; (xii) changes in laws and regulations; and (xiii) those factors discussed in the documents Carbon Revolution filed with the SEC, including the Shell Company Report on Form 20-F. If any of these risks materialize or Carbon Revolution's assumptions prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from the results implied by these forward-looking statements. There may be additional risks that Carbon Revolution does not presently know or that Carbon Revolution currently believes are immaterial that could also cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements reflect Carbon Revolution's expectations, plans or forecasts of future events and views as of the date of this communication. Carbon Revolution anticipates that subsequent events and developments will cause Carbon Revolution's assessments to change. However, while Carbon Revolution may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, Carbon Revolution specifically disclaims any obligation to do so, unless required by applicable law. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing Carbon Revolution's assessments as of any date subsequent to the date of this communication. Accordingly, undue reliance should not be placed upon the forward-looking statements. For further information, please contact: Investors Investors@carbonrev.com Media Media@carbonrev.com

Fruster scores 15, Eastern Illinois beats Blackburn 99-55SEATTLE (AP) — The Seattle Seahawks rode their dominant defense to a big win over a division rival to vault into first place in the NFC West. No, it isn’t 2013. These are the 2024 Seahawks, who, after struggling mightily against the run earlier this season, held the visiting Arizona Cardinals to 49 rushing yards in Sunday's 16-6 victory . The defensive line kept Kyler Murray under consistent pressure thanks to a dominant performance from Leonard Williams, the secondary flew around to smack away passes, and safety Coby Bryant scored on a 69-yard pick-6. Sunday's defensive performance was reminiscent of the Seahawks of a decade ago and a promising sign that first-year coach Mike Macdonald’s system is starting to click. Macdonald, who coordinated Baltimore's NFL-best defense last year, was leading one of the worst rush defenses in the league earlier this season. But Seattle consistently stuffed the Cardinals, who came in as the fifth-best running team in the league at 149.4 yards per game. “Three games in a row now we played pretty decent on defense,” Macdonald said. “There is an expectation and standard here throughout the course of our Seahawks history that we’re trying to live up to and build on. So that’s the idea.” At 6-5, the Seahawks drew even with the Cardinals in the tightly bunched division. The teams play each other again in two weeks at Arizona. Last month's trade for linebacker Ernest Jones IV has clearly paid off. Seattle hasn't allowed a running back to rush for more than 79 yards since its Week 8 loss to Buffalo, which was Jones' first game in a Seahawks uniform. He has led the team in tackles in every game he's played and has helped resurrect the run defense. The Seahawks' run game continues to underperform. Seattle got 65 yards on the ground Sunday, with the Cardinals holding Kenneth Walker III to 41 yards on 16 attempts. Zach Charbonnet had 22 yards on six carries. Walker hasn’t topped 100 yards since Week 1. Offensive coordinator Ryan Grubb needs to think of something different to get the running backs involved. Williams single-handedly disrupted the Cardinals with 2 1/2 sacks, four quarterback hits, three tackles for loss and one pass defensed. “I thought he was dominant,” Macdonald said. “I knew he played great and then I looked at the stat line and he played out of his mind.” The Seahawks finished with five sacks, seven quarterback hits, five tackles for loss and six pass deflections against the Cardinals, shutting down a team that had averaged 29.3 points over its previous three games. Geno Smith finished with 254 yards passing and a touchdown, but he threw another momentum-stalling interception. Smith was picked off on a third-and-6 play on the Arizona 18-yard line at the start of the fourth quarter, ending an 11-play, 73-yard drive. Smith has an NFL-most 12 interceptions this season, more than in either of his previous two seasons as the Seahawks' full-time starter. “That was a huge drive for us. ... Obviously made a terrible mistake down there, something I got to clean up,” Smith said. “But it was a big drive. We wanted to put the game ahead at least two scores.” The offensive line has contributed to the problem. Guard Anthony Bradford left with an ankle injury, and the line struggled to protect Smith, who was sacked five times. Macdonald said Bradford is expected to miss next week's game. 77 — Jaxon Smith-Njigba led the team with six catches for 77 yards and a touchdown, marking the fourth consecutive game that Smith-Njigba has led the team in receptions. He topped 100 yards receiving in the previous two games. “He’s getting open,” Smith said. “He’s catching the ball. He’s doing a great job in the screen game. All-around great player. I just think the way that teams are playing us coverage-wise, I feel like it’s the ultimate sign of respect.” The Seahawks play at the struggling New York Jets on Sunday. AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/nfl

Schottky Barrier Diode Market | Business Growth, Development Factors, Current and Future Trends till 2031 | Seekway Technology Ltd. SeeReal Technologies GmbH Sony Corporation