slot machine online casino
Surgical technology took a remarkable step forward when Venudhar Rao Hajari introduced a groundbreaking device that changed how doctors approach sports-related operations. His innovative medical tool stands out for its unique ability to handle both bone and soft tissue procedures simultaneously, filling a critical gap in surgical capabilities. Unlike traditional surgical tools, Hajari's device introduced a dual-approach methodology, merging mechanical techniques with advanced radio frequency technology. This combination gives surgeons exceptional control during complex procedures, particularly when treating athletes with compound injuries that affect multiple tissue layers. Behind this innovation lay months of careful engineering and clinical consultation. Hajari spent countless hours in operating rooms, observing surgical procedures and gathering insights directly from medical teams. These observations shaped his technical decisions, leading to specifications that precisely matched real surgical needs rather than theoretical requirements. The development process broke new ground in medical device testing. Rather than following conventional verification methods, Hajari created an original automated testing system that examined device performance across thousands of simulated surgical scenarios. This thorough approach uncovered potential issues that standard testing might have missed, ensuring exceptional reliability in clinical settings. Safety verification took an equally innovative path. Hajari developed a distinctive risk assessment model that examined both obvious and subtle safety concerns. This comprehensive approach satisfied FDA requirements while establishing new benchmarks for medical device safety protocols. His method specifically addressed the challenges of working with multiple tissue types, ensuring consistent performance across different surgical applications. Clinical trials revealed unexpected benefits of Hajari's design. Surgeons reported shorter operation times and more precise tissue separation, particularly in complicated sports injury cases. The device proved especially valuable in arthroscopic procedures, where its dual-functionality eliminated the need to switch between multiple tools. Post-launch monitoring brought additional insights. Hajari implemented a novel feedback system that tracked device performance across different surgical specialties. This data-driven approach enabled continuous refinement, with each update reflecting real surgical experiences rather than theoretical improvements. The impact on sports medicine has been substantial. Surgical teams now approach complex tissue repairs with greater confidence, knowing they can seamlessly transition between different tissue types without compromising precision. Athletes benefit from more accurate procedures and potentially faster recovery times, thanks to the reduced tissue trauma during operations. Looking ahead, Hajari's innovation sets new precedents for medical device development. His emphasis on practical surgical needs over technical possibilities has influenced how other engineers approach medical tool design. The success of this approach suggests a shift in medical device development, where clinical requirements drive technical specifications rather than the reverse. Beyond its immediate surgical applications, Hajari's work exemplifies the value of engineer-surgeon collaboration in medical innovation. His willingness to immerse himself in the surgical environment while maintaining an engineer's analytical perspective led to practical solutions for long-standing technical challenges in sports medicine. The measurable improvements in surgical outcomes continue to validate Hajari's approach. As sports medicine advances, his contributions serve as a foundation for future innovations, demonstrating how thoughtful engineering can enhance medical care in tangible, meaningful ways. About Venudhar Rao Hajari Venudhar Rao Hajari is an experienced engineer with more than two decades of experience in developing software for verification, systems engineering, and development of medical devices. His contribution has proven crucial in advancing the field of sports medicine, particularly through the development of a surgical device that supports soft tissue and bone resection using advanced resection techniques. Venudhar is a current Staff Quality Assurance Engineer at a global medical technology company and has been involved in the entire lifecycle of any product that has come his way-from system requirement tuning and risk analysis to designing automation test architectures and system verification. His passion for innovation and patient care continues to drive positive change in the medical device industry.Cleveland-Cliffs ( NYSE:CLF – Get Free Report ) and DeFi Technologies ( OTC:DEFTF – Get Free Report ) are both basic materials companies, but which is the better stock? We will contrast the two companies based on the strength of their institutional ownership, analyst recommendations, risk, profitability, valuation, earnings and dividends. Valuation & Earnings This table compares Cleveland-Cliffs and DeFi Technologies”s top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation. Cleveland-Cliffs has higher revenue and earnings than DeFi Technologies. Cleveland-Cliffs is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than DeFi Technologies, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks. Profitability Analyst Ratings This is a breakdown of recent ratings and price targets for Cleveland-Cliffs and DeFi Technologies, as reported by MarketBeat.com. Cleveland-Cliffs presently has a consensus target price of $17.56, indicating a potential upside of 40.78%. Given Cleveland-Cliffs’ higher possible upside, equities research analysts plainly believe Cleveland-Cliffs is more favorable than DeFi Technologies. Institutional and Insider Ownership 67.7% of Cleveland-Cliffs shares are owned by institutional investors. 1.8% of Cleveland-Cliffs shares are owned by company insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that endowments, large money managers and hedge funds believe a stock will outperform the market over the long term. Summary DeFi Technologies beats Cleveland-Cliffs on 7 of the 13 factors compared between the two stocks. About Cleveland-Cliffs ( Get Free Report ) Cleveland-Cliffs is the largest flat-rolled steel company and the largest iron ore pellet producer in North America. The company is vertically integrated from mining through iron making, steelmaking, rolling, finishing and downstream with hot and cold stamping of steel parts and components. The company was formerly known as Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. and changed its name to Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. in August 2017. Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. was founded in 1847 and is headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio. About DeFi Technologies ( Get Free Report ) DeFi Technologies Inc., a technology company, develops and lists exchange traded products in Canada, Bermuda, and the Cayman Islands. The company provides asset management services, such as investment vehicles, indirect exposure to underlying cryptocurrencies, digital asset indexes, and other decentralized finance instruments. It also participates in decentralized blockchain networks by processing data transactions that contribute to network security and stability, governance, and transaction validation. In addition, the company invests in decentralized finance companies in early-stage ventures. Further, it offers node management of decentralized protocols to support governance, security, and transaction validation for their networks. The company was formerly known as Valour Inc. and changed its name to DeFi Technologies Inc. in July 2023. DeFi Technologies Inc. was incorporated in 1986 and is headquartered in Toronto, Canada. Receive News & Ratings for Cleveland-Cliffs Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Cleveland-Cliffs and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter .Trump asks Supreme Court to delay TikTok ban so he can weigh in after he takes office
WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI should have done more to gather intelligence before the Capitol riot , according to a watchdog report Thursday that also said no undercover FBI employees were on the scene Jan. 6, 2021, and none of the bureau's informants was authorized to participate. The report from the Justice Department inspector general's office knocks down a fringe conspiracy theory advanced by some Republicans in Congress that the FBI played a role in instigating the events that day, when rioters determined to overturn Republican Donald Trump's 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden stormed the building in a violent clash with police. The review, released nearly four years after a dark chapter in history that shook the bedrock of American democracy, was narrow in scope, but aimed to shed light on gnawing questions that have dominated public discourse, including whether major intelligence failures preceded the riot and whether the FBI in some way provoked the violence. It's the latest major investigation about a day unlike any other in U.S. history, one that has already yielded congressional inquiries and federal and state indictments. The report offers a mixed assessment of the FBI's performance in the run-up to the riot, crediting the bureau for preparing for the possibility of violence and for trying to identify known “domestic terrorism subjects” who planned to come to Washington that day. But it said the FBI, in an action the now-deputy director described as a “basic step that was missed,” failed to canvas informants across all 56 of its field offices for any relevant intelligence. That was a step, the report concluded, “that could have helped the FBI and its law enforcement partners with their preparations in advance of January 6.” In addition, the watchdog found that 26 FBI informants were in Washington for election-related protests on Jan. 6, and though four entered the Capitol during the riot, none had been authorized to do so by the bureau or to break the law or encourage others to do so. Many of the 26 informants did provide the FBI with information before the riot, but it “was no more specific than, and was consistent with, other sources of information” that the FBI had acquired from other sources. The FBI said in a letter responding to the report that it accepts the inspection general’s recommendation “regarding potential process improvements for future events.” The lengthy review was launched days after the riot as the FBI faced questions over whether it had missed warnings signs or had adequately disseminated intelligence it had received, including a Jan. 5, 2021, bulletin prepared by the FBI’s Norfolk, Virginia, field office that warned of the potential for “war” at the Capitol. The inspector general found that the information in that bulletin was broadly shared. FBI Director Chris Wray, who announced this week his plans to resign at the end President Joe Biden’s term in January, has defended his agency’s handing of the intelligence report. He told lawmakers in 2021 that the report was disseminated though the joint terrorism task force, discussed at a command post in Washington and posted on an internet portal available to other law enforcement agencies. “We did communicate that information in a timely fashion to the Capitol Police and (Metropolitan Police Department) in not one, not two, but three different ways,” Wray said at the time. Separately, the report said the FBI’s New Orleans field office was told by a source between November 2020 and early January 2021 that protesters were planning to station a “quick reaction force” in northern Virginia “in order to be armed and prepared to respond to violence that day in DC, if necessary." That information was shared with the FBI's Washington Field Office, members of intelligence agencies and some federal law enforcement agencies the day before the riot, the inspector general found. But there was no indication the FBI told northern Virginia police about the information, the report said. An FBI official told the inspector general there was “nothing actionable or immediately concerning about it." A cache of weapons at a Virginia hotel as part of a “quick reaction force” was a central piece of the Justice Department’s seditious conspiracy case against Oath Keeper leader Stewart Rhodes and other members of the far-right extremist group. The conspiracy theory that federal law enforcement officers entrapped members of the mob has been spread in conservative circles, including by some Republican lawmakers. Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La., recently suggested on a podcast that agents pretending to be Trump supporters were responsible for instigating the violence. And former Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who withdrew as Trump’s pick as attorney general amid scrutiny over sex trafficking allegations, sent a letter to Wray in 2021 asking how many undercover agents or informants were at the Capitol on Jan. 6 and if they were “merely passive informants or active instigators.” It wasn't previously clear how many FBI informants were in the crowd that day. Wray refused to say during a congressional hearing last year how many of the people who entered the Capitol and surrounding area on Jan. 6 were either FBI employees or people with whom the FBI had made contact. But Wray said the “notion that somehow the violence at the Capitol on January 6 was part of some operation orchestrated by FBI sources and agents is ludicrous.” One FBI informant testified last year at the trial of former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio about marching to the Capitol with his fellow extremist group members, and described communicating with his handler as the mob of Trump supporters swarmed the building. But the informant wasn't in any of the Telegram chats the Proud Boys were accused of using to plot violence in the days leading up to Jan. 6. ____ This story has been corrected to reflect that the report said four informants entered the Capitol on Jan. 6.
‘Not Worth It’: Zoho CEO Sridhar Vembu Reignites 70-Hour Workweek Debate, Warns of ‘Demographic Suicide'
Mysterious data center company inks deal to buy huge amount of power in MontanaJulia Wick | (TNS) Los Angeles Times As California politicos look ahead to 2025, the biggest question looming is whether Vice President Kamala Harris — a native daughter, battered just weeks ago by presidential election defeat — will enter the 2026 California governor’s race. Related Articles 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 invites China’s Xi to his inauguration even as he threatens massive tariffs on Beijing National Politics | Pressure on a veteran and senator shows what’s next for those who oppose Trump National Politics | What Americans think about Hegseth, Gabbard and key Trump Cabinet picks AP-NORC poll Harris has yet to give any public indication on her thoughts and those close to her suggest the governorship is not immediately top of mind. But if Harris does ultimately run — and that’s a massive if — her entrée would seismically reshape the already crowded race for California’s highest office. Recent polling suggests Harris would have a major advantage, with 46% of likely voters saying they were somewhat or very likely to support her for governor in 2026, according to a UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies survey co-sponsored by The Times. “If Vice President Harris were to choose to run, I am certain that that would have a near field-clearing effect on the Democratic side,” Rep. Katie Porter, D-Irvine, said during a recent UC Irvine panel interview . Porter, a high-profile Democrat who has been eyeing the wide-open governor’s race, has yet to say whether she plans to run. Porter’s point was broadly echoed in conversations with nearly a dozen California political operatives and strategists, several of whom requested anonymity to speak candidly. Most speculated that a Harris entry would cause some other candidates in the race to scatter, creating further upheaval in down-ballot races as a roster of ambitious politicians scramble for other opportunities. “In politics, you always let the big dogs eat first,” quipped Democratic political consultant Peter Ragone. The current gubernatorial field is a who’s who of California politicians, but lacks a clear favorite or star with widespread name recognition. The vast majority of California’s 22 million voters have yet to pay attention to the race and have little familiarity with the candidates. The list of Democratic candidates includes Los Angeles’ first Latino mayor in more than a century ( Antonio Villaraigosa ); the first female and first out LGBTQ leader of the state Senate ( Toni Atkins ); the sitting lieutenant governor and first woman to hold that post ( Eleni Kounalakis ); the state superintendent of public instruction ( Tony Thurmond ) and the former state controller ( Betty Yee ). Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom is serving his second term as California governor, meaning he is ineligible to run again. Several other Democrats, including Porter, outgoing Health and Human Services Director Xavier Becerra and state Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta have also publicly toyed with the idea of a run. They could be less likely to enter the fray should Harris decide to run. What the billionaire mall mogul Rick Caruso — who has also been exploring a run — would choose to do is an open question, as Caruso might contrast himself with Harris as a more centrist candidate. The real estate developer was a registered Republican until November 2019. It’s unlikely that Harris will proffer a public decision in the immediate term, leaving plenty of time for political insiders to game out hypotheticals in the weeks and months to come. Harris’ office did not respond to a request for comment. “I think every candidate for governor is trying to get some kind of intel,” Mike Trujillo, a Los Angeles-based Democratic political consultant and former Villaraigosa staffer, said of a potential Harris run. Trujillo speculated that Harris’ current state was probably similar to Hillary Clinton’s hiking sojourns in the Chappaqua woods after losing to Donald Trump in 2016, or Al Gore growing a beard in the bruising aftermath of his 2000 defeat. “The first thing she’s probably thinking about is, ‘Well, can I run again for president in four years?’ Not, ‘Do I run for governor in two years?’” said one political operative who’s worked with Harris in the past. Harris maintains a home in Brentwood and previously served as California’s senator and attorney general. A successful run for governor in 2026 would almost certainly impede a grab for the presidency in 2028. (Though if history is any guide, an unsuccessful run for California governor does not definitively preclude a bid for the Oval Office: Two years after losing the White House to John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon lost the 1962 contest for governor to Pat Brown . The Yorba Linda native became the nation’s 37th president in 1969.) As the chief executive of a state that doubles as the world’s fifth-largest economy, Harris would have more power to steer policy and make changes as a California governor than she did as vice president, where her job required deference to President Biden. But leading a state, even the nation’s most populous, could feel like small potatoes after being a heartbeat (and a few dozen electoral votes) from the presidency. The protracted slog to November 2026 would also be a stark contrast to her ill-fated 107-day sprint toward the White House, particularly for a candidate whose 2020 presidential primary campaign was dogged by allegations of infighting and mismanagement. “I don’t think Kamala Harris has a deep psychological need to be governor of California, or to be in elective office in order to feel like she can contribute to society,” said the operative who’s worked with Harris in the past. “I think some of these people do, but she’s somebody who has enough prominence that she could do a lot of big, wonderful things without having to worry about balancing California’s budget or negotiating with Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel,” the Encino Democrat who chairs the Assembly’s budget committee. Technically, Harris has until March 2026 to decide whether she enters a race. But political strategists who spoke to The Times theorized that she probably would make a move by late spring, if she chooses to do so. “People will be more annoyed if she drops in in June,” a Democratic strategist involved with one of the gubernatorial campaigns said. Sending a clear signal by February would be more “courteous,” the strategist continued, explaining that such a move would give candidates more time to potentially enter other races. Kounalakis is a longtime friend and ally of Harris’ , and the vice president also has long-term relationships with some of the other candidates and potential candidates. California has eight statewide elected offices and campaign finance laws allow candidates to fundraise interchangeably for them, meaning money already raised for a candidate’s gubernatorial campaign could easily be redirected should they decide to run for, say, lieutenant governor instead. There are already a number of candidates running for lieutenant governor, including former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs, former state Sen. Steven Bradford and former state Treasurer Fiona Ma. But that office probably would see even more interest should Harris enter the gubernatorial race. It’s a largely ceremonial position, but one that has served as a launching pad for the governorship. Still, even if Harris does enter the race, Republican political strategist Mike Murphy threw cold water on the idea that she would have an automatic glide path to the governor’s office. “It’s like Hollywood. Nobody knows anything. She’s famous enough to look credible in early polling. That’s all we know for sure,” Murphy said. “Does that predict the future? No. Are there a lot of downsides (to a potential Harris candidacy)? Totally, yes.” ©2024 Los Angeles Times. Visit latimes.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Mary Trump Reveals the Worst Christmas Gift She Ever Received from Uncle Donald TrumpAtalanta stay top of Serie A with late equaliser at Lazio
Maryam proposes Beijing-Punjab working group to combat pollution
Clearstead Announces Bradley Knapp will become President and Chief Executive OfficerThomas Frank unhappy with officials in game with Brighton