Olympus http://so-l.ru/tags/show/olympus Fri, 15 Dec 2017 01:57:52 +0300 <![CDATA[Greece: 2nd climber dies on snowy slopes of Mt. Olympus]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_12_12_greece_2nd_climber_dies_on_snowy_slopes Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:44:37 +0300 <![CDATA[1 man dies, another injured climbing Greece’s Mount Olympus]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_12_10_1_man_dies_another_injured_climbing_gre Sun, 10 Dec 2017 03:38:13 +0300 <![CDATA[AMD EPYC Enters Azure Cloud Through Microsoft Project Olympus]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_12_08_amd_epyc_enters_azure_cloud_through_micr Fri, 08 Dec 2017 16:00:00 +0300 <![CDATA[President Donald J. Trump Stands with Local Communities against Government Overreach on Land Management]]> “The Antiquities Act does not give the Federal Government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water, and it’s time we ended this abusive practice.” 

—President Donald J. Trump

RESPONSIBLE LAND MANAGEMENT: President Donald J. Trump is modifying two national monuments to continue to protect objects of significance while prioritizing public use and access.

• Today, President Trump is signing two proclamations modifying the boundaries of the Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah.

• Bears Ears National Monument will be modified to two units named Shash Jáa, Navajo for Bears Ears, and Indian Creek, encompassing a total of 228,784 acres of land.

o Bears Ears was originally designated in 2016 to encompass nearly 1.5 million acres, including a patchwork of Federal, State, and private land.

o This modification will restore the majority of the National Forest and Bureau of Land Management land to the management status existing prior to the 2016 designation.

• Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument will be modified to three units encompassing a combined 1,006,341 acres, an area larger than the state of Rhode Island.

o Grand Staircase was originally designated in 1996 by President Clinton largely for political purposes.

• Presidents have modified the boundaries to remove lands from monuments 18 times in the past. The most significant reduction occurred in 1915 when President Woodrow Wilson halved Mount Olympus National Monument, which is now a National Park.

 

ENDING OVERREACH ON PUBLIC LAND: President Trump is ending past overreach and abuse of the monument review process under the Antiquities Act that has closed off land to the public, while continuing to protect objects of significance.

• The Antiquities Act requires that objects be of historic or scientific interest, that the area reserved to protect the objects be the smallest area compatible, and that monuments be designated on Federal land only. 

• Since 1996, several national monuments designations have gone beyond the intent of the Antiquities Act—to limit protected areas to the smallest area compatible—and now encompass millions of acres.

o In 1906, President Teddy Roosevelt designated the first national monument at Devils Tower, which was less than 1,200 acres.

• “Objects of historic or scientific interest” is a term that has been stretched to include landscape areas, biodiversity, “viewsheds,” World War II desert bombing craters, and “remoteness.”

o Past administrations have abused the designation of objects as national monuments to fill in pre-identified boundaries that mirror failed Congressional attempts to make protective land designations.

• Monument external boundaries often encompass private land, and in the case of the Cascade Siskiyou National Monument, the expansion contained 38 percent private land within the external boundary.

• Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument is the poster child for Antiquities Act overreach and abuse, having been designated to assist President Bill Clinton’s reelection campaign and end the development of a coal project.

 

A NEW POLICY FOR LAND MANAGEMENT: President Trump and Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke will work to put in place new land management policies to protect objects while prioritizing public access, facilitating infrastructure development, and allowing traditional uses of the land.

• The Trump Administration is continuing to protect public land, and is keeping parts of monuments to protect objects of interest within the smallest areas compatible. 

o The Trump Administration is not going to sell public lands wholesale.

o The Trump Administration will protect objects in the “smallest area compatible” with the proper care of the objects to be protected.

• The Trump Administration is making sure local communities have a voice by restoring traditional “multiple use” activities on Federal lands and waters.

o This will increase economic growth and prosperity, especially in rural communities, by allowing grazing, commercial fishing, logging, and in some cases, mineral development.

o Monument designations should be used to protect objects and not to unnecessarily restrain public access.

• Improving and developing infrastructure will help the American people experience our public lands that have been made inaccessible due to past overreach.

o Some monument designations prevent construction of future roads and other facilities, making the land inaccessible for use.

o Restrictions on vegetative management and maintenance activities have led to poorly maintained roads and even closures.

• Monument designations have greatly restricted multiple-uses like grazing, timber harvest, fishing, resource development, infrastructure upgrades, and motorized recreation. 

o Designating too much land for a national monument is harmful to the local tax base via the elimination or unnecessary restriction of grazing, timber and mineral activity and leases, as well as the restricting of access to hunting and fishing opportunities. 

 

A TRANSPARENT REVIEW PROCESS: President Trump and his Administration are being open and transparent in the review of monuments.

• The President’s proclamation follows an open and transparent review process originally initiated by President Trump’s Executive Order 13792, “Review of Designations under the Antiquities Act.”

o President Trump’s Executive Order limited the review to monuments designated after January 1, 1996, and over 100,000 acres in size, or monuments that Secretary Zinke deemed to have been created without adequate public input.

o The review only covers only 27 of the more than 150 monuments that the Act has been used to designate or expand.

• Secretary Zinke visited eight monuments in six States and personally held more than 60 meetings with hundreds of local stakeholders.

o Individuals and organizations representing all sides of the debate were involved, ranging from environmental organizations to county commissioners and local residents.

o Secretary Zinke met with Tribal representatives, including from the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition in Salt Lake City.

• Secretary of the Interior Zinke opened a formal comment period on regulations.gov, for the first time ever, of the review of monuments designated under the Antiquities Act.

]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_12_04_president_donald_j_trump_stands_with_lo Mon, 04 Dec 2017 23:17:59 +0300
<![CDATA[Fujifilm Poised for Growth in Booming Digital Camera Market]]> Premium photography and imaging company, FUJIFILM Holdings Corporation FUJIY has lately proclaimed that it foresees year-over-year revenue growth of nearly 10% for fiscal 2018 (ending March 2018). Share price of the company moved north to $40.00, post the newsflash on Nov 16, 2017.

Over the last six months, shares of this Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) stock have returned 8.7% against the industry 13.8% decline.

Also, the stock currently has a VGM Score of A.

You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

The company perceives that its revenues and profitability will improve in the upcoming quarters on the back of stronger sales of high-end digital cameras.

The Camera & Imaging Products Association recently revealed that global camera shipments climbed nearly 13.6% to 18.9 million units in September from January. This has raised camera makers’ hopes of a surge in demand for high-value-added models.

Since 2010, the worldwide camera market has been witnessing a downward trend as end-users are defecting to smartphones. However, this year’s shipment data discloses that the markets are rebounding. One major stimulus behind the rally is the “The Instagram Effect.” This widely used photo-sharing application has largely driven sales of premium compact digital cameras, offering much better image than smartphones.

Industry View

Robust growth prospects have triggered business rivalry in the digital camera market. Fujifilm Holdings Corporation, Panasonic Corporation, Canon, Inc. CAJ, Sony Corporation SNE, Leica Camera AG, Nikon Corporation, Olympus Corporation and HP Inc. HPQ are the major players in this space.

In order to grab a larger portion of market demand, these camera makers are launching high-end models and have raised near-term top-line forecasts. For instance, Canon, Inc. anticipates year-over-year sales growth of 8% for 2017. The company noted that its compact digital cameras and interchangeable lenses are currently witnessing better-than-expected sales. Sony Corporation has raised its sales view by nearly 10.5% for fiscal 2018 (ending March 2018). Sony claims that demand for its Alpha mirrorless cameras has been improving in recent quarters. Nikon and Panasonic have also elevated their near-term sales guidance.

Fujifilm Riding High

In August, Fujifilm rolled out the VISION2019 program through which it intends to boost near-term profitability on the back of increased cash-flow generation, propel growth in prime business domains and develop new high-margin businesses. On the back of these, the company aims to generate revenues worth ¥2,600 billion, operating income of ¥230 billion and net income of ¥150 billion in fiscal 2020.

We believe that strategic business acquisitions (like the Wako Pure Chemical Industries Ltd. buyout in April 2017) and new operational-efficacy improving programs (such as the Work Style Innovation program) will boost the company’s top and bottom-line performance. 

Notably, Fujifilm predicts that the future of the digital camera industry is highly dependent on demand of major emerging countries such as China and India. In sync with this, the company intends to tap greater share of the Indian mirrorless camera demand by promoting its Fuji GFX system and premium range of X Series cameras, going forward. In addition, the company’s 4K broadcast lenses are likely to secure sturdy response in the county in the near future.

In the VISION2019 program, the company stated that its Imaging Solutions segment will generate roughly ¥380 billion revenues and ¥45 billion operating income by the end of fiscal 2020.

We believe that the aforementioned moves will largely help Fujifilm withstand competition in the high-end digital camera market. However, the photomask industry is highly dynamic in nature. The possibility of a rival outpacing competency with a new product or marketing strategy remains a concern.

Wall Street’s Next Amazon

Zacks EVP Kevin Matras believes this familiar stock has only just begun its climb to become one of the greatest investments of all time. It’s a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in pure genius.

Click for details >>


Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
 
HP Inc. (HPQ): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Sony Corp Ord (SNE): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Fujifilm Holdings Corp. (FUJIY): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Canon, Inc. (CAJ): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.
 
Zacks Investment Research]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_20_fujifilm_poised_for_growth_in_booming_di Mon, 20 Nov 2017 23:01:00 +0300
<![CDATA[На Kickstarter появился проект модульного пленочного фотоаппарата]]>

Британский стартап Reflex начал на краудсорсинговой платформе Kickstarter сбор средств на проект модульного пленочного фотоаппарата с ручным управлением под названием Reflex 1.

Камера позволяет использовать объективы сторонних фирм, менять задники с разными пленками, а также поддерживает синхронизацию настроек с приложением для смартфона. Подробное описание проекта доступно на Kickstarter.

Несмотря на то, что некоторые крупные производители еще производят пленочные фотоаппараты, практически все производимые сегодня камеры оснащаются цифровыми сенсорами. Они имеют множество преимуществ перед фотопленкой: снятую фотографию можно практически мгновенно посмотреть на дисплее камеры, обработать на компьютере или распечатать. Но некоторые люди по-прежнему предпочитают снимать на фотопленку.

Зеркальные пленочные фотоаппараты имеют и другие неудобства, помимо невозможности быстро получить отснятые изображения. Например, фотограф не может быстро сменить цветную пленку на черно-белую или более светочувствительную, а объективы, как и на цифровых зеркальных камерах, совместимы только с камерами одного производителя.

Стартап Reflex разработал новый пленочный фотоаппарат под названием Reflex 1, в котором применено несколько необычных технических решений, позволяющих упростить его использование.

В нем используется стандартная 35-миллиметровая фотопленка, загружаемая в специальный задник, который можно быстро поменять, если фотографу необходимо использовать разные типы пленок.

Для того, чтобы фотографы могли пользоваться большим набором объективов, в том числе разных производителей, в камере предусмотрены сменные крепления. По умолчанию ней установлено резьбовое крепление M42, но его можно легко заменить на сменные байонеты распространенных в прошлом пленочных камер — Nikon F, Canon FD, Olympus OM и Pentax PK.

Фотоаппарат не оснащен автоматическим фокусом и перемоткой пленки, а экспозиция в нем выставляется вручную на основе показаний экспонометра. В камеру встроена вспышка и светодиоды для постоянного освещения.

Фотоаппарат построен на базе платы Arduino, также создатели заявляют, что если они соберут на проект 150 тысяч фунтов, они встроят в него модуль Bluetooth, который позволит синхронизировать со смартфоном метаданные снимков и настройки экспозиции (выдержка, диафрагма и ISO пленки). Стоимость камеры без объектива для первых 250 покупателей составляет 350 фунтов стерлингов.

В 2016 году госкорпорация «Ростех» заявила о намерении возродить производство бренд фотоаппаратов «Зенит», выпускавшихся с 1952-го по 2005 год.

Григорий Копиев

Читайте также: Игра «Зенита». Как прицелы для оружия победили легендарные советские фотоаппараты

]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_09_na_kickstarter_poyavilsya_proekt_modulnog Thu, 09 Nov 2017 15:10:00 +0300
<![CDATA[Olympus выпустила смарт-очки EyeTrek INSIGHT EI-10 для бизнеса]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_08_olympus_vipustila_smart_ochki_eyetrek_ins Wed, 08 Nov 2017 07:11:38 +0300 <![CDATA[Japan Inc gingerly embraces more foreigners]]>

MICHAEL WOODFORD, the first non-Japanese president of Olympus, likened the camera-maker’s board members who sacked him in 2011 to “children in a classroom”. Mr Woodford had confronted Tsuyoshi Kikukawa, the company’s imperious chairman, over a $1.7bn hole in its finances. Mr Kikukawa responded by orchestrating a show of hands in a boardroom coup that sent the Englishman packing. It all fitted a cliché of Japan’s boardrooms as an all-Japanese, all-male club where wizened bosses ruthlessly enforce wa, or harmony.

Gradually, the serenity is being disrupted. Nearly 15% of companies in the Nikkei 225 stock index now have at least one non-Japanese on their boards. That is still less than half the share in Britain’s FTSE 100, but it is up from 12% in 2013 and the trajectory seems set. Japan’s biggest bank, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, and Takeda, its largest pharmaceuticals company (which in 2015 appointed its first foreign chief executive, a Frenchman) announced the appointment of foreign directors this...

]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_02_japan_inc_gingerly_embraces_more_foreign Thu, 02 Nov 2017 18:51:37 +0300
<![CDATA[The wa forward: Japan Inc gingerly embraces more foreigners]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_02_the_wa_forward_japan_inc_gingerly_embra Thu, 02 Nov 2017 18:51:37 +0300 <![CDATA[Shell's (RDS.A) Q3 Earnings Beat Amid Higher Oil, Cost Cuts]]> Europe’s largest oil company Royal Dutch Shell plc RDS.A reported strong third-quarter results on all round contribution from all its segments. In particular, rebounding commodity prices and cost cuts helped the company follow continental rival BP plc BP in coming out with better-than-expected numbers.

The Hague-based Shell reported earnings per ADS (on a current cost of supplies basis, excluding items - the market’s preferred measure) of $1.00, breezing past the Zacks Consensus Estimate of 83 cents and the year-ago adjusted profit of 70 cents.

Revenues of $77,733 million were 23.5% above the third-quarter 2016 sales of $62,938 million. Meanwhile, operating expenses fell in the quarter to $9,477 million compared with $9,994 million in the corresponding period last year.

Royal Dutch Shell PLC Price, Consensus and EPS Surprise

 

Royal Dutch Shell PLC Price, Consensus and EPS Surprise | Royal Dutch Shell PLC Quote

 

 

Segmental Performance

Upstream: Upstream segment recorded a profit of $562 million (excluding items) during the quarter, soaring from the paltry $4 million (adjusted) achieved in the year-ago period.

This primarily reflects the impact of higher oil and gas realizations, revised assessment of a deferred tax asset and an arrears settlement agreement, partly offset by increase in depreciation charges.

Shell’s upstream volumes averaged 2,656 thousand oil-equivalent barrels per day (MBOE/d), 1% lower than the year-ago period. Liquids contributed approximately 61% to Shell’s total volumes, while natural gas accounted for the remaining portion.

Apart from the obvious BG role, production during the quarter compared with the year-ago quarter included volumes from new field start-ups and continued ramp-up of existing fields – particularly Kashagan in Kazakhstan, the Lula, Iracema and Sapinhoá fields in Brazil and Stones, Olympus and Mars in the Gulf of Mexico – that boosted output by roughly 243 MBOE/d. However, this was more than offset by the impact of normal field declines and asset sales.

Shell’s worldwide realized liquids prices were 16.4% above the year-earlier levels while natural gas prices were up 21.3%.

Downstream: In the downstream segment – that focuses on refining, marketing and retailing – the Anglo-Dutch super-major reported adjusted income of $2,668 million, 28.4% more than the $2,078 million earned in the year-ago period. The positive comparison reflects the impact of ‘improved refining and chemicals industry conditions’.

Integrated Gas: The Integrated Gas unit reported adjusted income of $1,282 million, a 37.7% improvement from the $931 million in July-September quarter of 2016. Results were favorably impacted by increase in commodity prices and higher LNG volumes (production and liquefication). Partly offsetting these factors were revised assessment of a deferred tax liability and higher depreciation.

Cash Flow

During the quarter under review, Shell generated cash flow from operations of $7,582 million, returned $4,000 million to shareholders through dividends and spent $5,742 million on capital projects. Despite falling from the year-ago period, the company’s resilient cash generation has helped it to cover dividend payments. Importantly, the group raked in $3,670 million in free cash flow during the third quarter, up from $3,324 million a year ago.

Balance Sheet

As of Sep 30, 2017, the company had $20,699 million in cash and $88,356 million in debt (including short-term debt). Net debt-to-capitalization ratio was approximately 25.4%, down from 29.2% a year ago following the BG Group acquisition. The improvement in the group’s debt ratio was helped by cost cuts and asset sales (worth more than $26 billion since 2016).

Share Performance: Royal Dutch Shell has gained 15.5% of its value during the third quarter, outperforming the 10.8% rally of the industry it belongs to.

Zacks Rank & Stock Picks

Royal Dutch holds a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).

Apart from Shell, one can look at other buy-ranked integrated energy players like ExxonMobil Corporation XOM and Chevron Corporation CVX ExxonMobil sports a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), while Chevron holds Zacks Rank of 2. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Irving, TX-based ExxonMobil is the world’s largest publicly traded oil company, engaged in oil and natural gas exploration and production, petroleum products refining and marketing, chemicals manufacture, and other energy-related businesses. company’s expected EPS growth rate for three to five years currently stands at 13.1%, comparing favorably with the industry's growth rate of 8.4%.

San Ramon, CA-based Chevron is engaged in oil and gas exploration and production, refining and marketing of petroleum products, manufacturing of chemicals, and other energy-related businesses. Over 30 days, the firm has seen the Zacks Consensus Estimate for 2017 and 2018 increase 4.2% and 8.1%, to $4.21 and $4.96 per share, respectively.

Zacks’ Best Private Investment Ideas

While we are happy to share many articles like this on the website, our best recommendations and most in-depth research are not available to the public.

Starting today, for the next month, you can follow all Zacks' private buys and sells in real time. Our experts cover all kinds of trades… from value to momentum . . . from stocks under $10 to ETF and option moves . . . from stocks that corporate insiders are buying up to companies that are about to report positive earnings surprises. You can even look inside exclusive portfolios that are normally closed to new investors.

Click here for Zacks' private trades >>


Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
 
BP p.l.c. (BP): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Chevron Corporation (CVX): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Royal Dutch Shell PLC (RDS.A): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.
 
Zacks Investment Research]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_11_02_shell_s_rds_a_q3_earnings_beat_amid_hi Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:52:00 +0300
<![CDATA[New ‘Justice League’ Footage Might Have Revealed an Important Character (Hint: It’s Not Steppenwolf)]]> Aquaman, Wonder Woman, and Cyborg prepare for battle

Justice League | Warner Bros.

Warner Bros. and DC Films’ Justice League is set to hit theaters soon. The studios have continued revving up excitement for the massive superhero flick with a ton of exciting behind-the-scenes clues and new footage. Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Cyborg (Ray Fisher), the Flash (Ezra Miller), and Aquaman (Jason Momoa) have all starred in recently released trailers. We’ve also gotten a glimpse of some spoilers that give us a bit of insight into Justice League’s narrative before it drops Nov. 17.

With Joss Whedon stepping into to finish the flick after Zack Snyder had to step away for personal reasons, it also looks like Justice League is going to have a much lighter tone than Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice or even Suicide Squad.

Now that DC Films has dropped even more footage of Justice League we’ve gotten a  look at an even more exciting character — and it’s not Steppenwolf. Here’s what the latest clips reveal.

Steppenwolf speaks!

We’ve known for quite some time that the Justice League is going to have to stand against the evil Steppenwolf and his diabolical army of Parademons. However, we had yet to get a true visual of what he would look like until now. For the first time, in the new Justice League footage, Steppenwolf, played by Game of Thrones alum Ciarán Hinds, finally speaks.

Imposing and menacing, Steppenwolf looms over one of his victims, who is begging for their life. The victim pleads, “We have families!” Steppenwolf responds, “Why does everyone keep telling me that?”

A twinge of humor

Aquaman looks to the side to a shadowed figure

Aquaman and Batman trade barbs in the new footage. | Warner Bros.

With the success of Patty Jenkins’ Wonder Woman, DC Films is trying to switch some things up a bit by adding small nuggets of humor in Justice League.

As seen in the UK trailer “Thunder,” Batman and Aquaman trade some hilarious jabs. After Aquaman tells Batman, “You really are out of your mind.” The Caped Crusader responds by saying, “I’m not the one who brought a pitchfork.” #Burn

A Cyborg spoiler

The new trailer isn’t the only new footage that gives us a glimpse of Justice League. If you take a closer look at AT&T’s Cyborg Exclusive First Look, it looks like the Cyborg’s dad Silas Stone (Joe Morton), has gotten caught in Steppenwolf’s clutches.

Though Cyborg appears to confront Steppenwolf, we have no clue if his dad will make it out of this horrid situation alive.

A touch of mansplaining

Even Wonder Woman can’t escape annoying mansplaining. Apparently, Bruce Wayne thought it was cute to explain to Diana Prince how a superhero team should work. In the clip, Wonder Woman tries to get Batman to understand the gravity of what he’s asking of their fellow metahumans.

She says, “We’re asking people we don’t know to risk their lives.” Walking away, Batman says, “I know. This is how it works.”  **Insert eye roll here.**

The ruler of Olympus

Brace yourself! If you look very closely at the Justice League “Justice is Served” trailer, you’ll get a glimpse at a character who looks suspiciously like Zeus. It seems as if the god of the sky and the ruler of the Olympians will join the Justice League’s fight against Steppenwolf.

The character’s inclusion in the trailer is one of the biggest surprises of the new footage — and the first time that fans are seeing him in the flesh.

A massive Wonder Woman connection

Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman

Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman | Warner Bros.

If you were paying attention in Wonder Woman, then you know that Diana Prince is a result of the connection between Zeus and her mother, Hippolyta. It looks like things got so bad on earth that Wonder Woman had to call on the big guns aka her dad for help.

A change of heart

In Batman v. Superman, Wonder Woman tells Batman that she is done with mankind and that she had given up on them a century ago. However, according to Gadot, Diana has since had a change of heart.

Recently at a Beijing press conference for Justice League, she said,

We realized that actually, there is no way that Wonder Woman will ever give up on mankind. The reason why she left the island was because she wanted to make their life better and safer. They are her calling. So, I’m giving you a very honest answer, sometimes, in a creative process, you establish something that is not necessarily the right decision, but then you can always correct it and change it. So Wonder Woman will always be there as far as she concerns for mankind.

Follow Aramide on Twitter @midnightrami.

Check out The Cheat Sheet on Facebook!

Read the original article from The Cheat Sheet]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_10_30_new_justice_league_footage_might_have Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:38:00 +0300
<![CDATA[Новые объективы Olympus M.Zuiko PRO позволяют получить красивый эффект боке]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_10_27_novie_obektivi_olympus_m_zuiko_pro_pozv Fri, 27 Oct 2017 09:01:06 +0300 <![CDATA[These Major American Cities Are Sitting Ducks for Giant Earthquakes]]> Mexico City earthquake rescuers

Mexico City’s recent earthquake caused massive damage. | Ronaldo Schemidt/AFP/Getty Images

Natural disasters seem to be increasingly common these days. Whether it’s the rapid, machine gun-like frequency with which hurricanes hit our coast or the earthquakes and tsunamis killing hundreds of thousands, it can feel like Mother Earth has a vendetta against humanity. Even if you live in an area you thought was relatively safe from natural disasters, you might be surprised at how much risk there actually is. And for millions of Americans, the biggest threat isn’t from hurricanes or floods — it’s from earthquakes.

Using data from the United States Geological Survey, we’ve compiled a list of 15 American cities that are in real danger of experiencing a devastating earthquake. Although some of these cities might not be much of a surprise, there are plenty that are — and might have you checking your homeowners insurance policy to make sure you’re in the clear. The USGS data say earthquake risk in these areas is both natural and man-made (as a result of hydraulic fracturing, among other things), meaning parts of the country that were once relatively risk-free now have increased odds of a serious seismic event.

We don’t mean to shake you up, but here are the 15 cities that could see potentially devastating earthquakes in the very near future.

1. Memphis, Tennessee

  • The city isn’t in what you’d consider a classic earthquake zone. But the USGS says otherwise.

While we typically associate large, destructive earthquakes with parts of California or in areas near volcanoes, the threat is very real even in middle America. Take Memphis for example. Most people would be surprised to learn that Memphis is actually at considerable risk when it comes to earthquakes, but a quick look at the USGS’ map reveals that the city is actually in a seismic hot spot. In fact, the USGS says there’s “a 25-40% probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater in the next 50 years.”

Memphis was unexpected. Our next city? Much less so.

2. Los Angeles

Los Angeles

The city is right near the San Andreas fault. | David McNew/Getty Images

  • Residents of Los Angeles have been waiting for “the big one” for decades.

For decades now, we’ve been hearing about “the big one” — the hypothetical (or inevitable) earthquake that will send Southern California into the sea. This, as comedian Bill Hicks once joked, would create “Arizona Bay.” LA sits near the San Andreas fault, which would likely be the source of the quake. And it’s not a matter of “if” but more of a “when.” Experts say a big quake is a near certainty by 2037, and it’ll be a 6.7 or larger.

We follow the San Andreas fault right up the coast to another major California city.

3. San Francisco

San Francisco panorama

California is at high risk. | kropic/iStock/Getty Images

  • Like those in Los Angeles, people in the Bay Area are also waiting for that giant, cataclysmic earthquake scientists have predicted.

It’s not just the Los Angeles area that’s in harm’s way when it comes to seismic events. The Bay Area, including San Francisco, is also at risk. We’ve seen big quakes hit the area before, and we’re certain to see it again. And as with LA, it’s only a matter of when it will happen. A 2008 USGS assessment says there’s a 63% probability of a large-scale quake hitting the area in the near future. You can blame the two faults the Bay Area resides near: the San Andreas and Hayward faults.

We head further north, now, where quake risks are even more pronounced.

4. Seattle

Seattle downtown and Space Needle

A big quake could be seriously problematic. | aiisha5/iStock/Getty Images

  • The Cascadia subduction zone is geological and not, surprisingly, related to Eddie Vedder.

If there’s one city scientists are most worried about, it might be Seattle. While the major California cities have the San Andreas fault to worry about, Seattlites have the Cascadia subduction zone to deal with, an area in which the Earth’s crust is being forced below the North American land mass. It’s a 680-mile zone that causes frequent earthquakes, and researchers say a big quake could lead to serious problems for the Seattle area’s 3.8 million residents.

Next up is a city few of you would expect to see on a list like this.

5. Oklahoma City

oklahoma city

The probability of an earthquake is up to 40%. | Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images

  • The probability of a major earthquake hitting Oklahoma in 2017 is up to 40%. 

For a long time, a major earthquake occurring in Oklahoma was a far-fetched idea. But these days, the likelihood of a large-scale seismic event hitting Oklahoma, including its capital Oklahoma City, is roughly equal to that in California. Given that Oklahoma is not located near volcanoes, subduction zones, or major fault lines, what’s the deal? You can partially blame hydraulic fracturing. Previously, one to three minor quakes would hit the state per year. Today, the state sees that many on any given day.

The next city takes us north — way north.

6. Anchorage, Alaska

Anchorage

A quake in Anchorage could cause serious damage. | iStock/Getty Images

  • Alaska sits along the Pacific Rim and “Ring of Fire,” along with other at-risk cities, including Seattle, Los Angeles, and San Francisco.

Fairly often, you hear about a major earthquake hitting Alaska. It’s not usually a big deal, and that’s mostly because population density in Alaska is so low that few people are affected. But in Alaska’s biggest city, Anchorage, there is some serious potential for damage. Alaska’s biggest recorded earthquake was a 9.2 in 1964 that ended up killing 128 people. But if Anchorage were to be hit directly, the body count could be much higher. Anchorage’s real risk is from tsunamis resulting from nearby quakes.

The next city takes us back to Oklahoma.

7. Tulsa, Oklahoma

tulsa city skyline

The industries making Tulsa money could lead to a natural disaster. | alex grichenko/iStock/Getty Images

  • Though not as big as Oklahoma City, Tulsa’s 400,000 people are also at risk of a major quake.

We already discussed Oklahoma. It’s remarkable that a state that experienced so little seismic activity in years past is now shaking and rattling like never before. And you have to include Tulsa, Oklahoma’s second largest city, on the list of cities at serious risk for earthquakes. Ironically, Tulsa has become increasingly wealthy as a result of the extraction industry fueling the local economy. But those processes could ultimately lead to a disaster.

We swing south, now, to Texas.

8. Dallas

Dallas cityscape with blue sky

Its risk is relatively small compared to some other big cities. | f11photo/iStock/Getty Images

  • Recently, Texas has seen a dramatic jump in earthquake risk.

Sure, Oklahoma has created a bit of a mess for itself when it comes to geological stability. But other areas haven’t been immune, and that includes North Texas and the Dallas-Forth Worth area. In fact, the risk of a major earthquake hitting the Dallas region has increased 10 times over the past few years, according to USGS data. The risk is still relatively small compared to other big cities, though, so those in Dallas can rest easy — but not that easy.

We go back to the Northwest now for another city that could be reduced to rubble from the coming “big one.”

9. Portland, Oregon

Portland

The West Coast has a high risk. | iStock/Getty Images

  • Seattle isn’t the only Cascadia city at risk from devastating earthquakes.

Yes, Portland is also in harm’s way when it comes to earthquakes. Though the threat isn’t as dire as its northerly counterpart Seattle, Portland is still at risk because of that pesky Cascadia subduction zone — which should really be the title of a forthcoming Fifty Shades sequel. According to The Atlantic, there is a 20% chance that the Portland region (most of northwest Oregon) will be hit by an 8.0 quake at some point in the next half-century.

You probably wouldn’t expect our next city to do any type of shaking, rattling, or rolling.

10. Salt Lake City

Salt Lake City

The city sits directly on a fault. | Garrett/Creative Commons

  • Salt Lake City sits on top of the Wasatch fault, which stretches for 240 miles.

Yet another city you wouldn’t expect to experience an earthquake, Utah’s capital of Salt Lake City is actually in prime position. The city — which, along with its suburbs, is home to more than 2 million people — lies directly on top of a fault, meaning the risk is real. A big quake hasn’t occurred for some time. The last major instance was in the mid-1850s. But scientists say that a big quake, perhaps as high as a 7.0 on the Richter scale, could occur sometime soon.

The next city on our lists lies on a geothermal hot spot.

11. Honolulu

Hawaii

Volcanoes and earthquakes often go hand in hand.  | Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Images

  • Hawaii is a literal volcanic hot spot. That means an increased risk of seismic activity.

Honolulu is the biggest and most populous city in the Hawaiian islands. Given that the archipelago is situated above an active geological hot spot (and the big island is an active volcano), there’s a good risk of seismic activity at any given time. A 7.9 quake hit Hawaii in 1868 killing 77 people, but that was before it was heavily populated. These days, nearly 1.5 million people live there, and earthquakes are quite frequent. Plus, Honolulu has the threat of tsunamis to take into account.

Our next city is far away from Hawaii.

12. Wichita, Kansas

A warm, beautiful sunset along the Arkansas River in Wichita, Kansas

Its risk is increasing. | ricardoreitmeyer/iStock/Getty Images

  • The extraction industry is also threatening Wichita.

Wichita is one of the biggest cities in Kansas. With a population of less than 400,000, that should give you an idea of how sparsely populated the state is. And that means there’s a lot of space for industry — from farming to extraction. Wichita is, unfortunately, in a position of increased risk due to what’s happening in Oklahoma. While Wichita’s overall risk of being hit by a major quake is low, it’s much higher than it was a short time ago. USGS data show the chance of a big quake hitting southern Kansas at somewhere between 10% and 17%.

We go from a relatively small city to the largest in America.

13. New York City

Times Square in New York City

New York City isn’t ready for a quake. | AndreyKrav/iStock/Getty Images

  • The amount of damage that an earthquake could do to New York City is unimaginable, but the city is due for one.

New York sits on shaky ground — literally. Though the risk of a huge quake isn’t anywhere close to cities such as Los Angeles or San Francisco, New York is located on an area fraught with fault lines. Moderate quakes have hit the region for centuries, averaging about 5.0 on the Richter scale. The last quake of that magnitude to hit New York occurred in 1884, and that means New York is about due to see another sometime soon.

We move from the Big Apple to a small but vibrant city on the Southern shore.

14. Charleston

Charleston, South Carolina, USA cityscape

A quake is rare here. | Sean Pavone/iStock/Getty Images

  • South Carolina isn’t immune to disastrous earthquakes, though they’re still pretty rare.

This might be the most surprising city on our list. Charleston is located on the South Carolina coast, not really a place known for its shaky ground. But it is, interestingly enough, at an elevated risk for earthquakes. The last notable quake was in 2002, centered somewhere in the Charleston area. But the data from the USGS show the Savannah area is at particular risk for more activity going forward. In fact, researchers are starting to prepare for the next quake, which could be more than a 6.0.

Finally, will Olympus fall?

15. Washington, D.C.

Washington, D.C., in spring

An earthquake damaged the Washington Monument in 2011. | SeanPavonePhoto/iStock/Getty Images

  • In 2011, an earthquake damaged the Washington Monument. So, yes, the threat is real.

If you live in the D.C. area, get acquainted with the Virginia seismic zone because it could be the genesis of a sizable earthquake. D.C. has been shaken up before. As recently as 2011, many buildings were damaged by a nearby 5.8 quake in Virginia. Although this is minor compared to the risks in California and the Pacific Northwest, D.C. is still in a danger zone. In fact, there’s higher risk in D.C. than previously thought as researchers learn more about the surrounding geology.

Check out The Cheat Sheet on Facebook!

Read the original article from The Cheat Sheet]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_10_15_these_major_american_cities_are_sitting Sun, 15 Oct 2017 07:13:00 +0300
<![CDATA[В ЯНАО тренер совершил суицид в фитнес-клубе]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_10_12_v_yanao_trener_sovershil_suicid_v_fitnes_k Thu, 12 Oct 2017 14:45:54 +0300 <![CDATA[Can GoPro's Fusion 360 and Hero 6 Fend Off Competition?]]> GoPro, Inc. GPRO has been in the news again, thrust into the spotlight by the launch of the latest camera equipment from technology giant Alphabet Inc. GOOGL. The move was preceded by similar releases from other established tech companies, thus pitting GoPro’s flagship cameras against tough competition, and forcing investors to question whether the Hero cameras can continue to hold their own in a rapidly expanding industry.

The Evolution of Competition

In early days, GoPro had taken the action camera market by storm, but in recent times the company has grappled with stiff competition from lower-priced action camera alternatives.

Earlier this week, Google rolled out a camera called Google clips, which has a 12-megapixel sensor and a 130-degree field-of-view lens, with 8GB of internal memory. The camera is priced at just $249, which is half the cost of GoPro's new Hero6 camera. Even though Clips is not as advanced and high-tech as the Hero line-up, it is cheaper and comes from a well-known company. GoPro's market could suffer further as Alphabet leverages its brand value and channels to aggressively market this product.

Another such product is Sony Corporation’s SNE latest action camera RX0 — which has features similar to GoPro’s line, and is waterproof and shockproof as well. The RX0 is due to be released in October.

Then there is competition from Spectacles — Snap Inc.’s SNAP augmented reality and camera glasses — priced at $130. Olympus Tough TG –Tracker ($299), Garmin’s VIRB Ultra 30 ($380) and VIRB XE ($310), Sony’s FDR-X300 ($368), TomTom’s Bandit Action Cam ($170) and Nikon’s KeyMission 170 ($397) are a few of the other leading products which compete with the Hero cameras. GoPro’s latest Hero6 camera is priced at $499.

Such lower-priced alternatives could corrode GoPro's market share and now, even its new video-editing software has a formidable competitor in Alphabet.

Amid an onslaught of such tough competition and with reviewers increasingly recommending cheaper alternatives, we believe GoPro's market share faces a very real threat. Granted, the company has a huge fan following, but it’s increasingly plausible that its brand value might not be enough to fend off competition at this scale. Even its subscription and licensing revenue plans stand at risk, and might not be as successful as previously anticipated.

GoPro’s Kitty

Late last month, GoPro unveiled the next version of its flagship action camera — the Hero6.

The latest Hero6 Black camera enables 4K video recording, with 60 fps, and 1080p recording, with 240fps. It boasts enhanced video stabilization, a built-in zoom that can be controlled from the touch screen, and packs 5Ghz for faster video offloads. The Hero6 Black operates on GoPro’s new processor — GP1— and is quite a bit faster than its predecessor.

The company also launched Fusion, its new 5.2k 360-degree spherical camera designed to capture both virtual reality, and standard video and picture. Earlier there was Omni, a video rig with six cameras, but the Fusion looks to be a more user-friendly, affordable version for the masses.

Fusion’s USP is something the company calls “over-capture” — which enables users to capture an entire scene, and then frame just the shots they want afterward in the GoPro app.  Priced at $699, the camera’s shipping commences in November. 

No doubt, Fusion will face tough competition from Garmin, VIRB 360 camera of which seems impressive, but costs a steep $800. There are several other spherical cameras already in the market. With GoPro's brand recognition and deep foothold in the action sports world, the company has a real chance to take the lead in this market, provided it gets Fusion right.

Getting it Right

GoPro has struggled in recent years, with messed-up product launches, operational stumbles and hitting the right price points. GoPro's shares have slumped nearly 70% in the last couple of years, as the company grappled with production delays and bungled up product roll outs, and lost ground to competitors like Sony, Garmin Ltd. GRMN, and Nikon Corporation NINOY. This culminated in some significant layoffs, restructuring measures and the decision to shutter its nascent entertainment business.

This year has been kinder to GoPro, as the company cut its losses and started to journey toward profitability. In fact, the company has been increasingly aligning itself with the smartphone era. Consider the content creation war between Facebook FB and Snap — it shows a secular trend toward individualized, social content creation. GoPro’s concept fits perfectly with this trend.

However, the company’s products have failed to achieve mass traction in the absence of an effective sharing aspect — which is a key element. Interestingly, GoPro is now working on making the smartphone the central focus of creating stories, which could help the company break out of its shell.

To keep a hold of its fragile market share, GoPro has to make sure that it gets its products and pricing exactly right. We remain optimistic on the company’s products, and hence have a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) on GoPro. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

5 Trades Could Profit "Big-League" from Trump Policies

If the stocks above spark your interest, wait until you look into companies primed to make substantial gains from Washington's changing course.

Today Zacks reveals 5 tickers that could benefit from new trends like streamlined drug approvals, tariffs, lower taxes, higher interest rates, and spending surges in defense and infrastructure.

See these buy recommendations now >>


Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report
 
Nikon Corp. (NINOY): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Facebook, Inc. (FB): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Snap Inc. (SNAP): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Sony Corp Ord (SNE): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
Garmin Ltd. (GRMN): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
GoPro, Inc. (GPRO): Free Stock Analysis Report
 
To read this article on Zacks.com click here.
 
Zacks Investment Research]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_10_06_can_gopro_s_fusion_360_and_hero_6_fend_o Fri, 06 Oct 2017 19:31:00 +0300
<![CDATA[Mount Olympus: the 24-hour theatrical orgy that outdoes Dionysus]]> Actors who nap on stage, ecstatic dances, ravishing arias, lovers swamped in sand … Jan Fabre’s epic in a Belgrade conference centre is an endurance test

The centrepiece of this year’s Belgrade international theatre festival was a 24-hour performance of Jan Fabre’s majestic, exhausting and exhilarating Mount Olympus: To Glorify the Cult of Tragedy. A hallucinatory vision of Homeric themes and characters, it presented a Dionysian orgy of madness, murder, incest, feminism, music (rave and arias) and extreme sports (skipping, dancing, fighting, loving). The show, which has had only a handful of performances in Europe since its premiere in 2015, started at 6pm on Saturday night and featured three 40-minute “dream times” during which the actors slept on stage. Durational theatre it’s called: the sort of event that tests your powers of endurance as well as the actors’. And it’s been going on a long time – the Greek festivals themselves were durational.

The modern template for all this is Robert Wilson’s KA MOUNTAIN AND GARDenia TERRACE, performed nonstop on seven hills in Shiraz, Iran, over seven days in 1972 (Wilson himself was hauled off to hospital after four days). In 1979, Ken Campbell had a 24-hour blast with Neil Oram’s The Warp, a 10-play rough theatre epic featuring Bill Nighy and Jim Broadbent. It started at 10am and the audience were on their feet for the duration: we were sustained by beer and sausage breaks. The sheer music-hall madness of that trip through the hippie underworld made it like an acid Archers. In 1985, Peter Brook’s eight-hour epic The Mahabharata was first staged late at night at a quarry in Avignon with the dawn coming up over the battlefield.

Continue reading...]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_09_26_mount_olympus_the_24_hour_theatrical_or Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:35:30 +0300
<![CDATA[Will Trump Change the Way Presidents Approach National Monuments?]]> In April, President Trump ordered Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to review more than two dozen national monuments, arguing that the designation of sites under previous administrations had gotten out of hand. Months later, Zinke’s recommendations, detailed in a leaked memo delivered to the White House, have sparked concern among local officials and environmental groups, prompting some to describe the proposals as “unprecedented.”

Zinke recommended changes to 10 national monuments, including Utah’s Grand Staircase-Escalante and Nevada’s Gold Butte. His proposals range from lifting restrictions on activities like commercial fishing to shrinking the parameters of at least four of the sites.

The contents of the report were made public a week shy of the 111th anniversary of America’s very first national monument designation. On September 24, 1906, Theodore Roosevelt deemed an area known as Devils Tower, Wyoming, worthy of preservation under the Antiquities Act. That act, passed the same year, gives presidents the power to protect “objects of historic and scientific interest.”

Devils Tower—a tan-colored monster of a rock, looming 1,267 feet above another thousand acres of open land—was just one of the 18 national monuments Roosevelt established during his presidency. Today, the country boasts more than 150 in total, from Governors Island in New York to Death Valley in California. Only three presidents since Roosevelt—Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, and George H. W. Bush—opted not to designate any during their terms. Never before, though, has a president attempted to scale down monuments to the extent that Zinke proposes.

Throughout history, a few monuments have become the source of political conflict. In 1915, for example, Woodrow Wilson cut down the boundaries of Roosevelt’s designation of Mount Olympus National Monument, much to environmentalists’ dismay. This past April, Trump called former President Barack Obama’s designation of Bears Ears National Monument, an area of more than 1.3 million acres in Utah, an “egregious abuse of power.”

In his assessment, Zinke proposed shrinking Bears Ears from 1.35 million acres to roughly 160,000, saying changes would “provide a much-needed change for the local communities who border and rely on these lands.” Still, environmental groups have pledged to fight Trump in court if he follows through on the recommendations.

I spoke with Mark Squillace, a law professor at the University of Colorado Boulder and former assistant to Bruce Babbitt, the interior secretary under President Bill Clinton, about the unprecedented territory the Trump administration has entered into—and the history behind a significant presidential power. Our conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.


Lena Felton: Let’s start at the very beginning and go back to the Antiquities Act of 1906. What was the significance of Congress granting the president sole power to protect sites?

Mark Squillace: I think it’s fair to say that people weren’t exactly sure about the breadth of the Antiquities Act when it was passed, but there clearly was a desire on the part of some of the people that were pushing this legislation to have more expansive authority than the narrow protection of small sites around our archeological digs. There clearly was some interest in kind of a broader type of legislation.

A large part of the reason for the Antiquities Act was to allow the president to act quickly to protect land. We can get into this later, but the big debate right now is whether it’s a one-way protection or whether the president somehow has the authority to undo protections made by previous presidents. If you think about the fundamental reason for the law in allowing quick protection before somebody can come in and undermine those protections by building roads, by locating mining claims, by logging timber, whatever they might want to do—you need to act quickly, and you need to do it in a way that’s protective.

Felton: Can you talk a bit about Theodore Roosevelt’s role in being the first president to use that power?

Squillace: The designation and decision that Roosevelt makes in 1908 to proclaim the Grand Canyon National Monument was one of the things that really changed the history of the Antiquities Act going forward. The Grand Canyon National Monument in 1908 was over 800,000 acres when it was designated, and it fairly soon thereafter led to a lawsuit by a guy by the name of Ralph Henry Cameron, who had located some mining claims around the Grand Canyon.

This, the famous case under the Antiquities Act, is called Cameron vs. United States, in which Cameron basically makes this argument that the Antiquities Act was a law designed to protect these small ancient sites with archeological finds, that it was not meant to protect these large landscapes, if you will. And the Supreme Court, in a rather short opinion … simply says that the Grand Canyon is one of the greatest eroded canyons in the United States, if not the world. It essentially says that clearly it’s an “object of scientific interest,” and says the Court has no problem confirming the designation of the Grand Canyon under the Antiquities Act. It seems to me that the Cameron case is going to be extremely important going forward, particularly if the Trump administration decides to pull back on some of the monuments that were previously declared.

Felton: Besides Roosevelt, did any other presidents use their power to designate national monuments in far-reaching ways?

Squillace: It’s remarkable, a number of Republican presidents [have]. It has been a bipartisan thing to designate national monuments. Herbert Hoover designated a bunch, Calvin Coolidge designated a bunch. Franklin Roosevelt, of course, designated quite a few. Particularly in the first half of the 20th century, there was really a lot of movement to try to protect lands that were deemed to be worthy of conservation.

We also end up getting this large number of some fairly substantial and impressive monuments towards the end of the Clinton administration. I don’t have the number off the top of my head, but it was something over 20 monuments that ultimately are designated or expanded by President Clinton. Until Barack Obama, at least, it was clearly the most aggressive and ambitious expansion of our national-monument system. … And, you know, George W. Bush, largely at the behest of his wife—Laura Bush was particularly a fan of the marine monuments, and persuaded her husband, I think, to push for the designation of a couple of large marine monuments off the coast of Hawaii. Obama took a cue from that work, and also designated a couple of big marine monuments that seem to be at least somewhat at risk from the recommendations that are coming [from] Secretary Zinke right now.

Felton: There were three presidents—Nixon, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush—who chose not to designate national monuments. Why might a president opt out?

Squillace: Well I think that presidents have different sorts of connections and attachments to the land. Richard Nixon never designated a monument—he was not really known as an outdoorsman in the way that some others are. As I said, many conservative presidents had no problem going forward and designating national monuments. I think it partly just depended on their relationship to the land, their interest in outdoors activities, and perhaps the people they surrounded themselves with—the secretaries of the interior, and the other people that were advising them about particular monuments.

Felton: That’s a good segue to the present. What do we know about this president’s—and Interior Secretary Zinke’s—approach to national monuments?

Squillace: Here we are today, Barack Obama having designated quite a few important national monuments, many large—of course the one that seems to get most of the attention is Bears Ears, but there are quite a few other significant monuments. And now we have a new secretary of the interior and a new president who seem interested in trying to pull back on some of these. For lawyers and academics like myself, the interesting question that we’re all trying to deal with is whether or not the president actually has the authority to do this.

[Zinke] seems to be taking this position that it’s wrong for the president to close off lands to what I think he describes as “traditional uses” of the land—that this should be exercised and the law should be construed very narrowly so the president doesn’t have this broad power to set aside these large landscapes. I think economics is part of the argument. But the economics argument is particularly odd, I think, because all the evidence we have suggests that national monuments stimulate local economies, they don’t harm local economies.

So the question is: What’s going on here with Zinke and his push to undermine some of these monuments? Is it a good thing or a bad thing that Zinke’s trying to do this? What I would say is, if we allow any future president to come in and second guess the choices that were made by prior presidents, the Antiquities Act is going to become this sort of whipping boy for every president that comes in. You can almost imagine if Trump decides to shrink Bears Ears and is able to get away with it, for example, the next president comes in and decides to reverse that decision and redesignate the land as a national monument—and it just sort of bounces back and forth, depending on the presidents and their predilection and whether they support the protection of public lands or mineral development or some other kind of use of the land. I just don’t think the law can work if it becomes this punching bag among presidents going forward.

]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_09_24_will_trump_change_the_way_presidents_app Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:00:00 +0300
<![CDATA[Новая статья: Обзор фотокамеры Panasonic Lumix GX800: «беззеркалка» для селфи]]> Panasonic хочет сразу все лавры: компания выпускает самую крупную камеру формата Micro Four Thirds, но одновременно не бросает и планы по выпуску самой маленькой. С Olympus Pen E-PL8 за эту «корону» должна побороться GX800 – наследница недолго прожившей серии GM и в то же время слегка урезанный вариант удачной модели GX80]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_07_20_novaya_statya_obzor_fotokameri_panasonic Thu, 20 Jul 2017 00:00:38 +0300 <![CDATA[Meet the Greeks who call Mount Olympus spiritual home]]> http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_07_12_meet_the_greeks_who_call_mount_olympus_s Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:23:09 +0300 <![CDATA[Моя вторая камера: «Олимпус» E-M1 Mark II]]>

Шифруюсь

Публикация от Ilya Varlamov (@varlamov)



Еще более внимательный читатель мог заметить, что с 2017 года половина снимков в этом блоге была сделана на «Олимпус» E-M1 Mark II (сейчас уже больше половины).

Решил проанализировать почти 100 тысяч фотографий, которые Илья размещал в своём блоге на протяжении почти десяти лет и посмотреть на динамику различных их характеристик. Сегодня рассмотрим модели камер и ISO. В анализе, естественно, учитывались только те фотографии, у которых не потёрт EXIF. К моему удивлению, таких оказалось большинство.

Для начала, простая статистика, — количество постов в год. Всего Илья за 10 лет написал 8172 поста. Впечатляет.

Количество постов в блоге в год

Давайте теперь посмотрим, на какие камеры были сняты фотографии. Тоже в динамике.

Модель камеры (из EXIF)

В эту статистику попали только модели, на которые было отснято 500 или более фотографий за всё время. Так что беззеркалок и айфонов тут нет. Видно, что сначала основными камерами блогера были Canon EOS 5D и Canon EOS 5D Mark II, затем в 2011 году основной системой стала Nikon и остаётся ей по сей день. Правда, в 2017 году появилось достаточно много фото, снятых на Olympus E-M1, что удивило.

Ещё одна любопытная статистика - по ISO.

Статистика по ISO (из EXIF)

Видно, что вплоть до 2016 года Илья почти всегда снимал на ISO 800, а в 2017 году появилось много фотографий, отснятых на ISO 200 (что, по-видимому, связано с использованием камеры Olympus). В статистику не вошли ISO, которые зафиксированы менее чем в 100 фото за всё время.

Конечно, это статистика приблизительная, поскольку я не могу отличить фотографии, сделанный Ильёй от других фотографий, размещённых в его блоге, но тем не менее, даёт какую-то общую картину.

Оригинал статьи


А началось все в начале года с путешествия по Океании. Я на 2 недели улетал по острова, багаж в такие поездки я с собой не беру, зато решил взять квадрокоптер. Он то и вытеснил из рюкзака огромный, быстрый, и надежный «Никон». Посмотрев на все свои вещи я подумал, что пора бы заменить камеру на что-то более компактное. Обратился к великолепному фотографу Александру Петросяну (уверен, вы следите за его инстаграмом), и он сказал, что снимает в том числе на «Олимпус» E-M1 Mark II. Не смею спорить с мастером — так у меня появился «Олимпус».

Я специально почти полгода не писал своих впечатлений, чтобы понять, буду ли я им реально пользоваться. Сегодня «Олимпус» объехал со мной полмира. Он был на Фиджи, в Австралии, на Бали, в Италии, Грузии и даже во время нападения в Ставрополе. Сегодня я беру его в путешествия и очень доволен.

Я не хочу вас грузить техническими характеристиками, думаю, вы их и сами найдете, тем более камера не новая и про нее есть масса профессиональных отчетов. Я расскажу больше о своих впечатлениях.

1. Нереальный стабилизатор! Это просто фантастика. Я с рук спокойно снимаю ночью с выдержкой 3-4 секунды! Там, где раньше был нужен штатив или твердая площадка, чтобы поставить камеру, сегодня можно снимать с рук! Это очень круто!



2. Камера очень скорострельная, до 60 снимков в секунду. Полезно, когда ловите сюжет на улице ;)



3. Картинка отличная, я практически перестал обрабатывать фотографии, и это круто.



4. По сравнению с другими беззеркалками, «Олимпус» очень шустрый. Если камера в «горячем состоянии», то снимки делаются моментально, как на зеркалке, камера не думает, автофокус на объективе M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40мм f2.8 Pro тоже отличный.



5. Один из плюсов беззеркалки, что камера бесшумная. Можно незаметно делать кадры там, где нельзя ;) Ну и прохожие не шарахаются, когда ты их незаметно снимаешь.



6. Ну и конечно, размер! У меня больше не болит шея по вечерам ;)




Из минусов:

1. О высоких ISO надо забыть. Уже на 6400 непозволительно шумит. После «Никона» D5 это очень непривычно. Снимать на ходу вечером, в сумерках уже не выйдет. В темных помещениях тоже. Ловить прохожих даже в пасмурную погоду будет тоже непросто: либо шумный кадр из-за высоких значений ISO, либо размытые люди из-за выдержки. Вроде как можно решить проблему с помощью светосильных объективов, но я не большой любитель открытой диафрагмы.



2. Как и во всех беззеркалках, быстро садится батарея. Камеру надо постоянно выключать, иначе аккумулятор разрядится за час. Здесь есть проблема, так как включается камера долго и если надо что-то снять оперативно, то вы упустите момент. У меня много раз было, когда едешь на машине, видишь что-то интересное, но пока включишь, пока все заработает, сюжет уже ушел. Зеркалка будет работать неделями на одном аккумуляторе, и выключать ее не надо ;)



3. Немного сложно привыкнуть к управлению. Но это дело привычки.



Я ни коим образом не хочу сравнивать маленький беззеркальный «Олимпус» E-M1 Mark II и огромный «Никон» D5. Это как сравнивать внедорожник и спорткар. Один хорош за городом в лесу, второй — на треке. У меня сейчас две камеры просто идеально дополняют друг друга. «Олимпус» сейчас беру в далекие путешествия, где важен вес и размер, да и так каждый день лежит в рюкзаке на всякий случай.

И тут читатель хочет спросить:

А может это реклама?

К сожалению, сегодня любой не отрицательный обзор техники, ресторана или фильма воспринимается читателем как скрытая реклама. С Олимпусом у меня нет никаких рекламных контрактов, они не заказывали у меня размещение, не согласовывали отзыв. Я сам на них вышел и попросил камеру на тест, они ее любезно предоставили и оказывали всяческую поддержку.

Если есть вопросы по технике, на которую я снимаю, задавайте в комментах.]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_06_30_moya_vtoraya_kamera_olimpus_e_m1_mark_i Fri, 30 Jun 2017 19:37:16 +0300
<![CDATA[Interior Secretary Recommends Donald Trump Shrink Bears Ears Monument]]>




WASHINGTON — Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke has submitted an interim report recommending President Donald Trump shrink the boundaries of Utah’s 1.35 million-acre Bears Ears National Monument. 


Instead of former President Barack Obama designating such a large area, “it would have been more appropriate to identify and separate the areas that have significant objects to be protected,” Zinke wrote


Zinke also recommended Trump ask Congress to enable tribal co-management of the monument. The Interior Department is expected to complete a full review and offer more specific recommendations, including how much the monument’s size would change, later this year.


“It’s a little premature to throw out acreage,” Zinke said in a call with reporters Monday.


The move comes as little surprise, given Trump and Zinke’s previous comments criticizing recent monument designations.


Bears Ears National Monument is protected public land in southeastern Utah, named after a pair of buttes and home to thousands of Native American archaeological and cultural sites. It is one of 27 American national monuments threatened by a pair of executive orders that Trump signed in April. 


One order tasks the Interior Department with reviewing all federal monuments 100,000 acres or larger that have been established or expanded under the Antiquities Act since Jan. 1, 1996. The other instructs the Department of Commerce to review all marine sanctuaries and monuments designated or expanded within the last 10 years. 


Bears Ears is at the center of the monuments controversy, and the issue has divided many in Utah.



In launching his review last month, Zinke insisted that “there is no predetermined outcome on any monument.” For those following closely, however, that seemed like nothing more than a talking point.


In April, when Trump signed the executive order tasking Zinke with reviewing 21 years of designations, he was flanked by Utah Gov. Gary Herbert (R) and the state’s U.S. Sens. Orrin Hatch (R) and Mike Lee (R) — staunch opponents of the Bears Ears monument. Trump spoke as if a reversal was already a done deal, as he praised the three men for their “never-ending prodding” on the issue.


Trump also gave Zinke a shorter time frame to conduct his review of Bears Ears than any of the other monuments being considered. And the president said during the signing ceremony that Bears Ears was designated a monument “over the profound objections of the citizens of Utah” and “should never have happened.” 



Zinke, like Trump, has suggested the monument won’t survive as-is. In April, he said the Antiquities Act has “become a tool of political advocacy rather than public interest.” And during a visit to Bears Ears last month, Zinke said he believed the area should be preserved, but “the issue is whether the monument is the right vehicle.”


“It is public land,” he said. “It was public land before the monument. It will be public land after the monument. What vehicle of public land is appropriate to preserve the cultural identity, to make sure the tribes have a voice and to make sure you protect the traditions of hunting and fishing and public access?”





Zinke did not tour Bears Ears with representatives of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition — a group of five Native American tribes that came together to petition for monument status. Instead, he was joined by monument opponents, including Herbert and members of the San Juan County Commission, the county where Bears Ears is located. During his visit, which the Interior Department called a “listening tour,” Zinke seemed to lose his manners after a protester repeatedly asked why he hadn’t spent more time talking with tribal leaders. Holding up his finger, Zinke forcefully ordered the woman to “Be. Nice.”


Zinke said Monday that he spent a lot of time listening and learning about the area, and it’s important the public understand his recommendations were “not made in a bubble in Washington, D.C.” He said he’s confident his suggestions are in the interest of Utah, the tribes and the country. 


The revised boundaries, Zinke said, would focus on providing protections for historic structures and objects, including Native American dwellings, archeological sites and drawings. 




An undeniable attack on our national monuments and America’s public lands.
Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, describing Zinke's reccomendation



Environmental groups were quick to slam Zinke’s decision. 


Heidi McIntosh, Earthjustice’s managing attorney in the Rocky Mountains, said unilaterally shrinking the monument “would not only be a slap in the face to the five sovereign tribes who share sacred ties to this land, it would violate both the Antiquities Act and the separation of powers doctrine.” If Trump follows Zinke’s recommendation, McIntosh promised Earthjustice would see the administration in court. 


Jennifer Rokala, executive director of the Center for Western Priorities, called Zinke’s recommendation “an undeniable attack on our national monuments and America’s public lands.” 



“Instead of reinforcing America’s conservation heritage, Secretary Zinke is recommending President Trump take actions that are both unprecedented and illegal,” she said in a statement.  “The law is clear: only Congress can modify or erase a national monument. This report, while disappointing, is not a surprise. President Trump made it clear the fix was in from the moment he signed the executive order, despite overwhelming public support for national monuments.” 


Hatch applauded Zinke’s decision in a video posted to Twitter on Monday. In a statement, Herbert called the report “an important first step toward re-establishing sound land management practices for one of the most special areas in the world.” 









 

Last month, the Interior Department denied reports that Zinke had already made up his mind and would recommend abolishing Bears Ears. San Juan County Commissioner Phil Lyman reportedly told E&E News that Zinke disclosed his plans during a meeting with the commission earlier that month.


Lyman insisted to HuffPost that E&E News had misquoted him and he didn’t say Zinke would definitely recommend abolishing the monument. However, “My impression is he’d like to rescind it,” Lyman said of the secretary.


Asked Monday why he didn’t recommend abolishing the monument, Zinke said that was an option. “But looking at it, there are some antiquities within the monument that I think deserve to be protected,” he said. “I have enormous respect for the tribes and I do want to push sovereignty, respect to self-determination. And I’m very sensitive to cultural traditions, rituals that that have conducted and are continuing to conduct on Bears Ears.”


It’s not clear where Trump got the idea that a majority of Utah residents oppose Bears Ears. An analysis conducted by the Center for Western Priorities last month found that 99 percent of the more than 685,000 public comments submitted during a recent 15-day comment period voiced support for the Obama-era monument.


Tump and Zinke’s comments about the Antiquities Act are also unfounded. In an April press release, the Interior Department wrote, “Since the 1900s, when the [Antiquities] Act was first used, the average size of national monuments exploded from an average of 422 acres per monument. Now it’s not uncommon for a monument to be more than a million acres.” 





During the executive order’s signing ceremony, Zinke noted that America’s first national monument, Devils Tower in Wyoming, was less than 1,200 acres. President Theodore Roosevelt designated the monument in 1906.


“Yet, in recent years, we’ve seen monuments span tens of millions of acres,” Zinke said, in a clear reference to marine monument designations and expansions by former Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.


The argument is that the law was established to set set aside small areas, and that recent administrations have abused this.


But the 422-acre figure is, at best, cherry-picked. In 1908, two years after the Antiquities Act became law, Roosevelt — of whom Zinke is an “unapologetic admirer and disciple” — designated more than 800,000 acres of the Grand Canyon as a national monument. Only a few Obama-era land monuments are larger. Roosevelt also designated 20,629-acre Chaco Canyon National Monument and 610,000-acre Mount Olympus National Park. 


Republican presidents Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover both designated monuments over a million acres. Coolidge designated Alaska’s Glacier Bay in 1925, and Hoover set aside California’s Death Valley in 1933.


The Interior Department did not respond to HuffPost’s numerous requests seeking clarification on the 422-acre figure.



Sixteen presidents have used the 1906 Antiquities Act to designate 157 monuments; however, no president has ever tried to revoke a designation. If Trump does indeed try, the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition and other groups have promised to sue


CORRECTION: A previous version of this article misstated when Death Valley National Monument was established.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

]]>
http://so-l.ru/news/y/2017_06_12_interior_secretary_recommends_donald_tru Mon, 12 Jun 2017 22:08:25 +0300