Японский производитель шин Bridgestone открыл в Ульяновской области первый в России и СНГ завод по выпуску радиальных шин для легковых автомобилей. Инвестиции составили $220 млн, или 12,5 млрд руб.
Японский производитель шин Bridgestone открыл в Ульяновской области первый в России и СНГ завод по выпуску радиальных шин для легковых автомобилей. Инвестиции составили $220 млн, или 12,5 млрд руб.
Kris Osborn Security, Air Force engineers say protection of computer networks is well established in many ways, but that the service needs to widen its scope with greater focus on IT dimensions to its nuclear arsenal’s command and control apparatus. Modernizing computer networks for the nuclear arsenal is part of the current Air Force plan to build as many as 400 new Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles, or ICBMs, to serve through the 2070s. The Air Force is seeking more interactions with private sector firms to build better networks for securing nuclear weapons computer systems, service officials said. Air Force engineers say protection of computer networks is well established in many ways, but that the service needs to widen its scope with greater focus on IT dimensions to its nuclear arsenal’s command and control apparatus. “Information technology that touches weapons systems needs to be cyber secure, updated and patched. Worldwide nuclear systems are one example of where we need to get an overhaul,” Peter Kim, Air Force Chief Information Security Officer, told Scout Warrior in an interview. The need to adjust nuclear arsenal computer systems was further emphasized in a recently announced U.S. Air Force Scientific Advisory Board Study on the topic that will be released in 2017. “Today’s dependences on cyber systems were not prevalent when legacy nuclear systems were fielded, nor were today’s cyber threats, including supply chain concerns,” the study’s outline states. Modernizing computer networks for the nuclear arsenal is part of the services’ current plan to build as many as 400 new Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles, or ICBMs, to serve through the 2070s. The Air Force is now assessing industry proposals to build the new ICBMs, from Northrop Grumman, Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The study preview goes on to indicate that the Air Force will benefit from a clearer understanding of how nuclear weapons’ security can be achieved in today’s increasingly digital environment. Initiatives to look at securing computer networks for nuclear weapons comprise a key part of an Air Force program aimed at better connecting with private sector innovators. The Air Force effort, which involves strengthening email encryption and computer-virus protections, is operating within part of a broader Defense Department effort referred to as Defense Innovation Unit – Experimental, or DIUx, Kim said. Thus far, DIUx centers have been announced by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter in Silicon Valley, Austin, Texas and Boston, Mass., Kim added. Read full article
Considering the fact that North America dominates the global unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) market, the increased defense budget spending is expected to unlock significantly higher opportunities for Northrop (NOC).
Enhanced CO2 uptake at a shallow Arctic Ocean seep field overwhelms the positive warming potential of emitted methane [Environmental Sciences]
Continued warming of the Arctic Ocean in coming decades is projected to trigger the release of teragrams (1 Tg = 106 tons) of methane from thawing subsea permafrost on shallow continental shelves and dissociation of methane hydrate on upper continental slopes. On the shallow shelves (
Dan Goure Security, Trump's Ballistic Missile Defense Review needs to seriously consider recommending an accelerated program to provide a dedicated missile defense capability for Hawaii. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea’s (DPRK) efforts to develop long-range ballistic missiles and nuclear warheads are accelerating. Pyongyang already has or will soon possess ballistic missiles capable of threatening virtually any target in the Western Pacific region. As if that were not enough to cause U.S. defense planners sleepless nights, the latest Worldwide Threat Assessment by the Director of National Intelligence believes that 2017 will be the year that North Korea tests an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), a weapon with sufficient range to deliver a nuclear weapon to Hawaii, Alaska and the continental U.S. There have already been more North Korean missile tests this year than in any previous one. While not all have been successful, a recent Washington Post article makes clear that these tests show the increased sophistication of Pyongyang’s missile designs, the improved reliability of key components and the continual progress toward development of a true ICBM. On May 13, North Korea fired an intermediate-range ballistic missile on an unusual trajectory, lofting it more than 2,000 km above the Earth. Pyongyang claimed that this showed the missile’s capacity to carry a heavy nuclear warhead, the kind that North Korea may already be capable of building. The most recent test, on May 21, may have been the second of a canisterized, road-mobile, solid fuel, medium-range missile. Such a system is particularly dangerous because it can be deployed and made ready to fire in a very short period of time with few warning signs. Last month, the North demonstrated the ability to do simultaneous launches, firing four medium-range missiles at one time. Western analysts believe that the DPRK may have been practicing a barrage attack on South Korea, U.S. and Japanese defense positions. Read full article
A strain of hepatitis E carried by some continental pigs has been given a topical nickname. So, do we need to vote leave on bacon?Name: the Brexit virus.Also known as: hepatitis E (HEV). Continue reading...
China and Russia teamed up to develop twin-aisle jets that will compete with Airbus SE and Boeing Co., the planemakers who dominate passenger aircraft capable of trans-continental flights.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un described the results of the country’s successful launch its second ballistic missile in a little more than a week as “perfect,” as Pyongyang increases the pace of its testing in its quest to develop the ability to strike the continental U.S. with a nuclear-tipped weapon.
New Research Reports for Britol-Myers, Pricline & Phillips 66
Today, we all know the U.S. dollar as an iconic currency that is recognizable to people around the world. And while Visual Capitalist's Jeff Desjardin has previously looked at the buying power of the U.S. dollar over time, as well as important events like the Great Depression, we have not looked at the history of the dollar itself. How and why was it conceived, and why do we call it a “dollar” or a “buck”? How did the dollar’s early history help to shape today’s world? Courtesy of: The Money Project Before the Dollar For the early colonists, currency was a bit of a free-for-all. Officially, cash was denominated in pounds, shillings, and pence, but in reality things were a different story. Cash was often scarce, and colonists needed to be innovative to fulfill transactions. At various points in time, they used tobacco, beaver skins, and wampum in the place of money. Some colonies even tried to issue their own fiat currencies – many of which went bust. As it turned out, the Spanish dollar was often the most abundant form of cash – and this is what led to U.S. currency eventually being denominated in dollars. The Revolution During the American Revolution in 1775, the Continental Congress issued a money known as the Continental Currency to try and fund the war. The government printed too many, and the value of a Continental diminished rapidly. Just five years later, after runaway inflation, the Continental was worth 2.5% of its face value. Benjamin Franklin rightly noted that the depreciation of the Continental had, in fact, acted as a tax to pay for the war. Holders of the currency – everyday people – were punished by losing massive amounts of buying power. Interestingly, this is where we get the phrase “Not worth a Continental”. Birth of the Dollar The failure of the Continental Currency must have been top of mind during the writing of the Constitution. A clause was even added, under Article 1, Section 10, to make sure such a failure would never happen again. It was written that states were not permitted to “coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; [or] make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts.” And so, the Coinage Act of 1792 created the U.S. dollar as a standard unit of currency. The U.S. Mint was authorized to oversee coinage, and the Act also established a penalty of death for debasing coinage issued by the Mint. The Almighty Buck In the 19th Century, a new slang term emerged for the dollar. Especially in the Great Lakes area, different amounts of money were equated with animal skins. One particular reference showed that in Ohio in 1851, the skin of a muskrat was worth $0.25, and that of a doe was worth $0.50. Meanwhile, the skin of a buck was equal to the “almighty dollar” – and hence, the word “buck” became synonymous with the U.S. dollar. The Civil War Leading up to the Civil War, private banks around the country issued their own paper currencies. With 10,000 or so of these currencies in circulation as the war broke out, governments soon found it very cumbersome to try and pay debts with many different types of notes. As a result, the $10 Demand Note was the first official paper currency issued in 1861 by the government to help finance the war. The North began paying debts with a fiat currency called the “greenback”, while Confederate states issued their own paper currency as well. The latter was worthless by the time the Confederacy lost the war. The Counterfeiting Problem Around this time, counterfeiting was a widespread problem with greenbacks and all the private notes that were circulating. More than 1/3 of bills were fake at this time. Sophisticated counterfeit operations were happening in British Canada, and some bank engravers would even moonlight as counterfeiters, using the same plates and dyes they had from their day job. To deal with the problem, the Secret Service was formed in 1865. The Modern Dollar Counterfeiting measures have come a long way since the late 19th century. Today, it’s estimated that less than 0.01% of notes are fake. Learn more about the modern U.S. dollar in the next part of this series. * * * The Money Project is an ongoing collaboration between Visual Capitalist and Texas Precious Metals that seeks to use intuitive visualizations to explore the origins, nature, and use of money.
Northrop Grumman Corp.'s (NOC) unit, Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., has won a modification contract from the U.S. Navy to procure three low-rate initial production Lot 2 MQ-4C Triton unmanned aircraft.
Have money, will buy hot cars: Here are 25 very expensive cars driven by star athletes.
Tim Evans for HBR It seems that everyone these days is looking for a disruptive business model. But a business model is only one part of the equation. Equally important is the mental model behind the business model, as well as a measurement model for both. It’s the combination of mental, business, and measurement models that allows real transformation to occur. The airline industry is a cautionary tale of what happens when companies emulate new business models without bringing over the associated mental models. For over 40 years, Southwest Airlines has been a disruptive force in the airline industry, creating an entirely new category and a record 43 consecutive years of profitability. Traditional carriers like United, American, and Delta have a wide range of fares with multiclass cabins, heterogenous fleets, and hub-and-spoke routes. Southwest’s innovation was to focus on low fares with one-class cabins, homogenous fleets, and point-to-point routes. From the start, Southwest cofounder Herb Kelleher saw his competition not as other airlines but as alternative forms of transportation, whether cars, buses, or trains. He wanted to enable people to fly who wouldn’t otherwise have been able to. Therefore his mental model was not how to gain market share from other airlines, but how to create a completely new market for air travel. This wasn’t the only difference in mental models between Southwest and traditional carriers. Kelleher is known for saying: “I tell my employees that we’re in the service business, and it’s incidental that we fly airplanes.” Other carriers fly airplanes that carry people. Southwest serves people using airplanes. In the early years, other airlines tried to copy Southwest’s business model with efforts such as Continental Lite, Ted by United, and Song by Delta. All of these efforts failed. The carriers blamed poor execution. When Continental shuttered Lite, then CEO Gordon Bethune said, “It wasn’t implemented in an orchestrated way.” The deeper reason was that a new business model was implemented without a new mental or measurement model. Traditional carriers were still thinking about their business as flying planes rather than thinking about serving people, still worrying about capturing share rather than growing the market, and still measuring success based on how well they utilized planes rather than how well they served passengers. In contrast, companies like JetBlue decided to emulate Southwest’s entire system: mental model, business model, and measurement model. Like Southwest, JetBlue focuses on people over planes, with a mission to “bring humanity back to air travel.” Beyond the usual financial metrics, JetBlue also measures the strength of its culture and the quality of its experience. As a result, JetBlue is a regular winner of the “Best Places to Work” award, leads the industry in customer loyalty, and is consistently profitable. It’s easy to blame a failed business on doing the wrong things, but rarely do leaders realize that the failure lies in their own thinking. Bethune and the other airline leaders thought that the Southwest model was about taking out costs. But that was the outcome, not the strategy. What Bethune should have said was, “We weren’t ready to prioritize people over planes.” The lesson is one that United’s CEO, Oscar Munoz, would be advised to heed as he seeks to turn the backlash over Flight 3411 into a “watershed moment” for the airline as it seeks to “put our customers at the center of everything we do.” We are in the midst of a massive migration in business models, from managing assets and delivering services to creating technologies and orchestrating networks. According to research by one of us (Barry), technology- and network-based business models are more profitable, enable faster growth, and are more rewarded in the marketplace. Many companies have “platform envy” and are trying to emulate the network-based business models of companies like Uber, Amazon, Airbnb, and Paypal. But before you start copying their business models, let the example of Southwest be a lesson. Copying a business model without copying a mental model will lead to disappointing results. You have to change how you think before you can change what you do, and then change what you measure to close the loop. Consider the recent announcement by Volkswagen that it plans to overtake Tesla in the electric car race. The head of VW’s brand said that the company will have “leapfrogging cost advantages” thanks to its MQB platform, a modular architecture for building cars. VW is replicating Tesla’s business model but with the wrong mental model. VW thinks of itself as a car manufacturer that uses technology. Tesla, on the other hand, thinks of itself as a technology company that manufactures cars. VW would say its cars have sophisticated computers. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has said of the Model S, “It’s a very sophisticated computer on wheels.” This difference in mental models generates very different measurement models. With a manufacturer mindset, the car industry is heavily focused on measuring changes from one model year to the next. By contrast, Tesla’s technology mindset has it thinking in terms of software releases and downloads rather than model years and shipments. Musk has said, “Most cars don’t improve over time. But the Model S gets faster and better.” Related Video Identify Your Thinking Style It depends on two factors. Save Share See More Videos > See More Videos > GE shows that legacy companies can adopt a new mental and measurement model with a change in business model. CEO Jeff Immelt has said, “We’ve made the decision that we’re going to try to be both a platform company and an application company…. We want to treat analytics like it’s as core to the company over the next 20 years as material science has been over the past 50 years.” GE recognizes that a networked business model requires a networked organization. Vice chair Beth Comstock is focused on transforming GE into an “emergent organization.” GE is also using very different metrics for its platform businesses. The key metrics are assets on the platform, rather than margin or revenue growth. This is appropriate for a platform business, as it measures capacity for exponential growth in the future rather than the results of incremental change in the past or present. There are opportunities to bring new thinking to every industry and function. For example, most retailers are merchants using technology. Amazon is a technologist empowering merchants. Traditional retailers obsess over incremental metrics like same-store sales that are tied to business goals. By contrast, 80% of Amazon’s metrics provide feedback on how well it is helping customers achieve their goals. The digital revolution is forcing every company to move from business models focused on products and services to those that leverage networks and platforms. This shift requires dispelling myopia, embracing new organizational models, and unlearning old habits. It’s a fundamental change in how you think and what you measure. But once you align your mental, business, and measurement models, you will be well on your way to a successful digital transformation.
What's Different About North Korea's Latest Missile Launch (And Why Washington Should Worry)
Bruce Klingner Security, Asia Pyongyang’s willingness to violate UN resolutions so quickly after Moon’s inauguration shows that it will not act benevolently toward the new president. Saturday marked another breakthrough in North Korea’s broad array of missile programs. Pyongyang successfully launched a new system that could target U.S. bases in Guam. It is now one step closer to an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that could eventually threaten the continental United States. Pyongyang announced that the Hwasong-12 intermediate-range ballistic missile flew 490 miles, but at an apogee of 1,300 miles. Experts assess that, had the missile been flown at a normal trajectory, it could have reached 2,800 miles. Guam is but 2,200 miles from North Korea. The regime declared that the missile can carry a “large-size heavy nuclear warhead.” When first revealed in last month’s military parade in Pyongyang, the Hwasong-12 appeared to be a shortened version of the KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missile. It may be a replacement or augmentation for the Musudan intermediate-range ballistic missile, even as it serves as a testbed for technologies for the KN-08 intercontinental ballistic missile. Saturday’s successful launch means Pyongyang’s quest to develop an ICBM is progressing more quickly than previously thought. This January, analysts greeted with skepticism Kim Jong-un’s claim that he had an intercontinental ballistic missile in the “late stages of development.” There are far fewer skeptics today. Saturday’s launch may have been the missile’s maiden test flight. While much has been made of North Korea’s numerous missile-launch failures, those have been concentrated in systems still under development. For comparison, the United States had very high failure rates in the initial development of its Redstone, Vanguard, Atlas, and Titan missile programs. Kim Jong-un has greatly accelerated the development and testing programs of all ranges of North Korea’s missile systems. During his five years in power, he has overseen three times as many missile launches as his father did during his eighteen-year reign. This is the tenth North Korean missile launch this year. Read full article
Facilitating exploration and development in the eastern Gulf of Mexico should be a top priority as the US Department of the Interior reviews its US Outer Continental Shelf decisions under President Donald J. Trump's Apr. 28 offshore oil and gas executive order, an American Petroleum Institute official recommended on May 1.
По данным национальной администрации безопасности дорожного движения США, немецкий автопроизводитель Volkswagen расширил программу отзыва автомобилей, связанного с дефектами в топливном насосе, которые могут привести к возгоранию. Так, немецкая компания отзовет дополнительные 300 000 авто под брендами Porsche и Audi. В частности, указанный дефект может быть обнаружен в моделях Porsche Macan, а также Audi Q5 и Q7. Стоит отметить, что компоненты, часть из которых может оказаться бракованной, были произведены немецкой компанией Continental. Сообщается, что отзыв начнется 2 июля текущего года, и дилеры будут обязаны установить специальное защитное покрытие на компоненты топливного насоса или полностью заменить их в случае обнаружения трещин.