monopolism

Guys, send me your best CS and Emma questions here and I will ask them tomorrow, for those of you who don’t use twitter or won’t be available at that time or simply the more we ask the better chance we got to get answers. I’ll also put them on a list and link it tomorrow so we can all copy paste & ask. If tumblr wont let u reply to this post send me a message here.

HUNDREDS OF FARMERS BLOCK ROADS IN PROTEST OF MONSANTO’S GMO CROPS

Poland’s largest farmer uprising

Poland’s largest farmer uprising ever has occurred as convoys of tractors took to the roads recently in protest of GMO infiltration and land grabs by biotech and Big Ag corporations.

More than 150 farmers blocked roadways and held numerous demonstrations in order to bring attention to the important issue of food sovereignty in Poland. Their focus is a ban on GMOs and a restoration of small farmer’s rights after decades of oppressive health and safety regulations which take rights away from small farms and give them to mono-cropping, poisoning Big Ag mega-companies.

The farmers have been stalwart – refusing to call off their demonstrations until their demands are met. Rallies and demonstrations have littered the country – in over 50 locations. Hundreds are picketing government offices in addition to the road blockades.

In the largest organized farmer’s protest the country has likely ever seen, the farmers are demanding that legislators protect the small farmer from exploitation by monopolizing companies and refuse the sell off of their country’s land to these behemoths. As the farmers point out, once the land is sold, the Big Ag model can’t be stopped, and the land is forever lost.

Until government officials agree to talk with the farming unions, they have vowed to keep up their efforts. Edward Kosmal, chairman of the farmers protest committee for West-Pomeranian Region said:

“We are ready for dialogue. We look forward to meeting with you, Prime Minister, and beginning a comprehensive government commitment to solving the problems of Polish agriculture. If you do not enter into a dialogue with the Union, we will be forced to step up our protests.”

There are 4 simple key demands the farmers would like to be heard:

  • Regulation of land grabs by primarily Western companies(translation – biotech and Big Ag) to prevent small farmers from losing their livelihoods.
  • The legalization of direct sale of produce and other foods from farms to the people.This cuts out the middle man and allows the higher quality produce of many farms to reach its customers directly. Poland currently has some of the most extreme policies of all of Europe in this regard, making it nearly impossible for small farmers to compete with big food companies who are notorious for selling us fake and highly processed foods.
  • Change inheritance lawsso that families can rightly leave land under lease to their heirs.
  • BAN THE CULTIVATION OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS!

One farmer stated:

“We demand the introduction of legislation that will protect Polish land from exploitation by foreign capital! Agricultural land cannot be sold to commercial companies. It’s part of Polish territory. Once sold it will be lost.

An Intense Escalation of Events

The farmer’s protests represent a dramatic increase in activist fervor that has been boiling to the surface for over a year, with marked unrest in the northern provinces.

These provinces are especially upset about not being able to sell their (mostly) organic produce, though uncertified. It is usually of higher quality than the food grown on modern industrial farms. Poland is one of the last places in Europe where ‘peasant’ farmers still use traditional agricultural methods, without the use of chemicals and very low mechanization, so the soil is healthier, and so are the plants grown there. The large majority of small farms are no larger than 5 hectares.

Industrial-bent foreign corporations are keen to expand their operations in Poland, and many small farmers see the increasingly ridiculous regulations as an attempt to force families off their land.

Furthermore, one of Poland’s biggest industrial producers, in the form of Smithfield (the world’s biggest pig producer which bought Poland’s Animex SA in 1999) is influencing the largely right-wing government. They own a string of 16 hog farms where conditions have been called“horrendous,” so you know they are not interested in protecting small farmer’sland rights or producing high-quality, no-GMO, organic food.

The triad of government and corporate interests in Poland along with EU pressure is causing the protests to reach a more fevered pitch.

These protests are touching the raw nerve of what’s wrong with the inhuman, neo-liberal and profit obsessed practices of today. Practices which ignore the real needs of farmers and consumers alike.”

Polish farmers are joined with millions of others who have been protesting against Monsanto, Cargill, and other biotech and Big Ag interests who have little concern for the quality of our food supply. Over 50 countries have marched against Monsanto, so the thousands marching in Poland are not alone. Almost all states in the US have marched against Monsanto and Big Ag, and Vermont recently staged a protest at the US Canadian border which involved more than 79 Vermont towns.

Hillary Martin, a farmer from Burlington, Vermont states the internationally-shared aims against these bullies clearly:

“We are here at the border to demonstrate the global solidarity of farmers in the face of corporate globalization. The corporate takeover of agriculture has impoverished farmers, starved communities, and force-fed us hazardous genetically engineered crops, only to line the pockets of a handful of multinational corporations like Monsanto at the expense of farmers who are struggling for land and livelihood around the world!”

You can read more about land grabs by multinationals at Pesticide Action Network, as well other sites. The actions of these companies keeps the world hungry and sick, not well fed. As the Global Policy Forum explains, unfair distribution of land, and unfair access to ownership explain much of the poverty and hunger in the world – NOT – as biotech would have us believe, the inability to grow enough food. Its all about distribution.

It is the one- percent-ers, owning most of the multinational companies, not rural farmers who commandeer the land. Even when small farmers do own land, they still suffer from inequality due to government regulations that favor these enormous companies.

“The struggle for land reform, which would shift the balance of power in favor of marginalized landless farmers, has been going on for many decades. However the food and financial crises contribute to worsening the trend towards land concentration, in which governments, agro-industrial corporations and private investors buy up fertile land in poor countries, [largely to spread GMOs] depriving small farmers of their ability to grow their own food.”

SAVE THE INTERNET

Companies like Comcast/Time Warner Cable want to monopolize and treat the internet as a product, that THEY control and regulate. The internet will no longer be a free space, we won net neutrality and we now have to defend it

{PLEASE don’t just scroll by, that little badge you see on tumblr, that is a REAL thing that is going to happen if WE don’t do something about it}

Quick Facts

it will work like this, sites that can afford to pay the new taxes/fees will get to use “fast lanes”. This means that we can access them at “regular” speed, however even then they will be regulated and monitored by cable companies.

sites that can’t afford to pay get put into “slow lanes” or get cut from existence completely.  This impacts small businesses, self help sites, resource pages, the INTERNET basically. 

Since all sites and traffic will be routed through the cable company, they control what you see and even how you see it. Privacy won’t be a thing anymore because there will be no sites/clients to protect you because they  can block those.

Cable companies get to control how we intake our media, a lot of what we read/see/hear/view comes from the internet and without free control, then who knows what we are being fed or what we are seeing is true. 

Cable companies have a heavy influence in congress and can get the new bill to pass allowing cable companies to take away our net neutrality (the freedom of our internet)

What you can do

- call your local representative, tell them why they should stand up for the internet. Remember to be respectful and polite, remember they are supposed to be there to represent the peoples’ views and don’t be afraid to remind them!

-SPREAD THE WORD, a lot of people don’t even know this is going on! signal boost

-inform yourself, research helps! 


 Sites like Tumblr, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram will be regulated and can be shut down if they don’t comply with the fees or if cable companies decide “they don’t like them” anymore.


It’s up to US to stand up for what we want

(and we’ve made progress + )

Help!

Are you or do you know any super rich people that would pay! my! tuition!? Now understand this is not a handout, in return I would:

  1. Love you forever
  2. Send you my report cards so you can know that your money is not going to waste
  3. Send you letters and pictures of me having fun in New Orleans (Note: this is a really good deal because i am cute!!!!)
  4. I am trying to become an obstetrician so I will personally deliver your children or grandchildren (Note: this is a long term gain because it will take about 12 years to become certified but it is worth it!)
  5. I will date your sons so they won’t get cooked by their friends and/or cousins anymore if they’re having that sort of problem (Remember this is a great deal because I am cute!)

Now how can you monopolize on this wonderful deal? Just slide into my askbox and we’ll discuss how YOU could give me approximately $60,000 every year for the next four years! Act fast this is a great offer!!!!!  

ISPs' arguments against net neutrality are bullshit. Here's why

Paying more for using more bandwidth solves nothing.

It might sound like it makes sense to make people who use the most bandwidth pay more for that use, but the fact is that it accomplishes nothing and solves no problems. 

Imagine a toll road that charges by the month. The people running that road decide to pin an extra charge on people who use it more. But they don’t add any more lanes. Everything’s working just like it was before, with the only exception being some people are paying more.

This is what ISPs are doing by charging more for bandwidth. Unless you build a separate network for the high-data streams, you’re essentially charging more to do nothing — well, nothing but intentionally throttling that traffic and slowing it down. It doesn’t solve any problems.

The internet is not a big truck nor a series of tubes.

The internet is a cloud. When you point your browser to a website, it’s not like making a phone call where there’s a direct line between you and the site. That sort of network is called “peer-to-peer.” The internet is a cloud network, where the first server to respond to your request is connected. When you go to a website, that data is actually carried through a series of servers that all share the load. Your ISP is only doing a fraction of the work, yet they claim they’re doing all of it and demand to be compensated for it. Most of that Netflix movie is carried across servers that have nothing to do with your ISP.

Worse, if the ISP can charge for traffic on its server, then every other server can demand a cut of the action as well. With somewhere in the neighborhood of a dozen or more servers negotiating each internet request, this could make the internet unusable — or, at least, unaffordable for all but the most wealthy users.

For some it’s not about bandwidth, it’s about eliminating competition.

Comcast got Netflix to raise its subscription rates through what’s essentially blackmail. They slowed down data coming from Netflix, then demanded Netflix pay a special fee for unhampered traffic. Netflix had to raise consumer’s rates to do so, which was the point all along. Netflix competes with Comcast’s cable subscription for viewers. Now the competition has been undercut.

Don’t believe cable company and ISP propaganda. Ending net neutrality is bad for consumers, bad for innovation, and completely unnecessary.

We’re from different worlds. Maybe they’re separate for a reason.

Or, the one where Jane Foster is going to bring Asgard to its knees with science.

Students who take up a lot of space caring about the subject

Anonymous asked:

I’m a teaching assistant for a medium-large class (~80 students) at a university. One student has a habit of interrupting me or the professor when we are lecturing, which can be very disruptive. Sometimes we have to cut him off while he is speaking, which feels rude, but we have limited time to teach. He’ll also monopolize class discussions. He’s often insightful and on-point, but I want to get other students’ input too! I don’t know what to do! And I don’t want to hurt his feelings! Help?

realsocialskills said: This sounds like a student who means well, so I’m going to answer this question with the assumption that he isn’t a jerk and isn’t taking up all the space on purpose. Some students do not mean well derail things for different reasons, but that doesn’t sound like what you’re dealing with here. Here are my thoughts on how to deal with well-meaning students who take up too much space:  Make time outside of class to talk to them:
  • When students are really into your subject and monopolize class time, it’s generally not because they want to shut everyone else down
  • It’s usually because they’re really into the subject and passionate about exploring the particular questions that are interesting to them
  • That’s a beautiful thing, and there needs to be space for it, but it can’t take over the whole class
  • When students derail class to discuss the questions they’re interested in, it can work well to say something like “That’s a great question, but we need to get through some other things now. Let’s talk about that during office hours.”
  • This demonstrates that you respect them and their questions and dedication to the subject, and that you will make room for it but need to make sure that the things that need to happen in class time happen
  • That only works if you mean it and follow through, though
There also might be a cultural issue. Norms about interrupting are highly culturally dependent:
  • In some cultures, the way you demonstrate that you’re respecting someone and paying attention is to take turns talking, and wait for the other person to indicate that it is now your turn. 
  • In other cultures, the way you demonstrate that you’re respecting someone and paying attention is by interrupting in on-topic ways and expecting that they will also interrupt you. 
  • It can be really frustrating to negotiate conversation with people who have radically different assumptions about how to pay attention
  • It might be that your student thinks that they are doing what they’re supposed to do, and that there’s confused with lack of response and interruption
  • If that is the problem, it might help to make expectations clearer. If the cultural divide is that wide, dropping hints and relying on politeness won’t help, but being explicit might:
  • For instance, by saying when they interrupt something like “I’ll take questions at the end”, or “Let Bob finish his point first”.
  • This demonstrates that you respect him and his interest, but that you aren’t going to allow it to take up al of the space

It’s also possible that he finds it difficult to follow what is going on:

  • I’m not sure how to describe this, but I know that I find it easy to pay attention to conversations and nearly impossible to pay attention to lectures
  • For me, the things that make it possible to pay attention to lectures are asking a lot of questions, using a strategy like collaborative note taking , or writing notes that are as much running commentary as they are taking down information.
  • He might be asking a lot of questions in order to follow what is going on
  • I’m not sure how you’d go about assessing or responding to that. I am mentioning it as a possible problem in hopes that someone else will have suggestions about what teachers can do if they suspect that a college student is having that kind of problem

No matter how you approach the situation, it’s possible that it might hurt your student’s feelings to realize that he takes up a lot of space and that it bothers people. This is not something you have complete control over. Facing up to problems like that can be painful. You shouldn’t avoid getting your class back on track in order to protect him from that kind of pain.

You should treat him and his interest in your subject with respect, and help him find ways to pursue it seriously without taking up all of the space during class. You’re probably in a position to do that. You’re not in a position to manage his emotional life.

News on Magnetic Monopoles

Physicists have produced a synthetic Dirac Monopole from spinor Bose-Einstein condensate for the first time ever. After hundreds of years (literally) of searching for the theoretical monopole it has finally been confirmed to exist. 

Essentially all a monopole is is a magnet that only pulls OR pushes, instead of the usual pull from one side and push from the other. Normal dipole magnets will still have two poles even when cut in half - 

Which is why many people thought the elusive monopole to be non-existent. 

The existence of the monopole could explain the quantisation of electric charge, as well as other problems faced by physicists in the past.

http://thephysicsbitch.tumblr.com/  promised to make a post about it sometime today, she could explain it in far better quality than I. I’ll almost definitely reblog it, but in case i forget, go follow her. or, you know, go follow her cause physics!