Economy maintains job growth as unemployment holds at 7.8%

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. job market continued to show slow and steady improvement in December as employers added 155,000 jobs last month, in line with analysts' expectations and at the average monthly pace for the last two years.

The jobless rate held steady at 7.8% as November's unemployment figure was revised up from the initial estimate of 7.7%, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said Friday.

The good news in the report is that worries about the so-called fiscal cliff of tax hikes and budget cuts didn't derail hiring last month, as some had feared it could. Healthcare hiring was very strong, manufacturing bounced back and construction added a solid batch of jobs, although part of that was likely due to recovery efforts from Superstorm Sandy that struck the Northeast in late October.

On the other hand, some analysts were hoping for stronger overall job growth last month, closer to 200,000, as there were some indications earlier this week that hiring in the private sector might have accelerated. But the retail sector cut back its staffing, as did the information industry. Government employers, mostly local schools, shed 13,000 from its payrolls. Temporary-help employment was flat.

The nation's unemployment rate of 7.8%, also matched in September, is the lowest since January 2009. Unlike November, last month workers didn't exit the job market. The labor force actually grew. More reported having jobs, but the ranks of the unemployed also increased, to 12.2 million last month.

Almost 40% of the unemployed said they had been without jobs for six months or longer -- a statistic that has shown little improvement over the years, which is particularly worrisome as more of these workers will find it increasingly difficult to find work as their skills atrophy and they become discouraged.

Analysts were expecting job growth of about 150,000 in December, which is about what the economy has been generating on average for the last two years. Although that is a decent pace, certainly enough to absorb new entrants into the labor force, it's not strong enough to bring down unemployment quickly and create opportunities for the large number of jobless workers.

As of December, the nation had about 134 million payroll jobs -- still 4 million fewer than at the end of 2007 when the economy began its descent into recession.

Looking ahead, economists aren't expecting any pickup in hiring in the near term. In fact, job growth could slide back a bit, analysts say, until policymakers resolve the thorny issues of raising the debt ceiling and budget deficit problems. Lawmakers averted most of the "fiscal cliff" earlier in the week, but they let payroll taxes rise to previous rates, which is expected to slow consumer spending a bit and could take a bite out of hiring in the next few months.

ALSO:

'Cliff' deal lifts stocks and doubts

Fed to tie interest rate to job gains

Economists see mediocre growth in 2013

Read More..

Forget the Internet of Things: Here Comes the Internet of <em>Cars</em>

What if large groups of people could go beyond ridesharing – replacing traditional car ownership altogether through on-demand access to the cars they want: a convertible in the summer, an SUV for winter ski trips?

What if driving skills could be computed as a score that warned us of bad drivers nearby – real time, on the road – also enabling navigation systems to offer safer alternative routes? Imagine if we could get rid of traffic jams and accidents altogether. Or how about if our cars picked up our groceries on their own – and dropped us off at the airport like a self-contained limo service?

What if automakers could subsidize our car purchases by working with telecommunications and other companies that want to capitalize on the lifetime revenue opportunity of a connected driver? Consider also the possibilities for insurance providers to charge higher premiums (for those who drive their cars themselves), or for local governments to monitor personal CO2 usage (in exchange for not taxing or tolling public roads).

Whether you embrace or object to these scenarios, they’re not too far away. This isn’t just an evolution of technology-enabled, connected vehicles. This goes beyond self-driving cars. And it’s more than a simple sensor-network: This is the era of smart mobility — an Internet of Cars.

Basically, cars have become the “ultimate mobile device” and we, the people, are becoming “connected drivers”. These aren’t just buzzwords: As a longtime strategic adviser and analyst of this space, I’ve been using these terms since 1998 to describe this fundamental transformation of the automobile. And it’s coming within this decade. For example, by 2016, most buyers in mature automotive markets (U.S., Western Europe) will consider vehicles’ ability to access web-based information a key criterion when purchasing an automobile. For premium vehicle brand buyers, this tipping point will be reached even sooner: 2014. That’s just one year away.

The connected vehicle is leading the automotive industry to its most significant innovation phase … since the creation of the automobile itself.

The Era of Smart Mobility Is Going to Change Everything

But what is it? “Connected vehicles” are cars that access, consume, create, enrich, direct, and share digital information between businesses, people, organizations, infrastructures, and things. Those “things” include other vehicles, which is where the Internet of Things becomes the Internet of Cars.

As these vehicles become increasingly connected, they become self-aware, contextual, and eventually, autonomous. Those of you reading this will probably experience self-driving cars in your lifetime — though maybe not all three of its evolutionary phases: from automated to autonomous to unmanned.

Those of you reading this will probably experience self-driving cars in your lifetime.

We still need to address a number of technology, engineering, legislative, and market issues to develop successful offerings here. But this automotive era builds on current and related industry trends such as the convergence of digital lifestyles, the emergence of new mobility solutions, demographic shifts, and the rise of smartphones and the mobile internet.

Consumers now expect to access relevant information wherever they are … including in the automobile. At the same time, these technologies are making new mobility solutions – such as peer-to-peer car sharing – more widespread and attractive. This is especially important since vehicle ownership in urban areas is expensive and consumers, especially younger ones, don’t show the same desire for vehicle ownership as older generations do.

To be successful, connected vehicles will draw on the leading technologies in sensors, displays, on-board and off-board computing, in-vehicle operating systems, wireless and in-vehicle data communication, machine learning, analytics, speech recognition, and content management. (That’s just to name a few.) All of this leads to considerable benefits and opportunities: reduced accident rates, increased productivity, improved traffic flow, lowered emissions, extended utility for EVs, new entertainment options, and new marketing and commerce experiences.

Besides providing automobiles and drivers with new function, connected vehicles will also expand automotive business models to include a much broader set of industries — IT, retail, financial services, media, consumer electronics. This is significant, because it could challenge the traditional automotive business model: Rather than focusing only on the sale and maintenance of a vehicle, companies will focus on the sum of business opportunities the automobile represents.

Consumers, especially younger ones, don’t show the same desire for vehicle ownership as older generations do.

But What Do Consumers Want?

Do people even want all this? Or is this just a case of business thinkers, technologists, and early adopters making predictions in an echo chamber? It’s not.

Consumers do show a strong interest in the features of a connected vehicle. For example, from analyses Gartner conducted over the last year, we found that of all U.S. vehicle owners:

• Almost half (46%) are interested in safely accessing mobile applications inside the vehicle. These applications include receiving on-demand wireless map or software updates, finding available parking spots, and conducting local searches; nearly 40% would also opt for remote diagnostic capabilities that alert them when parts need replacement.


• More than one-third are interested in a self-driving, autonomous vehicle.


• Thirty percent are likely to opt for a vehicle that allows them to tether their smartphone to get internet connection there.

Our increasingly digital “lifestyles” may also force consumers to re-evaluate personal transportation choices. For example: The combined cost of a monthly mobile and residential internet plan might be competing with the cost of filling up a car at the gas station.

These tradeoffs are even more important to younger vehicle owners (18- to 24-year-olds) than older ones (54+ years). The younger group is more likely (30%) to choose internet access over having a vehicle (compared to just 12% of the older group), and about the same percentages are likely to use a car-sharing service as an alternative to vehicle ownership.

The cost of a monthly mobile and residential internet plan competes with the cost of filling up a car at the gas station.

Obviously, connected vehicle applications have to be safe, reliable, and non-distracting to wow consumers on an emotional level and convince them on a rational level. Simply copying interfaces from other mobile devices will not be enough – buttons in cars actually work great for certain functions. The automotive industry will need to innovate new experiences and integrate systems thoroughly so consumers don’t feel they can get the same results with just an iPad on the passenger seat.

But the fact remains that automobiles are here to stay, and they’re going to be connected. The innovations and changes described here will mature relatively quickly over the next two decades. For example, I predict that by 2016 at least three companies will have announced concrete plans for upcoming product launches offering advanced autonomous vehicle technology.

This isn’t pie-in-the-sky — just consider a few recent advancements in the automotive connectivity space: Avis acquiring Zipcar; the first over-the-air automotive software patch by Tesla; Intel getting significantly involved in the connected vehicle value-chain; big telcos like Sprint extending their reach into automotive; a high-ranking Apple executive taking a seat on a carmaker’s board. All of these moves signal the trend.

And for those who are also passionate about automobiles and driving, the era of the connected vehicle will open a mesmerizing new world. You know that immediate connection between our senses and the stimulatory triggers of a car: sounds, speed, sights? Imagine that feeling, and so much more. I am optimistic that the automotive industry and technology companies will preserve this fascination of the automobile – it is, after all, an immersive experience.

But if you don’t like this dawning era of the connected vehicle, you should get your (unconnected) dream car now.

Read More..

Adele’s “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – British singer Adele‘s Grammy-winning “21″ scored a rare feat in 2012 as it topped U.S. album sales for a second straight year, beating out U.S. country-pop star Taylor Swift‘s “Red, Nielsen Soundscan said on Thursday.

It was the first time a single album had been a top-seller for two years in a row since Nielsen began tracking album sales in 1991, the organization said.

But U.S. album sales overall fell 4 percent in 2012 to 315.96 million albums, after 2011 saw a rare 3 percent bump in sales.

Adele’s “21″ sold 4.41 million units in the United States in 2012 to top Swift’s “Red,” which sold 3.11 million copies. In 2011, “21″ sold 5.82 million units.

“It’s a sort of a once-in-a-lifetime album,” Keith Caulfield, associate director of charts at Billboard, told Reuters of “21.” “Only a few of these albums come along in history.”

The heartbreak record, with hits like “Rolling in the Deep” and “Someone Like You,” earned Adele six Grammy Awards in early 2012, boosting the profile of the 24-year-old singer and songwriter, who records on indie label XL Recordings.

The album sold at a furious pace, reaching the 10 million albums-sold plateau in the span of two years, Caulfield noted. The last album to achieve that feat was boy band ‘N Sync’s “No Strings Attached,” which was released in 2000.

“It’s really the right combination of artistry and hit singles,” Caulfield said of “21′s” success.

“She really crossed over from pop to Latin to adult contemporary to dance,” he added. “Young and old consumers bought it, and because of its mixture of fans, she was able to sell it as well as she did.”

Adele’s success came despite the drop in 2012 U.S. album sales.

“Last year (2011) was a fluke,” Caulfield said. “A year gain in album sales is a mega achievement. … It’s the way the market works now, people buy songs and not albums.”

Indeed, digital song sales rose 5 percent in 2012 to a record high 1.336 billion downloads.

The year’s best-selling albums in the United States had a particularly British flavor as Swift was the lone American in the top five. Swift records for the independently owned Nashville-based Big Machine, distributed by Universal Music Group.

British boy band One Direction’s “Up All Night,” released in 2011 on Sony Music Entertainment’s SYCO/Columbia label, placed third with 1.62 million units sold, while their 2012 follow-up, “Take Me Home,” took the fifth spot with 1.34 million units sold.

Britain’s folk revivalists Mumford & Sons, on indie record label Glassnote, placed fourth with their album “Babel” selling 1.46 million units.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey; Editing by Jill Serjeant and Peter Cooney)

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Adele’s “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/adeles-21-scores-again-beating-swift-for-2012s-top-album/
Link To Post : Adele’s “21″ scores again, beating Swift for 2012′s top album
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Scant Proof Is Found to Back Up Claims by Energy Drinks

Energy drinks are the fastest-growing part of the beverage industry, with sales in the United States reaching more than $10 billion in 2012 — more than Americans spent on iced tea or sports beverages like Gatorade.

Their rising popularity represents a generational shift in what people drink, and reflects a successful campaign to convince consumers, particularly teenagers, that the drinks provide a mental and physical edge.

The drinks are now under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration after reports of deaths and serious injuries that may be linked to their high caffeine levels. But however that review ends, one thing is clear, interviews with researchers and a review of scientific studies show: the energy drink industry is based on a brew of ingredients that, apart from caffeine, have little, if any benefit for consumers.

“If you had a cup of coffee you are going to affect metabolism in the same way,” said Dr. Robert W. Pettitt, an associate professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, who has studied the drinks.

Energy drink companies have promoted their products not as caffeine-fueled concoctions but as specially engineered blends that provide something more. For example, producers claim that “Red Bull gives you wings,” that Rockstar Energy is “scientifically formulated” and Monster Energy is a “killer energy brew.” Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, has asked the government to investigate the industry’s marketing claims.

Promoting a message beyond caffeine has enabled the beverage makers to charge premium prices. A 16-ounce energy drink that sells for $2.99 a can contains about the same amount of caffeine as a tablet of NoDoz that costs 30 cents. Even Starbucks coffee is cheap by comparison; a 12-ounce cup that costs $1.85 has even more caffeine.

As with earlier elixirs, a dearth of evidence underlies such claims. Only a few human studies of energy drinks or the ingredients in them have been performed and they point to a similar conclusion, researchers say — that the beverages are mainly about caffeine.

Caffeine is called the world’s most widely used drug. A stimulant, it increases alertness, awareness and, if taken at the right time, improves athletic performance, studies show. Energy drink users feel its kick faster because the beverages are typically swallowed quickly or are sold as concentrates.

“These are caffeine delivery systems,” said Dr. Roland Griffiths, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who has studied energy drinks. “They don’t want to say this is equivalent to a NoDoz because that is not a very sexy sales message.”

A scientist at the University of Wisconsin became puzzled as he researched an ingredient used in energy drinks like Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy and Monster Energy. The researcher, Dr. Craig A. Goodman, could not find any trials in humans of the additive, a substance with the tongue-twisting name of glucuronolactone that is related to glucose, a sugar. But Dr. Goodman, who had studied other energy drink ingredients, eventually found two 40-year-old studies from Japan that had examined it.

In the experiments, scientists injected large doses of the substance into laboratory rats. Afterward, the rats swam better. “I have no idea what it does in energy drinks,” Dr. Goodman said.

Energy drink manufacturers say it is their proprietary formulas, rather than specific ingredients, that provide users with physical and mental benefits. But that has not prevented them from implying otherwise.

Consider the case of taurine, an additive used in most energy products.

On its Web site, the producer of Red Bull, for example, states that “more than 2,500 reports have been published about taurine and its physiological effects,” including acting as a “detoxifying agent.” In addition, that company, Red Bull of Austria, points to a 2009 safety study by a European regulatory group that gave it a clean bill of health.

But Red Bull’s Web site does not mention reports by that same group, the European Food Safety Authority, which concluded that claims about the benefits in energy drinks lacked scientific support. Based on those findings, the European Commission has refused to approve claims that taurine helps maintain mental function and heart health and reduces muscle fatigue.

Taurine, an amino acidlike substance that got its name because it was first found in the bile of bulls, does play a role in bodily functions, and recent research suggests it might help prevent heart attacks in women with high cholesterol. However, most people get more than adequate amounts from foods like meat, experts said. And researchers added that those with heart problems who may need supplements would find far better sources than energy drinks.

Hiroko Tabuchi contributed reporting from Tokyo and Poypiti Amatatham from Bangkok.

Read More..

U.S. Continues to Add Jobs at Slow Pace, Report Shows

Despite their concerns about looming tax increases and government spending cuts, American employers added 155,000 jobs in December, about apace with job growth over the last year, the Labor Department reported on Friday.

The biggest gains were in health care, food services, construction and manufacturing, with the latter two probably helped by rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy. Government payrolls fell modestly once again, the report said. The unemployment rate was 7.8 percent, the same as in November, whose rate was revised up from 7.7 percent.

“It’s not a home-run report by any stretch, but it’s constructive,” said John Ryding, chief economist at RDQ Economics. “It’s another month of fairly stable, solid, moderate job creation.”

Over the course of 2012, the country added 1.8 million jobs, despite continued job losses in the government sector and anxiety related to the presidential election and scheduled tax increases and spending cuts. 

Economists are unsure of what the rest of the year holds for the American job market, but most are forecasting more of the same: hiring fast enough to stay just ahead of population growth, but still too slow to make a sizable dent in the 12.2-million-person backlog of unemployed workers.

A number of encouraging trends in the economy suggest that businesses have good reason to speed up hiring, including the housing recovery, looser credit for small businesses, a rebound in China and pent-up demand for new autos. Friday’s report also showed slightly faster wage growth and longer working hours in December, both of which bode well for hiring.

But Congress’s last-minute deal earlier this week to raise taxes will offset some of these sources of growth, since higher taxes trim how much money consumers have available to spend each week.

“Job creation might firm a little bit, but it’s still looking nothing like the typical recovery year we’ve had in deep recessions in the past,” Mr. Ryding said. “There’s nothing in the deal to do that and nothing in this latest jobs report to suggest that. We’re a long way short of the 300,000 job growth that we need."

The fiscal compromise also renewed for a year the federal government’s emergency unemployment benefits program. That allows workers to continue receiving unemployment benefits for up to 73 weeks, depending on the unemployment rate in the state where they live, and acts as a stimulus to the American economy because unemployment benefits are spent almost immediately.

The extension has proved to be a tremendous relief to the two million workers who would have otherwise abruptly lost their benefits this week.

“We woke up on Wednesday morning and saw the news and just said, ‘thank God, thank God, thank God,’ and then went out and went food shopping because we knew we had money coming in,” said Gina Shadis, 56, of Newton, N.J.

Both she and her husband, Stephen, were laid off within the last 14 months from jobs they had held for more than a decade: she from a quality assurance manager position at an environmental testing lab, and he as foreman and senior master technician at an auto dealership. They are now each receiving $548 per week in federal jobless benefits, or about a quarter of their pay at their most recent jobs.

“It has just been such a traumatic time,” she said. “You know you wake up in the morning with shoulders tense and head aching because you didn’t sleep the night before from worrying.”

While Congress’s deal on New Year’s Day brought clarity to tax and unemployment benefits policies, lawmakers have still not settled their disputes about federal spending cuts and the debt ceiling. Economists worry that the lingering uncertainty over these issues could discourage businesses from investing in more workers or equipment.

“We may be seeing the calm before the storm right now,” said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomic Advisors, noting that a recent survey from the National Federation of Independent Business found that alarmingly few small companies plan to hire in the coming months. “Small businesses are wringing their hands in horror at what’s going on in Washington.”

In the meantime, more than six million workers have exhausted their unemployment benefits altogether since the recession began in December 2007, according to the National Employment Law Project, a labor advocacy group.

Millions of workers are sitting on the sidelines and so are not counted in the total tally of unemployed. Some are merely waiting for the job market to improve, and others are trying to invest in skills to appeal to employers who are already hiring.  

“I have a few prospects who say they want me to work for them when I graduate,” said Jordan Douglas, a 24-year-old single mother in Pampa, Tex., who is enrolled in a special program that allows her to receive jobless benefits while attending school full time to become a registered nurse. She gets $792 in benefits every two weeks, a little less than half of what she earned in an administrative position at the nursing home that laid her off last year.

She calculates that her federal jobless benefits will run out the very last week of nursing school.

“This had to have been a sign from God that I had to do this since it all worked out so well,” she said.

Read More..

Bieber urges crackdown on paparazzi after photographer's death

Justin Bieber and his collection of exotic cars have been tantalizing targets for celebrity photographers ever since the young singer got his driver's license.

A video captured the paparazzi chasing Bieber through Westside traffic in November. When Bieber's white Ferrari stops at an intersection, the video shows the singer turning to one of the photographers and asking: "How do your parents feel about what you do?"

A few months earlier, he was at the wheel of his Fisker sports car when a California Highway Patrol officer pulled him over for driving at high speeds while trying to outrun a paparazzo.

This pursuit for the perfect shot took a fatal turn Tuesday when a photographer was hit by an SUV on Sepulveda Boulevard after taking photos of Bieber's Ferrari. And the singer now finds himself at the center of the familiar debate about free speech and the aggressive tactics of the paparazzi.

Since Princess Diana's fatal accident in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by photographers, California politicians have tried crafting laws that curb paparazzi behavior. But some of those laws are rarely used, and attorneys have challenged the constitutionality of others.

On Wednesday, Bieber went on the offensive, calling on lawmakers to crack down.

"Hopefully this tragedy will finally inspire meaningful legislation and whatever other necessary steps to protect the lives and safety of celebrities, police officers, innocent public bystanders and the photographers themselves," he said in a statement.

It remained unclear if any legislators would take up his call. But Bieber did get some support from another paparazzi target, singer Miley Cyrus.

She wrote on Twitter that she hoped the accident "brings on some changes in '13 Paparazzi are dangerous!"

Last year, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge threw out charges related to a first-of-its-kind anti-paparazzi law in a case involving Bieber being chased on the 101 Freeway by photographer Paul Raef. Passed in 2010, the law created punishments for paparazzi who drove dangerously to obtain images.

But the judge said the law violated 1st Amendment protections by overreaching and potentially affecting such people as wedding photographers or photographers speeding to a location where a celebrity was present.

The L.A. city attorney's office is now appealing that decision.

Raef's attorney, Dmitry Gorin, said new anti-paparazzi laws are unnecessary.

"There are plenty of other laws on the books to deal with these issues. There is always a rush to create a new paparazzi law every time something happens," he said. "Any new law on the paparazzi is going to run smack into the 1st Amendment. Truth is, most conduct is covered by existing laws. A lot of this is done for publicity."

Coroner's officials have not identified the photographer because they have not reached the next of kin. However, his girlfriend, Frances Merto, and another photographer identified him as Chris Guerra.

The incident took place on Sepulveda Boulevard near Getty Center Drive shortly before 6 p.m. Tuesday. A friend of Bieber was driving the sports car when it was pulled over on the 405 Freeway by the California Highway Patrol. The photographer arrived near the scene on Sepulveda, left his car and crossed the street to take photos. Sources familiar with the investigation said the CHP told him to leave the area. As he was returning to his vehicle, he was hit by the SUV.

Law enforcement sources said Wednesday that it was unlikely charges would be filed against the driver of the SUV that hit the photographer.

Veteran paparazzo Frank Griffin took issue with the criticism being directed at the photographer as well as other paparazzi.

"What's the difference between our guy who got killed under those circumstances and the war photographer who steps on a land mine in Afghanistan and blows himself to pieces because he wanted the photograph on the other side of road?" said Griffin, who co-owns the photo agency Griffin-Bauer.

"The only difference is the subject matter. One is a celebrity and the other is a battle. Both young men have left behind mothers and fathers grieving and there's no greater sadness in this world than parents who have to bury their children."

Others, however, said the death focuses attention on the safety issues involving paparazzi

"The paparazzi are increasingly reckless and dangerous. The greater the demand, the greater the incentive to do whatever it takes to get the image," said Blair Berk, a Los Angeles attorney who has represented numerous celebrities. "The issue here isn't vanity and nuisance, it's safety."

richard.winton@latimes.com

andrew.blankstein@latimes.com

Read More..

Visionary Images: The Lost Fractals of Beno&icirc;t Mandelbrot

Many people know Benoît Mandelbrot from the computer screensavers of a pre-LCD era. Others have a deeper understanding of his mathematics, the repeating geometries that earned him the sobriquet Father of Fractals. Less appreciated, though, is the process underlying his work: Mandelbrot relied as much for guidance on visual imagery as whiteboard formulae. Primitive computer printouts were his maps to uncharted mathematical terrain, their dot-matrix patterns a "here be dragons" for the exploration of dynamical systems and chaos theory.

In 2008, fascinated by the interplay between imagery and scientific investigation, art historian Nina Samuel spent two weeks interviewing Mandelbrot in his Cambridge, Massachusetts home. After Mandelbrot passed away in 2010, she was allowed entry to his office, collecting some 300 printouts, sketches and notebook scribbles now on display in The Islands of Benoît Mandelbrot: Fractals, Chaos, and the Materiality of Thinking, an exhibition at the Bard Graduate Center in Manhattan.

"There is such an organic quality to these images," said Samuel. "These are the images the scientists used when they were working, and not what was found on magazine covers or popularized in screensavers."

The exhibition runs until Jan. 27, but for readers not fortunate enough to visit, Samuel took Wired on a guided virtual tour. Each entry is followed by links to high-resolution versions of the images.

Below:

The image below comes from a series of 120 prints, some composed of seemingly stray dots and others almost completely blank, that preceded Mandelbrot's discovery of the fractal set that bears his name (visualized above, as produced by a modern pattern generator).

"If you look at the shadows, you can see the resemblance," Samuel said of the early image. "Later on, he could have seen the shapes that became famous." But at the time, Mandelbrot saw only an undefined something, a hint of what needed next to be done.

"Mandelbrot would never say that an image was a proof, but an image would lead to conjecture, open up the imagination, and then you could prove something with formulas," said Samuel.

Images: 1) Geek3/Wikimedia Commons [high-resolution] 2) Benoît Mandelbrot and Mark Laff, programmer. Collection Aliette Mandelbrot. [high-resolution]

Read More..

“Hunger Games” and “Hobbit” most-anticipated films of 2013: poll

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – This year will look a lot like 2012 at the box office, with “The Hunger Games” and Hobbits at the top of cinemagoers must-see lists, according to a survey by ticket-seller Fandango released on Thursday.

The second installment in “The Hunger Games” trilogy, “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire,” which is set for a November release, topped the list as 2013′s most-anticipated blockbuster.

The first film in the life-or-death thriller series starring Jennifer Lawrence, raked in some $ 687 million at the worldwide box office in 2012.

“The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug,” director Peter Jackson‘s second installment in the “The Hobbit” series of elves and dwarves, ranked second on the survey that polled more than 2,000 moviegoers during the final week of 2012. It is scheduled to hit the big screen in December.

“People love the mega-franchises and that is what gets them most excited,” Dave Karger, Fandango chief correspondent, told Reuters. “The first ‘Hunger Games‘ whetted peoples’ appetites for more. The same can be said for ‘The Hobbit‘ and ‘Iron Man.’”

The superhero thriller “Iron Man 3″ starring Robert Downey Jr. ranked third on the list and is set for a May 3 release.

“Star Trek into Darkness” – the follow-up to 2009′s “Star Trek” science-fiction adventure – and “The Great Gatsby” starring Leonardo DiCaprio rounded out the top five. Both films are set to open in May.

‘JAZZED’ ABOUT FRANCHISES

The heavy dose of franchise films on the list indicates how familiarity can build buzz among moviegoers, Karger said.

“In the case of ‘The Hunger Games,’ many people who loved the movie have read the other books so they’re excited to see it brought to life,” he said. “The same with ‘The Hobbit‘ too.

“Some people say, ‘Where is the originality?’ but the fact of the matter is that these franchises are what people get most jazzed about.”

The survey also asked film fans to vote on the sexiest man and woman on the big screen in 2013, as well as best villain, breakout stars and best apocalyptic films.

Mila Kunis, who stars in upcoming film “Oz: The Great and Powerful,” was voted sexiest actress, while Channing Tatum was voted sexiest man for Paramount’s “G.I. Joe: Retaliation.” Both films are set for March releases.

Ben Kingsley (“Iron Man 3″) was voted most-anticipated villain, and June’s zombie thriller “World War Z” starring Brad Pitt was voted most-anticipated apocalyptic film.

British actress Alice Eve was voted biggest breakout actress for “Star Trek” while fellow Brit Henry Cavill got the nod as biggest breakout actor for playing Superman opposite Russell Crowe and Amy Adams in “Man of Steel,” which will be released in June.

Full results can be viewed at Fandango.com.

(Reporting by Eric Kelsey, editing by Jill Serjeant and Sandra Maler)

Movies News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

Scant Proof Is Found to Back Up Claims by Energy Drinks

Energy drinks are the fastest-growing part of the beverage industry, with sales in the United States reaching more than $10 billion in 2012 — more than Americans spent on iced tea or sports beverages like Gatorade.

Their rising popularity represents a generational shift in what people drink, and reflects a successful campaign to convince consumers, particularly teenagers, that the drinks provide a mental and physical edge.

The drinks are now under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration after reports of deaths and serious injuries that may be linked to their high caffeine levels. But however that review ends, one thing is clear, interviews with researchers and a review of scientific studies show: the energy drink industry is based on a brew of ingredients that, apart from caffeine, have little, if any benefit for consumers.

“If you had a cup of coffee you are going to affect metabolism in the same way,” said Dr. Robert W. Pettitt, an associate professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, who has studied the drinks.

Energy drink companies have promoted their products not as caffeine-fueled concoctions but as specially engineered blends that provide something more. For example, producers claim that “Red Bull gives you wings,” that Rockstar Energy is “scientifically formulated” and Monster Energy is a “killer energy brew.” Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, has asked the government to investigate the industry’s marketing claims.

Promoting a message beyond caffeine has enabled the beverage makers to charge premium prices. A 16-ounce energy drink that sells for $2.99 a can contains about the same amount of caffeine as a tablet of NoDoz that costs 30 cents. Even Starbucks coffee is cheap by comparison; a 12-ounce cup that costs $1.85 has even more caffeine.

As with earlier elixirs, a dearth of evidence underlies such claims. Only a few human studies of energy drinks or the ingredients in them have been performed and they point to a similar conclusion, researchers say — that the beverages are mainly about caffeine.

Caffeine is called the world’s most widely used drug. A stimulant, it increases alertness, awareness and, if taken at the right time, improves athletic performance, studies show. Energy drink users feel its kick faster because the beverages are typically swallowed quickly or are sold as concentrates.

“These are caffeine delivery systems,” said Dr. Roland Griffiths, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who has studied energy drinks. “They don’t want to say this is equivalent to a NoDoz because that is not a very sexy sales message.”

A scientist at the University of Wisconsin became puzzled as he researched an ingredient used in energy drinks like Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy and Monster Energy. The researcher, Dr. Craig A. Goodman, could not find any trials in humans of the additive, a substance with the tongue-twisting name of glucuronolactone that is related to glucose, a sugar. But Dr. Goodman, who had studied other energy drink ingredients, eventually found two 40-year-old studies from Japan that had examined it.

In the experiments, scientists injected large doses of the substance into laboratory rats. Afterward, the rats swam better. “I have no idea what it does in energy drinks,” Dr. Goodman said.

Energy drink manufacturers say it is their proprietary formulas, rather than specific ingredients, that provide users with physical and mental benefits. But that has not prevented them from implying otherwise.

Consider the case of taurine, an additive used in most energy products.

On its Web site, the producer of Red Bull, for example, states that “more than 2,500 reports have been published about taurine and its physiological effects,” including acting as a “detoxifying agent.” In addition, that company, Red Bull of Austria, points to a 2009 safety study by a European regulatory group that gave it a clean bill of health.

But Red Bull’s Web site does not mention reports by that same group, the European Food Safety Authority, which concluded that claims about the benefits in energy drinks lacked scientific support. Based on those findings, the European Commission has refused to approve claims that taurine helps maintain mental function and heart health and reduces muscle fatigue.

Taurine, an amino acidlike substance that got its name because it was first found in the bile of bulls, does play a role in bodily functions, and recent research suggests it might help prevent heart attacks in women with high cholesterol. However, most people get more than adequate amounts from foods like meat, experts said. And researchers added that those with heart problems who may need supplements would find far better sources than energy drinks.

Hiroko Tabuchi contributed reporting from Tokyo and Poypiti Amatatham from Bangkok.

Read More..

Your Money: Piecing Together a Tax Plan’s Effects

It is tempting for people who earn less than $400,000 to think that they got off easy this week under the tax deal to end the fiscal impasse, given that only those with incomes above that level will be in a higher income tax bracket in 2013.

But the legislation that both houses of Congress have now approved could increase taxes on people with incomes that are not quite that high as well. That’s because the bill includes language that begins to do what both President Obama and Mitt Romney proposed at various points in the past: Limit certain tax breaks available to people who are affluent.

The new rules target two tax breaks: personal exemptions and many popular deductions like those for state and local taxes, mortgage interest and charitable contributions. For both breaks, single people with at least $250,000 in adjusted gross income and married people filing jointly with at least $300,000 in income are vulnerable. A hypothetical Texas couple could end up paying about $2,500 more in taxes, for instance.

The mechanics of how the new limits will work are now clear, though it takes a fair bit of explaining to lay them out in plain English. What we don’t know yet is how many people will end up paying more in 2013 than they did in 2012.

The uncertainty is tied to the fact that many of the targets of the legislation often end up ensnared by the alternative minimum tax. The A.M.T., and its high tax bill, may continue to catch most of them.

But let’s start with the basics. Most of the discussion here begins with that adjusted gross income figure. That’s the number you get when you subtract items from your salary or take-home pay that are often referred to as above-the-line deductions.

For the income range we’re talking about, these deductions tend to include things like health savings account contributions and alimony. People who work for themselves also get deductions for health insurance premiums, certain retirement contributions and self-employment taxes that an employer would otherwise pay.

Mark Luscombe, principal analyst with CCH, a tax information provider, points out just how confusing the use of adjustable gross income is, given that the new tax limits, the new tax bracket and the new Medicare tax are all based on different definitions of income.

Under normal circumstances, a personal exemption, for a specific dollar amount, is available for each member of your household. You then add all of the exemptions and subtract the total from your adjusted gross income, which has the effect of lowering your taxable income. CCH predicts that the personal exemption amount for 2013 will be $3,900 per person.

The new law requires taxpayers in the targeted income range to reduce the amount of their exemptions by 2 percent for every $2,500 by which their income exceeds the $250,000 or $300,000 limit. So a married, childless couple with $400,000 in adjusted gross income and $7,800 in potential exemptions could lose $6,240 of that $7,800.

The math for the limit on deductions is different. There, the rules call for you to add up the applicable deductions. Let’s say that equals $50,000. Then, you subtract from that 3 percent of the amount by which your adjusted gross income exceeds those $250,000 or $300,000 thresholds.

So if you’re a married couple with $400,000 in income, you’re $100,000 over the threshold. Three percent of that is $3,000. So you’d subtract that from $50,000. The rule, which existed for years but had been phased out more recently, is known as the Pease limitation, for Representative Donald J. Pease, the Ohio newspaper editor-turned-legislator who got it passed. As before, you can’t lose more than 80 percent of your deductions, no matter how high your income gets.

If you’re trying to figure out whether and how this may affect you, well, join the club. So much depends on your income, your state and your various deductions. All of that will affect whether the A.M.T. hits you as well.

For people who are already in the A.M.T. but will not end up with the $400,000 (for individuals) or $450,000 (for married couples filing jointly) in income necessary to be in the new 39.6 percent tax bracket in 2013, the new exemption and deduction rules may not hurt you. “I don’t think there’s enough there that you would no longer be in the A.M.T.,” said Jude Coard, a tax partner at Berdon L.L.P., of people with income in the $300,000 to $400,000 range.

Much will depend on your own situation. CCH ran two hypothetical cases for me, which you can see in the accompanying graphic. The first examined a family of four in New York with $400,000 in adjusted gross income and $79,000 in total itemized deductions. The household pays the A.M.T. in both 2012 and under the new tax rules in 2013. They pay just $790 more in 2013, but that includes $1,350 in new Medicare taxes. (The total does not include the Social Security payroll tax that has been restored to its prerecession level.)

A family in Texas, however, might have the same income but lower property taxes and no income tax and thus lower deductions for its federal tax return. Their deductions are just $43,700, but they end up being hurt more by the new rules. They would have no A.M.T. liability in 2013 and would end up paying $3,852 more, or about $2,500 if you don’t count the $1,350 from the new Medicare tax.

This is a lot to digest, so much so that even the experts at the Tax Policy Center have not yet finished updating their online calculator. Once they do, if you have the stomach to gather (or try to predict) all of the data, you can take your shot at projecting what these new rules may cost you.

Read More..