Thursday, 31 January 2013

Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Foursquare shown on BlackBerry 10, integrated into OS

DNP Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Foursquare shown on BlackBerry 10, integrated into OS

The four biggest smartphone applications in social -- Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Foursquare -- are headed to BlackBerry's latest software platform, BlackBerry 10, via BlackBerry World. Not exactly a surprise considering that somewhere in the ballpark of 70,000 apps are planned for BB 10 at launch, eh? The first three were demonstrated on-stage during today's BB 10 launch event, and were all shown as integrated with BB Hub (as partially revealed in a recent leak).

We're also seeing Angry Birds Star Wars featured on BBW, but we expect to hear a lot more about applications any minute now.

Filed under: , , ,

Comments

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/30/twitter-facebook-linkedin-bb10/

michael buble michael buble brandi glanville Jenni Rivera Alive Facebook Down bo jackson bo jackson

Storms raking Southeast blamed for 2 deaths

ADAIRSVILLE, Ga. (AP) ? A massive storm system raking the Southeast hammered a Georgia town on Wednesday, overturning cars on an interstate and killing at least one person there, authorities said.

Bartow County Fire Chief Craig Millsap said the body was found in the storm damage but did not have further details on how the person died. The same system also was blamed for a death in Tennessee. Most dangerous were powerful wind gusts that in several places were powerful enough to overturn tractor-trailers.

There were reports that people were trapped in homes and businesses, and television footage showed large sections of a sprawling manufacturing plant had been destroyed.

Footage also showed a funnel cloud roaring through the downtown area of Adairsville, about 60 miles northwest of Atlanta, flipping cars and demolishing a home. Interstate 75 was closed in both directions after the storm flipped cars onto their roofs and tossed them onto the grassy shoulder.

At least two tornadoes were confirmed and several more suspected, and conditions remained ripe for more. Since Tuesday, the system had caused damage across a swath from Missouri to Georgia.

In recent days, people in the South and Midwest had enjoyed unseasonably balmy temperatures in the 60s and 70s. A system pulling warm weather from the Gulf of Mexico was colliding with a cold front moving in from the west, creating volatility.

Police said high winds toppled a tree onto a shed in Nashville, Tenn., where a man had taken shelter, killing him.

Across the region, downed power lines, trees and tree limbs were making it difficult to reach people who needed help.

Another person was reported injured by lightning in Arkansas during the storm's eastward trek. Two people suffered minor injuries when a mobile home was blown off its foundation in Kentucky.

In Tennessee, officials confirmed that a tornado with peak wind speeds of 115 mph touched down in Mount Juliet. No serious injuries were reported there, though the path of damage was about 150 yards wide, including homes, a warehouse and an automotive business.

Hail ranging up to nearly golf-ball size was also reported in some areas.

Thousands were reported without power in Tennessee, where tornado warnings and flash flood warnings were issued for several counties and a tractor-trailer was blown over by high winds.

The nation has had its longest break between tornado fatalities since detailed tornado records began being kept in 1950, according to the Storm Prediction Center and National Climatic Data Center. The last one was June 24, when a person was killed in a home in Highlands County, Fla. That was 220 days ago as of Tuesday.

The last day with multiple fatalities was June 4, when three people were killed in a mobile home in Scott County, Mo.

Source: http://weather.yahoo.com/storms-raking-southeast-blamed-2-deaths-183058942.html

walker recall censor pipa and sopa sopa pipa wikipedia blackout kyla pratt

Wednesday, 30 January 2013

The dung beetle as celestial navigator

Only humans, birds, and seals are known to navigate using stars. But the dung beetle does use the Milky Way to chart its path, say scientists.

By Joseph Castro,?LiveScience.com / January 25, 2013

Dung beetles have been shown to use the Milky Way to navigate.Researchers have known for several years that the inch-long insects use the sun or moon as fixed points to ensure they keep rolling dung balls in a straight line - the quickest way of getting away from other beetles at the dung heap. Pictured here, a South African dung beetle.

REUTERS/Marcus Byrne/University of the Witwatersrand

Enlarge

Despite having tiny brains, dung beetles are surprisingly decent navigators, able to follow straight paths as they roll poo balls they've collected away from a dung source. But it seems the insects' abilities are more remarkable than previously believed. Like ancient seafarers, dung beetles can navigate using the starry sky and the glow from the Milky Way, new research shows.

Skip to next paragraph

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

"This is the first time where we see animals using the Milky Way for orientation," said lead researcher Marie Dacke, a biologist at Lund University in Sweden. "It's also the first time we see that insects can use the stars."

After locating a fresh pile of feces, dung beetles will often collect and roll away a large piece of spherical dung. Last year, Dacke and her colleagues discovered the beetles climb on their dung balls and dance around in circles before taking off. This dance is not one of joy, however; the insects are checking out the sky to get their bearings.

"The dorsal (upper) parts of the dung beetles' eyes are specialized to be able to analyze the direction of light polarization ? the direction that light vibrates in," Dacke told LiveScience. So when a beetle looks up, it's taking in the sun, the moon and the pattern of ambient polarized light. These celestial cues help the beetle avoid accidentally circling back to the poo pile, where other beetles may try to steal its food, Dacke said. [Photos of Dung Beetles Dancing on Poop Balls]

In addition to these cues, Dacke and her team wondered if dung beetles can use stars for navigation, just as birds, seals and humans do. After all, they reasoned, dung beetles can somehow keep straight on clear, moonless nights.

To find out, the researchers timed how long dung beetles of the species Scarabaeus satyrus took to cross a circular arena with high walls blocking views of treetops and other landmarks. They tested the insects in South Africa under a moonlit sky, a moonless sky and an overcast sky. In some trials, the beetles were fitted with cardboard caps, which kept their eyes to the ground. Overall, the beetles had a difficult time traveling straight and took significantly longer to cross the arena if caps or clouds obstructed their view of the sky.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/science/~3/_kLAbUmFlvs/The-dung-beetle-as-celestial-navigator

black and tan dwight howard trade ncaa bracket 2012 2012 ncaa bracket john carlson greg smith catamount

Twinkie lovers can relax: Hostess sale is imminent

16 hrs.

The indestructible Twinkie appears to be one step closer to a comeback.?

Hostess Brands is close to announcing that it has picked two investment firms ? C. Dean Metropoulos & Co. and Apollo Global Management ? as the lead bidders for its Twinkies and other snack cakes, according to a source close to the situation.??

The so-called stalking horse bid would be for more than $400 million, according to the Wall Street Journal. It would serve as the baseline offer for the business and could be topped by others at an auction.??A judge would have to approve any final sale.??

A deal, part of Hostess's bankruptcy reorganization, is not yet final, said the source, who declined to be identified as the discussions are not public.??

Spokesmen for Metropoulos and Apollo were not immediately available to comment. Hostess declined to comment.?

Related:?Are you struggling in the suburbs? We want to hear from you.

After years of management turmoil and turnover, Hostess declared it was going out of business and selling its brands in November.?

Earlier this month, Hostess chose a $390 million offer by Flowers Foods , maker of Tastykake products, as the stalking horse bid for several brands including Wonder bread?and?Drake's.

?On Monday, Hostess said it chose McKee Foods Corp, maker of Little Debbie snack cakes, as the initial bidder for its Drake's cakes, which include Ring Dings, Yodels and Devil Dogs. It also chose United States Bakery as the lead bidder for four of its smaller bread brands plus bakeries, equipment and depots.?

The?Associated?Press?and?Reuters?contributed?to?this?report.?

Source: http://www.nbcnews.com/business/twinkie-lovers-can-relax-hostess-sale-imminent-1C8161026

Dave Brubeck Duck Dynasty frankie muniz today show powerball katt williams greg mcelroy

PFT: Eagles' unlikely to decide on Vick soon

Randy MossAP

We mentioned earlier today that 49ers wide receiver Randy Moss declared himself the best wideout in the history of the game.

You?ll likely see much more about him in the coming days, in many outlets, because he was so open and forthcoming and illuminating about many topics during his appearance at Media Day.

When Moss is on, he?s extremely interesting, he just chooses not to be on often.

But among the gems today was a candid admission that he didn?t particularly care for the way the 49ers used him this year.

In the past, it could have been a Keyshawn-level ?Just Give Me the Damn Ball? routine, but Moss said it so matter-of-factly it was easy to miss.

?I don?t like my role; I don?t,? he said. ?I like to be out there playing football. One thing that I?ve always had to really understand was being a decoy. It was put to me, Coach Dennis Green just said, ?Even though the football is not in your hand, you?re still out there dictating how the defense is playing the offense.? It took me awhile to really understand where he was coming from. Later on and now in my career, I understand that my presence out on the field, I don?t always have to touch the ball to be able to help the offense score touchdowns.

?Like I said, I don?t really like that, but it?s something that I?m used to. I have to grow to understand and grow to like it. I?ve always been a team player. I?ve never been about self. Anything that is going to push our team to victory and hopefully win a Super Bowl, I?m willing to do.?

No, that was Moss, who hasn?t always been accused to giving freely of himself for the greater good.

But 49ers offensive coordinator Greg Roman said Moss had been nothing but professional.

?He?s been great,? Roman said. ?I think he?s a great team player, and a mentor for all the guys, really.?

His love of competition has never been in doubt. Moss joked about past arguments, even fights, he?s had with coaches and players. But his role with the 49ers, as much as he might not like it, remains a valuable one, as Roman insisted Moss could still ?get behind a defense in a hurry.?

?When I hear people talk about how talented I am and how easy I make it look, I can honestly tell you people that it?s very hard work,? Moss said. ?I work out five times a week. I put the work in and for me to be able to go out there and have results it something I am proud of. It?s not always the individual results that I?m proud of. For me to be able to talk to a Michael Crabtree or talk to a Frank Gore or Percy Harvin and for them to go out there and have a good game that week, that?s something I can be proud of. That?s just me giving back to the NFL.

?I?ve always said, I don?t like what the NFL does for me because I?m very blessed. My family is blessed. I?ve always been the type of person to know what I can do to make the League better. At this point in my career, if I?m able to be vocal, to share a little knowledge and also to go out there and play, if that?s what it takes to win a championship, then I?m willing to do that. I?ve always been that way.?

Maybe so, but he hasn?t been quite the way he was Tuesday too often, or the perception of his career would likely be very different.

Source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/29/decision-on-michael-vick-likely-not-coming-soon/related/

kourtney kardashian DNS Changer ernest borgnine ESPYs 2012 venus williams Freeh Report direct tv

Tuesday, 29 January 2013

US regulator asks Boeing for full battery history

TOKYO (AP) ? U.S. regulators said Wednesday they asked Boeing Co. to provide a full operating history of lithium-ion batteries used in its grounded 787 Dreamliners after Japan's All Nippon Airways revealed it had repeatedly replaced the batteries even before overheating problems surfaced.

National Transportation Safety Board spokesman Peter Knudson said the agency made the request after recently becoming aware of battery problems at ANA that occurred before a Jan. 7 battery fire in a 787 parked at Boston's Logan International Airport. Boeing has already collected some of the information, he said.

ANA said it had replaced batteries on its 787 aircraft some 10 times because they failed to charge properly or showed other problems, and informed Boeing about the swaps. Japan Airlines also said it had replaced 787 batteries. It described the number involved as a few but couldn't immediately give further details.

All 50 of the Boeing 787s in use around the world remain grounded after an ANA flight on Jan. 16 made an emergency landing in Japan when its main battery overheated.

Lithium-ion batteries are prone to overheating and require additional safeguards to prevent fires. However, ANA spokeswoman Megumi Tezuka said the airline was not required to report the battery replacements to Japan's Transport Ministry because they did not interfere with flights and did not raise safety concerns.

Having to replace batteries on aircraft is not uncommon and was not considered out of the ordinary, she said.

Laura Brown, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, said in Washington that the agency was checking whether the previous battery incidents had been reported by Boeing.

With 17 of the jets, ANA was Boeing's launch customer for the technologically advanced airliner. The airline has had to cancel hundreds of flights, affecting tens of thousands of people, but has sought to minimize disruptions by switching to other aircraft as much as possible.

The battery problems experienced by ANA before the emergency landing were first reported by The New York Times.

Japanese and U.S. investigators looking into the Boeing 787's battery problems shifted their attention this week from the battery-maker, GS Yuasa of Kyoto, Japan, to the manufacturer of a monitoring system. That company, Kanto Aircraft Instrument Co. makes a system that monitors voltage, charging and temperature of the lithium-ion batteries.

On Tuesday, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said it was conducting a chemical analysis of internal short circuiting and thermal damage of the battery that caught fire in Boston.

The probe is also analyzing data from flight data recorders on the aircraft, the NTSB said in a statement on its website.

___

Joan Lowy reported from Washington.

___

Follow Elaine Kurtenbach on Twitter at www.twitter.com/ekurtenbach

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/us-regulator-asks-boeing-full-battery-history-052321216--finance.html

morosini death jacoby ellsbury jacoby ellsbury lionel richie kenny rogers avatar the last airbender david wright

22 die as passenger plane crashes in Kazakhstan

Shamil Zhumatov / Reuters

Emergency and security personnel are seen through a heavy fog about 100 meters (328 feet) from the site of a plane crash near Almaty on Tuesday.

By Dmitry Solovyov and Mariya Gordeyeva, Reuters

ALMATY, Kazakhstan -- A passenger plane crashed near Kazakhstan's commercial capital of Almaty on Tuesday, news agencies quoted SCAT airline as saying.

Twenty-two people were killed in the crash, Yuri Ilyin, deputy head of the emergencies department in Almaty, told Reuters from the scene of the crash near the village of Kyzyl Tu.

The plane had been en route from the city of Kokshetau in northern Kazakhstan to Almaty in the southeast of the country when it crashed near the village of Kyzyl Tu, Interfax news agency said.

Almaty and the surrounding area were veiled in thick fog on Tuesday.

SCAT is based in Kazakhstan and operates extensive domestic services and some international flights.

It was the second plane crash in the Central Asian country and former Soviet republic in just a over a month.

On December 25, a military transport airplane crashed in bad weather near the southern Kazakh city of Shymkent, killing all 27 people on board.

Copyright 2013 Thomson Reuters. Click for restrictions.

Source: http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/29/16749935-22-die-as-passenger-plane-crashes-in-kazakhstan-official-says?lite

lana del rey saturday night live focus on the family packers vs giants giants score 2012 golden globe nominations texans lana del rey snl

Richard (RJ) Eskow: As Federal Prosecutors Cash In, Big Bankers Go Unpunished

We needed heroes after the financial crisis. Instead we got bureaucrats, compromisers, and perhaps something much worse. Federal law enforcement officials, our "thin gray line" against banker crime, were charged with restoring the balance of justice and reducing the threat of future crises. Seems they had other things on their minds.

Now the Administration's first-term posse is riding off into the sunset. The most visible departure is Deputy Attorney General Lanny Breuer. Remember those submissive or avaricious sheriffs in the old Westerns, the ones who were always letting the bad guys run wild ???"Sorry, Ma'am, I'd like to help you and the boy but there ain't nothin' I can do." ?That's Breuer, whose shattered credibility and extreme reluctance to prosecute has become the stuff of legend. ?

But he's not the only one. Meet the senior partners in a firm that be more aptly named "Covington, Burling, and Justice."

Lanny Breuer

All it took was a well-edited compilation of his own words on PBS'?Frontline?to spur an announcement of Breuer's unscheduled resignation. (Mary Bottari has the Frontline highlights.) They're denying any connection between the program and the resignation, of course, but the denials ring false. Breuer was already on the record in a speech before the New York City Bar Association as saying that "we must take into account the effect of an indictment on innocent employees and shareholders" at major Wall Street firms.

That's like not arresting Tony Soprano because they'd all be out of a job down at the Bada Bing Club.

And note ?that Breuer did not say "We must take into account the effect of unpunished wrongdoing on defrauded investors, homeowners, or the American and global economies." ?The entire premise is bogus anyway. It's possible to criminally indict individual bankers without bringing down the whole bank. If necessary, the government can assume control of a failing institution to make sure that its workforce stays employed.

Besides, when did prosecutors start worrying about stock market value before deciding whether or not to indict suspected crooks? It must've been after Wall Street wrongdoing brought down the world economy and shattered global markets.

This anarchic reasoning reached its apotheosis (or nadir) with the Justice Department's recent refusal to indict anyone at HSNBC for laundering money on behalf the murderous Mexican drug cartels. ?Here's what that means in very real terms: If you work at a big bank you can fatten your bonus by breaking the law as many times as you want. You won't even be punished for colluding with crazed drug-dealing killers who have murdered 35,000 people, sometimes by tossing their severed heads onto a club's dance floor or leaving them in the town square to show everybody who's boss.

We know who's boss on Wall Street, too.

If Attorney General Holder endorses Breuer's thinking he's had the good sense to keep it to himself. But Breuer, who met Holder when they both worked for Wall Street firm Covington & Burling, couldn't resist the temptation to brag. Still, shed no tears. Public shame can be a ticket to Wall Street prosperity.

Robert Khuzami

Robert Khuzami was Breuer's partner in crime non-punishment over at the SEC. ?Khuzami ran the agency's enforcement division until his resignation was announced earlier this month. That inspired a Ben Protess puff piece?in the New York Times Dealbook?page that reads?like a regulatory?Fifty Shades of Gray?- call it?Fifty Shades of Gray Pinstripe -?with Khuzami as the "dominant" and the rest of us as "submissives.' We're told that Khuzami is "an imposing presence with a piercing stare," an effect he tries to replicate for the camera with lamentable results.

We're also told Khuzami had "a knack for grilling lawyers" who worked for him - a knack that clearly did not extend to bankers under his scrutiny.

Dealbook claimed that Khuzami's accomplishments include "becoming the public face of Wall Street enforcement and reining in firms like Goldman Sachs." ?Make that the public face of non-enforcement, as firms like Goldman Sachs openly mocked and defied enforcement efforts. ?While his Justice Department colleagues looked the other way - at behavior that allegedly included Congressional perjury by Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein - Khuzami dutifully allowed executives at Goldman and other firms to buy their way out of trouble with other people's money while "neither admitting nor denying wrongdoing."

Note to journalists: It's possible for a fine to be "record breaking" in its size and also be inadequate for the gravity of the offense. That's the Goldman Sachs story - and Khuzami's. And since the fine was paid by shareholders, not the perps themselves, there's no incentive not to keep committing the same crimes. ?Dealbook informs us?that Khuzami, the former general counsel for Deutsche Bank, is "is positioned for a lucrative job at a white-shoe law firm." Tell us something we didn't?know.

We're also told that Khuzami told his employees to ask themselves every evening, "How did I add value today?" Which begs the question: Value for whom?

Halls of Injustice

Bobby Kennedy took on the racketeers when he ran the Justice Department, and the motto on the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building says "Justice is founded in the rights bestowed by nature upon man. Liberty is maintained in security of justice." It may be time to update both the building's name and the letters engraved on its facade.

Peter Schweizer?notes that?Covinton & Burling, which gave us both Breuer and Holder, "currently represents Wells Fargo and J.P. Morgan Chase ... Bank of America, Citibank, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, ING, Morgan Stanley, UBS, and Wilmington Trust - many of which the Department has investigated for potential criminal activity."

Schweizer also observes that when Lanny Breuer ran Covington's white-collar defense team, "his counselor at Justice was another colleague from Covington, Steve Fagell, who was responsible for coordinating the Criminal Division's work with the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. Fagell returned to Covington in 2010 to rejoin the firm's white-collar defense practice."

We're not saying Covington & Burling?is?the Justice Department. Think of it more as lead counsel - for the defense, of course. ?But other firms get a piece of the action, too. Another?analysis from Dealbook?(which has multiple contributors) noted that senior Justice Department oficial Greg Andres, who worked for Breuer at Justice, went to Covington competitor Davis & Polk.

Dealbook also notes that "Recent moves (from Holder's Justice Department) include Christine A. Varney, the government's former top antitrust lawyer, who?left last year?to join Cravath, Swaine & Moore, and Boyd M. Johnson III, the former deputy United States attorney in Manhattan, who recently departed for WilmerHale."

The New Sheriff

Greg Andres' new firm also employs Linda Chatman Thomsen, Robert Khuzami's predecessor as the SEC's head of enforcement. Now Obama has nominated Mary Jo White to run the entire SEC, and lots of smart people are hopeful.

It's true that White was a tough and aggressive prosecutor - a "total badass,"?says?Business Insider - pursuing targets like John Gotti and Osama Bin Laden. But then she turned in her badge and went to work for the other side like the others, defending Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis - among the worst of the worst - as well as JPMorgan Chase and the board of Morgan Stanley (a group which includes Erskine Bowles of "Simpson Bowles" notoriety.)

It's easy to lose your edge once you become part of a social circle. Jailing your friends and clients begins to feel unimaginable. ?Still, White's got guts and character. ?Let's make the forecast 'guardedly optimistic,' with some of the 'guarded' part coming from concerns about the Justice Department/Covington & Burling gang. They can make her task easier ... or much, much harder.

Executive Inaction

It's the President and the Attorney General who call the shots, and who will ultimately be judged by their actions - or lack thereof. Change can only come from the top. ?What are the prospects?

Judge for yourselves: Last week the Obama/Holder Justice Department told producers of Frontline's hard-hitting report that "they thought (the bank crime episode) was a hit piece" and that "they will never co-operate" with the program again.

Ask not for whom the revolving door turns, Wall Street. As of this writing, it still turns for thee.
------

(We relied on the always-solid work of William K. Black Jr., Yves Smith, David Sirota, and Marcy Wheeler for this piece.)

?

Follow Richard (RJ) Eskow on Twitter: www.twitter.com/rjeskow

"; var coords = [-5, -72]; // display fb-bubble FloatingPrompt.embed(this, html, undefined, 'top', {fp_intersects:1, timeout_remove:2000,ignore_arrow: true, width:236, add_xy:coords, class_name: 'clear-overlay'}); });

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/as-federal-prosecutors-ca_b_2564522.html

james randi wargames blake griffin dunk florida primary full force odd fellows

Monday, 28 January 2013

The listening legacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton

The legacy of Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of State may be in her enhancement of the diplomatic art of listening to other peoples ? especially women ? and not only world leaders. With President Obama honoring her in a "60 Minutes" interview, that legacy needs to be sustained.

By the Monitor's Editorial Board / January 27, 2013

President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton speak with ?60 Minutes? correspondent Steve Kroft in the White House on Friday.

CBS/AP Photo

Enlarge

The greatest challenge of our time, said Madeleine Albright last week to a group of Massachusetts students, ?is between the people who are willing to listen and those who believe they know it all.?

Skip to next paragraph

' + google_ads[0].line2 + '
' + google_ads[0].line3 + '

'; } else if (google_ads.length > 1) { ad_unit += ''; } } document.getElementById("ad_unit").innerHTML += ad_unit; google_adnum += google_ads.length; return; } var google_adnum = 0; google_ad_client = "pub-6743622525202572"; google_ad_output = 'js'; google_max_num_ads = '1'; google_feedback = "on"; google_ad_type = "text"; google_adtest = "on"; google_image_size = '230x105'; google_skip = '0'; // -->

As the first female United States secretary of State (1997 to 2001), Ms. Albright set a precedent for the US in the art of listening more and asserting its interests less in foreign affairs. She was a model for two women who later ran the State Department, Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As Secretary Clinton now leaves office after four years as America?s top diplomat, she, too, is telling others ? such as in a ?60 Minutes? interview with President Obama ? that diplomatic style matters as much as substance for the world?s most powerful country.

Take, for example, her advice to US lawmakers last week on how the US should act in North Africa to repel Al Qaeda-linked Islamic militants: ?We have to approach it with humility.?

The US military alone can?t stabilize a terrorist-torn nation like Mali, the center of current fighting in North Africa. The Pentagon?s previous training of Mali?s Army only led to a coup against an elected leader, sparking the kind of chaos on which Islamists thrive. Instead, as Clinton advised, the US must learn from the examples of Somalia and Colombia, where the US helped deploy a balance of its assets ? diplomacy, development, and defense, or the ?3 D?s? ? to quell insurgencies in those countries.

Clinton refers to this security strategy as ?smart power,? but its main tactic is to hold back force in reserve in favor of connecting first to other nations through personal ties and building coalitions. A good part of her legacy also lies in building closer ties between the State Department and the Pentagon and in expanding the US diplomatic corps.

?Nobody can match us in military assets and prowess,? she told Congress last week, ?but a lot of the challenges we face are not immediately ? or sustainably ? solved by military action alone.?

Her favorite approach, as seen during official visits to 112 countries, was to listen to private citizens, mainly women, young people, and leaders of ?civil society? groups. This listening style allowed her to take the pulse of a country but also plant seeds of goodwill and expand shared values. If she doesn?t run for president in 2016, this ?soft power? activism may be her next calling.

She leaves State having enhanced an office devoted to women?s rights and created one dedicated to young people. With Mr. Obama in office for four more years, this style of outreach will likely continue under the incoming secretary of State, Sen. John F. Kerry, a Massachusetts Democrat.

By talking directly to women in countries with mass poverty and conflict, Clinton elevated their status in the economy and as leaders. ?People are beginning to see that empowering women leads to economic development. That you don?t espouse women?s rights because it?s a virtuous thing to do but because it leads to economic growth,? she said.

Women are also usually the people most affected by war, and thus often the ones who must be on the front lines of negotiating for peace. Clinton?s global ?listening? tours may have left lasting contrails of peacemaking that won?t be seen for decades.

Perhaps the measure of future secretaries of State should no longer be the policy ?doctrine? they leave behind but the quality of bonds created with other peoples.

Source: http://rss.csmonitor.com/~r/feeds/csm/~3/ybrZg9FXa2Q/The-listening-legacy-of-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton

Nazanin Boniadi Deval Patrick Dedication 4 labor day college football scores khan academy Espn College Football

Marc Andreessen On The Future Of Enterprise | TechCrunch

In doing research for a post on ?The Enterprise Cool Kids? at the tail end of last year, I interviewed Silicon Valley veteran Marc Andreessen about where he thought the enterprise was headed.

While excerpts of that interview made it into the post, the transcript of the entire interview was so good it deserved to be published in its entirety.

************************

Alexia Tsotsis: Since people like me (millennials) are putting pressure on our IT departments to buy products that we can actually use and aren?t blinded by, what do you think the enterprise space will look like in the next five years?

Marc Andreessen: Yeah. So let me maybe start with sort of ? top-down and bottoms-up is how we think about it, because both are important ? so let me start with historical context and then maybe go to the stuff happening right now. Is that all set?

Alexia Tsotsis: Yeah, it?s perfect.

Marc Andreessen: So the computer industry started in 1950 and basically ran for 50 years with the same model, which was a model where all of the new computers, all the new technology, all the new software started out being sold for the highest prices to the biggest organizations.

So originally the customer was the Department of Defense. It was the first customer for the computer. In fact, one of the big first computers was called SAGE, which was a missile defense, the first missile-defense computer, which was like one of the first computers in the history of the world which got sold to the Department of Defense for, I don?t know, tens and tens of millions of dollars at the time. Maybe hundreds of millions of dollars in current dollars.

And then five years later computers became ? they dropped half in price and then the big insurance companies could buy them, and that?s when Thomas Watson, who ran IBM at the time, was quoted as saying, ?There?s only a market need in the world for five computers.?

The reason that wasn?t crazy when he said it is because there were only five organizations that were big enough to buy a computer. So that?s how it started. And then IBM came along and productized the mainframe, and then all of a sudden big normal companies ? manufacturing companies and banks ? could start to buy computers. And then DEC came along and came out with the minicomputer, and then all of a sudden smaller companies could start to buy computers. And then the PC came out and then all of a sudden individuals could start to buy computers. But the PC only ever got to hundreds of millions of people. It never got to billions of people.

Now, the smartphone has come out and it can get to billions of people.

And so it has always been this kind of trickle-down model for 50 years. We think that basically about 10 years ago the model flipped. And so we think that the model flipped to a model where, today, where the most interesting and advanced new technology now comes out for the consumer first. And then small businesses start to use it. And then medium-size businesses start to use it, and then large businesses start to use it, and then eventually the government starts to use it. But this is a complete change from the way it has always worked.

Alexia Tsotsis: It?s grassroots versus trickle-down.

Marc Andreessen: Versus trickle-down. And the reason is because ? the reason fundamentally is because now that you have got these things, you have ? now that you have a computer in everybody?s hand, all of a sudden all these barriers ? it used to be these barriers to market entry were so big, it used to be there just weren?t that many early adopters in the world. To bring out a new technology for consumers first, you just had a very long road to go down to try to find people who actually would pay money for something.

And now all of a sudden you have got this global market of all these early adopters that have smartphones connected to the Internet, and they can just pick up their things and run with them.

And of course consumers can make buying decisions much more quickly than businesses can, because for the consumer, they either like it or they don?t, whereas businesses have to go through these long and involved processes.

So that?s the big, big, big change that?s happened. And that?s been reflected in the entrepreneurial community, where entrepreneurs, especially between 2000 and 2008, entrepreneurs really only wanted to do ? for the most part wanted to do consumer software, because that?s the only software that they could actually get anybody to adopt. It became very hard to get businesses to adopt new stuff.

In the last five years, there?s been this sort of acknowledgment of the consumerization of the enterprise, which is consumer product development, design methods applied to business software, of which SaaS and cloud and all these things are examples. Salesforce.com, Evernote is an example. So now you have got the rise of this new set of companies that are sort of consumerized technology for businesses.

Then from a bottoms-up standpoint what you said is exactly right, I think, which is that the new generation of employees grew up on smartphones and tablets and touch and everything, social networking and Twitter and everything else. And so if you take a typical mainframe or, even these days, PC-based system and you give it to a 22-year-old college graduate, it?s like beaming in products out of the Stone Age. Why would you do that? Why would you force people to use all this old stuff?

And then that leads to the big thing that?s starting to happen right now, which is this ?Bring Your Own Device? movement, where more and more companies are saying, well, basically, if I have to support smartphones and tablets anyway, and my CFO is probably carrying around an iPad and all my new employees are coming in with iPhones, so I have already got to support this stuff, so then I might as well encourage it.

And I might as well basically have a model where instead of issuing a company laptop to everybody or even a company phone, why don?t I just let people bring in whatever device they want and just plug-in and access it.

And then they get all excited, because then they say, well, not only are my employees going to be happier and more productive, but then I don?t have to buy them hardware anymore, so I can cut my budget. So that?s the big thing that?s starting to happen right now.

Alexia Tsotsis: So how does it affect the way people are building? I have about five companies that have made this list. Some of them are yours ? Okta, which is big on the Bring Your Own Device thing, because you are logging in through Okta. Okta, Cloudera, Box, GitHub, Zendesk, and Asana. Are there any that I have missed?

Marc Andreessen: We just invested in this company called ItsOn, that we announced yesterday.

Alexia Tsotsis: Oh, the mobile ?

Marc Andreessen: The mobile billing. The advantage ? the thing that that?s going to be able to do is do split billing in a new way, between the business and the consumer. So on a single device you will be able to cleanly build data usage by application. So your employer can pay for your Salesforce.com and your Workday data usage on your phone and you get to pay for your Facebook and your Hulu usage. So that will be another enabler for a lot more of the Bring Your Own Device stuff.

Marc Andreessen: We have a bunch of stealth investments. I mean, this is a big, big thing ? big change for us, so we have a bunch of stealth investments ? I mean, companies that haven?t talked about what they are doing yet.

Who else? I mean, there is a bunch, who else should we have ?

Alexia Tsotsis: Platfora.

Marc Andreessen: What?s that, Platfora? Yeah, Platfora is the actual user interface layer on top of Hadoop. So sort of Platfora and Cloudera kind of go hand in hand.

Actually ? we have another one actually that is ? well, it sounds esoteric, but it actually is very relevant. We have a company called Tidemark, which is in a category. It?s called Enterprise Performance Management, which is kind of a weird term. It?s basically large-scale financial planning and analysis for big companies.

The significance is it has a ? I believe it only ? I don?t know if it only or primarily, but I think it only has an iPad UI. So it?s the first complex financial system for big companies, where the assumption is that the user is on an iPad.

That?s a really big deal, because that category of software, line managers and businesses have never actually used that software themselves. Instead they employ analysts to use the software who become highly trained on the software.

By putting the iPad UI all of a sudden you can have anybody in the business have access to all the financial analysis and planning. Even in a very deep sort of sector of enterprise software where most people would never see it, this change is having a big impact.

What else? Asana you mentioned.

Alexia Tsotsis: Asana, Box, Zendesk, these are the companies that I am assuming I will be using four years from now to run my business.

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, exactly! Exactly right! Then of course Workday, of course, Salesforce.com, of course NetSuite, 37signals. We probably have three or four others in our portfolio that I am blanking on, but yeah, this is sort of the ? and then by the way, the corresponding thing is that a lot of this is on how you run a business and then how you do marketing, of course; AdWords and Facebook and Twitter, all these systems and then all the enabling systems for that; so HootSuite and Marketo and ?

Alexia Tsotsis: GoodData.

Marc Andreessen: Oh, another one, GoodData. So GoodData is at the intersection of kind of marketing and business. So GoodData is an actual easy-to-use analytics package. It?s sort of like a supercharged version of Excel that lets you suck in data, you can suck in all your Facebook advertising campaigns, you can suck in all your Salesforce.com data, and you can run ? you can actually, yourself, as a small business person, actually analyze and find friends and data.

Alexia Tsotsis: I have heard good things about them and they just sent us a guest post.?

Marc Andreessen: They are very good. So then you add up all these companies and you are like, ?Well, okay, so number one, they are all basically new companies. I think who is not on that list are all the existing companies that sell business software.?

Alexia Tsotsis: SAP, Oracle ? I mean I wrote a post about this that was supremely misunderstood and then today SAP came out with SAP Jam, which is a competitor to Yammer and to Salesforce, but it?s their own socialized CRM, like HR management software. I worry about this because it?s not going to work. You can?t fight the future.

Marc Andreessen: Oh, right, right, right. I mean, the joke about SAP has always been, it?s making 50s German manufacturing methodology, implemented in 1960s software technology, delivered to 1970-style manufacturing organizations, like it?s really ? yeah, the incumbency ? they are still the lingering hangover from the dot-com crash.

So a lot of incumbent business software companies did what a lot of big companies actually did and other industries, media companies after the dot-com crash, which is they said, ?Oh, thank God we don?t have to worry about this Internet thing. It?s over. Stick a fork in it. It?s not going to be a big deal.? And then it turned out that it actually wasn?t over, and they still haven?t adjusted.

Alexia Tsotsis: Yes, and we are watching that now. And so the other reason that I am very interested in delving deep into this space is that it seems like IPOs like Workday, Palo Alto Networks are sort of ? they have metrics and analytics that Wall Street understands, more so than a Facebook; like ?We are going to sell X number of this in the next year.? So it would seem like they are an antidote to, or at least less offensive than, social/consumer Internet companies are to the public markets.

Marc Andreessen: For now. The whole market goes back and forth in whether they prefer enterprise businesses or consumer businesses. The argument in favor of consumer businesses is you don?t have these crazy end of quarters like when the IT purchasing manager doesn?t buy the product and the company misses the whole quarter.

The advantage of the consumer businesses is they tend to be much broader-based, much larger number of customers, that tend to over time be a lot more predictable. The advantage of the enterprise companies is they are not as subject to consumer trend, fad, behavior.

But I would say the market is schizophrenic. So right now we are in an era where the market wants enterprise companies. I am just saying like wait a year, that will flip again; wait another year after that, that will flip again.

It?s sort of the picks and shovels thing. Like everybody ? it?s like the consumer businesses get really hot and then everybody realizes that there is lots of competition and that those models have ? they are complicated businesses and they have their issues, and then everybody gets all excited about picks and shovels.

And everybody rediscovers the picks and shovels analogy and says, ? Oh, the Gold Rush in California, the people that made all the money were the guys who were selling picks and shovels to the prospectors.? And then people realize the picks and shovels business is really hard, and then everybody says, ?Oh, we should invest in the consumer company because they? ? so it?s just ?

Alexia Tsotsis: It?s cyclical.

Marc Andreessen: It?s cyclical. It?s deeply cyclical. But we are in an environment right now, to your point, where there has been huge rotation out of the consumer companies into the enterprise companies.

Alexia Tsotsis: It seems like the consumer market is starting to cool ? I mean, not starting, but the signaling is there.

Marc Andreessen: Yeah. It?s unpredictable. All you need is for one of the new enterprise companies to completely whiff a quarter and their stock will collapse and then everybody will get all freaked out. I mean, it?s just a continuous ? the reality is every single business is hard.

Alexia Tsotsis: I love this.

Marc Andreessen: There are no easy businesses in the world other than maybe Google, but other than that, there is no easy business anywhere in the world. So what happens is Wall Street gets enamored by the businesses that look like they are easy, until it turns out that they are not, and then Wall Street gets disillusioned and freaked out, and then rotates into the businesses that they think are going to be easy, and then they get endless disappointment. It?s like a seventh or eighth marriage at some point.

At some point the problem isn?t with your seventh wife. At some point the problem is with you.

Alexia Tsotsis: Is the solution ?keep calm and carry on,? or what is the solution to this?

Marc Andreessen: There is no solution; it?s a permanent state of affairs. So this is a big part of what actually we do. A big part of why venture capital actually is important and enduring is because the public market is flighty and late-stage investors are flighty, and customers for that matter are flighty, and so you can?t ? if you are running one of these companies you can?t ? you just can?t rely on people being balanced. They are just not going to be.

And so you have to have a level of determination to just stick through the good times and the bad times. And you need to have investors at the core of your company who are going to support you through that.

The big advantage that we have as a venture capital firm over a hedge fund or a mutual fund is we have a 13-year lockup on our money. And so enterprise can go in and out of fashion four different times, and we can go and invest in one of these companies, and it?s okay, because we can stay the course.

And then what happens is everything tends to get better, all the products tend to get better, all the companies tend to get better over time if they are working hard at it. So we are fine. Like if everything we are investing in goes out of fashion, we are not going to change anything we do, because we can?t change anything. We are already invested in these companies; we can?t sell our stock. We don?t have to sell our stock. So we just say, we will go back to work. And then at some point it really gets exciting again.

Alexia Tsotsis: I guess the trick is to be hyper-aware.

Marc Andreessen: So the big thing we try to do is be aware of the difference between the reality and the psychology, and the reality tends to progress in a certain way and then psychology tends to whip all over the place.

It was very educational for a lot of us to go through the dot-com crash, because you remember, in 2002, like there were a number of universal truths asserted in 2002; the Internet didn?t matter, consumer Internet business was dead. Larry Ellison in 2002 came out and gave a speech and said the correct model for enterprise software, enterprise computing, will last for 1,000 years.

He said all these kids that were trying all this new stuff and it didn?t work, and now we know it didn?t work, and so the model is going to be the existing IBM and Oracle for the next 1,000 years. And everybody kind of said, hmm, you know, that makes a lot of sense, like all that innovation stuff didn?t work, and so ?

Alexia Tsotsis: That?s what David Sacks said.

Marc Andreessen: Exactly, this is the fact. People reach a point where they start to get a little bit too rich, maybe a little bit too old, and they start to say these things.

And then so here we sit 10 years later and we are in the middle of a complete reinvention of everything in enterprise computing, and it?s like, okay, like that?s the reality. People happen to be excited about it again at the moment. That?s great. I am happy for that. But wait two years and they will be depressed about it again, but that won?t keep it from happening. It will still happen.

Alexia Tsotsis: It?s just like the fashion industry. So because it?s heavily fashionable now, do you see it being over in a year?

Marc Andreessen: No, I don?t mean to make a specific prediction. I don?t know if it?s a year, two years, four years. Look, all of the products are going to keep getting better. All of the trends that we are talking about are going to keep continuing. Nothing is going to stop consumerization of the enterprise. Nothing is going to stop Bring Your Own Device. Nothing is going to stop Software-as-a-Service. Nothing is going to stop cloud. All those things are just going to keep going.

I am just saying people are going to be ? they are all excited about them now. At some point again they will be unexcited about them and then at some point after that they will be excited about them again. So it?s hard to draw conclusions about the importance of the trends or the progress of the trends by the current level of press coverage, the current level of Wall Street enthusiasm.

Alexia Tsotsis: So beyond the press coverage, beyond the fickleness of trends, beyond the application layers ? because most of those companies are just apps ? what are the real opportunities you see in the enterprise stack as it stands right now?

Marc Andreessen: Well, there is a whole bunch. So there is a big thing ? there are a couple of big things that are happening. So one of the really big things that?s happening is, historically the best enterprise technology was only ? it?s a trickle-down thing ? the best business technology was only ever available to the biggest companies.

And so if you were a Fortune 500 company with a big IT department, you had a huge advantage over a small business that was trying to compete with you, because you just had so much more budget and staff and professionals and expertise and access to all these big vendors and you could spend tens and millions of dollars on all this stuff.

So it was very easy for ? in the old world it was very easy for big companies to use IT as a weapon against small companies.

The classic was Walmart versus local retailer, right? Walmart?s advantage in logistics and in pricing and in data analytics was just so great that they could kill small retailers at will.

Today all the consumerized enterprise stuff is as easily usable by the small business as it is by the large business.?In fact, it?s probably more easily usable by the small business than it is by the large business, because with a small business it?s like you can just use it, like you don?t have to go through a long process, you don?t have to have a lot of meetings, you don?t have to have committees, you don?t have to have all this stuff, you can just start picking up and using it.

So the best technology for inventory management and for financial planning and for sales-force management and for online marketing can now be used just as easily or more easily by a small business. There is an opportunity here for a shift of the balance of power for big businesses to small businesses.

And then for vendors, the companies we fund, there?s an opportunity to really dramatically expand the market, because a company like Oracle, as successful as it is, it only really has about 5,000 customers that really matter worldwide. Whereas, a company like Box or a company like GitHub could have 500,000 customers or 5 million customers that really matter, and that?s a huge change.

So market expansion, small business versus big business, what else? Oh, the shift, the other big one, the shift from CAPEX to OPEX. So the shift from buying a lot of servers and databases and software licenses and networking equipment, the shift instead to just renting it all. So the shift towards cloud services.

So we don?t have ? no company that we invest in anymore actually ever buys any hardware. I mean, they buy their laptops and that?s basically it. And increasingly they might not buy their laptops, because their employees will just bring their own devices. But they don?t buy servers. They don?t buy storage devices. They don?t buy any of this stuff, they just rent on AWS. And they don?t buy sales-force automation software, they rent on Salesforce.com.

And so having sort of a much lighter-touch way for businesses to be able to get funded, you just need a much smaller budget. And that?s why you see these ? you see it in the startup world, you see three or four kids with laptops who are able to go do amazing things on a global scale for no money. And I think businesses are going to figure out more and more how to do that as well.

Alexia Tsotsis: Do you think that the biggest inefficiencies are at the network layer, the database layer, or the storage layer currently?

Marc Andreessen: All the above. They are all changing. I think they are all changing.

Alexia Tsotsis: What do you think about the interplay between the enterprise market becoming more efficient and the explosion of the consumer market because you don?t have to pay for something like storage?

Marc Andreessen: I don?t know, it?s sort of all intertwined. I mean it?s all ? because a lot of what businesses do is then offer consumer services based on all these changes. So it?s kind of all ? that?s why I say it?s kind of all happening at the same time, a lot of the same stuff.

I would say the consumer Internet companies ? in a lot of ways if you go inside the consumer Internet companies and you see how they run, it?s how all their businesses are going to run. They are going to be doing all of the same kinds of things. The big businesses are just in the process of trying to figure out how to catch up.

So everything, Hadoop and scale-out architectures and cloud services, and the whole thing it?s all ? and use of new technologies like Box and GitHub, the consumer Internet companies all are just built this way. And then if you go inside a big consumer product?s company or a big manufacturing company, they are all trying to figure out how to make the jump. But it?s all kind of the same stuff.

Alexia Tsotsis: So which of the big incumbents do you think are most likely to get disrupted by this new wave of the enterprise cool kids?

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, this is the part where I get into the most trouble.

Alexia Tsotsis: That?s why we save it for the end.

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, exactly! I don?t know if I am going to ? let?s see, I am going to try and figure out if I am even going to answer the question.

So I would say for sure ? like the systems companies, like the companies that provide hardware, the server companies and networking companies, the bad news for them is the end customers are not going to buy as much stuff; the good news is the cloud companies are buying a lot of stuff.

So for every server that?s not bought at a manufacturing company, there?s a server being bought at Amazon. So it?s a change in purchasing pattern for all the gear, but the gear is still being bought.

I think it?s at the software layer where the big disruption happens. I think it?s application software in particular and just sort of an extended infrastructure software. It?s like anything for which there is a ? any piece of installed software for which there?s a web or a cloud equivalent, I think is in real trouble, and I think that?s just now becoming clear.

The other thing that?s happened is 2012 seems to be the year of the actual SaaS tipping point, like where big companies are now saying, you know what, it?s fine, like I can do it, I can do Salesforce, I can do Workday. Because there used to be lots of issues around can I trust the security issues or liability issues, and an awful lot of big companies are now saying, ?You know what, I am going to save so much money, the service is going to be so much better, my users are going to be so much happier, more productive. I have got to make this stuff work on iPhones anyway, so I have got to do something new.?

?My old software vendors are charging me these huge upgrade and maintenance prices. I can switch to SaaS for less than the cost of the maintenance on the old software.? Like, at a certain point it becomes ??Oh,? and then on security it?s like, ?Yeah, I may have concerns about SaaS security, but it turns out I have the concerns about my own internal security anyway.?

So every one of these companies has had an employee steal a laptop that has 25 million customer records on it, and they are like, ?Well, okay, if I can?t even lock that down, then why am I that worried about whether somebody is going to break into Salesforce.com?? And by the way, Salesforce.com has gotten much better at security.

So there is a bunch of new technologies coming out that are going to make cloud and SaaS even more secure, and I think are going to end up making ? I think cloud and SaaS are going to end up being a lot more secure than anything inside the firewall. So that?s the other thing that?s about to happen.

Alexia Tsotsis: So which enterprise companies are doing their best to adapt to just this tidal wave of trends and which ones are just completely failing?

Marc Andreessen: The problem is I have conflicts on this issue, because I am on the HP board in particular, so I can?t really ? unfortunately I am kind of gagged on the topic of the big companies.

Alexia Tsotsis: Are you happy with how HP is doing?

Marc Andreessen: This is exactly what I can?t talk about. I just can?t talk about it. So the problem is I can?t talk about HP and I can?t talk about HP?s competitors, so it?s just a no-fly zone for me.

Alexia Tsotsis: I respect that.

Marc Andreessen: So I have to stick to the startups.

Alexia Tsotsis: Let?s see, what about other companies that aren?t in your portfolio?

Marc Andreessen: Although I have a lot of opinions. You mean startups?

Alexia Tsotsis: What about startups that aren?t in your portfolio, because you said that only 10, 15 companies a year are responsible for 97 percent of the returns. Which enterprise companies that aren?t in your portfolio are you interested in?

Marc Andreessen: So let?s see, there is this category of kind of outsourced work.

Alexia Tsotsis: TaskRabbit.

Marc Andreessen: Well, there?s TaskRabbit and Zaarly and companies like that on the consumer side; and then on the business side there?s eLance and oDesk and RentACoder. So these companies that are kind of for ? in the sort of mechanical term, distributed workforces and outsource work being run online.

So like oDesk, oDesk you can actually have remote contractors working on a project, and one of the features is that it actually takes snapshots of their screen every five minutes. You can see if ? anybody who actually manages anybody, number one that sounds spooky, but number two, ?Wow, that sounds great, like, I sure wish I can do that.?

So there is sort of the whole category of an outsourced workforce that sort of ? it goes back to what you said about the employees is, you will have ? it feels a lot like in the new economy you will have a lot more contractors. You will have a lot more people with sort of fluid careers contracting on a project basis, and then all this technology is going to be an enabling layer for that.

So anybody on their laptop, anywhere in the world, being able to tap in and be able to get work and do work, whether it?s for small companies or big companies like that. There is a whole layer of software there. We haven?t seen anybody really punch through on that yet, but I am very fascinated by it. We haven?t made an investment there yet. That?s one layer.

Let me think, what else haven?t we done? I mean, Cloudera is I think a good ? we haven?t actually done an investment at that. We haven?t done an investment at the Hadoop layer. We have done ? Platfora is our investment, which is the intelligence layer above Hadoop, but Cloudera definitely deserves to be on the list.

Zendesk and kind of its generation of companies are definitely for real, or so it appears.

What else? We have been pretty active. I mean, we have been trying to take down mostly good companies. We haven?t done anything yet with this whole category of marketing, the new marketing software so like Marketo and HootSuite and companies like that, we haven?t really done anything yet, but that?s a big deal.

It?s sort of like ? if you are starting a new company it?s so obvious that you would want to do most of your marketing on Google and Facebook and Twitter, whereas a lot of the existing companies still haven?t wrapped their heads around that.

Education ? there is actually going to be more and more. So actually companies are going to get a lot more interested in education for two reasons.

Number one is, a lot of companies need to actually educate their customers or their partners, and a lot of that has to happen online.

And then the other thing is companies are having ? if you talk to anybody running a company, they are having real trouble hiring enough qualified people. So companies are going to have to take a more direct role in educating the candidates or educating their current employees.

So the sort of model of employees just show up and they are either educated or they are not is not working very well. There?s lots of mismatches. It?s one of the reasons unemployment is running as high as it is, is people just don?t have the skills they need for the jobs.

So I think employers are going to have to get a lot more actively involved in making sure that the supply of candidates is actually educated and that they can hire somebody who doesn?t yet know what they need to know and actually educate and train them, and a lot of that is going to happen with the new technology.

So we have this company Udacity as an example, that?s going to be, I think, important in all of that.

Alexia Tsotsis: I think the model there is if someone shows up and they have got 80 percent of the skills.

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, let?s teach them ? right, exactly, the employer says let?s teach them the other 20 percent. And it?s like, well, instead of literally sending them to college, which presumably didn?t work the first time around or whatever, let?s just go ahead and provide them with the online training. Let?s set them up with their tablet at home with high-definition video. They can develop their remaining skills, or be able to retrain people once they are in the jobs.

The other is there is this real issue, like for some people it feels great to never be tied to a specific employer and to always be doing contract work and be changing jobs every two years, and it feels like it?s fun and exciting and exhilarating. For a lot of people that?s really scary. And so the lifetime employment promise that the big companies used to be able to make was very compelling for a lot of people because it felt safe.

So now you are in a world where the big companies can?t deliver ? even if they wanted to deliver on lifetime employment, they can?t, and so then they have got sort of two choices.

One is, do they start to basically be a lot rougher with their ? they start to do a lot more layoffs, a lot more restructurings. I remember IBM ? I don?t think IBM had a layoff for 50 years. And I was actually at IBM ? I was an intern at IBM when they were ramping up for their first layoff I think they had ever done, and, like, the level of freak out in the company was beyond belief. And people had no idea what to do if they got laid off from IBM. And it turns out their skills weren?t actually very useful to work for any other company, because IBM was so unique in how it ran.

So I think the companies have a real question about how do they develop their workforces, how do they make sure that their employees stay relevant for the purpose of staying inside a company for a longer period of time? And then how do you get the workforce over time to be a lot more flexible and adaptable, so that if you have to layoff a ton of people, or if you have to get out of a line of business, or if you have to expand into a new business, how do you get your current employees to adapt better to that?

Alexia Tsotsis: Do you think that?s the most ripe-for-disruption area in the enterprise currently?

Marc Andreessen: I don?t know if it?s the most, but it?s a big issue for every company. It?s a big issue for companies, because companies have hundreds and thousands of employees, it?s like, yeah.

Alexia Tsotsis: What are the top three issues that startups don?t exist for yet, because that sounds like one that a startup doesn?t exist for ?

Marc Andreessen: Sort of. Education is a big component of it, yeah, it?s possible, it?s possible. I don?t know. We will wait for the entrepreneurs to answer that question.

Alexia Tsotsis: Probably the biggest enterprise cool kid is GitHub?

Marc Andreessen: They are a big one, yeah.

Alexia Tsotsis: And you made a major investment?

Marc Andreessen: Yeah. We think it?s the largest investment ever done.

Alexia Tsotsis: How did you convince them to take your money?

Marc Andreessen: That?s the key thing. So they were beating off venture capitalists with a stick. So they actually ? I don?t know if you remember this, they used to have on their website, they used to say ? they had four metrics that they would put on their website. They had, I think, it was number of users, number of projects, number of code check-ins, and amount of venture capital that they had raised, and that final number was always zero, and they were really proud of that.

The GitHub guys did an amazing job. It?s very rare actually to find a main ? it?s very rare to find an important company that never raised any money. It?s very rare that they actually successfully bootstrapped, because it?s just so hard to do if you can?t invest any money.

So what they did was incredibly impressive. They reached a point though where they decided that they had the opportunity to become a very big and important company. And again, I would say there was a top-down and a bottom-up reason for that.

The top-down reason was they are the place, we think, and they believe, they are the place where all the software code wants to live. They are the place where all the open source code increasingly lives. All other code increasingly uses a ton of open source code. And so all the software basically wants to be in the same place, and it wants to be in the place where all the open source software is.

So they have an opportunity to be the main company that provides the systems for developing software, number one, which is just a very big opportunity, and they really decided to go for it, and that requires investment on their part.

And then the bottom-up reason was because they have enterprise customers lining up, like they have enterprise customers bombarding them with interest in buying services on GitHub. And they did not have ? at the time we invested they didn?t yet have any sort of sales or marketing kind of motion to be able to do it on. They didn?t have a Salesforce, they didn?t have the sort of pricing plans ? the whole thing to be able to do that ? and we have a lot of experience with that.

Alexia Tsotsis: So who are the enterprise companies and do they have ?

Marc Andreessen: Tons, it?s like the who?s who. I mean, they gave us access. One of the things they did in the diligence process was they gave us access to the email box that had all the incoming messages from all the CIOs and purchasing managers and all these big companies. And it?s literally like, ?Hi! I am from big bank X and we already have like 600 people on GitHub and we want to buy an enterprise license. Who do we call and where do we send the check?? And they just had the email queue up this, and they didn?t have ? they weren?t ? like it?s just sitting there.

And so we are working with them to help them build out the sales and marketing capability to be able to really go get all that business.

Alexia Tsotsis: And that?s how it will make a billion dollars a year?

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, yeah. Well, I don?t know, we will see how. I mean, aspirationally, yes. It should be a very big business. Historically companies in that market have been very successful. Big one, Rational is a big company that IBM bought a while back that?s in the same market.

And then even companies, Mercury Interactive was a big company that HP bought that was in a similar kind of market. And then in the old days you had companies like Borland and Lotus that were very big in these markets. So this is sort of the new version of all that. So if it works it should be very ? I mean, it?s working, so it should be very big.

Alexia Tsotsis: So we are watching the collapse of Zynga and Groupon and LivingSocial in the consumer space. Where is the bloodbath going to be, if there is one, in the enterprise space?

Marc Andreessen: I don?t know. Probably in the second and third tier. I mean, usually when you have a funding boom, categories usually get overfunded.

So probably it?s in the second- and third-tier competitors. We actually get yelled at for this a lot, but we really believe it. So the big technology markets actually tend to be winner take all. There is this presumption ? in normal markets you can have Pepsi and Coke. In technology markets in the long run you tend to only have one, or rather the number one company in ? the number one company in any consumer products ? cars, the number one company in cars is, I don?t know, Toyota or whoever it is.

Alexia Tsotsis: I think it?s Toyota.

Marc Andreessen: Fifteen percent or 18 percent market share. The number one soft drink has only 60 percent versus Pepsi, but like what is Coke as a percentage of all drinks, it?s, I don?t know, maybe 10 percent.

The big companies, though, in technology tend to have 90 percent market share. So we think that generally these are winner-take-all markets. Generally, number one is going to get like 90 percent of the profits. Number two is going to get like 10 percent of the profits, and numbers three through 10 are going to get nothing.

And the problem is, of course, there is too much venture capital, and so companies three through 10 still get funded. So there are probably lots of sort of second- and third-tier companies that are getting funded right now that won?t succeed, but that won?t have anything to do with whether or not the winner succeeds.

Alexia Tsotsis: Which is all the venture capitalists ?

Marc Andreessen:?Well, the venture capitalists who are successful in investing in the winners will be very happy with this. The venture capitalists who are investing in the losers will be very sad. But everybody will get freed, because at some point there will be a bunch of companies ? a bunch of startups that will go bankrupt, and then everybody will say, that must mean the whole sector is going down.

I just think people get confused. People get confused about ? it?s really funny watching the stock. Like the stock market does this all the time. It?s like one Internet advertising company will have a bad quarter and the other Internet advertising companies? stocks will all drop.

Alexia Tsotsis: It?s tethered.

Marc Andreessen: Maybe, but maybe it?s because the other ones are now taking market share away from the one that had a bad quarter. So I find the markets all have trouble processing cause and effect in the short-term and people get all confused.

Alexia Tsotsis: What is the solution to that? It?s so perplexing.

Marc Andreessen: That?s permanent. I think it?s permanent. I think it?s human nature. There are certain things that can?t be fixed, and I think that?s one of them.

Alexia Tsotsis: One would argue that the enterprise has come back into fashion, because the market is cooling on the Instagram deal being a billion dollars and now being $700 million. The market is cooling on all these photo-sharing apps and just ways to update your friends about your whereabouts.

Is the only reason the enterprise is sexy because it actually makes money and has results, or is there some overlaying tide of innovation that?s happening that?s exciting people simply because it?s culture-changing?

Marc Andreessen: I think it?s all the above. I think the changes are real. The businesses are good, which is nice. And then I think it?s also sector rotation. We talk to a lot of the big hedge funds, mutual funds. It?s really funny. We are talking about big hedge funds, mutual funds, about six months ago they all started saying, well, you know, we really think there is going to be a rotation from consumer and enterprise, and we are going to really get ahead of that. And I am like, yeah, you and 10 other guys in the last two weeks have told me the same thing. It?s like, good job, you are way out ahead on the leading edge on this.

I get to the point where I am just like ? my running joke has been, it?s like little kids, like everybody out of the consumer pool, everybody into the enterprise pool. So everybody out of the waiting pool, everybody into the hot tub.

What happens when you have capital flowing in a rotation is, if all the capital starts to leave one sector and go to another sector, then all the stock prices rise in the sector that all the capital is going into, because everybody is buying those stocks.

And then everybody says, wow, look at how much those stocks are going up. We should invest in those stocks. And so the up cycle starts perpetuating.And the down cycle similarly ? a lot of reasons people have been selling out of the consumer stocks is because they have been going down, because people have been selling out. So the cycle is perpetuating.

Alexia Tsotsis: So what should the smartest entrepreneur do? You have $1.2 billion to spend. Where are you spending it?

Marc Andreessen: Investing. So the smartest entrepreneurs I think generally ignore all this. We really look for the entrepreneurs who don?t pay any attention to this. We really look for the entrepreneurs who say the following, they say: ?I have this really good idea and I know it?s a good idea for the following eight reasons, and I have thought about it and I have worked in the field, and I know what I am doing, and I have talked to the customers and I have figured it out, and I am going to do it. I am just going to flat-out do it. And I am going to do it whether you fund me or whether you don?t fund me or I don?t get funded. I am still going to do it.? That?s the entrepreneur we are looking for.

Sometimes that entrepreneur is in a sector that?s completely dead, and that entrepreneur is going to say, I know that everybody thinks that this sector is just dead, and in fact that?s probably why now is a good time for me to do this ? is because I am not going to have very much competition.

Well, so a lot of these companies you talk about now, like Workday and GitHub and Box, got formed and funded when everybody thought enterprise was dead. Just like the consumer companies like Facebook and Twitter got funded and everybody thought the consumer stuff was dead.

So sometimes you get the entrepreneurs who are actually counter-cyclical. They are doing it precisely because nothing else is happening in that sector, and that means the big opportunities are just wide open.

On the other hand, sometimes you get the entrepreneurs who say, ?I know I am doing the 36th workforce collaboration system in the consumer side; Google was the 36th search engine, and I know it?s 1999, and I know the whole sector is overfunded, but I have a better idea. I know how to do it better, I know how to do it different. I have learned from the mistakes that everybody else is making, and I am going to be the winner.?

And so we will fund either one. We fund companies in the hot sectors and we fund companies in the not-hot sectors. The only difference is the pricing, and the pricing varies basically by like 4x. But what we have just found or what we have sort of tried to learn from history is you can?t ? for what we do you can?t really time the stuff. And the last thing you want to do is look at what?s happening in the public market today. And this is the thing that?s weird about how venture capital works ? a lot of venture capital investments are decided based on whatever the NASDAQ is doing.

Alexia Tsotsis: Are you seeing down rounds because the NASDAQ is down?

Marc Andreessen: No, we have not seen down rounds yet. We have not seen down rounds yet, but consumer rounds that are happening now ? consumer growth rounds are happening now at 2-4x lower prices than they were six months ago.

And the enterprise pricing is up a lot. Enterprise pricing a year ago was probably half what it is today. Maybe a third in some cases, and that made us happy at the time, but it?s all good.

Alexia Tsotsis: Last question ? your top five enterprise cool kids?

Marc Andreessen: I think they are all on your list.

Alexia Tsotsis: They are on my list?

Marc Andreessen: Yeah, yeah.


Andreessen Horowitz, Ning, Facebook, Qik, Hewlett-Packard, Kno, Bump Technologies, eBay, Asana, CollabNet, Opsware, Netscape

Mr. Marc Andreessen is a co-founder and general partner of the venture capital firm, Andreessen Horowitz. He is also co-founder and chairman of Ning and an investor in several startups including Digg, Plazes, and Twitter. He is an active member of the blogging community. Previously, Andreessen developed Mosaic and co-founded Netscape. Mosaic was developed at National Center for Supercomputing Applications, on which Andreessen was the team-leader. Andreessen co-founded what later became Netscape Communications which produced the ?Netscape Navigator?. Netscape Navigator...

? Learn more

Source: http://techcrunch.com/2013/01/27/marc-andreessen-on-the-future-of-the-enterprise/

dwts sean hannity bobby petrino fired buffett rule lollapalooza lineup joss whedon ronnie montrose

Search efforts underway for fighter jet missing on training mission

ROME (Reuters) - A U.S. F-16 fighter jet may have crashed on Monday during a training exercise over the Adriatic Sea and the U.S. Air Force said the status of its Italy-based pilot was unknown.

Search efforts, aided by Italy's Coast Guard, were under way and the Air Force declined to offer many details.

It said only that it "lost contact" with the F-16 at about 8 p.m. local (2100 GMT) - language often used to describe a possible crash, although Air Force officials declined to speculate about the incident.

"The aircraft was performing a training mission over the Adriatic Sea with one person on board. The pilot's condition is unknown at this time," the Air Force said in a statement.

Italy's Coast Guard confirmed it was helping in the search-and-rescue effort.

A spokeswoman at Aviano Air Base in northern Italy said more information would released as it became available.

(Reporting by Steve Scherer in Rome and Phil Stewart in Washington; Editing by Mohammad Zargham)

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/u-f-16-fighter-based-italy-may-crashed-210341193.html

sandra fluke kellie pickler costa rica kevin hart living social Earthquake Costa Rica Clinton speech

Chavez starting more cancer treatment in Cuba

SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) ? Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has begun additional medical treatment in Cuba after struggling with complications following cancer surgery more than six weeks ago, a government spokesman said Saturday.

Venezuelan Information Minister Ernesto Villegas said that it remains unclear how soon Chavez could return home, and did not specify the kind of treatment he is receiving.

"Vice President (Nicolas) Maduro estimates that the time it could take President Chavez to return is within weeks. But we haven't wanted to fix an exact timeframe for the president's recuperation," Villegas told reporters on the sidelines of summit meeting in Chile.

He read a statement that went beyond past government reports in providing additional information about Chavez's Dec. 11 surgery, but didn't describe the newest treatment. While refusing to release many details about the president's cancer, authorities in the past have reported on specific treatments, including radiation and chemotherapy.

"Forty-five days after carrying out a complex surgical intervention for the removal of a malignant lesion in the pelvis, with severe, acute complications, the patient's general evolution is favorable," Villegas said, reading the statement.

"At this time, the serious respiratory infection has been overcome, although a certain degree of respiratory deficiency persists and is being duly treated," Villegas said.

After that improvement, Villegas said, "systemic medical treatment for the fundamental illness began to be applied as a complement to the surgery."

Chavez hasn't appeared or spoken publicly since before the operation.

Maduro said early Saturday after meeting with Chavez in Cuba that the ailing president is now "in the best moment we've seen him in these days of struggle" following the surgery.

Maduro spoke on state television after returning from Havana to Venezuela, and before he traveled to Chile for the summit.

"We're taking a message prepared by the president, and we're going to turn it over to heads of state who attend the CELAC summit. He makes fundamental proposals," Maduro said, adding that the message was in Chavez's handwriting.

Maduro said Chavez also sent a message for Venezuelans, including that he was "very optimistic" about his treatment. Maduro said Chavez is "hanging on to Christ and to life."

Chavez has undergone repeated surgeries, chemotherapy and radiation treatment for an unspecified type of pelvic cancer. He has undergone much of his treatment in Cuba.

The 58-year-old president won re-election in October, and lawmakers indefinitely put off his inauguration earlier this month in a decision that was condemned by opponents but upheld by the Supreme Court.

The vice president said that Chavez "has reviewed and evaluated reports on different areas and has made decisions."

He said Chavez evaluated the country's economic situation and budget and made decisions about gold reserves, funding for public housing projects and "social investments and economic development." Maduro didn't give more details but said the actions approved by the president were intended to "guarantee the country's economic growth, infrastructure, housing."

Maduro said that one of the documents signed by Chavez dealt with the selection of his socialist party's candidates for mayoral elections later this year. The vice president showed the signature in red ink on one of the documents.

___

Associated Press writers Jorge Rueda and Ian James in Caracas, Venezuela, contributed to this report.

Source: http://news.yahoo.com/chavez-starting-more-cancer-treatment-cuba-231848932.html

denver weather super bowl recipes planned parenthood what time does the superbowl start kobayashi margaret sanger paul george