Media Search:



The Highwomen Included in Barack Obama’s Favorite Songs of 2019 – Taste of Country

"Redesigning Women," the debut single from country music supergroup the Highwomen, has landed a significant mention from former President Barack Obama. On Monday (Dec. 30), the 44th president of the United States included the tune among his year-end "Favorite Music of 2019" list.

That's some high praise for the group, comprising singers Brandi Carlile, Maren Morris, Amanda Shires and Natalie Hemby. They're the same foursome who helped a slew of fellow female music icons open the 2019 CMA Awards last month with a stunning country medley.

First released this summer, "Redesigning Women" is a fierce but funny anthem of empowerment. The song'saccompanying music video, directed by Elizabeth Olmstead and produced by Melissa Michalak, amplifies the Highwomen's support for their sisters in country music and beyond.

"From hip-hop to country to The Boss, here are my songs of the year," Obama says of his genre-diverse list of songs that includes the Highwomen's single. "If you're looking for something to keep you company on a long drive or help you turn up a workout, I hope there's a track or two in here that does the trick."

Elsewhere among the former president's "Favorite Music of 2019" are selections from Summer Walker, Kaytranda, Lizzo and Maggie Rogers. A few of the tracks previously appeared on Obama's summer 2019 playlist.

That summer playlist also featured Lil Nas X's "Old Town Road," the country-rap chart-topper that later found country singer Billy Ray Cyrus among the phenomenon's many remixes.

For their part, the Highwomen appear entirely pleased with Obama's nod to their tune. "Why, hello, Mr. President!" the group responded on Monday. "Thank you so much for including 'Redesigning Women' in your list of 2019 favorites."

These Are the 30 Most Powerful Women In Country Music:

Continued here:
The Highwomen Included in Barack Obama's Favorite Songs of 2019 - Taste of Country

Barack Obama’s year in film: from The Irishman to Amazing Grace – The Guardian

Shortly after releasing a list of his favourite literary works from 2019, the former US president Barack Obama has turned his critical eye to the silver screen.

Obamas list of favourite films from this past year, shared on Twitter and Instagram, is heavily in favour of gritty drama, with the likes of The Irishman, Diane, and Just Mercy alongside the Chinese mobster drama Ash is Purest White, the Senegalese ghost story Atlantics, and the Colombian crime film Birds of Passage.

The former presidents documentary picks include moon landing documentary Apollo 11 and Aretha Franklin concert film Amazing Grace.

Of course, theres also American Factory, a film from our own production company, Higher Ground, that was recently shortlisted for an Oscar, Obama said.

Theres also the dark comedy Parasite and coming of age films Booksmart and Little Women.

Half of the films in his list this year are Oscar contenders, with many having been listed for film festival awards and other accolades.

Obama first began releasing annual lists of his favourite cultural works in 2015, beginning with books. They were reportedly intended to highlight works from both high profile and lesser known creators.

Suggesting a perception that film is generally a more powerful medium than television, Obama also listed three television shows that I considered as powerful as movies: the true-story based MeToo drama Unbelievable, the recent adaptation of Watchmen, and the second season of Fleabag.

Obama also promised in an earlier tweet that a list of his favourite music would be forthcoming.

Excerpt from:
Barack Obama's year in film: from The Irishman to Amazing Grace - The Guardian

These 6 Incredible Discoveries From The Past Decade Have Changed Science Forever – ScienceAlert

From finding the building blocks for life on Mars to breakthroughs in gene editing and the rise of artificial intelligence, here are six major scientific discoveries that shaped the 2010s - and what leading experts say could come next

We don't yet know whether there was ever life on Mars - but thanks to a small, six-wheeled robot, we do know the Red Planet was habitable.

Shortly after landing on 6 August 2012, NASA's Curiosity rover discovered rounded pebbles - new evidence that rivers flowed there billions of years ago.

The proof has since multiplied, showing there was in fact a lot of water on Mars - the surface was covered in hot springs, lakes, and maybe even oceans.

A crater on the Red Planet filled with water ice. (ESA/DLR/FU Berlin, CC BY-SA 3.0 IGO)

Curiosity also discovered what NASA calls the building blocks of life, complex organic molecules, in 2014.

And so the hunt continues for signs that Earth-based life is not (or wasn't always) alone.

Two new rovers will be launched next year - America's Mars 2020 and Europe's Rosalind Franklin rovers, looking for ancient microbes.

"Going into the coming decade, Mars research will shift from the question 'Was Mars habitable?' to 'Did (or does) Mars support life?'" said Emily Lakdawalla, a geologist at The Planetary Society.

We had long thought of the little corner of the Universe that we call home as unique, but observations made thanks to the Kepler space telescope blew apart those pretensions.

Launched in 2009, the Kepler mission helped identify more than 2,600 planets outside of our Solar System, also known as exoplanets - and astronomers believe each star has a planet, meaning there are billions out there.

Kepler's successor TESS was launched by NASA in 2018, as we scope out the potential for extraterrestrial life.

Expect more detailed analysis of the chemical composition of these planets' atmospheres in the 2020s, said Tim Swindle, an astrophysicist at the University of Arizona.

We also got our first glimpse of a black hole this year thanks to the groundbreaking work of the Event Horizon Telescope collaboration.

(Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration)

"What I predict is that by the end of the next decade, we will be making high quality real-time movies of black holes that reveal not just how they look, but how they act on the cosmic stage," Shep Doeleman, the project's director, told AFP.

But one event from the decade undoubtedly stood above the rest: the detection for the first time on September 14, 2015 of gravitational waves, ripples in the fabric of the universe.

The collision of two black holes 1.3 billion years earlier was so powerful it spread waves throughout the cosmos that bend space and travel at the speed of light. That morning, they finally reached Earth.

The phenomenon had been predicted by Albert Einstein in his theory of relativity, and here was proof he was right all along.

Three Americans won the Nobel prize in physics in 2017 for their work on the project, and there have been many more gravitational waves detected since.

Cosmologists meanwhile continue to debate the origin and composition of the universe. The invisible dark matter that makes up its vast majority remains one of the greatest puzzles to solve.

"We're dying to know what it might be," said cosmologist James Peebles, who won this year's Nobel prize in physics.

Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) - a family of DNA sequences - is a phrase that doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.

(Meletios Verras/iStock)

But the field of biomedicine can now be divided into two eras, one defined during the past decade: before and after CRISPR-Cas9 (or CRISPR for short), the basis for a gene editing technology.

"CRISPR-based gene editing stands above all the others," William Kaelin, a 2019 Nobel prize winner for medicine, told AFP.

In 2012, Emmanuelle Charpentier and Jennifer Doudna reported that they had developed the new tool that exploits the immune defense system of bacteria to edit the genes of other organisms.

It is much simpler than preceding technology, cheaper and easy to use in small labs.

Charpentier and Doudna were showered in awards. but the technique is also far from perfect and can create unintended mutations.

Experts believe this may have happened to Chinese twins born in 2018 as a result of edits performed by a researcher who was widely criticized for ignoring scientific and ethical norms.

Still, CRISPR remains one of the biggest science stories of recent years, with Kaelin predicting an "explosion" in its use to combat human disease.

For decades, doctors had three main weapons to fight cancer: surgery, chemotherapy drugs, and radiation.

The 2010s saw the rise of a fourth, one that was long doubted: immunotherapy, or leveraging the body's own immune system to target tumor cells.

(Design Cells/iStock)

One of the most advanced techniques is known as CAR T-cell therapy, in which a patient's T-cells - part of their immune system - are collected from their blood, modified and reinfused into the body.

A wave of drugs have hit the market since the mid-2010s for more and more types of cancer including melanomas, lymphomas, leukemias and lung cancers - heralding what some oncologists hope could be a golden era.

For William Cance, scientific director of the American Cancer Society, the next decade could bring new immunotherapies that are "better and cheaper" than what we have now.

The decade began with a major new addition to the human family tree: Denisovans, named after the Denisova Cave in the Altai Mountains of Siberia.

Scientists sequenced the DNA of a female juvenile's finger bone in 2010, finding it was distinct both from genetically modern humans and Neanderthals, our most famous ancient cousins who lived alongside us until around 40,000 years ago.

The mysterious hominin species is thought to have ranged from Siberia to Indonesia, but the only remains have been found in the Altai region and Tibet.

We also learned that, unlike previously assumed, Homo sapiens bred extensively with Neanderthals - and our relatives were not the brutish simpletons previously assumed but were responsible for artworks, such as the handprints in a Spanish cave they were credited for crafting in 2018.

They also wore jewelry, and buried their dead with flowers - just like we do.

Next came Homo naledi, remains of which were discovered in South Africa in 2015, while this year, paleontologists classified yet another species found in the Philippines: a small-sized hominin called Homo luzonensis.

Advances in DNA testing have led to a revolution in our ability to sequence genetic material tens of thousands of years old, helping unravel ancient migrations, like that of the Bronze Age herders who left the steppes 5,000 years ago, spreading Indo-European languages to Europe and Asia.

"This discovery has led to a revolution in our ability to study human evolution and how we came to be in a way never possible before," said Vagheesh Narasimhan, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School.

One exciting new avenue for the next decade is paleoproteomics, which allows scientists to analyze bones millions of years old.

"Using this technique, it will be possible to sort out many fossils whose evolutionary position is unclear," said Aida Gomez-Robles, an anthropologist at University College London.

"Neo" skull of Homo naledi from the Lesedi Chamber. (John Hawks/University of the Witwatersrand)

Machine learning - what we most commonly mean when talking about "artificial intelligence" - came into its own in the 2010s.

Using statistics to identify patterns in vast datasets, machine learning today powers everything from voice assistants to recommendations on Netflix and Facebook.

So-called "deep learning" takes this process even further and begins to mimic some of the complexity of a human brain.

It is the technology behind some of the most eye-catching breakthroughs of the decade: from Google's AlphaGo, which beat the world champion of the fiendishly difficult game Go in 2017, to the advent of real-time voice translations and advanced facial recognition on Facebook.

In 2016, for example, Google Translate - launched a decade earlier - transformed from a service that provided results that were stilted at best, nonsensical at worst, to one that offered translations that were far more natural and accurate.

At times, the results even seemed polished.

"Certainly the biggest breakthrough in the 2010s was deep learning - the discovery that artificial neural networks could be scaled up to many real-world tasks," said Henry Kautz, a computer science professor at the University of Rochester.

"In applied research, I think AI has the potential to power new methods for scientific discovery," from enhancing the strength of materials to discovering new drugs and even making breakthroughs in physics, Kautz said.

For Max Jaderberg, a research scientist at DeepMind, owned by Google's parent company Alphabet, the next big leap will come via "algorithms that can learn to discover information, and rapidly adapt and internalize and act on this new knowledge," as opposed to depending on humans to feed them the correct data.

That could eventually pave the way to "artificial general intelligence", or a machine capable of performing any tasks humans can, rather than excelling at a single function.

Agence France-Presse

Read more here:

These 6 Incredible Discoveries From The Past Decade Have Changed Science Forever - ScienceAlert

Check Em: Texas Tech Knight Raiders dominate at the Pan-Am Chess Championship – KLBK | KAMC | EverythingLubbock.com

LUBBOCK, Texas (NEWS RELEASE) The following is a news release from Texas Tech University:

At the end of each of the six rounds of the 2019 Pan-American Intercollegiate Chess Championship, the competitors facing the Texas Tech University A Team all heard the same thing: checkmate.

We won all six matches, saidTexas Tech Knight RaidersCoach Alex Onischuk.That is very unusualto achieve in this tournament I dont remember the last time when a team finished 6-0 in this competition.

But thats just what the team did, earning first place in the tournament, held Dec. 27-30 at the Charlotte Chess Center in Charlotte, North Carolina. The win secured Texas Techs spot at the Presidents Cup, also known as the Final Four of College Chess, April 3-5 in New York City.

This is the ninth time in program history Texas Tech has qualified for the Final Four. Texas Tech won the Final Four in 2011 and 2012.

To earn the top spot at the 2019 Pan-American tournament, Texas Tech beat teams from Ohio State University, Harvard University, the University of Texas-Rio Grande Valley, Saint Louis University (SLU) and University of Texas at Dallas (UTD).

Starting from round three, we were playing very tough opponents and winning all our matches with the smallest margins, Onischuk said. The toughest was the final round against the University of Texas at Dallas. About two hours into the round, it lookedlike wewere going to lose, but our guys managed to turn the tables around. After almost five hours of play, we eventually won.

Im also happy for our womens team.They finished first among the womens teams and overall placed 34th.

Sixty-three teams competed at the Pan-American Championship this year, including three teams from Texas Tech. The A Team took first place with 6 points, the Womens Team earned first place among womens teams and 34th place overall with 3 points, and the B Team placed 26th, also with 3 points.

The Texas Techs A Team win broke a recent streak at the Pan-American Championship by Webster University, which has won the tournament every year since 2012, except for Texas Techs first-place win in 2015. Webster, which placed second (5 points), will join Texas Tech at the Final Four, along with third-place SLU (5 points) and fourth-place UTD (5 points).

We all feel very happy of course, Onischuk said. Before the tournament, we hoped we could get into the Final Four and, with very good play, maybe even win. But nobody expected us todominate this event. It was really a team effort. Everyone played well, and in every round, we had someone who would make a decisive victory.

Onischuk said he and the players are looking forward to competing in New York City this spring.

We will have a competitive team at the Final Four, Onischuk said. I feel that we are getting better with every tournament. Im optimistic. Our players got even more confident, and I know they will be ready.

The 12 students who competed at the tournament were:

For a full listing of the 2019 Pan-American final standings,visit the tournament website.

About the Texas Tech Chess ProgramTheTexas Tech Chess Programwas established within theDivision of Diversity, Equity & Inclusionin 2007. The Knight Raiders, the universitys chess team, has since earned more than 10 national titles and the program was named Chess College of the Year in 2014. Head coach and director Alex Onischuk was named Grandmaster of the Year in 2014 and has been ranked as one of the top 100 players in the world for the past 20 years. In 2018, Onischuk was inducted into the Chess Hall of Fame.

(News release from Texas Tech University)

Continue reading here:

Check Em: Texas Tech Knight Raiders dominate at the Pan-Am Chess Championship - KLBK | KAMC | EverythingLubbock.com

In chess game with Iran, Trump has only bad options – Haaretz

WASHINGTON The Trump administration is facing a dilemma in Iraq. A day after the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was stormed by pro-Iranian demonstrators, the White House needs to decide how to respond to the attack which U.S. officials have no doubt was planned and orchestrated with Iranian approval. Trump has promised to punish Iran for its actions, but how far is he willing to go in this confrontation with the Islamic Republic?

The attack on the embassy was preceded by a week of violence in Iraq, during which an Iraqi Shiite militia operating as a proxy for Iran attacked an Iraqi military base, killing a U.S. civilian contractor and wounding several U.S. troops. In retaliation, the United States carried out three airstrikes on the same Iraqi militia, killing at least 25 fighters.

Listen: Under Trump, haters don't need an excuse to attack Jews. Ep. 55

These events, which took place during the last week of 2019, represent a violent end to a year of constant tensions between the Americans and Iranians. They are the continuation of a series of escalatory steps taken by Iran during the course of the year including an attack on two major oil installations in Saudi Arabia last September, and the downing of an American military drone over the Persian Gulf last June. But while the United States refrained from using military force in response to Irans provocations then, things were different this time. That is why several leading Democratic politicians warned Tuesday that Trump is risking an all-out war with Iran.

Iran is acting out because it is under a lot of pressure from American sanctions, says Tamara Cofman Wittes, a former State Department Middle East director who is currently a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. The Iranians have been slowly and deliberately escalating their attacks, basically telling the United States: If you put us under pressure, we will put you under pressure as well. She believes the Iranian regime will likely continue this behavior in 2020.

The Iranians saw that there was no military response to their previous attacks, so they reached a conclusion that America doesnt want a military confrontation, Cofman Wittes says. The Iranians also dont want a military confrontation with the U.S. and thats certainly not what theyre trying to achieve with these provocations in Iraq. They have a different goal: Getting Trump to enter negotiations.

Risky moves

In May 2018, Trump withdrew the United States from the Iran nuclear deal, which had been signed by his predecessor Barack Obama. The U.S. administration has since placed tough sanctions on Tehran, triggering a financial crisis there that has led to massive street protests across Iran. However, at the same time as imposing these tough sanctions, Trump has also frequently expressed interest in negotiating a new deal with Iran.

We've got more newsletters we think you'll find interesting.

Please try again later.

The email address you have provided is already registered.

Earlier this month, after Iran and America completed a prisoner swap, he tweeted: Thank you to Iran on a very fair negotiation. See, we can make a deal together!

Over the summer, direct negotiations between the two countries seemed imminent. Trump said he was willing to meet Iranian President Hassan Rohani with no preconditions. But the Iranian side had a clear demand: The Americans had to lift some of the sanctions placed on Tehran in order for a meeting to occur. Trump refused, and an opportunity for the two leaders to meet on the sidelines of Septembers UN General Assembly was lost.

Now, Cofman Wittes says, Iran is trying to escalate the situation in the hope that this will somehow lead to renewed diplomatic engagement. They want to pull in diplomatic attention from other countries such as France, Russia, China, Japan and others to somehow get America to the table. Their moves are risky, but theyre designed to bring about a diplomatic engagement, she says. This is what Iran needs more than anything at the moment: new talks that could perhaps lead to sanctions relief.

Haaretz reported last month that Israeli officials were still alarmed by the prospect of new negotiations between the United States and Iran. The Israeli perspective is that even if no sanctions are lifted, the mere spectacle of a meeting between Trump and Rohani would by itself lift some of the pressure from Tehran. Trump has rejected that point of view and sees no harm in holding a meeting.

The Iranians are going to keep going and going with these attacks if they dont get what they want, unless they become convinced that this could lead to a larger military escalation, Cofman Wittes says. Neither side wants that kind of escalation.

Last June, after the Iranian attack on the U.S. military drone, Trump approved a military strike in retaliation but then canceled it, fearing that a war with Iran could hurt his 2020 reelection campaign.

Grave mistake

The attack on the embassy in Baghdad is part of a larger chess match between the U.S. and Iran, says Michael Doran, a former Middle East director at the National Security Council under President George W. Bush, and currently a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute. Doran shares Cofman Wittes assessment of Tehrans objective: The goal of the Iranians is to increase the pressure on Trump during the election season, in the hope that they can rope him into a negotiation.

Doran, who has advocated a hawkish line against the Iranian regime and was a strong critic of the 2015 nuclear deal, adds that Iran hopes new negotiations will distract the United States from Irans problems at home, and in Iraq and Lebanon where there have been massive street demonstrations in recent weeks against political parties connected to Iran.

In addition, he says, Iran wants negotiations to lead to sanctions relief and to forestall further actions by the United States that would delegitimate Irans supposedly civil nuclear program.

In Dorans view, it would a grave mistake if Trump agreed to such negotiations. The protests that swept Iran, Iraq and Lebanon in November have changed the balance of power. Iran is experiencing unprecedented difficulty at home and abroad. If Trump were to sit with Iran now, he would look weak in the region, demoralize allies and give breathing room to Tehran.

If Trump doesnt opt for negotiations and doesnt want a direct military confrontation with Iran, what are his options?

The administration doesnt have really good options to choose from, says Ariane Tabatabai, an analyst at the Rand Corp. and an expert on Iran. The administration keeps saying that its policy of maximum pressure on Iran is succeeding, but what exactly have they achieved? she asks. They wanted to either lead to the collapse of the regime or to a significant shift in Irans behavior. So far, both have not happened.

Tabatabai says the only option for de-escalation right now is a diplomatic off-ramp that would allow both sides to get out of this cycle. But it doesnt look very likely to happen at the moment. The Iranians view Trump as reluctant to take military action, but they consider maximum pressure a form of war. From their point of view, this is already a war and they are being attacked through economic pressure. So they are going to continue testing the Trump administration.

Wanted: A strategy

All of the Iran experts who spoke with Haaretz agreed on one thing: The attack on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was an Iranian initiative and not a local protest, as some news reports described it.

This is telegraphed from Iran, straight out of the regimes playbook, says Behnam Ben Taleblu, an Iran expert at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies a think tank that has advocated for tough sanctions on Iran.

The regime wants to spook America, he says. They hope to either get Trump to agree to negotiations, or, even better, to get America to withdraw forces and send a message of retreat. They would be happy to solidify the impression that America is getting out of the Middle East, whether its in Syria or Iraq. They are willing to take risks to make that happen.

Ben Taleblu says last Sundays U.S. airstrikes were very important, because they sent the opposite message: That the United States would not ignore Irans actions. But he warned that the administration needs to have an Iraq policy, not just a policy to fight ISIS in Iraq. Its clear to everyone what Iran wants to have in Iraq: control. They want to control Baghdad through their proxies. But what does America want in Iraq? Thats more difficult to answer.

Cofman Wittes also says the Trump administration doesnt have a strategy, or even clear objectives. They placed sanctions on Iran and have now responded for the first time with military force to one of Irans provocations. But what is the long-term goal they are trying to achieve? And what is their strategy for getting there?

The Iranian conundrum is further complicated by the political schedule in the United States. The Iranians, as Haaretz reported in August 2018, are betting that they can wait out Trump, who is up for reelection in November. So far, most of the Democratic presidential candidates have promised to return to the nuclear deal that Trump withdrew from. For Iran, this would mean the lifting of many sanctions and a return to the pre-2018 reality that was created by the nuclear deal.

But the Iranians also believe the presidential election will make it more difficult for Trump to take stronger military action. Trump campaigned in 2016 on a pledge to end stupid wars in the Middle East, and criticized his then rival, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, for her support of the 2003 invasion of Iraq (which Trump himself also supported at the time).

Trump has been warned by some of his most influential supporters, such as Fox News host Tucker Carlson, that a war with Iran would harm his standing with voters who oppose U.S. military involvement in the Middle East, and could cost him the election.

The Democrats have already adopted a line of criticism against Trump, warning that he is leading the country to war through reckless policies in the Middle East. This could deter Trump from further military escalation. But he is also facing political pressure from right-wingers, especially his evangelical Christian supporters, who want to see a tough policy against Iran.

At the moment, it seems, Trump is taking political risks no matter what he chooses to do.

More here:

In chess game with Iran, Trump has only bad options - Haaretz