Mediaboss Marketing

Pretoria, South Africa The murder trial of South African Olympic runner Oscar Pistorius has attracted unprecedented media attention. The coverage of the story, however, has not been without problems.

Pistorius' closely watched murder trial is the first major South African criminal trial to be broadcast live from within the courtroom.

The trial is being played on local radio stations and two South African news providers have started a cable channel dedicated entirely to the case.

But critics say the media attention has had significant issues. Among the critics is the trial's judge, Thokozile Masipa.

On day two of proceedings, Masipa lashed out at local media for publishing a photo of a witness who did not give broadcasters permission to film her testimony. In doing so, Masipa showed while that she may talk very softly, she carries a big stick.

"I must say this is very disturbing, I am warning the media if you do not behave you are not going to be treated with soft gloves by this court," she said.

Media mistake

University of the Witwatersrand journalism professor Anton Harber said the media outlets, including a prominent TV news station that ran a photo of witness Michelle Burger on screen along with her testimony, made a mistake.

"I think it was very foolish of the media to run a picture of the witness when it is clear that courts were trying to protect her. I think technically they may not have been in breach of the rules and regulations, but they were certainly in breach of the spirit, and that is a rather silly thing to do when the judge has her finger hovering over the control button for public broadcast," said Harber.

Pistorius has pleaded not guilty to the charge of murdering his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp on Valentine's Day, 2013. He said he mistook Steenkamp for an intruder when he shot her four times through a locked bathroom door.

See more here:
South Africa: Pistorius Trial Judge Notes Pitfalls of Media Attention

Creative Commons photo by ttfnrob on flickr.

Researchers at the University of Miami may have made a modest breakthrough in the search for an HIV vaccination. A vaccine developed at the school has been shown to prevent mice from becoming infected with HIV. The findings were published in the February edition of the Journal of Virology.

Assistant professor of microbiology Geoffrey W. Stone says that the modest study has had some very dramatic results, but that it could take as long as a decade before its available for widespread human use. The next steps to test the vaccines effectiveness include trials on larger animals and clinical trials on people.

Traditionally, vaccines use a dead or weakened copy of a virus to trigger your immune system to make antibodies, creating specialized killer T-cells trained to attack a specific disease. It basically acts like a mafioso: Hey, immune system, this is a flu virus. This is how to kill it. Remember this the next time you see it.

But HIV attacks the immune systems white blood cells, particularly your helper T-cells, which are sometimes referred to as the generals of the immune system because they rally other immune cells and help create antibodies to fight disease. Its a Trojan horse, basically, getting past the bodys warning system and killing its immune system soldiers. Then it multiplies rapidly, and the body is left without an army to defend itself.

Without the helper T cells, the body cant create antibodies to fight the HIV virus. And as the virus kills off these helper T-cells and other valuable immune cells, the body loses the ability to fight any infections, leading to AIDS.

Researchers have been searching for a way to trigger the bodys immune response to HIV by programming the T-cells to respond and mount an attack, rather than getting slaughtered by the virus. University of Miami researchers attached a copy of the HIV virus to an immune cell using a protein (CD40). The hope is to enable the T-cells to see the HIV virus before it attacks them, rally the troops, and produce killer T cells, the bodys specialized virus hit-men, to wipe out the virus.

Stone tested this technique in mice. He found that the mice resisted infection, even they were exposed to 10 million viruses, according to the study.

More than 1.1 million people in the U.S. have HIV. Nearly one in six are unaware they have the infection.

Originally posted here:
Is an HIV vaccine on the horizon?

youtube downloader software free download 2013 full version
http://bit.ly/1joO2ci youtube downloader software free download 2013 full version youtube downloader software free download 2013 full version.

By: Alvin Workman

Original post:
youtube downloader software free download 2013 full version - Video

Eric Raymonds Myth of the Fall, an account of the rise of software portability and reusable open source code (rather than the fall from a free software eden), should be required reading for free and open source developers, and for anyone who cares about the future of technology.

It exactly matches my experience working with Unix starting in the early eighties, although Ive always talked about it from a somewhat different angle: because Unix was a portable operating system running on incompatible hardware, the only way you could distribute your free software was in source form. In other environments, while there was a freeware culture (just there is today on smartphone platforms), that was always binary freeware. You would just download the program and run it, whether you were on CP/M or DOS or the Mac. Only on Unix did you have to compile the source code into binaries for your brand of machine. The reason open source culture grew from Unix was not political, it was architectural.

And because 9-track tapes were a bitch to ship around, and it took forever to send around programs (even the relatively tiny ones of the day) on slow networks, we used tools like Patch to share just the modified code as tracked by version control systems. Unixs philosophy of portability, which included not just a programming language (C) optimized for portability, but also an architecture of small, modular programs communicating using standardized rules for input and output, also shaped the design of the internet and applications like email and the World Wide Web that grew on top of it.

Understanding this history correctly can give deep insight into the role of architecture in making projects succeed. Ive been thinking about this lately in the context of open data.

If you think about open data from a political data must be free perspective, you will come up with projects like identi.ca and app.net. If you think about it from a useful interoperability perspective, you will come up with standards like GTFS (which cities use to provide their transit schedules to Google Maps and others), Blue Button (which started at the VA as a program for veterans, but now allows consumers to download their medical records), not to mention the government open data in areas like mapping, weather, and location data that powers so many commercial services today.

Ultimately, utility too can be a kind of politics. The internet is a testament to the power of open, interoperable architectures to create a platform for innovation and value creation. As we move ever deeper into the era of data driven computing, thats an essential lesson.

Will the Internet of Things be proprietary or open? It seems to me that the best way to ensure that the answer to that question is open is not to wave banners saying open data or to try to create open versions of successful proprietary products but to work assiduously to find ways in which open data and cooperating systems create more value than closed, proprietary data.

Excerpt from:
Reflections on Eric Raymonds Myth of the Fall

News Analysis

March 4, 2014 03:38 PM ET

Computerworld - The cheaper, the better.

Lowering the price of an operating system upgrade accelerates its uptake five-fold, but setting an upgrade free stomps on that pedal, boosting uptake as much as 12 times, data from an analytics company shows.

Microsoft has likely run those numbers too, and internally may be making the case that it's better to expand Windows-for-free to all upgrades, not just the more minor updates like Windows 8.1. (Don't let Microsoft catch you calling Windows 8.1 an "upgrade;" to them, it's an "update," and for financial reasons, even though it is free.)

The numbers game is admittedly a bit iffy, since it's comparing, well, apples and oranges, necessitated by comparing upgrades within Apple OS X world to those of Microsoft's Windows. But the results seem clear: cheap is better than pricey, free is better than cheap.

Free trumps all, in other words. Or as Apple's Craig Federighi, who leads software development at the Cupertino, Calif. company, put it last October: "Free is good."

Last month, OS X 10.9, aka Mavericks, accounted for 59% of all Macs running it and its two precursors, Mountain Lion and Lion, an increase of 4 percentage points from January, said California-based Net Applications.

(Unlike others, Computerworld stopped the in-Mac comparison at OS X 10.7, aka Lion, because Snow Leopard, or 10.6, has been nearly unaffected by the draw of the free Mavericks.)

Apple dropped the price of Mavericks to zero, giving it away to most, although not all, of its customers running Mountain Lion, Lion and even 2009's Snow Leopard. On the other hand, Mountain Lion, which came out in mid-2012, carried a price tag of $19.99, a third less than 2011's Lion.

Continue reading here:
OS upgrades: Cheap is better than pricey, free is better than cheap