What is an Algorithm?

In the modern digital world, everybody is talking about algorithms, but what are they exactly? Where can you find them? What can they do? How do they work? Should we be scared of algorithms? Can algorithms think for themselves? What do they look like? Can they do a job better than humans? This 7':53" BBC Ideas video with subtitles explains all about algorithms in a lively and attractive way.  It is accessible to B2 students and above.

The most difficult words you will find in the video are: algorithm, search engines, dating apps, to be baffled [by science], a riddle, overwhelming, to pick her brains (informal), a set of instuctions, to enable a computer programme [to do something], billions, a server room, a bunch of [blocks] (informal), to be concerned about [something], to drag and drop [blocks], a drone, a flip, a challenge, a hoop, a lap, no offence (informal), to take over the world, to take our jobs, to deskill [humans], dependent upon [them], trusting of [them], on the flip side, to speed up decision-making, to spot (something), the criminal justice system, social care, credit checks, prolific, adverts.

If you want to know more about the Persian mathematician, Muhamad ibn Musa al-Khwarismi, who introduced Algebra to the West 900 years ago and gave name to the term "algorithm", you can watch another BBC Ideas video here (3':08").

Abelone Kelley September 15, 2020 0

Michigan workers eligible for tuition-free community college and more unemployment benefits

According to an article on Mlive.com, "Michigan front-line workers eligible for tuition-free community college under state program", 9/10/20, by Lauren Gibbons:

"Michigan residents without college degrees who’ve worked through the COVID-19 pandemic can now apply for tuition-free community college, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer announced Thursday morning.

"The Future for Frontliners program, initially announced by the governor in April, is open to workers without an associate or bachelor’s degree who were deemed essential during the COVID-19 pandemic.

"To be eligible, workers must have worked at least part-time for 11 of the 13 weeks between April 1 and June 30 and were required by their job to work outside their home at least some of the time.

"The program is funded by $24 million from the Governor’s Education Emergency Relief, part of the federal funding Michigan received from the CARES Act, according to a press release from the governor’s office. The state estimates 625,000 workers could be eligible for the program...."

In addition, according to another Detroit Free Press article, "State of Michigan: Unemployed workers will receive $300 federal benefit within 10 days" by Adrienne Roberts, 9/10/20:

"Michigan workers filing for unemployment benefits will receive the extra $300 federal benefit within 10 days, the state's Unemployment Insurance Agency said Thursday.

"The payments are retroactive, and will be paid out for the weeks ending Aug. 1, Aug. 8 and Aug. 15 initially, Steve Gray, the director of the UIA, said in a release.

"The benefit, funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is available to states for up to six weeks, which would end Sept. 5. The UIA has applied for the additional three weeks of funding, according to the release..."

For details, read the full article and this update from the Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency.

Abelone Kelley September 11, 2020 0

13-year old autistic boy shot by police in Salt Lake City

This is easier to read about than to watch. If you prefer to read about it, this is an article from The Guardian:

"Police shoot 13-year-old boy with autism several times after mother calls for help"
by Kenya Evelyn, 9/8/20

 

Abelone Kelley September 09, 2020 0

Rescue Boat Baby Five Years On

This is the story of a baby who was born on a rescue boat, when her Nigerian mother was trying to arrive in Italy five years ago.  This short BBC News video with subtitles (2':47") is suitable for B2 students and it will allow you to listen to a West-African English accent in the voice of the mother.

The vocabulary is not too difficult, you will find words like miracle, a rescue ship, to flee (fled, fled), to struggle [for your life], to bear [a name], to faint, to be in labour, to make it to Europe on a boat, to go through [something], to be in [somebody's] shoes, to be blessed.

Abelone Kelley September 09, 2020 0

Celebrating the 1999 US Supreme Court Olmstead Decision

In June 2020, disability organizations celebrated the 21st anniversary of the 1999 US Supreme Court Olmstead decision. While there was much to celebrate, VOR  [a Voice Of Reason] has always been quick to point out that much of what is said about Olmstead is misinterpretation. The almost total emphasis by many disability organizations on integration of people with disabilities in the community misses the point that integration must be appropriate to the needs of individuals. Olmstead embodies protections that guard against inappropriate placement and services that might harm individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). People with I/DD are a diverse group and the claim that Olmstead is all about community integration falls short of its actual meaning and promise. This is a statement from VOR on the 17th anniversary of Olmstead that is as true today as it was 4years ago. [See also VOR Olmstead Resources]

Celebrating the [17th] Anniversary of the Olmstead Decision:
Opportunities and Choices

Recently, the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Administration for Community Living (ACL) issued press releases celebrating the 17th Anniversary of the Olmstead decision. VOR shares their view that there is much to celebrate in opening doors to community living for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) who are able and wish to take advantage of such opportunities. Unfortunately, their ideological preoccupation with one key part of Olmstead, community integration, at the expense of the other key part, choice, has reduced options for all people with I/DD. This crimped and, VOR would submit, inaccurate application of the plain language of Olmstead has done significant harm to many of our most disabled citizens.

By insisting that all people with I/DD live and work in the community, the DOJ and ACL are treating people with I/DD as a monolithic group, not as the individuals they are. DOJ and ACL are substituting the wishes of the government for that of the person with I/DD or, where relevant, the legal guardian. While their policies have opened doors for the less severely disabled, they have closed important doors for the more severely disabled. Many of these individuals have lifelong needs that require a very high level of care, the kind often found only in public and private Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities (ICFs/IID), sheltered workshops, and facility-based day programs.

DOJ and ACL are pursuing this agenda in the name of the ADA and Olmstead, but that is not what the ADA and Olmstead call for. Both the statute and the Supreme Court case embody the best values of American society —nondiscrimination and choice. All of our civil rights laws contain both elements. Civil rights laws do not tell people where they must live or work. They guarantee individuals are not denied opportunities based on a particular factor, and they expand choices for individuals who have suffered discrimination. In sharp contrast, DOJ and ACL are using federal dollars to bring lawsuits and promote policies that needlessly and dangerously eliminate important options – ICFs/IID, sheltered workshops and facility-based day programs – that many of our most disabled individuals rely on and prefer over small community settings. In pursuing its one-size-fits-all ideology, DOJ and ACL are ignoring the vital rights of choice embodied in the ADA itself: As the Court stated in Olmstead:

“We emphasize that nothing in the ADA or its implementing regulations condones termination of institutional settings for persons unable to handle or benefit from community settings . . . . Nor is there any federal requirement that community-based treatment be imposed on patients who do not desire it. Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581, 601-602 (1999).

In fact, the Court specifically incorporated the right of choice in the second prong of its holding:

 

“(b) the transfer from institutional care to a less restrictive setting is not opposed by the affected individual,” Olmstead, at 587.

Even DOJ and ACL’s concept of what constitutes the most integrated setting contradicts the view of Justice Ginsburg:

“[For some individuals, no placement outside the institution may ever be appropriate. ‘Some individuals, whether mentally retarded or mentally ill, are not prepared at particular times - perhaps in the short run, perhaps in the long run - for the risks and exposure of the less protective environment of community settings;’ for these persons, ‘institutional settings are needed and must remain available.’ ” . . . Each disabled person is entitled to treatment in the most integrated setting possible for that person – recognizing on a case-by-case basis, that setting may be an institution” Olmstead, at 605.

Not only are DOJ and ACL ignoring the plain language of governing law and decision, they are ignoring the harmful effects of their policies. Journalists have time and again documented the high rates of abuse and mortality for our most disabled citizens who have been forced out of congregate care facilities into unprepared communities. Federal agencies should stop dictating the lives of the severely disabled, and instead, join hands with the community of individuals with I/DD to ensure that all people with I/DD receive quality services and supports wherever they choose to reside and work.

The ADA and Olmstead are the beacons for providing more opportunities for people with I/DD, but they do not dictate one-size-fits-all solutions. Individual choice among the widest possible range of quality living and occupational options is what is necessary to realize the goals of the ADA and Olmstead. VOR supports the full reading of Olmstead, making individual choice of services paramount and ensuring a full range of living and work options in order to meet the spectrum of needs of this very diverse population.

VOR is a national organization that advocates for high quality residential and work options and human rights for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Established in 1983, VOR is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, governed by a volunteer board of directors and funded solely by dues and donations. VOR receives no government support.

Abelone Kelley September 04, 2020 0

Petitions: Read before you sign - statements by petition supporters and the collectors of signatures are sometimes misleading

Here is the short version of this post: A Michigan petition drive is underway to repeal the law that gives the Michigan governor the ability to protect public health and safety during the covid-19 pandemic. Some voters asked to sign the petition have been told that repealing the law will help the governor and small businesses or help hire more police and firefighters. None of this is true. One of the people involved in circulating petitions has a sketchy past involving voter and election fraud.

Read on for the details and political intrigue:

A petition drive is underway in Michigan to repeal a 1945 law granting emergency powers to the Michigan governor. Governor Gretchen Whitmer is using these emergency powers during the Covid-19 pandemic to protect public health and safety, including requiring face masks in enclosed public spaces, and regulating activities that can spread the Covid-19 virus and make it harder to control.

There is fierce opposition to the Governor’s actions, although, in general, governors who have taken strict measure on coronavirus have seen better political outcomes than those who have not. (According to a Washington Post article from 7/31/20 by Amber Phillips, Governor Whitmer has an approval rating of about 64%). Furthermore, the Michigan Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that said that Whitmer had not exceeded her authority under the Emergency Powers Act. The Michigan Supreme Court was scheduled to hear oral arguments on September 2, 2020 on a case challenging her use of executive powers.

According to an article in the on-line magazine Bridge Michigan, “The Michigan Constitution sets signature thresholds for petition drives at 8 percent of the total turnout in the most recent gubernatorial election. While there are 7.7 million registered voters in Michigan, about 4.25 million cast ballots in the 2018 election that Whitmer won by nearly 10 percentage points over Republican Bill Schuette.”

The organization collecting signatures is called Unlock Michigan . It needs to collect to collect at least 340,047 valid signatures within 180 days (by early January 2021), according to Michigan law. “…organizers hope to get the initiative to the Legislature this year while they are still guaranteed a GOP majority in the state House. Passage by the legislature under these circumstances does not allow a veto by the governor.”

If the legislature repeals the 1945 law that gives the governor emergency powers to control the Covid-19 pandemic without legislative approval, is the legislature willing to step up to its responsibility to protect public safety by agreeing to approve emergency measures under a 1976 law that requires legislative approval of the governor’s actions? Who do they fear more? Their supporters who aggressively oppose controls or the pandemic that has ravaged the country for 6 months with over 100,000 cases in Michigan and close to 7,000 deaths?

Petition drives to place an issue on a ballot for a vote are not unusual. The controversy here is about the bait-and-switch tactics of the people hired to collect signatures and questions about the sketchy reputation of the company they work for.

Funding for the “Unlock Michigan” campaign comes mostly from a group with ties to Michigan Senate Republicans

An article in the Detroit News, “Mystery money fuels campaign to limit Whitmer's emergency powers” by Craig Mauger, 7/27/20, looks into funding for "Unlock Michigan".

“The group collecting petitions to limit Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's emergency powers is primarily being funded by a nonprofit that doesn't have to disclose its donors."

…“Michigan Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility, a Lansing-based organization with ties to Senate Republicans, gave $660,200 to Unlock Michigan from June 9 through July 20, according to a new campaign finance report.”

…“Under Michigan law, ballot proposal committees, like Unlock Michigan, can receive money from corporate donors and unions, including nonprofits that raise their funds from elsewhere. The chain of giving effectively conceals the original source of the money.” [Emphasis added]   

…“Unlock Michigan released its first campaign finance disclosure on Monday. Of the $765,024 the group raised through July 20, 86% of the money came from Michigan Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility, which spent about $1.1 million backing GOP Michigan Senate candidates in 2018, according to the Michigan Campaign Finance Network.”

Unlock Michigan hires a firm to circulate petitions that subcontracts to a circulator with a criminal record
 

This is according to an article in the Detroit Free Press, “Unlock Michigan petition circulator has criminal record, history of 'bait and switch' by Paul Egan, 8/28/20:

“The owner of a firm collecting signatures to repeal a law granting emergency powers to Michigan's governor has a criminal record for falsifying his voter registration and a history of alleged ‘bait and switch’ tactics in paid petition drives around the U.S.”

The individual in question is Mark Jacobi, a subcontractor to National Petition Management, the firm Unlock Michigan hired to head up its drive to collect about 500,000 signatures.

“Mark A. Jacoby, 37, whose company, Let the Voters Decide, is publicizing that it will pay petition circulators $3.50 for each valid signature to repeal the Emergency Powers of Governor Act of 1945, was arrested for suspected voter registration fraud and perjury in California and pleaded guilty in 2009 to a lesser charge of registering to vote at an address where he did not live.”

Unlock Michigan disputes the involvement of Jacoby in the collection of signatures, but Jacoby said he is a subcontractor to National Petition Management, the firm Unlock Michigan hired to head up its drive to collect about 500,000 signatures.

According to the Detroit News [from "Mystery Money"], “As of July 20, Unlock Michigan had paid National Petition Management $300,000 in the relatively early stages of the petition drive, records show." , The Detroit News]

So, think before you sign and make sure you understand what you are signing.

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

For more political intrigue from The DD News Blog, read about the 2012 Proposition 4 campaign involving state advocacy groups and fines for campaign finance violations.

Abelone Kelley September 03, 2020 0

Antonio Banderas on "Pain & Glory" and Chutzpah

Antonio Banderas, talks to Terry Gross on Fresh Air about his latest movie with Pedro Almodóvar, "Pain & Glory", which earned him a "Best Actor Award" in the Cannes Film Festival and a nomitation to the Oscars, and about his acting career both in Spain and in Hollywood.  In addition, he explains what the contracultural movement, "La Movida" meant in 1980s Spain, when a whole country regained control of its own future and started enjoying public and private freedoms that had been alien during the dictatorship, and finally, he talks about his Soho Theatre in Malaga. During the interview, Antonio Banderas talks very openly about his experience as a learner of English, who started an acting career in Hollywood, with a very basic level of English and tons of chutzpah, and about the challenge of doing radio interviews in English.

This 37 minute long interview can be accessible to B2 students, as long as they have the support of the transcript, but it could be heard by higher level leaners while commuting, walking or doing housework. The interview might prove extremely interesting for examiners of English, as a genuine example of interlanguage from a bilingual Spanish speaker of English, who has a good command of his second language in terms of oral fluency, vocabulary range and an ability to explain complex ideas in detail and with touches of humour, but who still shows traces of L1 interference in some aspects of phonetics, word order and even in verb tenses.

In the vocabulary, you will find, among other words, quite a few examples of cinema and medical jargon, like screenwriter, ulcers, reflux, to star [in a film], rehearsals, the shooting [of a film], to dig up [deep into memories], a falling out, to overdo, to be bigger than life, the framing, to be measured [with the actors], [colours] clash or match, [it] is unheard of, swell (American English), a warehouse, stents, to be right on, a crier, a tough guy, teary, vulnerable, laundering money, to rule [a country], restraints, the counterculture, eerie, to prove [ourselves], anathema, on the screen, a scandal, there's something wrong, to usher [a new era of freedom], trans and straight characters, a gasp, to be under the political boot, customs, to be compromised, to grow up [in Spain], chutzpah (colloquial for "nerve" or "daring"), perseverant, a movie based on a novel, to fake, to do a screen test, to learn [your lines] phonetically, the exception to the rule, to comprehend English, to be out, to reassure [somebody on something], to label [somebody], a crane, a stunt guy, a harness, to rehearse, CGI (computer-generated imagery), grenades, a conflagration, excellence.

If you prefer a shorter interview to Antonio Banderas, you can try this 7 minute report from NPR's Morning Edition, which also includes a transcript.

Abelone Kelley September 03, 2020 0