Damien Chazelle’s space race drama First Man will open the 75th Venice Film Festival, it has been confirmed.
Chazelle returns to the Lido after La La Land opened Venice in 2016 and kicked off a triumphant awards season that saw him become the youngest winner of the best directing Oscar.
First Man will have its world premiere on August 29 in the Sala Grande at the Palazzo del Cinema on the Lido di Venezia. It will be in competition at the festival.
Ryan Gosling stars as Neil Armstrong, the former US Navy test pilot who became the first man to walk on the moon in 1969, marking the climax of the Apollo 11 mission and closing an intense chapter in the space race between the US and the Soviet Union.
Starring alongside Gosling are Claire Foy as his wife, Jason Clarke, Kyle Chandler, and Ciarin Hinds.
Universal will open First Man in the US and UK on October 12. The 75th annual Venice Film Festival will take place from August 29-September 8.
Chazelle said: “I am humbled by Venice’s invitation and am thrilled to return. It feels especially poignant to share this news so close to the moon landing’s anniversary. I eagerly look forward to bringing the film to the festival.”
In America, 21 million people believe that the moon landings were faked – despite pictures from Earth-bound telescopes clearly showing flags left by the Apollo missions.
Moon hoax conspiracy theories are often the ‘entry level’ conspiracy which guides people to the really weird ‘hard stuff’ like believing the Earth is flat.
But where did the idea come from?
We can blame one rocket expert, Bill Kaysing, a technical writer who self-published a book called ‘We Never Went to the Moon: America’s Thirty Billion Dollar Swindle.’
Many of the supposed ‘giveaways’ still touted by moon truthers today come from Kaysing’s book, according to author C Stuart Hardwick, writing on Quora.
Hardwick says, ‘The first person to give real voice to moon hoax conspira-nonesense was Bill Kaysing, a technical writer who had worked for Rocketdyne until 1963.
‘Why? It’s unclear. He was not obviously insane, but he was obviously unqualified to express the opinions he was expressing. My guess is, technical writing with objective criteria didn’t suit him, and pretending expertise to a bunch of ignorant sycophants fuelled his ego.
Kaysing misused his ‘expertise’ as a technical writer to create the impression the missions were faked, Hardwick says – but ignored any facts that got in the way.
Hardwick says, ‘He made a large number of idiotic claims that in fact only demonstrated his ignorance and paranoia.
‘For example, he claimed (without evidence) that the mighty F1 engine was wholly unreliable and so NASA was forced to cover that up by welding clusters of proven B-1 engines inside the F1 engine bell in order to simulate a lunar mission by launching a (presumably mostly empty) Saturn V that could never leave orbit.
‘The F1 engines from some of the missions he was talking about (including Apollo 11) have been recovered from the sea floor, and are clearly unmodified F1 engines.’
SAN DIEGO. California, with its attractive cities such as San Francisco and Hollywood, plentiful parklands, expansive Pacific Ocean and desirable year-round climate — can mesmerize vacationers and snowbirds alike. Wishing to escape harsh weather conditions or simply seeking a change of pace, the Golden State soon becomes a serious consideration for many who are desiring to relocate.
California dreaming? Not so much if you consider the state’s ginormous housing shortage. That shortage is so bad in California that it is creating a state of crisis.
THE HIGH COST OF HOUSING IN CALIFORNIA
But what is oftentimes overlooked by California dreamers is the state’s high cost of living. Overlooked as well: the high prices for housing and apartment rentals, some of the highest in the nation.
California wannabes might be determined to find a way to live the California lifestyle. But they are very possibly ignoring the underlying facts influencing what it might cost them to qualify to buy or to rent
LOW HOUSING SUPPLY CAUSES ESCALATING HOME PRICES
For those who currently own a home, the increase in housing values is highly desirable. But for first-time home buyers, however, the California real estate market makes it nearly impossible for many to afford a home. Only around 29 percent of Californians today can afford a median priced home of about $518,500.00.
Qualifying for a median priced home requires a total household annual income of $81,690.00. The estimated monthly loan payment is $2,720.00 (depending upon loan terms, down payment and the effective interest rate), according to the California Realtors Association.
In 2017, California Housing and Community Development Department estimated 3.5 million new homes would be needed to meet population growth.
SOLVING THE SHORTAGE OF CALIFORNIA HOUSING
The California Housing and Community Development Department estimates that the state needs 180,000 new homes each year to keep pace with housing demand. It follows that California should be a builder’s paradise. With millions of new homes needed over the next 20 years, the building industry could also be a positive source for creating new jobs.
However, the supply of new housing is falling dangerously short. The reasons for this are many.
For example, in 2017, approximately 110,000-115,000 building permits were requested or granted permitting the building of new California homes, according to the Construction Industry Research Board. However, estimates report approximately 70,000 fewer homes get built each year than are actually needed.
An a recent interview with a member of the California Building Industry Association, revealed a surprising multitude of barriers which prevent building badly needed new homes in California. This is especially true for those within a range of affordability.
THE COST OF OVER-REGULATION AND OTHER BARRIERS
California’s current list of regulatory barriers and cost-drivers includes
Slow permit processing
California Environmental Quality Act
Law suits from private citizens
Lumber shortages creating increasing costs
Rising materials costs
Increasing labor costs
In the 1960s the space race was at its peak, with the USSR and USA both competing for interstellar supremacy by the end of the decade. Could it be that to overcome the financial and technical obstacles standing in its way, that America broadcast a live publicity stunt to put the first man the moon?
NASA has canceled a mission to assay the resources that may be available to humans on the moon, even though President Donald Trump’s administration made it a priority to send humans back there, according to media reports.
The Resource Prospector mission would have sent a rover to the moon’s polar regions to learn about water and other deposits on and just beneath the lunar surface. Scientists have sent an open letter to new NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine, urging him not to shut down the agency’s only current moon mission, which has already been in development for four years, according to a report by The Verge.
The Resource Prospector mission consisted of a lander and a solar-powered rover equipped with a drill. The rover would have scouted the lunar surface, digging up soil for analysis. Scientists know that water ice exists on the moon, but the Resource Prospector would have provided scientists with a more complete understanding of these deposits.
Such knowledge is crucial to expanding a human presence on the moon. Lunar ice can potentially be melted and split into oxygen and hydrogen, providing a local source of water, oxygen and rocket propellant, The Verge reported. This would not only help make human activities more self-sustaining but also dramatically reduce launch costs, because many of these vital resources could be produced on-site.
“If we can demonstrate that we can access the water on the moon, then we can start to design the equipment that will mine it and deliver it to the outpost,” Phil Metzger, a planetary physicist at the University of Central Florida who is part of the science team for Resource Prospector, told The Verge.
Although it was not yet fully funded, the Resource Prospector mission had gotten well past the drawing board. Engineers had been working on the project for four years, and prototypes were tested on Earth in 2015 and 2016, according to The Verge. Plans had the mission launching in 2022. “It’s far enough along that it’s a real mission,” Clive Neal, an engineering professor at the University of Notre Dame and Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG) emeritus chair, told The Verge.
Issues likely started when the mission was transferred from one directorate within NASA to another, according to Metzger. Originally, it was funded with money allocated for human exploration, The Verge reported. However, it was moved to the section that funds scientific missions. Although Resource Prospector was a robotic mission, it didn’t fit as well within the Science Mission Directorate’s priorities or budget, which is likely why it was canceled, The Verge said.
As for why the mission was moved, “I don’t really know what the motive was, but I’m guessing it was probably budget-related,” Metzger told The Verge. NASA’s human exploration program is currently working on the massive Space Launch System rocket, which accounts for a sizable portion of the program’s budget. Given the recent growth of private launch companies, a number of people have criticized NASA’s decision to continue developing this costly rocket.
Several scientists at LEAG, which advises NASA on lunar exploration, wrote a letter to Bridenstine, urging him to re-evaluate the decision to cancel the mission. In their letter, they explained the mission’s importance in current plans to return humans to the moon and expand the nation’s lunar presence overall.
The decision to cancel the Resource Prospector mission is peculiar given the current administration’s plans for NASA. Trump has repeatedly called for NASA to return humans to the moon and even signed Space Policy Directive 1, ordering NASA to return astronauts to the moon ahead of crewed missions to Mars and beyond. As of now, “there are no other [NASA] missions being planned to go to the surface of the moon,” Metzger told The Verge.
The Resource Prospector also fit in nicely with the Trump administration’s desire to foster NASA’s partnerships with the commercial space industry, as there’s been increased interest in lunar exploration from private companies. Several businesses have plans to send their own spacecraft to the moon, and some would like to set up commercial operations there. The moon could even serve as a space port for longer-distance missions, like those to Mars, The Verge said.
“Of course, it could turn out that the water [on the moon] isn’t easily accessible at all, and that could change a lot of plans within the industry,” The Verge wrote. The Resource Prospector mission was critical to answering this question.
As college students grapple with the rising costs of classes and books, mortgaging their futures with student loans in exchange for a diploma they’re gambling will someday pay off, it turns out many of them are in great financial peril in the present, too.
More than a third of college students don’t always have enough to eat and they lack stable housing, according to a survey published Tuesday by researchers at Temple University and the Wisconsin HOPE Lab.
Overall the study concluded 36 percent of college students say they are food insecure. Another 36 percent say they are housing insecure, while 9 percent report being homeless. The results are largely the same as last year’s survey, which included fewer students.
National Survey Shows High Rates Of Hungry And Homeless Community College Students
National Survey Shows High Rates Of Hungry And Homeless Community College Students
The 2018 numbers are even higher when broken out to include only community college students. Forty-two percent indicated they struggled the most to get adequate food, as measured by the researchers’ scale. Nine percent said they had gone at least one day during the last month without eating because they lacked the money. And 46 percent said they had difficulty paying for housing and utilities.
Sara Goldrick-Rab, professor of higher-education policy at Temple University and the lead author of the report for the past three years, told NPR that while conditions remain dire for students from low-income families, the burden of covering these basic necessities is spreading into the middle class.
For poor students, she said, “It really undermines their ability to do well in school. Their grades suffer, their test scores appear to be lower, and overall, their chances of graduating are slimmer. They can barely escape their conditions of poverty long enough to complete their degrees.”
Whereas, middle class students “wouldn’t be going through these issues if they weren’t in college” because “their resources pale in comparison to those high college prices.”
For those students facing food insecurity, it means they have trouble getting enough to eat on a daily basis, often leading to skipped meals, weight loss and limited access to nutritious foods.
Housing instability can mean a student is at risk of eviction, behind on utilities payments, or actually homeless, although according to the researchers, homelessness can take on different forms. For instance, it may include students living in a shelter, as well as anyone “couch surfing” — staying with friends — or roaming across campus at night, catching short windows of sleep as they move from one empty building to another.
The report focused on 43,000 students at 66 institutions — 31 community colleges and 35 four-year universities — in 20 states and Washington, D.C. Students volunteered to participate and researchers say it is a non-random sample.
However, Goldrick-Rab and her colleagues have touted it as “the largest national assessment of basic needs security among four-year students.”
While the survey did not include any University of California respondents, most of the findings in the current annual study parallel those found by researchers with the UC Berkeley’s Basic Needs Security Work Group, which, in 2016 determined 42 percent of student in the UC system were food insecure.
Other notable findings in Goldrick-Rab’s study include:
More than 60 percent of former foster youth who completed this survey were food insecure and housing insecure, and almost 1 in 4 had experienced homelessness in the last year.
21 percent of homeless students said they felt unsafe where they live.
37 percent of community college students and 29 percent of four-year students reported the food they’d bought just didn’t last and they didn’t have money to buy more.
Among the most surprising findings in the survey, Goldrick-Rab said, “Is that homeless college students devote as much time to the classroom and to studying as do college students who are not homeless. However, they also work more, they commute more, spend more time taking care of other people and they sleep less.”
That is why she is urging higher education institutions to double down on providing services to help financially strapped students graduate. “Because these people have clearly exhibited a resilience that almost any employer would benefit from.”
(source: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/04/03/599197919/hunger-and-homelessness-are-widespread-among-college-students-study-finds )
Editor’s note: This column is excerpted and reprinted with permission from Aeon.co. Aeon is a registered charity committed to the spread of knowledge and a cosmopolitan world view. Read the full article HERE.
A paradox plays a pivotal role in our advanced hyper-connected democracies: The greater the amount of information that circulates, the more we rely on so-called reputational devices to evaluate it. Increased access to information and knowledge does not empower us or make us more cognitively autonomous. Rather, we become dependent on other people’s judgments and evaluations.
We are experiencing a fundamental paradigm shift in our relationship to knowledge. From the “information age,” we are moving toward the “reputation age,” in which information has value only if it is already filtered, evaluated and commented upon by others. Seen in this light, reputation is the gatekeeper to knowledge, and the keys to the gate are held by others.We rely on the inevitably biased judgments of other people, most of whom we do not know.
REPUTATION IS THE GATEKEEPER TO KNOWLEDGE, AND THE KEYS TO THE GATE ARE HELD BY OTHE
Some examples of this paradox are:
Climate change: In the best-case scenario, you trust the reputation of scientific research and believe that peer-review is a reasonable way of sifting out “truths” from false hypotheses. In the average-case scenario, you trust newspapers, magazines or TV channels to summarize scientific findings for you. In this latter case, you are twice removed from the sources: you trust other people’s trust in reputable science.
Moon landings: One of the most notorious conspiracy theories is that we didn’t send a man to the moon in 1969; instead, the entire Apollo program — including six landings on the moon between 1969 and 1972 — was a staged fake. The initiator of this conspiracy theory was Bill Kaysing, who worked in publications at the Rocketdyne company – where Apollo’s Saturn V rocket engines were built. At his own expense, Kaysing published the book “We Never Went to the Moon: America’s $30 Billion Swindle” in 1976. Afterward, a movement of skeptics grew and started to collect evidence about the alleged hoax.
According to the Flat Earth Society, one of the groups that still denies the facts, the moon landings were staged by Hollywood with the support of Walt Disney and under the artistic direction of Stanley Kubrick. Most of the “proof” these conspiracy theorists advance is based on a seemingly accurate analysis of photos of the various moon landings. The shadows’ angles are inconsistent with the light, the U.S. flag blows even if there is no wind on the moon, the tracks of the steps are too precise and well-preserved for a soil in which there is no moisture. And so on.
The great majority of the people — myself included — will dismiss these claims as absurd, although there have been serious and documented responses by NASA to these allegations. Yet, what I personally know about the facts mixes confused childhood memories, black-and-white television news, and deference to what my parents told me about the landing in subsequent years.
My reasons for believing that the moon landing took place go far beyond the evidence I can gather and double-check about the event itself: In those years, the U.S. had a justified reputation for sincerity.
Whenever we are at the point of accepting or rejecting new information, we should ask ourselves: Where does this information come from? Does the source have a good reputation? Who are the authorities who believe it? What are my reasons for deferring to these authorities? These questions will help us to get a better grip on reality than trying to check directly the reliability of the information at issue.
Gloria Origgi is an Italian philosopher and a tenured senior researcher at CNRS, the French National Centre for Scientific Research, in Paris. Her latest book is “Reputation: What It Is and Why It Matters,” translated by Stephen Holmes and Noga Arikha.
(source: http://www.hiltonheadmonthly.com/columns/last-call/5056-say-goodbye-to-the-information-age-it-s-all-about-reputation-now )
Planning a garden in advance can help you enjoy local, homegrown food year-round! Estimate how much to grow or buy and learn how to achieve food security with these guidelines.
Photo By Matthew T. Stallbaumer
Providing high-quality food for your family year-round takes foresight and planning, plus healthy doses of commitment and follow-through. Whether you grow as much of your food as you can or you source it from local producers, the guidelines here will help you decide how much to produce or purchase. The charts linked to in “Plan How Much to Grow” later in this article will also help you estimate how much space you’ll need — both in your garden to grow the crops, and in your home and pantry or root cellar to store preserved foods. Here’s a step-by-step plan to help you make the best use of your garden space (or farmers markets) to move toward homestead food self-sufficiency.
1. Establish Your Goals
Make a list of the foods you and your family eat now — and note the quantities as well. The charts linked to in “Plan How Much to Grow” further along in this article assume a half-cup serving size for fruits, vegetables and legumes, and a 2-ounce serving for dry grains. If your servings differ from the charts, be sure to adjust your calculations accordingly.
Decide what you’d like to grow, noting the foods your family prefers and recognizing that not every crop will grow in every climate. Research different crop varieties: Some crops — such as melons — require long, hot days to mature, but certain varieties need fewer days to reach maturity, which allows them to be grown in areas with a shorter growing season.
Don’t be afraid to start small and build gradually toward food self-sufficiency. A good starting goal might be to produce all of a certain crop that you use. An early milestone for me was growing all of the green beans we needed for a year and all of the ingredients for the spaghetti sauce I canned. Maybe you’ll aim to eat at least one thing from your garden each day. Keep your goals in mind as you’re planning a garden.
2. Choose a Gardening Method
I recommend following the guidelines of “Grow Biointensive Sustainable Mini-Farming” as developed by John Jeavons at Ecology Action in Willits, Calif., and explained in his book How to Grow More Vegetables and Fruits, Nuts, Berries and Other Crops Than You Ever Thought Possible on Less Land Than You Can Imagine. Jeavons’ form of biointensive gardening, which can sometimes produce higher yields than less intensive approaches, focuses on eight principles:
Deep soil preparation
Growing crops for carbon and grains
Growing crops for sufficient calories from a small area
Using open-pollinated seeds
Integrating all processes into a whole, interrelated system.