Letterkenny Credit Union urges parents to shun moneylenders at back-to-school time

first_imgA new, national survey has identified a rise in the number of parents in debt due to back-to-school related costs.Well over a third of parents in Ireland (36%) now say they are getting into debt trying to cope with costs at back-to-school time.This compares with 29% who reported being in debt last year. The worrying findings were revealed in the study commissioned by the Irish League of Credit Unions. More than two thirds of parents in the study also said that they found back-to-school costs a financial burden. Nearly half (46%) said meeting costs was their biggest back-to-school related worry.Close to one third of parents said they would be forced to deny their children certain school items this year because they could not afford them. Extracurricular activities and new school shoes were amongst the items to be cut from the budget this year.Reacting to the findings, Gordon Randles, CEO of Letterkenny Credit Union said that the credit union is all too aware of the struggle for parents this time of year. “We do see parents approaching us around this time of year requesting assistance with either budgeting or saving for the back-to-school spend, or with taking out a loan to see them through.“It’s understandable that back-to-school costs are seen as a financial burden for so many when parents are paying out €999 for every primary school child, and over €1,300 for every secondary school child in their household. “At Letterkenny Credit Union, we offer a special Back to School loan with an affordable APR rate of 7.2%*. The loan is typically approved within 24 hours and there are no hidden transaction fees or charges. As always, we are happy to work with parents to structure repayments in a way that suits their individual circumstances.”One concern for the credit union was the finding that, of those parents who said they were getting into debt, more than a quarter (27%) said they had turned to a moneylender in an effort to cope with back-to-school costs. This was a noticeable increase on the 20% last year who had opted for a moneylender.Commenting on this finding, Gordon said, “I would really encourage these parents to reconsider approaching a moneylender, some of whom charge APR rates as high as 188%**.“This can lead to a recurring cycle of unnecessary debt and panic borrowing.  Our welcoming staff are always on hand in the credit union to talk through borrowing options with any parent in the local community who might need assistance, whether they be a new or existing member, and equally if they have never dealt with the credit union before.“We are more than happy to assist anyone who might need a little extra financial assistance at this time of year.” * For a €1000, 1-year variable interest rate loan with 12 monthly repayments of €86.52, an interest Rate of 6.95%, a representative APR of 7.2%, the total amount payable by the member is €1038.23. Information correct as at 16/07/2019.** Central Bank of Ireland Register of Moneylenders, July 2018.-ENDS-For further information please visit our website: www.letterkennycu.ie or contact Letterkenny Credit Union on 0749102126 or email [email protected] Letterkenny Credit Union urges parents to shun moneylenders at back-to-school time was last modified: August 11th, 2019 by Staff WriterShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)last_img read more

Anger over illegal dumping on Donegal beach

first_imgA large-scale illegal dump on a popular Donegal beach has sparked calls for the community to take action against the issue. Walkers at Rossnowlagh Beach were met with a large pile of domestic waste during the weekend. Items discarded included furniture, DIY materials and general waste.A man, who wanted to remain anonymous, says the alleged incident happened on Sunday night. Illegal dump site at Rossnowlagh on MondayThe act has been described as ‘blatant’ by Cllr Barry Sweeney, who said those responsible ‘dumped the items expecting people to clean up after them’.The incident comes ahead of beach clean-up in the area tomorrow (Tuesday).Speaking to Donegal Daily, the south Donegal Councillor said it was ‘utterly ridiculous’ that people continued to do this.He said: “Tomorrow there is an organised clean-up on the beach so I would nearly question the timing of this incident. “It looks like someone already knew that there would be a clean-up taking place on Tuesday and they have took it upon themselves to dump whatever they want with the expectations that someone will clean it up after them.“It is ignorant, and this stuff is being left to be taken out by the next tide and be washed up along the coastline somewhere else.”Cardboard dumped on Rossnowlagh Beach“There is so much awareness out there now about ocean pollution and I really comprehend people doing that,” Sweeney continued.“They are destroying their own area and beautiful coastline,” he added.“When you’ve got so many brilliant Tidy Town initiatives throughout the county now, it is a real shame that people continue to carry out these actions and I would urge them to stop.” Anger over illegal dumping on Donegal beach was last modified: September 30th, 2019 by Shaun KeenanShare this:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window)Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)Click to share on Skype (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)last_img read more

Troublesome third ends Eureka’s year

first_imgMakaila Napoleon had 17 points but it wasn’t enough as the No. 8 Eureka High girls’ basketball team fell 47-44 to visiting No. 9 Aragon in the first round of the California Interscholastic Federation State Championship Division-III playoffs (NorCals), Tuesday night at Jay Willard Gymnasium.“It was tough out there,” Eureka head coach Mike Harvey said. “But we played hard tonight.”Eureka started off with aggressive offensive play, enabling an early six-point lead in a 13-10 advantage after the …last_img read more

Steph Curry crashes Oakland block party, plays pick-up with awestruck fans

first_imgThey held a block party in Oakland on Sunday and a Curry Flurry broke out.The party, held at Pepsi Park, was courtesy of Bay Area rapper Mistah F.A.B. according to CBS SF. Basketball was on the menu, and so were free backpacks for kids headed back for school.When what to their wondering eyes did appear: Stephen Curry.Rocking We Believe vintage shorts. See for yourself. Steph Curry’s going 1v1 with some random dude at the park on a Sunday. He really is the greatest guy ever. 😂 …last_img read more

Tau Ceti a Star for Life to Avoid

first_imgTau Ceti, a star with a dust disk astronomers had hoped might be an example of a planetary system under construction, is more like a war zone.  A press release from the Royal Observatory calls it “Asteroid Alley – an Inhospitable Neighbor.”  Using the James Clerk Maxwell Telescope in Hawaii, the astronomers detected 10 times the quantity of asteroids and comets as around our sun.  Jane Greaves, the lead scientist, explained the implications of this finding: “We don’t yet know whether there are any planets orbiting Tau Ceti, but if there are, it is likely that they will experience constant bombardment from asteroids of the kind that is believed to have wiped out the dinosaurs.  It is likely that with so many large impacts life would not have the opportunity to evolve.”    The press release says, “The discovery means that scientists are going to have to rethink where they look for civilisations outside our Solar System.”  Another astronomer suggests that our solar system may have been swept clean of impactors by a passing star.  Whatever the reason for the difference, Tau Ceti is “clearly a place you would not wish to be,” concludes Ian Holliday, Chief Executive of the Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC) of the Royal Observatory, Edinburgh.Evolution: always assumed, never demonstrated.  Dinosaur extinction via impact: a media mythoid that persists despite falsifying evidence (see 12/03/2003 and 06/02/2003 headlines).    Tau Ceti was the darling of astrobiologists who assumed its dust disk was evidence of an evolving solar system similar to ours.  Now chalk up another tally for the Privileged Planet hypothesis (see 06/24/2004 headline).  Even so, these measurements are too indirect to know for sure what it’s like out there at the Whale, without Han Solo to drive us through Asteroid Alley.(Visited 14 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Darwinism Still Corrupts Culture

first_imgThe bad fruits of Social Darwinism are well known. Less well known are ongoing negative influences of modern Darwinian ideas on human behavior.How Do You Correct Behavior Based on Fake Science?Have you been led to believe that men are naturally more promiscuous because sperm cells are cheap? that women are more choosy because eggs are costly? It’s all bunk. Phys.org just published the following headline: “Data should smash the biological myth of promiscuous males and sexually coy females.” That’s strong wording: smash, myth. New findings are teaching the opposite: men can be coy, and women promiscuous. But both ideas, being based on Darwinian ideas that people are just animals, can have unspeakably horrible consequences for marriage, family, and civilization.The article is merciless in its attack on this myth:These ideas, which are pervasive in Western culture, also have served as the cornerstone for the evolutionary study of sexual selection, sex differences and sex roles among animals. Only recently have some scientists – fortified with modern data – begun to question their underlying assumptions and the resulting paradigm.If Thomas Kuhn were still living, he would have here a great new illustration of his theory of paradigm shifts and scientific revolutions. The article fingers Charles Darwin himself as the mastermind of this fake science. His disciples took it and ran with it.These simple assumptions are based, in part, on the differences in size and presumed energy cost of producing sperm versus eggs – a contrast that we biologists call anisogamy. Charles Darwin was the first to allude to anisogamy as a possible explanation for male-female differences in sexual behavior.His brief mention was ultimately expanded by others into the idea that because males produce millions of cheap sperm, they can mate with many different females without incurring a biological cost. Conversely, females produce relatively few “expensive,” nutrient-containing eggs; they should be highly selective and mate only with one “best male.” He, of course, would provide more than enough sperm to fertilize all a female’s eggs.Surely this notion was tested, right? The article explains how Angus Bateman, a botanist, ran some experiments one time in 1948 on fruit flies (not human fly-by-nighters). Telling a whopper from this miniscule test, he alleged that the promiscuous-male-choosy-female scenario “was a near-universal characteristic of all sexually reproducing species.” In 1972, Robert Trivers amplified on the idea, talking about males’ “cheap investment” in sperm. Read the following quote, and think about what sexually active guys in dorm rooms are supposed to think about normal behavior after evolutionary biology class:In other words, females evolved to choose males prudently and mate with only one superior male; males evolved to mate indiscriminately with as many females as possible. Trivers believed that this pattern is true for the great majority of sexual species.The problem is, it isn’t true! The article explains many counter-examples. Men have just as much reason to be careful about their sex cells. It’s not the number; it’s the biological cost, the article explains. Semen contains many compounds that are expensive to produce. Men can run out of sperm. Consequently, males have every reason to be “choosy” about mating, too. Think of the consequences of poorly-tested bad ideas:The problem is, modern data simply don’t support most of Bateman’s and Trivers’ predictions and assumptions. But that didn’t stop “Bateman’s Principle” from influencing evolutionary thought for decades.Now get this: the article—still founded on evolutionary notions that people are just animals—makes matters even worse. Based on the latest Darwinian notions about sex, the article claims that females tend to be just as promiscuous as males. Think about how that will influence college students!If you think nobody teaches “Bateman’s Principle” any more these days, look at another post on Phys.org that came about the same time, like two ships passing in the night. Steiner Branslet writes about “One night stand regrets.” Another study supposedly shows that women have more regrets than men about casual sex. Look what it’s based on:“Women and men differ fundamentally in their sexual psychology,” says Professor Buss. “A key limitation on men’s reproductive success, historically, has been sexual access to fertile women. These evolutionary selection pressures have created a male sexual mind that is attentive to sexual opportunities.“The quality of one’s sexual partner in short-term relationships plays a lesser role biologically for men. Assuming women did not avoid having sex with them, men who ran from woman to woman and got them pregnant would have scored best in the evolutionary race.Sounds like Bateman’s Principle, right? Sure. Men just act the way evolution makes them act. “Female choice—deciding when, where, and with whom to have sex— is perhaps the most fundamental principle of women’s sexual psychology,” says one of the evolutionists in the article, referring implicitly to the views of Darwin, Bateman and Trivers. How about the guys? “These evolutionary selection pressures have created a male sexual mind that is attentive to sexual opportunities.”Take these quotes and apply them to the dormitory. Think of all the blessed effects on marriage and family down the line; after all, “Culture does not change biology,” this article admonishes. We can’t fight natural selection. Nor should we.An overall explanation presumably lies in the fundamental differences between men and women.The study results support theories of parental investment and sexual strategy: men and women have throughout generations invested differently in their relationships and any children that resulted.We’re talking evolution psychology here.Of course, if humans are more than mere animals, the whole conversation is fake science. We have comprehensive instructions from an all-wise Creator on how we are are to choose our sexual behaviors. But to the consensus, that doesn’t qualify as science. They feel we must derive our sexual ethics from the blind processes of natural selection, which couldn’t care a whit about morals.Other Darwin Fake Science with Evil FruitBateman’s Principle is not the only example of fake science that corrupts culture. Here are more interested readers can investigate:Social Darwinism in 2017. Can you get away with racism today? Evolutionists appear to have no qualms. In a PNAS paper entitled, “Selection against variants in the genome associated with educational attainment,” no less than 15 evolutionists claim that Icelanders with less education have more kids. “The rate of decrease is small per generation but marked on an evolutionary timescale,” they say. “Another important observation is that the association between the score and fertility remains highly significant after adjusting for the educational attainment of the individuals.” Figure this conundrum out: “This is thus a striking case where a variant associated with a phenotype typically regarded as unfavorable could nonetheless be also associated with increased ‘fitness’ in the evolutionary sense.” Well, if that’s the case, might as well go with the flow. Quit school and have more sex. Darwinism is as Darwinism does.Myth-busting Neanderthal narrative takes decades. A lengthy piece in the New York Times shows how long it has taken to overcome what CEH calls “historical racism,” the myth that fossil humans were “other” than human. That’s why we give them other species names, like Homo neanderthalensis. NY Times reporter Jon Mooallem interviews the work of Clive Finlayson at Gibraltar who shows many reasons why “Neanderthals were people, too.” He tells how Frenchman Marcellin Boule in 1911 propagated the Neanderthal myth of stoop-shouldered, beetle-browed imbeciles on their way to the cave cookout. “A lot of what he said was wrong,” Mooallem finds from Finlayson. “Still, Boule’s influence was long-lasting. Over the years, his ideologically tainted image of Neanderthals was often refracted through the lens of other ideologies, occasionally racist ones.”LGBT tales. The inverse influence of culture on science is a fascinating area of philosophy. Check for it in a book review in Science Magazine this week, where Sheri Berenbaum wrestles with the normality of deviant gender roles while reviewing Cordelia Fine’s new book, Testosterone Rex Myths of Sex, Science, and Society (Norton, 2017). Approach this quote like a qualified observer of social influences on science, paying attention to Berebaum’s use of culturally-popular buzzphrases as she plays the academic “On the one hand this, but on the other hand that” game:I welcome and applaud Fine’s efforts to ground policy in science and to spotlight the false reasoning and dichotomies that appear in popular books and some policies (such as single-sex education). I also recognize (and regret) the long history—and present—of using biology to justify inferior treatment of women. This no doubt contributes to resistance to evidence of biological differences among those seeking gender equality.The challenge is not to dismiss biological explanations of sex differences but to articulate clearly their implications. We can accept that biology contributes to behavioral sex differences and simultaneously argue that gender inequalities are not intractable. Rather than rejecting biological differences, we must seek to reveal the nonsense in the arguments that brain and behavioral sex differences justify discrimination, segregation, and differential treatment of the sexes.Shocking but true. At Live Science, Jonathan Sadowsky of Case Western Reserve University tells about “the wild history of electroconvulsive therapy.” Early shock treatments were horrifying to watch; modern ones are milder, he says. While not directly tied to Darwinian theory, this article assumes the brain is merely a physical organ, and that shocking it with electrical impulses can help with “mental illnesses” that are assumed to be mere biological abnormalities. While some forms of depression have biological causes, what about mental illnesses that have a spiritual root or stem from true guilt? The following quote shows how scientific thinking is often tied to the culture of the day. This example is from the 1950s. Are scientists today culpable of such “medicalizing behavior”?At that time, ECT was also used as a “treatment” for homosexuality, then considered by psychiatrists to be an illness. This was not a major part of ECT practice, but this is not a comfort to gay people who received the treatment, for whom it could be traumatizing. The psychiatrists who used ECT in this way sincerely believed they were trying to help sick people, which serves as a warning against “medicalizing” behavior, and assuming that this will reduce stigma. This use of ECT did not last, in part because there was no evidence it did alter anyone’s sexuality. But it survived in the social memory of the therapy.Punish nations with carbon penance. Nature‘s editorial this week says, “Base the social cost of carbon on the science.” The very title assumes that science can speak definitively on something as global as climate a hundred years from now, when we can’t even predict the weather 15 days out. New unknowns and revisions come out weekly, as we have reported (1/18/17); just today, Phys.org said that humans, not climate, caused the extinction of megafauna in Australia 45,000 Darwin years ago. While not tied to Darwinian evolution directly, this editorial shares the assumptions of scientism and millions of years. Nature‘s anti-Trumpism comes out again in the article, accusing the new US president and his appointees of “disregard for science” even though the Editors acknowledge, “There is, of course, plenty of room for debate.”Fake science and false certainty. In closing, we should consider the views  of a Worldview op-ed column in Nature: “Anita Makri argues that the form of science communicated in popular media leaves the public vulnerable to false certainty.” Yet she argues that scientists should “Give the public the tools to trust scientists.” Mouthing Pontius Pilate, she begins, “What is truth?” Of the two groups she works in that are concerned with truth (scientists and journalists), she believes that journalists are doing a good job (despite all the evidence for fake news in the mainstream media, complained about by conservatives, like Breitbart News; see also Breitbart’s report on BBC’s admission they’ve been biased; meanwhile, New Scientist is overtly publishing a very biased and unscientific series, “Resisting Trump”). But “Scientists need to catch up, or they risk further marginalization in a society that is increasingly weighing evidence and making decisions without them.” Science is “losing its relevance as a source of truth,” she worries.Yet further reading reveals her faith in scientism. The only purveyors of fake news are the conservatives, she suggests with a link to another Nature story accusing Breitbart News of that. To Makri, scientists don’t tell lies; they just don’t have all the facts yet. Scientists may have gaps in their knowledge, but it will eventually catch up to the truth, because in scientism, science works as a truth generator in due time—the most reliable truth generator in the world. “Current debates about truth are far from trivial,” she ends. “More scientists and communicators of science need to get involved, update practices and reposition themselves in a way that gets with the times and shows that science matters — while it still does.” In other words, scientists don’t have a truth problem; just a talking points problem (echoed in Nature‘s interviews with three scientists about how to solve “post-truth predicaments”). One wonders what would be these “experts”‘ responses to the paradigms above about promiscuity, Neanderthals, electroshock therapy, racism and the other matters that have really hurt real people under the guise of “scientific truth.”After the historical and current examples we listed above, do you trust scientists when it comes to their pronouncements about how people should live and behave? Jesus said it succinctly with timeless wisdom: “You will know them by their fruits” (Matthew 7:15-20). A species puts out what is in its genes.One scientist wrote a letter to Nature that bears quoting. “Beware of scientists wielding red pens,” he titles his comment about censorship.By inviting scientists to take their ‘red pens to the Internet’ and grade online sources of science reporting, Phil Williamson implies that science is the primary and final voice in public discussion (Nature 540, 171; 2016). This disregards other ways in which people make sense of their lives through political debate, social context, personal connections or beliefs (see also D. Sarewitz Nature 522, 413–414; 2015). It stems from the naive myth of science as a disinterested producer of neutral truths.Science has a delicate relationship with society. Both have the right to speak and both shape one another — for better or worse. Governance and government rely increasingly on a science that is embedded in socio-political arenas populated by scientists, policymakers and citizens, among others. Not every expertise is equally credible, but a democratic society should allow each one to have a voice.To discredit them online may feel like defending the honour and public status of science, but it is a form of censorship. Science cannot impose its truths through power play — it must convince through symmetrical and open conversation. Whoa! Did you get that?In that second link, Sarewitz had said this:Scientists are not elected. They cannot represent the cultural values, politics and interests of citizens — not least because their values may differ significantly from those of people in other walks of life. A 2007 study on the social implications of nanotechnology, for instance, showed that nanoscientists had little concern about such technologies eliminating jobs, whereas the public was greatly concerned (see ‘A matter of perspective’). Each group was being rational. Nanoscientists have good reason to be optimistic about the opportunities created by technological frontiers; citizens can be justifiably worried that such frontiers will wreak havoc on labour markets. Unfortunately, such voices of reason are often drowned out by Big Scientism.(Visited 133 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0last_img read more

Tourism glitters more than gold

first_img12 October 2004It’s official: South Africa’s booming tourism sector brings more dollars into the country than gold.The yellow metal was once the bedrock of the country’s economy, but recent research by Standard Bank shows that foreign exchange proceeds from tourism are significantly higher than those from gold exports.In 2003, forex from tourism totalled R53.9-billion, compared to the R35.3-billion from net gold exports.According to the research, tourism contributes about 7% to South Africa’s gross domestic product (GDP) and adds more to domestic economic growth than the mining sector, which contributes 5% to GDP, Business Day reports.Business tourism key to growthSouth African Tourism says business tourism – a category which includes conference tourism – is the key to further growth in the sector, and already injects some R20-billion annually into the South Africa’s economy.Business tourism sustains almost 260 000 jobs in SA, and pays out R6-billion in salaries and R4-billion in taxes every year.Despite a global slump, South Africa has continued to defy world tourism trends, and in 2003 achieved a 4.2% increase in overseas arrivals (not including arrivals from Africa) compared to 2002.This in the face of a 1.3% fall-off in global travel attributed to the conflict in Iraq, fears over the Sars virus and a weak global economy.The country’s exponential tourism growth has coincided with the its first decade of democracy: arrivals have grown tenfold since 1994, from 640 000 to 6.5-million in 2003.The Standard Bank research shows that in 2003, more than half of South Africa’s tourists came from other African countries – many of them on “shopping safaris” – with visitors from Lesotho, Swaziland and Namibia, whose currencies are pegged to the rand, spending R7.6-billion in the country.SouthAfrica.info reporterlast_img read more

SA ‘ready to send more artillery to DRC’

first_img30 August 2013 The South African National Defence (SANDF) says it is prepared to send more artillery to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) should the United Nations request it. Briefing reporters in Pretoria on Friday on the deployment of South African troops in the DRC, SANDF joint operations chief Lietenant-General Derrick Mgwebi said the UN had yet to sign the documents for the additional weaponry to be sent to the DRC. “We have said to them we are ready and this is what it is going to mean to you [financially] as the UN, the rates. The ball is in their court, not in South Africa’s,” Mgwebi said, adding that the United Nations was in charge of the operation. Last week, President Jacob Zuma informed Parliament of the deployment of 1 345 SANDF troops in the DRC as part of a UN mission in that country. According to the Presidency, the deployment was in line with South Africa’s obligations to the United Nations. The SANDF has been involved in the UN peace-keeping mission in the DRC since 1999. The initial directive from the UN was that the SANDF would help to protect civilians, assets and facilities, as well as provide training. Mgwebi said that nine soldiers that are part of this mission had sustained injuries in clashes this week, and that one soldier, from Tanzania, had died in hospital. Of the injured, three South African soldiers had sustained minor injuries. “The families of the soldiers have been informed … and they understand the situation,” Mgwebi said, adding that the soldiers had been given the opportunity to speak to their families. Mgwebi said the SANDF soldiers in the DRC were well-equipped. Last week, Zuma said: “Our soldiers are doing exceptionally well on the continent. We congratulate them and assure them of the support of their compatriots as they continue to contribute to the building of a better Africa, as a force for peace. “We are very proud of them and their contribution to African renewal and development.” Source: SAnews.gov.zalast_img read more

Product Review: Frame.io Solves Your Video Review Frustrations

first_imgFrame.io could save you hours on your next project and become an indispensable tool in your post-production pipeline. Let’s take a hands-on look.Normally when you’re working with clients or a team on a video project, the workflow goes something like this:Upload the video to Vimeo (or another video hosting platform)Email the video link to collaboratorsReceive critiques via emailRepeatIt’s a headache. It’s often difficult to understand your client’s notes…”Did they mean fix the color in this frame or that one?” Additionally, you’ve got a sea of links floating around, leading to disorganization and confusion…”Wait, which is the latest version of the project?”Up to this point there hasn’t been a good alternative. Enter: Frame.io.Frame.io is an online collaboration tool that streamlines the video review process by organizing comments, video assets, and file versions all in one place. The app has been making waves over the last few months with love from TechCrunch, NoFilmSchool and FXGuide. In the words of the Frame.io founders:We replace the hodgepodge of Dropbox for file sharing, Vimeo for video review and email for communication, but that’s just a start…When I initially created an account and dove in, I was surprised at how easy Frame.io was to use. Simply create a project then upload your files. The app allows you to add comments via text or outline certain areas of any frame by ‘drawing’ on the video. In this regard, Frame.io beats the heck out of marker comments in NLEs. This overview video from Frame.io gives a quick look into how the software works.Frame.io currently supports hundreds of file formats including video, audio, images, and PDFs.What I Like Most About Frame.ioTop of the list, Frame.io is easy to use. Unlike other convoluted file sharing platforms, the app approaches video collaboration with a minimalist user interface, but is packed with the features you need for collaboration and video review. The app’s modern design puts the review process first. If you’re asking a client to jump into an app to review work, it’s important that the learning curve is nonexistent. They nailed it there.It’s the first app that makes video review feel like you’re watching and discussing the video in the same room… even if you’re a world away. I love the fact that comments show up real time, as they are added, similar in fashion to Google Docs.Additionally, the app utlizes keyboard shortcuts. For example, you can playback the video using the J,K,L keys on your computer. Double-tap them to double the speed. In a similar fashion to the rating system found in Adobe Bridge or Lightroom, users can give files a star rating to highlight their favorite shots. This is especially useful when uploading dailies and picking selects. Speaking of dailies…Frame.io FCPX IntegrationFrame.io recently launched an integration directly with Apple’s Final Cut Pro X editing app. Send all the clips in your project (dailies), selected clips, or your entire timeline to Frame.io with one click inside FCPX. The integration is free from the App Store, so this is a no-brainer for any video editors that use FCPX as their primary NLE. Take a peek:Is Frame.io Right for You?Frame.io is an app that every video professional needs, even if they may not know it… yet. Professionals have long needed a solution for seamless collaboration – both with other editors and clients.Surprisingly, getting started with Frame.io doesn’t have to cost you a penny. The free version, which allows you to work on a single project, offers uploads of up to 2GB of video files and collaboration with 5 users. Of course, this won’t cut it if you’re wanting to work on multiple projects or use Frame.io as a large-file storage service, but it’s certainly enough to get your feet wet with the app before moving into one of their paid plans.What do you think of Frame.io? Have you had a chance to try it out? Share your experiences in the comments below.last_img read more

Bio Characteristics of Twitter Power Users

first_imgLast week I you that it’s a really good idea to put a bio and homepage link in your Twitter profile if you want followers. This week I’m going to start drilling into the content of that bio. Another surprising data point is self-declared political leanings: It turns out that conservatives and Republicans (especially those aligned with the #tcot hashtag) have far more followers than not only liberals and democrats, but also the average Twitter user. What happens when you specify the subject of your tweets in your bio? Here we see that marketing has lots of followers, while music does not. Originally published Mar 18, 2009 9:07:00 AM, updated October 20 2016 Since Twitter is popular with “mommy bloggers,” I also looked at the relationship between follower numbers and gender and family roles. Here we see that spouses and parents have more followers than the average, while people who refer to themselves by the somewhat diminutive terms “boy” and “girl” have fewer followers. While looking over the large list of commonly occuring words I noticed that lots of people use emoticons in their bio and nearly all of them have a negative relationship with follower numbers. Using Twitter Grader data again (we have over 1.6 million users in our database) I compared the average number of followers of users with various common words in their bio. If users with a certain word had 100 more followers than average I graphed it as positive 100 (a blue line to the right on the graph), if they had 100 fewer followers I displayed that as a negative number (a red line to the left). In every case I only analyzed words that occured in more than 100 bios. Don’t forget to share this post! AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to Email AppEmail AppShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to MessengerMessengerShare to SlackSlack Next, I looked at the words often used to describe a user’s occupation. Again, there’s a clear story: Marketer’s and entrepeneurs tend to have more followers than the rest. The Twitter bio is yet another area of social media advice rife with guesswork (“Don’t call yourself an expert or a guru!”), but let’s look at the actual numbers and see what story they tell. First up is the title you apply to yourself in your bio. There are two big takeaways here: “official” Twitter accounts are popular and the words “guru” and “expert” do not do anything negative to the number of followers, in fact those users tend to have quite a few more followers. Topics: showed Twitter Profilelast_img read more