text:
Christie (band)

Christie are an English soft rock band that formed at the end of the 1960s. They are best remembered for their UK chart-topping hit single "Yellow River", released in 1970, which hit number one in 26 countries that year.

Career
In addition to Jeff Christie (born Jeffrey Christie, 12 July 1946, Leeds, Yorkshire, England) their vocalist, bassist and songwriter; they initially included guitarist Vic Elmes and drummer Mike Blakley (born Michael Blakley, 12 January 1947, Bromley, Kent, England, brother of Alan Blakley).

Jeff Christie had previously worked with several bands, including The Outer Limits, who released "Just One More Chance" / "Help Me Please" (1967) and "Great Train Robbery" / "Sweet Freedom" (1968).

In 1970, Jeff Christie offered his composition "Yellow River" to The Tremeloes. They recorded it to release as a single but changed their minds as they were going more progressive as the seventies started. At the same time Tremeloes member Alan Blakley's brother Michael had a little group called the Epics and Alan wanted to give his brother a break. They decided to get Jeff Christie to come down from Leeds and let him use the Tremeloes' backing track. The Epics became Christie with Jeff as the lead vocalist and the result was a UK number one hit in June 1970, and subsequently No. 23 in the US, also accumulating more weeks (23) on the Hot 100 than any other entry on that chart completely inside 1970. It was a worldwide hit and was number one in 26 countries with global sales of over 3 million.

The follow-up single from October 1970, "San Bernadino" (misspelled if referring to, for example, San Bernardino, California), reached UK Number 7 and Number 1 in Germany, but only US No. 100. Both tracks became flash songs on their eponymous debut album of that year, and it stayed on US Billboard 200 chart for ten weeks. But the trio failed to sustain a lasting career, and Blakley was replaced by Paul Fenton (born 4 July 1946, Huddersfield, Yorkshire) just before the release of the band's second album, For All Mankind (1971).

Lem Lubin (ex-Unit 4 + 2) was added to the line-up after the release of Iron Horse (1972), but the title track proved to be the band's final hit single. The departure of Fenton and Lubin hastened the demise of the original line-up, but Jeff Christie returned with new members Terry Fogg (drums) (born Terrence George Fogg, 25 September 1945, Chesterfield, Derbyshire), Roger Flavell (bass), and Danny Krieger (guitar). A 1974 single "Alabama" / "I'm Alive" failed to resurrect the band's fortunes, and new members Tony Ferguson (guitar) and Roger Willis (drums) were brought in to join Christie and Flavell. "JoJo's Band", written by Elmes, was a major hit for Christie in Argentina and Brazil, while the last Christie hit, "Navajo", was Number 1 in Mexico. In 1982 Vic Elmes enlisted Mick Blakley and Peter Morrison of NYPL, to tour Germany on a package tour. At the end of the tour, the band folded. The band recorded an Elmes song, Deep in the Night, produced by Alan Blakley.

Jeff Christie reformed the band in 1990 with members of UK band Tubeless Hearts, Kev Moore, Simon Kay and Adrian 'Fos' Foster. Tubeless Hearts tried to represent United Kingdom in the Eurovision Song Contest 1991 with a Jeff Christie song, "Safe in your Arms", but were unsuccessful. They continued to tour for a further 16 years all over Europe, Russia and Israel, recording intermittently. Following the release of Jeff Christie's Floored Masters double album, the 1990 line-up of Christie embarked on a 2009 European Tour. In 2012, a Christie double album, No Turn Unstoned, was released, a collection of Christie demos and unreleased songs.

Current members

 * Jeff Christie – bass, vocals, keyboards (1969–1976, 1990–present)
 * Simon Kay – guitar (1990–present)
 * Adrian Foster – drums (1990–present)

Former members

 * Vic Elmes – guitar (1969–1973)
 * Mike Blakley – drums (1969–1970)
 * Paul Fenton – drums (1970–1973)
 * Lem Lubin – bass guitar (1972–1973)
 * Terry Fogg – drums (1973–1974)
 * Roger Flavell – bass guitar (1973–1976)
 * Danny Krieger – guitar (1973–1976)
 * Tony Ferguson – lead guitar (1974)
 * Roger Willis – drums (1974–1976)
 * Kev Moore – bass guitar (1990–2003)

Albums

 * Christie (1970)
 * For All Mankind (1971)
 * Iron Horse – unreleased (1972)
 * Los Mas Grandes Exitos (1972)
 * Navajo [released in Mexico] (1974)
 * Christie Again – Greatest Hits and More (2004)
 * Jeff Christie – Floored Masters (Past Imperfect) (2009)
 * Christie – No Turn Unstoned (2012)

Singles
Jeff Christie with The Outer Limits
 * "When the Work Is Thru'" (1967)
 * "Just One More Chance/Help Me Please" (1967)
 * "Great Train Robbery/Sweet Freedom" (1968)

Christie

Jeff Christie solo
 * "Both Ends of the Rainbow/Turn On Your Love Light|Turn on Your Lovelight" (1980)
 * "Tightrope/Somebody Else" (1980)
 * "Happy Christmas (War Is Over)/Yuletide Lights" (1997)
 * "Hattrick of Lions (Come on England)" (2010)
 * "You're Not There" with Lorenzo Gabanizza (2021)
 * "I guess I am the only one" with Lorenzo Gabanizza (2022)
 * "I don't want to live without you" with Lorenzo Gabanizza (2023)

title: Christie (band)


text:
Tavistock Square

Tavistock Square is a public square in Bloomsbury, in the London Borough of Camden near Euston Station.

History
Tavistock Square was built shortly after 1806 by the property developer James Burton and the master builder Thomas Cubitt for Francis Russell, 5th Duke of Bedford, and formed part of the Bedford Estate in London, owned by the Dukes of Bedford. The square takes its name from Marquess of Tavistock, a courtesy title given to the eldest sons of the Dukes of Bedford.

In 1920 the Tavistock Clinic was founded in the square, a pioneering psychiatric clinic whose patients included shell-shock victims of the First World War. In 1946 the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations separated from the Tavistock Clinic. The Tavistock Clinic has since moved to Swiss Cottage.

Richard Lydekker, naturalist, geologist and writer of numerous books on natural history, was born at Tavistock Square in 1849.

Tavistock Square was the scene of one of the four suicide bombings on 7 July 2005. The bomb was detonated by 18-year-old Hasib Hussain on a double-decker bus bearing route number 30; it had been diverted from its normal route along Euston Road because of traffic disruption by the other three bombings at tube stations. The bomb exploded immediately outside the British Medical Association building, many of whose staff came out to give what help they could. The explosion killed 13 passengers, plus Hussain himself. Many others were injured. In September 2018, a memorial honouring the victims and the efforts of those who gave assistance was unveiled in Tavistock Square Gardens, replacing a plaque that had been fixed to the railings outside BMA House, opposite to the new site.

Public art
The centre-piece of the gardens is a statue of Mahatma Gandhi, sculpted by Fredda Brilliant and installed in 1968. The hollow pedestal was intended, and is used, for people to leave floral tributes to the peace campaigner and nonviolent resister to oppression in South Africa and British rule in India.

A cherry tree was planted in 1967 in memory of the victims of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

A generation later, in 1994, the Conscientious Objectors Commemorative Stone commemorating "men and women conscientious objectors all over the world and in every age" by Hugh Court was unveiled.

These three features have led to the square unofficially being regarded by some as a peace park or garden, and annual ceremonies are held at each of these memorials.

A bust of the writer Virginia Woolf, cast from a 1931 sculpture by Stephen Tomlin (1901–1937), was unveiled in 2004 at the southwest corner of the square. Woolf lived at 52 Tavistock Square between 1924 and 1939. From there she and her husband Leonard Woolf ran the Hogarth Press, which became a prominent and influential publisher at the forefront of modernist fiction and poetry (publishing T.S. Eliot, E.M. Forster and Katherine Mansfield among others) and translating the works of Sigmund Freud into English.

The square contains a memorial to the surgeon Dame Louisa Aldrich-Blake (1865 –1925), with a bust of Aldrich-Blake by Arthur George Walker on a plinth designed by Sir Edwin Lutyens.

Buildings
The following buildings are on Tavistock Square:
 * Tavistock House, home of James Burton while he developed the area and then of Charles Dickens, was on the east side of the square. A blue plaque on BMA House commemorates him. It was demolished in 1901.
 * "BMA House", the headquarters of the British Medical Association, designed by Sir Edwin Lutyens in 1911 is on the east side (on the site previously occupied by Tavistock House) and is a grade II listed building.
 * Connaught Hall, a University of London hall of residence, which was built in the early 19th century, is on the west side of the square and is a grade II listed building.
 * Woburn House, on the north side of the square contains the headquarters of Universities UK, the conference of university rectors, and the headquarters of the Medical Schools Council, an organisation which represents the interests and ambitions of UK medical schools.
 * The Tavistock Hotel, a branch of Imperial London Hotels, completed in 1951 is on the south side of the square.
 * Lynton House and Tavis House, both substantial red-brick office blocks on the east side, were built in the mid-20th century.
 * Passfield Hall, a hall of residence for undergraduates of the London School of Economics.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Tavistock Square


text:
HMS Spartan

HMS Spartan may refer to one of these vessels of the British Royal Navy named in recognition of the military abilities of the Spartans of ancient Greece.
 * HMS Spartan (1806) was a 38-gun fifth rate launched in 1806 and broken up in 1822
 * HMS Spartan was to have been a 46-gun fifth rate; ordered from Plymouth Dockyard in 1824, the ship was cancelled in 1831
 * HMS Spartan (1841) was a 26-gun sixth rate launched in 1841 and sold in 1862
 * HMS Spartan (1868) was an Eclipse-class sloop wooden screw sloop launched in 1868 and sold in 1882
 * HMS Spartan (1891) was a second class cruiser launched in 1891, sent to harbour service in 1907, renamed Defiance in 1921, and sold in 1931
 * HMS Spartan (95) was a Dido-class cruiser launched in 1942 and sunk in 1944 by a Hs 293 guided bomb
 * HMS Spartan (S105) is a nuclear-powered Swiftsure-class submarine launched in 1978

Battle Honours

 * Bay of Naples, 1810
 * Burma, 1853
 * China, 1856–57
 * Atlantic, 1943
 * Mediterranean, 1944
 * Anzio, 1944
 * Falklands, 1982

title: HMS Spartan


text:
Taytu Betul

Taytu Betul (ጣይቱ ብጡል Ṭaytu Bəṭul ; baptised as Wälättä Mikael; 1851 – 11 February 1918) was Empress of Ethiopia from 1889 to 1913 and the third wife of Emperor Menelik II. An influential figure in the anti-colonial resistance during the late 19th-century Scramble for Africa, she, along with her husband, founded the modern Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in 1886.

Early life
According to Raymond Jonas, Taytu Betul (or Taitu) was born in Semien, North Gondar, Ethiopian Empire. Scholarly consensus is that she was born at about 1851.

Taytu's father, Ras Betul Haile Maryam, was part of the ruling family of Semien that claimed to be descendants of the Solomonic Dynasty through Emperor Susenyos I. Taytu's uncle was the Amhara warlord Wube Haile Maryam who governed the Semien and Tigray princedom.

Education
There are no records indicating that Empress Taytu attended school; however, she was taught to read and write in Amharic and Ge'ez. This is a rarity, considering that it was unlikely for women to be educated at the time. It is believed that she was taught diplomacy, politics and economics. Additionally, she understood a language once exclusive to the Ethiopian Orthodox liturgy.

Hobbies
Empress Taytu was known to play the begena, which is a 10-string instrument. Her other activities included playing Senterej, Ethiopian chess, and an interest in writing poetry.

Family history
Of Lasta, Yejju and Tigray descent, her family is claimed to have a ruling foothold in the Northern region of the country. Such places include: Semien, Begemeder, Lasta, Yejju, Wello and Tigray. Her aristocratic lineage dates back to 1607–32, descending from the daughter of Emperor Susneyos. Her great-grandfather, Ras Gebre of Simien, ruled for 44 years during the period known as the Zemene Mesafint, or the "Era of the Princes". His fame was acknowledged through two measures. He was responsible for making the communities west of Gondar pay taxes in gold, as well as treating his subjects so well – providing an ample amount of food and drink so that they no longer needed to farm to sustain themselves. Her grandfather, Dejazmach Haile Maryam Gebre, also held a respected title. He governed Simien, where his children Wube, Betul and Merso were born. Additionally, her uncle Degazmach Wube followed in the family's footsteps by also acquiring a high position in the region. As the half-brother of Taytu's father, Degazmach Wube was responsible for ruling the Tigray province. Taytu had two brothers (Ras Welle Betul & Temru Betul) and two sisters.

Personal life
In her fourth and final marriage, Taytu Betul married King Menelik of Shewa, who would later become Emperor of Ethiopia.

Political contributions
Taytu is acknowledged to have wielded considerable political power both before and after she and Menelik were crowned Emperor and Empress in 1889. She led the conservative faction at court that resisted the modernists and progressives who wanted to develop Ethiopia along western lines and bring modernity to the country. According to the historians, she was always consulted by the Emperor prior to making important decisions. Thus, Empress Taytu was a key player in the conflict over the Treaty of Wuchale with Italy, which she tore up. Empress Taytu was the first to motivate the hesitant Emperor and other men to stand up against the Italians. Deeply suspicious of European intentions towards Ethiopia, she was a key player in the conflict over the Treaty of Wuchale with Italy, in which the Italian version made Ethiopia an Italian protectorate, while the Amharic version did not do so. The Empress held a hard line against the Italians, and when talks eventually broke down, and Italy invaded the Empire from its Eritrean colony, she marched north with the Emperor and the Imperial Army, commanding a force of cannoneers at the historic Battle of Adwa that resulted in a humiliating defeat for Italy in March 1896. This victory was the most significant of any African army battling European colonialism. Menelik II and Taytu Betul were temporarily in possession of 4,000 prisoners of war. Menelik, who often prevaricated and postponed unpleasant decisions by answering "Yes, tomorrow" (Ishi, nega), found it useful to have his wife be in a powerful enough position to say "Absolutely not" (Imbi) to people and issues he just did not want to personally offend or refuse.

When Menelik's health began to decline around 1906, Taytu began to make decisions on his behalf, angering her rivals for power through her appointment of favorites and relatives to most of the positions of power and influence. As a means to curb her family's political influence at court, Menelik selected Sabla Wangel Hailu as the heir-presumptive Lij Iyasu's wife, as her family had no ties to Taytu's. Taytu was widely resented for her alleged Gonderine xenophobia and nepotism, and the nobility of Shoa and Tigray, along with the Wollo relatives of Lij Iyasu conspired to remove her from state responsibility. In 1910, she was forced from power, and a regency under Ras Tessema Nadew took over. Instructed to limit herself to the care of her stricken husband, Taytu faded from the political scene. Taytu and Menelik did not have any children. Menelik died in 1913 and was succeeded by his grandson from a daughter of a previous liaison, Lij Iyasu. Taytu was banished to the old Palace at Entoto, next to the St. Mary's church she had founded years before, and where her husband had been crowned Emperor.

While some believe Taytu may have played a part in the plot that eventually removed Emperor Iyasu V from the throne in 1916, replacing him with Empress Zauditu, the price for Zauditu's elevation was a divorce from Taytu's nephew Ras Gugsa Welle, who became governor of Begemder. Zauditu, Menelik II's daughter by yet another previous marriage, had always been close to Empress Taytu and invited Taytu to live with her. Although Taytu declined she resumed advising rulers "in a modest way," to quote Chris Prouty.

Later years
Taytu lived out the next few years at the old palace next to the Entoto Maryam Church overlooking Addis Ababa. She requested permission to go to Gondar in November 1917 to end her days, but was refused; she died three months later. She is buried next to her husband at the Taeka Negest Ba'eta Le Mariam Monastery in Addis Ababa.

title: Taytu Betul


text:
David Koch

David Hamilton Koch (May 3, 1940 – August 23, 2019) was an American businessman, political activist, philanthropist, and chemical engineer. In 1970, he joined the family business: Koch Industries, the second largest privately held company in the United States. He became president of the subsidiary Koch Engineering in 1979 and became a co-owner of Koch Industries (along with elder brother Charles) in 1983. Koch served as an executive vice president of Koch Industries until he retired due to health issues in 2018.

Koch was a libertarian. He was the 1980 Libertarian candidate for Vice President of the United States and helped finance the campaign. He founded Citizens for a Sound Economy and donated to advocacy groups and political campaigns, most of which were Republican. Koch became a Republican in 1984; in 2012, he spent over $100 million in a failed bid to oppose the re-election of President Barack Obama.

Koch was the fourth-richest person in the United States in 2012 and was the wealthiest resident of New York City in 2013. As of June 2019, Koch was ranked as the 11th-richest person in the world (tied with his brother Charles), with a fortune of $50.5 billion. Koch contributed to the Lincoln Center, Sloan Kettering, NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital, and the Dinosaur Wing at the American Museum of Natural History. The New York State Theater at Lincoln Center, home of the New York City Ballet, was renamed the David H. Koch Theater in 2008 following Koch's gift of $100 million for the renovation of the theater.

Early life and education
Koch was born in Wichita, Kansas, the son of Mary Clementine (née Robinson) and Fred Chase Koch, a chemical engineer. David's paternal grandfather, Harry Koch, was a Dutch immigrant who founded the Quanah Tribune-Chief newspaper and was a founding shareholder of the Quanah, Acme and Pacific Railway. David was the third of four sons, with elder brothers Frederick, Charles, and nineteen-minute-younger twin Bill. His maternal ancestors included William Ingraham Kip, an Episcopal bishop; and Elizabeth Clementine Stedman, a writer.

Koch attended the Deerfield Academy prep school in Massachusetts, graduating in 1959. He attended Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), earning both a bachelor's (1962) and a master's degree (1963) in chemical engineering. He was a member of the Beta Theta Pi fraternity. Koch played basketball at MIT, averaging 21 points per game at MIT over three years, a school record. He also held the single-game scoring record of 41 points from 1962 until 2009, when it was eclipsed by Jimmy Bartolotta.

Role at Koch Industries
In 1970, Koch joined Koch Industries under his brother Charles, to work as a technical-services manager. He founded the company's New York City office and in 1979 he became the president of his own division, Koch Engineering, renamed Chemical Technology Group. David's brothers Frederick and Bill had inherited stock in Koch Industries. In June 1983, after a bitter legal and boardroom battle, the stakes of Frederick and Bill were bought out for $1.1 billion and Charles Koch and David Koch became majority owners in the company. Legal disputes against Charles and David lasted roughly two decades. Frederick and Bill sided with J. Howard Marshall III, J. Howard Marshall II's eldest son, against Charles and David at one point, in order to take over the company. In 2001, Bill reached a settlement in a lawsuit where he had charged the company was taking oil from federal and Indian land; that settlement ended all litigation between the brothers. CBS News reported that Koch Industries settled for $25 million.

As of 2010, David Koch owned 42 percent of Koch Industries, as did his brother Charles. He held four U.S. patents. Koch served as an executive vice president of Koch Industries until retiring due to health issues in 2018. His retirement was announced on June 5, 2018.

Campaigns
Koch was the Libertarian Party's vice-presidential candidate in the 1980 presidential election, sharing the party ticket with presidential candidate Ed Clark. The Clark–Koch ticket proposed to abolish Social Security, the Federal Reserve Board, welfare, minimum-wage laws, corporate taxes, all price supports and subsidies for agriculture and business, and U.S. Federal agencies including the SEC, EPA, ICC, FTC, OSHA, FBI, CIA, and DOE. Their platform proposed privatizing all transportation and inland waterways. The ticket received 921,128 votes, 1% of the total nationwide vote, the Libertarian Party national ticket's best showing until 2016 in terms of percentage and its best showing in terms of raw votes until the 2012 presidential election, although that number was surpassed again in 2016. "Compared to what [the Libertarians had] gotten before," Charles said, "and where we were as a movement or as a political/ideological point of view, that was pretty remarkable, to get 1 percent of the vote."

After the bid, according to journalist Brian Doherty's Radicals for Capitalism, Koch viewed politicians as "actors playing out a script".

Koch credited the 1976 presidential campaign of Roger MacBride as his inspiration for getting involved in politics:

Here was a great guy, advocating all the things I believed in. He wanted less government and taxes, and was talking about repealing all these victimless crime laws that accumulated on the books. I have friends who smoke pot. I know many homosexuals. It's ridiculous to treat them as criminals — and here was someone running for president, saying just that.

Koch gave his own vice presidential campaign $100,000 a month after being chosen as Ed Clark's running mate. "We'd like to abolish the Federal Elections Commission and all the limits on campaign spending anyway," Koch said in 1980. When asked why he ran, he replied: "Lord knows I didn't need a job, but I believe in what the Libertarians are saying. I suppose if they hadn't come along, I could have been a big Republican from Wichita. But hell — everybody from Kansas is a Republican."

In 1984, Koch broke with the Libertarian Party when it supported eliminating all taxes; in a letter to David Bergland, the Libertarian candidate for the 1984 presidential election, Koch referred to Bergland's platform as "extreme", predicting that the country would be thrown into "utter chaos" if it was implemented. Subsequently, Koch shifted the bulk of his financial support to the Republican Party, though he continued to contribute to several Libertarian campaigns in local races. Koch donated to various political campaigns, most of which were Republican. In February 2012, during the Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election, Koch said of Wisconsin governor Scott Walker, "We're helping him, as we should. We've gotten pretty good at this over the years. We've spent a lot of money in Wisconsin. We're going to spend more," and said that by "we" he meant Americans for Prosperity.

In 2012, Koch spent over $100 million in a failed bid to oppose the re-election of President Barack Obama.

Views
Koch supported policies that promoted smaller government and lower taxes. He was against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Koch said he wasn't sure if global warming was anthropogenic, and thought a warmer planet would be "good", with lengthened growing seasons mitigating problems caused by disappearing coastlines and mass migrations. "Earth will be able to support enormously more people, because a far greater land area will be available to produce food". Koch opposed the Iraq War, saying that the war has "cost a lot of money and it's taken so many American lives", and "I question whether that was the right thing to do. In hindsight that looks like it was not a good policy." In an impromptu interview with the blog ThinkProgress, he was quoted as saying he would like the new, 2011 Republican Congress to "cut the hell out of spending, balance the budget, reduce regulations, and support business". Koch considered himself a social liberal who supported women's right to choose, gay rights, same-sex marriage and stem-cell research. He opposed the war on drugs.

Koch opposed several of President Barack Obama's policies. An article from the Weekly Standard, detailing the "left's obsession" with the Koch brothers, quotes Koch stating that Obama is "the most radical president we've ever had as a nation ... and has done more damage to the free enterprise system and long-term prosperity than any president we've ever had". Koch said that Obama's father's economic socialism, practiced in Kenya, explains why Obama has "sort of antibusiness and anti-free enterprise" influences. Koch said that Obama is "scary", a "hardcore socialist" who is "marvelous at pretending to be something other than that". Koch contributed almost entirely to Republican candidates in 2012.

Advocacy
Koch donated funds to various advocacy groups. In 1984, he founded Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE). He served as its chairman of the board of directors and donated funds to it. Richard H. Fink served as its first president. Koch was the chairman of the board and gave initial funding to the Americans for Prosperity Foundation and to a related advocacy organization, Americans for Prosperity. A Koch Industries spokesperson issued a press release stating "No funding has been provided by Koch companies, the Koch foundations, or Charles Koch or David Koch specifically to support the tea parties." Koch was the top initial funder of the Americans for Prosperity Foundation at $850,000. Koch said that he sympathized with the Tea Party movement, but denied directly supporting it, having stated that: "I've never been to a tea party event. No one representing the tea party has ever even approached me."

Koch sat on the board of the libertarian Cato Institute and Reason Foundation and donated to both organizations. The Koch brothers have been involved in blocking regulations and legislation to confront climate change since 1991, when the Cato Institute held the "Global Environmental Crisis: Science or Politics?"

In August 2010, Jane Mayer wrote an article in The New Yorker on the political spending of David and Charles Koch. It stated: "As their fortunes grew, Charles and David Koch became the primary underwriters of hard-line libertarian politics in America." An opinion piece by journalist Yasha Levine in The New York Observer said Mayer's article had failed to mention that the Kochs' "free market philanthropy belies the immense profit they have made from corporate welfare".

In 2011, 2014, and 2015 Time magazine included Charles and David Koch among the Time 100 of the year, for their involvement in supporting the Tea Party movement and the criticism they received.

Prison reform
In July 2015, David and Charles Koch were commended by both President Obama and activist Anthony Van Jones for their bipartisan efforts to reform the prison system in the United States. For nearly 10 years, the Kochs advocated for several reforms within the criminal justice system which include reducing recidivism rates, simplifying the employment process for the rehabilitated, and defending private property from government seizures through asset forfeiture. Allying with groups such as the ACLU, the Center for American Progress, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, the Coalition for Public Safety, and the MacArthur Foundation, the Kochs maintained that current prison system unfairly targeted low-income and minority communities at the expense of the public budget.

The Koch brothers' advocacy has also attracted scrutiny and criticism. Michelle Chen, writing in The Nation, and William C. Anderson, writing in The Guardian, caution that the Kochs' efforts reflect broader interests in further privatizing the criminal justice system. In 2015, The Intercept reported that the Kochs' philanthropic efforts exist alongside continued funding of "tough-on-crime" political candidates and committees pushing for harsher sentencing. Writing in Political Research Associates, Kay Whitlock argues that the Kochs' avid support for measures such as mens rea or "criminal intent" reform exemplify "an agenda of deregulation and relief for 'overcriminalized' corporations and executives" rather than concern for individual rights of the accused.

Philanthropy
Koch established the David H. Koch Charitable Foundation. Beginning in 2006, the Chronicle of Philanthropy listed Koch as one of the world's top 50 philanthropists. He sat on the Board of Trustees of NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital from 1988 until his death in 2019.

Overall, Koch has donated more than $1.3 billion to philanthropic causes.

Arts
Koch had a lifelong interest in the arts, which he attributed to his mother's role in introducing him to opera and ballet during his childhood. In July 2008, Koch pledged $100 million over 10 years to renovate the New York State Theater in the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts; the Theater is the home of the New York City Ballet. According to The New York Times, Koch's gift was "transformative, enabling a full-scale renovation of the stage" that included "an enlarged orchestra pit that mechanically rises". The theater was renamed the David H. Koch Theater. Koch also pledged $10 million to renovate fountains outside the Metropolitan Museum of Art. He was elected to the Board of Trustees of The Metropolitan Museum of Art in 2008.

Koch was the longest-serving trustee of the American Ballet Theatre, serving on its board for 25 years and contributing more than $6 million to the theater. He was also a member of the Board of Trustees of WGBH-TV.

Education
From 1982 to 2013, Koch contributed $18.6 million to WGBH Educational Foundation, including $10 million to the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) show Nova. Koch was a contributor to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., including a $20 million gift to the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), creating the David H. Koch Dinosaur Wing and a contribution of $15 million to the National Museum of Natural History to create the new David H. Koch Hall of Human Origins, which opened on the museum's 100th anniversary of its location on the National Mall on March 17, 2010. Koch served on the advisory council for the Smithsonian and the board of the AMNH. He also served on the executive board of the Institute of Human Origins. In 2012, Koch contributed US$35 million to the Smithsonian to build a new dinosaur exhibition hall at the National Museum of Natural History.

Koch was also a benefactor of the Deerfield Academy, his alma mater. The academy's natatorium, science center, and field house are named after him. Koch was named the academy's first Lifetime Trustee.

Medical research
Koch said his biggest contributions go toward a "moon shot" campaign to finding the cure for cancer, according to his profile on Forbes. Between 1998 and 2012, Koch contributed at least $395 million to medical research causes and institutions.

Koch has sat on the Board of Trustees of NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital since 1987. In 2007 he donated $15 million to NewYork–Presbyterian. In 2013, he gave $100 million to NewYork–Presbyterian Hospital, the then-largest philanthropic donation in its history, beginning a $2 billion campaign, to conclude in 2019, for a new ambulatory care center and renovation of the infrastructure of the hospital's five sites.

Koch was a member of the board of directors of the Prostate Cancer Foundation and contributed $41 million to the foundation, including $5 million to a collaborative project in the field of nanotechnology. An eponym of the David H. Koch Chair of the Prostate Cancer Foundation, the position is held by Dr. Jonathan Simons.

In 2006, Koch gave $20 million to Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore for cancer research. The building he financed was named the David H. Koch Cancer Research Building.

In 2007, he contributed $100 million to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for the construction of a new 350000 sqft research and technology facility to serve as the home of the David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research. From the time he joined the MIT Corporation in 1988, Koch has given at least $185 million to MIT, and $30 million to the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. The same year, he donated $25 million to the University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston to establish the David Koch Center for Applied Research in Genitourinary Cancers.

In 2011 Koch gave $5 million to the House Ear Institute, in Los Angeles, to create a center for hearing restoration, and $25 million to the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York City

In 2015, he committed $150 million to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City to build the David H. Koch Center for Cancer Care, which will be housed in a 23-story building in development between East 73rd and 74th Streets overlooking the FDR Drive. The center will combine state-of-the-art cancer treatment in an environment that supports patients, families, and caregivers. The building will include flexible personal and community spaces, educational offerings, and opportunities for physical exercise. Koch also donated $10 million to the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory for biomathematics research.

Wealth
Koch was the fourth-richest person in the United States in 2012 and was the wealthiest resident of New York City in 2013. As of June 2019, Koch was ranked as the 11th-richest person in the world (tied with his brother Charles), with a fortune of $50.5 billion.

Personal life
In February 1991, Koch was seriously injured as a passenger on board USAir Flight 1493 when it collided with another aircraft on a runway at Los Angeles International Airport, killing 35 people. Koch survived and said in an interview in 2014 that it helped change his life and prompted him to become "tremendously philanthropic."

In 1992, Koch was diagnosed with prostate cancer. He underwent radiation, surgery, and hormone therapy, but the cancer repeatedly returned. Koch said he believed his experience with cancer encouraged him to fund medical research.

Following Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis' death in 1994, Koch purchased her 15-room apartment at 1040 Fifth Avenue. In 1996 he married Julia Flesher. The apartment "wasn't roomy enough" after the birth of their third child, so Koch sold it to billionaire Glenn Dubin in 2006 and moved with his family to 740 Park Avenue. They had three children together; David Jr., Mary Julia, and John. Mary Julia is a staff reporter for The New York Sun, and was editor-in-chief of The Harvard Independent.

Death
Koch died at his home in Southampton, New York, on August 23, 2019, at the age of 79. Koch's wife, Julia Koch, and their three children inherited a 42% stake in Koch Industries from Koch upon his death.

title: David Koch


text:
First Saturdays Devotion

The First Saturdays Devotion, also called the Act of Reparation to the Immaculate Heart of the Blessed Virgin Mary, is a Catholic devotion which, according to Sister Lúcia of Fátima, was requested by the Virgin Mary in an apparition at Pontevedra, Spain, in December 1925.

History
The pious practice of honoring the Blessed Mother on Saturday is an ancient custom largely attributed to the Benedictine monk Alcuin (735-804), "Minister of Education" at the court of Charlemagne, who composed a Votive Mass formulary for each day of the week. Alcuin assigned two formularies to Saturday in honor of Mary. The practice was quickly adopted by both clergy and laity.

The practice of reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary on the First Saturday was initiated in Rovigo, Italy, by Maria Dolores Inglese, a Servite tertiary in 1889. She started among her friends the pious practice of "Communion in Reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary". The practice was endorsed by Bishop Antonio Polin of the Diocese of Adria and was taken up by sodalities throughout Italy and elsewhere. On July 1, 1905, Pope Pius X approved and granted indulgences for the practice of the First Saturdays of twelve consecutive months in honor of the Immaculate Conception. This practice greatly resembled the reported request of the Blessed Virgin Mary at the Pontevedra apparitions.

Inglese wished to establish a religious congregation dedicated to the apostolate of Marian reparation. Bishop Tommaso Pio Boggiani recommended that she join the Servite sisters, known for their devotion to Our Lady of Sorrows. She joined the Servites as Sister Maria Dolores in 1911. She and foundress Mother Mary Elisa Andreoli revised the rule, making propagation of Communion of Reparation on the First Saturday of each month the congregation's main apostolate. They also changed the name of the group from "Servants of Mary" to "Servants of Mary of Reparation". The sisters also published a monthly magazine that helped spread the devotion throughout Europe.

Pontevedra

At the age of 14, Lúcia dos Santos, one of the purported Portuguese seers of Our Lady of Fátima when she was ten, was admitted as a boarder to the school of the Sisters of Saint Dorothy in Vilar, near the city of Porto. On October 24, 1925, she entered the Institute of the Sisters of Saint Dorothy as a postulant in the convent in Tui, Spain, just across the northern Portuguese border.

Sister Lúcia later reported that on December 10, 1925, the Virgin Mary appeared to her at the Dorothean convent in Pontevedra, and by her side on a luminous cloud was the Child Jesus. According to Lúcia, Mary requested the institution of the Devotion of the Five First Saturdays in reparation to her Immaculate Heart:
 * Look, my daughter, at my Heart encircled by these thorns with which men pierce it at every moment by their blasphemies and ingratitude. You, at least, strive to console me, and so I announce: I promise to assist at the hour of death with the grace necessary for salvation all those who, with the intention of making reparation to me, will, on the first Saturday of five consecutive months, go to confession, receive Holy Communion, say five decades of the beads, and keep me company for fifteen minutes while meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary.

Devotees of Fátima believe that the First Saturdays help to console the sorrows of God, Jesus, and the Virgin Mary for the sins against her Immaculate Heart.

title: First Saturdays Devotion


text:
Talk:Abu Qir

What's a colonial spelling? it is anything like a provincial vocabulary? How about imperial punctuation!!!!! Wetman 22:21, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

title: Talk:Abu Qir


text:
Gallatin River

The Gallatin River is a tributary of the Missouri River, approximately 120 mi (193 km) long, in the U.S. states of Wyoming and Montana. It is one of three rivers, along with the Jefferson and Madison, that converge near Three Forks, Montana, to form the Missouri.

It originates in the northwest corner of Yellowstone National Park in northwestern Wyoming, in the Gallatin Range of the Rocky Mountains. It flows northwest through Gallatin National Forest, past Big Sky, Montana, and joins the Jefferson and Madison approximately 30 mi (48 km) northwest of Bozeman. U.S. Highway 191 follows the river from the Wyoming border to just outside Bozeman.

The river was named in July 1805 by Meriwether Lewis at Three Forks. The eastern fork of the three, it was named for Albert Gallatin, the U.S. Treasury Secretary from 1801–14. The western fork was named for President Thomas Jefferson and the central fork for Secretary of State James Madison.

The Gallatin River is one of the best whitewater runs in the Yellowstone-Teton Area. In June, when the snowmelt is released from the mountains, the river has a class IV section called the "Mad Mile". This section is over a mile long and contains continuous stretches of challenging whitewater. Rafting companies offer trips on this river – on the Mad Mile Section as well as other, less challenging sections.

The Gallatin River is an amazingly scenic river – winding through high alpine meadows, dropping into the rocky Gallatin Canyon, and flowing out into the Gallatin Valley. It is an exceptionally popular fly fishing destination for rainbow trout, brown trout and mountain whitefish. Portions of the river are designated as a Blue Ribbon trout stream while the remainder is designated Red Ribbon by the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department. The river is closed to fishing from boats from Yellowstone Park to the confluence with the East Gallatin River.

Parts of the movie A River Runs Through It were filmed on the Gallatin.

The river is a Class I water from the Taylor Fork to its confluence with the Missouri for the purposes of public recreational access.

History
The history of the canyon mirrors much of the activity during the late 1800 and early 1900s in southwestern Montana. The canyon was first explored by Native American hunters, and later fur-trappers and gold prospectors. There was a significant amount of consideration given to the idea of running the railroad through the canyon to increase travel between Yellowstone National Park and Bozeman, Montana. Logging was conducted in the canyon at the turn of the 20th century, and loggers would ride the logs down river to prevent them from jamming.

Pete Karst moved into the canyon in 1898 to homestead a ranch, and ran everything from an inn for travelers to serving liquor he made on the premise during Prohibition days. His most successful endeavor in the canyon was a bus route he ran in 1924 from Salesville (now Gallatin Gateway) to Yellowstone National Park. "Karst Camp", as it came to be known, was home to the first tow rope ski hill in Montana, and held annual ski jumping competitions.

List Of Crossings

 * trident Rd (source 45°56'14.1"N 111°29'29.5"W)
 * Logan Bridge (source 45°53'10.5"N 111°26'31.2"W)
 * Nixon Gulch Rd (source 45°53'29.4"N 111°20'12.3"W)
 * W Dry Creek Rd (source 45°51'37.2"N 111°17'27.5"W)
 * Frontage Rd (source 45°49'30.1"N 111°16'17.5"W)
 * Interstate 90 (source 45°49'25.1"N 111°16'19.5"W)
 * Amsterdam Rd (source 45°46'21.4"N 111°14'21.1"W)
 * W Cameron Bridge Rd (source 45°44'36.5"N 111°13'32.0"W)
 * Montana Highway 84 (source 45°40'18.7"N 111°12'32.0"W)
 * Axtell Anceny Rd (source 45°37'23.1"N 111°12'18.9"W)
 * Gateway South Rd (source 45°35'27.6"N 111°12'48.2"W)
 * W Williams Rd (source 45°32'25.6"N 111°14'05.0"W)
 * U.S. Route 191 in Montana (source 45°31'19.4"N 111°15'01.1"W)
 * Kleinschmidt Rd (source 45°29'29.4"N 111°16'19.2"W)
 * Squaw Creek Bridge (source 45°27'29.9"N 111°14'48.0"W)
 * U.S. Route 191 in Montana (source 45°24'28.0"N 111°13'34.1"W)
 * Karst Stage Loop (source 45°20'37.1"N 111°10'23.1"W)
 * Unnamed Road (source 45°17'54.8"N 111°12'13.1"W)
 * U.S. Route 191 in Montana (source 45°16'54.6"N 111°13'32.3"W)
 * Porcupine Creek Rd (source 45°13'33.2"N 111°14'58.0"W)
 * Rainbow Ranch Rd (source 45°11'40.2"N 111°14'08.3"W)
 * Walton Mine Rd (source 45°06'57.3"N 111°13'24.9"W)
 * Buffalo Horn Creek Rd (source 45°06'06.0"N 111°13'06.7"W)
 * U.S. Route 191 in Montana (source 45°03'54.7"N 111°10'56.9"W)
 * Black Butte Ranch (source 45°01'45.1"N 111°06'40.3"W)
 * U.S. Route 191 in Montana(source 44°58'16.3"N 111°04'43.5"W)
 * Fawn Pass Trl (source 44°57'02.7"N 111°03'28.1"W)
 * Bighorn Pass Trl (source 44°55'30.9"N 111°02'33.7"W)

title: Gallatin River


text:
SWIG

The Simplified Wrapper and Interface Generator (SWIG) is an open-source software tool used to connect computer programs or libraries written in C or C++ with scripting languages such as Lua, Perl, PHP, Python, R, Ruby, Tcl, and other language implementations like C#, Java, JavaScript, Go, D, OCaml, Octave, Scilab and Scheme. Output can also be in the form of XML.

Function
The aim is to allow the calling of native functions (that were written in C or C++) by other programming languages, passing complex data types to those functions, keeping memory from being inappropriately freed, inheriting object classes across languages, etc. The programmer writes an interface file containing a list of C/C++ functions to be made visible to an interpreter. SWIG will compile the interface file and generate code in regular C/C++ and the target programming language. SWIG will generate conversion code for functions with simple arguments; conversion code for complex types of arguments must be written by the programmer. The SWIG tool creates source code that provides the glue between C/C++ and the target language. Depending on the language, this glue comes in two forms:
 * a shared library that an extant interpreter can link to as some form of extension module, or
 * a shared library that can be linked to other programs compiled in the target language (for example, using Java Native Interface (JNI) in Java).
 * a shared dynamic library source code that should be compiled and dynamically loaded (e.g. Node.js native extensions)

SWIG is not used for calling interpreted functions by native code; this must be done by the programmer manually.

Example
SWIG wraps simple C declarations by creating an interface that closely matches the way in which the declarations would be used in a C program. For example, consider the following interface file: In this file, there are two functions sin and strcmp, a global variable Foo, and two constants STATUS and VERSION. When SWIG creates an extension module, these declarations are accessible as scripting language functions, variables, and constants respectively. In Python:

Purpose
There are two main reasons to embed a scripting engine in an existing C/C++ program:
 * The program can then be customized far faster, via a scripting language instead of C/C++. The scripting engine may even be exposed to the end-user, so that they can automate common tasks by writing scripts.
 * Even if the final product is not to contain the scripting engine, it may nevertheless be very useful for writing test scripts.

There are several reasons to create dynamic libraries that can be loaded into extant interpreters, including:
 * Provide access to a C/C++ library which has no equivalent in the scripting language.
 * Write the whole program in the scripting language first, and after profiling, rewrite performance-critical code in C or C++.

History
SWIG is written in C and C++ and has been publicly available since February 1996. The initial author and main developer was David M. Beazley who developed SWIG while working as a graduate student at Los Alamos National Laboratory and the University of Utah and while on the faculty at the University of Chicago. Development is currently supported by an active group of volunteers led by William Fulton. SWIG has been released under a GNU General Public License.

Google Summer of Code
SWIG was a successful participant of Google Summer of Code in 2008, 2009, 2012. In 2008, SWIG got four slots. Haoyu Bai spent his summers on SWIG's Python 3.0 Backend, Jan Jezabek worked on Support for generating COM wrappers, Cheryl Foil spent her time on Comment 'Translator' for SWIG, and Maciej Drwal worked on a C backend. In 2009, SWIG again participated in Google Summer of Code. This time four students participated. Baozeng Ding worked on a Scilab module. Matevz Jekovec spent time on C++0x features. Ashish Sharma spent his summer on an Objective-C module, Miklos Vajna spent his time on PHP directors.

In 2012, SWIG participated in Google Summer of Code. This time four out of five students successfully completed the project. Leif Middelschulte worked on a C target language module. Swati Sharma enhanced the Objective-C module. Neha Narang added the new module on JavaScript. Dmitry Kabak worked on source code documentation and Doxygen comments.

Alternatives
For Python, similar functionality is offered by SIP, Pybind11, and Boost's Boost.python library.

Projects Using SWIG

 * ZXID (Apache License, Version 2.0)
 * Symlabs SFIS (commercial)
 * LLDB
 * GNU Radio up to (including) version 3.8.x.x; later versions use Pybind11
 * Xapian
 * TensorFlow
 * Apache SINGA
 * QuantLib
 * Babeltrace

title: SWIG


text:
Talk:Artificial consciousness/Archive 1

AC as a field of study
At 19:05, 11 Aug 2003 24.214.173.244 commented "Absrud Science" and questioned if this is a worthy topic of discussion thus:

A totally and completely false assumption:

There is no accepted definition or understanding regarding real consciousness yet there is a field of artificial consciousness? How absurd!

http://www.enticy.org

tkorrovi replied:

In ai-forum was a passionate debate about the same question just not to repeat it here, but result was rather that it must be clearly stated that all abilities of consciousness mentioned must be known and observable. AC is not consciousness.

http://www.ai-forum.org

Is artificial consciousness real consciousness?
To say Artificial Consciousness is not Consciousness is simply to define Consciousness as being something human beings cannot build. If "it", whatever "it" is, is built by humans, then by definition it would not be conscious. The Philosophical Criticisms section of artificial intelligence applies directly to this topic too.

What is the special thing about humans that allows them consciousness? Humans are either machines (in which case the Church-Turing thesis applies) or they are not (in which case there is some magic spark). You (whoever wrote what I am commenting on) has now to decide: What is it? For you view to be consistent either you require a new computer science possibly requiring new physics, or you have a soul. Speak up now. Paul Beardsell 01:40, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yes this comment was written by me and I meant that artificial consciousness and consciousness are different terms, what doesn't mean that artificial consciousness necessarily must not be the same as consciousness, or that it must be the same as consciousness, just because of the subjective nature of consciousness as a whole we can never decide whether artificial consciousness shall be the same as consciousness or not. tkorrovi

A question you leave open is this: How similar is my consciousness to yours? Were I to build a machine which has the same characteristics as my brain - artificial neurons with the same latencies, triggering thresholds etc - and I was to scan my brain, take a backup, and load it into the machine, might not that machine be artificially conscious yet more similar to my consciousness than it would be to your consciousness? Paul Beardsell 13:24, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The machine's AC would be more like my C than your C is to my C.   Paul Beardsell 13:26, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think that the question of what is different in consciousness of different people always remains open, also what is in brain depends a lot on everything outside, and changes a lot, but then we may also look at the differencies between human consciousness and systems what can never become conscious, like your text editor. tkorrovi

AC forum http://tkorrovi.proboards16.com/

The questions are difficult, but I do not think they will "always remain open". If I understand you then you are saying that the difference between AC and C is simply terminolgical. I.e. Artifical Consciousness is Consciousness  in all but name. But you started off with a remark that concludes that they are not the same: "AC is not consciousness."

What is it? Where do you stand?

Paul Beardsell 06:11, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

external source
Paul, please discuss before you remove something. This definition was a collective effort, discussed before in different forums. In the definition similar to "the ability to predict the external events etc" was proposed for intelligence (this form was written by me, Rob Hoogers proposed "the ability to predict how the external processes will develop"). But then it was considered to overdefine intelligence, the ability to predict demands imagination, creativity etc, what even may require feelings etc, so don't entirely go under intelligence. Then it was replaced by more narrow definition, what most likely didn't define intelligence entirely though. Because of that this was added as one ability of consciousness. What exactly makes it strong is the requirement to be able to do it in any possible environment when possible, this very demanding and so indeed makes AC a *strong* AI. This also corresponds to my program in terms of theory. The first part was also discussed in ai-forum and decided to include it exactly as it was, except of later change by "195.218.198.164" of removing "theoretically" what I agree with because the rest says the same. Your proposed definition "An artificial consciousness (AC) is a man-made or otherwise constructed system which is conscious" simply is not proper because it doesn't define anything at all, as "conscious" isn't defined and *cannot* be defined because consciousness is subjective term. Please understand one thing -- subjective term cannot be defined. BTW sorry, I restored the definition. At least please discuss before you are going to remove anything. So if you have any questions concerning the definition etc, please ask and we will discuss it either here or in AC forum or in place you like.

AC and C are different terms, but the difference is not only terminological, AC is artificially created, while C is natural, and AC is objective while C is subjective. Concerning what you said about Igor Aleksander I may agree, if you indeed have evidence that AC was used before Igor Aleksander did it. Concerning that my evidence is unfortunately confined to Internet. tkorrovi

The external source for your definition is your artificial consciousness forum which you dominate. That it represents a broad consensus I doubt. I had difficulty even parsing it. That an ability to tell the future is necessary for consciousness seems risble to me. The claim that AC is AI is also rubbish.

I would have thought that you would have read the literature widely before claiming that the term artificial consciousness was first used in 1996. If you had you would know that claim is not true, you would also know that the term has been better defined by reputed computer scientists and philosophers than the definition you use. I refer you to the popular works of Daniel C Dennett, Douglas Hofstadter and Roger Penrose, for starters, which you have read, I presume.

Paul Beardsell 14:26, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

please discuss
Please discuss, would we please try to act reasonably. Defining artificial consciousness through consciousness is not circular because these are different terms and artificial consciousness is subset of consciousness what becomes as close to consciousness as much we objectively know about consciousness. Also though consciousness as a whole cannot be defined, things can be defined through it, ie through abilities of what what are known and objective and so can be determined. tkorrovi

I *am* discussing it. But I can not allow a nonsense (i.e. does not make sense) definition to survive.

Despite verbiage you are not discussing the issues. You make questionable assertions as fact without being prepared to back them up. Who says you cannot define something which is subjective? Who? You. Who says that consciousness is subjective? You. Who is it who insists on defining artificial consciousness? You. CONTRADICTION.

You say AC is not C because one is subjective the other not. Rubbish. Your C should be objectively discernible to me. As should the AC of a machine.

I carefully constructed an argument which shows that AC and C are the same. This you have ignored.

You are not discussing the issues. I have been but you ignore what I have said. Instead we get meaningless nonsense like your latest para above.

Paul Beardsell 14:40, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

> The external source for your definition is your artificial consciousness forum which you dominate. That it represents a broad consensus I doubt. I had difficulty even parsing it. That an ability to tell the future is necessary for consciousness seems risble to me. The claim that AC is AI is also rubbish.

Where I said that, or where you find that? I created a forum to discuss AC, I thought there is a lot to discuss and this is a good thing, and I *don't* dominate it, I did never delete not a single post from that forum and likely never do, my only policy there is only to delete post what are obviously offensive, no such so far, I hope you don't call it "domination". Otherwise I said there my opinion what everybody has a right to do. Some places where the definition was discussed were the ai-forum, the Hawking forum and the astronomy.net forum.

When you read the dictionaries, then you see that almost always there are several explanations for consciousness, to be self-aware is only one of these, other is "totality of thoughts and feelings" (Oxford dictionary) etc. The ability to predict was said to be one ability of consciousness, if you think that consciousness doesn't include that, then this is also widely disputed. (I don't know the word "risble" to be any English word, honestly, are you making jokes on me?) OK then, if you argue defining through selw-aware to be correct, then only reasonable option is to have a compromise, and include both possibilities.

I think the question whether AC is AI or a separate field is open. Some AI people want AC to be part of AI, others maybe not, this again depends on how we determine AI.

> If you had you would know that claim is not true, you would also know that the term has been better defined by reputed computer scientists and philosophers than the definition you use. I refer you to the popular works of Daniel C Dennett, Douglas Hofstadter and Roger Penrose, for starters, which you have read, I presume.

OK then why you don't include the facts you know.

tkorrovi

I will go with "totality of thoughts and feelings" but not with predicting the future.

I have found a posting on your AC forum where you (July of an unspecified year) state flatly that AC and AI are not the same. Here you hold the other view. Which is it? For the record I did not state in the article that I thought them different (it happens that I do) but that most consider AI a prerequisite for AC. That most do so is a fact.

You ask me to post what I know. This I did. You reverted it. A google search for '"artificial consciousness" conference' finds one in 1995. There are earlier mentions of AC on the web.

Paul Beardsell 15:15, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

it's not "tell the future" but "anticipate"

 * I think this talk of being able to predict the future is a misinterpretation of what was originally written, and which I had trolled, with my daft reference to psychics, in order to elicit some clarification. That light has now dawned: I think what he is talking about is anticipation: the ability to imagine a short way into the future: for the fly to be able to anticipate where your hand is going to go, based on where it has been and where it is now. Matt Stan 21:06, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Matt, the fly is not able to predict, it just flies away (to the opposite direction) from every big fastly moving object. If you try to catch one sitting on the table, you hit it towards its nose. Then the fly does the same - tries to fly away from your hand, but for that it must go to the air and turn around, what it has no time to do, and it flies directly into your hand. If the fly could predict the movement of your hand, it could find that your hand would not hit it, it shall not go to the air and will be saved. But fly never learns it, no matter how much time you try it, the fly does the same. So it likely has no consciousness, and we can say it because of failing a *single* test. tkorrovi

 * What if the fly watches on helplessly as it seems unable to consciously change its reflex action to always react the same way. Using tkorrovi's argument combined with tkorrovi's involuntary knee reflex we would prove tkorrovi without consciousness.  Indeed, tkorrovi could prove it about himself.   Seems to me failing *one* test proves nothing.  Paul Beardsell 14:59, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

self-promotional link
> You ask me to post what I know. This I did. You reverted it.

I didn't revert of what you changed concerning Igor Aleksander, only repaired a semantical error.

> external link to crank article removed

This wis offensive, you didn't substantiate it anyhow. I hope you understand that even only because of that our further conversation may not make sense. Maybe you just should take a rest awhile and think about it.

tkorrovi

I am going to delete the external link again because it is a link to a crank article. The article professes to discuss a program which exists which is conscious. As such a program would be the biggest news in computer science in a decade one of these things are true. Either the article is being ignored by the computer science establishment or the article is a hoax, or the article is by a crank. Paul Beardsell 15:28, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Haha! The linked article is by tkorrovi! All becomes clear. Paul Beardsell 15:38, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

First, it is nowhere argued that it is consciousness, but it is *proposed* mechanism for artificial consciousness, proposed means that it is not accepted, but also not rejected. If you like, add a comment that it is disputed or what you consider proper, but this link is important for the theory of AC, as only in the beginning now, you can remove it only if you prove that it is of no importanse for AC or completely wrong. If you like and know, add other links. tkorrovi

Well, in my defence, it is difficult to work out exactly what the article is about. But Wikipedia is not for self-promotion in any event. I have deleted the link again. Paul Beardsell 15:57, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And it seems the onus of proof is not on me but on you. Just say in which esteemed journal your article has been published then perhaps we can have a link. Paul Beardsell 15:58, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

more predicting the future
Just give your source for your defining consciousness as predicting the future. Who says so? Paul Beardsell 16:01, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please substantiate that predicting the future is not and is not considered by anybody to be an ability of consciousness (included in consciousness). tkorrovi

No, I cannot demonstrate that what you say does not appear in all learned books and papers. You simply have to show one authoritative use and I will back down as graciously as I can.

Paul Beardsell 16:15, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

must all tests be passed?
I am going to remove the "all" from the following sentence:

 * An artificial consciousness (AC) system is a man-made or otherwise constructed artifact capable of achieving all known objectively observable abilities of consciousness i.e. a totality of thoughts and feelings or self-awareness.

Imagine that we had a device which we were testing to see if it was (artificially) conscious. Imagine it passes all of our varied test except one. Is it conscious? I think it might be. E.g. If one of our tests was to recognise oneself in a mirror (a reasonable test, I suggest) and that test were failed but all the other tests ot passed (e.g. that it could recognise when a joke was funny, it demonstrated sympathy when someone was hurt, it said it felt guilty when speeding) then I would say, OK, conscious. So the "all" is not a necessary condition.

Paul Beardsell 16:16, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Paul Beardsell, you don't understand and start to change something what you don't understand. Read the definition, it says intentionally "capable of achieving", ie it doesn't *have* all these abilities, it must be *capable* of achieving them, so failing one test still doesn't mean that it doesn't satisfy the criteria. tkorrovi

No. If it is not capable of recognising itself in a mirror and it is not capable of achieving that in the future it could still be conscious. Paul Beardsell 16:37, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Time and time again I make a point here, I advance an argument supporting my edits, I point out contradictions in tkorrovi's posts. Much of this is ignored by him and he insists on including a link to his own article which, being kind, is not hard science. He will not substabtiate his points. He insists on reverting to versions which are flawed and which he will not support by cogent argument.

I have been typically combative but fair, I think. This article, as it stands, is not worthy of an encyclopedia. External review requested.

Paul Beardsell 16:38, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

> No. If it is not capable of recognising itself in a mirror and it is not capable of achieving that in the future it could still be conscious.

This is your opinion Paul. Nobody forbids you to say your point of view or write it in Wikipedia articles, but then you should not delete a point of view of the others. I accept adding opinions of everybody as I always did, the more people do it the better. In fact I didn't remove anything what you wanted to add, but concerning "all" it's more difficult, you should then add your version of the definition there, what you could do from the beginning instead of all this dispute. tkorrovi

I have provided an argument as to why "all" is wrong. You act as if the argument has no force. Instead you say that is my opinion. No. The argument is logically compelling. Refrain from your ad hominem attacks: Attack the argument. What is wrong with it?

Have you abandoned your "predicting the future" definition of consciousness? Where is the but one authoritative source? Can't you find one? In which case it is just your opinion and it must go. Or you must construct an argument as to why your opinion is correct.

Also Wikipedia is not supposed be a place where all opinions are aired. It is supposed to be an encyclopedia. If you cannot argue your points then give way.

There are Wikipedia articles about Wikipedia itself that makes this plain. Also, self-promotion is not allowed. That is why the link has to go.

Paul Beardsell 17:11, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Your argument may be logically compelling if you consider consciousness as self-awareness. Does self-awareness include recognizing yourself in the mirror or not? But self-awareness is not the only explanation of consciousness, this is a view of some, and most likely your view, but not a proved definition of consciousness. In this sense I said that it's your view, not only your personal view but view of many people what you agree with. I don't honestly see why you think it is as a personal attack, please please refrain to become personal. But then other people consider that for example an animal, who is incapable of achieving the ability to recognize itself in the mirror, has no consciousness. And my link was added not because of self-promotion, AC is still very much in the beginning and there is not much established material, everything what fits in then is necessary for the field, also for understanding the field, this is why AC is exceptional, this was included as one of the few proposed AC programs, so far not proved to fail to satisfy the AC conditions, not as worthless and questionnable one of many AI programs. You certainly know that I'm not bad or dishonest person, so I would not remove other links if they would be added, in order my to prevail, what some may do without doubt. You can say that it is self-promotion if you and others prove that it is worthless and doesn't belong where it is. And finally, making this program added my experience in AC and helped me to understand it much better, what is so bad in that I use this experience to help people to put together more information about AC and understand it better?

So as a conclusion, for such relatively new and often much disputed fields as artificial consciousness, the only reasonable option would be that different points of view would be added in the same article, without removing one when adding the other, or changing one to comply with the other, to give reader the opportunity to decide what approach he would prefer.

tkorrovi

-

I never said that recognizing oneself in a mirror was an essential test for consciousness. All I said was that there might be a set of tests, and that one of them (the self-recognition one) might be one of those tests, that that test might be failed, but all other tests passed, and that the tested device might still be conscious. It was a thought experiment. I quote myself:

 * Imagine that we had a device which we were testing to see if it was (artificially) conscious. Imagine it passes all of our varied test except one.  Is it conscious?  I think it might be.  E.g.  If one of our tests was to recognise oneself in a mirror (a reasonable test, I suggest) and that test were failed but all the other tests ot passed (e.g. that it could recognise when a joke was funny, it demonstrated sympathy when someone was hurt, it said it felt guilty when speeding) then I would say, OK, conscious.  So the "all" is not a necessary condition.

All the argument was doing was arguing for the removal of the word "all". It did not set out the definitive list of tests for consciousness. tkorrovi cannot attack the argument by attacking the examples. He must demonstrate why all the tests, whatever they might be, must be passed. He must demonstrate it because he insists that the word *all* is important. And if he doesn't, I will remove it again.

Now, I could deal with each of tkorrovi's other points in turn, but I am not going to, for the by now obvious reason.

Paul Beardsell 01:36, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

-

It's necessary to be capable to achieve all the abilities of consciousness for it to be artificial consciousness, otherwise if we satisfy only with one ability (or aspect) of consciousness, we may as well say that ability to calculate is one aspect of consciousness and state that calculator is artificial consciousness. Paul, you caused me a pain without a right or need to do so. I'm very tired of it. tkorrovi

-

Logic 101: "Not all" is not the same as "one". How painful is that?

Let us say that one of the tests for consciousness was an ability to argue logically but that the entity being tested failed only that particular test. Would it be conscious? I suggest it would be, but frustratingly so.

Paul Beardsell 02:15, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

-

Pay attention! Neuroscience vs Computer Science
"To neuroscientists, attention is a profoundly interesting and important phenomenon. We are constantly bombarded by information - smells, sounds, sights - yet we attend to only the slenderest sliver of the whole; the rest we tune out, just as you tune out the rumble of passing traffic as you read. Exactly how the brain achieves this feat is one of neuroscience's biggest questions, and for good reason: attention is intimately associated with consciousness. What you pay attention to defines how you experience the world from moment to moment." quoted from New Scientist vol 181 issue 2434 - 14 February 2004, page 32

None of the stuff here seems to be informed about developments in neuroscience, which surely must be a better key to understanding consciousness, and by inference, artifical consciousness. If we get bogged down in epistemological arguments about whether even non-human creatures are capable of consciousness and rely instead on introspection to grapple with the nature of consciousness then I fear we will get nowhere, as appears to have been happening here! Matt Stan 19:29, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I would be happy to get nowhere as opposed to where tkorrovi would like us to go which is into falsehood or at least speculation. But to claim that neuroscience is the key to understanding of consciousness doesn't seem right to me. (I know I set myself up here against half of AI and AC researchers.) Brain scientists have a (rather limited) understanding of the brain, and the human brain represents perhaps the only but certainly one of the few conscious devices we can study. But imagine we tried to kickstart the development of automobiles by sending a modern motor vehicle back into the 1800's but with its bonnet welded shut. (That is where we are with the brain.) All it would do is act as inspiration:  It would not help Benz (or whoever) to develop the internal combustion engine.

Currently a neuroscientist is to consciousness what a Mercedes mechanic is to engineering. A blind, quadraplegic Mercedes mechanic.

No, I think that developments will more likely come from computer science with the likes of Conway's Game of Life (OK, simplistic) and proposals for the Godel Machine (OK, not cogent). As Hofstadter seems to demonstrate there is a need to swallow one's tail in all complex things. Getting a program to modify itself recursively and to select a better version of itself seems a good way to go about it. Such programs already exist and are fascinating: Using toolsets developed by others I have provided the starting conditions which allowed a 1000's of generations of food-hunting program to eventually develop their own efficient algorithm, for example. The techniques I together with the excellent toolkit used are likely described here: genetic programming.

That is all Schmidhuber's proposed Godel Machine is: It is genetic programming layered on top of a starting condition that defines consciousness. No big deal. It is the starting condition which is interesting and to which he pays scant attention in his paper.

Paul Beardsell 02:11, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Actually, to be fair, the Godel Machine supposedly has an important advance. Scmidhuber claims he has found an optimal method of genetic programming or evolutionary programming. These techniques are notoriously slow, unreliable, sub-optimal. It is this claim which he "proves" in Theorem 2.1

Paul Beardsell 02:34, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The Fly and Descartes
Descartes.c

fly.c

Paul Beardsell 04:02, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * That's a fine program - now build a machine that can't be swatted easily. Get the thing to learn from its mistakes - or at least to build various replicas of itself that don't survive if they get swatted, by allowing variations to occur in some of the parameters, by ensuring that inheritors don't lose the memes that help survival, and by varying the methods of swatting (very important, that one). Ultimately, wouldn't you arrive at consciousness as we understand it?

I define consciousness solely as the ability to pay attention, moment to moment, to something. Consciousness doesn't exist when you are asleep (or unconscious).

 * sleepyfly.c

 * Only one iteration of the outer loop is executed and so any decent optimising compiler would get rid of it. Paul Beardsell 15:07, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Or does that contain a bug? You need a bootstrap,

 * Abstract: The relation between mind and matter is considered in terms of recent ideas from both phenomenology and brain science. Phenomenology is used to give clues to help bridge the brain–mind gap by providing constraints on any underlying neural architecture suggested from brain science. A tentative reduction of mind to matter is suggested and used to explain various features of phenomenological experience and of ownership of conscious experience. The crucial mechanism is the extended duration of the corollary discharge of attention movement, with its gating of activity for related content. Aspects of experience considered in terms of the model are the discontinuous nature of consciousness, immunity to error through misidentification, and the state of ‘pure’ consciousness as experienced through meditation. Corollary discharge of attention movement is proposed as the key idea bringing together basic features of meditation, consciousness and neuroscience, and helping to bridge the gap between mind and matter.

 * meditation.c

Matt Stan 20:43, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Aha! Prejudice. Why doesn't Descartes need a bootstrap? Paul Beardsell 15:07, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Artificial consciousness/Archive 1


text:
Negroni

The negroni is a cocktail, made of equal parts gin, vermouth rosso (red, semi-sweet), and Campari, generally served on the rocks, and commonly garnished with an orange slice or orange peel. It is considered an apéritif.

The drink has been documented in Italy since the late 1940s, and became popular in the 1950s, but the origin is uncertain, and early recipes differ somewhat from the modern standard. The basic recipe – an equal-parts cocktail of these three ingredients – is first recorded in French cocktail books of the late 1920s, alongside many similar drinks; in Italy a long drink of equal parts vermouth and Campari (but no gin), topped with soda and served over ice, has existed since the 1800s under the names Milano–Torino or Americano. There are claims of Italian drinks by the name "Negroni" containing gin from 1919, though these differ significantly from the modern drink; see for details.

Technique
The IBA recipe for the negroni specifies that it be built over ice in an old-fashioned or rocks glass and garnished with a slice of orange, similar to an old fashioned or spritz (short, minus the soda).

Common variations include using an orange peel (or lemon peel) in place of an orange slice (especially outside Italy), stirring then pouring over ice, and sometimes stirring and serving straight up.

History
The drink's origins are not known with certainty, and one must distinguish the modern recipe (an equal-parts cocktail of gin, vermouth rosso, and Campari, served over ice) from the name "negroni". See surveys and Difford.

To summarize, the documentary evidence is consistent with the drink originating as a short, American-style cocktail in 1920s France, like its well-documented contemporary, the old pal (and similar cocktails such as the boulevardier), and was most popular in the 1930s and early 1940s as a 2:1:1 drink, served up, called the Campariete. In the late 1940s the short drink then acquired the name negroni from a separate, similar long Italian-style drink of vermouth and soda, with small amounts of Campari and gin, served over ice; or from a variant of the Milano–Torino or Americano, equal parts vermouth and Campari, with a small amount of gin, plus soda, served over ice. By the mid-1950s the preferred name was "negroni" and the preferred ratio was 1:1:1, served over ice but without soda.

Recipe
The earliest known attestation of a drink with the same ingredients and proportions (1:1:1) as the modern recipe is from the French cocktail book, where it is referred to as "Campari Mixte", and the recipe is given as:
 * Dans un shaker, avec de la glace en morceaux, un tiers de Campari, un tiers de Gin, un tiers de Vermouth italien, bien mélanger et servir avec un zeste de citron.
 * In a shaker, with pieces of ice, a third of Campari, a third of gin, a third of Italian vermouth, mix well and serve with a lemon zest.

This differs from the modern IBA recipe in a few respects: it is shaken, not built; it is presumably served straight up (implied for cocktails), not down on the rocks; and it is garnished with a lemon twist, not an orange slice. All of these make it closer to a standard American-style cocktail than an Italian-style drink.

A similar recipe of 2:1:1 gin, vermouth, and Campari is attested from the Parisian book as the "Camparinete", where it is credited to Albert of the [Hôtel] Chatam (Chatham hotel), and specifies Cora brand vermouth and a lemon zest. The same book credits Albert of the Chatham bar with the Rose, though that is attested years earlier by another bartender at the same bar, so it is not clear if Albert originated this variant of the drink, or simply represented the bar in this collection.

This drink is listed in numerous American, French, and Spanish cocktail books of the 1930s and 1940s, including (shaken, twist lemon peel over),, and Trader Vic's Bartender's Guide (1947). credits the drink to Albert of Chatam, Paris (presumably from ), and specifies that it be shaken, and served up (in a coupe). In, this 2:1:1 cocktail is referred to as “Negroni-Cocktail”, and is given as:
 * Negroni-Cocktail
 * ¼ de vermut italiano, 2/4 de Campari, ¼ de Gin.
 * ¼ Italian vermouth, 2/4 Campari, ¼ gin.

Notably, Brucart refers to the same recipe as "Campariete" in 1943 and "Negroni" in 1949, attaching a new name to an existing drink.

There is no known recipe for a "negroni" or an equal-parts drink of gin, vermouth, and Campari in Italian cocktail books before the 1940s. For example, the encyclopedic contains 1,000 recipes, including several with Campari (two versions of the Milano–Torino and a dozen versions of the Americano), but no negroni or gin/vermouth/Campari drink.

The earliest known recipe for a "negroni" in an Italian text is in, where it is given as:
 * Nel bicchiere de acqua: un pezzo di ghiacco - ⅓ Bitter Campari - ⅓ Vermouth Grassotti rosso - ⅓ Gin - 1 buccia d'arancia; servite con del selz.
 * In a water glass: one piece of ice - ⅓ Campari Bitters - ⅓ red Grassotti Vermouth - ⅓ Gin - 1 orange peel; serve with seltzer.

This differs from the modern recipe in being a long drink, served with seltzer, rather than a short drink; and being garnished with an orange peel, rather than an orange slice. It is similar to the modern drink (and differs from the earlier French recipes) in being built and served with ice, rather than being shaken or stirred and served up.

The same text includes a variant, "Asmara o Negroni" (Asmara or Negroni), referencing the city of Asmara, the (by then former) capital of Italian Eritrea, with recipe closer to a martini, just with Campari as the bitter (and orange twist instead of lemon twist):
 * Nel mixing-glass: qualche goccia di Bitter Campari - ⅔ Gordon Gin - ⅓ Vermouth Grassotti bianco - buccia d'arancia; scuotete bene e servite nel Cocktail-glass n. 8.
 * In a mixing glass: a few drops of Campari Bitter - ⅔ Gordon Gin - ⅓ white Grassotti Vermouth - orange peel; shake well and serve in a n. 8 [number 8] cocktail glass.

An equal-parts cocktail called "Negroni" is attested in the British text, where the recipe is given as:
 * Negroni
 * 1/3 Dry Gin.
 * 1/3 Sweet Vermouth.
 * 1/3 Campari Bitters.
 * Stir and Strain.
 * Add Twist of Lemon Peel.

This is almost identical to the "Campari Mixte" (1929), except that it is stirred, not shaken. It still differs from the modern negroni in being stirred, not built; implicitly served up, not on the rocks; and garnished with a lemon twist, not an orange slice.

In popular culture
The earliest reports in English are from traveler writers to Italy and the Mediterranean, and describe a long drink based on vermouth and soda, with the addition of small amounts of Campari, gin, and sometimes Angostura bitters, similar to a vermouth-based spritz.

One of the earliest reports of a drink by the name "Negroni" came from Orson Welles in correspondence with the Coshocton Tribune while working in Rome on Cagliostro in 1947, where he described a new drink called the Negroni, "The bitters are excellent for your liver, the gin is bad for you. They balance each other."

Later, more detailed descriptions are given in Horace Sutton, Footloose in Italy (1950), and Rupert Croft-Cooke, Tangerine House (1956, p. 108), which gives the description:
 * You shake a dash of Angostura over a lump of ice in a large glass, add about a teaspoonful of Campari bitters, a wineglass-full of vermouth, a little gin, a shaving of lemon peel, then fill up with soda water.

Name
The name "Negroni" is an Italian/Corsican surname, and the drink is presumably named after some person of this name. Numerous persons claim to have invented the cocktail or to have had it named after them, though these lack contemporary sources.

The most widely reported account is that it was first mixed in Florence, Italy, in 1919, at Caffè Casoni (now Caffè Giacosa), on Via de' Tornabuoni, by bartender Fosco Scarselli, for his customer Count Camillo Negroni; see. The commonly-held origin story is that it was concocted by a member of the Negroni family asking the bartender to strengthen the Americano by adding gin, rather than the normal soda water. The bartender also added an orange garnish rather than the typical lemon garnish of the Americano to signify that it was a different drink. Cocktail historian David Wondrich researched Camillo Negroni, whose status as a count is questionable, but whose grandfather, Luigi Negroni, was indeed a count.

An implausible story is that it was invented by Pascal Olivier de Negroni, Count de Negroni in 1857 in Senegal; this has been circulated by his descendants, and is impossible, as Campari did not exist until 1860. A Corse-Matin Sunday Edition article from 1980 says he invented the drink around 1914; which is again impossible, as he died in 1913.

An unrelated person, Cavaliere (Knight) Guglielmo Negroni, founded Negroni Distillerie in Treviso, Italy in 1919, and produced a red amaro, now sold as Old 1919 (Antico Negroni 1919). There is no evidence that this is related to the modern Campari-based cocktail.

Precursors
Andrew Willett believes that this drink originated in San Francisco, where Campari was first imported to the United States (presumably due to the Italian American population in North Beach, San Francisco), between 1904 (when Campari began to be mass produced) and 1920 (when Prohibition started) as a modification of the martini, replacing orange bitters with Campari. Like the martini, this drink consists of Italian ingredients (vermouth, Campari) mixed with gin in an American-style cocktail. He finds an Italian origin implausible, as at the time the spirits-based cocktails popular in the United States were not made in Italy; they were considered American style, as seen in the American Bar (London, 1893), Harry's New York Bar (Paris, 1911), and Harry's Bar (Venice, 1931).

Variations

 * Aperol negroni: Uses Aperol in place of the Campari
 * Dutch negroni: uses Jenever for the London dry gin
 * Negroni sbagliato ("mistaken negroni"): uses sparkling white wine or Prosecco (spumante) in place of gin
 * Negroscan: a New Hampshire drink that uses traditional Scandinavian akvavit instead of gin
 * Agavoni or Tegroni: uses tequila in place of gin.
 * White negroni: gin, Lillet blanc, and Suze
 * Unusual negroni: gin, Aperol and Lillet blanc
 * A negroni served with a dash of freshly squeezed orange juice was named a negroni malato ("sick negroni") at Bar Piccolino in Exchange Square, London during the 2007 financial crisis, by Italian bankers employed at nearby RBS offices.
 * Pisco negroni: uses pisco in place of gin.
 * National negroni: uses Chilean herbal liqueur araucano in place of gin.
 * Negroski: uses vodka in place of gin

Similar cocktails

 * Boulevardier – bourbon whiskey instead of gin, 3:2:2 instead of equal parts (1:1:1), served straight up with an orange twist
 * Old pal – rye whiskey instead of gin, dry vermouth instead of (sweet) vermouth rosso, served straight up with an orange twist

title: Negroni


text:
HMS Spartan (S105)

HMS Spartan was a nuclear-powered fleet submarine of the Royal Navy's Swiftsure-class submarine. Spartan was launched on 7 April 1978 by Lady Lygo, wife of Admiral Sir Raymond Lygo. The boat was built by Vickers Limited Shipbuilding Group (now a division of BAE Systems) at Barrow-in-Furness in Cumbria, England. She was decommissioned in January 2006.

Operational history
Spartan was ordered to sail south for the Falkland Islands two days before the Argentine invasion of the islands on 30 March 1982. Spartan was the first vessel to arrive in the islands and began to enforce a 200 mi maritime exclusion zone imposed by the British. Shortly after, Spartan sighted Argentine merchant shipping mining the harbour at Stanley, but was not ordered to attack. This was partly due to British concerns about escalating the war too early, but also to avoid scaring off more lucrative targets such as the Argentine aircraft carrier ARA Veinticinco de Mayo. On 1 May, Spartan was marking Veinticinco de Mayo, from just outside the Argentinian 12 mi limit, when the submarine was ordered away by the Northwood fleet command in England, rejecting the strong view of the task force commander, Admiral Woodward. He considered, as the highest ranking naval officer in the area, he should control the RN submarines in the area and potentially faced losing the war by the lack of local control in the battle zone In the following days Veinticinco de Mayo was therefore able to move, unchecked by the British nuclear submarines, and potentially launch an A-4Q Skyhawk attack from much closer range than possible from Argentinian airfields. Unlike HMS Conqueror (S48), Spartan did not fire in anger during the Falklands War, though she did provide valuable reconnaissance to the British Task Force on Argentine aircraft movements.

In November 2010, it was reported in Hansard that Spartan had run aground off the west coast of Scotland in October 1989.

In 1999, Spartan was fitted with Tomahawk cruise missiles.

title: HMS Spartan (S105)


text:
Celon

Celon may refer to:

In places
 * Celon, Indre, commune of the Indre departement in France
 * Celón, a parish in Allande, a municipality within the province of Asturias, in northern Spain

In fiction:
 * Celon (Middle-earth), a river in J. R. R. Tolkien's Middle-earth writings

title: Celon