17 June 2011Neotel’s majority shareholder, Tata Communications, has increased its stake in the South African telecoms operator to over 60% by purchasing a 12.5% stake in the company from the Two Telecoms Consortium for an undisclosed sum.The deal makes Neotel a subsidiary of Tata Communications – part of the US$67.4-billion Tata Group of companies – which now has a enlarged 61.5% stake in Neotel.The increase in shareholding also highlights the strong support Neotel receives from its major shareholder, as well as Tata Communications’ commitment to the South African market.“We welcome the investment from Tata Communications and are reaffirmed by the continued support from all our shareholders,” Neotel CEO Sunil Joshi said in a statement this week.Reinforces relationship with TataThe deal further reinforces Neotel’s relationship with Tata Communications, and enables Neotel to leverage Tata’s proven and vast global network, and consolidate its own position as a serious player in the local market.Neotel, South Africa’s second landline network operator, provides a range of value-added voice and data services for businesses, wholesale network operators and providers, and consumers using its pure-IP Next Generation Network, powered by a fibre-optic backbone.It forms part of the West Africa Cable System consortium, owns the South African landing rights for the Seacom cable system, and is working together with local mobile operators MTN and Vodacom to construct a national fibre-optic backbone.Apart from linking South African cities to each other, Neotel directly links the country to Tata Communications’ global Tier 1 network.SAinfo reporterWould you like to use this article in your publication or on your website? See: Using SAinfo material
Well, here’s an unusual move: Apple hit the virtual streets Friday to tout Swift, its new programming language for developers, via a brand-new, dedicated blog.For the historically stand-offish—some would say arrogant—iPhone and Mac maker, this sort of developer outreach is unusual. Although the company has dedicated sections and webpages about various aspects of its software and hardware lines, they tend to be opaque holding tanks for official pronouncements and downloads. Now Apple seems to be going out of its way to appeal to developers in historically unthinkable ways. The Swift blog, hosted on Apple’s own website, offers a more open and friendly approach, pledging to give app builders an inside look at Swift development. It also carries through Apple’s overarching theme about the language’s ease of use for creating mobile iOS and desktop OS X apps. This new blog will bring you a behind-the-scenes look into the design of the Swift language by the engineers who created it, in addition to the latest news and hints to turn you into a productive Swift programmer.Get started with Swift by downloading Xcode 6 beta, now available to all Registered Apple Developers for free. The Swift Resources tab has a ton of great links to videos, documentation, books, and sample code to help you become one of the world’s first Swift experts. There’s never been a better time to get coding!Apple’s new Swift blogThere’s no telling how things could evolve from here. So far, there’s only one blog post talking about Swift’s stability across “past, present, and future OS releases.” But it’s easy to imagine it becoming a stepping stone on the way to more two-way conversations with the company. At least it’s easy to imagine now. A few years ago, it would have been inconceivable. The Wall Street Journal recently noted how Apple has softened under Tim Cook’s reign. The CEO’s warmer, fuzzier leadership style—which emphasizes teamwork and collaboration—stands in stark contrast to that of Steve Jobs, the cofounder known for dictatorial management and an uncompromising personality. Apple Senior VP of Software Engineering Craig Federighi rocked out at the 2014 Worldwide Developers Conference.Certainly a funner, and funnier, Apple seemed to be on display at its Worldwide Developers Conference in June, where Apple executive Craig Federighi threw devil horns when talking about a new feature called “Metal” and Cook teasingly called his colleague “Superman” for his ability to fly on and off the stage for presentation after presentation. That lent some credence to the notion of a more laid-back Apple. The new Swift blog adds even more, as Cook’s internal openness looks like it’s finally filtering outside to Apple’s army of independent software builders.But it’s very likely that the blog is more than just a nice gesture put forth by a repentant tech company. If Apple wants a Swift transition from the older, clunkier languages used to stock the App Store’s shelves, it needs to rally developers. And the best way to do that is to give this community—which is used to (some say tired of) being left out of the loop on iPhone and OS X plans—what they’ve wanted all these years: the iron fist of Apple to loosen into an open hand. At least, that’s what some developers believe.This is not just about Swift, more like APPLE HAS A BLOG. https://t.co/kIPQ2puOhK— Peter Steinberger (@steipete) July 11, 2014 adriana lee Tags:#app development#Apple#iOS#iPhone#Mac#Mac OS X#mobile apps#programming languages#Swift#Swift programming language#Yosemite Related Posts Growing Phone Scams: 5 Tips To Avoid 7 Types of Video that will Make a Massive Impac… How to Write a Welcome Email to New Employees? Why You Love Online Quizzes Apple engineers… talking publicly about their work? *looks suspiciously for marketing or legal people with nets*https://t.co/7F3xS6ewUd— David Smith (@Catfish_Man) July 11, 2014
Take a look at this ROI Analysis document. It shows that Cleveland Clinic will save $442k in net power savings over 4 years. In addition, they will save 29,000 IT support man-hours by year 4 through improved asset management and reduced deskside visits, remote patch management and reimaging and repair.
In a bid to move the needle, HHMI next year will select 15 inaugural Gray fellows. (Applications are due 15 February.) Each will receive $80,000 a year for up to 4 years as a postdoc, and then $270,000 a year for up to 4 years after they are hired into a tenure-track academic position. Candidates must be part of a group underrepresented in the biomedical sciences, a definition that includes those who are economically disadvantaged. (HHMI has committed up to $20 million for the first cohort of Gray fellows, and holds open the possibility of additional cohorts.)If all goes well, a decade from now those selected as Gray fellows might be well positioned to compete for NIH grants and other awards. But the list of HHMI’s 84 new faculty scholars—each of whom has been an independent investigator for less than a decade, and will get up to $1.5 million over 5 years to pursue their research dreams—is a reminder of how hard it is now for scientists from underrepresented groups, or less prestigious institutions, to rise above the pack. Only one of the scholars is black, and four have Latino backgrounds. And although the scholars come from 43 institutions, a majority (44) work at just nine schools—led by Harvard University, with a whopping 10 winners. Four other research powerhouses—Stanford, Princeton, and Yale universities and the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center—each boast five winners, and both the University of California, San Francisco, and The Rockefeller University are home to four scholars. None of the scholars come from institutions that educate large numbers of minority students.None of that is surprising, given that diversity was not a factor in selecting the winners—as is often the case in prestigious scientific fellowships. “The primary criteria were the quality of the proposal and whether the researchers could benefit from this additional money,” says HHMI’s Janet Shaw, who runs the Faculty Scholars Program. The scholars already have “terrific jobs” based on “their brilliant work as postdocs,” she adds, and HHMI hopes that its funding will let them take one more step up the ladder toward a “transformative career in biomedical research.”HHMI expects to spend $83 million on the first of what it hopes will be three cohorts of faculty scholars. (Some are jointly funded with the Bill & Melinda Gates and Simons foundations.) In fact, the quality of the first round of applicants—some 1400 from more than 200 institutions—led it to expand its initial plan to select just 70 winners.HHMI eliminated some 90% of the proposals after a vetting by outside experts, and researchers still in the running submitted a 15-minute narrated slide show that was judged without any additional input. “It was really challenging to present your vision of science” in that format, says one of the winners, plant biologist José Dinneny, who will receive $1.25 million.Dinneny’s lab at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, studies the novel mechanisms that plants use to obtain water to cope with environmental stresses like drought and salinity. He says the HHMI funding gives him “the freedom to pursue ideas at the leading edge.” Federal agencies “are extremely conservative,” he adds, “and the project has to be nearly complete by the time you submit a proposal.”Dinneny grew up in central California, and entered UC Berkeley 1 year after the state eliminated affirmative action in higher education. Although Dinneny believes that funding agencies need to do more to broaden participation in academic research, he says HHMI has “a tough balancing act. Their first goal is to fund the best ideas.” And minority scientists sometimes shy away from competitive programs like the faculty scholars, he adds, because they feel they won’t be successful. “As a Hispanic, I know there is a lot of self-selection,” he notes.At the same time, Dinneny is pleased that HHMI is starting a program for postdocs aimed explicitly at increasing diversity. “There simply aren’t enough minorities going into research careers,” he says. Last week the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), one of the nation’s largest biomedical research charities, offered news about two programs intended to help early-career scientists. One press release announced a new effort to create a more diverse biomedical research workforce through fellowships to postdoctoral students who are black, Latino, or from other underrepresented groups. The other named 84 young faculty members who had just won a prestigious grant aimed at bolstering the next generation of scientific superstars.The timing of the two statements from the Bethesda, Maryland, nonprofit was coincidental. Put side-by-side, however, they unintentionally highlighted the continuing difficulties that the biomedical research community faces in diversifying—both its demographic makeup and also the mix of institutions that tend to win a lion’s share of prestigious awards. The new Gray fellows effort, named after longtime HHMI trustee Hanna Gray, targets increasing the diversity of postdocs planning academic careers. It’s far from the first attempt by public and private research funders to improve the chronic paucity of blacks, Latinos, and other underrepresented groups in the academic biomedical workforce. But those programs have had remarkably little impact on the demographics of those who receive funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH).Sign up for our daily newsletterGet more great content like this delivered right to you!Country *AfghanistanAland IslandsAlbaniaAlgeriaAndorraAngolaAnguillaAntarcticaAntigua and BarbudaArgentinaArmeniaArubaAustraliaAustriaAzerbaijanBahamasBahrainBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBeninBermudaBhutanBolivia, Plurinational State ofBonaire, Sint Eustatius and SabaBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswanaBouvet IslandBrazilBritish Indian Ocean TerritoryBrunei DarussalamBulgariaBurkina FasoBurundiCambodiaCameroonCanadaCape VerdeCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChadChileChinaChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombiaComorosCongoCongo, The Democratic Republic of theCook IslandsCosta RicaCote D’IvoireCroatiaCubaCuraçaoCyprusCzech RepublicDenmarkDjiboutiDominicaDominican RepublicEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEquatorial GuineaEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Faroe IslandsFijiFinlandFranceFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabonGambiaGeorgiaGermanyGhanaGibraltarGreeceGreenlandGrenadaGuadeloupeGuatemalaGuernseyGuineaGuinea-BissauGuyanaHaitiHeard Island and Mcdonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)HondurasHong KongHungaryIcelandIndiaIndonesiaIran, Islamic Republic ofIraqIrelandIsle of ManIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJerseyJordanKazakhstanKenyaKiribatiKorea, Democratic People’s Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwaitKyrgyzstanLao People’s Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanonLesothoLiberiaLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtensteinLithuaniaLuxembourgMacaoMacedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascarMalawiMalaysiaMaldivesMaliMaltaMartiniqueMauritaniaMauritiusMayotteMexicoMoldova, Republic ofMonacoMongoliaMontenegroMontserratMoroccoMozambiqueMyanmarNamibiaNauruNepalNetherlandsNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaraguaNigerNigeriaNiueNorfolk IslandNorwayOmanPakistanPalestinianPanamaPapua New GuineaParaguayPeruPhilippinesPitcairnPolandPortugalQatarReunionRomaniaRussian FederationRWANDASaint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da CunhaSaint Kitts and NevisSaint LuciaSaint Martin (French part)Saint Pierre and MiquelonSaint Vincent and the GrenadinesSamoaSan MarinoSao Tome and PrincipeSaudi ArabiaSenegalSerbiaSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSint Maarten (Dutch part)SlovakiaSloveniaSolomon IslandsSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSouth SudanSpainSri LankaSudanSurinameSvalbard and Jan MayenSwazilandSwedenSwitzerlandSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwanTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailandTimor-LesteTogoTokelauTongaTrinidad and TobagoTunisiaTurkeyTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUgandaUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited KingdomUnited StatesUruguayUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofVietnamVirgin Islands, BritishWallis and FutunaWestern SaharaYemenZambiaZimbabweI also wish to receive emails from AAAS/Science and Science advertisers, including information on products, services and special offers which may include but are not limited to news, careers information & upcoming events.Required fields are included by an asterisk(*)
Baron Paul Condon, former head of the ICC’s Anti Corruption Unit (ACU), has set the cat among the pigeons with his disclosure that match-fixing and spotfixing in cricket was not only rampant in the 1990s and the first decade of this millennium, but also that most international teams were involved in this.He has also been emphatic that spot-fixing has its roots in county cricket, and was further fuelled by the growth of T20 cricket.It would not be impertinent to ask what Condon did to arrest this problem in his near-decade long stint as chief of the ACU. Indeed, why did it take him so long to make these observations public even as the game was being torn asunder by corruption? It would be a disservice to the sport if his research findings and assessments had been stored away as memorabilia for posterity, not affirmative action when he was heading the ACU.Nevertheless, Condon’s revelations have busted the myths that match/spot fixing is essentially a sub-continental phenomenon to which players from other countries are only innocent (or silent) bystanders.Ever since late Hansie Cronje’s nefarious activities were accidentally exposed by the Delhi police in 2000 (Condon’s appointment as ACU chief was a consequence of this), there has been sustained typecasting that the sub-continent is the hub of match-fixing.While the rise of the Asian illegal betting mafia has been well documented and is a fact, the assumption that only players from this region would be largely corrupt is ill-founded: it doesn’t take a degree to understand that greed is independent of race, colour or nationality.advertisementWith cricket boards ranged against each other in a power struggle, or for reasons of dubious national interest, the collective will to fight the menace was lacking and many offenders went scotfree. While a relook at some old cases (as the Delhi police has claimed it will in the Cronje matter) would still be worthwhile, in a broader sense, I think the second aspect of Condon’s revelation – where he mentions domestic cricket as the springboard for corruption – may be more significant in salvaging the future.Condon talks of how corruption is perhaps commonplace in English county cricket. Sharp practices on the county circuit (Imran Khan using a bottle cap to scuff the ball, others like John Lever using vaseline to get extra shine from Essex to Test matches in India) are well known, but Condon says that cheating for money too had crept in via spot-fixing.Domestic cricket in other countries too has not been above suspicions. The early part of this season has been engaged in unraveling the mystery behind Goa captain Swapnil Asnodkar inexplicably declaring his team’s innings in the sixth over when the victory target was 130 from 19. Corruption, it is widely believed, is institutionalised in Pakistan’s domestic cricket. Unsavoury reports have also emerged about problems in Australian cricket.Players who get away by cheating at the domestic level are more likely to be emboldened to do it at the global level too. The flip side is that players who don’t make it to the highest level and miss out on the massive financial rewards, could be tempted into hanky-panky because nobody is watching. The decision by the Australian and Pakistan boards to have an anti-corruption unit monitoring domestic cricket has not come a day too soon. It might not help in eradicating corruption completely. But every little bit helps.