1468289770000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fchris-weigant%2Fwar-on-weeds-end-in-sight_b_10934184.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
War On Weed's End In Sight

The end of the federal government's War On Weed is approaching fast. No matter how the details work out, that much seems pretty clear at this point. What began roughly 100 years ago as a racist legislative overreaction to Latino workers' preferred method of relaxing -- and was then ramped up (under Richard Nixon) to punish hippies and minorities and college students -- could once again become sane governmental policy, ending almost a century's institutional demonization of a fairly harmless natural substance. When it happens, it will be the most significant governmental shift on a pointless and endless social "war" since the end of Prohibition. The only remaining questions are how the mechanics of the war's end will work out, and how fast it'll happen. But whether it ends with a bang or a whimper, that end is definitely now in sight.

Consider the following developments (some very recent and some ongoing):

DEA about to report

The Drug Enforcement Agency is going to announce any day now their completion of a review of the status of marijuana under federal drug law. They had promised it'd be done by the end of June, so it's already overdue. No matter what their review recommends, it may spur fundamental change in the legal status of marijuana.

Suppose the D.E.A. actually applies common sense and science to the federal classification of marijuana. If they do so, they will recommend a downgrade from Schedule I to at least Schedule II (although a strong case could be made for Schedules III through V just as easily, depending on how you interpret the concept of "abuse" of marijuana). If the D.E.A. leads the way, the process will be fairly smooth and fairly quick. But even if they dig in their heels (they are the nation's drug warriors, after all) and refuse to recommend any change, they might just spark a backlash from other parts of the government.

Obama could act on his own, after the election

One of President Obama's campaign promises was to stop letting politics trump science in federal policy. He has had a very mixed record on this issue, however, as evidenced by the long (and pointless) battle his administration fought against allowing over-the-counter sales of the "Plan B" emergency contraceptive. Obama also consistently treated any suggestion of changes in federal marijuana policy as a joke to be laughed off, for pretty much his entire first term in office. His first attorney general sent some awfully conflicting guidelines out to federal prosecutors on marijuana policy -- first seeming to relax enforcement and then to tighten it back up. This confusion did eventually end, and the Department of Justice has now (mostly) taken a hands-off stance to states with legalized medical and/or recreational marijuana.

This is important, because it is not ultimately the D.E.A.'s decision how marijuana is classified -- it is instead the attorney general's decision. Congress doesn't even need to be involved with any shift in policy, because the attorney general can change the federal government's classification with her signature alone. So even if the D.E.A. review refuses to recognize that "the times they are a changin'," the Justice Department can easily overrule them and go ahead and reschedule marijuana. President Obama might just order this to happen on his way out of office, during the lame-duck period after the election, no matter what the D.E.A. has to say about it. What would a self-described former member of the "Choom Gang" have to lose, at that point?

Congress could act as well

Even if the D.E.A. proves recalcitrant and the Obama administration isn't bold enough to reschedule on their own, Congress may get involved. A bill which will remove all the needless red tape from medical research on marijuana is working its way through the House right now, and it is notable for who has sponsored it -- not just pro-marijuana congressmen, but also some of the most avidly anti-marijuana congressmen as well. It is no longer a politically acceptable stance to deny doctors from even studying marijuana's benefits anymore -- another measure of how the War On Weed is winding down.

For years, marijuana research was only allowed if the hypothesis was some version of: "Marijuana's bad for you... mmm-kay?" No science was permitted with the aim of proving any benefits at all -- and then politicians and the medical establishment could sanctimoniously fight against legalizing medical marijuana with the Catch-22 excuse of "no solid research has been done, therefore marijuana can't be considered a medicine." As Doc Daneeka might have explained to Yossarian: "Doctors say medical marijuana isn't a proven medicine until they see studies scientifically showing the benefits, but research showing any beneficial uses doesn't actually exist -- because any researcher who tries to prove beneficial uses is denied the permission to conduct such research by the government -- so this scientific evidence will never actually be allowed to exist." That was then, but now even the most strident anti-drug congressmen are working to remove this enormous Catch-22 situation, forever.

Democratic Party officially calls for change

This one has a worrisome undertone to it, because of the way it happened. Still, it's a positive development any way you look at it. This weekend, in a showdown between Bernie Sanders supporters and Hillary Clinton supporters, a plank was inserted in the Democratic Party platform document that called for a "path to legalization" for marijuana. This is stunning, because the subject hasn't been addressed by either party in such a direct fashion since at least the 1970s. Sanders, in his campaign, called for "descheduling" marijuana -- treating it like alcohol, essentially, and moving its regulation over to the folks who now oversee tobacco and alcohol (instead of the drug warriors). This was proposed by the Sanders supporters at the platform committee meeting, but the idea was voted down. Compromise language was offered instead (with the "path to legalization" language) which called for at least rescheduling marijuana down from Schedule I. This passed by only one vote (out of over 150 cast). The worrisome aspect was that the Clinton people fought so hard against it -- fighting for timidity rather than leadership, as Democrats have been regularly doing on the issue ever since they were badly spooked by Republican charges of being "soft on crime," back in the 1980s and 1990s.

A platform document fight doesn't guarantee how Hillary Clinton will treat the matter once in the Oval Office, however. Both Clinton and Obama, if you'll remember, were publicly against gay marriage in the 2008 campaign (timidity ruled the day on the issue among Democratic leadership, back then). But look where we are now -- Obama realized that he needed to "evolve" on the issue and politically it has done him a lot of good. He'll go down in history as the boldest president on gay rights of all time, in fact. Clinton could wind up doing the same on marijuana, too, no matter how timidly she's approached the issue so far during this year's campaign.

Legalize it

Even though the federal government states (as part of the Schedule I definition) that marijuana has "no accepted medical use," half of the United States have now legalized such medical use. Half. Depending on how you count, the number of such states is now at least 25 (some states have severe restrictions, red tape, and other hoops such as only allowing CBD oils and other non-euphoric forms, to treat diseases such as epilepsy). The tide on medical use has already turned and nobody will ever force this genie back into the bottle again.

The voters of four states -- and the District of Columbia, the seat of our national government -- have completely thrown in the towel altogether and just legalized adult recreational use of marijuana. The sky has not fallen in any of these jurisdictions. The sun rises, the sun sets, and the hellscape predicted by those against legalization has not materialized at all. This year, California voters will get a chance to vote on recreational legalization in November. California is the biggest market in the entire country -- if the state were its own country, it would have the sixth largest economy in the world. And California won't be alone. Seven other states may also have the opportunity to vote to legalize this November. Which means by the end of this year, marijuana may be fully legal for any adult to buy openly in over 10 states. This isn't quite the tipping point that medical marijuana has already reached, but it may be the biggest step towards such a tipping point yet taken.

Double the budgetary impact

Once other states see how much tax revenue is generated by states who have legalized recreational use, it's going to be pretty hard to argue against allowing such taxes to be collected. But marijuana legalization actually has a two-fold impact on state budgets. First, there's the tax revenue to be collected -- and marijuana smokers are just about the only political group in the country who are currently actually begging to be taxed. Think about that, especially seen through the eyes of a conservative politician. Who else is not going to complain about paying new taxes, after all?

But it gets even better, because the secondary budget impact is that millions of dollars (billions, when all states are added together) in law enforcement funds will be saved by not having to hassle with low-level pot busts anymore. Cops will be freed up to concentrate on other things, and new tax revenue will flow in at the same time. That is a double benefit to any state trying to put together a yearly budget -- and it's going to become more and more irresistible over time, especially to those who profess themselves to be fiscal conservatives.

War On Weed's end

In conclusion, although it is impossible to see precisely which path we'll take at this point, the federal government's War On Weed is almost over. Its days are numbered. The end is in sight.

It won't happen overnight, of course. Even it the D.E.A. gives its approval and Loretta Lynch acts immediately, rescheduling marijuana on the Controlled Substances list isn't going to be the last gasp. The war won't truly be over until the last vestiges of the federal government's wrongheaded policies have been reversed entirely. What would this look like? It would have many facets, because the idiocy behind the policy has become so ingrained in federal law.

First and foremost, federal officials would not be strangled by gag laws which now prevent them from even publicly admitting that marijuana is not as dangerous as heroin. This has got to be the biggest piece of idiocy in the entire misguided War On Weed, but it'll be the easiest to change.

More concretely, marijuana businesses need to stop being persecuted for what they sell. Right now, it is impossible for many of these businesses to use the banking system. The federal penalties for laundering money from drug trafficking are so severe that the banks refuse to allow marijuana businesses -- completely legal ones, in states where they are allowed -- from opening an account. That has got to change. Marijuana businesses should not be forced to operate on a cash basis (what other business is?) and instead should be treated like any other wholesaler or retailer in the country. Tax laws also need to reflect this normalization. As of now, marijuana businesses can't legally claim common business expenses like employee salaries or rent -- again, like every other business in operation is allowed to. This will require a shift in the federal tax code.

Medical research on marijuana should be approved just like research on any other substance. Marijuana supplies for such research should be allowed from anywhere, instead of one government farm being a bottleneck for such research supplies. No extra approvals by a multitude of departments should be necessary any more (the hoops that such research has to jump through are still on the order of Catch-22, even after some recent improvements have been made). Doctors should be able to get solid scientific studies which show effectiveness and which also start to break down the dozens of chemicals in the plant to more accurately prescribe their use for different medical conditions.

Marijuana should really become legal on federal property, so that campers in a National Park aren't at risk of punishments they wouldn't face if they stepped outside the park's boundaries. But this brings up a much wider point -- what I see as the real end of the road for the fight to dismantle the federal War On Weed. Prohibition required a constitutional amendment to end, and at least we won't have that hurdle to get over. But the War On Weed's end is going to look a lot like how Prohibition ended in one enormous way.

The states have to be given full control -- up to a point -- over how marijuana will be treated. The end to the federal War On Weed won't mean marijuana will be legalized in all 50 states the next day, but that's actually OK. Indeed, Prohibition hasn't actually ended yet in many counties across America. "Dry" counties still exist in plenty of states, where the sale of alcohol is absolutely forbidden. Alcohol can't be sold on Sundays in lots of other places (so much for separation of church and state). In some places "near beer" is the only thing you can buy (which is pretty horrendous stuff to drink, it should be mentioned). In other places, Everclear (190-proof grain alcohol) is illegal, but Bacardi 151 can be purchased. Laws still differ everywhere, in other words, concerning the legal purchase of alcohol. But here's the crucial footnote to this patchwork of alcohol laws across America: you can buy a bottle of liquor legally (in a "wet" county, of course) and then get in your car and legally drive to any place in America, wet or dry -- without having to worry about getting busted by the cops for having an unopened bottle of hooch in your car. As long as you consume it in private, mere possession of alcohol is not banned by law anywhere in America.

That is the real end of the road for marijuana, as well. No matter how all the rest of the details are worked out, this is when the war will fully be over. It's a monumental shift in federal policy, so it'll likely happen incrementally, but even so it may happen a lot sooner than you might think. These things have a way of steamrolling, in politics. The first step is taken (boldly or timidly), and then the next steps become easier because the logic supporting the entire War On Weed will begin to fall apart. "Why do we bother to still ban this, when we are now allowing that to take place?" becomes the question with no defensible answer (other than the wholly-inadequate: "Well, because we've always done it that way"). The framework will collapse of its own weight, and sometimes these collapses happen very swiftly. If 40 million Californians can enjoy the same freedom that citizens of Colorado and Oregon now enjoy, then the federal government is going to look pretty silly trying to turn back this tide. To some, the federal War On Weed won't be over until everyone affected receives an apology for all the idiocy (a full presidential pardon for Tommy Chong, perhaps?), but realistically speaking the end will happen when the government does exactly what Bernie Sanders boldly called for during his campaign -- the federal government treating marijuana not the same way it treats heroin or crystal meth, but the same way it treats alcohol and tobacco.

That was once a pipe dream, if you'll excuse the stoner-joke metaphor. For anyone who has lived through the War On Weed era, it seemed at times that the federal government was going so far backwards that such an end could not even realistically be conceived. But times are changing fast. The once-inconceivable hasn't quite become inevitable yet, but even so the end of the War On Weed is definitely now on the political horizon. Politicians should really take note, because they're now at risk of being on the wrong side of history. The old movement slogan has never seemed more appropriate, in fact: "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." Those are really the only choices left for the politicians, as the people in state after state jettison the War On Weed on their own, at the ballot box.

Chris Weigant blogs at:

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1468282489000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Ftodd-paglia%2Fstarbucks-cups-destroy-fo_b_10933538.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
Starbucks Cups Destroy Forests: 8000+ Paper Cups a Minute Used Once & Trashed
On Thursday, July 7, at 6:20 a.m. a yellow Penske rental truck pulled up in front of Starbucks Headquarters in Seattle. Ten Stand.earth volunteers jumped into the back of the truck and pulled out a series of 62 large plastic bags each of which was dangling from a long steel cable. It weighed a lot and the volunteers slowly, methodically laid it out this giant caterpillar-like thing on the sidewalk and began removing the hefty bags. Inside each bag were hundreds of Starbucks paper cups strung together in 11-foot lines that, when the steel cable was lifted, would form a 75 foot long wall of cups. In total there were 8,181 paper cups. When the volunteers strung that steel cable between two telephone poles all 8,181 cups formed a massive wall that from the street obscured the Starbucks main entrance.

8,181 is a lot of cups: it's the number of paper coffee cups that Starbucks serves every minute, every day of the year. The vast majority of those cups are thrown in the trash. The banner that hung alongside the wall of cups read: Starbucks Cups Destroy Forests.

The volunteers were met with incredulous private security officers who blocked them from entering the building to deliver copies of Stand's new report, Starbucks Cuts Forests for Cups. Our volunteers were heartened, however, by employees who streamed by the cup display, many stopping to thank us for pushing the company to follow through on its commitment to serve a better cup.

Starbucks, in a statement on our action quoted by the Globalist, stated:

"We have made a commitment and have never wavered from our efforts to make our cup recyclable..."

If by "never wavered" Starbucks means "we have made nearly zero progress" on altering the forest destroying nature of their cups, then we agree. In 2008 Starbucks made a public commitment to make its cups recyclable by 2015, meaning recyclable with regular paper recycling everywhere they served coffee. What the company fails to mention is that they failed to deliver. Why aren't current Starbucks paper cups recyclable? In order to hold liquid, they are lined with plastic made by the Dow Chemicals and Chevron Oils of the world, which makes recycling them with regular paper a major problem. But cups without that specific plastic lining that can hold hot liquids already exist. Starbucks is a huge consumer of paper cups and could demand those cups from their cup suppliers, but there's no indication that's happened.

Starbucks, which once committed to taking full responsibility for delivering a solution to disposable cups, instead passed the buck in their statement:

"What is recyclable varies significantly by municipality and sometimes even by store, and we pay local private haulers across the country to collect and recycle hot cups along with our other recyclable products, compost and trash."

That sounds very complicated. But here's something that's simple: wouldn't it make sense to use a cup that's recyclable anywhere that regular paper is recycled? No private haulers, no schlepping things across the country - all that's needed is a better cup!

Starbucks is just the type of innovative company that could be leading the charge to switch to an environmentally-friendly alternative. With 4.3 billion paper coffee cups leaving their stores each year, Starbucks has the chance to make a real difference. But instead of going with innovation and leadership, Starbucks is leaning on PR games and passing the buck. Their statement concludes:

"We're proud of the progress we've made, have annually reported and consistently shared our success and our challenges, and will continue to advocate to key policymakers and do even more within the industry to address the issue."

Starbucks, we can't wait to be proud of you. But with 8,000 cups a minute going straight into the trash, more than a million trees being cut annually to produce them, and big costs to our climate, you've got a long way to go.

It's time to stop wavering, stop passing the buck, and give us a Better Cup that doesn't destroy forests, create carbon pollution, or embarrass your mermaid and your customers who expect you to live up to your promises. Let Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz know you demand a better cup by signing our petition here.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1468282484000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fmarcia-g-yerman%2Fbeat-the-pollution-with-t_b_10907630.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
Beat the Pollution with the Plume Air App

"2016-07-09-1468103011-3050453-3ScreensPLUME.jpg"

Extreme heat waves are happening with alarming regularity. Summer used to be the time for kids to be outside non-stop. Now, both children and adults need more information on how to protect their health from a wide range of pollutants in the air.

Plume Air Report is my go-to tool. There are others, but Plume is my favorite. It is available free as an iOS and Android download.

Innovator, Romain Lacombe, is the founder and CEO of Plume. He has a varied background which includes environmental economics, math, banking, a stint in Silicon Valley, and a Fulbright scholarship. Open Data, which is a key premise behind Plume, is one of his top concerns.

During the COP21 conference in Paris, Lacombe co-organized the international event "Data Against Climate Change." He believes that data can boost "climate innovation," as well as serve as an instrument of assessment and evaluation.

Equally important for Lacombe is delivering to users a drill down on pollution history for specific areas via "geolocation." This illustrates hourly shifts, and daily comparisons to annual levels. Lacombe defines this as "making the air more transparent."

Plume's World Air Map collects beyond 500,000 data points every day from 11,000 stations, in order to build "predictive models" for over 200 metro localities. For those vicinities without a station, a combination of Artificial Intelligence and data science can estimate air pollution levels on a 60-minute basis. Emissions become a concrete entity, "democratizing access to environmental information."

"2016-07-09-1468102615-2205124-WorldMapPULSE.jpg"

The map contains hexagons of different sizes and colors to demarcate city population size (from 1 million to 10 million), and city pollution (from black indicating a Plume index of +300 to two shades of blue ranging from 0-20 and 20-50). Twenty countries are listed alphabetically; 150 cities cover North and South America, Europe, and Asia.

In the morning, I have a Plume Index Air Quality message waiting for me, with information about the current level of pollution. Living in New York City, change can be dramatic from day to day, and even within a 24-hour period. The more polluted the air is, the higher the number.

Individuals can set their level of sensitivity as Low, Normal, or High. Favorite activities to check in on are represented by icons symbolizing running, bicycling, going outdoors with young children, and eating outside. With the hourly breakdown, it makes it easier to plan activities. You can also be informed of the temperature and the UV Index. The primary pollutants of ozone, particulate matter, and nitrogen dioxide are noted, and compared with mean yearly averages. At times when pollution is HIGH, I am advised to "Take it easy" with almost everything. I even get a special message stating: "IMPACT IF CHRONIC EXPOSURE. The air has reached a high level of pollution. Higher than the maximum limit for 24 hours established by the World Health Organization (WHO)."

You don't have to be a geek to appreciate the deeper look into air pollution that Plume makes available. Clicking on the "head icon" with the brain center brings you to a series of concise evaluations about pollution specifics including:" What is it? Where Does It Come From? What are the risks?"

In the section Everything You Should Know About Pollution, there is information on the "inversion layer," which traps pollutants. I particularly liked the descriptions of frequently used terms like Nitrogen Dioxide, Ozone, Sulphur Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, VOCs, and Particulate Matter. Many people are familiar with the verbiage, but don't always fully grasp how or why their health is impacted.

In 2015, during the month of March, Paris hit a calamitous concentration of air pollution -- beyond the numbers of Beijing. Plume Labs informed the French government of the circumstances. In response, officials took steps to cut vehicle traffic by 50 percent for a full day.

Lacombe has written: "Air pollution is an invisible enemy, but we can fight back: actionable information helps limit our exposure, improve our health and well-being, and make our cities breathable."

Each year, air pollution leads to almost 7 million deaths around the world. It is presently the world's fourth-largest health threat. If we want to avoid the highest level of pollution on the Plume scale, Airpocalypse -- where everyone is advised to stay indoors a consideration of how serious a problem air pollution is must be addressed.

Tell Your Governor: Support the Clean Air Plan

Images: Courtesy of Plume Labs

This article originally appeared on the website Moms Clean Air Force.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1468278190000

robots

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fredirect.viglink.com%2F%3Fu%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Ffeeds.gawker.com%252F%7Er%252Flifehacker%252Fvip%252F%7E3%252FYFS05jrAr3Y%252Ftodays-best-deals-dash-button-blowout-better-posture-1783442586%26key%3Dddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
r0B0t: Today's Best Deals: Dash Button Blowout, Better Posture, Smarter Deadbolt

A huge Dash button promotion, a fitness tracker that improves your posture, and keypad-enabled deadbolts lead off Monday's best deals.

http://deals.kinja.com/todays-best-li…

Bookmark Kinja Deals and follow us on Twitter to never miss a deal. Commerce Content is independent of Editorial and Advertising, and if you buy something through our posts, we may get a small share of the sale. Click here to learn more, and don't forget to sign up for our email newsletter.

Top Deals

If you're curious about Amazon Dash buttons, there's never been a better time to stick them around your house. As part of a Prime Day countdown promotion, Prime members can purchase all the buttons they want for just $1 each, down from the usual $5. Plus, you'll still get a $5 credit the first time you use it, meaning Amazon's literally paying you to buy household essentials.

Amazon's Second Annual Prime Day Is Tomorrow: Here's Everything You Need To Know

$175 is a fair amount of cash for a single floorstanding speaker, even one that has dual subwoofers built right in, but $175 is the best deal Amazon's ever listed on the Klipsch R-26F by over $100, and it's only half its usual price, meaning you can buy a pair for the price of one.

While you can't control these Schlage deadbolts with your smartphone, the ability to unlock your front door with a passcode is perfect for house sitters or overnight guests, or for just unlocking the door while you're carrying groceries.

$69 is the best price Amazon's ever listed, and you can choose from several different finishes to match your decor. Just note that that is a Gold Box deal, so don't get locked out of these savings.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000NJJ1MQ/…

The world is full of fitness trackers that can count your steps and estimate calories, but today only, we've found a deal on a wearable device that can also help you improve your posture.

The Lumo Lift is a tiny clip that you attach to your clothing like a Fitbit One, but in addition to counting your steps, distance, and calories burned, it'll also start vibrating whenever you slouch. Assuming you heed its warnings and start sitting or standing up straight, this has the potential to meaningfully improve your life in a way that counting steps might not.

Today only, Prime members can snap one up for just $50, which is $30 less than usual, and a match for the best price we've ever seen.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00N9P8GMW/…

Your next TV really should have HDR support, and this 2016 Samsung 4K fits the bill for $590.

http://gizmodo.com/sonys-new-tv-t…

http://gizmodo.com/the-future-of-…

http://sploid.gizmodo.com/check-out-the-…

That's still a little expensive (though not too extravagant for a 50" set), but it gets you a great upscaling engine, local dimming, smart apps, Samsung Smart View, and yes, HDR. Today's price is the best we've ever seen, and about $60 less than Amazon's current price (which is itself Amazon's all-time low).

At $180, the FLIR ONE thermal imager is undoubtedly a luxury. But still, it's predator vision for your phone! It also normally sells for $250, and today's extended Lightning deal price is the best Amazon's ever listed.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00…

https://www.amazon.com/FLIR-ONE-Therm…

http://gizmodo.com/the-smaller-ch…

French press is your favorite way to make coffee, and it'll be an even more aesthetically pleasing process with this 100% stainless steel press for just $24.

http://lifehacker.com/most-popular-c…

We've seen less expensive french presses before, but if you prefer this model's shiny and simple design, $24 is a fine price.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B015A2BQ50/…

The Logitech G502 was your choice for best gaming mouse (though you don't need to be a gamer to appreciate its benefits), and the upgraded Proteus Spectrum model (which includes fully adjustable backlighting) is on sale for an all-time low $60 today.

http://co-op.kinja.com/most-popular-g…

http://lifehacker.com/improve-your-v…

The marquee spec here is the DPI range of 200-12,000, adjustable on the fly. There are also five easily movable and removable weights, and 11 customizable buttons, along with the classic Logitech dual-mode scroll wheel. Mechanical microswitches and a braided cable are also nice touches.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B019OB663A/…

Ready to get swole? Today only, Amazon's offering big discounts on performance nutrition products from the likes of BSN, EAS, Clif, and more, for Prime members only.

Inside, you'll find dozens of powders, shakes, bars, and more in a variety of flavors and formulas. Just note that the big red price listed is not the deal price in most cases. Look a little below that for the Prime price to see what you'll actually pay.

Amazon's virtual shelves are awash in $20 Bluetooth earbuds, but if you're willing to pay a bit more for superior sound quality, Jaybird's Wirecutter-recommended X2 sport earbuds have never been cheaper. Just note that this deal is only available today, and only for Prime members.

https://www.amazon.com/Jaybird-Sport-…

If wall-mounting your TV has been on your to-do list, you'd be hard-pressed to find a better deal on a mount. This model holds TVs up to 55", can extend up to 15" away from the wall, and can swivel and articulate in any direction, all for just $21.

https://www.amazon.com/Mounting-Dream…

These $6 deals from Andake can support your neck, your back, and your senses while sleeping on a plane. If you have any long trips on the horizon, these are no-brainers.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01…

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01…

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01…

Few activities will give you as much self-satisfaction making some fuckin' pasta from scratch, and this discounted roller makes it (relatively) easy to spin out both thin spaghetti and wide fettucini noodles. Plus, your friends will see it sitting out on your counter and think you're some kind of culinary savant.

https://www.amazon.com/Imperia-Pasta-…

http://adequateman.deadspin.com/lets-make-some…

We love shining a spotlight on good mini flashlight deals, and at ~~$6 for a two-pack~~, you could scatter these all around your home. They're even zoomable, so you can focus or widen the beam depending on the situation.

Update: Sold out, but here's a larger and brighter version of the flashlight for $6.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B016UGGBHS?…

If you've got the space for it, this feature-packed NordicTrack treadmill is marked down to $449 on Amazon today as part of a Gold Box deal. That's the best price ever listed, and a great deal for any treadmill that inclines up to 10%, and includes 20 built-in workouts, a space-saving fold-up design, and a lifetime frame warranty, and a 25 year motor warranty.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0193V3DJ6/…

LOFT wants to play a game, to solve “mystery” if you will, with their Mystery Flash Sale. Lucky for you, you don't need to sign up for emails to get any discount; that's what we're here for. Use the code LUCKY50 to get 50% off your entire regular-priced purchase.

Anker, purveyor of your favorite battery packs, charging cables, Bluetooth speakers, earbuds, and more, just released a deluge of promo codes and discounts on dozens of products in preparation for Prime Day.

There are too many deals to list on this page, but head over to our dedicated post for all of the links and promo codes.

http://deals.kinja.com/ankers-preppin…

$10 is a great price for any 32GB microSD card, but it's basically unheard of for an 80MB/s model from a reputable manufacturer like Samsung.

https://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Select…

Sugru is right up there with binder clips and the Raspberry Pi in Lifehacker's pantheon of must-have gear, and you can stock up today with 8-packs from Amazon for just $18 each.

http://lifehacker.com/top-10-diy-mir…

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B008URBC9I/…

We've seen plenty of deals on “premium” Google Cardboard-compatible VR headsets, but this is one of the only ones we've seen that includes a magnetic button on the side, which means you won't have to pair an external Bluetooth remote to navigate within VR apps. Seriously, if you haven't played with Google Cardboard yet, you'll have so much fun.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FU98R1E?…

If you still enjoy the feel of an old-fashioned paper magazine, Amazon's selling 6-month subscriptions to dozens of popular titles today, including Vanity Fair, Wired, Popular Science, and a lot more. Just note that this is a Gold Box deal, meaning it's only available today.

Tech

Lifestyle

Apparel

Patagonia Fitted Corduroy Pants - 32" Inseam - Women's | $44 | REI

Beauty & Grooming

Camping & Outdoors

10' Golf Practice Driving Cage | $30 | eBay
RockBirds S3 Foldable Silicone Sports Water Bottle FDA Approved 17Oz Blue | $8 | Amazon | Use code TW6WTFSG
Attmu Beach Blanket Mat, Water-ResistantOutdoor Mat- 78 in x 59 in - Blue Stripe | $13 | Amazon | Use code FVMCXBQQ
2-Pack Fazitrip Quick Drying Towel/Microfiber Towels /Sport Towels /Travel Towels with Carry Mesh Bag | $8 | Amazon | Use code OKJST788

Fitness

Prime Members Get up to 50% Off Performance Nutrition Products | Amazon | Today Only
NordicTrack T 6.5 S Treadmill | $449 | Amazon

Media

Movies & TV

Preorder The Iron Giant: Signature Edition | $10 | Amazon
Empire Records | $5 | Amazon
The Usual Suspects | $5 | Amazon
Les Miserables | $6 | Amazon
Far From The Madding Crowd | $8 | Amazon
Star Trek: Original Series - Three Season Pack | $50 | Best Buy

Books

Mudbound | $2 | Amazon
The Collectibles: The Collectibles Trilogy, Book 1 Audiobook | $3 | Amazon

Gaming

Peripherals

Razer BlackWidow Ultimate Stealth 2016 - Mechanical Gaming Keyboard | $80 | Newegg

PC

FREE Prince of Persia The Sands of Time | Ubi
The Sims 4 | $30 | Origin | Digital Deluxe version just $5 more

PlayStation 4

Sony PlayStation 4 Console Limited Edition Uncharted 4 Bundle | $370 | Best Buy
Resogun | $6 | Amazon
Trine Enchanted Edition | $6 | Amazon
Minecraft | $15 | Amazon
NHL 16 | $30 | Amazon

Xbox One

Transformers Devastation | $20 | Amazon
Quantum Break | $29 | Amazon
NHL 16 | $30 | Amazon

Wii U

3DS

Project X Zone 2 | $14 | Amazon
Persona Q: Shadow of the Labyrinth | $20 | Amazon

Toys

Miposaur | $39 | Amazon
WowWee Robotic Enhanced Vehicles (R.E.V), 2-Pack | $38 | Amazon
K'NEX Sky Sprinter Roller Coaster Building Set | $50 | Amazon
All Star Baseball Card Bundle | $23 | Woot

Commerce Content is independent of Editorial and Advertising, and if you buy something through our posts, we may get a small share of the sale. Click here to learn more, and don't forget to sign up for our email newsletter. We want your feedback.

robots

1468278186000

robots

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fredirect.viglink.com%2F%3Fu%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.slate.com%252Fblogs%252Fbrowbeat%252F2016%252F07%252F11%252Fwhy_geeks_are_angry_about_the_big_iron_man_news.html%26key%3Dddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
r0B0t: Geeks Are Angry About Iron Man Becoming a Black Girl—But Not for the Reason You'd Think

This article originally appeared in Vulture.

When Marvel Comics announced that a 15-year-old black girl named Riri Williams would be taking over as Iron Man later this year, the company was prepared for an attack from the right. Indeed, Brian Michael Bendis—the veteran scribe who introduced Riri in an Iron Man comic a few months ago and who will be writing her upcoming adventures—sounded a bit cocky about the high ground he held against his potential critics.

“Some of the comments online, I don't think people even realize how racist they sound,” he told Time in the article unveiling the move, referring to past assaults on Marvel for replacing traditionally white characters with nonwhite ones. “All I can do is state my case for the character, and maybe they'll realize over time that that's not the most progressive thinking.” Ironically, progressive thinking is what fueled the most pointed backlash to the news. The new Iron Person was emblematic of Marvel's efforts to become more representative of marginalized groups, but she also prompted a difficult question: What does progress really look like in superhero fiction?

The geek commentariat on Twitter swiftly and collectively reached two incriminating realizations about Riri. First, this black female character was created by and will be written by a white man. The contrast irked some on a creative level: “You can't call these diverse stories without diverse voices,” tweeted writer Carly Lane. Others looked at the problem from a financial standpoint: As pseudonymous blogger theblerdgurl put it, “I am happy to c a girl who looks like me as a lead in a #Marvel comic. I just wish someone who looks like me cld profit from it. #IronMan.”

That pecuniary line of criticism led to the second, more startling realization: Not only was this black female not being written by a black female, Marvel has no black female writers. Indeed, experts struggled to name a single black woman to have ever written a Marvel comic during the company's 77-year history. “Still can't think of a Sister who ever wrote for Marvel,” tweeted columnist Joseph P. Illidge. “Q for the superhero comics historians: has a black woman ever written an ongoing series for Marvel?”tweeted podcaster Al Kennedy, and when no one could come up with one, he followed up by saying, “Jeez. Feel like an prime idiot for not picking up on this before now. Easy to be in a cocoon as a white dude.”

Indeed. For much of the history of superhero fiction, the genre lived in that cocoon—white men paid other white men to write stories targeted at white men. As such, the most important characters were, themselves, white men: Batman, Superman, Captain America, Spider-Man, and the like. This is, of course, not unique to comics; it's true of all entertainment. But in the past few years, superhero comics have been morphing into something more multifaceted and representative, and they've been doing it in a way that movies and television can't.

Marvel has taken the lead on this front, using a fascinating tactic to get attention for their diversity pushes. Instead of trying to sell readers on new characters who aren't lily-white dudes, they simply rebrand their intellectual property. There's a long tradition of different people taking on the monikers of existing superheroes after the originals die or retire, so why not use that trope in a way that pushes the envelope on identity politics? You're not going to get much mainstream media attention by pitching the idea of a black girl who uses a robot suit. But if you say she's Iron Man—a name familiar to anyone who's purchased a movie ticket in the past eight years—all of a sudden, you've got yourself a Time headline. It's much harder to do those kinds of swaps in film and TV. Doing an all-female reboot of Ghostbusters or theoretically casting a person of color as James Bond is an exceedingly costly gamble; comics are cheap to make, so you can go back on your experiment with little risk.

The experiments have thus been plentiful. First came the 2011 introduction of Miles Morales, an Afro-Latino kid from Brooklyn who took up the role of Spider-Man during a period when Peter Parker was out of commission. Then came the 2012 shift in which Captain Marvel was recast as a woman. The next year, a new Ms. Marvel was introduced who, unlike her predecessor, was Pakistani-American and Muslim. There were twin announcements in 2014 that there would be a new, female Thor and a black man wielding the shield of Captain America. Last year brought yet another surprise: White-bread Bruce Banner would no longer be the Hulk—that emerald mantle would be held by a Korean-American kid. Now, we've got Riri.

All of those changes are pretty inarguably positive. It's hard to claim that making marginalized identities more prominent is anything but a step in the right direction. But how far does that step really stretch? To be sure, it's important for fans of the insanely lucrative and ever-growing superhero genre to see people like themselves on the page and on the screen. If you thrill to the antics of spandex-clad do-gooders, you deserve to not feel invisible, especially if you're a young person whose notion of identity and self-worth are still being formed.

And yet, Marvel has been undermining its own efforts in a number of ways. First of all, a lot of the changes have felt decidedly impermanent. The original Thor is still stomping around in the cosmos, waiting in the wings if and when his corporate overlords ever want to bring him back into the spotlight. The same goes for the Hulk. Puny Bruce Banner can go green whenever Marvel needs him to. Even more odd are the situations of Spidey and Cap. In each case, the replacement and the original are still operating in the Marvel universe under the name “Spider-Man” and “Captain America,” respectively. If there are two superheroes with the same name, and one's had that name since your grandfather was a kid—and has that name in a multibillion-dollar film franchise—why would you ever assume the nonwhite newbie will outlast him?

Luckily, there are no signs that Ms. Marvel or Captain Marvel will revert to their original statuses—no one is sharing their mantles. Even better, those two characters, in their new incarnations, have repeatedly interrogated race and gender (and, in the case of Ms. Marvel, faith). The rest have touched on identity politics only lightly, though often memorably. Thor has struggled with the fact that no one seems to take her as seriously as her predecessor, the black Captain America has dealt with racist hate groups, the Korean-American Hulk has challenged Asian-nerd stereotypes, and Miles has wrung his hands over whether he feels comfortable with people talking about his ethnicity.

The issue being addressed in the past 24 hours is the fact that four of the most lucrative and famous of these characters—Spider-Man, Iron Man, Thor, and Captain America—are being narratively stewarded by people who don't share their ethnic or gender identities. Their solo titles are all being written by white men. That's certainly not to say white people can't write about race or men can't write about gender. Of course they can. And Bendis is a very talented writer—his stories about Riri could be dazzling and groundbreaking.

But the post—Riri outcry is about matters that are larger than any one story decision: Why should we be prioritizing white, male creators' takes when a nonwhite, non-male character is put in the foreground? Aren't we losing a tremendous opportunity by not having people who look like those characters tell their stories? And isn't it frustrating that, as theblerdgirl noted, a black woman won't pick up the paycheck for a story about a black girl, especially after Marvel has reaped so much goodwill and praise for introducing one?

All of that said, it would be a shame to look at the critiques that progressive nerds are making about the Iron Man news and conclude that they're calling for a kind of identity siloing, in which only black people can write black characters, only women can write women, and so on. Marvel just needs more black creators and women creators, period, doing all kinds of series. Things are getting better, as of late. According to industry analyst Tim Hanley, nearly 19 percent of the company's creators are female, a number that's been generally rising in recent years. Last year, there was an outcry over the paucity of black creators on Marvel titles; there are a few more now, including none other than Ta-Nehisi Coates.

However, looking at the backlash to the Riri announcement, one is reminded of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's oft-quoted line about gender on the Supreme Court: “People ask me sometimes, ‘When do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court?' And my answer is when there are nine.” If a black girl can dream of flying as high as Tony Stark, it's perfectly reasonable for geeks to dream of a superhero-comics publisher whose staff is as diverse as its characters.

robots