Timberlake hints return to music in video


NEW YORK (AP) — Is Justin Timberlake bringing his music career back?


The superstar has concentrated almost exclusively on his acting career over the last few years. But on Thursday, he posted a video on his website that showed him walking into a studio, putting on headphones and saying: "I'm ready."


Timberlake hasn't made an album since 2006's Grammy-winning "FutureSex/LoveSounds." In the video, Timberlake is also heard saying that he obsesses over his music and doesn't want to put music out that he doesn't love — and that you have to wait for music you love.


Timberlake — who recently married longtime girlfriend Jessica Biel — has been in several movies, including "The Social Network," ''Bad Teacher," ''Friends With Benefits" and most recently "Trouble With the Curve."


___


Online:


http://www.justintimberlake.com


Read More..

F.D.A. Requires Cuts to Dosages of Ambien and Other Sleep Drugs





The Food and Drug Administration announced on Thursday that it was requiring manufacturers of popular sleeping pills like Ambien and Zolpimist to cut their recommended dosage in half for women, after laboratory studies showed that they can leave people still sleepy in the morning and at risk for accidents.


The agency issued the requirement for drugs containing the active ingredient zolpidem, by far the most widely used sleep aid. Using lower doses means less of the drug will remain in the blood in the morning hours, and leave people who take it less exposed to the risk of impairment while driving to work.


Women eliminate zolpidem from their bodies more slowly than men and the agency told manufacturers that the recommended dosage for women should be lowered to 5 milligrams from 10 milligrams for immediate-release products like Ambien, Edluar and Zolpimist. Dosages for extended-release products should be lowered to 6.25 milligrams from 12.5, the agency said. The agency also recommended lowering dosages for men.


An estimated 10 to 15 percent of women will have a level of zolpidem in their blood that impairs driving eight hours after taking the pill, while only about 3 percent of men do, said Dr. Robert Temple, deputy director for clinical science in the F.D.A.'s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.


Doctors will still be told that they can prescribe the higher dosage if the lower one does not work, Dr. Temple said.


“Most people thought that by the morning it is gone,” he said. “What we’re reminding people is that is sort of true, but that in some women who take a full 10 milligram dose, and in a lot of people who take the control release dose, it is not entirely true. Some people will be impaired in the morning.”


Read More..

Colleges Expect Lower Enrollment


 An annual survey of colleges and universities found that a growing number of schools face declining enrollment and less revenue from tuition.


  The survey, released by the credit reporting agency Moody’s Investors Service on Thursday, found that nearly half of colleges and universities that responded expect enrollment declines for full-time students, and a third of the schools expect tuition revenue to decline or to grow at less than the rate of inflation.


  Moody’s analysts say the problems are particularly acute at smaller, tuition-dependent schools and lower-rated universities, which have less ability to raise prices or attract students.


   “The cumulative effects of years of depressed family income and net worth, as well as uncertain job prospects for many recent graduates, are combining to soften student market demand at current tuition prices,” said Emily Schwarz, a Moody’s analyst and lead author of the report, in prepared remarks.


  The growing financial challenges for colleges and universities come a time when students and graduates have amassed more than $1 trillion in student debt, and many of them are struggling to pay their bills. Nearly one in six people with an outstanding student loan balance is in default, the federal government says.


  Before the financial crisis of 2008, colleges and universities routinely raised tuition and saw little impact on the number of prospective students who applied. Indeed, some private colleges said that applications actually increased when they boosted prices, apparently because families equated higher prices with quality.


  But that attitude has changed, in part because families’ income has declined. Ms. Schwarz also noted, “Tougher governmental scrutiny of higher education costs and disclosure practices is adding regulatory and political pressure to tuition and revenue from rising at past rates.”


  In addition, she noted that budget negotiations in Congress could lead to cuts in student aid programs, even as the share of students that depend on government help continues to rise. At public universities, federal loans fund a median of 40 percent of student charges; at private schools, the median is 21 percent.


  Overall, 18 percent of private universities and 15 percent of public schools that responded to the survey projected a decline in net tuition revenue for fiscal 2013. A much larger share, about one-third, said net tuition revenue would decline or grow by less than 2 percent.


  “Such weak revenue growth often means a college cannot afford salary increases or new program investments unless it cuts spending on staff and existing programs,” the Moody’s report said. By comparison, in fiscal 2008, only 11 percent of private schools and 9 percent of publics failed to grow tuition revenue by 2 percent or more.


  Growing awareness of student debt has focused increased attention on the value and cost of higher education, which has risen faster than inflation for decades as a result of increased spending on administrators, financial aid and debt for new buildings, and higher costs for items that have impacted all businesses, like health care.


  The Moody’s survey included 165 non-profit private universities and 127 responses from four-year public universities.


 


Read More..

Online Banking Attacks Were Work of Iran, U.S. Officials Say





SAN FRANCISCO — The attackers hit one American bank after the next. As in so many previous attacks, dozens of online banking sites slowed, hiccupped or ground to a halt before recovering several minutes later.







Daniel Rosenbaum for The New York Times

James A. Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington believes that recent online attacks on American banks have been the work of Iran.






But there was something disturbingly different about the wave of online attacks on American banks in recent weeks. Security researchers say that instead of exploiting individual computers, the attackers engineered networks of computers in data centers, transforming the online equivalent of a few yapping Chihuahuas into a pack of fire-breathing Godzillas.


The skill required to carry out attacks on this scale has convinced United States government officials and security researchers that they are the work of Iran, most likely in retaliation for economic sanctions and online attacks by the United States.


“There is no doubt within the U.S. government that Iran is behind these attacks,” said James A. Lewis, a former official in the State and Commerce Departments and a computer security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.


Mr. Lewis said the amount of traffic flooding American banking sites was “multiple times” the amount that Russia directed at Estonia in a monthlong online assault in 2007 that nearly crippled the Baltic nation.


American officials have not offered any technical evidence to back up their claims, but computer security experts say the recent attacks showed a level of sophistication far beyond that of amateur hackers. Also, the hackers chose to pursue disruption, not money: another earmark of state-sponsored attacks, the experts said.


“The scale, the scope and the effectiveness of these attacks have been unprecedented,” said Carl Herberger, vice president of security solutions at Radware, a security firm that has been investigating the attacks on behalf of banks and cloud service providers. “There have never been this many financial institutions under this much duress.”


Since September, intruders have caused major disruptions to the online banking sites of Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bancorp, PNC, Capital One, Fifth Third Bank, BB&T and HSBC.


They employed DDoS attacks, or distributed denial of service attacks, named because hackers deny customers service by directing large volumes of traffic to a site until it collapses. No bank accounts were breached and no customers’ money was taken.


By using data centers, the attackers are simply keeping up with the times. Companies and consumers are increasingly conducting their business over large-scale “clouds” of hundreds, even thousands, of networked computer servers.


These clouds are run by Amazon and Google, but also by many smaller players who commonly rent them to other companies. It appears the hackers remotely hijacked some of these clouds and used the computing power to take down American banking sites.


“There’s a sense now that attackers are crafting their own private clouds,” either by creating networks of individual machines or by stealing resources wholesale from poorly maintained corporate clouds, said John Kindervag, an analyst at Forrester Research.


How, exactly, attackers are hijacking data centers is still a mystery. Making matters more complex, they have simultaneously introduced another weapon: encrypted DDoS attacks.


Banks encrypt customers’ online transactions for security, but the encryption process consumes system resources. By flooding banking sites with encryption requests, attackers can further slow or cripple sites with fewer requests.


A hacker group calling itself Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Cyber Fighters has claimed in online posts that it was responsible for the attacks.


The group said it attacked the banks in retaliation for an anti-Islam video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad, and pledged to continue its campaign until the video was scrubbed from the Internet. It called the campaign Operation Ababil, a reference to a story in the Koran in which Allah sends swallows to defeat an army of elephants dispatched by the king of Yemen to attack Mecca in A.D. 571.


But American intelligence officials say the group is actually a cover for Iran. They claim Iran is waging the attacks in retaliation for Western economic sanctions and for a series of cyberattacks on its own systems. In the last three years, three sophisticated computer viruses — called Flame, Duqu and Stuxnet — have hit computers in Iran. The New York Times reported last year that the United States, together with Israel, was responsible for Stuxnet, the virus used to destroy centrifuges in an Iranian nuclear facility in 2010.


“It’s a bit of a grudge match,” said Mr. Lewis of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.


Read More..

Why bother with a Facebook phone? Facebook’s app is already on 86% of iPhones and iPads






Rumors suggesting Facebook (FB) is working on a smartphone have resurfaced a number of times over the past year. Each time, Facebook denied the various claims. Facebook may indeed still be working on its own phone but as a new report from market research firm NPD Group shows, it probably doesn’t need to.


[More from BGR: Is Samsung the new Apple?]






Facebook makes money by gathering information about its users and serving targeted ads based on that data. Allowing users to update Facebook with fresh data as often as possible is obviously beneficial to the company, and smartphones present a terrific opportunity to give users access to their Facebook accounts from anywhere. The more people using Facebook’s mobile apps, the better, and Facebook’s smartphone penetration is absolutely staggering right now.


[More from BGR: iPhone 5 now available with unlimited service, no contract on Walmart’s $ 45 Straight Talk plan]


According to data published by NPD Group on Tuesday, Facebook’s iOS application was used by 86% of iPhone, iPad and iPod touch owners as of November 2012. On the Android platform, 70% of smartphone and tablet owners used Facebook’s mobile app in November.


No other third-party app even comes close to approaching Facebook’s mobile penetration. Google’s (GOOG) YouTube app is the next most popular third-party app on iOS with 40% penetration and Amazon’s (AMZN) mobile application is the second most popular third-party Android app with just 28% penetration.


So why would Facebook bother making its own phone?


One answer — perhaps the obvious one — is that an own-brand smartphone with custom software would give Facebook access to far more personal data than it can reach using third-party applications. Considering Facebook’s track record with matters relating to privacy, however, users may be reluctant to buy a Facebook phone.


In any case, a Facebook phone certainly doesn’t seem like a necessity for the time being. Instead, focusing on ways to effectively monetize the hundreds of millions of users who interact with Facebook from a smartphone or tablet each month might be a wiser use of resources.


This article was originally published on BGR.com


Social Media News Headlines – Yahoo! News




Read More..

Yoda statue among features of new N. Calif. park


SAN ANSELMO, Calif. (AP) — A Northern California city has approved a new downtown park to be built on land donated by filmmaker George Lucas that will feature statues of Indiana Jones and Yoda, two of his most popular characters.


The Marin Independent Journal reports (http://bit.ly/Ws4CcS ) that the San Anselmo Planning Commission voted unanimously Monday to approve the park, which could be completed as soon as June 1.


Lucas donated land for the 8,700-square-foot park. A commercial building on the site will be demolished at Lucas' expense, and an historic fresco relocated.


A fund is being established by a community foundation to pay for ongoing maintenance and care of the park.


The park's Yoda fountain will be similar to the one located at the Letterman Digital Arts Center in San Francisco.


___


Information from: Marin Independent Journal, http://www.marinij.com


Read More..

Economic Scene: Health Care and Pursuit of Profit Make a Poor Mix





Thirty years ago, Bonnie Svarstad and Chester Bond of the School of Pharmacy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison discovered an interesting pattern in the use of sedatives at nursing homes in the south of the state.




Patients entering church-affiliated nonprofit homes were prescribed drugs roughly as often as those entering profit-making “proprietary” institutions. But patients in proprietary homes received, on average, more than four times the dose of patients at nonprofits.


Writing about his colleagues’ research in his 1988 book “The Nonprofit Economy,” the economist Burton Weisbrod provided a straightforward explanation: “differences in the pursuit of profit.” Sedatives are cheap, Mr. Weisbrod noted. “Less expensive than, say, giving special attention to more active patients who need to be kept busy.”


This behavior was hardly surprising. Hospitals run for profit are also less likely than nonprofit and government-run institutions to offer services like home health care and psychiatric emergency care, which are not as profitable as open-heart surgery.


A shareholder might even applaud the creativity with which profit-seeking institutions go about seeking profit. But the consequences of this pursuit might not be so great for other stakeholders in the system — patients, for instance. One study found that patients’ mortality rates spiked when nonprofit hospitals switched to become profit-making, and their staff levels declined.


These profit-maximizing tactics point to a troubling conflict of interest that goes beyond the private delivery of health care. They raise a broader, more important question: How much should we rely on the private sector to satisfy broad social needs?


From health to pensions to education, the United States relies on private enterprise more than pretty much every other advanced, industrial nation to provide essential social services. The government pays Medicare Advantage plans to deliver health care to aging Americans. It provides a tax break to encourage employers to cover workers under 65.


Businesses devote almost 6 percent of the nation’s economic output to pay for health insurance for their employees. This amounts to nine times similar private spending on health benefits across the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, on average. Private plans cover more than a third of pension benefits. The average for 30 countries in the O.E.C.D. is just over one-fifth.


We let the private sector handle tasks other countries would never dream of moving outside the government’s purview. Consider bail bondsmen and their rugged sidekicks, the bounty hunters.


American TV audiences may reminisce fondly about Lee Majors in “The Fall Guy” chasing bad guys in a souped-up GMC truck — a cheap way to get felons to court. People in most other nations see them as an undue commercial intrusion into the criminal justice system that discriminates against the poor.


Our reliance on private enterprise to provide the most essential services stems, in part, from a more narrow understanding of our collective responsibility to provide social goods. Private American health care has stood out for decades among industrial nations, where public universal coverage has long been considered a right of citizenship. But our faith in private solutions also draws on an ingrained belief that big government serves too many disparate objectives and must cater to too many conflicting interests to deliver services fairly and effectively.


Our trust appears undeserved, however. Our track record suggests that handing over responsibility for social goals to private enterprise is providing us with social goods of lower quality, distributed more inequitably and at a higher cost than if government delivered or paid for them directly.


The government’s most expensive housing support program — it will cost about $140 billion this year — is a tax break for individuals to buy homes on the private market.


According to the Tax Policy Center, this break will benefit only 20 percent of mostly well-to-do taxpayers, and most economists agree that it does nothing to further its purported goal of increasing homeownership. Tax breaks for private pensions also mostly benefit the wealthy. And 401(k) plans are riskier and costlier to administer than Social Security.


From the high administrative costs incurred by health insurers to screen out sick patients to the array of expensive treatments prescribed by doctors who earn more money for every treatment they provide, our private health care industry provides perhaps the clearest illustration of how the profit motive can send incentives astray.


By many objective measures, the mostly private American system delivers worse value for money than every other in the developed world. We spend nearly 18 percent of the nation’s economic output on health care and still manage to leave tens of millions of Americans without adequate access to care.


Britain gets universal coverage for 10 percent of gross domestic product. Germany and France for 12 percent. What’s more, our free market for health services produces no better health than the public health care systems in other advanced nations. On some measures — infant mortality, for instance — it does much worse.


In a way, private delivery of health care misleads Americans about the financial burdens they must bear to lead an adequate existence. If they were to consider the additional private spending on health care as a form of tax — an indispensable cost to live a healthy life — the nation’s tax bill would rise to about 31 percent from 25 percent of the nation’s G.D.P. — much closer to the 34 percent average across the O.E.C.D.


A quarter of a century ago, a belief swept across America that we could reduce the ballooning costs of the government’s health care entitlements just by handing over their management to the private sector. Private companies would have a strong incentive to identify and wipe out wasteful treatment. They could encourage healthy lifestyles among beneficiaries, lowering use of costly care. Competition for government contracts would keep the overall price down.


We now know this didn’t work as advertised. Competition wasn’t as robust as hoped. Health maintenance organizations didn’t keep costs in check, and they spent heavily on administration and screening to enroll only the healthiest, most profitable beneficiaries.


One study of Medicare spending found that the program saved no money by relying on H.M.O.’s. Another found that moving Medicaid recipients into H.M.O.’s increased the average cost per beneficiary by 12 percent with no improvement in the quality of care for the poor. Two years ago, President Obama’s health care law cut almost $150 billion from Medicare simply by reducing payments to private plans that provide similar care to plain vanilla Medicare at a higher cost.


Today, again, entitlements are at the center of the national debate. Our elected officials are consumed by slashing a budget deficit that is expected to balloon over coming decades. With both Democrats and Republicans unwilling to raise taxes on the middle class, the discussion is quickly boiling down to how deeply entitlements must be cut.


We may want to broaden the debate. The relevant question is how best we can serve our social needs at the lowest possible cost. One answer is that we have a lot of room to do better. Improving the delivery of social services like health care and pensions may be possible without increasing the burden on American families, simply by removing the profit motive from the equation.


E-mail: eporter@nytimes.com;


Twitter: @portereduardo



Read More..

DealBook: S.E.C. Enforcement Chief, Robert Khuzami, Steps Down

Robert Khuzami, a former terrorism prosecutor who revamped the Securities and Exchange Commission’s enforcement unit, is stepping down from the agency after an aggressive four-tenure.

His departure signals the end of an important chapter in the history of the agency, which has been praised for taking significant actions against some of Wall Street’s largest banks after the financial crisis but also scrutinized for not suing top bank executives at those firms.

After joining the S.E.C. in 2009, Mr. Khuzami reinvigorated the enforcement team, which was maligned for missing the warning signs of the financial crisis and Bernard L. Madoff’s Ponzi scheme. Mr. Khuzami, an imposing presence with a piercing stare, reorganized the management ranks, fashioning specialized units to track complex corners of Wall Street, and applied aggressive prosecutorial tactics to civil cases. In recent years, the enforcement division notched a record number of actions, many against banks at the center of the crisis.

“They know we’re out there, and we’re smarter and can cover more ground,” Mr. Khuzami said in an interview. He announced his departure to staff in an e-mail on Wednesday and is set to depart in about two weeks.

Mr. Khuzami’s successor, who has not been named, faces challenges. The enforcement unit must contend with the increasingly influential rapid-fire trading firms that, by some accounts, have introduced instability to the stock market.

The unit also faces lingering questions about its negotiating tactics. Some consumer advocates complain that the agency’s headline-grabbing settlements let Wall Street off the hook. Mr. Khuzami’s unit notably butted heads with a prominent federal judge in New York, Jed S. Rakoff, who in 2010 called the agency’s $150 million settlement with Bank of America over lax public disclosures “half-baked justice at best.”

Mr. Khuzami’s departure, part of a broader exodus from the S.E.C. following the resignation of its chairwoman, Mary L. Schapiro, raises further questions about the future of the unit. The move, at the very least, adds to the gap in the S.E.C.’s roster.

The agency has witnessed a wave of turnover in recent weeks, with the head of trading and markets and the director of corporation finance both leaving. Elisse B. Walter, Ms. Schapiro’s replacement, named interim replacements for those spots.

But the enforcement division, officials say, could struggle under a provisional leader. The enforcement chief, they note, sets the tone for Wall Street oversight.

Ms. Walter is weighing a short list of candidates to replace Mr. Khuzami, according to people briefed on the matter. The list includes Mr. Khuzami’s current deputy, George Canellos, and the enforcement division’s chief litigation counsel, Matthew Martens.

With Mr. Khuzami gone, the field of contenders to replace Ms. Schapiro is also shifting. President Obama awarded the job to Ms. Walter, a Democrat who became an S.E.C. commissioner in 2008, but her term expires at the end of 2013.

Mr. Khuzami, a political independent described as alternately harsh and playful with his employees, built a loyal following among some enforcement division officials who hoped he would win the chairman post. He opted instead to position himself for a lucrative spot at a white-shoe law firm.

“I don’t know what I’m doing next, but I loved the last four years and I’m sad it’s ending,” he said in the interview.

Mr. Khuzami, a Rochester native with a bohemian upbringing, followed an unlikely path to the S.E.C. His parents were ballroom dancers; his sister a muralist. They jokingly refer to Mr. Khuzami as “the white sheep” of the family.

He put himself through school with odd jobs, as a dishwasher, bartender, overnight dockworker. After graduating from Boston University law school, he was hired as a junior lawyer at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft in New York.

Mr. Khuzami tried out for the United States attorney’s office under Rudy Giuliani, but missed the cut. When the office eventually hired him in the early 1990s, he was assigned to terrorism prosecutions. The move led to a career-defining case — the conviction of the so-called “Blind Sheik,” a Muslim leader tied the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. He later ran a securities task force.

But after more than a decade as a prosecutor, he departed for Deutsche Bank, where he eventually became general counsel of the firm’s American arm.

In 2009, he landed on Ms. Schapiro’s radar screen. She was searching for an aggressive personality to shake up the enforcement team, a demoralized group criticized for missing the warning signs of the crisis.

“It had to be someone who was a great prosecutor,” Ms. Schapiro said in an interview.

Their relationship began with an awkward meeting. Mr. Khuzami, having dressed in the dark to catch a predawn plane to Washington, wore mismatched shoes of different colors. And at the end of the interview, without an explicit offer, he was unsure whether he won the position. Finally, after days of silence, Ms. Schapiro phoned him to ask: “Are you taking the job or not?”

Mr. Khuzami soon hatched a game plan for overhauling — some officials called it “dismantling” — the division.

He arrived in Washington with strategies imported from the United States attorney’s office. Mr. Khuzami pushed the S.E.C. to offer leniency for cooperating witnesses and to strike deferred-prosecution agreements to companies that promised to behave. The tools, he said, are “game changers” for unearthing fraud.

He also poached former prosecutors for his staff, including Lorin L. Reisner, Mr. Khuzami’s friend from the United States attorney’s office, who joined as the top deputy. Mr. Khuzami plucked other new hires from Wall Street, including traders and compliance officers. Adam Storch, then a 29-year-old Goldman Sachs vice president, became the unit’s first chief operating officer.

Under the new regime, the enforcement team eliminated a layer of management, moving senior lawyers onto the front lines of investigations. Mr. Khuzami mandated, for the first time, that all enforcement employees carry a BlackBerry, holding them accountable beyond the 9-5 workday.

Mr. Khuzami also built specialties among his staff, a strategy he picked up at Deutsche Bank. He created an Office of Market Intelligence to analyze and triage tips and complaints from investors. He then opened five units that tracked some of the darkest corners of finance, focusing on structured products like derivatives, market abuse like insider trading and the secretive world of hedge fund returns.

“The changes were necessary and dramatic,” Ms. Schapiro said.

Mr. Khuzami introduced the broad outlines of reform in May 2009 at a retreat in Solomons Island, Md., an annual gathering of senior enforcement officials. “It’s time to get serious about change,” he said, according to attendees.

But the message provoked concerns among enforcement lawyers, who lined up at microphones to question the nuances of new procedures and complain about potential violations of their contracts. A few top officials, some who were widely respected, were about to be left at the sidelines under his regime.

“Everyone in the office was scared, but we also started working harder,” said Thomas Sporkin, who ran the Office of Market Intelligence until last year, when he departed the agency.

The group faced some growing pains, as it adjusted to Mr. Khuzami’s management style. He had a harsh streak and a knack for aggressively grilling lawyers about the nuances of enforcement cases, according to staff members. But they also recalled a softer side. He invited employees to his family Christmas party, they say, and went to motorcycle safety school with Mr. Canellos.

As a motivational tool, he would often publicly perform for his staff. At a swearing-in ceremony for new members, he quoted poetry from Gwendolyn Brooks. Mr. Khuzami also once donned a red wig to sing a version of the “Annie” theme song “Tomorrow,” with lyrics twisted to fit the S.E.C., at an annual awards ceremony.

“Even though he scares the hell out of people,” one employee said, “you like him because he’s genuine.”

Mr. Khuzami’s tactics appeared to bear fruit. Under his tenure, the unit leveled more charges than in any comparable four-year period, including a record number of enforcement actions in 2011. They also mounted 150 actions against people and firms tied to the crisis.

Mr. Khuzami emphasized that the unit was tracking bigger game. The agency has taken aim at billionaire hedge fund managers, including Philip Falcone, and filed complex cases involving collateralized debt obligations, a crackdown that ensnared some of the biggest names on Wall Street. At the urging of Mr. Khuzami and Mr. Reisner, the S.E.C. brought a landmark fraud case against Goldman Sachs, netting a record settlement in excess of $500 million.

“He’s really broadened the net,” said Mary Jo White, a white-collar criminal defense lawyer at Debevoise who was Mr. Khuzami’s boss when she was the United States attorney in Manhattan.

Some consumer advocates say the enforcement unit remains too timid. They complain that it opted not to charge Lehman Brothers executives and went soft on firms like Bank of America and Citigroup. Judge Rakoff refused to bless the $285 million Citigroup deal, calling the penalty “pocket change.”

Critics also question why the S.E.C. sued only a handful of top executives who ran companies at the center of the credit crisis.

“If you’re rich and connected on Wall Street, then don’t worry about the S.E.C,” said Dennis M. Kelleher, the head of Better Markets, a nonprofit advocacy group critical of the financial industry.

Mr. Khuzami dismissed the grumbling, saying, “The critics ought to take comfort in that we’re not reluctant to charge high-ranking individuals.” The agency, he noted, sued 65 senior executives involved in the crisis, including the leaders of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and most major mortgage companies that caused the housing bubble. The cases involving big banks, he said, lacked sufficient evidence implicating chief executives.

And despite their differences, even Judge Rakoff credits Mr. Khuzami with a rapid turnaround of the enforcement division.

“Although, from our different perspectives, Rob Khuzami and I sharply disagree about some matters, overall I think he has done a terrific job,” Judge Rakoff said. “Most important, he has restored a sense of pride and purpose to the S.E.C. enforcement division, and we are all the better for it.”

Read More..

An Appraisal: Ada Louise Huxtable, Appraisal of an Architecture Critic


Gene Maggio/The New York Times


The architecture critic Ada Louise Huxtable died on Monday at 91.







The great architecture critic Ada Louise Huxtable, who died on Monday at 91, started writing for The New York Times in 1963 and just a few weeks ago was still making the most of her bully pulpit for The Wall Street Journal, railing against proposed changes to the New York Public Library building at 42nd Street.




She cared about public standards, social equity, the whole city. When I wrote some months back about branch libraries in Queens and elsewhere that have opened lately, thanks to the city’s Design Excellence Program, she shot me an e-mail: “These projects are clear, visual demonstrations, which people need in order to understand how a high standard of architectural design and the refusal to go with hack work can have very real and sometimes unanticipated social, human, environmental and neighborhood consequences, often in parts of the city that need it so badly and that we hear so little about.”


Nearly half a century earlier Ms. Huxtable celebrated a stretch of lower Broadway where a Noguchi sculpture had arrived in the plaza of a new tower, “one of the handsomest in the city,” she briefly noted in The Times before providing a 360-degree view in fine-grained prose. (“Look to your left,” she wrote, “and you will see the small turn-of-the-century French pastry in creamy, classically detailed stone that houses the neighboring Chamber of Commerce.”)


The architecture of the new building was inextricably bound up with the spot on which it had risen, and what mattered to her critical sensibility as much as the quality of its curtain wall (“the taut, shiny-dark sleekness of matte black aluminum and gleaming bronze glass”) was its impact at street level. Writing about architecture meant writing about life down to the corner and the curb — buildings are lived in, after all, not just sculptures or monuments on a skyline.


“Instead of a public architecture, or an architecture integrated into life and use,” Ms. Huxtable lamented in The New York Review of Books 20 years ago, “we have ‘trophy’ buildings by ‘signature’ architects, like designer clothes.” She identified the ingenuity of Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim in Bilbao, Spain, but also the debased, money-driven culture, with its desire for “an iconic look-alike by a tiresomely familiar name” that had come in its wake.


“I have never joined architectural groupies of any persuasion,” she wrote in the preface to “On Architecture,” a 2008 collection of her writings. That was true. “As an architectural historian, I have not bought into anyone’s belief systems, including modernism’s most admirable and often faulty illusions. I have a built-in skepticism of dogma.”


This allowed Ms. Huxtable to weather shifting fashions without having to say she was sorry. Her tastes didn’t waver over the decades, nor did her standards. She liked Boston’s City Hall when it opened in 1962, although most people didn’t, and she liked it a half-century later, when a young generation of architects was coming around to its Brutalism, but much of the public still wanted to tear it down. The building was “uncompromising,” she wrote.


Like her.


Patrician, old-school, crusty and softhearted, she never wrote as if she owed anything to anyone except her readers, treating her beat as a mix of aesthetics and public policy, art and advocacy, technology and politics, because to write about architecture as anything less would be to shortchange its complexity and significance.


I gather that Ms. Huxtable’s first publication in The Times was a letter to the editor in 1957, complaining about an art review of photographs of architecture in Caracas, Venezuela, that ignored the deleterious effects of those photogenic but authoritarian buildings on the fabric of the city and its people. Like many others who grew up reading her, I gained a sense of the central role of architecture and urbanism in civic life and culture from the urgency of her writing, which came down to meditations on how we live and what kind of legacy we wish to leave behind.


She emerged during the era of Lewis Mumford and Jane Jacobs, with whom she belongs in the pantheon, but as the first full-time critic writing on architecture for an American newspaper, she also had that rare journalistic opportunity to pioneer something of her own, to fill a yawning gap in the public discourse, to carve a path with moral dimensions, “to celebrate the pleasures of this remarkable art,” as she put it.


Years later Ms. Huxtable wrote in The New York Review of Books:


“When so much seems to conspire to reduce life and feeling to the most deprived and demeaning bottom line, it is more important than ever that we receive that extra dimension of dignity or delight and the elevated sense of self that the art of building can provide through the nature of the places where we live and work. What counts more than style is whether architecture improves our experience of the built world; whether it makes us wonder why we never noticed places in quite this way before.”


Dignity and delight.


“The consistent theme is pleasure,” Ms. Huxtable wrote in 1978. “There is so much more to see, to experience, to understand, to enjoy.”


Read More..

Target to match some rivals’ online prices year-round






(Reuters) – Target Corp said on Tuesday it will match on a year-round basis the prices found on the websites of key rivals Amazon.com Inc, Best Buy Co Inc, Wal-Mart Stores Inc and Toys R Us, its latest tactic to hold onto shoppers focused on price.


The move extends an online price-matching program that Target introduced over the holiday season and which was supposed to last only from November 1 to December 16. It also comes after Target last week reported flat sales growth in December at stores open at least a year.






In November Chief Executive Gregg Steinhafel said the retailer was not seeing a lot of price-match activity in its stores.


While shopping online has grown rapidly in recent years, it still represents a small fraction of overall shopping in the United States. Target’s policy of matching online prices differs from policies at several chains, which match only printed advertised prices for items sold at stores.


Target said that throughout the year it will match the price when a customer buys an eligible item at one of its stores and finds the same item at a lower price in the following week’s Target circular or in a local competitor’s printed ad. It will also match the price if the customer finds the same item at a lower price within a week on Target’s website or the websites of Amazon, Walmart, Best Buy and Toys R Us.


Amazon says it offers competitive prices and does not offer price matching when an item’s price drops after a customer buys it, with the exception of televisions. Walmart matches the prices of print ads from competitors. Walmart also says it checks the prices of 30,000 items at competing chains each week to make sure it has the lowest prices.


Best Buy matches the price from a local competitor’s store, a local Best Buy store or its own web site. Toys R Us matches in-store prices and certain online prices.


(Reporting By Jessica Wohl in Chicago and Phil Wahba in New York; Editing by Alden Bentley and John Wallace)


Internet News Headlines – Yahoo! News





Title Post: Target to match some rivals’ online prices year-round
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/target-to-match-some-rivals-online-prices-year-round/
Link To Post : Target to match some rivals’ online prices year-round
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment




Read More..