Greensburg, IN—The Decatur County United Fund hosted the Decatur County Youth worker Café Tuesday at the Decatur County REMC. The Indiana Youth Institute presented the State of the Child 2020 demographic date information to the crowd. The data presented was on overview of state statistics reported from the Department of Education for Decatur County as well as correlated information against State and national data. Decatur County ranked 29th overall for child well being. The largest issues for the area continue to be a lack of mental health options for youth and a lack of early education options. The data was presented by Sarah Micich, Director of Data and Research at IYI. The Decatur County United Fund hosts three Youth Worker Cafes per year. Joane Cunningham stated that the intent of the cafes is to gather all of the individuals and agencies in the community that works with the youth of Decatur County including schools and not-for-profits. The events are free but do need to register in advance as there is a lunch provided. The next Youth worker café will be held on May 14 at the Decatur County REMC. To review the snapshot information on any county in Indiana from IYI, click here.
A string of games early last week marked the last opportunity for area high school softball teams to make an impact before they headed into the Section III playoffs.Jamesville-DeWitt, holding the no. 7 state Class A ranking and a 15-1 record, nearly got upended last Monday against Syracuse, working hard to earn a 5-4 victory.Twice, the Red Rams went in front, 1-0 in the first inning and 3-1 in the third inning. Both times, Syracuse, who was 10-2 going into the game, caught up, scoring twice in the top of the fifth to pull even again, 3-3.Only when J-D answered that rally with two runs of its own in the bottom of the fifth did it move ahead for good, and even here Syracuse fought back with a run in the sixth before Shayna Myshrall was able to earn the final outs.Katie White hit a home run and got two RBIs, with Kate Dorazio also driving in two runs. Mysrhall and Paige Keeler each scored twice as Carmela Vigliotti-Martinez (three hits, two runs scored) and Adonia Wade (two RBIs) led Syracuse’s efforts.The second game against Syracuse was also quite competitive, but again J-D prevailed, this time 5-2 as Keeler scored a pair of runs and, while Myshrall rested, Dorazio and Sydney Linkiewicz combined for pitching duties, holding Syracuse to two hits.East Syracuse Minoa had a four-game win streak going into last Monday’s game at Cicero-North Syracuse, but got humbled by the state Class AA no. 6-ranked Northstars in a 13-0 defeat.An eight-run first inning and a five-run second inning was all the Northstars needed, with the Spartans held to two hits, one each by Shaina Brilbeck and Franchesca Polcaro. Brooke Nicolaos (three RBIs) and Francesca LoRobardiere (two RBIs) paced C-NS.But ESM roared back to life on Wednesday with a doubleheader sweep of Oswego, the first game a 10-9 decision where Polcaro drove home Rachel Brefka with the winning run. In the second game, the Spartans topped the Buccaneers 9-5.As that went on, Fayetteville-Manlius beat West Genesee 12-7, largely on the strength of Sophie Woodridge’s bat as she belted a home run, added two doubles and got six RBIs overall.The Hornets scored in every inning as Lily Fish got three hits and scored three runs, with Patricia Boltman adding a pair of RBIs.That was the first of two games F-M played that day, later taking on Christian Brothers Academy and, once again, finishing on top as the Hornets staged a furious comeback to beat the Brothers 8-5.A run in the first inning, plus four in the second inning, had CBA up 5-0 early as Victoria Hall drove in two of those runs, with RBIs also going to Abby Benware and Maddy Tallman.From there, though, F-M relief pitcher Paige Murphy blanked the Brothers through 5 1/3 innings, striking out nine while only surrendering two hits, giving her teammates time to rally.After a run in the fourth, the Hornets scored five times in the fifth inning to take a 6-5 lead, adding a pair of insurance runs in the seventh. Murphy doubled twice as she and Fish both got two RBIs, with Woodridge adding three hits as she and Gracie Bishop had one RBI apiece.Before all this, CBA took a setback in last Monday’s 6-0 defeat to Baldwinsville. All that the Brothers could manage was four hits off Bees pitcher Kayla Young, one each by Benware, Victoria Hall, Makenzie Witz and Maya Geiss.Tallman returned to the pitcher’s circle for the Brothers and did well late, but only after B’ville struck for two runs in the second inning and three more in the third as Alyssa Dybacz led them with three hits and two RBIs.Two more games followed on Wednesday, CBA shut out by Cicero-north Syracuse 5-0 and then the F-M defeat, but the Brothers still earned the no. 2 seed in the sectional Class A bracket as J-D got the top seed and ESM the no. 5 seed.In quarterfinal games next Thursday, J-D faces Central Square or Indian River, with ESM going to no. 4 seed Carthage and CBA hosting no. 7 seed Fulton as, in Class AA, F-M has an opening-round clash with Rome Free Academy, the winner to get C-NS in the semifinals, where Class A semifinals will also take place. Tags: CBAESMF-MJ-DSoftball Share this:FacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditComment on this Story
Two papers on evolutionary theory create a strong tension. One says that there is no law of evolution – just chaos. The other claims that morality evolved out of the mess.Evolution is a theory in chaos…: If you thought Charles Darwin brought biological evolution under natural laws, think again. Keith Bennett on New Scientist argued, “Forget finding the laws of evolution. The history of life is just one damn thing after another.” His surprising article undermines the two pillars of evolution: common descent and natural selection. Common descent, he says, was not discovered by Charles Darwin; it was stipulated by him. It has been “accepted as a basic premise of biology since 1859.” If it is a premise, it is an a priori assumption or axiom; it is not a finding. Bennett left it at that. As for the second pillar, the claim that life “evolves by means of natural selection and adaptation,” a principle he equates with adaptationism, Bennett says it is “more controversial, but has come to be accepted over the past 150 years as the principal mechanism of evolution.” But is it? Microevolution is uncontroversial, he said, but “there is still huge debate about the role of natural selection and adaptation in ‘macroevolution’ – big evolutionary events such as changes in biodiversity over time, evolutionary radiations and, of course, the origin of species.” The impact of that admission can hardly be overestimated. Many of the bitter disputes at school board meetings across the country have occurred over the presumption that there is no controversy over evolution among scientists. Darwinians have railed against citizens who have lobbied to “teach the controversy” about evolution. But Bennett continued to say that a “long-running debate” about it included the famous Stephen Jay Gould, who in 1972 “challenged the assumption that evolutionary change was continuous and gradual.” His notion of “punctuated equilibria” also challenged the expectations of adaptation to produce continuous change over long periods. Bennett argued instead for a “Chaos theory of evolution,” a theory that acknowledges that evolutionary changes are unpredictable, individualistic, highly sensitive to initial conditions, nonlinear, and fractal. Even the dynamics of evolution are changing all the time, he said, meaning that even the principles of flux are in flux. Using fossil data from the Quaternary period with its ice ages, he shows that many populations did not adapt to the changes, others adapted in unpredictable ways, and many went extinct. Here’s how he summed up the implications of his view:This view of life leads to certain consequences. Macroevolution is not the simple accumulation of microevolutionary changes but has its own processes and patterns. There can be no “laws” of evolution. We may be able to reconstruct the sequence of events leading to the evolution of any given species or group after the fact, but we will not be able to generalise from these to other sequences of events. From a practical point of view, this means we will be unable to predict how species will respond to projected climate changes over next century.Yet it has been the great goal of Darwin and his followers ever since to bring biology under natural laws. His ending reinforces the fact that there are none. “In the last analysis, evolution can be likened to the description of human history as ‘just one damn thing after another,’” he smirked. If the only law of human history is that we do not learn from history, then his analogy is apt. What can a biologist learn from a Chaos theory of evolution? No predictions can be made; there is no way to falsify it, there is no way to understand it.….But it creates morality: It’s doubtful that Franz der Waal read Bennett’s article, because he launched out in the New York Times Opinion Pages to explain how natural selection produced morality. Taking on all creationists and moralists, he argued that moral motions emerged out of the pleasure response. These “building blocks of morality” evolved into social instincts, he said, that increased the pleasure and survival of the group. Drawing on observations of apes, he constructed a “bottom up morality” –Such findings have implications for human morality. According to most philosophers, we reason ourselves towards a moral position. Even if we do not invoke God, it is still a top-down process of us formulating the principles and then imposing those on human conduct. But would it be realistic to ask people to be considerate of others if we had not already a natural inclination to be so? Would it make sense to appeal to fairness and justice in the absence of powerful reactions to their absence? Imagine the cognitive burden if every decision we took needed to be vetted against handed-down principles. Instead, I am a firm believer in the Humean position that reason is the slave of the passions. We started out with moral sentiments and intuitions, which is also where we find the greatest continuity with other primates. Rather than having developed morality from scratch, we received a huge helping hand from our background as social animals.Taking that cue from David Hume, he argued that religion came in as a latecomer and stole the credit for sanctioning these evolved behaviors. He admitted, though, that no human culture has been studied that was never religious. “That such cultures do not exist should give us pause.” Interestingly, however, though he believes science no longer needs God to explain how we got where we are today, he ended by supporting religion’s role in society. “I doubt that science and the naturalistic worldview could fill the void and become an inspiration for the good,” he concluded. “Any framework we develop to advocate a certain moral outlook is bound to produce its own list of principles, its own prophets, and attract its own devoted followers, so that it will soon look like any old religion.”So on the one hand, Bennett claimed that evolution is completely unpredictable and not necessarily adaptive, and on the other hand, der Waal argues that morality was a natural adaptation to social populations. Can these disparate views be reconciled? A heated set of comments followed the second article. Should schools “teach the controversy”?Bennett has reaffirmed something said often here: Darwinism is the Stuff Happens Law (SHL) in disguise. If universal common ancestry is a premise, then it is a deduction from a chosen world view, not a science. And if macroevolutionary changes are not adaptive, natural selection reduces to “stuff happens,” the absence of an explanation (see 10/03/2010). Thank you, Dr. Bennett, for affirming the demise of evolution as a theory in chaos. As for Franz der Waal’s attempt at putting a narrative gloss on his a priori commitment to naturalism, it doesn’t work, and it can’t work. There is no law inherent in producing moral motions in any population, because natural selection has no direction, no goal, no predetermined outcome. An impersonal, unguided universe could not care less whether it produces Disneyland or a world of all against all. What’s more, you can’t believe that morality is good or normative without begging the question. An anonymous commenter said, “The basic problem with De Waal’s approach (as so many other sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists) is that if altruism is simply an evolved trait, then so is genocide. If helping the old lady across the street is an evolved trait, then so is raping the young woman in the dorm…. both are simply acting according to the moral character given to them by evolution.” Q.E.D. He pointed out also that there is a distinction between viewing God as the source of morality (as stated, for instance, in the Declaration of Independence) and religion as a source of morality. These separate issues must not be confused. Bennett and de Waal illustrate the bankruptcy of evolution as a scientific approach to biology, and the shallow thinking of Darwinians pretending to be philosophers. You can’t get there from here, and evolution doesn’t even know where here or there is. Stuff happens? Science was supposed to do better. If Hume and de Waal really believed that reason is the slave of the passions, then the rest of us should most passionately reject their views as unreasonable.(Visited 33 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
7 February 2013 Africa’s under-invested mining sector has huge potential, supported by increased economic growth and political stability, and could play a vital developmental role on the continent, the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC’s) Bernard Sheahan told the Investing in African Mining Indaba on Wednesday. “The core message about the continent today is that Africa is rising,” Sheahan, the IFC’s director of infrastructure and natural resources for Africa and Latin America, told delegates in Cape Town. Africa is expected to grow at an above-average 5.5% per annum over the next five years, and according to projections in a recent McKinsey report, will have a larger labour force than China and India within the next two decades. Projections also point to rapid urbanisation, with the majority of Africa’s population expected to be living in urban areas by 2023.Increased political stability At the same time, Sheahan said, there were signs of improvement when it came to political risk on the continent. “There is increased political stability … we’ve seen positive political transitions in countries like Guinea, Senegal and Ivory Coast. This means better economic governance. It is not perfect in some countries, but there are improved policy choices which points to progress in investment climate reform. “Underpinned by social transformation in Africa, the continent is about to see a demographic dividend.” Sheahan said the IFC – a member of the World Bank Group – was taking advantage of the potential it saw in African mining, which now accounted for more than half of the IFC’s mining investments.Opportunities in infrastructure He said he believed the main opportunities in Africa lay in infrastructure. The continent has a huge infrastructure deficit, which the IFC believes will need an annual investment of US$93-billion. “Multi-user infrastructure can be an opportunity for mining to enhance the developmental impact of mining.” At the same time, Sheahan said, the mining industry could play a critical role in reducing the political risk to doing business in Africa through job creation and skills development. “We need more cooperative approaches between companies and other stakeholders, and this is where the mining industry can play a role.” He lauded the African Mineral Skills Initiative of the United Nations, in partnership with Anglogold Ashanti, for its role in skills development on the continent. He cautioned, however, that companies should be strategic in their community investments, and make them a core part of the mine project planning process. Local procurement was another area where the mining industry could contribute to reducing risk, he said, while stressing that a holistic approach was needed towards local sourcing. SAinfo reporter
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest By Carl Zulauf and Ben Brown, Ohio State University, and Gary Schnitkey, Krista Swanson, Jonathan Coppess, and Nick Paulson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ARC-IC (Agriculture Risk Coverage – Individual) has received less attention than ARC-CO (ARC – County) and PLC (Price Loss Coverage). ARC-IC is operationally more complex, thus harder to explain and understand. It pays on only 65% of program base acres while ARC-CO and PLC pay on 85% of base acres. Nevertheless, ARC-IC is worth considering if an FSA farm has one or more of the appropriate production attributes. These attributes include (1) 100% prevent plant acres on a FSA farm, (2) high year-to-year production variability, (3) much higher farm than ARC-CO and PLC yields, and/or (4) acres planted to fruits and vegetables. The prevent plant attribute is more relevant than normal in 2019. ARC-IC overviewARC-IC is a whole farm program option based on the average experience of all covered program commodities planted on the ARC-IC farm.ARC-IC applies to all base acres of all covered commodities on an ARC-IC farm. It is not elected on a commodity-by-commodity basis.An ARC-IC farm is the sum of a producer’s share in all FSA farms he/she enrolls in ARC-IC in a state.All payment entities on an FSA farm must elect to enroll in ARC-IC.ARC-IC makes a payment if average actual revenue/acre of all covered commodities planted on the ARC-IC farm is less than 86% of the ARC-IC farm’s average benchmark revenue/acre.Revenue/acre for a covered commodity and year is (ARC-IC farm yield times US market year price).ARC-IC farm benchmark revenue/acre equals the sum of the 5-year Olympic average revenue/acre for each covered commodity weighted by current year acres planted to a covered commodity.ARC-IC actual revenue/acre equals the sum of actual revenue/acre for each covered commodity that was planted weighted by current year acres planted to a covered commodity.Payment is made on 65% of total base acres on an ARC-IC farm times ARC-IC payment/acre.Payment/acre is capped at 10% of the ARC-IC farm benchmark revenue/acre.NOTE: Payment depends on program commodities that are planted.NOTE: Prevent plant acres are included in ARC-IC revenue calculations ONLY IF 100% of an ARC-IC farm’s initially reported covered commodities are approved as prevent plant.NOTE: Only initially planted covered commodity and approved double crop acres are included in the revenue calculations. Any subsequently planted crops are not included in the calculations. When ARC-IC should be consideredA farm production attribute must compensate for ARC-IC’s fewer payment acres (65% vs. 85% of base acres for ARC-CO and PLC). Such attributes include:(1) All of an ARC-IC farm’s initially planted covered commodities are approved as prevent plant. Current year revenue is zero since production is zero, resulting in a payment/acre equal to the payment cap of 10% of ARC-IC benchmark revenue/acre. In contrast, if any acre is planted to any covered commodity, payment is based on revenue/acre for the planted acre(s). Given the prevalence of prevent plant acres in 2019, examples are provided below. To underscore the key point, payment in this situation requires the ARC-IC farm has prevent plant for all covered program commodities on all base acres.(2) Production is highly variable from year to year on the ARC-IC farm. High variability increases the likelihood of ARC-IC payment. High variability is most likely when1 crop is grown and 1 FSA farm makes up the ARC-IC farm. ARC-IC averages across crops and FSA farms. Variability declines as more than 1 crop is grown and/or more than 1 FSA farm makes up the ARC-IC farm.(3) ARC-IC benchmark yield is (much) higher than ARC-CO benchmark yield and PLC farm payment yield. Assuming 1 covered commodity and same percent payment rate for both ARC programs, ARC-IC benchmark yield needs to be more than 30% higher than the county benchmark yield for ARC-IC to pay more than ARC-CO. Other situations result in different breakeven yields.(4) Fruits and vegetables (other than mung beans and pulse crops) or wild rice are planted on a FSA farm. Payment base acres are 65% for ARC-IC vs. 85% for ARC-CO and PLC. Non-payment acres are the remaining base acres: 35% for ARC-IC vs. 15% for ARC-CO and PLC. Payment is reduced if fruits and vegetables (other than mung beans and pulse crops) or wild rice are planted on more than the non-payment acres. ARC-IC has more acres that can be planted to fruits and vegetables (other than mung beans and pulse crops) or wild rice without losing program payments. Note, base acres on the FSA farm are not altered in this situation. ARC-IC Examples – role of prevent plant – OverviewAn ARC-IC farm with all yield information needed to calculate the ARC-IC benchmark revenue is assumed. This information plus the US market year average price for crop years 2013-2017 and 2019 are in the top half of each table of values for each example. The farm has 100 acres of cropland and program base, both composed of 60 acres of corn and 40 acres of soybeans.Calculation of the ARC-IC benchmark revenue is a 3-step process. In step 1, per acre revenue is calculated for each covered commodity (corn and soybeans in this case) for each of the 5 years in the benchmark calculation window. In step 2, the Olympic average revenue per acre is calculated. An Olympic average removes the high and low value before calculating the average of the remaining values. For the example ARC-IC farm, the Olympic average revenue is $605 for corn and $475 for soybeans. In step 3, the Olympic average revenues are weighted by the acres planted in the current year (2019 in this case) to covered commodities to determine an ARC-IC farm average revenue per acre. This calculation for the example ARC-IC farm is: (($605*60) + ($475*40)) / (60+40), or an ARC-IC benchmark revenue of $553 / acre. ARC-IC Example 1 – no prevent plant acresActual revenue / acre is $631 (166 bushels / acre times $3.80 / bushel) for corn and $423 (47 bushels / acre times $9.00 / bushel) for soybeans (see Table 1). These individual crop values are weighted by acres planted to each covered commodity, resulting in an actual revenue / acre for the ARC-IC farm of $548 (($631*60) + ($423*40)) / (60+40). Since actual revenue of $548 / acre exceeds the ARC-IC coverage revenue of $476 / acre (86% ARC-IC coverage level times benchmark revenue of $553 / acre), ARC-IC makes no payment. ARC-IC Example 2 – some prevent plant acresThis example has 20 acres of corn prevent plant acres and lower 2019 yields. Actual revenue / acre is $570 (150 bushels / acre times $3.80 / bushel) for corn and $378 (42 bushels / acre times $9.00 / bushel) for soybeans. These individual crop values are weighted by acres planted to each program commodity, resulting in an actual revenue / acre for the ARC-IC farm of $522 (($570*60) + ($378*20)) / (60+20). Only 80 acres is used in calculating actual ARC-IC revenue. The 20 prevent plant acres are not included in calculating ARC-IC actual revenue. Since actual revenue of $522 / acre exceeds ARC-IC coverage revenue of $493 / acre (86% ARC-IC coverage level times benchmark revenue of $573 / acre), ARC-IC makes no payment. ARC-IC benchmark revenue and coverage revenue is higher in Example 2 than Example 1. The reason is the combined impact on the weighted averages of (a) higher revenue per acre for corn than soybeans and (b) fewer acres planted to soybeans (20, not 40). ARC-IC Example 3 – all prevent plant acresThis example has no planted acres, with all initial planted covered commodity acres approved for prevent plant. Actual revenue / acre is $0 since no initial covered commodity is planted. Because no acres are planted to covered program commodities and all acres of initial planted covered commodities are approved as prevent plant, a benchmark revenue exists. It equals the benchmark revenue in example 1 ($553 / acre). ARC-IC makes a payment since actual revenue of $0 / acre is less than the ARC-IC coverage revenue of $476 / acre (86% ARC-IC coverage level times benchmark revenue of $553 / acre). Payment is however capped at 10% of the benchmark revenue, or $55 per base acre ($553 times 10%). Total ARC-IC payment is $5,500 ($55 per base acre times 100 base acres). Summary observationsCrop program choice rests on the production attributes of an FSA farm.ARC-IC may be worth considering more often than commonly thought.Farm production attributes which make ARC-IC potentially attractive include:100% of program base acres on a FSA farm are prevent plant acres,high production variability from year to year on a FSA farm,much higher farm than county or PLC yields on a FSA farm, andfruits and vegetables are planted on a FSA farm.If prevent plant is the production attribute of interest, all covered commodity acres on the ARC-IC farm must be prevent plant for ARC-IC to make a payment.If high production variability is the production attribute of interest, ARC-IC is more attractive if only 1 FSA farm in a state with only 1 program commodity is elected into ARC-IC. ARC-IC pays on the average experience across all program crops on all FSA farms in the ARC-IC farm. Averaging across multiple crops and FSA farms usually reduces variability and thus payment probability.Program sign up is for 2019 and 2020. Expected payments in both years need to be considered for ARC-IC, ARC-CO, and PLC. It is highly possible that the program with the highest expected payment will differ for 2019 and 2020, especially if ARC-IC has the highest expected payment for one year.This article is not an argument for electing ARC-IC. It is an argument for not dismissing ARC-IC without thinking about the individual FSA farm production attributes.
Technorati, the world’s first blog search engine, just unveiled Twittorati – a site where the top 100 bloggers’ tweets are featured and analyzed. The service allows users to view the links most tweeted as well as displays Technorati’s original concept of showcasing the Internet’s top trafficked blogs and content from its contributors. One interesting component of the site is the fact that users can view the pictures shared by today’s Twitter and blogging elite. While the community’s words may be articulate and cohesive, the world’s top rated bloggers prove themselves to be a fairly average bunch of human beings. You’ll notice the majority of the photographs feature blurry crowds at networking events, office furniture and gooey plates of food. With a catchphrase like, “Where the Blogosphere and Twittersphere meet” it will be interesting to see which sphere will hype the service more. Some of the featured bloggerati include ReadWriteWeb’s Richard MacManus, Huffington Post Editor Arianna Huffington and Zen Habits founder Leo Babauta. A Comprehensive Guide to a Content Audit Guide to Performing Bulk Email Verification Facebook is Becoming Less Personal and More Pro… The Dos and Don’ts of Brand Awareness Videos Related Posts Like any good Twitter-related service, Twittorati also has its own Twitter account with a feed to the site’s hottest trending topics. We’ll be watching closely to see how the site’s trend results differ from those displayed on Twitter’s newly redesigned landing page. Tags:#twitter#web dana oshiro
New Trimmed Project in Premiere ProWhen it’s time to archive your Premiere Pro project you can use the Project Manager to create a clean “trimmed version” of it. The trimmed version will remove all unused footage so that the new version only includes the media elements that were actually included in the video(s).Since we are trimming the media we’ll want to include handles on each clip (this adds time before and after each clip in the timeline). I generally make my handles 2-3 seconds, so that I can go back and make trimming changes or add new transitions if necessary. Although trimming will take out the majority of the footage that didn’t make it in the final videos, handles are useful for giving you that little bit of “wiggle room” in case you need it later on.Click “Calculate” to see what the size of the trimmed project/media will be.Click “Browse” to set a destination and then click “OK”.‘Gotchas’ with Premiere’s Project ManagerThere are a few things to be aware of when trimming projects using the Premiere Pro Project Manager:You can’t trim Long GOP footage like H.264 or MXF. You would need to transcode this footage to another format like Pro Res to trim it using Project Manager.Footage in a multicam sequence will not be trimmed (because it is nested into another sequence).After Effects compositions using Dynamic Link will not be moved using the Project Manager. You have to manually do this.Need additional help? You can read more about the Premiere Pro Project Manger on Adobe’s help page. Use Premiere Pro’s Project Manager to move/archive your projects without breaking connections and getting offline error messages. It’s not a sexy topic, but it is important!Use Premiere Pro’s Project Manager when you are copying or trimming (removing unused files) your project. If you move the project and the media separately you will break the link and have to reconnect them. You can run into additional problems if media isn’t reconnected properly or some files go astray. The Project Manager serves to simplify this process.Moving Files in Premiere ProHere’s a typical editing scenario: You want to collect your project and media files and copy them to a new location, such as an external hard drive. This is especially useful if you’re planning on editing off-site or need to share a project with another editor.From the Project menu select Project Manager.Under Resulting Project select Collect Files and Copy to New Location.Uncheck Exclude Unused Clips since we want to move all the files.Leave Include Preview Files (rendered effects) & Audio Conform Files checked.Check Rename Media Files to Match Clip Names when you have renamed your clips in the Project.Click the Browse button to choose a location to copy the files/project to. Then click OK. The media and project are then copied to the specified destination. Much more tidy than dragging files around your computer!
Basketball star Tony Parker is recovering from eye surgery in Paris after he suffered a corneal laceration during the Chris Brown-Drake brawl in the W.i.P. nightclub. It is still unclear whether Parker will be healed in time to play for France in the Olympics, which begin in five weeks in London.Parker’s attorney Elizabeth Eilender told E! News, “We hope and expect he will be able to play, but that is between him and his doctor.”After he was injured, the San Antonio Spurs all-star filed a $20 million lawsuit against the club owners, accusing them of negligence by “sitting persons known to be hostile to each other at the same time in order to generate funds for themselves” and “in serving liquor to intoxicated persons after they were obviously intoxicated.” It’s unclear why Parker limited his lawsuit to the club and didn’t include Drake or Chris Brown or any of the people who actually engaged in the brawl and bottle smashing.