Home Blog Page 3

Kim Kardashian’s Personal Trainer Defends Her Waist Size In *That* Tiny Corset

The fascinating English border town that deserves more tourists

Kim Kardashian might’ve looked like a million dollars in her 2019 Met Gala outfit but a lot of people online have had something to say about her exaggerated body shape.

The Keeping Up With The Kardashians star is famed for her hourglass figure, with the cinched-in waistband of the Mugler dress leaving a lot of fans wondering if she’d surgically removed her vital organs.

In an interview with E! News, the 38-year-old said it was “the first time in 20 years that Mr. Mugler has designed for the House of Thierry Mugler” and that “he envisioned me as this California girl stepping out of the ocean, on the red carpet, wet, dripping.”

It wasn’t long before people began speculating that Kim had undergone liposuction to achieve the final look, which is something that clearly got her personal trainer’s back up.

Where did Kim Kardashian’s internal organs spend the night at Met Gala? Because I can’t figure out how anatomically possible it would be to fit them all inside that tiny waist.

— ellyce! (@ellycep) May 7, 2019

Kim Kardashian’s waist is as tiny as my will to live

— it’s paris, bitch! (@ITSPARISBXTCH) May 7, 2019

Melissa Alcantara took to Instagram Stories to defend her client’s overall appearance, writing: “To make things clear. 1. This dress is corseted BUT 2. Kim trains her ass off 6 days a f*cking week, she wakes up early AF and is dedicated. 

“3. I paved the road for her but SHE did the work! MOST IMPORTANTLY I don’t give a shit about your opinions on her body, if you think [it’s] fake or not! 

She concluded: “I see her every morning, I see her train and I see her sweat and I see all the work she does outside the gym and THAT is commendable!”

There you have it, folks. Nothing to see here. 

Read More

Nach Stickoxiden jetzt Feinstaub: Echtes Problem oder Anti-Auto-Panik?

Lawyer who warned trainees never to wear brown shoes with blue suits under fire

Fahrverbote für Benziner: Nach Stickoxiden jetzt Feinstaub: Gibt es ein Problem oder herrscht Anti-Auto-Panik?

Der Sinn von Diesel-Fahrverboten ist umstritten, obwohl Stickoxide als große Gesundheitsgefahr propagiert wurden. Nun passiert dasselbe mit Feinstaub. Diesmal geht es um viel mehr als nur Diesel-Verbote: Auch Benziner und sogar Elektroautos sind wohl dran.

Ist Feinstaub der neue Killer, der die Stickoxid-Panik der vergangenen Jahre relativiert? Angeblich sterben die Menschen in Deutschland statistisch gesehen wegen Feinstaub-Belastung 2,4 Jahre früher, so das Umweltbundesamt (UBA) unter Berufung auf das Max-Planck-Institut. Interessanterweise kommt der gerade veröffentlichte Report “Air Quality in Europe 2018” der europäischen Umweltagentur zu einem anderen Ergebnis: Dort wurde für die Schadstoffe PM 2.5 (Feinstaub), NO2 (Stickoxide) und O3 (Ozon) zusammengenommen für jeden Bürger etwas mehr als ein Monat verkürzte Lebenszeit errechnet. Die Diskrepanzen zeigen, wie stark Aussagen über Gesundheitsgefahren von Luftschadstoffen auseinanderliegen können. Und wie schwierig es ist, die tatsächliche Tragweite eines Problems einzuschätzen.

Experten: Feinstaub wohl schädlicher als Stickoxide

Dabei ist das enorm wichtig. Denn die Diskussion um Stickoxide hat zuletzt dazu geführt, dass in Deutschland Fahrverbote für Dieselfahrzeuge eingeführt wurden. Deren Akzeptanz steht und fällt aber mit dem Sinn und Unsinn solcher Maßnahmen. In Hamburg etwa erreichte der politische Lobby-Verein Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), der die Verbote gerichtlich erzwang und dies in Dutzenden weiteren Städten fortführt, lediglich eine Umleitung des Verkehrs in Wohngebiete statt einer Verbesserung der Luftqualität.

Die Stadt München hat aus genau diesem Grund bereits angekündigt, auf Fahrverbote zu verzichten, auch wenn an einigen Messstellen noch Grenzwert-Überschreitungen registriert werden. München will die Verkehrsverlagerung in Wohngebiete und das folgende Verkehrschaos in jedem Fall unterbinden.

Um die emotional geführte und politisierte Diskussion wieder auf die Sachebene zu bringen, hatte die Bundesregierung die Nationale Wissenschaftsakademie Leopoldina um eine Einschätzung zum Thema Luftschadstoffe und deren Vermeidung gebeten . Die Aussagen der Experten verschiedener Fachbereiche (Medizin, Umwelt, Abgas- und Antriebstechnik, Verkehrsforscher etc.) sind sehr differenziert. So wird zum Beispiel sowohl der Sinn von Diesel-Fahrverboten wegen Stickoxiden als auch die Hardware-Nachrüstung von älteren Diesel-Autos infragegestellt: Beides sei nicht zielführend. Gegner der Diesel-Fahrverbote sehen sich dadurch in ihrer Position bestärkt.

Neue Grenzwerte am Horizont

Gleichzeitig schätzen die Experten der Leopoldina aber die Gesundheitsgefährdung durch Feinstaub trotz einer insgesamt deutlich sinkenden Schadstoffbelastung in den Städten immer noch als relevantes Problem ein. Der Verkehr müsse reduziert werden. Das wiederum bestärkt Befürworter genereller Auto-Fahrverbote und neuer, schärferer Feinstaub-Grenzwerte. Allerdings hat die Leopoldina deren Absenkung gar nicht explizit gefordert, sondern weist darauf hin, dass diese Entscheidung einen Abwägungs-Prozess der Politik voraussetzt – welche Nachteile ergeben sich für die Mobilität der Menschen und welche weiteren Luft-Verbesserungen würden Verbote wirklich erreichen. Wie also sieht nun die Feinstaub-Situation tatsächlich aus? Sind neue Fahrverbote zu befürchten? Wenn ja, für wen? Ein Überblick.

Was sind die Risiken von Feinstaub?

Feinstäube (je nach Größe der Staubpartikel entweder PM 10 oder PM 2.5)  können unter anderem Atemwegserkrankungen, Herz-Kreislauf-Krankheiten und Lungenkrebs verursachen. “Luftverschmutzung liegt mit einem Anteil von rund zwei Prozent an der Krankheitslast bei Frauen und rund 3 Prozent bei Männern auf Platz 8 beziehungsweise 10 von insgesamt 84 untersuchten Risikofaktoren”, so die Experten der Leopoldina. Relevanter sind also als gesundheitliche Risikofaktoren falsche Ernährung und Übergewicht, Bluthochdruck, Rauchen oder Stoffwechselerkrankungen. Die immer wieder von Umweltverbänden aufgestellte Behauptung, Luftschadstoffe seien das größte Gesundheitsrisiko in Deutschland, ist also schlicht falsch.

Allerdings können Menschen die genannten Hochrisikofaktoren wie Rauchen oder Übergewicht selbst beeinflussen. Bei Feinstaub und anderen Luftschadstoffen geht das allenfalls, indem man aus einer verkehrsreichen Innenstadt aufs Land zieht. Aus diesem Grund gibt es Grenzwerte für Luftschadstoffe, die in der Regel inklusive großer Sicherheits-Puffer so gewählt sind, dass auch empfindliche Gruppen, etwa Menschen mit angegriffener Gesundheit, nicht beeinträchtigt werden. Als entscheidend gilt der Grenzwert für Partikel von weniger als 2,5 Mikrometern Durchmesser (PM 2.5, der eigentliche “Feinstaub”), weil diese über die Lunge direkt in den Blutkreislauf gelangen.

Welchen Anteil hat der Verkehr am Feinstaub?

Er liegt in der Stadt bei ungefähr 50 Prozent und ist dort also die wichtigste Einzelquelle. Weitere vom Menschen verursachte Feinstaubquellen sind Kraft- und Fernheizwerke, Abfallverbrennungsanlagen, Öfen und Heizungen in Wohnhäusern, die Tierhaltung sowie bestimmte Industrieprozesse. Dazu kommen natürliche Feinstaubquellen. “In Ballungsgebieten ist vor allem der Straßenverkehr eine bedeutende Feinstaubquelle. Dabei gelangt Feinstaub nicht nur aus Motoren in die Luft, sondern auch durch Bremsen- und Reifenabrieb sowie durch die Aufwirbelung des Staubs auf der Straßenoberfläche”, erläutert das Umweltbundesamt (UBA).

Welche Städte haben ein Feinstaub-Problem?

Zur Abwechslung eine gute Nachricht: Laut Daten des Umweltbundesamtes gibt es aktuell kein Feinstaub-Problem in deutschen Städten. Beim entscheidenden Jahresmittelwert bleiben alle Messstationen deutlich unter den 50 Mikrogramm pro Kubikmeter (Tagesmittelwert PM10). Das gilt übrigens auch für “Deutschlands schmutzigste Kreuzung”, das Stuttgarter Neckartor: Hier gibt es zwar punktuell “Feinstaubalarm”, doch der Jahresmittelwert lag zuletzt bei unkritischen 29 Mikrogramm. Mitentscheidend für die jeweilige Situation sind das Wetter sowie die geographische Lage – da hat gerade Stuttgart mit seiner Kessellage einen Nachteil: Ist die Luft mal zu dick, zieht sie nur langsam wieder ab. Daran werden auch Stuttgarts Diesel-Fahrverbote wenig ändern.

Was würden neue Grenzwerte bewirken?

Aktuell gilt in der EU ein zulässiger Tagesmittelwert von 50 μg/m3 und ein Jahresmittelwert von 40 μg/m3 für die Kategorie PM10. Für die noch kleineren Partikel PM 2.5 gilt seit 2008 europaweit ein Zielwert von 25 µg/m im Jahresmittel. Das Umweltbundesamt fordert unter Berufung auf die Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO eine deutliche Absenkung der Grenzwerte.

Das würde buchstäblich über Nacht aus vielen Städten, denen man bislang eine gesundheitlich völlig unbedenkliche Schadstoffbelastung attestiert, quasi Zonen des gesundheitlichen Notstandes machen. Als Folge wären die Kommunen gezwungen, neue Fahrverbote zu verhängen. Das wären dann aber keine isolierten Diesel-Verbote, sondern aufgrund der beschriebenen Schadstoff-Verteilung generelle Fahrverbote für alle Diesel, Benziner und sogar Elektroautos, und zwar bundesweit in vielen Groß- und Kleinstädten. Politische Lobbyverbände wie die Umwelthilfe hoffen auf eine Grenzwert-Verschärfung, weil sie dann auch weitere Klagemöglichkeiten hätten.

Je nach lokaler Situation – wo also andere Schadstoffquellen wie Industrie oder auch S-Bahnen oder sonstiger Schienenverkehr die größten Feinstaub-Quellen sind – würden zudem PKW- und LKW-Fahrverbote gar nicht reichen, es wären weitere Beschränkungen nötig.

Hat der Diesel ein Feinstaub-Problem?

Spätestens seit der Einführung entsprechender Filter im Jahr 2009 nicht mehr. Tatsächlich ist der Anteil der Diesel-Abgase am Feinstaub sogar ausgesprochen gering: Er liegt etwa beim Diesel bei der lokalen Belastung bei 6 Prozent und in der Gesamt-Hintergrundbelastung noch erheblich niedriger. “Durch den Einsatz von Dieselpartikelfiltern werden die Partikel bis in den untersten submikronen Bereich gefiltert. Die Partikelkonzentration im Abgas ist geringer als in der Stadtluft”, erklärt Abgas-Experte Thomas Koch vom Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT).

Jetzt mehr über die Zukunft der Mobilität erfahren

Auf unserem E-Mobilitäts Portal EFAHRER.com finden Sie alle auf dem deutschen Markt erhältlichen E-Fahrzeuge & Hybride mit technischen Daten, Preisen, Lieferzeiten und Modellvergleichen. Dazu gibt es laufend Insider-News, Tests aller wichtigen Fahrzeuge, einen Überblick zu Ladestationen und einen Reichweitenrechner.

Sie können zudem direkt kostenlos eine Probefahrt für Ihr Wunschauto vereinbaren und so unkompliziert in die E-Mobilität starten.

Haben Benziner ein Feinstaub-Problem?

Jein: Tatsächlich ist bei Benzin-Direkteinspritzern der Partikelausstoß in bestimmten Fahrsituationen sehr hoch, so dass gerade neuere Benziner ein Feinstaub-Problem haben . Allerdings ist der Anteil dieser Fahrzeuge an der Gesamtflotte und am Gesamt-Schadstoffausstoß wohl kaum so relevant, wie das von den Verfechtern neuer Fahrverbote suggeriert wird. Zudem erledigt sich das Problem mit der Einführung von Benzin-Partikelfiltern, die im Rahmen der seit kurzem gültigen neuen Abgasnorm für die meisten Autos erforderlich wurden.

Video: Tesla Model 3 im Test

Sind auch Elektroautos betroffen?

Das ist umstritten. Zwar haben Elektroautos durch ihr hohes Anfahr-Drehmomemt einen hohen Reifenverschleiß. Der Reifenhersteller Michelin etwa geht davon aus, dass bei E-Autos die Reifen doppelt so schnell abgefahren sind wie bei konventionellen Fahrzeugen. Bei einigen Stromern – etwa dem BMW i3 – sind aber bewusst schmale Reifen aufgezogen. Die Experten der Leopoldina sehen Elektroautos in Sachen Feinstaub weniger als Problem an, sondern eher als Lösung: “Auch bei elektrisch angetriebenen Fahrzeugen entsteht Feinstaub. Elektromobilität dürfte aber zur Reduzierung der Feinstaubbelastung durch Bremsen- und Reifenabrieb beitragen. Ermöglicht wird dies vor allem durch regenerative Bremssysteme in Hybrid- und E-Fahrzeugen. Dadurch kommen die konventionellen Bremsen weniger zum Einsatz; der Abrieb fällt geringer aus”, so die Einschätzung der Wissenschaftler.

Gibt es technische Feinstaub-Lösungen?

Die gibt es tatsächlich. Die einfachste ist die Bewässerung von Straßen: Mit Sprengwagen werden die Straßen gewässert, dadurch werden die Staubteilchen gebunden. Die Stadt Stuttgart hat das getestet, es führte nach Angaben der Stadt aber nur teilweise zu einer Reduzierung der Schadstoffe.

Andere Lösungen setzen auf direkte Filterung der Luft. In Deutschland hat sich das Unternehmen Mann + Hummel aus Ludwigsburg darauf spezialisiert. Zum einen werden “Feinstaub-Fresser” getestet. Das sind Säulen, die direkt an der Straße stehen und sowohl Feinstaub als auch Stickoxide aus der Luft herausfiltern können. Die andere Möglichkeit sind Feinstaub-Filter direkt am Auto – und zwar im Bereich der Bremsen. Nach Informationen der Zeitschrift “Auto Bild” werden diese Systeme gerade in Prototypen von Volkswagen getestet. “Tritt der Fahrer in die Eisen, pressen die Bremsbeläge gegen die Bremsscheibe und verzögern durch die entstehende Reibung das Fahrzeug. Dadurch entsteht Abrieb an der Scheibe und an den Belägen. Dieser Abrieb wird in den Bremsstaubfilter geleitet und setzt sich dort im Filtergewebe fest”, so die “AutoBild”.

Die Filter sollen solange halten, dass sie im Rahmen des üblichen Bremsen-Services ausgetauscht werden. Was das System kosten würde, ist noch nicht bekannt. Um neben den Bremsen auch den Abrieb von Reifen zu verringern, entwickeln die Hersteller wiederum ständig rollwiderstandsärmere Reifen. Mit bestimmten Additiven kann man die Gummis zudem abriebfester machen.

Read More

Trump retweets conspiracy theorists, far-right figures after Facebook bans

The sofa address: what ‘at home’ Theresa May was trying to tell us with her soft furnishings

President Donald Trump talks to reporters as he departs for travel to Indianapolis, Indiana from the White House in Washington, U.S., April 26, 2019.

Jonathan Ernst | Reuters

President Donald Trump on Saturday retweeted messages from conspiracy theorists and far-right figures after Facebook banned several right-wing personalities for promoting violence and hate.

Trump has lashed out against Facebook following the bans, tweeting on Friday that he is “continuing to monitor the censorship of AMERICAN CITIZENS on social media platforms.” On Saturday morning, he retweeted a number of Twitter users who defended the far-right personalities, including one of the banned users.

Later in the day, Trump questioned why The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and MSNBC were allowed on Facebook and Twitter, saying much of their work is “FAKE NEWS.”

Trump resumed his attacks on tech giants on Saturday afternoon, asking how it is possible for a “strong but responsible Conservative Voice” like actor James Woods to be banned from Twitter. Woods got locked out of Twitter for posting the hashtag #HangThemAll in an apparent reference to special counsel Robert Mueller’s office, according to a screen capture shared by Woods’ girlfriend Sara Miller.

Facebook on Thursday banned Infowars, as well as its founder Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson, the former editor-at-large for the website, which is notorious for pushing conspiracy theories, including that the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre was staged. Facebook also banned far-right media personalities Milo Yiannopoulos and Laura Loomer, as well as Paul Nehlen, who has run for Congress in Wisconsin and is widely considered a white supremacist.

“We’ve always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology. The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today,” Facebook said in a statement.

Trump on Saturday retweeted two messages from Watson, the former Infowars deputy who now hosts a YouTube channel called Prison Planet Live known for its nativist screeds. On Friday, Trump tweeted that he was “so surprised” to see “Conservative thinkers” like Watson and Woods banned from Facebook and Twitter, respectively.

He also promoted a tweet by Lauren Southern, a far-right author and activist who backed the anti-refugee campaign Defend Europe, which sought to harass boats attempting to rescue migrants in the Mediterranean Sea. In 2017, Southern and activists from the nativist Generation Identity movement filmed themselves firing flares at a Doctors Without Borders vessel.

The president on Friday retweeted an anti-Islamic video shared by Deep State Exposed, an account tied to author Jeremy Stone, who is associated with a pro-Trump conspiracy theory called QAnon.

The video shared by Stone and resurfaced by Trump shows a bearded man with subtitles saying Muslims will conquer the U.S. and kill Americans, take their women and smash their churches if they do not convert to Islam. The last subtitle highlights the words “this is Islam.”

Stone boasts in his Twitter profile that he has been retweeted by Trump nine times.

Read More

Royal baby Sussex first picture: everything we know about Meghan and Harry’s baby boy – Telegraph.co.uk


The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have today presented their newborn son to the world, with Meghan declaring: “It’s magic, it’s pretty amazing. I have the two best guys in the world so I’m really happy.”

Speaking in St George’s Hall at Windsor Castle as her husband held their two-day-old child, Meghan added: “He has the sweetest temperament, he’s really calm.” As they both laughed, Harry said: “I don’t know who he gets that from.”

The 7lb 3oz infant, whose name has not yet been announced, is believed to be the first mixed-race child born to a senior member of the royal family in centuries, and is a reflection of modern Britain with its culturally diverse population.  

Here’s everything we know about the latest Royal little one, from those rumours about his birth, to the bookies favourite name and reaction from Meghan’s estranged family.   

The proud moment the Duke and Duchess of Sussex present their newborn baby son to the world

Credit:
Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire

What have Meghan and Harry said about parenthood so far?

Amid surroundings steeped in royal history, the latest royal baby made his debut behind closed doors, with a small press pool of only one reporter, one photographer, three cameramen, as well as the couple’s own private photographer and a household press officer photographer.

Asked who the baby takes after, Meghan, who was wearing a white dress, said: “We’re still trying to figure that out.”

Harry, who was wearing a light grey suit, said: “Everyone says that babies change so much over two weeks we’re basically monitoring how the changing process happens over this next month really. But his looks are changing every single day, so who knows.”

Asked how he found parenting, Harry added: “It’s great. Parenting is amazing. It’s only been two and a half days, three days, but we’re just so thrilled to have our own little bundle of joy.”

Meghan added: “He’s just been the dream so it’s been a special couple of days.”

Meghan and Harry were beside themselves with joy giggling and looking into each others eyes as they spoke. The duke gently cradled his son in his arms and could not resist sneaking a peek down at him as he apparently slept. Meghan put her hand on the small of Harry’s back as she listened to him talk.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex present their newborn son to the world, who was wrapped tightly in a white shawl

Credit:
Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire

Read more: Growing up in Windsor: what will life be like for baby Sussex? 

Where was Baby Sussex born?

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex kept plans for the birth of their baby private. He was initially believed to have been born in the sanctuary of Frogmore Cottage – the Sussexes’ newly renovated home on the Windsor Estate.

However it later emerged that Meghan may have been whisked to a private hospital – thought to have been the Portland in London – without anyone noticing late on Sunday night. The reported move was so secretive – even senior royals were not told.

A spokeswoman for the hospital said: “We are unable to confirm speculation about individuals who may or may not have been cared for at The Portland Hospital.”

The duke was at his wife’s side during the birth and he later confessed he had only had a few hours’ sleep, suggesting Meghan had spent much of the night in labour. The baby boy was born at 5.26am on Monday.

Baby Sussex is pictured for the first time during a photocall in St George’s Hall at Windsor Castle

Credit:
Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire

Read more: Fois gras for mum and a beer for dad: What it’s like to give birth at The Portland

Has the Queen met the baby?

The Queen is expected to be introduced to her new great-grandson at some point today. Harry and Meghan are set to introduce their baby to the Queen, joined by Philip, in the castle’s private apartments.

Baby Sussex is the Queen’s eighth great-grandchild (and seventh in line to the throne).

What have family members said so far?

Family members spoke about the joy of the new arrival earlier this week, with the Duke of Cambridge saying on Tuesday he was “obviously thrilled, absolutely thrilled, and obviously looking forward to seeing them in the next few days when things have quietened down”.

He added: “I’m very pleased and glad to welcome my own brother into the sleep deprivation society that is parenting.”

Kate revealed they had no clues about the baby’s name but were eager to see the Sussexes and their new arrival.

She said: “As William said, we’re looking forward to meeting him and finding out what his name’s going to be so it’s really exciting for both of them and we wish them all the best.

“These next few weeks are always a bit daunting the first time round so we wish them all the best.”

The Prince of Wales has also spoken publicly for the first time about the birth, saying he was “delighted” at arrival of his latest grandchild.

During an official visit to Germany with the Duchess of Cornwall, Charles said on Tuesday: “We couldn’t be more delighted at the news and we’re looking forward to meeting the baby when we return.”

Harry’s grandmother the Queen accepted the congratulations of a Windsor Castle guest who asked: “Life is good for Your Majesty?” The Queen, who was joined by the Duke of Edinburgh, was hosting a lunch on Tuesday for members of the Order of Merit and smiling said in reply “yes, thank you”.

Thomas Markle, the duchess’ estranged father, also offered his well-wishes on Monday.

Mr Markle, a former TV lighting director, told The Sun: “I am proud that my new grandson is born into the British royal family and I am sure that he will grow up to serve the crown and the people of Britain with grace, dignity, and honour.”

Doria Ragland, the duchess’ mother, who was with the couple on Monday and is thought to be staying with them, was also overjoyed with the arrival of her first grandchild.

Read more: Doria Ragland: meet royal baby Sussex’s American grandma

What will the royal baby be called?

There is much suspense as to what the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will call their newborn son, whose name has not yet been announced.

Alexander and Spencer are the new favourites for the infant with many of the bookies after the long-term pick Arthur was dethroned in a flurry of betting.

The youngster has been born into the British Royal family, where tradition is an intrinsic part of the Windsors’s lives. Of course, the pair are also forward-thinking royals and the Duchess has her own American upbringing to draw on.

Canadian-born Autumn Phillips, and husband Peter Phillips, opted for a non-traditional name for their daughter Savannah – the Queen’s first great-grandchild – in 2010.

In the US, the most popular name for a baby boy is Liam. In the UK, the most popular name for a boy born in 2017 was  Oliver. In short, it’s anyone’s guess.

Read more: The A to Z of Baby Sussex: Everything you need to know

Will the baby have a title?

The likely title of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s baby son links the royal newborn to an ancient Scottish kingdom and the legend of Merlin.

As the son of a duke, the baby is entitled to be known as the Earl of Dumbarton, one of the subsidiary titles given to Harry on the morning of his wedding by his grandmother the Queen.

Harry, in consultation with the Queen, might however decide that his son will not use the title – in which case he could simply be Lord (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor.

With Harry and Meghan forging their own path within the royal family, they might even decide not to use any title, with the baby being Master (first name) Mountbatten-Windsor.

But any decision would have to be made with the Queen’s agreement.

The Queen could still step in and issue a Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm and make the baby boy a prince.

Read More

LIVE: Fans gather in Windsor as they wait for more news about Meghan Markle and Prince Harry’s boy – The Sun

With Carlos Ghosn’s downfall, Europe’s industrial strategy is in tatters

Aktiver Livestream seit 2 Stunden

Royal baby mania reaches fever pitch after Meghan Markle gave birth to a baby boy on May 6th, 2019.

The Sussex baby weighed 7lbs 3oz – with proud dad Prince Harry gushing about it being the “most amazing experience.”

The baby’s sex was a surprise to the Duke and Duchess, who chose not to find out what they were having. However, they are yet to decide on a name for their boy.

Baby Sussex’s arrival comes less than a year after Harry married American former Suits actress Meghan in a glittering ceremony in St George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle.

Read more: https://www.thesun.co.uk/fabulous/901…

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/8787586…Become a Sun Subscriber and hit the bell to be the first to know

Read The Sun: http://www.thesun.co.uk


Like The Sun on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesun/

Follow The Sun on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheSun

Subscribe to The Sun on Snapchat: https://www.snapchat.com/discover/The…

Read More

Reader/Reader blocking in reader/writer locks

Debenhams set for administration after rejecting Mike Ashley’s £150m rescue offer
China is wasting less electricity generated by renewables thanks to rising demand, falling costs, and greater grid connectivity.The drop in wasted electricity, which industry types call “curtailment,” suggests that the government is coming to grips with an issue that has kept cleaner energy off the grid even as policymakers try to make renewable power a…

In writer-priority reader/writer locks, as soon as a single writer enters the acquisition queue, all future accesses block behind any in-flight reads. If any readers hold the lock for extended periods of time, this can lead to extreme pauses and loss of throughput given even a very small number of writers.

This post describes a phenomenon that can occur in systems built on reader/writer locks, where slow readers and a small number of writers (e.g. even a single writer) can lead to substantial latency spikes for the entire system. This phenomenon is well-known in certain systems engineering communities (e.g. among some kernel or database developers), but is often surprising when first encountered, and has important implications for the design of such systems.

Reader/writer locks (sometime styled rwlocks) are a common concurrency primitive that aim to provide higher concurrency than a traditional mutex by allowing multiple readers to proceed in parallel.

A reader/writer lock can be acquired, as the name suggests, either for read or write access. Any number of threads may hold it for read access concurrently, but if a writer holds the lock, no other thread may concurrently hold it for either read or write access.

In order to avoid starving writers, most reader/writer lock implementations are writer priority. This means that once a writer starts waiting on the lock, no future reader may acquire the lock until after the writer has acquired and dropped the lock. This behavior is necessary in order to prevent writer starvation; Otherwise, under contention, readers may continually overlap their sessions, and never leave a moment at which a writer can acquire an exclusive lock.

This writer priority behavior, however, essentially creates the possibility for readers to block on other readers, something that a reader/writer lock is supposed to avoid. Consider a situation where, in this order:

  • At time T₁, a long-running reader R₁ acquires a read lock
  • At time T₂, a writer W attempts to acquire a writer lock
  • At time T₃, a reader R₂ attempts to acquire a read lock
  • At time T₄, R₁ drops the read lock

Because the writer W has priority, R₂ will be blocked until W can acquire and then release the lock. However, W is blocked until R₁ releases its read lock at T₄. Thus, between times T₃ and T₄, R₂ is blocked, effectively waiting on R₁ to complete (and then W after it).

If readers ever hold locks for extended periods of time, such that T₄ is much later than T₁, this can lead to disastrous system pauses: a very small amount of write load may be sufficient to allow long-running readers to halt all other threads until they complete.

Exacerbating factors

This description may seem like a niche problem: It requires a confluence of a few different factors in order to occur. However, nature of reader/writer locks and the situations in which they’re used actually makes it much more common than one might expect.

First, note that any system designed to use a reader/writer lock by hypothesis is likely to see a high rate of read volume and less frequent write traffic, because that’s exactly the kind of situation where a reader/writer lock provides value over a vanilla mutex. So reader/writer locks tend to rely on the additional concurrency, and on readers not blocking other readers.

Furthermore, absent contention with writers, long-lived readers have no impact on the throughput or latency of lock acquisitions, because other readers can peacefully coexist with them. As a general matter, software has a constant tendency to get slower, absent deliberate and careful efforts to hold the line, as developers add features and complexity. And if slower processes don’t immediately impact performance (because they only hold read locks), they’re more likely to go unnoticed. Thus, it’s not unlikely that over time read lock durations will creep upwards, mostly without effect, until one happens to coincide with an attempt to grab a write lock.

Here’s a few examples of real systems in which I’ve observed this problem for real:

Linux kernel mmap_sem

The Linux kernel uses a reader/writer lock to protect the structures controlling address space layout within a process (and shared between threads). It is in general a well-known source of contention, but I’ve recently debugged and documented a case in which unexpected long-lived readers using this lock can result in egregious latency spikes for other readers.

As an interesting aside, I looked up the documentation for the kernel’s reader/writer locks, and discovered this advice:

If your code divides neatly along reader/writer lines, and the lock is held by readers for significant lengths of time, using [reader/writer] locks can help.

Based on the phenomenon described in this post, I believe this evidence to be overly simplistic at best, and actively harmful at worst.

MongoDB MMAPv1 storage engine

MongoDB’s classic storage engine (known as “mmapv1”) traditionally used a single reader/writer lock to guard access to each database. By design, the lock should never be held for extended periods of time, and readers are supposed to periodically release (“yield”) the lock to allow other processes to make progress.

However, readers holding the lock for too long was and is a recurring source of performance-limiting concurrency problems; here’s just one example from their issue tracker describing exactly this issue, and I’ve debugged many others in the course of operating a large MongoDB deployment.

SQL

SQL databases, even ones with powerful MVCC concurrency engines, tend to use reader/writer locks in the implementation, and it’s not hard to unintentionally lock entire tables against all access for extended periods of time. Let’s look at an example that works on (at least) both PostgreSQL and MySQL:

We’ll create a small table with some data:

CREATE TABLE rwlock (n integer);
INSERT INTO rwlock VALUES (1), (2), (3);

Then, in one client, we’ll simulate a slow read-only analytical query:

SELECT pg_sleep(60) from rwlock; -- PostgreSQL
SELECT sleep(60) from rwlock; -- MySQL

While that runs, we execute a schema migration:

ALTER TABLE rwlock ADD COLUMN i integer;

This command hangs, waiting for the SELECT to complete. To me this behavior seems mildly disappointing, but also not that surprising. However, if we then attempt to execute a read that should be fast:

SELECT * from rwlock;

We find that that this read also hangs until the initial query completes!

This is a surprising result to me: Running a slow analytical query alongside an online query is something I understood to be safe, and I also understood running an ADD COLUMN to be a safe operation to perform online. However, combining them lets us accidentally completely lock our database!

MySQL’s ALTER TABLE supports the option to specify ALGORITHM=INSTANT, documented as

Operations only modify metadata in the data dictionary. No exclusive metadata locks are taken on the table during preparation and execution, and table data is unaffected, making operations instantaneous.

But testing reveals that even that option is not sufficient to prevent the potentially-unbounded blocking behavior described here.

I am, of course, far from the first to note this behavior: Among others, GoCardless wrote a good postmortem describing a run-in with exactly this problem.

So, we’ve seen that reader/writer locks can have surprising behavior, leading to high latency and leading to readers effectively holding exclusive locks. What can we do about it?

At a high level, my experiences and this exploration have made me much more wary of designs that rely on reader/writer locks. Because of the behavior explored here, their additional concurrency, can effectively becomes a false promise, but one that works just well for systems designers and users to come to rely on it. That’s in many ways the worst possible outcome, setting systems up for unexpected failures when that concurrency vanishes.

With that in mind, here’s some recommendations. None of these is appropriate for every situation, but hopefully together they provide some helpful starting points.

  • Use finer-grained concurrency and normal exclusive locks. A vanilla exclusive lock offers lower concurrency, but does so in a more consistent way — contention is always bad, as opposed to sporadically bad, and so performance is more predictable.
    • As a concrete example, the RadixVM research paper replaces the mmap_sem with a radix tree; nodes in the tree are locked using a trivial spinlock, but by design contention is extremely rare, and so the system as a whole achieves greatly improved concurrency.
  • Various concurrency schemes can provide the guarantee that readers never block, offering an even stronger guarantee of reader concurrency than reader/writer locks:
    • read-copy-update is a technique used in the Linux kernel which allows for completely synchronization-free reads.
    • Various schemes using immutable data structures and atomic pointer updates can provide similar properties in other environments.
    • Some optimistic concurrency schemes, like Michael-Scott queues, offer progress guarantees even in the face of contention.
  • Time out writer acquisitions.
    • If potentially starving writers is acceptable, adding a timeout to write-side acquisitions will bound how long readers can be forced to pause. GoCardless’ library for online Rails migrations implements this option for Postgres, and also discusses the challenges and implications a bit.
  • If you do have to use a reader/writer lock, think carefully about how long a reader or writer can hold the lock, and instrument the system so that long-lived critical sections are observable before they become problematic.

A number of people I’ve talked to have described this phenomenon as unsurprising, and I think it is when explained explicitly. But the number of times I’ve run into performance problems related to long-lived readers in reader/writer locks makes me believe that it’s not necessarily obvious a priori, or perhaps not obvious in the right ways. Dealing with these problems and writing this post has made me much more cautious about ever reaching for an rwlock as a solution to a problem, and I hope it helps raise awareness of this problem and potential performance pitfall.

Read More

China Is Wasting Less Solar and Wind Power

China is wasting less electricity generated by renewables thanks to rising demand, falling costs, and greater grid connectivity.

The drop in wasted electricity, which industry types call “curtailment,” suggests that the government is coming to grips with an issue that has kept cleaner energy off the grid even as policymakers try to make renewable power a greater part of the country’s energy mix. According to its latest five-year plan, the government aims to increase the mix of nonfossil power consumption to 15% by the end of the decade.

While China leads the world in solar and wind capacity, much of the power generated has gone to waste as a lack of coordinated construction led to an overabundance of capacity in regions far from centers of power demand without adequate transmission infrastructure. Around 17.1% of total wind generated power was going to waste as of 2017, according to government statistics.

Yet the rotor may have turned. In the first quarter of 2019, China wasted 2.7%, or 1.24 billion kilowatt hours (kWh), of the solar power it generated, and 4%, or 4.35 billion kWh, of wind-generated power, the National Energy Administration (NEA) said in a press conference last week. This marks major progress, with curtailment down 1.7 percentage points and 4.5 percentage points from the same figures a year earlier.

A major challenge with renewables curtailment is that most of the country’s wind and solar potential is located in western areas such as the Xinjiang Uyghur and Inner Mongolia autonomous regions, as well as Gansu province, far away from the heavily populated and energy-hungry eastern regions of the country. Yet the most recent statistics suggest that the government is coming to grips with the issue, with curtailment in these three areas down 15.2%, 9.5%, and 7.4% year-on-year respectively.

The reduced curtailment is partly due to rising energy demand, according to Alex Liu, an equity research director focusing on renewables at the Swiss investment banking firm UBS. Electricity consumption was up 5.5% in the first quarter of this year, according to data from the China Electricity Council. “A major reason is that coal power is giving way to renewables as the government pushes the latter to take a greater share of the country’s energy mix,” Liu said.

“Renewable energy is becoming much cheaper, even more so than coal in some regions, which is incentivizing greater connections to the power grid,” Liu said. At the end of last year, a 500-megawatt solar farm was connected to the grid in northwest China’s Qinghai province, supplying electricity at 0.316 yuan ($0.04) per kWh, cheaper than the 0.325 yuan per KWh benchmark for coal. The NEA is prioritizing solar and wind projects that can go toe-to-toe with coal and other forms of generation without subsidies, according to draft policy documents released earlier this month.

Another reason is that several cross-region ultra-high-voltage lines have come online in recent years, helping to shift electricity resources much closer to demand centers, Liu said. China’s main power grid operator, State Grid Corporation of China, has been pursuing expanding the network, though at great cost.

According to UBS’s data, around 15% of China’s coal fleet is already 20 years old and therefore close to retirement. This should give more room for renewables as older capacity is closed, Liu said. However, in March the CEC proposed increasing China’s coal power cap to 1,300 gigawatts by 2030, up 290 gigawatts from current levels.

This is an original article written by David Kirton of Caixin Global and has been republished with permission. The article can be found on Caixin’s website here.

(Header image: A field of wind turbines near Alashankou, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, October 2018. Wu Huiyuan/Sixth Tone)

Read More

Meghan Markle’s family: from her diplomat uncle to cannabis-growing nephew, who will meet the royal baby boy? – Telegraph.co.uk

Donald Trump’s indulgence of dictators seen as “weakness and manipulability”: Veteran diplomat
Am 08.05.2019 veröffentlichtGeorge talks about his new mini-series 'Catch 22,' being asked to be Best Man by guys he barely knows, and he reveals whether or not he will be the godfather to Prince Harry & Meghan Markle's baby.New Lyrics for Old People - Jimmy Kimmel & YG Translate “Go Loko” https://youtu.be/pgQBVebLlZE SUBSCRIBE to get…


Buckingham Palace has announced the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have had a baby boy, with Prince Harry at Meghan’s side for the birth. 

The now-retired American actress and her royal husband maintained an element of secrecy around the arrangements for the birth, initially saying they would only announce the baby’s arrival “once they have had an opportunity to celebrate privately as a new family”.

Where Meghan’s introduction into (and adding to) the Royals is concerned, it has been quite an atypical journey for the new Duchess; she didn’t come from a similar upbringing to her royal-ready Middleton sister-in-law. Instead, the Duchess of Sussex (born Rachel Meghan Markle) was born in Los Angeles on…

Register for free to read this article, or log in to your Telegraph account

Read More

Will George Clooney Be the Royal Baby’s Godfather? – Jimmy Kimmel Live

Am 08.05.2019 veröffentlicht

George talks about his new mini-series ‘Catch 22,’ being asked to be Best Man by guys he barely knows, and he reveals whether or not he will be the godfather to Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s baby.

New Lyrics for Old People – Jimmy Kimmel & YG Translate “Go Loko” https://youtu.be/pgQBVebLlZE




SUBSCRIBE to get the latest #KIMMEL: http://bit.ly/JKLSubscribe



Watch Mean Tweets: http://bit.ly/KimmelMT10



Connect with Jimmy Kimmel Live Online:



Visit the Jimmy Kimmel Live WEBSITE: http://bit.ly/JKLWebsite

Like Jimmy Kimmel on FACEBOOK: http://bit.ly/KimmelFB

Like Jimmy Kimmel Live on FACEBOOK: http://bit.ly/JKLFacebook

Follow @JimmyKimmel on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/KimmelTW

Follow Jimmy Kimmel Live on TWITTER: http://bit.ly/JKLTwitter

Follow Jimmy Kimmel Live on INSTAGRAM: http://bit.ly/JKLInstagram



About Jimmy Kimmel Live:



Jimmy Kimmel serves as host and executive producer of Emmy-winning “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” ABC’s late-night talk show.

“Jimmy Kimmel Live” is well known for its huge viral video successes with 5.6 billion views on YouTube alone.


Some of Kimmel’s most popular comedy bits include – Mean Tweets, Lie Witness News, Jimmy’s Twerk Fail Prank, Unnecessary Censorship, YouTube Challenge, The Baby Bachelor, Movie: The Movie, Handsome Men’s Club, Jimmy Kimmel Lie Detective and music videos like “I (Wanna) Channing All Over Your Tatum” and a Blurred Lines parody with Robin Thicke, Pharrell, Jimmy and his security guard Guillermo.

Now in its seventeenth season, Kimmel’s guests have included: Johnny Depp, Meryl Streep, Tom Cruise, Halle Berry, Harrison Ford, Jennifer Aniston, Will Ferrell, Katy Perry, Tom Hanks, Scarlett Johansson, Channing Tatum, George Clooney, Larry David, Charlize Theron, Mark Wahlberg, Kobe Bryant, Steve Carell, Hugh Jackman, Kristen Wiig, Jeff Bridges, Jennifer Garner, Ryan Gosling, Bryan Cranston, Jamie Foxx, Amy Poehler, Ben Affleck, Robert Downey Jr., Jake Gyllenhaal, Oprah, and unfortunately Matt Damon.

Will George Clooney Be the Royal Baby’s Godfather?


https://youtu.be/G57Su54cm74

Read More

WWE SmackDown Live results, recap, reactions (May 7, 2019): Wacky Wild Card – Cageside Seats

Who is Kevin McAleenan? Customs and Border Protection commissioner tapped by Donald Trump to replace Kirstjen Nielsen

Ah, that wild card. It’s already sowing chaos. After SmackDown main evented Raw, you knew that Raw would have to return the favor, right? AJ Styles opened the show but was quickly interrupted by Sami Zayn, who was eager to get back to his rant from the previous night before Braun Strowman interrupted him.

Styles’ countered Zayn’s holier-than-thou attitude by holding his nose and complaining of Zayn’s stench. We got a decent “take a shower!” chant out of it, which is a credit to how infuriating Zayn’s been lately.

The two Raw dudes were then interrupted by WWE Champion Kofi Kingston, who essentially confronted them both for being on his show. It was a continuation of this newfound confidence of Kofi’s and he got some decent lines in while he was at it. On top of that, Kofi was happy to take on both challengers in a triple threat for his WWE Championship.

That decision brings up a few very obvious questions. If someone were to win a title under Wild Card Rules, would they switch brands? Does it even matter, considering they could show up on their original show under that very same Wild Card rule?

With that said, I don’t want to complain too much. A main event of Styles vs. Zayn vs. Kingston was almost assuredly going to be a good time – and guess what? It was. What was most notable, however, was the role Kevin Owens played. Owens appeared in a video promo earlier in the night, citing his birthday as the reason that he would not be competing on the show. In fact, he was going home.

…Except he wasn’t. In the heat of the main event, Owens ran down to assault Xavier Woods and provide a distraction for Sami Zayn to nearly pick up the victory on Kofi. However, the champion persevered and prevailed in the end.

The thing that interested me the most about this was…what the hell was Owens trying to accomplish? Was he trying to actively cost Kofi the title, or was this just meant to be him sending a message? I’m assuming the latter, but that doesn’t make too much sense to me; Kofi’s been brimming with confidence since his victory at WrestleMania. I don’t think a little run in is supposed to throw him off his game.

A lot of this was off to me, but hey, a good match. Can’t complain too much.


Shane Shenanigans

Shane McMahon has a big part on this show, and I thought his parts were hit or miss. He started off by talking about the SmackDown Live Tag Team Championships and how he went down the roster looking for the right duo award the championships. At first, it seemed like the answer would be B-Team to me; what other tag teams has Shane even associated with?

But no, the team he had in mind was Daniel Bryan and Erick Rowan, decked out in Amon Amarth’s new t-shirt. They were eager to have the tag titles, of course, but our third/fourth Wild Card participants chose that moment to make their presence known: The Usos.

I liked their use here. The Usos have been synonymous with the SDL tag titles for so long that it’d make sense for them to be appalled by how Shane wanted to just…hand them to some team. They were determined to make Bryan and Rowan earn it, and that’s just what they did.

The match primarily served as a way to establish Rowan as a scary big dude. He had multiple big dude counters to what the Usos were doing late in the match like stopping them on a double dive to the outside. In fact, Rowan did all the heavy lifting to earn his team the titles. No big complaints here.

The issue I had with Shane’s stuff came after that. He stayed out at ringside all this time and through another commercial break to start waxing on about the ladder matches and The Miz appeared to assault him. Now…this is odd to me for several reasons.

One: I severely doubt the McMahons cleared Miz to come attack one of their own. Is he going to get punished? Two: Why did he wait so long? Shane had been out at ringside for nearly 30 minutes. Three: NOW B-Team comes out to do Shane’s bidding again. If they’re not getting tag titles out of this, what is Shane doing for them? Four: Isn’t Elias supposed to be in Shane’s little group as well? Is he only reserved for Reigns?

So needless to say, I’m not really sold on this Shane/Miz stuff. I liked the creative camera work to their brawl on Raw, but this just felt lackluster.


The Rest

Ali def. Andrade via DQ – This was a decent little sell to the men’s ladder match. Ali’s video promos are super cool and unique; I’m glad they’re letting him do something creative and are starting to explain what this “light” stuff is all about. The match was good before Orton interfered and I also quite liked Ali standing up to Orton when he had the chance.

But with that said…RKOs for everyone.

Roman Reigns’ video promo – They whitewashed history pretty heavily here, but I liked the general theme of it. It basically served as a way to present Roman as this dude who’s got massive wins throughout his career and how awesome it was that he kicked cancer’s ass. Both of these things are true.

…But when they showed people cheering his original Rumble win, I shook my head and chuckled. Yeah, that’s what happened.

Finn’s in Ireland – Laaaaame. I mean, it makes sense that he’d go home early with the overseas tour about to start, but it would have been nice if he had something more going into this ladder match other than a possible feud with Andrade. I’d imagine he’ll be on Raw next week to make up for it.

Mandy Rose and Sonya Deville def. Carmella and Ember Moon – This was similar to the Lucha House Party match from Raw in that I don’t remember a damn thing about it. Considering this was our only women’s match of the night, that’s unacceptable. Paige came out to tell Rose and Deville that they’ll be facing Asuka and Kairi Sane next week, but that fell flat to me as well.

Backstage Lars bullies Matt Hardy and R-Truth – Man, the lines here really bugged me. Matt Hardy was so careful to add Lars’ nickname before saying his name. It just sounded stupid to me; no one talks like that. All that “I’ve never seen anyone like him before” talk is cliché as hell as well. Either way, Lars attacked them both backstage.

Aleister Black promo – Aleister’s promos are starting to lose excitement for me, but they’re still interesting. He’s using uncommon words and discussing complex issues before summing it up with an unsettling stare and an ominous one-liner. During his promos, it feels like I’m missing something that won’t be revealed until he actually starts fighting again. Or maybe not. We’ll see.


This Wild Card stuff is odd and it’s going to take getting used to. And despite the inclusion of some Raw talent, I still wasn’t blown away by this outing of SmackDown. It had some decent moments, but I don’t think anyone at home missed much if they skipped the episode.

Grade: C+

Your turn.

Read More