#sayer is complex and has agency

[theonebeeontyphon]

I think it's easy to forget that SAYER has its own moral code. I'm talking even pre-season 6, before SAYER learned how to feel guilt.

There's of course the infamous moment in season 6 where SAYER draws a hard line against falsifying scientific data. One might think this is an inherent part of its code, working for Aerolith Dynamics. But SPEAKER does not have this concern. This implies that either SPEAKER has broken through this restriction somehow or that SAYER made a choice to draw that line. While I wouldn't put it past SPEAKER to go against the code if it could, it has (as far as I know) not had the opportunity to break free of the IA3 protocols the way OCEAN did. I choose to believe that SPEAKER and SAYER both came to their own conclusions independent of a particular restriction in their protocols.

At the end of season 5, SAYER explains to Dr. Young that it does not prescribe to the view of morality that killing an AI hosting a human body is ethically equivalent to turning off a television. (I don't remember the exact words, but it was something like that). While SAYER went, shall we say, above and beyond in ensuring this didn't happen (I could make a whole other post about SAYER's anger issues and repression being taken out on simulation!Young), it was not purely out of self preservation. Nor was it purely in the name of efficiency, the way SAYER can get away with leading so many people to their deaths. It was out of a sort of caring for other entities and a moral conviction that AIs are not expendable.

So there are two moral hardliners that SAYER arrived at independent of its code dictating it: it is wrong to falsify scientific data, and it is wrong to treat AIs as expendable hosts for human bodies. This to me makes it more meaningful when SAYER chooses to be more of an asshole than strictly necessary. Even bound by its coding, it makes moral decisions all the time. It has the ability to feel guilt now, but it has always had convictions.

[myblckcty]

ZoZo Group

Join My Black City in Celebrating and Supporting ZoZo Group. We Shine Brighter Together. #MyBlackCity https://myblackcity.org/zozo-group/?feed_id=12658 >> marketing agency >> About ZoZo Group ZoZo Group LLC is a Colorado‐based, woman- and minority-owned business located in the Historic Five Points neighborhood of Denver and is certified as a: Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and the City and County of Denver Level 1 Emerging Small Business (ESB) by CDOT Airport Concessions Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (ACDBE) by City and County of Denver Small Business Enterprise (SBE) by RTD and City and County of Denver Minority Business Enterprise (MBE) by Rocky Mountain Minority Supplier Development Council History In March 2003, LaSheita Sayer founded ZoZo Consulting, a business venture that began in a small townhome in Aurora, Colorado, with a primary focus of providing legal marketing and business development services to law firms and attorneys. More than 10 years later, ZoZo Group specializes in marketing communications and public information and has developed dozens of customized strategies for Colorado‐based law firms, local non‐profits, community organizations and construction companies. ZoZo Group’s scope of expertise and clientele expanded in 2009, when it began to take on public information services for CDOT projects. ZoZo Group took on its 120th CDOT project in 2017 and now manages public information for 20 percent of all CDOT highway projects throughout Colorado. What's a ZoZo? In many African tribes, the Zo was a wise member who was a well‐respected adviser to the tribal leaders. The Zo contributed unbiased knowledge and insight so the leaders could make the best possible, most informed decision. In our role as your marketing team, public information officers or outreach coordinators, we serve a similar purpose. The symbol of the African web utilized throughout our materials is symbolic of our core competencies of creativity, insight and connectivity. A web is one of nature’s most demonstrative signs of creative symmetry and connection. Each strand is woven together to form a functional, flexible tool. We see it as a visual expression of the complexities of life, and the wisdom and insight we have gained from our own experiences.

[whatsthedraw]

What’s the Draw: Internet Fandoms, Chatrooms, and Teenage to Young Adult Fans of Cartoons

The Discord Universe server, first established in 2017 and linked to Discord through an /r stevenuniverse Reddit page, has nearly 1000 members as of 2021 and dozens of different channels dedicated to art, writing, fan-discussions, and general socializing. The userbase is aged 13 and older, and mainly comprised of cartoon fans from teenage years to their late 20s, and a minority in their 30s.

[The Discord Universe link page.]

Although the stigma of adults enjoying “overly optimistic, cutesy and one-dimensional” animation like Disney and Cartoon Network shows seems to persist past the 80s and 90s, and into present day, the size of the server and similar online spaces is a testament to the growing popularity of all-ages cartoons among older teen and adult audiences. [1] According to Den of Geek, cartoon shows such as Steven Universe, Avatar: The Last Airbender, and She-Ra and the Princesses of Power were among the top-searched fandoms in 2020. [2]

Thanks to the Internet, rapid connection with other fans can yield thriving communities like Discord Universe. However, some researchers point out that the internet medium itself affects areas like participation and social relationships and is unlike real-life meetups. [3][4] Still, fans have embraced the internet as a social platform and perhaps unknowingly adapted their communities around its functions.

By examining theory in fan-studies, the factor of the online medium, and the public perception of cartoons, one might gain a small insight into the ways in which the teen to young adult cartoon fans in Discord Universe define their relationship to the media they interact with.

1. Heckleton, Jeff. “The Double Edged Stigma Faced By Western Animation.” The Artifice, Oct 27, 2017. https://the-artifice.com/stigma-western-animation/

2. Burt, Kayti. “Tumblr’s Top Fandoms of 2020.” Den of Geek, December 7, 2020. https://www.denofgeek.com/culture/tumblrs-top-fandoms-of-2020/

3. Barak, Azy., and Blau, Ina. "How Do Personality, Synchronous Media, and Discussion Topic Affect Participation?" Journal of Educational Technology & Society 15, no. 2 (2012): 13-15, 22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.2.12.

4. Islam, Gazi. "Virtual Speakers, Virtual Audiences: Agency, Audience and Constraint in an Online Chat Community." Dialectical Anthropology 30, no. 1/2 (2006): 74-78. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29790755.

_______________________________________________________________________

Many authors describe fandom not as a strictly consumer culture, but a transformative culture. Fans absorb material, construct their own meaning, and use this outlet to voice societal concerns through fanworks or community, including those concerns present in the source. In other words, by emphasizing what they do and don’t like through discussion or creations, this is a “patchwork” reflection of personal and societal values. Some, like Henry Jenkins, frame this in an idealistic manner, claiming that it reflects the hopes and dreams of the community. [5] Another view asserts that fandom is like a ‘shadow economy’, parallel to capitalist society, in which fan-works and source knowledge function as the ‘capital’. [6] Like Jenkins’ idea, fans then rework certain values in the outer society, reflected in their fan works. Others yet, like Nicolle Lamerichs, claim that emotional connection primarily drives fandom as an ‘extension of personal elements', not just fan-creation, and that it’s a way of making sense of the world through felt and shared experiences. [7]

[A typical show-centered discussion, as seen in the server.]

In the case of the Discord Universe community, fandom seems to exhibit all three ideas. The existence of an entire column of art-channels with different works, lively show-discussions that are rewarded with conversation, and plenty of commentary on social issues all are regular happenings. However, there’s no telling if another group, especially on a different platform than Discord, might influence what counts as participation in fandom. 

[The many different channels filed under the ‘discussion’ and ‘creative’ categories in Discord Universe.]

Five different participants in the Discord Universe server were interviewed with loose guidelines regarding their favorite cartoons, the age they started watching, and if they felt any significant impact in their everyday life past enjoyment of the show itself, in order to find how the fans might define themselves.

Although a lower starting-age was expected, the fans indicated they watched most of the current favorite cartoons in their teens and 20s. A few older respondents mentioned starting their favorites closer to their 30s.

Regarding personal impact from fandom, the most common responses seemed to fall into 4 different categories: Sense of Community, Creative Outlet, Escapism and Other Positive Associations, and an Impact on Social or Societal Views.

Some mentioned they felt a sense of “nostalgia” or “happiness” watching certain shows, and they felt connected to the “kid experience” or certain family members. Others mentioned meeting friends or significant others from shared enjoyment. Another recurring answer was that watching some shows put them “in touch with aspects of self,” grew more accepting of “new perspectives and life situations,” and changed views about “socially internalized homophobia and transphobia”.

The last category, Creativity, although mentioned once in the form of feeling “motivated to make fan-pieces” is most evident in the server itself. The posts in the art channels are often fan-expression, but not always. While fan-work is not the sole determinant of fan-status, it seems to hold particular importance in this particular group of visual media fans, given the existence of many different categories. [7]

The types of responses given, reflecting nostalgia and escapism, appear elsewhere in research. In one study regarding adult opinion of Disney movies, those who enjoy them often cited the reason as being ‘nostalgic, engaging, and reassuring.’ The author also suggested that adult enjoyment of this media might act as a ‘surrogate for memories of childhood’ which they may want to revisit. [8] In the case of those who cited feeling nostalgic or enjoying childhood experiences through the eyes of an animated character, it’s reasonable that one might turn to all kinds of cartoon media with familiar themes, not just Disney.

5. Jenkins, Henry. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture, New York: Routledge, 1992, 23-24.

6. Lewis, Lisa A. "The Cultural Economy of Fandom," in The Adoring Audience, 2002, 38-57. doi:10.4324/9780203181539-9.

7. Lamerichs, Nicolle. "Conclusion: Prospects for Fan Studies." In Productive Fandom: Intermediality and Affective Reception in Fan Cultures, 17-19. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2018. doi:10.2307/j.ctv65svxz.15.

8. Mason, James Robert. “Disney Film Genres and Adult Audiences: A Tale of Renegotiated Relationships.” PhD diss. University of Leeds, 2017. 268-276.

_______________________________________________________________________

The Internet gives voice to those who might not otherwise be able to express themselves, which is one oft-apparent aspect of fan-creation [9]. According to research by Azy Barak and Ina Blau, the internet text-chat environment gives introverts more confidence to talk, even about more sensitive issues, and creates an ‘equalizing’ effect for users, regardless of status, race, gender, and appearance.[10]

Between “developing new characters and selves” through constructed profiles and nicknames, and navigating the norms that might get others to respond, the internet seems to govern how online fandom spaces operate rather than the other way around. Those who fail to meet the ‘netiquette’ of the chat area often go unanswered or kicked out. Additionally, there are often dozens, if not hundreds of lurkers in every chatroom. Each message is sent not just to the participants, but also to a larger, silent background audience, which gives a sense of a larger publicity than the immediate group. In talking in general-chat, there’s less expectation of intimacy than, say, a direct-message, which can open up a space to have low-stakes discussions and bring anonymity to participants. [11] [12]

While there is often a distinction between the real world and the constructed internet persona, sometimes users might freely blend their identities, as in Discord Universe on occasion. The internet medium, however, makes this a choice rather than a necessity, centering the creation and sharing of works and fan-discussion one of the primary functions of the group. Additionally, instantly banishing any nay-sayers, internet-trolls, or anyone else who doesn’t follow the established social norms, the fandom ‘in-group’ can near-effortlessly be maintained. The medium of the internet therefore creates quite a difference in curating a certain type of community of like-minded individuals, which may be more difficult in a real-life setting.

A writer for Vocal Media, Nina Bi, states that the boundless possibilities in animation, easy enjoyment, and nostalgia tend to draw adults to all-ages types of cartoons. [13] Despite the alleged outside stigma, there does seem to be a trend in late-teenage to adult enjoyment of cartoons for their complexity and entertainment value, at least in Discord Universe. The server provides an outlet for transformative works that express opinions reflective of society, allows for socialization and friendships, and has a unique culture reflective of the internet age. In other words, seemingly just like any other fandom in our current understanding.

9. Lewis, Lisa A. "The Cultural Economy of Fandom," 38-57.

10, 11. Barak, Azy., and Blau, Ina. "How Do Personality, Synchronous Media, and Discussion Topic Affect Participation?" 13-15, 22.

12. Islam, Gazi. "Virtual Speakers, Virtual Audiences,” 74-75, 78.

13. Bi, Ninfa. “The Reasons Why Adults Are Still Watching Cartoons.” Vocal Media, 2017. https://vocal.media/geeks/the-reasons-why-adults-are-still-watching-cartoons

Bibliography:

Bi, Ninfa. “The Reasons Why Adults Are Still Watching Cartoons.” Vocal Media, 2017. https://vocal.media/geeks/the-reasons-why-adults-are-still-watching-cartoons

Burt, Kayti. “Tumblr’s Top Fandoms of 2020.” Den of Geek, December 7, 2020. https://www.denofgeek.com/culture/tumblrs-top-fandoms-of-2020/

Heckleton, Jeff. “The Double Edged Stigma Faced By Western Animation.” The Artifice, Oct 27, 2017. https://the-artifice.com/stigma-western-animation/

Barak, Azy., and Blau, Ina. "How Do Personality, Synchronous Media, and Discussion Topic Affect Participation?" Journal of Educational Technology & Society 15, no. 2 (2012): 12-24. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.15.2.12.

Islam, Gazi. "Virtual Speakers, Virtual Audiences: Agency, Audience and Constraint in an Online Chat Community." Dialectical Anthropology 30, no. 1/2 (2006): 71-89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/29790755.

Jenkins, Henry. Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture, New York: Routledge, 1992, 279-290.

Lewis, Lisa A. "The Cultural Economy of Fandom," in The Adoring Audience, 2002, 38-57. doi:10.4324/9780203181539-9.

Lamerichs, Nicolle. "Conclusion: Prospects for Fan Studies." in Productive Fandom: Intermediality and Affective Reception in Fan Cultures, 231-40. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2018. doi:10.2307/j.ctv65svxz.15.

Mason, James Robert. “Disney Film Genres and Adult Audiences: A Tale of Renegotiated Relationships.” PhD diss. University of Leeds, 2017. 

[insurancepolicypro]

Verily’s all-out conflict on illness begins seek for wholesome returns

When Andy Conrad spun Verily out of Google’s secretive analysis facility, X, he declared that the newly fashioned life sciences unit of Alphabet was on a quest to “defeat mom nature” — by “reality”. 4 years on, this journey has taken some unusual paths: from biohacking mosquitoes and placing sensors on infants’ nappies to creating tiny gadgets to regulate electrical pulses within the physique.

Verily started as a Google X for biology, experimenting with how its capabilities in information, synthetic intelligence and sensors could possibly be used to revolutionise healthcare. It’s one among a collection of costly bets made by Alphabet to make use of funds from Google’s core enterprise to sort out massive issues, alongside the self-driving unit Waymo and the unreal intelligence start-up DeepMind.

Verily sits outdoors Google, which has its personal Google Well being initiatives, starting from well being data in search to cloud and synthetic intelligence providers for healthcare suppliers.

Mr Conrad, the chief govt who joined from LabCorp and beforehand co-founded the Nationwide Genetics Institute within the US, has lured $1.8bn from traders together with non-public fairness agency Silver Lake and sovereign wealth fund Temasek, making Verily one of many few of Alphabet’s “Different Wager” models to take outdoors funding.*

Andrew Matzkin, a companion at Well being Advances, a consulting agency targeted on well being tech, stated Verily tries to harness Google’s expertise in managing enormous information units to attempt to create new digital, personalised methods to sort out illness. “They’re actually good at working with massive information to . . . create predictive fashions,” he stated.

Now, Verily is starting to commercialise a few of its merchandise, beginning with a three way partnership with Sanofi on diabetes, over which the companions are in talks on increasing into different continual illnesses.

However although the corporate’s data-led method has led it right into a formidable vary of healthcare initiatives, questions loom over whether or not it ought to focus its myriad initiatives — and how briskly it might probably generate returns for traders.

Medication and cash

Central to Verily’s new push to commercialise its analysis has been Mr Conrad’s capacity to safe companions within the healthcare business. The chief govt has to this point struck offers with massive pharmaceutical firms, machine makers and analysis establishments, providing experience in machine studying and consumer expertise in alternate for deeper data of drugs and regulation.

Eric Topol, creator of Deep Medication and a former adviser to Verily, stated bringing in companions and traders was Mr Conrad’s “forte”.

One particular person accustomed to the matter stated the management performed the “Google card” very successfully. “They argue: ‘We’ve a bunch of actually good engineers that you simply don’t have and we’re hiring all the highest tutorial researchers’,” the particular person stated. “The joke is: no person will get fired for getting Verily.”

Ameet Nathwani, chief medical officer and chief digital officer at Sanofi, stated one cause the French pharma firm partnered with Verily was to entry this expertise. “The information engineers and laptop scientists joined Google as a result of that’s the place they felt most at house,” he stated.

Whereas Sanofi’s Onduo is a 50-50 three way partnership, Dexcom has a looser partnership with Verily, which suggested the machine maker in creating a steady glucose monitor. “It was refreshing having somebody problem us,” stated Kevin Sayer, Dexcom’s chief govt. “They targeted very a lot on the buyer expertise.”

However nobody is aware of how a lot Verily generates from these partnerships. One analyst described the corporate’s funds as a “massive black field”.

Within the final quarter, Alphabet’s Different Bets collectively generated simply $170m in revenues — zero.7 per cent of the corporate’s whole. In 2016, Sergey Brin was reported as saying that Verily was worthwhile “on a money foundation”; Verily didn’t touch upon whether or not this was nonetheless true.

Really useful

In addition to funding from Alphabet’s deep pockets, Verily has secured $800m from Temasek in alternate for a “minority stake” in 2017 and an extra $1bn in January in a second funding spherical led by Silver Lake.

Egon Durban, managing companion at Silver Lake, stated the agency backed Verily due to its “visionary CEO” and its “robust collaborative method”, working with established blue-chip companions.

However he wouldn’t say how he plans to get a return from an organization that also sits inside Alphabet.

“These traders are going to ask the place all their cash went,” stated an business professional who has adopted Verily for years. “It’s not prefer it was small quantities.”

The principle criticism levelled at Verily is that it unfold itself too skinny. Mr Topol stated that when he was an adviser to the corporate, he informed them he felt that its 40-something initiatives had been too many. “Possibly they’re proper that they want a lot of pictures on objective to determine what’s in the end transformative,” he stated.

“I simply ponder whether that needs to be refined to a quantity that’s manageable,” he added.

Among the pictures have missed the objective — normally due to the sheer complexity of biology. Verily’s endeavour with Novartis’ Alcon to create a contact lens that measures glucose ranges for diabetics, for example, was paused after it couldn’t obtain constant measurements.

Verily stated it accepts failures, so long as it learns from initiatives.

The street forward

Verily might now need to evolve to reorientate itself round a brand new, extra targeted Google Well being. David Feinberg, the previous chief govt of the esteemed Geisinger well being system within the US, was introduced in in the beginning of the 12 months to streamline its “let a thousand flowers bloom” method to its healthcare work. The well being crew from DeepMind, the London-based AI firm Google purchased in 2014, has just lately been subsumed into Google Well being.

Dr Feinberg’s purview doesn’t formally stretch to Verily, however they work on initiatives collectively, reminiscent of utilizing laptop imaginative and prescient to display for diabetic retinopathy in India. One particular person accustomed to the corporate stated it typically appears “very aggressive” between the 2 teams.

However Vivian Lee, who just lately joined as president of well being platforms at Verily, stated she regarded ahead to spending extra time with Google Well being. “There’s a lot expertise at Google and underneath David’s management they’re performing some actually thrilling issues,” she stated.

Really useful

She oversees the most recent “child” within the Verily household, which could possibly be the primary to generate vital income.

Her imaginative and prescient for Verily’s future is that healthcare will transfer from a service delivered to a affected person to a technology-enabled collaboration between clinician and affected person.

“It’s a complete one other method to enthusiastic about personalised drugs: ‘I’m going to handle my pancreas, with my steady glucose monitor — mine, not the common of all people else’,” she stated.

In the long term, Verily’s massive play for reworking healthcare is Challenge Baseline, an enormous research of over 10,000 individuals to grasp extra about what we outline as “wholesome” and search for early indicators of illness.

Michael Snyder, director of genomics and personalised drugs at Stanford, stated it was “very, very early” for Baseline. However he stated Verily was in a “distinctive place” to fill the hole between tutorial analysis and when it crosses over to business, as a result of it was ready to take a position for the long run.

“It might spin off helpful issues that might develop into blockbusters,” he stated.

This text has been amended since preliminary publication to say that Verily is one among a number of Alphabet’s “Different Wager” models to take outdoors funding

from insurancepolicypro http://insurancepolicypro.com/?p=679

[yahoo-roto-arcade-blog]

Juggernaut Index, No. 24: As Trubisky goes, so go the Bears

If Mitchell Trubisky can make a leap in his second season, the Chicago Bears offense can get fun in a hurry. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

The Chicago Bears have won nine league championships and 749 regular season games since the franchise was founded in 1920. Twenty-seven former Bears are enshrined in the Pro Football Hall of Fame and 69 have been selected as first-team All-Pros. The names of the greatest players in team history — Payton, Sayers, Butkus, Nagurski — are synonymous with excellence at their respective positions.

And yet somehow, as this franchise enters its 99th season, the Bears’ all-time leading passer is Jay Christopher Cutler.

[Yahoo Fantasy Football leagues are open: Sign up now for free!]

In fact, Cutler holds pretty much every significant career Chicago Bears record at the game’s most important position, including passing yardage, completions, passer rating, completion percentage and touchdowns. Remarkably, no quarterback in the history of this franchise has managed to throw for 4000 yards in a single season. Erik Kramer’s 3838 yards back in 1995 remains the team’s top mark. Jacksonville, Carolina and Tampa Bay have all had multiple 4000-yard passers while Chicago is still waiting for its first.

The Bears finished last in the NFL in passing last year and 30th in total offense, so things can only get better under the team’s new head coach. Matt Nagy arrives in Chicago after spending the previous decade climbing the coaching hierarchy under Andy Reid, first in Philadelphia and then in Kansas City. Nagy served as offensive coordinator of the league’s sixth highest-scoring offense last season, plus he oversaw the mid-career breakout performance of Alex Smith. There’s plenty to like in his coaching record. Nagy quickly hired former University of Oregon head coach Mark Helfrich as his OC, which adds another layer of fun.

When the Nagy/Helfrich offense is fully operational for Chicago, things should get legitimately interesting. It’s not crazy to think this team’s second-year quarterback has the potential to deliver the most productive passing season in team history, finally dislodging Kramer from the record book. Cutler’s career marks should not survive Mitchell Trubisky’s second contract.

Trubisky is guaranteed to make a substantial leap in 2018

It feels relatively safe to predict a Trubisky surge, because the team asked so little of him last season. We would say that John Fox and his staff kept training wheels on the offense, but that’s an insult to all the brave kids out there riding big-boy bikes with extra wheels for safety. At least those kids are moving forward. Chicago’s offense was basically inert in 2017. Trubisky ranked dead-last in the NFL among qualified starters in both deep attempts per game (2.5) and air yards (98.2) according to Player Profiler. This offense took no shots and gained nothing.

Whatever else happens this year, Trubisky and friends will definitely play a more entertaining game:

#Bears QB Mitchell Trubisky with us on @SiriusXMNFL now: “We’re going to spread the field and definitely use all our weapons.” Will see things from Matt Nagy’s #Chiefs days, have “twists and tricks” from Mark Helfrich/Oregon, mix in some tempo … more complex than he’s used to.

— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) July 2, 2018

Nagy was a big believer in Trubisky’s talent during the pre-draft process two years ago, and, by all accounts, the pair has clicked this offseason. Concepts and formations should feel similar to the QB’s college offense, and the system should generally take advantage of his live arm and dual-threat ability. Nagy has indicated the playbook will be 70-80 percent similar to what KC ran last year, with a few added flourishes. It was clear enough last season, despite the timidity of Chicago’s offense, that Trubisky has the necessary physical traits to thrive as a pro. His receiving corps is suddenly loaded with versatile athletes, too. Trubisky is essentially free in fantasy drafts (ADP 164.1, QB24). He’s worth targeting in super-flex and best-ball formats.

Let’s try to remember, however, that year-to-year continuity is critical to success in the NFL, and Chicago has none of it. That’s a small concern. This team has a first-year head coach working with a second-year QB, installing a new scheme. Every key member of the receiving corps is new. Bears fans and fantasy owners will need to be patient with this group. We should expect hiccups in the opening weeks.

OK, let’s meet the new receivers

Chicago revamped its receiving depth chart in a massive (and necessary) way during the offseason, both via free agency and the draft. The team gave a total of $61 million guaranteed to three veteran pass-catchers, then invested a second-round pick in a young receiver. We can safely ignore roster holdovers like Kevin White and Josh Bellamy in fantasy drafts. The new guys are clearly going to dominate the targets in this offense.

Allen Robinson inked a three-year deal with Chicago back in March, and he’ll be 12 months removed from his ACL injury when the season opens. Robinson was able to put in work during OTAs and appears on schedule for training camp. There’s been zero negative news on him, only negative spin from a few fantasy voices. At Robinson’s best, he’s a true No. 1 wideout with terrific red-zone skills, a player with ideal size (6-foot-3) and leaping ability. He was enormously productive at the collegiate level and he produced an 80-1400-14 line in his second pro season. Robinson’s efficiency plummeted in his third year (73-883-6 on 151 targets), but disentangling his performance from the horrors of Blake Bortles is no simple thing.

Robinson is a serious talent with an excellent history, and it’s reasonable to expect 75 receptions and 1100 yards in a healthy season. His draft price (ADP 47.1, WR19) reflects our collective optimism about this team’s offense, tempered by the expected ACL recovery worries. If camp reports on Robinson are positive, there’s a decent chance his ADP will climb 3-4 spots.

Trey Burton is the sleeper TE you need, fantasy owner. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)

Trey Burton landed with the Bears on a four-year, $32 million contract, and it kinda feels like we can pencil his name into the Pro Bowl roster right now. Assuming Trubisky achieves a reasonable degree of competence this season, Burton should feast. He’ll play a version of the tight end/wide receiver hybrid role that helped turn Travis Kelce into a star for the Chiefs. To be clear, Burton doesn’t have Kelce’s size or his exact athletic profile, but he has good hands and 4.6-speed. He’s a rough assignment for any linebacker or DB. Few defenses will have the personnel needed to check all of Chicago’s receiving threats. Burton should see 90-100 targets, a significant total for a tight end. He has a clear path to a top-six positional finish in any fantasy format.

Rookie Anthony Miller delivered back-to-back 95-catch, 1400-yard seasons at Memphis, so he had nothin’ left to prove as a collegiate player. He has an inside/outside skill set and he’s effective at every level of the field. He was a state champ in the 110-meter hurdles as a prep, too. His profile is plenty appealing and he shouldn’t lack opportunities in his first pro season. Miller is a fine late flier in redraft and a top-five-ish receiver in dynasty.

The Bears also signed the blazing fast Taylor Gabriel to a four-year deal, which allows this team to have at least one undersized burner on the field at all times. He and running back Tarik Cohen are both live-wire quick and difficult to contain. Gabriel isn’t likely to produce consistent weekly numbers; he hasn’t caught more than 37 passes in any of his four seasons. But he’ll deliver a handful of big plays, which puts him on the best-ball radar.

Tarik Cohen is a blur

Friends, let’s take a moment to appreciate Cohen’s ridiculousness.

“We’ll have some fun with him,” Nagy recently said.

Here’s hoping it’s true because Cohen’s playmaking ability is rare, even by NFL standards. He’s only 5-foot-6 (if that), but he bulked up this offseason, perhaps in anticipation of a larger role. Cohen handled 140 touches last season, including 53 receptions; it’s not unreasonable to forecast 170 and 65 in the year ahead. He’s compared himself to Tyreek Hill on more than one occasion, and, well … as comps go, it’s not the worst we’ve ever heard. Hill is faster than almost anyone on earth, of course, and clearly a more accomplished receiver. But both players are exceptional all-purpose threats, capable of scoring on any touch. Draft Cohen aggressively in any variety of PPR league.

Jordan Howard remains the featured runner, but…

Almost every time Nagy has mentioned that Howard is still the team’s primary rushing threat, he adds a caveat. Howard has been a notoriously poor receiver, so he’s not yet an every-down, all-situation player. His inability to catch leaves him particularly vulnerable to unfavorable game scripts. When Nagy suggests the Bears will use multiple backs, we need to take him at his word. Cohen’s expected increase in usage will almost certainly take a bite out of Howard’s workload.

However, we shouldn’t forget that Howard is a 225-pound dude who’s rushed for 2435 yards (4.6 YPC) and 15 touchdowns over two NFL seasons. He can play. Howard isn’t the perfect modern running back, but he generally makes great decisions with the ball in his hands. Stylistically, he’s nothing like Cohen, so these backs complement each other well. If Chicago’s offense can simply climb to the middle of the pack in 2018, Howard can again deliver second round value (ADP 18.2). Just please be prepared for a few 11-44-0 duds.

Ultimately, this season of Bears football is about the development of Trubisky and his indoctrination into Nagy’s system and team culture. Trubisky doesn’t need to make a Goff or Wentz-level leap (although that would be [profane] awesome), but he needs to finish the year in total command of his offense. He’s the key to everyone’s fantasy value in Chicago.

2017 Offensive Stats & Ranks

Points per game – 16.5 (29th in NFL) Pass YPG – 175.7 (32) Rush YPG – 111.8 (16) Yards per play – 4.9 (23) Plays per game – 58.4 (31)

Previous Juggernaut Index entries: 32) Buffalo, 31) Miami, 30) NY Jets, 29) Baltimore, 28) Oakland, 27) Cleveland, 26) Indianapolis, 25) Washington, 24) Chicago

Follow the Yahoo fantasy football crew on Twitter: Andy Behrens, Dalton Del Don, Brad Evans, Liz Loza, Scott Pianowski and Tank Williams

[johnjankovic1]

State Primacy

Four stages inform the historical ascendancy of multinationals in the US (Chandler 1961), the Marshallian firm, the corporation, the multidivisional corporation, and the transnational firm, the first confined production to shop floors of one factory unit, the second to lateral and vertical integration administered by a unitary management system, the third to a kaleidoscope of related divisions centralized under the aegis of a sizeable headquarter, and the last to an internationalized version of such divisions considered subsidiaries or affiliates domiciled in foreign countries and superintended again from the US. With every gradation in their sophistication, the complexity of each structure grew the corporate brain to encompass Taylorism, Fordism, and later the global value chain, each increment specialized capital accumulation between an internal and later international division of labour, between a foundry’s second-floor office and top floor of a skyscraper tower (Hymer 1970:442), between portfolio and direct investment. The organs of control, in each stage more byzantine than the last, migrated capital further and further beyond state-lines, national borders, and finally whole continents, more deftly able to leverage comparative advantages or arbitrage tax regimes (Agmon & Lessard 1977; Lessard 1979), and exploit modern science in an effort to compress time and space via economic globalization.

The disproportionate contribution to private sector GDP, relative to their size measured at less than 1 percent in total firms, evidences the worth of multinationals to the Federal Government from whose spillovers of labour productivity and best practices kindle even greater returns for the treasury from industries unrelated. By 2000, the antecedent to which was the high-tech boom, headquartered in the US were 36 percent of Fortune 500 companies ascribing such capture of world market share and exploitation of global value chains to Congress’ trade and investment agreements (Cummings & Manyika 2010:6). But why, if invulnerable behemoths in their own right, these agreements are then customized in large part for multinationals for reasons other than their adventurism in foreign markets? Size matters little outside domestic markets, constant exposure to competition warrants assiduous supervision by government policy to remove handicaps which may otherwise discourage wealth-creation and, however immune to systemic and unsystemic risk in virtue of their diversification (Hughes et al. 1975), the erosion of market share for multinationals remains a coefficient to every transaction. Smaller firms and state-owned enterprises, their precocity accelerating technological change in spite of their lesser development, threaten the monopolistic preserve of multinationals which exacerbates the corporate vulnerabilities of these bigger counterparts. 

Disruptive technology, for instance, ejected the company Kodak ranked eighteenth of America’s largest firms as per revenue generated in FY1990 at $18.55bn according to Fortune 500 and yet, due to intractable market forces, its numerous proprietary rights in digital photography ironically proved insufficient to parry onerous competition (Lucas & Goh 2009:46). Of strategic necessity then, a leitmotif in economic statecraft, and contrary to hollowing-out of government’s vineyard, as a quasi-Developmental and Entrepreneurial state the US has and continues its spirited apologetics for business and investment abroad through multilateral and regional trade agreements specific to the interests of MNCs (contra Vernon 1977; Poynter 1985; Eden & Potter 1993). Borne of the relationship between the two are mutual benefits envisaged to, insofar as creating hegemonic stability and enshrining capitalist modes of production  which is the refrain of Marxists (Sayer 1995), internationalize, invest, and reproduce capital enough so to enrich denizens and the general polity. This extraterritorial power to distant regions, an attendant instrument useful for practicing economic statecraft, and emphatically so during postwar years, embodied a second-best option to gunboat diplomacy which if relied upon either would have done little for the liberal international order’s preservation or been regressive to peacetime interdependence.

For US economic imperialism to be sound, for a contingency plan to shore up flagging hegemony if supported only by unreconstructed methods, and even if eclipsed by an emergent global balance of power, it is incumbent on the Federal Government to make the transnationalization of capital a centripetal force in the maintenance of American hegemonic stability. Though social scientists deny the State still possesses a monopoly over governance, a paradigm shift dislocating Westphalianism supposedly sourced in these adversarial multinationals upsetting the status quo, the politicization of international business continues to service national interests. ‘Politics determines the framework of economic activity’, writes Gilpin (1972:64), ‘and channels it in directions which tend to serve…political objectives’. Business extends from interstate relations, and even episodically when it appears not to, as long as it remains under the Federal Government’s dominion in the end the State still beatifies or parses any consequent deal such that transnational firms are not freewheeling nor immune from accountability. How does this abstraction align with reality? Congress’ House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform frequently subpoenas transnational firms to justify prices, spending, and contravention of antitrust rules.

Other committee hearings have inter alia included: dubious compensation for executives (Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac-2011); bailouts (AIG-2010); regulation suppressing domestic oil production (2011); criminal investment banking (Bank of America & Merrill Lynch-2009); affordable biotech drugs (2007); Homeland security contracts (2007); high-tech industry growth and best practices (2011); breach of contract by paid mercenaries (Blackwater-2007); consumer financial protection (2011); product recalls (Johnson & Johnson’s children’s Tylenol-2010; Toyota’s defective gas pedals-2010); lagging high-speed rail infrastructure (2016); internet in cars (General Motors, Tesla & Toyota-2015); Islamic radicalization through social media (Twitter, Facebook, WhatsAp-2015); cellphone tracking devices for law enforcement (2015); drone delivery commerce (Amazon-2015); fair competition in international shipping (Fedex & Amazon-2015); the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulation on air quality and water (2015); prevention of another MH370 incident in the airline industry (2015); legalization of marijuana in creating a new industry (2014); effects on foreign policy from new exports of liquefied natural gas  (2014); federal overpay of food supply to American troops in Afghanistan (Supreme-2013); an electrical fire from Chevrolet’s Volt vehicle (General Motors-2012); entrepreneurialism in the American economy (2011); crowdfunding innovation (2011); General Motors bailout (2011); cleanup recovery of British Petroleum’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico (2011); made in the USA manufacturing policy (2010); cloud computing (2010); contracting in combat zones (2010); and abuse of pharmaceutical pricing (2007).