PDF Archive search engine
Last database update: 17 December at 11:24 - Around 76000 files indexed.
female festivals Total amount 268 2.682 246 Total amount 338 2.683 263 Percentage 8,4% 83,9 % 7,7 % Percentage 10.3% 81,7 % 8,0 % female male mixed orange = female festival Australia Unsound Adelaide 2012 female male mixed - 9 - www.unsound.pl Austria female male mixed Ars Electronica 2012 32 e_may Festival 2012 composers acts 22 - 9 1 8 Music Unlimited 2012 6 www.e-may.org www.musicunlimited.at 95 18 3 4 Springfestival 2013 - 26 2 Urban Art Forms 2013 1 47 2 www.urbanartforms.com Finland Flow Festival 2012 www.flowfestival.com France 5 210 17 I Love Techno 2012 - 36 1 www.ilovetechno.be Mutek Montreal 2012 www.mutek.org Roskilde Festival 2011 www.roskilde-festival.dk female male mixed - 4 Nuits Sonores 2013 12 146 9 www.nuits-sonores.com Germany female male mixed Berlin Festival 2012 12 66 9 C/o pop 2012 14 54 14 CTM Festival 2013 18 153 7 frameworks festival 2013 1 8 - Fusion Festival 2012 acts bands 4 67 3 20 107 50 Les Femmes s’en Mêlent 10 - 3 Melt!
Możliwe byłoby również podjęcie współpracy z cyklicznie odbywającymi się w Krakowie festiwalami muzycznymi, takimi jak Sacrum Profanum czy Unsound, których repertuar doskonale odnalazłby się w takim pomieszczeniu.
In short, this approach is neither justified nor effective and it would be unsound to continue with a policy that would act in a very similar manner to that of Green Belt without meeting the stringent tests required for its designation (exceptional circumstances paragraph 82 of the Framework).
Federal Reserve fined HSBC Holdings PLC $175 million for “unsafe and unsound practices” in its foreign exchange trading business.
It is not intended for use on unsound previous coatings or floors that have a moisture problem.
This response is focussed on the designation of land at Horsley Road (see Appendix 1 – Site Plan) as ‘Important Open Space’ under Policy LP23, which is considered to be unsound as it stands.
Fool Me Once: Can Indifference Vindicate Induction? Roger White (2015) sketches an ingenious new solution to the problem of induction. It argues on a priori grounds that the world is more likely to be inductionfriendly than inductionunfriendly. The argument relies primarily on the principle of indifference, and, somewhat surprisingly, assumes little else. If inductive methods could be vindicated in anything like this way, it would be quite a groundbreaking result. But there are grounds for pessimism about the envisaged approach. This paper shows that in the crucial test cases White concentrates on, the principle of indifference actually renders induction no more accurate than random guessing. It then diagnoses why the indifferencebased argument seems so intuitively compelling, despite being ultimately unsound. 1 An IndifferenceBased Strategy White begins by imagining that we are “apprentice demons” tasked with devising an inductionunfriendly world – a world where inductive methods tend to be unreliable. To simplify, we imagine that there is a single binary variable that we control (such as whether the sun rises over a series of consecutive days). So, in essence, the task is to construct a binary sequence such that – if the sequence were revealed one bit at a time – an inductive reasoner would fare poorly at predicting its future bits. This task, it turns out, is surprisingly difficult. To see this, it will be instructive to consider several possible strategies for constructing a sequence that would frustrate an ideal inductive predictor. Immediately, it is clear that we should avoid uniformly patterned sequences, such as: 00000000000000000000000000000000 or 01010101010101010101010101010101. 1 Sequences like these are quite kind to induction. Our inductive reasoner would quickly latch onto the obvious patterns these sequences exhibit. A more promising approach, it might seem, is to build an apparently patternless sequence: 00101010011111000011100010010100 But, importantly, while induction will not be particularly reliable at predicting the terms of this sequence, it will not be particularly unreliable here either. Induction would simply be silent about what a sequence like this contains. As White puts it, “ In order for... induction to be applied, our data must contain a salient regularity of a reasonable length” (p. 285). When no pattern whatsoever can be discerned, presumably, induction is silent. (We will assume that the inductive predictor is permitted to suspend judgment whenever she wishes.) The original aim was not to produce an inductionneutral sequence, but to produce a sequence that elicits errors from induction. So an entirely patternless sequence will not suffice. Instead, the inductionunfriendly sequence will have to be more devious, building up seeming patterns and then violating them. As a first pass, we can try this: 00000000000000000000000000000001 Of course, this precise sequence is relatively friendly to induction. While our inductive predictor will undoubtedly botch her prediction of the final bit, it is clear that she will be able to amass a long string of successes prior to that point. So, on balance, the above sequence is quite kind to induction – though not maximally so. In order to render induction unreliable, we will need to elicit more errors than correct predictions. We might try to achieve this as follows: 00001111000011110000111100001111 2 The idea here is to offer up just enough of a pattern to warrant an inductive prediction, before pulling the rug out – and then to repeat the same trick again and again. Of course, this precise sequence would not necessarily be the way to render induction unreliable: For, even if we did manage to elicit an error or two from our inductive predictor early on, it seems clear that she would eventually catch on to the exceptionless higherorder pattern governing the behavior of the sequence. The upshot of these observations is not that constructing an inductionunfriendly sequence is impossible. As White points out, constructing such a sequence should be possible, given any complete description of how exactly induction works (p. 287). Nonetheless, even if there are a few special sequences that can frustrate induction, it seems clear that such sequences are fairly few and far between. In contrast, it is obviously very easy to corroborate induction (i.e. to construct a sequence rendering it thoroughly reliable). So induction is relatively unfrustrateable. And it is worth noting that this property is fairly specific to induction. For example, consider an inferential method based on the gambler’s fallacy, which advises one to predict whichever outcome has occurred less often, overall. It would be quite easy to frustrate this method thoroughly (e.g. 00000000…). So far, we have identified a highly suggestive feature of induction. To put things roughly, it can seem that: * Over a large number of sequences, induction is thoroughly reliable. * Over a large number of sequences, induction is silent (and hence, neither reliable nor unreliable). * Over a very small number of sequences (i.e. those specifically designed to thwart induction), induction is unreliable (though, even in these cases, induction is still silent much of the time). 3 Viewed from this angle, it can seem reasonable to conclude that there are a priori grounds for confidence that an arbitrary sequence is not inductionunfriendly. After all, there seem to be far more inductionfriendly sequences than inductionunfriendly ones. If we assign equal probability to every possible sequence, then the probability that an arbitrary sequence will be inductionfriendly is going to be significantly higher than the probability that it will be inductionunfriendly. So a simple appeal to the principle of indifference seems to generate the happy verdict that induction can be expected to be more reliable than not, at least in the case of binary sequences. Moreover, as White points out, the general strategy is not limited to binary sequences. If we can show a priori that induction over a binary sequence is unlikely to be inductionunfriendly, then it’s plausible that a similar kind of argument can be used to show that we are justified in assuming that an arbitrary world is not inductionunfriendly. If true, this would serve to fully vindicate induction. 2 Given Indifference, Induction Is not Reliable However, there are grounds for pessimism about whether the strategy is successful even in the simple case of binary sequences. Suppose that, as a special promotion, a casino decided to offer Fair Roulette. The game involves betting $1 on a particular color – black or red – and then spinning a wheel, which is entirely half red and half black. If wrong, you lose your dollar; if right, you get your dollar back and gain another. If it were really true that induction can be expected to be more reliable than not over binary sequences, it would seem to follow that induction can serve as a winning strategy, over the long term, in Fair Roulette. After all, multiple spins of the wheel produce a binary sequence of reds and blacks. And all possible sequences are 4 equally probable. Of course, induction cannot be used to win at Fair Roulette – past occurrences of red, for example, are not evidence that the next spin is more likely to be red. This suggests that something is amiss. Indeed, it turns out that no inferential method – whether inductive or otherwise – can possibly be expected to be reliable at predicting unseen bits of a binary sequence, if the principle of indifference is assumed. This can be shown as follows. Let S be an unknown binary sequence of length n. S is to be revealed one bit at a time, starting with the first. S: ? ? ? ? ? ? … ? :S n bits Let f be an arbitrary predictive function that takes as input any initial subsequence of S and outputs a prediction for the next bit: ‘0’, ‘1’, or ‘suspend judgment’. A predictive function’s accuracy is measured as follows: +1 for each correct prediction; 1 for each incorrect prediction; 0 each time ‘suspend judgment’ occurs. (So the maximum accuracy of a function is n; the minimum score is –n.) Given a probability distribution over all possible sequences, the expected accuracy of a predictive function is the average of its possible scores weighted by their respective probabilities. Claim: If we assume indifference (i.e. if we assign equal probability to every possible sequence), then – no matter what S is – each of f’s predictions will be expected to contribute 0 to f’s accuracy. And, as a consequence of this, f has 0 expected accuracy more generally. Proof: For some initial subsequences, f will output ‘suspend judgment’. The contribution of such predictions will inevitably be 0. So we need consider only those cases where f makes a firm prediction (i.e. ‘0’ or ‘1’; not ‘suspend judgment’). Let K be a klength initial subsequence for which f makes a firm prediction about the bit in 5
After discussing this result, we then diagnose why the indifference-based argument seems so intuitively compelling, despite being ultimately unsound.
In 1864 the Ecumenical Patriarchate Opens Syncretistic Dialogue With the Armenians, Presuming Their Mysteries To Be Valid DEDICATION. Kingʹs College, Cambridge, Festival of the Annunciation, 1866. MY DEAR HOPE,‐‐Permit me to inscribe to you the following pages, prepared under your roof, and bearing on a subject in which I know you to take a lively interest. They relate to the aspirations after Christian Unity expressed by an eminent Oriental Prelate, and bear very directly, as I have endeavoured to show, on the longing desire of many among ourselves after more intimate relations with the great Eastern Church. And it is surely a most remarkable and memorable combination, which presents to us a Gregory of Byzantium, Metropolitan of Chios, as mediator for the reconciliation to the Catholic Family of the Church founded by Gregory the Illuminator in the far East; and in that capacity‐‐unconsciously to himself‐‐helping forward a better mutual understanding between the Orthodox Church and that founded by the pious care of Gregory the Great in the then remotest West. If only the large‐hearted and intelligent charity exhibited by the Archbishop of Chios in the pages of his learned Treatise, were more widely diffused among us, the hindrances to Catholic Unity, which we have discussed together, insurmountable as they now appear, would speedily vanish away, and the idea of ʺone fold and one Shepherdʺ would no longer be regarded as an unattainable dream of a visionary and enthusiastic [iii/iv] imagination. The reviving faith of divided Christendom would then grasp the Divine promise, ʺthere shall be;ʺ and the kindling charity of Christian brotherhood would set itself in earnest to realize it, ʺbeing fully persuaded that what He hath promised, He is able also to perform.ʺ Yours most affectionately, GEORGE WILLIAMS. A. J. B. Beresford Hope, Esq., M.P., Bedgebury Park. N.B.‐‐This Series of Tracts will be issued gratuitously to the Members of the Eastern Church Association; and may be procured by non‐Subscribers of Messrs. Rivington: London, Oxford, and Cambridge. Number I., on the ʺApostolical Succession in the Church of England. A Letter to a Russian Friend.ʺ By the Rev. William Stubbs, M.A., Librarian to His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Vicar of Navestock. Number II., on the ʺEssential Unity of the Church of Christ.ʺ Extracted from ʺAn Eireniconʺ by E. B. Pusey, D.D., Regius Professor of Hebrew, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford, with the sanction of the Author. YEARNINGS AFTER UNITY IN THE EAST. AMONG the numerous indications of an earnest longing after the reunion of the estranged families of the Holy Church Catholic which the present age is witnessing, not one is fraught with more hopeful promise to the cause of the Christian faith than that attempt to reconcile the Armenian with the Greek Orthodox Church to which I wish to call attention in this Paper. Yet it is not merely, nor even mainly, on this account that I desire to bring these facts under notice; but chiefly because of their direct bearing upon the cause in which our interests and exertions are engaged,‐‐that, namely, of the restoration of friendly relations, and ultimately, if it please God, of inter‐ communion between ourselves and the Orthodox Church of the East. It will not, therefore, be necessary for my purpose to enter into any investigation of the causes that have so long alienated those two venerable and important communities of Eastern Christendom, the Gregorian Armenians, and the Orthodox Greeks. Still less could it subserve any good end to revive the discussion of the various points at issue between them for the past fourteen centuries of mutual crimination and recrimination, of misrepresentation and misunderstanding. Suffice it to say that now, at length, through the Divine mercy, more reasonable counsels would seem to be gaining the ascendant; the thick clouds of partiality and prejudice are vanishing away before the cheering beams of Christian love; the Sun of Righteousness has risen with healing in His wings over those two God‐fearing nations; and that prophetic Word is beginning to have its Evangelical accomplishment:‐‐ʺThe [5/6] envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.ʺ [Isa. xi. 13.] What the blessed results of such a reconciliation would be, can be estimated only by those who have witnessed, as I have, the lamentable consequences of the divisions of Christendom in the East. My convictions on this point, which I ventured to express twenty years ago, before any idea of such a reconciliation had been entertained, have been only confirmed by time. It would be like ʺlife from the deadʺ to the nations where the power of the Cross has been paralyzed for centuries by the shameful factions of Its natural champions. [Holy City, vol. ii., pp. 554‐556.] Chief among the living promoters of this much‐to‐be‐desired union is Gregory of Byzantium, the actual Metropolitan of Chios, whose weighty words it is the main object of this paper to introduce to the reader. It is now more than eighteen months ago that he commenced in the columns of the ʺByzantis,ʺ a Greek orthodox newspaper, published at Constantinople, the issue of a ʺTreatise on the Union of the Armenians with the Catholic Orthodox Church.ʺ This Treatise, commenced on the 1st of July, 1864, was continued in twenty numbers of the Journal, until October 24th of the same year, from which date it was interrupted until November 3rd, 1865, when it was resumed, and is still being continued in the same Journal. This most learned and valuable argument, historical and doctrinal, for the orthodoxy of the Armenian Church, so long suspected by the Greeks to be tainted with Monophysite heresy, is one of the most remarkable phenomena of modern times, as it is certainly one of the most able controversial works of this century. But it would be beside my present purpose to enter into a review of it in these pages. My purpose in referring to it is, to introduce a portion of the Work which is of the greatest practical importance to ourselves at the present juncture, when the possibility of the restoration of union between the Anglican Church and the Orthodox Eastern Church is occupying the attention of so many members of our [6/7] Communion, and has already so far attracted the attention of the Convocation of Canterbury, that a Committee of the Lower House was appointed in 1864, for the purpose of considering the subject, and has been reappointed in the new Convocation. At such a time, nothing could be more opportune than the opinion of a learned Prelate of the Orthodox Eastern Church on the means to be adopted with a view to restoration of intercommunion between two long‐estranged branches of the Christian family; and it cannot be wrong to regard this action, taken by the Metropolitan of Chios, as providential, in view of our aspirations after communion with Eastern Christendom. It is certainly most remarkable that a Greek Archbishop, having no knowledge, as would appear, of the recent progress of opinion in this country in favour of the re‐union of Christendom, should have furnished, with an entirely different view, precisely what was most wanted for the guidance of our own conduct in opening negotiations with the East. The Treatise is divided into Chapters, of which four were completed before the suspension of the work in 1864. Of these, Chapter I. is occupied with ʺthe Introduction and Progress of Christianity in Armenia.ʺ Chapter II. deals with ʺThe Schism of the Armenian Church, and its Dogmatical difference from the Orthodox.ʺ In the course of this discussion is introduced an account of the various attempts that have been made from time to time to bring about a reconciliation of the Orthodox and Armenian Churches; and long extracts are given from a Dialogue between Nerses IV., Catholicus of Armenia, and Lysias Theorianus, who was appointed by the Emperor Manuel Comnenus, on the part of the Orthodox, to confer with the Armenian Prelate on the subject of the restoration of communion. This Conference took place at Roum‐Kale in A.D. 1175; and the very charitable opening of the discussion is so highly creditable to both parties, and so valuable as a precedent in all like attempts, that I translate part of it, as narrated by the Greek interlocutor. The Catholicus,‐‐ʺHaving read the Imperial Letter, I understand it to be the will of the Emperor, and of the Holy Church of the Greeks, that if we will correct our errors, they are ready [7/8] to receive us as brethren. ʺWe desire, therefore, to be informed what are the points of Faith on which we have erred; and if we can be convicted canonically, with Scripture proof, we will fairly and willingly receive correction.ʺ Theorianus.‐‐ʺI beg your mighty Holiness to receive my remarks with your innate gentleness, and not to think my questions captious; but let this rule be observed in the interrogatories and answers on both sides:‐‐When we hear any thing which seems of unsound meaning, not forthwith to con‐elude that it is heretical; but to inquire carefully, and ascertain the force of the expression, and the mind of him who adopts it.ʺ The Catholicus.‐‐ʺYou say well. So be it.ʺ The third Chapter of the Treatise relates to ʺThe Phases and Variations of Worship among the Armenians.ʺ The fourth to ʺThe Ritualistic Observances and Customs of the Armenian Church.ʺ The fifth Chapter of the Treatise, with which the work was resumed in November last, is that which has the most immediate practical interest for us, as laying down principles directly applicable to our case. It discusses the question, ʺHow the Union of the two Churches may be arranged.ʺ Its importance demands that the general principles laid down in this admirable scheme should be given in full. ʺIn what Manner the Union of the two Churches may be effected. ʺFor the success of this much‐desired union two things are required: (1) The appointment of a Commission for the preliminary investigation and explanation of existing differences; and, (2) The adoption of certain concessions and accommodations, on the basis of the ancient precedents of the Catholic Church. ʺOf the Appointment of a Commission. ʺ1. The Commission to be appointed for the explanation of differences and the consideration of the preliminaries of Ecclesiastical Union, shall be mixed, being selected from the most enlightened Clergy of the two Churches. ʺ2. The members of the Commission to be chosen by each side shall be equal in number, considering the question on a perfectly equal footing, and in a spirit of brotherhood.  ʺ3. No inquiry shall be made concerning the validity of the Orders and of the Baptism of the Armenians; because all doubt on this point is a contradiction to the design of negotiations with a view to the union and reconciliation of Christian brethren, inasmuch as such negotiations of necessity presuppose the acknowledgment of these, as being incontrovertibly fundamental elements of Christianity: and consequently all doubt upon this point renders the appointment of a Commission impracticable; for how can we confer with men who are supposed to be without a priesthood and unbaptized, in other words, with heathens, and consult with them on a footing of equality and brotherhood concerning the doctrines of the Christian faith? ʺ4. Since nothing is more easily excited than national jealousy, therefore, for the removal of all suspicion (by which the whole object of the negotiations may be defeated) of a secret attempt either to Hellenize the Armenian Church or to Armenianize the Hellenic Church, it is necessary that it should be agreed that neither of the two Churches claims to impose its own Ecclesiastical discipline, or its own usages and customs, upon the other; but, on the contrary, should be ready to waive or even to abandon these, so far as they shall be proved contrary to Catholic tradition, and to admit the customs of the other, no longer as Hellenic or Armenian, but as Oecumenical, as being in manifest agreement with the Apostolical Constitutions, the decrees of Oecumenical Synods, and the teaching of the Holy Fathers. ʺ5. Since the negotiations themselves will be a continuation of those held at Roum Kale and Tarsus in 1179, it is requisite that in the proceedings of the
Federal Reserve fined HSBC Holdings PLC $175 million for ―unsafe and unsound practices‖ in its foreign exchange trading business.
In that Frith (described as old and unsound in religion) was performing illegal marriages.15 Frith gave his bond, but he didn't keep it if he performed Will's marriage later, but Frith was also a Catholic, which fits in with William's father religion and why the bishop is getting his records.
3) 2 Perhaps the most important affair which decentralization is currently affecting is currency. Though in the past, societies often used several currencies concurrently, many of which were not government created, recent history has seen the world dominated by central banking and fiat currency. This reality has had many dire outcomes, both social and economic in nature. Central banks in control of fiat currencies can freely manipulate the value of their currencies, as they can print as much as they want, and manipulate the money supply in other ways. With the advent of crypto-currencies such as bitcoin, whose intrinsic value comes in the form of their encryption, money is once again being decentralized and given real value. There is far less risk of economic catastrophe arising out of the perils of unsound money, and when governments are unable to freely manipulate a nation’s currency, they are much more at the whims of reality. Historically, wars ended most often when a nation ran out of money to fight it. It is not a coincidence that with the advent of central banking came total war, expansionist socialist states, society draining welfare states, and a general trend away from freedom in many places. Central banking, in a similar manner to public schooling, was just one more step towards the ultimate consolidation of power by governments. There is no quantitative easing possible with bitcoin. Bitcoin ownership cannot be consolidated in the hands of the state. When one does not depend on a group of violent thieves like the state for the legal ability to earn a living, one is much safer, and this is the true value of bitcoin, and other private crypto-currencies. Schemes of production are also enjoying this decentralization trend. 3-D printing is a powerful tool which both makes it easier for the average person to fabricate pre-existing useful or retailable items themselves, and allows people to create new products which did not previously exist. 3-D printers simultaneously decrease the reliance most people have on large companies, which risk corruption by the state, for many common practical goods, and increase the ability of people to create independently, and prototype and produce cheaply. In the future, it is quite possible that we will have a society in which families produce much of what they need at home, more free from state regulation than today. Whereas producers nowadays must comply with ridiculous levels of regulation which always make products more expensive, and often of a lower quality, a populace which is capable of producing on its own will do so cheaply and at maximal efficiency. With sites such as Etsy existing as platforms for people to sell what they produce at home or on a small scale, it also becomes very easy for a great deal of free competition to arise. When many small producers sell their goods on one platform, it is difficult for them to gain any advantage over each other unless they are actually making better products or selling them at better prices. Essentially, platforms like these help to make competition more perfect, and get us away from the monopolistic reality which we currently inhabit. This is good for everybody, as prices of goods decrease while quality increases when competition thrives. Crowdfunding sites such as Patreon enable people to donate and support exactly the type of media and content creators that they want to listen to. In this realm, no longer is there a gargantuan state censoring expression and colluding with equally gargantuan MSM outlets to set the narrative which must not be questioned. There are far more creators who each do their own thing, there is no longer any need to pick and choose from a set of a few vaguely different versions of the same status-quo, bland, unthinking news or entertainment sources. When there is no control by the government, which commits much evil in the world, over expression, especially on important topics often pertaining to that evil, people are actually able to make it known. When people do not depend on the ‘okay’ from government to produce their news stories or articles, they will be honest about what the government does, and will speak against the status quo when they realize there is something better. In a decentralized society and marketplace, man becomes much freer. The options and possibilities in terms of ideas to engage with, products to create, and ways to support one's self approach limitlessness. Decentralization makes hell for a government intent on shackling the minds of its serfs to a false and manipulativenarrative, in more ways than one. All freedom lovers ought to embrace and take advantage of this trend towards decentralization. 3 What We Can Learn From Crusoe on an Island, a Stagecoach, and Your Favorite Meal:
His ideas were so much ahead of his time that his paper — and a re-publication (in the “Elasticity” listing of the 1886 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica) — were regarded by some of his contemporaries as scientifically unsound (despite his stature) and thus made no impact on the development of the theory of anisotropy.
The adminis- it is not too late to shift gears and send a message to the tration gave inaccurate, unsound intelligence.
We find healing for our unsound minds in the balm of This exhortation can mean nothing more nor less than divine counsel.