Social Media links MONTREAL (July 18, 2016) — News Talk Radio, CJAD 800, is proud to announce that Ken Connors is the station’s new weekend morning host, and will take over the reins of three top-rated shows from Dave Fisher, who is retiring in August.Weekend listeners will be waking up to a friendly and familiar voice, as Connors has worked in Montreal radio for over 25 years. He has hosted some of the most popular shows on several stations, including CHOM 97.7 and MIX 96 (now VIRGIN Radio Montreal).CJAD 800 Program Director Chris Bury says Connors is the perfect fit: “We were racking our brains over this position, but as soon as we thought of Ken, we knew he was the one. Ken has the versatility, the work ethic and the warmth you need to fill these very big shoes.” Advertisement Advertisement A native of Montreal, Connors is excited about the new challenge: “It’s an honour that CJAD 800 would ask me to take over a role that Dave Fisher did so well for over 32 years. I’m really looking forward to being the person that listeners can depend on for company and information when they get up every weekend.”Connors will be hosting the weekend morning show (Saturday and Sunday, 6 to 9 a.m.) as well as co-hosting THE HOME IMPROVEMENT SHOW WITH JON EAKES (Saturday, 9 to 10 a.m.) and THE CJAD 800 TRIVIA SHOW (Sunday, 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.).Dave Fisher’s final broadcast will be a live edition of THE CJAD 800 TRIVIA SHOW on August 14, during which he will be celebrated by friends, family, colleagues and listeners, who will have a chance to win tickets for the occasion. LEAVE A REPLY Cancel replyLog in to leave a comment Advertisement Login/Register With: CJAD 800 ON FACEBOOKCJAD 800 ON TWITTER Facebook Twitter
Will the Dodgers break the all-time wins record?Current record is 116 wins WINSAT LEAST THIS MANY WINSEXACTLY THIS MANY WINS 11073.48.1 Elo still doesn’t quite think the Dodgers are the greatest team of all-time. Their 1608 Elo rating (through Sunday’s 8-0 rout of the New York Mets) only ranks sixth-best for a team through 111 games since 1901, trailing the 1944 St. Louis Cardinals, 1902 Pittsburgh Pirates, and the 1938, 1939 and 1998 New York Yankees. But if L.A. does end up smashing the wins record, they’ll be on the short list of greatest teams ever — particularly if they can finally get over the hump in the playoffs.Check out our latest MLB predictions. 10886.05.7 1195.12.2 11347.19.6 10980.36.9 11256.39.3 10596.2%2.2% 11165.49.0 10694.03.0 Move over, 2015-16 Golden State Warriors: There’s a new team chasing a sport’s all-time single-season wins record. The Los Angeles Dodgers have been on a tear — 43 wins in 50 games since June 9, the best 50-game stretch in MLB history — and they now stand at 79-32, which puts the team in a position to win more games than the 2001 Seattle Mariners and 1906 Chicago Cubs, who each won 116 games, the most ever by a baseball team in a season.According to FiveThirtyEight’s Elo model, which simulates the remainder of the season using power ratings and each team’s probability of winning every game, the Dodgers are on pace to win 112 games. But that’s just their average outcome — in some simulations they win more, and in some they win less. In a shade over 20 percent of our simulations, they win at least 116 games, which would tie the all-time mark. And 13.5 percent of the time, they finish the season with at least 117 victories, setting a new single-season record for greatness. 11437.49.4 10791.05.0 11620.16.5 11713.55.1 11528.07.9 1188.53.4 CHANCE DODGERS FINISH WITH… 1202.91.4
Posted: May 20, 2018 May 20, 2018 Categories: Good Morning San Diego, Local San Diego News FacebookTwitter Jason Austell 00:00 00:00 spaceplay / pause qunload | stop ffullscreenshift + ←→slower / faster ↑↓volume mmute ←→seek . seek to previous 12… 6 seek to 10%, 20% … 60% XColor SettingsAaAaAaAaTextBackgroundOpacity SettingsTextOpaqueSemi-TransparentBackgroundSemi-TransparentOpaqueTransparentFont SettingsSize||TypeSerif MonospaceSerifSans Serif MonospaceSans SerifCasualCursiveSmallCapsResetSave SettingsDave Stall tells Jason Austell all about the 29th and final San Diego Auto Swap Cool Car Expo. Jason Austell, Dave Stall: 29th SD Auto Swap Cool Car Expo
In a bid to spread awareness about magical performances and give it a grand entry into the city, Delhi Tourism in association with Government of NCT of Delhi organises the 4th International Magic Festival at Dilli Haat, Janak Puri, INA and Pitampura. This three-day long festival that opens today aims to attract people and popularise the long standing tradition of magical arts in the country.International and Indian magicians from diverse backgrounds will present their legerdemain skills to ensnare the audience. The programs are designed in a way that grasp the interest level of all age groups, with grand and interactive gala shows (by both national and international magicians) being the main attraction. Also Read – ‘Playing Jojo was emotionally exhausting’The venue will be an open host to ancient (Majma) and modern forms of street magic (like that by David Blaine). In addition to all these performances across all the three Dilli Haats by Delhi Tourism; Dilli Haat, Janak Puri will be showcasing an exhibition on history of Indian magic and its forms.People will be given an opportunity to learn about the early days of magic in India through an informative presentation. A short workshop for people on creating magic from day to day objects like pens, paper, coins and handkerchief will also be hosted. Also Read – Leslie doing new comedy special with NetflixMalkinn (Malaysia), Jorinee (Malaysia), Mamada (Bangkok) and Steven Cambian (United States) are few of the masters of magic, who are set to give an international twist with their performances. The festival will also be displaying few of the rarely seen fire and levitation acts by Kharbanda Brothers. Brij Mohan from Bihar will be adding laughter to his magic shows to tickle your funny bone. Drawing competition of children will also be hosted at Dilli Haat Janak Puri and Pitampura. Where: Dilli Haat, Janak Puri, INA and Pitampura When: 26 – 28 September Timing: 5 pm to 9 pm
Burnout is a state of physical, emotional, and mental exhaustion from work, which results in lack of motivation, low efficiency, and helpless feeling. Its health effects include anxiety, cardiovascular disease, immune disorders, insomnia, and depression. The results showed that a mismatch between job characteristics and either implicit motive can cause burnout. Employees can get burned out when they have too much or not enough scope for power or affiliation compared to their individual needs. “We found that the frustration of unconscious effective needs, caused by a lack of opportunities for motive-driven behaviour, is detrimental to psychological and physical well-being,” said leading author, Veronika Brandstatter, Professor at the University of Zurich in Switzerland. “The same is true for goal-striving that doesn’t match a well-developed implicit motive for power or affiliation, because then excessive effort is necessary to achieve that goal. Both forms of mismatch act as ‘hidden stressors’ and can cause burnout,” Brandstatter added. Also Read – Add new books to your shelfFurther, the unconscious needs of employees – their so-called “implicit motives” – play an important role in the development of burnout. The researchers focus on two important motives: the power motive, that is, the need to take responsibility for others, maintain discipline, and engage in arguments or negotiation, in order to feel strong and self-efficacious. Secondly, the affiliation motive, the need for positive personal relations, in order to feel trust, warmth, and belonging. Also Read – Over 2 hours screen time daily will make your kids impulsiveFor the study, the team analysed 97 Swiss men and women, between the age group 22 and 62. The greater the mismatch between someone’s affiliation motive and the scope for personal relations at the job, the higher was the risk of burnout, the researchers said. Likewise, adverse physical symptoms, such as headache, chest pain, faintness, and shortness of breath, became more common with increasing mismatch between an employee’s power motive and the scope for power in his or her job. Interventions that prevent or repair such mismatches could increase well-being at work and reduce the risk of burnout, the team suggested.
Attend this free webinar and learn how you can maximize efficiency while getting the most critical things done right. 6 min read Free Webinar | Sept 5: Tips and Tools for Making Progress Toward Important Goals Register Now » Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. April 18, 2017 My husband and I have a running joke where we have our Amazon Echo “compete” with our iPhones to see who does a better (i.e., more human-like) job of interacting with us. While there’s no clear winner, Siri seems to have the edge for casual conversation, but Alexa can sing.I’ve noticed something else, too. We don’t usually thank Siri or Alexa the way we would a clerk at a supermarket or an employee at an information kiosk, even though they’re providing us with identical services. And why would we? Siri and Alexa aren’t people; they’re anthropomorphized computer programs. They don’t care if we thank them, because they don’t have feelings.At least, we’re pretty sure they don’t.Related: Good, Bad & Ugly! Artificial Intelligence for Humans is All of This & More.Science fiction novels have long delighted readers by grappling with futuristic challenges like the possibility of artificial intelligence so difficult to distinguish from human beings that people naturally ask, “should these sophisticated computer programs be considered human? Should ‘they’ be granted human rights?” These are interesting philosophical questions, to be sure, but equally important, and more immediately pressing, is the question of what human-like artificial intelligence means for the rights of those whose humanity is not a philosophical question.If artificial intelligence affects the way we do business, the way we obtain information, and even the way we converse and think about the world, then do we need to evaluate our existing definition(s) of human rights as well?What are “human rights”?Of course, what constitutes a human right is far from universally agreed. It goes without saying that not all countries guarantee the same rights to their citizens and nationals. Likewise, political support for the existing scope of rights within each country waxes and wanes, both directly and inversely, with those countries’ respective economic fortunes and shifting cultural mores.Historically, technological improvements and economic prosperity — as measured by per capita GDP — have tended to lead to an expanded view of basic human rights. The notion of universal health care as a basic right, for instance, is a relatively modern affectation. It did not exist — and could not have existed — without a robust administrative infrastructure and tax base to support it, and without sufficiently advanced medical technology to assure the population of its effectiveness.Work to live? Live to work?Technological advancement has always, understandably, been met with skepticism, particularly from those whose livelihoods are most likely to be affected by a technological shift. Technology that enhances productivity makes the humans using it more productive, but this is a double-edged sword, as it likewise increases the productivity expectations, and reduces the number of humans required for any given level of productive output. Theoretically, this need does not necessarily lead to job loss, as long as the demand for productive output continues to outpace the technologically abetted output itself.Related: 5 Major Artificial Intelligence Hurdles We’re on Track to Overcome By 2020Do human beings have a right to earn a livelihood? And, if they do, how far does that right extend? How much discomfort is acceptable before the effort required to find gainful employment moves from reasonable to potentially rights-infringing? If technology renders human labor largely obsolete, do humans have a right to a livelihood even if they cannot earn it?Tech industry luminaries such as Tesla CEO Elon Musk have recently endorsed concepts like guaranteed minimum income or universal basic income. A handful of experiments with this concept have been undertaken, announced or proposed in Canada, the Netherlands and elsewhere. Bill Gates recently made headlines with a proposal to impose a “robot tax” — essentially, a tax on automated solutions to account for the social costs of job displacement. While people may differ on the effectiveness or necessity of these and other proposals, it’s clear that discussion on these points will be a part of the broader AI conversation in the years to come.Whose datum is it, anyway?Technology challenges our conception of human rights in other ways, as well. Some of the most fascinating applications of improved artificial intelligence relate to the ability to quickly and efficiently analyze large quantities of data, finding and testing correlations and connections and translating them into usable information. “Big data” has dominated industry headlines in recent years, including speculation that a data analytics solution may have played a role in the 2016 US presidential election.Typically, concerns around access to and use of personal data have centered on personal privacy concerns. Many countries have enacted strict laws prohibiting the collection and sharing of personal data without first providing specific, detailed information about the planned use of such information and obtaining consent. Businesses safeguard their confidential information through an assortment of contractual arrangements and trade secret protection laws.Less legal attention has been paid, however, to the anonymized use of personal or proprietary data — that is, data that has been stripped of identifying information and aggregated alongside other data. This is partly because the question itself is inchoate: who, if anyone, has a right to impose use limitations on aggregated datasets? And on what basis might such limitations be imposed? Some data is relatively easy to obtain, and has traditionally been part of either a formal public record or, at a minimum, thought to be fair game to anyone obtaining them lawfully. This approach essentially mirrors the privacy-rights approach, in that it focuses on data at the point of collection, rather than at the point of use. And yet it is clear that independent ethical concerns do arise from the use, standing alone, of such data.For example, consider the case of an international beauty competition that was “judged” by an AI algorithm. The algorithm was given criteria thought to be unbiased and objective, and yet the selection of winners revealed an unexpected characteristic lurking in the algorithm’s operation — racial bias. As we increasingly rely on data aggregation software not only to provide us with organized information, but to influence or direct actions, we may increasingly find ourselves asking the question — should we have the right to ensure data is used fairly?Related: Artificial Intelligence: A Friend or Foe for Humans?Where do we go from here?Of course, technological innovation likely cannot be halted, and our ability to meaningfully hinder it is questionabl, even leaving aside the matter of whether it is desirable to attempt to do so. Industry groups have already formed to consider the ethical ramifications of increasingly sophisticated artificial intelligence. And while clear answers are unlikely to emerge any time soon, it will be equally important to ensure that we, collectively as a society, are asking the right questions to ensure that technological innovation equates to genuine progress.