Here's Another Street Art Mural That Donald Trump Is Really Going To Hate

Donald Trump has added another political notch in his bedpost. Kind of.

Fresh from making out with Russian President Vladimir Putin in this controversial street art mural in Lithuania, he’s now being depicted smooching with former London Mayor Boris Johnson.

The “Kiss of Death” shows The Donald and Johnson, who both support Britain leaving the European Union, passionately locking lips.

The Paintsmiths — Felix “FLX” Braun and Jack “Dones” — painted the image onto a wall in Bristol, southwest England, on Monday. Photographs of the piece are now going viral.

The 15-foot-high artwork was commissioned by campaign group We Are Europe, which wants Britain to remain as part of the EU.

“People need to look at this image and think — is this the future I want?” We Are Europe spokeswoman Harriet Kingaby said in a statement.

If more Britons don’t register to vote in the upcoming referendum on June 23, she said, “It’s likely the UK will leave the EU and this is the kind of ‘special relationship’ that might become a reality.”

As with Mindaugas Bonanu’s piece in Lithuania, The Paintsmiths’ mural was inspired by Dmitri Vrubel’s “My God, Help Me To Survive This Deadly Love” — painted on the side of the Berlin Wall in 1990 and a riff on the “Socialist Fraternal Kiss” photograph, which showed former Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev kissing East German leader Erich Honecker.

Reaction to the latest mural, which is down the street from Banksy’s “The Mild Mild West” in the Stokes Croft neighborhood, has been overwhelmingly positive, said Braun.

“People were beeping their horns, stopping their cars to take pictures out of the window, shouting their approval, coming up and shaking our hands,” he added. “I’m voting in and it was great to chat to so many people today who will be registering to do the same. It was a pleasure to be involved.”

Bristol, where anonymous guerrilla street artist Banksy is believed to hail from, is also home to another Trump mural.

Pegasus, who is from Chicago but now lives in London, likened the presumptive GOP presidential nominee to Adolf Hitler in his piece on the wall of the Hen & Chicken pub on the other side of the city in February.

He said he faced death threats from Trump supporters after announcing he would be exhibiting a tweaked version of the piece at a show in Los Angeles in October. After the initial furor, he told The Huffington Post the attacks had died down.

See more anti-Donald Trump street art here.

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liarrampant xenophoberacistmisogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

What Are People Working On In Coffee Shops?

Almost every day I sit down in a coffee shop in Venice, California, to work on AboutTheStart.com.

I always wonder what everyone else is doing.

So this Tuesday around 12:30 pm, my friend Andrew and I decided to ask everyone at the Deus Ex Machina coffee shop what they were doing at that exact moment.

2016-05-19-1463688343-6340681-Untitled1.jpgImage courtesy of Deus Ex Machina

As you would imagine, getting out of your chair and interrupting every person you see hard at work is a pretty scary idea and enough to make you doubt if it’s even worth doing.

As a matter of fact, Andrew, who really liked the idea initially, didn’t want to do it once we were at the coffee shop.

Once he saw that the first few people I talked to seemed to be delighted by our experiment, he grabbed his notepad and started asking questions as well (we included a surprising note on our experiment at the end of this article).

Nearly everyone we talked to told us that they too had always wondered what everyone else was doing.

We thought it would be nice to share our findings with you. Here’s a selection of answers:

* * *

I’m a production designer currently doing location scouting for a film. I’ve been driving around taking pictures and stopped here to create PDFs with the various locations I’ve found.

* * *

I’m a lifestyle and portrait photographer. I come here to do edits. I work better around people.

* * *

I’m a student who also started a non-profit to get grants for acrobatic gymnasts who need money for training. I’m currently helping my friend with his bio.

* * *

2016-05-19-1463688394-1610691-15Qc1H57VYd4LTaqeUVMYbA.jpgImage courtesy of Deus Ex Machina

* * *

I’m a writer, but I’m working on a construction project for a building I own in Venice, dealing with my contractors.

* * *

I’m messaging friends.
I work in tech, and I basically never work in coffee shops.

* * *

I’m writing a creative brief (I’m in music marketing). I feel inspired around other people.

* * *

I’m a musician and I’m currently invoicing for royalties.

* * *

2016-05-19-1463688506-9462278-1GAUaLVu_6T2yPkAmVE24og.jpgImage courtesy of Deus Ex Machina

* * *

I’m writing a treatment.
(Note: a treatment typically is the step between scene cards and the first draft of a screenplay for a motion picture, television program, or radio play.)

* * *

I’m a creative director writing a pitch for a new client (an advertising account).

* * *

I created a company that manufactures and sells TV remotes for the elderlies. I’m currently expanding into Australia and working with a fulfillment center to get everything properly set up.

* * *

We are doing social media work for a travel agency we own in Canada.
I manufacture green building materials. I’m responding to emails and chillin’ out.

* * *

2016-05-19-1463688599-446424-1Zpm5tQa7O3_foTj08geUEQ.jpgImage courtesy of Deus Ex Machina

* * *

I’m a comic and a writer. I usually write 3 hours a day. I like coming here because it’s close to home and I’m inspired by being around people.

* * *

I’m studying for an exam on brain and behavior. I love the coffee and the environment here.

* * *

I work in Fashion Public Relations. I’m pitching stories for a client and working on a report.

* * *

I’m studying palm-reading history in my free time. I’m a writer and do teacher tutoring. I try not to work at home because of all the potential distractions.

* * *

2016-05-19-1463688700-7875927-13Ba5E39bH_MWE4TqXWsZAQ.jpgImage courtesy of Deus Ex Machina

* * *
A few numbers.
Out of all the people we talked to:

2016-05-19-1463688732-186934-12TnAKK3vV2TCrGSt0mti6g.jpg
2016-05-19-1463688820-6270177-1IG7JWsaLpR7U687hAg1Dg.jpg
2016-05-19-1463688868-4999429-14ozwEsHUFu14jxqGzVfvQ.jpg
2016-05-19-1463688900-7515494-1G6hJFZaHCMLAcG6m2jG2ag.jpg
2016-05-19-1463688951-7976541-1eruAfkcjOB3tSc69byUG6Q.jpg

* * *

An unexpected consequence
Something interesting happened that we weren’t expecting.

As I mentioned earlier, our brains were pleading with us not to talk to anyone in the coffeeshop.

As soon as we’d finished though, the both of us were BEAMING.

2016-05-19-1463688989-2071423-1CEMPT_ve2ZgzTm4qaByQ.jpgWe forgot to take a picture the day of so I shot a selfie and photoshopped Andrew in it (left) 😉

It felt absolutely amazing to connect with all these people who were previously part of the background. We had small conversations, shared many, smiles and laughs, and left the coffee shop overflowing with energy and raw joy.

We kept telling each other:

That was amazing! I love people! This changes everything! I can’t wait to say hi next time I go back!

******* UPDATE! *******

Since we’ve received an astonishing amount of requests from you to push this experiment further, we’re taking this experiment global so you can find out what others are working on in your favorite coffee shop (Coffeehouse Connect Week starts May 30).

Will you be a part of #CoffeehouseConnect Week?

Go to http://CoffeehouseConnect.com to learn how to get involved in changing coffee shop culture forever.

2016-05-19-1463689047-3410631-12Ohb32TE0gbw_IYPt0UkEQ.jpg

Photos: Deus Ex Machina Venice / graphs from infogr.am
This article was originally published on Medium.

About the Authors

Andrew Parr is an ex pro golfer & stroke survivor. He’s now dedicated to high level coaching. Podcast host of The Movement.

Learn how he teaches top athletes and olympians how to thrive in the uncomfortable. You can join his private email list here.

Tristan de Montebello created an online course where he teaches adults how to learn guitar in 3 months. His approach to teaching beginners is unconventional in many ways. He believes beginner guitarists should have as much fun as possible, need to learn actual songs, and should get personal feedback. You can learn more about his 3-month guitar course and approach by joining his private email list here.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

A Tool To Assess Onboarding Risk Before Accepting A New Job

If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it. With 40% of new leaders failing in their first 18 months in a new job, onboarding risk is definitely worth assessing and managing. Thus, this article propose a simple onboarding risk calculator that will enable individuals to assess and manage the risk they face before they accept or start a new job based on the insights in The New Leader’s 100-Day Action Plan.

Follow this link for free access to the onboarding risk calculator

Let’s put the tool in context. Here’s what we know:

  1. 40% of new leaders either get fired, forced out or quit within their first 18 months.[1]
  2. Failures in new roles almost always come back to either poor fit, not getting done what needed to get done, or failing to adjust to something changing down the road.[2]
  3. People evaluating new situations need a better way to assess and manage risk.

The Onboarding Risk Calculator
Building off the insights in The New Leader’s 100-Day Action Plan, we suggest assessing your level of agreement with 12 statements:

1. The organization I’m joining has a bias to risking more and gaining more versus protecting what it has now.

2. Communication in the organization is generally more informal/face-to-face/verbal than formal/directed/written.

3. The organization makes decisions with open debate and conflict encouraged versus more controlled and hierarchical.

4. Personally, I generally prefer to risk more and gain more instead of protecting what I have now.

5. I prefer to communicate informally/face-to-face/verbal versus formally/directed/written.

6.I prefer decision-making that is diffused with open debate and conflict encouraged versus controlled and hierarchical.

7. The organization’s strategy and ability to implement that strategy gives it a high likelihood of success.

8. I, my new boss and key peers are aligned around my role and expectations.

9. I personally have the right strengths, motivation and fit to succeed in this role.

10. I have spent/will spend many hours with my direct supervisor before day one.

11. My supervisor or another mentor will look out for me and guide me in the new organization.

12. On average I worked in my last three organizations for at least three years each.

Assessment
The assessment of fit risk comes out of the alignment of individual preferences and organizational culture.

The assessment of delivery risk comes out of the organization’s strategy and ability to execute, alignment around role and expectations, and personal strengths, motivation and fit. (Yes. Cultural fit impacts the ability to deliver.)

The assessment of adjustment risk comes out of your relationship with your supervisor or other mentor and your track record of adjusting.

Implication
Based on the insights in The New Leader’s 100-Day Action Plan, the calculator suggests you follow triage guidelines once you’ve assessed your risk.
If the risk level is relatively low, things should go well if you get a head start; manage your message; set direction and build your team; and then sustain momentum and deliver results over your first 100-days and beyond.

  • If there’s a manageable level of risk, follow the same prescriptions as if the risk level were low while keeping your eyes open for the particular risks of your situation.
  • If there are potentially mission-crippling issues with this role for you, you will need to address them before you start to reduce your likelihood of failure.
  • If the risk is extreme, consider walking away or at least having a back up plan.

Caveat
Note this tool provides a structure for your own assessment. But this may be counter-productive if you have bad information and/or fail to account for your own biases. The more complex the situation, the more help you’ll need in gathering and assessing information.
With that in mind, if you want to assess your risk and improve your likelihood of success, access the tool.

This article originally appeared on Forbes.com

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Some G7 Countries Still Providing Billions in Financing for Coal Plants – Findings from our new report

This post was co-written with Han Chen and Silvia Peng.

The Paris Agreement provides momentum to shift global resources towards low-emission and climate-resilient development. Unfortunately, continued government financing for international coal projects undermines that goal. To address climate change, governments must shift international public finance toward smarter, sustainable options. Japan, which will host the 2016 G7 meeting soon, continues to be the worst offender when it comes to public financing for international coal projects, providing $22 billion from 2007 to 2015. Germany comes in second, providing $9 billion during the same period. Japan not only financed $1.4 billion in coal projects in 2015 but is considering nearly $10 billion in future coal projects. See here for more on Japan.

Our analysis – co-written by the NRDC, World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Oil Change International (OCI), Kiko Network, Japan Center for a Sustainable Environment and Society (JACSES), and Friends of the Earth Japan – finds that between 2007 and 2015, the G7 countries have provided more than $42 billion of public finance for coal in the form of direct finance, guarantees, technical assistance, and aid for coal power, coal mining and related projects. (Our figures are likely an underestimation since it is based mostly on publicly available data and not all of these institutions are transparent.)

2016-05-24-1464098649-4083518-HCIMAGE1.jpg

G7 nations are trying to sweep the coal financing under the rug by increasing coal financing through export credit agencies and other entities that provide limited disclosure on their projects. These are the among the findings of our report – Swept Under the Rug: How G7 Nations Conceal Public Financing for Coal Around the World. [Note we also released a detailed publicly available database (xlsx) of all these projects, including information on power plant size, location of the project, funding per project, and other data.]

While many countries have made public commitments to end most public financing of overseas coal projects in the lead-in to the Paris climate agreement, three countries – Japan, Germany, and Italy – continued to directly fund coal power plants. And amongst the G7 countries Japan continues to be actively pursuing projects.

2016-05-24-1464098772-5050986-HCIMAGE2.jpg

From 2007 to 2015, channels for coal financing shifted from Multilateral Development Banks and toward Export Credits Agencies and other bilateral finance institutions, with the Japan Bank for International Cooperation being the largest financer among all institutions analyzed.

2016-05-24-1464098800-3357321-HCIMAGE3.jpg

About 75 percent of all coal financing went to coal power plants. Others went to coal mining, transmission and distribution, emissions control, and other activities. What’s appalling is that Japan counts some of its coal projects as “climate finance.” Japan has counted $1 billion in loans for coal plants in Indonesia and is counting two coal projects underway in India and Bangladesh as climate finance because the plants burn coal more efficiently than older plants. Japan is the only G7 country attempting to pass off financing for coal as climate finance, undermining the principles of the Paris Agreement. Counting coal projects inflates Japan’s numbers so they appear to be a big financial supporter for climate action. In reality, the coal projects Japan is funding lock recipient countries into decades of coal use, and hazardous environmental and health impacts. Emissions from coal plants financed by G7 governments from 2007 to 2015 totaled 101 million metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent per year, which is the same as the annual per capita emissions in 2013 for 60 million Indians or 6 million Americans.

It’s time to stop using public finance to subsidize overseas coal projects. To address climate change and improve transparency, the report highlights the following recommendations:

  • End international public financing for fossil fuels, beginning with coal power plants. G7 governments need to strengthen the OECD agreement and immediately end all international public financing for coal power plants, except for very rare circumstances in which no other option is available to provide immediate energy access in low-income communities.
  • G7 governments must limit funding for all coal-related activities, not only for power plants. They must commit to ending international public financing for coal exploration, mining, and transport.
  • Immediately disclose detailed data on public financing for coal, covering all relevant transactions by export credit agencies and information from wholly or partially state-owned banks on an annual, country-by-country, and project-by-project basis (including all project-level details necessary to provide a clear view of the climate and environmental impacts).

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

5 Words To Remember The Next Time Someone Breaks Your Trust

function onPlayerReadyVidible(e){‘undefined’!=typeof HPTrack&&HPTrack.Vid.Vidible_track(e)}!function(e,i){if(e.vdb_Player){if(‘object’==typeof commercial_video){var a=”,o=’m.fwsitesection=’+commercial_video.site_and_category;if(a+=o,commercial_video[‘package’]){var c=’&m.fwkeyvalues=sponsorship%3D’+commercial_video[‘package’];a+=c}e.setAttribute(‘vdb_params’,a)}i(e.vdb_Player)}else{var t=arguments.callee;setTimeout(function(){t(e,i)},0)}}(document.getElementById(‘vidible_1’),onPlayerReadyVidible);

Everyone has had their trust broken at some point or another, on a large scale or small. It’s a universal human experience, and according to life coach Iyanla Vanzant, one big key to being able to learn how to trust again comes down to remembering five words:

“Human beings are crazy as hell.”

It’s a statement that would receive more than a few knowing smiles and nods, but when Iyanla spoke about this topic at OWN’s offices in Los Angeles recently, she wasted no time focusing on the flip side of that coin.

“You’re human, too, you know,” she points out. “There are as many people who had to seek a therapist/coach after their dealings with you as you had to seek because of your dealings with somebody else.”

It’s a perspective that Iyanla believes can evoke more compassion, and it’s not the only piece of knowledge you must have to be able to reinstate your ability to trust. You must also understand that people’s mistreatment of you often isn’t personal. Iyanla uses herself as an example.

“I used to think how my father ruined my life,” she says. “It wasn’t personal. He was busy trying to clean up his own mess, and that just had a negative impact on me. It really wasn’t personal. My father never got up and said, ‘Let me destroy my daughter’s self-value and self-worth and self-esteem today. Let me make her doubt herself. Let me just destroy who she is as a woman…’ No. He was busy trying to handle his own crazy.”

It’s easy to get caught up in other people’s messes and “crazy,” Iyanla adds, but it’s important to remember that there’s always someone you can trust: yourself.

“Because of our interactions and our exchange with other people and their messiness, we begin to think that we can’t trust other people,” she says. “The truth is, we don’t trust ourselves to know which people we can and cannot trust.”

Another piece of advice from Iyanla:

How to trust yourself after you’ve made bad choices

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Hillary Now Loses to Trump in Polls. Bernie Beats Trump by 10.8 Points.

For months, Bernie Sanders has told audiences across the country that he is the best candidate to face Donald Trump based on polls that simulate a hypothetical showdown in November. Sanders continues to hammer in this sentiment now that the other Republican nominees have withdrawn from the race. And truly, new polls indicate this may now be the case. One of the polls, from Fox, not only shows Trump ahead of Hillary 45-42, a ten point swing in Hillary’s favor from last month, but also Bernie Sanders with a +4 lead over Trump. A similar CBS/New York Times polls shows Trump closing the gap on Hillary, with only a six point lead as opposed to last month’s ten point lead. The same poll shows Bernie Sanders with a 13-point lead on Trump. In this clip, I take a look at the group of recent polls that depict these claims. Earlier in his campaign, Bernie’s claims may not have been entirely true, but these polls indicate that right now, he may be right. Are these polls outliers or otherwise untrustworthy for some reason?

This entire issue circles back to the concept of a candidate’s electability- how likely they are to win in November. Even writing off Fox’s poll as trustworthy, and the Rasmussen poll as right-leaning, and the New York Times poll for including more independents than Democrats as well as Republicans, which favors Bernie, the realclearpolitics average of recent polling agrees that Bernie Sanders is polling significantly better against Donald Trump than is Hillary Clinton.

The real caveat or point of questioning is that this election cycle knows has been particularly peculiar. In general, polls conducted in May don’t necessarily indicate how the actual campaign will go come November. Given the wildcard nature of this election, there’s even more of a reason to wonder how much May polling tells us about a November election. While these polls may not completely paint an accurate picture, it shouldn’t take away from the sentiment that a candidate’s electability should matter to voters.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Feminism Is A Thing With Ravenclaws In These Feminist 'Harry Potter' Drawings

Attracted to the detailed, whimsical illustrations conjured up by Edith Hamilton, artist Louise Reimer started reading mythology a few years ago. Her interest in the early, heroic tales resulted in the making of a zine, Mythologie, which features scenes such as Atalanta hunting a boar while wearing Converse.

In addition to the ancient gods, Reimer’s rich, fun scenes center on female empowerment and subversive contemporary motifs. So it only makes sense that her latest drawings focus on a magical world where powerful teens run amuck. She whipped up four quirky images of girls in Hogwarts house getups, along with slogans such as, “What snake did your sense of entitlement Slytherin on?”

“I quickly realized most of the [mythology] stories involved sexual violence cloaked in romance or poetic images, like Daphne turning into a laurel tree to escape Apollo’s advances,” Reimer told HuffPost in an email. “I enjoy the imagery of mythology, but I think ‘Harry Potter’ is a much safer place for women than the realms of the ancient gods.”

Like her mythological rewrites, her “Harry Potter” sketches have a flat, geometric, colorful aesthetic, one that borrows from the tenants of folk art. Patterns and color schemes take precedence over, say, expressive lines; Reimer’s drawn to quilts and other textiles as sources of inspiration.

“Part of my attraction stems from the fact that often ‘folk art’ was the only kind of art that women were allowed to create,” she said, adding that she finds conceptual art at times dry and unapproachable. “It’s a fun game to play if you have the vocabulary, if you get the references, but it can also be ostentatious to make something hyper cerebral. Life can be a slog, so you may as well make something fun or that gives you or another person joy.”

Her drawings are also marked by their tough subjects: women with furrowed brows, women donning biker jackets, women flexing their guns. “I imagine the figures in my personal works as existing in an alternate universe where male gaze doesn’t exist. They are comfortable in their bodies and value female kinship,” Reimer said. “They are free to express their femininity without judgement, be it as soft and romantic or butch as they desire.”

See more of Louise Reimer’s work on her site.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Embarking on a New Adventure: Open Data at the US Patent and Trademark Office

Few things are more exciting than arriving at an unknown platform for the first time. Whether it’s Grand Central Station, Roma Termini, or the metro in Moscow, the idea that unknown possibilities are within reach is thrilling. The blur of hurried strangers, the unfamiliar sounds of travel information constantly refreshed, and the myriad of signs offering directions in foreign languages spark limitless ideas, a fair amount of confusion, and a quest to move forward. In the best case scenario, you have already done your research, talked to your friends, and read the travel brochures and guidebooks so you have a vague idea of what you are about to set off and do. But there is nothing like that feeling on that platform as you embark on your adventure.

When the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office heard President Obama’s call to provide the public with transparency and open government, I wasn’t exactly sure how one of the country’s oldest federal agencies would be able to respond. I challenged a small internal team to act like a “start-up” and develop some new ideas on how to use the vast reserves of data the USPTO gathers to help solve some of the agency’s age old challenges. They built a platform to dive into what very well may be the world’s largest repository of data on innovation and research and development technology trends. The unveiling of the USPTO’s new Open Data and Mobility Program offers a new platform in an ecological way to discover, explore, and innovate.

I’m thrilled to say this month we made a great leap into exposing the world to this wealth of information when we launched the USPTO’s new Developer Hub. We’re providing vast data sets, interactive visualizations, and a community platform for sharing and discussing this data. While this treasure trove of data has been available to the public for centuries, we also provided a step-by-step guide for you, the user, to create your own insights about innovation and share it with the world in the community café. Go to github link to get the tutorial and be empowered – http://commercedataservice.github.io/tutorial_pto/.

For most of our history you had to flip through a bunch of paper documents to find what you needed. Times have changed–fortunately, quite profoundly. Now, with this new tool, anyone with even the most basic programming experience will be able to explore our data according to their own interests, curiosity, and business needs. This makes it easier for innovators–from researchers to entrepreneurs to well-established companies–to mine this data, help inform them where to allocate research and development resources, and provide them with a much more detailed view of the competitive landscape than previously available. This access to extensive patent data also provides current information on the competitive landscape.

This data will not only bring more intelligence to technology trends, but when government data silos are broken down with easily digested, open data, it also has the opportunity to bring powerful advancements that could greatly improve people’s health and quality of lives across the globe. In 2016, it is estimated that more than 1.6 million new cases of cancer will be diagnosed and about 600,000 American lives will be lost to the disease. Under the direction of the Vice President of the United States Joe Biden, the USPTO is collaborating with a coalition of government agencies, including the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, and Veterans Affairs, along with the National Institutes of Health and others to figure out ways our agencies can provide data to spur advances in the treatment of cancer. This Cancer Moonshot Task Force’s goal is to use the data to inform public policy, and to make that data available to other interested groups so they can use it to best invest in the areas that are showing the most promise.

By streamlining the patent process for technologies that show promise, government and research entities can make more precise investments in the areas the data illuminates. We can now look at which areas of innovation are showing the most promise, use that data to scope out what tech is most germane to cancer treatments, and fast track those treatments through the process. This could spur innovation, help direct funding to fast track advancements, and possibly get cancer research and ultimately patients better tools to fight the pervasive disease.

I believe these ideas are just scratching the surface of the prospects of how this data can change the world. The establishment of a shareable and “social” platform to showcase unique ways to use our data and combine it with other datasets, such as economic and geographic data, provides endless opportunities. This unique forum hosted in the Developer Hub not only leverages the power of the crowd to address questions about trends in technology and innovation, but also functions as a forum for users of our hub to provide input to the USPTO on other types of data sets we should release. This sharing and feedback loop allow the community and the USPTO to extract new value from our data reserves, allowing all players in the innovation ecosystem to have better information to make smarter decisions.

Successful companies have harnessed other government data, such as real estate apps using U.S. Census data and the weather apps using real-time and historical NOAA data. Similarly, we want our data to be inspiring, useful, spur innovation, and create conversations.

2016-05-24-1464098982-6072947-OpenData.png

For example, the graph shows there are now more U.S. patents granted to foreign inventors than to U.S. inventors. This speaks highly to the United States being the best place for global innovators to register their patents. We take pride in the world seeking out our IP system; however, we do not take it for granted that the jobs and industries take root here. The administration continues to take important steps to put more tools in the hands of businesses of all size, domestically. This ensures that the best ideas not only take root here, but they’re ideally conceived, designed, and built here in the United States resulting in jobs for Americans. This is just a glimpse into the data on our new platform, but it’s easy to see how it could help us make even better data-driven policy decisions that could have even greater impacts on society. Further, it underscores how important it is to foster innovation through science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education to encourage even more innovators here in the United States to create new innovations.

I can only imagine what many insights we can find using this new tool. Along with our other open data platforms, including PatentsView, and others, I’m excited about the possibilities and impacts that this open and accessible approach to government information will bring. We challenge developers and innovators to dive into the wealth of information we are now providing. We want developers and anyone to pose questions, use this data to create visualizations, and share these new insights in our Community Portal. Right now we have interactive visualizations that give us awareness into topics that we have never had before, and we know there are many more questions to be answered. And isn’t that the best kind of adventure on which to embark? Join us on the platform!

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Chewbacca Mom Loses It Again With James Corden And J.J. Abrams

She’s Chew-back-a!

The Chewbacca Mom‘s infectious laughter led a video of herself to rack up more than 140 million views in three days. Now Candace Payne is joining the carpool lane.

On Monday’s episode of “The Late Late Show,” James Corden recruited Payne to drive him to work. Normally, Corden would break out some karaoke in a situation like this, but who needs singing when you already have Chewbacca masks and surprise guest J.J. Abrams?

After sporting the mask, Payne predictably loses it again, and Corden and Abrams can’t help but laugh along, too. So it looks like Chewbacca Mom isn’t rolling (Han) solo anymore.

Also, check out Payne’s interview with Corden. This “Star Wars” fan is giving “New Hope” to parents who want to have fun.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

Americans Are Better Off Than We Were Eight Years Ago

2016-05-24-1464098796-6943500-President_Obama_delivers_the_State_of_the_Union_address_Jan._20_2015.jpg

Right now, Democrats appear to be at each other’s throats. However, it’s highly likely that a month from now, the party will come together just as it did in 2008. The fight this fall will be between two candidates, yes, but also two vastly different understandings of our national narrative, of the course of our development over the past several decades and, in particular, the last eight years.

In two recent commencement speeches, one at Rutgers and the other at Howard, President Obama deftly laid out the differences. He defined a progressive understanding of our collective path that has the virtue not only of being accurate, but also of being one that will help progressive candidates win election this fall and beyond.

The president’s take may be more nuanced than that of Mr. Trump, but that’s more about Trump than anything else. In a nutshell, the Obama argument is this: Although we’ve got more work to do to improve opportunity and increase justice for all Americans, we have made real progress, we’re moving in the right direction, and we are significantly better off than we were in the past.

In fact, by almost every measure, America is better, and the world is better, than it was 50 years ago, or 30 years ago, or even eight years ago.

And he’s right. Digging into the details, he continued:

And by the way, I’m not — set aside 150 years ago, pre-Civil War — there’s a whole bunch of stuff there we could talk about. Set aside life in the ’50s, when women and people of color were systematically excluded from big chunks of American life. Since I graduated [from college], in 1983….crime rates, teenage pregnancy, the share of Americans living in poverty — they’re all down. The share of Americans with college educations have gone way up. Our life expectancy has, as well. Blacks and Latinos have risen up the ranks in business and politics. (Applause.) More women are in the workforce. (Applause.) They’re earning more money — although it’s long past time that we passed laws to make sure that women are getting the same pay for the same work as men. (Applause.)

Meanwhile, in the eight years since most of you started high school, we’re also better off. You and your fellow graduates are entering the job market with better prospects than any time since 2007. Twenty million more Americans know the financial security of health insurance. We’re less dependent on foreign oil. We’ve doubled the production of clean energy. We have cut the high school dropout rate. We’ve cut the deficit by two-thirds. Marriage equality is the law of the land. (Applause.)

Note that even as Obama highlighted progress on gender equity, he also reminded us that progress is not perfection, and called for continued efforts to achieve full equality. There’s one other thing the president did not mention, but which is of crucial importance in understanding the achievements of his administration in terms of progressive economics. The federal tax code has become significantly more progressive than it was eight years ago, and is overall more progressive than it has been since before Reagan’s presidency, with the top 1% paying their highest effective tax rates since 1979.

On income taxes, we’ve brought rates on the top couple of percent back to where they were in the 1990s (where they were after being raised in 1990 and 1993), while locking in the income tax rate cuts for those below that level put in place by George W. Bush. In 1989, the top income tax rate was 28 percent. Starting January 1, 2013, it stood at 39.6 percent.

On capital gains taxes, Obama increased the rate paid by those in the top bracket by 5 percent, and also added a separate 3.8 percent increase–the funds from which go to Medicare–to the rate paid by those in the top three brackets. Additionally, Obamacare included a separate, broader income tax surcharge of 0.9 percent on higher-income households. And those Obamacare-related tax increases don’t go into the general budget–a good chunk of which gets spent on things like defense and corporate subsidies–it goes right back out the door to lower-income families in the form of premium subsidies that help buy health insurance. As Paul Krugman pointed out, Obamacare represents “an important redistributionist policy — the biggest such policy since the 1960s.”

Finally, three days after the President’s Rutgers speech, the administration announced new overtime rules that will make an estimated 12.5 million working Americans eligible for overtime pay if they exceed 40 hours of work in a given week. Going back to Krugman, he called them “a pretty big deal.”

It will take a long time to undo the increases in income inequality that we’ve seen since Reagan took office. The Obama tax changes, however, are unquestionably a step in the right direction, one that should have a real impact over time. Moreover, recent data shows that, in addition to overall wage growth improving, wage growth has been even stronger at lower-income than higher-income levels. According to one measure: “On a rolling twelve-month basis, [the past year] marks by far the best relative performance among non-college educated workers going back to 1997.”

To return to the larger narrative of progress, let’s start with the obvious: Anyone who wants to go back to the 1950s either likes the idea of a society dominated by straight, white, Protestant men, or is forgetting about that reality.

At the Howard speech, the president’s presentation of the American narrative included more of a focus on how life for African Americans has improved over time. He cited the importance of the changes to law that the civil rights movement won, and continued: “those mileposts of our progress were not perfect. They did not make up for centuries of slavery or Jim Crow or eliminate racism or provide for 40 acres and a mule. But they made things better.” Obama added:

America is a better place today than it was when I graduated from college.

[snip] I graduated in 1983. New York City, America’s largest city, where I lived at the time, had endured a decade marked by crime and deterioration and near bankruptcy. And many cities were in similar shape. Our nation had gone through years of economic stagnation, the stranglehold of foreign oil, a recession where unemployment nearly scraped 11 percent. The auto industry was getting its clock cleaned by foreign competition.

[snip] Since that year — since the year I graduated — the poverty rate is down. Americans with college degrees, that rate is up. Crime rates are down. America’s cities have undergone a renaissance. There are more women in the workforce. They’re earning more money. We’ve cut teen pregnancy in half. We’ve slashed the African American dropout rate by almost 60 percent, and all of you have a computer in your pocket that gives you the world at the touch of a button. In 1983, I was part of fewer than 10 percent of African Americans who graduated with a bachelor’s degree. Today, you’re part of the more than 20 percent who will. And more than half of blacks say we’re better off than our parents were at our age — and that our kids will be better off, too.

Of course, Obama recognizes that we’ve still got work to do on the matter of racial injustice and inequality:

Yes, our economy has recovered from crisis stronger than almost any other in the world. But there are folks of all races who are still hurting — who still can’t find work that pays enough to keep the lights on, who still can’t save for retirement. We’ve still got a big racial gap in economic opportunity. The overall unemployment rate is 5 percent, but the black unemployment rate is almost nine. We’ve still got an achievement gap when black boys and girls graduate high school and college at lower rates than white boys and white girls. Harriet Tubman may be going on the twenty, but we’ve still got a gender gap when a black woman working full-time still earns just 66 percent of what a white man gets paid. (Applause.)

We’ve got a justice gap when too many black boys and girls pass through a pipeline from underfunded schools to overcrowded jails. This is one area where things have gotten worse. When I was in college, about half a million people in America were behind bars. Today, there are about 2.2 million. Black men are about six times likelier to be in prison right now than white men.

Despite these continued inequities, and despite the problems that remain in our society, Obama emphasized that while the present day may not be paradise it sure as hell is better than what came before–for African Americans and for Americans more broadly:

If you had to choose one moment in history in which you could be born, and you didn’t know ahead of time who you were going to be — what nationality, what gender, what race, whether you’d be rich or poor, gay or straight, what faith you’d be born into — you wouldn’t choose 100 years ago. You wouldn’t choose the fifties, or the sixties, or the seventies. You’d choose right now. If you had to choose a time to be, in the words of Lorraine Hansberry, “young, gifted, and black” in America, you would choose right now. (Applause.)

In both speeches, President Obama took aim at the presumptive Republican nominee–without mentioning his name. On the idea that we need someone who will “make America great again:”

Point number one: When you hear someone longing for the “good old days,” take it with a grain of salt. (Laughter and applause.) Take it with a grain of salt. We live in a great nation and we are rightly proud of our history. We are beneficiaries of the labor and the grit and the courage of generations who came before. But I guess it’s part of human nature, especially in times of change and uncertainty, to want to look backwards and long for some imaginary past when everything worked, and the economy hummed, and all politicians were wise, and every kid was well-mannered, and America pretty much did whatever it wanted around the world.

Guess what. It ain’t so. (Laughter.) The “good old days” weren’t that great.

Conservatives have long attacked President Obama over his views of our historical development. Among countless other examples, on July 16, 2012, Rush Limbaugh said that the President “despises the country and the way it was founded and the way in which it became great.” Having read almost every word Barack Obama published or uttered publicly through mid-2012, and much of the rest since then, I can tell you that such a patently false statement only confirms Senator Al Franken’s measured, sophisticated assessment of Limbaugh.

What Obama has provided in these remarks and over the course of his public life is a truly inclusive narrative, one that recognizes the ideals at our nation’s core, the ways in which we’ve fallen short of them, and the steps we’ve taken to overcome those shortcomings. Here’s how he described that narrative on July 4, 2012:

On that July day [in 1776], our Founders declared their independence. But they only declared it; it would take another seven years to win the war. Fifteen years to forge a Constitution and a Bill of Rights. Nearly 90 years, and a great Civil War, to abolish slavery. Nearly 150 years for women to win the right to vote. Nearly 190 years to enshrine voting rights. And even now, we’re still perfecting our union, still extending the promise of America.

And in his second Inaugural Address, Obama again connected our founding values to the movements and activists who fought and bled to ensure that we lived up to them:

We, the people, declare today that the most evident of truths — that all of us are created equal — is the star that guides us still; just as it guided our forebears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footprints along this great Mall, to hear a preacher say that we cannot walk alone; to hear a King proclaim that our individual freedom is inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on Earth.

This is the kind of nuanced understanding of our country that can appeal to Americans of every stripe. Given that being American is the only thing that connects all of us who live here to one another, the only bond with any kind of cultural and historical content that can cross all the other group lines that divide us, we need a workable concept of Americanness and of our collective history. As I’ve written elsewhere:

A history that emphasizes only our crimes and ignores the progress is but the mirror image of one that does the opposite–one that presents our history as one solely bathed in glory and righteousness. And if those are the only two options, many middle-of-the-road Americans, in particular whites but others as well, are likely to be more attracted to the Pollyanna-ish view simply because it sounds more familiar and feels better.

We progressives have to make sure that we present a balanced picture. That way we can get those people who sometimes forget about the crimes to remember them and to commit to reversing their effects, rather than dismiss our criticisms as “anti-American” because we [supposedly] talk only about the negatives in our country. We have to present our case as representing the true American values, and contrast them to the values of those whom we oppose.

At Howard, Obama summarized the narrative of our history–as well as how it relates to the course of our future. He described:

The evolution of America–the course by which we became bigger, stronger, and richer and more dynamic, and a more inclusive nation.

But America’s progress has never been smooth or steady. Progress doesn’t travel in a straight line. It zigs and zags in fits and starts. Progress in America has been hard and contentious, and sometimes bloody. It remains uneven and at times, for every two steps forward, it feels like we take one step back.

But progress is bumpy. It always has been. But because of dreamers and innovators and strivers and activists, progress has been this nation’s hallmark. I’m fond of quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.” (Applause.) It bends towards justice. I believe that. But I also believe that the arc of our nation, the arc of the world does not bend towards justice, or freedom, or equality, or prosperity on its own. It depends on us, on the choices we make, particularly at certain inflection points in history; particularly when big changes are happening and everything seems up for grabs.

[snip] Isolating or disparaging Muslims, suggesting that they should be treated differently when it comes to entering this country — (applause) — that is not just a betrayal of our values — (applause) — that’s not just a betrayal of who we are, it would alienate the very communities at home and abroad who are our most important partners in the fight against violent extremism. Suggesting that we can build an endless wall along our borders, and blame our challenges on immigrants — that doesn’t just run counter to our history as the world’s melting pot; it contradicts the evidence that our growth and our innovation and our dynamism has always been spurred by our ability to attract strivers from every corner of the globe. That’s how we became America. Why would we want to stop it now? (Applause.)

Finally, although it does not directly bear on the discussion of our historical development, there is one other section of the Howard speech to emphasize as both especially important, and as central to Obama’s take on America, in particular given Trump’s disproportionate appeal to racially resentful white men. It is a call for empathy, about being able to put yourself in someone else’s shoes and understand that person’s perspective–even if one disagrees with the policy positions to which that perspective gives rise. He was talking to African Americans directly, but my hope is that hearing him say this to African Americans encourages each of us to apply the lesson to our fellow Americans of every background:

But we must expand our moral imaginations to understand and empathize with all people who are struggling, not just black folks who are struggling — the refugee, the immigrant, the rural poor, the transgender person, and yes, the middle-aged white guy who you may think has all the advantages, but over the last several decades has seen his world upended by economic and cultural and technological change, and feels powerless to stop it. You got to get in his head, too.

President Obama is not on the ballot this fall, but he has been the dominant political figure of the past eight years. When we go to cast our votes for president in November, the fundamental question is whether we want a president who will, by and large, share the policies and vision of Barack Obama, or one who in addition to being a hateful, uninformed, groper of a fascist who would destroy our position in the world, fundamentally rejects them–not merely on matters like the size of government, but in every imaginable sense.

Do we want to continue moving forward, continue the progress we’ve made, and keep fighting to make things better–or do we turn the keys over to Donald Trump? That’s what this election is about.

— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.