Korean Naval College Receives NAUTIS Simulator Classroom from VSTEP

first_img View post tag: VSTEP View post tag: College View post tag: Navy VSTEP in cooperation with its Korean partner Dongkang M-Tech  have successfully delivered and installed a full NAUTIS Naval Task Force maritime simulator classroom at The Korean Naval College in Seoul, Korea. The classroom consists of 20 NAUTIS Naval Task Force Trainee Stations and Instructor Station. The Korean Naval College has selected NAUTIS for efficient maritime training and preparation of cadets and naval personnel in ship handling and navigation.The Korean Naval College is one of Korea’s most renowned Naval Academies. Having used traditional legacy simulation technology in the past, the Korean Naval College selected the NAUTIS Naval Task Force simulators for its new simulation center, because of the cost effectiveness of the solution, its user-friendliness and the high quality of realistic maritime training it provides. NAUTIS Naval Task force is tailored specifically to the needs of Naval Forces and offers a wide range of navy specific simulation and training options.VSTEP CEO, Cristijn Sarvaas: “We are happy to add the Korean Naval College to our client portfolio and rejoice in the fact that such a renowned national naval college has selected NAUTIS maritime simulators for training of its cadets. NAUTIS is a new generation of simulation technology that meets the high standards of today’s maritime professionals. The Korean Naval college has evaluated and recognized the powerful benefits of NAUTIS, such as low cost, flexibility for the user and superior visuals in training.”About NAUTIS The NAUTIS range of advanced maritime training simulators offers an affordable and effective alternative for training maritime professionals, officers and crews. With a full range of simulators, from desktop trainer to full mission bridge simulator, VSTEP has a cost-effective training solution fulfilling the training requirements of both the civilian and military maritime industry, including nautical colleges, naval academies, maritime training centres and individual ship owners.About Dongkang M-Tech Dong Kang M-Tech Co.,Ltd was established as a reliable supplier of the advanced shipping technology and information in 1986. Since then we have provided high-tech equipment and system to Korea for modernization and management improvement of the shipping equipment at home and abroad.About VSTEPVSTEP is a leading European developer of simulators and virtual training software. Using interactive 3D technology, VSTEP creates awardwinning training applications that allow people to build their skills in a practical and cost effective way.  Since its founding in 2002, VSTEP has delivered numerous simulator solutions for leading industry clients and governmental organisations worldwide. As one of the industry leaders, VSTEP continues to innovate the virtual training world with professional, accurate and groundbreaking new simulation technology. A winner of multiple innovation prizes and awards, VSTEP sets the standard for virtual training and simulation and advocates more effective training through enhanced virtual reality.[mappress]Source: nautis, October 14, 2011 View post tag: Classroom Equipment & technology Korean Naval College Receives NAUTIS Simulator Classroom from VSTEP View post tag: News by topic View post tag: NAUTIS October 14, 2011 View post tag: Simulator View post tag: from Back to overview,Home naval-today Korean Naval College Receives NAUTIS Simulator Classroom from VSTEP View post tag: receives View post tag: Naval View post tag: Korean Share this articlelast_img read more

Big Thaw in Ocean City Brings Broken Pipes

first_imgBy Maddy VitaleAs temperatures increase from single digits to the 30s and 40s this week, the 15-plus inches of snow that blanketed the region is beginning to thaw out. That means one thing: Water-related calls.Fire Chief James Smith and the 62 firefighters in his department, have been working around the clock responding to calls for leaky, and even worse– broken pipes— gushing water through homes and businesses causing damage.“In the last few days we have had 30 calls for water leaks and broken pipes. As the temperatures have risen after a frigid weekend, leaks have started coming,” Smith said. The fire department partnered with the police department and water company to address the calls. If there is internal damage to the property, the fire department gets called out. If it is, for example, a broken or leaky ground sprinkler or outside shower, police respond. In addition to the water company, gas and electric companies are also notified when needed, Smith said.One home had major external damage. A neighbor reported water damage on the outside of a home on the 2300 Block of Simpson Avenue. When firefighters arrived, the siding was buckled due to water pumping from a broken pipe. Firefighters went in and salvaged Christmas presents and other items for the homeowners who were away for New Year’s Eve, Smith said.“The property was damaged greatly. We were able to protect and salvage their personal items and valuables,” Smith said. “We protected their property with tarps after moving it away from water.” Ocean City Firefighter Timothy Young responds to the call at the home on the 3400 Block of Asbury Avenue.On Monday afternoon firefighters were called to a house on 34th Street and Asbury Avenue for a broken pipe.Timothy Young was one of the firefighters on the scene for a broken pipe. Another firefighter turned off the water supply.“The guys are out there battling all of the elements, the wind and the cold temperatures. They are doing a great job,” Smith said, adding that even though the temperatures are increasing, firefighters still have to walk through a foot of snow in some areas to get to the utilities.And he has no doubt, more calls will be coming in.“It’s supposed to be in the 40s and 50s later in the week. As the temperatures climb, pipes that remained frozen will crack and burst,” Smith said. “Our guys ran out to a number of calls today and I definitely expect more as the days go on.”Smith offered some tips for property owners. If you experience water damage, call your insurance company right away. If you haven’t had a leak, be prepared with all of your paperwork in case you do. If you are a seasonal resident, give a key to someone you trust to check on your property, daily, if possible. Even if you are at the residence a couple of days a week, there could be a big freeze. and a problem that you are unaware of. Keep the thermostat above 60. Although some experts say to keep your home at 55 degrees to prevent freezing, Smith opts for the higher temperature, to be on the safe side. Take photos of your belongings, so if damaged, you would have a record of the items for insurance reimbursement. It is hard to say how this herculean storm will shape up for the fire department when it comes to water-related calls, Smith said. But in February of 2015, firefighters responded to 145 water-related calls in just a week. However, that was prior to the change in response, in which police handle external water leaks.“We will have a better handle on this as the days go on,” Smith said. “We are 24/7, that doesn’t change.”If your pipes burst, first turn off the water at the source. In Ocean City, you can call the non-emergency police number at 609-399-9111 to have Fire Department personnel dispatched to cut off the water supply leading to your home. Cut off electricity to any area of the house damaged by water. Firefighters are responding to numerous calls for broken pipes. Firefighters respond to the 3400 Block of Asbury Avenue for a report of a broken pipe. Calls are coming in as temperatures increase, and frozen pipes break, thaw out and gush water.last_img read more

Suffolk OKs Seizing Hit-and-run Vehicles

first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Suffolk County legislators unanimously approved Tuesday a bill that allows authorities to seize vehicles used by convicted hit-and-run drivers to buttress a New York State proposal to increase sentencing for such crimes.The county legislation would also allow authorities to seize vehicles owned by people other than the driver when the car or truck is used to flee the scene of a crash that left a victim seriously injured or dead if the owner knowingly tried to cover-up the incident.“Too many lives have been lost, and while we can’t change what has happened, we can do everything within our power to prevent these tragedies from happening again,” said Legis. Kate Browning (WF-Shirley), chair of the public safety committee.Authorities similarly seize vehicles owned by felony drunken-driving suspects. Browning cited Suffolk County police statistics showing that there were 5,555 hit-and-run crashes last year, 11 of which resulted in fatalities.Suffolk County District Attorney Tom Spota urged the legislature to pass the bill before the vote. He also urged lawmakers to lobby the state Assembly to pass a bill that would increase the sentences for hit-and-run convicts—a proposal that has already passed the state Senate.“Drivers who leave the scene of an accident and are arrested later, face lesser criminal charges than they would if they were caught at the scene—especially if the offender was driving drunk or while under the influence of drugs,” Spota said.The state bill would increase the prison sentence to 7 years to 15 years from the current 2 1/3 to 7 year maximum sentence for those convicted at trial of a hit-and-run crash.Spota and Browning both cited the case of repeat-felon Preston Mimms, 48, of Mastic, who was sentenced to 1 1/3 to 4 years in January after pleading guilty to killing 24-year-old Erika Hughes while she was walking to her Shirley home on July, 29 2011.After he was apprehended nine months after the fatality, investigators found that Mimms was driving with a suspended license but were unable to prove if he was intoxicated or speeding at the time.The hit-and-run vehicle seizure law now goes to County Executive Steve Bellone for signing and would take effect immediately.last_img read more

Information Overload: Fake News in The Era of Online Propaganda & Disinformation

first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Everyone from Hillary Clinton to President Barack Obama to academics and media critics have voiced concern over the spread of fake news following Donald Trump’s surprise election victory, even going so far as saying viral fictitious stories directly influenced the result.Still reeling from her election defeat, Clinton in a speech in the nation’s capital framed fake news as an existential threat to democracy.“It’s now clear that so-called ‘fake news’ can have real-world consequences,” she said. “This isn’t about politics or partisanship. Lives are at risk. Lives of ordinary people just trying to go about their days, to do their jobs, contribute to their communities.”As a result of the chorus of complaints about how blatantly false stories purportedly impacted voters, Facebook said it would clamp down on fake news through partnerships with standard fact-checking organizations. Among the most-shared fugazy stories was one about Pope Francis endorsing Trump, an FBI agent investigating Clinton’s emails dying in a horrific murder-suicide and a purported quote from Trump about running as a Republican because that particular base is gullible.Blame for Clinton’s loss has been spread far and wide: to Macedonia, where teenagers created phony articles and raked in thousands of dollars, to Russian hackers interfering in the election, and FBI Director James Comey, for announcing a new probe into Clinton’s email inquiry just weeks before the Nov. 8 election.It’s no surprise that scapegoats abound following one of the most incendiary and hard-fought presidential campaigns in modern US history and that such speculation overshadowed coverage of Clinton’s apparent shortcomings.Meanwhile, little attention has been paid to an ever-evolving problem gripping the internet: For all its democratizing prowess, it is saturated with so much information—from traditional media outlets, alternative voices, hyperpartisan blogs, and industry groups funneling propaganda through websites masquerading as legitimate public policy centers—that it’s become increasingly difficult to distinguish between factual news, scientific research and agenda-driven content, academics say.“Every single topic that is pressing for a citizen to decide upon is being influenced by the information that comes across the digital transom,” Sam Wineburg, founder of the Stanford History Education Group at Stanford University, tells the Press. “You name an issue of public policy, whether it’s the legalization of marijuana, charter schools or attacks on sugary drinks, and the way that a citizen learns about how to form an opinion about those topics is typically through a digital medium, increasingly through a digital medium… And so this issue goes far beyond fake news and far beyond news literacy to implicate the most basic duties of citizenship in the 21st century.”Research behind internet consumption and social media habits has delivered troubling conclusions. Among the findings: The majority of Americans fail to recognize the difference between marketing content and real news and nearly two-thirds of people are more likely to share articles on social media without actually reading the story—meaning they are forming opinions and endorsing stories based solely on headlines.Yet ensuring that fake news is curtailed has emerged as a chief concern for elected officials, who have pressured the likes of Facebook and Google to tackle the problem. In doing so, they are calling upon the very same institutions that contribute to this age of hyperpartisan politics to clamp down on the ability for such stories to go viral.So how can tech companies combat fake news without first addressing what appears to be the bigger issue: that news consumers, perhaps out of no fault of their own, are struggling to navigate the increasingly convoluted World Wide Web.‘Pants On Fire’Last year, Facebook supplanted Google as the largest driver of traffic to news sites in the United States. Much of the content is delivered to Facebook users in a way that is very much undemocratic: The social media giant’s algorithm decides, based on a user’s activity, which stories are more likely to spur engagement, and subsequently dumps related content into their news feed. It’s through this mosaic that Facebook is able to provide marketers with valuable data about specific users: What department stores they’re interested, where they do their grocery shopping, and their political ideology.Facebook users who primarily get their news through the site do so in an echo chamber, which means they’re interacting with articles that already confirm their political beliefs, what psychologists call “confirmation bias.”Google works very much the same way. By delivering content based on a user’s past searches, a climate change-skeptic, for example, is more likely to receive results that align with their viewpoint, says Michael Patrick Lynch, professor of philosophy and director of the Humanities Institute at the University of Connecticut.“What the internet is good at doing is keeping track of our preferences and predicting our preferences, our desires,” Lynch tells the Press. “So in a sense, it’s a sort of desire machine and we get what we want from it. Of course, what we want and what’s true are two different things.”An example of Yahoo, Bing and Google’s predictive searches for “Climate change is a _”Lynch says social media, like Google, has shaped the way we consume content. But sites like Twitter and Facebook are different in that users are not only collecting information, but also distributing it.That means anyone—the teenagers in Macedonia or a high-powered lobbying group—can disseminate potentially faulty information to the masses—who can then share those posts with their friends on Facebook.Some academics see this as problematic, to say the least.“We are in a post-Gutenberg era where we have extended freedom of speech to anyone who can spend $20 on a web template and get a high-speed internet connection,” says Wineburg of Stanford, referring to 15th century goldsmith Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press and its introduction to Europe, launching a revolution in printing technology. “And so we have invented tools that are handling us, and not us them.”What is true and what’s not took on greater significance in 2016 largely due to the frenzied presidential election. Trump, according to fact-checkers, was the candidate who was most disengaged with the truth. According to PolitiFact, 69-percent of his statements were considered “mostly false,” “false,” or “pants on fire.” His remarks were completely true only 4 percent of the time.By contrast, Clinton’s truth scorecard had her telling an honest statement 25 percent of the time. Her combined false score was 26 percent, according to PolitiFact.Traditional truths in the public arena were in such short supply in 20016 that Oxford Dictionary dubbed “post-truth” its “Word of the Year,” and PolitiFact struggled so much to agree on one particularly heinous mistruth that it settled on the broadly defined “fake news” as this year’s most egregious lie.“Each year, PolitiFact awards a ‘Lie of the Year’ to take stock of a misrepresentation that arguably beats all others in its impact or ridiculousness. In 2016: where to start?” the site wrote. “With such a deep backlash against being truthful in political speech, no one person (though there are world-class frontrunners) and no one political claim perfectly stands out as the dust settles from an extraordinary campaign.”Among the most-shared fake news stories in 2016 is one that emerged from a phony site called The Denver Guardian with a headline that screamed: “FBI Agent Suspected in Hillary Email Leaks Found Dead in Apparent Murder Suicide.”A search of that headline on Facebook shows that the debunked story continues to live on the site. Thousands have either shared the article or commented, with one person writing: “I won’t be surprised if she put a hit on this FBI man and his family. This smells fishy and its (sic) stinks.”What was actually fishy was the story itself—but not that it mattered.When the administrator of one pro-Trump Facebook page that shared the story with the caption “You be the judge” was notified that the story was false, they bristled, offering an unapologetic retort.“You think the Dems don’t lie by the truck load?” the administrator wrote. “And WIN because of it. I didn’t write the story. Don’t know if it’s true or false and don’t really care. They don’t fight fair why should we?”Lynch describes two phenomenons at play: “implicitly recognizing bullshit…and then saying well the other side does it too” and “sharing [a story] and saying well, ‘I can’t tell what’s true but I’m going to share this anyway.’”“What both of those phenomenons tend to reveal is that social media, and the sharing that goes on in social media, isn’t actually sometimes about reporting facts,” he adds. “It goes under that guise so people will share information under the idea that they’re sort-of fact-checking the mainstream media or they’re giving alternative views that looks as if they’re engaged in distributing factual information.”To quantify just how viral fake stories were, a BuzzFeed analysis found that in the last three months of the presidential campaign the top-performing fake news stories inspired more engagement than articles from major news sources.“I’m troubled that Facebook is doing so little to combat fake news,” Brendan Nyhan, a professor of political science at Dartmouth College, told BuzzFeed. “Even if they did not swing the election, the evidence is clear that bogus stories have incredible reach on the network. Facebook should be fighting misinformation, not amplifying it.”Before acquiescing, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said the idea of fake news influencing the election was a “pretty crazy idea.”A month later, Facebook issued a statement saying it would began flagging fake news stories and work with such fact-checking sites as PolitiFact and Snopes that would scrutinize the articles. Disputed stories would still appear in news feeds, but would come with a warning that states: “Disputed by 3rd Party Fact-Checkers.”Facebook’s newfound dominance in the news distribution business played a direct role in the spreading of disturbingly false stores, says Lynch.“Google searches are now not as much a source of information of news, according to some data, as Facebook is,” he says. “That’s what made the fake news phenomenon so painful, [it] was because most of the people were getting these fake news stories because of seeing them on Twitter and Facebook and other social media sites that’s distributed, not by some faceless entity, but by one of their friends.”Much of what’s happening on the internet today, Lynch says, jives with what esteemed philosopher Marshall McLuhan said decades ago: “The medium is the message.”“Whether it’s reading from a book or reading online or just talking to people, can shape the way in which we understand information.”‘Zuckerberg Cannot Save Us’Between January 2015 and June 2016, researchers from the Stanford History Education Group at Stanford University studied how adolescents analyze news, and found that more than 80 percent of middle school students were unable to differentiate between so-called “sponsored content”—online posts that appear to look like stories but are paid for by advertisers—and news stories.“Some students even mentioned that it was sponsored content but still believed that it was a news article,” the study’s authors wrote. “This suggests that many students have no idea what ‘sponsored content’ means and that is something that must be explicitly taught as early as elementary school.”Students are not alone. Stanford’s Wineburg, the study’s lead author, says an industry analysis revealed that 59 percent of adults had the same problem distinguishing the two.The inability among the general public to decipher real news and advertisements is just part of the problem, Wineburg says. The way in which adults typically read digital content and print is the same: vertically. Meanwhile, fact checkers and researchers tend to consume digital content laterally—scrutinizing sources by opening multiple tabs and trying to pull the wool over a website’s true owner.“The higher something is on a Google search they impute greater trustworthiness to it,” Wineburg says of college students, adding that this represents “a fundamental misunderstanding of search engine optimizers, the algorithms that Google uses.”A society in which people are better equipped to analyze who’s writing a certain piece of content and the goal behind it is critical to a more stable democracy, he argues.“The quality of information is to civic intelligence what clean air and clean water are to public health,” Wineburg adds.Instilling in college students best practices on the internet are professors at Stony Brook University’s Center for News Literacy.Howard Schneider, the founding dean of SBU’s School of Journalism, said the course has been taught to more than 10,000 students on campus and has been adopted by 20 other universities in the United States and abroad.“When we started the school in 2006 we said it was no longer sufficient for journalism schools just to train journalists,” Schneider tells the Press. “Given all of the changes in the way we get information, and the way it spreads, and the fact that we’re all now publishers and have the ability to basically publish anything we want and spread it, we have to train the audience.”“The fake news phenomenon…is the latest manifestation of how the communications revolution is making it even more challenging for consumers to find reliable information,” he says.One of the first techniques the center teaches is to slow down the way in which students process information.“It’s getting faster and faster,” he said of the 24/7 news cycle, “and it’s a mix of real journalism and fake journalism and rumor and propaganda and infotainment and advertising and native advertising, so the first rule is stop.”“The second thing is to ask some questions, and these are obvious,” Schneider continues. “In a way you have to think like a journalist thinks: How do you know what I’m saying is true? What’s the evidence? The more outrageous the story the higher the bar should be before you trust or share anything. Check whether the story supports the headline. When you see a headline, read the story, don’t just only read headlines.“Always ask…who are the sources in the story? How do I know that these are trusted sources? How do I know where it comes from? And on social media you’ve got a whole other world you have to worry about.”The good news is help is on its way. SBU’s Center for News Literacy is launching a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) globally on Jan. 7. The course will be taught in three languages—English, Spanish and Chinese—and is completely free. (Students that want a certificate will have to pay for one.)This will give consumers of digital content the opportunity to learn how to weed out fact from fiction, news from opinion, and propaganda from scientifically backed research.Learning the ways of this post-truth Internet could potentially better equip readers the next time a story with a flashy headline rolls across the screen.“Mark Zuckerberg cannot save us,” says Wineburg. “The genie is out of the bottle. What used to be the responsibility” of journalists and editors “now falls on the shoulders of anybody who owns a smartphone. So Zuckerberg will come up with a bot that allows us to indicate wobbly content, there’s going to be an enterprising group of Macedonian teenagers who figure out a way to circumvent it.“What we have to do, is we have to endow ordinary citizens who learn about the world through a digital device to become more thoughtful about evaluating that digital content.”last_img read more