Our Introduction and our team
André de Sà Pessoa – Born in Portugal. Graduated of fine Art School of Lisbon in 1989 – Jewellery master class.Than at FIT-Fashion Institute of Tecnologiy - New York in 1990. Before joining on aura tout vu he worked as jeweller,and as cristal designer in Portugal and at Dome France. He created also hat collections.
Yassen Samouilov - Born is Bulgaria Graduated at Applied Arts School of Sofia in 1991 –Master class textile design and toys design.Than Fine Arts School of Versailles in 1994. Before joining on aura tout vu he worked in consulting trends agency and develope accessories, ready to wear collections.
Livia Stoianova -Born in Bulgaria. Graduated at Fine Arts School of Sofia in 1992 – master class Graphic Arts.Than Fine Arts School of Paris in 1996 Before joining on aura tout vu in 1998 she present her art works in France and collaborate in contemporary art galeries in Paris.
Brand history
The company ” ASP “was founded in 1995 and in 1998 under “on aura tout vu” as a brand /a French expression in translation : You think you v’seen it all / and made its name at first by creating and producing exclusive fashion accessories, embroideries, buttons and garments for the famous Haute Couture Brands before starting its own collections of ready-to-wear, accessories and couture clothes.
Economic Recovery Meeting
Feb. 27th ‘09
Meeting started at around 6:30pm with a total of 8 participants.
After brief personal introductions we shared some comments on the current economical situation and its impacts on each of us.
We watched the video with the Gov. Tim Kaine message and then we started talking about the Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, watching the Pres. Obama’s recent video on Budget Blueprint. We also spent some time exploring the Recovery.org website to let all the participants to look at the information provided by the White House on this matter.
We had a 45’ brainstorming-like discussion about the points we believe should have an high priority within the Recovery/Reinvestment Plan. The points are:
Accountability/transparency “all the way down”Cities going “green”/efficiency issues:Introducing “green” solutions in public propertiesOptimizing the number of public officesRewiring buildingsParticular attention should be paid to the real effectiveness of major “green” projectsPrivate energy production solutionsSupporting aging populationEconomic value of the projectsMedical records managementOptimizing local transportationWorkforce re-aggregation
Please, see click below on "Read More" for details.
The innovation and job creation "engine" that was the US VC sector has ground to a halt. Early stage companies are failing by the dozens. Not because of failed business models, but because of lack of capital. The VC industry has essentially shut down. They are concentrating on maintenance of their current portfolio companies as opposed to putting capital to work in bringing new innovation to the market.
Do we need to bail out or fund industries that need to become *lean* and shed jobs to become economically viable.... or should be concentrate our efforts and capital on a sector that has long proven to be the job creation and innovation engine of our economy.
A mere rounding error by the Treasury would supply enough capital to the Healthcare VC sector to fund the next level of innovation which would create jobs, improve healthcare, reduce medical errors and keep the US in its leadership position as the worlds innovation leader.
I refer you to a post on John Cook's Venture Blog, by Rob Coppedge.
HL
Most agencies struggle with getting through the IT Acquisition Process and fail over 80% of the time, costing the tax payer over $15Billion per year. These failures can be attributed to multiple root causes including;
- Antiguated Architecture & Acquisition Processes designed prior to the E-Commerce revolution, which disenfranchise both the user and the small innovative companies
- Organizational Conflicts of Interest within the support contractors supporting the architecture and acquisition process.
- Lack of congressional support for those few honest brokers who are overwelmed by the FFRDCs and Federal System Integrators special interests.
- Lack of incentives or performance metrics that would help motivate govt Program Managers to change their focus from compliance to capability delivery. When a program fails in todays world, the PM gets more funds and the program is re-baselined.
Worse, the integrators are experiencing record profits while the govt experience record program failures. The good news is that some of our most patriotic leaders who have challenged the status quo are making progress, including efforts within the OSD BTA, AF CIO, and DIA. As the US Govt Info Technology Budget approaches $100Billion per year, we have a great opporunity to restart the US innovation engine if the barriers to entry can be overcome.
The problem with the American auto companies is that they are too slow to respond. My sources tell me that it takes an American auto company 5 years to develop the smallest innovation. That means a new idea takes 5 years from conception to construction. In contrast, the Japanese take only 8 to 12 months to do the same. Even if by some miracle someone gave the American auto companies the ultimate innovation, it would take them 5 years to receive a dime of profit. If the American auto companies are too large for their own good, we can only hope that some visionary lawmakers provide a way to break them up into smaller independent units. To be independent would mean they would not answer to any auto czar. These smaller units would rise or fall on their own merits. The competition for innovation would be against science. The net result in my opinion would encourage measured risk taking. A creative and nimble company is better than a company that is set in its ways and failing. I have been looking to buy a production electric car for over 30 years. I know I am not alone in my desire to own an electric car. I now drive 2 Toyota hybrids because I am tired of waiting for the big 3 American auto companies. I intend to stay the course until the big 3 innovate their way out of this mess.
I hear a lot of talk about citizen participation and public engagement, such as enabling citizens to track government decision-making and comment on it.
I'd like to offer some useful distinctions between
We need to connect citizens with each other to engage them more fully and directly in solving the problems that face us. We must use all available technologies and methods to open up the federal government, creating a new level of transparency to change the way business is conducted in Washington and giving Americans the chance to participate in government deliberations and decision-making in ways that were not possible only a few years ago.
America risks being left behind in the global economy: Revolutionary advances in information technology, biotechnology, nanotechnology and other fields are reshaping the global economy. Without renewed efforts, the United States risks losing leadership in science, technology and innovation. As a share of the Gross Domestic Product, American federal investment in the physical sciences and engineering research has dropped by half since 1970.
Too many Americans are not prepared to participate in a 21st century economy: A recent international study found that U.S. students perform lower on scientific assessments than students in 16 other economically developed nations, and lower than 20 economically developed nations in math performance. Only one-third of middle class physical science teachers are qualified to teach in that subject, and only one-half of middle school math sciences have educational background in that subject area.
It's truly amazing how our nation seems to just now realize how out-of-touch it has become with such a high-profile industry as automobile manufacturing...
I listened to the interview with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on "Face the Nation", shedding light on the wrong message of infusing cash into the Detroit 3 while CEOs are rewarded for their lack of success (we're talkin Ten$ of Million$ in individual compensation)--and the condition congress puts upon them to come back in 10 days with a business plan.
Giving good news to the big 3 that the government will assist, Pelosi asks, "What innovation can Detroit bring to the table?" Better greener cars being among the obvious and implied goals i'm sure...
(According to Pelosi) Detroit fought against the so-called "Cafe" fuel efficiency standards...
This is part where i sat on the edge of my chair and talked back to my TV: Hey, what about overseas? Surely the success of the European models of Ford and GM cannot be ignored...
...how is it that they have that fuel-efficiency model in Europe but not here in the US?
Here's an idea: Detroit, bring your Euro-philosophy back across the pond to our own home soil. You already have a proven business model in Europe - why not share it with your American peeps?
Too bad they couldn't hear my interjection. At any rate, we'll see how things progress soon enough.
CK~
Well tonight I did some calling for Barack. The online system is great. Connecting with real people out of the blue is a fairly unpredictable pursuit. I spoke to a Republican who for voting for Barack, and I spoke to someone I thought was a Democrat who wouldn't tell me who he voted for because he thought I might be a shill for McCain. What I liked most about the experience was the ease of participation. Anyone can make a contribution from anywhere with a network connection even if you have a limited amount of time. There are a ton of reasons I want Barack Obama to win this election, most of which are written in other blogs posted here. One reason that isn't being discussed often enough is how extensively the mechanisms of democracy will have changed if he wins. Anyone can call or knock, anyone can blog, anyone can set up their own event. Technology is really making "by the people for the people" actually possible.
What intrigues me most about this angle of the campaign is what you do to harness all of this participation after such a revolutionary candidate gets elected. It seems to me that you would want to leverage all of these tools and more to make participation both online and in person a central premise of what it means to be an American. Barack's campaign is testament to the fact that many of us have a lot to contribute and will happily do so if the methods to do so are straightforward and provide feedback on how to make a difference.
Here's hoping this innovation in democracy continues......
If it is true that the great majority of American voters can only be reached through sound bites. and then only by a limited number of such sound bites, well that's what we'll need to give them.
sound bite - noun, a brief, quotable remark, or excerpt from a speech, made as by a politician and suitable for use on TV or radio newscasts: often a dismissive term implying superficiality. YourDictionary.com Eistein utters the ultimate sound bite:
sound bite - noun, a brief, quotable remark, or excerpt from a speech, made as by a politician and suitable for use on TV or radio newscasts: often a dismissive term implying superficiality.
YourDictionary.com
Eistein utters the ultimate sound bite:
I'm sure you can come up with your own summary phrases to describe Barack Obama's plans for the country. Please add your ideas in the comment section below. But for starters, here are my seven. I hope you'll agree they are appropriately short, sufficiently limited in number and accurately descriptive.
Don't be surprised if you start seeing and hearing bites like these from Barack Obama in ads and the Presidential debates.
wizinit is the nom de guerre of a veteran diplomat and fan of the late columnist Art Buchwald who writes serious analysis and political satire. If you would like to be notified whenever wizinit posts a new article join Food Tasters For Obama.
In a previous blog I had a thread about my typical MO around life, experimenting and looking for the next opportunity to do some serious "ocean boiling", I wanted to expand on my concept of "farmable" energy.First, let me throw out a thought to set a context for your reading, farming produce. Growing oranges in the Northeast United States is neither efficient nor effective. On the other hand, blueberries from New Jersey are a real treat in the late summer. Simple things like crop rotation among others organic methods allow the land to replenish its self in a natural way. This leads to a natural balance that enables sustainability.So farming is about growing the right product in the right place while keeping the land farmable. Makes sense, not easy to do, but when done in a large scale becomes economically viable.The concept of farmable energy is not only about being renewable. Farmable energy is about being renewable, ability to be pervasive, efficient, effective, replicatable and achieve a balance that through the cycle of energy creation to energy consumption to managing the by-products produced by consumption. An example of an energy supply model would be:Energy creation -> Transmission/Storage/Distribution -> Consumption -> By-Product ManagementSo for example, nuclear energy is renewable however it creates an imbalance due to its toxic by-products and the safe disposal of them.Typically in the United States we have created technologies and solutions to deal with the imbalance, however the end result only partially manages the imbalance. In many cases we have developed entire industries to deal with toxic waste and have embedded these "solutions" into the supply chain and amortized the cost so it appears to have a low economic impact.The metrics used for the measurement of the economic impact are calculated based solely on the supply/consume cycle and not on impact outside of this cycle. So for example do our toxic waste handling solutions address scalability and are they future proof? Well no and no.So I have taken a look at some of these solutions and technologies and quite frankly I am impressed with the innovation and execution of the solution. What an amazing waste of brain power and money. Innovation needs to drive solutions that avoid issues, not innovate to cleanup the aftermath.If you look at wind power as an example, it achieves the goal of being neutral in its impact on natural resources. Wind however does not scale nor is replicatable in a pervasive way. That said wind can be effective and efficient in some areas of the world.Solar is another example that again achieves the goal of being naturally balanced. It too has the same issues about pervasiveness in an efficient and effective way. Again solar can be an effective energy source in some areas of the world.The same can be said about Geothermal, tidal, Biomass, hydro and other forms of farmable energy. So you are looking for the single magic bullet that creates the ultimate solution, forget it. The answer comes in the form of fit for purpose energy sources that are specific to geography, climate and consumption patterns.Now if I am designing a farmable energy system in Death Valley Nevada I am certainly going to look at leveraging solar as a primary technology. Likewise in certain parts of California, mid-western United States and parts of continental Europe, wind is my choice.So being farmable is not about choosing one source of energy production. It is about making a context specific choice based on the natural conditions of the region where the energy sourcing is located. Given that, we need to identify and develop a series of farmable energy technologies and deploy where we achieve efficiencies and effectiveness.Just to give you an idea where I am heading here, I plan to do some more blog entries on this topic. The next entry will discuss farmable technologies, after that I will boil the ocean with my master plan on the next generation electric grid and bring it back to reality with a real life example that will surprise you.
supports implementation of an economy‐wide cap‐and‐trade system to reduce carbon emissions
by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. This market
mechanism has worked before and will give all American consumers and businesses the
incentives to use their ingenuity to develop economically effective solutions to climate change.
Obama's cap‐and‐trade policy will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100 percent
auction ensures that all industries pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving
these valuable emission rights away to companies on the basis of their past pollution. A small
portion of the receipts generated by auctioning allowances ($15 billion per year) will be used to
support the development of clean energy, invest in energy efficiency improvements, and help
develop the next generation of biofuels and clean energy vehicles – measures that will help the
economy and help meet the emissions reduction targets. It will also be used to provide new
funding to state and federal land and wildlife managers to restore habitat, create wildlife
migration corridors, and assist fish and wildlife to adapt to the effects of a warming climate. All
remaining receipts will be used for rebates and other transition relief to ensure that families and
communities are not adversely impacted by the transition to a new energy, low carbon economy.
2.Convert our Manufacturing Centers into Clean Technology Leaders. America boasts the
highest‐skilled manufacturing workforce in the world and advanced manufacturing facilities that
have powered economic growth in America for decades. Barack Obama believes that America
companies and workers should build the high‐demand technologies of the future, and he will help
nurture America’s success in clean technology manufacturing by establishing a federal investment
program to help manufacturing centers modernize and help Americans learn new skills to produce green
products. This federal grant program will allocate money to the states to identify
and support local manufacturers with the most compelling plans for modernizing existing or
closed manufacturing facilities to produce new advanced clean technologies. This investment will
help provide the critical up‐front capital needed by small and mid‐size manufacturers to produce
these innovative new technologies. Along with an increased federal investment in the research,
development and deployment of advanced technologies, this $1 billion per year investment will
help spur sustainable economic growth in communities across the country.
I believe in sustainability. I believe we have a significant amount of waste in our society and lifestyle that could make up a considerable amount of the difference between what we have and what we import in the way of energy (NOT oil). The remainder of the difference is doable by existing alternative energy sources and by the incredible amount of innovation our people have if they put their mind to a specific problem. There are countless unconfirmed stories about people inventing devices that could save millions of gallons of gasoline but one way or the other were not allowed to come to 'market'. We can DO what is in front of our faces if we only decide to DO IT! Lets see what ideas any of you can come up with that are practical and implementable solutions so that a President like Barack Obama would use the Office of The President and all the resources available to help develop your dream for our country. The only limit I know of is our imagination.
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/project-earth/project-earth.html
Discovery Project Earth ~ Watch Fridays, starting Aug. 22 at 9 p.m. ET/PT
You've heard the dire warnings and seen the detailed slide shows, and you've even bought that lightbulb with the swirls. You wonder, though, how can small, individual measures like switching to CFLs and using canvas grocery bags in lieu of plastic be enough to save the planet? Tune in to Discovery Project Earth and watch as some of the world's leading scientists put the most ambitious geo-engineering ideas to the test in order to tackle global climate change.
~@~
I am posting this announcement in the hope you might plan ahead and watch this program, starting tomorrow, Aug. 22 at 9 p.m. ET/PT
Gather your children, if you are so blessed, and use this as an educational opportunity. Teach your children how everyone can decide for themselves, whether they can do anything or if they should even bother.
If anything, it certainly looks entertaining with loads of excitement and Discovery .
While you are waiting for tomorrow to arrive, perhaps you or your children would enjoy learning something new while having fun at the same time ? Get the kids involved early and they will anxiously await 9 p.m. tomorrow night.
http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/project-earth/puzzles/puzzles.html
Information at any age can lead to life-changing decisions. I imagine a child somewhere in the United States, watching a show like this and deciding on their own to not toss that piece of paper or plastic on the ground with careless abandon.
Maybe you will find yourself joining me and take a permanent shopping bag to the store, foregoing a plethora of cheap plastic bags which are thrown away once emptied.
Every time I get wind of the so-called Experience Issue, I cringe. Look what our opponent's so-called experience has wrought!
We need someone bold enough to try what needs to tried. A special courage is required to do so, but as I hope the following example will illustrate, it requires something else.
The prolific writer on the topic of creativity, Michael Michalko, commented recently to The Hub a website devoted to the same topic, on the innovative leadership of Dick Drew, inventor of masking tape at 3M. Despite his company's strong emphasis on creativity, Drew found he had to fight now and then for his biggest ideas. And he did so, more than once at the risk of losing his job.
Among Michalko's summary of Dick Drew’s basic beliefs about creativity is the the concept of Constructive Ignorance.It means that agents of change need to know just enough to get this moving, but not so much that they get in their own way, especially with loyalty to the old ways that did not work.
Michael Michalko's post on The Hub: Be the Weed in the Flower Garden
I live in California and work around the country. I am appalled about the state of education and how we are leaving more children behind then we ever have before. The focus of "No Child Left Behind" was framed so people thought that we were going to fight for all children. Actually, what has happened is that "Every poor, disadvantaged, learning disabled, at-risk, and minority child is left behind." What kind of country is this that we do this to our future. In today's SF Chronicle, the headline is 24% of high school students will dropout.
Where are they? What are these dropouts doing now? How will they survive?
I noticed this starting to happen several years ago as a consultant working with several high schools in the SF bay area. When I pointed out that the data is alarming (i.e. at one urban school there were 800 freshmen and only 160 seniors), the school told me not to talk about it. I informed them that this is a big problem they need to address. So now the state superintendent is talking about it (5 years later).
We cannot throw away one child!
Since I work in other states, I have become aware that funding levels do impact class size, teacher quality, etc. California is now 49th in funding per pupil. Class size averages over 30 where in Texas the average is 22. How can you be effective with that many children in your class? In other countries, teachers are valued, honored. We blame teachers for problems that are out of their control. In Japan, there is time for professional learning and teachers to share teaching practice almost daily. We expect teachers to do the impossible and learn on the job without much support and resources. No other job does this.
To create the 21st century citizens we want our children to become, our teachers need an environment that allows them to take risks where innovation and creativity is encouraged.
With so much focus on tests and accountability, innovation, problem-solving, critical-thinking, and creativity is not only discouraged but not allowed. We have to change this - NOW! Our children need to learn how to think, not what to think.
Since I work in other states, I have become aware that funding levels do impact class size, teacher quality, etc. California is now 49th in funding per pupil. Class size averages over 30 where in Texas the average is 22. How can you be effective with that many children in your class? In other countries, teachers are valued, honored. We blame teachers for problems that are out of their control. In Japan, there is time for professional learning and teachers to share teaching practice almost daily. We expect teachers to do the impossible and learn on the job without much time, training, support and resources. No other job does this.
