See how you can eliminate manual errors, reduce complexity and simplify standard network changes across sites with DNA Center. Learn more: http://cs.co/60558Lcyd
by Cisco via Endless Supplies .De - Brands
Endless Supplies Corporation liefert weltweit, bietet Angebote am selben Tag und enthält CPUs, Speichergeräte, Notebooks, Server, Monitore, Büroausstattung, Computer, Motherboards, Grafikkarten, Displays, Wireless Networking, Cases, Unterhaltungselektronik, Software und mehr. E-Procurement-Systeme für B2B, B2G und B2C. Mailen Sie uns heute.
When a product has been recalled and disappears from store shelves, that includes virtual store shelves. Yet jars of I.M. Healthy’s recalled soy butter, a peanut butter substitute, were available from a third-party seller on Amazon’s site last week, meaning that customers could potentially get a large helping of E. coli along with their sandwiches.
Food Safety News reported that Linda Harris, the chair of the Food Science and Technology Department at the University of California-Davis, noticed that the soy butter was still listed on the site. She went ahead and ordered it, paying $50 to get three jars of the recalled, potentially contaminated product delivered to her doorstep.
Wait… why did three jars of sandwich spread cost $50? That’s nearly $17 per jar; specialty foods aren’t usually that expensive.
For comparison’s sake, a competing soy butter brand, Don’t Go Nuts, costs $13.28 for two jars (a unit cost of $6.64 per jar) on Amazon today. We don’t know what the market for illegal soy butter is, but at least one seller thought that there was one. (We’ve contacted the seller, and will update this post if we hear back from them.)
Amazon declined to comment for this story, instead pointing us to their product safety page. What the mega-retailer doesn’t say is how it handles recalls for third-party merchants, and whether it allows products that have been recalled in the past to be listed and sold months or years after the recall. Perhaps this item slipped through the cracks because a 3-pack is listed as a separate product.
“When we learn of a recall, we suspend all impacted product offerings from our website and quarantine any related inventory in our fulfillment centers,” Amazon says on its product safety page. “We also reach out to any customers that previously purchased impacted products (and any seller that may have offered such products) to inform them about the recall.”
The problem is that it’s illegal to sell products that are part of a recall, whether it’s at your garage sale, in a big-box retail store, or through an online mega-retail platform.
While the government won’t chase after you for selling an old crib in your garage sale, it will go after retailers caught selling recalled products, like the $5.7 million civil penalty against Home Depot announced last week for selling 28 different recalled products, or a $3.8 million penalty imposed on Best Buy for selling recalled gadgets and appliances.
Coral Beach of Food Safety News noted in a column today that there were other retailers with I.M. Healthy products listed on other e-commerce sites as of this morning, even though banning recalled items from sale should be a simple matter.
I.M. Healthy filed for bankruptcy in May, and the FDA shut down Dixie Dew, the soy butter processing facility, in March. Soy butter has a long shelf life, though, and the product may keep making people sick for years into the future. What no one expected, though, was for retailers to keep selling the butter almost six months after it was pulled from stores.
In a statement to Consumerist, a rep for the FDA says the agency has verified that this listing has been removed from Amazon.
“We are investigating further to determine how the products were still available for sale,” says the FDA. “Many online retailers will create filters to prevent recalled products from being relisted for sale. Unfortunately, some listings make it through those filters. The suspension order is still in effect. The SoyNut Butter Co. is now out of business.”
For more information from the FDA about this outbreak, go to this page on FDA.gov.
Longtime New York sports radio personality Craig Carton was arrested this morning on federal charges of securities and wire fraud in connection with a scheme that allegedly tricked investors into thinking their money was being spent on blocks of concert tickets that would then be resold at a huge profit. Problem is, say prosecutors, those tickets didn’t exist, and the money just went to cover Carton’s casino debts.
Carton, who has cohosted Boomer and Carton with retired NFL quarterback Boomer Esiason for about a decade, was arrested this morning by the FBI, along with his alleged co-conspirator Michael Wright.
In 2016, according to the criminal complaint [PDF], Carton, Wright, and an un-named co-conspirator pitched investors on an idea: Give us your money and we’ll use Carton’s existing connections with arena owners in the New York City area — and the unnamed co-conspirator’s supposed agreements with live event promoters in the region, to purchase large blocks of tickets to popular events. Investors would get a return on their money when those tickets were later sold at a profit on secondary markets.
But according to the Justice Department, no such agreements existed. Prosecutors say the investors’ funds were not being used to purchase tickets, but were instead going to cover the defendants’ personal debts — including millions of dollars in alleged gambling debt for Carton — and to repay previous investors in a Ponzi-like fashion.
The FBI says that emails and text messages cited in the complaint appear to indicate that the defendants were taking in millions of dollars through these investors while being aware that there were no tickets being purchased. An Oct. 2016 message from Carton refers to an investor — the FBI says it is a hedge fund, but does not name it — willing to extend $10 million in capital to the defendants to fund their ticket purchasing, and possibly another $40 million in credit.
Later communications between the alleged conspirators shows, according to the FBI, that they intended to use the hedge fund money to pay their debts, and not to purchase tickets.
To convince the hedge fund that their operation was on the level, the defendants provided the fund with a number of signed agreements with a concert promoter to purchase up to $10 million in blocks of tickets from the promoter. However, the FBI says the documents are fraudulent and that the person whose signature is on those arrangements never actually signed any deal with the defendants.
In the weeks that followed, prosecutors say the hedge fund provided the defendants with millions of dollars that they believed was going toward the purchase of these tickets. To keep this money coming, Carton allegedly produced an agreement with arena owners for another $2 million in tickets. Again, the FBI says this contract was fraudulent and no such tickets were purchased.
The two defendants were each charged with one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and wire fraud, one count of wire fraud, and one count of securities fraud. Carton was reportedly released on $500,000 bond this afternoon.
This morning’s arrest of the radio host appeared to catch his cohost unawares.
“I thought he called in sick this morning, but unfortunately my partner was arrested,” Esiason said during this morning’s show. “I’m taken aback and surprised by it, just like everybody else is.”
Former pharmaceuticals executive, convicted fraudster, enemy of spellcheck, and online troll Martin Shkreli appears to be selling the sole copy of a Wu-Tang Clan album he famously purchased for a reported $2 million in 2015. And in true Pharma Bro fashion, the album isn’t being sold through some fancy auction house, but via eBay.
The hip-hop legends in Wu-Tang only made a single copy of Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, making it available through a 2015 auction and leaving it up to the highest bidder to decide what to do with their purchase.
The eBay listing, ascribed to seller martishkrel_7, appeared online late Tuesday night, and claims to be the “one and only Wu-Tang album.”
“I decided to purchase this album as a gift to the Wu-Tang Clan for their tremendous musical output,” writes the seller. “Instead I received scorn from at least one of their (least-intelligent) members, and the world at large failed to see my purpose of putting a serious value behind music. I will be curious to see if the world values music nearly as much as I have. I have donated to many rock bands and rappers over the years to ensure they can continue to produce their art when few others would.”
The seller dangles the possibility that he can cancel the auction at any time he wants and that he might even “break this album in frustration.”
He promises in the listing to donate half of the money to medical research. In a series of answers to users’ questions, the seller says that this half will go to “OHSU for rare disease drug research. I know a great researcher there very well who will make terrific use of the funds.”
As of right now, the highest bid for the album is around $108,000.
Though the listing says the seller is not making the sale to raise cash, there is no mention of whether or not any of the remaining half of what he brings in will go to cover legal costs.
Reps for Wu-Tang tell Bloomberg that the group is aware of the eBay auction.
While Shkreli owns the only copy of Once Upon…, he does not control the copyright of the music contained on the CD. In fact, he’s contractually blocked from commercial use of the songs for another 86 years. He is allowed to publicly play limited portions of the album. In 2016, he played what he claimed were selections from the album to celebrate the election of Donald Trump. More recently, following his conviction on two counts of securities fraud, he live-streamed an interview with an Associated Press reporter. That discussion included several minutes from the Wu-Tang album.
It was Shkreli — the CEO who was thrust into the spotlight when his former company Turing Pharmaceuticals acquired the lifesaving drg Daraprim and then jacked up the price more than 5,000% overnight — who later confirmed that he’d paid $2 million for the album.
At the time of the original auction, the many, many members of Wu-Tang said they knew nothing about Shkreli or his business practices. The group has subsequently said that it used some of the funds from the sale to benefit charities.
In recent years, Shkreli has been arrested, charged, and convicted on securities fraud charges. He also made a mockery of a 2016 congressional subcommittee hearing by pleading the Fifth Amendment to all questions, including ones about his purchase of the Wu-Tang album.
It’s out with the old — or underperforming — and in with the new at Gap. In a bid to turn around sales and get people into stores, the mall staple says it will close about 200 Banana Republic and Gap locations, while opening 270 Old Navy and Athleta stores over the next three years.
The store changes were announced today at the Goldman Sachs 24th Annual Global Retail Conference as part of what the retail company calls its long-term, balanced growth strategy.
Gap says the strategy is intended to shift focus to where customers are shopping, while also increasing the presence of its more profitable brands.
For instance, the Old Navy brand is expected to exceed $10 billion in sales over the next few years, while Athleta is estimated to exceed $1 billion in sales.
On the other side of the retail spectrum, the company’s stalwart brands, Gap and Banana Republic, have seen sales fall consistently in recent years. Just last month, Gap reported that sales at its namesake stores fell 1%, while Banana Republic’s sales fell 5%.
To that end, Gap says it will concentrate on brands that make it money: Athleta, Old Navy, and other “value expressions.”
In all, Gap brands will see a net increase of 70 stores over the next three years, as it closes 200 Gap and Banana Republic locations and opens 270 Old Navy, Athleta, and other stores. A list of stores slated for closing has not yet been released.
The changes, the company notes, will result in an expected $500 million in expense savings over the next three years.
“We will leverage our iconic brands and significant scale to deliver growth by shifting to where our customers are shopping – online, value and active,” Art Peck, president and CEO of Gap, said today.
Nearly a year after IKEA recalled 29 million topple-prone dressers and chests following the deaths of at least four children, another furniture manufacturer has issued a similar safety campaign: Ameriwood Home recalled 1.6 million chests sold at Walmart.
Ameriwood Home announced today the recall of its Mainstays four-drawer chests after receiving a report that a four-year-old child was injured when the dresser toppled over.
According to a notice posted with the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the unstable chests pose a serious tip-over and entrapment hazard if they are not anchored to the wall.
Additionally, the furniture does not meet the performance requirements of the U.S. voluntary industry standards. The CPSC notes that it has received one report of an injury after one of the composite wood chests tipped over onto a four-year-old.
The affected chests include four drawers with plastic drawer glides and a single decorative pull on each drawer.
Measuring about 40 inches in height and 27 inches wide, the chests were sold in six colors — alder, black forest, white, weathered oak, walnut, and ruby red — at Walmart and other retailers from April 2009 to May 2016 for about $60.
Affected pieces can be identified by the following model numbers located on the instruction manual:
• 5412012WP
• 5412301WP
• 5412328WP
• 5412015WY
• 5412301WY
• 5412012PCOM
• 5412015PCOM
• 5412026PCOM
• 5412213PCOM
• 5412214PCOM
• 5412301PCOM
• 5412317PCOM
• 5412328PCOM
Consumers who have the furniture in their homes are urged to stop using the chest if it is not properly anchored to the wall and place it into an area that children cannot access.
Owners can contact Ameriwood at 877-222-7460 or ameriwood.com for a free repair kit that includes a wall anchoring device and feet for the unit. Consumers who require additional installation guidance should contact Ameriwood for further assistance.
Millions of T-Mobile customers with family plans of at least two lines will soon be able to watch Netflix for free, as the wireless company announced today that it will include a free Netflix subscription for these multi-line plans.
Starting on Sept. 12, 2017, folks with T-Mobile ONE family plans with at least two lines will be able to have T-Mo cover the cost of the most popular Netflix account ($9.99/month). The offer will be available to both new and existing T-Mobile subscribers.
When the offer goes live next week, T-Mobile customers will have to activate the option via the T-Mobile app on their phone. This will provide them with a link to connect your T-Mo and Netflix accounts.
Be aware that both companies caution that it could take 1-3 billing cycles for T-Mobile to start paying that Netflix bill for you, so until then you’re responsible for making sure your subscription is current.
The $9.99/month plan only allows streaming on two devices simultaneously, so what if you want (or already have) the $11.99/month Netflix plan that gives you up to four streams at the same time? Both T-Mo and Netflix tell Consumerist that people with this pricier plan would only be responsible for the $2/month above what T-Mobile pays Netflix for the standard plan.
It’s also worth pointing out that while the $9.99/month Netflix plan includes streaming in HD, T-Mobile ONE limits the video resolution of cellular streaming. T-Mobile customers who want true HD over cellular would need to pay for the more expensive T-Mobile ONE Plus plan.
Today’s T-Mobile announcement could set off a content-subsidy battle among wireless companies. AT&T has been trying to leverage its ownership of DirecTV, offering discounts for customers with AT&T phone and DirecTV satellite TV service, or not counting online access to DirecTV Now against the data limits of AT&T customers. AT&T is also in the process of acquiring Time Warner, and has been using free or discounted rates for that company’s HBO premium network in an apparent effort to boost its DirecTV Now numbers.
Big data isn’t an entirely new concept: We have an entire division of the U.S. government dedicated to quantifying our nation’s population, and the Census Bureau has been doing so in its current form since 1902. The scope, quantity, and granularity of the data has changed, though, and Facebook in particular specializes now in knowing pretty much everything about everyone. But someone is clearly wrong, because the two have population estimates that just don’t match.
One analyst has recently noticed a fairly big discrepancy, Reuters reports: Facebook is promising users that simply shouldn’t exist.
Facebook tells advertisers that they can reach up to 41 million users in the 18-24 age bracket. At first blush, that seems to make perfect sense. Pretty much everyone has Facebook, after all; the company boasts 236 million monthly active users in the U.S. and Canada, and they tend to skew younger.
Except, the analyst notes, the U.S. Census Bureau currently says that there are 31 million people in the country in that age bracket. The gap between accepted federal reality and Facebook reality also persists in the next age bracket up, users ages 25-34, he notes.
On the one hand, the Census Bureau has decades of experience coming up with scientifically accurate population estimates based on birth and death rates, immigration rates, representative surveys, and even literally going door to door and counting people. They have specialized in gathering this data for quite some time, and accuracy is important when basically every federal decision (and no small number of state ones) rests on your data.
But there’s some wiggle room in there. Estimates are just that: Data-based, educated guesses and models that may not exactly match reality no matter how hard you try.
On the other hand, Facebook data is both specific and granular. Users provide their birthdays, and Facebook captures where you log in from. So the company knows if you’re inside the boundaries of the U.S., and it knows how old you are.
But there are caveats aplenty, even as creepy as Facebook’s all-knowing eye can be. Every profile that Facebook says exists doubtless actually exists, but they may not be what they seem to be.
Plenty of people, for example, have more than one Facebook profile. Plenty of people can and do lie about their age. And plenty of Facebook accounts purporting to be 18-34-year-old women are spambots. So Facebook’s hard data isn’t infallible.
Facebook agreed to Reuters in a statement that its audience estimates don’t match census data, but said that’s not only fine, but intentional, as the ad reach numbers “are designed to estimate how many people in a given area are eligible to see an ad a business might run. They are not designed to match population or census estimates.”
But if the people don’t exist, can even Facebook actually reach them? That, apparently, is a philosophical question for our digital, big-data era.
With just about every person in every family having their own cellphone, odds are that whenever you get a “new” number, it’s actually a recycled number that previously belonged to at least one other person. But not all of us can hit the recycled number lottery and end up with Sir Mix-A-Lot’s old digits. No, some folks will be stuck having to explain to strange callers that they are not “Pebbles,” the escort who once used that phone number.
CBS Chicago has the story of a mom who was less than pleased to learn that the new phone line she’d purchased from T-Mobile for her 13-year-old daughter not only once belonged to an escort, but that the number was still listed online as in that escort’s contact information.
“My daughter called me at my office and said that someone is calling and asking for Pebbles,” explains the mom, who says these callers left voicemails and texts asking things like “Where are you? Where can I meet you? Where do you live?”
A quick Google search of the daughter’s number turned up multiple online ads for the escort, says mom.
T-Mobile provided the daughter with a different number, but her mother tells CBS that she wants the phone companies to have some sort of processes for preventing this from happening again.
But can that be done? T-Mobile has more than 50 million postpaid and prepaid customers, with millions of subscribers entering and leaving the company’s umbrella every year. A system to check if a number is associated with illicit activity would seem to require individualized investigation on the part of T-Mobile, running each recycled number through various searches before handing out to a new customer. And just because a number doesn’t turn up on public searches doesn’t mean it’s not linked to a person or activity that the new owner might find objectionable.
In fact, a T-Mobile rep tells CBS Chicago that there is currently no way for the company to vet recycled numbers in this manner.
The best you can do is check these numbers for yourself before you put that phone in your kid’s hand, and if there are any reasons to be concerned about a phone number’s history, deal with it before random people are lighting up your kid’s phone.