Tree Queen

Toraji is an artist based in Tokyo.You can see more of Toraji’s work at her ArtStation and Instagram pages.

Source: http://tz2d.me/?c=h7v

Flat design is a user interface style that uses simple two-dimensional elements, minimal textures, and bright colors. There are plenty of benefits to flat design — the simple elements allow for faster load time and easier user navigation.Plus, it looks modern and clean. Windows 8 is a good example of flat design:

As you can see from the Windows 8 interface, the large, colorful blocks are effective elements for easy usability. Plus, the flat design ensures optimal user experience on various devices, since the simple shapes and lack of texture easily scale for different devices’ screen sizes. If you think flat design is just a short-term trend, think again — Usabilla surveyed 100 professionals and found 68 percent believe flat design will affect how we design for the web, long-term. Here are the major elements of flat design: Illustrations Bright colors Uncomplicated shapes Functional Simple typography Minimalist Intuitive More use of negative space Absence of three-dimensional depth Here, we’ll take a look at the top websites using flat design, so you can decide whether flat design is the right style for your business. Flat design colors Spiced Nectarine (#ffbe76) Pure Apple (#6ab04c) Pink Glamour (#ff7979) Turbo (#f9ca24) Greenland Green (#22a6b3) Alizarin (#e74c3c) Wisteria (#8e44ad) Midnight Blue (#2c3e50) Clouds (#ecf0f1) Concrete (#95a5a6) Top Websites Using Flat Design 1. Wistia

2. The Hype Agency

3. Intercom

4. Stripe

5. Apple iOS 7

6. Taasky

7. Operativnik Website Design by Felix Baky

 

Source: http://tz2d.me/?c=h4w

Photo: AtGamesA new plug-and-play retro game machine doesn’t offer what it promises on its box. Players are feeling burned by what they say is a bait-and-switch, while the maker of the system says it’s all due to last-minute production snags.The manufacturer, AtGames, has been making all-in-one retro consoles including the popular “Flashback” line for well over a decade. These inexpensive machines are pre-loaded with a bunch of classic games and vary in quality. Last year’s Sega Genesis Flashback HD had a shaky start, where the company ended up sending faulty review units to the press. This year, one of its new machines is having the exact opposite problem: The early review units sent to the press are better than the ones on store shelves. AdvertisementOne of its new machines is called the Bandai Namco Flashback Blast, which contains 8 of that publisher’s most popular games, including Pac-Man, Galaga, and Dig Dug. As the reviews started to trickle out for the Bandai Namco Flashback Blast, something started to seem wrong. YouTuber John Hancock had a review copy which was sent to him by At Games, which he gave a generally good review. Another reviewer, known as Madlittlepixel (or MLP) on Youtube, picked up a version of the console at Walmart, and gave it a very different, much more negative review.As MLP’s fans pointed the differences in their reviews, he realized that the retail version of the console that he bought at the store included the Nintendo Entertainment System versions of the games, whereas Hancock’s review copy had the games’ original arcade versions. The original arcade versions are considered to be much better than the NES versions, which had to be significantly downscaled to work on the less powerful home hardware of the 1980s. MLP went on to point out that the box for the retail version of the Bandai Namco Flashback Blast uses pictures from the arcade versions, which he felt was misleading to customers.As fans of retro games picked up on this, they began tweeting at AtGames asking for an explanation (or just outright accusing it of deliberately misrepresenting its product). AtGames began to respond.Advertisement“The early review version could not make it to production, even though it was anticipated it would,” read one tweet. AtGames did not elaborate on why the version with the arcade games did not get produced, and as of press time has not responded to an email from Kotaku asking for clarification. But AtGames was also not done tweeting, and some of its responses to fans were strongly worded, to say the least.“You never heard of companies multi-tracking product development? There have never been changes from earlier versions of products versus the retail release?” it wrote to one user.“So you’re saying we custom made a special product in hopes of deceiving people because we thought no one would notice a difference like that? I’m not sure I’m seeing how that makes sense versus the reality of a production change,” it wrote to another.Advertisement“You clearly don’t wish to discuss things reasonably and don’t wish for the company to help with whatever issue you might have, so I guess you’ll just continue to make one-sided accusations,” it said in response to MLP’s video about the situation.In a later production run, AtGames said, it will replace the home console versions with arcade versions. In the process of explaining this, the At Games Twitter account started blocking other users, including another YouTube reviewer, who made a video about it. In several replies to users, the person (or people) running the AtGames Twitter account said that the only people who were being blocked were those who had “cross[ed] the line into harassment.” They clarified in a response to another user that part of their definition of harassment is “repeated use of the word ‘scam’ and words like it.”AdvertisementSo is this a “scam”? It’s plausible that last-minute production issues might have caused AtGames to have to switch the versions of the games it used on the Blast. But since the imagery used on the retail box still shows the arcade versions of the games, it’s not out of the question to say that some consumers might be misled by the advertising.It seems like everybody involved here could benefit from a little more understanding: customers shouldn’t automatically assume that every change in a product during its production is a deliberately concocted scheme intended to trick them, and AtGames should probably try to listen more and dig in its heels less when it makes a mistake that materially affects the quality of its products.

Source: http://tz2d.me/?c=h5s

If you’re caught up in the buzz of all things pumpkin spice, it’s likely that you’re missing out on another seasonal spice blend: apple pie spice. And I’d love to help you change that right now. We most commonly pick up a jar of this seasonal spice blend — a mix of cinnamon, nutmeg, and allspice — when it comes time to bake up an apple pie. But instead of stashing back in the pantry where it’s sure to be forgotten, I urge you to put it work as much as possible.
READ MORE »

Source: http://tz2d.me/?c=h45

Gary Cameron / Reuters

Cuts to military veterans benefits in December’s budget deal have outraged veterans groups, but as Congress and President Obama return to Washington this week, the cuts don’t appear to be going anywhere soon.

The budget agreement reached before Christmas puts into place a 1% across-the-board reduction to the cost of living adjustment for military pensions, a move that on principle alone has upset many veterans after 13 years of war. Veterans groups plan to push back against the provisions in the recent budget deal — but so far they’ve been met with radio silence from the White House.

“It is a big surprise for us,” said Michael Hayden, a retired Air Force colonel and director of government relations for the Military Officers Association of America. Hayden’s group has had “informational” conversations with the White House about the impact of cutting veterans benefits, he said, but so far has no insight into whether President Obama will come to their aide.

Top military brass below the president have also been a disappointment, Hayden said.

“We’re really kind of surprised the chairman [of the Joint Chiefs Of Staff] and the Joint Chiefs haven’t come out and said this is wrong,” he said.

But the groups acknowledge the focus will be on Congress even as they hope for the White House aid.

“[Congress] screwed this up, they’re going to have to fix it,” said Tom Tarantino, government affairs director at the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America.

“I would like to see the president be more vocal,” Tarantino added, praising the president on his advocacy for veterans and their families. “He’s probably been the most active president we’ve had in 50 years on this stuff. But I think this took everyone by surprise. I would like to see the president continue supporting our community.”

The veterans benefits cuts are proving to be the most controversial part of the bipartisan budget deal. The two prominent partisans who led the crafting of the deal, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), have already agreed to remove the cuts to disabled veterans’ benefits, calling them a “technical error.”

But both Ryan and Murray have taken stands that make it hard to undo the rest of the cuts. Ryan has defended the cuts, saying they’re necessary to prevent the military from suffering sequestration cuts.

Murray, meanwhile, has said she’s open to replacing the cuts with other spending cuts equal to the $6 billion in savings created by retirees’ COLA increase, but is not in favor of dropping the cuts all together.

Hill sources on both sides said the White House has not pressured budget writers to repeal the COLA cuts or to stand by them. But some suggest the president’s signature on the budget deal, which in theory will prevent another round of fiscal crises in 2014, signals that he’s on the side of the cutters.

“President Obama signed the Bipartisan Budget Act into law,” a source familiar with the process said. “[Defense] Secretary Hagel voiced support for the law generally and the need for compensation reform specifically.”

The White House did not respond to multiple requests for comment on the veterans’ complaints.

The COLA cuts don’t go into effect until late 2015, a lead time that veterans’ groups say gives them plenty of time to help allied members of Congress who have condemned the cuts find a way out of them. And though they want the president to lend his voice to their efforts, Obama is so far not the focus when it comes to lobbying Washington to find its $6 billion in savings somewhere else.

A pressure campaign over the cuts launched by the MOAA and its allies before the bill passed last month was restarted Friday with a call for veterans to push their representatives of Congress to repeal the COLA cuts. Before the bill passed, the MOAA campaign and a letter sent by veterans advocate umbrella The Military Coalition included Obama among the recipients of the pressure messaging. In the latest iteration, the president has been left out.

“Our focus is to work on the Hill,” said John Davis, legislative affairs director at the Fleet Reserve Association and co-chair of The Military Coalition.

“It doesn’t surprise me that Obama’s not going to jump out and take a position one way or the other on this until he sees something moving,” he added. “It’s standard operating procedure for presidents. We’re hoping to force his hand.”

Tarantino expects the White House to go along with changes to the benefits cuts if Congress can find them.

“I am not anticipating a lot resistance from the White House. If there is resistance we will push back hard,” he said. “But I’m not anticipating a lot of resistance.”

Update (1:35 p.m.): An administration official provided the following statement to BuzzFeed, which leaves unaddressed the cost of living adjustment:

“The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 represents a compromise between Democrats and Republicans in Congress. As the president made clear, the law doesn’t include everything that he would have liked. Importantly, the law unwinds some of the damaging sequester cuts that have harmed our military, our students, and our seniors, and has acted as a headwind our businesses have had to fight. Without this deal, the Pentagon faced the prospect of additional cuts that would have further degraded our military readiness and support for our troops. The administration supports the effort underway to fix the unintended reduction in COLAs for working-age military retirees with service-related disabilities.”

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/white-house-silence-on-benefits-cuts-irks-veterans-groups

Larry Downing / Reuters

WASHINGTON — As D.C. enters week two of the government shutdown, House Democrats find themselves in a very strange position: Most of them have now voted against funding nutritional assistance for women, national parks, the District of Columbia, pay for the National Guard, FEMA, veterans benefits, and cancer research at the National Institute of Health.

And they’ll tell you they are just fine with that.

Congressional Democrats have said from the beginning of the shutdown that they would not settle for anything short of a clean funding bill that reopens the entire government without any strings attached. Republicans have responded by introducing a series of narrow bills that would fund specific, highly visible parts of the government and nothing else. The GOP’s strategy is to force Democrats to vote against funding popular programs — thus convincing the public that the party of President Obama is being unreasonable.

“Hard to believe, but 164 Democrats voted against WIC yesterday. They would rather keep gov. shutdown than support WIC,” tweeted Republican Rep. Renee Ellmers after a House vote on funding nutritional assistance program during the shutdown.

Comments like that have left Democrats — who have long championed programs like WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) — infuriated and baffled to say the least. But they are also confident that no amount of Republican messaging can shift public opinion against them as the shutdown drags on.

“Everything that was up is now down, everything that was left is now right. It seems like it’s a bizarre divide and conquer strategy,” said Democratic Rep. Eric Swalwell. “The tea party is maybe repenting for years of neglecting poor hungry children or veterans. It does feel like we’re in a strange land right now.”

Rep. Keith Ellison, one of the most outspoken progressives in the House, said even the vote to fund WIC was an easy one for him to oppose.

“No, it’s not hard because I know it’s not going anywhere,” he said. “People in my district and districts all over this country know who is for food stamps, they know who is for WIC, they know who is for education. [Republicans] cannot switch their identity that miraculously. They wanted to cut $40 billion out of food stamps two weeks ago. They are trying to get Democrats on bad votes. The American public isn’t stupid.”

“I don’t think anyone buys that Democrats are the heartless ones in Washington,” said Rep. Joe Crowley, a member of the Democratic leadership in the House.

It’s an uphill strategy for the GOP, considering it was Republicans who set the government on the path to a shutdown when they first insisted that any bill to fund the government would have to also defund or delay Obamacare. There’s now no clear plan for an end game. As one Republican lawmaker told The Washington Examiner last week, “We’re not in a situation that has been planned out and war-gamed and plotted.”

But in the short term, the latest strategy has caused a few dozen Democrats to buck party leadership on the piecemeal bills, giving Republicans some bipartisan cover. It also prompted an unforced error by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid when he was asked about funding for cancer patients at a press conference. So far, the House has passed seven mini-funding bills, all of which Reid has said he won’t take up and the president has threatened to veto.

And talk to any Republican and you’ll get virtually the same message : We’ve done something to end the shutdown. They haven’t.

The exception to that pattern is a bill that guarantees furloughed workers will receive back-pay once the shutdown ends, which the president has signaled he will sign. A bill that guarantees pay for the troops was passed and signed into law before the government shutdown.

Democrats said Republicans’ strategy resemble the successful one the GOP employed during the sequester battle, during which progressives effectively caved. This time, they say, they won’t make the same mistake.

“Their strategy for sequester was to try and piecemeal it. They thought they could have their cake and eat it too. They are trying to have that same cake now with the shutdown,” said Democratic Rep. Steve Israel. “The sequester was damaging enough, but a shutdown of the entire government of the United States of America is a completely different matter. We’re not interested in continuing a game.”

The face-off will continue this week with the added pressure of a deadline for hitting the debt ceiling on Oct. 17. House Speaker John Boehner said on ABC this Sunday that the House doesn’t have enough votes to pass clean continuing resolution despite the fact that more than 20 Republican members have signaled they’d vote for one with House Democrats should the bill ever come to the floor.

“Let me issue him a friendly challenge. Put it on the floor Monday or Tuesday. I would bet there are the votes to pass it. We have just about every Democrat, 21 Republicans have publicly said they would. There are many more Republicans who have said that they privately would,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, who followed Boehner appearance on ABC. “So, Speaker Boehner, just vote. Put it on the floor and let’s see if you’re right.”

But if the last week was any indication, that’s not going to happen. Instead, the House will continue to take up the piecemeal bills: On Monday they’ll vote on one to keep the FDA running during the shutdown, and later in the week one that funds Head Start educational programs. Boehner has continued to insist that it is the president and Senate Democrats who are responsible for keeping the government closed because they refuse to negotiate.

“[I]t’s my way or the highway. That’s what he’s saying. Complete surrender and then we’ll talk to you,” Boehner said of Obama. “It’s about having a conversation. I gave the Senate majority leader some advice at the White House about how to proceed. I gave him some advice over a week ago about how to avert this. And yet they refuse to do it.”

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/katenocera/defiant-democrats-say-theyre-not-afraid-of-republicans-shutd

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta addressed same-sex partner benefits in a memorandum signed Monday, February 11, 2013.

WASHINGTON — The Department of Defense will be extending certain benefits to same-sex couples in the military, a move announced Monday in a memorandum by Secretary Leon Panetta — a final punctuation mark to the outgoing defense secretary’s tenure at the Pentagon.

“Our work must now expand to changing our policies and practices to ensure fairness and equal treatment and to taking care of all of our service members and their families, to the extent allowable by law,” Panetta wrote of the post-“don’t ask, don’t tell” military in the memo.

The Defense of Marriage Act prohibits the federal government recognizing same-sex couples’ marriages limits those benefits, but both the Pentagon and advocacy groups had identified several benefits that could be extended, from joint duty assignments for couples in which both partners are in the military to allowing servicemembers’ same-sex domestic partner to have a military identification card.

Although several such benefits were extended — from those two areas to benefits involving commissary privileges and family programs — neither on-base housing nor burial benefits were granted by today’s memo. Secretary Panetta said their issuance involved “complex legal and policy challenges” and would continue to be reviewed.

An implementation plan for the new benefits will be issued in the next 60 days, with the expansion of the benefits, per Panetta’s memo, to take effect sometime between August 31 and October 1.

President Obama, who has received some pressure on the issue, “welcomes the announcement by the Secretary of Defense that the Department will extend certain benefits to the same-sex partners and families of service members based on its thorough and deliberate review of this issue,” White House spokesman Shin Inouye told BuzzFeed. “This step will strengthen our military and help ensure that all our troops and their families are treated with fairness and equality.”

Sen. John McCain, who had opposed the repeal of the military’s ban on out gay service but had not continued his opposition since the change was implemented, reacted without fanfare or opposition to the benefits announcement Monday afternoon, saying only, “I respect their decision.”

Activists likewise hailed the decision. “Today, the Pentagon took a historic step forward toward righting the wrong of inequality in our armed forces, but there is still more work to be done,” Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin told BuzzFeed. “Gay and lesbian service members and their families make sacrifices every day, and this country owes them every measure of support we can provide. Since the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ the Obama administration has shown true leadership on this issue.”

The issue of same-sex partner benefits has been one of three main issues pushed by advocacy groups like OutServe-SLDN since the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in September 2011. The benefits issue, along with an explicit nondiscrimination policy and an end to the ban on out transgender service, were not addressed in the legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama in December 2010. Asked whether there was any plan to expand the nondiscrimination policy to include sexual orientation, a senior Defense Department official briefing the media Monday on background said there was no such plan.

Of today’s action, OutServe-SLDN executive director Allyson Robinson said, “Secretary Panetta’s decision today answers the call President Obama issued in his inaugural address to complete our nation’s journey toward equality, acknowledging the equal service and equal sacrifice of our gay and lesbian service members and their families. We thank him for getting us a few steps closer to full equality — steps that will substantively improve the quality of life of gay and lesbian military families.”

In recent months, a situation in which the same-sex wife of an Army officer was not allowed to join a spouses’ group that met at the Fort Bragg installation highlighted the ongoing issues with the military’s treatment of gay, lesbian, and bisexual servicemembers.

In addition to the benefits extended today, the advocacy group OutServe-SLDN has an ongoing lawsuit against the Pentagon and Department of Veterans Affairs challenging DOMA to the extent it limits military and veterans’ spousal benefits. Although the Obama administration has not been defending that lawsuit, the House Republican leadership has taken up the defense of DOMA in the case as it has in other challenges to the 1996 law.

As recently as Friday night, the government response to inquiries over the past year had been that “the Department of Defense is conducting a deliberative and comprehensive review of the availability of benefits, when legally permissible, to same-sex domestic partners of service members.”

While the Pentagon’s decision was historic, activists weren’t wasting any time calling for further action.

“Even today, the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act makes inequality for gay and lesbian military families a legal requirement. It’s time to right this wrong. When the Supreme Court considers the constitutionality of DOMA in the coming weeks … [it] should reflect on the sacrifice made by Americans like Staff Sergeant Tracy Johnson, whose wife was killed in action late last year, or the family of Chief Warrant Officer Charlie Morgan, who succumbed to cancer earlier this week,” Griffin said.

The ongoing Supreme Court challenge to the definition of “marriage” and “spouse” in DOMA also means that the groundwork that is the basis for the limits to this expansion could change by June, when the final Supreme Court decisions of the term are generally issued.

To that end, Panetta wrote in Monday’s memo, “In the event that the Defense of Marriage Act is no longer applicable to the Department of Defense, it will be the policy of the Department to construe the words ‘spouse’ and ‘marriage’ without regard to sexual orientation, and married couples, irrespective of sexual orientation, and their dependents, will be granted full military benefits.” The memo notes that, should that happen, the Pentagon will reassess whether to continue to allow “unmarried same-sex domestic partnerships” being the basis for eligibility of the benefits extended Monday.

Read more: http://buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/pentagon-announces-expansion-of-benefits-to-same-sex-couples