Advertising and marketing. Advertising is the practice and techniques employed to bring attention to a product or service. Advertising aims to put a product or service in the spotlight in hopes of drawing it attention from consumers
The cherry blossoms that bloom every spring on the Tidal Basin in Washington are world famous, but thousands of visitors also come to a nearby Maryland suburb to enjoy the pink and white flowers that usually bloom about a week later.
In Chevy Chase, Maryland, a small neighborhood called Kenwood also goes into full bloom with 1,200 Yoshino cherry trees that put on quite a show.
“It’s so romantic and they’re pink, which is one of my favorite colors,” said Mara Cai, a local resident who moved to the United States from China several years ago.
The delicate blossoms help showcase the manicured upscale homes, creating a pretty picture. Visitors stroll down the streets, enjoying the sea of flowers.
“It’s like walking through a fairyland,” Patrica Eng said. “There’s this incredible feeling of peace, and oneness with nature. I feel incredibly happy and content.”
First planted in 1920s
The first cherry trees in Kenwood were planted in the 1920s to promote the new neighborhood. As the area grew, so did the trees, with many more planted in the 1950s. Homeowners are responsible for the upkeep of the trees on their property.
When they bloom, a steady stream of tourists comes to Kenwood, which is considered one of the best places in the Washington area to enjoy the cherry blossoms.
“It’s a good time to spend with the family,” said Javier Ventura, who was in a little park admiring the flowers with his wife and baby girl. “The view is really nice.”
Cathy Searby stopped by for a nostalgic visit.
“I think it’s gorgeous,” she said. “I lived here 45 years ago for a couple of years, and I just moved back to Chevy Chase again, and I can’t remember ever seeing the cherry blossoms here look like this.”
Visitors from near and far
A number of the visitors are from different countries, especially Japan and China. Jill Fitzpatrick came from England to see the cherry blossoms for the first time.
“I just think it’s magnificent and I only wish I could live here,” she said and smiled.
The cherry blossoms only last up to a couple of weeks, and each day more petals fall to the ground. But for those who miss it, there’s always next year to see another spectacular display.
…
From: MeNeedIt
The cherry blossoms that bloom every spring on the Tidal Basin in Washington are world famous, but thousands of visitors also come to a nearby Maryland suburb to enjoy the pink and white flowers that usually bloom about a week later.
In Chevy Chase, Maryland, a small neighborhood called Kenwood also goes into full bloom with 1,200 Yoshino cherry trees that put on quite a show.
“It’s so romantic and they’re pink, which is one of my favorite colors,” said Mara Cai, a local resident who moved to the United States from China several years ago.
The delicate blossoms help showcase the manicured upscale homes, creating a pretty picture. Visitors stroll down the streets, enjoying the sea of flowers.
“It’s like walking through a fairyland,” Patrica Eng said. “There’s this incredible feeling of peace, and oneness with nature. I feel incredibly happy and content.”
First planted in 1920s
The first cherry trees in Kenwood were planted in the 1920s to promote the new neighborhood. As the area grew, so did the trees, with many more planted in the 1950s. Homeowners are responsible for the upkeep of the trees on their property.
When they bloom, a steady stream of tourists comes to Kenwood, which is considered one of the best places in the Washington area to enjoy the cherry blossoms.
“It’s a good time to spend with the family,” said Javier Ventura, who was in a little park admiring the flowers with his wife and baby girl. “The view is really nice.”
Cathy Searby stopped by for a nostalgic visit.
“I think it’s gorgeous,” she said. “I lived here 45 years ago for a couple of years, and I just moved back to Chevy Chase again, and I can’t remember ever seeing the cherry blossoms here look like this.”
Visitors from near and far
A number of the visitors are from different countries, especially Japan and China. Jill Fitzpatrick came from England to see the cherry blossoms for the first time.
“I just think it’s magnificent and I only wish I could live here,” she said and smiled.
The cherry blossoms only last up to a couple of weeks, and each day more petals fall to the ground. But for those who miss it, there’s always next year to see another spectacular display.
…
From: MeNeedIt
SpaceX launched its second supersized rocket and for the first time landed all three boosters Thursday, a year after sending up a sports car on the initial test flight.
The new and improved Falcon Heavy thundered into the early evening sky with a communication satellite called Arabsat, the rocket’s first paying customer. The Falcon Heavy is the most powerful rocket in use today, with 27 engines firing at liftoff — nine per booster.
Eight minutes after liftoff, SpaceX landed two of the first-stage boosters back at Cape Canaveral, side by side, just like it did for the rocket’s debut last year. The core booster landed two minutes later on an ocean platform hundreds of miles offshore. That’s the only part of the first mission that missed.
“What an amazing day,” a SpaceX flight commentator exclaimed. “Three for three boosters today on Falcon Heavy, what an amazing accomplishment.”
Launch from Apollo pad
The Falcon Heavy soared from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, using the same pad that shot Apollo astronauts to the moon a half-century ago and later space shuttle crews.
Prime viewing spots were packed with tourists and locals eager to catch not just the launch but the rare and dramatic return of twin boosters, accompanied by sonic booms. The roads were also jammed for Wednesday night’s launch attempt, which was scuttled by high wind.
Because this was an upgraded version of the rocket with unproven changes, SpaceX chief Elon Musk cautioned in advance things might go wrong. But everything went exceedingly well. SpaceX employees at company headquarters in Southern California cheered every launch milestone and especially the three touchdowns.
“The Falcons have landed,” Musk said in a tweet that included pictures of all three boosters.
Tesla Roadster still in orbit
Musk put his own Tesla convertible on last year’s demo. The red Roadster, with a mannequin, dubbed Starman, likely still at the wheel, remains in a solar orbit stretching just past Mars.
The Roadster is thought to be on the other side of the sun from us right now, about three-quarters of the way around its first solar orbit, said Jon Giorgini, a senior analyst at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
A couple dozen ground telescopes kept tabs on the car during its first several days in space, but it gradually faded from view as it headed out toward the orbit of Mars, Giorgini added.
The Roadster could still look much the same as it did for the Feb. 6, 2018, launch, just not as shiny with perhaps some chips and flakes from the extreme temperature swings, according to Giorgini. It will take decades if not centuries for solar radiation to cause it to decompose, he said.
Air Force mission next
SpaceX plans to launch its next Falcon Heavy later this year on a mission for the U.S. Air Force. The boosters for that flight may be recycled from this one.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine last month suggested possibly using a Falcon Heavy, and another company’s big rocket, to get the space agency’s Orion capsule around the moon, minus a crew, in 2020. But the preferred method remains NASA’s own Space Launch System mega rocket, if it can be ready by then.
Bridenstine said everything is on the space table as NASA strives to meet the White House’s goal of landing astronauts back on the moon by 2024.
NASA’s Saturn V rockets, used for the Apollo moon shots, are the all-time launch leaders so far in size and might.
SpaceX typically launches Falcon 9 rockets. The Falcon Heavy is essentially three of those single rockets strapped together.
Until SpaceX came along, boosters were discarded in the ocean after satellite launches. The company is intent on driving down launch costs by recycling rocket parts.
…
From: MeNeedIt
SpaceX launched its second supersized rocket and for the first time landed all three boosters Thursday, a year after sending up a sports car on the initial test flight.
The new and improved Falcon Heavy thundered into the early evening sky with a communication satellite called Arabsat, the rocket’s first paying customer. The Falcon Heavy is the most powerful rocket in use today, with 27 engines firing at liftoff — nine per booster.
Eight minutes after liftoff, SpaceX landed two of the first-stage boosters back at Cape Canaveral, side by side, just like it did for the rocket’s debut last year. The core booster landed two minutes later on an ocean platform hundreds of miles offshore. That’s the only part of the first mission that missed.
“What an amazing day,” a SpaceX flight commentator exclaimed. “Three for three boosters today on Falcon Heavy, what an amazing accomplishment.”
Launch from Apollo pad
The Falcon Heavy soared from NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, using the same pad that shot Apollo astronauts to the moon a half-century ago and later space shuttle crews.
Prime viewing spots were packed with tourists and locals eager to catch not just the launch but the rare and dramatic return of twin boosters, accompanied by sonic booms. The roads were also jammed for Wednesday night’s launch attempt, which was scuttled by high wind.
Because this was an upgraded version of the rocket with unproven changes, SpaceX chief Elon Musk cautioned in advance things might go wrong. But everything went exceedingly well. SpaceX employees at company headquarters in Southern California cheered every launch milestone and especially the three touchdowns.
“The Falcons have landed,” Musk said in a tweet that included pictures of all three boosters.
Tesla Roadster still in orbit
Musk put his own Tesla convertible on last year’s demo. The red Roadster, with a mannequin, dubbed Starman, likely still at the wheel, remains in a solar orbit stretching just past Mars.
The Roadster is thought to be on the other side of the sun from us right now, about three-quarters of the way around its first solar orbit, said Jon Giorgini, a senior analyst at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
A couple dozen ground telescopes kept tabs on the car during its first several days in space, but it gradually faded from view as it headed out toward the orbit of Mars, Giorgini added.
The Roadster could still look much the same as it did for the Feb. 6, 2018, launch, just not as shiny with perhaps some chips and flakes from the extreme temperature swings, according to Giorgini. It will take decades if not centuries for solar radiation to cause it to decompose, he said.
Air Force mission next
SpaceX plans to launch its next Falcon Heavy later this year on a mission for the U.S. Air Force. The boosters for that flight may be recycled from this one.
NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine last month suggested possibly using a Falcon Heavy, and another company’s big rocket, to get the space agency’s Orion capsule around the moon, minus a crew, in 2020. But the preferred method remains NASA’s own Space Launch System mega rocket, if it can be ready by then.
Bridenstine said everything is on the space table as NASA strives to meet the White House’s goal of landing astronauts back on the moon by 2024.
NASA’s Saturn V rockets, used for the Apollo moon shots, are the all-time launch leaders so far in size and might.
SpaceX typically launches Falcon 9 rockets. The Falcon Heavy is essentially three of those single rockets strapped together.
Until SpaceX came along, boosters were discarded in the ocean after satellite launches. The company is intent on driving down launch costs by recycling rocket parts.
…
From: MeNeedIt
Lin Feng contributed to this report
WASHINGTON — A senior official in the U.S. Department of State said Wednesday the security concerns the government has raised related to Chinese telecommunications firms Huawei and ZTE extend to all companies headquartered in China, saying they are effectively “under direction” of the Chinese Communist Party.
“It’s very important to distinguish how Western democracies operate relative to their private sector companies and vendors, and how the Chinese government operates with its companies,” Ambassador Robert L. Strayer, deputy assistant secretary for Cyber and International Communications and Information Policy, said during a conference call with reporters.
Chinese companies don’t have the ability to mount a legal challenge to directives from the government, he said.
“They don’t have the ability to go to court,” he said. “They’re basically under direction — what we call extra-judicial command — of the Communist Party of China … to take actions, when requested by the government. There’s not the same rule of law that we consider a part of our daily lives and all of our business dealings in Western democracies.”
Strayer has been the point person in the Trump administration’s effort to block Chinese firms, and Huawei in particular, from participating in the global rollout of 5G mobile communications technology, insisting that Chinese law requires the companies to cooperate with Beijing’s intelligence services.
Strayer and other officials have warned that Chinese telecommunications firms could give Beijing intelligence services secret “back-door” access to sensitive communications networks, or that in a crisis, they could disrupt communications on command.
His comments were among the administration’s most comprehensive justification for trying to block Huawei’s entry into the U.S. and European 5G markets.
The push has included warnings that the United States may restrict the kind of intelligence it shares, even with close allies, if Washington is not satisfied that communications networks are secure.
To this point, the U.S. has failed to produce hard evidence of Huawei or ZTE engaging in espionage for the Chinese government. However, both firms have been charged with theft of intellectual property from rival companies, and Huawei has been charged with conspiracy to violate U.S. sanctions against Iran.
Huawei and ZTE have consistently denied they ever have or will act as an arm of Chinese intelligence services.
Ren Zhengfei, Huawei’s 74-year-old founder and president, recently told the BBC that to do so would be economic suicide.
“Our sales revenues are now hundreds of billions of dollars,” he said. “We are not going to risk the disgust of our country and our customers all over the world because of something like that. We will lose all our business. I’m not going to take that risk.”
Samm Sacks, cybersecurity policy and China digital economy fellow at the New America Foundation, said, “The reality is the Communist Party of China uses the law selectively as an instrument as it sees fit.”
“What does worry me is this hypothetical situation of what Huawei would be employed to do by the Chinese government,” she told VOA. “I think we have to look at what Huawei as a commercial company needing to succeed in global markets have in its interest. And I’d say right now, it’s not in its interests to use those vulnerabilities. But that could change in another scenario.”
The U.S. effort so far has achieved only limited success in its efforts to get allies to impose blanket restrictions on the use of equipment made by Huawei and ZTE in cutting edge, high-speed, next-generation infrastructure. However, Strayer said that as countries around the world begin looking closely at the risks, he believes an eventual ban on the two firms’ products is inevitable.
He cited a recent analysis of Huawei equipment by government investigators in the United Kingdom, which found myriad security flaws and engineering deficiencies in devices meant to support the rollout of 5G in that country. In Germany, he said, a set of strict security standards under consideration would amount to a de facto ban on Chinese-made 5G equipment.
The proposed German standards would require that telecommunications systems “be sourced from trustworthy suppliers whose compliance with national security regulations and provisions for the secrecy of telecommunications and for data protection is assured.”
Given the legal requirement that Chinese companies assist the intelligence services —and keep that assistance secret — “It’s hard to see how Chinese technology would meet that standard for protection of data,” he said.
Strayer said the U.S. is encouraging all countries to consider similar regulations.
“We have encouraged countries to adopt risk-based security frameworks,” Strayer said. “And we think that a rigorous application of those frameworks, if they include supply chain security risk and the consideration of the relationship between a 5G vendor and their government, will lead, inevitably, to the banning of Huawei and ZTE.”
In his remarks Wednesday, Strayer focused on the issue of 5G infrastructure, but at times broadened his critique of Chinese government policies to encompass all firms based in China that deal with sensitive technology.
“We think it’s very important that countries deploying 5G networks consider the relationship between a foreign government, where a vendor is headquartered, and the companies themselves and that country,” he said. “When we look at the Chinese laws, relative to intelligence and national security, those allow the Chinese government to direct the actions of companies for their national interest of China, as well as require that companies to maintain secrecy, about the actions they’ve taken at the direction of the Chinese Communist Party.”
He also echoed a common complaint from Western countries that Chinese government policies provide advantages to domestic firms that give them an unfair competitive advantage when they move into international markets.
“The Chinese government, through state-owned banks and other sources, has provided in some cases zero percent interest, 20-year loan offers, which are not commercially reasonable,” he said. “That kind of unfair playing field is not one that Western technology should have to compete with. It should be a level playing field for technology vendors.”
In addition, he said, government-supported “cross subsidization” allows Chinese firms another avenue by which they can undercut the prices of Western firms.
“They can get large profits on what they sell into the Chinese market, which they largely have under their control through the government, and then use those subsidies to then offer lower prices in our markets in the West.”
From: MeNeedIt
Lin Feng contributed to this report
WASHINGTON — A senior official in the U.S. Department of State said Wednesday the security concerns the government has raised related to Chinese telecommunications firms Huawei and ZTE extend to all companies headquartered in China, saying they are effectively “under direction” of the Chinese Communist Party.
“It’s very important to distinguish how Western democracies operate relative to their private sector companies and vendors, and how the Chinese government operates with its companies,” Ambassador Robert L. Strayer, deputy assistant secretary for Cyber and International Communications and Information Policy, said during a conference call with reporters.
Chinese companies don’t have the ability to mount a legal challenge to directives from the government, he said.
“They don’t have the ability to go to court,” he said. “They’re basically under direction — what we call extra-judicial command — of the Communist Party of China … to take actions, when requested by the government. There’s not the same rule of law that we consider a part of our daily lives and all of our business dealings in Western democracies.”
Strayer has been the point person in the Trump administration’s effort to block Chinese firms, and Huawei in particular, from participating in the global rollout of 5G mobile communications technology, insisting that Chinese law requires the companies to cooperate with Beijing’s intelligence services.
Strayer and other officials have warned that Chinese telecommunications firms could give Beijing intelligence services secret “back-door” access to sensitive communications networks, or that in a crisis, they could disrupt communications on command.
His comments were among the administration’s most comprehensive justification for trying to block Huawei’s entry into the U.S. and European 5G markets.
The push has included warnings that the United States may restrict the kind of intelligence it shares, even with close allies, if Washington is not satisfied that communications networks are secure.
To this point, the U.S. has failed to produce hard evidence of Huawei or ZTE engaging in espionage for the Chinese government. However, both firms have been charged with theft of intellectual property from rival companies, and Huawei has been charged with conspiracy to violate U.S. sanctions against Iran.
Huawei and ZTE have consistently denied they ever have or will act as an arm of Chinese intelligence services.
Ren Zhengfei, Huawei’s 74-year-old founder and president, recently told the BBC that to do so would be economic suicide.
“Our sales revenues are now hundreds of billions of dollars,” he said. “We are not going to risk the disgust of our country and our customers all over the world because of something like that. We will lose all our business. I’m not going to take that risk.”
Samm Sacks, cybersecurity policy and China digital economy fellow at the New America Foundation, said, “The reality is the Communist Party of China uses the law selectively as an instrument as it sees fit.”
“What does worry me is this hypothetical situation of what Huawei would be employed to do by the Chinese government,” she told VOA. “I think we have to look at what Huawei as a commercial company needing to succeed in global markets have in its interest. And I’d say right now, it’s not in its interests to use those vulnerabilities. But that could change in another scenario.”
The U.S. effort so far has achieved only limited success in its efforts to get allies to impose blanket restrictions on the use of equipment made by Huawei and ZTE in cutting edge, high-speed, next-generation infrastructure. However, Strayer said that as countries around the world begin looking closely at the risks, he believes an eventual ban on the two firms’ products is inevitable.
He cited a recent analysis of Huawei equipment by government investigators in the United Kingdom, which found myriad security flaws and engineering deficiencies in devices meant to support the rollout of 5G in that country. In Germany, he said, a set of strict security standards under consideration would amount to a de facto ban on Chinese-made 5G equipment.
The proposed German standards would require that telecommunications systems “be sourced from trustworthy suppliers whose compliance with national security regulations and provisions for the secrecy of telecommunications and for data protection is assured.”
Given the legal requirement that Chinese companies assist the intelligence services —and keep that assistance secret — “It’s hard to see how Chinese technology would meet that standard for protection of data,” he said.
Strayer said the U.S. is encouraging all countries to consider similar regulations.
“We have encouraged countries to adopt risk-based security frameworks,” Strayer said. “And we think that a rigorous application of those frameworks, if they include supply chain security risk and the consideration of the relationship between a 5G vendor and their government, will lead, inevitably, to the banning of Huawei and ZTE.”
In his remarks Wednesday, Strayer focused on the issue of 5G infrastructure, but at times broadened his critique of Chinese government policies to encompass all firms based in China that deal with sensitive technology.
“We think it’s very important that countries deploying 5G networks consider the relationship between a foreign government, where a vendor is headquartered, and the companies themselves and that country,” he said. “When we look at the Chinese laws, relative to intelligence and national security, those allow the Chinese government to direct the actions of companies for their national interest of China, as well as require that companies to maintain secrecy, about the actions they’ve taken at the direction of the Chinese Communist Party.”
He also echoed a common complaint from Western countries that Chinese government policies provide advantages to domestic firms that give them an unfair competitive advantage when they move into international markets.
“The Chinese government, through state-owned banks and other sources, has provided in some cases zero percent interest, 20-year loan offers, which are not commercially reasonable,” he said. “That kind of unfair playing field is not one that Western technology should have to compete with. It should be a level playing field for technology vendors.”
In addition, he said, government-supported “cross subsidization” allows Chinese firms another avenue by which they can undercut the prices of Western firms.
“They can get large profits on what they sell into the Chinese market, which they largely have under their control through the government, and then use those subsidies to then offer lower prices in our markets in the West.”
From: MeNeedIt
The arched stone-built hall in Jerusalem venerated by Christians as the site of Jesus’ Last Supper has been digitally recreated by archaeologists using laser scanners and advanced photography.
The Cenacle, a popular site for pilgrims near Jerusalem’s walled Old City, has ancient, worn surfaces and poor illumination, hampering a study of its history.
So researchers from Israel’s Antiquities Authority and European research institutions used laser technology and advanced photographic techniques to create richly detailed three-dimensional models of the hall built in the Crusader era.
The project helped highlight obscure artwork and decipher some theological aspects of the second-floor room, built above what Jewish tradition says is the burial site of King David.
“We managed, in one of the… holiest places in Jerusalem, to use this technology and this is a breakthrough,” Amit Re’em, Jerusalem district archaeologist at the Israel Antiquities Authority, told Reuters of the project, which began in 2016.
Re’em pointed to reliefs of what he described as the symbols of the “Agnus Dei,” a lamb that is an emblem of Christ, and the “Lion of Judah” on keystones in the hall’s vaulted ceiling.
“It tells the story of this room,” Re’em said. “It delivers the message of the Last [Supper] Room, Christ as a Messiah, as victorious, as a victim — and the lion, the lion is a symbol of the Davidic dynasty. They combine together in this room.”
Some archaeologists have questioned whether the room is the actual venue of the Last Supper, the final meal which the New Testament says Jesus shared with disciples before his crucifixion.
Ilya Berkovich, a historian at the INZ research institute of the Austrian Academy of Sciences who worked on the project, said the endeavor opens “incredibly new horizons” with enormous potential.
From: MeNeedIt
Author Charles Van Doren, who will forever be associated with one of the biggest scandals in U.S. history, has died of natural causes at 93.
Van Doren was an obscure college professor in 1956 when he became a contestant on the television quiz show Twenty-One. The show offered big cash prizes for answering very difficult multipart questions.
During 14 weeks on Twenty-One, Van Doren defeated opponent after opponent, winning $129,000 before finally losing.
Tall, handsome and self-effacing, Van Doren became a national hero, appearing on magazine covers, television shows and radio programs, and receiving huge amounts of fan mail and even marriage proposals.
Rigged show
But what the audience did not know was that Twenty-One was a rigged show. Van Doren and nearly every other contestant were given the questions and answers ahead of each broadcast and coached on how to give answers in a hesitant and entertaining manner to build suspense and tension.
When the cheating was revealed in 1958, Van Doren strongly denied his appearances were scripted until he confessed all in a dramatic appearance before Congress, which was investigating the matter.
The humiliated and ashamed Van Doren was fired from his teaching job, dropped by the television networks, and became the punch line of jokes.
Van Doren and dozens of other contestants and producers were convicted of lying before a grand jury and were given suspended sentences.
Private life
Van Doren returned to private life, living in a small New England village, writing books and articles for the Encyclopedia Britannica, and refusing all interviews and big money to tell his story.
He never publicly talked about the scandal until the 1994 film Quiz Show put him back in an unwanted spotlight.
Van Doren finally broke his silence in a 2008 New Yorker magazine article, calling his participation in the TV fraud “foolish, naive, prideful and avaricious.”
…
From: MeNeedIt
Author Charles Van Doren, who will forever be associated with one of the biggest scandals in U.S. history, has died of natural causes at 93.
Van Doren was an obscure college professor in 1956 when he became a contestant on the television quiz show Twenty-One. The show offered big cash prizes for answering very difficult multipart questions.
During 14 weeks on Twenty-One, Van Doren defeated opponent after opponent, winning $129,000 before finally losing.
Tall, handsome and self-effacing, Van Doren became a national hero, appearing on magazine covers, television shows and radio programs, and receiving huge amounts of fan mail and even marriage proposals.
Rigged show
But what the audience did not know was that Twenty-One was a rigged show. Van Doren and nearly every other contestant were given the questions and answers ahead of each broadcast and coached on how to give answers in a hesitant and entertaining manner to build suspense and tension.
When the cheating was revealed in 1958, Van Doren strongly denied his appearances were scripted until he confessed all in a dramatic appearance before Congress, which was investigating the matter.
The humiliated and ashamed Van Doren was fired from his teaching job, dropped by the television networks, and became the punch line of jokes.
Van Doren and dozens of other contestants and producers were convicted of lying before a grand jury and were given suspended sentences.
Private life
Van Doren returned to private life, living in a small New England village, writing books and articles for the Encyclopedia Britannica, and refusing all interviews and big money to tell his story.
He never publicly talked about the scandal until the 1994 film Quiz Show put him back in an unwanted spotlight.
Van Doren finally broke his silence in a 2008 New Yorker magazine article, calling his participation in the TV fraud “foolish, naive, prideful and avaricious.”
…
From: MeNeedIt