Features

Bluster: Donald Trump’s War on Terror 

Peter Neumann 

UK: C. Hurst & Co.

Pp. 233

Peter Neumann has impeccable credentials for writing on his topic. Currently Professor of Securities Studies at the Department of War Studies, King’s College London, he was founding director of the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation. Hailing from Britain, he can be assumed to be above the fray of the US’s highly polarised political scene. His book builds on the debate about American counterterrorism that has raged since September 11, 2001, along two main lines: the projection of US power abroad, and America’s purported ideas and values. 

Given the dramatic change that Donald Trump’s ascent to the White House heralded, Neumann’s most surprising conclusion is that in terms of actual practice, his “War on Terror” is not fundamentally different from that of preceding presidents. This was not by design, however, but because Trump came to the presidency woefully unprepared, seemingly uninterested in informing himself about pertinent matters, and having failed to work out specific policies or acquire adequate staff to implement his campaign promises. While Trump’s counterterrorism doctrine can be summarised as “killing terrorists” and “keeping Muslims out of the country”, there were not enough qualified “true believers” he could appoint to carry out his ideas. Rather, military and national security officers inherited from previous administrations — “the generals” — have continued to do their jobs in much the same way they had been, based on experience. 

The real change wrought by Trump is his systematic conflation of terrorism, immigration, and Islam, resulting in the “Muslim travel ban”, the most significant policy application of his doctrine. This opened the controversy about American values, challenging the idea of America as an ethnically and religiously diverse nation of immigrants. Neumann contends that the ban had less to do with countering terrorism than with mobilising people’s fear “as part of an ideologically-driven effort to ‘break’ the mainstream consensus on immigration, and promote a different, less ‘exceptional’ and more aggressively nationalist idea of America—‘America First’” .(p. 8) 

“[N]one of Trump’s ideas on immigration were feasible or made Americans safer from terrorism. The reason was simple: immigration was not the main problem, and existing systems for vetting immigrants worked as well as they could.” (p. 75) 

To his credit, Neumann points out that the consensus on America as an ethnically and religiously diverse nation of immigrants is contrary to most of the country’s history. On the other hand, he states that neither Barak Obama nor George W. Bush linked terrorism with Islam, which is correct concerning Obama but not Bush 

Another striking difference is Trump’s “enthusiastic support for torture. Unlike Obama, who opposed torture as a matter of principle, and Bush, who defended it as a last resort, Trump embraced torture as a form of ‘payback’ and punishment”. (p. 19) 

Neumann traces Trump’s evolution from his time as a real estate dealer and reality TV star in the 1980s. While his insistence on presenting America as a nation being taken advantage of and 

his suspicion of international cooperation were there from the start, his open hostility toward Muslims began only in 2011, when he hooked up with racist ideologue Steve Bannon and the “birther movement” which contended, without evidence, that Obama was a Muslim and not born in the US. Neumann sees Trump’s core beliefs as harking back to Andrew Jackson, US President from 1829-1837, who advocated bold military aggression to solve conflicts, and was reluctant to engage with the outside world and suspicious of outsiders. 

On this background, Neumann analyses Trump’s campaign strategy that was based on outrage and fear, his relation with the media, and his difficulties in staffing his administration with competent “true believers”, leading him to rely on “know-nothings” like his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and fringe groups like the far-right Centre for Security Policy, which, inter alia, had promoted the idea that the Obama Administration was infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood. 

The book covers the imposition and repercussions of the “Muslim ban”, changes in the rules of engagement for military operations in a more aggressive direction with less concern about harming civilians, the campaign against ISIS, marginalisation of the State Department, erratic decisions that were soon contradicted, enhanced relations with “strongman” regimes, and on the domestic scene, empowering the far-right and hate crimes, and alienating Muslim communities. 

The book concludes that Trump’s policies have not made Americans or the world safer due to their corrosive effects on allies, and the fact that his rhetoric and the actions he advocates call into question American values and thus feed directly into jihadists’ propaganda. “Far from promoting stability, Trump’s foreign policy has resulted in a vacuum of global leadership and greater opportunities for terrorist groups to gain support, take advantage of violent conflicts, and find safe havens… While much of his War on Terror has been bluster, its effect has been to leave Americans and the world more exposed to terrorist threats.” (pp. 115, 158)

However, in Neumann’s view, the greatest risk posed by Trump’s leadership is that it could draw the US into a direct military confrontation with Iran. The events of the past week make this risk dangerously evident.

LOS ANGELES — Hollywood’s biggest stars gather on Sunday for the glitzy Golden Globes, the first major awards show of a packed season that looks set to mark Netflix’s coming-of-age in Tinseltown.

The celebrity-filled gala in Beverly Hills is billed as the most raucous event in the showbiz calendar, where success helps create buzz ahead of next month’s Oscars.

Netflix garnered an overwhelming 34 Globe nominations across film and television categories, and is the hot favourite to win several major gongs at the champagne-soaked ceremony.

The streaming giant has two frontrunners for the night’s top film prize, best drama — Martin Scorsese’s gangster epic “The Irishman” and heart-wrenching divorce saga “Marriage Story”.

“They are having a really good year,” Variety awards editor Tim Gray told AFP, noting Netflix has “five or six” heavyweight films this season, up from just “Roma” last time around. “I think they’ll do well.”

Netflix only began producing original movies in 2015, but has spent billions to lure the industry’s top filmmaking talent and fund lavish awards season campaigns.

The firm’s Vatican drama “The Two Popes” has four nods, while Eddie Murphy is the favourite to win best comedy actor for the streaming giant’s blaxploitation biopic “Dolomite Is My Name”.

Murphy, making a comeback to the awards circuit, is among a plethora of A-listers enthusiastically campaigning throughout the busy season.

The Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s (HFPA) 90-odd members, who vote for the Globe winners, are a priority stop for every serious contender. Last year, they correctly picked the Oscar winner in every film category except for best musical score.

“They don’t generally miss more than one, maybe two” Academy Award winners, said Chris Beachum, of awards prediction website GoldDerby. 

Oscar nominations voting ends Tuesday, two days after the Globes.

Ricky Gervais back again

British comedian Ricky Gervais returns for a record fifth time to host the ceremony, where his provocative barbs have both riled and delighted Hollywood stars in previous years.

Gervais has promised it will be “the very last time” he hosts.

While several film categories are too close to call, Quentin Tarantino’s “Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood” is tipped to take home the prize for best comedy, according to GoldDerby.

Brad Pitt is also a clear frontrunner for his supporting turn in the 1960s Hollywood pastiche, set against the backdrop of the Manson cult murders.

Joaquin Phoenix is leading a crowded drama field for his radical turn in dark comic book tale “Joker”, while Renee Zellweger is angling hard for the best actress gong with Judy Garland biopic “Judy”.

Newcomer Apple will be hoping to make waves in the television categories, where its #MeToo drama “The Morning Show” has multiple nominations. 

But it must fend off Netflix’s flagship “The Crown”, boasting a new cast led by Oscar winner Olivia Colman.

And early signs suggest a breakthrough year for Asian filmmaking.

Asian-American actress Awkwafina is seen as a shoo-in for best actress in family tragicomedy “The Farewell”, while South Korean black comedy “Parasite” is expected to bag the award for best foreign language film.

Bong Joon-ho, the filmmaker behind “Parasite”, goes head-to-head with Hollywood heavyweights Tarantino and Scorsese in the best director category. 

‘Good year’ for films

But the HFPA drew stinging criticism for its failure to nominate any female directors. The surprise omission of Greta Gerwig (“Little Women”) was particularly notable.

“Of course, I’m disappointed. I love the film that we made,” Gerwig told AFP last month.

“There are so many beautiful films made by women this year,” she said, but added that the overall low number of female-helmed movies was “dreadful” for the industry.

HFPA president Lorenzo Soria defended the all-male list, telling Variety that members of his organization “don’t vote by gender” but “by film and accomplishment”.

Gray agreed the director nominations list remains “pretty good,” with Sam Mendes (“1917”) and Todd Phillips (“Joker”) rounding off the slots.

“All the directors who were nominated deserve it,” he said. “It’s not a simple case of prejudice against women directors.”

He added: “It’s just a good year — every category is overcrowded.”

By Andrew Marszal and Javier Tovar

PARIS — A computer programme can identify breast cancer from routine scans with greater accuracy than human experts, researchers said in what they hoped could prove a breakthrough in the fight against the global killer. 

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in women, with more than 2 million new diagnoses last year alone.

Regular screening is vital in detecting the earliest signs of the disease in patients who show no obvious symptoms. 

In Britain, women over 50 are advised to get a mammogramme every three years, the results of which are analysed by two independent experts. 

But interpreting the scans leaves room for error, and a small percentage of all mammogrammes either return a false positive — misdiagnosing a healthy patient as having cancer — or false negative — missing the disease as it spreads.

Now researchers at Google Health have trained an artificial intelligence model to detect cancer in breast scans from thousands of women in Britain and the United States.

The images had already been reviewed by doctors in real life but unlike in a clinical setting, the machine had no patient history to inform its diagnoses.

The team found that their AI model could predict breast cancer from the scans with a similar accuracy level to expert radiographers. 

Further, the AI showed a reduction in the proportion of cases where cancer was incorrectly identified — 5.7 per cent in the US and 1.2 per cent in Britain, respectively.

It also reduced the percentage of missed diagnoses by 9.4 per cent among US patients and by 2.7 per cent in Britain. 

"The earlier you identify a breast cancer the better it is for the patient," Dominic King, UK lead at Google Health, told AFP. 

"We think about this technology in a way that supports and enables an expert, or a patient ultimately, to get the best outcome from whatever diagnostics they've had."

Computer 'second opinion' 

In Britain all mammograms are reviewed by two radiologists, a necessary but labour-intensive process. 

The team at Google Health also conducted experiments comparing the computer's decision with that of the first human scan reader. 

If the two diagnoses agreed, the case was marked as resolved. Only with discordant outcomes was the machine then asked to compare with the second reader's decision. 

The study by King and his team, published in Nature, showed that using AI to verify the first human expert reviewer's diagnosis could save up to 88 per cent of the workload for the second clinician. 

"Find me a country where you can find a nurse or doctor that isn't busy," said King. 

"There's the opportunity for this technology to support the existing excellent service of the [human] reviewers."

Ken Young, a doctor who manages mammogramme collection for Cancer Research UK, contributed to the study.

He said it was unique for its use of real-life diagnosis scenarios from nearly 30,000 scans.

"We have a sample that is representative of all the women that might come through breast screening," he said. 

"It includes easy cases, difficult cases and everything in between." 

The team said further research was needed but they hoped that the technology could one day act as a "second opinion" for cancer diagnoses.

By Patrick Galey

When a new version of a major operating software system (OS) such as for example Windows or Android is released, is it better to keep the computer or the mobile device you have and do the upgrade to the new OS, or to make a bolder move altogether and to buy a newer device especially designed for the new OS and that has it already installed from the onset?

The question may seem simple but it is not.

For example, if yours is a Samsung Galaxy S8 smartphone running under Android 9 system, chances are you cannot upgrade it to Android 10, the company’s newest version and that was released last September. On the other hand newer models of the phone can.

When Microsoft Windows 10 was first released in 2015 the company smartly provided a way to “inspect and analyse” your computer to tell if it was able technically speaking to take the new system; that is to move up from Windows 7 to Windows 10. In many instances the analysis worked flawlessly and the upgrade report by Microsoft would provide you with the correct decision: your computer can be upgraded to Win10, or it cannot.

Unfortunately there were also countless instances where the report was inaccurate or incomplete. Which meant that your computer would be upgraded to Windows 10 alright, but some “minor” functions would not work anymore or would stop working as they should. For instance this old scanner you loved and used for years under Windows 7 would not be compatible with Windows 10 and would not function anymore — without any previous warning.

In other cases it is the WiFi adapter that would not work at all. In the “least bad” case everything would work but slower than expected and even slower than before the upgrade, making you regret the move. Examples like these abound.

Depending on the OS and on the hardware, you were sometimes given the possibility to roll back to the previous state if you were not happy with the upgrade. This was mainly available with computers but rarely with smartphones and tablets.

So basically you are left with the following choice: to go for the upgrade keeping your fingers crossed and to see what happens, or to buy the most recent model of the hardware, be it a mobile device or a computer. The second option, understandably, entails continuous expense — not always a comfortable choice, though…

The fact is despite apparent additional expense, buying the latest hardware has proven to be cost-effective in the end, for most of us. Just like many of the expenses we usually incur, spending on technology also involves knowing what the real cost of things is, not at the precise moment of course but over a period of say five years or so.

The reason is that features and functionalities of equipment and software evolve continuously; they all move up at the same time, often in a parallel pattern.

So if you acquire a new Android smartphone because you want to be able to use Android OS 10 fully, you would at the same time benefit from a set of advantages that come with it too: Faster processor, better camera, extended digital storage, and so forth.

Some would argue —rightly so — that it is still more money spent in the end, regardless of how you do your actual costing and accounting. Life with technology has been like that since the early 1980s, making you always spend more money on it, just to keep up the pace.

LOS ANGELES — “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker” stayed on a strong glide path in north American theatres, taking in an estimated $73.6 million for the three-day weekend, industry watcher Exhibitor Relations reported Sunday.

The Disney film, marketed as a grand finale of the nine-film “Skywalker Saga”, has had mixed reviews and was down considerably from last weekend’s lofty $177.4 million opening.

But it has compiled a strong domestic total of $364.5 million.

It again maintained a big lead over the No. 2 film, Sony’s “Jumanji: The Next Level”, an action sequel starring Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson and Kevin Hart, which had $34.4 million in North American ticket sales for the Friday-through-Sunday period.

In third for the second straight week was Disney’s “Frozen II”, at $17 million. The animated musical film has Broadway star Idina Menzel voicing Queen Elsa in her latest adventures.

Louisa May Alcott’s classic novel “Little Women” has been brought to the screen many times — no fewer than seven, by Variety’s count — but the new version from director Greta Gerwig has drawn strong reviews and netted $16.2 million to place fourth in its debut this weekend.

The film stars Saoirse Ronan, Florence Pugh, Timothee Chalamet, Emma Watson and Laura Dern, in the story of the joys and struggles of four sisters during the US Civil War.

In fifth was new Fox/Disney release “Spies in Disguise”, at $13.4 million. The animated children’s film features the voices of Will Smith and Tom Holland.

Rounding out the top 10 were “Knives Out” ($9.9 million), “Uncut Gems” ($9.4 million), “Bombshell” ($4.8 million), “Cats” ($4.8 million) and “Richard Jewell” ($3 million).

Specifically designed with developing markets in mind, where car ownership rates are broadly on the rise in recent times, the Citroen C-Elysee is a sensible and rugged, but stylish and comfortable car intended to take on Korean and Japanese C-segment players that have somewhat displaced European manufacturers in such markets. A sister model to the Peugeot 301, on which it is based, the C-Elysee is another face in the PSA Groupe’s rivalry with fellow French brand Renault and its Logan model in reclaiming its share in developing markets.

Common sense design

Built with common sense engineering and packaging that Citroen needs in such markets being firmly at the forefront of its development, the C-Elysee’s design is, however, more stylishly upmarket and stands out from much of its rivals in a competitively cutthroat segment. Untypically elegant and with a sense of character the its design, the C-Elysee’s market profile and presence was pushed along with its entry in touring car racing when initially launched back in 2013. More recently it received a mid-life face-lift that includes a spruced up design revision, improved infotainment system and a new automatic gearbox.

Revised for the 2017 model year onwards, the C-Elysee’s most noticeable visual changes include its new headlights and grille, with the central Citroen double chevron emblem extending into twin grille slats and trailing off into lighting elements. With squinty headlights and heavily defined, creased and bulging bonnet, strong side character line and sweeping roofline, the C-Elysee has a modern and assertive presence. Its proportions and high boot allow for generous in-segment rear legspace, decent rear headroom, spacious front seating and voluminous 506-litre minimum luggage capacity, while all-round visibility is for the most part good.

Cost-effective engineering

Designed with comfort, sensibility and cost-effective construction, purchase and running costs, the C-Elysee uses modestly sized 195/60R16 tyres, which well-fill its wheel-arches, but also prove durable and supple on rough road surfaces, and aid steering feel and precision on winding roads. Its restrained 1185kg weight meanwhile allows for effective and cost-efficient ventilated front and drum rear brakes. With generous 139mm ground clearance, a light weight and forgiving suspension, the C-Elysee is well suited for the developing markets it is intended, and is comfortable for long journeys and rugged roads, and is easy to drive, park and live with.

Built to be effective and attainable, the C-Elysee 1.6 VTi is particularly well-suited for developing markets in its use of a tried and tested 1.6-litre 16-valve DOHC conventional multi-point injection engine, instead of newer, pricier and more sensitive direct injection and turbo technology. Durable, smooth, fuel efficient, clean and Euro 5 compliant, it returns 7.3l/100km fuel efficiency and 168g/km CO2 emissions on the combined cycle automatic gearbox guise. Developing 113BHP at 6,050rpm and 111lb/ft at 4,000rpm, the C-Elysee 1.6 VTi offers progressive and smooth delivery, and a good mixture of economy and power.

Confidence and control

More confident and more refined than the base 1.2 litre three-cylinder version but slightly slower and thirstier than the 1.6 litre manual version, the C-Elysee 1.6 VTi nevertheless returns decent performance including 10.8-second 0-100km/h acceleration and a 188km/h top speed. Gaining a 6-speed automatic gearbox in polace of the outgoing 4-speed, the revised C-Elysee benefits from a better range of ratios for improved low- and mid-range flexibility, top-end refinement and real world efficiency.

A generally better, smoother and more consistent driving experience, the C-Elysee’s new gearbox reduces the need to rev or kickdown gears aggressively in more demanding situations.

Shifting gears smoothly and swiftly for a value-oriented small family saloon the C-Elysee meanwhile walks a fine dynamic line between stability and responsiveness, and comfort and handling. Finding a happy medium for most occasions the C-Elysee is refined and reassuring on fast highways and sweeping bends, and is agile and maneuverable with good visibility in the city and on winding B-roads.

The C-Elysee’s steering wheel also finds a happy compromise between high speed damping, lightness in town and decent feel, feedback and speed, including 3.15-turns lock-to-lock, the light and agile the C-Elysee turns in tidily.

Comfortable and affordable

Comparatively eager into corners with decent body control and good grip, the C-Elysee’s steering gives a good impression of road surface, grip limit and position. A supple riding car designed for less-than-perfect roads and family use, it comfortably dispatches lumps and bumps, while body roll is well controlled and not too pronounced through corners. Settled over crests and dips with good vertical control, the C-Elysee well irons out and fluently rides over road imperfections, but more so, its decent ride clearance allows it to confidently traverse developing nations’ sometimes rutted, broken, unpaved and dirt roads.

Classy for a value-oriented car in look and feel, the C-Elysee’s layouts are meanwhile intuitive and user-friendly. With decent quality plastics and textures in prominent places, including its gear lever, dials and sporty contoured steering wheel, the C-Elysee’s cost-cutting components are, however, more discreet, and include cost-effective centre console electric window buttons.

With good standard and optional equipment levels for a rugged everyman’s car likely to be used hard as a first new family car in less than perfect conditions, the C-Elysee features highly effective heating and air conditioning and now includes an Android Auto and Apple Carplay enabled infotainment system.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

Engine: 1.6-litre, 16-valve DOHC, transverse 4-cylinders 

Bore x stroke: 78.5 x 82mm

Compression ratio: 11:1

Gearbox: 6-speed auto, front-wheel-drive

Power, BHP (PS) [kW]: 113.5 (115) [85] @6,050rpm

Specific power: 71.5BHP/litre

Torque, lb/ft (Nm): 111 (150) @4,000rpm

Specific torque: 94.5 Nm/litre

0-100km/h: 10.8-seconds

Standing km: 32.3-seconds

Top speed: 188km/h

CO2 emissions: 168g/km

Fuel consumption, urban/extra-urban/combined: 10-/ 5.6-/ 7.3-litres/100km

Fuel capacity: 50-litres

Height: 1,466mm

Width: 1,748mm

Length: 4,442mm

Wheelbase: 2,652mm

Tread, F/R: 1,501/1,478mm

Overhang, F/R: 800/967mm

Ground clearance: 139mm

Aerodynamic drag coefficient: 0.32

Luggage volume: 506-litres

Kerb weight: 1,185kg (estimate)

Suspension, F/R: MacPherson struts/torsion beam

Steering: Electric-assisted rack and pinion

Turning circle: 10.7-metres

Lock-to-lock: 3.15-turns

Brakes, F/R: Ventilated discs/drums

Tyres: 195/55R16

By Ibrahim Mango

Life Coach and Positive Psychologist

Wouldn’t you love to undo the effects of negative emotions? What about decreasing stress and improving your wellbeing overall? The key is cultivating positive emotions.

I recently covered the Five Pillars of well-being according to Positive Psychology (Positive emotions, engagement, Relationships, meaning and achievement). Here, I dig deeper into the first pillar: positive emotions. Emotions like fear, anger, disgust and guilt are unpleasant and discouraging but in the right context, they are normal and serve a purpose. Meanwhile, positive emotions such as joy, serenity, curiosity and love are pleasurable and inspiring. While perhaps we might prefer to experience only positive emotions, it is neither possible nor healthy to eliminate negative emotions as they serve two goals: 

• Without their contrast to positive emotions, we will not be able to enjoy positive emotions 

• Negative emotions stimulate our survival instinct in the face of danger and can help us survive by triggering the fight or flight response

Fight or flight response

When we experience a dangerous situation such as being attacked, our brain takes over automatically, without conscious thinking on our part and triggers the negative emotion of fear. This prepares us for the fight or flight response (fight refers to confronting and fighting the attacker while flight refers to running away from the threat), which is accompanied by increased stress in the body. Our thinking and actions become more instinctive and automatic while we become less creative and the scope of thoughts and actions available to us becomes more limited.

Unfortunately, our brain cannot differentiate between a real threat and an imaginary danger. So, when we are at a job interview, giving a speech or preparing for an exam, we might still react to a perceived threat in the same way as we would to a real threat. Our negative emotion of fear gets triggered automatically, preparing us for the fight or flight response while we undergo a surge of stress in our body. As in the case of a real threat, our creativity is diminished by constricting the range of our thoughts and actions and, therefore, negatively affecting our performance. The release of stress hormones into the body is likely to also cause a series of health problems in the long run. So, learning to manage these stressful situations is vital. 

Positive emotions

Positive emotions do not help us survive in the face of threatening situations like negative emotions do, but they do change the biochemistry of our bodies. Positive emotions widen our awareness and extend the range of our actions and thoughts while increasing creativity, fuelling personal growth and enabling skill acquisition. Here are some of the most common positive emotions and their benefits: 

• Joy encourages us to become playful (physically, socially, artistically, intellectually), increasing our creative and intellectual skills 

• Interest (curiosity) stimulates us to explore and learn and increase our knowledge, leading to personal growth and future creativity 

• Contentment (serenity) comes when we feel safe and are required to exert little effort. Feeling contentment allows for our positive life circumstances and successes to be combined and solidified into our self-image, promoting self-growth 

• Love of all kinds (romantic, caregiver, friendship) builds social bonds which are not merely satisfying but can also be the source of future social support

Other benefits of positive emotions include undoing the effects of negative emotions and improving physical and psychological wellbeing, as well as boosting resilience (the ability to bounce back after a setback). 

How to cultivate positive emotions

• Keeping a gratitude journal: At the end of the day, list three things you are grateful for or that went well for you 

• Cultivating mindfulness: Mindfulness is experiencing the present moment without judgement. Meditation, prayer, yoga or breathing exercises are examples

• Reframing negative events: We are usually disturbed by our perceptions of an event rather than the event itself. Reframing means finding our thinking bias and seeing the negatively perceived event with fresh objective eyes and accordingly removing the negative emotional sting

• Being kind: Performing random acts of kindness, such as volunteering or as simple as holding the door open for a stranger can increase positive emotions

Takeaway message

Negative emotions restrict our awareness and our range of thinking and behaving by giving precedence to automatic and instinctual thinking and acting patterns which reduce creativity and increase stress.

Meanwhile, positive emotions expand our awareness, extend the range of how we think and perform, encourage creativity and build valuable resources.

Let’s set out to cultivate our positive emotions and reap their benefits while we learn how to manage our negative emotions appropriately.

Making this a daily practice will help us lead a balanced and flourishing life.

Reprinted with permission from Family Flavours magazine

When people ask me what I’ve learned most about retirement in my years covering the subject as a journalist, I typically deadpan a one-word answer: Don’t.

For both financial and health reasons, delaying retirement by even a year or two beyond the original plan can make a big difference.

A new survey takes the idea a step further, contemplating a world in which the traditional concept of retirement pretty much disappears.

The “Unretirement Survey” of people aged 40 to 79 found that a majority of adults plan to work in some capacity for pay after retirement, and more than half of those say they have or would consider working until they die.

“I wouldn’t say retirement has been [completely] eliminated, but it has evolved,” said Christine Russell, senior manager of retirement and annuities for TD Ameritrade, the investment firm that commissioned the Harris Poll survey of 2,000 adults. “There is now a stage of personalisation where people make it what they want it to be.”

Of course, plenty of other studies have shown that even workers who planned to stay on the job past traditional retirement age often get derailed by age discrimination, ill health or family obligations.

But if the gold watch party never comes for us, we’re really just leaving one job and moving to the next when a longtime position ends. So, what does that mean for how we execute the departure? How much notice should the unretiring retiree give? Too little and they leave co-workers in a bind. Too much and they’re the lame duck who stayed too long.

And once we leave, how should we announce it to the world? Every person’s context will vary, but it’s clearly becoming an important piece of the retirement thought process.

“It’s an interesting question, because particularly if you want to stay with a company and try a new role or work part time, you need to start those discussions well in advance,” Russell said. It’s the same with the financial part of the retirement equation, she said. It could take some time to smoothly shift a savings portfolio from being invested for the long term to one that’s positioned to kick off income.

Perhaps the mindset that we’ll be working longer is already creeping into our mental retirement math. Releasing data this month about its retirement account customers, Fidelity Investments noted that nearly 40 per cent of baby boomers (born from 1946 to 1964) were invested too heavily in stocks in the third quarter.

“Fidelity’s Q3 analysis found that many 401[k] account holders had stock allocations higher than those recommended for their age group,” the company said in a statement. Much of that is likely due to inertia, with savers allowing the effects of a long bull market to overweight stocks in their retirement funds.

It’s also a recognition, perhaps, that if we can still earn a paycheck, we may be able to weather more volatility in our retirement accounts.

Writing in a blogpost under the headline “Retired but not dead — your LinkedIn profile is not your obituary,” technical writer Wayne Yoshida urged people not to use the word “retired” under their names on the social media platform.

Just as people wouldn’t use the word “unemployed” in that space, there are always more interesting ways to describe anyone’s current pursuits, he said.

In a follow-up conversation, Yoshida said he’s still working, a decade now past his original intention to retire at 50. He says what works for him in staying “unretired” — whether it’s for financial or mental health reasons — is developing a strong personal brand via social media.

“These are the folks who will enjoy companies reaching out to them for opportunities,” he said. “Kinda neat to be the hunted rather than the hunter when it comes to employment.”

By Janet Kidd Stewart 

WhatsApp, text or e-mail — which is the most secure option when your conversation really has to be locked down?

The recent private-messages-going-public news with Congress scouring the messages obtained from diplomats as part of its impeachment inquiry again has private exchanges top of mind and offers a good jumping-off point to discuss what options you have with the tools you use most.

There are varying degrees of privacy or protection among the chat and communication platforms. Ultimately, there are precautions you can take.

Encryption, says Apple on its website, is used to protect trillions of online transactions every day, for shopping, paying bills and communicating with programs like its own iMessage or FaceTime, or Facebook’s Whatsapp. Encryption, says Apple, “turns your data into indecipherable text”.

And this has been a hot topic in Washington. Attorney General William Barr wrote to Facebook, asking it to change its encryption policy for Whatsapp.

“We must find a way to balance the need to secure data with public safety and the need for law enforcement to access the information they need to safeguard the public, investigate crimes, and prevent future criminal activity,” Barr said.

Facebook opposes Barr’s request.

Meanwhile, how to encrypt your communication?

Start with e-mail

Messages written via popular web programs like Google’s Gmail, Microsoft’s free version of Outlook or Yahoo Mail are not encrypted by default, nor is government or corporate e-mail. (There are ways to send encrypted Gmail, but only to other Gmail users, via a third party plug-in.) The free webmail programmes are both easy to track, both by subpoena and by the companies offering the free tools, says Micah Lee, director of information security for the Intercept website. “E-mail is the easiest to spy on,” he says.

That said, there are a handful of startups offering encrypted e-mail, including Switzerland-based Proton, while Microsoft offers the ability to encrypt Outlook (for paying subscribers), but it’s complicated. You essentially turn it into gibberish and send a “digital key” to the recipient to unlock it and make it readable.

Secure phone text messages

“But you shouldn’t use a company device,” says Lee. “Many of these have corporate spyware and can take screenshots of what you’re doing. Only use your personal phone.”

If your personal phone is a Samsung, it offers a feature to encrypt data after it’s been generated and have it stored on an external SD card for Galaxy phones. To use this feature for text messages, download the Messages app for Android and move them there. Know that once you encrypt the data, you’re able to decrypt the data only on the same device. Samsung notes that you won’t be able to read it anywhere else.

Additionally, the iPhone has a feature that can prevent outside forces like law enforcement or the government from using a USB device to tap into your phone and grab your unencrypted data. Go to Settings, Touch ID & Passcode, and scroll to the bottom for USB Accessories, to click off and prevent USB accessories from connecting when the iPhone has been locked for more than an hour.

SMS text messages on your phone

Texts sent on the iPhone, the most used digital device in the United States, to another iPhone, are encrypted, and thus, wouldn’t be able to be read without decoding, according to Apple. The company says text messages stored on its iCloud service will be encrypted as well, as long as the user has opted in for two-factor authentication sign-ins. Note that if the person on the other end doesn’t have an iPhone, the message is no longer encrypted. (Android phones don’t encrypt SMS messages by default, says Lee, but as we noted, backing them to an external card and opt to encrypt the data manually.)

Encrypted chat apps

Signal, Wire, Rakuten Viber and Whatsapp are popular apps to look to for secure encrypted written and spoken conversations. Yes, the same Whatsapp that’s owned by Facebook, the company that’s apologized many times for security breaches.

Because Whatsapp is the most popular chat programme in the world, used by over 1 billion users, the odds are high that the person you want to speak to currently uses it. That’s a huge bonus for being able to communicate freely and privately, says Lee. And it makes a big deal on its website about how messages are encrypted and not read by company officials.

However, Facebook does have access to your metadata and can determine who you spoke to and when, adds Lee.

—The app Signal does not have Facebook ownership issues and is considered the go-to app for the most secure form of communication. Even Edward Snowden, the former US whistleblower who has been hiding in Russia since 2013, offers a testimonial on Signal’s home page.

“Signal messages and calls are always end-to-end encrypted and painstakingly engineered to keep your communication safe,” the company says. “We can’t read your messages or see your calls, and no one else can either.”

Signal says it doesn’t accept advertising and is supported by grants and donations.

—Germany-based Wire says it provides the “strongest security” for organisations and their workers, but it’s not free, starting at around $6.50 monthly. “End-to-end encryption gives you the confidence to talk, message, and share across teams and with clients, through a single app that’s available on all of your devices,” the company says.

—Rakuten Viber, based in Japan, points out on its website that it offers a “Secret Chats” feature that lets users set a self-destruct timer, so just like on “Mission: Impossible” or SnapChat, after the message is read, “it is automatically deleted from the Viber chat”.

Facebook Messenger

These messages are not encrypted by default, but they can be. Facebook offers a feature called “Secret Conversation” for private chatting, but both sides have to turn it on for it to work. (Click the word “Secret” at the top right side of the screen on iPhone or the lock icon in the same place on Android.)

Authenticity can be proven during the conversation by both sides checking their digital ID keys (stored under the person’s names) and making sure they match.

But privacy is in the eye of the beholder, as the person on the other end of this encrypted conversation can easily make a screenshot and share it with the world.

Still, Facebook says the messages are intended “just for you and the other person — not anyone else, including us”.

Meanwhile, Lee understands why the diplomats may have opted for texting. “It’s quicker and more convenient. Who wants to wait for the e-mail to arrive?”

By Jefferson Graham

A few days ago, I heard a young father telling his son — who was probably around 10 or 11 — to “man up”. I started thinking about that phrase and wondered about all the gender stereotyping we do without even realising it. Are expressions like “man up” harmless parts of our language or do they make a difference?

There’s no question that we use a lot of gender stereotypes in our everyday speech, most of the time without realising it. Sometimes even the most gender-neutral phrases carry a strong stereotyped message. In most cases, the words are harmless, but other times they’re dangerous.

Take, for example, the word “behave” as it’s often used in schools. For decades, we’ve been telling boys in classrooms that they should “behave” properly: sit still and be quiet — behaviour that’s strongly associated with girls. Unfortunately, that’s not the way boys learn best. Boys get the message that girls’ behaviour is “right”, and that there’s something wrong with boys’ behaviour. Parents are told that their sons have ADHD, and they rush out to find a doctor who will confirm that “diagnosis”. As a result, way too many boys are unnecessarily drugged.

And think about “big boys don’t cry”, another harmless-sounding phrase. But there’s a straight line between “big boys don’t cry” and men’s tendency to avoid going to a doctor until their symptoms become unbearable — an attitude that often leaves them permanently disabled or dead.

The most interesting part about sex-stereotyped language is how it makes boys and girls (and men and women) change their behaviour to conform to the stereotypes. Boys and men are often told that they need to get in touch with their “feminine side”. Perhaps in response, there’s been an increase in the number of “metrosexuals”, straight men who take a greater-than-average interest in fashion, cosmetic surgery, and skincare — including wearing makeup. But it doesn’t end there. According to researchers, men are starting to talk like women, most notably raising the pitch of their voice at the end of sentences.

Researchers at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) compared how “uptalkers” change their intonation when they make a statement or ask a question. They recorded subjects in a number of situations, including providing directions from a map and describing clips from a sitcom. According to UCSD linguist Amanda Ritchart, all of the subjects — regardless of ethnic group, or sex — uptalked. But the uptick in pitch towards the end of a statement started later than it did at the end of a question. To many peoples’ ears, the change in pitch makes uptalkers sound unsure, tentative, or insecure. Or feminine.

Okay, so what? The answer is that voice pitch — especially for men — is frequently associated with career advancement: the deeper the voice, the more money a man makes, the longer he’ll stay in his job, and the higher he’ll advance within his company, at least according to scientists at Duke University.

Women see that male behaviour advances careers, and they’ve started acting more like men. At work and elsewhere, many women are (probably subconsciously) lowering the pitch of their voices at work. It’s a technique that linguists call “vocal fry”, and it produces a breathy, creaky voice that you’ve no doubt heard. And various studies have found that women are skipping the skirts, heels, and makeup and instead dressing in a more “masculine” (or at least, less stereotypically feminine) way. Some working women believe that they need to hide their emotions and be more aggressive towards their direct reports and colleagues — just like those stereotypical “alpha males”.

Bottom line: the words and tone of voice we use — and the hidden meanings they convey — can do a lot of good or a lot of harm. So watch what you say.

By Armin Brott