Next Article News reporter –shares June 20, 2017 Virtual Reality You won’t be able to buy a Varjo headset any time soon, but it promises resolutions 70 times greater than what current virtual reality headsets offer. Fireside Chat | July 25: Three Surprising Ways to Build Your Brand Image credit: Joan Cros Garcia – Corbis | Getty Images This story originally appeared on PCMag Startup Looks to Boost VR Resolution by 70 Percent 2 min read Add to Queue Tom Brant The grainy resolution of current virtual reality headsets — even powerful ones like the Oculus Rift — isn’t likely to impress people used to watching an HDTV, let alone a 4K set.To change that, a Finnish startup called Varjo is working on a new VR headset design that it says has a resolution 70 times greater than the Rift or the HTC Vive (pictured above). That kind of clarity, according to Varjo, will result in image quality that approaches the limits of what a human eye can distinguish. The startup — which has recruited engineers from Nvidia, Intel, Nokia and other companies — intends to begin shipping headsets for professional users by the end of the year.A VR headset’s screen resolution and refresh rate are crucial factors for determining a wearer’s ability to enjoy games or other apps. Lower figures can mean a fuzzy experience at best, or a potentially nauseating one at worst, especially for people who have never tried a headset. The Vive, for instance, offers a refresh rate of 90Hz and a combined resolution of 2,160 by 1,200, or 1.2 megapixels for each eye. Compare that to Varjo’s prototype, which has a 70-megapixel resolution for each eye.The secret to achieving that resolution isn’t packing in more pixels to an already-tiny screen, but instead making the existing pixels more efficient at rendering objects in the user’s field of view, a technique known as foveated rendering. Varjo says its technology is able to create a “super-high-resolution image” in the direction of the user’s gaze. The rest of the field of view is rendered with a lower resolution to save processing power.The Varjo headset — which will also come with “video see-through” technology (VST) for augmented reality apps — doesn’t yet have a price or an availability date for consumers. For now, the company is focused on proving its worth to professional users, according to its CEO Urho Konttori.”This technology, along with Varjo VST, jump-starts the immersive computing age overnight — VR is no longer a curiosity, but now can be a professional tool for all industries,” he said in a statement. Enroll Now for $5 Learn from renowned serial entrepreneur David Meltzer how to find your frequency in order to stand out from your competitors and build a brand that is authentic, lasting and impactful.
December 7, 2018 Here’s Every State’s Favorite Holiday Movie (Infographic) Register Now » Learn how to successfully navigate family business dynamics and build businesses that excel. The holidays often kick off a host of hot-button discussion topics — politics, religion, sports — but if you’re looking for a less-loaded conversation starter, try “favorite holiday movie.” The question should fuel a healthy debate minus the raised voices (depending, of course, on how many Die Hard loyalists are in the room). And according to a new report and infographic by StreamingObserver.com, the consensus may look different depending on your state. Georgia and the Carolinas favored Gremlins, New York and Alaska went with The Apartment and Home Alone came out on top in Illinois — where much of the movie was shot — as well as in neighboring Indiana. Interestingly, Christmas in Connecticut reigned supreme in Montana, while Connecticut was partial to Trading Places. As far as methodology, the site used the top 50 Christmas movies on ratings site Rotten Tomatoes as its base (including nontraditional choices such as Batman Returns), then used Google Trends statewide search frequencies to determine the holiday movies that people in one state searched for more than any other state. Check out the infographic below for your state’s favorite film. Free Webinar | July 31: Secrets to Running a Successful Family Business Image credit: 20th Century Fox Infographics Next Article –shares Associate Editor Add to Queue New York is partial to The Apartment, while Georgia went with Gremlins. See where your favorite film stacked up. 2 min read Hayden Field Entrepreneur Staff
This article was reprinted from khn.org with permission from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Health News, an editorially independent news service, is a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy research organization unaffiliated with Kaiser Permanente. Reviewed by James Ives, M.Psych. (Editor)Nov 20 2018Supporters of the nation’s health law condemn them. A few states, including California and New York, have banned them. Other states limit them.But to some insurance brokers and consumers, short-term insurance plans are an enticing, low-cost alternative for healthy people.Now, with new federal rules allowing short-term plans that last up to three years, agents said, some consumers are opting for these more risky policies. Adding to the appeal is the elimination of a federal tax penalty for those without comprehensive insurance, effective next year. Short-term health plans often exclude people with preexisting conditions and do not cover services mandated by the Affordable Care Act.Colorado resident Gene Ferry, 66, purchased a short-term health plan this month for his wife, Stephanie, who will become eligible for Medicare when she turns 65 in August. The difference in the monthly premium price for her new, cheaper plan through LifeShield National Insurance Co. and the policy he had through the ACA is $650.”That’s a no-brainer,” said Ferry, who considers the ACA “atrocious” and supports President Donald Trump’s efforts to lower costs. “I was paying $1,000 a month and I got tired of it.”He signed up his wife for a three-month plan and said that if she is still healthy in January, he will purchase another one to last six months. But Ferry, who is covered under Medicare, said if something happens to her before open enrollment ends — which in Colorado is in January — he would buy a policy through the exchange.There’s a lot of “political jockeying” over the value of short-term plans, said Dan Walterman, owner of Premier Health Insurance of Iowa, which offers such policies. “I think people can make their own choices.”Walterman, 42, said he chose a short-term policy for himself, his wife and their 3-year-old daughter — at a sixth of the price of more comprehensive insurance. “The plan isn’t for everybody, but it works for me,” he said, adding that he gets accident coverage but doesn’t need such things as maternity care or prescriptions.Essentially, short-term plans cost less because they cover less.Some plans have exclusions that could blindside consumers, such as not covering hospitalizations that occur on a Friday or Saturday or any injuries from sports or exercise, said Claire McAndrew, director of campaigns and partnership for Families USA, a consumer advocacy group.”People may see a low premium on a short-term plan and think that it is a good option,” she said. “But when people actually go to use a short-term plan, it will not actually pay for many — or any — of their medical expenses.”The plans can exclude people with preexisting conditions such as cancer or asthma and often don’t cover the “essential benefits” required under the health law, including maternity care, prescription drugs or substance abuse treatment. They also can have ceilings on what they will pay for any type of care. Insurers offering such plans can choose to cover — or not cover — what they want.”Democrats are condemning them as ‘junk plans,’ but the adequacy of the health plan is in the eye of the beholder,” said Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies for the libertarian Cato Institute. “The only junk insurance is a plan that doesn’t pay as it was promised.”The plans originally were designed to fill brief gaps in insurance coverage for people in the individual market. When the ACA went into effect, the Obama administration limited short-term plans to three months, but the Trump administration this year expanded that to 364 days, with possible extensions of up to three years. Critics fear healthy people may abandon the ACA-compliant market to buy cheaper short-term plans, leaving sicker people in the insurers’ risk pool, which raises premiums for those customers.Related StoriesRevolutionary gene replacement surgery restores vision in patients with retinal degenerationGene modulation goes wireless hacking the “boss gene”Employing new federal rule on health insurance plans could save moneyBut some agents said the policies may be good for healthy people as they transition between jobs, near Medicare eligibility or go to college — despite significant limitations.”It’s hard to encourage those types of people to spend hundreds of dollars extra on a health insurance plan that they are rarely using,” said Cody Michael, director of client and broker services for Independent Health Agents in Chicago.Michael said agents also get a higher commission on the plans, providing them with more of an incentive to sell them. But he advises clients that if they do have a chronic illness, they may face denials for coverage. “This is old-world insurance,” he said. “You basically have to be in perfect health.”Dania Palanker, assistant research professor at Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms, said preexisting conditions aren’t always well understood — or well explained. A person might discover too late that, for example, they aren’t covered if they have a stroke because an old blood test showed they had high cholesterol.But Ryan Ellis, a 40-year-old lobbyist and tax preparer in Alexandria, Va., who is considering a short-term plan for himself, his wife and his three children, said his decision will be made “very deliberately, with my eyes wide open knowing the advantages and disadvantages.”Some agents said they offer the short-term plan as a last resort — only after warning clients that if they have an accident or get sick, they might not be able to renew their plan. That means they could be stuck without insurance while waiting for the next open-enrollment period.”They could really be in a world of hurt,” said Colorado insurance agent Eric Smith. “This is just a ticking time bomb.”Roger Abel, of Marion, Iowa, said he’s willing to take the risk. He has a short-term plan for his 2-year-old daughter. Abel said he pays about $90 a month for her, compared with more than $450 that he would have paid for comprehensive coverage. He and his wife have a separate policy from before the Affordable Care Act took effect.But Abel, who is an investment adviser, has a backup option. He said he could always start a group health plan under his company that would provide his daughter with more coverage.Neena Moorjani, 45, said she wanted to buy a short-term plan but can’t because she lives in California, where they were prohibited under a law signed by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown this year. Moorjani, a tax preparer in Sacramento, said she rarely gets sick and doesn’t need an ACA plan.She decided on religious-based health coverage known as a Christian ministry plan. These cost-sharing programs use members’ fees to pay for others’ medical bills. Such programs are not regulated by government agencies and may not cover preexisting conditions or preventive care.When California banned short-term plans, “I was really, really upset,” Moorjani said. “I wish I had the freedom to choose what health care insurance is appropriate for me.”KHN’s coverage in California is supported in part by Blue Shield of California Foundation.
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Explore further A third claim is that sexbots might somehow be used as a therapeutic intervention for pedophiles and other sex offenders.And a fourth entertained the notion that sexbots might help dissuade users from acting on the urge to rape or engage in any form of non-consensual sex.But a systemic key-worded search across appropriate research databases—based on terms such as “robot,” “sex,” “sex toys,” “doll,” child sex abuse,” sex therapy” and/or “pedophile”—turned up no proof for these claims, the British duo reported June 4 in BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health.And what about arguments against the use of sexbots?Kathleen Richardson is an ethics professor at De Montfort University in Leicester, England. She told the Washington Post that sex robots represent an intrusion of machines in human relationships. She also believes the devices’ perfection and compliance might numb men to relationships with real women. “It offends me that they think a human woman is like a machine,” Richardson said.So Bewley and Cox-George tried to investigate the evidence for these “anti-sexbot” theories—that they would cause men to expect real women to be constantly available for sex; that the airbrushed and largely hairless features of sexbots might promote unrealistic expectations of beauty; or that sexbots might actually increase the urge to inflict sexual violence on real people.But there was simply too little evidence available to support or deny these claims, the researchers found.Their take-home message: “Based on the lack of evidence, which is at the heart of medical professionalism, we advise that sexbots shouldn’t be used in medical practice, at least not unless that forms part of robust and ethical research.”Noel Sharkey is professor emeritus of artificial intelligence and robotics at the University of Sheffield in England, and co-founder of the Foundation for Responsible Robotics. He told the Post that Bewley and Cox-George’s research was extremely rigorous and “went a lot further than we did and actually delved into hundreds and hundreds of journals.”In the meantime, sexbot manufacturers continue to extoll the benefits of their products. Douglas Hines, chief executive of sex robot maker TrueCompanion, spoke in an interview with the Foundation for Responsible Robotics last year. He said that “Roxxxy, our sex robot, provides what every adult needs —unconditional love and support. The ability to feel the loving embrace of a lover is a right every adult should be granted. We provide a solution to help adults meet their social as well as sexual needs.” More information: Chantal Cox-George, academic foundation doctor, St George’s University Hospitals, NHS Foundation Trust, London; June 4, 2018, BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health.Find out more about this issue at the Foundation for Responsible Robotics. Current marketing health claims for ‘sexbots’ misleading Copyright © 2018 HealthDay. All rights reserved. Citation: Sex robots are already here, but are they healthy for humans? (2018, June 5) retrieved 18 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-06-sex-robots-healthy-humans.html World, meet Harmony. Completely artificial and programmed by computer chips, the somewhat lifelike sex robot is marketed by sex doll maker Realbotix for $15,000. According to The Guardian, she’s equipped for intimate relations but is also “the perfect companion,” Realbotix says—able to quote Shakespeare and remember your birthday. Harmony is at the leading edge of sex robot technology spawned by the $30 billion sex tech industry. “Sexbots” are designed for those who yearn for an opportunity to simulate a sex act in the company of an exceedingly realistic-looking mannequin.To that end, sexbots often come packed with many lifelike features, which distinguish them from their much more primitive “sex doll” forebears.For example, some sexbots offer customizable orifices—vaginal, anal—while others can respond to speech, exhibit eye-tracking capabilities or perform limited mobile functions.Are sex robots simply high-end sex toys? Or might they serve a grander therapeutic purpose, helping to channel or curb bad behaviors—rape or pedophilia, for example—that might otherwise be inflicted upon real people?A pair of British researchers decided to try and answer those questions but faced a big roadblock: A lack of evidence.”We found a number of health claims were being made, which we analyzed,” explained study co-author Chantal Cox-George. She’s an academic foundation doctor at St. George’s University Hospitals with the NHS Foundation Trust in London. “That sexbots might help safe sex, be therapeutic for people with sex or companionship problems, and might reduce sexual abuse of children.”But in the end, “we were unable to find any empirical evidence in the medical literature to support or refute any of these,” she said.Along with her co-author Susan Bewley, of the Women’s Health Academic Centre at King’s College London, Cox-George figured there must be some scientific literature exploring the clinical pros and cons of sexbots.After all, as of 2018, four companies are already marketing adult “sexbots,” with one company even offering consumers a child-like iteration, known as a “pedobot.”Four main claims to “health” have been put forward to support sexbot use.One centered around the notion that the devices might promote safer sex by helping to cut back on sex trafficking, sex tourism or the solicitation of prostitutes.Another claim is that sexbots might help users gain sexual knowledge and expertise—without the crippling pressure of real-life intimacy. Or they might bring relief to those suffering from a range of sexually-related struggles, including erectile dysfunction, libido irregularity, loneliness or disability.
Citation: Indian government grounds Air India sale plans: reports (2018, June 20) retrieved 18 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2018-06-indian-grounds-air-india-sale.html Embattled Air India seeks ‘urgent’ loan © 2018 AFP This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Civil aviation minister Suresh Prabhu said the government had dropped the idea for now because of next year’s general election and rising oil prices, the Press Trust of India news agency reported.Prabhu said the decision to put on hold the proposal to sell a 76 percent stake in Air India had been made at a meeting headed by India’s finance minister Arun Jaitley on Monday.”We will review it (the sale) later,” PTI quoted Prabhu as telling reporters in New Delhi on Tuesday.India’s government announced in March that it planned to privatise the ailing carrier but a May 31 deadline for bidders to express interest passed without any coming forward.Local and international airlines were said to be put off by some of the terms, including the government’s insistence that buyers take on both Air India’s international and domestic operations.Air India, founded in 1932, was once the country’s monopoly airline, known affectionately as the “Maharaja of the skies”.But it has been haemorrhaging money for years and it has lost market share to low-cost rivals in one of the world’s fastest-growing airline markets.Successive governments had spent billions of dollars to keep it flying before Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s cabinet last year gave the go-ahead for a sell-off.Air India is about $8 billion in the red and reported losses of almost 58 billion rupees ($860 million) for the financial year ending March 2017.Earlier this month it sought an urgent loan of 10 billion rupees to maintain day-to-day operations. Explore further Air India has been haemorrhaging money for years and has lost market share to low-cost rivals, while potential bidders have also been put off by some of the Indian government’s terms India has shelved its plans to sell debt-stricken national carrier Air India after failing to attract any bidders, a senior official has told local media.
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. © 2019 AFP Turbo-charging Europe’s car battery industry Explore further Swedish start-up Northvolt Wednesday announced it had secured funding, in large part from Volkswagen, for Europe’s biggest car battery factory, set to rival electric carmaker Tesla’s US “Gigafactory”. The battery producer said it had completed a $1 billion equity capital raise, led by Volkswagen and Goldman Sachs, alongside BMW, Swedish pension fund AMF, insurer Folksam and the IMAS Foundation, part of the IKEA Group.”Today is not only a great milestone for Northvolt, it also marks a key moment for Europe that clearly shows that we are ready to compete in the coming wave of electrification,” Peter Carlsson, CEO of Northvolt, said in a statement.The company did not specify how much capital the different investors were providing, and added that the transaction needed the approval of the Swedish Competition Authority.According to a separate statement by Volkswagen, the German carmaker would be aquiring a 20 percent stake of Northvolt and would have one seat on its board.In 2017 Northvolt announced plans for battery factory “Northvolt Ett”, to employ between 2000 to 2500 people and be located in Skelleftea, a coastal town in Sweden’s industrial north-east. The European Investment Bank gave an in-principle approval of a loan of 350 million euro ($396.2 million) to Northvolt in May of this year, and together with the additional funds raised the company said the “establishment of the initial 16 GWh of lithium-ion battery cell manufacturing capacity at Northvolt Ett is enabled”.Construction work is scheduled to commence in August and large scale production is estimated to begin in 2021.Northvolt also said that it was also planning on setting up a joint venture with Volkswagen to build another battery factory in Salzgitter, Germany.In May, Volkswagen already announced it would spend close to one billion euros ($1.1 billion) building a factory for battery cells in Salzgitter.Production of the individual cells that make up the massive batteries for electric vehicles is seen by politicians and some businesspeople as key to keeping Europe competitive in carmaking.German economy minister Peter Altmaier has promised one billion euros of public support to consortiums planning to build the cells in Germany and the wider European Union, while France has offered 700 million.Volkswagen and Northvolt are members of one such research consortium stretching across seven EU nations.But Asian firms, which enjoy a headstart in battery tech, are already gearing up to supply an expected surge of electric vehicles from European factories.One major example is China’s CATL, which plans a battery plant in Erfurt, eastern Germany to rival Tesla’s production site. Citation: Swedish start-up secures funds for battery ‘gigafactory’ (2019, June 12) retrieved 17 July 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-06-volkswagen-stake-battery-cell-maker.html Asia in charge of electric car battery production
About 80% of all the matter in the cosmos is of a form completely unknown to current physics. We call it dark matter, because as best we can tell it’s…dark. Experiments around the world are attempting to capture a stray dark matter particle in hopes of understanding it, but so far they have turned up empty. Recently, a team of theorists has proposed a new way to hunt for dark matter using weird “particles” called magnons, a name I did not just make up. These tiny ripples could lure even a fleeting, lightweight dark matter particle out of hiding, those theorists say. [The 11 Biggest Unanswered Questions About Dark Matter] The dark matter puzzle We know all sorts of things about dark matter, with the notable exception of what it is.Headbutting Tiny Worms Are Really, Really LoudThis rapid strike produces a loud ‘pop’ comparable to those made by snapping shrimps, one of the most intense biological sounds measured at sea.Your Recommended PlaylistVolume 0%Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcutsKeyboard Shortcutsplay/pauseincrease volumedecrease volumeseek forwardsseek backwardstoggle captionstoggle fullscreenmute/unmuteseek to %SPACE↑↓→←cfm0-9接下来播放Why Is It ‘Snowing’ Salt in the Dead Sea?01:53 facebook twitter 发邮件 reddit 链接https://www.livescience.com/65887-quasiparticles-could-unmask-dark-matter.html?jwsource=cl已复制直播00:0000:3500:35 Even though we can’t directly detect it, we see the evidence of dark matter as soon as we open up our telescopes to the wider universe. The first revelation, way back in the 1930s, came through observations of galaxy clusters, some of the largest structures in the universe. The galaxies that inhabited them were simply moving too quickly to be held together as a cluster. That’s because the collective mass of the galaxies gives the gravitational glue that keeps the cluster together — the greater the mass, the stronger that glue. A super-strong glue can hold together even the fastest moving galaxies. Any faster and the cluster would simply rip itself apart. But there the clusters were, existing, with galaxies buzzing around within them far faster than they should given the mass of the cluster. Something had enough gravitational grip to hold the clusters together, but that something was not emitting or interacting with light. This mystery persisted unresolved through the decades, and in the 1970s astronomer Vera Rubin upped the ante in a big way through observations of stars within galaxies. Once again, things were moving too fast: Given their observed mass, the galaxies in our universe should’ve spun themselves apart billions of years ago. Something was holding them together. Something unseen. [11 Fascinating Facts About Our Milky Way Galaxy] The story repeats all across the cosmos, both in time and space. From the earliest light from the Big Bang to the largest structures in the universe, something funky is out there. Searching in the dark So dark matter is very much there — we just can’t find any other viable hypothesis to explain the tsunami of data in support of its existence. But what is it? Our best guess is that dark matter is some kind of new, exotic particle, hitherto unknown to physics. In this picture, dark matter floods every galaxy. In fact, the visible portion of a galaxy, as seen through stars and clouds of gas and dust, is just a tiny lighthouse set against a much larger, darker shore. Each galaxy sits within a large “halo” made up of zillions upon zillions of dark matter particles. These dark matter particles are streaming through your room right now. They’re streaming through you. A never-ending rain shower o’ tiny, invisible dark matter particles. But you simply don’t notice them. They don’t interact with light or with charged particles. You are made of charged particles and you are very friendly with light; you are invisible to dark matter and dark matter is invisible to you. The only way we “see” dark matter is through the gravitational force; gravity notices every form of matter and energy in the universe, dark or not, so at the largest scales, we observe the influence of the combined mass of all these countless particles. But here in your room? Nothing. Unless, we hope, there’s some other way that dark matter interacts with us normal matter. It’s possible that the dark matter particle, whatever the heck it is, also feels the weak nuclear force — which is responsible for radioactive decay — opening up a new window into this hidden realm. Imagine building a giant detector, just a big mass of whatever element you have handy. Dark matter particles stream through it, almost all of them completely harmlessly. But sometimes, with a rarity depending on the particular model of dark matter, the passing particle interacts with one of the atomic nuclei of the elements in the detector via the weak nuclear force, knocking it out of place and making the entire mass of the detector quiver. Enter the magnon This experimental setup works only if the dark matter particle is relatively heavy, giving it enough oomph to knock out a nucleus in one of those rare interactions. But so far, none of the dark matter detectors around the globe have seen any trace of an interaction, even after years and years of searching. As the experiments have ground along, the allowable properties of dark matter have slowly been ruled out. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing; we simply don’t know what dark matter is made of, so the more we know about what it isn’t, the clearer the picture of what it could be. But the lack of results can be a little bit worrying. The heaviest candidates for dark matter are getting ruled out, and if the mysterious particle is too light, it will never be seen in the detectors as they’re set up right now. That is, unless there’s another way that dark matter can talk to regular matter. In a recent article published in the preprint online journal arXiv, physicists detail a proposed experimental setup that could spot a dark matter particle in the act of changing the spin of electrons (if, in fact, dark matter can do that). In this setup, dark matter can potentially be detected, even if the suspect particle is very light. It can do this by creating so-called magnons in the material. Pretend you have a chunk of material at a temperature of absolute zero. All the spins — like tiny little bar magnets — of all the electrons in that matter will point in the same direction. As you slowly raise the temperature, some of the electrons will start to wake up, wiggle around and randomly point their spins in the opposite direction. The higher you raise the temperature, the more electrons wind up flipped — and each of those flips reduces the magnetic strength by just a little bit. Each of those flipped spins also causes a little ripple in the energy of the material, and those wiggles can be viewed as a quasiparticle, not a true particle, but something you can describe with math in that way. These quasiparticles are known as “magnons,” probably because they’re like tiny, cute little magnets. So if you start off with a really cold material, and enough dark matter particles strike the material and flip some spins around, you’ll observe magnons. Because of the sensitivity of the experiment and the nature of the interactions, this setup can detect a lightweight dark matter particle. That is, if it exists. 9 Ideas About Black Holes That Will Blow Your Mind The 11 Biggest Unanswered Questions About Dark Matter The 18 Biggest Unsolved Mysteries in Physics Paul M. Sutter is an astrophysicist at The Ohio State University, host of Ask a Spaceman and Space Radio, and author of Your Place in the Universe. Originally published on Live Science.by Taboolaby TaboolaSponsored LinksSponsored LinksPromoted LinksPromoted LinksYou May LikeVikings: Free Online GamePlay this for 1 minute and see why everyone is addictedVikings: Free Online GameUndoTruthFinder People Search SubscriptionOne Thing All Liars Have in Common, Brace YourselfTruthFinder People Search SubscriptionUndoGundry MD Total Restore SupplementU.S. Cardiologist: It’s Like a Pressure Wash for Your InsidesGundry MD Total Restore SupplementUndoKelley Blue Book2019 Lexus Vehicles Worth Buying for Their Resale ValueKelley Blue BookUndoFinance DailySeniors With No Life Insurance May Get Up To $250,000 If They Do This…Finance DailyUndoCNETMeet the US Navy’s new $13 billion aircraftCNETUndo