Enjoy Biggest Sell

Friday, April 4, 2025

अब नहीं चढ़ेगा काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब का भोग, यहां जानिए क्या थी मदिरा चढ़ाने के पीछे मान्यता

Ujjain temple Kaal Bhairav ban liquor : मध्य प्रदेश में 1 अप्रैल से कई बड़े बदलाव किए गए हैं. जिसमें सबसे बड़ा है शराबबंदी, जी हां. मप्र के 19 धार्मिक स्थलों पर शराब बैन कर दिया गया है. इसका सबसे बड़ा असर महाकाल की नगरी उज्जैन में पड़ेगा, क्योंकी यहां के काल भैरव मंदिर में मदिरा का भोग लगाया जाता है. ऐसे में महाकाल मंदिर के आस-पास की दुकानों पर आसानी से शराब मिल जाती थी, लेकिन अब यहां पर मदिरा की विक्रय पर रोक लगा दी गई है. 

चैत्र नवरात्रि की अष्टमी और नवमी को लेकर है कंफ्यूजन, यहां पंडित से जानिए सही तिथि और मुहूर्त

ऐसे में अब श्रद्धालुओं को भोग लगाने के लिए अपने साथ में ही शराब लेकर आना होगा . क्योंकि शराबबंदी लागू होने के बाद धार्मिक नगरी उज्जैन में सख्ती से इसका पालन पालन किया जा रहा है. ऐसे में आइए जानते हैं काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब चढ़ाने के पीछे क्या है मान्यता...

क्यों लगाया जाता है शराब का भोग

काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब के भोग लगाने के पीछे कई तरह की मान्यताएं हैं. जिसमें सबसे ज्यादा प्रचलित है कि इसकी शुरुआत राजा विक्रमादित्य के शासनकाल में हुई थी. इसके अलावा काल भैरव को तांत्रिकों का देवता कहा जाता है और तांत्रिक कामों में इसका उपयोग किया जाता था. यही कारण काल भैरव को शराब का भोग लगाया जाता है. 

यह भी माना जाता है कि काल भैरव की पूजा तांत्रिक परंपरा के अनुसार होती है. इस विद्या में शराब को पंचतत्व माना जाता है.आपको बता दें कि तंत्रिका पूजा में शराब का उपयोग सांसारिक बंधनों से मुक्ति पाने के लिए किया जाता है. इससे साधना में रुकावट नहीं आती है. यही कारण काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब का भोग लगता आ रहा है. 

शराब चढ़ाने के बाद क्या किया जाता है

हालांकि, जो शराब काल भैरव को भोग लगाई जाती है, उसका सेवन नहीं किया जाता है. वहीं,  काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब चढ़ाने को लेकर कई तरह की बातें कही जाती हैं. लोगों का दावा है कि जिस पात्र में शराब डाली जाती है, वह खाली हो जाती है. वह शराब आखिर में जाती कहां है, इसका पता आजतक नहीं लग पाया है. लोगों का कहना है कि शराब मूर्ति पी जाती है.

(Disclaimer: यहां दी गई जानकारी सामान्य मान्यताओं और जानकारियों पर आधारित है. एनडीटीवी इसकी पुष्टि नहीं करता है.)



from NDTV India - Latest https://ift.tt/jf897lK

Opinion: Why Does Your AI 'Ghibli' Look So Terrible? Because It Is

Earlier this week, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman joked on X (formerly known as Twitter), “Can y'all please chill on generating images, this is insane our team needs sleep”. This was a reference to the massively popular online trend of Studio Ghibli-style images being churned out by OpenAI's new ChatGPT Image Generator. Altman's words struck me as deeply ironic — the whole point of AI art, as its proponents keep reminding us, is that sleepless nights are not required to create these images. Users worldwide currently ‘Ghiblifying' their personal photographs aren't losing any sleep. The only people involved in this situation who've spent sleepless nights creating art are Studio Ghibli's Hayao Miyazaki and his team of artists, animators, et al. In other words, the people currently being ripped off by half the planet because in 2023, the Japanese government declared that copyrighted works could be used, sans permission, for AI-training endeavors (a position that the US, the UK and the EU are still distant from, legally speaking).

When Theft Is Art

The ongoing Studio Ghibli situation really is the perfect distillation of AI art discourse—an act of material theft and creative bankruptcy is being paraded as pathbreaking innovation. And you're being asked to shift your gaze from the scene of the crime and focus instead on the genteel faces and kind eyes of Studio Ghibli grandmas.

To my mind, there are three principal aspects of the AI art debate: material (pertaining to the labour-capital relationship between artists and corporations), legal (pertaining to the ownership/distribution of art) and aesthetic (pertaining to inherent artistic value). And on all three planks, generative AI—at least in its current shape and form, exemplified by OpenAI's ChatGPT—seems to me to be a net negative for humanity in general, and a crushing blow in particular to artists and creators everywhere.

Manufacturing Consent

First, the material aspect. Let's say you are a freelance artist and designer who was commissioned to create a few minor logos and webpages for a mega-corporation, a couple of years ago. At the completion of said project, you were paid what you assumed was a fair wage. But now, a couple of years later, you realise that the mega-corporation is also deeply invested in AI, and has been feeding all of your work (not just the finished product, but stage-updates and mockups as well) into the data-guzzling, AI-training machine. You never consented to this process, but your consent may have been manufactured by vaguely-phrased clauses buried deep within your standard-issue freelancer's contract.

In this way, the mega-corporation gets to use your work twice: once in the usual way, and then once more for AI-training. The mega-corporation gets two bites at the apple but has to pay only for the first one. This is theft in the most ab initio, first principles sort of way. Every day is a cost-cutting day if you can simply get free work off people.

The Copyright Loophole

The second aspect speaks to legalities, which in this case means the concept of copyright. For successive decades, large corporations told us that copyright law was sacrosanct, that without the legal protections that controlled access, writers and artists and creators everywhere would be impoverished. You might remember the tragic suicide of Aaron Swartz (1986-2013), the genius programmer behind the RSS web feed format and the development of Reddit. Swartz was threatened with 50-plus years in prison for downloading a stash of JSTOR articles (JSTOR is a repository of paywalled academic articles) off MIT servers, which prompted him to take his own life.

But now, we are suddenly being told by Altman and co. that unless we suspend the idea of copyright completely and allow copyrighted works to be chewed up by AI-training ventures, we are being anti-progress and undemocratic. It's funny how ideas of progress, fairness and the “greater good” seem to gravitate around the interests of billionaires, shifting one way and then another in sync with share prices and investor valuations. Why should independent artists and creators embrace a technology and an extra-legal framework explicitly designed to undercut and eventually replace them? In 2024, Mira Murati, then-CEO of OpenAI, said that AI will definitely replace some creative jobs but that it was alright because “maybe those creative jobs shouldn't have existed in the first place”. In the ‘growth-hack' model of the universe favoured by Silicon Valley executives like Murati, creativity is an active threat that can and should be snuffed out by machine logic, the imperceptible hum of digital ones and zeroes. No surprise then, that influential groups of creators worldwide are suing OpenAI and co. for copyright infringement—the comedian Sarah Silverman is leading one such lawsuit against Meta, for example, while The New York Times has its own lawsuit against OpenAI.

Art Minus The Artist

The third aspect of the situation speaks to the purely aesthetic, the raw artistic value (if any) of AI-generated imagery. Every single professional artist I have spoken to or heard online testifies to how terrible, soulless and emotionally hollow AI-generated art is. Quite simply, the tech simply isn't very good. How could it be any good, when the vast majority of culturally significant art is, in fact, still protected by copyright law? Existing image generators are being trained on leftovers, discards and amateur/learner fare, for the most part, with Japan being a rogue exception, of course, thanks to its whimsical interpretation of copyright. For professional artists, the most common ongoing use case is to create mockups or demos for prospective clients—demonstrating what a particular style or color palette might plausibly look like. And even there, as professionals would know, there are significant limitations to the output.

The reason why AI-generated art is so terrible brings us to an intangible fourth aspect of the situation: the philosophical. Think about the very concept of image generators for a minute—they seek, essentially, to conjure art out of thin air while completely isolating the (ChatGPT) user from the process. An artefact minus the artistry. A hunk of butter that's all hunk and no butter is futile, both nutritionally and ontologically.

An artist's work, especially when it's beyond a certain minimum quality, speaks to their very soul, the story of their life. And the story is ingrained upon their callused hands, like a grand old tree marking the passage of every solar cycle with a concentric ring. To remove the process of learning your craft, to remove the inevitable sequence of mistake-correction-growth from an artist's life, is downright dystopian and a fundamentally antagonistic attitude towards art and artists.

An Insult, Indeed

Back in 2016, Hayao Miyazaki himself was given a brief demonstration of AI-based animation techniques, and it left the veteran animator and filmmaker unimpressed, even shaken. The phrase he used to describe the experience was “an insult to life itself”. I think he was absolutely right. If you're currently getting a chuckle out of ‘Ghiblifying' your last year's Himachal road-trip, I'd urge you to listen to the man responsible for those genteel faces and kind eyes.

(Aditya Mani Jha is an independent writer living in New Delhi. His first work of nonfiction will be published by Oxford University Press in 2025)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/AXMD8rz

Thursday, April 3, 2025

Why Monkeys Are Better At Yodelling Than Humans

Yodellers of the world, you never stood a chance: Monkeys will always be better at yodelling than humans because they have a "cheap trick" hidden in their voice box, scientists revealed Thursday.

When monkeys howl -- or yodellers yodel -- they rapidly switch back and forth between low and high frequency sounds.

This is in contrast to opera singers, who are trained to precisely control how they gradually move from note to note, in a way that is pleasing to listen to.

Yodellers and monkeys, however, make bigger jumps far more abruptly, creating vocal breaks that sound like Tarzan's yell.

When yodelling, a human might be able to jump an octave, which doubles the frequency.

Monkeys can manage three and half octaves, according to a new study.

A "cheap trick" in their larynx means these monkeys will always beat humans, senior study author Jacob Dunn of the UK's Anglia Ruskin University told AFP.

Both humans and monkeys have a pair of vocal folds in their larynx which vibrate to create sound.

But monkeys have an additional pair of membranes that gives them a far wider pitch range, the international team of researchers discovered.

This is thought to give monkeys, which are social creatures, a more complex way of communicating with each other.

All other primates, and even ancient human ancestors, appear to have this special tissue, Dunn said.

At some during our evolution, humans seem to have lost these membranes, he added.

But the shame of being inferior yodellers may have been worth the trade-off.

To be able to speak clearly, humans needed a "streamlined" larynx -- and these membranes would have gotten in the way, Dunn explained.

"If you put a human brain on the primate larynx" it would struggle to speak intelligibly because of the membranes and other things like air sacs, he said.

For the study, the researchers put sensors on the necks of some monkeys at Bolivia's La Senda Verde Wildlife Sanctuary.

This allowed them to see what was going on in the larynx of black and gold howler monkeys, tufted capuchins, black-capped squirrel monkeys and Peruvian spider monkeys.

The spider monkey was the best yodeller, managing around four octaves, Dunn said.

The researchers also studied the larynges of dead monkeys and used computer modelling to analyse the frequencies.

The study was published in the journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B.

(This story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/UPhxoC6

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

Opinion: Trump & The Ayatollah: It's a Pity Both Can't Lose

Whoever said history repeats itself was not talking about Trump 2.0 and Iran. In 2018, during his previous term, Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) meant to restrain Iran from developing atomic weapons, calling it “the worst possible deal”. He further imposed a “maximum pressure” policy that led to an 81% contraction in Iran's crude oil exports, its economic lifeline. He authorised the assassination of an Iranian general in Baghdad in early 2020. Last year, during Trump's re-election campaign, an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate him was uncovered. On February 5, soon after re-entering the White House, Trump restored the “maximum pressure” policy against Iran. Subsequently, the US intensified consultations with Israeli leadership to prevent Iran's nuclearisation. Why, then, exactly a month later on March 5, President Trump wrote to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proclaiming that he did not want to hurt Iran and its great people and suggested bilateral dialogue to resolve the nuclear issue?

'Deception Of Public Opinion'

Iran's reaction to this Trump initiative was equally fork-tongued. Even before he had read Trump's letter, the Iranian Supreme Leader publicly spurned the offer, calling it a “deception of public opinion”. He pointedly added, "When we know they won't honour it, what's the point of negotiating?” Three weeks of Iranian fire-eating rhetoric against the United States and Israel followed. But then, on March 27, an adviser to Iran's supreme leader said that Tehran “has not closed all doors to resolve its disputes with the United States and is ready for indirect negotiations with Washington.” Iranian Foreign Minister amplified, “Our policy is still to not engage in direct negotiations while under ‘maximum pressure' and military threats, however, as it was the case in the past, indirect negotiations can continue." Adding another twist to the tail, while President Trump's letter was delivered by a UAE official, an Iranian response was conveyed via Oman, which hosted such indirect US-Iran talks during Biden's presidency.

What exactly is going on amidst this shadowboxing, and what is the likely endgame?

A Little History

While Iran was never colonised by the West, it was often subject to political coercion aimed at economic exploitation, particularly by the Anglo-Persian oil company founded in 1908. In 1951, Iran's populist Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and the Iranian parliament nationalised the company, prompting the UK and the US to covertly arrange a successful coup against the elected government. They strengthened the Shah, a megalomaniac autocrat, who acted largely as a Western vassal and the US-appointed “Policeman of the Persian Gulf”. However, in early 1979, a protracted popular uprising deposed him and brought in Ayatollah Khomeini, a Shia clergyman and fierce critic of Shah and his Western backers. The fledgling Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), a theocratic democracy, was born and tapped into Iranians' adherence to Shia Islam and anti-Western sentiments to gain strength. The IRI survived a bloody eight-year-long war with Iraq that began in 1980, various internal dissensions and insurgencies, serious geo-political turbulences in the neighbourhood, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as unmitigated Western eco-political sanctions and attempts to isolate the country and demonise its policies.

The Choking Of The JCPOA

For the past two decades, Tehran's nuclear technology programme has been a recurring and growing source of tensions with the West and the regional powers. They believe that Iran, blessed with huge deposits of hydrocarbons, does not need an extensive and expensive nuclear programme. It is widely suspected to be a Trojan Horse to acquire nuclear weapon capability. Although Iran, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has always denied such ambitions, it has also asserted its right to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. After extensive negotiations, seven global powers, including the United States, and Iran agreed in 2015 on a JCPOA that put in place strict restrictions, including an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspection regime on the Iranian nuclear programme, in general, and the uranium enrichment cycle in particular. In return, many of the Western economic sanctions on Iran were lifted. However, Trump 1.0's withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 upended the arrangement and provided Iran with the justification to enrich uranium beyond the stipulated 20% limit.

Separately, the Iranian acquisition of substantive missile and drone capabilities has also raised eyebrows. Its robust support to some regional regimes and non-state actors, such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthis—collectively dubbed as the “Axis of Resistance”—has inflamed tensions with Israel and the US, which last month jointly reiterated their determination to disallow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon capability. Israel, widely believed to have nuclear weapons, calls the Iranian nuclear programme “an existential threat”. Indeed, the antagonism between Jewish and Persian civilisations dates back at least to 587 BCE, when the first Jewish temple was destroyed by the Babylonian army under King Nebuchadnezzar II.

Suspicion Above All

This short but extensive background puts in broad relief the long mutual suspicion arrayed against any successful resolution of Iran-US-Israel hostility. However, the issue is as broad as it is long. Iran is already a formidably potent foe that has both battle-hardened, technologically competent and ideologically motivated military capability and a siege economy. If it further acquires deliverable nuclear weapons, it would become virtually invincible. In such an eventuality, Tehran would upend the longstanding Pax Americana in the Gulf and could configure the regional geostrategic stability that currently favours US-Israeli preponderance. Consequently, both Trump and Netanyahu are determined to prevent such a scenario from coming to pass.

At the same time, any objective SWOT analysis would show that Iranian nuclear assets are geographically diversified and well-defended—often physically located deep underground. Tehran has openly warned that any attack on its nuclear facilities would attract a swift and disproportionate response against the US-Israeli interests in the region. Further, such an act is likely to unsettle the crucial global oil and gas market. While the Muslim Ummah is not quite fond of Iran and its aggressive policies, no Muslim country would publicly approve of Iran being attacked in this manner. The country's regional neighbours, many with pro-Iran Shia minorities, would be particularly wary of the resultant instability. Although the clergy-led government is brittle and unpopular, a foreign invasion is likely to provide a much-needed rallying cry for its support base. Israel's right-wing government has its reasons for not only supporting any US military action against Iran but also participating in it, but Iranian retaliation could be even bigger and more vicious than seen last year. Moreover, a surgical destruction of nuclear capabilities would not be enough, the invaders may need to ensure that those are not revived. This may necessitate a regime change, and the past US experiences in the neighbourhood, viz. Iraq and Afghanistan, are dissuasive. Hence, a military campaign against Iran's nuclear assets may not be the preferred option. It can, at best, be a Pyrrhic victory without any guarantee of success.

Will Economy Be The Decider?

Iran's Achilles Heel is its economy, long hobbled by Western sanctions and drained by the heavy unproductive outgo on subsidies, defence and nuclear portfolios, and burdened with the need to support the regional proxies and allies. While Iran has a diversified economy, oil and gas exports are still its mainstay. The Western economic sanctions, in general, and the American “maximum pressure” campaign in particular, have seriously dented it. Although the sanctions caused serious socio-economic problems, such as public disaffection due to high inflation (40%; national currency has lost 90% of its value since 2018), youth unemployment (22.7%), etc., the regime stayed on course with its nuclear policy. During the past few months, however, the regime has been shaken as its regional proxies (in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen) suffered serious setbacks. Further, Israeli air attacks and covert operations against Iran have exposed the latter's vulnerabilities. The regime has, nevertheless, sought to exude strength. It remains to be seen if by agreeing to the indirect negotiations with the Trump administration, Iran is indicating a higher degree of flexibility. Tehran's counter-offer may simply be a ploy to buy more time. For Trump, too, the negotiations offer a low-cost option: an agitprop strategy to divide the Iranian leadership. Last month, Russia, too, offered to mediate between the US and Iran; but the recent turbulence in the Kremlin's relations with the White House over the Ukrainian conflict ceasefire might have put that offer in some doubt.

Given the low mutual credibility and long list of grievances, the proposed negotiations have a fairly small chance of success. Similar talks were held in Oman during Biden's presidency, and they failed to resolve the issue. A parallel can be drawn with three well-publicised summits Trump held with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un that failed to denuclearise Pyongyang. Further, the motives of the two sides may not coalesce: For Trump, a successful conclusion would, by definition, require a deal tighter and more intrusive than the JCPOA. On the other hand, Iranian leadership would perhaps be happy to buy more time, thwart the threat of an all-out war and negotiate a reduction in the sanctions regime.

No Easy Deal

The negotiations are likely to be protracted and complex. In case a breakthrough nuclear deal is reached, the possibility of more ambitious workover straddling various geopolitical and economic issues in suspended animation for nearly five decades, such as softening of Iranian anti-US and anti-Israel profile, faster removal of sanctions, return of frozen Iranian assets as well as leveraging Iran's economic opportunities for hydrocarbons and infrastructure, etc., cannot be ruled out. Such a comprehensive US-Iran makeover would have profound implications for the region as well as the global oil and gas ecosystem. Some details are likely to emerge by the time Trump pays his first foreign visit in his second term next month to three Gulf countries, viz. Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar. The timeline for proposed indirect negotiations would have to keep in mind the lapse of the JCPOA architecture in October 2025, after which the “Snapback” of some other sanctions on Iran may be invoked.

At a different level, it would be fascinating to watch the forthcoming indirect and secret US-Iranian negotiations. After all, who can predict the outcome of a tryst between a self-styled “transactional” deal-maker and those who coined the word “Bazaar” and raised negotiations to the art of Mutazayedat, or overbidding. As Henry Kissinger put it pithily, albeit in a different context, “it's a pity both sides can't lose".

(The author is a former Indian Ambassador and a specialist on the Middle East. He currently heads Eco-Diplomacy and Strategies, a Delhi-based consultancy.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/oYlsW8D

Tuesday, April 1, 2025

UK Firm Trashes NYT Report On "Sensitive Tech Transfer" To Russia Via HAL

British aerospace manufacturer HR Smith Group has slammed a New York Times report that accused it of transferring sensitive technology to a blacklisted agency supplying Russia with weapons via an Indian state-run company. The allegations are "entirely false", the company told NDTV, echoing responses from sources trashing the charges against them and Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL), a government-owned aerospace company.

"These allegations made by the New York Times are entirely false. HR Smith Group takes its supply chain obligations extremely seriously and follows all applicable export controls. We maintain rigorous supplier oversight and supply chain monitoring to uphold the highest standards of compliance," said a company spokesperson.

The alleged products exported to India were for use in a satellite-based search and rescue network that supports life-saving operations across land, sea, and air. They "are not designed for military use", it asserted.

The Group said they were not provided any evidence to support the claim that its products were shipped to Russia.

"The only apparent connection is a common Harmonized System code - an international product classification number used for customs purposes, covering a wide range of products. This code alone does not show what the product is or where it originates from and therefore cannot be used to establish a link, which the New York Times has misleadingly done," it said.

The NYT article that ran with the headline "Major Donor to Reform U.K. Party Sold Parts Used In Weapons to Russian Supplier" had accused HR Smith Group of selling transmitters, cockpit equipment, and other sensitive technologies worth nearly $2 million to Russia.

Both the UK and US had banned such sales in the wake of the Ukraine war.

Some of the shipments reportedly went via Hindustan Aeronautics Limited - and had the "same identifying product codes". The report claimed that HAL received 118 shipments from HR Smith Group between 2023 and 2024, and sent 13 shipments of the same products to Rosoboroneexport, a Russian arms agency blacklisted by the US and UK, during the same period.

HAL has not yet responded to the charges.

Sources had earlier told NDTV that the report was "factually incorrect and misleading". Accusing the US-based outlet of trying to "distort facts to suit a political narrative", they said HAL had followed all international obligations on strategic trade controls.

The sources also urged "reputed media outlets to undertake basic due diligence while publishing such reports."



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/yWwaFYP

Myanmar Quake: What It's Like Being Trapped Under Rubble, Survivors Show

Over 2,000 people have died following the deadly earthquake in Myanmar, with rescue workers, sniffer dogs and paramedics rushing to find survivors from rubble as the golden rescue window closes fast, diminishing the realistic chances of survival. Amid the chaos, stories of survival are starting to emerge from the ground zero as rescuers continue to grapple with the scale of devastation.

A video emerged on social media showing an elderly woman and her two teenage granddaughters trapped in a small pocket of air under the debris of their home. The girls filmed their desperate cry for help as they used a butter knife to bang on broken concrete to get rescuers' attention. 

The trio was trapped under wreckage for a frightening 15 hours before the rescuers pulled them to safety.

Two other women experienced a similar horror when they waited for five agonising hours for rescues to find them under the rubble of their collapsed hotel in Mandalay, where they sat crouched under broken ceilings amid piles of wreckage.

The duo, who don't want to be identified, shared their borrowing ordeal during an interview with CNN.

"We were trapped in total darkness, but the good thing is we had a phone and we could use its light to see. If we didn't have that, we could have died. We could see to clear rubble from on top of each other," one of the women told CNN.

"While being trapped, we learned that nothing is permanent, and the most important thing to do before death is to live a happy life and to do many good deeds. Don't do bad things, because karma will follow you," said another woman.

But alongside the miraculous rescues, tales of devastating losses have also reverberated through Myanmar.

Two hundred Buddhist monks were crushed by a collapsing monastery, fifty children killed when a preschool classroom crumbled, and seven hundred Muslims were struck while praying at mosques for Ramadan.

Survivors Without Food, Shelter

Aid groups arriving in the worst-hit areas of Myanmar said there was an urgent need for shelter, food and water for survivors. Civil war in Myanmar, where the junta seized power in a coup in 2021, has complicated efforts to reach those injured and made homeless by the Southeast Asian nation's biggest quake in a century.

The junta's tight control over communication networks and the damage to roads, bridges and other infrastructure caused by the quakes have intensified the challenges for aid workers.

"In the hardest-hit areas ...communities struggle to meet their basic needs, such as access to clean water and sanitation, while emergency teams work tirelessly to locate survivors and provide life-saving aid," the UN body said in a report.

The International Rescue Committee said shelter, food, water and medical help were all needed in places such as Mandalay, near the epicentre of the quake.

"Having lived through the terror of the earthquake, people now fear aftershocks and are sleeping outside on roads or in open fields," an IRC worker in Mandalay said in a report.

"There is an urgent need for tents, as even those whose homes remain intact are too afraid to sleep indoors."

The 7.7 magnitude quake, which hit around lunchtime on Friday, was the strongest to hit the Southeast Asian country in more than a century, toppling ancient pagodas and modern buildings alike.

State media has reported Myanmar's casulties at 2,065, with more than 3,900 injured and at least 270 missing. 
 



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/4C9MpLs

Hard-Hitting Netflix Drama 'Adolescence' To Be Shown In UK Schools

The Netflix drama "Adolescence", which has sparked widespread debate about the toxic and misogynistic influences young boys are exposed to online, is to be shown in UK secondary schools, officials said on Monday.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who met the creators of the show alongside charities and young people at his Downing Street office, called the move "an important initiative" which would help start conversations about the content teenagers consume online.

Starmer said he had watched the drama -- in which a 13-year-old boy stabs a girl to death after being radicalised on the internet -- with his own teenage children and that it had "hit home hard".  

The internet and social media meant "ideology" can now be "pumped directly into the minds of our children", he added.

"Adolescence", which was released on March 13, follows the aftermath of the schoolgirl's fatal stabbing, revealing the dangerous influences boys are subjected to online and the secret meaning youngsters are giving to seemingly innocent emojis.

Maria Neophytou of the UK's children's charity NSPCC said the meeting with the prime minister had been a "critical milestone".

"The online world is being polluted by harmful and misogynistic content which is having a direct impact on the development of young people's thinking and behaviours. This cannot be allowed to continue," she said.

The series has resonated with an audience increasingly disturbed by a litany of shocking knife crimes committed by young people and the misogynistic rhetoric of influencers like Andrew Tate.

Earlier this year it emerged that Axel Rudakubana, a British teenager who stabbed to death three young girls in a knife rampage last July, had viewed footage of another high-profile stabbing just before the attack.

Pressures on young people

Australia notably banned access to social media for all under-16s late last year.

"Adolescence" also highlights the "incel" (involuntary celibacy) culture of males who feel unattractive to the opposite sex and harbour a hatred of women.

Netflix's vice president of UK content Anne Mensah said the series had "helped articulate the pressures young people and parents face".

"Adolescence" had 24.3 million views in its first four days, making it Netflix's top show for the week of March 10-16, according to the entertainment industry magazine Variety.

New UK rules requiring technology firms to tackle illegal content on their platforms -- including extreme pornography and child sex abuse material -- came into force on March 17 as part of the government's Online Safety Act, but were dismissed as "timid" by critics.

Ian Russell, whose daughter Molly died aged 14 in November 2017 after viewing harmful material on social media, said the approach had been dominated by media regulator Ofcom's "fear of legal challenge and their eagerness to placate the tech companies".

"Worried parents across the country are dismayed by yet more half measures," he added.

"Adolescence" writer Jack Thorne said he hoped a solution could be found to the issues raised by the series.

"It's about other people ... being given the opportunity to have conversations they haven't had before and that they should have had that might lead to policy change and things being made better for our young people," he told Sky News after the meeting.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)



from NDTV News- Topstories https://ift.tt/CLJ4iyU

अब नहीं चढ़ेगा काल भैरव मंदिर में शराब का भोग, यहां जानिए क्या थी मदिरा चढ़ाने के पीछे मान्यता

Ujjain temple Kaal Bhairav ban liquor : मध्य प्रदेश में 1 अप्रैल से कई बड़े बदलाव किए गए हैं. जिसमें सबसे बड़ा है शराबबंदी, जी हां. मप्र के...