ITB400_A1 Template.docAssignment 1: Multinational Corporation ExpansionImagine that you are a senior business manager for a U.S.-based multinational company. You have been informed by your supervisor that your Company needs to consider expanding into a new international market to seek new opportunities.To get started, you must decide the following:Select a publicly-traded Multinational Corporation (MNC) with which you are familiar.You must select a publicly traded company and a country the company is NOT currently operating in. Select a company that you like or you are interested in.Where to find a list of publicly traded companies:http://www.investorguide.com/stock-list.phphttp://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/18/United_States_Rank_1.htmlSelect a new international market and a country this company currently has not explored and should consider.Write a 6-8 page paper in which you:Analyze how each of the three major dimensions of international finance can affect your possible venture of your MNC in your chosen new international market, including potential opportunities and risks for each dimension.Examine the economic trends and impact of globalization in the chosen market and determine which of those emerging factors have potential for disruption that could affect operations.Assess whether the country you have chosen maintains a fixed or a flexible exchange system and discuss how this monetary system will affect your MNC. Provide a strong rational for possible implications and drawbacks of the existing system. Determine how the balance of payments will support the management of your MNC and explain how deficits and surpluses found within the country you have chosen can positively or negatively affect operations of your company.Analyze how the foreign exchange market your company is considering entering can impact international business operations. Examine key foreign market participants and provide recommendations of possible key financing opportunities for your MNC.Use at least three (3) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not quality as academic resourcesYour assignment must follow these formatting requirements:Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
International financial management
Net Neutrality and Freedom on the Internet
Net Neutrality and Freedom on the Internet. Net Neutrality: The end of internet freedom The internet has been one of the greatest technological advances ever seen in the last 40 years. It has opened the doors to many new advances in many other fields and has changed the way the world works today. Now, the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) and the government have decided that they need to regulate it. In theory, the regulation they would like to put in place seems like a good idea. The regulation they are putting in place is called net neutrality and it is supposed to do three things. The three things that net neutrality aims to do is no blocking, no throttling, and no paid prioritization. These all seem like good ideas and they are, the only problem is what must be sacrificed in order for the government to ensure these regulations are enforced. Net Neutrality laws should be removed so the internet can continue to grow. The first new rule of Net Neutrality is no blocking. According to CNET, this means that the ISP (Internet Service Provider) cannot block access of any legal content, services, or applications. The key here is what does the government consider legal. People would be surprised how much of what they view online each day may not be considered legal by the government. Another problem with the government blocking access to these certain website and services is that in order for them to block someone from visiting an illegal site or service, they must be monitoring them all the time. If someone is not being monitored, they could just as easily visit that site or service as they could before. So, by making strict new rules to block any illegal content, the FCC will always be monitoring everything that everyone is doing online. This will give the government a whole new level of access to peoples’ personal lives and nothing will be completely private anymore. Another common happening today is networks and systems being hacked (Science Alert). This requires very fast implementation of new security methods and protocols to prevent mass hacking. So, what happens when the government is going to be involved with the ISP’s? Every time an ISP needs to do a network update, it will likely need to be approved by the government first in order to make sure that it is still complying with the no blocking rules. That way, an ISP could not secretly start blocking a service without the FCC being aware of it. As can be demonstrated by how fast and efficient a post office works, the government is not very fast in what it does, this means that if a new network vulnerability is found, it is possible that in the time it takes for the government to look over and approve the update, a hacker or group of hackers could have already hacked into the network and start stealing information from millions of people. How could this be improved? The answer is no blocking, period. ISP’s simply do not need to block any content of any kind unless their own system detects that it is a threat. Using this method, it would allow all content to be available to everyone just as most people are used to now. However, with an automated threat detector, it would make the internet safer as well and less vulnerable to viruses and other hacking threats. This is basically how the internet works right now. Essentially, the government does not need to fix what is not broken already. Nonetheless, the government does not want things to be that simple. The reasoning behind their no blocking policy is not to protect people from the big evil internet service providers, but rather it is so that no one is downloading or viewing anything illegal (Wired). Otherwise, the government would have little interest in the no blocking policy. This is simply a way for them to get their foot in the door to block people from doing anything they determine to be illegal on the internet. Here are some examples of illegal things that most people do every day on the internet and don’t even realize its illegal. For examples, it is illegal to fake a name online, it is illegal to use ad blocking software, and it is illegal to save pictures from the internet because they are someone else’s property. People view lots of illegal content on YouTube all the time and one of the more ridiculous things that is illegal to do online is to post anyone singing happy birthday because it is a copyrighted song. If this rule of Net Neutrality were to be kept, many of the freedoms that people are able to experience online today would be gone. No more happy birthday videos on YouTube. The next rule that Net Neutrality will enforce is no throttling. This means that ISP’s cannot slow down or speed up certain services as long as they are legal (USA Today). This comes back again to the issue of what does the government consider legal on the internet. The real point here, though, is that an ISP should not be able to slow down a certain service because they use a lot of bandwidth or if they are providing content that the ISP does not agree with. An example of this throttling happening is if someone were trying to view content on a competitor of the ISP that someone is currently subscribed to. So, if someone on Comcast’s network was trying to view a news story on a website other than NBC (Comcast owns NBC), it is possible that Comcast could throttle them because they are viewing content on a competing news network site. This is where the idea of no throttling is a very good idea, it is not right for one company to throttle data to impair access to a competitor. However, there is one perspective of throttling that the government does not take into consideration. In some instances, throttling ensures that many people are not impeded by the usage of the few. In other words, a few people could be hogging tons of available bandwidth to access a media intensive site or service while everyone else ends up with reduced speeds and network reliability while they try and do less bandwidth intensive tasks. This has been becoming less of an issue as ISP’s continue to invest in their infrastructure and try to improve total available bandwidth so that more people can be accessing more content at the same time. An example of throttling being necessary, however, was demonstrated when an app on Android became very popular and everyone was using it to communicate, which caused a massive bandwidth problem over the T-Mobile network. In order to keep the network stable so that everyone could still use it in some capacity, T-Mobile had to throttle the users who were using the communication app. In this case, the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few. It’s cases like these where throttling can be a necessity in order to maintain network integrity. Netflix has often been the victim of throttling. Almost one third of the internet traffic, today, is from people streaming Netflix (Time). Most networks now have the capability to allow for that. However, a few years ago, when Netflix was starting to become big, this was quite a strain on the current networks and in many cases people would get stuck with buffering because the ISP’s were having to throttle Netflix in order to keep the network in working order. Throttling is a self-solving problem in many ways. If people complain that a service they like is being throttled, then the ISP will have to make improvements to handle the additional traffic and this leads to network improvements and an overall better service. The part that can be an issue is when an ISP tries to throttle a competitor, which is when Net Neutrality could be good. However, this problem as well can be self-solving. If someone is trying to view something from a competitor of the ISP and they keep getting throttled, they will either complain or they will switch ISP’s. This will then force the ISP to stop throttling that site or they will lose customers. So, once again, the problem solves itself without the government needing to intervene. The third rule of Net Neutrality is no paid prioritization. This is meant to prevent any ISP from favoring some legal traffic over other legal traffic that has paid them (Wired). This is often referred to as “no fast lanes.” The best way to look at this is to think of a highway. Say there are eight lanes to this highway and the speed limit is the same for six of the lanes. However, two of the lanes have a higher speed limit and have less traffic, but they require a toll to use them. This is basically what some ISPs have been doing. They will charge certain companies to use these faster and less congested lanes so that their service is better. The idea behind this third rule of Net Neutrality is that no one gets access to fast lanes and everyone has equal access to everything. In theory, this is a great idea, but the problem here is similar to the problem with the second Net Neutrality rule. If one service is using most of the bandwidth, they should have to pay a premium to be a drain on the network. When a massive bandwidth using company like Netflix is being used on a network, it is a huge drain on the network and it requires often expensive upgrades to be made in order to handle that new bandwidth demand. These upgrade costs are partly due to the fact that the bandwidth hog is impeding the networks performance, so they should have to pay a premium for a fast lane so that it can offset the cost of network upgrades. This also allows the network to advance and overall advance the way the internet is used. When a new company comes around and starts putting a strain on the network, this makes it so the network needs to be upgraded in order to handle it which leads to an overall better network. If there is no paid prioritization, then ISP’s may not be able to justify the costs associated with making network improvements and then that will lead to an even worse service overall. Thus, the third rule of Net neutrality is also a bad idea as it will cause the US to fall even farther behind in average internet speeds around the globe. Those were the three main points that the government highlights about Net Neutrality and about how great it is, but what are they hiding? One key detail that they never want to mention to anyone is the fact that they will have control over how the internet is run. They are trying to stop ISP’s from regulating the internet by regulating it themselves. The government isn’t exactly well known for providing great regulations, generally they are tedious and time consuming and ultimately pointless. Why should the internet have to move at the same pace as the government? It has cost taxpayers over two billion dollars so far to make the government run healthcare website work, and it still doesn’t work properly. From the beginning to the very end of the enrollment period for the healthcare website, it was having tons of problems. Constantly freezing and glutting and kicking people off the server. The same people that developed this system now want to be in charge of how the internet is regulated and run. It would be only a matter of time before the government wants to further tighten its grip on how the internet is regulated and run. Before too long, they may end up being completely in charge of how the internet works and that will lead to disaster. The internet today is by no means perfect. However, the last thing it needs is a bunch of incompetent politicians in charge of how it works. These are all things that the Net Neutrality bill will secretly allow. Therefore, it was enacted without a proper vote even being taken, it was just suddenly put into place, a bill that as over 300 pages was put into place without anyone even having time to read it. Essentially, it was put into action without anyone even knowing what it all really entailed. A huge right that will be infringed upon by Net Neutrality is everyone’s own right to privacy. Part of the Net Neutrality act allows the government to monitor internet activity. The NSA is a part of the government which allows the NSA to view every bit of activity from everyone on the internet. No one will have any privacy from the government anymore. Any time someone looks at anything on the internet, the NSA can find out about it. This is a huge infringement on a right to privacy from the government. The government knows enough about the citizens of the United States, they don’t need to know what size cloths someone wears or that somebody is very interested in funny cat videos. This is just giving the government more control over what people do every day and not allowing them to feel like what they are doing is somewhat private. The argument to this is that once something is on the internet, it never goes away, and anyone can have access to it. That is true, however, with the government monitoring everyone’s activity, it makes it just that much easier for them to keep tabs on people. The other fact is that while what someone posts to the internet is no secret, what they are doing on the internet can still be unknown to many. With the government able to monitor activity through ISP’s, nothing that is done over the internet anymore is private. The government could start monitoring if someone is selling lots of their things on Craigslist and could then audit them if they did not report their profits on their taxes. Technically, profit made even from selling items can be taxed. This will simply reduce the freedom on the internet even more. It’s all just a step closer to complete government control over what everyone does everywhere. In the end, the government is ultimately enacting these new Net Neutrality rules, so they can gain more control over people on the internet. It will give them a whole new level of access and control over everything that everyone is doing. The no blocking policy allows them to control what is displayed on the internet by not blocking things that are legal, but making sure anything they consider illegal is blocked. The no throttling policy will make it so that everyone has an equal playing ground. This will make sure that things people want to be faster are not simply in order to make it equal for everyone. Lastly, not having the paid prioritization could cause the ISP’s to not get enough money to continue making important network improvements that make the internet an overall better place. The government is going to end up holding back the internet and will slow down its evolution. If the government had been in charge of the internet from the beginning, it would be nowhere near as powerful as it is today. E-Mail probably never would have come into existence because it would compete with the Post Office, making the Post Office less profitable. The way the very world today works could have been changed if the government had been in charge from the beginning. Hopefully, in the future, the Net Neutrality laws will be repealed to help the internet grow, not the government. So far, seven ISP’s have filed lawsuits against it, so it is likely that more ISP’s will join together to help ensure that the internet will not become crippled by the government. The government needs the internet, the internet does not need the government. Works Cited Babcock, Grant. “Net Neutrality And Obama’s Scheme for the Internet Are Lousy Ideas.” Reason.com. Reason Foundation, 12 Nov. 2014. Web. Apr. 2015. Beck, Glenn. “Tell The FCC To Stay Away From The Internet.” Glenn Beck. MERCURY RADIO ARTS, 16 Feb. 2015. Web. Apr. 2015. Berkman, Fran. “Net Neutrality Jargon Explained.” The Daily Dot. N.p., 25 May 2014. Web. Apr. 2015. Cobb, Kelly W. “Why Net Neutrality and Open Internet Mandates Are Bad for Consumers.” Americans for Tax Reforms. Braynard Group, 21 Oct. 2010. Web. Apr. 2015. Dorfman, Jeffrey. “Net Neutrality Is A Bad Idea Supported By Poor Analogies.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 13 Nov. 2014. Web. Apr. 2015. Gillula, Jeremy. “The FCC Is Keeping an Eye on Interconnection, But More Clarity Is Needed.” Electronic Frontier Foundation. EFF, 13 Apr. 2015. Web. Apr. 2015. Gross, Grant. “Thousands Call on Congress to Overturn Net Neutrality Rules.” PCWorld. IDG ConsumerNet Neutrality and Freedom on the Internet
Emergency Management Response Analysis Paper, Part B
order essay cheap Emergency Management Response Analysis Paper, Part B. I need support with this Law question so I can learn better.
Refer to the same event you wrote about in the Wk 1 assignment, Emergency Management Response Analysis Paper, Part A, and the selected articles about Hurricane Katrina and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill from the Week 3 University Library Readings.
Write a 700- to 1,050-word paper in which you analyze the work of the secondary responders (i.e., non-law enforcement, such as EPA, Coast Guard, engineers, etc.) in the aftermath of the emergency. Exclude details about police and fire response, as they are primary responders. In your paper:
Detail roles within structured command (ICS).
Outline applicable crisis response objectives.
Discuss decision-making strategies and challenges faced by leaders in working through the event.
Include at least 2 academic sources in your paper.
No more than 20% of paper shall be outside sources.
Format your paper according to APA guidelines.
Emergency Management Response Analysis Paper, Part B
Part 2: Hypothesis testing Context: Your organization is evaluating the quality of its call center operations. One of the Essay
Part 2: Hypothesis testing Context: Your organization is evaluating the quality of its call center operations. One of the most important metrics in a call center is Time in Queue (TiQ), which is the time a customer has to wait before he/she is serviced by a Customer Service Representative (CSR). If a customer has to wait for too long, he/she is more likely to get discouraged and hang up. Furthermore, customers who have to wait too long in the queue typically report a negative overall experience with the call. You’ve conducted an exhaustive literature review and found that the average TiQ in your industry is 2.5 minutes (150 seconds). Another important metric is Service Time (ST), also known as Handle Time, which is the time a CSR spends servicing the customer. CSR’s with more experience and deeper knowledge tend to resolve customer calls faster. Companies can improve average ST by providing more training to their CSR’s or even by channeling calls according to area of expertise. Last month your company had an average ST of approximately 3.5 minutes (210 seconds). In an effort to improve this metric, the company has implemented a new protocol that channels calls to CSR’s based on area of expertise. The new protocol (PE) is being tested side-by-side with the traditional (PT) protocol. Instructions: Access the Call Center Waiting Time file. Each row in the database corresponds to a different call. The column variables are as follows: ProtocolType: indicates protocol type, either PT or PE QueueTime: Time in Queue, in seconds ServiceTime: Service Time, in seconds Perform a test of hypothesis to determine whether the average TiQ is lower than the industry standard of 2.5 minutes (150 seconds). Use a significance level of α=0.05. Evaluate if the company should allocate more resources to improve its average TiQ. Perform a test of hypothesis to determine whether the average ST with service protocol PE is lower than with the PT protocol. Use a significance level of α=0.05. Assess if the new protocol served its purpose. (Hint: this should be a test of means for 2 independent groups.) Submit your calculations and a 175-word summary of your conclusions.
Discuss Unreliability In Shutter Island
Films more often than enough can demonstrate signs of unreliability and the majority of the time it is the narrator who is the cause of the film’s dubiousness. The dictionary definition of an unreliable narrator asserts that they demonstrate qualities and tendencies that denote an absence of reliability or perception of the narrative. “Whether due to age, mental disability or personal involvement, an unreliable narrator provides the reader with either incomplete or inaccurate information as a result of these conditions.”  As Wayne Booth once stated: “I have called a narrator reliable when he speaks for or acts in accordance with the norms of the work, (which is to say, the implied authors norms) unreliable when he does not”  . We are consumers of narratives which has given us the ability to identify unreliable stories. However as “theoreticians, we are less well able to say what constitutes unreliability and how it is detected”.  Shutter Island is a film adapted, from a novel, by Martin Scorsese; the film is within the film noir genre, with an unreliable narrator that, as result, plays with your mind and makes the film appear to be very ambiguous. Shutter Island is clearly shown through the perspective of a fallacious narrator. A narrator’s job is to reveal what is real in the narrative and, comparable to tellers in reality, the narrator may have it incorrect or would rather disclose what they deem to be true. “On this model we perceive narrative unreliability when we perceive a disparity between the intentions of the implied author concerning what is true in the story and the intentions of the narrator concerning what she would have the reader believe.”  Shutter Islands’ narrative follows this idea as throughout the film, the central characters perspective gradually becomes more and more inconsistent. The narrator successfully distorts the lines between fantasy and reality which as a result makes the audience struggle to distinguish between the two. It is not until half way through the film where we are initially required to consider the option that the protagonist himself is the one who is in fact mad. It is, to a certain extent, evident from the beginning that something is not right or clear. Scorsese suggests that the narrator is unreliable “without explicitly revealing where the perspective diverges from an objective view of events”  ; thus, we can, on no occasion, really believe what we are being shown. In many films it is possible to distinguish between “dream sequences, flashbacks and concrete reality.”  Shutter Island has all of these components however it is hard to distinguish which section is which. The unreliability of the narrator in Shutter Island is hard to decipher as the narrator does not really give us a motive to suspect Teddy. The uncertain characteristics of the island and of the establishment are reinforced with the blustery weather, but also visually with repeated long shots. These shots emphasize the remoteness and eeriness of the area as well as the uncanny diegetic and non-diegetic choice of symphony music. “Furthermore, figures like Dr Cawlez (Ben Kingsley), Dr Naehring (Max von Sydow) or the warden (Ted Levine), not to mention the patients themselves, make it even easier to align oneself with Teddy’s judgment that what is happening on Shutter Island is uncanny.”  It is as the film develops that Teddy’s illusions turn out to be more powerful and make his reliability dither. For example, during his discussions with Noyce in the prison, Dolores interferes as a hallucination and enhances the unsettling of Teddy. What’s more, Richard Dyer and Douglas Pye are two theorists who indicate with respect to film noir “the way in which dream, flashback and voice-over structure cast into doubt the status-as-truth of the eventers presented”  . In Shutter Island, Teddy repeatedly has memories and recollections of Dachau, which he recounts to Dr Naehring. These flashbacks however also blend with his dreams and as result become more detached from the proceedings happening in real life. This is an exemplar for the cooperation amongst the narrator’s partiality, recollection and trustworthiness, which we reexamine after the recognition of Teddy’s psychological condition. This unreliability persists all throughout the film and even at the end we are still unclear as to what is real. Furthermore, Shutter Island is made within the film noir genre. A key characteristic in film noir is that there will permanently be some form of a mystery. Shutter Island would be considered a neo-noir film due to the fact that it does “relate or draw upon the notion, the image and the putative conventions of film noir, and, directly or indirectly, on some of the film featuring centrally within most version of the basic noir canon”.  It has been affirmed that an element of the film noir genre is that the characters the story is centered on are “mentally and emotionally vulnerable”  and occasionally they are, or envision themselves, to be physically helpless too. Leonardo Di Caprio is the protagonist in Shutter Island; he has been through a distressing incident where his wife and children have died. He is plagued by images of his dead family and haunted by the fact he was unable to stop it; as a result, he is on a mission to find and murder his wife’s murder. However, he is hampered by himself through his mental condition of suppression and deterioration which is the primary narrative impediment for the audience. A quote by Leonardo from the film Memento that sums this idea up: “Memories can be distorted. They’re just an interpretation, they’re not a record, and they’re irrelevant if you have the facts”.  As a final point, when watching a film, we need to be conscious that nonentity may appear as it seems and that even the camera may be lying to us. Seymour Chatman once asserted that “visuals are no more sacrosanct than words and that the camera can even conspire with an unreliable narrator”  . In the genre film noir, this method of narrative disruption is very common, for example in the movie The Lady from Shanghai (Orson Welles), the camera’s focal point is on the main character who is correspondingly the unreliable narrator, which is confessed by mistake in the introductory narrative. In Shutter Island red herrings can be discovered, however they are quite simply disregarded, which operates to subvert the narrative. Shutter Island supports this idea of not being able to trust the camera: one example is seen when Teddy fires his gun at Cawley where his blood is dashed all over the white board. However, shortly after the image we are presented with a shot that makes it appear as if nothing has occurred, that the gun is fake and the Cawley is still positioned in the same place and very much alive. It is clear in this sequence that the “narrative discourse here is built for shock effect”  ; however it also clearly demonstrates to the audience that Teddy and the camera are scheming with each other and that the camera is in actual fact Teddy’s coconspirator. In conclusion, it can be debated that Shutter Island’s story occurs on six distinct planes which are “the actual reality, the narrated reality, the perceived reality, the flashbacks, the dreams and finally the hallucinations”  . It is difficult to differentiate each one throughout the film due to the fact that they all blend together which is what makes it confusing and difficult for the audience to extricate reality and the truth from the rest. As a result, the audience, between the unreliable narrator and the unreliable camera work, are left with unclear knowledge of what is really happening. Shutter Island strongly follows the film noir genre characteristics by leaving the revelation of what is real until the end, however, Shutter Island is slightly different to many common film noir films due to the fact that even the ending is slightly unclear, while it is generally supposed that the film will end with “Teddys lobotomy as he is taken away by the orderlies in the final image of the film”  . Due to the fact that even the ending is ambiguous, it is clear that Shutter Island has a very unreliable narrator which makes it difficult for the viewer to distinguish reality from the rest.