game slot online gratis tanpa deposit

game slot online gratis tanpa deposit IWV Burros compete at Valley Youth Football League Super Bowl

Skobalj's 19 help UIC down La Salle 96-83

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — A South Korean legislative push to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol over his short-lived imposition of martial law fell through on Saturday after most lawmakers from his conservative governing party boycotted the vote. The defeat of the motion is expected to intensify public protests calling for Yoon’s ouster and deepen political chaos in South Korea, with a survey suggesting a majority of South Koreans support the president’s impeachment. Yoon’s martial law declaration drew criticism from his own ruling conservative party, but it is also determined to oppose Yoon’s impeachment apparently because it fears losing the presidency to liberals. Impeaching Yoon required support from two-thirds of the National Assembly, or 200 of its 300 members. The opposition parties who brought the impeachment motion had 192 seats, but only three lawmakers from PPP participated in the vote. The motion was scrapped without ballot counting because the number of votes didn’t reach 200. National Assembly Speaker Woo Won Shik called the result “very regrettable” and an embarrassing moment for the country’s democracy that has been closely watched by the world. “The failure to hold a qualified vote on this matter means we were not even able to exercise the democratic procedure of deciding on a critical national issue,” he said. Opposition parties could submit a new impeachment motion after a new parliamentary session opens next Wednesday. There are worries that Yoon won’t be able to serve out his remaining 2 1⁄2 years in office because his leadership took a huge hit. Many experts say some ruling party lawmakers could eventually join opposition parties’ efforts to impeach Yoon if public demands for it grow further. If Yoon is impeached, his powers will be suspended until the Constitutional Court decides whether to remove him from office. If he is removed, an election to replace him must take place within 60 days. Woo repeatedly urged ruling party members to return to the chamber to participate in the vote, waiting several hours for them to come. At one point, Democratic Party leaders visited a hall on the floor below the main chamber where PPP lawmakers were gathered, attempting to persuade them to vote. After being blocked from entering, they angrily accused the conservatives’ leadership of preventing its lawmakers from voting freely. Earlier Saturday, Yoon issued a public apology over the martial law decree, saying he won’t shirk legal or political responsibility for the declaration and promising not to make another attempt to impose martial law. He said would leave it to his party to chart a course through the country’s political turmoil, “including matters related to my term in office.” “The declaration of this martial law was made out of my desperation. But in the course of its implementation, it caused anxiety and inconveniences to the public. I feel very sorry over that and truly apologize to the people who must have been shocked a lot,” Yoon said. Since taking office in 2022, Yoon has struggled to push his agenda through an opposition-controlled parliament and grappled with low approval ratings amid scandals involving himself and his wife. In his martial law announcement on Tuesday night, Yoon called parliament a “den of criminals” bogging down state affairs and vowed to eliminate “shameless North Korea followers and anti-state forces.” The turmoil resulting from Yoon’s bizarre and poorly-thought-out stunt has paralyzed South Korean politics and sparked alarm among key diplomatic partners like the U.S. and Japan. Tuesday night saw special forces troops encircling the parliament building and army helicopters hovering over it, but the military withdrew after the National Assembly unanimously voted to overturn the decree, forcing Yoon to lift it before daybreak Wednesday. The declaration of martial law was the first of its kind in more than 40 years in South Korea. Eighteen lawmakers from the ruling party voted to reject Yoon’s martial law decree along with opposition lawmakers. Yoon’s speech fueled speculation that he and his party may push for a constitutional amendment to shorten his term, instead of accepting impeachment, as a way to ease public anger over the marital law and facilitate Yoon’s early exit from office. Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the main liberal opposition Democratic Party, told reporters that Yoon’s speech was “greatly disappointing” and that the only way forward is his immediate resignation or impeachment. His party called Yoon’s martial law “unconstitutional, illegal rebellion or coup.” The passage of Yoon’s impeachment motion appeared more likely Friday when the chair of Yoon’s party called for his removal on Friday, but the party remained formally opposed to impeachment. On Saturday, tens of thousands of people densely packed several blocks of roads leading up to the National Assembly, waving banners, shouting slogans and dancing and singing along to K-pop songs with lyrics changed to call for Yoon’s ouster. Protesters also gathered in front of PPP’s headquarters near the Assembly, angrily shouting for its lawmakers to vote to impeach Yoon. A smaller crowd of Yoon’s supporters, which still seemed to be in the thousands, rallied in separate streets in Seoul, decrying the impeachment attempt they saw as unconstitutional. Lawmakers on Saturday first voted on a bill appointing a special prosecutor to investigate stock price manipulation allegations surrounding Yoon’s wife. Some lawmakers from Yoon’s party were seen leaving the hall after that vote, triggering angry shouts from opposition lawmakers. On Friday, PPP chair Han Dong-hun, who criticized Yoon’s martial law declaration, said he had received intelligence that during the brief period of martial law Yoon ordered the country’s defense counterintelligence commander to arrest and detain unspecified key politicians based on accusations of “anti-state activities.” Hong Jang-won, first deputy director of South Korea’s National Intelligence Service, told lawmakers in a closed-door briefing Friday that Yoon had ordered him to help the defense counterintelligence unit to detain key politicians. The targeted politicians included Han, Lee and Woo, according to Kim Byung-kee, one of the lawmakers who attended the meeting. The Defense Ministry said Friday it suspended three military commanders including the head of the defense counterintelligence unit over their involvement in enforcing martial law. Vice Defense Minister Kim Seon Ho has told parliament that Defense Minister Kim Yong Hyun ordered the deployment of troops to the National Assembly after Yoon imposed martial law. Opposition parties accused Kim of recommending to Yoon to enforce martial law. Kim resigned Thursday, and prosecutors imposed an overseas travel ban on him.Warren Buffett just sent out a deafening warning signal to the market. 3 things investors should do

South Korean President Yoon's impeachment fails as his ruling party boycotts voteIn a case that could affect thousands of property owners and beaches visited by millions of people along California’s 1,100-mile coastline, a state appeals court has indicated it will uphold rules limiting the construction of sea walls along the coast. The case, centered on the California Coastal Commission’s decision to deny a sea wall for 10 vulnerable townhouses near Half Moon Bay, is playing out at the First District Court of Appeal in San Francisco. It has been closely watched by environmental groups, builders and oceanfront cities across the state as sea levels continue to rise due to climate change, putting billions of dollars of property at risk. “It’s a big deal,” said Charles Lester, director of the “This will potentially resolve a question that’s been under debate for years now.” In late October, the appeals court issued a tentative opinion agreeing with the that buildings constructed after Jan. 1, 1977, are not entitled to obtain permits to build sea walls. The state’s landmark Coastal Act took effect on that date. It says the commission “shall” issue permits for sea walls and other types of armoring to protect “existing structures” against erosion from battering waves. But state lawmakers never clearly defined the term. Property owners have argued “existing structures” means any building present at the time the permit application is filed. But the Coastal Commission’s attorneys have argued in recent years that “existing structures” only means those built before 1977. They cite a growing body of scientific evidence that shows that construction of concrete walls along the coast stops bluffs from eroding, depriving public beaches of sand. Such armoring also stops beaches from naturally migrating inland, resulting in them becoming submerged over time. “Sea level rise is a new game in town,” said Lester, the former executive director of the Coastal Commission from 2011 to 2016. “The shoreline is moving landward. We’re looking at projections of losing a significant amount of California’s beaches due to sea level rise. And most of that is in places that have a lot of sea walls.” The court scheduled a Dec. 11 hearing and then will issue a final opinion. In its tentative opinion, the judges cited earlier versions of the Coastal Act as it was being debated in the state Legislature, and showed how broad language allowing sea walls was tightened to read “existing structures.” “If the Legislature intended to guarantee any structure shoreline protection — regardless of when it was constructed — it could have retained the broad language,” the appeals court wrote. Private property rights groups are unhappy. “There may not be a simple solution. But reinterpreting the Coastal Act to sacrifice the rights of coastal landowners isn’t the way to solve these problems,” said Jeremy Talcott, an attorney with the , a Sacramento property rights group. “Simply allowing thousands of homes to fall into the sea is a very drastic decision.” The case will decide the fate of a quiet neighborhood on the San Mateo County coast. In 2016, a severe storm caused 20 feet of bluffs to collapse into the ocean in front of Casa Mira, a complex of 10 townhouses on Mirada Road that’s 2 miles north of Half Moon Bay. Worried their homes were in imminent danger, the owners obtained an emergency permit from the Coastal Commission to place boulders, called riprap, along the crumbling shoreline to block the waves from causing more damage. But when they applied to build a permanent 257-foot concrete sea wall, the commission said no. “Sea walls eat away at the beach,” said the commission’s chairwoman, Dayna Bochco, during the 2019 meeting. “So someday as this keeps moving in and in, you are going to lose that beach if you have that sea wall. I think it’s anti-access.” The commissioners in front of an adjacent four-unit apartment building that was built in 1972. They said the Casa Mira, whose townhouses were built in 1984, couldn’t have a sea wall. The Casa Mira Homeowners Association owners in San Mateo County Superior Court last year. The Coastal Commission appealed. In its tentative opinion, the appeals court overturned much of the lower court ruling, siding with the Coastal Commission and its Jan. 1, 1977, cutoff date. The appeals court said the Casa Mira homeowners still can get the sea wall they want, however. But only because it would protect a portion of the California Coastal Trail that runs between their homes and the public beach below, making it a “coastal dependent” use to improve public access that is allowed protection under the Coastal Act. Joshua Emerson Smith, a Coastal Commission spokesman, said the agency will withhold comment until the appeals court issues its final ruling. Thomas Roth, a San Mateo attorney who represents the Casa Mira Homeowners Association, did not respond to requests for comment. With so much at stake, experts say the issue could end up at the state Supreme Court next year. For that to happen, one of the parties would have to appeal, and the court would have to agree to take the case. Numerous groups filed briefs in the case, including the , the and the . “This is not just a California problem,” Lester said. “There are houses falling into the ocean in North Carolina, in Hawaii and other places. We’re not going to stop the ocean from rising. The question is what do we choose to protect over the long run? What’s in the public interest? Some of these developments have arguably reached the ends of their natural lives if you want to protect the beaches.”

South Korean President Yoon's impeachment vote fails after ruling party boycotts itNet loss of ($2.5 million) during the third quarter of fiscal 2024 compared to a net loss of ($11.9 million) during the third quarter of fiscal 2023 Company reiterated $15.5 million implemented SaaS ARR adjusted EBITDA breakeven run rate expectation Company accelerated expectation for achievement of SaaS ARR adjusted EBITDA breakeven run rate to the first half of fiscal 2025 ATLANTA, Dec. 16, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Streamline Health Solutions, Inc. (“Streamline” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: STRM) , a leading provider of solutions that enable healthcare providers to proactively address revenue leakage and improve financial performance, today announced financial results for the third quarter of fiscal 2024, which was the three-month period ended October 31, 2024, and the nine-month period ended October 31, 2024. Fiscal Third Quarter and Nine-Months Ended October 31, 2024 GAAP Financial Results The following financial results have been prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”). Total revenue for the third quarter of fiscal 2024 was $4.4 million compared to $6.1 million during the third quarter of fiscal 2023. For the nine months ended October 31, 2024, revenue totaled $13.2 million compared to $17.2 million during the same period in fiscal 2023. The change in total revenue was attributable to previously announced client non-renewals offset by successful implementation of new SaaS contracts. SaaS revenue for the third quarter of fiscal 2024 totaled $2.9 million, 66% of total revenue, compared to SaaS revenue of $3.9 million, 64% of total revenue during the third quarter of fiscal 2023. For the nine months ended October 31, 2024, SaaS revenue totaled $8.7 million, 66% of total revenue, compared to $10.6 million, 62% of total revenue, during the same period of fiscal 2023. As previously reported, the Company had a SaaS contract which did not renew at the end of its 2023 fiscal year. Net loss for the third quarter of fiscal 2024 totaled ($2.5 million) compared to a net loss of ($11.9 million) during the third quarter of fiscal 2023. For the nine months ended October 31, 2024 net loss totaled ($8.0 million) compared to a net loss of ($17.3 million) during the 2023 period. The third quarter and first nine months of fiscal 2023 included $10.8 million of impairment expenses offset by a $1.2 million and $1.9 million gain, respectively, from valuation adjustments which did not recur during the same periods in fiscal 2024. Net loss during the third quarter and first nine months of fiscal 2024 reflected lower total revenues and higher interest expense offset by reductions in cost of sales, SG&A and R&D expense of $1.9 million and $5.3 million, respectively, primarily due to the Company’s strategic restructuring at the end of fiscal 2023. Cash and cash equivalents as of October 31, 2024, were $0.8 million compared to $3.2 million as of January 31, 2024. The Company had no outstanding balance on its revolving credit facility as of October 31, 2024, compared to $1.5 million as of January 31, 2024. Subsequent to the end of the quarter, on November 13, 2024, the Company and its principal lender amended certain financial covenants related to the Company’s senior term loan and revolving line of credit, which are described in more detail in the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended October 31, 2024. On November 20, 2024, the Company received a $1.0 million draw from its revolving line of credit. Fiscal Third Quarter and Nine Months Ended October 31, 2024 Non-GAAP Financial Results Adjusted EBITDA for the third quarter of fiscal 2024 was a loss of ($0.3 million) compared to $0.4 million during the third quarter of fiscal 2023. Adjusted EBITDA for the nine months ended October 31, 2024, was a loss of ($1.3 million) compared to a loss of ($1.8 million) during the same period in fiscal 2023. The change in adjusted EBITDA reflects lower total revenue as a result of the previously announced client non-renewals, offset by significant cost savings achieved through the previously announced strategic restructuring. As of October 31, 2024, the Company’s total Booked SaaS Annual Contract Value (“ACV”) was $14.1 million compared to $15.0 million as of January 31, 2024. $12.0 million of the Booked SaaS ACV was implemented as of October 31, 2024, compared to $11.1 million as of January 31, 2024. Booked SaaS ACV represents the annualized value of all executed SaaS contracts, including contracts that have not been fully implemented as of the measurement date, assuming any contract that expires during the twelve months following the measurement date is renewed on its existing terms unless the Company has knowledge of the non-renewal. The Company reiterated that it believes its adjusted EBITDA breakeven run rate is $15.5 million of implemented SaaS ARR and expects to achieve this run rate during the first half of fiscal 2025. Due to the continued unpredictability of timing related to the closing of new contracts, the Company has not provided more specific guidance related to the timing of bookings. Management Commentary “During the quarter we expanded existing relationships through our new eValuator quality module, completed implementation for key accounts, including our first enterprise clients and added new logo wins. The resulting momentum has led us to accelerate our expected Adjusted EBITDA breakeven timeline,” stated Ben Stilwill, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company. “The Streamline team is focused on expanding our client footprint, maintaining a high caliber of client service, improving our solutions and progressing our financial goals and our mission to ensure our nation’s health systems are paid for all of the care they provide.” Conference Call The Company will conduct a conference call on Tuesday, December 17, 2024, at 9:00 AM ET to review results and provide a corporate update. Interested parties can access the call by joining the live webcast: click here to register . You can also join by phone by dialing 877-407-8291. A replay of the conference call will be available from Tuesday, December 17, 2024 at 12:00 PM ET to Tuesday, December 24, 2024 at 12:00 PM ET by dialing 877-660-6853 or 201-612-7415 with conference ID 13750374. An online replay of the presentation will also be available for six months following the presentation in the Investor Relations section of the Streamline website, www.streamlinehealth.net . About Streamline Streamline Health Solutions, Inc. (Nasdaq: STRM) enables healthcare organizations to proactively address revenue leakage and improve financial performance. We deliver integrated solutions, technology-enabled services and analytics that drive compliant revenue leading to improved financial performance across the enterprise. For more information, visit www.streamlinehealth.net . Non-GAAP Financial Measures Streamline reports its financial results in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). Streamline’s management also evaluates and makes operating decisions using various other measures. One such measure is adjusted EBITDA, which is a non-GAAP financial measure. Streamline’s management believes that this measure provides useful supplemental information regarding the performance of Streamline’s business operations. Streamline defines “adjusted EBITDA” as net earnings (loss) before net interest expense, income tax expense (benefit), depreciation, amortization, share-based compensation expense, valuation adjustments, restructuring charges, transaction related expenses and other expenses that do not relate to our core operations such as severance and impairment charges. A table reconciling this measure to “net loss,” to the extent relevant items were recognized in the periods covered, is included in this press release. Booked SaaS ACV represents the annualized value of all executed SaaS contracts, including contracts that have not been fully implemented, as of the measurement date, assuming any contract that expires during the twelve months following the measurement date is renewed on its existing terms unless the Company has knowledge of the non-renewal. Booked SaaS ACV should be viewed independently of revenue and does not represent revenue calculated in accordance with GAAP on an annualized basis, as it is an operating metric that can be impacted by contract execution start and end dates and renewal rates. Booked SaaS ACV is not intended to be a replacement for, or forecast of, revenue. There is no GAAP measure comparable to Booked SaaS ACV. Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 Statements made by Streamline Health Solutions, Inc. that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements that are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in the forward-looking statements included herein. Forward-looking statements contained in this press release include, without limitation, statements regarding the Company’s growth prospects, anticipated bookings, recognition of revenue from contracts included in Booked SaaS ACV, achievement of a breakeven SaaS ARR run rate, anticipated cost savings from previously announced strategic restructuring, expected improved implementation timelines and lower expenses for our clients, industry trends and market growth, adjusted EBITDA, success of future products and related expectations and assumptions. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the timing of contract negotiations and execution of contracts and the related timing of the revenue recognition related thereto, the potential cancellation of existing contracts or clients not completing projects included in the backlog and Booked SaaS ACV, the impact of competitive solutions and pricing, solution demand and market acceptance, new solution development and enhancement of current solutions, key strategic alliances with vendors and channel partners that resell the Company’s solutions, the ability of the Company to generate cash from operations, the availability of additional debt and equity financing to fund the Company’s ongoing operations, the ability of the Company to control costs, the effects of cost-containment measures implemented by the Company, availability of solutions from third party vendors, the healthcare regulatory environment, potential changes in legislation, regulation and government funding affecting the healthcare industry, healthcare information systems budgets, availability of healthcare information systems trained personnel for implementation of new systems, as well as maintenance of legacy systems, fluctuations in operating results, effects of critical accounting policies and judgments, changes in accounting policies or procedures as may be required by the Financial Accounting Standards Board or other similar entities, changes in economic, business and market conditions impacting the healthcare industry generally and the markets in which the Company operates and nationally, the Company’s ability to maintain compliance with the terms of its credit facilities, and other risks detailed from time to time in the Streamline Health Solutions, Inc. filings with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s analysis only as of the date hereof. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements, which may be made to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as required by law. Company Contact Jacob Goldberger Vice President, Finance 303-887-9625 jacob.goldberger@streamlinehealth.net *The Company effected a 15-for-1 reverse stock split effective as of 12:01am Eastern Daylight Time on October 4, 2024, and the Company’s common stock began trading on a split adjusted-basis when the market opened on October 4,2024. Comparative periods have been adjusted to reflect the impact of the reverse stock split. Source: Streamline Health Solutions, Inc.

Sean 'Diddy' Combs' third bid to be released on bail won't be decided until next weekAmmonia, a key ingredient in synthetic fertilizers, is critical in global agriculture, supporting billions of people. However, its production contributes significantly to carbon emissions, prompting urgent calls for greener alternatives. The traditional process of making ammonia involves nitrogen and hydrogen, with hydrogen typically sourced from natural gas. Environmental engineer Aurelian Istrate states, “Natural gas contains both carbon and hydrogen, but only hydrogen is needed for ammonia. This means that a lot of carbon is released during production.” The carbon footprint from traditional ammonia production is a pressing concern in the fight against climate change. Sustainable solution One promising solution lies in hydrogen production through electrolysis powered by renewable energy. However, Istrate notes that this method remains expensive and not widely adopted, leaving most ammonia produced through conventional means. In his research, Istrate proposes an innovative alternative: using biomethane instead of natural gas in ammonia production. Biomethane, derived from biomass such as food waste and agricultural residues, has the same chemical structure as natural gas (CH4) but with a significant difference – it is a renewable resource. When biomethane is used, the carbon dioxide released during combustion was recently captured from the atmosphere during biomass growth through photosynthesis. “This achieves a balance,” Istrate explains. In contrast, burning natural gas releases CO2 stored underground for millions of years, adding extra carbon to the atmosphere. Istrate further emphasizes the potential for carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to mitigate ammonia production’s environmental impacts. “If instead of emitting this carbon, you capture and store it permanently, you can work towards net-zero emissions or even carbon negativity,” he says. This means that ammonia production could offset more CO2 than it emits. Net-zero Ammonia One of the advantages of using biomethane is that it aligns well with existing ammonia production technologies. Istrate points out that the separation of CO2 is integral to biomethane and ammonia production processes, meaning no new technologies are needed for carbon capture. In his comparative research, Istrate evaluates three ammonia production methods: conventional processes, electrolysis, and biomethane-based production. His findings reveal that using biomethane alongside CCS can produce carbon-negative ammonia. He also delves into a more pragmatic approach, investigating a scenario where natural gas is blended with biomethane. To achieve carbon neutrality, Istrate discovered that a mix of 44% biomethane and 56% natural gas, combined with carbon capture, would be required. Economically, biomethane stands out as a competitive option, particularly in the current landscape influenced by high gas prices due to geopolitical tensions like the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This situation and the cost and inefficiency of alternatives like Direct Air Carbon Capture and Storage (DACCS) position biomethane as a more viable solution. “You don’t need complex technology like DACCS,” Istrate asserts. “Often, there are simpler solutions that can have an immediate impact.” Introducing biomethane into ammonia production is one such solution that could significantly lower carbon emissions in the agricultural sector while ensuring a sustainable supply of fertilizers. As the world grapples with climate change, innovations like biomethane represent hopeful pathways towards a greener future in ammonia production, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and aligning agriculture with environmental sustainability.