Square D was founded in 1902 in Detroit, Michigan, by Bryson Dexter Horton and James B. McCarthy as McBride Manufacturing Company, focusing on electrical fuses. By 1908, it became Detroit Fuse and Manufacturing, adopting the iconic “Square D” logo—a “D” in a square—reflecting its Detroit roots.
Renamed Square D in 1917, the company pioneered safety switches and circuit breakers, growing significantly with 18,500 employees and $1.65 billion in sales by 1991. That year, after a competitive 10-week bidding process, French multinational Groupe Schneider S.A. acquired Square D for $2.23 billion, raising its offer from $1.96 billion to $88 per share.
The acquisition, approved by Square D’s board and the U.S. Justice Department, made Schneider Electric the world’s largest electrical distribution equipment manufacturer, integrating Square D’s innovative products into its global energy management portfolio.
Did you know we have a number of programmes available with a January start date? Find out more about our programmes, scholarships and accommodation and join us in the new year – https://t.co/0sb2ziLGnKpic.twitter.com/kJopkWS8QH
ANSI’s 2025/2026 Student Paper Competition challenges high school & college students to investigate the invisible standards that keep our world running—from smartphone compatibility to food safety.
For nearly twenty years now, the American National Standards Institute Committee on Education administers a student paper competition intended to encourage understanding of the global standards system that also provides a solid prize — in the $1000 to $5000 range. The topic of the 2024 Student Paper Competition will be What Role Do or Could Standards Play in Safe and Effective Implementation of Artificial Intelligence Applications/Systems?
For the past six years Standards Michigan has hosted Saturday morning workshops to help students (and faculty) interested in entering the contest. We will soon post those dates on our CALENDER. We typically host them — three sessions ahead of the deadline — on Saturday mornings.
We provide links to previous paper winners and refer you to Lisa Rajchel: lrajchel@ansi.org for all other details.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
Higher education institutions worldwide exhibit a pronounced left-leaning bias primarily due to their structural dependence on large government. Public universities rely directly on taxpayer subsidies, while even elite private ones receive massive federal research grants, loan guarantees, and regulatory favors. This creates powerful incentives to support expansive government: more spending sustains enrollment via student aid, funds bureaucratic growth, and aligns research agendas with state priorities in climate, equity, and regulation.
Faculty and administrators, insulated by tenure and public-sector-like employment, internalize the worldview that justifies their funding model—favoring redistribution, identity politics, and skepticism of markets. Dissenting views threaten grant flows and institutional prestige tied to government alignment. Globally, from Europe to Latin America to Asia, state-dominated higher education reproduces this pattern, as independence from Leviathan remains rare. The result is ideological conformity masquerading as expertise.
Gad Saad, Professor of Marketing at Concordia Quebec, quotes E. O. Wilson (Edward Osborne Wilson), the renowned Harvard biologist and professor” “Karl Marx was right, socialism works, it is just that he had the wrong species.”
16yrs married to this RockStar today! Something like 25+ years together… 3 awesome wild kids and whole whack of crazy experiences together! I’ve Bullshitted my way to a lot of successes but Sarah’s been the best yet!… pic.twitter.com/BLBHTtwjSC
Educated at Yale College, Somerville College, the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard Medical School and Columbia Law School, Amy Wax speaks to the Buckley Institute, founded by William F. Buckley (Yale 1950). Links to National Centers at Bowling Green State University, the University of Virginia and the University of Nebraska.
People grow up in a web of relationships that is already in place, supporting them as they grow. From the inside out, it includes parents, extended family and clan, neighborhood groups and civic associations, church, local and provincial governments and finally national government.
The most important decision and life’s biggest hack is picking the right partner. pic.twitter.com/MeLu5it3rn
US academia has increasingly mirrored the dystopian control mechanisms in George Orwell’s 1984, particularly through the lens of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and its extensions into Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) frameworks.
In Orwell’s novel, the Party enforces ideological conformity via Newspeak (a restricted language that limits thought), doublethink (holding contradictory beliefs), thoughtcrime (punishing unapproved ideas), and the rewriting of history to serve power.
CRT posits that racism is embedded in the structure of Western institutions. It rejects colorblindness and meritocracy as tools of “white supremacy,” framing individuals primarily by racial identity — oppressors versus the oppressed. In universities, this has evolved into mandatory trainings, curricula, and loyalty tests that prioritize “equity” (equal outcomes by group) over equality of opportunity.
Key Orwellian parallels include:
Language control resembling Newspeak: terms like “systemic racism,” “white fragility,” “microaggressions,” and “anti-racism” redefine reality so that disagreement signals complicity in oppression.
Doublethink: universities champion “diversity” while enforcing ideological uniformity, claiming to fight oppression while stigmatizing dissent as violence.
Thoughtcrime via cancel culture: surveys show high rates of self-censorship, with dissenting scholars facing social ostracism, investigations, or professional consequences.
History is reframed — America’s founding reduced to perpetual racial hierarchy — echoing the Ministry of Truth. Standpoint epistemology elevates “lived experience” of favored groups over empirical evidence and universal reason.
This agenda undermines academia’s core purpose: the pursuit of truth through open debate and evidence. Instead of rigorous inquiry, power — framed as “punching up” — dictates acceptable thought, eroding liberal education’s commitment to individualism and free expression.
In the late 1960s, the discovery of massive North Sea oil reserves transformed Norway from a modest fishing, shipping, and hydroelectric economy into one of the world’s richest nations. Oil revenues funded an expansive welfare state and created the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund. This “outsized good fortune” should temper any sense of moral or cultural superiority some Norwegians express toward America. Striking oil is no guarantee of success — see Venezuela or Nigeria. Norway also benefited from American technology, open markets, and capital.
The United States further provided critical security: liberating Norway in WWII and leading NATO during the Cold War, allowing Norway to focus on welfare rather than heavy defense. No student debt! Arrogance ignores contingency. Norway’s success rests on oil rents, a small homogeneous population, high trust, and luck — not inherent superiority. America’s innovations and security role helped create the global order that enabled such fortunes in Norway specifically and Western Europe generally. Recall the American role in the destruction of the German heavy water refinement plants in November 1943 (The Heroes of Telemark) which bears an uncanny resemblance to the present USA Operation Epic Fury in Iran.
Gratitude and humility suit these discussions better than condescension.
This content is accessible to paid subscribers. To view it please enter your password below or send mike@standardsmichigan.com a request for subscription details.
…”Your children are not your children. They are the sons and daughters of Life’s longing for itself. They come through you but not from you, And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.
You may give them your love but not your thoughts, For they have their own thoughts. You may house their bodies but not their souls, For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
Outdoor play facilities for school children are governed by several key codes and standards to ensure safety and accessibility. The European Standard EN 1176 outlines safety requirements for playground equipment, covering design, installation, and maintenance to minimize risks like entrapment and falls.
The Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 mandates risk assessments and safe environments, while the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 (revised 1984) ensures playgrounds are reasonably safe for users.
The Consumer Protection Act 1987 holds manufacturers liable for defective equipment. The Children Act 1989 requires facilities to be suitable and safe. Ofsted emphasizes stimulating, inclusive, and varied play environments that promote physical and mental health, encouraging year-round outdoor learning. Compliance with these standards, alongside regular inspections (e.g., TÜV certification), ensures safe, durable, and engaging playgrounds that foster children’s development while minimizing injury risks.
Today at the usual hour we update our understanding of the technical literature that supports making these facilities safe, sustainable and enjoyable. Use the login credentials at the upper right of our home page.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T