Category Archives: Progress

Ndoeljindoel/DreamstimeProphets of the impending automation apocalypse predict that robots will soon take 7 percent to almost 50 percent of all American jobs. Recently, billionaire Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates suggested that the job-stealing robots should be taxed just like the workers they replace. In an interview last month with Quartz, Gates suggested,"Certainly there will be taxes that relate to automation. Right now, the human worker who does, say, $50,000 worth of work in a factory, that income is taxed and you get income tax, social security tax, all those things. If a robot comes in to do the same thing, you'd think that we'd tax the robot at a similar level."

Of course, taxing anything means that it raises the price and less of it is produced. For example, if you want to have people use less electricity produced by fossil fuels because you are worried that the carbon dioxide emitted contributes to possibly dangerous climate change, you impose taxes on that. In a sense then, Gates' proposal is treating automation as a negative externality. In fact, automation (and the productivity it enhances) is the key to economic growth. Doing more with less is how people achieve prosperity.

In an insightful op/ed over at The Washington Post, Harvard University economist Lawrence Summers asks ...

...why tax in ways that reduce the size of the pie rather than ways that assure that the larger pie is well-distributed? Imagine that 50 people can produce robots who will do the work of 100. A sufficiently high tax on robots would prevent them from being produced. Surely it would be better for society to instead enjoy the extra output and establish suitable taxes and transfers to protect displaced workers. It is hard to see why shrinking the pie, rather than enlarging it as much as possible and then redistributing, is the right way forward.

This last point has long been standard in international trade theory. Indeed, it is common to point out that opening a country to international trade is like giving it access to a technology for transforming one good into another. The argument, then, is that since one surely would not regard such a technical change as bad, neither is trade, and so protectionism is bad. Gates's robot tax risks essentially being protectionism against progress.

Taxing robots will slow down progress and ultimately make most of us poorer than we would otherwise be.

Nevertheless, with regard to the future of automation, Summers seems to buy into the notion that this time it is different. However, there are voices cautioning against dire forecasts of automation making humans economically redundant. MIT economist David Autor makes a persuasive case in which he identifies ...

...the reasons that automation has not wiped out a majority of jobs over the decades and centuries. Automation does indeed substitute for laboras it is typically intended to do. However, automation also complements labor, raises output in ways that lead to higher demand for labor, and interacts with adjustments in labor supply. Indeed, a key observation of the paper is that journalists and even expert commentators tend to overstate the extent of machine substitution for human labor and ignore the strong complementarities between automation and labor that increase productivity, raise earnings, an augment demand for labor. ...

Changes in technology do alter the types of jobs available and what those jobs pay. In the last few decades, one noticeable change has been "polarization" of the labor market, in which wage gains went disproportionately to those at the top and at the bottom of the income and skill distribution, not to those in the middle. I will offer some evidence on this phenomenon. However, I will also argue that this polarization is unlikely to continue very far into the foreseeable future.

When considering whether Summers or Autor is right, I come down on the side of Autor. More on why the automation apocalypse is overstated at another time. In the meantime, a tax on robot "labor" is a dumb idea.

Read more from the original source:

Robot Tax = Protectionism Against Progress - Hit & Run : Reason.com - Reason (blog)

White House spokesman Sean Spicer, along with Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price, addressed the GOPs health care overhaul Tuesday during a news briefing.

WASHINGTON Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price says the new House Republican health care legislation is a work in progress that represents a step in the right direction.

Price says at the daily White House briefing that the administrations goal is to improve health care and coverage while reducing costs and making plans more affordable.

He says the bill is just one of three phases. He says the administration is also planning a regulatory overhaul and additional legislation to accomplish things that cant be done through the reconciliation process.

As for an early wave of opposition from conservative groups like Club for Growth, he says this is the beginning of the process. He says the administration looks forward to working with the groups through this process.

READ MORE: As Trump praises health care legislation, GOP tries to sell it.

View post:

WATCH: Price says GOP health care a 'work in progress' - PBS NewsHour

On March 8, International Womens Day, women worldwide are planning to strike in the name of equal rights. Dubbed A Day Without A Woman, the strike encourages women to take a day off from both paid and unpaid labor. Women comprise almost half of the U.S. workforce and thus could make a large economic impact by taking off work.

How exactly would a day without women affect the economy? According to the Center for American Progress calculations based on the labor share of the gross domestic product, or GDP, and womens relative pay and hours of work, womens labor contributes $7.6 trillion to the nations GDP each year. In one year, women working for pay in the United States earn more than Japans entire GDP of $5.2 trillion. If all paid working women in the United States took a day off, it would cost the country almost $21 billion in terms of GDP. Moreover, women contribute many millions of dollars to their states GDP each day, making their work crucial to the health of their local economies as well. (see Methodology for more detail)

However, this number does not fully represent the hit the economy would take if all women took a day off. Womens paid labor contributions are undervalued because women are overrepresented in sectors of the economy that are low-profit. Many of these sectors are inherently less likely to have significant productivity gains since they are face-to-face service occupations, but they still matter a great deal to the overall functioning of the economy. Women make up 94 percent of employees at child day care services, 88 percent of home health service workers, 97 percent of preschool and kindergarten teachers, 90 percent of registered nurses, 94 percent of secretaries and administrative assistants, and 89 percent of maids and housekeeping cleaners. These supportive and caregiving services contribute to the productivity of the individuals and families who are the recipients of this work. For example, children who receive a high-quality education earn higher lifetime earnings, and high-paid managers productivity often relies on skilled assistance. If the earnings of female-dominated service and caregiving sectors accurately reflected the long-term value created by these jobs, womens labor share contribution to the GDP would be even higher.

Even if womens paid work was valued more accurately, this still would not include the other ways in which women contribute to the economy. This is because economic measures such as GDP do not include unpaid labor, which is mostly taken on by women. Women in the United States spend 150 percent more time on housework than men and more than twice the time men spend on caregiving. This unpaid labor includes child care, caretaking, and cooking along with a variety of other tasks that are vital to the economy.

Although many women who care for their families do not receive a paycheck for doing this work, their labor is valuable and should be included in GDP. Economist Nancy Folbre notes the irony that the measure we call gross domestic product excludes the value of most domestic work. If a woman did not do that unpaid work, the family would have to hire someone and pay them a wage, contributing to GDP. Since unpaid work is not included in GDP measures, it could be said that the nation is consistently and significantly underestimating GDP. Using a conservative assumption, a 2015 report by McKinsey Global Institute estimates that womens unpaid work amounts to about $10 trillion per year, or about 13 percent of global GDP. Additionally, a paper from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis found that incorporating unpaid domestic work into U.S. GDP would have raised it 26 percent in 2010.

Women have always been a valuable and integral part of the economy, and womens paid work is becoming increasingly important to family well-being. In 2015, 42 percent of mothers in the United States were breadwinners, and an additional 22.4 percent were co-breadwinners, making between 25 percent and 49 percent of household earnings. The womens strike offers an opportunity to reflect on how important womens labor is to the country and remind Americans of what remains to be done to accurately value the work that women do to sustain the nations families and economy.

Using data on average hours worked per week and employment from the 2014 Current Population Survey, the authors calculate the proportion of hours women work out of total hours worked by all workers. They found that women provide 43.8 percent of all labor hours in the U.S. economy. If all their labor were withdrawn, it would lead to a roughly proportional reduction in GDP.

Data used for national calculations: 2014 Current Population Survey data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Table 22: Persons at work in nonagricultural industries by age, sex, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, marital status, and usual full- or part-time status) and 2014 data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (Table 1.1.5: Gross Domestic Product)

Data used for state calculations: 2014 Current Population Survey data at state level from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (Table 21: States: Employed people, by class of worker, gender, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 2014 annual averages and Table 22: States: people at work, by gender, age, race, Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, and hours of work, 2014 annual averages) and 2014 regional data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (Gross domestic product (GDP) by state)

Kate Bahn is an Economist and Annie McGrew is a Special Assistant for the Economic Policy team at the Center for American Progress.

See the article here:

A Day in the US Economy Without Women - Center For American Progress

Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price labeled the House Republican plan to repeal and replace ObamaCare a work in progress.

Appearing at the White House press briefing on Tuesday, Price praised the House bills as a step in the right direction but stopped short of saying the Trump administration supports everything in it.

This is a work in progress, he added. This is an important process to be had.

The former Georgia lawmaker notably refused to accept the label TrumpCare to describe the proposal.

The newly unveiled House plan faces a rocky road forward in Congress.

It ran into a buzzsaw of opposition from conservative lawmakers and outside groups less than 24 hours after it released. Republican opponents say the plan does not live up to the GOPs promise of fully repealing the law and balked at the potential high cost of the measure.

Moderate Republicans have also expressed concern about provisions that phase out Medicaid expansion and defund Planned Parenthood.

Price cautioned that the House bill is only the first step in Trumps three-phase plan to overhaul the healthcare system, which also includes regulatory changes and additional legislation to allow insurance to be sold across state lines, among other changes.

This is the beginning of the process and we look forward to working with them and others, the HHS secretary said when asked about opposition from conservatives.

Price said the goal of the legislation is to allow patients to keep their doctors and keep insurance premiums low, but he avoided making specific promises about the plan.

The bill was released before a Congressional Budget Office score of the proposal, which would indicate how much it would cost and how many people could use their insurance plans.

But Price said lawmakers would work to ensure the measure doesnt add to the deficit once the score comes in.

See the rest here:

Health secretary: ObamaCare repeal plan a 'work in progress' - The Hill

There is a slow-moving threat in our nation that is ravaging higher education. To the untrained eye, it might go unnoticed, but there are thousands who do see the dark clouds and feel the pelting rain of the damaging, persistent storm. Across this great country, our campuses are flooded with bad news: decreasing funding, increasing tuition, (the prospect of) decreasing enrollment and increasing debt for our students and institutions.

More acutely, our nations Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) are directly in the eye of the storm, fighting just to tread these waters. While other colleges and universities are facing these challenges, our institutions must also deal with the legacy of decades of discrimination, underfunding and both intentional and unintentional neglect.

The proposals we brought to President Trump and to Congressional leaders, including the co-conveners of our visit, Sen. Tim ScottTim ScottFor the countrys sake, HBCUs must make progress Dem lawmaker apologizes for crude Conway joke Chelsea Clinton: Conway deserves apology for Dem lawmaker's 'despicable' couch joke MORE (R-S.C.) and Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.), would go a long way to addressing key problems we are facing.

First, the states in which our schools reside need to fully fund the match required for the federal dollars our 1890 institutions receive. At many of our schools, we have been forced to return millions of dollars to the federal government since 2000, when state matching funds were first required for our land-grant dollars. For example, at Lincoln University of Missouri, over 17 years we have received $96 million in federal funding. Our state funding total for the land-grant match is $9 million. Despite the mandate for a dollar-for-dollar match, we are receiving approximately one-quarter on the dollar. This disparity costs not only the land-grant operations, but the university as a whole, when we must return a large portion of that funding. Over the last two years, we have made strides to explain this plight to Missouri state legislators, but we still have a long way to go before we are fully matched. Other 1890s are doing the same, with some filing lawsuits as the last viable option. We believe the federal government should use every incentive and tool at its disposal to make states meet their financial obligations.

Second, general operating funds from our states are down as well. One research study found that 46 states are spending, on average, 18 percent less per student post-recession. In order to make up for these cuts, institutions in many states have responded by raising tuition. Tuition increases make college less affordable and accessible for many students, particularly those at HBCUs. We must seek solutions to maintain that accessibility through the development of scholarships and the reinstitution of year-round Pell Grants.

Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) introduced legislation last Congress, and again in January, which would provide $19 million for scholarships for students at our HCBUs. We need more advocates like Scott and allies like the Thurgood Marshall College Fund to help our students attain a college education.

Third, once we get students into our schools, our next goal is to help them become successful citizens. Book learning and classroom work alone do not make students competitive in the global workforce. Our HBCUs must work to increase work-study and internship opportunities. Our students need to work at government agencies and privately-owned entities. There is no reason why interns from every HBCU should not be filling the halls on Capitol Hill this summer and throughout the year. Similarly, our large and small businesses have an obligation to recruit and partner with all colleges and universities and we intend to forge those relationships. Sure, we can sit back and tell our students to blaze their own trails, but to truly live up to our missions, we should be helping them build those trails.

In addition to these challenges for HBCUs, there are other important opportunities, including making certain that there is at least a $25 billion infrastructure package for modernizing, renovating and repairing our buildings and facilities and installing broadband and other science and technology upgrades for our schools.

The almost 90 HBCU Presidents and Chancellors who came to Washington last week left after our conversations feeling hopeful that progress can be made. Together, we can and will withstand the storm that is hitting higher education. And, we will reap the harvest for the public investment in HBCUs and our students hard work when these outstanding young people take their places and become the leaders of this great nation.

Dr. Kevin Rome is President of Lincoln University in Missouri and is Chair of the Association of Public Land-grant Universities Council of 1890 Universities. The Council of 1890 Universities is comprised of the 19 presidents and chancellors of APLU-member historically Black land-grant universities.

The views expressed by this author are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

More here:

For the country's sake, HBCUs must make progress - The Hill (blog)

Precise knowledge of the connections in the brain -- the links between all the nerve cells -- is a prerequisite for better understanding this most complex of organs. Researchers from Heidelberg University have now developed a new algorithm -- a computational procedure -- that can extract this connectivity pattern with far greater precision than previously possible from microscopic images of the brain. Prof. Dr Fred Hamprecht, head of the "Image Analysis and Learning" working group at the Interdisciplinary Center for Scientific Computing, expects such automated image data analysis to bring about great strides in the neurosciences. It will likely lead to a circuit diagram of the brain.

Understanding how the brain works is one of science's greatest mysteries. "Except for a simple roundworm, there is still no circuit diagram of a complete animal brain, let alone a human brain," states Prof. Hamprecht. In recent years, imaging techniques have been developed that can finally produce three-dimensional images of the entire brain at a sufficiently high resolution. These images are so big, however, that manual analysis would take centuries. What is needed, therefore, is an automated analysis process with the lowest possible error rate.

The new algorithm leverages non-local image information, allowing the researchers to study non-adjacent regions of the image and deduce whether they belong to the same nerve cell. Dr Bjrn Andres of the Max Planck Institute for Informatics in Saarbrcken has demonstrated how short and long-range interactions can be considered jointly. The aim is to find an optimal solution that does justice to both types of image information in the best way possible. "This approach affords far lower error rates than all known methods," states Prof. Hamprecht.

Research groups around the world have joined in competitions to measure the accuracy of their automated analysis pipelines. The aim is to partition a three-dimensional image into the nerve cells it contains. A labour-intensive manual process is used beforehand to determine the correct partitioning, which is kept secret. All submissions are then compared to the diagram and the approach with the lowest error rate wins. In the latest partitioning challenge, the CREMI Challenge on Circuit Reconstruction from Electron Microscopy Images, the researchers at the Interdisciplinary Center for Scientific Computing succeeded in producing the most accurate analysis by a large margin.

To explain the challenge of using this analysis method to produce a circuit diagram of a brain, Prof. Hamprecht resorts to the fly as an example. The fly is capable of astonishing feats: It finds food, shelter and mates in a complex and often hostile environment. "Although its brain is smaller than the head of a pin, the diagram of its neuronal connections remains elusive." The Heidelberg team is using their new algorithm to map the brain circuit of the fly first before moving on to higher animals, according to mathematician Dr Anna Kreshuk.

In the past fifteen years, the "Image Analysis and Learning" working group has been developing machine learning algorithms for computer vision, with applications mostly in the life sciences but also industry. The latest research results, achieved in a close international cooperation, were published in the journal Nature Methods.

Story Source:

Materials provided by Heidelberg, Universitt. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.

Here is the original post:

Progress towards a circuit diagram of the brain - Science Daily

TechCrunch

Hyperloop One shows off progress on its full-scale test site in Nevada TechCrunch Hyperloop One is building its first full-scale test track, which is meant to demonstrate every aspect of its eventual first shipping Hyperloop transportation system, in the Nevada desert and it's making good progress. The so-called 'DevLoop' site is ... New images show progress on Hyperloop One high-speed transit systemThe Daily Dot Hyperloop One unveils progress on test site in Nevada desert (Photos)L.A. Biz Hyperloop One Dubai Test Shows Photos Of Progress At Nevada Testing Site 'DevLoop'International Business Times all 44 news articles »

Read the rest here:

Hyperloop One shows off progress on its full-scale test site in Nevada - TechCrunch

COMING UP SHORT again on mental health, The Pilots Feb. 26 editorial, is correct in many ways. While we have made progress in recent years, much work remains.

But this is a long game. I disagree that the accomplishments made during the 2017 General Assembly session were insignificant.

The Joint Subcommittee on Mental Health Services in the 21st Century had three broad goals for the session.

First, we wanted to redefine the mandated services provided by our community services boards. Current law only requires CSBs to provide emergency services and case-management services if funds are available. A longer list of services is enumerated in the Code of Virginia that the CSBs may provide. The Joint Subcommittee sought to expand the list of mandated services, beginning with same-day access and coordination with primary health care, by 2019. Our goal for this session was to add those two services and set a schedule for the delayed implementation of the remaining services. We accomplished that goal.

HB1549, sponsored by Del. Peter Farrell, and SB1005 from Sen. Emmett Hanger establish the new service requirements and are accompanied by a $6.2 million appropriation. Beginning on July 1, 2021, CSBs will be required to provide crisis services; outpatient mental health and substance abuse services; psychiatric rehabilitation services; peer and family support services; veterans services for those who are not able to access care at VA hospitals; care coordination; and case management.

Our second goal was to respond to problems made clear by the horrific 2015 death of Jamycheal Mitchell at the Hampton Roads Regional Jail in Portsmouth.

I remain shocked by the circumstances of Mitchells death and cannot fathom how this young man was allowed to die.

Someone must be responsible for investigating suspicious jail deaths. At the last minute, we were able to reach an agreement giving the Board of Corrections funding for an additional investigator and clear responsibility to perform investigations. Del. Rob Bell and Sen. John Cosgrove carried the legislation on behalf of the Joint Subcommittee. I carried a similar bill for the governor. The final budget also included language to mandate prompt assessments for people in our jails shown to have a mental illness during an initial screening. The budget also directs the Compensation Board to report to the money committees the impact of this change and any recommendations for adjusting staffing standards.

Our third goal was to increase funding for permanent supportive housing, which has demonstrable positive effects for people with mental illness. Long-term recovery and success requires a safe place to which someone can go, and those services must be available throughout the commonwealth. We received an additional $5 million for these services. Given the tight fiscal times, getting this infusion of new dollars is significant.

I am very proud of the accomplishments made this year. In the past, such advancements would be viewed as the end of the reform effort. However, the legislature acknowledged the need for a continued focus on mental health and extended the work of the Joint Subcommittee until 2019. The action reflects a level of commitment necessary to expand on our progress.

Some big questions remain unanswered. More than 30 years ago, the late Sen. Elmon Gray pointed out that we dont really have a system of mental health care. We have an array of services that are good in wealthy communities but limited everywhere else. Sadly, to some extent that is still true. Would we be better off reorganizing our public mental health system? What about the state Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Services and our 10 public psychiatric facilities? Can we improve upon the function of and the relationships between those entities?

Our questions are not limited to the general structure and function of our mental health system. How can we improve our jail diversion efforts so that people like Mitchell get treatment instead of being arrested? How can we streamline and improve the process for getting services for children? What more do we need to do as a commonwealth to reduce the stigma and raise awareness about mental illness?

The volume of work ahead does not diminish what we have accomplished thus far. I am reminded every day of the urgency of this work by the calls from scared or desperate families, but I am confident in the future.

Creigh Deeds, a Democrat,

represents the 25th District in the Virginia Senate and is chairman of the Joint Subcommittee to Study Mental Health Services in the 21st Century.

Original post:

Creigh Deeds: Progress on mental health - Virginian-Pilot

Republican leaders in Congress are hoping to have a vote on a budget reconciliation bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act in the coming weeks.There is significant concern that the repeal bill will cause millions to lose their health care coverage and make affordable health insurance out of reach for many.In this time of uncertainty, the importance of preserving programs that have provided access to essential health services and have been an effective part of our public health system for decades, is perhaps greater than ever before.

Title X established in the Public Health Services Act in the 1970s with strong bipartisan support - was signed into law by President Richard Nixon. Since then, it has been a proven success and a critical component of the health care safety net.Today, Title X supports the delivery of family planning and related services, including the full range of birth control methods and breast and cervical cancer screenings, to over four million patients nationwide.Recent pollingshows that while support for family planning has largely fallen along party lines in Congress, there is widespread bipartisan support among the American public for federal funding for contraception.

The need for publicly funded contraception is already far greater than the supply.Recent researchshows that nearly 20 million American women currently live in contraceptive desertsdefined by their lack of reasonable access to public health care sites offering the full range of contraceptive methods. An article published in the American Journal of Public Health noted thatTitle X would need at least$737 million allocated annuallyto provide care to all women in need of publicly funded family planning care. This estimate was developed with coverage options that are available in our current health care environment and would surely be much higher if those coverage options were eliminated.

For those that are more focused on fiscal impact than public health outcomes, Title X is a good investment and cost-saver. Every$1 invested in the program saves taxpayers more than $7, thats a net government savings of $15 billion.

Californias Title X program the largest and most diverse Title X system in the country program is a model of the programs success. Over one million women, men and teens are served each year thats 25 percent of the nations Title X patient population through a comprehensive network of providers. Californias Title X network includes federally qualified health centers, city and county health departments, universities, hospitals, school-based clinics, Planned Parenthoods and stand-alone family planning and womens health specialists.

Title X providers in California collectively helped women avoid one million unintended pregnancies in 2013. A key part of this success is ensuring that patients have access to their provider of choice that they trust to provide quality, confidential services in their local communities and that providers have access to training and technical assistance to help them provide care based on current clinical guidelines and best practices.

In our polarized Congressional environment, lets call on our representatives on both sides of the aisle to come together in support of Title X and what should be widely shared domestic goals of reducing unintended pregnancy, saving taxpayer dollars, enhancing womens economic security, and strengthening families and communities.

Julie Rabinovitz, MPH, is the President and CEO of Essential Access Health. Julie serves on the Board of the National Family Planning & Reproductive Health Association (NFPRHA) and was Board Chair from 2009-2011. She is the current Chair of the Family Planning Councils of America Board of Directors.

The views expressed by this author are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

The rest is here:

Don't reverse decades of progress in ensuring access to women's ... - The Hill (blog)

2017 V 2016 mileage by team

Photo by: Motorsport.com

Beyond the headline times, with Mercedes and Ferrari sharing the top spots throughout the first test, a deeper look at the testing progress shows just how big a step Maranello has made with its 2017 contender compared to 12 months ago.

For while Mercedes completed the most mileage with 558 laps the Brackley-based team is actually down on what it managed in the first test 12 months ago, when it got through a mighty 675 laps.

Last week Ferrari managed 468 laps, which is up on the 353 laps it had delivered in the first test last year.

Further proof of the reliability progress of Ferrari's power unit was shown by Haas, whose 343 laps were a leap over the 281 laps it did last season.

While Ferrari will be looking to keep up its form, teams like Toro Rosso and McLaren will be eager to deliver a complete turnaround this week.

Scuderia Toro Rosso's integration of new Renault power has had a significant impact on its year-on-year mileage achievements, as it completed the fewest laps out of all the teams.

It's in stark contrast to last season when its 447 laps was the second highest tally behind Mercedes.

Year on year lap time comparison

Photo by: Motorsport.com

This week's second test will give us a better indication of how much faster 2017's Formula 1 cars.

The opening week was more about systems and reliability checking with ultimate performance not really a priority until the next few days.

So far, the five fastest F1 cars had shown a performance increase of 3.86 percent, something that is expected to grow.

Reliability index

Photo by: Motorsport.com

Despite the heavily revised cars that have appeared, the first test showed that reliability does not appear to be a big issue.

The red flag count was down by 20 percent compared to this time last year. The 2017 field is somewhat different, with fewer rookies and reduced accident flag potential perhaps.

New regs might be expected to push the number of mechanical stoppages out on track higher, but in fact the mechanical failures generating red flags are so far down by 50 percent.

Read more:

Analysis: Ferrari mileage proves 2017 F1 progress - Motorsport.com, Edition: Global