In this video, we're gonna continue our conversation about the persuasive process, specifically by talking about content premises. This is the second of our third videos on the persuasive process. So if you missed the first one, on the Tools of Motivation, you might wanna go back and check that out. But just to get us started, I wanna lay a little foundation here because all of these persuasive processes really go back to what we call Anthemomatic Persuasion. Anthemomatic Persuasion. So I just wanna review really quickly if you missed that first video or if it's been a bit since you've watched it, what is Anthemomatic Persuasion? Well, first of all, it was really developed by our pal Aristotle, all the way back with Aristotle, who kinda looked at syllogism, which said there's a major premise and then a minor premise and a conclusion. And he looked at that and said, for persuasion, that may not be the best method. Let's try something a little different here. Let's not use syllogism. Let's just assume that the audience will make a connection here and leave that major premise unstated. Let's not state it. Let's let the audience come to that conclusion. The audience will supply that major premise. It's our job as a persuader then to identify the common ground that comes along with that major premise that we're both just on the same page with. I don't have to say it. You know what I'm talking about, right? And so that's our major premise and that's what Aristotle was saying. We don't have to say the major premise. We'll leave that unstated. We're all on the same page. Let's just jump right in with some other things. And so the persuader then, though, has to be very specific in identifying that common ground to make sure that we're on the same page as the audience and we know where we're starting from. This really encourages the co-creation of meaning between the audience and the persuader and gives you that kind of step up. Already we're on the same page. Already we're working together. Our minds are working as one. So it kind of makes that connection for us, right? Encourage that co-creation of meaning between the persuader and the audience. So for our purposes, again, we're breaking this down into three different areas. There are three different ways that we go about using this enthemomatic persuasion. The one we talked about in the first video was process. We use kind of the psychological aspects, the psychological factors of persuasion in connecting with the audience. That was our process premise. This video is gonna focus on the content premise, which has more to do with the logical or rational patterns of persuasion. Then the other video that will be the third in this series is going to be on cultural premises, right? The cultural premises that are rooted in the values, the beliefs and the behaviors passed down by that culture or society. So in this video, though, we're gonna focus on the content premises. So just to cover a few principles of this content premises, first of all, it does, again, as we've mentioned, operate in the enthemomatic persuasion realm of enthemomatic persuasion. Here, this is this content premises. These content premises are part of that enthemomatic persuasion. They also rely on logical and or analytical abilities of the audience, the ability of the audience to understand and to make those logical connections and to be persuaded by those logical connections and use their analytical abilities to do so. Sometimes the content premises are called arguments or propositions or offers or whatever, but it all really comes back to those logical elements of persuasion. So just to clarify a little bit more and connect to the last video, in the Tools of Motivation, we talked about the psychological process. We talked a lot about how that related to the peripheral route, for example, in the elaboration likelihood model. We mentioned that it was the low involvement process, processing, usually reserved for, I don't wanna say necessarily less important, but we're talking here about, what kind of candy bar should I get? Not what house should I buy? Now in the content premises, we're getting into the high involvement processing that deals with things like, where should I buy this house or not? What should I look for in a car that I buy? These are major or, you know, who should I marry? Who should I date? These types of things are in the high involvement processing arena in the evaluation likelihood model. And those are the types of things we're gonna be getting into with these content premises, as opposed to the low involvement processing that we talked about in the psychological premises, the Tools of Motivation that we talked about in the first video. So when we talk about content premises, we need to talk about proof. We need to talk about proof, because that's what the audience is looking for for these logical elements. They want proof. They want to know for sure what it is you're saying. They want evidence of that, right? So we need to understand, first of all, that the effectiveness of proof varies from, due to a variety of factors. The effectiveness of proof will not be stable from one situation or one person or the other. So we need to consider how this proof, the effectiveness of this proof will vary from situation to situation. So just to take an example, one popular topic here lately has been the legalization of marijuana. Some states have done it, some states haven't, so it's been a hot topic for several years now. We need to understand that if we're trying to persuade about the legalization of marijuana, whether or not it should be, let's just say for the sake of argument that we're arguing that it should be legalized, right? That it should be legalized in whatever state where we're at. We need to understand that the situation we're in will impact how people perceive that logic and whether it makes sense or not, right? If we're making this argument at a fraternity house, then that might be different than making this argument at a Sunday school classroom, right? Those are gonna be two different situations. Or even at the rotary, which is made up of business leaders and social leaders from the community that have a different perspective on these things. So the situation is going to impact how the audience perceives that and how that persuasion is perceived and how effective it is, right? We also have to consider the persons involved, right? Who are the persons involved? Again, we can look at demographics, we can look at age, we can look at sex, we can look at, you know, employment, socioeconomic factors in determining, you know, how this particular person or this audience might perceive our argument and the effectiveness of that proof. Some audiences are gonna be more likely to take evidence from particular people or situations and believe that more strongly than other audiences might. So we need to consider the persons and understand that the effectiveness of that proof will vary from person to person. And then finally, topic to topic. Obviously people care about different things. Some people are gonna feel strongly on one side of this argument or the other. It may feel strongly that marijuana should be legalized or it may feel strongly that it should not be legalized and then you're gonna have a whole bunch of people in the middle who just don't care or don't know or don't have an opinion on this particular topic. So we need to understand that the effectiveness of proof is gonna vary from topic to topic as well. So effectiveness of proof is going to vary. We also need to understand that there are different components of proof, right? Two primary components. When we look at logos, we look at logical appeals, we look at proof, we look at, you know, these rational appeals for persuasion, there are really two things that are involved. The first is evidence. Can you prove it? Can you prove it? Do you have the evidence to back it up? So that's one aspect of it. The other then is reasoning. So we look at evidence and reasoning. Reasoning then has to do with can we make that connection between the evidence and what it is we're talking about and between the evidence and what it is the audience wants to hear or what they want to know or what they already know about, right? So we need to consider the evidence that we have, the proof that we have and then the reasoning, can we make that connection between those things and between that audience and so forth? So when we look at logical persuasion, when we look at logos, we're concerned with evidence and reasoning. So we're gonna talk about each of those things in greater depth here. First, let's take a look at the evidence by examining the different types of evidence that we can have, different types of evidence. The first category that we have is what we call dramatic evidence. By dramatic, we don't mean like cinematic and the drama of life and things like that, not the drama of reality TV. We're talking about drama in the sense of, for example, telling the story.  We are compelled by stories. We are persuaded by stories and so forth. So dramatic evidence has to do with telling that story or somehow conveying that story to the audience. So we take a look at things like narratives, right? Again, we are narrative creatures. We love stories. We love to be involved. So narratives are these longer form stories that we have where we tell evidence, we provide evidence through the use of storytelling. We tell elaborate and involved stories that engage the audience and help them understand what it is we're talking about and why we're trying to persuade them of that and so forth, the benefits of all that. So it all comes to fruition through these longer form stories that we can tell. That's what we mean by narratives, right? We also have anecdotes, which are kind of the same thing except they're shorter.  They're very compelling. You know that you can tell when somebody knows how to tell a story, right? You can tell when somebody knows how to tell an anecdote. One famous example of this in both arenas, really narratives and anecdotes, would be President Reagan. Ronald Reagan was a great storyteller and part of that comes from his personality, but part of it comes from the fact that he was a professional actor. He knew how to deliver these things. That's why he was called the great communicator, right? But he had all these three notebooks and note cards and things that he kept around that people are still discovering in his presidential library, these little stashes of stories and things that he would drop into speeches and drop in when he was communicating with people because he knew that people were narrative creatures. He had all these kinds of little stories and jokes that he would slip in there because they're very powerful, they're very convincing and that's what people are compelled by those things there, okay? So we can provide dramatic evidence through the use of narratives and through the use of evidence. We can also do so through the use of testimony, right? So when we have an expert in some arena or we have somebody that would be expert testimony or when we have somebody who's experienced something firsthand, we call that peer testimony, but either way, that's dramatic evidence. That's somebody who has some special knowledge or expertise of that particular topic and that particular arena who is telling us about that thing and that is compelling to us. That is dramatic evidence that we like to hear from people who know about it either because they've studied it and have an expertise in that area or because they've lived it and have some personal experience in that area and they can share their story then too. We can also convey and engage in dramatic evidence through the use of participation, right? We can have people engage in that activity themselves and to really understand it and understand what it means. So maybe you've been involved with a number of college fairs and high school fairs and things like that where the police are there and they bring what they affectionately call the drunk goggles, right? They put these on and it simulates what it is like if you're trying to drive or walk after you've had X amount of drinks, right? So you put these on and it's a fun way for people to kind of, they put them on scooters or they put them on, just have them walk a course and they film it or they have their friends watch it and talk about how difficult that is, right? They give them that firsthand experience of what that would be like and it's all fun. And then they say, though, these simulations, they say, yeah, that was great. And then along the process, you killed three people in a drunk driving accident, right? And that really drives that home, that experience home when you realize, well, this is not just for fun. It's not just, you know, something that's completely lighthearted. We get people to participate in these things and to live these experience, that's a really compelling way to engage evidence and to engage in persuasion with those people, right? Then finally, we just have rational evidence, okay? So no longer into the storytelling and things like that. Now we're really strictly using logos, things like statistics, things like, you know, we're asking people to use their logical processes. We're laying out this evidence and asking them to really consider and think about those things. So those are different types of evidence. We have the dramatic evidence that has more to do with engaging a person's in narrative, inherent narrative interest and desires and telling stories and being a part of stories. And then you have rational evidence, which is really just engaging the analytical, logical part of their brain. We also have different types of reasoning. Okay, there's two sides of the same coin here. Evidence and reasoning, both important. Evidence to demonstrate proof and to provide that proof. Reason to make the connections between that evidence and the audience and that evidence and the topic that you're talking about to make sure that there's a secure connection there. So when we talk about reasoning, we have a variety of different types of reasoning. I want us cause to effect, cause to effect so that the one thing causes the effect of another. So on classic examples, we know that we don't have to go too far to explain to people that smoking causes lung damage and causes cancer and so forth, right? We know this scientifically. So we start with the action, smoking cigarettes or smoking, whatever, and we can then proceed to the effect because this person smokes cigarettes, they are more likely to have lung damage and to have health issues in that arena, right? So that's cause to effect. We can also flip it around and go the other direction. We can start with the effect and go to cause in the recent impeachment trial, the second impeachment trial for President Trump regarding the Capitol riots and the Capitol insurrection, the prosecution from the House representatives started with the effects. They showed this really compelling video which really walked through the days of the effects of the people in a rioting and storming the castle and attacking police and so forth, searching out for public figures and presumptively to do them harm so they started with the effect. They said, this is what happened. This was the result.  And they went through months of, you know, President Trump said this and President Trump implied this and met with this person. And then on that day at the ellipses, he gave the speech and said these things and he said fight so many times and this is why it happened. So they started with the effect and then provided the cause for that. Okay, that's another type of reasoning. So we can go cause to effect. We can also go effect to cause. Other times we can reason from symptoms. We can take a look at things and say, okay, this person is president. So right now we have, you know, just in general, just talking in general, you know, at the moment the economy's horrible and so the economy's horrible and we're at war with this nation and people are living below the poverty level and health is an issue and so forth. All you can give this laundry list of things that are wrong with the country and say these symptoms are all representative of this person's leadership and that's why this person should no longer be president. This person should no longer be senator. There's no, you know, whatever it should no longer be mayor or whatever level you're talking about. So we list of all the symptoms and we reason from that criteria to application. This is a type of persuasion where we say, okay, what is it that people need? What is it that presumptively people need and are looking for? So for example, if you're, this would be an example of if you're looking to buy a car then this, this advertisement is laying out this is what you need. You know, these are the criteria you should be using to apply what you're looking for in a car buying experience. You should be looking for complete transparency. You should be looking for lifetime warranty. You should be looking for technology driven process. Presumably this is all things that are provided by this dealer then, right? So they're laying out the criteria that are necessary in the application of that situation. So we have that kind of reasoning. Another type of reasoning is reasoning from comparison. We compare things all the time, right? We compare, you know, when I get an example as a politician says, I have a plan to fix social security. Here's my plan. Here's my opponents plan to fix social security. Let's compare the two. Or my plan on the budget is this and theirs is that, right? Let's compare those two. So we reason from comparison. We compare two things that are presumably related, ideally related and we work from there. Then we also two very common types of reasoning that we have our first reasoning from deduction, which is what our guy Aristotle did a lot. And he started, you know, if we think of it like a funnel where we're starting at the top with the big idea, right? The big broad idea. And then we're narrowing it down. We're narrowing it down to a particular hypothesis and narrowing it down to specific conclusions as a result of that, right? We're working our way down that funnel. We pour the big ideas in at the top where it's widest. And then at the end, we come out with these very narrow ideas. And that's what Aristotle did very well. He was, he used deductive reasoning on many occasions on many of life's large issues. The other type of reasoning that we can have then the kind of the flip side of this is inductive reasoning. And this is what we see when you see Sherlock Holmes, for example, Sherlock Holmes is a famous example of somebody uses inductive reasoning. Sherlock Holmes looks at all these little things, right? That he sees along, picks up little clues along the way and from that then expands outwards. So he's starting kind of the upside down funnel, right? He's starting from something very narrow, these very specific clues that, you know, at times seem disconnected, seemed like they're not connected at all. And then from that, he's able to put together a pattern or something and at the bottom then come out with this broader conclusion, right? That's inductive reasoning, inductive reasoning. So those are two different, you know, kind of famous types of reasoning, deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, but all different types of reasoning that we can use. Okay, there's no shortage of inductive or types of reasoning that we can use. There's also different types of reasoning evidence. So again, different ways that we make these connections between reason and evidence. Things like statistics, we use testimony, we use comparisons and analogies. All of these are ways that we support our reasoning and connect it to the evidence and demonstrate the relationship between the two. Those are all important things. Again, because we need to, we can't just have either reasoning or evidence and we can't just have reasoning that exists separately from the evidence or vice versa, right? We need to have reasoning and evidence that are connected and that we can demonstrate that relationship between the two of them. There are times when our reasoning gets out of hand though, it does not make sense. People use illogical reasoning and we call these fallacies. Okay, so there are a variety of common logical fallacies, fallacies again being illogical reasoning. And so we want to avoid these things and we also, as persuaders, we need to avoid these things and we also, as an audience, then need to know how to recognize them so that we can discard those arguments from other people too and call them out on those types of things. So one is called, and the first few here in Latin, that's just how they come out, but post hoc ergo proctor hoc, which means after, therefore, because of. So because something happened after something else, that means that there's a relationship between the two, which is not, again, this is illogical. It's not true, right? So you see an example here. Everybody who's been to the moon has eaten chicken. That means anybody who eats chicken goes to the moon. And we know that's not true.  So that's a post hoc ergo proctor hoc. Just because something happened afterward does not mean there was a relationship between the two. So again, going back to the capital insurrection, that's the argument that President Trump would make, that his supporters would make, that just because the ride happened after his speech or after some things he said does not necessarily demonstrate a relationship between the two. No, I'm not saying that's the case. I'm just saying that's the argument they would make, that just because it happened afterward does not mean you can attribute what happened to him. That's a post hoc ergo proctor hoc argument, and it's illogical. Ad hominem means to attack the person. Ad hominem means attacking the person instead of attacking their argument. You don't like something somebody says.  What's the connection there?  There's no specific, you need to offer specific evidence in response to what they said, if you're going to try and negate their argument, right? You can't just attack that person.  Okay, what's the connection between the two? That's an ad hominem attack. That's attacking the person instead of attacking their argument. Ad populem is what we call a bandwagon argument, a bandwagon effect, and this is also illogical. It says that just because something is popular does not mean it's true. And we know that to be the case, right? There are lots of people and lots of things that are popular but aren't necessarily good, if you know what I'm saying, right? Aren't necessarily good at what they do. So if we don't necessarily want to jump on the bandwagon just to say, oh, well, other people think that this person or this thing is good, so I have to think that too. A lot of people say, this person's very popular. They sell a lot of records, so they must be good, not necessarily. The undistributed middle, undistributed middle means that we tend to pull people to one extreme or the other in a sense and we see this a lot in politics. For example, in the 2020 election, we saw a lot of President Biden or then candidate Biden is a Democrat and so is Bernie Sanders and they've talked and they're kind of friendly, so that means that Biden must be a socialist as well. Bernie Sanders is a socialist, well known, likes these socialist ideas and so because he is friendly with Biden, that must mean that Biden is a socialist as well. He can't be in the middle there, he can't be undistributed, gotta be somewhere in the connection between the two. And then finally, the straw man argument where you sort of make up a weak argument for the other side and then explain why it's a weak argument, even if it's not their argument specifically. Again, not to belabor this point, but in the impeachment trial related to the insurrection, the impeachment trial of President Trump, his lawyers continually made the argument and stressed that there was a lack of due process involved in the situation, right? And they kept playing that on the prosecution that the prosecution hadn't investigated enough, hadn't done this, had not considered and followed due process and while that may have been accurate, the fact is in an impeachment trial, it's not a criminal trial, so due process does not apply in that situation and yet they kept throwing that because they didn't have much else to rely on, I don't think, they kept throwing that on the prosecution and saying that this was an illegitimate case because of a lack of due process, even though, again, due process, not required to be a part of an impeachment trial. Since the straw man argument, they laid this argument on them, they laid this policy on them, that the other side had not demonstrated an interest in or not laid out themselves, but they had laid it out there for them because it was something that they could attack, simply so and it gave them an arena to attack. So these are things we need to watch out for to be cautious of in using as a persuader. We don't wanna fall into this trap of using logical fallacies as a persuader. We also wanna be on the lookout for these types of things as we receive persuasion from other people. So again, in this video, we've talked more about the logical process of persuasion, how we can use logos and these content premises as methods of persuasion again, we've talked about in another video, we've talked about psychological processes and then the third video in this series, we'll talk about cultural premises and how culture impacts persuasion and can be used in persuasion, but in this video, we talked about logic and reasoning, right? And so logos, again, broken down into evidence and reasoning, we need to be able to provide that proof and understand what proof is and then accurately and correctly apply the use of evidence and reasoning in these situations in order to provide an effective persuasive argument. If you have questions about this or anything else related to persuasion, I'd be happy to chat with you about that. Just feel free to shoot me an email. I'm always happy to respond to those.


How old exactly is the GNU slash Linux operating system? Because last week, Linux had a birthday. The Linux kernel celebrated its 30th birthday and a lot of new to Linux users, especially those that watch my channel, many of you guys are thinking about coming over to Linux from Windows and you hear stories about Linux celebrates its 30th birthday and you think the GNU slash Linux operating system is actually turning 30. No, no, no. Because again, GNU slash Linux is actually the full name of our operating system and GNU, the GNU part of that, has actually been under development for about 38 years. Now GNU, the project, was announced in September of 1983. So 38 years ago this month actually. So it's celebrating a birthday. Maybe we should celebrate the birth of GNU instead of the birth of the Linux kernel. But nobody ever celebrates the birth of GNU. I don't know why because that actually is the real start of the operating system because those guys were actually building GNU. GNU's not UNIX, right? As a UNIX operating system, a UNIX-like operating system. Way back then, they just never got a kernel completed. They were working on a kernel, the Herd kernel. It just never got completed. And then Linus Torvalds in 1991 created his kernel called Linux. And then the GNU guys worked really hard to make their GNU operating system work with the Linux kernel. So it was a collaborative effort. Too many people give Linus Torvalds and the Linux kernel too much credit for the operating system because there were so many people that are responsible for the birth of the GNU slash Linux operating system. And then, you know, it's not like either Stallman and the GNU people or Torvalds and the kernel team made a GNU slash Linux operating system. I mean, if you're talking about distributions, the first distributions didn't appear until two years after the start of Linux. I mean, in 1993, that was the birth of Slackware and Debian late 1993. I think September and October of that year, respectively. So really, how old is the GNU slash Linux operating system? If we're talking about releases, you know, it's only about 28 years old. It's not 30 years old. But if you're talking about as far as conceptually how old it is, it's 38 years old. So I just wanted to put this short video out there because a lot of people seem to think that that 30th anniversary of the kernel is actually the date for GNU slash Linux as an operating system. And honestly, depending on how you think about it, our operating system is either 38 years old or 28 years old. Not 30 years old. Anyway, peace, guys.


Hey what's up you guys, welcome back to my channel. If you're new here, hi hello I'm Lydia and today I'm doing a collaboration video with another YouTuber called Hannah Fykes. Her link will be in the description down below and also on the icard. I hope I pointed to the right s*** in Kavana. Well the video collaboration is comparing what private hospitals are like to NHS hospitals. I have been in adult services for a while now. Hannah is in a private mental health unit at the moment and she sent me this lip of what a private room is like.  We have an ensuite and this is just what the ensuite looks like. This is one of the newer rooms so yeah just got a toilet I think and a s*** and then the and this is what an NHS room is like. Bright coloured door and because I've mainly been in NHS hospitals I decided I'd talk a bit about what an NHS hospital is like but I'd show you at the beginning like what the obvious difference is like the rooms. Well I lived very elicious yesterday of some of the things that I want to look like. So number one is the admission process. So the admission process for I think any mental health admission is if you're having crisis you are yourself, you are risked to others or it's just needed for your treatment. For me I've been in hospital when I've been suicidal, I've also been in when I've been manic and I've also been in a mental disorder. There are the three things that I've been hospitalized because hospital admissions can occur for any mental health condition it doesn't matter if it's anxiety or if it's schizophrenia. Any mental health condition can lead to an admission it just depends how severe it is, it depends on treatment, it depends on risk level. Risk level is the main thing that things are assessed on with the NHS. My most recent admission two admissions so when I was sectioned back in January to February and then when I was in last weekend that was because I was both a risk to myself I was also experiencing some psychosis. For me it was risk to self that's pretty much always been the criteria for me to be admitted is some level of risk to myself. And then there's observation levels so inpatient linger we say levels and we know what that means. So levels vary from hourly observations 15 minute hour, one to one, two to one, three to one and then I think it's seclusion. So seclusion can also be used at any other point. I personally been in seclusion twice within the last year and that was because I was suicidal or I had made an attempt in my life, I wasn't cooperating so yeah there's that. Then we move on to medication so medication is issued usually four times a day. If you are informal it is totally within the right to refuse medication though you can then be sectioned if you are refusing to engage with treatment. I don't ever refuse medication unless I'm struggling in which case I'm probably on a section and that was the case back in January. So to give you an idea of what my medication is, is I take some in the morning, some in the afternoon, some in the evening and some at night and then I have PRN which is take when needed. Then there is a thing called I am which anyone who's been impatient anyone in the mental health community probably knows what an I am means. You've either refused to take a tablet to calm down or the tablet isn't a viable option and what it means is you don't get an Australian and then they inject you with either Lerazepam, heliparadol or Lerazepam for methazine. When I was in hospital in January to January I was I am three times once heliparadol once with just Pranephazine and once with Lerazepam and Pranephazine. I was going through a lot in that time and I haven't actually put out any videos from the experience because it wasn't good. They didn't do it when it's necessary though I've never seen it be abused. I've never personally had it abused. It's used when necessary so that's that. In NHS wards there isn't really a daily structure. The only things that are structured are meal times. They have breakfast, lunch, evening and then you have medication times. They're the only things they're rescheduled. Some wards do have activities on another day but they are not compulsory in any way or shape or form. So the next part I want to talk about is leave. There are different kinds of leave and that depends very much so on whether you are sectioned or informal informal. You can pretty much come and go as you please as long as you are not at risk. If you try and leave when you're at risk they can use section 5 part 2 of the mental health act which is a 72 hour holding power they can enforce and then it means you have to be assessed under the mental health act which in my experience has always led to me being sectioned. When you're on a section you have to get given section 17 leave to leave the hospital to even off the ward. You have to have section 17 leave. You can't. There's normally gardens on most adult wards. I happen on some where there isn't and it's horrible and I wouldn't wish it on absolutely anybody because it is horrible. Not being able to get fresh air is horrible because obviously the windows don't flip it open. Like it's a locked wall. If you are on section 2, 3, 37 whatever you have to get given section 17 leave by a consultant. So another little subject that I think people are often curious on is contraband. Wards vary. There is no guideline really wards. In Lancashire I was allowed to have my phone charger, my laptop charger, anything. Every ward I've been in in London especially and Milton Keyans you are not allowed to have a charger that is longer than like that. Like it has to be like 20 centimetres. You can't you couldn't have like this because that's seen as a ligature risk. In the UK you are allowed to have your phone charger, you are allowed to have your laptop. They give you as much freedom as they can.  It's nothing fancy. Private and NHS is very different. I do know someone who's in a private ward right now and someone who's in an NHS ward and there are very big differences. So I've been asked where my hoodie is and stuff and they haven't taken strings out so I don't know with that. It just varies person to person.  So when I was in high I wrapped my head off a wall because I was having flush racks and I just needed them to start. I couldn't cope with them and I didn't even know what came out of me. I've never done it before. I whacked my head a few times off a wall and made myself go a little dizzy which not the best. And I hope this gives you a little idea of what NHS Hospital is like and if you want to know what private hospitals are like head over to Hanafite's channel. I will again link it in the comments down below and hopefully on the icard up there if I remember. And also I did make a video yesterday about my last admission which I'll link again on an icard. It just kind of explained if the admission it shows what the admission was anyway. It wasn't a very long admission. Very simply because two patients on the ward had confirmed cases so I let discharge to their home treatment team who see me they come to my flat and see me daily. So I thought this would give you a bit of an idea. This is it's been an interesting collaboration but yeah thanks for watching guys and I'll see you soon in a new video. Bye


Hi there! If you love model railroading as much as I do, then you'll want to check out Train Masters TV brought to you by Model Railroad Hobbiest. TMTV is MRH's membership video website for model railroading. And we have many new inspirational and how-to videos coming throughout 2016 and into 2017, such as the art of airbrushing series on notch 8. The ups and downs and ins and outs of painting with air. We're taking the mystery out of airbrushing on notch 8. Literally dozens of step-by-step DCC installs for HO and N scale. The track power, if you put the decoder in and the socket's not wired properly, what'll happen is the locomotive will program on the programming track and act normal until you try to run it. And as soon as you try to advance the throttle, the decoder will fry. Getting started in DCC on DCC decoded. And then enter. And then we've got speed. Perfect. That was easy. It is. It's actually very simple. A new layout building series using Toma. Toma stands for the one module approach and allows you to start small but think big as to your layout aspirations. Also, watch for our new ah-ha moment tips. Short and sweet videos loaded with meaty tips that even some hobby experts may not be aware of. It's read the range of the motor. It's adjusted anything that it found. And now CV54, which is my back game of CV, is corrected for it. Nice. So now when I go to move this, it should start off very nice and slow and smooth. Look at that. Very nice. Plus, I will be coming to Train Masters TV in 2017 with several segments from my Run Like a Dream book series and from the MRH painting guide. TMTV has over 400 videos with new videos added every week. In fact, to watch every video in our library at 30 minutes a day will take you nine months. And during that time, we will have added another 50 new videos. Right now, we're running our summer special, giving you extra free bonus months. But the summer special ends soon, so don't delay. I gotta go. Looks like the Yard Master has given me permission to enter the yard. Train Masters TV, only from model railroad hobbyist magazine.


Hello friends and welcome to another session on geometry and we have been discussing triangles. Today, we are going to take up another theorem which is more commonly known as the Pythagoras' theorem. Okay, so you have been studying about Pythagoras' theorem for a long, long time. So it is not new to you. So this is called Pythagoras' theorem. Now why it is called Pythagoras' theorem? The story goes that Pythagoras in around 6th century BC proved this theorem. It is not that this theorem has not been there before Pythagoras' era, it was there. In fact, if you look at Indian sources, Indian mathematical sources as well, so there is this scholar called Bodhayana, right, Bodhanyana and he dates around 8th century BC, right. So before Christ 8th century BC, Bodhayana actually also gave the proof of this theorem in the series of books called Sulbasutras, right. So the book he wrote, all these people wrote, called Sulbasutras, right. So these are post Vedic literature, okay. So in these books, the proof for these kind, this theorem has been discussed. Okay, so let us not get into the history part of it more. Let us try to find out the proof or let us say try, let us understand this theorem and then try to prove ourselves. Now what does this theorem say? It says in a right angle triangle, the square of the longest side which is also known as hypotenuse, you know this, hypotenuse. So the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of squares of other two sides. So in this case, we can start with the formal proof starting with let us say what is given. So it is given that in triangle ABC, ABC, we have angle B is equal to 90 degrees, okay. Angle ABC is 90 degrees other. And we have to prove, what do we need to prove? We need to prove that the square on the longest side which is AC. So AC square is equal to sum of the squares of the other two sides. So that is AB square plus BC square, okay. And there are lots of proofs for this theorem, you know, more than 20-25 proofs are existing. So we are going to use the concepts of similar triangle to prove this theorem here, okay. So you would have studied similar triangles by now. So let us now try to prove it. So for that we need a construction. So the construction is I have to drop a perpendicular BD onto the hypotenuse that is AC, okay. Now let us try to see or observe some similar triangles. So how to go about the proof? Now this particular diagram is pretty common in similar triangles and you can see triangle ABC is definitely similar to triangle the upper one. So this one I can draw. So this one is similar to the main triangle and this will be ABB, is it it? So these are two similar triangles, why do I say that? Because angle A is common to both triangles. Look carefully, angle A is common and there is a 90 degree as well. So angle V here is 90 and angle D here is 90, is it it? So hence which criteria we are using guys? So the criteria A is AA, AA that is angle angle similarity criteria, similarity, similarity criteria. Is it it? By this criterion we can very well say that the two triangles are similar. Now the moment these two triangles are similar what do we conclude? We can conclude that the let us say side AB, the sides will be proportional, right? So AB upon AD is going to be equal to AC upon AB, okay. So these are the two ratios for the two triangles. How do I get that? So let us say AB, AD so I wrote it back here and then AC and AB are corresponding sides. So can I not rearrange them and write as AB square, AB square is equal to AC into AD, right? So there is this first relation and let us name it as 1, first relation is 1, okay. Now let us take a triangle ABC again but this time we will choose the other triangle that means this one. So let us choose this triangle and you can see this is similar to triangle, ABC will be similar to BDC, BDC. This is these are these two triangles are similar so angle C is equal to angle C. Why? Because angle C is common in both and angle B again 90 degree and in this case angle D 90 degree. So these are two, these are the two angles which are equal. So guys if that is so then again we can say in this case BC upon DC is equal to AC upon BD, right or BC rather. So BC upon BC is equal to AC upon BC and then rearranging again you can very easily say what is this? BC square is equal to AC into DC, right? So this is equation number 2, equation number 2. Now what we are going to do is we are going to simply add these two equation 1 and 2. So you can write from 1 and 2, right? From 1 and 2 what do we need to do? Just add so this is AB square plus BC square on the left hand side and on the right hand side you will get AC into AD, AD plus AC into DC, okay? So now we can take AC common. So let's take AC common and you will get here AD, AD plus DC. Now what is AD plus DC? Look at the diagram. If you look at the diagram AD plus DC is AC itself. So hence this can be written as AC, AC into AC, yep which is nothing but AC square, AC square. So you can see AB square plus BC square is coming out to be AC square and this is what we wanted to prove. See this was what we wanted to prove and hence proved so we can say hence proved, okay? So I hope you understood how to prove Pythagoras' theorem or you can also call it Bodhainas' theorem. So hence we proved this theorem. There are multiple other ways. You can use congruences, you can use area, multiple ways of proving the same theorem. So hence we have proved it using the concepts of similarity, right? Next video we are going to see the converse of this proof. That is if this relation holds that is the sum of one, the square of one side is equal to sum of the squares of the other two sides, then the triangle is bound to be a right angle triangle, okay? So let us prove this in the next session.


Hey guys, I am Amit Nambiar. So, I studied architecture and I work as a computational designer. So, by architecture, I mean like the building kind of architecture. So, I started off in a very design oriented background and then I moved into this field within the field of architecture called computational design where I essentially picked up programming skills and tried to use it in different ways for design logic and this is like an outcome of that. So, quick preview of what parametric or computational furniture is. It's like using inputs into a script to create 3D geometry, which you can fabricate using real materials. So, this is a script set up in a proprietary software called Rhino where I'm collecting inputs from the user, which is like design parameters like age, weight, height, which makes sense for the user as a design parameter. And then there's a script in between which is like hidden, it's a complicated thing, which converts that into geometry and this geometry can be exported into a CAD file which you can feed into a CNC machine and you trace cut that out of pieces of plywood and then you assemble it together. So, this is the process I was talking about like for those who are unfamiliar like the pieces that you saw moving around. It was generative, it was like created on the fly. But then you use a CNC, like you pass it through a CNC machine, trace cut it out of sheets of plywood and then you assemble it in a particular sequence to make stuff like this and that's like a perfectly functional, usable furniture piece and people can actually use it. So, that was my idea behind like starting of this project. I did this back in Mumbai a couple of years back and back then I was primarily using Rhino, which is like a closed thing. And there's a huge community behind it. A lot of people do experiment with this. It is people like me, computational designers with a design background, who come into programming or architecture and but that was, I felt like that was a closed environment. Like we were heavily dependent on the Rhino platform and for all the functionalities and ever since I've been like trying to explore how to make it more accessible, more free, more open, like for people to try it out, for people who don't really, who are not into architecture, who are not into programming or trying to do any of that. And so it's sort of to experiment with JavaScript to do that. So, let me do a quick, yeah, this is it. So, this is the app I was talking about, this is like, this is a live demo, you can check it out if you want. And it shows you the furniture piece with a sense of scale. So, anyone who wants to try this out, gets a fair sense of idea. And the app lets you extract the CAD file that you would need. So, anyone can make it themselves, but making it is also kind of like, it is easy, but you need some idea about how to go about doing it. So, it is slightly expertise. And my idea behind developing this was to make, to have an environment of computational furniture, which is like furniture which is not fixed in time, which is not designed once and then just fabricated 10,000 times. But capturing a design logic in it, so it's more dynamic. And the parameters that I always try to play with, they're like age, weight, height, so like they're human terms. Not like, how, weight or like, not a very technical thing, just to make it more friendly for people. And well, the idea that I started off with was this, that was the implementation of it being accessible on the web. And to bring it out, like to make it more accessible, this is the idea that I'm trying to build on, of making it a web app so that a community of people who are interested in such designs and people who wanna make it, can collaborate with each other over a web platform. And since it has to be fabricated, everyone needs to conform to like a set standard so that it's reproducible. So it's actually a bunch of different challenges and it's like a lot of different things to go through. I'm gonna try to go through the best that I can. So my idea behind starting off like doing with this web framework was to make it easy for designers to collaborate. So the sample that you saw was like just one piece of all possibilities. And if more people are interested in, like they can come up with designs and collaborate. And the architecture that I'm using to have an environment which allows this, encourages people to replicate each other's design, like the general open source philosophy from what I understand of it. Makers really shouldn't need to be bothered with all this, they just wanna make pieces. And it has to be like easily accessible. So going with that, this was the general, like a broad picture of the architecture. And the stuff that you see inside the dotted line, that's like the part that I'm working on. But the stuff outside, that's like external collaborators. So the piece that you saw was one example. But anyone could be building pieces like these.  I'm gonna like move forward a few slides where I talk about what it means from a design perspective when you try to explore design this way. But let me move on with the general slide. So quick description of this. Designers, there are people like me who want to make such furniture. This is what is supposed to allow anyone to do it. Makers are people who just wanna fabricate it. And user is like someone who wants to sit. I've been trying to take it forward with the idea of like making design more accessible and trying to take it out. And the idea with, if you conform to a standard, it should be reproducible everywhere. The design adapts locally cause you can imagine like someone from say Germany is gonna be different in bodily proportions compared to say someone from Northeast India where like people tend to be smaller. And doing such stuff like might help reduce the entry barrier into this field. Cause like making furniture piece and setting up a studio is a big task. Like you need a lot of resources. You need to like trial and experiment with a lot of things. But it's unlike, once you have a design, manufacturing is like a different thing. Like you have to talk to people and set it up. You have to tie up. So the general idea of like entry barrier is very high with this. These are the parts that I'm more interested in. Like the stuff that which I told you about anthropometric analysis of data. So people are different everywhere but we've conformed to a standard of standard furniture designs cause it's easy to manufacture them. But that's not really like set in stone. And I guess like in the last 20, 30 years maybe the technology has come around where we can explore beyond this. So using this platform or like this idea to explore this way of designing furniture or actually it could be anything. And the same idea which I was talking about. Which also brings in a lot of stuff about like how you think of design. So a little while ago we were having discussions about how Git is used in a design sense. So a lot of the conversation hangs around like Git just being a design tool. But Git has a bunch of philosophies which I think like, not philosophy. Like a bunch of concepts which are useful for designers in general. Like you folk others designs. You have a check of who's worked on how much on each designs. And that sort of stuff. That's another idea that I'm experimenting with this. Cause it's based, built on all this web technologies and you encourage people to copy others design. Cause historically from what I studied in architecture school. Like I think someone said that like the best artists copy, imitate or something like that. So going by that idea. Like it's good to learn from the community. But you maintain accountability. So you learn from others, but you do credit them. And that's kind of inherent in the Git ecosystem which doesn't like, so the little experience that I had working in architecture. Conventionally in design studios that I've experienced it works like there's a design project and there'll be a huge team. Like ranging from five to 500. But in the end it's like the lead designer who gets it. But I believe that loses a trace of accountability. And if we try to approach this, well, a very specific subset of design. It's just like exploring it. So to try to do all this, I set up this rather complicated system. Well, not really complicated, but it works.  But the app and you just report it to the central, the web app of what your design is, where your design is. And it's life-witching it every time.  Like you always have the latest design, design branching and the other stuff which I spoke about. Like merging, forking and all that. So that brings the design concept and more collaborative and incentive to collaborate from the design point of view into the picture. And I guess that's about it. Like that's the main meat I wanted to talk about about like how I'm exploring design from a developer's point of view. And also this rather unconventional way of manufacturing stuff. And it totally works. Like none of the designs I've made I was so far have broken with anyone sitting on them. And I guess I'm done quick. So open for questions. Yeah, in brief, yes. And the idea is like the app, it's a completely JavaScript engine which runs on the browser. Which is making back and forth rest calls for like make a design, fabricate this. So the app is a 3JS based thing running on the browser. A designer which are like, yeah. So a designer hosts their GitHub repo with the design. And once he finishes a design he registers it with the community. Like, hey, I've completed the design because when I include it in the gallery. So at that point the idea should be like there's a curation. So making sure like any manufacturer who doesn't need to think about like how it's gonna be made. Like it's always producing ready to be made drawings, CAD files. Does that make sense? And having it accessible publicly. So the designer controls the design repo all the time. If they wanna merge people, like if they wanna let other people merge code into their original design, or if they wanna not do it, or if they wanna take it down, it's not like it's less like a wiki and more like a completely authoritative model at that point. But to bring it into gallery you just register it and you have to follow the standards. So being openly accessible, right now I'm leveraging it on GitHub because free public repos. But that's the idea. Does that answer your question? Oh, that's a good question. I've never explored GitLab, but I'm not making any GitHub API calls. I'm just fetching, yeah, publicly accessible files. So it should be workable across, but I've never done that yet. Yeah, well, I didn't go into the like technical part of this framework that I tried to build. But yeah, I'm like, I think we can talk later. So there's a starter like tutorial thing to help you through it. But if you're familiar with JavaScript, you're more than good. If you know three chairs, golden. Like I've tried to explore that. That's doable in Rhino environment. That's what I'm familiar with, but not being able to do that on the web yet. Although that's like a really cool thing I would like to explore.


It was difficult times, but people probably couldn't have done it without Will Miller, my friend Daniel. When it first happened, when I went to Will's and with his wife, Michelle, and his family, it was such like a sanctuary for me. Will's has been like a brother for me for 20-25 years now. Ac rwyng i'n gweithio'r ysgrifennydd worstiaeth gyda'r ysgrifennydd. Rwy'n eu'r ystyried hefyd i'r hyn ar draws, ac mae'r hyn yn ystyried hyn. A rydych yn yr hyn, yr ysgrifennydd wedi'i rŵs i ymludiwr m'rolaeth. Yw Llywodraeth? Mae Llywodraeth, yw Llywodraeth, mae'n rôl i'r cyffordd. Mae'r rhannwch ar yr yw ychydig meddwl commentsau. Mae'r rhannwch ar yr ystyried hynny, mae'n rhannwch ar y ysgrifennydd, The week end after we come back and get married, he's married... Yeah so it just went on and on If you spoke to Ryan's missies Because she must have been through a tough time as well Did she see that? Yeah she probably No she stuck it out as long as she could That's been right She stuck it out as long as she could You might have to shake that to pop And I don't really get...ility is also super important I think there's a small chance that Ryan tells me Dyna, dyna eich fadeithaeth, dyna eich lle iddyn nhw sydd yn ystyried yn mynd i hynny. Ac nid i'n gweithio i ddoes iawn ei ddechrau dweud â cael meddwl. Mae'r holl iawn i ddweud, mae'n i'n glatt i'r oeddfa. Mae'r holl iawn i ddweud a chweithio i'n glatt i'r holl iawn i ddweud. Ond mae'r holl iawn i ddweud sydd yn ddiddwrnod. Mae'n gweithio i ddweud. Rhun genno'n gwneud. Yna yw i'r amser wrth yn ddweud, yna wnaeth i'r amser ond, fe wnaeth i'r amser. Ond, dwi'n cnyddiad pethau mewn gwahanol a'r amser i'r amser. Felly fe wnaeth ni'n i gwybod, bethau yna gael. Ond mae'n dweud oherwydd, fe wnaeth i chi'n mynd i'w ymu. Mae gyrfa o'n byddwyd. Mae wedi'n meddwl pwynt nifer, mae'n mynd i eisiau. Ond mae gwybod yn ymchwil o bwysig ac mae wnaeth i'n mynd. Yn y gall faint rydyn ni arweiniu have Warf drws? Felly rydyn ni yn fwy o'r eu gweld fel gwaith. gyda maen nhw. Rhyw gwaeth eu bod yw'r hyn sy'n gobeithio… Intwch yn gobeithio yn gweithio'r yr hindfol gan gweithio, a gwi'n credu. Oed os ydych chi'n iawn, maen nhw, mae'n gweithio'n ardal e thumbsaith yna yn rhan o'n cyffin! Dwy'n rhaid i'ch meddwl ymlaen! Ie. Ie. Mae'n rhaid i'n meddwl. Dwi'n do 하겠습니다 cofi ar eich bod i'w peth arniwn i gael, boe'r Rhiannog wedi cael ei chath arhaeth, felly wnaeth chi wedi'i gael ar y cwmddio ar y gwaith i'n gwyfod o'r amser i'r rhai. Felly roedd y gallwn yn ystod, maer nid yn rhaid o ferpeti'r cyffraffau. Ysfi wedi'u ddau, maer nid yn y cwmddio ar y gwaith, dwi'n gael e gael ar y cyffraffau. Ynny'n gweithio, cyffraffau. Ynw wedi'i gael eich bod i'n gweld未? Mae'r Silwy Gesetz? Mae'r Silwy Gesetz, mae'n grifwm am hyn sy'n gwybod. Mae'r Silwy Gesetz, mae'r Silwy Gesetz, mae'n grifwm am fyyd, mae'n grifwm am fyyd cydd, dyna'n chwarae agynnal'i siwtur, hopi sy'n sut yw'r calorau, dyna'n cael hwn yn rhan. Mae'n cael hwn yn rhan, dyna'i ni'n mynd i gyrgydd. Yna'n gyrgydd, mae'n gyrgydd, mae'n gyrgydd, mae'n gyrgydd. Dyna'r chadr, mae'n chadr i siwtur. Wyth i chi'n gweithio'r gyda chi? Dwy. Ychydig yw'r cyfnod o wybod yr adeilad? E'n gwneud i chi'n gweithio'r gyda'r cyfnod sydd. Felly e'n gweithio'r cyfnod i'ch gweithio'r cyfnod. Fydd yw'r cyfnod i'r cyfnod, dwi'n gweithio'n gweithio. Fy hoffi wneud i chi'n gweithio'r cyfnod. Felly e'n gweithio'r cyfnod. Mae'r adeiladau maen nhw i 21. flwyd nad o'r ffordd o'r eu might. Mae tân o'r meddyl o rai gofio hyn. Mae'n meddyl fel Ydisgawn, mae'n pobl sy'n ei ddim yn ffordd o'r ysgrifwlad doti'r hyn, sylfa nifer o dechrau'r hyn. Y'n adws. Mae'r cyfyrdd y gallu newid, mae'n cyfyrdd y gallu newid. Mae'r cyfyrdd y gallu'r youngdalol a'r cyfyrdd y gallu newid i'r meddyl yma, i robi'n heli yn wedi'u meddyl o'r ysgrifennawed. Mae'n cael ei geistio'r meddl. Mae'n ddweud bod, mae'n ddigonio. Rydym yn gallu llawer i fod yn ei gweithio a'r ddweud. Mae'n ddweud y bydd eich gweithio sy'n gweithio a'r ddweud? Rwy'n gwneud. Mae'r ddweud y byddwn yn 10 oes. Mae'r ddweud yn gweithio? Mae'n ddweud. Mae'r ddweud, ac mae eich dweud. Dyna, mae rhai o fynd bod yn gweld, mae rhai o'r mae'r mae'n gweld yn gweld yn llunio. Mae'n rhai o fwy o'r mae'r mae o'r mae o rai o fy mwen, mae'r bod yn elu- Mae'n enw yn credu y bach godio syniadol i'n elu, ond mae'n dweud yr ysgrifiad, ond... Mae'n dweud efallai bod yn gwybodaeth yn bach. Felly mae hi! Mae'n dweud o'r mae o'r lle i'w ddweud. Mae'n dweud ydweud i'w dweud, ac mae'n dweud ni'n adeiladau yma. That would have been probably more mentally damaging. Push over there do you think?  That is some heavy stuff it is. People don't realise that some men can't take that. No psychiatrist, no help, no nothing, just friends just talking it through. Maybe it would have healed quicker if it did talk to professional people. Were you lonely time for you? Mae'r pats here. When did you come back from Spain? When's the first time you spoke? After it came out? Probably about ten days. They were all scared to come.  It was quite calm, very calm. Because if you lose your temper then... You could have a Caleine Spree. No. Onw'n iawn am y cyhoedd i'n begodol o'r grfunio. Mae'r ei fionwyr yna fel bod am ydy rhan o'r blynyddiadau yn ei ddoedol Cynllun. Toi'n bwysig o'r bwysigiaid. Felly oedd wych. Mae'r hwn o'n ei wneud. Mynd o ddweud o'r rhan o'r fan yw'r ysgrifennu. Mae'r rhan o'r pan fawr i'r gwybod i'n ei fionwyr sy'n gwybolaeth. Er ôl o'ch bod ei wneud arwain, rydym yn ymduygiad, I'll have an ounce for you to do it, whatever you want to do.     I don't...  It's just a very, very selfish, selfish person. Is he a lonely man? Well, he must be. He must be. I'm quite comfortable in my own skin, in my own company. This is why it's been no problem in lockdown for me. But, yeah, people like that have always need to have people around them and pamper them and... Yeah, it's always stuff like that that's never been for me. To get put up in a pedestal that people... He deserved to be in a pedestal because he's crazy, speaks for himself.  If you live in a negative world, no one will people want to talk about it.  So he's done that, not me.  He's got the best career in the world. He's an absolute world-class footballer. But no one will remember that, unfortunately. What hurt you the most? Out of all that? Erm... All of it. Yeah, yeah. Were you ever suicide, though? No. No. Too strong for that? Just got kids, stuff like that. Yeah, yeah. That's what all the things about... Any negative thing, oh, wait a minute.    And then that... It'd just be... So I did your mum this one, you? What was it you've done to that? Everybody's saying that. I tell stories, I do this, I do that. I can't be trusted.  Prove it.  Great. See me, kids, if you want. I'm not interested in what I'm really interested in. The doors are open for her. Yeah, I don't really care. I'm not really thinking about it. I've got three children to concentrate on. Yeah, and you've done that, which is the main thing.  I've not, like, fair play. Fair play, and it must be difficult to even bring it back up and not bring back a lot of emotions and memories. But this is what I mean, it doesn't any mark, because after about five years, five years to get over. What did you do in that five years? Did you ever get back with Natasha? Did you ever... We tried, we went to Cyprus to pass for us, but it was just mentally, I was like, no, I can't do this. Too many thoughts going through your head. Did she ever get help? I'm not sure. Do you know what I mean?  That must be difficult. That'll play back her mind if she gets older. I know she probably regrets it now, because she was young and daff and people made daff mistakes, but... How old was she? She was... My name was happening, probably 21. So she was very young, I don't know. Seen someone playing for Manchester United, it is a massive turn-on, no matter who it is, no matter who you're married to, but you've still got to have more respect and more morals for yourself, especially your man. Were you married? Engaged? Married in 2010. The year before it came out? Yeah. She said to me, she went, Will, Will Miller, so she said when she got married, she went to see a clairvoyant and she said, you'd be forced within the year. I didn't see that clairvoyant, she was bang on.   I don't know how you've managed to pull it all together and on it.


I just like kind of went to the gym did my sauna nice meditation and Yeah, I just want to start doing the things that make me feel good again and kind of get out of this little Ruff that I'm in so yeah I'm just gonna clean my kitchen right now because it is a mess and For me to function properly. I honestly need to clean space like mentally. It just makes a huge difference So let's do some cleaning and then I gotta run some errands today as well like a groceries I need to clean out my fridge too because it's just in well need of a clean so yeah That's clean Just got to the grocery store. I'm thinking of making these like yesterday Brittany my sister She made these rice wraps and I used to make them all the time for my family with like vegetables rice shrimp and Peanut sauce and oh my goodness. They are just so good and they're so healthy They have like very basic ingredients of vegetables in them and so since you made them yesterday I've just been craving them since and so that's what I'm gonna make for dinner tonight And it kind of plays into the getting back into my motivational state Because I honestly like haven't been eating the best either. We've been eating out more frequently than usual and I just haven't been making the most Healthiest meals in the world. It's mostly been some last-minute things So I'm really excited to make these tonight I'm gonna try to do this grocery shop in under 45 minutes because I have a fitting soon So I want to go home to drop the groceries off go out to the fitting Come back clean out the fridge and then make dinner So I just hate being on a time crunch because I feel like it's a little stressful, but it's fine. We can do it It's a beautiful day. It's not that hot. It's like 23 degrees Celsius So it's not like that hot, but at least it's like sunny, you know, at least the sun came out to play I got my dollar here for the carts I just find it's so funny how grocery stores still make you put in a dollar to get a cart I got that and my reusable grocery bags and we're good to go Grande brown sugar oat shake in espresso, please sure brown sugar oat shake in espresso wrong day. Yes, please Anything else for you? That's all. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much you too So we got my brown sugar oat shake in espresso. I always ordered the same thing. I really do But this is like my favorite drink and it has the least amount of sugar in it Not that sugar matters that much But I don't want to be really drinking a drink often that has like 50 grams of sugar in it because a lot of their drinks Do so when I got the app like I checked to see how many grams of sugar this one has and this one only has 13 grams Of sugar for grande so it's not that bad. Whereas like a caramel macchiato has like I think it was 35 or 40 So this has been my go-to drink and it's still so good like I love it Cheers So I just got inside and I brought in my groceries, but I have to zip out right now like I said for my COVID I mean my fitting so I'm gonna go quickly and then come back with the groceries way I put like the stuff that needed to go in the freezer away already because I didn't want to leave that out I'll see you guys literally in the second for you, but I'll be done my fitting home It took me an hour and 30 hour and 30 minutes to get back home for my fitting And it took me 20 minutes to get there because of the traffic Like I knew it was gonna be traffic key, but I didn't know that it was gonna be that bad because it's currently six o'clock almost six o'clock right now and That was ridiculous. I was so bored in the car I was like I can't I hate traffic with the burning passion because I just get so bored Feel like if you're with somebody it's better, but I was just alone absolutely ridiculous, but it's fine It happens. We're home. We're safe. We're good. I'm just gonna unload my groceries now because they're still sitting on the counter literally right here Not unloaded yet, so I'm gonna give you guys a bit of a grocery haul right now. I'm gonna take them out Okay, here is a quick overview hop before I put it in the fridge. I'm gonna clean the fridge out first though actually So I really wanted to try these carrot chips They're literally just carrots with dill and they look so good and different so I'm excited to try them And then I got these plant-based cheddar puffs, which I've never tried before so I'm excited for those two then I just got a carton of Organic eggs cucumbers for the wraps I'm making tonight and then I got some pasta cuz we are all out I got some plums some bagels Mangoes I've never tried this Annie's What's it called macaroni before and people rave about it, so I just bought it to try it for fun I do try to stay away from dairy, but this will be like for a junk night or whatever because I really want to try it So I got two of those and I always go for the white cheddar. I just like it better and Then I got ranch because we run out of ranch sauce. We always use it. I got some jasmine rice I got some soy sauce for the sauce that I'm making for the wraps tonight vitamin D3 because I am all out green onions and bananas, and then I just got pocky pocky sticks And I just had a pack. They're so good. I got the strawberry ones, but That's a little haul. I think I'm gonna clean out the fridge right now, and then I'll put it all away Okay, here is the final Fridge reveal it is so much better and just cleaner everything is here in here is like good and it smells good now So yeah, it feels so good. Oh, I'm just about to head out once again, but I'm gonna walk this time No more traffic for me. I'm just gonna walk through the grocery store to get the rice wraps that I still need For the rice wraps that I'm making tonight It's already seven and I had no idea because I was stuck in traffic for so long But it's fine. I'm gonna walk to the grocery store real quick get the rice wraps And then we're finally gonna make dinner dinner probably won't be done until like nine o'clock Which is fine the stage has been feeling so weird that traffic really just threw me off Anyways, it's fine because I feel super productive today That was the goal Here's my mini grocery haul once again I just got olive oil peanut sauce for the wraps to save me some time instead of making my own The rice wraps I needed and then just some of these rice chippy things But let's get cooking because it's already a clock