I'm Jay Fidel. This is Think Tech. We're going to talk about Fair Game, which is actually a, I don't know if you could say it's a docu-drama or a documentary, but it is really based on truth fact. And it stars, what is it now? I mean, Watts as Valerie Plain and Sean Penn as Joe Wilson, her husband at the time. So, George, thank you for joining me. This has been important movie to talk about because there are threads in this movie that lead right up to today. And since it's true, there are lessons to be learned. You know, when we say movies you can learn from with this one, we're not kidding. You can learn from this one. Sir George, give us in a five minutes summary what this is about. Back in the early 2000s, right, with the whole Iraq war, how we went to war in Iraq, right? Valerie Plain was a special CIA agent. And her husband, Joseph C. Wilson, was a former ambassador to Gabon and then Niger in Africa. Niger. Niger, okay, I'm pronouncing that wrong, in Africa. And the Bush administration was claiming that Iraq, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, had a nuclear weapons of mass destruction. And that was one of the reasons we went into Iraq to dislodge him, right? But with this, what the Bush administration was stating, Joseph Wilson wrote an article and stating that he had been, he had done some research as a consultant just before this and had gone to Niger and he was familiar with the situation. And he said, there was no way all this or orange uranium ore than past because he knew the infrastructure, the transportation infrastructure. And he said, this is a very backward country. There's no truth to this. This is all manufactured by the Brits and parlayed by the Bush administration. Yes, okay, let's hold there. And to put the environment on it, Bush was trying to establish a reason to attack Iraq. He was trying to get the Brits to support his initiative to attack Iraq. And he was doing everything he could to manufacture evidence in situations and data to suggest that the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction, tragic because we now know, and in fact, we knew then that they did not have weapons of mass destruction. But Bush believed that if he could come up with fabricated evidence, lies, in other words, he could demonstrate to the public and the world that it was a legitimate effort to go and attack Iraq. This was about that. So on your one hand, you would have this funny baloney paper that came out of Britain about how Sodom was saying was trying to develop nuclear weapons, which wasn't true. I'm sorry. I think somebody got bought off or intimidated into writing that paper. And then you had people in the CIA who were tasked with trying to go into, in this case, a Niger, and in other cases, Iraq itself, to verify that there were active attempts to build a nuclear weapon. And those attempts were around two things. One is aluminum tubes, which you use in the centrifuge when you build the uranium. And two is the uranium itself, which is called yellow cake. And as it happens, French Equatorial Africa, we know this even today, was Putin in French Equatorial Africa. The Sahel, we've done a number of shows about that, does have uranium. So the husband of the CIA officer, operative Valerie Flame, was asked by the CIA to use his contacts in Niger and determine whether there was yellow cake there, whether they were manufacturing it and sending it out to Saddam Hussein and so forth. And he went down there and found no yellow cake at all, as you said. And she, for her part, she was a very good operative. She was top, top line operative for the CIA, best of her class. She went to Iraq and she contacted the brother of an Iranian American woman who wanted to help her brother get out of Iraq. And he was going to spy for Valerie Flame. And she in return was going to arrange papers for him and transportation for him to come to the United States with his wife and several children and save them from what was going to be a war, because George Bush was organizing a war. And they have secret police, you know, Saddam Hussein was unkind to his own people and if he found out that this guy was a spy, you know, that would be the end of that. So it's two efforts, actually, to determine whether Iraq was building a nuclear bomb. And in the one case with the husband, Joe Wilson, in the one case with the husband, Joe Wilson, he found nothing. And the other case was his wife, Valerie Flame, and the Iraqi guy that she recruited in Iraq, in Baghdad. He found nothing. And he said, you're right, his sister came and asked him these memorized questions about all of the efforts that he was a scientist, all of the efforts that the Iraqi government was making to build a bomb. And he laughed, he said, you're kidding, they're not doing anything like that. They don't have the capacity. That's a project that never happened. What are you asking me these silly questions? And that was the payload back to the CIA. So they're getting it from two sources that there are no aluminum tubes that would qualify for a bomb. There is no yellow cake. There is no scientific effort in Baghdad to build the bomb, to getting all this data and they reject the law. Why? It's because Bush needed to have data suggesting that they were engaged in weapons of mass destruction. What a crot our government was involved in. He was lying to everyone. The CIA was lying. Everybody was lying and doing dastardly things. Okay. And that's the environment in which this movie moves forward. It's a true story. Okay. How does it unfold after that? Talk about the New York Times article, which is, I found nothing, words to that effect, I found nothing in Iraq. Because he had experience in leisure, you know, and he was an ambassador for two or three other African countries. He had one, there was one, another small one. And he was very knowledgeable. So it just ruffled his feathers that they were coming up with this BS, right? So he wrote this article for the New York Times and pretty much explained his background, his expertise, and that there was absolutely no truth to this from his own experiences as an ambassador there in that country. And this aggravated Bush a lot. And you know, I went and looked online, I sent you a copy, George, of the very op-ed piece we are talking about. It wasn't very long, but it laid it out just the way you described. And this infuriated the Bush White House. What did they do? They did something that's totally out of line. They were able to get the identity of Valerie Plaint, who was a special agent, secret special agent of the CIA, leaked by Robert Novak, who was one of the buddies, I guess, that Washington post, I think. And he wrote an article basically leaking her identity of the world, right? To her neighbors, to her friends, the only ones who knew was her husband and her parents. Those are the only ones that knew she was a CIA agent. And this created unbelievable havoc for them, for both her and her husband, wasn't going to take this standing down. So he started getting on all these shows, you know, to explain his part of the story. But what this movie shows is what they went through. They were getting threats. She was getting threats. Her children. Don't forget Richard Amitage. Yes. I met Richard Amitage. She was deputy secretary of state, a retired military that, you know, got into the state department. And he came to Hawaii a few years ago, just before the Trump election, and spoke. And everybody thought he was really the cat's meow. I had no idea that he was involved in leaking, you know, her name and Colin's name, and wrecking her career and wrecking her operatives in Baghdad, the family, for example, that she had recruited. But it was much more than that. He had operatives all over the world. She was a major CIA operator, and she had recruits everywhere doing spying for her. And when she was out at this way, all of them were in great jeopardy. And in fact, the scientist I mentioned in Baghdad, the brother of the woman that she found and recruited here in the United States, was never heard of again, or anyone in his family. And although the movie doesn't go into it, you can presume they were killed by the secret police as having been involved in espionage in the prewar Iraq. by Saddam Hussein. So Armitage was directly in line for that. He took the memo. He gave it to Robert Novak. Novak published it with her name in it, knowing that he was outing, she was, and it came from Scooter Libby, who was ultimately prosecuted for related offenses, but not the offense of violating the statute that says you cannot reveal classified information. This is all a study on how people in the government deal with classified information. And Scooter Libby revealed classified information that resulted in mess and destruction of this whole apparatus that the CIA had done. And the CIA was not going to help. Not going to help Palry claim they disowned her. You know, the secretary never heard of you, that sort of thing. And so it was really gross that the government refused to help, refused to help the people she recruited, refused to help the people whose lives were now in jeopardy, and refused to help her. And her life was ruined. And the same thing with Joe Wilson. His life was ruined. They were all outed.  Now, what's uncanny is that Armitage was opposed to the Iraq war. He was opposed to us going, but he must have gotten from above. You know, he was directed to do so. He did it. He was coming from above. So it plays as you said it today with Trump. What's his name, the sort of column that he's on TV, something mayor, he's like he's also a comedian kind of thing.  So what you have is you had the same thing with the Bush and Scuder Libby, as you said, he was chief of staff to Cheney, the vice president's chief of staff. So this was this whole operation was coming directly from the top, which is what, as you said, what does this say about our government? And it plays into the present. You've got the same kind of, I mean, another Trump administration would be guilty of the same kind of things. I mean, the hand writing's on the wall. But as you said that family in Iraq, they probably would brutally murder, right? And I don't know if the sister was still there or she's back in the States. No, she's back in the States. And if you remember the scene of the movie, one night there's a knock on Valerie's door in her home, and she opens the door and there is the doctor, the Iranian doctor in the US, Iranian American doctor. And she says, I haven't heard from my brother. I thought you were going to save him. I thought you were going to make, keep him safe and bring him to the United States. What happened? I mean, so at the end of the day, Valerie was left high and dry. She couldn't help. I don't even think she was in a position to apologize. She couldn't say anything. She was sworn, you know, to maintain confidentiality. They were intimidating her. The CIA was making life miserable. These people thought she was kind of some kind of communist is really incredible. And such unfairness, such lying. And ultimately, you know, Stuart Libby was prosecuted, investigated and prosecuted. And he was prosecuted for something like lying under oath in the investigation. He was not prosecuted for revealing, you know, classified information, revealing the name of an agent, not that. And so he was fined $250,000. And that really talks about, you know, the vice president, Cheney was doing it, and probably Bush was doing it. And the scooter Libby, $250,000 in two and a half years in jail. However, Bush commuted the sentence. And in 2018, a year after Trump took office, he pardoned the scooter Libby, who actually never paid the price at all. And so, I mean, I gotta say, this all sounds like Republican shenanigans to me.  She was really a patriot.  And then for them to do this, it shows you that there's no honor, there's no credibility.  It was good to have the two party system. But for what we're learning, I mean, totally corrupt. I mean, there's problems with the Democratic Party too, but nothing like what they're doing. They're not patriots. These are scoundrels, all of them. Scoundrels. And they knew they were outing her to be terrible consequences. All over the world, not only in Iraq, but all her other, you know, she had other operations going in other countries around the world. Around the world.   I mean, as we come up to this next election, all the more decent Republicans are out of the picture, right? Like the one, the moderates. And you've got Trump, who was a character jewer, who's just a, and he's the one who's going to have the Republican nomination. And it's going to be between him and Joe Biden. And that's the choice. And for me, there's really no choice there, right?  Well, and even before you get to that, you know, what happened here, these dedicated individuals who cared about the country and their jobs, middle-class people, they make a lot of money. They just work for the government. And they were highly competent, the two of them. And they had dedicated their lives to the federal civil service, really. And if they're doing their jobs, they got bashed for being honest and being concerned about this, this crack over weapons of mass destruction, they got their lives were destroyed. And I think it was very, very hard on them, just to follow up a little bit. They tried to just do, you know, and they got nowhere, probably on this thing about privilege, you know, you can't talk about what happened in the CIA. And so the Bush administration stopped any lawsuit, opposed any lawsuit. And Obama comes into office and he opposes any lawsuit. This does not, this does not endear me to Obama. He knew the story, he knew what happened with these people, because in fact, the two of them had written books, separately, Claim and Wilson had written books, and you could buy those books now to hear from both of their mouths what happened to them. And their lives were ruined. They had to leave town essentially, and they moved to Santa Fe. And it was, you know, it was a sweet moment, at least in the movie about now, after all the trouble that Wilson had created for Valerie Plain. I mean, had he not written that article in the Times, none of this would have happened to them. This is vengeance for the article. She forgave him, okay? But you wonder, you wonder exactly how this all affected their relationship. And in the end, you know, this is not necessarily in the movie. They got back together, they moved to Santa Fe. They lived in Santa Fe for a few years. But in 2017, they divorced. A marriage was broken somehow by their life experience with this. In 2019, he died. In 2020, she ran, I think for Congress, out of New Mexico, and she was number two. That's not good enough. She lost that election. Don't know what she's doing now. I expect she's still in Santa Fe with her kids. So, I mean, the whole thing is like a, it's a bone crusher. And the movie captures that, although it doesn't take you to the last chapter, it captures that. And it's really well done. And I believe that it's sort of an accurate statement of their life experience being attacked by their own government, who they worked for, being lied to by their own government as we all were. Okay. And then being the subjects, the victims of vengeful, obviously horrible, vengeful moves by the government, intending not to do anything positive. It didn't serve the public good. They just wanted to do vengeance.  How nice of them. So, you're saying yourself, gee, we didn't know about that at the time. It only came out later when they persisted in telling their story. And you wonder how much of that kind of thing goes on now. And your point is well taken. There's probably more of it now than there was then. These were the good old days. But now it's not, it's not the good old days. And certainly during Trump, it's not the good old days. It's a dangerous business being a CIA operative. You know, she applied to the CIA immediately after school. She did well in school, and she was top of her class in the CIA. She wanted to serve her country. She was young and inspired. Okay. How many young and inspired kids would apply to the CIA after seeing this movie, eh? Oh, I'm sure very few. You know, they wanted to make an example of her. But that example does not bode well for the young kids coming out of college to want to, you know, when I graduated from college, a letter came to our, to our house from the FBI, because I must have, whatever reason, wanted me to be cruelly for the FBI. But my mother tore it up and threw it away. I was entering law school at Washington College of Law in Washington. And she didn't want me to do that because she was afraid, you know.  And my mother definitely opposed that because the whole history we'll talk about sometime.   Who would want to help this our country when you've got these kind of scoundrels sitting in the White House? And, and, and I'm really, I worked by Taylor Law for Obama to get him elected. And he was a disappointment on, as you said, on many, many levels. I mean, he, he, the deep state or whatever we have here was able to tell him, no, you can't do that. So just a sad situation. I would like to see us to get back to the days, I mean, when in my youth when our government, at least on the surface, it seemed to me to be, you know, more honest, but I mean, in retrospect, as I do a lot of more historical reading, even in the 50s, who was that guy? The brother of we mentioned him, got a senior moment, who will come to me in a minute, the brother who was the head of the CIA, one of the earlier ones. And, and he was doing a lot of focus, focus stuff too. So, you know, you look at the Constitution, you look at what this country was based on, this whole episode with Valerie Plain is totally opposed to what our country is supposed to be. And if you have a democracy, you've got to stick with those values. And if you don't stick with those values, where are we? Well, you know, the other, the other side of it is that this was in a way, it was a how to do it look on how to be a spy. What spies do, you know, a blonde woman, pretty presentable, who dressed well and talked well and could speak multiple languages and all that. She was a winner. But when she went to Baghdad and all those other cities where she was trying to recruit agents for the CIA, she was in great jeopardy. It's, it's, it's, it's very dangerous to do this. It's dangerous for you, Valerie Plain, and it's dangerous for your family here in Washington. And it's dangerous, of course, when the people in your recruit, we're talking about murder.  And it amazes me that people who ran the government didn't know that or knew it and ignored it. But the bottom line for me is the world is a dangerous place. The US has to do this to gather intelligence. It's like, you know, what's happening now in the Middle East, you have to have intelligence. If you turn your back for one minute and you don't have intelligence, see what happens in Gaza. You cannot not have intelligence. And yet the cost of getting intelligence is very great. Because it's a, it's a life endangering experience, whoever is involved. And so there's a kind of confluence between what Valerie Plain was doing and, and the family she recruited was doing or trying to do. And what's happening now, what happened in, in Gaza, in southern Israel just a week ago. So that's the world we live in. And what is very troubling is that the government isn't strain about it. The government lies, you know, and then, and this whole thing about to so, so we have a, a, a failed rocket going down on that hospital yesterday in Gaza. And it's a question of credibility. And so Biden says, I agree with the Israelis and the Israelis say it was from, you know, from terrorist organization and Jihad. And, and they, they say they have data and I believe them. And Biden says he believes them. But think about it. It's a credibility issue. And there are mobs all over the Middle East now that don't believe Biden and don't believe the Israelis. And they're all too happy to reject that. So at the, at the end of the day, we're talking about whether those prevails with lies prevail. And if you send it out on social media, as, as a modest did, and say no, was the Israelis and you do that minutes after the event takes place, if finds it, it finds our own throughout the Middle East and everybody's in the street, fully believing that it was Israelis, even though it wasn't. And so credibility is everything. And, and when the government does the kinds of things like starting up weapons of mass destruction, you knew and I knew at the time it was a crock. We knew that, but they, they, they persisted in lying to us for quite some time. And in fact, justified a phony war on that, on basis of a lie. Some people say that the Vietnam War was also a war based on a lie. And so, you know, I'm saying governments should not lie. They have to tell the truth. And they have to make us believe what they say. It's really important now. They say if you tell a lie enough times, it's believable. This whole thing with the 2000 election, Trump keeps insisting that if that election was stolen, some of his own Republican, you know, officials that are, that were in charge of the vote are saying no, that Biden won the election, yet Trump is still saying that no, it was stolen. So, so I mean, we're talking credibility, right?  And what we alluded to, where was the Israeli intelligence operation? To not know. And where was Mr. Erdogan, who, who, who probably had, had notice of this because he's so tied with the Hamas leadership? Who, who know what was this was coming? And how did it, how did the Israeli intelligence miss this? Where was it? Well, as I said before, you've got to have intelligence. You must have intelligence so this happens. And you also must tell the truth about what you find. You don't have to, you know, disclose everything, but at least when you disclose something, tell the truth. And what, what happened in this movie was, was not that, and it was, it's a black eye that will last for a long time on the American government and on the Republicans in the Oval Office. So that's what we got, George. Read the newspaper, watch the news, and you have to look at it with a jaundiced eye to figure out who's telling you the truth and who's not. It's an everyday chore that we all have to engage in. And in fact, that's what Joe Wilson said to his class, he was teaching. That was his primary occupation at the time. And he told his class, it's up to every one of you to use critical thinking. This is back in what, 2006 or seven like that. You have to use critical thinking, you have to know when they're lying to you. And then you have to read everything through the filter of critical thinking. And it was a powerful statement that Sean Penn delivered. For my money, it was the most important part of the movie. It was the portarole, the real message as he was, you know, lecturing his class on the duty of a citizen in a democracy. You could hear the echo of that right now. You can.  Yes, that's true. They were really pariah. And there were people after them. And this is not during Trump. And, you know, it's not, it's not the, the stochastic, the stochastic long whistle thing from Trump. This was, you know, two generations before that, under a Republican president, where people were out to hang the two of them, even though they hadn't done anything wrong. Tell the truth. So George, what do you, what do you take from this movie? And what do you give as a rating for this movie? I'll give it a 10 because of the whole idea of this whole issue. It's really blotted out to light and people pretty much for a lot of people have forgotten what this was all about. So I'll give it a 10. I think the acting was good. I didn't have any problems with the acting or the premise. So I'll give the movie a 10. It was a good movie. And it really hits the, hits the point on the bullseye. Yes. And as you and I have discussed before, we like movies that tell us stories that we need to hear about. This is a movie we can learn from. And so I give it a 10 for that alone because we learned, and as you said a moment ago, it's easy to forget these events. They somehow blend into history. And then we don't realize how very instructive they are. And how important it is that we understand what happened with Valerie Plame. Thank you, George. Thank you, Jay. Thanks. Hopefully your viewers will make note of this whole issue and let that sink in. Yeah, let it sink in. George Cation, movies you can learn from here on Think Tech. Aloha.


I'll just go ahead. I put together a few overview slides here and then specifically about the data quality element within the core trust seal requirements. I'm the, I guess you'd call me the coordinator of the Australian Trusted Data Repository Community that's sponsored by the ARDC. And I'll talk a little bit about what that community does and how it works over the next few minutes. These slides are all online, means put the link in the notes or you can go to my Twitter at value management. I've put a, we did a link to them there and you can find them there on SlideShare. You can, if you're on your phone or device, you can access them through SlideShare, but the links won't work until you download them. So if you're on your computer, you'll have to download the PDF and then you can access the links. All right, the, the community has a website you can access tiny.cc slash tbr for trusted data repositories. And most of this material comes from the website. And also the one page summary introduction we have to the community, which will also going to share as a bof at the upcoming research conference. All right, so just let me know if you have any trouble accessing those slides. So then you can browse through them at your own pace. So just one outline to ARDC is hopefully that's no mystery to anyone here, but we're about competitive advantage through data, retention of high quality data assets. So trusted data repositories. Obviously, once you've got the data assets, you've got to put them somewhere. And that's where the trusted element comes in that we want to be able to trust where those data assets are being held. So that's who I acknowledge and celebrate the first Australians on his traditional lands with me pay our respects to their not as past prison and emerging. I'm here in Melbourne on the lands of the laundry people in the Kulin nation.  So, what is called trust seal so you can go and have a look at the website. It's a bit of background. It's a spin off from the research data reliance where those group of academics and government said how can we determine what is a trustworthy place to put our data. So the core trust seal was a spin off organization that came from that working group that tried to define what should be the requirements of a trustworthy repository. We have a funding model where when you apply for a certification pay a thousand euros as an application fee, and then that triggers a peer review of the application, the application. Then become once you certified becomes a public document. So if you click on the link, you can get a map of the world that shows all the repositories are just have to stop share change. So here you can quickly you can see that map of the world and you can see Australia. The repository is certified. You can see the CSIRO data access portal and Australian data. Steve. So if we click here on CSIRO, then you can call up their application or call trust seal and see how they responded to the requirements. So for the say a hundred repositories around the world that are certified, you can see what they've written against the core trust. Okay, so another important part of core trust seal is that there's a designated community that's the users and the requirements relate to how do you interact with those users having their needs. So here's a diagram that we have on the community website, which provides an overview of the current 16 requirements. You see there it's in three kind of layers organization infrastructure, digital object management and then kind of technical technology layer. And the quality one there is considered a lit number 11. So about management of digital objects, praise or quality discovery in use, we're going to dig into that 11 quality but it was also touched on praise. The whole structure of the 16 requirements comes from something called the reference model. It's a national standard. And you can find a link to it on our community website. I'm not a repository specialist. There are probably people in this call who understand much more about that but it's a way of breaking down the processes of a repository. And the requirements follow that model. A couple of other things here on the slide. The certifications are valid for three years once you certify. So Australian data archive is about to witness the recertification process. And the other part of that is that core trust seal regularly reviews the requirements and changes them every two or three years. The next slide is about. So this is about, we're just about to enter a new version of the requirements. And this is the closest we've seen to a change log about how the requirements are changing from 2022 to 2023. And we have several organizations in the community working towards the last submission day is the 30th of October 31st of October. Over the next few weeks they were trying to get in with the 2022 requirements so they don't have to update their applications for the 2023 requirements. Which come into a force from 15 January next year. A kind of shut down period from November to January so they're trying to get into the 2022 requirements. I'll give you a list of the people who are doing that at the moment so you can see. So there's slight changing of the titles. So, for instance, R2 is changing from licenses to rights, R3 from continuity of access to continuity of service, R4 from confidential ethics to ethical and ethical. And R11 you see the quality is unchanged. Okay, so let's have a look at R11. So this is the full text of R11. It's spread over two slides. And I will open the requirements themselves so you can see the format of them because that tells tell you a little bit about how this works. So our requirement has like a one sentence summary. This is it here. So it's title data quality short summary is the repository is appropriate expertise reduce data and metadata quality and ensures that sufficient information is available for end users to make quality related evaluations. So this is a theme all through what I see all that it's about the repository making declarations to the users so the users can make an assessment about what data they're getting from the repository. Can the user trust the repository. So you have three participants who have the data depositors repository and you have the users. So it's about the relationship between the first of the second and second to the third. So we just have a browse through statement. Maybe I'll just give you a quick read of it. So basically what they're saying is that when someone deposits their data they must provide sufficient description so that a user can understand what they're looking at that there's enough information in the description for a user to be able to assess the quality of the data. It's not telling you whether it's good science or not, but it's up to the repository to make sure that the date that the users can assess the quality of the data. So the next second half of the requirement what people who submit an application to the course I see what do they have to describe. Approach the data and metadata quality taken by the repository, any automated assessment around a schema. So you have the community to comment on and write the data and metadata where the citations or links to citation indexes are provided. I'll put a link there to how CSIRO has written an answer to that. This is actually the whole application. So if you click on the link, you'll be able to read what CSI wrote in response to this. So I had a look at it just before it was basically saying I have a repository staff who have a look at the data and make sure there's sufficient description. There is also an extended guidance document which adds a little bit more color to the requirement. It should make clear on the response that they understand the quality levels that can be reasonably expected from the depositors. Evidence to describe how quality will be assessed during curation and quality expectations of the designated community. So this is where the community is important. You're trying to meet the needs of the community so different communities might have different needs. So if you have a clear view of who's using the data, then you're more likely to have a clear review about what they need in order to assess the quality. Repository and depositors are expected to document in areas in which the data or metadata quality falls below expected standard. So I was also going to show you R8 here on appraisal which also touches on quality and R12. So I'll stop the share so I can share. So this is the actual requirements. So I'm just going to go down to R11. In fact, first I might go to R11 to the format. So R11 has a title, a short description, and then this text which I've just pasted into the slides. Please refer to R8 appraisal. So we're going back and look at R8. R8 is about appraisal, i.e. what does the repository do when it accepts data? How do they check that it's sufficiently appropriate to go into depository? So just reading here, appraisal function is critical in determining whether data meet criteria for inclusion, collection, establish, appropriate management of preservation. Does the repository use a collection development policy to guide selection of data? Does the repository have quality control checks to ensure completeness and understandability of data that are not deposited? So provide references to control standards and reporting mechanisms, including how issues are resolved. This is a repository of this list of calling controls, place, usual data producers, and here it says it contrasts with data quality, which addresses metadata at the quality point of view of the designated community playing the users. So since I don't write these applications, how you actually respond to these is really a question of the community and perhaps Steve can talk about how the Australian data archive might respond to these kind of requests for clarification. I've just got one more slide now, the community itself. I'll tell you a little bit about the Core Trust CEO community in Australia. So we have monthly meetings of a broader community and we have writing workshops with those groups who are actively drafting documents and there are six who are actively working at the moment. So I must submit their application towards the end of the year and they're replying to the review comments. GA, Geoscience Australia has recently in the last few weeks submitted their application and we have four others. AIMS, UWA, TUNE and OSCOPE who are looking to submit their Core Trust CEO applications over the next few weeks before the 1 November deadline. And yes, maybe I'll just give you a quick look at our website. Here's our website and the list of resources including those two diagrams I just showed you. There's some lists of videos, some comparison documents, a list of the requirements and one page summary reviews for the conference. And then you can see the list of meetings and writing workshops that we've had, like the street so to speak. All right, I think that was about all, just my last slide is a contact us slide. And thank you for the opportunity to let me know about our community. We are interested in other repositories and maybe interested to work towards Core Trust CEO. So feel free to reach out to me in my details on the first slide or contact us. We'll be invited to our regular meetings or my contact details and so on.


Hello, I welcome you all once again to my channel explore education. I am Dr. Rashmi Singh, Assistant Professor Department of Education SS Kanna Girls to the college University of Allahabad. And this time I'm going to discuss with you all about teacher education, the status of teacher education in India. If you have ever read the NEP 2020 on teacher education, the first line it has been written there according to Justice Verma committee and all. So, I thought that first of all I have to discuss with you all Justice Verma committee and then after that I am discussing I will discuss the NEP 2020 on teacher education. So, firstly we have to know what are the recommendations, what were the recommendations of Justice Verma committee on teacher education and then we will come to the recommendations of national education policy 2020. Okay, so lecture will be bilingual mode and it must be useful for you all no doubt. So, first of all, we are only talking about the recommendations of Justice Verma committee. So, from the name of Justice Verma committee, you will know that Justice Sahab is its chairman, Verma Justice JC Verma, I think. So, the Honourable Court, the Supreme Court had gathered this committee that you give your recommendations on the status of teacher education. So, this has divided our recommendations into three parts, four parts, five, total five. First is the quality of pre-service teacher education, then quality of in-service teacher education, then they have talked about teacher audit and then they have talked about how to strengthen the NCE and then general recommendations. So, under these five heads, you can understand these recommendations. Why did the Supreme Court gather these recommendations? It means that someone must have made a decision or made a mistake. So, in order to correct it, you can google it all. We are only talking about recommendations here so that we can cover them as soon as possible. So, keep in mind one more thing. You should always keep in mind that after 2010, all the committee commissions have been gathered. They are all in this light, in this light that what has happened in 2010 has come right to education. So, we should always keep in mind that whatever commission or committee will be gathered after 2010, it will be in the main umbrella term, right to education. So, this is 2012, it means that right to education has been applied in your country. So, pre-service teacher education, that is, the trainees, the weird trainees, for them, the in-service teacher education that has been applied, how is it necessary to be improved for them? So, the commission has said for pre-service teacher education that the commission recommends that the government should increase its investment in establishing teacher education institutions and increase the institutional capacity of teacher preparation, especially in the deficit states. He has made this argument, he saw this argument that the state is something like this in the country. The deficit where there are no proper institutions, there is no infrastructure, the condition of teachers is not good, the teacher is being recruited, they are well capable and well, you can say, they are not qualified. So, the commission has said that we should invest, we should invest in the teacher education institutions, we should increase our investment, which increases the institutional capacity of teacher preparation and the deficit states, especially those deficit states. Then, teacher education should be a part of the higher education system. He has said that education should be a part of higher education. The duration of the program of teacher education needs to be enhanced. Since when is it being said that the duration of teacher education should be increased? It used to be a year ago, and after 2014, 2015, 2015, it has become a part of the program. So, he is saying that when you are in one year, then what happens? Practice is also there, teaching is also there, psychological practicals are also there, so we cannot do much emphasis on any part. And if you are a professional trainer, then it has to be enhanced duration. So, he said that the education commission, the Kuthari commission, in the year of 2014, he submitted a report saying that the duration of teacher education should be increased, but it has not been increased yet, so increase it now. We have to keep in mind that this is a committee 11 years ago, and as soon as you read the NEP 2020, there are only 11-13 points in the teacher education, and the first line is according to the Justice Verma committee. So, maybe I thought that I should discuss with you the Justice Verma committee, what it had already said, what it has said, so now how can we improve our teacher education? It is desirable that new teacher education institutions are located in multi- and interdisciplinary academic environments. Look, all these things are being done earlier. If we had not read the Justice Verma committee, then we feel that NEP 2020 is saying this for the first time, but it has already been said that the teacher education institutions are located in a multi- and interdisciplinary academic environment, that is, they have ended the stand alone. This is also being said, your NEP 2020, that there should not be any institution of teacher education. There are more courses going on there, multi- and interdisciplinary academic environment. This will have significant implications for the redesigning of norms and standards of various teacher education courses specified by the NCE. We have discussed about the NCE, the National Council of Teacher Education is saying that this will have significant implications. It will have some significant implications. The NCE will make the courses, the norms and standards to redesign them. It is saying that current teacher education programs may be redesigned keeping new recommendations in the NCE FTE 2009, National Curriculum Curricular Framework for Teacher Education 2009. What is the National Curriculum Framework in 2009? We will make a curriculum, we will make a national body, you can do a little flexibility in your state according to your local conditions, but you have to follow the same basic structure. So, it is also made for school education, NCE FTE, it is also made for teacher education, but in the teacher education, it is a matter of sorrow that we have not got any framework from 2009. NEP 2020 said that we have given it a national framework, now school education is made according to itself, teacher education is made according to its own framework. School education has been made in 2023, but teacher education has not been made yet. For teacher education, NCE FTE has not been made yet. So, it is a matter of sorrow that it has been three years, policy has come, teacher education has not been given its framework yet. So, in 2009, NCE FTE was coming, so it said that you can redesign your curriculum according to 2009. In keeping with the recommendations of the Education Commission, every pre-service teacher education institution may have a dedicated school attached to it as a laboratory where student teachers get opportunities to experiment with new ideas and hone their capacities and skills to become reflective practitioners. Look, and this Education Justice Fund Committee has repeatedly quoted the Education Commission. Look, the Quotari Commission has said that you have not done it yet, now do it. What to do? Every place where B.H. teacher trainings are taught, where teachers are trainees, where prospective teachers are made, they are told that they should have a school so that they can teach there, practice teaching there, to write their education, how we can do something new, we want to change something, we want to experiment. Why? Because we don't get many things at school where we send our trainees to teach. And then the school authority doesn't let us change their timetable, they don't let us teach according to their needs. They say that wherever we teach, our course is going on, we teach the way you teach, otherwise our syllabus will not complete. All these practical challenges come when you are doing B.H. or doing it.  Then there is a need to establish a national level academic body for continual reflection and analysis of teacher education programs, their norms and standards, development of reading material and faculty development of teacher educators. They said, make a national level academic body, look at all this. Then as a matter of policy, the first professional degree or diploma in teacher education should be offered only in face to face mode. When I read this, I felt that we are now talking face to face or blended and all these things. We feel that we are going to go to the new blended, right? But since we don't study, we don't know what is being said, we won't be able to know most of the people's home I have things. So, the Justice Verma Committee has used the material in the blended learning in 2012. So, they said that you should teach teacher education in face to face mode. Distance learning programs and use of blended learning material may be developed and used for continuing professional development of school teachers and teacher educators. So, they said, the concept of CPD is continuous professional development. Now we have a lot of work to do and we have to learn something new. Then you use blended learning material that you don't have to take a leave, you don't have to take a DLCL so that you can learn it. But the normal education is done in face to face mode. This is what Justice Verma Committee and use of blended learning material is being done 11 years ago. Even earlier, you will learn something else. The institutional capacity should be increased for the preparation of teacher educators. The issue is that the more you make teachers, the more they make their students. And if every teacher makes what they want, it's not like that. There is a need to make the master in education program of two-year duration with the provision to branch out for specialization in curriculum and pedagogic studies, foundation studies, management, policy and finance and other areas of emerging concerns in education. They said, you should do the master in education for two years and add specialization. Then NCT needs to develop broad based norms for the qualification of teachers and educators. The idea of creating opportunities for teaching practitioners to teach in teacher education institutions as visiting faculty may be explored. Faculty development programs for teacher education should be institutionalized. That is, if your teaching practitioner is going on, you can make visiting faculty a faculty development program. There is a need for enhanced investment in the promotion of research in education in general in the area of education. If you invest more money in education, it will be a good investment and it will be a good research. Especially in education. So that they can know what is the purpose and what solutions are possible. Then how to improve in-service teacher education? We have already made a good teacher but the teacher has come to the service so the government has required to appoint an expert group to develop a policy framework for in-service teacher education. And all existing teacher training institutions imparting in-service teacher education need to be strengthened. All the in-service teacher training institutions where in-service teacher education programs are going on, you should strengthen them. Make it a comprehensive program so that the continuous professional development of secondary school teachers can continue. And in the case of teacher performance education with the state government and other state holders may develop a framework for the assessment of teacher performance keeping in view the guidelines and strengthening the school. In this report, the guidelines that have been given to keep in mind the performance of the teacher should be an encouragement so that we have a accountability to do good work. Otherwise, after coming to the service we stop studying, right? That is the regulatory functions of NCT. The better the NCT will be the better it will work. So they are saying that NCT should review its norms and standards for the teacher education program. They should make it a guideline so that the innovative teacher education program can be recognized. They should make it a framework so that the institutions can be inspected. They should tell parameters so that the quality can be developed in the institutions. They should give a grant and make an assessment. Then NCT should formulate appropriate regulations for implementing section 17 of the NCTE Act 1993. You can see what is written in the section of Act 1993. He said that he should make a teacher education assessment in an accreditation center. When you read it, you will know what is NEAC? Actually, NEAC is wrong. Teacher education assessment and accreditation center is wrong. Constituent committee to prepare a comprehensive framework of accreditation. How much work do you have to do to improve? Generally, the NCT should notify regulations to govern inspections of teacher education. In order to ensure accountability is essential to establish a vigilance in the NCT. The NCT should inform that the work should be done so that we can run a teacher education. What are the general recommendations? The commission recommends the constitution of the committee to enable the setting up of structural mechanisms and processes for instituting each of the recommendations outlined in this report. In this report, we will discuss how we will implement it and how we will implement it. That's all. The Justice Verma committee was mentioned in 2012. There are a few more in the NEP 2020. Every new committee that has come before is a little ahead of the recommendations. You have already said that you have not done it yet. Justice Verma committee is quoting the commission again and again. In-service teacher education teacher audit for in-service teacher education for NCT and how it will work. Now we can discuss what NEP 2020 said about teacher education and we will know what Justice Verma committee said. So I have completed this very topic for you. Thank you and don't forget to like and subscribe my channel Explore Education. Thank you very much.


Narbash starts the crash bang boom, Mckinche doing everything he can to bob and weave. Twin Blast must be missing a lot of shots, he gets the kill on Narbash, and now Twin Blast is missing shots and Mckinche is hitting his What's up everybody, I'm the Mangus, you are awesome, and this is Casting Call, the show where iCast replays submitted by viewers like you. Today we're going to take a look at a great Murdock game from Mckinche, Twitch and YouTube linked below. If you have your own gameplay that you would like to see on the show, just fill out the form linked in the video description below. Be sure to hit that like button if you enjoy and subscribe if you want to see more. Now, let's get into the action. Starting this game up and Mckinche's support is not with him yet. The enemy team has a Twin Blast and a Narbash that he's facing off against. He's going to throw a ward down just behind the fog wall. Narbash misses the thunk, takes a shot from Murdock, and Murdock sees the Twin Blast waiting in the wings, trying to gank him through that fog wall, but he did put that ward up good on him. So now he's facing off against two here and they're splitting up. They're making him split his focus here. He's pinging on the Narbash, but Twin Blast is coming in behind him, and Twin Blast is going to move in. They're going to trade some shots. We're going to have a little bit of a carry off. It looks like neither one of them are really missing, but the thunk comes in from behind. He should have been aware of the Narbash and he's very low on life, but Twin Blast is taking tower shots. Twin Blast goes down. That's first blood for Mckinche due to a greedy dive by the Twin Blast. Now Mckinche can sit back and farm and get some health back from his health potion. That was a little nuts there at the beginning. I'm sure they thought that they could get that kill. You know what, one grenade or something and Mckinche would have been done. Now Narbash is going to run.   Is he going to pay for that? Oh no, he's got his minions with him now, so Mckinche is going to back off. Probably a good decision on Mckinche's part because one thunk would have ended him right there with the enemy minions attacking him. Mckinche is still abandoned in this right lane all by himself. He's been desperately calling for help, calling for a gank. Nobody has come over. He's just been playing as safely as he can, but he is woefully under farmed as he's been. Other than that first kill, he's been a little bullied by the Twin Blast and the Narbash. They haven't killed him yet, but it has come really close a few times. Now he's going to get a little bit of farm finally. They're going to probably rotate over for raptors. He's going to check it out. I don't know if he could do anything with this, but he's going to dive in here. See if he can pick up a steal on a raptor at least. Oh, he goes straight for the Narbash. Narbash takes a lot of damage there. He gets thunked. Narbash starts to crash bang boom. Mckinche is doing everything he can to bobbin weave. Twin Blast must be missing a lot of shots. He gets the kill on Narbash, and now Twin Blast is missing shots and Mckinche is hitting his. Twin Blast is in trouble here, and he takes out the Twin Blast. He gets two kills. That's going to help his farm. That's going to help out quite a bit. That was a ballsy maneuver there. I don't know if I would have done that, but it worked out for him. Great job for Mckinche there. I guess if your team's not going to help you out, you can use the raptors to help you out. The raptors got that Narbash pretty low for him, and he was able to take him out. That Twin Blast kill was all him though. He might be trying to come over and get some. Oh yeah, here's the, here's why he takes the raptor and takes down the Chimera. Again, using the raptors to his advantage here, he picks up a raptor then. His team's trying to surrender as they would. They've been getting their dicks kicked in, but yeah, Murdock takes a raptor for himself. So that's three kills now for Murdock. Well, four if you got that first one.  Yeah, like I said, if your team's not helping you out, use the raptors. Use the raptor's help. McKinchy spies a fully stacked jungle camp here, and I would normally counsel against taking that jungle camp, but it is a five stacked jungle camp, so the jungler hasn't been taking them. And yeah, the jungler hasn't been helping McKinchy out at all anyway, so he might as well get some feet off of these junglers, off the junglers, off the jungle camp. Altrication in the mid lane, McKinchy's going to rotate over to try and help out. I don't think that's going to happen. Gideon is bobbin' and weavin'. He gets away. All the Void bomb sides make slam. Twin Blast is getting straight up murdered here, and he does, and now we're going to ping on the Norbash. And Norbash is going, he's bobbin' and weavin'. He's got a little bit of armor, so he's not going down nearly as fast as the Twin Blast was. He almost dies. Gideon comes in, tries to kill him, takes two tower shots for absolutely nothing, and gets killed. So McKinchy's doing the best he can, but it looks like his team is not the greatest of players. The mid lane is a busy place today, as Gideon is probably going to fall into this enemy team. They do to a Chimera ambush. Ooh, that, that, that bellica is doing a little serious damage. Easy target up in the sky from Gideon, but McKinchy identifies as a real threat, which is Chimera coming after him. They're able to take him down pretty easily, and then just an arbitrary kill on Gideon. Gideon just kind of stood in the way of that bullet there, and Norbash goes down to easy triple kill. Now they're starting to work together. The bellica damage is really starting to come into play. Bellica in fault is a beast. Our friendly team finally working on this right side tower that McKinchy wasn't able to put any pressure on at the beginning because he didn't have a support, but it's all starting to work out for him. They're starting to push this tower down. Norbash is the only one defending, and he's, oh, here comes Countess from behind. Oh, I think that just interrupted her ult. The bellica back up with the seismic slam and the void bomb. Oh, he's low. Is he going to get the snipe? He gets the snipe on Norbash, and Countess knows better than to try and move in anymore that seismic slam void bomb almost took her out, combined with McKinchy's. Oh, Twin Blast coming in from behind drops a grenade.  Oh, that bellica is good. If she would have supported it from the beginning, they probably would be even more further ahead. There's probably one of those situations where the Gideon picked mid, and, you know, oh, Countess coming in with the, oh, she does take out Murdoch, but is she going to pay for it? She does pay for it. And how did Murdoch get that, get credit for that kill? Oh, well, whatever. It all works out in the end.  You get that situation all the time, especially like, I don't know. I don't know why, especially in a pre-alpha like this or early access like this, but God, mid lane popping off once again, as Murdoch has the red buff. Let's see what he can do with that. He's waiting for the Twin Blast to come around. The Twin Blast does come around.  And they got his number. He gets a thunk. McKinsey's going to have to back off a little bit, but his team is starting to come in. Crash Bang Boom starts, but immediately interrupted by the size of Islam.  Gideon ults, but he's just a big old skeet up in the air. He does, McKinsey takes a lot of damage from that, but Bellica is able to finish off Gideon. What was that little ramp there? Bellica takes off, takes out Twin Blast too.  That was a good target selection from Countess, but now she's got to deal with Bellica and Gideon. She easily, easily deals with Gideon. The Countess really knows what she's doing now. And Bellica is going to try and take her out, but yeah, Bellica is not the target that Countess wants. She backs off, which is smart, I think. Got us another team fight. McKinsey's heading in for the action after clearing out the left lane a little bit and setting it. And it looks like they're just going to square off for a bit. He's going to get a little bit of farm. And they're going in, they're going hard. Oh, and Graystone looks like he's really low. I don't know if he has his ultimate or not. It's not coming out from Narbash. The seismic assault lands on Narbash. Oh, Narbash take a lot of damage there.  But the long arm, quicks him in the shoulder, takes him down for the kill. Now Gideon's in a lot of trouble, take a lot of damage from McKinsey. McKinsey takes him out. Now the Chimeric is getting melted. Countess is getting melted. Oh, she's stasis. She went to stasis. It's not going to help her out though.  Nice little team fight there. At 32 minutes in on the heels of absolutely nothing, the enemy team throws in the towel, goes ahead and surrenders. Look at that poor Gideon level nine with like one item. But yeah, this is a really good lesson on how if you just keep your cool and do your best, then you can succeed. So great job for McKinsey there. Endgame analysis, I think McKinsey's team won here just through simple perseverance and good ward usage. You saw that at the beginning and they were warding all throughout the game and they were able to end up winning quite a few team fights, pushing the enemy team back. They're Gideon, I suppose is probably a new player. I shouldn't bag on him too much. He's just learning the game. That's fine. But it ended up being a really great game. I think if the Countess would have came online a little sooner, that could have been gone very different because she was playing really well towards the end. But yeah, great game all around. McKinsey, enjoy your kiltage.


Where is the best place to search for life beyond the solar system? Astronomers using telescopes at ESO's observatories in Chile have discovered three planets around a dim dwarf star, just 40 light-years from Earth. These worlds have sizes and temperatures similar to those of Venus and the Earth. They may be the best targets so far found in the hunt for life elsewhere in the universe. This is the ESOcast, cutting-edge science and life behind the scenes at ESO, the European Southern Observatory. New telescopes and more sophisticated instruments have allowed astronomers to discover and study large numbers of planets around other stars, known as exoplanets. Now scientists are searching for planets where we could detect life in the near future, if it exists. Astronomers hope to find the characteristic signatures in the atmospheres of these planets of molecules that could indicate the presence of life. But there are billions of stars in our galaxy, so how can they find the kind of planets they're looking for? A type of tiny dim red star, called an ultra-cooled dwarf, is a good place to look. They are the only places where life could be detected on an earth-sized exoplanet using our current technology. The light from much brighter stars, like the Sun for example, would swamp vital measurements of the atmospheres of any candidate planets. An international team of astronomers has used the Belgium Trappist Telescope to monitor the brightness of an ultra-cooled dwarf star in the constellation of Aquarius, which has been named Trappist 1. They found that it faded slightly at regular intervals, indicating that three planets were passing between the star and the earth, events known as transits. The host star Trappist 1 is much cooler and redder than the Sun and barely larger than Jupiter. Stars like this are very common in the Milky Way and they are very long-lived. This is the first time that planets have been found around one of them. Transits like these provide a surprising amount of information about the planet. The team were able to tell that the three planets are very similar in size to the earth and that they orbit very close to their dim parent star. But the really exciting result is that all three planets might have habitable regions on their surfaces. This study has found the first earth-like planets that are well suited for the detection of biological activity. The next step is to make more detailed observations using the next generation of telescopes such as ESO's European Extremely Large Telescope and the James Webb Space Telescope scheduled for launch in 2018. That will allow astronomers to study the atmospheres of planets like this and to search for molecules related to biological activity like ozone, methane or water. Ultra-cool dwarf stars are common. They account for around 15% of the stars near to the Sun. So this discovery opens up a new direction for planet hunting. A direction that is taking us one step closer to the goal of finding evidence for some kind of life on distant worlds.


It's not like any other employer.  We have, you know, hundreds and hundreds of employees that work here in so many different departments. The opportunities and where you can end up in the city of Columbia is endless. And I think if you really work hard and you are determined to get where you want to be, you can do it.


That don't sound good. We've got nothing coming out either. Let's take it apart and find the clog We had a problem simmered to similar to this before it was leaking Now I think it's just clogged But what we're going to do is we're going to take this thing apart and up under here There's a screw there. There's one there and there's one down in there now Now yours may differ. Gotta get a smaller screwdriver. It's all pretty much the same We got to get this bottom off of here Oh, that's one of those three those three prongs. Yeah, it's not a regular Phillips So let me get another screwdriver or something different. We'll try one of these little Screwdrivers that may be how I took it out of there before Okay So this is going to work must have been what I did before because I don't sure don't have One of these things they just don't want you taking these things apart Okay, it's understandable, but guys like me We can do this stuff and it won't be an issue But it's like everything anymore.  Wow. They don't want to get sued and all this.  You know what I mean?  They get dirty and I think the clog Is right in here somewhere It might be in that tube if you guys remember the last time this this tube Something happened in this tube blew off but I think there's a clog in here because Down inside here. I've seen it coming Up, but it wasn't coming up through this tube. Now this tube could be bad. It could be clogged too So we're going to take this top off By gently pulling that out Just like that your phillips screw right here They let you take this one off down in there. See that right in there. You got to kind of Bend it back. Okay Now see if we can blow through this one Yes, so this one's not clogged And I don't see a clog in that one Which is this side here, so What we're going to do in there. Can you see that that silver clip I'm going to take that clip off I'm going to pull a hose off and try to blow up through that if there's another issue I'm guessing it it's clog, but these hoses they'll get all brittle and once they break you're pretty much done Okay, so now we're going to blow through this hose right here Okay And see if uh because this is where it comes up through or we're going to take This clamp off. I'm not going to be able to These are soldering on take this clear out of here, but I'm not going to do that So I'm just going to let me grab a piece of wire And let's jam a piece of wire up through here and see if we can't get that cleaned out Okay guys, what I've got here is a piece of mechanics wire. It's pretty thin You can maybe try to use a coat hanger, but I just I think it's too strong to bend around there So We're going to stick this in here And see how that That will kind of bend around there a little it's only going to that bend So hopefully that's not rusting through Although it wasn't leaking now what I'm going to do with some compressed air Comes in this one and then comes out there So I'm going to try to blow rusty stuff there some more Now this time watch this end here What I'm going to do Is I'm going to clean all this stuff up this out some And then I shall be back with you momentarily So hang tight. Let's try it out. I hear something I think it's doing something There it goes. Look at that. I know this is kind of dirty. I should have cleaned that but Putting water in it now Now you can't see inside there steaming up too bad But I'm seeing there see all that dirt So you're going to want to run it run it a couple times run it through there So that way it can get itself cleaned out now what I recommend if you got hard water once a week Maybe twice a month Run you some vinegar through that thing man and let it run a couple times to keep that cleaned out and she doesn't do it And I should do it for But you know if you don't have hard water You know maybe once every six months just to keep it cleaned out run some vinegar through there But oh yeah, it's It's falling up now pretty good. It's on the inside There we go Okay So what I'm going to do is I'm going to dump that water out And I'm going to run some vinegar through there Say yeah, you can see it coming down in there now. Okay, so that's what we're going to do Running in there pretty good. Now. That's not coffee. I just got some tea in there I'll show you I don't know what it's supposed to do. Okay, so there you get this is what We're having for supper All right guys That's how you fix your coffee pot if that don't work by a new one. They're what 20 bucks Maybe 15 Something I think we gave 15 10 or 15 for that one So, you know, it's no big deal if it don't work. I'll give it a shot, right in this case It did work. So I want to thank you guys for watching appreciate it. She barely met the man a legend We're gone for now. Y'all take care. Bye. Bye guys


Right! New driver from Mizuno and a new strapline is the next generation of stability. And with every other manufacturer claiming to be longer, faster ball speeds, are Mizuno going to gain respect from consumers or just it really just lessened the excitement? In fact in the latest information the press really so to speak, that Mizuno sent me, Mae'n rhaid i'w gwneud o'ch cymryd ar gyfer y llun o surfwydd a'r cwrs, os ydych yn rhaid i'w gwneud, mae'r cyfrifiadau yn cael ei ddau'r cyfrifiadau am y cyfrifiadau. Yn gwneud o'n gweithio cyfrifiadau yma, ac mae'r ffordd iawn yn rhywbeth phobl i gyfrifiadau yn y cyfrifiadau yn y cyfrifiadau. Ie, ydych yn rhaid i'w gwneud yma, yw s-t-x i s-t-z.的時候, ac mae'r cyd-i Aberch nyfawr yn gallu cyfnodd.  If that's happening for a tall player, it's certainly going to affect an average golfer. So I'll be trying both of these out and seeing what we do in terms of consistency or what I do in terms of consistency will again look at impact locations, see where we get drop offs in terms of ball speed and try and measure Mizuno's claim. I will do that very, very shortly but before we do that let me just tell you, on how these two drivers differ in their setup and what performance attributes Mae'n weithio chi. Felly, mae'n dyn nhw'n meddwl dweud mai ychydig ychydig i rwy'r tas o'r cyffreddau. Ma那就 taliau y Z-model yn cael'u bod y dyma rwy'n credu slam eu peth o droi a'r eich dyn nhw'n cychwaned o gyffreddau. Ond mae'n ddweud y C-model, mae'n adegwyr, mae'n adegwyr allanen nhw'n ystafell, ac mae'n meddwl i'w ei ddwyng a'i ddechrau i'r cyffreddau, mae'n ddechrau i ddwyng mewn sydd wedi'uunku gyffreddau, a'n mynd i'r cyfrifio gyda unrhyw y right ac y llyfr amddangos. Mae'r meddwl yn bod digwyddau a llyfr mewn cyfrifio a'r cyfrifio cg mae'n meddwl i'r gwahanol i gyd yn ei ffwrdd o'r ddau cyfrifio ar y ddweud o'r model Z, ond gallwn ni'n meddwl i'n ddweud i'r gyd yn ei wneud yn ei gyd. Ond oherwydd roeddwn ni'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r ddau'r model X. Ydw i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r gyd yn ei ddweud i'r gyd. Algo o ddau gweithio ac mae'r crumel wnaeth yw'r grunffod â'r teimlo. Wrth gydy'r gwneud nesaf y stabilad yna'r oes y ddechrau o beth o blwyd rwy'n gwneud hynny a'r mwylo gweithio y tra bwyd. Rwy'n gwneud y twelio gyda'r modern a ddod o gwneud relio ar y gwyrdd. Rwy'n dod o ceisio gwneud hynny yn ei gweithio mwylo. yw'r hyn o'r fforddau, mae'r bwrdd yn ychwanegol, rwy'n lle'n gwybod o'r ddweud o'r gwaith yn gweithio'r gweithio'r gwaith. Rwy'n gallu cyflwyno. Mae'n rhaid i'r botwm a o'r gwaith o'r gyfnod, rwy'n gallu gweithio'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith. Mae'n gweithio'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith o'r gwaith. Felly'n gweithio fe fyddai'n gweithio i ni'r hyn o'r gwaith. I didn't get the didn't get to record data on that shot. And again, more out the middle. We get up to two three five.  Let's do the same with the STZ She's one really. Out the toe, doesn't get impacted in terms of carry distance nor ball speed One out the center Rwy'n dwych yn fwy o'r ysgol. Mae rhan o'r tynnu'n dwygon sy'n rhan o'r wath o'r iawn. Mae'r ddwygon o'r centaeth 234 o'r 238 o'r cyflethau o'r cwmhysg. Rwy'n dweud i'r wneud i'r wneud ei wneud i'w cael eu cyflethau. Mae'r eich bod yn dweud i'r ysgol i'r ddoch yn ddechrau'r cyflethau o'r gweithio. Mae'r 237 o'r cyflethau o'r cyfflethau o'r cyflethau o'r cyflethau o'r gweithio. ddwy'n gyfnod i'w ddwydd, ddwy'n ddwy'n cyfrifio'r cyfrifio'r cyfrifio. Have we seen anything major in what I've collected so far? I probably would say nothing conclusive, although there is some suggestion there that the sweet spot is certainly on the shot you're looking at right now. As big as we'd expect it to be. But I would remain, I think it's a type of test that you would need to hit 50 shots with each of the drivers to really take a look at how many off-centred hits can we really see if there's a drop or four or not. And slightly worrying, I suppose, on that STX that we've certainly seen a drop-off in those couple of shots that were low in the face. And that last one again, yeah, pretty much low in the face where we've seen a little bit of a drop-off. That would concern me just a little bit. Anyway, back inside. Right, so interesting to see there in terms of consistency and stability that Mizuno is suggesting. We kind of seen it a little bit, but I don't think we've seen anything different than we've seen before in terms of other manufacturers' performance at least anyway. I think that forgiveness has been a thing in recent years in terms of drivers. That sweet spot is certainly getting bigger, which is always a thumbs up for average golfers. We'll get to the data in the end in terms of overall performance. But first of all, just want to see how these two drivers look. From the crown and address, they're very, very similar indeed. At first glance, you'd hardly notice the difference. They've got this kind of new look that Mizuno have adopted in the last couple of years. That thicker black line at the front into the checkered flag element. The Mizuno chevron showing you where the centre of the clubface is. My thing with the look is it's okay, but it does nothing to assist with alignments. And if anything, my criticism might be, it's a little bit distracting, if anything. But it certainly does nothing to aid or assist where I think other driver heads possibly do help frame the ball a little bit better. In terms of underneath the clubhead, the shelf appeal thing, I think as you'd expect from Mizuno, it's a real high quality finish. And the only thing you can see that differs, again, is that positioning of the weight location. I mean, overall, a good looking driver with a good finish to it. I'd just like to quickly see if we can pick up any audio and see if we can notice any differences in terms of the sound or how good the two drivers sound or not. I mean, it's just a nice balance between, we'll try the other driver as well. Interesting enough for the data, we'll have the same shaft in both clubs before anybody picks up on that. But it's just got that fine balance, is what I was going to say, between something that feels like it's going off the clubface, but not going off like a gunshot.  We haven't got the track man switch on right now, but that was, again, I don't know how much you pick up. But I just think they've done a really good job of, aesthetically, it's got thumbs up and from a sound perspective, really good. Right now, just in their drivers, in their full range, they've just got a nice balance between everything in terms of that performance, sound, aesthetics. It's a really good position they've got themselves in now, in this kind of fairways and driver market. Right, let's start off by going back to the video and look at what Mizuno claimed in terms of what each of these drivers was set up in terms of that weighting. Don't forget that 20 gram weight was in a different place for each of these drivers. One was supposed to promote a draw bias, the other one, a straight ball flight. So the first thing for me in terms of data is what I would like to see is did that actually ring true. So we're going to start off with a dispersion chart. The red dots that you see are from that STX, that's the draw bias. The blue dots are from the STZ, which is the straight flight. I think it goes far as to say there's not a huge difference in it, but virtually every ball I hit with the straight ball flight was right of target line, if you like. It probably did travel straighter and more down the line that I aimed, and that red dot that you can see a lower still, a fewer out to that right hand side, which it didn't quite get moving. But on the STX, I probably would say you're seeing those balls a lot more close to the central line and left of central line. So I think first of all, some proof there that that waiting system actually did work. So that again just depends on your current shot type, and if you've got a big sort of fade in your game, then maybe that waiting system into that sort of heel area might be a big help for you. In terms of then performance of the two drivers, although I always do, I'll put the whole lot of data up at the end of these videos for you to have a look and break it down yourself. But for now, I'm just going to put up the two average set of numbers. And what you'll see there is a lot of similarities to say the least. We've got half a yard set of them, separate them in carry. We've got what is it, half a degree, not even that in terms of launch. Ball speeds, 0.6 mile an hour separated them, 100 revs a spin, and my swing club head speed remain constant. I suppose a good thing there wasn't one that performed different than the other in terms of the face itself. We've already had luck at that sort of forgiveness factor, and that's something that is again very much key to Mizuno's message in this. I think for me in terms of the performance, anything in and around that 240 carry distance with driver is probably where I'd like it to be, so fell off a little bit shorter than what I'd have hoped. But having said that, the drives that I hit and the drives that we recorded data from going back to that initial dispersion chart, I would say pretty much most of them are finding the fairway maybe a couple leaked out to the right. So the overall summary would be that Mizuno has certainly paid a lot of attention to off-center hits. They've certainly looked at that kind of consistency and dispersion. And I think it'd be hard to argue that they haven't done a good job and that has happened. The thing is that the only thing I would say is that they've not done anything different than we've already seen. Now probably think that is just down to this mere fact now that ball speeds are now at their limits. We're not going to see anything in terms of distance, so they're focusing their attentions on consistency. Yes, it does seem to have happened, but ultimately going back to the beginning of the video, is that an exciting thing to hear about? Or is it we want to hear the story about ball speeds and distance, otherwise drivers become less exciting? That's a question that you still need to answer. But for me, like I said, very, very good overall massive thumbs up in terms of performance, in terms of the way they look. It's hard to knock them as it is with most products right now, so it's finding those little fine gaps. And the one final thing to mention I almost forgot it is the price tag. These are going to be 399 in terms of their RRP, what they then sell at, I don't know. You're not saving a lot of money now by choosing a Mizuno driver, which perhaps were a couple of years ago. I've already mentioned in terms of the quality of the build. Maybe that's not something that they should be looking to do anyway. Right, as ever interested in your comments, your feedback, let me know down below. I'm always interested to know with big releases like the stealth and the road that we've seen in recent months, is the Mizuno driver going to be one of those ones that you have to try? Let me know in the comments below and I will see you all very soon. Bye for now.


So here's a useful tool that shows up in many, many, many, many, many different applications, and it's known as dimensional analysis. And it's based on the following idea. Any time you measure a quantity, the amount of the quantity present is given in terms of a number of units. So for example, if you've talked about a mass of five kilograms, what you mean is that the mass that is present is the same as five masses, each of one kilogram, where our kilogram is the unit. Likewise, if I want to measure the duration of a movie, and I want to say it's 135 minutes, then it's the same duration as 135 one-minute intervals, where again, the one-minute is our unit. Likewise, I could talk about a volume of three gallons, and what I'm talking about is the same as having three one-gallon volumes. As a general rule, everything that you measure has to have a unit written down. If you don't write down the unit, the answer that you have written is meaningless. You can't talk about a length of seven, because it makes a difference whether you're talking about seven feet, seven yards, seven miles, or seven millimeters. This might seem to be adding an extra layer of complexity to any problem, but actually it makes it a lot easier, because units can be treated exactly like algebraic variables. And that's the basis for dimensional analysis. For example, if I multiply 2x times 3x, I know that I should get 6x squared. The 2 and the 3, the coefficients, multiply. The x and the x multiply, and there's my product. And if I treat the units just like algebraic variables, then, well, here's a simple calculation. Here's two feet. That's a length by three feet. That's another length. If I multiply these two together, I multiply the coefficients to get six. I multiply the units together to get feet squared, and my product six feet squared. And this actually helps us, because if I have unlike units, I can't combine them in any meaningful way. So I can't combine 2x plus 8y and get 10xy, and likewise I can't write two feet plus eight inches and get 10 anythings. Now, I can write the expression 2x plus 8y and just leave it that way. Likewise, I can write the expression 2 feet plus 8 inches and leave it that way, but I can't combine them without doing some extra work. So one of the things we might be able to do is, if I know the relationship between x and y, I can express the original expression in terms of one of the variables. So maybe I know that x is the same as 12y, and that means I can transform the expression 2x plus 8y into 2, here's something that is the same as x, 2 times 12y plus 8y, and that simplifies at the end of the day to 32y. Likewise, if we happen to know that one foot is 12 inches, because we have been brought up in a peculiar system of units that nobody else in the world uses, then I can transform the expression 2 feet plus 8 inches, that's 2 feet plus 8 inches, that's 24 plus 8, that's 32 inches. And the fundamental rule of dimensional analysis is the following. If the units of an equation don't match the units of the quantity sought, something is wrong, you're missing something important. So let's think about that. So to begin with, if you know the formula or definition of a quantity, you can figure out what the units are. So for example, in all but three nations in the entire world, those being Liberia, Myanmar, and there's some other places whose name escapes me right now, but in all but three nations of the world, we use the metric system. And so length is measured in meters or kilometers. Oh, that's right. In the United States, we use this peculiar adherent system that uses inches, feet, and miles. But now that we know that length is measured in meters or kilometers, inches, feet, miles, whatever, I do know how to find the area of a rectangle. It's the product of length and width, which means that the units of area could be meters times meters, and that, again, treating these like algebraic variables, that's meters squared, or we might read that as square meters. And that means that every area that we run into can be measured in units of square meters. Or if we're in one of these nations like Liberia or Myanmar, we might measure area in square feet or square inches or square miles. Also, since we know that volume is length times width times height, then my units of volume could be things like cubic inches or cubic feet or cubic centimeters if you're in most of the rest of the world. How about velocity? Well, the definition of velocity is its distance divided by time. So I can find its units. It's going to be a unit of distance, well, how about meters? Divided by a unit of time, how about seconds? So the units of velocity could be meters over seconds, which we generally write as m slash s, meters per second. Now, just as a simple example of how dimensional analysis works, let's say you're working through a problem, and all of a sudden, you can't remember how to find the area of a circle. And you remember it has something to do with pi, and there's a couple of formulas that are circulating in your head, maybe 2 pi r or pi r squared or 4 thirds pi r cubed. And you don't know which of these formulas is the correct one. So one of the things we can do is we can try to analyze the units to determine which one is not correct. So first important idea, numbers like 2 and pi and square root of 11 and all these other things that are pure numbers, they do not have any units. On the other hand, r is our radius, and that's a length. So whatever the units of r is, those will be units of length. So since I was brought up in this aberrant system of unit, the units of length of feet and inches come much more naturally to mind. So suppose r is one foot, then I can determine the units for each of the formulas. So let's consider that first formula, 2 pi r. Again, 2 and pi don't have any units associated with them. r has a value 1 foot, so the expression 2 pi r is going to give me something like 2 pi feet. And likewise, if I take that expression pi r squared, r is measured in feet. It's 1 foot, so when I square it, I get 1 squared. That's 1 foot squared, feet squared. And so this expression pi r squared becomes pi feet squared. And then that expression 4 thirds pi r cubed, again, r is 1 foot. So when I cube it, 1 foot cubed, 4 thirds and pi have no units. My units of this expression will be feet cubed. And now I'll take a look at each of these expressions. So feet is a unit of length. So whatever this first expression is, whatever this measures, is something that's measured in feet, and that's a length, not an area. So I know that first expression cannot possibly be the formula for the area of the circle. And I'll just get rid of it. Now this last expression, feet cubed, so I have cubic feet here. This is a measure of volume. So again, this last expression, whatever it tells me, is a volume. And again, that can't possibly be the area of a circle. So I'll get rid of that one as well. Now this expression here does have units feet squared. That is a unit of area, which means that this expression could potentially be the area of a circle. Now add one qualifier here. Remember that constants do not affect the unit. So if I threw a constant in front here, 2 pi r squared, the dimensional analysis would tell me that 2 pi r squared is something that is going to measure an area. What you have to watch for is that it might not be the area that you want. But at the very least, it will be some area. And given that our memory tends to be triggered more by associations than absolute recall, if we have at least an ability to remember that something 2 pi r, pi r squared, 4 thirds pi r cubed, if we happen to know that at least one of these happens to be the correct expression, the dimensional analysis will help us identify which ones can't be the correct expression.


The engineering senior design project is our capstone as seniors. Our specifically is building a bioelectric low-weight low-noise prosthetic hand. The first semester is research and second one development. We're looking to use all those skills we've learned through our classes all the way through from freshman year, applying them to do an actual engineering project. There are 15 groups with a mix of disciplines of engineers. Each one has their own project going on. So my team is me, Kat, Rob and Moses. We have two biological engineers. I'm a software engineer then Moses is an electrical engineer. We're all sharing the responsibility of different parts of the project. I am working mostly on the biocide doing stuff with the biocompatibility of the device so making sure it works with the human user. Moses focuses on the electrical side of it so he works on the circuits which help pick up the EMG signals making the electrical components in the hand function and on the software side. So what I do is basically build the brain of the arm. I've also been taking over more of a mechanical role designing and developing natural physical prosthetic. So we were lucky enough to get two grants. We got the Hardman Grant from here at Fairfield University and we also received the Connecticut Space Grant from NASA and that allows us to do a lot more trial and error different prototypes of our design. Our kids are a much more natural process than we would otherwise be able to do. Fortunately we all get to work closely together and learn about each other's disciplines just a new process one that probably seems more professional and more realistic. When I got into bioengineering in freshman year I wasn't really sure what I wanted to do with it but after doing this project I'm really sure I want to do prosthetics.