بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم والصلاة والسلام على أشف المبيائي والمرسلين سيدنا ونبينا عب القاسم محمد العامين وعلى أهل بيته الطيبين والطاهرين المأسومين المفلومين ولاعنة الله على الداحم أجمعين من الآن إلى قيامي ومدين عامين يا رب العالمين ومجمعين الذين يتبعون أصدقائهم ومجمعين الذين يتبعون with us on core beliefs وفي the past few days we have taken a slight detour in order to cover some of the arguments raised against the original Islam and its connection to the أهل البيت they have a peace and blessings of Allah upon them by an individual who claimed that his beliefs in a different theological school happened to correlate with the أهل البيت more and upon further investigation we found that those beliefs were lacking that his argument was lacking and that he follows a distorted form of Islam that happens to be nowhere near the أهل البيت neither at the theoretical level nor at the practical level firstly dear viewers allow me to clarify what shall we shall be discussing today and more importantly a very important key issue other than this dear viewers because of course we are operating upon the western calendar when it comes to scheduling what we will be discussing this has been appropriately titled the New Year's special episode because of course this is New Year's Eve very few hours are left of 2017 and we shall be making our way into 2018 that does not mean to say that we are commemorating, celebrating or even venerating this day as a great day of importance or as a day in which we are even celebrating now rather our days here in Karbala have been fairly normal they've been fairly normative not much has changed at all in fact most parts of the world with the exception of those who are gathering with their families not many people will really be celebrating New Year's Eve because at the end of the day this day has no significance although society has made it a certain day in which we hope to look at resolutions and changes of course on the Islamic calendar we are actually falling upon a day of sadness it is the Isthisad or the death anniversary of Sayyada Fatima and Masouma they have a piece of blessings of the lobby upon her and so in light of that we'll be continuing our regular topic but we'll be taking a slight detour as well but in a manner which is befitting of the topic we were originally speaking about prior to our short so-called Christmas holiday in which we analyzed a completely different topic we were of course looking at atheism as a worldview as a worldview in the sense that we said that if you strip God or you strip the concept of God from the picture you would end up having a very very different set of ideas, notions and concepts about reality and these notions and concepts they were not merely me trying to attack atheism and saying that this would be a consequence no, I cited several prominent atheist thinkers particularly a philosopher of science and one who had written a book as a proponent of atheism entitled The Atheist Guide to Reality and of course I utilized that book as the benchmark for understanding what the atheist worldview would look like of course there are many different atheists and they might choose to even follow different worldviews but we would say that they're doing that in spite of their atheism and they're not being loyal to the necessary consequences that their atheism has to offer but in regards to that point there are many different things we saw when looking at that particular viewpoint when looking at the consequences of atheism we saw that there are several things which are really really problematic particularly with a thesis of Dr. Alex Rosenberg of a particular scholar and professor of philosophy at Duke University who we had cited stating that the atheist worldview has the following consequences just to give you a reminder the consequences of his atheism were that number one that scientism or the thesis that the methods of science or the only ways to acquire knowledge were basically put forward as the research model we ought to use if we believe in atheism he states and I quote this is the conviction that the methods of science are the only reliable ways to secure knowledge of anything that science's description of the world is correct in its fundamentals and that when complete science will not be surprisingly different from what it tells us today science provides all significant truths about reality being scientific just means treating science as our exclusive that is to say soul and only guide to reality to nature both our own nature and everything else I want you to pay very close attention both our own nature and the nature of everything else around us now of course what would that mean if you reject a God from the picture and you take literally scientism as your soul view of what reality would be it's going to have several implications and one of them is physicalism Rosenberg states on page 28 if we're going to be scientistic then we have to attain our view of reality from what physics tells us about it actually we'll have to do more than that we'll have to embrace physics as the whole truth about reality this is a necessary consequence of thinking scientifically according to Rosenberg he also believes it's a necessary consequence of atheism he then goes on to say on page 28 all the processes in the universe from physical to mental are purely physical processes involving fermions and bosons interacting with one another again I want to break down these quotes because I know that sometimes they utilize a language which is beyond our expertise and we might start thinking to ourselves as well am I really understanding that correctly is Yahya understanding that correctly focus he states all the processes in the universe from what physical to mental so he separates that physicality from mental states to another are purely physical processes involving fermions and bosons interacting with one another what does that refer to it refers to the fact that our thoughts our intentionality our being able to even think things is all a physical process for Rosenberg for Rosenberg there is no such thing as a thought because describe a thought what is a thought it's a mental process it's something else according to Alex Rosenberg he doesn't have his conception that we can dream up things that we have the capability of dreaming up thoughts which don't exist and bringing thoughts into existence Rosenberg does not believe that's possible because Rosenberg doesn't believe there is such a thing as thought rather physics explains chemistry which turns into biology which explains all life including mental processes which according to Rosenberg are physical and chemical and that's all there is this belief is called materialism, physicalism and scientism naturalism at times as well and according to Rosenberg the only thing which thoughts could really be described as thoughts as we as human beings understand it is an illusion he states the following on page 142 of his book the brain can't have thoughts about Paris or about France or about capitals or about anything else for that matter when consciousness convinces you that you or your mind or your brain has thoughts about things it is wrong essentially telling us what but according to Rosenberg again the very thought process we have is merely an illusion why? because according to Rosenberg's presuppositions about the universe the physical universe is over is the brain is physical therefore it can't be doing anything that a physical thing like a table wouldn't be doing he states the first clump of matter that we bit of wet stuff the Paris neurons is about the second chunk of matter the much greater quantity of diverse kinds of stuff that make up Paris and the first i.e. the Paris neurons be about denote refer to name, represent or otherwise point to the second clump how can one clump of stuff anywhere in the universe be about some other clump of stuff anywhere else in the universe so we asked the thought when your brain has that process we call intentionality where I think about for example the shrine of Abul Fadal al-Bas which is in the background how is it possible that my brain which according to Rosenberg is merely a physical clump of matter could be thinking about the shrine of Abul Fadal al-Bas because physical things according to Rosenberg don't think about or be about other physical things then my whole thought process is just an illusion and Rosenberg clearly states he says since there are no thoughts about things notions of purpose plan or design in the mind are illusory since the brain can't have thoughts about stuff it cannot make have or act on plans, projects or purposes that give itself he states again scientism allows for moral improvement it's a matter of combining the core morality that evolution has inflicted upon us with true beliefs vouched safe for us by science but the real disaster in the atheist world view when it comes to thoughts is that Rosenberg believes that some things are true and some things are false but just as physical things cannot be about other things neither can they be true or false can a clump of wet matter be true, how could it be if it follows that if it follows that it is he also believes that thoughts can be true or false but in order for thoughts to be true or false they must be true or false about something and yet if thoughts cannot be about anything how can they be true or false either way so the real disaster here is the following if atheism were to be true the atheism as a worldview that Rosenberg subscribes to then we can't have a true thought about it because thoughts don't exist according to Rosenberg Rosenberg argues quite viciously that the scientism he believes to be true and it must be true but his scientism it renders and means that no beliefs even ones about scientism even ones about his own worldview could be true he also insists that his scientism is necessarily linked with atheism and that atheism is best understood and defined as scientism but if that's the case then no one can believe that atheism is true or false because that would require them to have some beliefs about atheism which would require thinking about atheism so let's get this right let's break down the argument to the most simple way according to Alex Rosenberg if atheism is true then scientism is true according to Alex Rosenberg if scientism is true then we have no such thing as thoughts we have no such thing as thoughts because we are in purely physical universe so if atheism is true no one can believe or think that atheism is true because there's no such thing as beliefs or thoughts and that would require that we know and understand that if atheism is true so it makes Rosenberg's atheism quite impossible what we mean by that is it could physically be true that atheism is true and that Rosenberg's right that we can't actually have thoughts but if it's the case then you and I could never know it because anything we try and think about it would merely be an illusion caused by a physical event which precedes it and therefore this may come as a particular shock to Rosenberg and other atheists but everything is really strange if atheism is true and we have a very good reason if what Rosenberg is claiming is true to doubt atheism because we can never truly know anything so you see according to Rosenberg he lives in such a world where in order to deny God he'll even be willing to behead himself philosophically and cut off all forms of rationality dear viewers thank you for tuning in we're going to go for a quick break please join me afterwards patiently with us during that short break prior to the break we were discussing the natural consequences of the atheist world view as put forward by our respected scholar and proponent of atheism for Alex Rosenberg in his book The Atheist Guide to Reality just to summarize his argument once more for those who did not catch it according to Alex Rosenberg if atheism is true then it's not merely the absence of belief in God but rather it comes with a beautiful world view called scientism scientism for Atheist Alex Rosenberg is essentially the view that everything in reality can be described and understood using one particular discipline physics and according to him if that's the case then everything in the realm of existence is physical this is the belief known as physicalism according to him the brain is the only thing which could be loosely referred to as a human mind but according to Alex Rosenberg the brain is a physical object now because our brains have this function known as intentionality which allows us to think about something Alex Rosenberg will go all the way further and say that no we don't really think about anything rather any thoughts we have as human beings or just illusions caused by the brain his argument is as follows no physical thing can be true or false a thought is a physical thing so he argues that how is it possible for this clump of matter known as the brain to be about something else to have a thought about something else in the same way that if my brain is like this table you don't have a table being about something else so for Alex Rosenberg the whole process of thoughts is an illusion but this is problematic because let's apply Qa'ad as an exam to Alex Rosenberg's thinking here no physical thing can be true or false a thought is a physical thing but atheism, scientism and Alex Rosenberg's entire world view is a thought therefore Alex Rosenberg's world view namely atheism or physicalism or scientism cannot be true or false therefore it's not true and therefore we can reject it so the real problem here is it's literally shooting yourself in the foot the atheism that's followed by Alex Rosenberg it's a bit like the Salafi School of Islam that we looked at earlier on but really when you apply its arguments for the existence of gods to its conception of gods it needs to self destruction and it doesn't make itself progress any further at the table of discussing refined world views it's essentially intellectual absurdity but am I misrepresenting people someone might say to me Alex Rosenberg is one atheist it's not very fair no matter how qualified he is to take what he says to be true because I know other atheists that don't argue like that well to be honest with you I'm not straw manning Alex Rosenberg to be quite fair there's a good chance to Alex Rosenberg who is an atheist even more qualified than our average atheist friends to know the implications of his atheism because at the end of the day he's a specialist in this area whereas our atheist friends and colleagues are just people that happen to claim to be atheists they don't necessarily represent anyone nor spend a lot of time thinking about their atheism and its consequences but even if I were to say that Alex Rosenberg is unique in that it wouldn't detract from what he's saying but there are others who also say they're similar Charles Darwin the famous founder and proponent of what we would call today Darwinian evolution the theory of evolution which is a scientific theory has gained much prominence namely the theory that we share mutual ancestors with apes and that eventually when we go back in history life form has a common ancestor but these ancestors had split off and evolved into different species until we got where we are today this theory brought to the west by Charles Darwin what does Charles Darwin state about his particular view in regards to being able to trust reason he states with me the horrid doubt which always arises which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals or of any value or at all trustworthy would anyone trust in the convictions of a monkey's mind if there are any convictions in such a mind another contemporary the atheist philosopher Patricia Churchland another one in the philosophy of science she states the following boiled down to essentials the nervous system enables the organism to succeed in v4f feeding, fleeing, fighting and reproduction the principal chore of nervous systems is to get the body parts where they should be in order that the organism may survive improvements in sensory motor control confer an evolutionary advantage a fancier style of representing is advantageous so long as it is geared to the organism's way of life and enhances the organism's chances of survival so we as an organism our brain is largely geared towards whatever it takes to survive she states truth whatever that is definitely takes the hind most what does that mean she's essentially saying that this brain if we came through this process of blind natural selection without a divine creator with us in mind then because our brains are geared towards getting us to survive they're not geared at all towards discovering truth and as a result she states not only are they not reliable for discovering truth she states truth whatever that is definitely takes the hind most namely our brains would really not consider truth finding and the ability to reason to be a reliable process now what's interesting about all of this is that these people were not may Allah strengthen you all they're not people who lack intellect they're not people who lack reason they're very intelligent people I'm sure by far they would score much higher in IQ tests than the rest of us but this brings us on to the next point that we should be making in the next few episodes they looked at physical reality and they said what they said that physical reality without a God means that there's no such thing as trusting reason there's no such thing as morality and everything else even though I take this for granted the rest of us would say that because we know that God must exist for surely we do think rationally we do have morality but these guys in their abstinence and their stubbornness of wanting to reject God have said that no God does not exist and therefore there are no thoughts there are no morality they embrace the negative consequences of God without us even needing to point it out to them and this really rings true to the saying of the Holy Prophet where he says أعرفكم بنفسه أعرفكم بربه whoever knows himself the most would certainly have a better knowledge of his Lord and of course this is stated in other ways من أرف نفسه فقد أرف ربه but insha'Allah dear viewers we will elaborate more on this particular principle insha'Allah tomorrow thank you so much more for joining us tonight والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته


This video will show you how to use the basics of PowerPoint. To begin, go to your Start menu and click one time. Microsoft PowerPoint may be listed here or you may need to go to all programs. Click one time on Microsoft PowerPoint and the program will open. It automatically opens to a title slide, and the first thing we're going to do is go up to the toolbar and click on Design. You'll see that there are different options for designs, and if you click on them or just move your mouse over them, it'll show you what they look like. I'm going to choose this design. Then it says, click to add title. So I'm just going to click and then type the title of my presentation. Here it says click to add subtitle. I'm going to put my name in the subtitle. Now I want to add a new slide. So I need to go back to the toolbar, click on Home, and you'll see New Slide. If you click the top, it will automatically add a slide. If you click the bottom, it will give you different formats to choose from. I'm going to click the top and get a regular content slide. Here again, it says click to add title. So I'm going to put the heading for one of my categories. And then down here, I click to add text. You'll see this dot here, we call that a bullet. And usually the content for PowerPoints use bullets so that they're easier to read. So I click and type my content. And then I want another slide, so I go back to the toolbar and click on New Slide again, click to add title again, and click to add text. When I finish typing one line, I hit Enter on my computer and that takes me to the next line with a new bullet. So I have a title slide and two content slides. I can move these slides around.  So now Education is the second slide.  When I'm finished, I'm going to go up to File and click Save. It used my title for the name of the document. That's okay, but I'm going to add my last name so it's clear whose document it is. This is saving on my computer in documents. If you have a flash drive, you will click down to computer and you'll see your flash drive listed here. And then you click Save. It's still open, so I can still make changes. So for example, I think I'm going to change the font for the title and make it easier to read. So I click up here and says font, and I click the down arrow and it shows me a list of fonts. And if I click on them, they will show me what they look like. So I think I'm going to choose aerial. I made a change, so I want to save this document again. I can go back up to File and click on Save, or I can just click on the small disk, which is also a way to save. So both of those are ways to save. If I want to view my PowerPoint, I click on Slide Show. And it asks me if I want to start from the beginning or from the current slide. And usually I want to start from the beginning. So I click from beginning. And this is what my PowerPoint presentation will look like for my audience. So I can look at it and check my spelling. I can click and go to the next slide, click and go to the last slide. And if I click one more time, it tells me that I am at the end of the Slide Show, and I just need to click and exit and I'll go back to my work. So this is just the basics of PowerPoint. Good luck with your PowerPoint presentations.


So I'm presenting a paper co-authored with Patricia Giustino, who is right here, who you all know. And Maria Ivánis, who you have seen around as well, and Juan Camilo Cardenas, who is not here. And so this is a paper looking at the legacies of civil war, not just rebel governance on support for the rule of law. So when we think about the rule of law in post-conflict settings, we know from different literatures, in research, in policy that this is crucial. It's crucial for democracy. This is one of the pillars of democracy. You cannot have democracy without the rule of law. This is essential for peace, right? For peace to really exist. You need the ruler to be constrained in some way and to follow the law. And this is also crucial for development based on a large literature in economics. This is one of the basic functions of the states that you need for people to engage in productive economic activities, right? So we need the rule of law. Another finding of the literature that is very clear in political science is that for the rule of law to prevail, you need citizen support, right? So we need people to rely on institutionalized ways to resolve their disputes. We need people who are willing to withdraw support from politicians who fail to abide by the rule of law, who punish them in elections. We also need citizens of a country to prevent the rise of extremists or authoritarian political groups and rise to power. And we also need this influence and this demand for the rule of law, because that's going to push the government and the authorities to respond to violations of the rule of law. So this is very well established. And so when people think about promoting the rule of law in these post-conflict settings, we usually find, again, both in policymaking debates and in research, that one of the critical barriers for building the rule of law in these post-conflict settings is that you have low support for the rule of law. And usually this is explained in terms of a very weak civic culture, discredited political institutions so people don't trust these institutions and they are not going to really demand the authorities to defend them. And so there is this widespread assumption and I could give you quotes of how one of the critical things, of the critical barriers that we have to build the rule of law in post-conflict settings is just that people don't want the rule of law or they don't care enough. And so in this paper we ask, is this true? So we think this has been assumed rather than investigated. We were not able to find research, even descriptive research, really showing that people who live in conflict zones are more likely to have a weak preference for the rule of law. And there is also a lack of development of mechanisms. How is it that civil war erodes support for the rule of law? And so the goals of the paper are twofold. First, we want to derive hypothesis based on existing research. So if we assume that this is true, how is a civil war going to erode support for the rule of law? And in particular, if we think of a country and not cross country, it might be the case that if we compare countries that have endured a civil war, support for the rule of law is lower. But if you look at a particular country, where are the places where this is more problematic? Based on what we know about civil wars and about support for the rule of law, can we think about which are the populations where support for the rule of law is going to be more problematic and therefore in greater need of policies to build the support? And we are going to test this hypothesis with data on Columbia. So let me walk you through the hypothesis that we derive. Again, this is based on existing research, but it's one of the contributions of the paper because this has been an assumption that has not really been unpacked. So the first hypothesis is very obvious and it's that people who live in conflict zones in places where there is presence of armed actors are going to be more likely to disregard the rule of law. Why? Well, because it can be that there are many different dynamics of war that undermine the support for the rule of law. So the presence of armed actors is going to be correlated with destruction of physical property, violence, rebel governance, or paramilitary governance, and all the different things that you can think of that could undermine these preferences for the rule of law. So our first hypothesis is that exposure to armed actors or living in conflict zones is going to be correlated with a weaker support for the rule of law. The second hypothesis that comes from the literature on support for the rule of law is that disorder, so living in a place where because of the presence of armed actors, people don't really know what to expect, there is no social conflict, people don't really know how to form expectations about what might happen. These people are going to be more likely to support a strong ruler and really have a weak preferences for the rule of law. And again, this comes from a literature that is especially developed for Latin America where people have found over and over that high levels of criminal violence, either real or perceived, correlate with support for what is called iron fist policies, right, Manolura policies, where basically people don't care about rulers violating the law in order to carve crime. So we expect that if we look at people who live in conflict zones, those who have lived for more time or under highest higher levels of disorder of this uncertainty are going to have weaker preferences for the rule of law. The next hypothesis is also building on this literature, and again, it's that violence is going to undermine support for the rule of law. And again, here the mechanism is that when you feel unsafe, when there is this perception or real insecurity, people care more about like a strong ruler that can defend themselves than about following the rule of law and preserving this principle. So we expect civilians who have lived in conflict zones that have experienced higher levels than other civilians also living in conflict zones, right, to be more likely to disregard the rule of law. The next hypothesis also builds on this literature on how criminal violence and insecurity increases support for these Manolura or iron fist policies, but it's trying to think a little more and saying, well, if you have lived under an armed actor that is present in your community, and this group governs, and it's actually quite effective at carving crime, reducing insecurity, which often happens, then you may learn that this is the way to rule. This is the way to have a better situation in your community because we learn. We learn based on our experiences with institutions. And so here we expect that people who actually portray their community as being ruled by an armed actor that was able to decrease criminality or to promote public order are more likely to prefer this kind of a strong ruler in the post conflict situation. And so we're going to see weak support for the rule of law. And then finally, and this is building on a completely different literature on the legacies of authoritarianism. We expect that people who are living under these very authoritarian forms of governance may also just learn that this internalize this form of governance in their minds, and especially in cases where you see people living under these armed actors for many years or even decades, as in the Colombian case. So there's a literature that shows that people who have lived through a dictatorship for a long time sort of internalize these forms of governance and it's difficult for a country to sort of move on to embrace their support for the rule of law and democracy. So if this is true, we should see people in conflict zones who have lived under more repressive institutions having weaker support for the rule of law than others who are also living in conflict zones but who are not really exposed to these authoritarian institutions. So we're going to test these simple hypothesis with data on the Colombian armed conflict. I'm not going to say a lot about Colombia. I have five minutes. Yes, okay. I think you have probably already heard about Colombia in different sessions, but basically it's a very long conflict. We have guerrillas, we have paramilitaries. There has been a lot of rebel governance. And I want to say that I'm talking about post-conflict right now, not saying that Colombia is in a real post-conflict stage, right? But what we show in the paper is the data that we are using come from places where there was indeed demobilization of paramilitaries and then of the guerrillas and there have not been presence of armed actors in the territory. Actually we exclude the couple of cases where there is still presence. So again, Colombia is not in a full post-conflict stage but we're looking at communities that have actually lived without the presence of armed actors for quite some time. So we rely on data that comes from two sources. First is the El Cal Longitudinal Study of Los Andes University, which has been looking at rural communities in a sample of municipalities. It's 17 municipalities, the survey, it's a panel, it's large, it's about 4,500 households. And some of these communities endured the presence of armed actors in the past and some did not. This is the first source. The second one, as we went back to these communities and relying on a methodology that I proposed in previous work, we combined memory workshops, surveys and qualitative work to construct both data sets describing the patterns of wartime governance and of interactions between armed actors and communities and the local histories before and during the presence of these groups. So we have the data on this exposure to different dynamics of the war and then we have this data on individuals, these are household heads who were interviewed in 2013. We're just using the data on 2013. So I'm just going to show you the findings of a model where the outcome of interest is whether the person responded that they disagreed or totally disagreed with authorities relying on extra legal measures to control crime. And so that's our proxy for support for the rule of law. And again, this is very relevant in Latin America where support for these measures is really high and it's actually really higher in places that endure a lot of criminal violence. So we really expect these two, if those patterns apply to civil wars, we expect to see the same here. This is a linear regression model with fixed effects of the municipality level and I can talk more about the models and concerns about the cluster, the structure of the data, if anyone is interested. Okay, so the findings, so the first one. Do we, sorry. So do we find that exposure to armed actors decreases support for the rule of law? So here we are comparing civilians living in areas of the country where there were never armed actors with civilians who lived under the presence of an armed actor or more than one. And what we find is that the coefficient is positive, not significant, so there is no evidence of a negative effect. There is no difference between, especially there is no lower levels of support for the rule of law in conflict zones. So what happens if we look inside conflict zones? Just comparing people who have been exposed to armed actors, let's see which of these dynamics decreased support for the rule of law. So first we look at disorder. I'm happy to talk about how we measure this and we see if people who are exposed to high levels of disorder show weaker preferences for the rule of law. And again, if anything, people who lived under disorder actually support more the rule of law. And remember, we have fixed effects for the municipality so we are controlling for the local governance on what has happened after the groups have left. And we are not focusing here on the fact that we have a positive effect. We don't want to claim a cultural effect but definitely it's not negative, right? So people living this disorder are not less interested in the rule of law. How about violence? So I'm gonna quickly show you three different proxies. One is sort of the mechanism, it's insecurity. So we ask people about levels of insecurity under the presence of these groups. Again, people who report higher levels of insecurity are not less supportive of the rule of law. If we look at people reporting the armed actors threatening community leaders, we don't find, this is the only coefficient that is negative actually in one of the models and I wanted to show you. It's not significant but it's the only one. And then we also asked if the group target a specific sector of the community with violence and again, the coefficients are always positive, sometimes significant, sometimes not. Displacement, if the armed actor displaced people, again, positive effect, not significant. So we don't find that people who were exposed to these forms of violence are less supportive of the rule of law. The next hypothesis was whether people who say, well, you know, under the paramilitaries, there was no crime or the group was in charge of, so it's a combination of two questions. The group was in charge of preserving public order, security, and there actually was very low in security. So we find actually that when people lived under these successful authoritarian rule, there is no less support for the rule of law. If anything, it's higher. And finally, we look at whether people who lived under more restrictions to individual freedoms and rights internalize this form of authoritarian governance are now more supportive of breaking the law to fight crime. And again, we find that this is not the case. The coefficients are again positive, sometimes significant, sometimes not. So in conclusion, we know that the rule of law is critical. We know that citizen support for the rule of law is essential to finally get to this respect for the rule of law. And this widespread assumption that these communities have this democratic deficit seems to be an assumption that requires more attention. We are not saying that the effect is the opposite. We need to think more about this, but the different dynamics that you can think of that could explain these negative association, at least in the Colombian case, this is not working out. I want to emphasize that we are not claiming that there is actually a cultural positive effect. There is a lot more to think about. And the implications I think are, the first one is that not just this one, I think there are many assumptions that we have about conflict zones and what people learn and what their preferences and what the challenges in these communities are that we may need to reconsider. Because there's a lot that we still don't understand about conflict zones and about how people process these experiences. I think we need more theoretical approaches to really unpack and understand better the legacies of civil war dynamics on political behavior in general. So this is not just about support for the rule of law. I think in general, we have been focusing on prosocial behavior, maybe participation. There is a lot more that we need to unpack to really say that we understand what are these political legacies of civil war and of specific dynamics. And finally for policy, we need to be very cautious when making these assumptions and then designing policies to solve these problems and to prioritize communities where actually there may be opportunities. Maybe based on this data, maybe other communities may be in a greater deficit of democratic values, perhaps because war teaches you that you need the rule of law, that you need institutions to work, that living under these armed actors that have this unbounded authority is really bad for the quality of your life and for the cohesion of your community. So we need to theorize more, get more data, think more and pack more and generalize less. Thank you.


They've got to listen to me. I'll make them. That's what you think. But if they don't want to, they won't. You're certainly not very optimistic. Oh, don't get me wrong. I sure hope they do listen to you. But I wouldn't be so sure if I were you. Well, if they won't listen to me now, I'll wait until I'm questioned again. And then I'll come out with it. Can you imagine Red Morrison being on that court? Listening to Jerry being accused of something that he did himself? That's your nerve for you. That's more than nerve. It's mean. And even that isn't the right word for us. Come on, hurry up. Did you ever stop to think that you've got longer legs than I have? Well, move yours a little faster, then, to make up for the difference. We've got to get back before it's all over, and they find Jerry guilty. After you tell them what you found, just start all over. You mean reopen the case? Uh-huh. Maybe. Oh, they won't be through yet. Well, I don't know about that. When I left, they were calling Sergeant Alden to be questioned, and I think he was the last witness. Did he think Jerry did it? Mm-hmm. It was he and Ted Metcalf who figured Jerry was the guilty one. They were the only ones who knew Jerry. I thought Ted liked Jerry. He seemed to get along all right. Now, wait a minute. Don't hold it against Ted for wanting to get at the bottom of a thing like this. It's serious, and it should be looked into. Yes, and regardless of who it hurts, friendship has nothing to do with duty. I suppose you're right about that. Sure I am. Hello, Phillips. Oh, hello. What's your hurry? Are you going on fire? Well, worse than that. Should I wait outside? No, sir, you come right in with me. I might need you to help me. Oh, wait a minute. Oh, wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Why don't you come with me? I might need you to back up my story. But you didn't tell me what you found in Red's Room. What could I say? Never mind. You'll come with me. You want to knock at the door? Nothing doing. There might not lot ofRETEMING. I'm going to break right in on them. And here it goes. So every witnessIGOTARY Couldette Phillips. And you, Linwell. I'd like to say something, Major. It's very important. business enough for the moment but what I've got to say sir has to do with this case I've got to tell you just a moment Phillips Captain Bogart is rather an usual procedure I'd like to ask you advice in this matter sir Phillips says he has information bearing on the case but the defense continue with cadet Dugan and then we can listen to what Phillips has to say you might let him remain in court until you call him thank you Captain Bogart we'll hear what you have to say as soon as Captain Radford finishes questioning Cadet Dugan you may be seated up thank you sir continue Captain Radford I'd like you to tell the court cadet Dugan whether or not you have ever committed a malicious action before coming to Pharaoh's no sir I have not have you ever taken part in any pranks or let us say practical jokes no sir have you ever been accused of either no sir thank you I will be all my gentlemen I think in questioning cadet Dugan I have brought out the fact that his character is above reproach I think it's safe to assume that a young man such as cadet Dugan who has had good training is of good morals and habits wouldn't in a short time change to a malicious and ruthless person his character belies the fact that he would be capable of the crime he's accused of in closing I'd like to say that while we have been unable to present witnesses in our behalf or established televised the evidence presented by the prosecution has been purely circumstantial that's all thank you gentlemen now cadet Phillips yes sir step up here please and tell Captain Bogart and myself your information regarding this case yes sir that all now Captain Radford afraid it is unless Lee Phillips really has some new information or evidence that will help you do you're seeing that just tell what he knows or what he found out yes he did let's hope he has something because if he hasn't I don't think there's much in your favor you mean you mean they'll say I'm guilty now take it easy we didn't have any alibis you know you were out in the store with Splendor and you admitted making that remark to Major Metcalf looks bad for you but what you just said in your last speech that they only had circumstantial evidence against me that's true but we'll just have to wait and see wait a minute Captain Bogart's going to speak order gentlemen Major Metcalf and I have just received some startling and enlightening information in regards to this case cadet Lee Phillips has just presented some facts that by all means bear looking into he boy is that news let me be a break for you Major Metcalf may give the court their instructions this court will now adjourn in orderly fashion to Trent Hall where we will be again in session I'll phone Dr. Campbell and tell him to meet us there good you've got any idea what this is all about no I haven't not as yet but it looks good for you they certainly wouldn't be going to this trouble to get more evidence against you but I can't figure out why we're going over to Trent Hall I can't see what that's got to do with me the chances are Lee has found some evidence that's going to be in your favor and in order to see the evidence we've got to go to some room in Trent Hall it's over my head I can't figure it out but I'm sure glad I've got a feeling now that maybe they'll find out I wasn't to blame after all well if that's the case you can certainly thank your friend Lee for coming through for you at the right time I'll see so please all right he did you notice the way he answered the questions Captain Lockhart asked him yes I did it was like pulling teeth to get him to say anything against you oh he's a pal hey Jerry oh Harold I don't know what I'm supposed to be talking to you or not you think it's okay no I don't know I guess so how about it Captain Radford I can't see where we're doing it huh boy are you lucky you don't know what this is all about though do you know do you well I know something what is it Linwell do you know why the courts adjourned at Trent Hall I know part of it oh come on in out with it you really think it's okay to tell I don't want to get any trouble over certainly we'll find out in a couple of minutes anyway but you can relieve Dugan a little by giving him some advanced information if you have any well one thing I know the courts are going over to Reds room red Morrison what for Linwell well that's the part I don't know well and how do you know we're going over to Reds room then because Lee and I went over there while you were in the court Marshall and Lee found something it's sure gonna help you found out something what do you find I don't know but he said he had enough proof now to prove that you didn't lose miss saddle and besides he said he was sure sure red did it you mean Phillips can show proof that Morrison was the one that caused the accident that's what he told me red Morrison what how could he well well I don't know what this is all about but well red was one of the last ones out to the field yesterday afternoon sounds kind of funny I hope your friend Lee isn't building up something in his mind that he can't back up with facts did Lee go into Trent Hall sure how else did he get in the Reds room boy sure took an awful chance I told him he's taken an awful chance when he did it but he said it was worth the chance if he could help you you're right to get Lee is a pal of yours he's been at Farrell's long enough to know what upperclassmen do to please when they're caught in Trent Hall how about you Harold did you go in with them sure but it's okay for me to go into Trent Hall today what do you mean today well I made your netcast orderly this afternoon oh let's get into this room quickly man I hope your troubles are over Jerry now thanks are go ahead to stand over by the window next to the dresser there's a good place for you yes all right all right gentlemen the reason we adjourn to this room is to investigate the claim Cadet Lee Phillips presented to Captain Bogart and myself Phillips came over to this room while the court martial was in session in the cadet officers club room now I'm aware that Phillips being a plebe isn't allowed in Trent Hall we can overlook that and view of the fact that he claims to have discovered startling evidence all right Phillips you may address the court now in this wardrobe closet our cadet Morrison's regulation boots this boot here if you look closely you'll see a piece of hay caught in the heel excuse me how do we know that you didn't figure this out to help Jugans but you didn't plant this piece of hay in the boot I know it didn't I was right here with him go ahead Phillips well the hay is only one thing now these gloves hanging here at or into it too there are a few white horse hairs in the seam of the right glove I'll continue now Phillips Morrison step forward yes sir are these your boots and gloves yes sir did you wear these regulation boots to classes yesterday yes sir did you wear these boots or your riding boots that mounted drill practice yesterday I wore my riding boots sir splendor is the only white horse at Fair Oaks is that right yes sir were you riding him yesterday no sir I come in why yes Dr. Campbell step right in just in time doctor now Morrison but a half hour before you would do with the stables for drill practice yesterday you were in my mechanical drawing class right yes sir you asked me to excuse you said you didn't feel well and that you wanted to see the doctor dr. Campbell yes captain did cadet Morrison pay you a visit at the infirmary yesterday between 2 30 and 3 o'clock no he didn't were you at the infirmary at that time doctor yes I was but Morrison didn't come over there thank you doctor when I got out of the classroom and got out of the air I felt much better sir never mind that Morrison Major Metcalf men of the court I'll carry on from here yes sir Morrison yes sir when you asked me to excuse you I allowed you to leave didn't I yes sir but as I said I own when you left you went directly to the stables wearing your regulation boots you went to the stall in which the horse splendor is kept you loosened the synth strap on that horse in order to cause an accident to Paul Warren just in order to make a place for yourself as pivot man on the riding team and so you could ride that horse is that true quiet men well Morrison was it you who loosened that synth strap yes sir yes I did it but I didn't think what I was doing I didn't realize it was going to make so much trouble I didn't want to hurt Warren as much as I did but I quiet man all right Morrison you'll go with me immediately to see Major Davis but first before your fellow officers and the cadets from your supposed to inspire as a cadet officer at Fair Oaks Military Academy I want to say that in all my years of service active and here at FMA I've never seen or heard of such a low trick I probably shouldn't be saying anything to you at this time should probably leave it in Major Davis's hands but I can't help it I feel sorry for you Morrison when you go out to battle the world that's all Major Metcalf you come with Morrison me you're dismissed men may go to your quarters or you can before you go I want to say Jerry I'm very very sorry about this you're a real man thank you sir congratulations do good I'm that Jerry yeah I don't know it it all happened so fast I ah gee Lee I just knew you didn't do it Jerry and and I well I did the best I could to prove it nice work Phillips thanks doctor yeah I don't know how to thank you Lee I'll forget it Jerry you do the same for me you bet I would


Hello and welcome to the Grand Line Review, your source for everything one piece. Today we are going to be logging yet another entry into the Devil Fruit Encyclopedia by examining the Baku Baku Nomi. The Baku Baku Nomi is a Paramecia type fruit that allows its user to eat essentially everything in the known world, with the notable exception of Seastone. The consumed items can then be fused with the user's body to create a whole host of new forms depending on what was devoured. The fruit itself was eaten by Waple and first put on display during the Drum Island Arc. Sadly the etymology for this fruit isn't quite as clear as most, as Baku can mean a wide array of things, but with Devil Fruits it's usually best to look for the Onomatopoeia first, of which Baku is one, but it is quite specifically used for the sound of sheet metal being struck, which may play into things as Waple is quite a metallic based character, and furthermore it does bear some similarity to the sound of eating, which is Baku. However it is also entirely likely that the name of the fruit may come from the Japanese phrase Baku Baku Tabeteru, which is a phrase that pragmatically translates to chowing down, or if you're Australian, getting stuck into it. Also of note is that Baku can refer to a mythological Chinese chimera, which was known to devour nightmares, all very potentially appropriate sources of inspiration for the name of this fruit. Sadly the English translation is nowhere near as beautiful as Japanese, and all three of our major translation sources being Viz, Funimation and Four Kids, elected to call it the Munch Munch Fruit, which doesn't quite have the same mystique about it, but hey it gets the job done, I guess. Moving into the abilities of the fruit though, it first needs to be addressed that the power to eat quite literally anything is completely insane in every way, shape and form. It means that aside from Seastone there is no substance in the world that would ever be able to contain you, as you can simply norm your way out of any situation. Not only that, but the fruit comes with the bonus ability that allows the user to stretch their mouth to the size of seemingly whatever they want to eat. Whether or not there is a limit to this stretching is currently unknown, but at the very least it grants the user a mouth wide enough to consume evenly largest objects in a time efficient manner. And I feel like it's very important to highlight the time efficiency aspect, because we have had cases of people in the real world with an appetite for eating various objects, like airplanes for example. The most famous of which is Michel Lotito, who ate this plane, a Cessna 150, and doesn't it look doubtlessly delicious? However it took Michel two years to completely devour the plane, whereas the user of the Baku Bakunomi would be able to do that in less than two minutes. And furthermore they'd be able to transform into the plane afterwards, which brings us to our next absurd ability granted by this fruit, the fact that the user can incorporate whatever they've eaten into their own body. Now I thought that the Baku Bakunomi was a decent fruit before coming to this, but this secondary skill gives the user of this fruit quite literally limitless possibilities for what they can mold their body into. The most common usage we've seen in the series thus far is eating a weapon and then having that weapon pop out of the user's body, ready for use. And that can be escalated to anything and everything, but the truly crazy thing is that the user can combine various objects they've eaten into a whole new creation. So for example if the user were to eat a bunch of cannons as well as a house, then they could turn themselves into a fortress.   The possibilities are literally endless. I cannot stress that enough. Although there is a limitation on how long the user is able to access forms of consumed objects, which is a rather reasonable 24 hours. I say reasonable because if the user had permanent access to their consumption, then this fruit would just be plain broken. However, I assume the logic behind this time limit is due to the fact that inevitably the user will be forced to go to the bathroom and pass their eatings. But I think it's very important at this stage to note that the user of the bakubakunomi does not necessarily have to incorporate their nomings into their own body. The user of the fruit is entirely capable of eating two separate things and respawning them as an entirely new entity through the use of the bakubaku factory feature. And very interestingly, this factory can not only be used to combine two objects, but also living things. The best example of which we've seen in the series is when Wapol ate both chess and marimo in order to fuse them into chess marimo, which is a very dragon ball-esque type fusion whereby the new being retains both former voices. Although unlike dragon ball, this fusion does not result in an exponential burst of newfound power, but it should more accurately be considered a reconfiguring of two beings in order to take advantage of the most positive aspects of both. Although chess marimo is probably not a good example of this. But with all of these amazing powers, I think it's finally time for a negative aspect of the bakubakunomi, which is that it renders the user perpetually hungry. And this is quite a huge curse, actually, because your quality of life would drop significantly. It's essentially like being inflicted with a hardcore addiction. The user of this fruit would either have to be eating or thinking about what to eat next, almost 24-7. That's a pretty severe debilitation. And even though Wapol seems to cope with it alright, I feel like this is one of the worst drawbacks we've seen a devil fruit inflict in the series. Although speaking of Mr. Wapol, let's take some time to examine exactly how he makes particular use of the bakubakunomi. And essentially, this fruit is entirely wasted on him.  Arguably, the greatest thing he has done with the bakubakunomi was by using it to create a brand new metal, known as Wapol Metal. But even this was entirely unintentional. Essentially, after being defeated on Drum Island, Wapol was destitute and began eating garbage, which led to the accidental creation of some toys, as well as the new metal, which skyrocketed Wapol back into the wealthy elite. And I think that just goes to show the sheer power of the bakubakunomi. If the king of morons can use it to become a wealthy leader of his own nation, then just think what could be done if this fruit were in the hands of a competent person. I should say that Wapol does have one somewhat interesting use of the fruit in which he eats himself, which results in him becoming a much slimmer form of himself. It's an interesting idea, but it really does make me wonder at which point one considers the possibility of eating themselves. In regards to the awakening of the bakubakunomi, it's a bit of a weird one to think about. It's one of the more unconventional paramecia types, so I feel like any awakening this fruit is capable of won't really fit what we know of as the standard paramecia awakening. However, if it did follow the known trend then one possibility may be that the user is able to create mouths out of the environment around him that can swallow objects and living things and then incorporate them into the landscape in a similar manner to what the user does with their own body.  But once again, I feel like this is one of those fruits that wouldn't necessarily follow convention and would result in some insane idea that only Oda could ever conceive. Some other miscellaneous things to consider when becoming a voracious eating human. The bakubakunomi may be one of the rare devil fruits that creates a bit of a loop hole in the theory that a person can only consume a single devil fruit. The idea comes from movie 9 where Wapol ate his non-canon older brother Mashuda who was also a devil fruit user, forming a new being that has the power of two fruits. I'll stress that this is 100% not canon, but it is a curious idea. Provided you have engaged in enough temporary consumption, in theory the user of the bakubakunomi has access to incredible regenerative abilities. For example, if you were to lose an arm then you just need to simply replace it with something from your temporary storage system.  Zeya, infinite things. In summary, this fruit bestows its user with what I can only describe as a god-like power. Even the hardest metals in the world will crumble before your mighty mouth and what you do with those substances afterwards is very much akin to playing god. Effortlessly creating new beings or even fusing them into your own body. Really, if it weren't for the 24 hour time limit, this fruit would probably be considered one of the best in the series. However, even with that restriction, as well as the side effect of permanent hunger, this fruit is still nothing short of phenomenal and limited only by the creativity of the user themselves. And with that we are going to commit the bakubakunomi to the devil fruit encyclopedia. Next week things will be getting quite exciting as we will be examining our very first zoan-type fruit encountered in the series, the Ushi Ushi nomi, model bison. If you enjoyed this video then feel free to like, favorite or subscribe. And if you aren't anyway keen on supporting this independent channel then please do check out my Patreon, Discord server or Twitter. The links to it are in the handy description below. And finally, please do comment with your thoughts on the bakubakunomi. This has been the Grand Line Review and I'll see you next time.


The Shimoda Black Ship Festival is one of the biggest events of the year for both US Navy sailors and Shimoda residents. The town of Shimoda is fantastic. This is the 75th anniversary of the first Black Ship Festival here in Shimoda, and they really pull out all the stops. The things they do for us and our sailors, not just the ceremonies, but the real friendship that we feel here in Shimoda is like nowhere I've ever seen before. It was more than a century ago that Commodore Matthew Perry arrived with a fleet of US Navy ships to negotiate trade between the US and the island nation of Japan. During a break in the celebration, sailors took time to honor five sailors who died during the first visits to Japan. For some sailors, this is their first time in Shimoda, but they're already thinking about coming back. As long as I'm here in Japan, I will definitely come back to this festival, even might take a trip if I'm stationed in San Diego, take a trip back out here to Shimoda. The Black Ship Festival is about celebrating relationships, not only between the Japanese and US governments, but also between the Japanese people and the US Navy. Petty Officer Sonia Wickard, Shimoda, Japan.


Okay, welcome everyone to the Jenkins infrastructure public quick limiting. Today we are Tuesday 10th of May, 2022. As usual, I'm adding the collaborative notes that will be published in community Jenkins, IO and on GitHub. This session is recorded as well. So I've just added on the Zoom link and an IRC, the link to the collaborative notes. Today we have Damien Duportal, myself, Ferve Lemur, Mark White and Stefan Merle. It is started with the announcement. First of all, last week the weekly release was failing to be released because we had the credential on Azure that was expired. So that has been fixed. Thanks Mark for re-triggering the second time the release and the release was successful a few hours after. For information that credential is now under the management of infrastructural code. So everyone here is should be able and has the right to update it in the future. However, we have created a new issue on a desk to think and walk around something that will watch the expiration for different kind of credential from certificates to API tokens. That's not the subject there, but we have that issue. So if you have ideas or if you want to review it, the link has been added on the notes. We have the weekly, we have a weekly today. I want to check the status Mark. I did check the status. It was stopped by a restart of the Jenkins controller and was waiting to resume. So there's some bug in the declarator in the pipeline that's causing it not to correctly resume. So I just stopped it and restarted it. It was about 10 minutes ago that it started. So roughly two hours from now, it will have completed the build phase and start the packaging phase. Okay, I really need to either fix that problem or stop merging pull request on the Jenkins LDS token incubation. I don't think either of those is the, yeah. I think certainly there's a bug somewhere and that bug it would be nice to fix because they should be, should be resumable, right? They should be durable, but it's easy to restore. May I ask one of you to open an issue while we're speaking about that? Or I will do it at the end, but we need an issue to track that element. Is a help desk issue okay? Or what would you like? Yes. Okay, I'll do it. Great. Okay, so we'll monitor the image. Is there anything else about the past or current weekly mark or the others? No, I expected to proceed. It looks fine. I've got to review the change log and be sure that the change log is accurately describing all the changes, but that's just usual work. Okay. Next announcement. Next week, there will be a security advisory. So please don't merge anything. I'm looking at you. I'm here at the portal. Yes, I'm speaking to myself. Not to merge anything on the puppets that could impact trusted, just because it might be used for some components. But since this is mostly plugins, we should not have anything to do on trusted or CI and the security team will take care as usual of installing the released plugin on CI Genkinsia and restarting it. Just we have to be careful to not channel anything. The weekly should be proceed and treated like every week. Is there any other question on that advisory? Okay. I will take care of sending a reminder early morning US during the day for a wrap in IRC just to remind everyone on that day. Other announcements? Nope. Okay. So let's start. Let's start with the work did on during the past weekly iteration. We had an issue with repo Genkinsia that has been fixed. That was an issue on Google compute cloud. That was a great opportunity for Stefan to test the work on data dog metric that would speak later. That show us that the current data dog, some of our current data dog monitoring are not working as expected. They always are green. So Stefan is working on fix. I don't have anything else, despite the fact that we are not able to have status Genkinsia being automatically updated when there is an issue on GFrog. So we have to still to rely on the good faith of any contributor that time it was team. So thanks for that. That issue was not caused by us or by GFrog and it spent a few hours before their platform was back. So right now no action item, but yes there is clearly room for improvement in automating the status Genkinsia websites. So let's get started by fixing the monitoring for repo Genkins and then we can take decision once we have a monitoring that works as expected. We have a one fix issue. I won't treat it there. It wasn't the correct issue tracker. All the issues around infra report and report and repository permission later have been fixed. No issue, an SM mistaken. So that's fixed. Don't hesitate to interrupt me if you, if you forgot something. We had the LTS release last week that has been applied to all the Genkins controller that we managed that are using the LTS line. So CI trusted, search CI and release. No issue whatsoever. Almost everything was done automatically when the issue was opened by Alex. So good for automated system. We granted access to Bazel, to some part of the infrastructure. The goal is to give him enough field and access and privileges. So we can help us on diagnosing the issue on CI Genkinsia from the president past outages. We added something with the post mortem that I still have to publish. Bazel will need access to the EKS, the Amazon cluster in order to be able to diagnose. So we have to check with him if he can access the AWS CloudBiz account, which is the actual account running all our machine. So we'll take care of that part. That's why I haven't created a public issue because it's still the CloudBiz account. So it's another process than the usual. Outside this Bazel confirmed that you have access to everything and it has everything required. The issue about the Azure service principle. So you have all the details, oh and oh, we can use the infrastructure as code to rotate as your credential or at least where it is. Thanks, Tim, on the initial issue about tracking, it sounds like we might have really nice solutions to avoid credential at all in certain cases that will avoid having credential. And finally, there were, I'm not sure about missing permission. I forgot, okay, Tim, you fixed that one. Okay, so Alex had to be allowed on the correct group to access really CI to perform the LTS release last Wednesday. Thanks, Tim, for fixing that. Seems like the key clock was terribly slow, which was horrible. Yeah. Still not sure if it's related to LDAP, which is OM killed a lot. Okay, did we create an issue? Yeah, it's on key clock. Okay, thanks, Tim, for handling that and having the patience and handling the frustration created by a slow key clock. That can be terrible. So these are the main tasks that we completely closed and we can't forget about. Now the work in progress, unless I forgot any closed tasks. Nope, okay. Blushen, replacing Blushen in default display URL. So we try to merge it after asking question on the tickets on email. Thanks for everyone who answered. But as cooked by some users, when you enable the classic UI, it seems like that it's not using the redirect endpoint on Jenkins controller, which means that it changes the permalink of on the GitHub check generitates, which means you cannot ask a user to set its preference to classic user or Blushen and you cannot have something that is guaranteed to work in the future. So we roll back the change as on the line and I haven't checked. It seems like it's something related to the display plugin. Is that correct him? Yeah, it looks like a bug or a missing feature that the redirect was not implemented for the classic. Well, if you force the setting with the system properly, it doesn't seem to redirect. So that means it's exiting our scope as infra people, we need that. I'm not sure what is the usual process. Should we, yeah, we might have wants to open an issue on the plugin tracker, right? I would say, yeah, open an issue with the plugin and then just either block or close this ticket until that's resolved. Okay. I propose to ask to Calolav Nimetello because it sounds like that person clearly have a clear understanding of what the problem is. So I will rely on them when opening an issue on the plugin tracker. So I propose that we move that tickets outside of the milestone until something new come. Sounds okay for everyone because I don't see any other action that we could do. Yes. Next one, there are still two open tasks about CI Jenkins.io. There has been two outage two weeks ago. We ran a post mortem last Friday with Basil. I have to finish the notes and publish them. Basil has everything that he needs except the EKS cluster and he's walking around. The summary is there isn't any action expected from the infra team. Basil will open the issues on the desk when he will need. So we have to wait for him. The idea is that there are different clues but he's working on trying to reproduce better apprehend and compliance the issues. So he can share some reproductable tests to the plugins or the Jenkins core parts that are creating issues. We identified that the root cause that was, that trigger all the bugs and unwanted behaviors was related to the Docker API rate limit. So the only thing we can do on our side is knowing that if we are again API rate limited on the container and CI Jenkins.io, then we only have to wait and let the controller deal with the build queue. We just have to be patient. So we are waiting for Basil, no ETA because he has a lot of other stuff to do. The thing is if he needs something, we have to provide him as quick as possible to unblock him. That's the only takeaway. Thanks to the work of Stefan who was split two weeks ago, the accounts for push and pull, we should delay the threshold of the API rate limit. I got news from Docker that now Jenkins is part and this tag has open source program for them. So it's the DockerCon that week. So they have in mind that we need that. They should be able to add our accounts with an almost unlimited API rate limit in the upcoming days or eventually weeks. Worst case, end of May, they're guaranteed. Data dog, there are two subjects. First one is adding a new monitoring probe for repo Jenkins CI. So that's Stefan on that. Work in progress. We thought it could be easy to add, but in fact, we uncovered that all the data dog synthetics tests that we have defined through Terraform are always answering. Everything is working as expected. The synthetics with the cheapest brother. With a type of brother. Type, sorry. So we have to recreate these probes, change them to the types that Stefan selected and tested on a single one. And we might also have a campaign of migrating some of the probes that are run by the Docker, data dog container on our Kubernetes cluster back to the API. Still not sure why do we run such tests, but we have some work around cleaning up the data dog probes before being able to have something working. Deprecation of phone calls. Stefan, I assume you didn't add time to spend on that one. No, sorry. Is it okay if someone else take it since it will start to be quite urgent to take that? With pleasure. Is there someone volunteering on that one? Yeah, no problem. Okay, you want to take it, Hervé? Yeah. Cool, thanks. I'm available if you need any indication or precision on that part. Just know that both of you, Stefan and Hervé, will have to work on the same Terraform configuration so that might have some impacts. It can be fun. Migrate rating, Jenkin, Sayo, to Azure. So the shift to Kubernetes went very well. Great job, Stefan. The only two items to close that issue are we clean the virtual machine on AWS, but we still have to clean the old database, managed database on Amazon, and documentation updates. So almost there we are at 90%, but still some cleanup tasks before being able to finish. Is it okay for you, Stefan, to keep that task for this iteration? Yes, please. Oh, sorry. Thanks. We still have the mirror in Singapore requests. So we are in a work, both Hervé and I, to finish collecting what do we... We weren't able to... We failed to find a documentation about what to tell and ask the people proposing a mirror. How much space do they need? What they need? Where are the instructions for them to start mirroring? I'm sure there has been emails or knowledge, but we weren't able to find something in the wrong book. So... We only found the blog post from Tyler saying that the MFA team will give all the recommendations by mail. You just have to check the Jenkins info mailing list. It's in there from previous posts by Olivia. That's the idea. So thanks for confirming team that we are in the correct direction. So the status of that task for the upcoming iteration is Hervé and I are going to search mailing lists, repositories. We are going to write a run book with the information and then we can contact back on the initial email Fred to tell them, okay, you need that. You have to do that and let's proceed. Yeah, I mean, you should generally just be able to copy basically Olivia's last response to the last one. That's confirmed. Thanks a lot. Hervé's work in progress for building our own Windows image, Windows Docker image in FRACI. So it's mainly two areas providing Windows virtual machine image with all the tooling with the same feature sets as we have on Linux to link the Docker file to build the Docker file and publish them. And it's on the backer image templates. Second part is the pipeline library that we are using. We need a feature parity so Hervé is working on that part, which is mainly being able to execute the same command between PowerShell and Linux Bash. Mirrors Jenkins.io. So yesterday we switched the main consumer from the domain Mirrors to get Jenkins.io. We also changed to HTTPS. I haven't seen an issue until now but either I might have missed or it was silent. The goal is to track all the usages that we could have of the former Mirrors the Jenkins.io domain. I'm working on a blog post that I would expect to be published on the week if it's okay to tell that Mirrors Jenkins.io will be forced to HTTPS and explaining that we will consolidate all the mirror infrastructure using the new one. So everything has been tested on Kubernetes. If you point your DNS for the Mirrors Jenkins.io to point to the IP of the public AKS cluster it works very well. The goal is then being able to remove all the mirror brain stuff. So you're keeping the old domain not just turning it off? No, because we also serve the date center is on that machine and it's used for packaging. I mean Mirrors.jnkins.io you're keeping that domain? Oh, yes, that should be a CNAME pointing to the mirror bits just to avoid breaking installation or proxy on some users. All right, I highly doubt. Well, I don't know how much to it this would actually transparently upgrade. The access lock of the Apache were showing a lot of IPs that were on towers still using it some time to time. Were they using it on HTTPS or HTTPS though? On the HTTPS because there isn't any HTTPS in the mirror. No, good point. I haven't checked because if you check it on HTTPS you see the I think it's fallback or PKG page. So it might answer HTTPS 200 while it's misleading. Go to check. Yeah, I don't know. It's probably not much effort to keep it going to the domain. Yeah, I mean mirrored Genkin say you're pointing to the mirrors still makes sense in terms of naming convention and it's few lines. It's not that big of an effort. Yeah, I assume there's some comment or something saying that this is just a compatibility domain. Nothing in our infrastructure points to it. Exactly. I've tried different things during the weekend because it seems like it is going worse and worse in terms of response time for the data center. We need to do something about that. That will be the priority for the coming weeks as well. But still, I did something during the weekend. There were three post-greSQL instances installed on running on that machine in parallel. And there were a lot of Apache or logs. So it happened that the change I did did not improve anything in we are still spammed by the alerts. But at least now we only have one fully working instance of mirror brain. Most of the issues are related to that error message about the scoreboard for Apache server because Apache server due to mirror brain is configured to MPM event, which is a set of dynamic workers to under the incoming request. And it seems like that the setup for Apache is not correctly done on that instance. But since Olivier and I decreased the site of the machine, we went from 16 CPU to 8 a few months ago. I bet that change, we didn't correctly update it to Apache server fine tuning that might have an impact, which results in a lot of on-game workers that feel the queue. And so Apache starts to answer slower and slower. Most of the time, a reload or a restart of Apache helps. But still, it's an issue. That's an old way of configuring Apache and there are issues with Apache 2.4 with the MPM event configuration. So the goal is to try to deprecate mirror brain as soon as possible so we can go back to MPM pre-fork where Apache work like Nginx with a set of static child processes, always the same set. It's more deterministic and you can pin them per core. So it's clearly easier to scale it up. So right now, still issues on that area. Based on that, we have migrate updates CIG and Kingston as a cloud. So the idea and the consensus is to start spawning an instance of updates here on the Oracle cloud system and then start updating all the delivery and sync scripts for the releases. So they can start publishing on both AWS and the new Oracle machine on the first time. That machine should not be available right now. And as soon as we have the same feature set on both machine, we can switch the DNS in a few weeks on that new machine. That will also allow us to decrease the AWS bill of 3K. So that's an important one. Avery, you mentioned that you were interested in starting working on the Terraform area. Damien, I think the help desk ticket may have an extra two letters in it, three letters. It's updates.jankins.io, right? Oh, yes, correct. I just changed it. I just changed it. So many things. Yeah, OK. But it is updates.jankins.io that's being changed. So the first step right now is to prepare the foundation. So we need an Oracle Terraform project and that will be better to start importing the existing two virtual machines. But that second part is optional. We can do it in parallel, but we need a foundational Terraform project to manage as code. And then we'll have to start to create a virtual machine with Terraform and integrate it with Puppet. And you plan to use a rune-robing in DNS to use both of them for a while? That could be an idea, yeah. OK. That's a nice idea. So I will update that ticket and link back with Oracle. So are you interested in starting the project and starting working on that one? And if you're interested, do you think you can start working on that this week? Yeah. So that one, we keep it for next iteration. The new monitoring probes, so work in progress, as we said. That's on your area, Stéphane. I propose to the realign repojankins.ci.org mission for GFrog. I propose that we prioritize this one for now because we don't have the bandwidth and it's not top priority. Is it good for everyone? Agreed for me. Installer NGD on old Jenkins controller. That's a minor task, but still a good exercise for Stéphane to get autonomous on Puppets. So that's a low priority task. That's the first step of what Basil reported. The goal is to install that package to improve the usage of random number generations. So the first step is it doesn't cost anything and it's an improvement to have that package installed on all the virtual machine managed by Puppets. That won't fix the whole issue. We still need to check how does it work and integrate with Docker container for the virtual machines. And same question on the Kubernetes area because it depends on the underlying host operating system and all the container engine is using DevRandom and Urandom. But first step first, installing the package on the virtual machine is the good first step. So work in progress. Is it okay, Stéphane, to keep working on that one this week or is it too much given the amount of tasks? I found few information that I want to speak with you about on that area. Okay. So you will need some sync afterwards. Okay. So we keep it on next milestone. Finally, Digital Ocean sponsorship. I've stopped the cluster because it's my payment card that is configured on Digital Ocean. We were going to run out of credits with the last week or previous week's rate. The cluster is not deleted. It's disabled and I only removed the node pool of beefy machines that cost a lot. Now we have almost $150 of credit left which will allow to stay for eight to nine months in that state. So next step now is to contact Digital Ocean and tell them that we are running out of credits. So that was a nice sponsorship and then request if they want to continue the sponsorship so we need more credits and if they are willing to and if also they are willing to increase given we are planning to use it more and more given the reliability of the service. I don't know if anyone is interested on maintaining that relationship by default that will fall back to the infrastructure officer, EG myself, I don't mind but if anyone is willing to do it no problem for me as well. Yeah, I'll draft the mail and ask your opinion about it. Nice. Okay. These were the things. I will finish the update at the end of the meeting. I wanted to check with you the infra team sync next issues so that's the milestone where we put it's a kind of back burner but you have to get back the mail, the press mail issue because we had an answer from Kosuke. It's not a back burner. Yes, so Kosuke answered to us that he has the mail gun account so he's going to send it to either Mark or I in encrypted. As soon as Mark or I have the access we will update the issue and put it on the current milestone. But I propose we react on Kosuke event based. Yeah, you're right. Because he might send an email this week or next week. I mean, he's a busy person so I don't mind, but yeah, I don't want to put some ETA for us in that area. But correct, thanks. Thanks for that one. That's a good thing to remember. If we have access to mail gun that should help us to see the list of elements and to create an alias right now. I haven't heard from the Linux Foundation about the program manager officer that should help us to get started on hosting email. So I'm not sure who to contact, Mark. Is this something I should send an email to the Jenkins board to escalate? So so this is your question is from Linux Foundation. Who do we ask for help on the CDF? Sorry, one CDF. Linux Foundation told me to contact the PMO on the CDF. So they asked them for us to be email hosted. OK, so what we probably need to do is contact Andrew Grimberg. Yeah, that's now he's he's actually at Linux Foundation, not CDF, but he can kind guide us on the next step. So let me look up his contact information and I'll put it in the notes. And I will take care of that. On the email part. Um, we have a new ticket that I want to put on top. Airway, as I mentioned last week, created an issue to specify how to have two Azure Terraform project, one for the Azure network, including the DNS, the virtual network, and the other for the Azure. Like what we worked on with writing, the CI Jenkins, your virtual machine and other pieces of infrastructure. The goal is that by splitting into project, we should limit the risk of us breaking down the entire infrastructure, like Olivia and Tyler had issues in the past. That's the reason why they stopped automating the Azure infrastructure management with Terraform. And most of the time it's DNS. And sometimes it's virtual network and it's the need to have two separated projects so we can upgrade infrastructure as code on the Azure area with confidence. Whatever kind of contributor we have, whatever skills, and we can do it quite often without being slowed down by fear. So that will be a nice improvement. There is already a lot of tasks, so are you okay? If we keep that one on top of the back burner, but we start once you will have worked on the Oracle parts. Which means if you are quick enough this week and you are able to fulfill all the tasks, don't hesitate to take that task additionally, but only if you were able to fix the current milestone. Is that okay for everyone? I don't see other important tasks important to pick on the back burner right now. Do you see some? We have the key clock horrific performance. Oh yes, now there is one asked by Alex. Manage new crowding project through LDesk. All right, yes. So the idea is to use, if I understand correctly to use the LDesk repository also for the crowding projects. I don't see any issue. Alex already opened the pull request on the issue template, which is really nice. Thanks Alex for that. Is there any reason for not accepting this request? Do you see any? No, I was wondering how it could also include in RPU request since it's related to plugin management, more than LDesk or Afra issue, but since it has to be added to existing plugin, yeah, it's a good place for these requests for now, but later I think it should be included in the repository permission of data template. I had another question about crowding. Will it also mean with the current translate plugin will be deprecated or uninstalled? Not really because they are separate and independent things. So you can still use the translate plugin if you wish. I think crowding is much easier, but what we hope is that crowding will become the de facto preferred way of doing translations because it's so much easier for translators and for proofreaders. So did that answer your question, Eva? Yeah, yeah, it's answer it. I'll open an issue on this plugin to, I've noticed some issue on it, like it's completely unreadable when you are in dark mode or something like that, but it's minor. Ah, or the translate plugin, okay. Yeah, okay. And for the crowding, yeah, I have just have some suggestion pending on his request. I'd like to add a localization in the title, crowding localization project or something. So it's a little bit more clear what it's for when you don't know what is crowding. May I ask you to take the issue then? So you can discuss with Alex and get that. Sounds good for you? Yeah. Many thanks, Eric. I don't see other team sync topic. Yeah, the rest are bonus. We have the update key, maybe separation at the moment in time. Being able to have a folder with specific multi-branch jobs or on a GitHub organization scanning update on infrast.ti that will only under the update key pipelines. As per suggestion of Daniel Beck, we could use, I forgot the name of that plugin, where you define one Jenkins file and every repository with a token file will use that Jenkins file. So that's an intermediate between GitHub organization scanning, where you need to define a Jenkins file each time you want it to be built. And a full shared library. The token file is only a marker that I enable or disable without having to specify a Jenkins file each time. That will avoid first requiring an under Jenkins file and a Jenkins file case and a Jenkins file dot update CLI, et cetera. That would avoid the complex pipelines such as the one we have today, where as soon as you use a declarative matrix, you have to wait for update CLI to perform its def and apply it before being able to really do things. If update CLI fails, it fails your pipeline. So it's kind of complicated. And being able to manage different pipeline and the only way is creating different jobs. So if anyone is interested in half time, we can have on this, but it's nice to have. It's not the priority. That's all for me. I don't have other topics. So Blue Ocean link. Blue Ocean. But I don't know if, from more conversation. Oh, the CI Blue Ocean.io. Yeah. I have no idea. So we ask, we have that instance. It came from a discussion when Damien announced in Gitter the open source program for Jenkins talker organization. And one user noticed the Blue Ocean image on Jenkins. Ski user. Jenkins CI user was published a day ago and now an hour ago. And so we were surprised and gave in in Tadas. It could be CloudBees, a CloudBees instance. And indeed, Olivier Lamy was using it. So that instance was working a few hours ago and it was mentioning DevOptics on the left menu, which confirm it's a CloudBees managed something. So it's not under our area. However, the Docker image for Blue Ocean, we might need your help, Mark, on that area. I remember that image also being used on the Jenkins.io documentation at some point in time. Not anymore. Yes. About a year, year and a half ago, we removed it. We provided, we switched to a Docker and Docker technique and it still works just fine. So that Docker image, well, I hope it's still updated is not relevant to the Jenkins docs anymore. Okay, so that means we should be able to disable the job that builds that image. And then if CloudBees needs to have that instance or someone else, they will have to use their own Docker hub account instead of this one that will also helps on the work around the UI in Jenkins area. So yeah, we'll try to take care. We are waiting for feedbacks from people inside CloudBees and based on that, we'll create an issue on the help desk to see if there are actions on our site, on that area. Thanks, Eric. Good reminder. That's all for me. Do you have other topics? No. Many thanks everyone. Good job and see you next week.


This is a video about Spider-Man Funko Pops. I know, I know, Funko Pop bad, they stink, they smell, whatever, I don't want to hear it. I'm low on content ideas, and this one has been rattling around in my head for a while. One of my favorite things about Spider-Man Funko Pops is probably just the massive amount of them. I love the multiple looks Spider-Man has had over the years, and there's a Funko Pop for almost every single one. Super obscure Spider-Man villain, Webman? He got a Funko Pop, it got announced like two days ago.  Point is, there are a lot of Spider-Man Funko Pops out there in the wild, and since I have so many of them, I figure that it'd be a waste of all of my money that I've spent on these plastic posers if I didn't make a video on them. So let's take a look at Funko's first attempt at Spider-Man. Huh. Uh, this kind of sucks, but only a little bit. I think for the most part, the bobble head actually comes off as a bit charming, with its round, spidey eyes and goofy emblems, but like, why did they go for the darkest and most shitty shade of red possible? Like, come on!    Stick to your guns, dammit.  My favorite. I meant that, by the way. I wasn't being sarcastic. Speaking of classic Spider-Man, it was really nice to finally be able to see some Spider-Man Noe home merch, after it being a bit over a year since the movie came out. Like, goddamn.  Like, everyone knew they were in the damn movie anyway.   I'm not really much of a Funko Pop collector, believe it or not. I just usually tend to pick up any cool ones I see when I'm out and about, unless it's something really cool, which is the case when it comes to these Noe home pops. Like, come on.  How long has it been since this man has been on anything? This Andrew Pop is pretty cool, too. I noticed they made a much less of an eyesore as compared to the last time they tried to make a Tasm 2 Funko Pop. Like, good god, what were they thinking when they made these eyes? Like, they very easily could have colored them in all white. And you can tell that they very easily could have because there's a small rim on the edge. I'll do a little edit for you to show you what that'd look like. I mean, other than that though, I actually don't mind the body of the figure. I actually really like how wide the Spider logo is on the body. And call me crazy, I kinda wish the logo was this wide on the real Tasm 2 suit. Nonetheless, the Tasm 2 suit is still a really good suit, and this Funko Pop is still outdone in almost every way by the new one. It's more accurate. He's got those big eyes Tasm 2 Spider-Man is known for. It's pretty good. You know, they actually made a Funko Pop for Tasm 1, too. I actually used to have this one, but I had it when I was a little kid, so I didn't actually realize the worth of keeping one of these in good condition.    Anyway, issues that need therapy aside, this is actually a really dope pop. I actually don't mind them using the same technique for the lenses that they used for the Tasm Pop after this. Since the rims of the lenses are much smaller, it actually makes it look much more natural. Although I will say, the lenses on this pop are inaccurate since they used a black rim instead of the blue one present in the movie. But I won't hold it against Funko since I actually think the black rims look better here instead of the blue ones from the movie. Not that the blue ones in the movie don't actually look good. I just prefer them black specifically on the Funko Pop. Anyway, moving on to other movie Spider-Man based pop figures, I want to talk about something that for once isn't directly related to Spider-Man.  I assume it's because Marvel or whoever decides who has to get a Funko Pop has to pick a certain amount, which is decided by somebody at Funko or Marvel. So if there's gonna be 10 new Spider-Man movie pops, you're gonna get a net or two. I think one of the most egregious examples of this is Spider-Man fart from home. For some reason we got Funko Pops of the fire elemental and the water elemental from No Way Home and the glow in the dark versions of them on top of that.    Like no wonder Funko is fixing to dump their inventory in the landfill.  No one is gonna buy these! I used to see these Funko Pops at stores, unbought, all the way up until the release of No Way Home.    This company will go bankrupt by the time I turn 40. These fuckers don't even know how to do capitalism right. It's so easy! Just be as evil as possible and make smart choices. Let's talk about some new Funko Pops. Across the spider versus coming soon, and the pops that are coming out for this movie are amazing. There are so many I'm going to mention coming up, and they're all spider people this time. So at least people will actually come through and buy these instead of leaving them out to dry like all those other Funko Pops Funko shouldn't have made. Spider-Man 2099 gets two pops, and honestly, he looks better here than he has in any other Funko Pop that I've ever seen made for this character. I've always found Spider-Man 2099's other pops to look kinda odd. The first one they made doesn't look too bad, I'm just not in love with the design of it. Also, it doesn't have a cape, so... Automatic 0 out of 10, bro. No cape. No cape!  Their second Spider-Man 2099 Pop is undeniably much better. Although I do find the eyes to be a bit close together, everything about it is actually really nice, but I do end up missing the colors of the old one. 8 out of 10. These lenses have been formed to fit the shape of the Funko Pop so well, and I love both of the different figure poses they gave to Miguel. The colors are great, the pop looks amazing, 10 out of 10, I will be participating in capitalism and buying one of these. Hopefully if I get enough, Funko's stock will rise again. Next up is Spider-Punk. I don't remember most of what I said about Spider-Punk's design in my Spiderverse video, but I do remember thinking that Spider-Punk's skin was actually visible in his design, but as you can see, very clearly it is not, and instead he's wearing a red spandex suit under all of his clothes. I'll have to wait to see how he looks in the movie, but... for now, this is a perfect 10 out of 10 pop.  Yes, sir. Scarlet Spider is getting another Funko Pop, and I'm glad to see that this one is actually making use of the comic shading style that Ben was actually frequently colored with. It looks like this time Funko actually put a bit of a thought in painting this. If you compare the Scarlet Spider to the first one Funko made, it's really no contest. This one is definitely good, but it's outclassed in almost every single way by the across the Spiderverse one. There's definitely more Spiderverse pops I could talk about, but I didn't really think I'd be saying anything worthwhile about them, so I figured I wouldn't.  These are eight classic Spider-Man Funko pops, and three of them have something I dislike about them.  I know it's a nitpick, so save your angry comment.  Take it out on your drywall or something.  I've always found it really unappealing. It's too geometrical, and it does not at all work as a Spider logo. On its own, it's just really unsatisfying. Its legs are bent at a 90-degree angle, preventing the legs from stretching out across Spidey's back, which usually tends to make back logos much more appealing. For example, the Funko pop of the Japanese Spider-Man back logo looks so much more appealing, as it takes up much more space and stretches out across his back. The legs lack form with one another, and all of them stretch out slightly farther, more than the last, and it just makes it look worse. The main problem with this logo is just the really ugly legs. They're too blocky. They're too blocky, and they lack motion. They feel so stiff and lifeless. I hate that they continue to use this back logo when they have access to so much better ones, too. I mean, look at them. Even the first Spider-Man Funko pop had a better back logo. Dear Marvel, I hate this. Please stop using it. Love, PSM. And that's all I really have to say about Spider-Man Funko pops. I could talk about how lame it is that there was that one era where they would just reuse the MCU lenses over and over again for a couple of Spidey pops, but it seems like they've changed their ways since then and started making new lenses for their Spidey pops, so, good on them.  Well, except for you, Zach. Anyway, see you next time with the Spider-Man Cosplay Tutorial. Bye-bye. I... You know what? I'm gonna dedicate the entire fucking...   Alright, fine.  Like, I can't be the only one who thinks this is a good idea.    Why? Like, I...  I feel so hopeless in this fucking... I've been feeling really hopeless lately in America.  And like, I don't know, I'm venting about this in a Funko Pop video. I'm venting about this in the end card of a Funko Pop video. Jesus Christ.  Just fucking...  This Spider-Man character. And remember that like, there's a good out there that can be done.  Whatever. It's dumb, it's dumb.   Anyway, this is the end of the video. Please come back next week for a less unhinged madness. I think I'll be less unhinged in the next video. Thank you. Bye.