This video is a re-upload of my original Luffy vs. Kaido, a fan-based divided video, which was manually flagged and blocked worldwide by Toei Animation on Christmas Day. So thank you Toei for really getting into the spirit of Christmas, but here's the video once more in all of its opinionated glory. Enjoy. Hello and welcome to the Grand Line Review, your source for everything on peace. And today it's time to talk about some controversy within the global fan base, spawning from the recent anime episodes being primarily 914 and 915, the centerpiece of which was the much anticipated Luffy vs. Kaido clash. Now there have always been manga critics and staunch anime defenders at war with one another since the beginning of time. In fact, I'm pretty sure those two factions actually pre-date the dinosaurs. However, I don't think I've ever seen such an intensely split opinion between these two groups. Generally, what will happen is that manga readers will complain that something was not realized properly, be it through art, animation, pacing, or just downright changing events. And anime watchers will be like, yeah, that's fair, but I still liked it. However, in this case, anime only watchers on mass are praising this fight as one of the greatest events to ever grace this anime. While manga readers seem even more disappointed than ever before. And to be perfectly honest, even though I fall firmly into the manga camp, I do believe that both sides have very legitimate reasons for feeling the way they do. And I'd like to explore that here today. Now I would like to begin by stating that these episodes, no matter what you thought of them, are far and away superior to the quality of storytelling that we've experienced for the last 10 years. And that is never lost on me when viewing any one new episode, no matter how much I may criticise it. The art style is nothing short of stunning, and the animation by and large was pretty solid, especially in episode 915. 914 had some, let's say, questionable elements during the filler combat. But that's irrelevant now, because for the first time that I can really recall in my lifetime as a One Piece fan, the series is being presented as an aesthetically polished product. As a result, the difference in opinion between anime watchers and manga readers has become much more streamlined and a relatively simple endeavour to identify. And it effectively comes down to the original intent of a scene as presented on the manga page, versus the animated realisation. And now you might be thinking, well, what's the issue here? If the art is great and the animation is competent, then this shouldn't be a problem at all, right? Well, no, actually. Because there is a hell of a lot more to the art of storytelling than that. And One Piece, as well as all anime adaptations in general, are subject to the artistic and narrative direction applied to it. And in the case of Luffy vs Kaido, the anime took a radically different storytelling route than the manga did. I mean, the final result was still the same, Luffy ended up defeated, but the journey to get there ends up radically reshaping how we view this event, as well as how we view both Luffy and Kaido as characters. And manga fans are understandably upset with this change of direction, whilst anime fans have no point of comparison, and so are pretty thrilled with what's on screen, a sort of ignorance as bliss situation. But to dive into how the anime radically redefined this encounter, let's go to how the events played out in the manga, and I'd like to focus on two key aspects. The first of which is Luffy's initial punch on Kaido, and the second is Kaido's knockout blow on Luffy. These two events, despite following the exact same story, could not be more different across the contrasting mediums. So first up, Luffy punching Kaido. Originally, after Kaido used Bora Breath targeting Oden Castle, there was a moment of shock, followed by spotting Luffy immediately in the air, smacking Kaido, bam in the head. And the beauty of how this plays out on paper is all to do with the element of surprise. The panels we see of Luffy are minimal. There is one shocked reaction, and then the very next time we see our protagonist, he is engaging in a head-on assault against one of the four emperors, surprising not only Kaido, but more so us as the readers, and thus in my opinion amplifying the experience significantly. If Oda had elected to portray Luffy gearing up for this attack in any way, that flawless surprise would have evaporated before our very eyes. And I think this is a very important aspect of Luffy's character as well. He is an individual who acts much faster than he thinks, and a long-standing motif of the manga involves Luffy leaping into action before we as readers have the chance to clock that it's even happening. It assists in us helping understand the kind of man he is, rash, irrational, and uncontrollable. Meanwhile, the anime changes this significantly. So to begin, we spend some time watching Luffy effectively power up in a very stereotypical, super sainish kind of way actually, and already from this moment on, the original intention of the manga scene has changed. And that is because we know that Luffy is clearly preparing for combat, and so from here on out we are just sort of waiting for the moment where he assaults Kaido. The surprise of our protagonist taking on an emperor out of nowhere is gone, being instead traded for more of a slow sequence to build up anticipation for the event that we now all know is inevitable. And in many ways, I don't think this is a true portrayal of Luffy's character. He just isn't the type of person to stand there, get mad, power up, and then comparatively slowly make his way to the target of his rage. Like I said before, Luffy is the kind of character who acts before he thinks, meaning that in order to properly convey him, we can't be privy to too much of his thought process or it very much undermines who he is. It's very conflicting to take an impulsive character and then give us a step-by-step guide to their thought process. That's my opinion anyway. I can also fully understand if anime only watches defend this portrayal of Luffy because it is really all I know. He is still a charming character, just in the anime he's very easy to understand. So in one way that could even make him more endearing to some because they find it easier to identify with him. For others like me who have always been invested in Luffy's shock value and super left field lifestyle, it removes a huge layer of that and so it can be quite frustrating to sit through. Now let's also talk about the action itself and may I just say that the anime absolutely nailed the moment of impact when Luffy's fist collided with Kaido's head. It was such a satisfying oomph moment and very reflective of the instantaneous action of the manga. In fact I'd say it even surpassed it. However where the two differ greatly is the decision made immediately after. With the manga choosing to down Kaido swiftly while the anime milked this moment for well everything it was worth by showing about a billion sequential close-ups of Luffy and Kaido artificially extending the clash. Now this is a very common device implemented by Toei and it frustrates me on every occasion they use it. To me action is best when it is swift. Swift is powerful and every millisecond that the anime delays the outcome of a strike lessens its power. And it's another one of those things where I guess you can argue that the intent behind it may be to amp up the dramatic stakes by having an extended clash whereby you can't necessarily immediately tell who's going to come out on top and while that's a valid opinion it just doesn't depict the reality of the situation as presented in the manga. Which is why so many readers are annoyed to watch it because they've been waiting for I guess roughly a year now to see this engagement being given the animated treatment and when it finally happens the way it plays out is completely counter-intuitive to the actual purpose of the original scene as well as to the character performing the action. And this is very similar to the second part I want to examine which is Kaido's defeat of Luffy. In the manga it's difficult to really express just how quickly this happened. Luffy basically finished pummeling Kaido's non-dragon form then Kaido stood up, gave Luffy a glare and like that Kaido took Luffy out with a single hit. There was no clash there wasn't even any time for Luffy to react. He was just completely outclassed in terms of speed, power, haki, you name it. And it really hammered home the sheer difference between Luffy and an established Emperor of the Sea. It made it clear that Luffy was not going to be able to take down Kaido in a head-on situation and that this was not going to be a standard antagonist. And in the anime version they once again completely changed this intention but even more radically than the first example actually because in the anime version Kaido is not the one to initiate this interaction which is massive. The powerful factor of the manga events is that this moment was Kaido saying enough is enough and actually getting mildly serious for the first time in the conflict resulting in Luffy's immediate dismissal. Whereas in the anime it reads more like Kaido is still on the defensive especially because Luffy is the one to initiate the attack, a King Konga no less, which he not only begins but even lands at the same time as Kaido lands his own attack. And despite the fact that Kaido still comes out on top it gives this encounter the illusion that these two combatants are far more equal than they should be because Kaido's sheer speed is now effectively non-existent. He is still a superior power but he does not feel like the impossibly unscalable wall that he should. And I will be more insistent about this example because while this clash is definitely entertaining to watch and well animated I do believe that it is doing Kaido a great disservice which may sound insane to say because yeah he still came out on top but it really does make him look like significantly less of a threat than he should be and actually kind of like if Luffy just engaged in combat at a clever angle or more intelligently like I don't know you snake man or something then he might even have a chance but this is not the case. And seeing it this way does radically redefine the audience impression of not only Kaido but also Luffy. And just as a side note it also results in a weird little moment where Luffy had to end up behind Kaido somehow despite being flung away from him due to the impact of the new strike so seeing Luffy need to be like maneuvered back into his manga position was a bit jarring to me although I highly doubt that any anime only fans would have noticed so it's not a huge issue I guess. But this is the core of why there is such a vigorous debate spawning every time discussion of these episodes pops up. Whatever your opinion of the anime is what it is doing is not Oda's original intention and it might seem like very minor changes but they completely redefine the atmosphere of the scene as well as the impression of the characters involved. Of course it's not just Luffy versus Kaido either these changes happen at almost every point in the anime adaptation and I guess here is the part where you can say that an adaptation does need to be its own thing to suit the storytelling medium. And in most cases yes I would agree one of the better examples of this would be the Lord of the Rings films they simply could not be a faithful retelling of the books because they do not directly translate into the format of film so they had to take that world and its characters and craft the story for that medium. Anime and manga are a bit different though because they aren't as far removed as purely literary and purely visual mediums. Manga exists as something of an in-between and so it can serve as a direct translation. In my mind what a great anime does is take that manga material and elevate it not change it. It takes the ideas the characters and the narrative and serves it as best it possibly can through the tools available to animation. That is not what the One Piece anime is doing though and there is no artistic reason to implement the scene redefining differences. However I will point out that there is indeed a practical one and that practical reason is because episodes need to be longer. In reality the events of Episode 914 and 915 should have played out within half an episode at most. However because Shueisha, Toei and Fuji TV insist on producing One Piece all year round instead of seasonally, directors are constantly under the pump to extend events and action is by far the most difficult feature to add filler into. So more often than not the choice gets made to extend the action so that a punch that took an instant to complete in the manga now takes 30 seconds to a minute to complete in the anime. And as someone who is captivated by Oda's brilliant storytelling beats it is highly unsatisfying to see them consistently undermined, even if they are done so with flawless art and stunning animation. Those things are almost meaningless if the scene doesn't play out correctly. But I do want to end on a slight positive note for anime watchers. In the end if you are satisfied by what's happening on screen then it really doesn't matter what manga readers like me say. Do not ever let anyone inhibit your personal enjoyment of One Piece. But I guess the thing to understand is that there are two very different incarnations of One Piece. They follow the same story but they lead very different lives. And sadly they happen to have the same name so this manga versus anime conflict is going to continue occurring until the end of time. And that pretty much does it for why Luffy Vs Kaido has divided the fanbase. If you enjoyed this video and the content this channel produces in general then please do consider donating to the Grand Line review Patreon because the support of all of your amazing people is what continues to make this channel possible. And if you'd like to see more videos like this but apply to other anime manga series then please do check out my second channel New World Review for all of your wider needs. And if you'd like to join the fun at any time then please do head over to my discord server where a wide array of shenanigan retakes place on a daily basis. And finally please do comment with your thoughts on the Luffy Vs Kaido anime adaptation. This has been the Grand Line review and I'll see you next time.


If you wanted to turn around and talk to the younger you who just got that deal, who was in New York about to sign and you know that person about to come to you with the perks, whatever, what would you tell that kid? Because there's a lot of kids out there who's about to go in the same situation. Oh, I love this question only because I thought about that, like, I wish it was somebody, but if it was me, like, talking to me, I feel like I just tell myself, like, I'll show them. I'll go to YouTube and show them the withdrawals, like, I'll show them people talking about the withdrawals. I'll show them, like, this stuff, like, it's pros and cons to this, only, like, you're going to be feeling like this for this, but you're going to be feeling like that for that, so I'm saying. Yeah, we on Boss Talk 101, 101. Yeah, we gonna talk. I noticed whenever I asked you about why did you choose to get baptized, you started to tell us, but you swerved and went to something else but you didn't finish.  Oh yeah, that's what I said.  So you were just moved to go up there and do it? Yeah, oh yeah.  You didn't think about it. No, no, it's just like, I didn't even fit, I didn't even know I went up there. I just was up there and I was like, damn, like, cause where I was sitting there, I was like, damn, they're in the middle of the church and it's so big, like the preacher thing up there.  And then I had just got up. It just, something got me up. I don't even know, I don't, I told them that I was like, bro, I didn't even fit cause I don't never get up. I don't never be like, all right, I'm finna go up there. For what? So I'm saying like, I don't wanna, I was too much me. So do you believe in the spirit?  Yeah, I believe in it only because like, it's certain stuff that don't happen that I don't feel like it wouldn't happen like that if it wasn't no higher power like, you see what I'm saying? So I just feel like that. But. So getting baptized and giving your life, what has changed for you? What changed? Can you know people always say when you decide to give your life up to Christ, you know, you're supposed to have a different mindset on going forward. Yeah, I'm gonna say something though. I know you're going back to that. Yeah, I'm gonna go in on y'all cause y'all that's crazy. I don't know, I don't know if nothing changed. I'm gonna tell you something. Most people when people go through a change or transformation, if they go through something, a lot of times people be wanting to see a change right away. But over time, over time people change. It don't be something to where, it don't be something to where basically you just, you know, you just, this person all of a sudden they just change the name to never the same again. It happens like that sometime, but sometime it don't.  That's the way it's supposed to be. Yeah. It's just like, I'm grinding to get to that point. You see what I'm saying? Like I'm grinding to where I can just get everybody out of the city and everybody be comfortable to do what they want to do.  Like even the people that still was rocking with me and believed in me, I felt like I need, I owe them. You know what I'm saying?  I just feel like it's a lot of rappers out here that are started and then get selfish and then get on drugs and then they turn to nobody. You see what I'm saying? So I'm still young, I'm 23. So I'm saying I can get like 25, 26 and still be and then try to make a comeback and now it's gonna be ugly for me. So if you wanted to turn around and talk to the younger you who just got that deal, who was in New York about to sign and you know that person about to come to you with the perks, whatever. What would you tell that kid? Because there's a lot of kids out there who's about to go in the same situation. Oh, I love this question only because I thought about that, like, I wish it was somebody, but if it was me, like talking to me, I feel like I'll just tell, like, I just tell myself, like, I saw him. I go to YouTube and show him the withdrawals. Like, I saw him people talking about the withdrawals.  So I'm saying, and I saw him like, okay, boom, just step back and look around.  So I'm saying you in a label with Rye Wave, y'all. Everybody is nobody, nobody is nobody. Little TJ ain't nobody, there's nobody right now. Everybody just around. It just like, they chose a path and I chose a path. So I'm saying, so it was just like, I just tell myself, like, I just feel like I had to show him, like, where everything gonna be. So I'm saying, like, I just feel like I had to show him and I tell myself a lot, I tell myself to talk to my little brother name. So I'm saying that I feel like they wouldn't have never been in jail. Like, we just trying to be where my daddy name was, but I don't feel like, so I'm saying. It's not the right path. It's not the right path, but I'm like, my daddy name used to tell, we used to get in trouble for wanting to game bang and saying blood only because my daddy was trying to find another way out, but we didn't understand it. So you know what I'm saying? Like, we didn't understand it. So, you know, like as a kid, when you tell somebody something, don't do something and make you want to do it more. So I'm saying, like, just when you not around. So I'm saying, so it just like, when they weren't around, it just like we felt deeper and deeper and deeper and deeper. I would have just told myself like, the money. So you know what I'm saying?  And that wasn't a big thing for me either. Like I ain't gonna, like a lot of rappers probably get up there and be like, I was trying to get some money. Like I was in my situation, but I felt like, I felt like that's how it was because I was in a sense of baby. So I'm saying, so the situation that it was, it was just fun to me. So I'm saying, like when I got around suburb people, it wasn't the same vibe as in the hood and struggling and having stuff and going to people house and waking up and just having stuff trembling. It wasn't the same vibe as being, having nothing in the hood. Yeah, we on boss talk one on one, one on one. Yeah, we gon' talk.


Hello and welcome to this webinar and this is hosted by the Center for Transportation and Logistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and I'm here with Professor Jim Rice who has been collaborating with us from the University of Denmark in the development of this work which we still consider to be very, very relevant for companies. So I hope you derive some useful tips from what we're going to present now. Anything else? No, I'm excited that you're here working with us Daniel and I hope that our partners are able to understand and engage in the work that you're proposing. Actually it's work that you're doing now and you're looking for partners to join in and I'm excited that you're sharing this opportunity with us. Okay, thank you. So first of all I will share with you some administrative information. You are looking at this through YouTube and there is a chat feature that you can use throughout the presentation. Please post your questions in the chat and we will have 15 minutes at the end of the presentation. At the end of the presentation where we will go through the questions and answer your questions. So I'll get now to the presentation and we should have the presentation on screen. As I was telling you, this is a research that we've been doing at the Thames University of Denmark for the past two years and we have been in collaboration with the Center for Transportation and Exportational Logistics here at MIT in the topic of cyber risk for the supply chain. And this research has led us to a way of understanding these cyber risks which we look into the structure existing in supply chains as a trigger for better response to cyber risks. So we will start developing the idea with you here. So the agenda for this presentation, I will talk just a little bit about me and my background where I came from and why I drifted into this topic. Then we will talk about the problem description, how this problem can be described and the two main areas where we think the problem lies for supply chains. Then we will talk a little bit about the analysis of the approach that we want to suggest for understanding these risks and we will end with some steps that we have been developing for approaching the solution to cyber risks for the supply chain. So my background is I am a mechanical engineer by trainee and I worked for over 12 years in industry in different positions in supply chain management as a regional buyer to supply chain manager for multinational companies and I worked all over the place mainly Latin America, North America and Europe. And my academic background is a mechanical engineer as I was telling you and I have a master's in engineering and a master's of science in the last one from MIT and I am currently then doing my PhD degree at the Tinker University of Denmark to be ended by the end of this year beginning of next year. That's how I came about. So what seems to be the problem here? How are cyber risks a problem for supply chains? When we look at definitions for cyber risks or cyber attacks we have come across different types of definitions most of them hold some or all of these concepts in them. First of all it's an offensive maneuver that will target the computing information systems to either steal, alter or destroy. That is the general definition that is out there and this could easily lead us to believe that cyber attacks fall in the management of information technology of IT in that company. And this was largely the case until 2010 when something came in the scene worldwide which was not expected is what we call here the Dawn of Stuxnet. Stuxnet is a computer worm, a standalone program that was discovered in 2010. It was discovered in 2010 but there are some evidence that has been gathered after its discovery to believe that it had been around for at least a couple of years before its discovery. It was a very high technology piece of code. It did not need, it started to be connected to internet and it targeted very specialized hardware in nuclear plants all over the world. It was very effective. The plants that were affected by Stuxnet almost a fifth, 20% of the centrifuges that they used for the production of enriched uranium were affected and damaged. They had to be replaced. Some of the interesting things that we have not yet understood about this worm is that it had a turn off date. The code in the Stuxnet worm explicitly said it would turn off and not infect any other computer after the 24th of June 2012. We still don't know what that means but it was in the code. That's something that we find very odd. But this discovery led to some important realizations. Computer programs could have a direct and very powerful effect on the physical operations of supply chains and that there is a group of hackers working silently beyond the public attention developing these tools for disruption. This was a change in the way we think about the problems of cyber risk. They are not only from IT only. They affect the whole organization. We understand the problem. It has two parts. The first part has to do with the effects the cyber attacks are having on physical operations and the second part is how we are reacting to these attacks. Let's first look at how these cyber attacks actually affect our physical operations. I will give you some examples of this. There are some interventions which go beyond what we usually hear which is data, the effects of data or the change of data in a company. It has to do with how they affect physical things in the world around us. Here are a couple of examples which are very easy to hack these signs but it's a way of affecting and physically changing the way how we interact with the world through a cyber attack. These changes in the construction signs, for instance, is something that we see almost every day and we've shown here some of the lighter messages. Hackers have been able to convey all types of messages. These interventions go beyond these anecdotal examples to some financial effects. For instance, here we have three examples of hackers hacking different companies in the world, one from Germany, another one from Australia and the third one from the US where they were able to misdirect payments. In these cases, hackers accessed the processes that these companies had and they were able to get paid instead of the supplier. This is a direct effect from a company and it has to do with some structures which we will analyze later but this is an effect which is also very common. This happens all the time. In this allocation of payments, it even has its own term now. It's called cyber heist. But these operational effects don't end there. We have effects that can be either direct or indirect in operations itself. For instance, a direct effect, an example we have here is the hacking of the control system in a German steel manufacturer. Hackers, through this intervention, they were able to shut down some of the furnaces in an uncontrolled manner. If anybody is familiar with this, the furnaces need a very controlled cool-down process. Otherwise, the components could be damaged. The interior ceramics and other components if it's not shut down in a controlled manner. Then the effect of these hackers was reputable damage. They had to replace some of the components of these furnaces because of this uncontrolled shutdown. So this is a direct effect of cyber attacks on an operation, in this case, as in the lecture. But there is also indirect effects. So this has to do with the conditions in which the production takes place. What I'm pointing out here is two examples. One of them, the one on top, has to do with hacking of a water treatment plant. Cyber attackers were able to access the control systems in these water treatment plants and change the ratio of the chemicals that were being added to the water to make it drinkable for instance. These were very, very scary prospects. And the one on the bottom has to do with cyber attacks that have happened to the power transmission lines and power generation companies. They have happened all over the world. This one is an example in Ukraine, but there are examples in Brazil, there are examples all over. So this is a type of indirect effect of cyber attacks. So this brings us to the second part of the problem, which is not only how these cyber attacks are affecting our supply chains, but how are we reacting to these attacks? And so this I want to bring to the table an analogy which some of you may be familiar with, which is the iceberg model. This is something that is being used for some time in management to understand the different processes in a company and differentiate those that are visible, which in this picture could be seen as the events that are above the water, in terms that we can see the events, and it differentiates these from the ones that lay below the water, which is the patterns of behavior that actually cause these events, and even deeper below the patterns of behavior, we have a system structure which actually causes these patterns of behaviors which results in the events, and even deeper we have the mental models that drive the whole process. So if we look at this in terms of we have an initial symptom, which is the hacking of the organization, we have an organization that has been hacked, we could have different approaches to understand this. So our first approach could be hacking is the domain of IT. So management of hacking is the IT department, so let us call IT departments to make a system safe when this fail and fix them so that they are not unsafe anymore. This is a silo approach, and this is very common, but it's not enough for systems that are growing in complexity. So when systems are growing in complexity we have another approach which has been, which is also very common, which is again starting from the mental model that hacking is the domain of IT, but now we will protect against whatever lays outside our organization. So we have reactive firewalls and anti-viruses. I say reactive because they are normally generated and developed after the event. And the pattern that we obtain through this is protecting against the entry of anybody who's not authorized within the organization. And this could be understood as a defense model. And the third one that we want to advocate for, which is a bit different approach, has to do with hacking. It's not something that happens to a company, but something that our company is allowing itself to happen. So our organization is allowing the problem. And in that case, our structures, our information control structures, which is something I'll go a bit deeper in the next slide, our information control structures are the ones that are actually causing this problem. Not something outside is our own structure that is causing the problem. So what would be a control pattern of behavior? If we have the control structures and information control structures to understand and to recover from the cyber attacks, it would be a control time to recover. Here we have, for the first time, the work time in all of this, which is very relevant. And this we have named a structure approach to understanding the hacking of systems. And this is what we want to talk about a bit deeper in the rest of the presentation. So let's do a little bit of supply chain structure analysis. Supply chains are mostly seen, so the events that we see in supply chain is the physical movement of groups and services. We have physical operations. But underneath the physical operations in a supply chain lays a whole network of information flows, both within the organization and with our partners. And that is a continuous feedback. This information flows cause a physical operation of some kind, and these physical operations then feedback into the information flow. So this is an ongoing process which is adapting and adjusting all the time. So this is one first thing to realize about supply chains. And we have been aware of this up to a certain point because systems for improving supply chains, such as value stream mapping, which is the one I'm showing here, has considered information flows as part of their representations that they do. So they have this lower part which considers the material flows and the different processes that happen through the material flows. And we have also some time breakdown. So the material flows has a very important part of this analysis. And there is an overlaying or some enabling information flows which although gives some information on what information is required for the different material flows, it doesn't have any information on how this is controlled or how this allows a company to react over time. And why is the time factor here so important? And if we look at the destruction curve that Professor Sheffi and Professor Rice developed some years ago on how to characterize how a company reacts when it has a disruption. We have the lower access time. We have some measure of performance that is behaving around a certain value until we have an impact of some type of a disruptive event which could be for instance a cyber attack. Then the performance starts to go down until we have the full impact of the disruption. At the time of full impact, we have a process of starting the recovery and then we start a recovery which will aim towards either returning to the performance level or if there is some organizational learning there might be even an improvement in performance. So this is a qualitative description of how the reaction in a company would happen in front of a disruption. What we can identify from this graph is that the economic impacts lay in all this throughout the time when we are operating before the expected performance level. So we can deduce from this that the quicker we react or the less that the disruption affects our performance, the better the economic impact. The idea here is to reduce the area underneath this curve so the performance can stay on the expected levels permanently as much as possible. So reaction time is a relevant factor for a company performance. So this changes then a little bit the approach that we saw in the value stream mapping for instance where we had information as communication to what we understand as information as regulation of a process. So this is a very important change because when we consider communication as regulation we are not merely informing the different stages of the process on how to proceed but also we are confirming action. So for this is an example the correct supplier received all the information it needs to match our requirements. This is a regulation process it's not merely informing the supplier what we want but confirming that he has all that he needs to proceed and that is more than just one communication. We need some type of feedback to obtain this. So this is one example of regulation and another example of regulation in the supply chain is the reaction to changes. So what if a supply needs to adjust our requirements? We should have the information flows that allow us to adjust this and the linear or representation of information flows without the feedbacks involved in a regulation process or that do not allow us to identify those opportunities. So what is control as regulation? Let's look at an example which we may be familiar to you. Let's look at a system where there is a boy filling up a glass with water. This is the process. So this process has different parts of it which we can identify. For instance, there is sensors involved in the process, the eyes of the boy. Those sensors are continually looking at how the process is advancing. There is actuators in the system. So the boy has a hand on the handle on the pipe, on the regulation of how much water is flowing out and this actuator is not static. It's moving continually and adapting to what the boy is seeing in the glass and another important aspect we have inertial effects what we call inertial effects which are actually accumulations. So this is not only the effects of change from time to time but how these effects are accumulating as the complete process because the process we want is filling up the glass in this case. And this is not a linear process. This is within a loop of continually adapting processes. For instance, the boy is looking at the glass and he's adjusting how much water is he letting out and then he's looking at how that affects the amount of water in the glass and he again adjusts. So this is a feedback loop that repeats itself throughout the process. And it's not immediate. It could have delays. In this case it's very immediate because whenever the boy opens a little bit more, the tap it will flow very quickly in a higher quantity, it will flow more but this might not be the case. He might, for instance, apply a change in this handle and the flow of water may adjust with some delay which will change the dynamics of this system yet again. And this can be represented in a technical way in the following way. We have a controller which is the boy and the controller has the power of actuators and the sensors feed information into the controller and these actuators affect the control process and this is a continuous process that goes on and on and adjusts to changing conditions throughout the process. So why is self-regulation crucial? Well, it's crucial in certain conditions. Maybe not in others but it is crucial for instance when we have a variable environment when we have different ways of cyber attackers attacking a suppression that we need to adjust to the different attacks that are happening or the different types of failures that we could have in a suppression. We need to have these regulation processes to be able to adapt. Another aspect is when we have a quick reaction requirement when every minute that passes or the quicker we react the better it will be for the company. Well, you could say you could argue that is almost always true but there are some instances where we have some crucial processes that have been affected and then time becomes of the essence. We need to react more quickly. That's when self-regulation is crucial. Also, self-regulation is crucial when we have complex systems. Why is that? It's because the other another option to self-regulation would be centralized control and when systems grow very complex the centralized control becomes unfeasible or very cumbersome and not very effective. When we have self-regulation of different areas of a company then we get a system that is self-regulated in total. So if the supply chain for instance the purchasing department and the suppliers have a regulation process then we won't need any assistance or coordination through management for instance because the processes and the feedbacks and the communication paths have been designed for the supply department and the supplier to solve their problems with the system they have. And also self-regulation is important when failures are complex. So in a complex system, a complex supply chain many times when we have some type of failure this will not affect only one area of the company and it will not affect only the company but the suppliers as well. So as failures grow increasingly complex it's increasingly beneficial to have self-regulation as part of the design of the supply chain. So our proposal is derived from what I've been speaking all along which is a two-step solution. The first is looking for better ways of representing the information flows in supply chains using this representation of information flows to do what's been called a systemic risk analysis. So let's go one by one. The representation of supply chains of the flows in a supply chain we can give an example here of a seller and a buyer that have a transport agent that carries the goods from the seller to the buyer this is the physical movement so this is the event layer of the system. And this can be represented in the following way. We have a buyer, a seller and a transport that have different positions in the control structure this means that the buyer has more of a controlling position than the seller and than the transport because the buyer starts the process because the buyer is the one that has to be in control of the process throughout throughout the time it's being carried out and so on. The seller is below the buyer because the seller controls the transport agent as well. So the first thing that we get from this control structure representation is the hierarchical positions of the different actors in the system. Then this system will also represent the different flows of information that happen between the different agents in what we are considering to be the system. So between the buyer and the seller we have flows such as the purchase order and the payment and those are communications that happen between the buyer and the seller. There are some communications that happen between the seller and the buyer for instance the order confirmation documentation that have to be sent to the buyer and so on. So we have different flows between each of these agents in the system. But not only that we also have feedback loops that means that there are flows in this structure that's happening between the seller and the buyer that are linked or that somehow allow the company to change the action it's doing according to how these flows evolve. For instance when we have a purchase order we could have an order confirmation and this would be a feedback loop regarding purchase order. If one of those is missing or if one of those changes then we would have an action in the system. And in that sense we can identify many different feedback loops even in this simple model. So this representation we could extend to the case of seller that for instance. In this case we have the three members of the system which is the buyer the seller and the transport but in the case of a hacker intervention we would have the same three agents that we had before but we would have a fourth agent which is the hacker and this hacker would have a flow towards and from the different agents in the system which these flows would be undesirable flows but potential flows. So an analysis of cyber attacks for supply chains would consider adding an additional agent which is the hacker and considering the different flows that this hacker might have with the buyer. And then when we have this representation start to do some analysis of which I'll show some examples but this representation includes loops so we can have a first representation of the regulation processes happening in a supply chain it requires a common mental model this is not something that we will generate on our own or one person will generate in his office it has to be a process to be shared with organizations so that the different ways in which the agents or the persons in the different agents understand systems are being run we can generate one representation of that system and it's an explicit representation it's a graphical explicit way of sharing how the company communicates and how the company shares and flows its information this is an example which is more of an extreme example where we had the representation of the information flows for a pharmaceutical industry but far beyond the pharmaceutical industry so we have the pharma industry in this place but there was a representation of how this pharma industry interacts with the payers interacts with the Food and Drug Administration and academic researchers and so on so this is an expanded representation of a system how expanded the representation needs to be as in the case of any model depends on the question that you are trying to answer so in this case the question was more of a policy level more than an operational level but it's possible to do that at any level that you want so there some of the illustrations of what we can get out of this representation so I just want to tell everybody that if you have any questions please use the chat to post those questions as I will answer them at the end of the presentation we will have some 15 minutes to go through the questions that have been sent and we will get into our discussion so going on with this slide the illustrations of some of the results that we can get from this simple representation but explicit representation could be several, for instance we could identify some missing information flows an example here would be that finance did not confirm the payment of data before paying a supplier and the result of this was that the payment was made to a hacker after the supplier data was compromised and we saw some examples at the beginning of the presentation where this is really fairly common so there are some fairly common information flows that are missing so we could also have busy control structures so for example purchase orders could be processed without confirmation and we have seen in some organizations that hacker purchase orders were not detected and they were processed and then the real supplier was charged and the supplier did not recognize the purchase order and the goods were lost so missing control structures are a fertile ground for hackers we could have redundant information flows so this is also important for an organization so why for instance purchase and quality departments both contact suppliers this is the case in many companies where we have parallel contact of suppliers by quality and by purchasing and in some cases this allowed the supplier not to identify a hacker contact which resulted in a loss we could also have redundant control structures these control structures could be for example that the supply manager can instruct suppliers in parallel or without a coordination between them and this has led to conflicting instructions during emergency reactions for instance and all those can be can be used by hackers to gain some some other effects could be the identification of non-digital flows that we would want to have for instance suppliers that confirm orders by phone or by fax this seems far away but many companies are still operating in this way especially in the Far East so in these cases phone conversations were intercepted and delivery was changed and the goods were delivered to hackers so all this can be from a simple representation like the one we are proposing and the second step so once we have this information flow representation we could go to what is called a systemic risk analysis which is the stamp method which is a method developed by the MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics department with Nancy Levison it's been used for over 10 years particularly in production processes and very complex production processes and it's been used only in a limited way to supply chains and we are venturing into the analysis of cyber risks in supply chains so this process results in the requirements for a desired response which is the structure and the IT systems and the information flows that a company would need to have a better reaction through the analysis of the risks to which the company is exposed so we will a brief outlook of the process the stamp process starts with identifying the system which is the end result of the previous step we were talking about the information flow representation so in this case as an example we have a buyer-seller relationship that's the system we are considering for this simple example then we have to identify what are the unacceptable losses or accidents that the system would have so we would have to get a scope on what we don't want to happen in this system and in this case we have later no deliveries or a wrong delivery those are accidents we would want to avoid then we identify the hazards so what are the actions that are happening within the system within the information flows a problem that would lead to an acceptable loss for instance unverified purchase orders from the buyer or unverified your confirmations from the seller those are things that could happen, flows that could be absent or present and would lead to hazards and then we identify what are the control actions within the system what are people actually doing in the system that changes something and in this case we have some control actions which could be executing a purchase order or confirming a purchase order those change the system in some way executing a purchase order generates a whole set of information flows which are derived from this action and the same with the second one so these control actions are the ones that will create the dangerous conditions and then we identify when these control actions would be risky and there are four conditions in which this can happen and anyone who is interested in this methodology please write an email I can send much more information on how this has been applied to processes so far but in this case we have an example of an unsafe control action would be the seller provides execution of the purchase order when the purchase orders has not been confirmed with the buyer because this creates a cyber risk and then as a result of these control actions we create requirements so a requirement from this would be always require a purchase order purchase order verification from the buyer and if that is complied by any IT system whatsoever we would be avoiding this cyber risk and this is an analysis that is made with the different agents in the system it converges very quickly to a set of requirements which is much less than the number of control actions and which is much less than the identifiable hazards all the processes have seen so far so a summary of the talk so far first of all you have to remember that behavior is caused by structure, this is not something that is particular to supply chains this in general all behavior is caused by some structure that analyzes it and in our case we are saying that information flow the information flow structure in a supply chain leads to the physical flow behavior so if we want to maintain the physical behavior that we want we should look into the information flows that cause them so the third point is that if we understand this information flows we can design them and what we are proposing here are steps for analyzing and designing this information flows in a supply chain for better response but the first one is dynamic information flow mapping and the second one is a systemic risk analysis so what is a project meeting at this moment? we are looking for a collaboration with companies that would be willing to engage on a two-month project and consider five to eight interviews for at most two hours with some people in the organization to gather data both from the process and from the information flows that exist in the supply chain with the result of an information flow map stamp analysis and some recommendations derived from this analysis and the idea of the project is to help companies design their supply chains for improved response by applying a structure behavior approach which is the one that we have described here so with this I have completed the presentation and we can go into any questions that might be of why it was presented yeah, Daniel could you go back to one slide and I would like to leave that one up if that's all right so Daniel before we jump into some of the other questions I wanted to ask could you talk a little bit more about what these interviews are like when we were talking you said it's going to be one or one and a half hour I know you hear you say two but just to be on the safe side with whom are you intending to interview and what kind of questions will you be asking me okay, we would be wanting to talk to persons in a supply chain so in the organization everybody wants to participate and at least one of their suppliers and with key positions within that supply chain that have a central role in the control actions that happen in the supply chain so normally it would be buyers it would be warehouse managers or warehouse people that are in charge of the warehouse supply chain managers also where we would gather data of two types managers the first one would be process data so how much information they share not necessarily what information we are not interested in necessarily what information, what type of information they share with their suppliers in what format what is the regularity of the information and the information flows that they have so who are they connecting with both in the normal operation and within emergency operation so we want to see if there are changes between the normal operations and the emergency operations in terms of those things that I was mentioned and we would then with that information extract both the formal aspect of the information flow happening in the company and the mental model aspect of what's happening in the company and we expect to find some insights there to find that there is maybe a need for alignment maybe not but the data will tell us what the next processes are and we want to do this through the deliverables which is the information flow map and the stamp analysis and thank you Christine so I want you to read the question so the question is if we will receive a soft copy of the presentation I think we will be sending a soft copy of the presentation to the people that requested so let's be clear we don't know who is on this right now so if you want a copy that you're going to need to reach out and contact us and so you can do that by contacting Daniel directly at that email but another thing is what will be available is this a recorded presentation so this presentation will be available in the MIT center for conversation and logistics YouTube site so once we're done with the webinar today you can always come back and view it again and share with any colleagues who may be interested just by coming to our YouTube channel and seeing the videos that we have and you can see them and you can see them and you can see them and you can see them and you can see the videos that we have and finding the one that Daniel and just sharing the link with anyone that you know or re-watching it in case you'd like to get a better idea of what he was saying today thank you so with this we thank you very much for taking part in this presentation as I was telling you and my particulars are here at the end of the presentation anybody who's interested in getting more information about this work can contact me directly or access the MIT CTL site or my LinkedIn page there are many ways of finding it so thank you very much okay thank you very much


In nature, a caterpillar always begins life as a tiny and forgotten thing before blossoming into a vibrant eye-catching butterfly. The same could be said for social media influencer Chrissy Schlapecke. She went through a metamorphosis of her own, transforming from a college student struggling with her identity into a pink-haired, self-proclaimed bimbo who is currently dominating the TikTok algorithm. As a child, Chrissy grew up hyper-feminine and was often mocked by her classmates for being both outspoken and loud. She once described this experience to Lithium Magazine by telling them, I was never fully taken seriously in school or public group settings. I was always made fun of her being the bimbo girl, the dunk girl. She's got nothing behind those eyes, stuff like that. Other people might not have believed in her, but Chrissy Schlapecke has always known that she was destined to entertain. As a youngster trying to find where she fit in the world, she gravitated towards musical theater, but her big break wouldn't come from performing on stage. After realizing she wasn't quite as interested in theater as she thought she was, Chrissy dropped out of college and found herself working three dead-end jobs to pay rent. Then she began her transformation into who she is today, with what will become the first of many tattoos. Despite the fact that she'd always been intimidated by needles, Chrissy decided to get her first ink in an attempt to do something meaningful for herself while being trapped in a toxic relationship. Soon after, she stopped denying her queerness to herself. She explained to LogoTV, Chrissy has since come to realize that there are many fluid layers to her sexuality and gender identity, which means she tries awfully hard not to limit to herself to just one label. That's why she uses both she and they when it comes to her pronouns. Chrissy's older brother Kevin is also queer and started using he they pronouns with their family before Chrissy did, something that helped pave the way for her in kind. Reflecting on sequence of events, Chrissy told LogoTV, Chrissy never directly came out to her family and said she just openly began posting about her life online and knew that they would eventually find it. It took time for her parents to understand, but they've since come to accept their daughter for who she is. Other extended family members, well, they haven't been as kind. Not that that's going to stop Chrissy from turning the family name into something more famous than it's ever been before. As COVID set in all around the world in early 2020, Chrissy found herself still trapped in an abusive relationship, one in which she had lost any aspect of herself. But after getting her first tattoo scrawled on her body, Chrissy found the necessary courage to end this relationship. After breaking free from her abuser, Chrissy felt the need to shed the skin of her previous life because it no longer felt like her true self. Soon after getting divine feminine tattooed across her ribs, Chrissy began her class to take over social media. Many years earlier, the first social media page Chrissy ever created for herself was a Webkin's account where her username was happy 1114. From there, she branched out onto much more popular platforms such as Instagram and TikTok, the latter of which is where she's steadily built her audience to where it is today, at an astounding 5 million followers. What originally started as a means for her to pass the time during lockdown almost immediately turned into something much more. Not long after her first post, Chrissy went viral for posting a reenactment. Not long after her first post, Chrissy went viral for posting a reenactment of an uncomfortable encounter she had with a stranger at Walgreens. When she checked her TikTok the next morning, she was shocked to discover her video had received more than 500,000 likes. After that, she dove head first into the platform by simply being herself. She's even earned recognition for having a speaking voice with an uncanny resemblance to that of pop star Ariana Grande. Something that Chrissy has leaned heavily into by entertaining her fans with impersonations of the singer on a regular basis. Many of Chrissy's videos center around her identity as a member of the LGBTQ Plus community. She's admitted in the past she didn't always have a place where she felt safe enough to be the most authentic version of herself. But with content focused on self-love, bisexual pride and sexual liberation, Chrissy has now managed to shed the chrysalis of her past and spread her wings further than anyone would have imagined possible. Today, you'll find Chrissy expressing this newfound confidence in her TikTok videos by wearing bold outfits and makeup, which is to say that she's never went to shy away from bright colors or patterns. While Chrissy is finally sure of who she is that isn't to say the rest of the world is always supportive, like many social media influencers, Chrissy has to contend with trolls and hateful comments, most of which always seem to come from men. The good news is that Chrissy actually enjoys responding and by doing so in a sarcastic way, it helps her take comments less personally. Most notable of everything Chrissy has accomplished, however, is the bimbofication of TikTok. Chrissy officially introduced bimbo talk on the platform through a video on which she answered the question, Who is the Gen Z Bimbo? Her fan base then picked up this idea of bimboism and ran with it, asserting themselves as hyper-feminine, outspoken and sexually liberated individuals who refused to be regulated by anyone. Chrissy never referred to herself as a bimbo until her followers began to do so lovingly. Instead of using the term in the derogatory sense that proliferated the early odds, Chrissy's community of fans have recontextualized the word to establish themselves as an inclusive queer subculture open to anyone who finds confidence in expressing femininity. And now that she's been dubbed queen bimbo, there's no going back. As a much of an institution as Chrissy Schlapeke has become on TikTok, she's gearing up for yet another important step in her career by looking to become a pop singer. Chrissy has wanted to be a singer since she was little girl but she's never really had a chance to spread her musical wings.  Writing music like her hit track, I'm so hot. But don't think for a second that Chrissy is just gonna forget about all her fans on TikTok. If anything, she's looking to synergize both careers by having them play off one another. She explained to Ink, My brand as a musician is very similar to the brand I have on TikTok. I just want to be a little pop star party girl and that's the kind of vibe I'm giving. I'm obviously very heavily influenced by Slater as well as Rebecca Black, Lady Gaga and Ariana Grande. And while Chrissy might be best known for her large within life personality, flamboyant outfits and her deep seated appreciation for boobs, she's more than ready to show her fans how talented she is. Sonically speaking. Chrissy is creating this music for her teenage self, the one who struggled with who she really wanted to be. She told Ink, I want my music to reflect back and pay tribute to the girl I was in high school because she really needed a big hug. It's really still in the works, but I guess that's the best way I can describe what I'm doing right now. I think it'll be really relatable to a lot of people who've had to find themselves all by themselves. In the meantime, she will continue to share her meaningful real life experiences with her millions of followers so that they can navigate themselves through similar situations. Alright everyone, that's gonna bring us to the end of this before and after about Chrissy's transformation from a closeted bisexual teen to the TikTok Bimbo she is today. Before you head out, consider answering the following question. What's one derogatory word from the past that you'd repurpose into something more ethically and socially meaningful? I never thought I'd see Bimbo reinvented as something positive, but I'll take it. Give me some even better ideas in the comments below. Otherwise, like, subscribe and turn on your notifications to make sure you never miss an episode. My name is Kara and before signing off, why not keep watching instead? Because coming up is our look into the transformation of Chris Tyson. I'll see you all next time. Bye! YouTube star and co-host to Mr. Beast, Chris Tyson has been making headlines since revealing he has begun hormone replacement therapy and reportedly transitioning from male to female. Now, the news not only shocked fans, but many are canceling Chris altogether because he's portrayed himself as a masculine family man and now it appears that he's abandoning and betraying his wife and young son in the process. It's obviously a complicated situation, but we'll uncover what we know about Chris Tyson's transformation and backstory in this before and after. Chris Tyson, AKA Mr. Beast's sidekick, has shared that he has begun what he calls life-saving hormone replacement therapy a couple of months ago. The 26-year-old is being met with controversy due to the fact that he's a married man with a son and many believe that this is a betrayal to his family. TikTok is abound with opinions and news on the subject with creators spilling what they know about Chris's gender journey. Christopher Tyson, known as Chris to much of the internet, is a YouTube star who rose to fame as the co-host to Mr. Beast, appearing in most of the videos alongside Jimmy or Mr. Beast. Born in 1996, Chris has described himself in the past as a country boy growing up as a boy scout and apparently does the most work in their survival challenges. He grew up in North Carolina and still lives there today. Chris and Jimmy created the channel in 2012 and since then Mr. Beast has grown to over 144 million subscribers. The easiest Chris is one of the only people that is consistently appearing on the channel and he's also the main host of the channel, Beast Reacts. Chris is also a big fan of cartoons which means he can be quite childish and he's said to be the most vulgar of the group but his wild antics have always kept things flowing well. In terms of his personal life, Chris has a wife, Katie Tyson and in June 2020 they welcome their son, Tuck Earth, together. In November of the same year, Chris further came out to fans on his alt Twitter account as bisexual which also came as a surprise to fans back then. Most recently, Internet is a buzz with Chris opening up about his gender identity after people speculating online about his new look. Chris claims he started life-saving hormone replacement therapy two months back and that his physical appearance has already started to change following this. The 26-year-old spoke about HRT in response to a Twitter user who compared an old and new photo of Chris and to this he said, HRT and it's only been two months. Hormone replacement therapy or HRT in Chris's case is feminizing hormone replacement therapy and this is when a doctor administers hormone medications to lessen male physical characteristics and increase female ones. People assigned male at birth are typically prescribed estrogen since it blocks testosterone and allows people to better align with their feminine gender identity. Chris also went on to post a link to a tweet from their alt Twitter account recounting how informed HRT helped save their life saying, informed consent HRT saved mine and many others' lives replying to a tweet that claimed that conservatives are trying to erase the trans community. Chris continued, the hurdles GNC, gender non-conforming people have to jump through to get life-saving, gender-affirming healthcare in a first-world country is wild to me. Just let people make informed decisions about their own bodies. Transitioning as many positive benefits including alleviating gender dysphoria for 80% of individuals who undergo the changes improving their sex life and overall quality of life. However, introducing higher levels of sex hormones can have serious risks including raising the risk of heart attacks, strokes and blood clots. Chris has a lot of people talking as he was beginning to don a new look including longer hair, dressing increasingly more feminine as well as wearing some makeup and previously showing off his long painted nails. Kind of like these. Chris revealed that they were originally hesitant about opening up about their journey saying, I was super nervous to be public about this because I've always been so private when it comes to this but seeing conversations started because of me is amazing. Now he said he struggled with gender dysmorphia for some years and was learning about it for reported 21 years after discovering his sister's dresses and going through her closet. In fact, he claimed that becoming a parent to his two-year-old son Tucker actually helped with his decision to start the treatment. The YouTuber tweeted about this alongside a photo of him and his son. If I didn't have this little nugget I'd never have gotten this far. He's taught me so much about myself in such a short time. I can't wait to learn through life together. The number of people who are transgender as well as those who undergo surgery and hormone therapy to transition has increased immensely in recent years particularly in the US. Chris's reveal couldn't have been more timely since the US is currently plagued by an anti-LGBTQ plus legislation with a focus on trans and gender non-conforming individuals. In some states there are even denying trans and non-gender conforming individuals from vital and gender-affirming healthcare. In case you didn't know gender-affirming healthcare includes hormone replacement therapy and surgeries while some also receive speech therapy, family therapy, counseling, puberty blockers and things like hair removal. One accusation Chris experienced from those objecting to him undergoing gender-affirming care said Tyson's child had lost a quote-unquote father figure and responds, Chris wrote that their child Tucker is loved and happy and that the insult is just quote-unquote more dog-wisling that somehow trans and gender non-conforming folks aren't safe around kids. And added, I made this decision because I wanted to show up as my best and happiest self for him. Speaking of Chris's son, he also still has a wife, Katie Tyson whom he married in June 2018 and is the mother of his child. This is a major reason why Chris is getting so-called canceled because he's maintained the image of a family man all these years and now appears to be betraying and abandoning Katie and Tucker. It's unclear what the pair's relationship status is after Chris announced his HRT treatment but rumors are abound that they've separated. On Reddit, many are discussing and wondering if they're divorced since Chris never posts photos with Katie anymore. Neither does she. One user answered claiming they're together still and live in the same house but Chris is becoming more liberal and agnostic while Katie is still a conservative Christian. I wouldn't be surprised if that's causing conflict between them.  However, neither Chris nor Katie have addressed any of the rumors. Katie is also an influencer over on Instagram and has an Amazon page where she promotes a range of products such as clothing, dupes, households and kitchen items, home decor and more. Over on her Instagram, she hasn't posted any photos with Chris since December 2021. In February 2023, Chris did comment on one of Katie's photos featuring their son, writing, Tucker's tail from your ponytail and the first picture is so cute. As mentioned in the past, Chris also revealed that he's bisexual and in April 2023, he reaffirmed his sexuality with a tweet saying, I'm 99.9% sure I still like both genders lol. Another rumor that fans have often created theories about is that Chris is dating his other co-host, Carl for Mr. Beast. Fans of the show have coined the term the Carl Effect because they believe Mr. Beast's team member, Carl Jacobs, has a negative effect on others in their group. Many also suspect that Carl and Chris spend a lot of time together and that could be a reason why Chris started dressing differently and much like Carl and that Chris and Katie might have grown apart due to this Carl Effect. But there's no evidence to back up these claims. Either way, for now, that is all we know about Chris Tyson's gender identity journey and his transformation. So that's going to wrap up today's Before and After. But before we go, answer this question for me. Do any of you, Mr. Beast fans out there believe in this so-called Carl Effect? Let me know in the comments down below. Don't forget to like, subscribe and turn on your notifications. My name's Karen and I'm a vampire slayer. Follow me on Instagram to chat more and I'll see you all in another video. Bye.