And welcome to Think Tech Talks here on Think Tech Hawaii. I'm Ethan Allen. I'm guest hosting for Jay Fidel today. And with me today is Tyler Harris. Welcome, Tyler. Thank you. Good to have you here. We're going to have a great tech talk today. Jay found an article the other day that he wanted to share and get out there, because it's such an intriguing phenomenon that he ran into. It was reported in the New York Times, a sort of experimental program now happening in New York. So many cities, New York included, have these surveillance cameras around. Chicago has 30,000 of these things. London has probably several times that number. These things they mount to on street corners, anywhere they scan. The police typically have access to them, right? They can run through. They've proven tremendously valuable post facto in tracking down criminals, seeing people leave the scenes, et cetera. What Newark has done that very few other places have done is they've made the access to these video images public. So people, the man on the street can basically, if you've got a good internet connection, you can pull this up and you can choose, let's see, I want to see all in fifth and main here. I want to see that camera. What's going on in front? And that raises some interesting questions. But maybe before we get into that real meat, let's talk just a little bit about the idea of surveillance cameras. Now, I sort of think they're sort of good things. Hey, more eyes on the street, keeps potential problems down, blah, blah, blah. What's your take? Well, I mean, having security cameras available, especially for law enforcement use is fantastic. They're great tools for gathering evidence which can assist in future prosecutions of any subjects. It also gives a sense of security for citizens of any community that employ these. So that way, they know that there are being watched for other potential individuals that may look to make them a victim. So it's a fantastic opportunity, but there are some downsides. Sure, sure. I mean, if that data gets hacked and stolen, people could know where you are, where you aren't. They'll know that you're at work now, not at your home. If they want to take advantage of breaking into your home, that's a good thing for them to know, right? Definitely. If the government chooses to use this to sway public opinion or whatever, to disenfranchise people or make trouble for some people, they have some potential to do this, right? Absolutely. I mean, for every good thing, there's an equal opposite negative aspect. So definitely in this scenario, I do believe that there's an equal number of positive aspects to this plan of action and how it's being integrated, but also there's an equal amount of bad reaction and bad possibilities that come with that as well. And it would be a great opportunity, especially with this show, to be able to educate the public about the different viewpoints and allow the viewers to make a good educated decision. Yeah. I mean, all technology is that way, right? From the first time, some primitive person sharpened a stick and used it to get dinner. That's great, but he probably next turned around and used it to get rid of some neighbor. Right. Absolutely. And that's sort of how we always find our technologies, right? Definitely. So let's talk, let's go into this, what's called the Citizen Virtual Patrol in New York. So the police in Newark have had a fractious relationship, I guess, with the Newark community. And as a way to try to help sort of integrate the community into law enforcement better, they sort of set up and said, hey, we're going to give you access. You can be part of this process. You can keep an eye on the streets, you know? You can be part of the process to make your own streets safer. And it sounds really good, right?  Absolutely. And the plan of action they have in place is that they're encouraging citizens of the local community to observe this video feed, report suspicious activity to their police departments. So that way the police departments can react and then, you know, be able to confirm or deny this specific activity if there was a crime involved. So it is fantastic. However, it's still kind of fundamentally flawed. The reason for it is because these individuals that they're encouraging to go on to the public feeds and, you know, view this video footage of the public, these are, I'm sorry, they're untrained or uncertified individuals that really leave it up to their perception based on, you know, whether it's suspicious or not. So then perception is typically problematic when you're looking at facts. Right. We all have biases. Many times we are unaware of our own biases, but we may be biased, like, you know, when they may be biased against men, men may be biased against women, a lot of people may be biased against whites, fights the versa. A lot of people have a lot of biases, only some small fraction of which are we cognizant of, right? Absolutely. So yes, if you see suspicious activity, it may depend who is doing that activity as to whether or not that's suspicious or it's just, oh, it's just a guy walking down the street. Right. Right. These preconceptions, you know, they do pose a lot of issues.  Those, you know, preconceptions of the two individuals and what they might be up to are, even though they're doing the same exact act, may be entirely different. Right. So that's definitely a major issue. Right. And then this leads to the whole thing, yes, what do the police choose to respond to and how do they make that choice? Absolutely. And, you know, considering these, you know, these citizens, although their intentions are fantastic, if you have, let's say, 1,500 people watching a particular camera and half of them find this suspicious and then half of them report it to the police department, you now have, you know, roughly about 350 to 400 people that are now calling the phone lines for the police reporting the exact same information, you know, even with some variations, you know, as they see fit. And then you also have to think about the limited police force and their ability to respond to these suspicious activities. And so one of the major concerns is the increase of dispatches for these police officers, their ability to respond quickly to, you know, to crimes in progress and the ability to maintain that level of safety and security while still answering these potentially suspicious reports. Right. And different places have actually tried different techniques to get around that. So I guess in Camden, New Jersey, they've set up cameras. And if you live near one of these cameras, you can apply to have access to the video, to that camera or that set of cameras, which begins to make more sense. You've got presumably some vested interest in that neighborhood and wished to keep, you know, your neighborhood okay, right? You're not liable to just randomly call police for a prank or anything. Right. But again, there is this whole issue of training people, training people as to what may or may not be suspicious. If somebody comes up and rattles a doorknob, is that suspicious? And maybe that's a homeowner and he left the door open and now not, you know? Right, definitely. And unfortunately, when you're observing from the outside and you're looking in, so for instance, someone that's watching this video footage, they don't get to see what happens to the left of the footage and to the right of the footage. They only get to see what's going on right there in the middle. So for instance, you know, an individual that's walking into the frame, let's say that they're wearing baggy clothes, and it's a gentleman, but he's carrying a purse. In fact, he's carrying this purse very briskly. It could simply be that he got a phone call to the left of the image about, can you please bring my purse? And on the right side of the image is his spouse or significant other that's waiting for that purse. So that's a really good example on how this limitation, you know, kind of gives that issue. Yeah. So there are ways this could clearly go very, very wrong. And then it brings up sort of this whole issue of what's sometimes called the expectation of privacy, right? We used to think when we walked down the street that we had some vague expectation of some privacy. Now we all know, you'll see signs around saying this area is under video surveillance. You no longer have any reasonable expectation of privacy. Anyone who believes that almost anything they do in public space is private is sort of living a force of paradise, right? Absolutely. And with the thousands and thousands of people with video phones now and cell phones just hanging out their windows, shooting stuff randomly. Absolutely. I mean, cameras are so mainstream now that the privacy concerns of these street cameras that are being placed up versus the concerns of the privacy and just cameras in general is kind of overshadowed a little bit since cameras are so readily available on our smartphone phones now. At least the security cameras that are in place are regulated, whereas individuals with cell phones and cameras are unregulated. So there is a level of concern for privacy. You're absolutely correct. However, to be fair, we almost really don't have a whole lot of privacy anyways because we could be in any photo at any time, any video at any time entirely without our knowledge. Right. And what's even worse now, of course, with the technology being increasingly sophisticated is if somebody can record you talking for about 10 or 20 minutes and get a little video of you, they can basically then, there are tools that they can make you say anything they want, that they can literally make it appear that you are talking, spewing out hate speech, whatever they feel like making you appear to do, right? Absolutely. I mean, luckily, there's a course of actions that can be used to prove or disprove any video footage that were to come out. And digital forensics, we deal with that a lot, ensuring that a video is original and authentic. So however, unfortunately, by that time that we do disprove a video, the damage typically is already done. Right. It's gone viral. Millions of people have seen it. They know it's fact now. Exactly. And it goes right back to perception. You know, they already assume that this is fact and they're wrong with it. Yeah. And it's very hard to undo that kind of thing. People thrive on bad news, I mean, psychologically, bad news in some sense is more important twice than good. Absolutely. And therefore, we pay more attention to it. You know, it's more important to figure that wrestling in the bush besides you is a tiger rather than to think that maybe it's a rabbit that you can go after, right? You're probably better off just making that other assumption. Right. Definitely. You might live longer. Right. Yeah. Exactly. So, you know, bad news basically gets higher priority in our brains and it lives longer and it lingers and it spreads faster. There have been studies on social media now that show how basically bad news does it. People spread it, more people spread it more widely, it's picked up faster by more people. Absolutely. Yeah. And preconceptions also, you know, is incredibly important in that as an individual that logs into one of these cameras to look at the footage, they're already looking for everything suspicious possible because they want to be this great citizen and get back to their community and be able to, you know, make their community safer. However, as humans, we typically like to see exactly what we want to see. Right. So that, again, is another issue where, you know, these suspicious activities now compounding, you know, based on perception, again. Right. And we really will see what we both want to see and expect to see. I don't know if you've viewed that little perception test where there's people passing and bouncing a ball around and you're asked to follow how many times a ball gets passed and all. And during this guerrilla, a guiding guerrilla suit walks through and completely unaware of it. Literally, nobody will pick up on the fact that this guy with the guerrilla suit just wore a watch because you're focused on this other aspect of the situation. Right. Right. Absolutely. So, yeah, people, each person watching this video footage has their own pre-mindset about what it is they expect to see, think what they'll see, want to see, and all that's going to impact what they do see. Absolutely. And, you know, that goes right back to the issue about, you know, the number of phone calls that are going to be reported and then the demand on the police department at that time and then also the conception afterwards if the police numbers show up to that phone call. Right. You know, so there's a lot, unfortunately, that hinge on the perception of individuals within the community. Yeah. You almost think this technology needs to have something sort of like what they do in classroom now with a clicker technology so people can sort of vote. You know, and so the police could very quickly get a scorecard and say, oh, this particular camera showing 16 people showing mild concern, three people showing serious concern, eight people showing no concern at all, okay, well, yeah, one way, if 25 people show severe concern and nobody else was on, it's like, okay, we probably should go there. Right. And that's definitely, you know, that's one good, really good possibility for your security cameras. The challenge with that, you know, would be you're going to have individuals that they turn on the live feed and they walk away from the computer. So now you're going to have people that don't find it to be a concern, you know, if that's the default action that's assigned for the voting process.  Right. So yeah, right back to square one again. There are certainly a lot of issues about this, a lot of things to think about. The question, I guess, is we can't put this genie back in the bottle, right? The cameras are out there now, camera up by the thousands, by the 10 thousands, probably by the hundreds of thousands across the country, probably by the millions actually. Right. It's going to be used, this data is already up in the cloud, being stored there, being viewed, being analyzed. So the question is how do we deal with this? What kind of process do we use? And maybe before we get into that, I think we probably need to take a quick break here and then come back after one minute and see it. Tyler Harris is with us here. We're talking about public access to these surveillance cameras. I'm your host, Ethan Allen, here on In Tech Talks and we'll be back in one minute. Host of New Japanese Language Show on Think Tech, Hawaii, called Konnichiwa, Hawaii, broadcasting live every other Monday at 2 p.m. Please join us where we discuss important and useful information for the Japanese language community in Hawaii. The show will be all in Japanese. Hope you can join us every other Monday at 2 p.m. Aloha. Aloha. I'm Jay Fiedel, one of the hosts of Asia in Review, which is broadcast Monday afternoons on ThinkTechHawaii.com.  We work hard to bring you the most interesting subjects and guests who will raise your awareness. Please join us Mondays every week on Asia in Review on ThinkTechHawaii.com and also on YouTube and iTunes. Thanks for watching. We'll see you then. Aloha, Xie Xie, and Sai Jian. Ethan Allen here, hosting Think Tech Talks in place of Jay Fiedel, who usually does this show. Tyler Harris is with me today. We're talking about the issues of surveillance cameras in cities and in particular about allowing public access to those images and having the public then become part of the eyes on the street. And I've been sort of playing the positive side of this, thinking of all the good things they can do, how this can help the police. Tyler's been putting more perhaps realistic slant on it, pointing out the problems with the data that we'll get and all. And that does lead us to this whole issue of the sort of quality of the data, right? And how do you judge that? How do you sort through your data?  So now all these cameras are going to be connected to a digital video recording device commonly known as a DVR. So these videos are going to be assigned typically within a server when they're stored. They'll be assigned a file name that incorporates the date and the camera number associated with that. And then it's sorted, of course, so that way the information can be easily located for evidentiary purposes later and extracted. But it does kind of raise the concern as well about this footage that's there, since it is available to the public, anybody can keep a recording of that footage, whether it's for good or bad purposes. And because this information is being stored in a cloud environment somewhere, it does become a more high profile target for hackers or anybody else that may seek to use a video footage for negative purposes, such as extortion or blackmail or anything like that. Yeah. And people clearly want to use this for different things. If you have a confrontation with police caught on cameras here, some people are going to want to use it to exonerate the police and say they acted rightly and professionally. Other people probably want to use it to sort of prove just the opposite, right? Right. Exactly. In my experience, especially in Texas, I was working for a private investigative firm doing digital forensics. And what I can tell you is that I have a lot of interaction, a lot of experience with field private investigators that conduct surveillance on individuals and subjects. And what I can tell you is that these cameras are an excellent asset for information collection in support of private investigative cases. Very much so in the same fashion as police departments. So there is that negative aspect as well. However, on the positive aspect, you're absolutely right as far as the issues that could occur if they're caught on camera and the accountability that comes from that, especially since these can be exported as an arbitrary item to hold anybody accountable for anything, which is fantastic for transparency and trust in local police departments. Yeah, but I mean it breaks down to individual stuff, right? You've told your spouse you're going on a diet and they see you stopping in a donut shop, you know, like, oops, I gotcha there. Right. But you know, it really boils down to, you know, for those that are incredibly security heavy, you know, the viewpoint is pretty simple. If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide. So don't worry about it, right? However, from a citizen's standpoint of, hey, I'm an individual, I'm an adult, I deserve my privacy, and this infringes on my privacy. And that's really the two big aspects there. And it's nice because they're trying to meet halfway in the middle with these security cameras over there in Newark. However, unfortunately, you know, there's still a lot of misconceptions about it as well. Yeah, it is. It is. Again, that gets back to the earlier issue we were discussing, what expectation of privacy do you have, and what does that really mean in this day and age? From the security aspect as well, you know, when you look at these security cameras, there's a lot more questions than just the camera itself, right? So the camera's available, but what software overlays are a part of that camera? Is facial recognition? What about audio recognition? Which apparently aren't part of the current system in Newark. Well, right, correct. But you must start somewhere. Right. Exactly.  We're just going to install the cameras. And then everybody gets used to it.  Right. You know, so it opens up that book to push the envelope a little bit further down the line. It does. It sort of puts you on that proverbial slippery slope, right? Exactly. Yeah. Of having more and more of your information be more and more in the hands of other people, right? Absolutely. And the other aspect, too, since these are publicly available, there is the possibility that a third-party company could take that video, create the overlays, and then turn around and sell a for-profit video feed, you know, based on the facial recognition or anything else that they add into the overlay. So there are possibilities there as well. Sure. There was one of these articles that was, they were discussing a case of a surveillance camera that was located near a gay bar. And some police officer was basically taking this, getting them license numbers, tracking these people down and trying to use it to extort money from them so as to not expose them. Right. They were really, really seeming stuff, very, very ugly, very much a downside. So it sounds like one of the things we're here or really in agreement on is that with any system like this, some degree of public education is going to be a really key component, right? Absolutely. You know, if we leave it up to perception, or I'm sorry, perception, and if we don't educate the public on the pros and cons, the positives and the negatives, and everything that could occur with these systems, then we're going to be living up to imagination, which is horrible. So you know, if education accompanies these cameras and the citizens of that community are educated as far as how they work, what they're being used for, and the potential downsides, and they're okay with that, I think it's fantastic. But not every community might be okay with that. Right, yeah. And you can see, I thought it was very interesting that this was being tried in Newark as a sort of, I think a desperate bid to try to get, heal some rift between law enforcement and the broader community and more power to them if they can make that work and actually get people on board. Absolutely. But yeah, so then we get into that area. How do you make this data more secure? How do you stop the abuses? How do you try to make the system work as well as it can over? Unfortunately, that's an incredibly complicated answer. There's a lot of security needed on the camera side as well as the server side. There needs to be a encryption, preferably a 256-bit encryption or better, between the server and the camera itself. What do you mean by a 256-bit encryption? Sorry. So AES, 256-bit encryption is a quote-unquote military grade encryption that encrypts the data so it's not easily readable if anybody were to intercept that data in between. Now on the server side, everything should be encrypted there as well. So what it does is if I were to hack that live feed or if I were to hack that server, any information I pull from that is going to look like gibberish. Right. So as long as that's in place, which it should be, I would imagine that the technicians responsible for that camera system would already employ that. But it's not impossible to steal the information and steal. So yeah, there's that. As far as for the live feed offered to the public, every time that a live feed is pushed out and individuals are able to gain direct access to that feed, there does raise the risk that there could be a potential hack in progress or that it's already being hacked and observed. And again, this is worldwide. So anybody in any country can hack that system. So that's pretty important to remember. Yeah, and then there's all these other sort of odd associated risks, right? Somebody who's in a witness protection program, for instance, just walking down the street and suddenly, you know, Joey the knife sees, hey, there's a guy who put me behind bars 20 years ago. Right. Now I know where he is, right? Definitely. Or again, spouses who have taken their kids to leave an abusive situation and suddenly that the kid is running past one of these cameras and the spouse who shouldn't know where the kids are now knows, I mean, how do you stop that stuff? Unfortunately, there's not really a good stopping with that. You know, if there was anything such as a restraining order, you know, that legal document would would be the protective factor. Unfortunately, not very effective. Yeah. Yeah. Sometimes you're absolutely right. That's that's the case. It's just it's not effective. Sometimes. However, it goes right back to and how much privacy are you willing to give up to increase the security of the community? And for new work, they determined that this was a reasonable compromise between the two. So unfortunately, without having that facial recognition, the camera would never know to blur out that face as it went by for a witness protection program participant. So it's a catch point too, no matter how you look at it. Yeah. But I like what you just pointed out that in a sense, every community has to or should come together and make a decision about this kind of technology, which is sort of rolling out now and say, do we want this? Do we not? Here are what we see as some costs here are what we see as some benefits. Here are some real potential downsides here are some real potential gains. Let's talk about this. Have a civil discussion about it. If we can find some common happy middle ground, we'll keep most people satisfied. Absolutely. It made me naive, right? Yeah. I mean, just as long as the public education was out there to educate the public that this is the intended use, these were all the potential downsides. This is what we look to gain from this. As long as the community is all in the same page and they kind of eliminate that uneducated perception, then I absolutely that that would be the way to approach it. Excellent. Well, thank you, Tyler. And very educational for me to discuss this with you. I've enjoyed this and I hope you'll come back and join us on Think Tech Talks next week.


Hi Tom. Good afternoon. Oh yeah, how you doing? You well? Yeah. Good. Hello, good day. How are you? Everyone have a good weekend? Yeah, eventful, but yeah. Eventful, okay. Spent an hour and a half on the side of the motorway. My tire blew out. Oh yeah, that's not great. Well, I share in your experience somewhat. My son, my senior high school student went to a friend's graduation in another state, drove there on Friday and had to drive back on Friday night and called. He woke me up at 12.30 at night to tell me he was on the side of the highway with a flat tire and he needed help. So yeah, I was that was an interesting experience doing that over FaceTime. Yeah, not the nicest thing in the world. No, a little stressful when you see the cars zipping by at a 55 miles an hour, 65 miles an hour. I had my daughter and my dog with me as well. It's not nice at all. Anyway, we're all safe. Let's find out. Right, meeting notes in the chat. Right, I've got a hard stop at half four today, but obviously carry on after I've gone. Just so you know, I'll need to drop off. So I think last week was the Big 5G event. I don't know if anyone on the call went. I think Taylor saw some posts from you about it. Yeah, it was an interesting event. I've never been to that one. So I think it was, there was a good mix of hardware focused exhibits and some talks and government and government programs, rural and private 5G discussions, which ended up bringing in a lot of service providers that are more focused on that, including like Metro, Metro, smaller Metro and as well as large Metro type of communication solutions. And some of that ended up going into like Wi-Fi 6 overlapping into 5G and how those can be hybrid type setups. And that won everything from people talking about deployments that are either active or going in right now to folks that are doing like, I think next, the next generation type research or building out hardware demos and products. IEEE folks were there. So it was a pretty mixed event with R&D all the way through, whatever you would think on the business side. And we ended up with a pretty good interest. I mean, we were definitely a small presence for the whole thing, but the entire event was smaller than say KubeCon. So it's easier to get around and speak with people. But had tried to get more of the service providers aware, the smaller one specifically. And then on the larger ones, spoke with several folks from like Verizon and T-Mobile. And normally we've had the most engagement for the cloud-native telecom work that we've all been doing from Deutsche Telecom and, you know, Svetofontam. And I would say a lot more of the European rather than the North America on the larger telecom. Now, we've had stuff from service providers like Charter and Cox has been interested. They have a cloud, a telecom cloud that's now a lot further along than the last time that they were talking with us. In any case, there's interested in the cloud-native telco day, interested in the working group as well as the certification and test suite, including from some vendors and a lot of system integrators. There was a lot of system integrators there. But I did post what I think the comment there was, I put as much as I could, I tried to put summaries on LinkedIn. So some of the panels and talks that I was at and Lucina Watson, they've shared and put some stuff up as well. We'll be gathering up more of the content that we've had and then trying to get more folks to join. Okay, cool. And so there was interest in joining the working group as well as using the test suite. Yeah, some of the questions were actually about where the resources should be allocated and then it came down to what type of folks would be engaged. And so then those discussions seemed to happen to decide on, are they wanting to be hands-on for something like implementing tests in the test suites or they were definitely interested in writing up challenges and those would be the working group would be a good place for that. Okay, that's good. There was a lot of talk about automation and programmable networks, that there was a whole set of talks in one track that were related to that. And I saw it in other discussions and it came up when folks were just talking about problems and challenges outside of that. So FIO would be an example, GitOps in general as far as using those patterns that you see that are under what's called GitOps. All of that would be very applicable for a lot of the automation. And then I think there's a blend between private 5G stuff that you're seeing over in ORAN and the automation end-to-end that a lot of them I've talked about. But I mentioned the multi-network, which some of y'all have been seeing the pull request from multi-network, adding a new network object that expands on the capabilities. And I think that from like the network automation point is going to be a key change in automating for Kubernetes in a non-vendor specific way that probably has a pretty big impact on innovating how you do that. And a lot of new projects are probably going to really push forward and we may have new projects pop up as a result too. I expect stuff like DanM to take the ad support. I'm interested to see what happens with projects like multis and everything. The new network object from the multi-network is supposed to be a super set and it'll support CNIs. So you could just continue acting like a normal CNI, but then you won't be taking advantage of that stuff. So anyways, I put forward as any of those type of things that seem to be related so that we'd have entry points for discussion with the folks and be follow-ups and trying to get more engagement for the next few weeks as well as MWC in September, MWC Las Vegas. So there's requests to some of you want to meet. If there's enough folks that are going from CNF working group, then maybe we can put something together. We're seeing what else can happen for that. Do you guys have any questions? Otherwise, that'll be it as far as my summary. No, I don't even have any questions. Sounds like there was a lot of good conversations there. Certainly sharing the challenges, that's always useful. Good stuff to work from. So Taylor, do you know if they are going to make available the recordings? Or do you know if anyone can add access to the videos? I don't. I was wondering the same. Thank you. Yeah. It's on my list of things to look into more this week. So I didn't see anything mentioned. Did Watson, Lucina, did you all see anything or drew about recordings for all of the talks? I haven't seen anything myself either. Yeah, we'll share them for sure if we find those. Cool. Thank you. So the next event on the list is the LFN DTF, which is virtual only. CFP is actually extended to the end of today because there were so many bank holidays at the end of last week. Across Europe, certainly. So if anyone does have any ideas for that in terms of the working between the test suite and the Anacut projects, for example, then the CFP is still open today for that. Other than that, I've added another one here, which I know is on the same time as the open source summit, but there's a team formed ETW event, which is perhaps more telco IT focused, but it could be interesting in terms of the use cases for telco potentially not long now for weeks until the CFP closes for coupon North America, which has a new telco and edge track. Anything else on events you want to talk about for me? Please and everyone keep trying to help get sponsors for the Claudine of Telco Day. Make sure it happens and forget enough sponsors and it could expand either a full day or a remote virtual, which has been asked every time. We need to get sponsorship to support that. Yeah, sure. Okay, so I'm going to skip an item. So next week is public holiday in the U.S. and also the UK and possibly elsewhere. Just double check. Yep, on Germany possibly. So do we want to keep or cancel the working group? I think given the three co-chairs are either a U.S. or UK based, I'm going to suggest we cancel it unless anyone objects. Then, so Victor, you wanted to talk through this proposal and some of the comments that have been made in particular. Yeah, so I guess it's a good time to start focusing on some proposals. I guess it's a good candidate. I mean, Paulie and I were having an interesting chat the other day and I guess it's better to try to focus in certain proposals. Probably this could be a good candidate. Okay. Try to, there's a comment and move forward. Yeah, I know that this could be a very controversial topic, but I guess we have a lot of information to do something. If this is something that we can make it like a best practice, let's move forward and to meet the proposal. If this is not a best practice, probably we have to document why it's not a best practice and document all the reasons why we didn't consider this as a best practice. But yeah, I mean, reading the comments like, for example, Gehry was saying like his main point is like best in performance. So I don't know if, yeah, definitely there are pros and cons. So I just want to bring this particular now and try to do something like a sweet spot where anyone can feel agree or disagree. Do you ever get a response to your suggestion? Well, that's what I found in most of the relevant topics about this. What I have heard is like the best practice is to use like an additional or an external like service to manage the different processes. I found like some groups like a super vice or D or tiny or all these things. The last week, Ian just just put the latest comments. So regarding, yeah, probably the same thing, like what is this going? I guess it's like a best way to summarize it. Now that we have like more form here, I would like to hear your ideas and know what you think about if this could be a good potential, like best practice or like, if not, like what do you think? So that some of the comments and there's make this a little bit confusing. It overlaps a couple of things. So this is a, the issue was put forward as a best practice to discuss and then and that could be documented put forward. There's comments in here that are related to the CNF certification and not saying whether it's a best practice. It's just saying remove it from the, well, there's three categories in the CNF certification, essential and normal and bonus. And one of the comments from Gergay just is referring to the certification and whether it should be essential or not. So I want to make sure, like, how are we talking about this? Because we could respond to a piece and then it's not relevant to the whole context of what it means in the certification versus, is this idea in general a best practice? Okay, we can talk about it that way. Should it be part of a set of tests in a certification? That's a different thing. Is it going to be in the test suite at all? There's a related pull request that's just over in the test suite. And I just want to make sure when we're discussing this, we're, what are we talking about? And I will bring up the certification just momentarily and then I want to bring it back to say, what are we going to discuss? On the certification side, there's a whole set of tests and it's not past failure done. It's how are you doing in an area? You can have, if you are passing a certain number of tests, you can still pass the certification. And when we're looking at potentially saying that certification may have different levels, then it would be how many tests? So this is unlike some tests where they are going to be, you must pass everything. So I think that's important. And then related specifically to this idea as a best practice, this is related to microservice best practices and we could go down to a specific area. But there's other tests that are in progress to go into the test suite, which could also be written up as best practices, which would be related. At which point on the certification side, you could say, well, we passed three out of four of those related tests. We didn't pass the one process type or we passed it, my past, a couple of others. We still are showing that we're following best practices for microservices. Likewise, if we're looking at what are we doing for documenting and talking about guidance in the working group with our, we have a CNF Dev document that we're trying to write up and fill out. To me, this would be related to the grouping that you can see in other best practice guidelines where you have a subset of practices that may get into more details, but you can still talk about the higher level. Like the principle of least privilege, it seemed to be general agreement that, yes, you should try to follow that. Now, when you talk about specific practices to get to least privilege, you may or may not choose to follow those during implementation. But the idea that least privilege principle is good and should usually be followed just as a guideline. There was no question on that, including from anyone that would say a specific one, you could find documentation from any of those groups. I want to start from there and try to, what is our context? I know Watson, you were actively working on those newer related ones, but what do we want to do context and focus here in the working group? Did you have some thoughts, Victor, on that since you put this forward? Do we want to focus on moving this forward as a proposal for the working group so that we're adding it to that? Can you open that dev, CNF dev doc, Victor or Tom? I think this is your screen, Tom. This one? No, the Google doc and the working group repo for best CNF dev under docs. I'm going to share it in chat as well. If I can find the chat, there it is. This one? Yeah. So this has categories and areas and then we'd be adding best practices under any area that we think is the most focused for it, if this makes sense for the categories. But the idea is to add recommended best practices here. We're not talking requirements. I want to restate this. Some folks already know. We're not saying hard requirements. Everyone must meet every best practice that is listed here. This is a guide, it's recommendations for people to follow. The CNF certification is a separate thing. The CNF certification would be looking towards best practices that are listed here and going, well, here's some that we are listing in the certification. If we have different levels of the certification, then some of the best practice we may say are essential, which are strong recommendations, and get maybe weighted more in if you're following them or not. And then some are going to be bonus where we may say, this is good and if you're doing it, we know it's going to make it easier for deployment or automation or whatever it's for. You got to step away, Tom. Yeah, sorry. I didn't want to be mid-sentence, but yeah, I'll put a link to the doc I was just sharing in the chat. But yeah, sorry, I need to go. I understand. Victor, can you take over the screen share? Sure. I suggest that we focus on what we're recommending in that CNF Dev best practices, which we may expand this as we're looking at stuff like highlighting practices from Nephia, which is about automation, or GitOps, which is related to a larger part of the life cycle. And it may expand beyond what people are just thinking CNF developers, but we could just think cloud-native, telecom, best practices for cloud-native, telecom development, something like that, and operations, whatever. But as we're trying to publish something, that's really a point in the working group. Coming together and talking about what are the challenges, what are the use cases related for context, and then what can we say are best practices to solve those cloud-native and Kubernetes-native best practices that we were seeing and would recommend for the community to follow. That's our goal as the working group. So I suggest that from that GitHub issue, for discussion that we focused on, how would we recommend it? If we want to have a different discussion about certification, then we should do that as a separate conversation. Okay. For me, this particular proposal seems to be related with the microservice area. I don't know if you have a place to put it. So I think that that particular proposal posed in this category. Yeah, I know that there are different ways to implement it, but I guess it definitely makes the manage of microservices easier. So what do you think? Do you think that that could be a possible way to associate this proposal? I mean, Victor, I think it, and I guess Taylor as well, I agree with what everything Taylor just said. I mean, I think it just feels like this is a best practice proposal. I agree it probably goes under microservices. I think it just, I don't want to say it got derailed, but maybe, I mean, there's probably a way for us to handle that when we have questions that sort of take the, take it, you know, causes the best practice to take a turn or sort of the comments take a turn on the, on the, on the proposal just to bring it back to this is a best practice proposal. And so I guess it's, we don't have to worry about certification or anything like that. And I think that's pretty clear to me. So I think it's just a question of how we take this now to, at what point does this become a best practice? Do we all give it a looks good to me? Or what is it that we need to do to get to that state? Yes, agreed. This proposal, you know, I open this issue. So this was, when I opened this, it was for putting forward a best practice in the working group. I've added a comment in the Google doc. I want to put one, I got to fix my login here again on GitHub, but I'm going to add one into this issue. If we're going to do something for the CNS certification, let's open a different issue for that. All right, let's dig into this just from a best practice. And I don't know about responding live for anybody that hadn't, I've just saw Ian's, I hadn't even seen the message until today. So, but anyone else is so pretty to talk. And what's not to ask if you can just give feedback, not on the Ian stuff, unless you want to, but the general reason this was a best practice. I know that maybe length the microservice, drop a link to the microservice article that you worked on and which has a lot of references to other people talking about this area. I'm going to stop talking. I'd like for you to speak into this with focus. This is a recommendation. This one process type is a recommendation. Why are we recommending it? As far as the article, is that what you're asking about, Victor? I'm trying to look for it right now, so I haven't put it in. Yeah, I mean, from my point of view, I think the discussion is fine. It's nice to receive a different perspectives and opinions about this, but eventually we have to move forward. If this idea is not making sense, that's fine. But I guess even in that case, again, we have to document and say why it doesn't make sense to have it. Maybe it's an anti-pattern or something like that. If this definitely makes sense with several exceptions or something to consider, we need to document it. That's basically my idea. I cannot refuse any of the things that have been discussed here, although these are very valid points. I remember we received a feedback in LinkedIn, someone also pointing or saying something about this particular thing. It's nice. It's great to receive this kind of attention and different opinions. But again, I guess eventually we have to reach that point where we have to deliver something. Can you all hear me? Now I can hear you. I can hear you now. Great. Okay. All right. Yeah. I think it's interesting or it's useful or even mandatory to when you're talking about architectural decisions, you should put forward the trade-offs. That's really what we're trying to do. The trade-offs here are from what I can tell. There's a performance trade-off versus are you basically writing your own sophisticated supervisor or administrator? If you have multiple process types, non-processes, that'd be confusing, process types. To simplify it, if you had a web server and a database inside of one container, those are two concerns and process types, that's of processes. You would have to have something smart enough to know the life cycle of both at the top end. It would basically be the equivalent of what Kubernetes does as the top process. You have two totally different reasons for restarting, monitoring, and all that. That's really all of the arguments go under that. When you're able to separate all that, you have deployability and your logging, reasoning, and all of these other things that come into play. I would say that that is the only reason why this is even a consideration is because of the performance requirements of network and network functions. If we were to say, no, we're going to go ahead and put all the process types we want inside the container, whatever, just don't even think about calling it a microservice. The rest of the world is just going to say, we're just using the word just for cool points. That's really what it comes down to. That's where it comes. As far as saying it's a best practice, not a requirement, but a best practice, I have no idea how this is even a discussion really. Another interesting thing is one of the critiques of the article is actually saying we're not going far enough. How can you possibly think that you would need to even worry about putting more than one or separating the concerns in by container? You have pods, so you can have multiple containers. The person didn't even understand the article. They want even more. My position in the article is that, oh, no, we have to worry about low latency and all this stuff. Here's some things that you can do to try to work within the system, like inner process communication, that will increase the speed between processes and all this. That's kind of the high level, I would say. I would say for Ian, he probably needs to read the article because there's some things that he's saying. Are we talking about only one process per container? No. We're talking about process types, these types of things. I also address that there's new schedule or provisioning or, I guess, configuration for Kubernetes that can allow you to do certain things that before it couldn't. There's lots of things there, but I'd like to see more on the performance side from the network, from the telecommunications. So what's the example that you provide? I mean, it's kind of very radical. Obviously, try to separate like database from the problem. It's very obvious. At least for me, but about those cases, for example, what I have seen is using memcache inside of a front end application, that is a little bit more tricky, right? Because, as you said, that you get a little bit more performance, but you have two different process types running in the same container. I mean, even for me, it's better. I'm in favor to separate this sign of process types in different containers. Anyway, I'm also in favor of not trying to rewrite and having everything, like trying to use an additional process manager inside of a container. So you think that we have other those particular use cases? I mean, it's not clear. Or the advantage to separate them, the cache portion versus, so I don't know, we have other these particular cases where things are very tight together. Are you saying that in the example of using a cache separate from the whatever functional of application process that you're doing? Yeah, that's a bad example, or you're saying that that's a more realistic example? Yeah, I guess that's more realistic example, like, or at least a little bit more hard to distinguish the separation and the benefits. So how can we address those particular cases? Like, we're definitely we have a better performance in favor of maybe architectonic design or whatever. Yeah, so I mean, I think that's a good example to reason about. So you have a functional cache that only you are using, only, I say you as the process that's inside the container are using, or is it being used by other containers? Yeah, that's a good point as well. Right, so I would just say that if that functional cache, so that's one process, has a life cycle, reasons to restart all of these things that are different than the actual application, let's say the other process that's inside the container, then you've got to trade off, you've got a problem, the decision to make. Now, why not have it in another container? Well, someone would say, well, in order to reference it, I need to go out to the network. No, you can use in a process communication, you don't have to go out to the network. That still works within this environment that we're talking about. Another thing I wanted to make sure that I think sometimes people, for whatever reason, they're calling threads a process. So no, the thread is not a process. New threads is not what we're talking about.  But we're talking about total processes. So we're talking about execution and memory isolated from each other. That's two processes. Sometimes they call it a P thread within the Linux community, that's a thread, not a process. So that's fine. We're not talking about that. For some reason, within these examples, someone is saying, I want to start up a new process, a new OS process. I want to tell operating system, start up, allocate new memory isolated and all that and start it over there, but inside of this container. For what reason? That's what we're trying to figure out, trying to find out real examples of that on why you would do that and not have it in another container. So there are some slowdowns that happen when you have it in another container. I addressed them in an article. One of them is security. You can do some things where you can try to, you can reduce some of the security provisioning. You want more speed. Again, it's a trade-off again. But you're handling all that within one pod. Yeah, also now that you mentioned about security, one process can have different security requirements versus another one. For example, your application maybe requires certain privilege that maybe the cash portion doesn't need it. Or they need a completely different set of permissions. So also managing the security permissions for every single process is a different thing. If we want to follow the last privilege, best practice that we created, I guess the best way to do it is isolating the process types and manage their permissions per process type instead of like having multiple processes having all the privilege. I think so. Yeah, I have in the article I'll just read out some things that are arguments for from the trade-off perspective on why you would want to have one concern per container or one process type per container. One of them is isolation. That's what you just brought up. So isolation where processes use the container namespace system. They are protected from interfering with one another. So you can lock down security on that level. There's pod-level security, which is multiple containers for pod. And then there's also container level. So scalability, scaling one process a process type is easier to reason about than scaling multiple types. This can be for complexity reasons. So one process type is harder to scale than multiple process types. Or because the rate of change is different. So one process needs to be increased based on different conditions than other processes. So again, scalability for the example of a cache versus the application in the same container. We want to scale up the cache. We need more processes for the cache. Is it hard coded to one process or can you increase it? Remember, as far as talking about cloud nativeness and all of this, one of the arguments is we want to develop things so that they can scale up. So by increasing processes or pods or whatever. And those different processes have different arguments or rationale or conditions for scaling up. What are the implications of that? You need all of that should be configuration declared based off of the process. But if they're both inside of the container, you're essentially writing your own orchestrator and having to do all that yourself. So again, complexity reasons or what have you. So that's a scalability argument. You have testability. It's easier to test when the processes are separate. Deployability. So when the processes binary dependencies are deployed in a container, the deployment is coarse grain and relative to the rate of change of the binary and the container. But a fine grain deployment relative to the rate of change of the other processes in their dependencies, this makes deployments adjustable to where when a change happens in your dependency tree instead of redeploying everything in lock steps. So essentially what I'm saying is when you have a process, you can have a process that all of it is spawned from one binary. In your example, like having a cache versus an application, that's two different binaries. And so those all have their own dependencies and everything behind them. But now you're having to deploy them in lock step with each other. Guess what? When you have a security deployment or patch for one of them, you've got to redeploy both that of it having in per container. That makes sense. So composability is another reason telemetry, someone posted in here, it's easier for instead of having your logs interleaved with each other based off the processes, they're separate and you can easily reason about them per container. And as far as orchestration, I would say orchestration is the number one. You're writing your own sophisticated supervisor, something that knows when to restart, the order to restart, all of this other stuff inside of the container. You're essentially rewriting Kubernetes and its declarative configuration, all that stuff inside of it. I just don't see how, I know old school programming, that's what you did. But no, we're trying to get away from that. Trying to have agnostic orchestrators. So I'll set up and let people comment. Well, basically what I was reading about that is, so I mean, yeah, I'm agree with you. It doesn't make sense to repaint the will, like I'm trying to put everything there. So probably the recommendation beside just one single process type per container was to making sure that your application is managing properly the OS signals. So I guess like it's something to just keep in mind as a developer, like, okay, if the OS is going to raise this particular signal, I need to catch them and propagate properly to the orchestrator, which in this case is very like to manage properly Kubernetes, like I'm not saying that has to be these internal supervisors. So probably that could be only just to consider like a, or as part of the best practice, like, okay, once you separate these things in one process per container, also consider like that process signal properly. If not, this is going to, you're going to lose some of the capabilities, but probably this is something a little bit different, or maybe another best practice to be considered, but associated with this particular case, I think so. Yeah, yeah, I dressed those in a paper too. You have to do those as well. It isn't either or you have to do, so those aren't sophisticated, what I'm calling a sophisticated supervisor, even though it's a supervisor D run it money and all that stuff like that, those will do two things. One of them is a platform, they will do proper signaling.  And then the PID one, the main process, accepts that signal and is able to communicate it on to the other processes. It says, please shut down nicely. Now, what are the implications of that, just to make sure everyone's on the same page. If you have files open, and you don't shut down, you don't close those files, you will corrupt the data in those files. That's what's at stake here. So you need to handle graceful termination. You will have a serious problem. So again, we can go off into the rabbit hole here. You have things that handle state like writing to hard drives and all that stuff. And then you have things that don't do that, having that all interleaved, that's another problem. But now we're not talking about that. So handling signals, so graceful termination, having the capability of doing that, that would be the PID one needs to be a process manager, something capable of passing on signals. So Supervisor D, run it, monet, penny, dominate, S6, those types of things like you talked about in the paper. That's one problem. Another problem is zombies. Handling zombies, PID one needs to be smart about when the process dies that it doesn't just stay out there. It needs to run a check.  What are the implications of that?  If you do not, that's what are the implications of having zombies. Those are two things in addition to you should only run one process type. So you need to do these things. Most programming languages are pretty good about handling signals. So if you were to run Java as your PID one, it can handle signals and handle all of its processes and all that. Now, will it handle the zombies out of the box? Well, we're finding is oftentimes, no, sometimes yes, sometimes no. So those are things where having a PID one that handles zombies, that you know handles zombies correctly, is a good thing. So yeah, you need to do these as well, and it's recommended in the paper. And as an aside, we have these now as part of in the Tech Suite. Checking to see if you have these top end PID one, something within this list. Also, do you handle zombies? We actually create a zombie attached to your process and then send, kill it. And then if it doesn't get erased from the PID, we know you don't handle zombies. The fun fact, a lot of containers out there are not handling zombies properly. Even Kubernetes itself had problems with zombies. And then handling signaling. I have examples in the paper of GitLab. Very subtle and insidious errors happen when you don't handle signaling. Very hard to track down. So yeah, all of this, by the way, is exacerbated when you have more than one process type. Work, made work. So there. Well, we are reaching the top of the hour. So I don't know if someone else has any additional comment on this or what could be the action that we can take on this particular topic. Can we start writing the best practice or like? Victor, do we? Do you know if we have a draft document for this one? I was trying to look for it. I know we do. We started creating Google draft docs, but I didn't find a link for this one. And I'm trying to see if we have it somewhere. But that would be what I would suggest. Let's write it up like we were doing for the other practices as a draft so that we can see. I think some of the problem with why this is sitting so long is the content is linked out to other places and everyone would have to go read like this article that Watson was talking about. There was a lot of other content. This idea of separating concerns. That's a pre-cloud native. People talk about concerns as far as separation concerns for a long time. So if we can take all of that, including like going into the article where Watson just went there and talked about the specific things that are addressing these questions and write it up into the proposal, I think it'll be easier for folks to come in and see how we're recommending it. So that's what I'd say we focus on. We'll write up a draft, source it from content available this article and other places, and then link that into this issue. And then at that point, we can put it forward. If we have enough in the draft or when we have enough in the draft, then we can put in a pull request to add it as a best practice recommendation. Okay. Well, that sounds like a good plan. Maybe I can start collecting that in the draft and and put that in there. By the way, if anyone has any other particular comment or like I will invite you to put your thoughts in this particular issue. That way we can also consider for the draft and make it better, I guess. Taylor, you're going to say something else like I just interrupt you. Oh, it's fine. I didn't find everywhere that I'm looking, I'm not finding a draft, so I'm going to create one over in the working group folder and I'll share the link, I'll add it to, I'll add the link into the GitHub. And then anyone that wants to help, you can jump right in the document or ping me on Slack for a working session as well, where we can focus on this. All right. Well, the next meeting is going to be cancelled, I guess. So we'll see you in two weeks. Thanks everyone. Thank you.


Jay-Z is one of the richest musicians in the world, having achieved billionaire status and you can bet he's living a life of luxury with his wife Beyonce and their kids.  This has afforded him properties all over from multi-million dollar mansions in the Hamptons, his 8th figure, custom estate in Bel-Air. We'll be checking out Jay-Z's properties and we even found some of the listings. Sean Carter, known to the world by his stage name Jay-Z, is a rapper, songwriter, record exec, entrepreneur, and more, who's in fact the first hip hop billionaire. He started his career in music way back in 95 after founding the label Rockefeller Records, releasing his debut album a year later. It may have only been his first try but the album achieved critical success and was enough to solidify his place in the music industry. Over the years Jay-Z has also gained attention for his career as a businessman. There was his clothing line Rockwear and his luxury sports bar chain 4040 club for example, which both became multi-million dollar corporations as well as other ventures. Like I mentioned Jay-Z's empire has awarded him billionaire status and according to Wikipedia he's the 5th wealthiest African American and the wealthiest American musician. So for those of you asking who's richer Jay-Z or Beyonce, there's your answer. But I won't downplay her mega fortune either, she's worth at least 355 mil. Although Jay-Z has achieved success in most of us only dream of, it wasn't without a rough start. We're up in Brooklyn's Marcy houses which was in a pretty rough area of New York. The rapper claims these humble beginnings helped shape him and he constantly shout out his old hood in his work. Hey guys it's Karen here with another house tour here on Famous Entertainment. We'll be giving you all the details on where billionaire Jay-Z calls home with his family and let me tell you it's a far cry from those Marcy houses. Well he has multi-million dollar mansions in Bel Air, the Hamptons and more. If you like these videos make sure you're subscribed during that bell to be notified when we post. You can always be up to date. We'll also do house tours on the likes of Young Thug and LeBron James and we'll link to some at the end. Follow me over on Instagram to chat and as usual let me know who's house tour is next in those comments down below. Now let's get into this video. Although Jay-Z ended up investing an insane amount of money on a family home in Los Angeles, he and Beyonce used to write once upon a time. Before they found their dream, Home the Power couple leased this place for a port at 150K per month back in 2015. They were on a one year lease so I'm guessing this was while they were house hunting for their current place. Jay-Z's previous rental property was located in Los Angeles in the elite Celebville community of Home B Hills, home to the famous Playboy Mansion and Kylie Jenner's new mega estate she just bought. The current estimated value of this home is over 52 million so I'm not surprised with that rental cost. Inside Jay-Z's previous mansion it spanned over 20,000 square feet of living space with five beds and six baths. Everything in this home was fit for royalty from the moment you walked in the large front door. There's a double height entryway and main living spaces with classic fireplaces and large floor to ceiling windows in almost every room. There were stone terraces and balconies branching off the home, so many that it's hard to keep count. It's clear that Jay-Z only likes living in the best homes and this one had everything you could imagine. There were the expected spaces like multiple living and family rooms, a state of the art kitchen and large formal dining room with fireplaces in almost every room. Then other features included a library and even an indoor Olympic size swimming pool and spa. Outside the grounds of the mansion also had a pool, this one with a waterfall. It's safe to say that although he was only renting, I'm sure Jay-Z enjoyed living in this place for a year. So if you haven't already seen or heard about it, Jay-Z's main home is reportedly this obscene estate in Bel-Air. Apparently this property last changed hands in 2013 for $15 million, at least according to Redfin. It was then built from the ground up by Irish firm Maculain Developments and designed by architect Paul McLean. Originally the estate was listed at an insane, wait for it, $135 million, but that was over Jay-Z's budget. At least he wasn't interested in paying that much. Sores to say he and Beyonce landed the home with an offer of $90 million in August 2017 after months of speculation as to who would win the bidding war. Public records show the couple made the purchase through Blind Trust, mortgaging a whopping $52.8 million, meaning they put down $35 million or so in cash. Despite the discounted rate, it was still the sixth highest price paid for a single family home in Los Angeles County at the time. Jay-Z's massive compound is located near Beller's East Gate, of course, in an elite and celeb-filled neighborhood. Property covers about two hillside acres of land and is completely hidden behind massive iron gates so it's definitely secure and hard to reach. This spec-built compound is made up of six sleek glass-walled buildings, spinning a total of 30,000 square feet of interior space. In total, there are eight bedrooms and 11 bathrooms. The three-story main residence on Jay-Z's property has a sculpted circular staircase running through it lined with leather, as well as walls of bulletproof floor-to-ceiling glass windows that open electronically with the touch of a button. There's a classy officer library we can see in the photos, which I'm sure is one of many, as well as a home movie theater. Most of the bedrooms offer floor-to-ceiling glass sliders leading to the balconies and views of LA. There are also attached marble bathrooms and in a minimalistic one that looks like the master ensuite, it's fully enclosed in glass. Another 10,000 or so square feet of outdoor living space offers Jay-Z and his family an outdoor lounge under a cantilevered roof, a full-size basketball court, a spa and wellness center, a 15-car garage, and separate staff quarters. Let's not forget that among the many high-end amenities at this home, there are also four outdoor swimming pools. Yes, four. Each of them offering different views of LA. One of the pools is even perched on the roof. Aside from ballet, Jay-Z also has a mega mansion in the Hamptons. After renting big homes here for vacations year after year, the fam decided to invest in property of their own. In 2017, the Carters became part of the Posh Hamptons crowd buying this mansion, also known as the Pawn House, for just under 26 million. It sits on an elevated two sprawling acres of land complete with 203 feet of waterfront. Designed by Stanford, why the 100-year-old home is also right beside 17 acres of Meadow Preserve. The previous owners before Jay-Z and the fam got their hands on this place, put the mansion through some extensive renovations, even rotating the entire structure 90 degrees. Why you may ask? So the 30-foot high living room now faces west over the water instead of north for perfect views of the sunset. Inside Jay-Z's Hampton estate spans about 12,000 square feet of living space with seven beds and seven and a half baths. There's also an additional detached 1,800 square foot guest cottage on the property offering two beds, one bath, a living room, and a kitchen. This stunning mansion features bathrooms sculpted with marble from Verona, Italy, along with patina-matched tubs, tiles, and counters, all carved from single blocks of stone by European craftsmen. Hand-milled woodwork can also be seen throughout the home. From photos, we can see there's a large double height entryway oversized staircase and archways leading to other rooms of the home. There's also an expansive great room with double height ceilings, full wall of windows, two fireplaces and balconies from the upper level looking over the space. Outside on the grounds, you'll find an infinity pool and spa on the pond side of the property as well as an outdoor grilling area. So now we've taken a look at where hip-hop billionaire Jay-Z and his family call home these days like their crazy $90 million compound in Bel-Air and their Hamptons estates. Some argue that the ultra-modern mansion in Bel-Air wasn't actually purchased by the couple, but most reports say otherwise and we know that money isn't an issue for Jay-Z so it makes sense that they were the ones to buy this place. These are just naturally a couple of the many homes in the Carter real estate portfolio. Jay-Z and Beyoncé currently own properties in Manhattan like the Tribeca penthouse they got hitched at years ago, a home in New Orleans and more. Any rentals they've called home are also extravagant like the Home v Hills mansion we looked at earlier. Not to mention they also leased a 400K per month ocean front Malibu spot when their twins were born for some time. Anyways, after looking at Jay-Z's mega mansions, which ones did you like the best? Honestly, as impressive as his Bel-Air spot is it's a bit too modern and minimalistic for me and I gotta say that their Hamptons home is my fate. Be sure to let me know what you guys think in those comments down below as well as what other celebrity houses you'd like to see. Follow me on Instagram if you haven't and you wanna chat and I'll see you all in the next video. Bye.


If there's been like a seven since I started my journey to Islam I had said that one of the motivating factor for seeking an alternative faith where I hope to serve God better, that Christianity is by and large looking fake as a day whispers by. I fed it up after my soul experience as a seminarian and as an ex-seminarian trying hard to worship God in truth and in spirit. Those days I was left hollow I felt an unusual emptiness of both of peppers and drive to move on. Just like a lady in this video we are about to watch I started doubting and questioning the scepticism gave way to a deeper search and long story short I am now a bona fide Muslim. In consistency in Christianity refers to the discrepancies that can be found between the teaching and the practice of different Christian individuals and obviously groups. This inconsistency can arise due to differences in interpretation for scripture, cultural context, historical development and the theological beliefs. This has led to disagreements on important issues such as the role of women in the church, the acceptance of LGBTQ individuals and the interpretation of the Bible itself unimportantly modesty. Asalaamu alaikum brothers and sisters, welcome to another episode of the open-minded thinker show. To spread the darwa please like and share this video widely. Let it get to people. Don't forget to be part of the family by subscribing to help us grow bigger and better. The Christian woman aka pastor we are reviewing her rejection of Christianity is one in a million folks from around the world who are increasingly tired of the Gangartuan hypocrisy harpering Christian evangelism around the world. I want to announce to every of my friends all over the world that henceforth and no longer want to be regarded or be called a Christian. Yes, I'm serious about it. Please don't call me a Christian. Don't look at me as a Christian. Okay, I'm tired. I'm totally tired of the name called Christianity. The name called Christian. You know why? Please don't try to preach to me or try to to advice me or encourage me. No, it's over. Okay, because the Christianity that I know of in the 1980s when I was born, the Christianity I know of in Antioch is no longer the Christianity I'm seeing today. In fact, the definition have changed.  You don't hear me? The Christianity I know of in the Bible is different from what I'm seeing today. First, madam, I expected you to start the charity at home by dressing us with your hair fully covered. Shouldn't there be the starting point of your retreat from the lies which Christianity has told you? Look madam, if you are watching this video, you know that the Christianity is not different. There has been corruption of the truth, raging like fire from the cradle of the faith. Christ preached a faith that everybody understood, which among other things was the obedience to one God, which in Islam we know as Allah. But poor, after his conflicting account of divine arrest on his way to Damascus, claimed to have come with a new message. Paul at some point has communicated pathetic over Christianity and rebranded it according to his whims and caprice. The aftermath is what we are witnessing today.  But today, the reverse has been the case. So I don't want it. I want to be known as a child of God. I want to be known as a person that is born from the womb of Yahweh, that looks like Jesus in my character, in my attitude, in my behavior. Yes. So what is happening? What am I saying? Even right from the bedroom, right from the sitting room, even to the church, even to the marketplace, what we are saying is not the Christianity in the Bible. Please stop deceiving yourself. Explain to us a kind of Christ you are following. If you say you are a Christian, please explain to us which kind of Christ are you talking about? Is it the Christ that died on the cross of Calvary or the Christ you are preaching to us?   That's full of hatred, backbiting, anger, envy, gossip. Is it the Christ you are preaching to me? Please, I don't want that kind of Christ. I want the Christ that is holy, the Christ that is pure, the Christ that is transparent. Pastor, you are seeing the consequences of the infiltration of Christianity by falsehood today. There is no concretation of Christianity, every sect and denomination teaches their own brand. In fact, in Africa, where you reside, I hope so, churches and now business centers were pain of tide, supersede, praying and leading an exemplary life. Between now and next year, one year, one whole year, you're going to raise an altar to the Lord on behalf of your children with $1,000. I want you to step out. We're asking you to give so you can be blessed, yes. The church is a blessed body. He has given you a 21-day miracle function, which means in the next 21 days, you're going to have miracle money. However, my joy is that you said you want to be born from the bosom of Yahweh. Yahweh is in Islam, is Allah, and by stating that you want to be like Prophet Jesus, you have automatically chosen to be a Muslim because Jesus was one by virtue of his obedience to one God and Lord. Instead of wandering from pillar to post, I hereby extend an invitation to find your worth with Islam. As a Muslim, you would love and understand the person of Jesus Christ better.  You are arguing.   Eh? I'm going to the church, and when you get to the church, you'll be smiling. Praise the Lord. Hallelujah. God bless you. Hey, honey, honey, please, can you give me the microphone?  What kind of sweetie is that? What kind of Christianity is that? And as you are preaching, at the seat there, she's crying, she's weeping, she's bleeding. I say, honey, please, do you have something to say to the church? Please, can you just lift your hands and say a word of blessing to the church? That's your Jesus.  That's your Christ. I don't want him in my life because it's not the Christ that I know that died on the cross of Calvary. The Christ that I know, like I said earlier, that appeared to me, he said, I'm holy, be holy. Jesus is loving. Jesus is sweet. Jesus is kind. Jesus doesn't insult anybody.  How come you are hostile?  And you say you are a Christian. Go forbidder. Jesus did insult people. In Matthew chapter 23, Jesus criticized the Pharisees. He refers to them as hypocrites, blind-guide and white-washed tomes. Among other things, in Matthew chapter 21 verse 12 to 13, Jesus insulted. But the point here is that Christianity does not follow Jesus. Over the centuries, there have been modifications such as the introduction of the Trinity, veneration of Mary and saints, raising of altars with images of Mary and Jesus, continued changing of God's words to fit man's whims and cuprises. By this, I mean the Second Vatican Council, the protestant reformation and modernization of Christian teachings. Today, Christianity is hardly recognizable. Tradition has been thrown to the swine. Why a spiritual nuclear attack has been initiated at the heart of the faith? Madam, the ball is in your core air. I serve the true faith of Jesus. Come to Islam. Well, they draw the curtain here. Please, share this video until the woman says it, because that's the motive. Asalaamu alaikum.


The uncomfortable truth is, we get the government we deserve. Hey everyone, Dylan Schumacher of Citadel Defense, and I was thinking about this last night as I was falling asleep, and the government that we have at the end of the day, for better or worse, whether you like it or not, or want to admit it or not, is the one that you deserve. It's the one that you chose, one way or another, either through action or or inaction, and let's talk about what I mean by that. So I think we all believe that the government is corrupt. It's just a matter of how corrupt you think they are and how bad it really is. But it's not corrupt everywhere. And what I mean is, when you look at local elections, like electing your local senator or congressman or even more local, you know, we're talking about like city council officials and all that, are there pockets of corruption across the nation? For sure, absolutely. But not all of them are to the same degree corrupted or or evil. And the way we, our government still, for the most part, actually does function is we still elect leaders to go and and serve for us. Now the presidential corruption election, presidential election last time was obviously horribly corrupt, but that's that's not my main point here. Let's just look at congress, for example, and let's look specifically at the state of South Dakota. South Dakota is a state that is as red as it gets, right? Has been for a while, votes consistently red, sends three Republican representatives, one for the House, two for the Senate, has a Republican governor. Most of local officials everywhere are Republican, deep red South Dakota. When you look at who they send to represent them to Congress, to say it's embarrassing is an understatement.  He has been in government in some form or capacity. Been in the Senate for the last 20 some years, just got elected to his fourth term. In the primaries, he trounced his competition at like 72 percent, okay? Sailed through the election obviously and won the seat. John Thune is the whip for the Senate and has done nothing of actual value as far as I can determine ever. He voted for a variety of bills that you should absolutely abhor as far as their, you know, protecting small government. He talks to talk, but he doesn't actually do anything. Horrible senator, not helpful to the nation, let alone South Dakota at all. Then you have Mike Rounds, been a senator since 2005, been in government since like 2001. Again, nothing of value. You've never even heard the name Mike Rounds. You have no idea who he is. Why? Because he doesn't do anything to actually protect, preserve the nation, right? And then you have Mr. Dusty Johnson, who was appointed to his position as the our delegate to the House when Kristi Noem retired from that because she became governor. And then has since been re-elected, sailed through his primary. I guess maybe not sailed through. I think he won it like 59 percent of his primary. I have no idea who actually primaried for this guy.  It's one of the two. Either way, it's really bad. And these are the representatives that South Dakota, deep red South Dakota chooses to send to the federal government. Now I say chooses to send because that's what's happening, right? Maybe there's some minor corruption here or there in these elections. Maybe there's some issues, whatever. But at the end of the day, people are going out and voting for these people, right? People are going out and saying, well, yeah, I mean I support them. They did a good job. You know, I see signs. They're, you know, representing South Dakota. Gonna fight back Biden in that whole, that horrible agenda, right? Like they don't, people are voting for these people. And either they're not paying attention or they don't know. I don't know who primaries and isn't paying attention. Honestly, that that continues to bewilder me. But people are making choices to support these candidates. The entire world is burning down and falling apart.  They're not getting voted out. They're not getting rejected. They're not getting protested. They're just people that just quietly going to the polls and supporting these people with their vote and then sending them to represent them. And again, these people have been at it for 20 some years. How has the state of the nation gone in the last 20 some years? No, it's not entirely the government's fault. No, there are a lot of issues that play here. Let's be the first to recognize that. But if things continue to get worse and you keep putting the same people in charge, what do you think is going to happen? Right? And that might, the South Dakota is just a great microcosm of the entire nation, right? Now, yeah, you have your Rand Pauls out there. You have your Thomas Masses out there. You have people out there that are, you know, attempting to do something to stem back the tide of debauchery. But by and large, that's the state we're in.  That's the problem. Money's in it. That's the problem. You can't do that.  And I'm sure corruption is a factor across the board somewhere, right? But I don't think for stuff like this, that's the major factor. Now, again, there are a variety of issues here, but the other one that I think is relevant to this video is the fact that the federal government, of course, has way too much power, right? Whether or not you like John Thune is irrelevant. If you live in New York City, for example, and some guy from South Dakota can vote one way in the Senate, and that has a major direct impact on your life, that's a problem, right? America was never supposed to work that way. We all know that and the government isn't supposed to function the way it currently functions. And the fact that the federal government has become this massive behemoth of destruction that spends all of your money, that sucks life from you via tax dollars out of your paycheck and every other which way means and how, that's a big problem. And so we elect these people into these positions that are making giant decisions for the entire nation that, one, they should never be empowered to begin with, and two, we keep sending them there expecting different results. So, you know, we talk about being past the point of no return. I have a video series on that, but I just think that at the end of the day, we are choosing our own downfall. Now, you're meant to watch things like, no, Dylan, I'm not choosing that. I'm voting against it. You know, I'm voting in the primaries. I'm doing all this other stuff. Hate, that's great. Keep doing that. But just understand that at the end of the day, most people are either, like I said, the ignorance or stupidity, still choosing to elect people who are not just failing at their jobs through stupidity or incompetence, but might actually be working against their interests while paying lip service to it. Think about it. Who do you know that's supporting these people that just doesn't see it? Do brave deeds and endure.