Today we continue on with the text from chapter 2, the second section, The Atonement as Defense. You can do anything I ask. I have asked you to perform miracles and have made it clear that miracles are natural, corrective, healing, and universal. There is nothing they cannot do, but they cannot be performed in the spirit of doubt or fear. When you are afraid of anything, you are acknowledging its power to hurt you. Remember that where your heart is, there is your treasure also. You believe in what you value. If you are afraid, you will inevitably value wrongly, and by endowing all thoughts with equal power will inevitably destroy peace. That is why the Bible speaks of the peace of God which patheth the understanding. This peace is totally incapable of being shaken by errors of any kind. It denies the ability of anything not of God to affect you. This is the proper use of denial. It is not used to hide anything, but to correct error. It brings all error into light, and since the error and darkness are the same, it corrects error automatically. True denial is a powerful protective device. You can and should deny any belief that error can hurt you. This kind of denial is not a concealment, but a correction. Your right mind depends on it. Denial of error is a strong defense of truth, but denial of truth results in miscreation, the projections of the ego. In the service of the right mind, the denial of error frees the mind and re-establishes the freedom of the will. When the will is really free, it cannot miscreate because it recognizes only truth. You can defend truth as well as error. The means are easier to understand after the value of the goal is firmly established. This is a question of what it is for. Everyone defends his treasure and will do so automatically. The real questions are what do you treasure and how much do you treasure it? Once you have learned to consider these questions and to bring them into all your actions, you will have little difficulty in clarifying the means. The means are available whenever you ask. You can, however, save time if you do not protract this step unduly. The correct focus will shorten it immeasurably. The atonement is the only defense that cannot be used destructively because it is not a device you made. The atonement principle was in effect long before the atonement began. The principle was love, and the atonement was an act of love. Acts were not necessary before the separation because belief in space and time did not exist. It was only after the separation that the atonement and the conditions necessary for its fulfillment were planned. Then a defense so splendid was needed that it could not be misused, although it could be refused. Refusal could not, however, turn it into a weapon of attack, which is the inherent characteristic of other defenses. The atonement thus becomes the only defense that is not a two-edged sword. It can only heal. The atonement was built into the spacetime belief to set a limit on the need for the belief itself, and ultimately to make learning complete. The atonement is the final lesson. Learning itself, like the classrooms in which it occurs, is temporary. The ability to learn has no value when change is no longer necessary. The eternally creative have nothing to learn. You can learn to improve your perceptions and can become a better and better learner. This will bring you into closer and closer accord with the sonship. But the sonship itself is a perfect creation, and perfection is not a matter of degree. Meanwhile, there is a belief in differences is learning meaningful. Evolution is a process in which you seem to proceed from one degree to the next. You correct your previous missteps by stepping forward. This process is actually incomprehensible in temporal terms, because you return as you go forward. The atonement is the device by which you can free yourself from the past as you go ahead. It undoes your past errors, thus making it unnecessary for you to keep retracing your steps without advancing to your return. In this sense, the atonement saves time, but like the miracle it serves does not abolish it. As long as there is need for atonement, there is need for time. But the atonement as a completed plan has a unique relationship to time. Until the atonement is complete, its various phases will proceed in time, but the whole atonement stands at time's end. And at that point the bridge of return has been built. The atonement is a total commitment. You may still think this is associated with loss, a mistake all the separated sons of God make in one way or another. It is hard to believe a defense that cannot attack is the best defense. This is what is meant by the meek shall inherit the earth. They will literally take it over because of their strengths. A two-way defense is inherently weak precisely because it has two edges and can be turned against you very unexpectedly. This possibility cannot be controlled except by miracles. The miracle turns the defense of atonement to your real protection. And as you become more and more secure, you assume your natural talent of protecting others, knowing yourself as both a brother and a son. And from the workbook, lesson number eight. My mind is preoccupied with past thoughts. This idea is, of course, the reason why you see only the past. No one really sees anything. He sees only his thoughts projected outward. The mind's preoccupation with the past is the cause of the misconception about time from which your seeing suffers. Your mind cannot grasp the present, which is the only time there is. It therefore cannot understand time and cannot, in fact, understand anything. The one holy truth thought one can hold about the past is that it is not here. To think about it at all is therefore to think about illusions. Very few have realized what is actually entailed in picturing the past or in anticipating the future. The mind is actually blank when it does this, because it is not really thinking about anything. The purpose of the exercises for today is to begin to train your mind to recognize when it is not really thinking at all. While thoughtless ideas preoccupy your mind, the truth is blocked. Recognizing that your mind has been merely blank rather than believing that it is filled with real ideas is the first step to opening the way to vision. The exercises for today should be done with eyes closed. This is because you actually cannot see anything, and it is easier to recognize that no matter how vividly you may picture a thought, you are not seeing anything. With as little investment as possible, search your mind for the usual minute or so, merely noting the thoughts you find there. Name each one by the central figure or theme it contains, and pass on to the next. Introduce the practice period by saying, I seem to be thinking about blank. Then name each of your thoughts specifically, for example, I seem to be thinking about name of a person, about name of an object, about name of an emotion, and so on concluding at the end of the mind searching period with, but my mind is preoccupied with past thoughts. This can be done four or five times during the day unless you find it irritates you. If you find it trying, three or four times is sufficient. You might find it helpful, however, to include your irritation or any emotion that the idea for today may induce in the mind searching itself. My mind is preoccupied with past thoughts. So today the focus is taking a moment to allow the idea that the reason I perceive only the past, the reason that I'm addicted to the past, the reason that I have been locked in unreality or stuck dreaming is because of the belief that the thoughts I think I think are real thoughts. But in authenticity, I notice that the stream of thoughts that are moving through consciousness are really just thinking about the past and thinking about the future. It's past future thinking that is where the preoccupation occurs. It's past future thinking that is the addiction. And that is what we must notice today to pull our focus away from the images of the world and come to an admission that I have a thought problem going on here. It can be tempting to think about people and things, emotions, situations, but those are all just projections of the thoughts that are passing through consciousness. So there's no point in remaining so focused on effects when we are being told that these erroneous thoughts about the past and the future are causing or projecting the world of images that seems to be there. We are told the one thought, the one holy true thought one can hold about the past is that it is not there. And so we could say the one holy true thought we can hold about the world is that it is not there. And you see this sets your mind on a very helpful direction of paying attention to the thoughts that you think you think from a reminder, from a context of they aren't reality. The past is gone. The future past is an imagination as well and is gone. We're being convinced by the Holy Spirit that what is to come is already over. And think how that would change your outlook. Think how that would change your efforting if you had a glimmer of an experience that what is to come is already past and that the past is over. You may have a hint of how this relates to peace of mind because why would you retain future goals if you had an awareness that the future was already over?  Always egoic, always about a personal self and attainable so called future goals that will make things much better. Ego wants you to hold on to these thoughts of past and future because that's the only way that the ego can be perpetuated. An illusion of self based in time can only be perpetuated if you keep giving your mind over to that future that's not there and that past that is gone. So in our reading from the text today we learned that the atonement is the correction. It's the only so called defense will say that works. That can't be used destructively. It's not a double edged sword. It's the only thing that will work. It's the gateway to eternity and while the sleeping mind believes in time then the atonement, the correction to this false belief in time is really the only thing worthy of your mind. You could wake up every day with that one word in your mind. Atonement, not future goals, not what will I do today, not thinking about what happened last night or what happened last week. That's the same old, same old versions of past future thinking that keep the mind from joy, from true happiness and peace. So the focus is atonement or correction. That could be a mantra if you want a mantra. Let me accept the correction for the belief in time and space, the belief that I've separated from my source, my creator. Let me accept the correction and today's lesson, my mind is preoccupied with past thoughts is just a reminder again of causation. It's the thoughts that cross consciousness. It's the thoughts that I think I'm actually thinking that are causing the world that I seem to see. And when I see the impossibility of these thoughts, I see the impossibility of causing such a world. We can't stop with thinking that we're just causing the world, but we have to admit it. We have to come to a moment of stark, clear, unproductive admission of this setup before we can laugh and let it go and come fully into our holiness, which could never be concerned with such a foolish imagining, such silliness. So join me in this today. Join me just in accepting the admission that will begin to free the mind. And what is that admission? My mind is preoccupied with past thoughts.


Good evening everybody and welcome to our February 12th, 2024 meeting. I'm going to just do our official introduction to call the meeting to order and then we'll get started. The time is now 707 p.m. and seen as a form of committee members is in attendance. This public hearing is being called to order. As I said, this is the February 12, 2024 public meeting of the Amherst community development block grant advisory committee pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by the state legislature on July 16 of 2022. This meeting is being conducted virtually using the zoom platform and the meeting is being reported and minutes are being taken as usual. So why don't we do a quick roll call make sure we can all hear each other and then we will go into our agenda. I'll just call on people to make it easy. Just, I'm Becky, I'm the chair. Suzanne, just to make sure you. Great. Oh, you're in. So you're muted. I apologize. Hi, I'm so it's always on a committee member. Great. And Rika. Hi, President Rika Clement committee member. Yes, and that Larson here. I'm also trying to eat some dinner or so it might be off video for a little while. No worries. And, and Nate, you're here. Hi, I'm Nate, a staff liaison to the committee. Great. And of course, and I'm so apologetic. I have a dog barking at the door who I'm just going to let in and then we're going to jump into the meeting actually one second. That's what happens when I kick everybody out of the house so I can have a quiet house for a meeting and then I'm still stuck with the dog duties. So tonight we are meeting primarily our. Well, our first agenda item is to look through to talk about if there are any announcements, but then we will spend most of the time going through the applications. The 2024 application review where we can review and prioritize the proposals review and discuss potential changes to target areas and determine what our recommendations to the town manager are. And then we'll go through any items not anticipated within 48 hours. And, and then have time at the end of this meeting for public comment. This is a meeting not a hearing, but we will have public welcome public comment at the end. And I guess I'll also just say that I'm just going to pull up who's here for attendees that we are obviously going to be talking about the proposals and we. I'll just say for the people on that we have read you can rest assure that we've read the proposals well. But if you hear us talking about something that is actually incorrect, then do raise your hand because we obviously don't want to be considering something that's not correct as we're making our decisions. But other than that, we'll wait to hear from people at the end and we will put a, as we often do a three minute timeline of people's comments at the end of our discussion. So, with that, I guess, are there any announcements that people want to make before we get started. Okay. All right, great. So, why don't we go in and I think what we often do, and what I'd like to propose we do here is begin our conversation with the non social service activities. So, which of this at this application around there are just the two, which are the, the valley CDC micro enterprise project and the infrastructure improvements to southeast street along the East street common project. And that project would require that we believe change one of the target change a target area so that that would be in it. And so that's just something to consider as we go. Does anybody have any thoughts that they want to share on either of those two proposals or neat is there anything that I didn't address just then that we should have in mind is we're thinking about these things. Yeah, I guess I just want to clarify and I think people said they had seen the Southeast Street one and maybe it had been. That was a previous year, but this is the North Pleasant Street. Oh, I'm sorry. You know, I just want to try to try to find where that had been mentioned and so I just wanted to say that it's the North Pleasant Street will deuce path from, you know, like, presidential about, you know, or Hobart lane somewhere in there north to. Yes, and I'm, you know, I'm reading I think it was in the 2024 proposals outline the rubric that you gave us. And I read the actual one, but didn't describe it right as I was just reading off the page. So the North Pleasant one. So sidewalks essentially on that on North Pleasant Street in that area. Right. Correct. And that's not currently in one of our target areas but if I am correct, it could be Nate is that correct that the income. Okay. Do we need to vote first to change the target area before we recommend this or does it matter, but what do we do it in. Yeah, I can let me share my screen and then do we set the target areas up the town did that. Well, the is this where am I here. Yep, yep. Yeah, no, the target areas are set by the committee I mean in the town it's really a target area is meant to be in, you know, a location it can be, you know, fairly, fairly large where the town's investing other infrastructure besides CDBG so where you know where there's some improvements to whether it's, you know, public facilities or looking at increasing housing or doing certain things and so on this map it's a little hard to see, but there's three target areas one is in like the magenta outline down here at Pomeroy. And that included Hickory Ridge. And so we've done like the southeast street and we've done a different number of things down here and then the town center is outlined in red in this kind of odd shape. The light green is where there's income eligible block groups, and the yellow is the outline of the census block groups and so the, the north pleasant street sidewalk is in this area.   I mean we have North Amherst be a target area it's just that then the specific project would have to serve low mod we couldn't base it on just a geographic area because there's not a majority lower income. And so, for the committee it could be that the town center target area is extended and it just, it grows, you know, it's a bigger town center target area, or we can do a separate North Amherst and so how many target areas we can have. Yeah, you know, we used to have four and the state said can you try to keep it to three. It's meant to, I think they, and from their perspective. You know, they'd like to see within those target areas, you know, impactful improvements and so whether that's, you know, outside of block grant to so we could say that in the town center target area. If we extend it, you know, we've been working on sidewalks, you know, we have, you know, the new library we're working on a bite on bike lanes and this so the proposal is for a multi use path on the west side so connecting to bike lanes and then, you know, it's also a sidewalk and then a new sidewalk on the east side. So, I think really the, some communities have a really generous target area and it's just one, or they might have some, you know, two big ones and so. But you know the capital projects have to be in a target area. And so if we're supposed to keep it to three, does it matter if we move a target area to a new location if there's a current project going on in that target area from a prior year. I'm not sure that's a good question yeah I mean we have the Hickory rage is still ongoing. You know, I mean it could be that we, we extend this and say it's just a larger town center target area. You know one point when North Amherst was a target area. This area up here was actually income eligible and so the thought was oh could we do some sidewalks or infrastructure but since, since the demographics have changed it's harder to have this be a target area even though we're doing the town's doing the Amherst you know the library and then maybe some field work and things that mill river but yeah to your point it might be strange to remove Pomeroy, for instance and then create a North Amherst one. You know just because there are, there's still ongoing projects in Pomeroy. So in that case I think I would move to just expand the Amherst town center and then that takes care of any issues at all around that right. You can see here where it kind of comes up and covers an area that was to include Olivia Oaks, years ago, you know probably like, gosh, I don't even want to say 14 years ago but a number of years ago and so we could, you know, extend it along some to come up here. Yeah. Okay. I guess we'll take him. So I moved to do that so we need to vote on that right. Yeah, I'll second that. Okay. All in favor. I'll do a roll call Becky. All right. Rika. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. Zoe. Yes. Okay, so that passes unanimously great. So then we now can discuss the project as being in a place in a location that we're actually allowed to have a project be. So obviously we're in a situation where we have valley, which has done some great work in the past and is asking for a really small amount of money and I remember last year that I did ask. The representative whether they could use more than that and the response was no, they've asked for exactly what they need. And it looks like that's still where they're at. So we could fund both Valley Valley CDC and then give the remainder to the infrastructure project. Which to me makes that would be my recommendation. Okay. Makes no sense. Okay, so why don't I will move to vote in that way that we fund both activities. We fund Valley CDC to the, what it's requested for 15,000 and the remainder, which I assume is 543,000 to the infrastructure project on North pleasant street. Would it be 540,000 if they available is 555. Right. So if that, yeah, you're right. Suzanne. I think we could just leave it as whatever the differences and we can. The remainder too. Okay. So I would move to do that. Second. Great. All right. So why don't we do a roll call. Nat. I said, yes. Zoe. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. And Rika had seconded. Yeah. Yes. Great. Okay. So now always to the, the more complicated and more complex and harder choices. We'll go to the social service proposals. And I just want to say, I think I've said this every time we've done this just for the, I think it's good for our own selves to hear this and for anybody listening that. I think we all can agree that all of the agencies that apply are doing necessary work and they're doing it well. And so this is always an incredibly difficult decision to make. But it's 1 that we signed up to make. And so we're here to do it. Just to remind everybody we can fund up to 5 agencies, but it doesn't have to be 5 so we can. We've since at least I've been on the committee, we've always done 5, but that doesn't mean that we have to do that. And so we have the, the rankings that needed sent out. And I know Rika has now also has her rankings in and Rika, I guess yours. What we could do is just sort of as we're talking about them, you can share your opinions rather than trying to change the spreadsheet right now. And I, I was just going to make 1 comment. I'm sort of curious what people have to say before we sort of jump into the conversation, but I was. I was looking at the, the rubric that we had created and thinking about the categories. A lot of them seem pretty objective. And the, the ones to the 1 to me that's the most subjective is project impact. Because I think about the sort of the, for myself. The ways to define what impact is and project impact could be the impact that the program has on a particular person or it could be the impact that the program has on the community as a whole and sort of the numbers of people that it's helping. And so I ended up. I think all of these. Anybody who's going to any of these organizations for assistance is going to be. You know, highly impacted by them. So I ended up thinking about it really in terms of numbers of people who are impacted understanding that there's always a ripple effect and there's families and all that, but each 1 of them did give us actual numbers of. Of who they, how many people they're actually assisting. So I don't know if anybody has any comments about that or thought about impact differently or any of the other categories that that were sort of the 1 that you found yourself having the most. Consideration of our thoughts about. I shared in that to Becky and also the number of people, not just that the agency helps with the number of Amherst residents. I kind of had to use that as a factor. In, in how I was looking at impact that particular score. Yeah. I did go with the same interpretation as well. I thought about it, you know, long and hard, you know, and it was clearly stated though in a lot of the proposals, you know, the number of people that would be, you know, that would benefit or impacted by this. So I use the Amherst, you know, also category, you know, how many of the, you know, impact that clients would be residents of our area as well. Yeah, I think, I think for me, both project impact as well as project need were some of the biggest differentiators. So, you know, project need. I think I range from two to four and project impact I range from also get two to four.  That sort of thing and project need is hard to quantify because they're different aspect of it aspects of it. But, you know, so that is definitely subjective. But, you know, if I guess I would imagine if something were not available. With the, you know, community impacted by that and if it seems like it would be a huge hole in the community then that to me would be that's a really big need. And if it's something that well, yeah, some people would be impacted but, you know, the community as a whole wouldn't feel it that much. Maybe it's not as high on community need so in some sense, those were related, I think. And as I look at my scoring now, it turns out that pretty much, you know, the, you know, the low end of two was the same for project need and project impact, and kind of the same for the high end of four. Yeah. I also looked really a lot at project need and, you know, impact and I think as I look at my notes I, I really was focused on impact of on the particular beneficiary, as opposed to the quantity. I think in the past, I've probably thought more about more broader community impact, but this year, I don't know, I was thinking about individual beneficiary impact. Yeah. So, it's always hard to sort of get this started in a minute, you know, I look at this and it looks like, you know, Amherst Survival Center is sort of the one that everybody has at the top of their list regardless I don't have yours here but that's an organization that I think, you know, fits both of those fits the need very easily and then also both ways of thinking about impact. And then the sort of at the, at the bottom end of it. I think that it looks like the literacy project. What's more literacy project was in everybody sort of bottom two and then the other ones varied. So, in sort of thinking about what's in between all of those, you know, maybe we should just go through each a little bit and sort of see where we're at. I will say, I remember when Amherst Mobile Market first applied last year, I think or maybe two years ago, and it had not quite gotten up and running yet and I think it was maybe reaching like 25 to 30 people with like a $5 voucher. I was so impressed by their application this year. And, and when I thought about impact with them, for me, it was not just that they're serving 192 people with providing the, you know, with with food but it's also the community. I was thinking about our, you know, the name of our committee, right, community development and that so much of what they've done is to develop what they saw the community needed and that they're staffed by people who are now working in the community and that they're providing an activity, you know, where they where they are and they talked about, you know, the different other activities that are going on besides the farmers market, the mobile market. And so, and so the staff, it's the staff and it's the people and it's the people who are coming to it and it's really such a broad way of thinking about community and thinking about impact so I was really impressed by them and and put them really way toward the top of my list. I don't know if other people have thoughts they want to share about that or where people thought about. I was gonna say I can share my screen just to show what we have in the spreadsheet form that's visible for everyone. So some of the rankings, you know, each row is a ranking so for some it was, you know, the a clear one through five or one through six and some, you know, for instance, this one had survival center mobile market outreach as a kind of a tie for one. This one had a lot tied for two and so, like I said, I think that, you know, I don't think there was a it doesn't seem like there was a big spread and how they were reviewed and so, you know, maybe there is one or two. So usually right we say one or two seem like they rise the top and then there's the middle and then a lower reviewed one and so I don't know if you know I can type in another column as we're talking if you want to start, you know, putting things down in an order or, you know, other things and then assign, you know, dollar values to them once we get to that point. And one thing that that I was trying to do to because, as you said, there are different ways people did this so three tied for first or five tied per second and how to make sense or not make sense but how to sort of combine those rankings into something that reflected each respondent and guess the way I looked at it was if we just divided it between like first rank and second rank. So for example, in column D and we're survival center is ranked number one and everything else is ranked number two in column a we have three organizations ranked one and then the rest I guess would be ranked number two and it's like in column B survival center big brothers and family outreach we ranked number one in the top half and then the other three be ranked number two. So if when I did it that way and gave each one a numerical either one or number two then it turned out that the average was survival center was average of one family outreach was average of 1.25 big brothers big sisters average of 1.5 mobile market average of 1.75 and then both Center for new Americans and literacy project were both average of two so kind of, you know, my thinking was that kind of gave a spectrum of how people viewed them whether they ranked one through five or one at the top and then the rest tied for a second. Yeah, my rankings would be along that same line I actually I didn't have the survival center number one partly because even though they do amazing work and they really serve a lot of people I also see that they have a lot of places to go for resources and so I didn't have the number one but they're certainly in my top three but I that was helpful in that your analysis of it. Yeah so so in that example, if they were in your top three then they would be given a rank of one in this kind of simplistic. Yes. So then my top one my number one would be as yours were as you described. So if we sort of looked at that as guiding the conversation we have two organizations tied for that fifth spot right who have the excuse me both with the two and but one of which ended up in the very bottom it looks like I mean if the rankings if we went like broke down to into further rankings literacy project I think would end up lower than Center for New Americans if we sort of redid it at that point. So I guess sort of in terms of going does anybody want to make a pitch for funding the literacy project given kind of where it ended up here. I do want to make a piece for the literacy project I feel that once we take care of our basic needs which is food insecurity once we really you know deal with this piece you know the next level of really you know breaking a cycle of poverty is achieving self-sufficiency and kind of you know maintaining you know at that level so you definitely you know you definitely need an agency or an organization who could really work with you know people to get to that level. So it serves a very. I think needed. It's a very needed area. You know that we should not overlook. Yeah, I agree and and I think the way I've always seen Center for New Americans and literacy project is is you know there are some differences in what they do. I guess most most basic description of helping people get education and jobs and integrated into society. They're very very similar in what they do. And in the past because of their similarity. We've typically not granted funds to both and we've kind of chosen one or the other because we can only choose five and it's been a tough, you know, decision to not fund everyone but in the past we've kind of given to one or the other and the one thing that I can't help but take into account is that in the last grant cycle. We gave 30,000 to Center for New Americans but none to the literacy project. And so I guess if we are not able to fund both in this round. I think that my preference would be to be able to fund a literacy project because we gave the kind of two year funding previously to the Center for New Americans. But that's so I'm just looking at so they each are asking for 20,000. And it looks like I mean and I'm happy to be correct if I'm wrong but the literacy project indicated that they would impact 20 people. And Center for New Americans indicated they could impact 100 people or serve 100 people. 100 Amherst residents and literacy project was 20 Amherst residents. And that for me was because now I agree we've always sort of just gone back and forth kind of recognizing. So, for me that was where my thoughts went to fund Center for New Americans if we're going to just do one of the two. I think there's an argument also that can be made that given sort of what's going on globally and the huge number of new Americans who are coming to our area that both of these organizations are providing such a timely need or filling such a timely need that maybe this is the year that they both got funded. So you would propose funding both of them, even though they're in the bottom definitely not making any proposals. I mean I could imagine because it's true we've always sort of gone back and forth. And I think the numbers suggest that if we're only going to fund one it would be Center for New Americans. Which is because of the impact from my perspective but that it might be the year when we've on both. One thought I did have is, I mean, I would propose that we fund the Center for New Americans because of the greater number of people that the organization helps last year was 30,000 because it was to a two year cycle. So, if we thought about just one year of that could be 15,000, or if we wanted to fund the literacy project. I was thinking it could be a percentage of what they were asking based on the percentage of people that they help me know if it's 20 people or their proposals at 57%. But, so that was just some of some of my thoughts about those two particular organizations. Did people print out the rubric do all have that in front I mean the what what we're screen sharing right now, do people generally have access to that. Yeah. So can we can we not screen share so we can see each other. Sure. People go that okay good just easier to have this kind of conversation so we can protect my notes, I see that literacy project in my notes. It was 35 students 20 of whom were Amherst right. The percentage of Amherst out of the 100 beneficiaries were centered for new Americans that was 100 was Amherst. Okay, okay. Thank you. Yeah. And then 85% of them are 85 of them or 85% are low income. Right, okay. So if we were to do both of those obviously, I mean, essentially we need to, if we decide we want to do five organizations as we historically have, we have to pick one that's not getting funded this year. Right.  And that's that will be the hardest decision before we figure out who's how much everybody's getting. So, big brothers, big sisters. Also just on the rankings that we had put together, both Center for New Americans Literacy Project had the average of two, and then the next lowest one was Amherst mobile market at 1.75. So going by that, if we say, well, how about Amherst mobile market, would they be a candidate for elimination at this point. And I would, you know, one argument in favor of eliminating mobile market is that well survival center covers the food security nutrition supplement needs an Amherst to such a great extent that you know, the community wouldn't be so impacted if we didn't fund mobile market, they would be on their own to do whatever they could. That's one argument. But on the other hand, I agree with what I think Becky and maybe others have said to that that I was impressed by the application by the mobile market and the strides that they've made over the last couple of years and becoming an independent 501c3. You know, I feel like yeah, I would like to support that. So again, so it's hard for me to say, even though survival center does really cover so much of the, you know, does such a great job of meeting the nutritional needs out there to make sure that they can. It's still hard for me to eliminate mobile market, but others might feel differently. I would, I would be reluctant to eliminate mobile market I would, I would prefer to eliminate either center for new Americans or literacy project personally. I was just, I think there may be people that use the mobile market that don't use services at their survival center aren't quite ready to use services at the survival center or this is a lot more convenient and available. Sometimes then having to get to the survival center, even though they do have, you know, some delivery but I would advocate that we keep the mobile market. And based on the number of people that you know that they've grown to be able to the number of shares that they have. Right, their impact is much larger than literacy project. Yeah, and I think I mean I sort of said this before I think, you know, having watched them grow from being.  And I think that this committee supporting supporting that is important and recognizing that. Okay, so if we put Amherst mobile market on the definite list over here, I'm just making notes. So then, if we go to big brothers big sisters, I would definitely like them on the yes. Yeah, they're, they're the ones who I look at as you know that individual benefit is so tremendous site. And, and they're the only one on the list that that is, you know, aimed at youth. Right. Right. Yeah. So true. Yeah. Family outreach. Yes, I would like to see them. I think, I mean, when I, you know, they're, when they talked about prior to August 2022 three to five requests for help a week now five a day. I thought we need to fund them. And housing security is such a big problem and seems to be only getting worse. Yeah, or ability and lack of right inventory and just keeping people in their homes but they've been doing is just, you know, amazing. I think they, I think serve such a unique need to cover such a huge right range of, I mean, from eviction legal issues through who need, does anybody have an extra mattress that they can run this family. I would keep on. Okay. Okay, so we are then down to selecting from between Center for New Americans in the literacy project. If we, it sounds like the, the other four are all ones that everybody's in agreement should be on that list. I think the comments that a couple of you've made already about just what's happening in the country makes me lean towards Center for New Americans over literacy project. In addition to the greater impact. I was going to say, I mean, two things one, the literacy product is now only virtual or immersed there may be a physical location at some point in the future. And I think that is possible to do this. It is different than the other proposals. And that, you know, it's not, you know, there's not a, you know, a physical site in town, and that could be one piece. And then, you know, I was going to mention that there is an ongoing complaint with the survival center and someone not receiving service on whether or not they're following the proper policies and rules there. And so that's something that's ongoing that the town's looking into and, you know, determine how to proceed and may or may not affect how you review the survival centers food pantry tonight but there is something that, you know, staff is looking into. And Nathaniel, what, when do you anticipate that that situation at the survival center would be resolved. Yeah, I'd like to think it could be resolved in the next two weeks. So, you know, as part of the committee's review you make recommendations to the town manager and then the town manager may, you know, I'm assuming is aware of this.  You know, we don't, there isn't, there aren't too many proposals this year. It's interesting there's only six. So it does make it a little tricky. But yeah, I think the town manager would, would, you know, review anything that the committee doesn't anything else that comes out of the dispute resolution. It strikes me that if there's, if there's a, you know, individual dispute, I'm sure there are channels to address that. So I think my feelings that we can let that proceed under whatever channels are appropriate. And this is kind of a different dimension. And we can proceed and, you know, with our review. I agree. Okay, so it sounds like we will actually let's just make sure it is anybody. Right now it looks like, like, it's just it looks like we're leaning towards Center for New Americans over the literacy project, but I want to give anybody an opportunity to. I made, I made the one, the one case for literacy project, but I'm persuaded by the other views for Center for New Americans. So that's fine with me. Okay. And Zoe, how are you feeling about that? I do feel good about that as well. I both are fulfilling the need for self-sufficiency, which is I see it as a the next logical step after we take care of our, you know, your other other needs. And I can, you know, I can be behind this decision. Okay, great. So I guess, probably the first thing is to move to accept the groups and then we'll talk about money. Nate, does that make the most sense that we usually.  Okay. So I move then that the five organization that we give to five organizations of those five organizations would be the Amherst Revival Center, the Brothers Big Sisters Center for New Americans, the Amherst mobile market and family outreach of Amherst. I know in a second. Second. Great. And now I'll do a little. Matt. Yes. Zoe. Yes. Suzanne. Yes. Great. Okay. Okay. So I'm going to do a second at that counts. Okay. Terrific. So now we can talk about money. And this is where I turned to that because I'm hoping that you have some spreadsheet that you're looking at right now. You created this whole represented situation. So, it's really only a starting point, but I'm happy to share it. Great. So that we have. So with the five that have been, you know, voted. If you add up there, all the requests, it's 222,000. So it's more than, you know, what can be funded. And the total because we have 185. Is it 185 or 195. Well, my spreadsheet says 185. Yeah. Sorry. The state increased the grant amount to 925. After the fact. He's for all, for all minis. So. So I guess, is that so 185 am I 185. Yeah. It was 20%. Yeah. He was trying to do that quickly. Okay. 195 right, but 185. 185 is correct number. Yep. Okay. Oh, so can I. Share my screen. This. I guess I can't share my screen. Oh, sorry. You know what, let me. They can allow you to do that. Try that again. That it should be. Can you see this. Under funding recommendations. Yeah. This is just a starting point, but, and you see the percentages here. So these are, these are kind of roughly. The way the rankings went. So survival center was highest ranked. And so the number 67,000 here is 89%. And family outreach. Was second ranked. And their number. 42,000 is 84%. And big brothers. Was third ranked. And so their number here at 32,000 is 80%. And mobile market. Was next ranked. And so the number 29,000 is 78%. And center for new Americans. Was bottom rank. And so the number of 15,000 is 75%. So it's not. Not really a mathematical formula as much as it is. Putting in numbers and ranking them according to the. You know, scale. One to two average that we. Had done earlier. So that's just a. Starting point. I don't know what people. Think about those numbers. I guess I'm curious to see if we just, I mean, now that we've. Decided that these five are worthy of funding if we looked at the same percentage across the board. I mean, that's what that would be. Yes. I agree with that. Cause I feel like. While we've ranked them. They're all doing really good work. And it's very hard to rank them. And if, you know, essentially we have about. They 83%. I mean, 185 is 83% of 222,000. So if we funded each of them at that percentage. I would, I would like to see what that looks like. Yeah. Okay.   But wait, that can't be right for the survival. No, it can't. Oh, sorry. I got the wrong. It's, it's, it's of column C, right. Get this right here. So what were you, sorry, I miss, what were you asking an appropriate amount based on. Well, I was just saying if we have, we have a total of 185,000. Right. The request total 222,000, right? 185. About 83% of 222. So I was thinking if we funded everybody at that percent, we'd get to a 185. So when I look at it, it's more like 62,000. Yeah. Yeah. Sorry. I was taking into account it. What don't we want to divide the request by. Yeah, so times 83%. Yeah, which would come out to be 62 to 50, I think. There you go. That comes out to 200. Oh, sorry. Not this one. Right. So then, yeah, so it's very close. Yeah. So that's the. Yeah. And so the. But that's actually giving. Oh, no, never mind. Sorry. I was looking around. Yeah. So there's not, not that much. Difference. If we gave everyone the same percentage. I think I preferred this version of it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about the work that's being done. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think it's more in line with how I was thinking about it. I think based on the way that the rankings were done, because so many people had the same number ones are the same number twos, it's probably the fairest way to do it. Because it wasn't a clear. One, two, three, four, five, six. Right. For everybody. Yeah. So I think if everybody gets the same. Pool. Yeah. Right. It seems like a fair and equitable way of doing this. I think the, the main argument. Against doing it that way is that it gives an incentive or rewards. And ask that. Is maybe disproportionate, right? So if you. But. But in looking at these numbers, it's hard for me to say that. Any of these is really. You know, disproportionate or out of line. I don't. When you say disproportionate, disproportionate to what? Well, to what's realistic. So for example, what they've received in the past, for example, right? So if. In the past. Big brothers, big sisters has received. You know, 30, 35,000, let's say. And they came in asking for 60,000. Because. There's a system where they can receive 83% of what they asked for. There's an incentive just asked for a really, really big amount. But. On these numbers, I guess I don't really see that as. Actually happening. But it is, but it is a big bump for some of these from what we did fund previously. So. Family outreach. If we were looking, if it was a two year grant and we funded 73,000. Half of that is not 41,000. So it is a little bit of a bump. I still think it's fair. I think it's a good way to do this. I just think it's a. That argument could be made. And I haven't looked back at what they had asked for in the past, but, but. Yeah. But it doesn't, it doesn't look to me. Superficially that anyone has asked for anything.  And I think I, I appreciate that. And I think that you're right to, to point that out. And it, but since it's something that we can, since we're not setting in stone that this is how we're going to do it. We can always fix that should that be an issue going forward. I mean, while, you know, each of these organizations, I'm sure could use quadruple what they're actually asking for. Exactly. So if you look at their budgets, they are not. Yeah. Anything. No, no one's buying it yet. All right. So does anybody have any other thoughts on this before we vote? Anybody want to suggest any other way of dividing it? I mean, there is a little bit. You know, $740 could be. So if I, if I add 740 to survival center that. I cannot believe you can work Excel so well. Yeah, that looks great. I mean, is there. I mean, would we add, you know, at some point we've said that.  Right. Or does $750 mean more to one organization than another organization? I mean, I think it probably does. I don't know how we begin. Right. To figure that out. Right. Or we just give everybody. 200. And then. We're not even everybody 150 more. 148 each. 148 each. Why don't we just do that? Yeah, let's do that. I'm so glad there are people who are good at math on this committee. And I just want to call you guys out and say, I appreciate. We found his ceiling. Perfect. Yeah, that looks great. Great. Okay. I need more thoughts before we take a vote. Great. Okay. Great. Well, I move that we accept the. Excel spreadsheet that we're all looking at right now. Call him. Final decision. Second. Yeah. Okay. All in favor. Let's see. Yes. Suzanne. Yeah. Matt. Yes. And Rika. Yes. Great. Wonderful. So Nate, if we can take off. Stop screen sharing. And then we. Can go into. Public comment. Yeah. Before we do that, so I will. I just wanted to say that I'll take these recommendations and forward them to the town manager. There's a public hearing at the end of the month. On the 29th. Where we would, you know, have comment on the recommendations that may or may not be changed by the town manager. And so the idea is to have. Comments on the recommended activities that are part of the grant application. And then the grant is due in late March. I was pushed back a little bit. So I think that would be great. I think that would be great. I would just work on that application. The. As part of the public hearing, we can also receive comments on the change in the target area. So I think that'll be some of it as well. Just the, the modification of that target area. And. I think that's it. I just wanted to make a note of that. Okay. Great. Thanks for the spreadsheet. I copied it down. So I have that as well. Okay. So if, if anybody who is an attendee wants to make a public comment, if you raise your hand, then Nate can bring you in. Give a couple of seconds here for people to raise their hands. And if not, then. Okay. Are you, I don't see any hands raised, but I don't know. Okay. Okay. Okay. In that case, are there any issues? Anybody wants to raise that we did not anticipate within the last 48 hours or occurring with that did occur within the last 48 hours. And I think we are all set. And we can adjourn the meeting. Thank you, Becky. Oh, yes. Thank you. Thank you. So we meet back on February 29th. Okay. You'll be in touch with us between now and then regarding the town managers review. Correct. Okay. All right. Great. Terrific. See everybody on the twin night. Thanks for all your hard work. Yes. Thank you. Bye bye. Bye.


from New York City. It's theCUBE. Covering Automation Anywhere, Imagine. Brought to you by Automation Anywhere. Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're in Midtown Manhattan at Automation Anywhere, Imagine 2019. We're here last year, it's about 1,500 people. We're excited to be back. The RPA space is really, really hot as evidenced by tons of investment coming into it. And we're excited to have the CEO fresh off the keynote, but here, shoot together the CEO and co-founder of Automation Anywhere. We're great to see you and great job on the keynote. Thank you, get to see you too. Yeah, so I want to jump in some of the top level themes that you outlined that I think are so important. And one of them was kind of this whole concept of democratization of automation. We hear about it in big data. We hear about it citizen developers and you guys are taking it really into the automation space. And you had three things that were really important. One, it has to work for anyone. It's got to be available anywhere, which implies on anything. And it has to be available to any company regardless of size. And it sounds like you really baked those concepts into a lot of the announcements that you've had today and kind of where you're taking the company. So I wonder if you can dive a little bit deeper as to why those are kind of guiding principles. Absolutely, I think what guides us there is that we believe that the power of technology lies when it impacts the lives of millions of people. And makes them better. So if you start with that premise, how do you make that possible? Now when you look at any technology that has affected and made millions of lives better, they had these three characteristics in common. Take an example of a personal computer or an internet. It was available to anyone for any kinds of people. Any profile of people. It was available anywhere in any device. And it was available for any size company. So we have seen this play out few times in our lifetime. So we have learned from that that if our mission is to make a power of RPA and AI reach millions of people and make their lives better. So if that's the mission, then we have to make this possible for anyone, for anywhere and for any size company. And a big piece of that was the announcement of the community version, which is free. So I'm sure there were some interesting discussions about moving to a freemium model and actually giving the software free for people that qualify. I wonder if you can talk about those discussions and clearly there's a bigger picture that you're focused on versus just the revenue for one or two small customers. Right, so our community addition is free for small businesses, student and individual developers. And the reason why we did this is for two reasons. One is we believe the students are our future and they will take this technology forward and we need more and more people with digital skills. So it seems like the right place to invest and enable them with the next set of technologies. The reason to make it available free for developers is we believe that today about 95% of processes that we automate are the processes that we do manually today. But that is changing very fast. In three to five years, 30% of things that we will automate will be the things that are not part of our lives today. It is things that we don't know yet, right? And that happens every time. The way we use phones and everything, nobody could have predicted this. So we know that will happen, like it happened in internet and other evolution, it will happen in our space as well. And developers are an amazing asset. They are the one who will discover, find these new ways that none of us know about.  So it made sense to empower developers. And especially developers are very picky, they want the best software available, they won't settle for anything less. And because we had the complete intelligent digital workforce platform that include the best RPA, artificial intelligence and analytics. We thought that's a great, they would love the power of this combined platform that is not available anywhere else. And true to the cause, as soon as we announced it, we had an amazing success. The requests are pouring in from our 120 countries worldwide and the adoption has been phenomenal. And you mentioned on stage on the keynote that there's some examples out there where people are not doing automating of processes that they already did, but are really starting to get creative in the uses of this tool. And I think we see it over and over. As you said, people miss, people miss the hyper curve. It's hard to see the future and it's hard to apply kind of what we're doing today to what we're going to be doing in the future because we really don't know. That's right. I think sometimes I describe this way to people that when the new technology comes, people think that new technology is the train and the world is the station. So the station remains where it is and the train moves on, right? That's not how real world is. The real world is, the world is a train itself that's moving forward. Technology is one of the, you can say it's the first, The locomotive. The first locomotive of it or one of the PCs. But the whole world is moving to it as well. So we often, many of us get this wrong that we make a mistake to think that how will this new technology fill in a stationary world, where that's not the case, the world is moving as well. The other thing you brought up, I thought was pretty interesting, is that this is not to displace workers. It's to enable workers to do better and I couldn't help but think of just like my PC helps me do my job better. The internet helps me do my job better. My phone and my ERP system all help me do my job better. So of course, why wouldn't I want a powered AI assistant to help me do my job better? That's absolutely true. Look, I have a very extraordinary privilege of seeing this transformation through the eyes of thousands of people who use our platform every day. And I've visited about of the 2800 plus customers we have, I have visited hundreds of them and talked to thousands of people on the ground who use this technology. And there is not a single one of them who would go back. And I invariably ask that, after a few discussions I would say, would you ever consider going back? And the answer is universal across any country, any vertical, people do not want to go back to, why would you? Why would you do a robotic job? Right, right. And so it is more clear than ever before that this transformation is certainly not about us, certainly not about bots. It is about empowering people so that they are more productive unlike any other time in human history. Right. Taking it step further, as you said, compared to the where PC brought us. You used to not, I mean, again, I could go on on your keynote all day long, another great thing you brought up which was just, was crushing. I think you said that four percent, four percent of people will have jobs that need some degree of creativity. That is horrible. Is it not? Is it not? That is horrible. Yeah. And again, to personalize it and talk about, you talked about your kids and this world that they're going to be coming into, why would we want to put them into a robotic job? Right, so the data shows that only four percent of U.S. jobs require medium creativity. And as a parent, that is, I'm troubled by it because we, like all parents, we tell our children they can do anything. What do we mean by they can do anything? If they get one of those four percent jobs, there's still a medium level of creativity. So probably we hope they get point one percent of those jobs that require full human capacity. Right, right. That's not anything they can do. They don't have as many opportunities that they should have. And I think we need to create a better world with more opportunities for our children. Right. I would settle it 40 percent, but four percent is an exception. So a little bit about the business because the deeper stuff I think is more interesting, but the business is doing well. Again, since we last met, you had this huge A round, I think someone said the largest A round ever, you put over half a billion dollars into the bank. A, what does that kind of show in terms of validation from the marketplace for the opportunities you guys are addressing? And it'd be that with great resources comes great responsibility. So what are you doing next as you look into 2019? What are some of your top priorities? So we've been very fortunate to get the, as you mentioned, about 550 million in our series A round. And it is, if not the largest, one of the largest series A round ever. I think it shows, first of all, it's a validation of our market leadership and the growth of the category both. We continue to invest heavily in three areas. First is our R&D investment continues to grow, especially in AI and making RP accessible to millions. So those investments continue. We are significantly investing in the global expansion across, now we have offices in about 30, 35 countries worldwide. And the third is we will carefully look at acquiring maybe new technologies and new acquisitions to make our digital labor platform more complete and offer customers more seamless solution. Right. So last question before I let you go, I know they got you slanted back to back to back all day. It's really about the ecosystem.  But talk about, you know, kind of how you're developing the ecosystem to extend the reach beyond just the people that work automation anyway. So we have two important pillars to our ecosystem. We have a SI system integrators. We bought 700 plus partners who provide invaluable experience in various domains all over the world. And many of them provide the bots in the bot store. There are domain specific, process specific related to tax and audit and finance and accounting and supply chain and oil and gas and telcos across all industries, right? So they bridge the gap between technology and the customer specific domain specific process. So that's a one important pillar. The second important pillar is the software companies. So we have a great deal of partnerships with many of them. For example, we have a continued partnership with IBM with their digital business automation group. We recently announced partnership with Workday that is very important to us. It has an enormous potential of how when you combine best in class HR and cloud finance best in class intelligent digital workforce, the possibilities of value creation is enormous. We today announced our partnership with Oracle and we extended our partnership with Microsoft on multiple fronts and there are many more as well. There are two key pillars to our creating an ecosystem. Again, all of this is almost everything that we do comes down to a single mission statement which is how do we take the power of this tech RPA and AI to millions of people and make their lives better? It's a great mission. So again, thanks for having us. Congratulations on a great event and we look forward to watching the next year unfold. Thank you. I look forward to it. All right, he's been here on Jeff. You're watching theCUBE. We're at Automation Anywhere. Imagine 2019 in Midtown Manhattan. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time.


Hello students, myself Ganesh B. Aghlavi working as an assistant professor in department of mechanical engineering, Valjean Institute of Technology, Sulapur. In this session of conduction, we will see composite cases, composite wall, composite cylinder and composite sphere. At the end, the students will be able to draw thermal network of the composite cases, that is composite wall, composite cylinder and composite sphere. First case is of composite wall. First case is of composite wall. If there are more than one wall is present, it is called composite wall. So, suppose this is the wall of material A and second wall is of material B. The surface temperature of wall on this side is T1, the interface temperature is T2 and outermost temperature is T3. Then, there thermal network, thermal network I will be drawing here. Now, temperatures of wall A, left-hand side temperature is T1, interface temperature is T2. Then, there will be conductive resistance. Then, there will be conductive resistance R1. The wall A has L thickness, wall B has also L thickness and the area normal to the heat flow is same in both the cases. So, conductive heat transfer is Q. Composite wall is in series. Now, the conductive heat, conductive heat Q will be transferring from wall A and B in equal, equal amount means QA will be equal to QB is equal to Q. Same rate of heat transfer is there through the both walls in series network. Wall B will oppose the thermal resistance and it works between temperatures T2 and T3 and resistance offered will be R2. Here, the first resistance which you can calculate separately that is R1 is equal to L by KAA. KAA is the thermal conductivity of A material and KB is the thermal conductivity of B material. Similarly, for second wall thermal network will be equal to L divided by KB into A. Here, the thicknesses may be different that is L1 and L2 whenever these are not same, I can substitute here their own notations. Now, in addition with conductive heat transfer, I can add the convective heat transfer. So, this will become combined mode of heat transfer. Suppose, the internal wall will be heated by means of the gases whose temperature is T i and convective heat transfer coefficient is H i. On the outermost side also, there will be fluid properties are there. Suppose, second fluid is passing through over this wall having the temperature T o and convective heat transfer coefficient is H o. Then, I have to add two more resistances. First resistance will be convective resistance. It will be working in between temperature difference T i and T1 and on outermost side, there will be one more convective resistance. This is R C 2 and suppose this is R C 1. Now, R C 1 will be equal to 1 by H i A and R C 2 is equal to 1 by H o A. So, rate of heat transfer, rate of heat transfer activation can be written as q is equal to q is equal to if I take the temperature T i and T o in consideration, then I have to write in the numerator T i minus T o divided by 4 resistances that is summation of resistances which will be equal to T i minus T o divided by this R C 1 plus R 1 plus R 2 plus R C 2. Either, you can find out the resistance R 1 R 2 R C 1 and R C 2 separately or can substitute their relations in this equation also. So, this will become equal to T i minus T o divided by 1 by H i into A plus L 1 by K A A plus L 2 K B into A plus 1 by H o A. Now, as area is same, I can take it common also and the equation can be written as q by A, q by A is nothing but heat flux which can be represented by small q. So, small q is equal to q A is equal to T i minus T o divided by 1 by H i plus L 1 by K A plus L 2 by K B plus 1 by H o 1 by H o. There are one more concept there is one more concept called overall heat transfer coefficient. So, the overall heat transfer coefficient q is equal to u A delta T. This overall heat transfer coefficient considers mixed mode of heat transfer. So, whenever such cases are there, so u A could be written as could be written as 1 by thermal resistance because this equation Fourier law of heat transfer in terms of Fourier law of heat transfer can be written as that is delta T divided by r thermal as there are two areas are available. So, overall heat transfer coefficient will be of two basis. So, first one is on inner side and second one overall heat transfer coefficient on other side. And one more concept is present that is called overall thermal contact resistance that is called thermal contact resistance. Now, second case we will see of composite cylinder.  Then their temperatures are suppose T 1, T 2 and T 3. Then thermal network for the composite cylinder between temperature T 1 and T 2 will be first resistance between T 2 and T 3, T 3 there will be secondary resistance. This is for composite cylinder where this is the A material and this is the B material. So, you can write the convective heat transfer rate sorry conductive heat transfer rate which is equal to T i minus T 3 divided by r 1 plus r 2 r 1 plus r 2. Similarly, for sphere for sphere you could write also this is suppose hollow sphere which is insulated which is insulated the inner radius is r 1, the outer radius of the sphere is r 2 and insulation radius is r 3. Then the thermal network will be this is temperature T 1, temperature T 2, temperature T 3. So, this is the temperature T 1, temperature T 2, temperature T 3, this is for sphere hollow sphere composite case. Resistance first resistance will be r 1, second resistance will be r 2. I can add two more resistances of the convective case. So, this is suppose T i, this is the convective resistance first, this is the convective resistance second. I can add for composite cylinder also T i, this is the r c 1 convective resistances, r c 1 and r c 2 will be convective resistances. So, in the composite cases depending upon the number of walls, number of layers of insulations you can just go on adding the resistances you will be getting the rate of heat transfer.  You can calculate rate of heat conduction through the sphere with multiple layers and rate of heat transfer through hollow cylinder with multiple layers of the insulation. These are the different cases. For further study, you can refer fundamentals of heat and mass transfer by Incropera David. Thank you.


It's good when idols get knocked off pedestals, notes from the edge of the narrative matrix. Jeffrey Epstein, Woody Allen, and Noam Chomsky went out to dinner one night. There's no punchline, that's just something that happened.  Anti-China propaganda needs to be opposed ferociously. US military encirclement of China is rapidly increasing and the floodgates are being opened to pour weapons into Taiwan as quickly as possible, and it's getting almost no resistance anywhere. People barely know it's happening. The propaganda campaign against China needs to be opposed right now because it's a threat right now, and also because otherwise when the time comes to actually send out the warships, the public will just consent to it since the war propaganda went unchallenged that whole time. After a certain point, a propaganda narrative can gain enough momentum that there's simply no resisting it. We can't just ignore this. Here's an article by antiwar.com. Taiwanese leader meets with John Bolton, calls for deeper ties with US. It's a tweet by Caitlin. And there he is. Bolton shows up literally every single time there's a new opportunity to push for war. We don't rage hard enough about the fact that there are human beings whose actual job is to try and get as many people violently killed as possible at every opportunity. The US alliance is indisputably encircling Russia and China in ways it would never permit itself to be encircled. The only way to defend this discrepancy is to say, well it's okay when we do it because we are good guys and they are bad guys, which is an infant's understanding. Believing that democracies should be allowed to do things that autocracies shouldn't be is just subscribing to the adult-sounding iteration of the good guys versus bad guys plotline of every children's cartoon. It can't withstand an instant of critical thought. Even if you do subscribe to an infantile good guys versus bad guys worldview, all facts and evidence say the US should, if anything, be considered the latter. Russia and China haven't spent the 21st century killing people by the millions in wars of aggression, for example. Russia and China haven't been strangling entire nations around the world with economic warfare for the crime of disobedience. Russia and China haven't been encircling the planet with hundreds of military bases in order to rule the world. Russia and China haven't been plotting to destroy any nation which disobeys them. Only the US is doing these things. A great question to ask someone is, what conspiracy theory do you think might be true? If they struggle to come up with even one, then that means they don't question anything. If they don't question anything, they're not thinking at all. If you believe the official story about everything that happens, then you're not thinking, you're repeating.  You're as much a separate person with your own thoughts as a car radio speaker is separate from the sound of the disc jockey. The contradictions and hypocrisy of the Empire are so in your face right now that it sometimes seems barely worthwhile to mention it. But it needs to be pointed out every time because the majority of people still manage not to see it. Example, tweet by Brianna Joy Gray. Biden at the Correspondence Dinner. Journalism is not a crime. Julian Assange conspicuously missing from the evening's remarks. I think it's probably a good thing when our idols get knocked off the pedestals we put them on. Chomsky, Bernie, the Dalai Lama. It's not healthy to elevate others to a lofty status above ourselves instead of seeing them as normal human beings who are as capable of error as anyone else. Our entire culture, movies, school books, religions, etc. tells us to always be looking for heroes. Tells us to look outside ourselves for celebrated leaders who will show us where to go. And I just think that's a terrible dereliction of duty, of our duty to find the truth for ourselves.  People hand off that responsibility to journalists, pundits, thought leaders, teachers, preachers, and gurus. But to do this is to neglect a very sacred duty.  Don't pass off that responsibility to someone else.  You have no business abdicating that authority because someone else is speaking about something with a confident and authoritative tone. Find out the truth for yourself. Place blind faith in no one when it comes to understanding reality, including me, obviously. It's disempowering to have idols on pedestals because they create the false impression that the solution to our problems exists somewhere outside ourselves. In reality, no one individual will ever solve the massive problems humanity now faces. It's going to take all of us. Truth doesn't exist in some other person. It's for you to sort out for yourself. Revolution isn't hiding in some celebrated hero. It's going to come from within us. Enlightenment doesn't exist in some lofty future state. It's here presently and just needs to be recognized. The healthy way to relate to famous figures is to relate to them as anyone else. If they say something useful, then use it. If they say something unhelpful, then don't. You never need to elevate them so high that there's an expectation that they'll always get everything right. Or that you feel a sense of disappointment or betrayal if they get something wrong. It's disempowering to put people on pedestals and it's no fun to be on the pedestal either. I always cringe a bit when I see someone constantly praising me as a person instead of focusing on the specific merits of my work on a case-by-case basis. Not because I have a problem receiving compliments, but because I know they're going to have to knock me off that pedestal one day. Anyone who's sincerely interested in truth will eventually have to knock some idols off of pedestals because keeping them there inevitably becomes an obstacle to your own understanding of what's true. The whole relationship is just deeply unpleasant for everyone involved. Hero stories keep you looking for heroes outside yourself. Idols keep you looking for truth outside yourself. Gurus keep you looking for enlightenment outside yourself. It's good to make use of all the knowledge and wisdom that exists in the world, but don't let it get you digging for treasure in the wrong place.


And on that note, I'm curious about recruitment, you know, how do you recruit the young designers? Margaret was talking about recruiting our teens yesterday at the Teen Design Fair. But how do you, you know... I was at the maternity ward at one of the hospitals. I'm kidding, I'm kidding. Get him early. Get him early. But the recruiting thing is, it's pretty fascinating. I mean, I think that there are so many contexts where formal training is so critical to doing a job well. And yet I see over and over again young designers growing up native to digital experiences and coming with perspectives that are born out of that experience and not through formal training. And I've seen it work pretty well both ways. And I think actually the combination is really fascinating. You get somebody who's gone through a highly rigorous traditional even graphic design training who then takes on interaction and design coding. And then, you know, we have a designer at Facebook who has been a working freelance interaction designer since he was 12 years old. And, you know, on day one had more work experience than most of the people at the company. And I am, you know, not in a position to say that that isn't kind of an amazing thing because he's an incredibly mature individual who brings like a ton of experience to it. So I think that is one of the things that's most interesting. You know, how do you continue to bring appreciation for design as a craft and design education and marry that with the reality that, like, expectations and needs, at least in the digital context, are changing pretty rapidly? I can certainly relate to the significant amount of time spent recruiting, like if we use that specific word. And the, I mean, one reason for that is we've found while it is a lot of work we're much more successful and we seek out the people that we choose rather than waiting for them to come to us, just sort of operationally not a good use of anyone's time to look through a lot of things that mostly don't fit. But when we're looking at people, it seems that there are sort of three metathemes that probably describe the team. One are people who show predisposition to make things and get them out in the world, whatever that means. They're just compelled to, sometimes they're, sometimes the artifacts don't even look like design. Sometimes they're just great writers that write all the time, constantly writing, constantly sharing that. That's interesting. Sometimes they're making products. They're actually making small business ideas and getting them out in the world all the time. There's a whole variety of stuff, but this predisposition to make things and share it. The second which is related is the kind of self-awareness that leads them to educate themselves or know how best they learn. And so the people may have very, you know, seek very formal education. They may do lots of self-education they learn by doing, but the people who are aware of their own learning style and then engage with those things. It's not about formal education or not. It's much more individual than that. And the third one is really the, probably the hardest one, which is really taste. I think those others are sort of so, there's so much sort of logic that I can use to explain those other ones. And the third one is that last, like, sparkle desk part. Does this feel right? And sometimes it's almost like cultural taste. Does this feel right for the company culture? And sometimes it's just the output taste. Does that, wow, they consistently have beautifully, like, beautiful finesse around their typography. And there's just something there that isn't, that's beyond learnable. And like, when you get those three things together, that's okay. If I were to yes in on that, I would say taste or instincts. You can see it in a designer's sense that something in their world experience. So, you know, when you talk about the predosition and make things, or self-awareness is usually drawn, I just look at people who have lots of worldly experience, right? They've traveled. They've, you were there at that particular time, so I knew that that must have been an interesting time for them. I always ask about their personal work for some reason. And for some reason, we rarely get to satisfy 100% of this tenacity in the day job. And so somehow, if that intersects with passion, I always discover something that they're doing on the side, right? Oh, yeah, I print make or, you know, I screen print t-shirts. Oh, tell me why, right? And through that passion, something's driving them in that self-starter curiosity way. I have a hard, I have a biggest challenge is to tell other leaders that are non-designers what makes designers tick. And the greatest hire is someone who's constantly curious. They're great problem solvers. It just happens to express itself differently. So great hires have always been curious people. And when they fall in love with problems rather than solutions, that always, and that's hard to tease out in a first meeting. I think it's a very good point. And as this topic relates to the fashion industry, I would say, that notion of collaboration makes me really think about how successful fashion companies build their design enterprise around community of designers. And I think that leads to a more nuanced discussion perhaps that we've been having about designers at the business table and creative leadership. I think there are people within the design enterprise for whom it's really critical to be at that table. And in a way, in the fashion system, it's critical for them to have a kind of equilibrium between this art and science, to have a place at the table where they're discussing what worked last season or they're discussing what they're seeing in the marketplace and they're infusing it into the studio. But in fashion, I can say specifically in fashion, it's critical for certain designers to not have that burden and to not even be distracted by it. Because there is an artistry, and this is where the art comes in, there is an artistry work that we depend on in the best designers where in a sense, it's not even about problems and solutions, it's about the shape of something or the texture of something or a new way to create a scene in something or a new way to address a hyper-functional object like a suit or a suit jacket. But I've seen that there is a very delicate balance between sort of the artistic burden of a designer in the fashion system, a creative director in the fashion system and a chief merchant. They all need to have a certain sensibility for design and they all have relative engagement with the business and that engagement has to be purposeful and I think is a really delicate thing. I think there's just something really interesting, really a lot of themes to all of our stuff. The three parts of design I always like to kind of hang on to are thinking, making, feeling are the three things and depending on our industry, the hierarchy of how those three balls come together and also as we kind of advance in our careers, how those three balls interact really come. But I think one thing that's really interesting is that the part I usually about design I get most excited about is the feeling part. Like the reason like why do I care or the craft kind of goes that way. But for that feeling part, I think it's about anything that is successful. That's the one thing that creating that emotional connection is that and I think for designers who understand that and can make that happen, that for me is where the magic happens.


Hello, everyone. I'm Jose Delgado. I'm a corporate commercial attorney. What we're going to cover today is we get often queries about from sellers and purchases of property as to what their rights are under the Consumer Protection Act, or just generally when selling a property. How does this footsteps clause apply to me? And also, often people ask, what is this cooling off period? How does it apply? Is it applicable to my transaction? So we're going to cover both of those scenarios. Firstly, the cooling off period is a remedy available to or a right available to purchase of a property in terms of the Alienation of Land Act, which deals with all property transactions. So any immutable property transaction in South Africa has to be in writing and has to conform specifically to this piece of legislation. In that Act there is this cooling off period. You have five days to withdraw from a contract for a property that you enter into that is valued at less than $250,000. So not a lot of relief for many people, but if you're at the bottom end of the market and you're acquiring a property of that value, then know that you have that remedy available to you. The biggie is the footsteps clause. It's an old Roman Dutch principle and pretty much it says you buy the property as it stands. Warts and all. Good stuff, bad stuff. And the seller is not responsible for any defects in the property. The purchaser, obviously, assumes all of that risk. That however is countenanced with the common law principles of latent defects and patent defects. So patent defect is something you can see and if you enter into the contract pretty much if you are unhappy with a huge crack in the wall or something that's not to your liking after the fact, you pretty much have no claim because it's something you could see and the footsteps clause would cover that for the seller rather, if you're a seller. In the event that it's a latent defect, which is something you cannot see, under the footsteps clause the seller will not get protection if they were aware of the latent defect. So footsteps clause will protect the seller and the purchaser will have no remedy available to them if the seller was unaware that there was a latent defect. However, if there's a latent defect that the seller is aware of, the footsteps clause will not protect them because basically that's misrepresentation. So there you have it. Those are the two positions.  If there are defects that are not visible, make sure to bring them to the attention of your agent, bring them to the attention of the purchaser. If you're a purchaser, obviously do your homework, get as much information, ask the questions, ask the agent the information and if they then make representations that later on you can rely on if you've been misled or you've not been correctly informed. So just be sure to check those positions when you're buying or selling a property.


Grandma's all the best by the way little life advice make whatever you do go spend time with your grandparents Man, I'm just telling you if you're the busiest person in the world make less money go at least once a month now If they live super far away, you should go at least three times a year to go see him I'm telling you the best use some money man.  I've experienced different things and tried different things and I've had failures And I've had successes, but the one thing I've learned is the most important thing in this world is loyal friends and family


We're destroying our world over imaginary nonsense. Notes from the edge of the narrative matrix. We are killing each other and our ecosystem over an economy made of debt books and imagination. In Hollywood, the U.S. military has usually either shown fighting Nazis in World War II or in modern times fighting fictional enemies and fantasy monsters like zombies, aliens, or Godzilla. This is because in all modern real-life conflicts, the U.S. troops are the villains. You get a lot of moral clarity and focus once you understand that the U.S. and its allies are the most murderous power structure on earth by an extremely massive margin. You see that criticism of other power structures is not just hypocrisy, but a distraction from the real evil. Rather than the American flag or the bald eagle, the symbol everyone uses to represent the United States should be the Pentagon. Notice how both progressive Democrats like TYT and the Squad and populist Republicans like Trump and Tucker Carlson pay lip service to opposing war, yet still want the U.S. to remain the global unipolar hegemon.  You can't have a globe-spanning unipolar empire without using mass military violence to hold it together, because otherwise the world will just do what it wants to do. Opposing war without wanting to dismantle the empire is like opposing the use of whips and chains, but not wanting to end slavery. If you think making military personnel get a COVID jab is barbaric, we'll hear the rest of the stuff they make them do. Censoring people for talking about COVID policies that affect everyone is what you get when your institutions have such an extensively established track record of deceitful and unethical behavior that you know you can't win the public over through simple argumentation and facts. The more your ideology prohibits you from seeing capitalism as the problem, the more frantic you will be to seek out other explanations for why the world keeps getting more unjust and tyrannical. I don't know what narrative manager came up with the brilliant idea of training COVID skeptics to start referring to the great reset as a leftist or Marxist agenda, but it's a great way to alienate leftists who'd otherwise be sympathetic to opposing plutocratic power grabs.  During the partisan debates about the latest IPCC report, remember that our ecosystem is hurtling toward collapse on many other fronts beside climate change. There are many other indications of collapse besides warming. The way the debate fixates solely on climate change is like if someone had stage four cancer throughout their body and they're in a coma and their vital signs are dropping and the doctor says death is imminent, and everyone's arguing over whether or not low blood pressure is necessarily a bad thing. For decades, people have been saying climate change is a hoax that's being used to set up a one-world government, and all that's happened during those decades is the planet getting hotter while the powerful do nothing because ecocide is profitable. Everyone who thinks climate change is a hoax being used to advance sinister agendas can relax. No actual things will be done in the name of preventing climate change. The news cycle will move on once again, and everyone will forget all about it. You know how you keep saying Democrats are trying to take your guns away and nothing ever happens? This is that. How to fight climate collapse by working within the system. One, elect corporate warmongers who promise to start moving towards sustainable energy in the next century as long as it doesn't inconvenience the powerful. Two, cloth grocery bags. Three, maybe Elon Musk will save us. Four, paper straws. For generations, incremental reform has been the dominant political strategy for advancing positive change, and the only incremental reform we've seen is toward more war, more ecocide, more corruption, more exploitation and oppression. It's time to admit incrementalism does not work. Don't just ban evictions, cancel the rent. Don't just cancel the rent. Cancel the predatory scam of renting itself. Don't just cancel renting, cancel capitalism. Don't just cancel capitalism. Cancel the entire competition-based model of human behavior that's driving us to extinction. War is just the most overt manifestation of the manifold abuses inherent in a system where human behavior is driven by competition rather than collaboration. There are centuries of institutional infrastructure supporting capitalism and generations of mass scale PSI-OPS programming public thought, and people wonder why it's so hard to affect real change. Our entire civilization is a bubble that's going to have to burst fairly soon. Only thing we have any degree of control over is how that bursting happens. At this point, the only change agent I still have faith in is humanity's latent potential for a mass scale collective awakening from egoic consciousness.


What made him stay so loyal to you? So to look at you what make did it seem like drake keeps a loyalty to you Sam sneeze What makes this what make it seem like you are the guys that he to me Locks into just being one that looks as a as a friend. What made him stay so loyal to you Yeah Yeah, yeah Yes So you gave it y'all And he knew that he's seen that oh, yeah And and I think that's that's something to be commended commended because a lot of people in your situation That went through what you went through Could have just gave up when even moved like you moved It had to be something in you at that time to keep you going No matter if you look at the drugs the alcohol and all the other stuff that you was dealing with It's still something in you. That's a drive. They say I'm gonna continue to press on with my mission.  I seen you come back on on that album Yeah, yeah, you how hard was it you to do you was on that snoop album? And you that's when I first heard your voice again. You remember that serial killer serial killer How hard was that to go back in I had you already been going back in trying to you know Coach your voice into being able to be displayed again, but I never stopped You never stop never stop.  Yeah, right songs and if they heard it and liked it that they could have it, you know Yeah, I can remember now There's a movie called a beautiful mind. Okay, I ain't seen a beautiful man. You seen it I'm beautiful mind. This is dude. He was crazy It was Russell Crowe's in that movie, but anyway he was suffering and He thought he was cracking codes for the government. Okay Oh, but what what he saw on the floor and all these things was really just trash But in his mind, it was something else. So Breed came to la MC breed RIP man RIP breed. I was a big fan He came to LA and to a party. Drake was having came in my room And I was just, you know loaded and it was just Wrapped songs rap songs are all over the floor like a beautiful mind. Yeah, he picked it up And start rapping a thing and asked me what it was wrapped like I wrapped it to him And he said I'm taking that with me and he said you got to come with me late And I never went back Yeah, we on boss talk one on one