do you ever think about your posture? Do you begin or end your days with any kind of pain or tension? Well, you can begin to change that today with this video. I'm going to be interviewing Grayson Harris Young. I'll give you his background in a moment, but he's going to be showing us some mindfulness and guiding us towards relieving that kind of pain and tension in our bodies and becoming more friends with our bodies. So let me share with you his bio and then I'm going to bring him on. So Grayson's company is called Whole-Bodied Coaching and there's going to be a link in the notes of the video to more information. He creates regular content on his Facebook page, for example. And Grayson's all about learning how our bodies work so that we can have a better relationship with ourselves. Grayson is a mindful posture and movement coach and a certified Alexander Technique teacher. And he specializes in helping people overcome chronic pain and tension. He creates regular content to help people be best friends with their body and maintains a private practice in San Diego. He can also do consultations virtually via video chat. And Grayson is a client of mine in my group coaching program. Grayson, great to have you here. Hi, George. It's great to be with you. Yeah. So I'm really looking forward to what you're going to share today because I know that it can help me as well. So what is one of the biggest misconceptions people have or myths that they have about how do we feel good in our bodies? Yeah, absolutely. The biggest myth that people have about how to feel better in their bodies is that they believe that they need to do more or that they somehow themselves are not doing enough or are enough themselves. So almost everybody that comes and works with me, typically the people who come and work with me, they've worked with a whole bunch of different practitioners in the past, but almost all of them have at one point for another been given exercises and stretches and things like that that they're told that they're supposed to do to make themselves stronger. And the issue with exercises and stretches and things like that is, and they're fine, there's nothing wrong with them. But they often don't really touch on the underlying problem, which is how are you actually coordinating your body? How are you actually holding yourself? What are your habitual patterns of tension, things like that? And the assumption that somehow we're too weak or that we need to be doing more often gets in the way of that because when we start to do a whole bunch of exercise or we start thinking about our strength, we start to think that we need to actually hold ourselves tighter. And it can be very counterproductive to the actual experience of living in your body in a way that feels good to you. Yeah.  So is that, is that good posture? No. But that is the most common thing that people think about posture. So if the most common misconception about generally feeling better in your body is that you're too weak, the most common misconception about posture is that it's something rigid that takes a lot of work that oftentimes we're too weak to be able to do because if you do that, if you lift your chest and you pull your head back like this, and you do this, and I invite anyone watching to try this on right now, really do your best posture. If you do this for more than, you know, 15 seconds, you're going to start to notice something, right? For many people, it's going to be fatigue. For some people, it's going to be pain right away, but it's not sustainable. And the truth about good posture is that it's something that should be effortless. Good posture is about allowing your body to function the way that it's meant to. It's using it to its best effect. And very clearly, this is not to your best effect, right? If you were to think about a wild animal doing that, the only time a wild animal might lift and puff themselves up like that is if they were bluffing for a fight, right? If they were faking something to make themselves look bigger. But then if you were to actually watch them and they had to get into a fight or they had to run away, they would never fight like this. They would never run like this. It's completely ineffective. And in fact, that's where some of this bad posture stuff comes from. It comes from a fight or flight response. So in our lives, we experience a great deal of stress. And unlike wild animals, our stress is chronic, right? We have to deal with social situations. We have to deal with bills. We have to deal with business, family, whatever the stresses in your life are. And they're around us all the time. But our bodies and our brains evolved to deal with stress differently. We evolved to deal with those momentary fight or flight responses. And we don't have that anymore. So we often don't actually have the opportunity to let go of that innate response, whether it's to puff up or to actually tighten and bear down. And it becomes something that flies under the radar. It becomes an unconscious habit and those things accumulate over time. And so we end up with all of these underlying patterns of tension. And we're not usually even aware of them, except that they make us feel bad. So with posture, one of the most common things people do, right, is they tend to be collapsed forward in some way, right? But what we think of this, excuse me, what we often think of when we notice ourselves collapsing down is we think, oh, I'm not doing enough work to pick myself up. My core is too weak or my back isn't engaging. But the truth is, you have muscles in the front of you. And those muscles are actually active here. They're closed and they're pulling you down. And when we wrench ourselves up into quote unquote, good posture, that's actually one muscle group fighting another muscle group. It's co-contraction.  Wow. That's interesting. And it makes me think about how this idea can apply, of course, I think about business and marketing. It's like there's this thought about posturing. It's kind of like puffing ourselves up to make ourselves look bigger or more advanced than we might actually be. And that creates tension. It creates tension and it creates stress and it's not natural. And it's not natural for movement and flexibility and kind of responding more gracefully to situations. It's just not as effective is the truth. Yeah. That's right. And so let's talk about tension. So what is muscle tension? I mean, I think that's one of the things that you talk about with your clients work on. What is muscle tension? And is it a good thing, bad thing? How do we work with it? Yeah. So all muscles can do is they can contract and they can relax. That's all they do. And so there's nothing wrong with muscle tension. If we didn't have muscle tension, we wouldn't be able to be upright. We wouldn't be able to move. It would be ridiculous not to have muscle tension. The issue is when we have unnecessary muscle tension. And particularly when we have muscles that are tense, that are not meant to be doing that work, especially all of the time, which is most of us. And we all have our different problem areas, but most of us fall into that in one way or another. And the thing with muscles though, is that they don't have a mind of their own. They only do what your nervous system tells them to do. They only do what your brain tells them to do, what your mind tells them to do. And this isn't always a conscious thing, because a great deal of your coordination and your thinking is unconscious. But it can be a conscious thing. And that's how you can start to get ahead of muscle tension. So if we start to accept that muscles don't have a mind of their own, and there's something we can maybe do about it, then we have to start to think about how do we think in order to change our muscle tone? So to go back to the example of slumping forward being pulled down, one way that we often think of trying to release muscle tension is we basically pull on the other side. That's what we're just talking about. So we might lift ourselves up here and somehow that's supposed to lengthen these muscles. But actually muscles can be tight and fight each other and do it for quite a long time. And it doesn't really work. It's also why some stretching is not very helpful, because it's possible to stretch while still contracting muscle. So I can make this a lot of work to just lower my arm, or I can do it quite passively. And you can probably even see a quality difference to that on the camera. So if we go back to this example of being pulled down, and if we think, okay, first, I'm not going to do my normal thing, which is to pick myself up. Because if we do this, we've already lost. So the first thing to do is to pause and notice our habit that we have in response to the habitual tension and let that go. So this is just where my body wants to be right now. Fine. All right, I don't really want to stay here, but what do I do with it? What do I do with this muscle tension? So what I'm going to do is I'm going to think about it. So I'm literally going to think to myself, what would happen if I let the front of my body release? And immediately I start to breathe. And I get a little bit lighter.  What if I just let myself come up? And all of a sudden, I've let go of most of what was pulling me down in the first place. And so I've righted myself naturally. And that's basically how we can learn to change muscle tension. But to go to the principles of how we think to release muscle tension, probably everyone who's watching, maybe you too, George, has been told at some point, don't, don't worry, don't stress. Stop being anxious, you know, any of those things, it's like, don't think of an elephant like you do it. It's not very helpful. So it's not very helpful to think don't be tense, right? That's not something that's very actionable. It's not very manageable to do. And in fact, normally makes us more tense and more frustrated that we're out of control, which then just makes things worse, comes a feedback cycle. So instead, we want to think to ourselves with directions. We want to give ourselves things to not exactly do because what we're actually doing here is undoing. But we want to think of things that allow us to undo. So directions, like literal directions like in space, like I want to go up. But I'm just thinking them, I'm not going to make myself go up. That's the, that's the trick you have to observe. What happens if I just think about it versus me making it happen?  Well, it's, it's interesting what you said because it's what you're saying is that our thoughts are more connected to the movements of our body than we realize. Yes. And that when we, it's like, instead of having to be so kind of consciously moving everything, it's like we're, we're one between our thoughts in our body and we're just, right? Yeah, exactly.  So a pilot in a 747 is not controlling every aspect of that plane, right? They have access to all of these different instruments and controls and they, they get all of the information coming in from their, their senses, but really they're just making sort of executive decisions and the plane mostly takes care of itself. And if the pilot of a 747, we're trying to micromanage every little part of flying that plane very quickly, they would at least become exhausted if, if not fail entirely, right? You need that instrumentation. And it's kind of the same with our brains. We, we actually can't just control every little muscle and make every little thing happen how we want it to. And if we do try to do that, it very quickly becomes exhausting. It's much less effective. And instead, what we have to do is use our minds, use our brains to consciously direct ourselves, but not try to micromanage it, not try to control it. And what I was just saying about it feeling a little bit airy-fairy is it sounds that way, but it really isn't because again, our muscles only do what our brains tell them to do. And if we're going to use our conscious thought to direct things or at least if we're English speaking, our brains speak English, right? If we tell ourselves to do something with words, that's comprehensible to the lower levels of the brain. And it's because it's specific, it's something they can actually, the lower levels of the brain can actually try to do as opposed to something like don't be tense, which isn't an actionable phrase for the brain. So overall, I mean, as we go through our day, how do we be? How do we move with more ease? Yeah, it's back to those same principles that I kind of mentioned before. It's the ability to first become aware of what you're doing, right? To notice the habits that you have, both the underlying habits of tension and your response to those things. And then to be able to press pause on it so that you can give yourself a new direction. And it sounds a little complicated. It seems like how could I possibly do that in my day to day life? But in fact, it's just a momentary thing of, oh, I just noticed I wasn't breathing. Oh, and I tensed up a little when I noticed it. What if I let that go? Excuse me. And I let something go indeed. And look, there I'm breathing again, right? It's actually quite quick. And if we just throw out these little thoughts of direction of even something as simple as what would it be like if I was a little easier right now? And we just let it land, right? It can make a big difference, especially when you start to notice how often you're preoccupied with the things that are going wrong in your body. So it's not just the magic of that thought. It's also the replacement of the thought of, oh, my shoulder is really bothering me. So when my shoulder is really bothering me, what would it be like if I, instead of starting to pull it, which is not helping anything, if I let that go? And I think, oh, what would be easier in my body? Oh, there I let something go, right? And so I'm a little less focused on what's going wrong. You know, what's amazing is I woke up this morning with a bit of forearm strain for the pain. And when you just said that, I was like, oh, what if I was more easy about this? And like, I feel like the pain went away because I feel like I've been fighting it all morning, kind of like consciously and subconsciously fighting them, like, oh, this is not right. And I must do something about it. I must stretch it or something in this way. And just having you guide us through the moving with more ease, it's like, oh, doesn't have to be that strained. And that's just incredibly common, is the truth of the matter. Yeah. And with my clients, again, many of them have, you know, really serious pathological issues. And yet by shifting their attention and their coordination, the symptoms of those pathologies can often be greatly reduced because so much of it comes out of how we're perceiving pain, how we're responding to it, how we're trying to fight it. And it's not always the most effective solution. So when I introduced you, we mentioned the Alexander technique, right? Tell us about that. Some people may have heard of it, and a lot of people haven't. So what is the Alexander technique?  I am. Yeah. So to become a certified Alexander technique teacher takes three years of postgraduate training. So it's pretty significant training. And it's one of these things that has just sort of flown under the radar over the last like hundred years. And our profession is a little bit to blame for that. We're not the greatest communicators often. But what it is, is basically the most effective way of changing habits of how you're coordinating your body that's ever come around. And the research, the clinical research that exists around it is really supportive, especially for issues of chronic pain. Yes. Well, that's great. And what is, you know, like how does, how does somebody use it? Or is that, yeah, give us a bit more picture of like, if, so people learn that technique with you, like in private sessions, how does that work? Yeah. So typically it's taught in private sessions one on one, although there are different models of teaching coming out, group classes, remote things done digitally, things like that. And it's fundamentally an educational process. So it's not really about a practitioner, like me or somebody like that, trying to fix you. So much as it is about teaching you how your body works and how you can coordinate that yourselves. So those principles that I mentioned of awareness, inhibition or pausing and direction, that's basically the Alexander technique. And it's, it's very simple to talk about that way and a little bit harder to put into practice. And so it takes a little bit of time to learn how to do it and to apply those things in your life and feel like you have some real mastery of it, which is why support from a teacher is very helpful. Yeah, absolutely. So tell, tell, tell us about what kind of client you work with, who should work with you and how, how do people work with you? Yeah. So I already mentioned many of the people that work with me have already seen a variety of people. So I work with a lot of people who are sort of at the edge of their hope with things. And, and then I also work with people who are sort of exceptional performers, musicians, actors, Aikido black belts, folks like that, who are really looking to take their performance to the next level. But the truth is, this is, it's transformational for people just in their everyday lives.   But if you're somebody who goes for a massage every week or every couple of weeks, and it's great if you really enjoy that massage, but if you're doing it just to keep yourself going, learning how to change those things that are underlying can give you such a great grasp of control over, over your life and your body. Speaking of massage, I don't go as often as I would like to actually, but none of us do. But is it, is it, is it a good, I mean, of course, there's different types of massage, but any, any opinions about that, I mean, guidance on, you know, what type which might look for what, what could be dangerous. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. So in general, massage is fine to good, right? If you like it, great. And a lot of people get a lot of really wonderful relief from massage, they, it feels really wonderful to them. And that's, that's perfect. The issue comes when you become dependent on it, and dependent on it in a way that you don't like, right? As far as types of massage to avoid, I, I'm personally a believer that if massage is extremely painful, it's really probably not doing you many favors. But besides that, if it's something that you enjoy, then, you know, go, go all in. The one exception to this that I will add is self massage. So self massage can also be perfectly fine. But if you're somebody who is in a, who's dealing with a lot of pain or a lot of tension, and it's one of the main ways that you're trying to resolve that. In fact, when you, if you've got one of those like hooks or something, when you're, when you're doing that all the time, you can actually be making things worse because you're starting to sensitize yourself to the, to the pain and the experience of that. And so sometimes if people are really sort of addicted to that kind of self manipulation, sometimes it's helpful to, to back that off and see if it's really helpful or not. Right. That's a good point about the sensitization, because I have had kind of like back massagers, you know, and it's like, yeah, it's like, you kind of get used to more and more pressure and exactly.  And one of the characters in your videos is, is Max. Yeah, this guy back here. That's awesome. So I love that you have this kind of partner in your, in your videos. So I, I encourage folks to go and check out your Facebook page and watch some videos.  So people can, if anyone is local or ish can work with you in person, but you work with people virtually also. And how does that work? You want to talk about that a bit? Yeah, I do. And it is a bit different. So in person, I can use my hands to provide information and guidance. And when we're digital, all I can use is my vision and my, and my words to help provide guidance. So it, so it really is a different experience. That said, so I would say that the work that I do in person is probably better than the work that I'm able to do digitally. But the difference that it can still make in the ability to coordinate is, is massive, right? So if the ideal thing would be if I could find a colleague for somebody in their area, I would love to be able to send them their way and maybe provide other support around that. But for many people, that's not possible. There really aren't very many of us. And so in that case, it is possible to do training with people where I'm able to observe what they're doing, provide feedback, because that that's the biggest thing actually is that we're often not aware of the patterns that we have, or we're not able to be aware of the way that we're thinking and how that's coordinating us. So it's helpful to have outside feedback. And I can do that remotely. I don't know if that answers your question exactly. Yeah. So people should contact you anyway, and you'll, you can either refer them or you could work with them virtually. Yeah. The most important thing to me is that people are taken care of. So I came to this work myself because of really debilitating chronic neck pain.  And I also know how I know, I know what it's like to live in that place. And so it's most important to me that people are taken care of. The other way that people can work with me is I do live videos on my Facebook page and I'm more than happy to answer questions either live or in the comments after the fact. Obviously it's not always enough. Sometimes people need more individualized attention, but it's a really good starting place. And people often get kind of surprising, even surprising to be benefits from that. Well, I believe in investing in oneself. And this is one of the, you know, in physical health and well-being is one of the best investments we can make because it translates into everything else. So yeah, it is a good investment in my opinion. And it's worth it. So, Grayson, thank you for sharing with us today. And I hope if anyone is watching and finds benefit or finds this interesting, definitely check out Grayson's website. I'll hop that in the notes of the video. Actually, let's actually say it. Spell it out. Spell it out. Anyway, it's whole bodied. Actually, what is your URL again? It's whole bodied.com. Whole, okay. W-H-O-L-E bodied. B-O-D-I-E-D.com. Yeah, easy. Okay. And then, of course, the, the Facebook page, which is where you put most of your content is Facebook.com slash whole bodied. So, same thing. All right. Thank you so much, George. Yeah, thank you.


All right, so I will use the time while Zunka is searching for my presentation to introduce myself. My name is Nina Ziedler. I'm a partner at DWF, a global law firm and specialized on financial regulatory work and governance questions. And to just give you a bit of a background, I am for quite some years deeply involved, especially here in the Berlin blockchain scene. I'm one of the founding partners of the German Blockchain Association called Bundesblock. And I'm heading the finance working group there since its foundation in 2017. We published what we call the token regulation paper early 2018. Thank you. And built a European group from there covering the topics from the European perspective. And then earlier this year, I had been involved with the initiative by the European Commission to create a private industry blockchain association as main body for their communication with regard to blockchain topics, which is called INATVA, International Association of Trusted Blockchain Applications. And I'm also on the board in that association. We currently organize a larger conference next weekend in Malaga as our first step to establish the communication channel between the private industry and the blockchain sector and the governmental side. So, and I would like to give you an update about the financial regulatory environment for blockchain projects and tokens. So just briefly, I showed precisely this slide last year already. That should visualize what the main, from a financial regulatory perspective, token classes are defined. Not only in Germany, as mentioned above, but this definition here, which defines what a security token is, hands in most of all times, needs a prospectus to be issued prior to you issuing such a token, is actually based upon a European wide definition of securities. And in Germany, we always like to add a couple of further stuff to any regulatory requirements. So we're making it a little bit harder to do business here in Germany. And that is what we're then seeing on the other side. And also to raise this right at the beginning, we will see a lot of changes at the end of this year. There will be a couple of new laws coming up, which will be implemented as of January 2020 already. This is in a couple of months time, and we still don't have the final bill. So this is kind of a bit of guessing what comes later. Security token. Security token includes everything that is transferable. Well, tokens are built for being transferable, so typically you can take off that. Negotiable on a capital market, according to our German financial regulator Baffen, any kind of token exchange is a financial market. Negotiable means that you can trade it, and most of the tokens are built for being traded, so you can take off that as well. Standardized, things like CryptoCity would fall out, but other than that, any normal token would also fall into that category. Now, interesting is a security token can never be an instrument of payment, right? Those are two different types of financial instruments. Hence, cryptocurrencies like virtual currencies would typically not take that box, typically. So that is the criteria that distinguishes security tokens from cryptocurrencies. And then this one was a lot debated over the past years, because that's this last requirement is not really stated in the European definition for securities, but you can take it from the context of the law. The token must be comparable to classical equity or debt instruments, and that criteria, which is by now agreed, for example, by the German regulator Baffen, that is what distinguishes the European-wide security token class from, for example, the US one. So in the US, it doesn't need to be a typical equity or debt-like instrument, but it can be enough that you expect promise from any kind of efforts of others. So it might be a cryptocurrency that you're selling from its purpose, but the expectation of the investor is that it will raise in value and thereby create a profit for you. That would not be comparable to a classical equity or debt instrument, which always relies upon the fact that you have the right to receive some future earnings or interest or alike, and is not only based upon that it raises its value as such. And that is also where we distinct the security token from what we call utility token. And I know, you know, the term utility token is used in so many ways, but in my area we use utility token, not for the classical native token of a blockchain, which would typically be rather a cryptocurrency, but utility token means everything that is neither insecurity nor cryptocurrency. And what does that include? Well, it includes business models like a membership token or a voucher token, for example. That would be a utility token, and that's the only type of token that is up to now completely out of the financial regulatory reach, right? So the security token, as well as only in Germany, the cryptocurrency token are both financial instruments and caught by financial regulation. The cryptocurrency is a financial instrument in Germany because we have this strange thing called unit of account. And the bathroom has voiced already in 2013 that they believe that cryptocurrencies are units of accounts, and thereby they are in Germany only a financial instrument, not in the rest of Europe, but here. So what does this mean? Security tokens typically require a prospectus to be issued prior to the issuance of the token. If a token falls into this European definition of security token, you're lucky, because then you can actually issue one prospectus for whole Europe. If it doesn't, then you might still be caught by national prospectus obligations. So this is not the only reason for being required to write a prospectus. But that, at least, is European-wide regulated, and it's one standard. You one time need to get it approved by your local financial regulator, and from there you can passport it to all other European countries. So that was the basics so far until the end of 2020, also in Germany. Just a quick view, I already mentioned, the difference to especially the important US HAUI test that is truly dominating the whole discussion wherever you look in the internet, but don't mix it up. HAUI test does not apply here in Europe. We have different criteria. So HAUI test requires that it's an investment of money. There's expectation of profits from the investment. No matter where those profits arise from, they don't need to come from any payments or payment-like issuances from the issuer. So you don't need to distribute profits or pay interest, which would make it like what we saw on the previous page, equity or debt-like. It's sufficient that the money is invested in the belief that the instrument itself, the token itself, could raise in value. That's sufficient from the US perspective. And then the profit must come from the efforts of a third party. Well, that's typically the case. When you buy a token, for example, any kind of native token in a new blockchain project, then you might do it because you believe that the team is a great team and will build this whole project and in the end, your token will rise in value. Switzerland adopted that view in 2018 already. My Swiss colleagues were telling me back then there was no need to do so, right, because it has no grounds in the current laws of Switzerland, but nevertheless, they went that way so that the pre-financing and presale, when the token does not yet exist or is not yet usable, in the end creates a Swiss security in that the results are very similar to the US Howard test. So, upcoming now is the implementation of the fifth anti-money law redirective. You might have heard about that already. It is required to be implemented throughout Europe until January 2020. And it will include for the first time also cryptocurrency and tokens into its reach. So, everyone providing access to crypto tokens will be required to apply the KYC rules. That's tough enough, but in addition to that, in summer, the Financial Action Task Force issued even further going recommendations. The Financial Action Task Force is a group of global regulators agreeing on standards with regard specifically to anti-money laundry rules and anti-terrorism financing rules. And they strictly observe that all of its member states implement their recommendations. So, you might read recommendation, well, you know, who's observing that? The countries will, because otherwise they will be kicked out of that group and will exit the group of compliant countries, which will make it their financial system way harder to interact with the rest of the world. So, they are not only asking for banking level AML counter-terrorism financing regulation, which is already anticipated by the EU anti-money laundry directive, but they are going even a step further. They are asking for license requirements, right, so that not only crypto exchanges and wallet providers, which are all access provided from the fiat into the crypto world, will need to do KYC on their customers. In addition of that, they will need to get a public license for doing those. So, that's even a step further. And we in Germany, we anticipate that already for 2020. And then, what is also a problem is this travel rule. What does that mean? The travel rule is currently only known in the US, right? So, we don't have any travel rule in Europe yet. We will get it through the FAT recommendations. It means that in case of a doubt or suspicancy, the KYC providers, in our case, exchanges and wallet providers, will not only need to report any suspicious receiving of funds to their clients, to the public authorities, but they will have to show where the funds are coming from. So, if somebody is now sending any crypto funds from one wallet to the others, they will not only have to report about one side of that deal, but both sides. So, how do crypto exchanges are able to make sure that they can not only state that one of their customers did any transaction, but also where did it go to, right? And the identity of the receiving side of that transaction need also to be insured, to be known to those access providers. And that's creating a problem, because that doesn't really match with how the technology currently works. And there is much debate, you know, how can wallet providers and exchanges actually make sure they are not only knowing the identity of the one initiating the transaction, but also the identity of the one of the receiving end of that transaction. So, we'll see. Yeah, in Germany, we are using, unfortunately, the obligation to implement the fifth AMLD and the FATF recommendation to introduce a new definition into our common banking laws, and that is the definition of crypto assets. So, deviating from this year, we will get a fourth category. And the fourth category will comprise of cryptocurrencies and partly also of utility token. So, the piece of the unregulated tokens will get even smaller down here. Crypto assets are defined as tokens which are used either due to a contract or because the public simply uses the token as such as a means of exchange or payment while not being issued by any public government or alike. Or, and that is new, so that's basically old. That's what the cryptocurrency had been seen so far as well, the unit of account. But in addition to that, the crypto assets will also include any token which is expected to be used for investment purposes. And by that new criteria, we in Germany also take a step towards the how we test. So, we are leaving, unfortunately, the objective criteria which you can assess fairly easily and are moving into the more subjective space by adding expectations and certain views to that definition. So, unfortunately, the crypto asset as we will get it as of early 2020 will include any kind of token which is sold or bought from an investment perspective. Yeah, and in addition to that, that new type of financial instrument that we're getting, Germany intends to introduce a new license requirement and that is for crypto custodian-ship. It's pretty unclear what that all includes because there are so many technical solutions which you could describe as custody. But at least during the past months of debate, there seems to be agreement that this will only really include custodian wallet providers or service providers which means that they will need to have access to the private key, right? So, if the private key remains with the user, those technical solutions should not be touched by this. So, by introducing this new license, Germany tries to already answer to this requirement and goes beyond the mere European requirements, which I think is problematic. I believe in Germany we should simply stick to the European rule because otherwise we will never be able to create a true European whole wide financial markets. All right, just quickly jumping through this. A list of typical license requirements applying throughout Europe. I'm not going into details here. In Germany we're adding some stuff atop of that due to the fact that we make cryptocurrencies and in the future crypto assets a financial instrument, so any dealing with that, any service offering you build surrounding that will require a license. Plus the new crypto custody license. And what is also coming next is the electronic registers for the new electronic securities. Currently by law the securities formally need a paper in Germany and that will be amended. But the discussion is that the electronic registers, which, funnily enough, are called in the position paper throughout blockchain registered. They are supposed to be organized by licensed entities. So, I wonder how that plays along, right? So, if you have a licensed entity running a blockchain, well, we'll see. There is no draft law yet in that regard, so we're still waiting for that. You could get the idea that this whole crazy regulation, which is really complicated, even for a specialist by now, and getting even more complicated now, is truly stifling any innovation in Germany, right? So, how did we get here, right? Why is there so little understanding about the positive opportunities the blockchain technology can deliver? Well, actually, I think the reasons are here. So, where did we fail as a community? We again, we started with Bitcoin as kind of a true public digital infrastructure project, usable by everyone, open to everyone. And from there, new projects started and they realized in order to speed up, they would need to pay developers and marketing and stuff like that, so they were needing funding, right? That started the whole ICO craze, which was really damaging the community and also how this whole blockchain movement is seen from the outside. That, in the end, triggered the tightening regulation and it also ended up in a complete loss of focus. So, most of the projects I know by now are not building public infrastructure anymore. They are building their own private revenue-based system, right? And we simply must be honest. We cannot expect any regulatory release from any rules for private profit ventures. So, we really need to start to be honest. Are we actually building something decentralized? Are we actually democratizing anything here? Typically, even with the non-traditional blockchain structures, you're not democratizing anything. You're plutocrotizing the world, right? Everything that is token-based and is based upon the idea who has more tokens earns more and stuff like that, so staking and all of those things has nothing to do with democracy, right? And I really, you know, be cautious if you're using the terms democratizing or decentralizing, right? Explain what you're honestly doing. So, in my view, we need to join efforts to return through the core values to also acknowledge the importance of off-chain governance, right? So, in any kind of system that you're building, there are decisions being made prior to setting the code into the Internet, right? And this off-chain part is typically neglected. Why is that? Because people don't want to bear responsibilities, right? They don't want to talk about who's actually responsible for what. They, you know, often the scene is trying to hide behind the shield of decentralization, but even if you're looking at Bitcoin or Ethereum, if you're honest, there are certain circles determining where to move into, into what direction those systems go, right? They are just, you know, trying to hide behind the code. But that is not convincing to regulators and politicians, right? Be honest. Disclose the holistic governance of your project, not only the on-chain part. So, and then I believe if we, again, focus on really creating decentralized public infrastructure with public access to everyone, you know, same rules for everyone, objective criteria for nodes, and that includes, to be honest, you must close data processing agreements somehow because there is data processing going on, and GDPR simply requires that. And if you want to have any industry player on your chain, then you need to have that. And it's not that painful, right? You need a tick box for downloading. So I still believe you could classify those things as permissionless, right? But the people who want to play along, they need to agree to certain standards. Otherwise you will never get mass adoption in this area. And then transparent and inclusive governance, including the off-chain part. There is quite a lack of research in that area. Or maybe, yeah, on this slide, I'm again trying to argue how we got there and that funding is the main problem and that we need to think about new funding mechanisms which might not be token-based, but maybe more copying, like, tax-funded projects like the streets, the real streets outside. So that will need some new thinking. And I wanted to give a hint to the crypto governance. Disclosure questionnaire we are working on within the Wharton group here. I added some links there and I summarized for you what this disclosure questionnaire is about to give projects the opportunity to assess their own project and their own governance if they actually took a look into all of the questions which are important and on the other side to build up a database for more research in that area and also to give users the opportunity to assess how decentralized and democratized is a project, actually. All right, I was given a hint that I need to come to an end. So thank you very much and we'll be here for questions. Any questions? Is it just because there has been some non-honesty from blockchain people or there's also like a contraction from the other side not to allow that movement to grow too freely from the existing financial and legal structures to try to control back, maybe? Yeah, certainly. So the current rules, especially in the anti-money laundry and counter-terrorism financing area, they are built around the current financial system which is trying to close loopholes, right? And obviously a system that is building up in peril to that is somehow contradicting that purpose, right? So there is much thinking giving currently in that field, you know, how do we handle that? And I personally think we need to go beyond the known traditional mechanisms. A colleague of mine and I, we wrote a piece about this FATF recommendation, especially the travel rule. And I think the current system builds up on the banks actually doing work which is owed by our states to the whole community, right? It's a governmental purpose to prevent money laundry and terrorism financing. And in order to deliver on that task, they are leveraging the banking system and said, hey, you have all your customer data, so you do that for us. And in case you observe anything suspicious, please report back to us, right? And I doubt that this will be a valid system in the future when more and more is run on technologies like blockchain. I believe the regulators will move like in the US, the SEC already does to gaining that data directly. So that's why the SEC started to run full nodes of Bitcoin and Ethereum a couple of months ago. And then to work with data analytics firms, encrypted analytics firms to find those suspicious transactions. I think that's where unavoidably we are heading to. But not many states acknowledged that yes, we in Germany, we are far away from those ideas. So we are currently really sticking to the traditional system of KYC.


In this lecture, which will be answering these questions, what is the cardinality of infinite sets? Are all infinite sets equivalent? Which has more elements than natural numbers or real numbers and can a set be equivalent to its subset? When we were small kids, the first thing we learned maybe were alphabets, but after that we were taught how to count. One, two, three, four, five, and we can go on and on counting. Have you ever wondered how many natural numbers there are? These numbers are called natural numbers or counting numbers because they develop naturally and they are used to count. But first let us define the cardinality of a set. We say that the cardinality of a set is just the number n, such that A, the set A, for example, has five elements. So as an example, the set of vowels A, E, I, O, U has cardinality five since it has five elements. Now for a finite set, finite sets are easier to handle. Take note that if A is a finite set, n of A is equal to k, if A can be placed in a one-to-one correspondence with a set one, two, three up to k. So a one-to-one correspondence is simply a function. It's a correspondence between two sets A and B, such that for every x in A, there exists exactly one element in B mapped to it and for every B in B, there corresponds exactly one element in A. So for example, for the set A, E, I, O, U, its cardinality is five and we can place the set A, E, I, O, U in a one-to-one correspondence with the numbers one, two, three, four, five. It can also be with five, four, three, two, one. This correspondence need not be unique. So it's just a pairing off. Like in real life, we want everyone to have a partner bawat isang tao, isang partner lang. Hindi pwede ang two is to one or one is to two, isang tao, dalaw ang kanyang partner, hindi yun fair, di ba? So we want it to be a one-to-one pairing. Now, we define two sets to be equivalent if they have the same cardinality. So equivalently, A and B are equivalent if they can be placed in a one-to-one correspondence. So for example, the set A equal to A, E, I, O, U and the set B with elements one, two, three, four, five are equivalent. So take note also that if A is finite and B is a proper subset meaning there are elements of A which are not in B then the number of elements in B is strictly less than the number of elements in A. So for example, if A is one, two, three, four, five and B is the set two, four then take note that the cardinality of B is two and the cardinality of A is five. So the cardinality of B is strictly less than the cardinality of A. Now the question now is, is this also true for infinite sets? In particular, can infinite set possibly be equivalent to a proper subset? So maybe this difficulty imagine but we can see later that this is true. So let us first look at the familiar number set, the set of natural or counting numbers. So n is the set one, two, three, four, five the kth element is k and then the next element is k plus one. This is an infinite set since it goes on and on. What is the cardinality of this set? When we have a finite set we can easily count but if we have an infinite set can we define the number of elements? Of course we can. We just have to assign a certain symbol. What is the cardinality of the set of natural numbers? We call it the aleph null which is represented by the Hebrew alphabet aleph. It's also called aleph not or aleph zero. Let us now answer the following question. So you've always heard that infinity plus one is still infinity. What is infinity times infinity? Now this is something not so well defined but if we have aleph null what is aleph null plus one? What is aleph null plus two? What is aleph null plus aleph null? And what is aleph null times aleph null? So maybe this is a bit too complex but I can easily show that all of this will be equal to aleph null. Now David Hilbert is a German mathematician and one of the most influential mathematicians he gave the paradox of the Grand Hotel or the Hilbert Hotel problem which presented counter-intuitive properties of infinite sets. So I'm warning you this is counter-intuitive so it's not the usual thing that's the usual way of counting. So this is the Hilbert Hotel problem. Imagine a hotel with infinitely many rooms which can only accommodate one person per room. So and for a certain night each room is occupied. So if a new guest arrives can he be accommodated? Kasha pa ba siya? What if two guests arrive? Kasha pa ba sila? What if infinitely many guests arrive? Kasha pa ba sila? So take note that let's number the rooms as room one, room two, room three and remember there are aleph null rooms so this will be infinitely many. Each room is occupied let's call them guest one, guest two, guest three and so on. So suppose that one person arrives and he wants a room, he needs a room so can he still be accommodated? So anong gagawin ng hotel manager? Remember that all the rooms are already occupied by one person. Two persons cannot share a room so dapat one is to one lang and there are aleph null guests there are aleph null rooms. So can he still be accommodated? So what do we do? Assuming that all the guests are nice you can request them to transfer to the next room that's what you will do. Ask guest one to go to room two as you guest two to go to room three and so on. In other words guest n who is in room n will now go to room n plus one. Take note that you have infinitely many rooms so every room has a room beside it so everyone can move one room let's say to the left for example and that will vacate room number one meaning the guest who arrived can still be accommodated. So what will that mean? The number of rooms is aleph null the number of guests is aleph null plus one with the arrival of one guest but there is still a one to one correspondence between guests and rooms so what will that mean? Aleph null plus one is still equal to aleph null so adding one does not change the value of aleph null. Now what if two guests arrive? Can they still be accommodated? So similar to our solution for one guest arriving we simply move guest one to can can you guess? Guest one will move to room three guest two will move to room four guest three to room five and in general guest n will move to room n plus two. So if you're occupying room ten you're just going to move to room twelve. If you're occupying room one million just go to room one million two and you have infinitely many rooms aleph null number of rooms but with this movement the first two rooms will now be vacated so therefore the two new guest will be accommodated. So what does this mean? Aleph null plus two is still going to be equal to aleph null. So in general suppose k number of guests arrive k can be any number they can still be accommodated by transferring guest one to room k plus one. So example if there'll be ten guests arriving you ask guest one to move to room eleven you ask guest two to move to room twelve and so on. In general if k guests arrive you simply ask the guest in room number k room number n to move to room k plus n. So what does this mean? This will mean that aleph null plus k is equal to aleph null. So it does not really change the value of this of aleph null. Now imagine we have a hillburt hotel with infinitely many rooms and suppose hillburt has a bus so let's call it the hillburt bus with infinitely many seats and suppose the hillburt bus arrives and all the seats are occupied. So what does this mean? It means that the hillburt bus has aleph null passengers. So suppose they come from somewhere and they want to be accommodated for the night k kasyapa ba ang mga nasa hillburt bus? If yes this will actually mean aleph null plus aleph null is still going to be aleph null. Kaya pa ba? Kaya pa yan. So how do we do it? So what we do now it's not that simple. What we do is you ask the person, guest one in room one to move to room two. You ask guest two who is in room two to move to room four. Guest three where do you think should he go? The guest in room three will now go to room six. In general the guest in room n will go to room two times n. And if n is any natural number 2n is still going to be a natural number therefore all the guest can move to room two times n. So what does that mean? We have occupied only the event number rooms and if you think of all the event numbers this will still be infinite. So what will be vacated will be the odd number rooms room number one room number three room number five and so on. So therefore you still have infinitely many rooms vacated. And these are now ready for occupancy. So the passengers in the Hilbert bus can now be accommodated. So what does that mean? It means that alefnal plus alefnal is alefnal. So far is that clear? So let us review. We have said that alefnal plus one that's the one guest arriving is still alefnal. Alefnal plus two is still alefnal. Alefnal plus k is still alefnal and now alefnal plus alefnal is still alefnal. Meaning two times alefnal is alefnal. And you can also show somehow that alefnal plus alefnal plus alefnal is still alefnal. So what you can do is you vacate all the rooms so ba'yagil lang siyang only the you just leave all the multiples of three rooms vacant in which case infinitely many can still fit in. Now before we deal with the question what is alefnal times alefnal? Pwede pa ba yon? Let us now consider the number sets defined by n, the set of natural numbers, w, the set of whole numbers which will start from zero and then one, two, three, four. E is the set of even numbers that will be zero, two, four, six, eight. The kth element will be in two times k so these are the natural numbers or the whole numbers which when divided by two will leave no remainder and zero is an even number and o is the set of odd numbers one, three, five, seven. The kth element is 2k plus one. In other words, odd numbers are just even numbers and you have z, the set of all integers. These are the whole numbers together with the negative of the natural numbers. And q is the set of rational numbers so they are called rational because we can imagine them. These are just numbers of the form a over b where a and b are integers, b is not zero and in terms of decimals these are just terminating or non-terminating but repeating decimals. Example three-fourths is a rational number one-fourth, one-third. One-third is non-terminating but repeating one-fourth is a terminating decimal that's 0.25. Now, but we also have the so-called irrational numbers and these are numbers which are not rational meaning we don't use them in our everyday lives. Example will be pi squared of two and these are in terms of decimals the decimals which are non-terminating and non-repeating. So the set of real numbers is just the set of rational union the set of irrational numbers. So if we represent this using event diagram you see that these are two disjoint sets rational, irrational. Inside rational will be the natural numbers inside the set of whole numbers inside the set of integers. And take note that the set N is a proper subset of W the set W is a proper subset of Z and Z is a proper subset of the rational numbers because there are rational numbers which are not integers. There are integers which are not whole numbers and zero is a whole number but it's not a natural number. So, an tanong what is the cardinality of these sets? So what is the cardinality of W of Z of even numbers of rational and irrational numbers and the real numbers? So for example the set of natural numbers is contained inside the set of whole numbers but you can establish a one-to-one correspondence to show that a certain set has cardinality alef null you simply have to show that you can pair off one set with a set of natural numbers which is one-to-one meaning bahwat isang part isang bawat natural number I make a partner do sa isang set and vice versa. So if you look at the set of natural numbers one, two, three, N and you look at the whole number zero, one, two you just pair off one with zero two with one three with two in general N with N minus one. So in other words there is a one-to-one correspondence so kahit mas maliit tignan yung natural numbers than whole numbers actually they have the same number of elements. This is counter-intuitive unlike infinite sets if it is a proper subset it always has less elements but for infinite sets it's a different thing. Now let's look at the set of even numbers two, four, six, eight and so on we can include zero and then the odd numbers be one, three, five two N minus one you can easily have a pairing let's say one the natural will go to two even two natural will go to four three will go to six N will go to two N so if I give you let's say 10 as a natural number it will be paired off with 20 and let's say I'll give you an even number 100 what is the natural number which goes with it it will be 50 so take the this well defined because if N is natural two N is even and if M is even you divide it by two it's still going to be a natural number so what does it mean? even numbers this will be a proper subset of the natural numbers but they have the same number of elements so parang nakakasyak but it's true because we have shown that there is a one-to-one correspondence between natural and even numbers for the odd numbers it can also be similar so even if parang kalahati lang yung even ng natural they have the same number of elements meaning one-half of alefnal will still be alefnal the same manner that twice alefnal is still going to be alefnal how about for natural numbers and integers? take note natural numbers parang kalahati lang siya ng integers and we can use the same reasoning pag kalahati lang or times two siya ng isa and one is alefnal the resulting set is still going to have cardinality alefnal so the one-to-one correspondence will be if you have let's say the number zero so integers we can pair it off with zero then what you do now you cannot pair off one with one two with two what will happen? if you have this pairing of positive integers with natural numbers there'll be no more partners for the negative integers so you have to make sure lahat make a partner para lahat masaya so what you do is you divide z into two parts or n into two parts which will be even and odd and now you have to map the natural numbers which are even with the positive integers and the natural numbers which are odd with the negative integers and this will ensure that all of them will be paired off with one element so therefore this will be a one-to-one correspondence and this will mean that the set of natural numbers and the set of integers are again equivalent again the set of integers is seemingly bigger than the set of natural numbers because you have negative of the natural numbers but eventually they have the same the same cardinality now it's a little bit more tricky for rational numbers what you do is you can just represent the rational numbers as an array so you have the numbers one and then two and then three then form all possible combinations so you can have the first row will simply be one over one one over two one over three and so on the first column is one over one two over one three over one and so on so you will have alefnal rows and alefnal columns so you will have how many elements all in all it will be alefnal times alefnal so what is alefnal times alefnal if we can show that there is a one to one correspondence between the rational numbers which we have formed this way and these are only the positive rational numbers then it will mean that rationals and natural numbers are actually equivalent now you cannot make the pairing one goes to one over one two goes to one over two because for the first row your natural numbers will all be used up the same manner you cannot just use the pairing with the column so what you do is the trick is you imagine an infinite string and then number that with one two three for the natural numbers and you string the rational numbers diagonally so if you do it this way take note that one over one will be map to one one over two will be map to two two over one is map to three and in general n over m is map to it's something not simple n plus the quantity m plus n minus one times m plus n minus two over two a bit complicated but it works and these are one to one correspondence so what does it mean? aleph null times aleph null is still aleph null so let us recall again review the even numbers and the odd numbers are proper subset of n n is a proper subset of w z q but all of these sets have the same cardinality aleph null hence they are all equivalent so these only a property of infinite sets an infinite set may be equivalent to a proper subset and this is not true for finite sets in fact you can define infinite sets to be infinite a set is infinite if it can be placed in a one to one correspondence with a proper subset of itself so we say that a is countably infinite if it is equivalent to the set of natural numbers meaning aleph null so theoretically it's still countable because the numbers are discrete so you can count one, two, three and so on until you die but you can continue counting and counting it will never end but you can count okay so but is the set of real numbers also countably infinite meaning does it have a cardinality equal to aleph null so anong mas marame real numbers or natural numbers so this time maybe you can say that real numbers but it took some time to prove that okay so it's intuitive mas marame ang real but remember earlier you thought that natural numbers have more elements than even numbers so there is a German there was a German mathematician George Kantor who developed set theory he studied infinite sets and their cardinality and showed that there are more real numbers than natural numbers specifically he showed that the cardinality of n the set of natural numbers is less than the cardinality of the set s which is the open interval from 0 to 1 meaning the set of all real numbers between 0 and 1 take note if a number is between 0 and 1 it can be expressed as a decimal of the form 0 point then you have you have numbers following 0 point something and this can be terminating it can be non terminating for example 0.25 is between 0 and 1 0.333 dot dot dot is also between 0 and 1 so Kantor argues what we call natural argument to show that we cannot establish a 1 to 1 correspondence between n and the set s and the argument is by contradiction so we call it now the diagonal argument so what do you mean by argument by contradiction so he first assumed that n and s will have the same number of elements what do you mean by a set has a left now elements it will mean that you can theoretically enumerate all so suppose you can enumerate all elements between 0 and 1 so take note that in this argument if you list down a number let's say r1 is 0.00012345 let's just keep it finite first r2 is 0.04256437 r3 and r4 are given by 0.29578356 and 0.52679013 we take note that we can actually create a new number from this 4 which will be distinct from the 4 numbers enumerated so we take note in r1 the first decimal digit is 0 in r2 the second decimal digit is 4 in r3 it's 5 and in r4 the fourth is 7 how do we form a new number which is not the same as the previous 4 numbers what we do is we simply choose the decimals the first decimals should not be equal to the first decimal of r1 the second digit should not be the same as the second digit of r2 the third digit is not equal to the third digit of r3 so for example the first decimal is 0 just choose any number not equal to 0 for example 3 the second decimal of r2 is 4 for the second decimal choose anything not equal to 4 for example 1 so if we proceed this way take note we form the new decimal 0.3148 and it's not the same as r1 r2 r3 and r4 so if we extend this argument for all the decimals between 0 and 1 we actually can show that you cannot enumerate all the numbers between 0 and 1 so this is how Cantoy did it you have the set the number 1 is mapped to r1 for example you can enumerate all real numbers between 0 and 1 so 1 is mapped to let's say r1 of the form 0. we express the decimals in the form a11 a12 a13 and so on 2 is mapped to r3 r2 3 is mapped to r3 in general n is mapped to rn and rn is expressed as 0.a and 1 that's just one number a and 2 a and 3 and so on and then we now show that you cannot enumerate all because you can actually create another number which is not in the list so we are assuming that all the numbers between 0 and 1 are already in this list so how do we create that number so let r be the number let's say 0.b1 b2 b3 and so on that can go forever where b1 is not the same as the first digit of r1 b2 is not the same as a22 which is the second digit in r2 and bj in general will not be the same as the jth digit of rj and take note because this number is not equal to r1 r2 r3 because they differ by at least one numeral it cannot be equal to any of the given numbers r1 rn and so on so what does that mean? the set of natural numbers is not equivalent to the set of points between 0 and 1 the set 0 and 1 is just a subset it's a small part of the set of real numbers but it has a lot more elements than the set of natural numbers so we cannot place the two sets in a 1 to 1 so which means that the set of natural numbers is strictly less than the cardinality of the set of points between 0 and 1 question is which has more elements? the set of numbers between 0 and 1 or the whole real numbers the whole set of real numbers take note the set 0, 1 can be expressed as a finite line segment and the set of real numbers can be expressed or can be represented by an infinite number line you are familiar with the number line so 0, 1 is finite r is infinite can we place them in a 1 to 1 correspondence? so let's do it geometrically so for example if you have two finite line segments you can place them in a 1 to 1 correspondence by just get any point outside the two lines and then connect the point to one point on one given line and then just connect this point and extend so it intersects the second line and this will be the partner points so if you continue this way all the points in the first line will be partnered with another point in the second line so there's no problem if you have finite lines but you must also do the partnering in the correct manner if you just draw perpendicular lines it will not be a 1 to 1 correspondence because some points in the longer line will not be mapped two points in the shorter line now how about if you have an infinite line and a finite line so what we do is you simply bend the finite line and you can now map it this way get the midpoint of that arc and you simply map with a fixed point and then pair it up with the points on the curved line and then try to see where it intersects the line on the number line now this can be easily seen if you remember the tangent graph you have the line pi over 2 or negative pi over 2 to pi over 2 is mapped actually to an infinite line meaning if you have tangent x and you simply let x be between negative pi over 2 and pi over 2 then it will generate the whole set of real numbers this is just a 1 to 1 correspondence one point between negative pi over 2 pi over 2 to one point between negative infinity to positive infinity so there is a 1 to 1 correspondence between a line segment which is finite and an infinite line again counter-intuitive kasi mukang mas maraming points ang infinite line but actually they have the same number of points and it's not alef null this number is greater than alef null now cantor went into depression several times in his life and they noticed that each time he was depressed he would be thinking about one question is there a number between the cardinality of the set of natural numbers and the cardinality of the real numbers which we call now alef 1 so up to the day that he died and he died in a hospital I think thinking about this problem it was that he never was able to prove it that there is a number between alef null and alef 1 but he was able to establish that there are different degrees of infinity alef null is the smallest infinity it's the cardinality and the set of real numbers will have a bigger cardinality which we now call alef 1 now cantor's big question is now called the continuum hypothesis which states that there is no set whose cardinality is strictly between that of the natural numbers and the real numbers it seems to be a very simple question but it was included in the 23 problems posted by Hilbert and this was the first problem these were important math problems during that time which were unsolved some have been solved but for the continuum hypothesis I cannot say that it has really been solved well it has been shown that at this point you cannot prove nor disprove it so it seems that cantor's thinking over it was not really in way it is a difficult problem to prove it with existing Zermella Frankl's set theory or without what we call the action of choice perhaps if we change this set theory or the action of choice maybe we can prove or disprove so again the things that we learned now are counter-intuitive but we learned something that in mathematics we actually have to be open-minded because what seems to be obvious is not maybe that obvious and what seems to be real may actually be not real but we can always show it and we can prove or disprove our hypothesis but if on a certain night you need a hotel remember that there's always a room in Hilbert's hotel


Today guys we take a look at a new artifact to the game which arrived with the Guns, Love and Tentacles DLC. The artifact is called the Pearl of Inevitable Knowledge. How's it going guys my name is DPJ and today I'll be giving you another BR3 video if you do enjoy it leaving a like really helps out and subscribe if you do want to see more. So this is an artifact rewarded to you at a certain point within the DLC story. I will try to be a spoiler free as possible as I can so I won't show footage at all but this is rewarded during the call of Gileon part of the DLC story towards the end, which is given to you by Claptrap at the Lodge. And straight away guys you can see this thing is actually a decent artifact. Now in terms of genuine artifacts I guess it's limited in what it can offer. Skill wise I guess this again is limited also but it's all about the stack damage and those consecutive successful hits which grant 1% increase damage per hit up to 15 times at maximum stacks and an additional 20% damage. Now as far as testing this thing it's relatively straightforward it does what it says and it works great. And yes it does stack with everything else including 90 weapons which have similar benefits with consecutive hits increasing damage. And yes as you might be thinking this un-15 consecutive hits grants a total of 35% additional damage. 15% for the first 15 shots then anything else after that will gain an additional 20% damage so 35 in total. Now in terms of being a top tier artifact I wouldn't in reality pull it up there. Yes it's truly unique yes everybody will get this but there are much better artifacts in this game. Artifacts offering weapon damage or elemental damage and so on basically void all what this offers with only in reality 35% additional damage there's nothing else here this offers and when you miss or reload that additional damage is at the window and other artifacts that damage bonus is stoned. So yeah in terms of being a top tier artifact I'm afraid it's far from there's just too much out there now which offer way way more and in reality I don't see a position for this in many builds if any at all but hey that's just my opinion people. I mean if this thing can drop after in decent skills we can see it's got fire rate and magazine size of 50% but if it could drop after an additional damage here which would be quite rare as it's a one-time thing it's a one-time reward unless you mess around with your pc safe files and doubt we'll see too many of them. But like I said in my opinion all of the artifacts in the game can drop with random rules and those random rules can make it by far better than this and what this can offer. So yeah guys my thoughts on the pearl of a nethable knowledge artifact rewarded near the end of the guns love and tentacles dlc stow campaign and on that note guys we have come to the end of the video if you guys enjoyed it leaving a like really helps out if you're new around here and want to see more borderlands be sure to subscribe and if you never want to miss a video upload you can turn notifications on by hitting that bell button but guys thanks as always for stopping by hopefully you enjoyed the video and hopefully I will see you on that next one


Hi everyone, Joe for jatsby's casebreaks.com coming at you with 2021 panini flawless baseball one brief case break Random team number four second half the case that we popped open the other night last night last night big Thanks to this group Maybe two nights ago big things of this group for making it happen. Thanks for the people Thanks to the people who bought spots straight up and then Congrats again to the winners of those two filler packs. We did those quick-pitch packs All right, there's all the teams right here Let's go. Let's roll it randomized names and teams four and a five nine times for names and teams one two three four five six seven eight nine and Just nine times right yeah four and a five nine times We got dusty on the pole and Michael in the 30 spot Four and a five nine times for the teams one two three Four and ninth and final time After nine. We've got the snakes the diamond bags down to the TV rays All right Dusty with the diamond backs Michael with the Tigers Danny with the Phillies Michael with the Yankees Darren You got the Royals Diego with my Dodgers Daniel with the Ems Michael with the Nats and the Giants Dusty with the pirate Danny with the Reds Dusty with the Brew Crew Michael with the Rangers Dusty with the Astros Daniel with the Red Sox Last spot mojo star next your name Jake angels Jeremy Padres Michael Marlins and Rockies Danny with the Mets Nicholas with the A's Michael with the Cubs Adrian with the Blue Jays Michael with the Braves Dusty with the Guardians Carl with the Twins and Orioles Darren with the White Sox Diego with the Cardinals and Michael with the Tampa Bay Rays Sort this alphabetically and we're gonna pause the video when we come back We're gonna see if there's any trades and then we'll have the break stick around BRB All right, welcome back ladies and gentlemen No deals were done here in this one box break flawless Thanks everybody for getting into it appreciate it Now the first half from what I remember was pretty good Maybe the second half will be even better. I'm at the Lakers hosting the Sixers And Lakers are only down by five With about 140 left in the first half, so it's a lot better than I thought it would be All right, so let's cover up the hits Gem is on on the right side The auto whoever that is is on the left side My small print just tells you that the gems are naturally mine and not lab grown nice cards here Let's see what we got. I think we're starting off with a train whistle ladies and gentlemen. It's a four out of five Dual relic Dustin Padreia laser show Boston Red Sox Daniel last spot mojo Daniel out of five and under get the train whistle All aboard the Big Hit Express Got Mastercraft triple relic 11 out of 20 Robin yam piece of his lumber on top there, too. That's pretty cool That's dusty with the brew crew seven out of seven might Yastremski Carl Yastremski's grandson. Well, it doesn't Rex Doesn't matter. There's David Wells eight out of 15 Spring training doesn't matter Rex That's Blue Jays edition of David Wells. That'll be for Adrian and Toronto Nick Gonzalez three color patch and autograph one out of 15 Yeah, you've got a lot of 80s and 90s Numbers are out there in mostly spring training games. It doesn't really matter Dodger starting lineup is pretty much set they just need to get a couple swings in just to just to Get some reps rest of it just trying to figure out the rest of the roster 15 out of 15 two color patch and autograph Brady singer. Oh, we got a nice one coming up here That's Royals by the way that goes to Darren and two out of five a piece of the elephant right here Dalton Jeffrey star swatch signatures for Oakland Nicholas L with the A's There you go Nicholas All aboard the Big Hit Express And the last one here is another star squash signature signature this time for Miami nine out of 15 That is a Jesus Sanchez. That'll be for Michael Osia and the Miami Marlins Nice Terry said Terry's holding outman keeps up the good. Yeah, there's been some guys like, you know, the number 26 27 28 guys on the roster. Who's that gonna be? You know Outman looks at think Jake Lamb went three for three today Those are the battles that were that we're looking at not the not the final score Casuals will look at the final score and the the records, but The real baseball fans know that spring training doesn't matter the players themselves say One and a four it's glorified practice another train whistle for Wow for Detroit double diamond KC mice former number one overall pick a keeper on my fantasy team hopefully the Hopefully the restrictor plate will be taken off of KC mice and he'll be he'll be unleashed this season Michael Osia Detroit congrats and all aboard the Big Hit Express Don't see the double diamond too often. All right The autograph. Good luck everybody. Got a got a pitcher or a player throwing What is this? Who do we got here? Whoa? nine out of 15 Sandy Kofax autograph That's Diego who got randomized the who won a spot in a filler break quick pitch pack 23 got randomized my Dodgers And it gets a really nice out of 15 Sandy Kofax autograph That's it ladies and gentlemen Case closed on random team for I'm Joe. I'll see you next time for the next break. Bye. Bye