citizens. Thomas Looninger and Alexander Jadilek from Vienna are experts in that field of work, and they will introduce the current state of this topic. Both of them belong to Aka Furat, which has now got a new name, which we'll put in later, and it's basically focusing on privacy laws of citizens of the country. Thomas has already done many, many presentations on this topic, in Belgium, also in the parliaments. Alexander is part of epicenter.org as a lost lawyer, and the stage is yours. And welcome everyone to the translation. This translation is done by Nini and Starfish, and we welcome you. All right. A little bit of January topics, though a working group on... In 2017, we reached our highly set goals. So we were thinking, what do we do now? Are we going to work on or are we just going to stop now? But there was this Mr. Snowden, and this made us realize that we have to move on. We are working on many other topics in data retention now, including the state surveillance law, as well as net neutrality and other issues. And so we started... We changed our name because we thought that data retention is not enough to tell what we're actually aiming for. The new work epicentrum works wants to show that it's like shock waves through all of society, the topics that affect us in this field. We're going to work for basic and human rights in Austria. And we have a lot of stickers with the slogan, civil society works, because we think it's a recipe for success that if we work with support from the citizenship, for example, when we work against the secret service, but also with telecom organizations. This talk is not only about epicenter, but also about net politics in Austria and generally. For example, there have been many things going on there. We now have a regular event called Netzpolitische Abend, net political evening, which is happening once a month in Vienna. We learned in Berlin how this works at the Netzpolitische Bier, and a group of people found itself to replicate the same thing in Vienna. And we have always had a full house, really every single time, for very different kinds of talks. For example, what the unions are doing when it comes to consumer protection rates, but also more core things. Without any structure, we're just a discussion room. There is no statutes or organization behind. Just join if you ever happen to be there in Vienna for the right time. At the same time, last year, there was also the founding of the Chaos Computer Club Wien. Yet another try of founding a Chaos Computer Club in Vienna. There was a Chaos Neigruppe in Vienna. There have been a break, but now there's a new group like this. The Case Computer Club in Austria has been active with consultation by the parliament, but also pulled off a very interesting event called Privacy Week. Austria didn't have a bigger net politics event than one evening event, and this changed with the Privacy Week this year. We had stellar talks, and I really want to thank everyone who worked together for making this happen. We're looking forward that this works next year as well. And another thing that I definitely have to mention, a Jugendhakt, which you from Germany probably know. It's the concept that you youngsters teach how to program how to code with mentoring systems. And I was at the first time where that happened in Austria. And now we have this going on in Austria with the same concept that you guys had in Germany, and I've heard nothing but good things going on with that. And if you have any youngsters around you that are interested in like sending them there, it's a lot of fun. It's really good for them. All right, let's get to the hot facts now. The most important law this year was the Staatsschutzgesetz, the state safety law. We've been talking about the problematic aspect of this law in Austria for quite some time now. And because of a lot of privacy issues, this is something that we really need to pay attention to and not approve of. Over 30,000 people signed our petition to watch this law and not make it pass the way it's been constructed at the moment. We've done a lot of creative things to work upon this topic. And I'm very thankful for everyone involved in working on this. The bigger picture is something very simple. What we see here is the parliament building. And what we did was we took balloons and put a security camera watching, rising high into the sky. And with this very small but very creative concept, we really made it big in the news because this is something that works visually very well. Unfortunately, politicians did not think about reconsidering the way that they're putting this law forward. So we worked on it again and did something different and portrayed on buildings of political importance related to this law, slogans that we are basically creating new secret services. And we also portrayed Edward Snowden's face on the buildings with projectors. And it was one of the very few snowy nights in Austria. And it was very, very effective and it worked really well. But the law unfortunately got passed. What we're now seeing is the parliament making the decision about the law that they've been trying to prevent from passing in the way that it was formed because it highly interferes with personal privacy of Austrian citizens. We basically are watching with four perspectives into the parliament and they're trying to be part within the decision making process and want to try to show who is making what list, who's making what decision. Normally it takes five months to figure out who is making what decision. But this time around within one week we figured out who in which position of which party voted on this issue and this matter. And if they voted on their own conscience or what their faculty like their faction of the party would want them to vote on. The law is publicized by now and it will be instated publicly by July in the past year, so July 2016. For the second time in history we filed constitutional complaint. And in order to do so we need one third of the parliament to support our claim. And we got basically what happened was we got two parties to get involved in this, so we got to file the constitutional complaint which is going to be dealt with in 2017 and we hope that this will go our way. And now we're switching over to the second project, second subject, which is the Bundes-Trojaner, which is a Trojan Malware state-based. I would like to say a warm welcome to Werner Reiter, who unfortunately cannot be with us. So the Bundes-Trojaner is what they named, what in Germany is the State Trojaner, which is a straight Trojan horse. And it's something that we're fighting because we see it as a very problematic law. A little bit of short note on the history of the subject. We know about a leak that the text of the law was in the drawers of the ministry. But it was only brought forward in 2016 after the attacks in Brussels. And if we take into consideration how long it takes until something gets out of the drawer, normally it takes up to 83 days. But on this law it took nine days after the attacks of Brussels for that to be brought forward from the drawers of everything. It's a classical case of laws of being forward based on action that is taking place in other places where they're taking emotional, basically emotional reasoning to bring something forward and make something pass that normally maybe wouldn't pass. The ministry basically argued that the terrorists of Paris through the network of PlayStation 4 communicated through that network. And this story was something that was basically fake news that was revealed in 2015 and in 2016 explained in the ministry as the reasoning for why this law is necessary. So basically they're stating a case based on fake news. I don't really want to go into depth on the law level of these kind of things. There's an unreasonable attack on privacy and data security that's happening through this snooping software, this surveillance software, which causes problems within. It starts with a question of who is programming this kind of software. And I mean, we can be sure that within the ministry nobody is doing that. So you've got to hire companies that start doing that, phishing companies, hacking teams who also cater to totalitarian systems. You've got to buy on the black market. You've got to pay tax money into very, very fishy fields and industries. You have to target critical security issues when you're using this kind of software. So on the one hand you have, you're wanting to use this kind of software. And then at the same time you also have the same ministry who's responsible to be protective in the same kind of field. And upon asking about this issue, we only got evading answers. Another point that I want to raise is that searching a whole system. So if you want to look at all the data on one computer. So that's what they refer to as online searching, but it technically goes against the constitution of the state. So online surveillance of data and messaging data that is unencrypted is basically against the constitution of Austria. Yet it's still going on with the laws that they already have. So there's a certain separation that the Austrian government is claiming exists, but within the text of the law this separation does not exist. So they've been making exceptions, which so and all of this obviously remembers us of the thought police of George Orwell's 1984 computer systems, smartphones, our devices are super personal, highly personalized devices that know more than our actual partners that we share our lives with. There was a lot of critical voices reviewing what was going on with this kind of law and there's a lot of state institutions as well that also criticized these kind of passing of laws, these kind of working of how surveillance is already taking place. And we're really proud that we are one of the first few who entered their own suggestion of what should be changed, of how this should be addressed. We've talked to a lot of people and a lot of people have very very critical thinking about this. There's a lot of private citizens also involved. This is the list. There's 56 official statements that were brought forward and now I want to show a short video. That's the state hack into our smartphone soon. Will they look after all of our steps? This should be made possible by a state law change officially to be more efficient in the fight against terrorism. The state should be allowed to install software on smartphones and other devices of suspects without them knowing. The Justice Ministry is therefore decorated today with a Trojan horse. It is symbolic for the so-called Bundesztriana, which is a software in order to surveil on people at least according to possibly implemented law. The activist from Aka Vorrad Österreich for the normal citizen, this would mean to be surveilled down to the underwear. Also, a professional person will know when they are hacked and will be able to use surveillance tools. The state has a state of interest in this case. The state will now be interested in surveilling and making sure that surveillance works on their citizens, which also would be available to third people. At the same time as their protest in front of the door, the Justice Minister is giving an interview. In that way, apparently the law is not really useful, but we're going to work on it. This happens very rarely that the minister says, well, maybe we haven't talked too much about our law. We're almost in tears because of so much honesty. We didn't come to tears. For us, it was immediately recognizable that even though the Justice Minister was very insightful, this was a ministerial draft, but it didn't get moved over to the whole government, which would then be able to put it forward to the parliament because they figured out that this would be nonsensical. The changes that were made afterwards were not really detailed. On an EU level, we're talking about anti-terrorism laws and security and anti-terrorism organizations should be able to use these kinds of tools, investigative tools for covered surveillance, including electronic surveillance. We will stay alert, but now we're going to talk more about net neutrality. As said, this EU anti-terrorism directive is a directive, so it doesn't immediately get put into national law, but national parliaments have to form their own laws after this directive. This means we can fight. Only in two cases, we were able to stop the law with good arguments and a little bit of pressure from the street. In this case, this worked with the long list of very many people that raised their arguments, and in this case, the politics listened to it. It shows that democracy works, but also that an actor is necessary that points out these issues. We are only able to show the tip of the iceberg, but all of the administrative tasks and also the legal work is very necessary. If we move on to an European topic, net neutrality, we had a great success in August after three years of campaigning. The new rules for net neutrality for the internet in Europe are fixed. In my other talk today with Chris from Lagat-Katatudu.net, we have explained what is inside this law. Here I'm going to show you only very quickly, because we in Austria were a key actor to make this large change possible. Safety Internet in the EU was developed mainly in Austria, and we had, for example, this demonstration with many, many groups that have not only in Vienna, but also in Riga, where the European Regulation Authority has its seat. We came over and brought the first box of 100,000 comments. There were almost half a million contributions in six different EU languages. In most of these consultation processes, there were only a couple of hundred, mainly contributions, but this time this was very different. We due to some technical issues, not all of the emails, they were able to receive all of the emails. Last time, the last fight, we won with faxes, and also this time we had to revert to some old technology. Now we have some form of phrasing, and now we're moving over to making sure that this is actually implemented. Just like with data security and ePrivacy, we're working on the practical implications, especially where providers are actually not following the new net neutrality regulations. For example, in Austria, the mobile provider 3 was, if you look on this graph, this is the Austrian Broadcasting Station's online service, and after you have used it for quite some time and have hit your limit, then it drops the traffic and you're unable to watch it. But if you have used a provider that is part of the 3-mobile TV plan, then you are still allowed to use it even though you have used all of your data volume. This is hurting the net neutrality principle, and so we fought against this and put public pressure onto it, and the mobile provider changed their plans, which in some cases led to 1700% more data volume for everyone. The same principle, after the same principle, providers also worked in Slovenia and the Netherlands where net neutrality was implemented beforehand. We're going to work on all of these issues in the future. If you ever see any violations of net neutrality, please turn to us for respectminet.eu, where you are able to add your new case. If you see it on your own internet access, just put it there, and this is our crowd source to-do list in the field. Also, if this is going well, we're looking for an economics person for our team, because this is a part where you also have to make an argument from an economic standpoint of view. So moving on to the next topic, transparency law, which is something that seems to be a burning topic, a continuously burning topic in Austria, which Austria is one of the few countries that still has a certain kind of law that makes you able to keep things very secretive and private, which is part of the Austrian constitution, which is rare within Europe countries. And what we're trying to work on is creating a transparent state, however, not a transparent citizen. We want to have a see-through democracy, but not see-through citizens within this democracy. We have a group of people that do amazing work on this kind of field, and they raise great awareness on this topic, and we really want to thank them. You can see one of the authors who's working on this issue portrayed on the slides right now. There is a draft that at this moment is being put forward, but it's not publicly accessible. So in parts, what we already know is that is something that's going to make stuff worse than better. Everything that's considered in relation to how company practices, well, basically how companies get the actual job. That's something that's being impacted by the way that this law is being framed. And the question right now is, are we sticking to the 19th century secretive act or are we creating a transparency law that will make the state more comprehensible for its citizens and democratic members? This law last December was dealt with in the constitutional ministry, but it's still not part of the daily agenda of the parliament. We're sticking on this subject with the colleagues of a forum who's also working on this issue, and we're trying to continuously break it forward. We're now talking about copyright laws. Gunther Attinga brought forward a copyright law that is disastrous. One of the aspects that's the most disastrous is called the upload filter, which forces any host of a website to check whatever they upload against copyright laws, which basically means that technically Google with Content AG knows about any kind of cultural stuff happening around the world and publicizing that they can't really do that anymore because that's basically infringing copyright law in the understanding of how the EU is trying to put this forward with what Gunther Attinga is trying to do. The minister for media is at least partially in favor of that, but the most important part for him is how press support and media support will be handled in the future. We would hope that this would be put on new feet and reinvented totally. Currently it seems like Austria is producing its own problems and boulevard media by financing it, but for example fake news, it would be a good idea to buy in funding in the future to reducing fake news. The invite email to the media ministry's consultation includes many, many people. There's many, many laws that are being implemented at the same time and most people don't have the energy to work on all of them, so it's very important to get knowledge about all of these things and see what you're actually interested in. In yellow you see on the invite other ministries and state bodies. On the green people on the list are the copyright industry and in blue that's civil society and everyone else, starting at whatever. So in green we have the people who are the actual rights holders and in blue we have the industry itself. The law, the law that Ertinger has inherited us before he was moved over as commissioner for the budget of the EU. Whenever Ertinger does something stupid he will get promoted and this is one of the most problematic laws in the net politics field including the upload filters for all platforms from Wikipedia to Moodle e-learning platforms. We need to put this away. This may not exist in Europe because you need the censoring infrastructure of China to actually put this in place and then it can be used for other things as well. We also work for a unified fair use. There should be some forms of limitation to copyright and there should be including the modern forms for example if you make a gift this should be in a fair use manner possible to do and the third thing we're working on is the ancillary right for press publishers which has already been in place in Spain and Germany and which has massively failed there and we shouldn't put it on an EU level. Next topic is heat which Alexander is going to take over. For the last block we're going to talk about the project heat the handbook of evaluation of anti-terror legislation in Austria. This is a work that we have worked on for the past year and there was many many contributors who has written it. We're gonna I'm gonna the ACA for that or now AP Center works has started all of this and the research institute the Center for Digital and Human Rights in Vienna I've worked together for this it was financed by the IFA by some random grant in Austria and with 25 000 euros of crowdfunding. Why did we do that? We are losing the war. We sometimes win a battle but and we also argument all of the intricate legal stuff and and we also move over to constitutional laws but in the bigger picture we're losing the war. We want to have a effect based security policy. We don't need ad hoc nitric legislation and for that we need transparency about how effective all of the measures put in place actually are. So we looked at all of the laws. The fact is that the need for a law has to be evaluated by the state already before putting the law in place. This happens rarely in the field of surveillance. We wanted our arguments that we put forward to the courts already heard during the legislative process. We were in contact with a member of the government and he was like well why do we have to look into this already during the lawmaking process the constitutional court will look into it anyways later on. In this case we were able to talk the ministry into thinking about these issues beforehand but usually this doesn't happen and he is supposed to be a total balance of surveillance. This is a picture of the federal German constitutional court in Karlsruhe during the data retention directive implementation in Germany. They were the constitutional court in Karlsruhe during the EU directive implementation case in Germany for data retention was introducing the word comprehensive surveillance footnote evaluation and so it exemplifies the need of the state to think about the total sum of surveillance that hits a single person. We have an interdisciplinary angle and we're not only working first of all from the law side but also from the technological and from the humanities side. Just got the 20 minute warning so I'm trying to keep in time so we've taken this interdisciplinary attitude and angle on this and we've been trying to work with everyone together and I don't want to leave them out who've been involved in this project. On the left Professor Kreisel from Vienna for Social Security who's a social scientist and wrote the social scientist chapter of the charter. So basically the way that we addressed this we started asking questions started asking questions to the governments in Austria it's possible to bring forward questions towards the parliament which we thankfully could do due to small parties within the oppositions. Basically which brought also from like one of the things that was brought forward is that there was no children's software that was put to use within the Austrian society through the government which was something that was never done through them yet however we have a leaked document from the state police which is from 2008 which clearly states the internet surveillance through key logging software which was asked for which would brought forward to the state officials and the courts and so obviously the government had no idea what their actual policemen were doing or they just lied to us we're not sure of this. So we looked at a few laws which laws did we look at there's obviously the police state securities law which is one of the most important ones which was instated this year which is a law that enhances the possibility of surveillance and this is something that we up to this point have not had and now we're waiting on the constitutional courts whether or not this is actually something that they can pass and they can take into actions. I would like to show you some graphics this is one that we created what we've tried to do is mapping basically what we've tried to do is bring forward offences and we've tried to figure out what kind of ministry is getting involved in clearing these offences and what is being used what kind of surveillance is being put forward and what kind of offence do I need to have in order to get the kind of state surveillance that I want to have. Do I for example need a judge passing a law do I only need a state attorney getting involved these kind of things so we kind of made kind of made clear if you have something like so damage of property property damage like what am I going to do with it how do I get an actual surveillance warrant issued if this is a terrorist act all of a sudden this doesn't really matter anymore it's not just a damage of property it's obviously a terrorist act which creates a completely different kind of justice scenario which means that I don't even need a judge anymore to pass that kind of surveillance warrant. So what we want to show now is the the weight of justification you're all invited to download this document take a closer look at it it's it is about the weight of justification you have the criminal act and the further I moved into the pre-field of the actual criminal act there is a much much bigger weight of justification the law government needs to give facts and give reasons of why these kind of laws need to already apply this kind of like in this kind of early stages and the weight back like in those early stages is much much higher so this is about a fair trial so this graphic shows the more people are affected by a directive like data retention for example it means the whole public of Austria but already within Funktzenauswertung where you basically extract the data of all the people whose phone numbers are within this kind of radar point that already is a very big group of people which obviously is not the whole public but it is a large number of people so what we did was we looked at the relevant judiciary issues and we also looked at how it was dealt with within Germany and within the European courts because obviously those affect us and these are good exemplary cases and we look at what kind of measures are available to security officials and which are the ones that they actually use like what kind of technologies for example the current law that they passed is obviously it's possible to extract geodata geolocation data but it also goes as far as actually listening and we've also tried to go into sociologic theory to really look at surveillance theory of surveillance and what it does within the society structure and we know that with surveillance conformity is something that is being enhanced highly we also statistically want to understand what kind of surveillance directives are being put forward which ones are rejected but I mean we want to have an understanding of it but obviously this is a difficult case because part of it is always a bit in the secretive field of this kind of lawmaking but one of the central parts is the catalog of criteria what you see in really tiny letters is an overview of the kind of criteria that we've tried to work out all of this is not completely new we did not develop the wheel anew but we've added a few things that we want to zoom into so that we could still have a few areas like time for questions in austria based on article 18 we have the principle of legalizing norms need to be comprehensible norms cannot be against the constitution only if the normal citizen of austria can understand the norms and act upon these norms the laws can be passed and especially within the police state security law this is something that needs to be highly questioned so there's the formal aspect if it is not even fulfilled another aspect is the actual control of a judge is that something that that is given or not so that's part of the legal protection when it comes to the kind of laws it's obviously possible that evidence cannot be proved like be put forward within a case of justice and in the court of law but at the same time it's the question of if you can still base your judging and ruling on that why are we doing this for who are we doing this and i mean obviously for the people who work within the ministries but at the same time it's also for all the politicians it's for all the civil civilians it's for everyone who works within state security as well and this overview will show you how it affects our fundamental laws in austria this is a graph of how the constitutional court in austria handles basic rights infringements and if they are allowed or not we the next steps are making a printing version we are very glad that professor chau kind of touch her from the united nation he is the special envoy on the private sphere has written the preamble to our text we will want more transparency and we will act to make newer versions of this document as we move forward we would also like to do the same thing on an EU level and hope that our book is used both for judicial analysis but also in constitution in court cases we also want to work on some form of legal measure that is currently used to evaluate certain topics when it comes to the forming of law including gender and and environmental issues but not basic rights issues and we want to like restructure all of that and are supported with that from lawyers in the so we now want to back it up and really kind of understand of what is our understanding what's our responsibilities our responsibility is a platform we're a platform for protest civil protest within relation to our constitutional basic fundamental laws and if you ever want to get involved if you think that you can do a better job than we do our tools are all open source as well as our tool for contributions we believe that not politics and activism will only work if we have an actual community of shared community of shared culture of transparency and I mean everyone is only cooking with water you know and if you think that stuff looks a bit heavy-headed or just overwhelming it's an amazing feeling to be part of it and in the most cases we can make a very big difference on the topics that we work on and there's so many that we need to work on on the I think that on the European base up to this point we've never had this many issues and laws that we're dealing with these kind of issues with net neutrality copyright infringement all of these things there's so much happening and we're expecting that next year within Austria there's going to be something forward a law proposal for a copyright reform if you want to participate you want to take part there's whatever you can do your program or your graphic design you want to put your your talent forward there's so much that we need and we have a small office but without the volunteers there's literally very little that we could do nothing would be possible no press release would be being put forward in public without the volunteers that contribute so this is why I think it's so important that we make transparent how we work so honestly we live of your donations our only way to secure political independence is by financing ourselves through the donations from all of you from the private sector and we would be excited if you would donate obviously and be a member of us thank you very much for your attention and we're now moving on towards the Q&A questions please hi Tom hi Alex amazing talk thank you so much thanks so much for your amazing work two comments that will lead me to a question so you keep talking about the fight the conflict charged situations with lawmakers in a different talk we heard about how the FBI globally hacks to take out child pornography rings and I mean there is the cases where the state needs to have these kind of methods and methodology how can we have a consultative process where you can on one hand where you can have a collaborative process that where the lawmaker can make pass losses with you guys in the kind of balanced ways with you guys and the way that it works in England with the kind of white papers where they can bring forward a draft for a law that actually takes all the different perspectives into account that's a very good question it's not the answer all right so we try to naturally create a constructive base for a discussion that includes all parties in all angles and all the aspects and we're not only criticizing of course we really try to when when ministries are doing a great job really also talk about that so I mean in order to create something that will work for every one of the civil society is important to also point out when stuff is going well so I mean there's a lot of stuff that is being discussed previously but I mean we are also very hesitant to be part of these kind of cuddling parties I mean there's there's circles if you if you keep that kind of policy like you'll be privy to all basically all drafts of what kind of laws will be passed but this is not what we think we don't think this kind of discussion and basically lobbyism will create the kind of environment that we will want to work in we don't think it's healthy to be owned by the politicians in this kind of perspective we've had offers of entering ministry referendums based on the fact that afterwards we would not be allowed to speak about what was being discussed and what we talked about this is not how we think in a democratic society these kind of things should be discussed so that's why we do make decisions on what kind of contact we want to have and what we don't want to have now we're very sorry outside oh we have one more time like a little bit more time for a one quick question I'm interested how the constitutional court in Germany has influence on Austrian things and how you can argument things in Austria then many things are quite common between Germany and Austria but the constitution is the constitution is not one of these fields for that you have to say that the Austrian highest court or constitutional court and and the German one are somehow friends they have some form of closeness in in like constitutional history and oftentimes we look to Germany and see how it goes in Germany I trust in Karlsruhe the German constitutional court it is some form of guardian of basic rights also in Luxembourg the the european court of justice and at this point they turn off the audio for us um we will


Nigeria's Vice Chancellor Professor Clement Adebuye has emphasized the importance of a peaceful teaching and learning environment to prevent strikes and student violence in Nigerian institutions. Speaking at the press conference, he emphasized the university's commitment to staff welfare, management, and the use of modern technologies for knowledge importation. He also mentioned that the university teaching hospital complex is 97.97% completed and is expected to be operational soon. The event will award 4,210 degrees in diplomas including 89 fourth class and 1,326 second class upper among others. We produced a total of 1,818 second class lower degree candidates, a total of 470 third class and five mid-pass degrees. It is interesting to note that graduates who will not have the opportunity to join us physically can be part of the ceremony virtually. I'm very happy to inform our stakeholders that we are consistently poised to take continental lead in academic excellence and global visibility for relevance and impact. We are very strongly committed to our vision and funding objectives as a responsible and highly responsive 21st century university. Our targets are clear and our strategies well defined. We want to be among the top 10 universities in Nigeria and emerge among the top 25 in Africa by 2026. We know the various requirements for this and we are pursuing them vigorously.


Why do narcissists treat you this way? The narcissist depended on you. They needed you for support. They relied on you, but they always find a way to mess it up because they have trouble controlling their emotions and behaviors, which causes them to become very unstable and unpredictable, where they will do anything to regain their emotional stability because they're completely out of control. They're disorderly and disruptive. They're unmanageable. They're not amenable to discipline or control, but they're trying to give the appearance that they are in control. They're trying to give the appearance that they can behave appropriately, but you cannot reason with them. Because they have poor cognitive reasoning skills, so there's no way to stop them from damaging the very source that they depend on, because they also hate and resent anyone that they are dependent on, because deep down they understand that they need you, but they want to entertain their delusions of grandiosity, where they are superior and greater than other people. So even though you may be doing everything they want you to do, their delusional state triggers a sudden and unreflective urge or desire to act, and it's very difficult for them to control, but it leads them to lie, cheat or steal from you, because they're not strong enough to suppress the development action or expression of a feeling impulse or idea. They cannot delay gratification, so they expect their wants, needs and desires to be considered as being more important than someone else or something. They expect to have priority in a pawn's order or rank. They expect to prevail over any moral or ethical agreements that you may have had with them, because they don't know how to stop, they can't control their impulses, so they try to control the world around them, by engaging in acts that may be considered inappropriate or unfair.  It was all about them, but they even broke their own rules and regulations. They couldn't even be committed to themselves. Everything that they said they valued and believed in, they went against that. So if they couldn't even be loyal or committed to themselves, you should know that you don't have anything coming, because a person must first have their own values and beliefs, before they can value and believe in you. They must first be committed themselves, before they can commit to you, but sometimes, there is no logical explanation or reason for why they do what they do. It's just their inherent and unchangeable character. They operate within their disorder, which eventually destroys them as well, because they're heedless of danger from the consequences of their own actions. They're out of control, just so they can try to maintain their supply, so that they're not exposed, and so that they don't lose their supply. Why do narcissists treat you this way? They treat you this way because they're out of control. They're very dangerous, but they managed to convince you that they were normal and sane, when in reality, they are not normal at all. They were at war with themselves, and you got caught in the crossfire. They did everything they could to make it seem like it was safe, but then you soon discovered that they are not normal, and they are actually very dangerous. Thank you for watching. I hope this video resonate with you. Please like, comment, share, and subscribe. If you would like to donate, my PayPal link is in the video description. Coaching inquiries, you can email me at coaching.actify.academyuk. Thank you for watching. I look forward to talking to you soon.


Hi everyone, Sean with jaspyscasebreaks.com, here doing 2021 Leaf Flash six box break, 2020 Panini one three box break, random team number two. So a little mixer of three boxes of Panini one football and six boxes of 2021 Leaf Flash football. So this is going to have your current draft class Trevor Lawrence, Trayland, Zach Wilson. This is going to have last year's draft class Justin Herbert, Jalen Hurts, Tua Tagawaia Loa, Joe Burrow, etc. So 32 spots, we're going to get to random team NFL all card ship, should be 33 autos of this break. And we're going to go by group break checklist on the Leaf Flash. So let me open up that and I'll drop that link for you guys. 2021 Leaf Flash football and there you go. So here is the group break team checklist hobby edition. There you go. So there's that checklist for everybody. Here is our customer list from Travis Hildebrand down to Sean Harnish with the spot he just won in mosaic 85. Whether you guys one spot or bought spots straight up. Thank you very much and good luck. And here is the list of teams from the Cardinals down to the Washington football team dice roll to randomize both lists and pair them up four and a five nine times. That's crazy. Yeah. Ninth and final time. I mean, his longest drought without a home run, I think it's like seven games or six games total in his entire career so far. Nine times on the randomizer for the customers. Nine times on the dice and nine times on the teams. Ninth and final time from the Browns down to the Vikings. So nine times on the teams. Nine times on the customers. Nine times on the dice. And here's how it shakes out.  So there is the full list. So trade window is open for you guys. Here's a list of everybody's teams. I'm going to go grab a drink of water while you guys take a look at trades. So if there's no talks of trades, give it another 20 seconds or so. We'll go ahead and print and rip. Okay, trade window going once. Trade window going twice. Trade window going three times. Trade window closed. What are you talking about, Jonathan? You have the Steelers in there.  Who's your, who's the wide receiver? What can I think of Steelers wide receiver? Is it Johnson? Johnson? Who's your other team? I think you had Lyons? No. Ravens. JK Dobbins. It's pretty good. It's actually supposed to be one of the best running backs this year. Chase Playpool. There you go, Mark. Thank you. I don't know why you think it's you, Anthony Johnson. It was last year. So there's our final list. There is the final list and there's our boxes. We'll start with flash football. Oh, somebody let Shawn know his video is delayed. Yeah, there you go. Sorry, Shawn. I was just trying to tell you you're on delayed. Okay, so let me open up my checklist here. Starting off with Pat Freyermuth, which is Pittsburgh Steelers. Jonathan Arnaldi. That is 72 out of 75 from Penn State to Pittsburgh Steelers. Quitty Pay, which should be Indianapolis Colts, I believe. Most positive. Yeah, Indianapolis Colts. That's Eric Jock, 28 out of 35. Ben Skornek. I want to say either Vikings or Saints. I know he's out of Notre Dame. Rams. Ben Skornek. Rams.  Taderal Slayton. No clue. That's Packers. Green Bay Packers. For the Rams on that Ben Skornek, that's Bill Norton. For the Packers, Connor Beck on Taderal Slayton. Trey Sermon, which is 49ers, non-numbered. 49ers is Julian Schiltz. Yeah, for some reason, I could have sworn Skornek was like, maybe I was getting him confused with Ian Book, but Ian Book's with the Colts. I keep forgetting who the quarterback is that's in New Orleans. I know they picked up somebody, and I always forget who it is. It's not Kellan Maughan. Wait, maybe it is Ian Book. Sam Ellinger's in, Sam Ellinger's in Indianapolis, so maybe it is Ian Book. Rashad Weaver, that is 10 out of 10. That is Tennessee Titans and Connor Beck. Larry Roundtree, that's a running back for the Chargers out of the University of Minnesota, sorry, Missouri. Los Angeles Chargers, Connor Beck. That is one out of five. I really like him too. Des Fitzpatrick, I want to say is, sorry, Philadelphia. That's Tennessee again, Tennessee Titans, Connor Beck. That one is number 64 out of 75. Amari Rogers, Eagles. Green Bay Packers, Connor Beck. That is 28 out of 50. And Malika, or sorry, Micah Parsons, which is Dallas Cowboys, 18 out of 35, 99% sure. Dallas Cowboys. That is Michael Everly. Box three. All this is going to lead up to a big quarterback for us, right? There's my guy. Amon Ross St. Brown for the Detroit Lions. That is Sean Harnish. There you go, Sean. Let's do this. Got a USC. Hopefully next year when the Lions get a wide quarterback. 33 out of 75. Nice second card. Patrick Sertain, which is the Denver Broncos. Denver Broncos, Matthew Brister, non-numbered. We've got Shane Buckel. Nope. Shane Buckel. That is Kansas City Chiefs, Connor Beck. Maybe he'll start for the Chiefs this year. That is not numbered. And Chava Hubbard, Carolina Panthers, Ethan Cook, Kero Nana. He was also the number three overall pick in the Canadian football league draft, just in case he ever doesn't make it. And Elijah Moore for the New York Jets and Mark Haraki, 27 out of 35. Apparently this guy is just electric on the field. Now they just need to sign Zach Wilson so that they have somebody to throw to him. Last thing I read about the Jets camp was that they had thrown 11 total passes. One of them was more than 10 yards and that one pass was an interception. I was just like, yeah, they could definitely use Zach Wilson right about now. Box four. That is Rodarius Williams. I don't know. It's a nice spread so it's probably out of five. Rodarius Williams is the New York Giants, which is Connor Beck. One out of five. Did he sign? Was that today? Because he hadn't as of last I had seen. Jamon Osbon, I'm going to say Vikings. Philadelphia Eagles is Greg Zaghab.  Two out of 75. Next up is Rashad Weaver. Titans. Connor Beck. Non-numbered. Dylan Moses. Jags. Jacksonville, Connor Beck. That is 38 out of 75. His new teammate, Travis Etienne. Also for the Jacksonville Jaguars. And Connor Beck. Signed Friday afternoon. Okay, so last night, yesterday. Interesting. Well, that's good news for the Jets. Bad news for the Colts. Carson Wentz. Foot injury. A tingle in his foot when he was rolling out of the pocket. What I thought it said. Bad news is, they said their exact statement is, we don't expect this to be a season ending injury. That's how that's how confident you are. Brevin Jordan. Texans. Houston. That is Sean Harnish. No numbering on that. Rodarius Williams is our next up. That is the New York Giants. And Connor Beck. That's how confident you are in his injury. Two out of 75. First week of training camp you say, your response to his injury is, we don't expect this to be season ending. Well, I hope not. Sean Wade. That's for the Baltimore Ravens and Jonathan Arnaldi. You're a week in the training camp. You should say, I hope this doesn't, like, at this point, it's like, we should hope this doesn't limit his training. One out of 25. Jamon Osbon. We just had him. Who are you, Jamon?  That's for Greg Zaghab. I think this one's the same numbering too. 73 out of 75. And Ian Book, which we think is Saints, maybe? It is. New Orleans Saints and Travis Hilderman. And our last box of flash. Brendan Knox. 47 out of 50. Dallas Cowboys. That's going to Michael Everly. Stevie Scott, the third. Stevie Scott, the third. Cincinnati Bengals. James Oh. Tariq Black is Indianapolis Colts and Eric Jock. No. Tariq Black is numbered. That is 26 out of 35. And Amir Smith-Marcette, I want to say is Vikings. It is. Minnesota Vikings and Mark Haraki. And that is 29 out of 15. We're finishing with a one-of-one printing plate. I'm guessing Najee Harris and the Steelers. One-of-one, rookie auto, Najee Harris, Pittsburgh Steelers, Jonathan Arnaldi. There you go. See? I do expect Pittsburgh to be one of the most disappointing teams this year with their abysmal offensive line and their very aged quarterback. As much as I love Najee Harris, he's not going to have a great year because of those two other statements that I just made. Panini won. Three boxes. First box. It's a Super Bowl auto of Ronde Barber from Super Bowl 37 for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Conor Beck. These are awesome looking cards where they beat the Raiders 48 to 21. This is very nice. Patches five out of 25. Chad Johnson for the Cincinnati Bengals. Two color patches all the way around. Cincinnati Bengals is James O. Little Chad Otrosinko. It's got to wait until week six to see if O'Long is getting better than jump in. I feel like, I mean, my brother is a die-hard Steelers fan. Even he's just like, it's, their offense line was, was bad and then they lost people. So it just got, it got worse. And last box of the break. And it's a very nice one for the Philadelphia Eagles and Greg Jaghab. Jalen Hertz, 27 out of 75. Rookie autograph, little shadow box signature there. Nice way to finish it. Jalen Hertz, Philadelphia Eagles, Greg Jaghab. And there you go guys. That is the break. That was 2021 Leaf Flash six box break, 2020 Nini won three box break. Random team number two from jaspyscasebreaks.com. I'm Sean, jaspyscasebreaks.com. Thanks for hanging out and we'll see you next time.


this question came in 1983 here when Simon here got born okay can you tell me one thing their top surface do they remain at the same level yes or no they'll remain at the same level because at the top it is atmospheric pressure right the pressure is same so along horizontal line only pressure will remain same if horizontally the system is not accelerating okay so they both have to be in the same level if they are not let us say right-hand side liquid is slightly more then pressure over here will be atmospheric pressure plus rho gh of this liquid but that is not the thing pressure both side has to be atmospheric pressure now let us say second liquid is up till here so from here I can draw a line like this okay then since it is horizontal line pressure over here let's say is p1 pressure here let's say is p2 p1 has to be equal to p2 okay now p1 is atmospheric pressure plus rho of the second liquid g into h where this distance is h okay and p2 is what p2 is atmospheric pressure plus density of the first liquid g into h right and both of them are equal because they are along the same horizontal line so since p1 is equal to p2 this implies density of first liquid has to be equal to density of the second liquid so if specific gravity of first one is 1.1 for the second one also it has to be 1.1 okay so like this you have to do you know this question any doubts on this okay I'll move to the next question so you can see there are two questions on your screen try attempting both of them it is written that it's a large open tank so you can consider that the area of process of tank is much more than the area of the holes so you can use Toshery's law what is Toshery's law I'll quickly introduce Toshery's law so is it option A wait if this is area of procession A and the hole is very small and at a depth y then the velocity of the liquid that is coming out will be equal to root 2 g y assuming A is very large compared to smaller so this is Toshery's law remember this or you can derive it also but it is good to remember now quantities of water flowing out is what quantity of water that is flowing out per second is nothing but dm by dt this is mass flow rate which is rho a into v okay so if density is same I can say that a1 v1 is a2 v2 this is not continuity equation but what is given here is that if this is square hole and this is circular hole a1 v1 here will be equal to a2 v2 there that is what it means okay if mass flow rate coming out both sides are same okay now the quantities of water coming out is same circular hole has radius r and depth 4 y okay so okay circular is at a depth of 4 y so this will be a square which is at y and this will be let's say circular which has a depth of 4 y okay so let's say this is v1 and this is v2 okay so v1 is root of 2 g y 2 g into 4 y is v2 okay so this will come out to be two times under root 2 g y there is v2 now a1 is what a1 is the area of the square hole which has side length l so l square is the area this into v1 under root 2 g y1 this should be equal to a1 of the square hole which has radius r is pi r square this is area of this circular hole this into velocity of the water coming out from there okay so when you equate it root 2 g y get cancelled out okay and r will come out to be equal to l divided by under root 2 pi okay so many of you have solved these questions before so others those who do who are not able to get it from the first go because you are seeing it for the first time don't get unnecessarily intimidated by that fact okay there will be many people who have solved this question four or five times also at times anyways sixth one what is the answer okay Vaishnav is asking how you arrive dm by dt is rho av Vaishnavi velocity is what meter per second okay when you multiply with area of cross section you get volume per second area into meter per second volume per second okay now that volume per second when you multiply with density so density into volume becomes mass but then it become mass per second so rho av it comes so I am telling you in a very crude way in case you want to you know get into the details of it you can refer the notes where we have derived the Bernoulli's theorem there we have discussed in greater detail okay sixth one any answer no one should I do it okay let me do this now there is a hemispherical portion of radius r removed from the bottom the cylinder of radius r okay so this is a cylinder hemispherical portion is removed the volume of the remaining cylinder is v and the mass is m so volume of the cylinder is given okay it is suspended by the string in the liquid of density rho it stays vertical the upper surface is at a depth h the force on the bottom of the cylinder by the liquid is what okay first of all we know that net force due to liquid in this case is what bow and force okay which is what v rho g isn't it this is the net force due to the liquid now if you draw free by a diagram of this cylinder due to the liquid there will be a force from the top and there will be a force from the bottom okay there will be sideways force also but they will get cancelled away okay but these two forces will not get cancelled all right so we can say that pressure over his is p1 so p1 into a is the force from the top but here the problem is that this hemispherical portion every point is at different depth so let's just keep it as f only okay we know that net force is v rho g so f minus p1 into a is v rho g okay and of course there will be you know this you might be wondering well what about the force due to the tension which will be from here let's say this is tension okay and what about the mg force so first of all you need to understand I'm not doing the force balance here okay I am not writing force balance equation what I'm writing here is the force due to the liquid equation okay the force due to the liquid the net force is in upward direction that is the buoyant force which is v rho g okay now this v rho g you can split it into two components the force from the top and force from the below okay so this is not force balance so f will be equal to p1 a plus v rho g okay now p1 is not the total pressure here p1 is just the pressure due to the fluid okay so what I'm trying to say here is that you know there will be a atmospheric pressure also here p a plus rho g h is p1 okay so this is p1 okay similarly the atmospheric pressure will be acting from below as well okay but we are trying to find out the force due to the liquid not because of the atmospheric pressure okay so since when you subtract the pressure due to the atmosphere will anyway get cancelled away so I'll just consider the rho g h pressure due to the liquid okay that is that is simply rho g h only rho g h so f will become equal to p1 into a now a is what pi r square so rho g h into pi r square plus v rho g this is the answer for the force from the bottom option number d so if you understand discussion properly many concepts will be clear because here we have actually utilize the fact that buoyant force is the outcome of all the forces because of the fluid any doubts on this question anything fine let's move to the next one these two okay so back so for the seventh see you you have seen a similar question before also isn't it so when the coin is on top of the wooden block when the coin is on top of wooden block then it is displacing more volume than its own volume isn't it so when the coin is in the is at the top of the wooden block it is displacing more volume than its own volume okay but when the coin is fall fell when the coin fell down then it is just displacing you know it is just displacing volume equal to its own volume are you getting it so earlier it was displacing more volume okay and now it is displacing lesser volume so h will decrease h will go down getting it because the water is getting more volume to occupy so h will reduce okay so what about l see l is nothing but this lambda only which is shown over here so even this will reduce because now the wooden block doesn't have to displace more volume earlier it was getting compressed below because of coin okay so both h and l will decrease why this will increase both will decrease right what about eighth one what is the answer for eight seventh answer d is correct d for deli all of you understood why seventh d is correct type in yes or no okay eighth okay eighth one so this is showing a graph between delta l and the load that is connected or to the other end the cross section of the area of the wire is this calculate the Young's modulus of the material so Young's modulus is simply given as sigma divided by epsilon right sigma is what force per unit area divided by this is delta l by l okay so you will get f l divided by a delta l now here we have l given as one meter so it is simply f divided by a times delta l is Young's modulus okay and area of cross section is also given so Young's modulus is simply f by delta l multiplied by 10 this power 6 so I think this is a straightforward question where f is 20 20 newtons okay and delta l is 10 is a power minus 4 this into 10 is power 6 so you'll get 2 into 10s for 11 a is the correct answer okay at times they will give you just rather than weight they can give you mass so you need to multiply that with g also all right so we'll move to the next one any doubt guys please type in in case you have any doubts no doubts


What'd you say to me? Uh, I was thinking it. You heard it? Yeah, what'd you say? Well, I said it before. I just don't know if Alexis ever heard it. What? What kind of bees make milk? Boobs. Boobs. Oh, you said this to me the other day. Yeah. We're using intros we used a week ago. Yep. Used intros. Wow. He just woke up. This is why you don't have children. Hey, welcome back to our studio. Not why you don't have children. Why you don't have children with me. No, not with me. He's right here on set. He's burying a hole.  It's Ian and some Corbin. I'm Alexis.  You can follow us on Instagram and Twitter for our juicy content. Thanks for the page and follow us to the camera. We'll see you in the next video. Hey, we are reacting to a haul. I thought we were going to react to one of Evie's full diapers. Is your son gambling over there? What's shooting crap? Yeah. He is. Today we're reacting to a song. I'm sure he is shooting crabs. But don't just. Oh, they smell. Everybody. Yeah. But babies. Once babies start eating food, man, that poop turns to Duke. Oh, not fun. I mean, it's not even that great before. No, it's definitely not. But it's not what it becomes when they start harvesting the hard stuff. But it's not as black as it is in the beginning. That's myconium. That's something if you've never been around a child that you don't know right at the beginning. I didn't hear what you said. Your mom? Today we're going to do a song. It's called Laman. Laman? Laman. Pianada. Official song. Folk song. Folk. Himacho. Himachali. Hindi and Dogri and Mahasu? I don't know what that means. Laman is an Indian folk and semi-classical band from Himachal Pradesh and also an initiative to explore and recreate the existing and forgotten folk melodies with the help of modern sound and instruments so that the contemporary world could identify with these melodies. I wonder if Tushar knows about all this. I'm sure he does. Hey, Tushar, we miss you, bro. You haven't explored this region yet. Yeah. Pahari cinema refers to cinema in Western Pahari languages, especially Dobri language, spoken primarily in the Jammu division region of Jammu and Kashmir. Okay, cool. And Himachal Pradesh of India. The song is Hindi, Mahasu, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, and Dobri, Jammu and Kashmir. Love this. I've ever heard those terms and names. Never heard those words. Never. Learn something new every day. Freaking love it. This is going to be a gorgeous video. You don't know. Like a album. If it's filmed, look at the first frame. It's filmed up in that region. It's going to be gorgeous. I've seen mountains before. There we go. Don't say it's gorgeous. You've seen one before. Don't want subs, yeah. Your place to go. What deal are you talking about? Vikram Anasad? Yes. Thank you, Vikram and Asad, who I guess you know those languages. So this is from the Kashmir and Jhanu, right? Yeah, Jambu and Kashmir area, which I believe is where our host from Emiratesar lives. Yes. Or at least when he did, because I know he trained, or flew, or trained down to meet us in Emiratesar to show us around, and everybody loves him. Apparently he has his own channel, so go check him out if I can find it, I'll link it below. There's nothing to do with his video, but yeah, that was extremely, so what are you all talking about? When you said that, he said, what, the apple orchard? No. I thought the apple orchard was a nice place to go. Yeah, no, there's just, there's certain things that you anticipate when you listen to music long enough, and if you write music, you know where certain things are going to go typically, especially if it's a basic song. There's standard one, four, five chords, a three, a minor chord, and then there's some times where you can take it into a chord that typically doesn't relate to that key, and you basically, you leave the key for just a second, but you haven't, because it's relative, and you go to a chord that's typically not used with a note that still relates to all the other chords, but you've left the general flow of the major chords that are a part of that, typically, because most songs are one, four, five chords. That's standard in terms of, it's C, F, G, C, F, G, or some variation of the same, but then if you add, if you're playing, for example, for those of you who know basic Western music, if you're playing C, F, G, you could play a B-flat chord, because it's relative to F, which also is relative to C, but it, and then get even weirder by going to something like E-flat, right? And that's what they did. E is weird. It's something that is not typical for that key, so it was just beautiful. Why is E weird? It was so surprising. Why is E weird? It's not that E is weird, an E-flat chord, an E-flat chord would be very unusual for a song written in the key of C. Do an E-flat. The note? Yeah, do it. Do the note. Give me an E-flat. I have a piano app. I'll check you. Okay, hold on. Wow, I haven't heard anything in E-flat in a long time, so okay, so hold on. Mike, you could probably do it. Yeah, Mike is better than you. That one's a little flat. Or you can also be sharp. I don't understand music. Alright, three, two, one. You were singing in E. I was an E natural. I was a half step off. But that's good. How do you not know that? That's close. Yeah. But, okay, we just heard, at the beginning of a song with the kids' voices, I was sitting here in a state of like, I was just receiving this, just heard a language I've never heard before in my life. Never heard that language in my ears in my life. I think we have. I don't believe, I've never heard of that language. Well, we've seen stuff from Kashmir and Janna. Yeah, but I've never seen that. Soon we've heard it. I could be wrong. But the other thing is, as far as the composition's concerned, they got away from an electric guitar in that song. Yeah, they did. It was unexpected. Yeah. Yeah, but it worked. Yeah, that was cool. But I also, I don't know, emotionally, there's certain regions of the world that if you just mention them, it hurts my heart. Syria, Kashmir, putting a lot of them in, and that's how I was going to go, that whenever someone says Kashmir, my heart hurts because of what's gone on there and how many people are just stuck in that and it hurts them. So I, when I hear Kashmir, a great song, so let us know what other songs and bands we should react to from this region or others down below.


Hello, welcome to Out of the Comfort Zone on Think Tech Hawaii. I'm your host, Arby Kelly, and we have an awesome show lined up for you. Now we've got a really cool guest that I think you're going to love, but first, our book of the week. Now, this is a book that actually has kind of saved my marriage in more ways than one. This is called Negotiating the Non-Negotiable by Daniel Shapiro, and he's actually the founder and director of the Harvard International Negotiation Program, which I think is super, super cool. Like, I'm fangirling over here. So Henry Clay, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Daniel Shapiro are all masters of negotiation. Now the problem is, have you ever had a situation where you and someone else are fighting and it's the same fight you've had over and over and over and over and over and over, and you're just rehashing the same discussions, but nothing ever changes and you feel bitter and resentment and tempers just fly off the handle and nothing ever seems to change? That is when you need this book. There are actual, it's almost too cool to go into because there's so much content, but there are actual tools you can use to start calming down those fights, coming together without giving up your position, without causing more strife in the future. So if you've had the same fight over and over again with your spouse, with your boss, with a co-worker, with a friend, trying negotiating the non-negotiable with Daniel Shapiro, I think you'll really love it. Now for the body language tip of the week, it's Christmas. It's been Christmas every year for the past long time, but our kids are growing up. And that means eventually you have to tell them that Santa's not, eventually you have to tell them the truth about Santa. And when that happens, that can be a really tough moment. So we have found there's a body language cue that helps to soften any bad news. It's called the head tilt. Just like that, just tilting your head actually makes you seem more sympathetic and helps to soften the blow. Now this was studied with people who were being fired from their jobs, and that's a horrible thing to go through for anyone, but they found when someone was fired with a head tilt, they saw the company and the person who fired them as more sympathetic, and they had softer, more soothing feelings towards the company after they were fired. That's how powerful this head tilt is. So when it comes time to tell the truth about Santa, say it with a head tilt, and it'll make the news a little bit easier. All right, now let's get on to our guest. This woman, if you haven't heard of her, I'm sure you will shortly, Pam Chambers is one of Honolulu's top 10 most admired women. She's a prolific author, public speaker, consultant, coach, and she was my mentor. So Pam, thank you for coming here. I'm so happy that you finally made it onto my show. Thank you. Glad I asked. Me too. Why am I going on your show? So Pam, for the people, the few people who haven't heard of you, what is it that you really do? I help people with every aspect of how they come across in the world, whether it be they're speaking, they're dining, they're working the room, they're email, they're even, I'm starting to even talk about texting etiquette. So it's about how we show up, our body language, our voice, our words, our image. Interesting. So today we wanted to really focus on public speaking because that's something seems like a lot of people dread. So how did you get started in public speaking? I remember in the third grade, eager to give my book report about Charlotte's web. All girls love that book and know of it. So I was eager because I was an avid reader. I loved the story and I was eager to get up in front and do my book report. And as I began to read my book report, I flubbed a word. And one of the leaders in the class laughed at me. And the rest of the people joined in in her laughter. I'm the one who didn't join in. I should have. And I decided then and there. I remember I decided this is not a safe place. This in front of the room space is not safe. So I avoided public speaking of any kind for more than two decades. Whoa. And I was good at avoiding it. Lots of people are great at avoiding it. But sooner or later, I think almost all professional people are called on to speak in front of a group, speak in a board meeting, introduce someone on stage somewhere. And I decided I wanted to conquer my fear. So I did. Wow. So you decided to conquer the fear. And you did. What did that journey look like? Well it looked like asking my bosses for more speaking opportunities. I spoke one minute once a month only. And that was not enough to get good at. You can't get good at anything in that short amount of time. So I said, do you think I could speak more often? Oh. So scared to ask for that. But they said, well, that would be good. So I had small groups of 10 or 12 people, maybe 15. I knew what I was talking about, the seminar, and I loved the seminar. And I did that once a week, and that did it. Yeah. And then someone asked me, do you think that you could teach our staff how to be as comfortable as you are? And I said, I don't know. I don't know if I can teach this. But I found out that I could. So that was 31 years ago. So you've had 31 years of teaching people to speak and helping them feel comfortable on stage. Yes. Wow. So I love that first you realize this was a problem, and then you set out a plan to fix it. And I can totally sympathize with you at that moment saying, can I have more time to speak? You must have had to just screw up all your courage to ask that. I couldn't believe that those words were coming out of my mouth.  Don't ask for that. Wow. So what do you think other people hate to public speak? I ask every group I'm in front of, why do you think public speaking is such a common fear? And someone always says the right answer. We're afraid of being judged. And I said, right. And you're hoping I'll tell you that you're not being judged, but the truth is you are being judged. You are being judged. We must judge each other. We must assess, is this a safe person for me to be with? Should I be crossing the street right now? Can I sit down with this person? Should I trust this speaker?  Exactly. We must assess. So we assess, and some call it evaluating, some call it judging, but we are assessing. And when we're done doing that, then we decide to listen or not. So be judgeable. Yeah. You have to be confident. And this sounds horrible to say. Some of you are thinking, this is bad advice. I hate public speaking. Why would I feel confident about doing it? But it seems like that's one of the eventual outcomes is that you begin to feel confident on stage even though you know all the eyes are on you. Sometimes you have to fake it till you make it. And I don't love that fake it advice. But sometimes we are required to act as though we want to be doing this. And that's one of those times. So what are some of the steps you took or that you see your clients taking when you start building more confidence for public speaking? I mean, how do they build more confidence? There are a couple of main things. One, we have to believe that what we have to say is worth saying, that our message will help someone, that what we have to say is deliverable and worthy. We have to believe that. If you don't believe it, you're not ready. You're not even saying it. That makes sense. You wouldn't want to risk this fear if you weren't ready and had something valuable and powerful to say. And having it valuable, be valuable eliminates the fear because what I have to say is going to help someone. I don't mind clammy hands or some butterflies in my stomach because it's worth it. And then the other tip I share is to love your audience ahead of time instead of fearing them as you get ready to be there, love them. Appreciate that they're coming. Appreciate that they are taking their energy and time to be with you. And if you like them, love them, respect them ahead of time, you'll find that there was reason to do that. If you fear them ahead of time, you'll find that there's reason to fear them too. You'll see, oh, they just looked at each other. What did that mean? Oh, those two are giggling. What are they laughing about? And oh, she just raised her eyebrow. I've been there up on stage when you see something happening in the background and you're like, they're laughing at me. They're ignoring me. I'm being disrespected. I'm being humiliated. I just want to get off this stage.  Well, it's wrong thinking. We have to catch ourselves thinking that way and say, I'm probably making up a story right now. And I have been a master of making up those stories. So I can say that firsthand. Yeah, they're probably not thinking what you think they're thinking. We get paranoid.  Did they notice that I have a stain on my jacket?  And Pam, I'm pretty sure you have a series of classes where people can come and just practice in a safe environment with you. Can you tell me more about how those classes started? Well, they started in 1985. They started. And that came from a group of people who had a desire to learn how to be an emcee of all things. It was an emcee training. And that led to dozens of thousands of people coming through these classes. And it's a six-week course, once a week, in the evening, downtown. I take only 10 people at a time. So everyone does get, as you said, the practice and the feedback. So they come from all walks of life. I could have a 16-year-old boy and a financial adviser and a lawyer and an entertainer all in the same class. And they all have that desire to be more confident in common. So backtracking from everything we've said so far, it sounds like there are three steps you have to take at first to begin feeling confident on the stage. And the first is to actually want to change. You have to want to feel more confident. You have to long for it and be ready to take steps for it. And then two, you have to find your message, something you're willing to face the fear in order to say. And then the third step was loving your audience ahead of time. That was it. Loving your audience ahead of time. So you're not afraid of them. You love them. You have something that's going to help them. And that gives you the courage to stand up there and speak. Another tip would be to get there in plenty of time to meet anyone who, just looking at them, causes you to feel intimidated. So you don't want to be standing up there and then seeing that intimidating person and kind of freaking out right there. So I recommend get there early and meet as many of the people as you're going to be talking to ahead of time, whether they're intimidating or not. Meet them so that when you stand up, they're not strangers. Remember, we were taught, don't speak to strangers. Remember? Yes. I remember that. Strangers are dangerous. So yet, we grew up, we go into a profession and we're expected to speak to strangers when we were taught not to. So have them not be strangers. So instead of seeing someone in the back of the room glaring down at you like this, if you've already met that person and just kind of taken the edge off of their frightening presence, then when you see them in the audience, it's not nearly as scary. And I'm because we had a friendly interaction. That look means something different to me now. That's clever. That really makes a lot of sense. So let's see. We are all of us struggling on this journey to become better people, become better professionals and become better than we are today. I mean, that's one of ThinkTech's founding principles here in front of me. We have something that says lifelong learning, every day better. So when it comes to public speaking, what are some of the benefits that people see when they start conquering the sphere of the stage? So many. For one thing, look at the efficiency of speaking to 50 people at a time instead of having 51 on one meetings.  Well, that's not efficient. So there's that. You become more valuable to your organization if you're someone who they can send out to the rotary clubs on the island to speak. So you're more valuable. You're probably going to advance more quickly. And just the satisfaction of overcoming such a barrier, just go to bed at night and say I did that well. I did better today than I did yesterday. And speaking is a chance to do that. I love that. So you not only become more valuable to your company, you also just become more confident. You're able to talk to anyone anywhere about anything. Right. Only people I'm not afraid to talk to are people who look dangerous. But I can talk to any group, I mean, I can talk to any group now. Not in the past, but now. So that's a powerful thing to be able to say. I can talk to people who don't even want to be there. I believe I can win them over. Let's be honest. There are a lot of people who are forced to come to events who just don't want to be there. And then there are ones sitting in the back like, oh, I don't want to be here. This is so boring. And previously, those would have been the people who totally made you dissolve into nerves. Oh, yes. But now I know how to say, I can tell that some of you don't want to be here. And I remember being sent to places I didn't want to be. So I get it. And maybe this will change as we get going. And then they can stop trying to prove to me that they don't want to be there because I named that tune. I love that. I call it, if you can't hide it, paint it red. So everyone else can tell if there's this one person who really doesn't want to be there. And if you just kind of ignore them, that becomes kind of a point of contention in the room. But if you just point it out and say, no, you don't want to be here. You're stuck here. May as well have a good time. I would never say that to one person. I used to do that. Well, I can tell you don't want to be here. But I learned from years of living in Hawaii that is not, we don't do that. So it's easier. Actually, it's easier if several people don't want to be there. It's easier if several people are rummaging as opposed to one person rummaging. That makes sense. So they don't feel called out. Right. You can address, I see, I haven't given you enough time to get settled. Let me give you a moment as opposed to, could you quit rummaging, which is, it's offensive. Yeah, it's like, you over there in the corner, shape up. So I would rather have a few unhappy people than only one. Because you can kind of treat them as a group and handle them as a group. Or how about people who are dozing? How about the room is too hot, they just had a heavy lunch or you inherited a bored audience. I'd rather have 20 tuned out people than only one because I can say, oh, you know what, let's all stand up and stretch and you can deal with the whole package. That makes sense. Now Pam, I love this discussion we're having. We are going to be right back. Just stay tuned. We'll take a short break and then we'll be back with Out of the Comfort Zone. I'm your host, Arby Kelly, with our guest, Pam Chambers. See you. We have this crazy thing going on today. I was just walking by and all these DJs and producers are set up all around the city. I just walked by and I said, what's happening guys? They told me they were making music. So we'll do it. Welcome back. This is Out of the Comfort Zone. I'm your host, Arby Kelly, here with Pam Chambers, speaker, coach and all around awesome person. Now, we've been talking about public speaking and one of the things that people seem to fear the most about public speaking is when things go wrong. And so Pam, what are some of the things that you've seen go wrong as a public speaker? Oh, let's count the things that can go wrong. Okay, people can start a side conversation and that can distract you and people around them. That can go wrong. You can have your mind go blank. You can forget what you were saying or why you were saying it because you got distracted by something.  That can go wrong. I've seen that happen a lot. You could have someone ask a completely irrelevant question like, where'd you get that sweater? Something completely, you might just burst out laughing at that. You could be heckled and you could have someone verbally challenge what you're saying. It's happened to me. So those are all things that can go wrong. And in my classes, I teach what to do if those things happen. So if you have a toolbox with a tool for each one of those, where's the fear? If you have a tool for everything that could go wrong, there is no fear. I love that. Can you tell us about a situation when something went wrong while you or one of your clients were on stage and what they did to fix it? Yes. I can tell you many things. But I'll start with one. This was a woman speaking, well-known public relations woman. She was speaking and I was in the audience and a man stood up and was acting like he had a question, but he really wanted to show how much he knew. It was not a question. It was him showing off. And she said, you seem to know very much about this. Come on up and join me up here. And I thought, no, that's not what you want. So he went up there. He stood on the riser with her and she handed him the microphone. And then she got off the riser. And so she elevated him, lowered herself, and he, of course, with this permission went on and on. And someone in the audience said, I'm going to use a fake name, Angela, actually I do have a question for you. And she took that as her opportunity to get back on the riser. He graciously, thank goodness, handed her the mic and then he kind of disappeared. But the mistake she made was offering something she didn't want to have happen. So say someone opens a bag of pork rinds. Oh, you know that sound. Oh, pork rinds. Do you have enough to share? Sure. And now the bag goes around the room. And that's the opposite of what you wanted. So we're too eager to accommodate the wrong things. That makes sense. I'm actually thinking about the time that happened to me. Now, as a body language speaker, I only once or twice met someone in my audience who is an expert on body language. And one of them, when I was just starting out, started talking about how, oh, he used to be a body language trainer for cells 30 years ago and such an expert. And I was like, OK. And he just went on and on and on. And I remember having to finally gather my guts and be like, I am the speaker today. I am going to take control. And I had to say, thank you, everyone. Let's give them a hand to please it down. And I remember just finding the guts to deal with that. I can imagine it would have been so much easier for me by taking your class and knowing what to do as soon as he started talking. Right. And in a nutshell, what we should do when we identify, aha, this is a know-it-all, we should be a detective and look for where we can interrupt that person with praise. So John, you are so right. Did everyone hear what John just said? He just said, blah, blah, blah, blah. And you talked to everybody. Thank you, John. So no one who's interrupted with praise will feel that they were interrupted. Clever. So you say, OK, here's my know-it-all. What can I, what shink in this wall can I step into so I can get the ball back? That's such good advice. Because I was taught not to interrupt, all right? So they're going on and on and on. And you're like listening politely. And they're still talking. But if you could just interrupt a button with praise, that is such a good strategy. Barbie, you're so right. You can say that. And that honors the person. It makes the audience relieved. The audience gets worried when they see a speaker allow that to happen. So they don't want you letting that happen. So what are some other things that could go wrong? Oh, well, OK. So your mind goes blank. You're in the middle of a story or anything. And I have literally said, why am I telling you this? And always, there's someone in the room who is the nurturer type. And she'll say, she's usually a she. She'll say, well, you were, and she'll prompt me to know why I was telling that story. And I say, oh, that's it. Thank you. So I don't think it's a bad thing that I lost track. I think it's a human thing. But to say it, why am I telling you this instead of pretending that you know what you're doing when clearly you don't? I love that. And I've seen that so many times, or someone, or I've lost my train of thought. And then you try to look profound. Yeah, try to find it. Yeah.  And then they give you the point back. Or if they don't, if no one can help you, you say, well, I guess it wasn't that important.  And you'll say, oh, I just remembered why I was. So people like that. It's genuine. It's real. It's honest. It's human. It's OK. I love that. And how about people getting emotional when they speak? I've seen many people speak about something they care so much about, that they literally, they get teary. And some of them think it's right to pretend that they're not teary when they are. So when they do that, they send a message to the audience. Let's all pretend that this isn't happening. Instead of I see that I've become emotional, I think a lot of us are emotional about this. So you kind of validate the feeling. Because if you invalidate the feeling, then why are they listening to you in the first place? Well, they all have to pretend that this isn't happening. And that's uncomfortable for people. I love this, Pam. All right, Pam has been my mentor for several months. And so I've had the chance to see her speak and talk to her. But every time I get to talk with you, Pam, I always get to learn more and get more advice. So I love it. Thank you. I love it. Thank you for your enthusiasm. Well, we've only got a couple minutes left on the show. So Pam, is there anything else you'd like to say to people who are struggling with this? Some people will never not be nervous ahead of time. Barbara Streisand and Joan Rivers are two famous people who never were not nervous ahead of time. So that may be the case for some of your listeners. But that doesn't mean you can't get better. You just say, OK, this is part of the package for me. Oh, hi, nervousness. I knew you were going to show up. Hi, let's get going. Have a seat. Sit in the back row. I love that. And I'd like to have your listeners know that I have this book that is available to them. It's called Life is a Presentation. And it's a digital book, an e-book. And they can get it by going to my website. All right. Well, can you tell us a little bit about what's in the book? Oh, sure. It's a book made of many articles that I used to write for the Chamber of Commerce. So I wrote a monthly column for them. And someone said, could you put those into a book? I said, sure, why not? So that was the genesis of this book. And it's been revised over the years several times. But it's very easy to read. Lots of empty space, nice, big font. You can read it in an hour. Good. And that's for free on your website? Yes. Wonderful. What a good resource. Now, if you haven't read Pam's work before, you should because she's just as engaging as a writer as she is as a speaker. So I am certain if you go and read this book, you will find something special in here that's helpful for you. Now, at the very end of our show, I always love to ask. Pam, what's next for you? What's coming up for you? Where are you going with this? Oh, well, I just wrote another book, which you kindly talked about in one of your shows. It's called Not This Again. And it's a book for Hawaii leaders about challenges that leaders in Hawaii face. And my intention with the book is to have it be almost a textbook that will go along with workshops that I'll put on that will be customized based on which of those 18 challenges were the most meaningful for whatever client I have. So this coming year will be the year of that book. Wow. Not this again. And I read that book. It's for Hawaii's leaders. If you're in business, if you're struggling with any aspect of your business, there's something in this book for you. And you can also find that one at poundchambers.com. Now, we are closing up. It's just about the end of the show. And I know you, our viewers, are getting ready for Christmas. You're getting ready for family time. You're planning for the new year. And as you're planning and thinking about what you want 2018 to look like, what you want next Christmas to look like, I want you to know that if you start mastering your public speaking skills, if you start mastering your people skills, then 2018 will be full of better friendships, more client relationships, happier marriages, happier families. And this time next year, you won't even recognize your life because so much could have changed for the better. But that only happens when you get out of your comfort zone. Because if you keep doing what you've been doing, you're never gonna get better at speaking. You're never gonna get better at all the things you could be better at.   When you and I both know, it could be so much better. So I challenge you, as you're sitting with your family this Christmas, as you're planning for New Year's, think about what you can do to get out of your comfort zone and make your life better. All right, we are out of time. Thank you, Pam, so much for coming. It is so always a pleasure to have you here. And always a pleasure to meet with you. Thank you. Thank you for having me. My pleasure. All right, everyone, this is Out of the Comfort Zone on Think Tech, Hawaii. You can find us on Thursdays at 11 a.m. We'll be here next week. Till then, have a wonderful day, have a wonderful week, have a wonderful Christmas, and I'll see you next week. Thank you.


So their journalists leave a short remarks, after that it is possible for me to ask questions. The faster Putin understands he will not reach his objectives, the sooner the war ends. Our strength is our unity, but breaking this unity is the gremlin's strategy to win. We will prove them wrong. We cannot agree with Putin's land drought. That is why the number one focus are arms, ammunition and training. They all must continue at the scale sufficient for Ukraine to win this war. Ukraine is hosting the NATO summit in July, Ukraine. To that end, Estonia and Latvia began negotiations with German manufacturers to jointly procure medium range air defence. This is an important milestone in our cooperation to better protect our skies. If we do not succeed as the collective west in stopping and reversing state aggression against a neighbour, then the world becomes dangerous for everyone. And this is why I am convinced that at the end of the day, once the war in Ukraine is over, and Ukraine has won in this war, that Ukraine should and must become a member of NATO. Looking into the Vilnius summit, it is essential not only to adopt NATO defence plans, but to commit adequate resources to their realisation. The entire eastern border must be reinforced with air defence and with ground based air defence capacities. We must take decisions in Vilnius to upgrade air defence capacities in the region. Our top priority should be effective deterrence, so that aggressor would not even think of testing NATO's resolve and capacity to defend its every inch. It is absolutely clear that it could be not a frozen conflict. So if Russia is just thinking that it could succeed with its robbery of land of Ukraine, it will not succeed with this idea and attempt. And this is why we are supporting Ukraine as long as it is necessary. Russia must withdraw troops and this is the basis for peace. Thank you, Carolina Vosley from Stoner News Portal, Delphi. I have also not found this situation as dramatic.


The second situation is that with the ball in play, the base runner fails to touch a base, and then he would proceed on to the next one. So this is if we have a base runner here, then we have our batter up the bat. And let's say the batter hits a fly ball way out to maybe the whole way out to the wall. And the ball's going to bounce it out, bouncing around out here. And the left fielder, he's running over to get it. Maybe with the center fielder, he's running over to get it. So as soon as this ball is hit, this runner, he's going to take off. And for whatever reason, then, whenever he gets to second base, instead of stepping on the base like he should, maybe he steps over it. Maybe he's distracted. He's looking at the ball out here. He's looking at a pretty girl in the crowd or something. And he actually steps over the base, and he continues into third. Third, and he reaches third base, and they throw the ball back in here to the infield. Maybe the original batter on the play, he gets a double out of it. And so he's standing on second base. So what the defensive team here is going to do is if the defensive team, remember, the defensive team, they're responsible for this. They have to watch and pay attention to the play. They can get the ball. Again, maybe it's the pitcher who has the ball. He can throw it out here. Maybe the shortstop comes over. He'll throw him the ball. The shortstop will step on second base while he's holding the ball. They'll ask the second base umpire. They'll say that we would like to appeal that the runner missed the base. And in that situation, if the umpire agrees, if the umpire had seen this runner step over second base, then he would uphold the appeal. We would call the runner out. And so this runner on third base would be out. However, the runner, the batter on the play, he would still get the double. Assuming there were less than two outs. If there were two outs, and that was the third out in the inning, then the inning would be over. But with this, the batter, he would still remain on second base. So this was basically if a runner misses the base. And this can also, that's obviously the abbreviated wording there. But this can also come into play if a runner, for whatever reason, he would be running and he does step on second base. And then he realizes he has to turn around and come back. He is responsible for stepping on second base again and then on his way back if, say, a ball was caught in the outfield or something like that. So whenever he's returning to first base, he would have to step on it. If in the situation he doesn't step on it, maybe he tries to cut across the field or something like that to get back to the base quicker, then the defense could then appeal on that situation. The third way that we can look at is something we've mentioned before. And that is if the runner, if he runs through, he hits the ball and he runs through, there's a close play, say, at first base, he runs through the base and he doesn't return immediately. So maybe there was confusion. He thought he was called out on the play, but actually he was safe. And the runner, then maybe he gets bad and he goes back into the dugout. So in this situation, the team can either tag him out or they can appeal there. They can get the ball step on first and appeal the play. So this is failing to return to first base immediately. And the final way that we'll take a look at in this video is that if the runner fails to touch home plate and then he makes no attempt to return to it. And so that is kind of similar to the first base one. Maybe there is a play where a runner scores, or actually he wouldn't be scoring if he doesn't step on the plate. So if for whatever reason, he steps over the plate and then he just continues on into the dugout, the defensive team could get the ball, step on home plate, make the appeal. And if the umpire has seen that the runner stepped over the base, then he would call him out. If for whatever reason the umpire didn't see that or he thinks he does, did step on home plate, he would call him safe and the run would count. So those are the four ways. Oops, let's get a. Those are the four ways, then. This is failing, failing to step. Those are the four specific appeals on the rulebook states.