This is Think Tech Hawaii, the immunity matters here. Okay, we're back. I told you to come back. We came back. It's the 130 block, if you will, here on a given Wednesday. I'm Jay Fidel. This is Think Tech. And more specifically, this is Think Tech Talks. Now, you may not know this, but last Saturday, you should have known it, was the visitor industry charity walk in and around and back to Alamoana from Waikiki. And we were there. We took footage. And that footage is going to play this Sunday and the week following and every day in the week following on OC16. So take a look at it. And it includes lots of wonderful conversations with the people who were walking. Some of them are pretty interesting. Some of them are really funny. And one of them, one of the conversations was with Prashant Doshi, who was right there in front of, where was it? It was right near the Ilikai. Right near the Ilikai. And that was worth having. And if you watch our show at 10.30 on Sunday, you'll see a bit of Prashant. So welcome to the show, Prashant. Nice to have you here yet again. Oh, great to be here, Jay. It was an interesting story you talked about. It was a story about tech, entrepreneurship, a story about courage in the marketplace, if you will. So let me see if I can pick up on the thread. You're here in Hawaii because you want to do tech. And we always like that because our middle name actually happens to be tech. So you were in New York, which is my original hometown. And you were doing three, not one, not two, but three tech companies there. And you upended all of that and sold them all. In the process. In the process. And we'll ask you about that. And then came out here because this is a better place for many reasons and we'll talk about that too. And you wanted to establish a tech company. And in fact, today, what's today's date? 23rd of May. 23rd of May. It's my wife's birthday. It's my wife's birthday. Prashant Doshi formed a Hawaii LLC. And following through on what he said he was going to do on Saturday called Shreem, that's H-S-R-E-E-M-L-L-C right here in Hawaii. Good for you. It's a good beginning. What does Shreem mean? So Shreem is actually an ancient Indian mantra. It's a beach mantra. And it's the mantra for Lakshmi. And Lakshmi is the goddess of prosperity. So when you literally say Shreem, you're invoking prosperity. And you don't have to be Hindu or have you. It's about invoking prosperity. That's pretty good. I haven't heard the name before, so looks like I got a lock on that one. I hope so. And I do have a trademark on it as well. Go get a website right away. Shreemcom.com or something. Okay, so let's talk about, you know, the story. Sure. How did you come by having three tech companies in New York City? Yeah. So it's actually, it starts in New York City. So I'm originally from MIT. And I've been in a variety of industries across the board. I've been doing something from manufacturing to telecom, cybersecurity. This story kind of starts in the late 90s. I was, I'm independent, but I was consulting to the Giuliani Administration through a private sector company. Giuliani, did you say Giuliani? I did. I thought you said Giuliani. I did. He's no longer my hero, I gotta tell you that. You know, if we want to make this a part of the project, no he's not. And actually he's kind of, I'm no offense. But he's letting me down a little bit and some of the choices he's more recent. You and millions of others, yeah, but that's another story. But he was a fantastic mayor at the time. I mean, I grew up, I was born in Hoboken and New York back in the day. How the mighty have fallen from grace. Yeah, Hoboken. Yeah, I was. I was born in Hoboken, me, Frank Sinatra in baseball. One of the three of us is not well known. So, yeah, no, but I, back to New York. We were there in the late, I was there in the late 90s. And I was coming back from Europe. I had been working in the telecom arena. And the head of HR, the company that a multi-billion multinational corporation said, you know, you get bored easily. You like to solve new problems. We're going to throw you into health and human services. And I knew nothing about it. And I'd never worked with the government before. They have pills for this, you know. Yeah. So, we were in New York City. You probably have heard, you know, sort of the broken windows theory, which is the, it's essentially, New York was not, was a crime-ridden place, right? And it was a difficult place to go to. People like to not hang out in New York City. And Giuliani, you know, he, former district attorney, really cleaned it up. And the story is actually a story about data and the use of technology and data. What they found out, essentially, is that the big stuff relates to the small stuff. So, big crime is expensive to resolve, has a low hit rate, and it's very difficult, okay? The small stuff is, what the data showed is that it's correlated to the big stuff. So, we're talking about graffiti and turnstile jumping and broken windows, hence the broken window theory. And the idea was that if you could be tough on the small stuff, the big stuff goes away. And it was true. It was a true theory. It actually worked that way. It actually worked. And he capitalized on that, and he made the city a lot safer. He did. And I definitely credited him for that.  Well, in 9-11, he was pretty good in that. Well, and I was there. In 9-11, I watched the towers come down. That leads to a second story, but I actually... There's a watch. Yeah. Well, I ended up running the city's, part of the city's disaster relief efforts in New York City. So, that was incredible. But the story was about performance management and analytics, and I had come from this very similar background in other industries and using data strategically. We just studied MIT.  But that's not atypical. Yeah, it kind of sort of happens. Yeah, but the story about using data strategically, and then we applied that to the health and human services field. Long story short, I ended up creating a program there called Centerstat. It was one of the finalists for Harvard's Innovation Awards in government. And it was basically about using data to help government people. Now, just mind you, government is not what I would call at the top of the list in terms of accountability and performance and results. And that's what it was about. It was about culture. It was about using data strategically to recognize people. Analytics. Analytics. And that ended up, long story short, the welfare roles were cut in half, went from a million to half a million, typically in New York. In the city of New York. In the city. All five boroughs are just about half. Five boroughs. And so there were a million people on welfare in the mid-90s. And then half a million by the time we were done. And typically the agencies were putting in about 10 or 15,000 people in the jobs. Giuliani in, I think it was 2000, had given us a goal of 100,000. None of us thought that was achievable. But we achieved 133,000 job placements. And that's a collective story. That's not a story about me. That's a story about all of us working together. But you all, you worked together with this data stack. What did you call it? This program in particular was called Centerstat. And it was one of three major programs that all worked together. That was company number one. That was not a company. I was working for another company at the time. And then from there I went and, you know, because I was involved in disaster relief. I went to DC. I launched a, we, and the company that I was with launched a cybersecurity practice. That happens. That's a long story. I ended up sort of leaving and deciding, took a severance and went out to the west coast and have always continued to move out west since. And from there decided with a partner to take what we had learned in New York City and apply it to a broader group in health and human services. So what was the three companies you established? The three companies were exemplar human services, exemplar analytics, and exemplar corporation. And these are kind of three companies that work in tandem that primarily help government agencies. And most of our... Like city or state agencies. Yeah, county agencies in particular. And California is a big mainstay, was the mainstay of our business. Because there's, California if you know now is like the fifth largest economy in the world. About 37 million people. And they're 58 counties. So you were in New York before you came out? No, I was in California before this. But the work came out, while you remember New York is, A, we're both from there.  But yeah, that's sort of the story. Okay, so your last place... It's California. It's California. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's all over California. Okay, okay. We're virtual. Okay, so you have these virtual companies, they're surviving, if not doing really well. They're done very well.  How easy is it to sell a tech company, three tech companies in California right now? Yeah, you know, the thing that we do is very unique. I had developed the only software as a service cloud-based model for what we do. It's still, you know, 11 years ago. Still is the only one. We typically compete, if you will, with the large systems integrators. Software as a service is a term that I heard 10 years ago. Yeah, right. I don't hear it anymore. Yeah, exactly.  So it's still the only one in California and in the industry space, at least the best of my knowledge that exists. So it's fairly unique. It's a fairly attractive kind of proposition because of its placement. So how do you sell a company like that? Well, that's part of the thing that's happening right now is it may be to the other shareholders and maybe we have, you know, foreign buyers that are very interested. So we're just right now trying to figure out what's the best thing. Why don't you hold on to it and appoint someone else? Yeah, I mean, that is part, I did actually. You can sit on the beach with me. Yeah, you know, I've never sat on the beach.  I understand back in Hoboken and MIT you were a shy child. You know, I doubt that anyone ever would say that. My wife would hope that someone would say that, but that's not happening today. All right, so you haven't sold them yet? It's kind of near. Got buyers? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Definitely. So it's up to the lawyers. Yeah, it is. That's where it is. They're important in the development of the sector. They are actually important. You know, I never, my dad always said I should have been a lawyer. And, you know, actually, I really do want to bring that up and this is, you know, to the folks out there. This is a shout-out to the camera. Yeah, yeah, this is a shout-out to the camera. One of the, I think, the main important things if you're in a start-up, because you tend not to spend a lot of money because you're bootstrapping and defensive IP and making sure you have agreements in place, partnership agreements, membership, confidentiality, IP protection, hugely important. And typically something, even us as a company, really didn't do a great job in the beginning and you sort of pay the price if you don't do it right. Yeah, it really does. And you have to have a lawyer who will dot the i's and cross the t's. And one that actually knows the subject matter area well. Right, and it's very specialized. Yeah, absolutely. And I mean, I guess we can have another show about this, but how do you determine whether the lawyer who presents has specialized, especially in tech, especially with certain kinds of technology and intellectual property, how do you know he's real? Yeah. I mean, you can be a lawyer, but it doesn't mean you know that stuff. Yeah. Anyway, okay, moving on forward. Yeah.  It comes down a vision perhaps. It comes down to a lightest shining on your face. And there's a voice. And the voice is saying... Go to Hawaii. Prashant, go west, young man. It says, go to Hawaii. Get on the beach. No. Get on to the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs, Fuller Corporation. Yes, I did. And it's one of the best websites I've seen. So easy. It didn't about 15 minutes this morning. So tell me about the light coming down. Yeah. So what happened is about a couple of months ago. It was clear that my vision and the vision of the other shareholders was sort of diverging, I think, very globally and wanted to do business globally. And the others kind of wanted to stick within one vertical within the United States. And I'm not suggesting that the U.S. is great, but tech is one of those things where truly you could be located anywhere. Sure. I've now spent, in the last four months, I've been on four different continents. I've spent a lot of time in India, the UAE, Scotland, Australia, and here, Hawaii, and then California. And I tell you, I've been amazed at the innovation that's going on around the world in pockets. Now, people tend to think of Silicon Valley, right? I hang out a lot in Palo Alto and Stanford and what have you. And innovation is happening everywhere. And so the application, whether the ideas now come from everywhere. I actually believe that money's not the real currency anymore. And of course, if you own any Bitcoin, you would know a little bit about that, I'm sure. I actually wrote a social currency. 27 shows on Bitcoin. Yeah, I wrote a social currency prior to Bitcoin. But what I was going to say is that ideas come from everywhere and I believe information, knowledge, insights, that's the new currency of the world. Yeah, well, you know, we look for seed changes. That's what it's all about for us. We don't spot the seed changes. We don't want the little pieces. We want to look at the big pieces and find out how the world is changing so we can sort of gauge ourselves or, you know, to integrate better. And so I think it's absolutely true change in general. And one of the changes, you know, I'm thinking of Ai Weiwei's new movie. It was in February, I think it opened up. It's called Human Flow. Yeah. And it's about refugee camps around the world. There are 65 million people. I didn't know that. Yeah. I don't think a lot of people did know that. And it's a seed change. The world has changed and we weren't watching. Right. And now he helps us understand the seed change and how we better stay conscious about that because it could lead somewhere that we don't like. So the same thing here. There's a seed change happened. Yeah. It's not all in Silicon Valley. No, it's not. It's not all in Beijing either or in Tianjin. No. It could be anywhere now. It could be in Europe. Okay. Let's go further than Europe. You know, there's a question. Let's go to Asia. Let's go to India. Let's go to Southeast Asia. Absolutely. They're out there, kids. I say kids. They're not a kid anymore. Although you're not shy. Yeah, I know. You know, who are having innovative thoughts because the fundamental building blocks of making information technology are available to everyone instantly. That's the piece. That is, and I want to underscore that point. I mean, I think technology, IT, and all the technology fields, is the great equalizer of this generation, right? Globally. Globally. It doesn't matter where you come from, what you have. You know, if you can get access to connect into the internet, and most of so much of freeware is available now, that you can build something that could transform the world. So I just want to ask one more question before we take a break. Sure. Yeah. You know, in order to use these building blocks, in order to be innovative, in order to transform the world, I think you can confirm one way or the other. I think you don't need to go to MIT. And if you went to MIT, you don't need to finish MIT. It's been proven so many times. This is a discussion that's a particular area of passion for me. I took the former prime minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, to task in Stanford. She was at a global education forum. And they were all kind of beating on the drums of college, college, college. And you hear that in the country. And I'm telling you, that's absolutely untrue, especially when it comes to tech. So what do you need? What you need, first of all, you need some chutzpah. You need some courage. You need to be a good observer of humanity. Look for problems. The first thing is to find out what problem or unique value proposition you're going to create. You've got to be a pessimist and find the problem. Yeah, you do. But once you do, then you think creatively. You apply some technology, and I believe in fast pilots and agile technology doing things, not sitting in some backed in the old software. Uber. Exactly. Think about Uber. It's not just about the app. It's about a democratization and unleashing. I had a piece in Symbol Beat this morning, came to that same conclusion. It's the democratization of our society right now, right here. I've been taking ubers all around Honolulu because I was like, why rent a car? I can take Uber everywhere. I mean, at 3 AM, I took an Uber this morning after my walk. My point, I've met a realtor whose child is at Punahou who in between showings is like, hey, I'm already on the road. Let me use Uber or Lyft or whomever it is. The point is that people had an asset, it was called their car. They have another asset, it's called their time.  It's brilliant. And right after this break, Versace, I want to find out how you're going to do the same thing, not the same exact app, but how you're going to do the same thing right here in River City. We'll be right back. You'll see this is going to be amazing. This is Think Tech Hawaii, raising public awareness. Aloha, I'm Dave Stevens, host of the Cyber Underground. This is where we discuss everything that relates to computers that's just going to scare you out of your mind. So come join us every week here on thinktechawaii.com, 1 p.m. on Friday afternoons. And then you can go see all our episodes on YouTube. Just look up the Cyber Underground on YouTube. All our shows will show up. And please follow us. We're always giving you current, relevant information to protect you. Keeping you safe. Aloha.  And we're talking about this company he started, but before we get into the grass roots of that and the weeds, if you will, I want to follow through on the one point about whether you need MIT and finishing MIT in order to do Ukubucks. Absolutely. I mean, look, I'm very thankful that I got into MIT and I had a great run at MIT. And it obviously opens a lot of doors for me. But I can absolutely assure you that it's unnecessary. And you look at now the burden of college debt, okay? And people coming out, what, you're, you know, 300,000 easily in the hole.  Apprenticeships is the key. I've studied apprenticeships around the world, okay? Germany is one of the best models. Switzerland's another good model. They've done it in the UK. But the one that I think is most relatable to Hawaii and the U.S. in general is Australia. I was just down there for quite some time last month. And they have a national apprenticeship strategy, okay? Wherever you go in Australia, you can get an apprenticeship across a ton of industries. I met with people from the government, from the private sector, apprentices, you know, they call it a year 13, right after high school that you can go. But it starts with a cultural acceptance that you are not less than because you didn't go to college. That's the big problem we have in this country is that we think that if you don't go to college, there's something wrong with you.  So apprenticeships are key. I'd like to highlight a particular example or model. So Jim McKelvie, the co-founder of Square, is a colleague of mine, an esteemed colleague of mine. And Jim got very upset after he launched Square and that became a, you know, multi-billion-dollar success that, you know, no one teaches really how to code, okay? And so there are a number of coding academies out of there, but the key thing that Jim did... We have one here. Yeah, the key thing that Jim did is not just 60, anyone 16 to 60 can learn how to code, okay? But after you do that in the three to six month academy, you get an apprenticeship and you work somewhere, okay? And they make sure that that happens. All of his results are on launchcode.org. Go check him out. And the basic story is he takes people that had earnings expectation of $10 to $15 an hour and turns them into 50 to $60,000 jobs. Right, and potentially entrepreneurs. And entrepreneurs. And that's particularly important and relevant here in Hawaii because we have a brain drain problem, right? Yeah, yeah. So there's a brain surgeon and he's got a leak in his house under the sink. He calls a plumber and the plumber slides under there. He hits the thing with a couple of the hammer, you know, slides out and says, it's all fixed. The brain surgeon says, how much is that going to be? He's going to be $1,500. $1,500. I'm a brain surgeon. I don't make that kind of money. And the plumber says, you know, when I was a brain surgeon, I didn't make that kind of money either. That's great to be here. Okay, let's go to the weeds now. What do you got in mind for Shreem LLC? Okay, so Shreem, it's a couple of parts. And it's a concept that's a strategy. It's an approach and a methodology more than anything else. All right, so as I was telling you, I've been working with the government agencies to try to impact social good change, right? And I'm a little frustrated. I tell you, you know, the government's not the easiest of organizations to deal with. You heard it here on Think Tech. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You heard it here. I'll sign anything. I mean, look, a lot of folks in Silicon Valley and other places stay away from the government because they're hard to do business with, okay? In general.  And look, there's some amazing people in the government, but the burden of the bureaucracy just makes it difficult for entrepreneurship to flourish. And we've had to fight tooth and nail and a lot of blood, sweat and tears in 12, 13 years. And I'm like, there's got to be an easier way. I think you're going to do better here. Well, so I don't want to do it in the government, okay? So my thought is that I'm going to go into the commercial sectors. Now, prior to these companies, I was all in the commercial sector, in telecom, in manufacturing, in FinTech, all these different ones. And I'm not, it's more cutthroat, okay? But, and the competition's higher, but it's easier.  I could do that with you and government. And it might be two years later that we actually have a contract. Well, yeah. And the other thing with government is you don't know what motivates them. Well, exactly. Power maybe. Yeah.  Who knows what it is. Well, and sometimes doing things like saving costs is actually not a good thing because their budgets might get cut in the next cycle, right? Exactly. But in business, you always know what the bottom line is, the bottom line is the bottom line. Exactly. And so I said, you know what? I said, I'm going to go back to my history and the things I learned prior to these companies. And then what I'm going to do is work in the commercial sectors. And then, and this is my, and I'm announcing it right here so you guys can all hold me accountable. You start taking notes now. So, so I was in India for four months, right? And they implemented a 2% CSR requirement, Corporate Social Responsibility, meaning 2% of income. I mean, I forget if it's net income, we'll go to doing good, right? Altruism. But the common good. Yeah. Mine is going to be 11%. Why 11? Why not 15? Well, hey, hey, now come on. Now I got to make some money again. Well, 11 is still five times more than what they're mandating in India, right? Okay, okay. But the idea is, and I like the number 11, but the reason is that I believe in tech, if you operate efficiently, first of all, you can have those kind of margins. Does 11 have some symbolic meaning to you? It does. But that would be like a whole, so I have 888. 888? Yeah, yeah. So you know that. Long life and everything. That's right. In Chinese, but... 11's a mystical number, okay? And it's, you know, it's a divine mystical number. Oh, now I understand. Yeah. So 11% will go, and what I'm deciding right now, so remember I told you before, Shreem, I actually did a social currency. And what originally I was thinking was taking 11% of dollars and giving it to places, right? And that's how I'll do the social good. I decided differently as recently as this week after I met you. That... Yeah, it was something you said. You positively influenced me. The 11% what I'm going to do is use that to hire people that will then give away for free to the government or the nonprofit sector their expertise, okay? So you're getting a multiplier effect, right? So the 11% of net income will be used to say, for instance, instead of us, my previous company, working directly with the government agency, Health and Human Services, Child Welfare, whatever it is, I will hire someone or contract with someone and use that money to get an expert to work for free with the government.  People come in and sign their agreements and say we're just giving them to you for free. The other thing is I'm going to use a lot of, I'm going to call it, because they call it themselves, retired talent. See, I don't believe in this thing about 65 as the retired. Life gets better after that. Exactly. The ancient Vedas suggest that the natural lifespan is 120. So 65 to me is about, 65 to me is midlife, okay? But my point is that 65, something didn't suddenly turn off in your brain that you're no longer useful, okay? In fact, what I believe retirement is that you get to decide what you want to do versus what you have to do to take care of your family and other responsibilities. That's a great asset. It's an asset like the car and the time you talked about in the case of Uber. Yeah. It's an asset to be played and if you can connect with that and you can use computing power to manage that asset and leverage that asset, it's got to go in the right place. So what's the ultimate goal here? Yes. You want to do the 11% and make everybody happy or do you want to put yourself on a tropical island with a mint julep? Well, I mean, it may be perhaps a little bit of both, and I'm already on a tropical island. Okay. So what I'll say is what the real mission of Shreem is, in addition to the social impact side of it, is, okay, Facebook and those, a number of these companies have been in the press recently about how essentially your data is used against you, okay? Now, I've worked in the cyber security and intel field and I'm telling you it's been going on for a very long time, okay? Your data is used against you. Yeah. We knew from the New York days. Yeah, Facebook account? Yeah, it's... Your profile? No, none, none. I, in fact, deleted all my accounts. I'm one of those people that I actually deleted. You mean recently? Yes. Well, I had, I've never had too many of them, but I only keep LinkedIn and this is not a pitch for LinkedIn, but I kind of like LinkedIn. But no, what I was saying was that data has been used against you. As we say in New York, there's no such thing as a free lunch. There is no such thing as a free lunch.  And this is not, again, I like Mark, you know, a good guy, and he's done a lot of great stuff, but I'm talking about the fact that these companies' business models are fundamentally driven by collecting as much data about you as possible. It's true. And then selling you stuff or using it against you. You know, maybe you could give him a call. Mark? Yeah. Yeah. He's on Kauai. Yeah, sure. It's an 808 number. Yeah, yeah, yeah, that's true. Maybe, you know, pop up at his house one day to come on the show. I will. I have some questions.  It's all about relationships, isn't it? It really is. It's all about connecting up and networking, and this is a great place for that. So I'd like to have you come back. You want me to bring Mark? Bring Mark? I'll bring Jim. Square, I mean, that's pretty amazing. Okay, bring Jim. I'll get a crew. Okay, all right, yeah. And we'll talk some more. Well, you know, we're going to need that here. You want to follow your company. I hope it's successful. I hope you make all the right moves, and I'll see you back at this table. We'll take further status on it soon. Jay, thank you so much. It's been an honor to be here. Fashant, nice to meet you. Nice to talk with you. I knew it would be like this. Aloha. Aloha.


The email shows my clients how hardworking, dependable, you know, professional, knowledgeable. It does all that for me on a huge scale while I continue trying to connect with more people to get them into my relevance system. This is what I believe. I'm sharing that with you for nothing.  My strategy is to call property owners. OK? It's unlimited. You can't call them all. OK? Property owners, by the way, are the highest quality prospects. They buy and sell. They're the best buyers. They already know all the, you don't have to educate them. They already know everything about home ownership. You don't have to educate them at all. They know it. They already know that. So you take the education time out of that equation. To me, the highest quality prospect is the prospect that makes me the most amount of money and the least amount of time. I'm a single agent. As a single agent, I have to be most effective. I have to pick and choose the actions that are more efficient than anything else. And I'm really good at figuring out what's most efficient. And what I'm telling you is the most efficient way to build a really huge business. Not everybody wants a really, really huge business. I don't know what everybody wants individually. But I can tell you what I did. I called condo owners for years and years and years. I'm calling them in a low-pressure manner. I'm not asking them if they want to buy or sell. If they do want to buy or sell, great. That's that less than 1%. I'm going to live off of right now. But I'm looking for the 20% to 30% of people who like me and we connect long-term. I'm going to have this conversation. I'll tell you my entire script in just a second. I'm going to get their email.  If we connect, I'm going to get their email. And then they're going to get a weekly email every single week on the same day of the week forever. It's been going on since 2007. 11 years, this email's going out every single Wednesday through all kinds of crazy stuff. Never missed a week. And the email shows my clients how hard-working, dependable, professional, knowledgeable. It does all that for me on a huge scale while I continue trying to connect with more people to get them into my relevance system. So that's what I do.


Meaning and nature of learning. What is meaning of learning? Do you think that everything that you are getting is learning? Whatever you are wrote memorizing that is learning. Whatever the information is you getting it is learning. You are storing information into the mind that is learning. And you think that you are learning. You are reading book and you think that I am a great learner. So the individual is constantly interacting with and influenced by the environment. Whatever you are learning from environment. Whatever you are getting from environment. Is it learning? The experiences make seem to change or modify his behavior in order to deal effectively. Now this line is very important. Learning means that you are getting information and according to information you are modifying your behavior. You learn that aggressiveness is not good habit. So did you change your behavior? If you change your behavior that is called learning. And very common example that usually we give to get understanding of learning.  Next time you will be very careful. You will not touch the hot kettle. It is called learning. Whenever you will get some negative reward. Then you will not repeat the action that is called learning. When you will bring change into your personality and you will again repeat it because it was positive for you. That is also called learning. So basically modification of behavior is called learning. And I will just you know interlink with some other things. That we said that when we cheat from one place then we should not repeat that action again. So that we do not cheat again. That is why Islam said that the moment is not repeated from one place to another. That means when you experimented and you found out that this is how people cheat. Or if I do this work then I will be cheated. Or if I do this work then there will be negative effects. So we stop doing that work. If there are positive effects then we do that work again. So this is a kind of change in the behavior of your father. It is a change in your habits. When you wake up late, you always reach school late and you cheat. You have changed. Now you will not wake up early. This is called the change. This is the modification in the behavior. So that is called learning. You have learned that I always take a lot of damage. I go every day and I cheat. So it is better if I should change my habit to avoid cheating. So attitude, interest or other things that you modify yourself. The things that give you harm, they leave you.  So that is called learning basically. So the meaning of learning doesn't mean that you are getting information blindly and you are storing it into your mind and whenever you need then you are just getting it back. This is not called learning. That you have the degree of MFIL, MA and PhD.  You cannot control your aggressiveness. You cannot behave well with other people. So you are not honest at this stage. So what you have studied so much. If it has not put any effect on you, if it has not changed in your personality then how can we say that it is learning? What have you learned? You have only stored information. You have not learned anything. Learning will happen in the same way. We will call it learning from which you will get a change in your personality. So change, modification is called learning and this is actually the meaning of learning. So the more you interact with the environment the more you are getting hurt. If you are revising the same work then you are not learning anything. So after having a change do something new. You have modified your behaviour that you should be careful. This is also modification. This is also modification to do something new. This is also modification to discipline yourself. So modification of behaviour is called learning.


Okay, so this is the question we have discussed in the second one. The next one you see, an excess of liquid mercury is added to an acidified solution of this molar Fe3+. It is found that 5% of Fe3+, remains at equilibrium at 25 degree Celsius. We have to calculate E0 for this, assuming that the only reaction that occurs is this. Hosell reaction is given, and E0 of Fe3+, to Fe2+, is given. So you have to use Nernst equation here. This value, it should be E0, it is just a misprint. This should be E0. Now you see this mercury is getting oxidized, and Fe is getting reduced, right? So cathode is what? Cathode is Fe3+, to Fe2+, reduction, and anode is Hg2, Hg2+, okay? E0 of this cell is what? E0 of cathode minus E0 of, right? Here you see this E0 of anode, both are reduction potential. And that is what we need to find out, reduction potential. This E0 is the answer we have, okay? Now when you apply Nernst equation into this, so E cell is equals to this thing, right? E0 cell is nothing but this. E0 cell minus 0.0591 divided by 2, right? Because the N value is 2 log of Hg2+, Hg2, 2+, 102, 102. We have Fe2+, square divided by the ion, we have Fe3+, square. This is what the question we have. It says what? 5% of Fe3+, remains at equilibrium. Means when this reaction takes place and equilibrium achieves, there we have 5% of Fe3+, present in the solution. Obviously the state of equilibrium, E cell is 0, is equals to E0 cell minus 0.0591 by 2. We'll substitute the value of this. The concentration of Fe2+, 2F3+, so it is given 1%. So you see this thing we'll use over here. We have Fe3+, the reaction is this. Concentration we can find out with this value. 5% thing is there. OK, so serious. The reaction is 2Hg plus 2Fe3+, gives Hg2, 2+, plus 2Fe3+. This is 1 into 10 to the power minus 3, present initially. It is 0 and 0. When 5% left with 95% react, right? So this is the Fe3+, concentration which is left here. That will be 0.95 reacts, 1 minus, or we can write simply, 10 to the power minus 3 into 0.05, alpha is this, right? C minus C alpha we can write, so I can write down here. Suppose if I write it in the general term, probably that will be easy for you to understand. If it is C initially and C value is given, so it is C minus C alpha. This will be C alpha. This will be 2C alpha. What is C alpha? C is 10 to the power minus 3 into 1 minus alpha. Alpha is 5%. So it is 1 minus 0.05. C is 10 to the power minus 3. Alpha is 0.05, 2 into 10 to the power minus 3. Alpha is 0.05. So this is 0.95 into 10 to the power minus 3, right? This will be 0.05 into 10 to the power minus 3. This will be 0.1 into 10 to the power minus 3. I will find out this concentration we have already. We'll substitute this and we'll get the answer. One more thing you see here, one thing we must write. This is one thing I'm missing here. Just one small correction here. This should be 2C alpha because 2 we have here. So this will be what? This will be 2 alpha. 2 alpha is 0.1. This is the concentration we have. Now when we substitute all these values here and we'll find out E0 cell, right? So E0 cell here is we can also write this down as E0 cell is equals to. It is E0 of cathode minus E0 of. And that would be equals to. When you solve this, we'll get some value here. E0 of anode we need to find out, which is Hg2 Hg2 plus reduction potential. So E0 of anode is equals to. The value we get is 0.7926. This is the answer we get in this question. So what we are doing here, we are just using Nernst equation. Equilibrium condition will apply here. And then to find out the concentration of the species involved, we use the concept of equilibrium. Ions are in equilibrium. So how it dissociates, how concentration of ion changes. We'll find out that and we'll substitute it in this. We'll get the expression. OK, fine. Now this is the next question. The standard reduction potential of copper is given 0.34. Standard reduction potential of copper is given 0.34. Find the reduction potential at pH 14 for the above couple. Ksp is given. We need to find out the reduction potential of Cu2 plus to Cu, Ksp is given. So Ksp is given for CuOH whole twice. So CuOH whole twice dissociates as Cu2 plus plus 2OH minus. So Ksp expression, if I write it down, that will be concentration of Cu2 plus concentration of OH minus square. So if it is S, this one is 2S. So we can write 4SQ. So concentration of Cu2 plus is equals to S is equals to Ksp by 4 root over of it. And that would be 10 to the power minus 19 divided by 4 root over of it. OK, so this is, one more thing is given, pH is given. So it means PoH is what? PoH is 0, means OH minus concentration. We can do this way also, because why we cannot use this, I'll tell you, because the solution, pH is given. Means it's OH minus concentration is already given. Means in the solution, we have H plus OH minus already present. Hence, we cannot talk about the solubility of this. This solubility we get when there is no common ion. But when common ion is present, the solubility is something different. So this is true when the solution is, does not have any common ion with respect to the salt. Hence, we cannot use this method over here, because the solution has, we do not have any idea about the solubility of this compound, since solution thing is not mentioned. Ksp expression is this, but we know the fact that when pH is 14, it means PoH is 0. This means OH minus concentration, if you find out that is one. And hence, one is substitute here. So concentration of Cu2 plus, we can find out where that is 10 to the power minus 19 with the given data, okay? Now we can use NUST equation and find out the answer, right? So this equation for Cu2 plus to Cu, we can write E Cu2 plus to Cu is equals to E naught is 0.34 minus 0.0591 by 2 log of 1 by Cu2 plus, okay? All the value you can substitute here, 0.34 minus 0.0591 by 2 log of 1 by Cu2 plus is 10 to the power 19. So when you solve this, you'll get it as around minus of 0.221, right? This is the answer for this question, okay? So the point here, we won't use the, because ultimately we have to find out the concentration of Cu2 plus, but we won't use the solubility expression here. Why? Because the pH of the solution is mentioned, right? So there is H plus present into the solution and in presence of H plus OH minus, the solubility may differ, right? That's why we cannot use that KSP is equals to S4S square X4S cube expression here, okay? Hence, we'll find out the OH minus concentration with respect to pH, which is this and then KSP. Okay? Now, the next question you see, how many grams of silver could be plated out on a serving tray by electrolysis of a solution containing silver in plus one oxidation state for a period of eight hours, okay? So obviously when electrolysis is there, the question is based upon Faraday's law of electrolysis. Time is given eight hours, so eight into 60 into 60 second, right? This is the time. I is given. I is also 8.46 ampere. What is the area of the tray if the thickness of the silver is plating is the centimeter, right? Area of the tray. So see density is given. Density is given with density is equals to mass by volume. Volume is equals to what? Area into the thickness. That's the area we need to find out. Thickness, we know. Mass, we can find out the mass is deposited and density also given, right? So first of all, we'll find the idea of behind this question is what? We'll find out the mass deposited, that is M. So mass is what? Mass is equals to density into volume, and volume further, we can write density into, volume further, we can write area into the thickness that is X suppose we have, okay? This area we need to find out. So area is equals to what? Mass divided by density into the thickness X, okay? So density is given, thickness is already given, right? We need to find out mass. Now for mass, what we can write? M is equals to EIT by 96500, right? E is the equivalent mass and that would be 108 for silver. Plus one, so it will 108 only. I is 8.46 and T is 8 into 3600. This whole thing is divided by 96500, okay? So you can calculate this and we'll find out mass that mass would be approximately 270, 2.17 grand. 273 also you can take approximately this. Now this mass will substitute here, 272.17. Density is given 10.5 into the thickness is 0.0025, right? So area is 1.02 into 10 to the power 4 and the unit is centimeter square. This is the answer for this question. Easy one, next question you see. The electrolysis of the solution of MNSO4 in aqueous sulfuric acid is a method of preparation of MNO2, okay? What is said that electrolysis of the solution of MNSO4 in aqueous sulfuric acid is a method of preparation of MNO2 as per the reaction period. Passing the current of 27 ampere, okay? So I is given 27 ampere, T is 24 into 3600 seconds, right? Mass of MNO2 is 1 kg means mass is 1000 grand, okay? We need to find out the value of current efficiency, okay? Now for all these things, you know we have to apply Faraday's law of electrolysis. M is equals to EIT by 96500. We'll find out current for this. What is the current required for this particular mass to get deposited? 1000 into 96500, okay? Divided by E into T. T is 24 into 3600. What is E? E is the equivalent mass. So that would be atomic mass of magnies and the change is what? The change is of, you can see here, the number of electron exchange is two. And this is two, plus two electrons, correct? So if you write down this reaction, I'll tell you. How do we get the number of electron exchange? MN plus two converts into MNO2. So when you balance this in an acidic medium, we'll write two H2O this side, then four H plus this side. When you balance the charge, we have to add two electron this side, okay? So charge will be balanced. Two electron is getting exchanged. This will be atomic mass of magnies divided by two equivalent masses. So when you solve this, the I value that you get here is 25.67 ampere, okay? So current efficiency is what? Current efficiency is the current that has been used divided by the current which is provided into 100. When you solve this, you'll get approximately 90% current efficiency. Next one you see. Calculate the equilibrium constant for the reaction this. Everything is given, right? Equilibrium constant means what? Delta G is zero. So we can write Delta G naught is equals to 2.303 RT log KC. This KC we need to find out, okay? What is the E naught of the cell? Because Delta G, we know it is minus NF E naught of the cell is equals to 2.303 RT log KC. So this we can further write the number of electrons so this we can further write the number of electron exchanges one. So log of KC is equals to minus N divided by 2.303 RT by F. So log of KC is equals to into E naught cell. So log of KC is equals to one. One divided by this value is 0.0591 into E naught cell is CFE is getting oxidized, CE4 plus is getting reduced, right? So CE4 plus to CE3 plus, FE3 plus to FE2 plus. So this is cathode and this is anode. So E cathode minus E anode. E naught cell is 1.44 E cathode minus E anode the reduction potential of this 0.68, okay? This is the E naught cell. That will be 6.76 volt, which we substitute here. KC value is, okay? I have missed a sign here, minus. This minus, minus gets cancelled. This is the answer we get, okay? So answer for this question is 7.6 into 10 to the power 12. The next question is find the solubility product of a saturated solution of this in water at 298 Kelvin. If the EMF of the cell is, this is AG to AG plus and this is this, correct? AG plus to AG. So this is, this side we have cathode and this side we have anode. So for this reaction, if I write down the E cell is equals to E naught cell minus 0.0591 divided by one log of AG plus cathode by AG plus, this is what the reaction we get. Now, AG plus cathode, the concentration is given 0.1, right? Since we need to find out a solubility product. So we have to find out the concentration of AG plus in the anodex side. So if I substitute all the value, E naught cell is 0, it is a concentration cell. E naught cell is 0, 0.0591 by one log of 0.1 by the AG plus concentration on the anodex side. Now, when you solve this, we'll get the concentration of AG plus at anode and that is, that is 1.66 into 10 to the power minus 4 in order, right? So when you look at the dissociation of the salt, which is AG 2 CRO4 here, AG 2 CRO4, CRO4, it dissociates as 2 AG plus plus CRO4 2 minus, okay? The concentration of this is 2S, which is given here. We have already calculated and this is S. So with this relation, you see the concentration of CRO4 2 minus, if you calculate, O4 2 minus, that will be the half of this, divided by 2, half of this. Now, the solubility product KSP is equals to we have 4S cube, right? S value is, S value is this. So answer is 4 into 1.66 into 10 to the power minus 4, divided by 2, 2. So this is 2.287 into 10 to the power minus 12, more per liter, this is the answer, okay? I can understand, guys, there are some calculation into this, some log, anti-log value must require to solve this kind of expression. But these are the questions you can see, these are questions of 1998. There we have this kind of calculation. We have made, we have J is spinning and Vane's exam that point of time. And we have subjective questions also. So we get enough time for this kind of questions there, okay? So that's why they give some weird kind of calculation also in the question. But nowadays, you don't have that much time, right? So you won't get calculation also like this. But the concept you must understand how to do this kind of questions, okay? So fine, guys, thank you. We are done for the session for today, okay? See you in the next session. Take care, bye-bye.


Well corporate virtue signaling all the rage these days, but will it be enough to turn the anti-capitalism tsunami that is really upsetting the world these days? Big business trying to get in front of it in the moment, and they really, what they want to do is they want to appear to be woke or concerned. Consider this week, you got Levi Strauss taking on guns in the Second Amendment, Burberry ditching furs and pledging to stop burning unsold products. And then there's, of course, there's the marketing at Nike that takes on the national anthem. And that's just the start. I want to bring our panel now to discuss Carol Roth, a future file legacy system creator, Melissa Armo, Stock Swoosh and Michelle McKinnon, paying capital management senior wealth advisor. Carol, I'll start with you because this is something that I'm concerned about. And when I talk to, you know, I've had an opportunity to talk to billionaires. I've had an opportunity to talk to some thought leaders on the right and business owners and they kind of play it off. They kind of don't think it's a big deal, but I do believe it is. And I see the political winds shifting not just in this country, but around the world, particularly in the West. And I think if we don't find a way to stem this time, we may wake up one day and Alexander Ocasio-Cortez is our new president. Oh, please no, Charles. I hope that that doesn't happen. I think the bottom line here is that right now we are in such a pace of disruptive change. We have so much disruption in terms of technology, in terms of the customers, in terms of employees, that businesses are really struggling with what to do, what messages to put forth. And right now they're experimenting and I'm not sure that they're doing it in the right way. They're hearing things like social justice is a great thing and so they're going down that track, but it's not necessarily authentic. I think the good news is that the pace of change is so fast that we will continue to see change. So I don't think we will just continue to go in the one direction, but I think it's important for companies to realize that there are a whole slew of different customers, a whole slew of different employees who have different opinions, and at the end of the day, if you take care of people, that's probably your best bet to create loyalty. You don't necessarily need to go down the social justice warrior route. Well, you know, we get the jobs report tomorrow. Everyone's going to be looking for wages, ladies. And we know that they've been, that's been the one component of our economic boom that has not really kept pace. Corporate profits $2 trillion last quarter, up $47 billion. A lot of that money corporations are sitting on. You know what? Today United said we're getting rid of straws. That's great. That's cute. I don't, but in the last five years United stock is up more than 100% more than the Dow Jones Industrial Average. You know, two days ago they announced they're raising their fees on baggage. Okay, they made $7 billion charging us to change the flight ticket. Michelle, you know, I don't know that you can continue to do that, continue to have this kind of prosperity on one end and not pay a price for it. I think the corporation is going to have to find something smarter than getting rid of straws. And I think they're going to because capitalism is going to encourage them to find a smarter way because the consumer, like myself, the millennials as well as the Gen Zs are going to want companies to be more socially aware. And so they're going to be forced to adapt. But you wanted to see them make a real sacrifice, right? Something that might hit the bottom line. No, I think you can do both, honestly. And there are studies that show that companies that are socially aware, that are more environmentally friendly, can also create profit. I don't think it has to be black and white one or the other. I think it can be a gray. Alyssa, Bernie Sanders issued the Bezos tax, right? Think about this. If it was a few years ago, it might have been the Walmart tax. Or a few years before that would have been the McDonald's tax.   Yeah, I can't name five things I agree with Bernie Sanders, but I will address this issue right now. He's not poor. His net worth estimated for 2017 is $2 million. So I'm not really sure why he's picking on the wealthy people. I don't know that he's going for himself. I think what he's saying is that Jeff Bezos is worth $160 billion. Yeah, but good for him. Well, he's saying it's good for him, but he also has workers who get food stamps. Now, you may not think it's a big deal, but you only get one vote. There's 100,000 people who may work at Walmart who think it's a big deal. There may be another 50,000 in Amazon that says, hey, Bernie Sanders has a point. You start to add that up and you get upset elections in Florida. You get upset elections in the Bronx. You get upset elections in Georgia. And next thing you know, we may be in an economic system that we can't laugh about anymore. Yeah, but I don't think all of Bernie Sanders, what he said wasn't 100% correct. And this is the statement that Jeff Bezos put out. Some of the people that are collecting these subsidies are part-time. Some people want to work part-time. They don't want to work full-time. In other words, sometimes working part-time and accepting the subsidies is the same as if they worked 40 hours a week plus. So that's what Jeff Bezos was talking about. He said, listen, come in. Come and take a look at our corporation. Take a look at the workers. See if people are happy. I really don't think that this is going to get everybody where they want to go. By taxing the corporations, we lower the taxes. Now we want to put another tax on them. It just seems to negate the corporate tax cuts that we just did. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Again, though, you know what, if these corporate tax cuts were resonating, Michelle, the way people think they are or the way they probably should, then we wouldn't see the Republicans on the verge of losing the House in the midterms, right? So there is a disconnect. And if someone just goes out and says, well, corporations made $2 trillion. I mean, as a politician, that could be suicide if the group you're talking to hasn't seen much money. Absolutely. It's political rhetoric. And I think some of what Bernie Sanders is doing is obviously trying to drum up the vote. And at the end of the day, right, things are cyclical and parties come and go. So we might look at this right now and freak out and say, oh my gosh, you know, the Republican Party is or it's not going to be in party. But at the end of the day, things come, things change. And I really feel in my heart of hearts that companies always figure out a way to be profitable. And I think they can do that now. You know, Carol, real quick, I do want to ask you because there's a book out, Winner's Take All. One of the things that implies is that this new round, the current round of billionaires that we have, might be worse than a robber baron. You know what, Carnegie, Rockefeller, say what you will, they created millions of jobs.  So there's additional pushback there as well. But at the same time, you have all of the billionaires who've signed a pledge for the majority of their wealth and they're investing privately to do things like eradicating diseases. There is a pace of change, especially in the free market. The companies of yesterday that you just mentioned aren't the big companies today. The companies that are big today won't be the big companies tomorrow. There is always a pace of change. It is difficult to go through. And I do think at the end of the day that capitalism and free markets will prevail because that is what our country is based on. Here's the problem with socialism. Say me, Michelle, we both work together. What if I work hard at the Michelle? And I have to give then part of my money to Michelle. I agree with everything everyone's saying here. What I'm saying though is that the political wins are such that I think people who are champions of capitalism are missing out. And they think that they're explaining it, but the way they explain it, I think often makes it even worse. Then they need to change, right? So it's not to change because if it doesn't, we may find ourselves in a system that none of us can become rich. Alright, folks, speaking of that, we'll break down the markets next. It was a mixed day. Also a preview of tomorrow's job report. Next.