All right, so maybe let's get started. Hi, everybody. I'm Patrick Chenezon from Docker. And today, we're going to talk about the Moby project. And we're lucky because many of us from Docker came at Kupron. And so we'll have Stephen Day, who's going to talk about container D. And Justin Kormak is going to talk about Linux Git. So let's talk about the Moby project. So Docker itself is a platform that sits above your infrastructure, any type of infrastructure, and then runs any type of applications, both Linux and Windows. It runs on premise, in different cloud providers. So it provides you that insulation and future proofing, allowing you to add new type of infrastructure and have that same layer of isolation on top of it, and then run new types of workloads on top of it as the way we're building applications evolves. So that's what Docker is. If we look in the details of it, there are four layers in there. So on top of infrastructure, you have the core container runtime that's called container D. So we're going to talk about that. That's one of the key piece of the Moby project. And actually, yesterday was really a great day because after one year working on the container D project, we announced container D10. Then on top of that, you have orchestration. So in Docker, orchestration is done with a component that's called Swarm.  And then on top of it, we're building Docker Enterprise Edition, which is a full-blown platform for enterprises to be able to run containers and manage them. So the Enterprise Edition and Community Edition ship on different types of distros, the most common ones that people are using. The Community Edition, you can find it on Mac and Windows on your laptop for development. The Enterprise Edition runs on any type of infrastructure that enterprises typically use. And one of the use cases that we see enterprises use Docker for most commonly is to modernize traditional applications. So initially, when containers appeared four years ago, a lot of people were using Docker for CI, CD, or microservice type applications. Nowadays, all the rage is to take your old .NET or Java application that are running in VMs or on bare metal, containerize them. And then once you've containerized them, you can use Docker to set up a full workflow, CI, CD, and run them on different type of infrastructure. So that's a very important use case that we see more and more enterprises doing. So one of the big news that we announced at DockerCon this year, and this is why there are so many Docker engineers coming at KubeCon, is that in addition to Swarm, we're in the next version of Docker Enterprise Edition. We're also going to support Kubernetes as a choice of orchestrator. So that gives you the best enterprise container security management with Docker Enterprise Edition, the best container development workflow with Docker Community Edition, a choice of two orchestrators. And it's the native Kubernetes bits that are in there. So that means that all the Kubernetes ecosystem of different projects can run with it. And then this is backed by the core container runtime that is a container D, which is now 1.0. Congrats, Steven and Tim. So in order to do that, we followed the traditional Docker innovation model. We developed all our components upstream in the MOBI project. So there we collaborate with 9,000 other open source contributors. There's 8,800 PRs per year. So it's a very active set of projects. And then based on that, we use that as the upstream for Docker Community Edition, targeted at developers, and then Docker Enterprise Edition targeted at enterprises. So the MOBI project has lots of different components. So SwarmKit is for orchestration. InfraKit is for infrastructure management. LinuxKit is a toolkit that allows you to create your own Linux distributions that are very small and very secure. Container D is the core container runtime, which is now 1.0. And it implements the OCI standards for image format as well as runtime. Run C is the reference implementation for OCI. So it's used by Container D. VPNKit is a toolkit that's used to do the network management on Docker for Mac. Registry, LibNetwork, there are tons of projects in there. So today, in today's session, we'll focus on three of them, Container D, LinuxKit. And if we have time, InfraKit. So how did we integrate Kubernetes in Docker? Actually, it's been a work that happened in the open for more than a year. So it started with the Container D 1.0 roadmap defined with the Kubernetes community at KubeCon in November 2016. Then in March, we contributed Container D to the Cloud Native Foundation. So it's a CNCF project. In April, at DockerCon, we showed LinuxKit and Kubernetes working together with the help of Ilya from Weave, who's sitting there. Thank you, Ilya. And then we've worked with Google, with Lantau, and the Google team on CRI Container D, which is Kubernetes Container Runtime Interface Implementation in terms of Container D instead of Docker D. LibNetwork implemented, started to implement CNI in September. We talked about that at the Open Source Summit. Then in October, we gave Notary to CNCF. There was a talk about Notary earlier this morning by David Lawrence and Ashwini. And then the beta of Docker with Kubernetes support is starting probably in December, private beta. And then the GA will be in the first half of 2018. So Container D and Notary are now CNCF projects. So we really love the CNCF. They are a whole community of developers who participated in that. Ilya, your picture is a little bit small there. And then what we're really excited about at Docker is what will happen for containers in terms of innovation when the two largest open source projects around containers, Moby and Kubernetes, join forces to innovate further. And at the end of the day, we are one big community trying to get containers to be more mainstream. One of the changes that happened that's pretty important that Michael Crosby led is we had a BDFL close, Benevolent Dictatorship for Life in our governance for Moby projects. And the BDFL was Solomon Hikes, the founder of Docker. And what BDFL means is that when there are technical disagreements between maintainers, they can escalate that to the BDFL. So we replaced that by a technical steering committee that has been elected last month, I think. So let's talk about Container D, Linux Kit, and Infrakit. And so for Container D, Steven, who's one of the maintainers in Container D, is going to explain how we went to 1.0. Hey, everybody. Did Patrick or anybody mention that Container D is at 1.0? So this is pretty exciting. We honestly didn't plan it to be released with KubeCon. It was just like that's the way the dates worked out. So I think it's great to be having that news here. So it shipped yesterday. Check out the blog link. You can read all about the details. I'm not going to go into the details of what was and wasn't in the 1.0. I'll just talk a little bit about the project. Oh, yeah, if you're taking a picture. Go back. Yeah, there you go. All right. So early history of Container D 1.0, or sorry, of Container D was the basic. So Docker had this thing called libContainer. And that was spun out into a project called Container D eventually. There's a few steps in there that I'm going to omit. And that was released in Docker 111. And it acted as a management or like a supervisor of OCI RunC executors. We then, over time, we decided due to requests from people in the community. And based on architecture, we decided to expand that the Container D project was a good place to expand some of the core functionality of Docker that people wanted in just kind of a simple core Container runtime that people could rely on. And this is a Docker with minimal features and that has full capability of the entire operating system. So this is kind of the timeline. December 2016 is when we first spun it out of Docker. I think 111 came out in the spring of that year, maybe April 2017. We then donated it at CloudNativeCon in March 2017. We had our first Container D summit in April of this year. And that was, this is where we kind of collected information from the community. And we brought a lot of people together and said, hey, what do you want if we could turn, if we could expand the scope of Container D just into what's needed as this single host container runtime, what would it look like? And so we took a lot of feedback there. And this informed what became Container D 1.0. In November 2017, we released our first Kubernetes 1.8 integration so that Kubernetes, you could try out the betas with Kubernetes and use Container D as the base runtime through the project CRI Container D. And then I think yesterday, or the yesterday, flights extend time. Yesterday, we released the Container D 1.0. And that's now generally available.  So you may be running it and not even know. So again, why did we do this? Why do we do all this work and why the big hubbub? So we wanted to expand the Docker platform. Well, we wanted to extend Docker into a platform and focus on developer experience. And we found the goals of that conflicting with the goals of a well-behaved Container Runtime. And this affected our engineering processes, but the engineering processes of our partners as well. So we wanted something that could be used beyond Docker and kind of fulfill the role of the 2014 view of Docker as this single-host Container Runtime. So we donated it to the CNCF, and history was made. So the goals of the project were to have a very small, lightweight, GRPC-based API and a heavy client library that minimized the amount of abstraction. So we didn't want you to have to plum a single flag all the way through from the client to the runtime. We wanted to make that stuff available directly in the Container D client, making it a lot easier to add new features. So if you upgrade Run C, you don't need to also upgrade Container D to get access to new features in Run C. The other part of this was designing for stability and performance. This means that when we add something, we know that we want that to be there forever. But also, when we do add things, we are trying to design so that they can be stabilized. And so if we're unsure about things, we hold off on putting them in, and this will help us to stabilize over time. We also have lots of things that can help us to do this, such as API-based integration tests rather than CLI-based integration tests, like are in Docker. And as well as, we take the entire API and scan all of our protobuf files, and we take that and put it into a giant API stabilization file. So this will help us identify API changes over time. And this is all generated and automated. So it'll prevent a lot of the problems that we had with Docker. And the other thing to note is that it's highly decoupled. It's made up of several microservices that you've kind of used together. And if you're more curious about the details of that, you can come to the ContainerD salon and I will talk your head off about it. So the other thing about ContainerD that's huge is we focused on an all-cart design, so that if you don't like the way we do image storage, or if you don't like the way we do push and pull or anything, you don't have to use it. You can only use the parts of ContainerD that you actually want to use. And you can actually disable most of the parts of ContainerD that you don't need to use. We also focused on using known good technology from the CNCF, as well as the Linux Foundation. So like OCI Container Runtime and Images, we used DRPC heavily, as well as a project called Prometheus for exporting metrics. And those are great CNCF projects. You should definitely check them all out. This is my list of use cases. I hope this slide's a little old. But I hope this to be expanding. I mean, the big one is Docker. Again, you're using it in Docker today. The next one that we'll see coming out in the next few weeks going into beta, hopefully, is CRI ContainerD. You'll be able to use ContainerD on Kubernetes. We also have an experimental SwarmKit implementation, but it might not compile anymore. But the other two big ones are LinuxKit and BuildKit. LinuxKit uses ContainerD to actually package its system services, and BuildKit uses it to control build. And this is one thing I'll actually highlight about ContainerD is that it's meant as being a critical piece of the infrastructure, whether you're on your dev machine all the way out to your cloud or your own hardware, so that when you're running containers in ContainerD, there's no such thing as, oh, it works for me. It's end to end. You use it for the build. You use it on your dev machine. You use it in production. And the future potential things, like there is an open fast integration. I don't know. There's Alex Alice is using it. It has a talk where I think he's integrated with CRI ContainerD. He's always doing really cool stuff. So I don't know what the current state of that is. And then IBM Cloud Bluemix will use CRI ContainerD. And hopefully, you will be too. You can integrate it, let us know what you're doing, let us know if you're having problems. So a few facts and figures about the project. We have 1,994 GitHub stars, 401 forks, 108 contributors. I think it was roughly 87 to the ContainerD 1.0, which is really cool to see. And there's a lot of different people contributing. I was looking at the list of the names the other day, and it's really, really cool to have so many people be interested in this project, such that they're going to do code contributions. We also have eight maintainers from independence and member companies, including Docker, IBM, ZTE, ZJU, is that right? As well as 3,030 commits and 28 releases, I think. 28 or 29. Anyways, so this is a lot of links. And if you go to that blog, I think we get most of these. But I'll highlight the most important ones that you might be interested in. Check out the Getting Started Guide. The Getting Started Guide is really cool. It'll kind of show you what is ContainerD, what does it do, what does it not do, that kind of thing. And then you can look through the scope table, the roadmap, kind of see where we're going, if there's stuff missing on there. Reach out to us through an issue or on the Docker Community Slack, and you should be able to kind of push us in the direction that you want, and we can help you with a proposal or anything that you need. You can also read a little bit about the architecture of ContainerD and the approach to how we've implemented it. And that can help you to understand how to use the APIs a little bit better. And then you can learn more about this. There's actually lots of talks. There's the Linux kit and Kubernetes talk at the Austin Docker Meetup, but that's already happened. Oh, OK. So Phil's talk has already happened. But tomorrow, we have the ContainerD Salon, where I think we have a large slot. I think it's 70 minutes or something like that. And we'll go into details on architecture as well as we'll show you a little bit how to use a client and then how to get started with ContainerD. I think Jess Valaraiso has created a great Getting Started guide, so you shouldn't be able to. It should be low drama. Anyways, now I'm going to pass it over to Justin Cormack for a presentation and demo on Linux kit. Yep. There you go. Do you want to learn? No, I'm OK. OK, that's nice, yes. OK, so I'm going to talk to you about Linux kit and a bit about Kubernetes as well, because we're at KubeCon. And we've been doing a load of cool stuff with Kubernetes. So kind of why and what is it? So let's get the sort of strap line as a toolkit for building secure, portable, lean operating systems for containers.  We give you a load of pieces that help you build Linux in the way we've been using it for Docker uses, but you can totally replace all of them with anything else you want. And the pieces that you build it from are containers. So you can build them with your normal workflows for building containers. And you can build Linux in just a minute or so. It's designed to be built in a CI pipeline. You can test it locally and then deploy it wherever you like in the cloud or on bare metal or on your laptop or whatever you want. And so it's a very different lightweight cloud native approach to how to deal with Linux. And it's also, I don't think the whole immutable delivery idea that we have with containers is very important also for system images, and we've really gone with that. So the idea is that you build a new image and redeploy if you want to update things rather than having a really complicated kind of desired state management thing going on inside your image. Security is designed to be minimal and just run exactly what you want. And I think the NIST Container Security Guide recommends that you do use a container-specific OS for running containers, and that's one of the important use cases for Linux Kit. As it work, it's got a very, very simple architecture. It's exactly the same design as a pod in Kubernetes. Kind of coincidentally, but it's also kind of convenient to understand. So the life cycle is that you start a few containers on boot sequentially, which we run through Run C.  And so it's a very simple, understandable architecture, and that corresponds to a YAML config file. So you can see here, you've got on boot. You've got DHCP, and then this is running Redis. So it's a really simple example. I'll show you that in practice in the demo in a minute. Other important differences is that it's all designed around immutability. There's no package manager or anything at runtime. You can just build it and replace it. If you want to do dynamic services, you can run Docker or Kubernetes on it. So it makes life much simpler, and it's easier. And that gives you all the advantages of building fast and running fast. We have a very container-like build, push, and run workflow with support for pretty much every kind of cloud provider or disk format. You can build ISOs, or you can build VHDs. And we've had the community add support for all these different platforms that like to use everything from OpenStack to VirtualBox to KVM and so on. So there's a really wide range of platforms. You can run it on, and there's really simple tooling. Or you can use the native provider tooling. So you can just build an AMI using our tooling and then run that using the Amazon tooling or whatever you want to do. So we design the tooling around giving it a starting point. And then for production applications, you can obviously use more advanced tooling. How it fits into other CNCF projects. We use a whole range of things. Obviously, container is really important because it's actually the key bit that's running in containers. We use nature in tough image signing to assign the packages we build. Kubernetes and CNI, I'll talk about in a second. And Geopracy and Prometheus are used in container. And you can use that to get system stats out and so on out of LensKit, which is really cool. So it's very much a cloud native way of doing things. It's now in the CNCF landscape, as of the new version today. Kubernetes. We've actually been working on Kubernetes support actually with Elia, as Patrick mentioned, for seven months now. We did Kubernetes's demo when we first launched LensKit. And it was the first time we showed Kubernetes and kind of at DockerCon. And apart from the original launch of Kubernetes, which was at DockerCon. And we've worked together with the community to build out everything. It's now got its own repo. It's a really straightforward, standard, understandable version, unmodified version of Kubernetes using QBED-UM to run it. It supports both the Docker runtime and CRI Container D. We've been using that for testing CRI Container D. It's designed to be customized. You can add different networking, whatever. And it's also the upstream for the Docker desktop editions, where we're shipping Kubernetes on the desktop support any day now. You can sign up for the beta at beta.docker.com. And it will probably ship in the next few days. This is the UI for Docker desktop, which I'm really excited about. It's very simple. There's a tick box saying, I want Kubernetes. And then you have Kubernetes on your desktop. And it's just there. And you can just run Kubernetes. It's all enabled by the LensKit support that we use as the app. It's all exactly the same code as we're using in the upstream open source project that you can, if you want to make different customizations, you're using the same code. But it's just designed to be really, really easy to use. And we're incredibly excited that we're being able to ship out Kubernetes on the desktop to millions of users of Docker for Mac and Windows. And we think that's really going to help people get their hands on Kubernetes for the first time and understand how to use it and have a really easy development experience. So I'm going to show you a few demos. We've got a few minutes for demos. I'll show you. Here's the Mac that's about to ship with the Docker's running, Kubernetes is running, and the preference thing here, which is enabled Kubernetes is, which is. You click that button. It takes a minute or so. And it will just restart with Kubernetes support. And when you're running it, you've just got a normal Kubernetes that's there. Kubekertl's already installed. It tells you it's Docker for Mac and running Linux Kit kernel. And this is Docker 17.11. So it's all really, really straightforward. You can just use Kubernetes as you normally would. I'm going to show you a quick example of how easy it is to build something with Linux Kit. So this is a really simple Linux Kit YAML file that we have just at the top of the repo. We say, which kernel we want, which version of container D, whatever we want. And this, apart from a few other things, it just runs the nginx image from Docker Hub, the Alpine one. So it shows that you can just run services from straightforward upstream normal containers. We can just do Linux Kit build with the YAML file. And I need to update my cert. We always check the certificates when we're building everything. We did a lot of integration with Notary, which is there. So that's how long it takes to build.  And there's Linux booting. As you can see, I've got quite a big text on this thing. So we've just booted up Linux Kit, got a console, and we're just running a very few processes. We can just connect to nginx and get the LA World page from nginx. So that's how simple it is to just build a very simple, simple service. Kubernetes is obviously slightly more complicated, but not much. This is a console on actually on Docker for Mac. And you can see it's running, I should make this text a bit smaller, shouldn't I? So you can actually see more of it. So you can see it's running Docker container decompose, Kube DNS, Weave networking, Kube proxy, everything, the Paws container. So it's just a very simple Kubernetes install that we built with Linux Kit, which is basically exactly the same code as if you go to Linux Kit, the Linux Kit Kubernetes repo. I made this all very large for a meetup earlier when the screen was a bit small. So this is the Linux Kit Kubernetes repo, which has a very simple build process that you can basically build your own Kubernetes, customize it, and basically configure it in different ways. And you can kind of get started with that. So it's a really simple way to build Kubernetes's images for local use, for production use. And we've got a lot of people working with us on this who want to use it in production. We've been talking about integrating it into cops yesterday, for example, which I think would be really cool to do, so that you can deploy it on AWS easily with cops. And we've got lots of people who've got real interest in putting this into production in large companies and things. So we're really quite excited about particularly the Kubernetes integration, because a load of people have come to us and said, that's what they want to use Linux Kit for. So if you want to get involved, it's been a very successful project. There's lots of demos to get started. So come and chat. OK, so we just have a few minutes left. And I wanted to talk to you about the one last project from the mobile project, which is called Infrakit. Oh, no luck. OK, I'll do it without slides. So the last project I wanted to tell you about is Infrakit. So Infrakit is a declarative management system for managing your infrastructure. And it's all based on containers. And so, oh, it works very good. So it's all based on containers. And, oh, OK, can I, yeah, mirror displays. OK, that's good. It's all based on containers. We launched it at LinuxCon in Berlin in October 2016. One of the difference between Infrakit and other infrastructure management systems is that it's doing an active monitoring of the infrastructure. And if the description that you're telling him that you want for your infrastructure differs with reality, Infrakit takes active action to change that. So we proposed it to CNCF last June. And it's a little bit too soon to accept the infrastructure management projects in there. But these are actually some of the slides that we use in order to present it to CNCF. So it's focusing on the provisioning aspect of provisioning. So you could use it to provision your Kubernetes cluster or your Docker cluster. So in the CNCF landscape, it tackles that part at the bottom there. And the kind of use cases that can be used for is to set up your day zero install and also your day one configure for container orchestrators. But where Infrakit really shines is in day n automation of infrastructure, like how to provision new nodes, how to update your nodes with new versions of the orchestrator itself. One of the, yeah, actually, time is done. But just one thing I wanted to mention is one of the really interesting developments in Infrakit recently, David Chang, who's working on that, has been working on a cluster autoscaler for Kubernetes. So your Kubernetes cluster connected to Infrakit could, based on some metrics that you define, autoscale the cluster itself based on the load. So lots of interesting developments tied to Kubernetes there. So these are the details about the autoscaler. And you can get involved on GitHub, Docker slash Infrakit. You can learn more about all the projects on the Mobi blog. We had a Mobi summit at DockerCon this year that had tons of talks. All these talks have been recorded. And all the slides have been published on our blog. So it's blog.mobiproject.org. Or you go on GitHub, and you can find the code and play with it. Thanks very much. Many of us will be at the conference, so you can find us either at the Docker booth or in the corridors. And there's one more session that should be pretty interesting. It's the OpenFast session by Alex Ellis. So OpenFast is a serverless platform. And he's doing some really interesting ties with some of the Mobi projects. So for example, in there he has a fantastic demo of using functions to just deploy automatically Linux KT images. All right, thanks very much.


An e-hailing driver, Jerry Meyer, at Deniro has confessed to kidnapping and robbing his unsuspecting female passenger, but blamed his ordeal on fuel-safety removal, which he says pushed him into crime. At Deniro, who was paraded alongside other alleged criminals, made a confessional statement while fielding questions from newsmen in Lagos. Plus, Steven Hughes' crime correspondent, Lovie Cuckoo, tells us more in this report. These other paraded suspects, they are alleged to have been involved in faring degrees of crimes ranging from armed robbery, kidnapping, stealing, murder, vandalism, amongst others. Among them is an e-hailing driver, Jerry Meyer at Deniro, who specializes in robbing female passengers. That's right, I think. So, I picked out around after once, already to my two friends, Joyce and Gondiro, since I know where she's going. After picking out, I picked both of them up, while both of them started their pressure with the lady. They turned into the shop. I saw the lady that I picked up on Friday night along with Gondiro. I saw her inside the shop, and instantly she recognized me because I was not with her. It's too much. That was how I was arrested and taken to the police station. The state police public relations officer, Benjamin Kundei, paraded at Deniro alongside other suspects, on behalf of the state commissioner of police, Hidu Owo-Hunwa. In first act area, particularly Alakijaba stop, under first act division, your random, your routine, stop and search, which some people kick against anyway, yielded results, were able to arrest one Agbo Ichi from an ambush state, with a firearm, a barricade pistol. This time around, we're not talking about the locally made pistol. We're not talking about the fabricated one that looks like the real thing. This is the real thing, an imported pistol that fires 9mm ammunition. So it was found with this pistol, and they are so far confirmed. It's also here. The gun is there for display. Kundei disclosed that Owo-Hunwa launched Operation Flush to tackle pockets of crime resurfacing in parts of the state. The commissioner of police is assuring legations again, and again, that we have a listening here. The moment people have the confidence, or develop the confidence, to report cases to us, we would respond accordingly. We got information about robberies, actually doing bus stop, and that made the city go there personally. We got to report of 30 crimes around 1004 estates. And if you ask the residents of 1004 estates, if you know, if you may know when they ask, and they will tell you that the CP was there personally yesterday. He reassured legations that the command is not leaving any stone unturned to ensure adequate security of lives and property. Love Ikuku Uiedoku. Plus TV News.


We're getting down to the core question of belief and separation in the sense that in reality, it's impossible to separate from God and So this is a crazy belief. This is why Jesus calls it a tiny mad idea.  It's a blip. It's a puff of nothingness But but the the actual belief will say in separation is the belief that there could be more than everything You know, it's the belief that it's a belief in impossibility is what it is and then the world Is simply this is the ego's world God did not create this world What business would God having creating a world of fragmentation and separation of pain suffering disease?  Well, you know God is God gave us free will and look what we did with it. Is that supposed to put God off the hook? Thanks for nothing Thanks for that free will there I really appreciate that I know I used it for a little pain and suffering, but you know in fact, you know, if you take it back to Genesis, you know There's Adam and Eve and it's like it's paradise la la la la la paradise paradise paradise and then and then somehow With all this paradise going on, there's a tree Like that damn tree It's like paradise paradise la la la la la and then a tree of what the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Now anyone who had any kind of sanity would probably ask the very first question Why What's the tree there? I mean, isn't that a basic question, you know Yeah, and why won't anybody exactly and why when you raise that question do people Say talk about something else So so why would there why would God put such a tree in such a beautiful garden of paradise and in a course of miracles Jesus comes right out. He actually addresses this very topic in his text and he said He wouldn't and he didn't Now he's overturning Genesis He's going back after Genesis Jesus didn't come along till the New Testament now. He's going back and he's going after Genesis, but it's it's good Someone's finally addressing these things, you know Basically in the text of a course of miracles Jesus says God would never put you in such a position Well, hallelujah Thank you for saying that, you know, let's get it straight. Let's get it right straight. So So but we have this concept or this belief in duality You know the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that's tied in with the error You know the belief in duality, that's an error. If everything is pure oneness then the belief in duality, that's an error this very error is Has to be exposed in other words. Jesus says we have to look Together upon this error and see its falsity We have to look at it instead of projecting it to the world and And This whole world was made by the ego just as like a dumping ground as a giant hall of mirrors as a big trick Which is an attempt to to see the duality in the world instead of in the mind That this whole world was made as a giant hiding place Now if we go back to the Genesis story, we can pull from a little bit in this net It's like there was this la la la la la la this paradise paradise Adam and Eve are like, you know, they're disco and they're dancing I believe they're like having a good time. There's party there. It's a paradise and everything and then at some point in there, it's like They knew that they were naked Sounds almost like that of course America's book that just got published up here in Canada. What was it something about? Something about naked naked. Yeah, something like naked and Robinette or something. I don't know what it was That's best author's thing. Anyway, at some point that here that was great party. It's paradise and all of a sudden They knew they were naked and it was like a sense of shame And already this is shame projected out onto the bodies. What's wrong with naked?  You know naked clothes not it was and what did they do? It grabbed the closest fig leaf To cover up And this is still going on today. These are like this is like in the orange fig leaf and the green fig leaf You know, it's like we you know, here we go. This stuff is still going on. It's like covering.    It gave me the cancer or why they had to get born Into a family where there was this genetic heart disease or this genetic whatever Anomaly this this lung disease or whatever it was why keep projecting the the guilt the shame out to time and space as if Time and space is the cause as if time and space is the culprit When of course the miracles is coming along and is saying it's not the problem isn't in time and space The problem is in the belief in your mind And the separation that made up this time and space has the big cosmic fig leaf So we don't have to project it the end. That's why where we are in great need of forgiveness Which is just releasing the error because as we release the error. We are able to recognize the power of thought and recognize that that the error has no consequence in other words what Jesus says is Soon as the error of separation the belief in separation seemed to arise Simultaneously Simultaneously with the belief the answer was given It's not like there was a hesitation like a pause Like in heaven like I got in the angel went up.  It's a rebellion down there. It's a separation. They've got no, no, it's not Solved solve as quick as you could even have the thought The tiny tick of time the little tiny man idea the separation was was solved the instant that it seemed to arise now The if you still believe in linear time That that solution isn't going to do you any good If you still believe in it if you still want time to be true the corrections right there Like going I'm right here. I love you. I Haven't gone anywhere Choose me now Save yourself some misery and choose me now You know, it's like that that correction didn't go anywhere that correction is still there in mind But the will say the mind that believed in the separation It it ran away. It had shame. It had guilt. I think it did something wrong. It's like It's like putting your hand in the cosmic cookie jar When your mom's looking the other way and trying to steal a cookie quick Don't hide it. Don't let it be seen


that hopefully this will be taken into account in those areas where there is a significant additional impact on workload. If I can on valuations, I think that this is an absolutely crucial part of this. In the previous system, the way the valuation was undertaken, it ended up with a system that was roughly based on bagged data to get to a unit value to be able to come up with the hypothesis of the hypothetical tenant to get to the value. As we know, that resulted in the mass appeals that we are going on at a time that moved further and further away from reality, and we ended up in a situation with mass appeals because, obviously, the values were being challenged and we do not want to end up in that same position that no one does. We talk about a rate per bag or a rate per number of animals taken. That is not what we are doing. What we are valuing is our estimate of the net annual value, which is the rent. Once we have done that, and we do that with all properties, we will work that back into something that is readily recognisable in terms of being able to do a comparison with shops—it is a rate per square metre, public houses, turnover, cinemas, a number of seats. With shooting that is the bag, it could equally be a rate per hectare. It is just a mechanism that we use to enable us to draw comparisons. If we do not agree, then the right of appeal is always there. 90 per cent of appeals are settled amicably. We are looking at different forms of local taxation in the tax commission, separate from that particular bill. Those issues are going to be very germane, because there may be a very different way of assessing local taxes in the future, which the assessors will have to do as well. Those things are not to be seen in isolation. I want to explore whether the ending of the exemption is consistent with sustainable deer management and land management objectives. Is there, for example, a potential negative impact on biodiversity? Potentially, yes. Referring to previous remarks, if the effect of reintroducing rates adds cost to deer management, the likely casualty is likely to be employment, which means less ability within the system to control deer numbers and prevent environmental negative impact. On the biodiversity front, the independent work that we were involved with demonstrated that shooters in Scotland spend the equivalent of £35 million in conservation activity each year. That is a very wide-ranging conservation activity from pest predator control, land management, habitat creation, pheasants feeding and duct punts. All those things fall into the category, and it is very important. It is very concerning that, if that was to affect the viability of shoots, it would affect the viability of that conservation management that takes place as well. If you increase the cost of operation for any operation, it is going to have a negative impact. In this case, it is going to have an impact on biodiversity. As we have said in our evidence, about £35 million a year is invested into conservation management as a result of the exercising of shooting rights across Scotland, which provides 3,500 full-time equivalent jobs. There will obviously be consequences, but it also comes back to the process of valuation. If bad data and such things are used, you can end up producing some pretty perverse outcomes where people might, for instance, end up shooting less deer, which would increase biodiversity impacts. That needs a lot of thought, so we do not get perverse outcomes. To echo some of that in relation to the conflict, farmers are being asked under the current cap reforms to pay attention to greening, to have greater wildlife margins, to have areas that have an ecological focus on their holding. If a land manager or farmer undertakes all of that activity and is then told right now that you have created something that is rateable, where is the focus? Is it on increasing that biodiversity or getting people in to deal with what is now harbored? It is the boots on the ground, it is the rabbits, it is the moles, it is the deer causing erosion. If you remove the men that are doing the job, it will have a dire effect on the landscape. Abandoning that, your ability and your capacity to do it, the extent to which you could do it, might be diminished very slightly if you had, say, one less gamekeeper. In reality, you would still carry out in the main the same tasks. I think that the more gamekeepers that are on the ground, the more likelihood there is that these tasks are carried out to the level that they should be. I think that a blind man could probably see the increase in mole numbers in rural communities over the last few years, and that is purely through a change of legislation. You definitely need the workers on the ground and you need to encourage those workers to be on the ground. The only way to do that is to encourage the landowners to employ them. Dave Thomson, briefly. Thank you, convener. It is just a quick follow-up, not directed to anybody in particular, but I am intrigued by a number of the statements that were made about not following a profit-making model in relation to some of those shootings, which probably would not relate to the farmers ones, but maybe some of the bigger estates. If the model is not profit-making and we want to encourage folk to improve the environment, then stop running the model that does not make profit, which actually loses money, and use that money to employ people to do the jobs that Bruce was mentioning in looking after the environmental issues. Is that logical or is that daft? Well, Bruce, it is very difficult, because, believe you me, we try to make a profit, but it is very difficult to make a profit with what you have available to you. This season, for instance, very bad weather. Our income from driven drought shooting has been cut by 75 per cent. The landowner does not want to pay off his six keepers. He just hopes that the weather is a bit better next year and that he cannot possibly narrow that margin down a bit. The deer management side of it is very difficult because it is such an expense to run. You need the gamekeeper, the guillie, the land over the Argo carts, so it is a very difficult environment to make a profit into it. We are just trying to do the best that we can. Maybe if I could just come back quickly in that convener. Yes, I accept what you are saying, but the logic of that is that if they stopped doing those things, they would save money. If a landowner wants an estate with a nice environment, it would surely make sense to stop doing things that aren't effective and is costing them money and use the money to actually improve the environment more generally, still employing six people, maybe even more. You understand the logic of where I am coming from. If it is so difficult to make that profit, stop doing it and use the money for better things to improve the environment in which the landowner can live and others can also enjoy. What is the other thing? I think that a lot of other things have been explored. We have put a hydro-system into our Glen, a burn-flow hydro-system, to help to generate some income, but what else do you actually do? Gamekeepers to keep them all down, to keep the rabbits down, to generally improve things around erosion. The point that I am trying to get at is why are people wasting their money on a non-profitable exercise? I don't think that they are wasting their money, because when it is good, it can be money making. A lot of the comments that we heard earlier, that the model was non-profit making, were incorrect. I think that the aim is always to make a profit, but it is very difficult to do so. Finding an alternative to make the profit and keep the men on the ground would be extremely difficult. We are not going to go further with this particular line of argument. I am sure that everybody would love to talk about what is profitable, good and bad and all the rest of it, but that was not the question in the first place. We can leave that hanging in the air, which we can follow up, because I think that Dave has made a point that we need to explore with the ministers, and we need to move to Mike Russell's part of this question just now, time being, as it is. There would be people observing this from another universe, shall we say, who arriving here by rocket and sitting in through this meeting might sort of define what we have heard so far in this session by people who say that they own lots of land, they do not make any money from it—I am sorry to go back to Dave's point, but they do not make any money from it—but then saying to a Government, if you dare to tax us in the same way as we tax other people, we will lay off staff. Would that be a fair representation of where we find ourselves at this moment? If you came from somewhere outside this argument, seems of what I am hearing. I do not see that as a fair representation of NFU Scotland's view. We seem to have lost sight that actually field sports, rural sports, because it is not just about deer, it is about shooting rabbit and pigeons and the rest of it, is a leisure activity. It is a leisure activity enjoyed by many of the rural poor. Around where I am, it is mostly the self-employed and people who do not have access to land who are doing those shootings. There is a real fear that an unintended consequence of this is that it becomes a commercial concern and therefore, soon, the only people who would be able to take part if it became a purely commercial concern would be parties of Europeans who paid significantly to come over and shoot over the land. Of course, if we take away the opportunity for this leisure activity from many in our rural areas, I am sure that they will seek it out in other ways. Can I just follow that up, convener? I mean, skirting round the description as a rural poor, which I think we could have a great debate about, but just skirting round that description, I would not support anything in this legislation that was discriminatory against the people who lived in the countryside. I think that you can take it as read and you do not have to take my word for it, though I will offer you my word on it. What I am trying to do here is to get to the stage where there is workable legislation that does not penalise small and medium-sized enterprises, that does not bear down unfairly and wrongly on deer management, which we want to see improved rather than made worse. We are just trying to find a way through this. Let's take it as read that your objection—not the way that you have put it—is taken. What I am trying to say is that there appears to be an element in this that I do not understand in terms of economic impact. Doug has argued for a full economic study, but what I have heard is a succession of figures without any cogent proof that there would be an impact on rural employment. Where is that proof? Where is that going to be handed to the committee? I have heard good arguments that the state of the euro at present is impacting on people who come from other countries to take part in this. When are we going to see the proof that this is disadvantageous to specific people? If I could go back to your previous question and then address that one. If I was coming down from outer space and looking at the situation across Scotland, I would be saying, look at those people who are prayer to invest private money on a huge scale into the operation of these land holdings and look at what they deliver. I would just commend anyone on the committee who has not seen this. This was the report by SRUC and the University of the Highlands and Islands that Fergus Ewing launched last week, which looks at exactly some of these issues and what the local communities think of that. First of all, that is what I would be saying. I was saying, let's value this and let's treasure it and let's use it in the right way. As to your point about the evidence, I fully agree and that is why we think that this issue needs to be looked at in a lot more detail because we are even at the moment trying to discuss what the mechanism might look like and how is it possible for an individual business to understand the consequences for them and their operation if they do not know how this is going to be operated, what it is going to cost and hence what the impact on them is going to be. Mike, I agree with you that we need that diligence done. You can make some assumptions from the discussion today. You have heard more of that discussion. There is more question of the ministers to take place, so I would encourage your organisation in the new circumstances to look at it, make those assumptions and bring real evidence. I am not unsympathetic to this debate, but I have not seen that real evidence presented to the committee that says that there are other people who are going to be affected. However, I have heard the discussion saying that, if you impose this, those people will not be employed. That strikes me as an unfortunate way to deal with the Government. Two things, if I may, on that. First, we have surveyed our members to get a handle on basically the sport across Scotland and what the economic situation is. As Colin said earlier, 90 per cent of those said that their costs were more than their income for the operation. In terms of the sort of information that you talked about, I think that BASC has done some work on that and there were some figures in their submission trying to estimate, as you said, about what the cost could be and hence what that would mean in terms of employment of gamekeepers. I might pass on to Colin to go on on that. Yes, not specifically in employment of gamekeepers because it is hypothetical at this stage, but it is inevitable. I think that anyone looking from really high up would see that tax that is being imposed on an activity, those who will pay the tax will ultimately be those who are enjoying the activity. What concerns us is that 100,000 people who enjoy sporting shooting in Scotland will ultimately have to pay the price of this because it will be passed down from the farmer on to the rent on to the syndicate. The syndicate, a collective group of people who enjoy shooting, is the most common form of shooting in Scotland. People who enjoy shooting, what would make them exempt from taxation? I mean, somebody at some stage is going to quote Emerson, so we might as well be me. If death and taxes are inevitable, so what makes that so special that it is not treated in this way? We have already discussed exemptions for sustainable management, things like that. What concerns me is that a large estate involved in wildlife state Scotland can demonstrate that they are behaving sustainably, but the small farm may not have the resources to go through that process. The multitude of people who enjoy shooting in the form of small syndicates on farms may have difficulty in enjoying that exemption. That is what concerns me. It is already working people, not just those who live in the country. The majority of them live in the central belt of Scotland or come to Scotland. If we exempted the small farm and the type of thing that you are talking about, you would have no objection to that. If small farms were exempted, that would be good, but we are concerned that there is a collective effect, because the majority of small farms do not just have their farm business and their shooting business, but they are diversified into many other areas. Taking that aside, if we were to exempt small farms and that type of shooting, you would be content. I would still have concerns relating to the wider employment issues that Bruce alluded to on the larger estates. It is very hard to get people to be positive to you, convener. Had Mr Russell been able to join us on Monday—I fully accept his reasons for not being able to join us—we heard evidence from an individual who takes the shooting on an estate in the Borders and runs it as a commercial enterprise and employs seven people in that valley. His concern was that having to pay rates would make him very uncompetitive compared to similar businesses just south of the border, which is not far away from where he lives. I found that quite a powerful argument, and I dare say that there is a level of rateable value that might be absorbed into the business, but there must be a level whereby that competitive argument comes into play. I just wondered whether anybody had a brief comment to make on that aspect of it. Brief comments are welcome. Long comments are not. I did see a brief comment. Daniel Russell did. I would share his concern in that area, but there is a particular geographic rationale to that as well. If I could just pick up a point that might have been made about no taxes being paid, I would remind the committee that estates do pay tax, and in those operations they will pay income tax, they will pay national insurance on employees and they will pay existing non-domestic rates where it is due and other parts of their business. We are talking just perhaps one part of a much larger operation. I want to make it clear that estates do pay tax where it is due. The state concern that we are talking about has its business dealt with by CIC Montreal. I thought I would just add that little bit there. Dave Thomson. It is just an extrapolation from some of the figures. Four million is the estimate of the income. I think it was Colin mentioned 100,000 shooters. I take Mike Russell's points about small farms being exempted and all that, but let's say, for the sake of argument, you divide £4 million by £100,000. It works out at £40 a year, £80 a week. Are we really saying that that level of taxation is going to destroy this shooting and all the rest of it? I think that, if I am right, the average level of tax before was something like £10,000 on the people who are on the valuation role, would that figure be correct? It was certainly of that order of magnitude. If it was £40 a year, everyone would qualify for the small business bonus and it wouldn't be an issue, but until we have done the work to understand that, we can't say, but it was significantly more than that, which is why people are concerned. I would be interested to see what others have to say, especially the assessors, but if it was £10,000, that, by definition, must have been much bigger operations and not the very small ones that were being mentioned that Mike Russell and others were talking about exempting. It would make the point about the exemptions for the smaller ones, but it would be interesting to hear what the assessor has to say. I was there in 1995 and, clearly, that is maybe not the soundest of places to start because things have changed, as I said earlier, and we are talking here of averages. I didn't take every valuation with me, but I have some here, and they are from the Borders area. Shooting rights, Abbey St Bathans, which I think is near Duns, are £155. You can go to Argyllshire, where there are larger estates and you will find values at that time, which were £4,000, £7,100. Even if the smallest of those increased by a factor of £10, they are still not going to, as if small business bonus scheme applies, they are still not going to reach the threshold for paying any rates on that basis. Obviously, that is a different matter than valuation. That is a rating relief matter, and that is not for assessors. That is for the Government and the finance officers to deal with. However, there are clearly a range of values ranging from quite substantial to values in small hundreds at that time, and we have to now establish where that sits now. I think that that sequence is there in terms of money, which we will need to follow up. I am going to hand over the chair to my deputy as I have to go and meet the first minister. I think that we are moving on with a brief question from Alex Ferguson. I was going to ask about the whole process of assessment and all those things, but I think that we have covered most of the whys and the wherefores. However, there is an issue that I want to ask Mr McMillan about, if I may. We have touched on it, but I am still really unclear as to where we lie on. It goes right back to a question that I asked Mr McLaren when the civil servants were in front of us. In fact, my exact words were asked him to confirm whether, or not, they are levied, rateable values will have to be applied to virtually every non-urban acre of land in order to identify those that are not to have sporting rates levied upon them. The answer that I got was not exactly clear, if I could put it that way. I am still not exactly clear on exactly where we lie with that. I have anecdotal evidence that some of your colleagues believe that, in order to meet their statutory duties, all sporting rights will have to be valued and entered on the role whether they are taken up or not. I wonder if you are able to put on the record, for the sake of clarity, exactly what the position will be. My understanding is that every acre or hectare of non-urban land will have to have a sporting rateable value attached to it as part of the exercise. Can you confirm that? I think that what we have to do in terms of legislation, as it is proposed, is directing assessors to make an entry for all shootings and deer forests, to reintroduce entries for all shootings and deer forests. That is tempered by the phrase, in so far as exerciseable, and we have discussed that earlier, what that might mean, and that might mean a piece of ground where the shooting right cannot be exercised for one reason or another. To establish what needs to go into the valuation role, assessors firstly need to identify the ownership and occupation of each and every piece of ground. That is not something that is simplistic or straightforward to deal with. The valuation role plus the council tax valuation list are probably the most extensive and current lists of property ownership and occupation in Scotland. What is exempt from that at the moment is agricultural lands and forestry lands. We have to examine all that part of Scotland and establish what the current landscape is in terms of ownership, occupation and use. Once we have established that, we can then move to look at what the value of that is, and that is where it becomes. That is the complex part of it, from our point of view, and the time-consuming part is establishing who is there, what they use it for and what is it worth. Once we have done that, we can then decide what entries should be made in the valuation role and at what level. If the will of Parliament is that we do not enter certain classes of lands and heritages because reason A, B or C, then we maybe need to modify the terms of legislation and that is where assessors and, hopefully, colleagues here would be willing to sit with the Government officials and find a form of words that might temper the impact of those reintroduced provisions. However, as they stand, we will have to look at every nook and cranny. The short answer to my question is yes. That is what I am looking for. No, not at all. The explanation was useful too. We are moving towards the conclusion of this session. I just want to open up an opportunity to colleagues if they have any additional questions that they want to hear at this stage. No, everyone is content with that. It remains for me to thank the panel for what has been a very helpful and informative evidence session. It will certainly help to inform lines of questioning for the Government. The next meeting of the committee is on 7 October, when we will consider three pieces of subordinate legislation that will take evidence from stakeholders on human rights aspects of the Land Reform Scotland bill. We will also consider the petition on the control of wild geese. As previously agreed, the committee will now move into private session to consider the evidence that we have heard this morning. I will now close the public part of the meeting and I ask for the public gallery to be cleared.


It's a Monday and don't judge me. I look crazy.  It was my human anatomy physiology and Yeah, I didn't go For the week and I went back home.  I couldn't get up, but I have a math class at What one so I got to do that. I just got an email From codes I applied there for you know seasonal term whatever until like December or early, January and got an interview I set that up for This Friday it's three. So yeah, I haven't really blogged a lot So I'm gonna take y'all around with me for this whole week. So right now I'm literally Since it's 11 about the cooking a piece of Since it's 11 about the cooking 435 Boo-boo today under my bed and You found him on TV like he's bad anyways, I Gotta go to library today also to print off and I sold something on my McCarty McCarty's just like Poshmark. So you can go check it out. My name is underscore Akira with three a's But yeah, it should be in the description a link or something because I'm selling a few items and promises and shit that you can use. So yeah, I just sold a more face Hoodie and I just washed it for the person I just got back from class and shopping at Walmart and You'll see a little clip. I got some plates cups and Sibler and stuff. The point of going Walmart was to get tape and What did I need? I needed tape and a blender and the $10 blender that I was looking for they sold out Because my old mother blew it out. So That'll wait till they come back in. I did get some tape high-ass tape for it all and now I'm about to ship out This order that I got from the app called McCarty. You can go check it out Once again And yeah, I got this off at our school Post office since it's the closest one. I'm gonna want to give me some chick-fil-a and Nikki and everybody It's down at the pool. I don't know if I'm gonna go or not Okay, so I'm gonna try to drive with y'all up here. I do have a mini tripod that I got from Amazon, so I was gonna try to put that in here, but I don't know how Well, that'll work. See six to seven I always work out every day six to seven.   They did use the map as you can see But I'm still over it. So I'm about to try to set this up and I did put clip in but Just another look I got these glasses They were like seven dollars for a set of 18. This was nine something might as well say 10 and there was 10 dollars and I'm gonna run all this in that for the dishwasher I wanted to take all this clean stuff out Put that up in the negative element too, but I'm gonna run my clean stuff first And this is my side But I want all my stuff not together or whatever. This is my side too So I was thinking about moving over there if I can get this uh Dog crate put together I'ma show y'all. I also forgot to show y'all I got two pillows. They were on clearance for five dollars.  So cute and they match my room. I got to clean up my rooms As you can see They're over there sleep right now. So I'm gonna go put all the stuff up in the kitchen and wait till they wake up Over there before I put him up in here. So let's let me get some light. It's 803 still Monday night I just got done seasoning my steak and I rearranged my Food and my dishes Watch out Come here This is the food This is steak I put potatoes on too Anyways, my stuff was over here And then I moved it all over here.  It's 9 31 in the morning and I like a little mushroom. So don't judge me But I don't have classes at two o'clock today So yeah, I'm about to try to find me something to eat for breakfast. Um I gotta go shopping again But I really like I don't even have no bread no more to make toast. So In my blender broke. I can't make me no smoothie or anything. So The only thing I have Just like meat for dinner Sure, if that's my boyfriend's Fries, I'm gonna have to do another pizza We just ate breakfast pizza So yeah, I'm just gonna have to set this 21 shallower roots or h&m But I haven't told y'all already. I'm going to Amigo's concert Here. Yeah, I need something to wear so I'm just about to order something Fashion Nova, which I should be in the first place.  It's hot up in here But I'll get this I want to pet smart We bought puppy pads and only 10 in the pack. These were Four dollars or something. We're in there today.  You get 50 pads A puppy pads for $4.97 and they had a hundred for $8.97 I'm like, hell yes And my best friend Nikki, she just went to Walmart Bought some 10 for four dollars Kissed And I also My baby coby he was doing really good when I first got him like he pee on the mat and he poop on the mat, but now He didn't lost his damn mind. I don't know what his problem is. That's sorry y'all But I got this simple solution puppy aid attracting Um, it's a special scent. They help change puppies work to urinate for indoors and outdoor use And this was nine dollars, but I mean I'ma try it out for a whole week. And if it don't work within, you know a week we can have It's going back because they said I could take it back. So, you know We bought it and I cannot lose that receipt I've been having to take different things back lately and I like lose my damn receipts I hope I work out today It 6 to 7 I gotta work out today because one of my period I don't work out on my period last week from Wednesday to saturday And then I got my new sweet sweet I'ma use that How about I just got a ticket for 10 dollars they Broke ass school. I look horrible. I didn't do anything today, but Yum my time expired in 1043 He uh got me at 1047. I was like four minutes late.  I ready to see me goes, but Let me get up So great today is Thursday the 28th and I'm wearing my boyfriend shirt. That's why I'm so big But I guess I feel all black today and I really didn't feel like dressing up or doing my hair So I just put on a hat didn't do my eyebrows or anything And Where you go? He's bad. It's all get out Like that Anyways, um Tuesdays and Thursdays and we have one class and it's it to it's my English class I just paid my essay this morning and I think after class I'm gonna go order me a piece of and I don't know I may go to a couple stores today, but I got some work to do and So Gray's the name to come on tonight and I'm ready I just decided to watch the last episode in season 12 I think that was on Netflix because I I could have been finished a long time ago But I just managed it since it's come back on now And I can't wait so I love gray's But yeah, let me go. I don't think I'm taking the backpack. I think I'm gonna take This bag because I may go to the store So I'm gonna take this with me today because I only need Pencil and paper. I think so I just got back home class was pretty cool today Um, I just got me two pieces for $15 I gotta meet lovers And then just regular pepper on it So, yeah, that's until gray's come on is seven Seven o'clock. I'm chilling to the end. Um as I get done eating I may You know Do a little work over never I gotta work out Six to seven on up and go today because I need to make sure I'm back in time to catch that gray's Okay, so today is Friday. Um, I'm one my first class at 10 was canceled. I had algebra at What's on the house with one my interview was at two that went well. I just can't call be a bad Hey, hey, baby Hey, you scared and cold saying So, yeah, this is my little tire or whatever and I'm about to cook cheese dip and I forgot my rotel like I don't know if I want to cook chili dogs and cheese it now, but I've been having chili dogs like a lot in the past week so I think I might just do Cheese dip so I gotta get some rotel. I'm so over today and I got so much work to do by either tonight Friday or sunday So I gotta get to it and I don't know if my bae come in a senior or not, but Hopefully he do like surprising or something, but we'll see and unfortunately i'm not going to the migos concert. So Whatever because I don't want to drive like What four hours by myself in big so no and they don't perform until 11 30 on saturday. So that may change but It's not looking like that right now And I did throw my hair full with plexi rods and it really didn't turn out how I wanted it, but whatever. Good morning It's saturday um Kind of lit right now. Um, I got this g and c blender to go take back Because I need my money back.  It's not really working and I don't really have time And chihuahua's a smart anyway. So like he know what he doing But yeah, something about to do Nicky have her niece with her and we're about to go To auto because they got a good sale going on right now ladies and I believe today is the last day And just for an outfit of the day I got on the regular choker from I think charlie roose or somewhere and I Just curled and plexi right in my hair. That's basically what it is last night I did not wrap it. I put it in a bun and then put the button the back of my head This bossy bodysuit is from I want to say forever and I have to use bobby pins on the side like how ratchet am I because my boobs like coming out But I just got on some pants that was from Just to sort of don't have no more wet sealing and then I wear my pull-ups That my baby bought me No Isn't this my outfit of the day?  I'm trying to get some makeup and she baby sitting her niece Hey, hi, hey there She's so cute That's what we're doing You might I'm someone up. I'm here. Oh, she look just like your daddy I don't know. What's my thing? She's smelling it.  Check that out. Okay. Check like check me out We're all gonna get better grip on her here. Okay, here we go She's got the egg She's got one more pumpkin. It's not funny. You're looking cute


Okay, Eric, you drew with Olga Giriya today. Tell us something about the game. Yeah, it was a pretty clean game. I played an opening I've never played before, prepared it last night and this morning. And then once the game began, I forgot most of my preparation and had to figure it out on the board. So I took like 10 minutes in the early kind of opening theory to recall what I was studying. And thankfully, I didn't mess anything up. And we got kind of a interesting playable position, some imbalances. And yeah, I checked afterwards with the engine, just a brief leachess engine analysis. And it was a perfect game. There were no mistakes, blunders or inaccuracies for either of us. So can't complain with that. Sounds good. Let's look at it. Okay. Okay, Eric, we're looking at the position after you've just played Queen C2 and a Jaco Piano. Tell us something about it. Right. This is kind of trendy opening these days. There's a chess ball course by Wesley So, and this is one of the main positions that's featured in that course. And here, Black has a few different options. Olga played Knight takes C3, which was a secondary move in my preparation. I was a bit more ready for Bishop G6, which is a more natural move, aligning with the Queen. And the main line here is Queen to B3, hitting the pawn, Knight to E7 and castling C6, Bishop D3. And there's been a lot of top level games that have reached this position. So this was an alternative, but we went for a slightly different route. Yes, you did. Okay. So Knight takes C3. Yeah. And if we go forward a few moves, I think the play was pretty natural. It takes, F6 takes. One thing here, if we just go back after I took on F6, Black has the option of taking on F3. And I had this position on my computer screen this morning. And the only thing I remember is Black can't take on F3 because I have the intermediate move, pawn takes G7, and White's doing quite well here. So we followed kind of the main line. If we just talk about the main line, Queen of 6, Bishop to E2, Knight to E5, and then Knight to E5. Natural move, Bishop takes, and takes, and C5 gets Black. Right. And when I first saw C5, it looks like an elementary plunder because it allows a very simple fork on D7. And it took me a few minutes to realize that it's not good for me to deliver the fork, because if I go for a Nd7, Black has some interesting counterplay with Queen C6, Nf8, and pawn takes D4. And it's weird because I'm temporarily up a full rook, but I think White is just much worse here because I'm losing back a lot of material. Queen C3 is in the position, and I just didn't want to have any of this. Yeah. Yeah. That's right. Okay. So I castled instead. I castled, and we carry on. Yep. Takes, takes. And you played Queen to E6. Queen E6, and this is a very natural move. It avoids the fork now, which I was threatening. It also supported Knight to C4, which we're going to see very soon after F4. For Knight C4. And then Knight C4. And yeah, so it's an interesting kind of imbalance because I have this very strong Knight on E5, but now Black is challenging it. And the problem with my position is my Bishop on E3. It's just a really sad piece. So my dream was to get in G4 and F5, and eventually Bishop F4, and try and attack on the King side. I really wanted to play G4 right away, but I don't think this quite works for me because after Knight takes E5, I would really like to take back with the pawn, but then D4, and I'm getting hurt here because Bishop F2 hangs F4 pawn, and Bishop D2 is even worse because D3 attack. So instead of going into this, I played Rook Ad1, which is just improving the worst place piece, more of a prophylactic move. And if we keep going... So we move on to that one. Keep going. Yeah, we can keep going. So G4, and this is where things begin to simplify. We trade on, or Rc4 is a good move, and we trade on B6. Trade on B6, checks, I move the King. And then very quickly, a lot of things came off the board because I lose F4. It's a major hoovering off of material. And then I win D5, and at first it looks scary for me because my King is a bit naked, my Rook is pinned, but it turns out everything is under control after Queen to D3. It does look scary, as you said. And then Rf8, and I still have to be careful because Black is threatening Rook to D8. And my Rook is still pinned, so I move on. And then Queen c1, and it still looks scary because all these check possibilities and... Yeah, King's a bit exposed. Right. Very exposed actually. And I realized here that I can just drop back to D2 and I'm allowing Queen g1. But if she plays Queen g1, I just tuck my King away on H4. And surprisingly, my King is quite safe here because I'm controlling the two checking squares. G5 doesn't quite work for Black, and I'm ready to play Rook to D8 and just force some trades. So she didn't go for this. That was OK. Queen a3 check out played. Queen a3, and this is where we just repeated moves. I don't think she saw anything better than to just go for this. After Queen c5, I move back. I still was allowing Queen g1, but if she didn't play it the first time, I didn't think she would play it this position. So the game ended very peacefully. OK, thanks very much, Harry. Thank you.


This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information and to find out how you can volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by J. A. Carter. Orthodoxy by G. K. Chesterton. Chapter 9. Authority and the Adventurer. PART II As a common sense conclusion, such as those to which we come about sex or about midnight, well knowing that many details must in their own nature be concealed, I conclude that miracles do happen. I am forced to it by conspiracy of facts. The fact that the men who encounter elves or angels are not the mystics and the morbid dreamers, but fishermen, farmers and all men at once coarse and cautious. The fact that we all know men who testify to spiritual incidents but are not spiritualists. The fact that science itself admits such things more and more every day. Science will even admit the ascension, if you call it levitation, and will very likely admit the resurrection when it is thought of another word for it. I suggest the regalvanization. But the strongest of all is the dilemma above mentioned, that these supernatural things are never denied except on the basis either of anti-democracy or of materialist dogmatism. I may say materialist mysticism. The skeptic always takes one of the two positions, either an ordinary man need not be believed or an extraordinary event must not be believed. For I hope we may dismiss the argument against wonders attempted in the mere recapitulation of frauds, of swindling mediums or trick miracles. That is not an argument at all, good or bad. A false ghost disproves the reality of ghosts exactly as much as a forged bank note disproves the existence of the Bank of England. If anything, it proves its existence. Given this conviction that the spiritual phenomena do occur, my evidence for which is complex but rational, we then collide with one of the worst mental evils of the age. The greatest disaster of the nineteenth century was this, that men began to use the word spiritual as the same as the word good. They thought that to grow in refinement and uncorp reality was to grow in virtue. When scientific evolution was announced some fear that it would encourage mere animality. It did worse. It encouraged mere spirituality. It taught men to think that so long as they were passing from the ape they were going to the angel. But you can pass from the ape and go to the devil. A man of genius, very typical of that time of bewilderment, expressed it perfectly. Benjamin Disraeli was right when he said he was on the side of the angels. He was indeed. He was on the side of the fallen angels. He was not on the side of any mere appetite or animal brutality, but he was on the side of all the imperialism of the princes of the abyss. He was on the side of arrogance and mystery and contempt of all obvious good. Between this sunken pride and the towering humilities of heaven there are, one must suppose, spirits of shapes and sizes. Man, in encountering them, must make much the same mistakes that he makes in encountering any other varied types in any other distant continent. It must be hard at first to know who is supreme and who is subordinate. If a shade arose from the underworld and stared at Piccadilly, that shade would not quite understand the idea of an ordinary closed carriage. He would suppose that the coachman on the box was a triumphant conqueror, dragging behind him a kicking-in in prison captive. So, if we see spiritual facts for the first time, we may mistake who is uppermost. It is not enough to find the gods. They are obvious. We must find God, the real chief of the gods. We must have a long historic experience in supernatural phenomena, in order to discover what is really natural. In this light I find the history of Christianity and even of its Hebrew origins quite practical and clear. It does not trouble me to be told that the Hebrew God was one among many. I know he was, without any research to tell me so. Jehovah and Baal looked equally important, just as the sun and the moon look the same size. It is only, slowly, that we learn that the sun is immeasurably our master and the small moon only our satellite. Believing that there is a world of spirits I shall walk in it as I do in the world of men, looking for the thing that I like and think good. Just as I should seek in a desert for clean water or a toil at the North Pole to make a comfortable fire, so I shall search the land of void and vision until I find something fresh like water and comforting like fire, until I find some place in eternity where I am literally at home. And there is only one such place to be found. I have said enough to show to any one to whom such an explanation is essential that I have in the ordinary arena of apologetics a ground of belief. In pure records of experiment, if these have been taken democratically without contempt or favor, there is evidence first that miracles happen, and second that the nobler miracles belong to our tradition. But I will not pretend that this curt discussion is my real reason for accepting Christianity instead of taking the moral good of Christianity as I should take it out of Confucianism. I have another far more solid and central ground for submitting to it as a faith, instead of merely picking up hints from it as a scheme. And that is this. That the Christian church in its practical relation to my soul is a living teacher, not a dead one. It not only certainly taught me yesterday, but will almost certainly teach me to-morrow. Once I saw suddenly the meaning of the shape of the cross. Some day I may see suddenly the meaning of the shape of the mitre. One free morning I saw why windows were pointed. Some fine morning I may see why priests were shaven. Plato has told you a truth, but Plato is dead. Shakespeare has startled you with an image, but Shakespeare will not startle you with any more. But imagine what it would be like to live with such men still living, to know that Plato might break out in an original lecture to-morrow, or that at any moment Shakespeare might shatter everything with a single song. The man who lives in contact with what he believes to be a living church is a man always expecting to meet Plato and Shakespeare to-morrow, at most. He is always expecting to see some truth that he has never seen before. There is only one parallel to this position, and that is the parallel of the life in which we all began. When your father told you, walking about the garden, that bees stung, or that roses smelt sweet, you did not talk of taking the best out of his philosophy. When the bees stung you, you did not call it an entertaining coincidence. When the rose smelt sweet you did not say, my father is a rude barbaric symbol enshrining, perhaps unconsciously, the deep delicate truths that flowers smell. No, you believed your father, because you had found him to be a living fountain of facts, a thing that really knew more than you, a thing that would tell you truth to-morrow as well as to-day. And if this was true of your father, it is even truer of your mother, at least it was true of mine, to whom this book is dedicated. Now, when society is in a rather futile fuss about the subjection of women, will no one say how much every man owes to the tyranny and privilege of women, to the fact that they rule alone, education, until education becomes futile, for a boy is only sent to be taught at school when it's too late to teach him anything. The real thing has been done already, and thank God it is nearly always done by women. Every man is womanized merely by being born. They talk of the masculine woman, but every man is a feminized man, and if ever men walk to West Minister to protest against this female privilege, I shall not join their procession. For I remember with certainty this fixed psychological fact, that the very time when I was most under a woman's authority, I was most full of flame and adventure. Exactly because when my mother said that ants bit they did bite, and because snow did come in winter, as she said, therefore the whole world was to me a fairytale of wonderful fulfilments, and it was like living in some hebraic age when prophecy after prophecy became true. I went out as a child into the garden, and it was a terrible place to me, precisely because I had a clue to it. If I had held no clue it would not have been terrible but tame. A mere unmeaning wilderness is not even impressive. But the garden of childhood was fascinating, exactly because everything had a fixed meaning which could be found out in its turn. Inch by inch I might discover what was the object of the ugly shape called a rake, or form some shadowy conjecture as to why my parents kept a cat. So since I have accepted Christendom as a mother and not merely as a chance example, I have found Europe and the world once more like the little garden where I stared at the symbolic shapes of cat and rake. I look at everything with the old elvish ignorance and expectancy. This or that rite or doctrine may look ugly and extraordinary as a rake, but I have found by experience that such things in somehow in grass and flowers. A clergyman may be apparently as useless as a cat, but he is also fascinating, for there must be some strange reason for his existence. I give one instance out of a hundred. I have not myself any instinctive kinship with that enthusiasm for physical virginity, which has certainly been a note of historic Christianity. But when I look not at myself but at the world, I perceive that this enthusiasm is not only a note of Christianity, but a note of paganism, a note of high human nature and minispheres. The Greeks felt virginity when they carved Artemis, and Romans when they robed the Vestals. The worst and wildest of the great Elizabethan playwrights clung to the literal purity of a woman as to the central pillar of the world.   With all this human experience allied with the Christian authority, I simply conclude that I am wrong, and the Church right, or rather than I am defective, and the Church is universal. It takes all sorts to make a Church. She does not ask me to be celibate, but the fact that I have no appreciation of the celibates, I accept like the fact that I have no ear from music. The best human experience is against me, as it is on the subject of Bach. Celibacy is one flower in my Father's garden of which I have not been told the sweet or terrible name, but I may be told it any day. This therefore is in conclusion my reason for accepting the religion and not merely the scattered and secular truths out of the religion. I do it because the thing has not merely told this truth or that truth, but has revealed itself as a truth-telling thing. All other philosophies say the things that plainly seem to be true. Only this philosophy has again and again said the thing that does not seem to be true, but is true. Alone of all creeds it is convincing where it is not attractive. It turns out to be right, like my Father in the garden. Theosophists, for instance, will preach an obviously attractive idea like reincarnation. But if we wait for its logical results, they are spiritual superciliousness and the cruelty of the case. For if a man is a beggar by his own prenatal sins, people will tend to despise the beggar. But Christianity preaches an obviously unattractive idea, such as original sin. But when we wait for its results they are pathos and brotherhood and a thunder of laughter and pity, for only with original sin can we at once pity the beggar and distrust the king. Men of science offer us health, an obvious benefit. It is only afterwards that we discover that by health they mean bodily slavery and spiritual tedium. Orthodoxy makes us jump by the sudden brink of hell. It is only afterwards that we realize that jumping was an athletic exercise highly beneficial to our health. It is only afterwards that we realize that this danger is the root of all drama and romance. The strongest argument for the divine grace is simply its ungraciousness. The unpopular parts of Christianity turn out when examined to be the very props of the people. The outer ring of Christianity is a rigid guard of ethical abnegations and professional priests. But inside that inhuman guard you will find the old human life dancing like children and drinking wine like men. For Christianity is the only frame for pagan freedom. But in the modern philosophy the case is opposite. It is its outer ring that is obviously artistic and emancipated. Its despair is within. And its despair is this, that it does not really believe that there is any meaning in the universe. Therefore it cannot hope to find any romance. Its romances will have no plots. A man cannot expect any adventures in the land of anarchy. But a man can expect any number of adventures if he goes traveling in the land of authority. One can find no meanings in a jungle of skepticism. But the man will find more and more meanings who walks through a forest of doctrine and design. Here everything has a story tied to its tail, like the tools or pictures in my father's house, or it is my father's house. I end where I began, at the right end. I have entered at least the gate of all good philosophy. I have come into my second childhood. But this larger and more adventurous Christian universe has one final mark difficult to express. Yet as a conclusion to the whole matter I will attempt to express it. All the real argument about religion turns on the question of whether a man who is born upside down can tell when he comes right way up. The primary paradox of Christianity is that the ordinary condition of man is not his sane or sensible condition, that the normal itself is an abnormality. That is the inmost philosophy of the fall. In Sir Oliver Lodge's interesting new catechism the first two questions were, What are you, and what then is the meaning of the fall of man? I remember amusing myself by writing my own answers to the questions, but I soon found that they were very broken and agnostic answers. To the question, What are you, I could only answer, God knows. And to the question, What is meant by the fall, I could answer with complete sincerity that whatever I am, I am not myself. This is the prime paradox of our religion. Something that we have never in any full sense known is not only better than ourselves, but even more natural to us than ourselves. And there is really no test of this except the merely experimental one with which these pages began, the test of the padded cell and the open door. It is only since I have known orthodoxy that I have known mental emancipation. But in conclusion it has one special application to the ultimate idea of joy. It is said that paganism is a religion of joy and Christianity of sorrow. It would be just as easy to prove that paganism is pure sorrow and Christianity pure joy. Such conflicts mean nothing and lead nowhere. Everything human must have in it both joy and sorrow. The only matter of interest is in the manner in which these two things are balanced or divided. And the really interesting thing is this, that the pagan was, in the main, happier and happier as he approached the earth, but sadder and sadder as he approached the heavens. The gaiety of the best paganism, as in the playfulness of Catalyst or Theocratus, is indeed an eternal gaiety never to be forgotten by a grateful humanity. But it is all a gaiety about the facts of life, not about its origin. To the pagan the small things are as sweet as the small brooks breaking out of the mountain, but the broad things are as bitter as the sea. When the pagan looks at the very core of the cosmos he is struck cold. Behind the gods, who are merely despotic, sit the fates, who are deadly. Nay, the fates are worse than deadly. They are dead. And when rationalists say that the ancient world was more enlightened than the Christian, from their point of view they are right. But when they say enlightened, they mean darkened with incurable despair. It is profoundly true that the ancient world was more modern than the Christian. The common bond is in the fact that ancients and moderns have both been miserable about existence, about everything, while medievals were happy about that at least. I freely grant that the pagans, like the moderns, were only miserable about everything. They were quite jolly about everything else. I can see that the Christians of the modern ages were only at peace about everything. They were at war about everything else. But if the question turned on the primary pivot of the cosmos, then there was more cosmic contentment in the narrow and bloody streets of Florence than in the theater of Athens or the open garden of Epicetus. Giotto lived in a gloomier town than Euripides, but he lived in a gayer universe. The mass of men have been forced to be gay about the little things, but sad about the big ones. Nevertheless, I offer my last dogma defiantly, it is not native to man to be so. Man is more himself, man is more manlike, when joy is the fundamental thing in him and grief the superficial. Melancholy should be an innocent interlude, a tender and fugitive frame of mind. Praise should be the permanent pulsation of the soul. Pessimism is at best an emotional half-holiday. Joy is the uproarious labor by which all things live. Yet according to the apparent estate of man as seen by the pagan or the agnostic, this primary need of human nature can never be fulfilled. Joy ought to be expansive, but for the agnostic it must be contracted, it must cling to one comrade of the world. Grief ought to be a concentration, but for the agnostic its desolation is spread through an unthinkable eternity. This is what I call being born upside down. The skeptic may truly be said to be topsy-turvy, for his feet are dancing upwards in idle ecstasies while his brain is in the abyss. To the modern man the heavens are actually below the earth. The explanation is simple. He is standing on his head, which is a very weak pedestal to stand on. But when he has found his feet again he knows it. Christianity satisfies suddenly and perfectly man's ancestral instinct for being the right way up. Satisfies it supremely in this, that by its creed joy becomes something gigantic and sadness becomes something special and small.  The silence is not the heartless silence of an endless and aimless world.  We are perhaps permitted tragedy as a sort of merciful comedy, because the frantic energy of divine things would knock us down like a drunken farce. We can take our own tears more lightly than we could take the tremendous levities of the angels. So we sit perhaps in a starry chamber of silence, while the laughter of the heavens is too loud for us to hear. Joy, which was the small publicity of the pagan, is the gigantic secret of the Christian. And as I close this chaotic volume I open again the strange small book from which all Christianity came, and I am again haunted by a kind of confirmation. The tremendous figure which fills the gospels towers in this respect, as in almost every other, above all the thinkers who ever thought themselves tall. His pathos was natural, almost casual. The Stoics, ancient and modern, were proud of concealing their tears. He never concealed his tears. He showed them plainly on his open face at any daily sight, such as the far side of his native city. Yet he concealed something. Solemn supermen and imperial diplomatists are proud of restraining their anger. He never restrained his anger. He flung furniture down in the front steps of the temple and asked men how they expected to escape the damnation of hell. Yet he restrained something. I say it with reverence. There was in that shattering personality a thread that must be called shyness. There was something that he hid from all men when he went up a mountain to pray. There was something that he covered constantly by abrupt silence or impetuous isolation. There was some one thing that was too great for God to show us when he walked upon our earth. And I have sometimes fancied that it was his mirth. End of Chapter 9 Part 2 End of Orthodoxy


SMAC is hosting Diversity Day because we want to make sure that the entire community can come out and learn from each other and appreciate all the differences and the unique cultures that are here in Saber Nation. SMAC is the Spangdala Multicultural Awareness Council and the goal of SMAC and our Diversity Day is to ensure that all of the unique cultures that make up Saber Nation are celebrated and represented. This event is supposed to be laid back and where people can relax and like get out of the shop environment and come out here and just have a good time and enjoy the weather and enjoy the company of everyone here. I believe celebrating diversity within the Air Force is really important because we all come from different walks of life and when we accept our differences and get to know each other on more than just a co-worker level, that's where all of the teamwork really happens and I think that's incredibly important for today in the Air Force.


Hello friends, welcome to the session. I am Malika. Let's discuss the given question. Find the coordinates of a point A where AB is the diameter of the circle, whose center is with the coordinates 2 and minus 3 and B with coordinates 1 and 4. Here is the figure according to the question with AB as the diameter and the coordinates of B are 1 and 4 and that of the center of the circle is 2 and minus 3. Now let's begin with the solution. Now here we have to find the coordinates of A. So let the coordinate AB, so we will write here X and Y. As we all know that the center lies on the midpoint of the diameter of the circle, then according to the problem AB is the diameter and O is the center. So O is the midpoint of diameter AB. So now coordinate given by the midpoint formula that is X1 plus X2 upon 2 and Y1 plus Y2 upon 2. Now we will substitute the value of X1, X2, Y1, Y2 and give the coordinates of O that is here X1 is X plus X2 is 1 upon 2 and Y1 is Y plus Y2 is 4 upon 2. So these are the coordinates of the point O. Now but it is given that the coordinates of O are minus 3 therefore we can say that on equating the corresponding parts we get X plus 1 upon 2 equal to 2 and Y plus 4 upon 2 equal to minus 3. So let this be our first equation and this is our second equation. Now from equation first we have X plus 1 equal to 4. This implies X equal to 3 from equation second that is Y plus 4 upon 2 equal to minus 3. This implies Y plus 4 equal to minus 6. This implies Y equal to minus 6 minus 4. This implies Y equal to minus 10. Therefore coordinates of A will be 3 and minus 10. Therefore 3 and minus 10 are the coordinates of the point A. So hope you understood the solution and enjoyed the session. Goodbye and take care.


from COVID-19 and our efforts to address the global pandemic. And our efforts to address the global pandemic. He's in, boys! He did it! He said it!