So, this is lecture 23, so we saw quite a few things in the previous lecture, a lot of interesting new things which are quite crucial in understanding why LDPC codes work in practice. Towards the very end, I showed you a plot, so maybe I will insert that here, it is a picture, so this picture looks quite big, so then at the end of the day after everything has been said and done with all these analysis and thresholds and all that, finally this picture is very crucial, so you should be convinced about the performance of LDPC codes immediately after seeing this picture, so you can go back and work with a lot of these things like thresholds and all that and finally that is very important that you know all that, but at the end of the day this is the picture which justifies LDPC codes, so for instance we have this wonderful threshold analysis which is based on this IID assumption which is based on the tree like neighborhood or no cycle free neighborhood up to depth L, so here I have codes of block length 30, 100,000 and 10,000 and I have constructed them, I have constructed so that there are no length 4 cycles, so I have taken care to remove length 4 cycles and each and every one of these parity check matrices has a lot of length 6 cycles, they have quite a few, let me not say lot, they have quite a few length 6 cycles, so what does it mean, moment I say there are length 6 cycles, length 8 cycles, up to what iteration do you have IID assumption being valid, only up to 2 iterations, so third iteration onwards you will start having problems with your IID assumption, but still what happens here, what happens here in spite of the fact that you have violations of the IID assumption at the beginning with the third iteration, I am doing 10 iterations here and the performance seems to track the threshold very closely, so that is pretty much the state of knowledge today as far as analysis of LDPC codes, we know that threshold analysis is valid only under the IID assumption which requires cycle free graphs, if I have 10, if I am doing 10 iterations for the analysis to be accurate, minimum length cycle should be 22 or so, otherwise I cannot talk about threshold being a valid thing, but what am I seeing in practice, I am seeing in practice that even if there are several length 6 cycles, I can do iterations up to 10 and threshold is still meaningful, so if you come up with a theory to extend the threshold analysis with cycles you will become very, very popular, so it is considered a very non-trivial thing to do, but you can always draw mean do simulation plots like this and justify why this is very useful, so this plot the x axis is transition probability, so as you move to the left the transition probability becomes better, so to the right of the threshold you have very poor BR performance and to the left of the threshold it falls down, not really, oh you have to see if it is worse than the input transition probability, not necessarily the threshold, it could be, so what is the moral of the story, at the end of the day threshold analysis is very useful even in very practical scenarios, even when you cannot guarantee that the IID assumption holds, threshold analysis is still useful, maybe one day somebody will show why it is useful, but for now we can accept that it is useful even when the IID assumption breaks down, so that is the first point and the next thing is I thought I will be able to show you a nice animation, I thought I had saved it in e if I want to, it looks like this folder does not have it or maybe it has, let me see, okay it is there, so I am going to show you an animation, hopefully it will work, okay, so I have to explain quite a few things, can you see it large enough, okay maybe I will blow it up a little bit, I am sorry, okay but that is good enough, you can see what the animation is, okay, so this is, okay I have to explain quite a few things before I launch into this, so far we have been discussing the decoder from a graph point of view, okay, I have always described the messages as flowing from bit nodes to check node or check node to bit node on the edge, okay what does an edge correspond to in the matrix, the ones, okay, so I can imagine at any iteration in step A, okay, there are a bunch of messages that are flowing along the edges, I can imagine that as a matrix, okay, matrix, a sparse matrix with the messages being put on the non-zero positions of my original parity check matrix, okay, maybe this is a little difficult for you to imagine but let me start with very simple things first, okay, so this is the 30 comma 15 parity check matrix that I have put up here, so what do I mean by saying this is the matrix, okay, so remember, yeah, okay, so I guess it is clear to you, okay, so it is got 30 columns and 15 rows and what do the, what are the green blocks, the green block represents a 1, okay, black means it is 0, okay, so in the graph the green blocks represent edges, okay, so in step A of iteration 1, I will put values on these green blocks, what values will I put on these green blocks, the actual messages that are flowing on the corresponding edge, okay, for instance, from the channel what do you receive, you receive 30 bits, okay, each of those bits I can associate with each column, what will happen in step A of iteration 1, all the messages will flow on that column, okay, so you will see I have assumed all 0 codeword, okay, and my probability of error is quite low, so you will have very few errors in each out of the channel, okay, and what I am going to do here is, so you can read, if you can read the title, it says block 1 output after iteration 2, okay, so I am going to backtrack a little bit, okay, so this is not going to allow me to backtrack, how do I backtrack with this? Okay, so clearly you guys are better at Windows media player than I am, okay, so then what do I do, it's not changing, I have to play, is it, but I want to stop immediately at the first frame, okay, but it's going, oh my god, it's gone, third button from the left, no, it won't play, how do I play it slowly, is it possible? Okay, anyway, so let me try to be very quick with my play and pause, okay, okay, but somehow it's gone to iteration 1, okay, I want to, okay, so I guess it's not too bad, but this is not the thing I want, there is one more frame before this, okay, so I think the quick time player is better, do we have quick time player on this? No, it's a problem with these Windows things, there should be something, no, that will play it frame by frame or something, play speed, okay, so maybe this is not a good, okay, so this is the plot I wanted, okay, so I've called it iteration 0 block 2, so when I say block 2, it's a fresh block that comes out of the channel, so each block is 30 bits, right, my code word length is 30 bits, so I took 30 bits out of the channel, okay, what happens in step A of iteration 1, okay, I've called it iteration 0, what happens, what are the messages that are flowing from the bit nodes to the check nodes, okay, so you see from here you can easily figure out how many bits were in error out of the channel, two bits were in error, right, so what is red now, red is 1, green is 0, okay, so this is what, is it clear, okay, reasonably, no, you can't see what's going on, okay, I'm sorry, okay, so now, okay, what is this matrix now, okay, so initially I showed you the matrix and I said greens were 1s, okay, that's the parity check matrix, now I want to use the same matrix to represent the messages that are flowing on the edges, okay, is it clear, I want to use the same matrix to represent the messages that are flowing on the edges, okay, so this is how we implemented in practice, right, when you actually implement, write a program to implement message passing decoder, you have a sparse matrix with non-zero values on the non-zero locations of your original parity check matrix because that's where the messages are flowing, right, all my rows are my checks, my columns are my bits and the messages that are flowing I represent at the, on the edges, edges are what, the non-zero locations of my parity check matrix, okay, so now don't think of this block as a parity check matrix, this actually represents the message that is flowing from bit node to check node in step A of iteration 1, okay, so iteration 0 is what I called it, okay, let me slowly come to it, so now when I go to messages, any message which is 0, I am going to put as a green block, any message that is 1, I am going to put as a red block, okay, what a black thing, yeah, those are 0 positions in the parity check, those don't correspond to edges for me, so those are not messages, okay, is that clear, okay, so this is how you actually represent the message flow in your program, okay, it is a sparse matrix, it's an easy way of thinking about it, okay, or you can write a graph or whatever I mean, something, this is basically, this is how I have represented the graph, okay, okay, I am only going to show messages from bit node to check node, I am not going to show messages from check node to bit node, okay, just to simplify the animation, I could have added that also, it's not a big deal, but that, I have just shown messages from bit nodes to check node after each iteration, okay, hopefully I can stop it iteration after iteration, we will see, okay, so you see this is what happened after iteration 1, okay, so after iteration 1, the messages that go from bit node to check node are all 0, what does it mean, I have decoded correctly, okay, so you can, let's see if I can go back, I can show you how it worked also, okay, so this is bad, okay, this is block 1, right, okay, it's terrible, I don't know, I am not even able to grab that thing, so okay, anyway, so let's see, okay, anyway, so you get the picture, right, so let me see, maybe the next block, I think we should really work on a better media player than this stupid Windows media player, I don't know, you should get something, yeah, something I can run frame by frame, I don't know how it can't let me run frame by frame, I don't know, it's just ridiculous that it doesn't allow me to run frame by frame, okay, anyway, so I think this is not ideal for this demo, but I'll just run it and hopefully you'll get something out of this, okay, so you see this is, next you'll see block 3, well there were no errors, block 4 had one error which went away, block 5 had one error which is going away, block 6 has several errors, so you see it won't go away, okay, as the iteration numbers are increasing, those errors are continuing to be in the messages, so after a while I say this is my output I give up, okay, block 7, similarly, there are several errors and they keep on spreading, okay, so you see as the iteration progresses, different errors show up in different places and it's very random, it's tough to predict, okay, if there are one or two errors, in many cases it works, 10 iterations I'm stopping, or if I get a valid code work, H times, H times, you take your parity check matrix, multiply with C cap transpose, no, you are doing it, actually, you can, you can see, you'll see at the check nodes you're always evaluating the checks, so you can use that to simplify your, okay, so you can see how it works, okay, and it's, so you can imagine this is for the 30-15, I can also, I could have also done this animation for the 151, it would have been much, much bigger, the boxes would have been much smaller, maybe you can't see it, okay, so I'll try to upload this animation also on the website, maybe then if you have a better media player, you can, you can play it frame by frame and see how it works, okay, so but roughly the idea is clear, right, so this is how, this is how the, the messages would actually look, okay, so it's difficult to do it in class, take a 30 by 15 matrix and fully do it, run it for you, stuff, okay, for each Solomon decoding and all, we can do it, but for these kind of decoders, it's difficult to do, okay, you want the code, let me, I have some ideas about that we'll see, okay, so how do I get back, okay, this is not what I want, this is terrible, I want that bottom thing to come, I don't know how to make it up here, okay, anyway, this is too complicated for me, no, simple, people don't like simple programs anymore, really complicated programs, anyway, so, okay, so, so what am I trying to say, so, so for a very large block length, okay, when you're actually even running a simple algorithm like Gallagher A, all kinds of things will happen and things like what you observed and people are making remarks yesterday that you may never converse, right, you keep on going on and on, you saw that happen quite a bit, okay, some very strange things can also be observed, there'll be only very few instances when you will converge to the wrong code word, in fact, I've done simulations for so long with LDPC codes, I've rarely ever seen unless I designed, I picked a real bad code from the ensemble, I'll hardly ever see convergence to a wrong code word, it'll either converge to the right code word or it'll keep on doing these oscillations back and forth, back and forth, it'll never converge, okay, so those are all interesting properties for this decoder and you can't really analyze them in a very easy way, so it works, right, it's quite strange to analyze, yeah, so, yeah, exactly, so you'll not have problems of wrong convergence with these decoders, well, in practice you won't have, can I prove it, maybe I can't prove it, okay, but in practice, it's very unlikely that you will have it, it's tough to calculate any other probability, okay, all right, yeah, by simulations you can check, okay, so, okay, so the next thing I want to do is go back to this PL and QL things and just speak a little bit more about it, I think I kind of rushed the whole threshold argument towards the end, but hopefully it's clear, okay, so PL was what, we said PL is probability that a message from bit to check node, no, bit to check equals 1, okay, this was the probability, probability of erroneous message from bit node to check node and we had a recursion for this, we came up with a recursion, okay, some recursion which I'll call l minus 1 and this recursion is parameterized by WR and WC, right, I'll put down WR and WC here, just to be very specific, okay, there were terms inside the recursion which involved WR and WC, we in fact did it in two steps, we went from PL to QL and then QL to PL plus 1, okay, so that's how we did that and P0 is the same as the transition probability P, okay, so in fact you can even say this recursion is actually a function of PL minus 1 and P, okay, the reason is that each step P is also involved, so you'll see, right, from when you went from QL to PL plus 1, P was also involved, so if I have to write that properly, this is a very nice and concise way of writing down that recursion, okay, so now when you study this function, you have to study it as a function of two variables in PL minus 1 and P, okay, and there are a lot of interesting analytical properties for this function, okay, and what are its fixed points, what are its, is it monotonic with respect to one argument, is it monotonic with respect to the other argument, and all these properties are very interesting and there's lots of studies based on those things, okay, so I don't want to talk too much about it, I'll simply state some analytical properties of this function, okay, I won't even state it, I'll just say some properties are important, okay, analytical properties such as monotonicity, monotonicity with respect to P and PL minus 1, okay, both of those are interesting, and then fixed points, what is fixed point now, yeah, so fixed point would be PL will be equal to PL minus 1, okay, if you reach a point where the iteration basically converges, right, it doesn't go beyond that, okay, so yeah, the derivative being equal to 0 is also another way of looking at it, okay, so fixed points, etc. can be studied, okay, and there's lots of literature, you'll see, there'll be lots of literature on these kind of things, okay, no, I mean for the function fixed point is PL equals PL minus 1, not for the code, I'm just saying fixed point for this iteration, I'm just studying analytical properties of this function, okay, so you want to derive it, you want to see if it's continuous, you want to see things like that, analytical properties, okay, so fixed points are, there is a connection between fixed points and thresholds which is again very interesting, okay, so then how do you define thresholds now, so okay, so the way I said that is for, depending on P, okay, so clearly if P equals 0, okay, what is PL? PL converges to 0, and if P equals 1, what happens to PL, okay, it'll also be 1, right, so those two you can check, you can put it in that formula, you can plug it into the formula, you'll see if P is 0, it'll be 0, P is 1, it'll always be 1, okay, so from there you can argue, since it's a monotonically decreasing sequence bounded away from 0, there will be a minimum value of P, minimum or maximum, yeah, maximum value of P for which PL will still converge to 0, okay, and that's how you define the threshold, okay, so let me write down how the threshold is defined, okay, P star is maximum P such that PL converges to 0, okay, so in fact people don't use the maximum here, the reason is, yeah, use supremum, you don't want the maximum to be in this set, so if you do that then you can't define it properly, you can always keep on going over and over, so if you say supremum, that's the right thing to say, okay, so anyway, but if you're not worried about it, just forget about it, just say maximum, that's good enough, okay, so you start with P equals 0, keep on increasing P, okay, run this recursion, see at what point you're getting the PL to converge to 0, till what point you're getting PL converging to 0, at one point you'll see sharply PL will converge to something non-zero, okay, it will converge to something which is not 0, at that point you declare that as your threshold, okay, the smallest value at which that happens becomes your threshold, this is a proper way of defining thresholds, one can do it, see this recursion is not very difficult, you can implement it in MATLAB and two lines, right, just a simple closed form expression, can implement in a two line and write a simple program to run this recursion, quickly find thresholds for WR and WC, okay, like I said for 3,6 the threshold is 0.04, okay, for other things also you can do it, okay, so that's about the threshold, any questions on how to compute this is clear, right, okay, at least for the Gallagher A algorithm this is clear, okay, yeah, one can study that also, so you can write the whole thing in terms of QL, so instead of studying this recursion I can write for instance, so he's saying instead of studying PL tending to 0 why don't you study QL tending to 0, both of them will happen together actually, this is difficult to have one happening and the other not happening because PL has gone to 0, QL will become 0, if QL is 0 then PL plus 1 will become 0, right, the way we defined our iterations, okay, but, but let me let me reiterate once again, the QL iteration might be useful in some case, okay, because the form of the QL iteration is different from the form of the PL iteration, you write the whole iteration for PL in one way, you'll see that whole expression is different from the expression for the QL iteration, okay, in some cases that might be easier to optimize or study or anything, so for that reason you might study the QL iteration, okay, so that's also equally important, you can write QL instead of PL also for this, okay, so there's no sanctity for the bit to check message being one, you can even look at the other one, okay, any other questions on this? Okay, so the next crucial thing to understand is to understand this analysis in terms of the neighborhood, okay, so that's one more piece of understanding which will give you more clarity about what's actually happening, okay, I've been talking about this neighborhood and I've been associating this IID assumption to lack of repetition in the neighborhood or lack of cycles up to suitable depth in the original graph, okay, so let's try to write down the neighborhood and associate this PL and QL to different stages of the neighborhood, so you'll see there'll be a natural association, okay, so that's very important, okay, so let's see that, okay, so let me write down the neighborhood just the, I'll call it the neighborhood view of Gallagher A, okay, so you have the bit node, okay, so this is one edge which is going from the bit node to some check node, okay, then there'll be other edges, how many edges will there be? W, C minus 1 of them, okay, edges going to check nodes, from each check node you'll have WR minus 1 edges going to bit nodes, right, okay, so these guys will be WR minus 1, okay, so likewise the neighborhood will keep on going, okay, so this is depth 1, no, is depth 1 or depth 2, depth 2, okay, so then you go to depth 4, depth 3, you'll get C minus 1, okay, I know I'm drawing a very bad picture but maybe you can improve this, each of these things will be W, C minus 1 again and then you have, okay, so the depth 4 neighborhood, so likewise you can keep on going and finally you'll have the depth 2L neighborhoods ending up like this and even here you'll have WR minus 1, okay, so this is let's say depth 2L, okay, okay, so how am I going to think of Gallagher A decoding on this neighborhood? So for each bit, okay, this is quite important, there's lots of meaning in this, okay, so for each bit, for the bit on the top, okay, right, for the bit on the top, if I form this depth 2L neighborhood, okay, and forget about the rest of the graph, okay, can I say what will the message be from the bit node to that check node, okay, so if I'm only interested in this message after L iterations, okay, I don't care about any other message, okay, so suppose I isolate my view at one bit node, okay, and say the message that goes from that bit node on a particular edge, okay, I've come to that point, okay, I'm only interested in what happens to that at the L iteration, is it enough to just have this neighborhood or do I need anything else, okay, do you see why that is enough, okay, right, now I have a bunch of bit nodes here, in each of these bit nodes, okay, the last bit nodes at the very end, okay, those are called the leaf nodes of a tree, okay, the leaf nodes of this tree, okay, if I fill out all the received values, okay, and then if I go through and fill out the received values in each and every bit node from there, I can completely figure out all the messages that are going to flow that will affect this final message that I have here, okay, are we able to visualize this a little bit difficult to visualize, okay, so, but this is reasonably crucial, okay, is there any confusion here or is there any, sorry, okay, so, so, so, so, so, so, okay, so how do I, okay, so, so the main objective is Gallagher A decoding, the way we described it is, how did we describe it, we said, okay, bit to check messages are being passed, inject to bit messages are being passed, all of it is happening in parallel for all the bit nodes and all the check nodes, okay, then we wanted to calculate the probability that one message from a bit node to a check node, iteration L was in error, okay, that is what we wanted to calculate, I did that very quietly by saying some IAD assumption, etc., and all that and everybody was happy, okay, I am not saying that is a bad thing, okay, it is good that you believe me and you are happy, okay, but if I have to properly do it, if I have to actually find the probability that a message from a bit node to check node at the L iteration is in error, I have to actually backtrack from that edge, go back to the previous iteration, the previous iteration, previous iteration, figure out all the bit nodes that would have actually contributed to that message and then go through that and calculate it carefully, okay, that is the proper way of doing it, right, so that calculation will come only if you understand Gallagher's decoding in terms of this neighborhood, okay, so maybe this whole depth 2 L picture is too advanced to start with, okay, maybe we start with depth 2 picture, okay, just for the first iteration, okay, so suppose I say the bit to check node message in iteration 1, iteration 1 step A, what are the only bits that are involved in this message? Just that bit itself, right, because this message itself is RI, okay, now if I have to find the same message on the same edge after iteration, in iteration 2 step A, what should I do? I have to look at the neighborhood of depth 2, you see that, okay, because what would have happened, okay, so this would have been connected to, let me fix WR equals to 3, okay, this would have been connected to 2 other check nodes and each of those check nodes would have been connected to 5 other bit nodes, okay, so I am drawing the neighborhood in slightly different way, okay, so if I know all the messages here, all the received values here, okay, and the received value here for all the bit nodes, okay, then I can figure out what this message will be at iteration 2, okay, you are not able to see this, okay, so if I say RI here, okay, RI is the received value here for this bit, what is the message at iteration 2? I cannot say it is RI, obviously it is not RI, I do not know RI, I need to know these messages and these messages, how will I find this message? Okay, I need to know what was passed before, okay, so you have to go all the way up to a depth 2 neighborhood to figure out what message would have come here, for instance, if I say, let us say, let us say all these guys were 0, okay, all the received values corresponding to all these bits were 0, then what would have happened, what would have this message been? 0 again and then I can say this will also be 0 according to Gallagher, okay, with check node, so with check node, this check node you mean, why am I not worried about this check node, because the way I design my Gallagher A, I will never send back anything I receive from that check node, okay, so that is crucial, so I do not have to worry about what happens beyond that check node, because whatever came from there, I am not going to use it when I send information back, okay, so to figure out the message that is being sent in iteration 2 step A, I need to look at a depth 2 neighborhood of this bit node, okay, okay, now I can repeat the same thing, suppose I say iteration 3 step A, what do I need, I have to again figure out what messages would have come before this, so I have to put one more check node here, one more layer here, okay, right, so it is the same, this picture I have generalized here, okay, in the previous picture that is what I have written down, okay, suppose I want to figure out the message that goes from a particular bit node on a particular edge, I have to look at its depth L neighborhood, okay, like you said I do not have to worry about what happens to the neighborhood of the check node here, this side I do not have to worry about, on top of that I do not have to worry about, only to the other side I have to look at, okay, hopefully it is reasonably clear, it requires some careful thought, okay, it is not very simple in the first place, okay, because I have been, I have described the Gallagher algorithm, it is most easy to describe and analyze in this parallel fashion, you may isolate it to one bit node and see what all the other bits involved, it is a little bit difficult to imagine that, okay, but it is important, okay, it is very important. Now I want you to calculate something, suppose I want to calculate the total number of bits that will be involved in the calculation of this message, can you calculate that? All the bit nodes in this neighborhood, okay, the total number of bit nodes in this neighborhood will be the neighbor, the bits that were involved in the message from the bit node to the signal, okay, okay, yeah, only to well know all these other bits will also be involved, no, no, no, no, no, it also depends on what was received there, see if these two match, then see that can actually be RI, right, this message can be RI, if these two do not match, so obviously there is a crucial dependence on every bit node in the neighborhood, not only the leaf nodes, see you start at the leaf nodes, yeah, in iteration 1 you start at the leaf nodes, but then when you go into one of the intermediate bit nodes, the value of that bit node could be the message that is sent, because if these messages do not agree, then you would send only the value of the bit node, right, what is this message? You go back and think about Gallagher A, how did we decide this message? It is equal to RI if the messages do not agree, okay, so ultimately when I do this calculation, the total number of bit nodes that are involved in the computation of the message in the L-th iteration from a bit node to a particular check node is a function of what and what, it depends only on what and what, WR and WC, it does not depend on N, okay, okay, so all these things are crucial arguments in the proofs and all that, okay, the number of bit nodes depend only on WR and WC and L, of course, because L, but it does not depend on N, so I can tend N to a larger and larger number, but what will be the same? The number of bit nodes that are involved in the computational message will be the same, because it depends only on WR, WC and L, okay, these are, this is a fact that is used several times in many of the proofs of LDPC codes, convergence, etc., etc., okay, yeah, even for that you use properties like that, okay, and this WR and WC are presumably small numbers compared to N and you can imagine this being very large, okay, that's the first thing that I want you to think about once more, convince yourself that you understand this relationship between the neighborhood and Gallagher decoding algorithm, okay, next thing I want you to do is I want you to put down P0, P1, P0, Q0, P1, Q1, etc., on this neighborhood plot, what is the, where is the probability P0 going to show up? What is the probability P0 is? Well, which one is an error? The Rs at the leaf nodes, okay, what about Q0? The one immediately above that, do you see that? Okay, so if you have edges here, okay, so this will, this is where P0 will show up, it's the probability that the message from the channel is an error, okay, these messages, any of these messages are an error, the probability that any of these messages are an error is Q0, what about Q1? The next stage, P1, next stage, Q1, next stage, next stage, okay, do you see that? Okay, so likewise as you keep going, you will get this to be PL, this will be QL, L-1, etc., okay, this will be PL-1, etc., do you see that? Okay, and all our calculations, these IID assumptions, everything are valid, if none of these bit nodes repeat, do you see that also? Okay, if I make an all-zero assumption and there is no repetition among any of these bit nodes up to depth 12, then I can assume IID, right, because there is no dependence, they are all identically distributed, okay, so this is how you tie up this whole thing in a solid way to the neighborhood, okay, the neighborhood plays a crucial role in deciding what the message is from at a particular iteration, every iteration, okay, and only the neighborhood plays a role, the other things don't play a role, okay, whatever is outside of this neighborhood, those bits do not affect my message at a traditional, okay, only these bits affect, okay, so it's clearly suboptimal, okay, if you stop at a finite number of iterations, a iteration number is very small compared to the block length, there is every chance that your decoding will be suboptimal, okay, you may not even use all the information that's out there, or it doesn't matter to you if it's good enough, okay, so it's important to even associate this calculation, this analysis P0, Q0 to this neighborhood, okay, what is P0? The probability that the leaf nodes, the message from the leaf nodes are in error, what's Q0? Probability that from the check node to the next level is in error, bit note to the next level is in error, that's what we calculate, okay, I did that very quickly and quietly on the simple description, okay, nobody really asked me any deep questions at that point, which is good, you should understand that first, then go and dig in here and understand this further, okay, the reason why this understanding is very crucial is, eventually we will go to a situation, okay, the next thing we'll do is, we'll move to a situation where we don't expect the graph to be regular, okay, so we will make it irregular, okay, what do I mean by irregular? Some nodes will have different degree, some other nodes will have different degree, okay, then what will happen, okay, this neighborhood will change depending on which bit you look at, right, if you have a regular code, then the neighborhood remains the same irrespective of which bit you look at, right, looks the same, bits will be different, but it will, the structure will look the same, the calculation for P0, Q0 will hold for every bit in the exact same way, okay, right, remember P0, Q0, what was involved in the calculation? WR and WC, why is all that valid? Because this thing looks exactly the same for each bit, okay, when I go to irregular structures for my tanner graph, the first confusion will be, the neighborhoods are not the same, okay, so then how do you do this analysis, okay, so all those questions will come up, at that point you have to do some further approximations and concentrations and all that, okay, so we will do all that, to visualize all that very clearly and see exactly what is happening, you need to keep this picture in mind, you should also keep the previous picture in mind, just do some IID assumption and then do the computation in a very simple way, okay, so we will have to do both of those, okay, so, all right, is this clear, any other question lingering doubts about this neighborhood and how it plays in, it is okay, okay, the next thing I want to comment upon is the all-zero assumption, okay, so why is the all-zero assumption true, okay, what am I actually doing when I do the all-zero code word assumption, okay, so what I need to actually compute is probability that C cap is not equal to C, okay, this is what I am interested in computing, this is my probability of error, what I could do is sum over all codes in C, all code words in C, my transmitted code word, probability that C cap is not equal to U given C equals U times probability that C equals U, okay, I am going to condition it on each individual code word, find the probability that you have an error given that that code word has transmitted, then sum it over all those cases, okay, I am going to assume all code words are equally likely a priority, so what will be this value, 1 by 2 power k, okay, so that is clear, okay, but what about these guys, why should they be all equal, okay, suppose I say no, let me rephrase, let me slow down a little bit, suppose I say this expression is independent of U, it is equal for all U, okay, then what happens, I can even pull that out and say this whole expression will simply become probability that C cap is not equal to U given C equals U for any U, for any 1 U, I compute this, then that will be equal to the entire probability, okay, so what is a good U that you can choose, that you will know will be in all 0, okay, so what do you need to make the all 0 code word assumption in your calculation, all these probabilities given that a particular code word is transmitted have to be the same, okay, there are, one needs to prove this, okay, right, remember what are we doing in the decoder, we are doing something which is not necessarily the same for each received code word, right, if you receive a code, transmit a code word, the actual messages will differ, okay, some things might be 1, some things might be 0, everything will change, okay, so one needs to carefully prove it, okay, so the trick to proving this is to show, to show that if you transmit any code word U, okay, and then you face an error vector E, it is the same as transmitting 0 with the error vector E and then you can map these two decoders 1 to 1, okay, so that is what people do, people show, if you transmit U and face a particular error vector, okay, it is the same as transmitting 0 and facing maybe some of the error vector, I believe it is the same error vector, so you have a 1 to 1 correspondence between a decoder for a code word U and the decoder for the all-zero code word, they run exactly the same way, exactly the same way in the sense, if you have an erroneous message in one decoder, the exact same message will be erroneous in this other decoder for the all-zero code word, okay, so you do that mapping and then you show it works, okay, that needs to be done, it needs proof, okay, but we will not see that proof in class for, I will not do that proof in class, but I will just say that it is possible to show it, okay, a crucial necessity for this is symmetry of the channel, okay, usually you need the channel to be symmetric, okay, the decoder should also satisfy some conditions, on top of that the channel should be symmetric, symmetric in the sense what, channel should do the same thing to both 0 and 1, okay, for the BSE is a very classic nice symmetric channel, it does not do anything very different to 0 or 1, so it works out, okay, so channel symmetry helps in this proof, the decoder operation is also important and one can do that, okay, so by the way if you want rigorous proofs for many of these statements, there is one central reference, it is a book called Modern Coding Theory, okay, I believe at this point it is available for free download from Rudiger Erbank's website, this book was written by, it is being written I believe by Rudiger Erbank and Thomas Richardson, do you remember these names, okay, I mentioned these names before, okay, you can do a Google search, you will find it from Rudiger Erbank's website, okay, but it is a difficult book to read as in it is very rigorous and proper and they have done a lot of careful study, but if all these missing proofs that I keep saying that I will not do this proof, you can go to this book and look at the proofs, okay, it is a very, all the detailed proofs are available, available there, okay and go back and check and convince yourself that the all-zero code word assumption was very crucial for us in the simplification of the density evolution, otherwise you will be stuck with some messages being, see, we could happily say probability of error is the same as probability that UL is 1, okay, if I did not know the message was all-zero, I will have to be careful, it will depend on the actual bit and then I have to do all kinds of calculation, it will be the same, it will not change too much, I can show it to be the same, but the calculation, the computation becomes much easier if you do, okay, probability of, oh, it is looking at the error vector instead of looking at the thing itself, yeah, maybe, yeah, maybe, maybe, maybe, so it is a little bit more tricky than that, go and look at the proof, I mean you have to be careful with the steps of the, steps of your decoder, okay, you should not see the steps of the decoder should not depend on what exactly U was, I mean the code word was, right, so sometimes, it is not very clear that the way we described it, it does not depend on that, when you are saying the steps of the decoder should only depend on E, yeah, I agree with you, when you do a syndrome decoder, first thing you do is H times R transpose, which becomes H times E transpose, so anything you do is only dependent on the error vector, so you can happily assume all-zero and do all these things, you have to show that the steps of your decoder are getting rid of the syndrome, getting rid of U and are operating only on the error vector, it is not clear because you are not directly computing all the parity checks, you are doing only partial parity checks, right, you are doing, right, you remember the message from the check node to the bit node, it is not, it is not the full parity check, right, it is parity check XORed with one of the things, so you do not know a priori if you are only dealing with the error vector or the code word itself is involved, so you need to prove that, that is all, okay, all right, so we will stop here for today, in the next class we will pick up from here and continue so forth.


Thank you again for meeting with us. So the reason that we came today is because we wanted to ask for some information or some suggestions about how to make online teaching more immediate and lifelike. So most of those schools right now that are doing business teaching, they're doing one of two things. They're either recording all of their classes and then just sending it to the kids and saying, or they're using like zooms or will meetings like that. So in Taiwan or across the world? In Taiwan I don't think anybody's zoom right now. Because we just find it. But what we've seen is because our kids are younger than university level, so they're not that good at regulating themselves. They need that feeling of immediacy. So they have to feel like they're actually inside the classroom. What's preventing them from being inside the classroom? I mean we are inside the room now. This is probably not going to be the only situation with a virus or a pandemic or something like that. And even if it is, I think the future of education isn't going to be 100% always inside the classroom with all the kids. It's very possible that some days we'll have some kids and other days we'll have other kids. Sometimes they're going to be home, sometimes everybody's going to be together. So we were wondering how can we create a sort of environment where the kids inside of the classroom can feel like the distance learning kids are also inside the classroom. And how can we make the distance learning kids feel like they are inside the classroom? Well you just connected the rooms together using projectors on walls. The rooms on the walls probably is pretty effective. You can connect one, two, three, four rooms together. That's probably pretty effective for the kids inside the school. But what about the kids outside of the school? If they want to feel like they're actually inside the classroom. But they're also protecting them through their walls. There's a lot of protectors. Yeah, that's right. But we do do that. Like every other week or so we tour around Taiwan and we connect whichever municipality. I think we're in L.D. right now last time. And we connect with people from Taipei, from Taichung, from Elshun, from Taidong and so on. And each of them use a wall size projector. So that it's virtually like a large room. Okay. So if I'm walking around the room and I want to talk to this particular person. Yeah. Does that mean we need like eye tracking software? You don't. You just need a camera like this that follows around. So who operates the camera like it just is right. And we also have stand-in avatars. So we actually have this. So if you want somebody to stand in for somebody else you just put it to a rotating chair. Okay. And put on it a tablet. And then whoever wants to talk to their remote participants just walk out to this tablet and start talking to them. And then the chair can be moved around? Yes. Is there rotating with chair? Alright. And if the distance person would like to feel like they can move inside the room. Yeah. Then they can just point some place. And either they're, this is like a wheelchair student right. They can either wheelchair themselves in or somebody can help to wheelchair them there. And there's different sorts of wheelchairs. There are more mundane wheelchairs like double robotics 2.0 which you have to manually wheel yourself by pressing the arrow keys on your keyboard. But on double 3.0 it's a more advanced wheelchair. You just point anywhere in the room and it just navigates to it without you manually controlling it. Is that a big financial burden? No. No. You can use it I think more than 10 times now. What would we talk to about something like that? We work with trip moment. Trip moment. In for example the National Palace Museum visit. I visited the south division of the National Palace Museum as a robot. And because they put their 360 camera on top of my robotic global. And then everybody on YouTube can just view if they have a VR then immersively but otherwise rotation to see. And I don't have to broadcast my face in 360. It's just me with a face in the tablet but what I see is 360. And so people can just look at whichever MPM exhibitions that they wish to talk more about. They're having their questions and I follow those questions to the head curator. And the curator just answers that. So that is very immersive for everybody who follows along under low latency YouTube 360 live stream. It's actually what I was thinking. Remember I said having little robots on the table so they can go around and talk to different people. That's right. This is just live size robots but otherwise the principle is the same. So with the current situation with our 4G network is the latency a really big issue for people that are using VR goggles? So VR is there to counter the latency issue.  But because it's 360 you can turn locally. It's taking in all the angles anyway. So there's zero latency when it comes to rotation. There's some latency of course when it comes to movement but people are more okay with that. It's the rotational latency that can render people dizzy. I think last week we went to talk to some people at NQ and they were telling us like because of the slight latency people might feel uncomfortable after a while of using it. That's right. So if you have a rotating but not moving chair everybody will feel very good about it. But once it's moving once there's translation movement rather than only the rotational movement then there's some C-sync like VR-sync that you need to anticipate. If they're not moving they're staying in place with a 360 camera then there's no risk of that. We should definitely try that. I attended a local court in Shilling Court. It's a mock court with a bunch of junior high school students and in a mock trial. And we also use a 360 camera at the middle of the mock court so that people who are following along can see the face of all the different sides and I'm mounted on the judge seat so that it is a combination of the two technologies that we have mentioned. One is a 360 that lets people see what's going on and what is this robotic avatar. You did it in the UN, right? Yeah, well I did. Yes, in UN IGF and for UN it's just watching a movie. The PRC ambassador did not leave the room. So you said that we would take one of those tablets and put it on like a little robot track and you could do whatever else. So we just point and it will turn? Yeah. So the manual turning is essentially costless, right? You just have an existing tablet. The turning rotation only is slightly more expensive. The whole movement is even more expensive but it's always in our procurement budget which is $500K. So maybe it would work with like a Wii remover or something like that. Yeah, sure. You can try various combinations but one of the key point is that you allow for VR immersion then you have to get a pretty good stable connection to the 4K 360 camera. But if it's only 2D and it's not moving horizontally or vertically then you don't need that much of a good connection for what you would do. Doesn't have to be 4K? No, 4K is all pixel combined and if you have 4K in 360 then each perspective is not 4K. So your knowledge other than maybe high end users, are there any schools or any educational organizations that are doing things like this? There's a learning forum at Middler High School. And lower than university level. Yeah, so there's plenty of primary school principals in New Taipei City that are setting up their own GCMeet video conferencing solution. So GCMeet is a very simple, fully open source free software that you can start a conference at any event in time. And with password connection and so on. But the good thing is that because it's fully open source there really is no restriction of how you can use it. So for example you can do a virtual classroom like this and let your student join so that I can join whichever area that I want. And I can walk around the classroom virtually. I can also attach myself to one of the virtual iPads. I can then turn on the camera in which case for people following online it's me talking into the camera. But for people who are on site it's my tablet talking with my face. And this is a very cheap technology that the primary school people can just implement using their own existing hardware and software. Because it's free there's no licensing cost.  And you can see this Yushan bank people on the upper right side. You can see this zero people. You can see they leaving their tributes to GCMeet and so on. And it's based on the same GCMeet technology that you can very easily set up with no licensing cost. So you can see there's a huge number of concurrent people in memory of GCMeet. That looks a little bit like Animal Crossing. But it is a little bit like Animal Crossing. Except of course we don't have to pay for licensing fee. It's the same 8-bit aesthetics. I think we can set something like that up. And this is a free software. You can set up yourself. So when you walk around here, what do you actually see? What shows up on your screen? So basically if there's multiple people all joining this, then you can see multiple people each one. So their faces will show up on the right here? I'm just talking with myself this way. Which is a little bit eerie I guess. You can easily imagine that it's not two people with the same face but actually two different people. So that's how they look like. And there's also setups that we're working on. So this is all contributed by the GovZero Community Contributors. It's not a purely government project but we do plan to use it in many government sponsored project settings. So for example you can see there are places with a speakers microphone or a moderator like this place with a screen share so that you can screen share to there. And if you stand to the kind of moderator's place like where Helen is here, then you can attach to one of the existing tablets that's mounted there so that your face will then actually occur in the physical classroom. So you can teleport inside the classroom. Exactly. That's how it looks like. There's many people online at the same time. You'll see many little screens. Would it make you very laggy? No, no, no. I think last time we tested with the Pratt Institute of Management School and they're in a different time zone even and I think 45 people joined concurrently and there's no lag.  There's a built-in feature that mutes everyone but the person in Napoleon. So you want to talk, you walk through Napoleon. And if people are just watching without speaking and so on, they can turn off their video which saves the bandwidth even more. But as you can see it's very downscale resolution. So it really doesn't matter how many people join because the bandwidth causes minimal. It's just one speaker with their screen share that needs to be maximized just as what we see in the video that I just play you. You'll see Dr. Chen Shanwei being the large screen. Of course that needs to be high-definition. So only one person can speak at a time on the podium? At the moment there's three in this setup. Because there's three physical projectors. But we can change the layout, of course. Can people personalize their little amateurs? Yeah, of course. You can choose school uniform or a teacher. Like fantasy. Right, this is like one of fantasy. So you can change or look like. And the teachers can choose the headmaster. And you can design the costume too, right? Yeah, that's right. To make the actual physical. That's very interesting. The headmaster look. Do you think this could be connected to the actual little robots that we have inside the room? Yeah, of course. It would be so cool. And then kids would never go to school anymore. Well, kids would always go to school. Always go to school. So are there any government meetings that are happening like this? Yeah, the presidential microphone for one is going to happen like this. Our cabinet meeting is using WebEx. But there's no cute cartoon characters where we're not there yet. But the principle is the same. Yeah, just could be like a project. Yeah, there's a community within WebZero called, I don't know how to pronounce it, SDH-001. So school. School. Yeah, school. Right, and called Ling Shi Xiao Sui Xiao. If you look for Ling Shi Xiao Sui Xiao, you can find the teachers that are currently engaged. And as you can see, the venue is online. And it's powered by GC Meet. And so they're already kind of drinking their own champagne before they inflicted to their students. The teachers are being empowered using this kind of online farms. These are teachers in just normal schools right now? That's right. Or alternative schools. I think 1C is in an alternative school. So all of these are public documents. We can very easily Google them. And you said for the chair I think it's called CHIP Moment. We have a T-R-I-P-M-O-M-E-N-Z CHIP Moment. Yeah, CHIP Moment. They are our partners during the MPM visit. Yeah, it's this one. So you can buy the wheelchairs or rent it from them? Yeah, previously we rented from them. But I think now, if you look for double robot 3, I think there's multiple resellers now. Yeah, and if you already have a double 2, they can just switch to a double 3 head. It's very modular. And the main feature of the CHIP Moment collaboration was a double 2. But the kind of flagship feature of double 3 is self-navigation. Oh, and then if you point that way, it's going to be cool. Yeah, just point anywhere and just point to the other one. Interacting Google Maps. So it's just like playing the synths. Do these things ever go so fast that they might be an injury risk to people? No, no, no. I don't know. I tried double 2, not only in Geneva in the UN meeting, but also in MIT Media Lab and in Venice by Anyal and many other places. And it's a consistently very smooth experience. And you can also mount a 360 camera on top of it, as we have done in MEM, which completes the full circle. And then you wouldn't? Yeah, boost up. This is like what you said about what it did. I was thinking about more old style like tank treads. But yeah, this is pretty similar to what we were imagining. We didn't know that the hardware was actually available already. That's right. As you can see, they mount, actually the gray dots are the ones that are navigable because there's a depth of detection capability. So there's no way that you can get yourself injured or run over someone because otherwise it won't be gray dots and you can't click there. It's not with like gray dot or anything. So the future is already not even in distributed. When we were talking to Ben Q, one of his main concerns, we talked to Tim, Tim Holm, one of his main concerns was this and then people throwing up all the time. Yeah, so I don't recommend the VR headset at the very beginning. It just started with a wall-size projector. Everybody is fine with a wall-size projector. And a couple of that was a laptop or a tablet and with mounted tablets. And these are all very regular things that people already know. Their eyes know how to adjust. And you do all of this and then you introduce augmented reality through audio. That's another thing because if you have two connected rims, it's better if their sound come from different speakers instead of mixing it to the same speaker. And that adds to the velocity. And if you play your speaker's right, you can feel that entirety of the classroom is transported somewhere else. It's called an immersive soundscape and in the C lab, there is a lab that is doing exactly this. And then visual. Because visual is the one that with the most health risk. So I think it's good to start safe. First to learn more. It's approximately how much of this classroom is? Yeah, so if you have existing tablets, then it is trivial. It doesn't cost anything. If you already have wall-size projectors and tablets and rotating chairs. And if you add to it a moving platform, of course, if you want to procure it, that's time we check W2 is as I said $100K, $80 each. That does the W2. I don't know if I have a 3, but it should be a simple pack. And if you want to deploy this software, it's free software, it's no cost. If you want to run some experimental applications of this, InstaSounds.com actually gets funding from Google Dauer. So they're actually paying people to train these things out. So the budget may well be negative. Yeah, of course. So during the night, because these are all light-emitting services, it disrupts sleep. Everybody knows that. So try to keep your teleconferencing classes before the sunset. That's what a responsible educational facility would do. If you do this at 10pm, then people don't sleep very well. Well, all of our current students are in Taiwan right now, so we're not going to do anything. So you don't have time zone in Taiwan. Well, then you can be very ethical. Another thing we were thinking is because we've met up with quite a few students who are very promising students, but they have social difficulties. They don't really like to leave home. If we had something like this, we could provide them that safety net of knowing I can unplug myself any time I want. That's right, exactly. If you don't like how people are forgiving to you, just disconnect. Rage quit. Well, not in a rage, hopefully, but explore this option. Well, you can maybe try out whether two of these classes are possible, and then we can see how... There's an existing community, so you can just reach out to them. I think they visited us, and there was a transcript of them visiting us. So if you check out our website, there's a transcript that calls best visits, and they actually added quite a few very useful hyperlinks of their focuses and things like that. If you don't have to copy that, I think ST has this link and can send it to you. So these are the people you want to get in touch with if you want to try out that two-dimensional math thing. We'll definitely do that. The kids are on what's it called, the game. Minecraft is 3D. That has been very educational. We also want to try Google VR. We want to make our own Google Cardboard. It's good as an exercise. Just don't stay in it for too much. Are you satisfied with your beef? Yes. I'm happy with it. I think that's another thing that we're going to explore as well. The thing with STAD is that it requires a lot of setup. So if you have 20 students, trouble shooting 11 would cost you a lot of time. But we did try, for example, a virtual classroom through the Spouse of Shipping Life with the public TV. Back in 2016, I talked with a lot of junior high and also primary schools, students, and in a virtual meeting room called High Fidelity. And I shrink my avatar to the same height as they are. So they feel more comfortable talking to me this way about looking after me. So it was a fun exercise. But it does require a lot of logistics and setup. Does it require a lot of sensors everywhere? Well, the latest version, though. But they do require a lot of modeling work. Because once we're within the VR, something like Minecraft doesn't feel quite right. So you have to model something that's more realistic. But JITC and the Double TVR, that's too complicated right there. JITC just need a laptop. And the Double is really just a carrier. It doesn't care about a tablet that's not designed. That can connect to JITC. And Double is just a navigation platform. What happens if there's a class of 20 of those which is running around? I feel like they're just going to keep passing it. Yeah, so in which case, we recommend you have the existing chairs and only mounts and they can only rotate. And there's no movement. So different stations in the room. That's right. We don't really need the Double. Yeah, we saw that in the Neon Genesis Evangelion. It's a popular anime many years ago. And what they each have at the station. Yeah, yeah, yeah. We could try that for us. Yeah, I think Double is only really useful if you want to go to an excursion, like going into the south side of the National Press Museum. So just send one and pilot it by you. But everybody join at home. They can join through YouTube or JITC. And they ask questions. And then the person driving that relates the questions. And that's definitely the case. You don't do 20 Double's roaming around. Do you think there's going to be a virtual tourism outside of like indoor areas? Definitely. There needs to be some legislation about that. Otherwise they're just running around all over the place. Yeah, but currently the Taiwan Minister of Culture has the Taiwan Digital Asset Library. So you can visit these places completely as your leisure. Because all of these are already 3D mapped through photogrammetry. Okay. And so you don't have to actually send a Double going to Bartomeu. I doubt the stairs would be friendly to the robot. But you can nevertheless just walk by it. I'm wondering if in the future there are Double's just being actual avatars for people moving around in society. But they ever get stolen by people or anything like that? It could. So yeah, I think that's why Sophia prompted so much discussions. And I think it's a good thing to have a lot of intermediate forms. So before they get fully semi autonomous, we make sure very clearly. For example, as I said Double is just a movement platform. By the person speaking it's not a synthesized image. Although technically you can put a synthesized image on it. But then everybody will get very confused. How is this different from like Google Maps though? So Google Maps skins only from the road. It's a street car right? But this scanning is complete like you can look at all the different angles in it and you can rotate it. Or you can take this stuff inside here. Yeah, you can actually walk inside. How about like if you can touch the move around the stuff that's inside too? Yeah, it's a model. It's a complete model. That's interesting. Right, so there's training videos of how to use it in classrooms. Because they're mad by drones. I thought there was a guy with a 360 camera just running around in his face. No, it's drones. There's another technology. There's many technologies around. Yeah, this is what we wanted to do in middle school. How about the drone? We want to try to create this kind of thing. Yeah, and AI Labs has a very interesting technology that use the drones to take as the late director Zebelin, G-Bolin, is taking. But because the drones doesn't have the same grade of the camera that G-Bolin was having they hallucinate the details based on the G-Bolin films. And so it's actually quite convincing. So if you look at their trial cameras, they are actually of rather high quality. But actually the resolution is actually not good. So a lot of those details. So this is completely drone taken. But most of the details are hallucinated. And it can learn about when to tilt, to pan, to zoom the camera after they finish the primary shooting. Because they capture the light from all the different angles. They can decide to rotate post-production. And that's also done by AI algorithm that learns about the aesthetics from G-Bolin's work. So that's like this double in a sense. We're really happy to share what we've led. I mean frankly speaking within the cabinet, our kind of telepresencing meeting was seen as something of an experiment of a pilot. But after the coronavirus is down the door. We're really happy that there's more people paying attention. We're really happy that there's more people paying attention. We're living in the future now. That's right. My wife told me that it was your birthday. Yeah, a few days ago. I know that last time I said my wife is in Japan and did you want anything. But you said that you often go. So you're something that you can't get in Japan. But also from Japan. It's really nice. And it's obviously not above $3,080. Thank you for everything.  Of course, of course. Just let ST know. I'm sorry I keep bothering you. You pay your taxes. It's okay.


So, did you guys know that Skyward Sword HD comes out next week? Right? Like, time is flying, isn't it? Feels like MarioGall Super Rush just came out and we're already, you know, almost a week away from Skyward Sword HD. So, hey, we are giving away two copies of that game, head down into the description to enter. Today's video or tonight's video, since I am recording this at night, I've had quite a busy day. We have some stuff to go over here, but before we get into it, you guys already see the title. Let's talk about that Switch OLED, because, uh, well, you guys had a lot to say. In fact, here's a sample of comments. Rila, Ruth Saylor, not happy, and I blame you.  Where is your Switch Pro? Aiden Snoo. No more rumors, no more speculation, no. Now you're going to make 600 clickbait videos on Switch 2, the next gen, for the next two to three years, until that comes out.  Just face it. You knew all along there was never going to be a Switch Pro. You just dragged people along all this time, making them think it was going to happen. Well, all along, I was saying that all it was going to be was a simple revision with a seven inch screen and improved stand. Now who's right and who's the idiot? John Gregorio. It's really cringe listening to you talk about this announcement like it's an actual Switch Pro as rumored. It's not. It's still the same Switch. No spec bumps at all. No features for TV mode players. Not even options for higher storage. It's 64 gigs. It was just the usual barrel effort by Nintendo for a way too high price. You and your other Switch Pro rumor obsesses on YouTube got played. Just admit it. I love how you stumbled over yourself trying to still support this concept of a 4K upscale. You profited off rumors. You were wrong. Admit it and move on. Formally called pro says Philly Graham. This is for all intents and purposes, not the rumored Switch Pro. It is a Switch XL. There is no additional power. Just a bigger form factor. Please stop moving the goalpost. Just so y'all can pretend you haven't been wrong about a Switch Pro coming this year yet again. Ultima. Keymaster. Formally called pro. Nate. Come on.  We're wrong already. This is not the pro. This is the Vita screen on the Switch. And literally nothing more. David. Jigran. Was this that mighty Switch Pro? Come on man.  This Switch is okay. But everybody that was on the hype train needs to admit it. That it was dumbed to be hyped about nothing. Gesula HT. So a small upgrade. Just like Nintendo always does. All those dozens and dozens of videos. Speculating about huge changes and catching up to the competition. And catapulting into the latest console generation with the Switch Pro. And it's a small upgrade. And you called us dummies for saying it was going to be a small upgrade too. Please learn something from this. Okay. Jason. Mineheart. 1080p TVs came out in 2005. 1080p phones came out in 2012. 4K TVs came out in 2012. 4K phones came out in 2014. Here is the year 2021. And Nintendo's new Switch OLED is 720p handheld mode and 1080p docked. To me this is insane. It should be at least 1080p and handheld by now. And 4K docked. Or 4K in both modes. Holy cow. They are so behind. Also 8K TVs were shown at CES in 2012. The reason I bring that up is this year we had a lot of 8K TVs come out. And next year we'll likely have more. And Nintendo is barely doing 1080p. The wireless is still 802.11ac wifi 5. Which came out in 2011. But the spec was finalized in 2013. Which is what the Switch is using. It should be on 802.11ax aka wifi 6. Which came out in 2016. And specs were finalized in 2019. I have no idea what the LAN port is. Because there's not much info on it. I hope it's at least a gigabyte. Red Meridian. Oh please. This isn't the Switch Pro. This is something we knew was coming over a year ago. Bloomberg has once again out of themselves as fake news and propaganda. This Switch is not a pro. Even close. I know you need to try and save face. But the better action will be to just let the pro go and stop making clickbait. No shoe Sonic VR. Wow. This is worthless. Everyone. Everywhere. Ninja Nick. Dumb video. Look at that channel name. LMAO. Colin Unger. No more rumors. This isn't the Switch Pro. Nate already confirmed. You'll be back soon with new rumors. Tony. This was a sad day for Nintendo. Do better. Rhett M. You didn't even admit you were wrong after making 100 clickbait Switch Pro rumor videos. Alex Escobar. I guess we're going to deal with more of the same crappy 720p and sub 30 FPS coming from newer games for the next few years. Nintendo thinks they can still compete with a crappy 2015 SoC in 2021 and beyond alongside the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X LOL. The Alexander 707. I'm unsubscribing from this Nintendo Prime channel and Switch Force and all the rest of you Nintendo content creators who overhyped every single friggin rumor that came out with regards to improved spec hardware.   I'm signing out. Nintendo Prime. Sorry you feel that way. We're just trying to give our thoughts on rumors. You're free to have your own thought. The Alexander 707 replies.  Hence, I will no longer be a consumer to unreliable content.  So nothing personal, but if you want to win back consumers like me and I bet there are many who were also disappointed by your channel, you just gotta become more reliable and more responsible with your content. Cheers, mate. Infamous one. Big flop. Someone who hasn't touched a Nintendo product since the N64. I became a Sony Pony, baby. I was actually kinda hyped for the Switch Pro as a second console to go with my PS5 and my gaming PC, but now I'm not interested. Nintendo could have brought back defectors had to actually release something good, but instead there's just what we get. Nintendo will continue to be at the kitty table of gaming. Look, it took longer than I wanted to to get through all of that, but there's a reason that I decided to bring up all these comments. All of them, some of them being super critical of me, some of them being super critical of Nintendo themselves. I think all of it really stems from frustration with Nintendo. Look, guys, we're gonna do what we're gonna do.  Let's get right into it. For starters, this part's not really a rumor. This comes from Eurogamer. Oh no, don't trust Eurogamer. Tom Phillips told us there's gonna be 4K DLSS. Oh no, let's throw Eurogamer in the trash can. Fine, do what you will, but here's what they had to say. So they talked about how there is actually a new dev unit going out, and for some reason this dev unit has more RAM in it. And it's kind of weird. For those who don't know, the dev units have 6 gigabytes of RAM in it instead of the four that retail has. But yeah, hey, for some reason, they're sending out new OLED ones that have 8 gigs of RAM, and they don't really give a reason for the 8 gigs to be there. So I'm not really sure if this means much. But I just wanted to bring it up because Nintendo has basically told them that yeah, people can make games for this OLED model without getting a new dev kit because there's no spec differences. But it says so far Nintendo and indeed game developers a Switch OLED model is very much a business as usual. To the point where the platform holder is telling game makers that no new development kits are essential for making games. And there are no new technical requirements that require changing out standard Switch iconography in game to accommodate the new model. On top of that games running on Switch OLED have no idea they are running on anything other than a standard unit. Nintendo's developer documents revealed that there is no way for their games to query the system to figure out whether they are running on a Switch OLED or not. With that said, the firm does recognize the need for developers to test their games on the new screen. With that in mind, a new A-Dev development model is being made available to coexist alongside the S-Dev and E-Dev versions. For reasons undisclosed by Nintendo, this machine ships with 8GB of onboard memory in comparison to the 6GB in other development models and the 4GB in retail. So again, for some reason this dev unit, which has no difference in actual raw specs or anything, for some reason is going to have 8GB in it. 8GB of RAM, I don't know why. Nobody knows why. It doesn't really make sense. Why would they give them double the RAM? Now you're wondering why they might have more... Dev units traditionally have more RAM. This is just for compiling reasons. Because once a game is compiled and torn down, they can get it to run on that 4GB. But why would you give double the RAM? That's very strange. I don't know what that means anything, but I wanted to mention it because it is something that is factually changed and Nintendo themselves have basically put out there. Beyond all that, Takahashi Matsuzuki quoted Serkin Toto. And here's what he said. Takahashi Matsuzuki, by the way, he is the originator, the OG of all the Switch Pro rumors. And pretty much everything he said was right, except for it having 4K and DLSS. He was right about the release timing. He was right about the 7-inch OLED panel. Looks like he's probably right about who's making the panel, right about when Nintendo went into mass production. He's basically right on everything but 4K DLSS. And here's what he has quoted in his new article dealing with the OLED Switch for $350. He says, This new Switch looks more like an interim model than a real upgrade to me. This might just be a dummy upgrade until Breath of the Wild 2 is ready and the component shorted just over next year. So he's chalking this up to, hey look, we're not going to see the new chip that he's heard about possibly until next year, because opposite is by manufacturing issues and maybe it's been more impactful than Takahashi Matsuzuki was made aware of. In addition, Jeff Grubb, oh you guys know Jeff Grubb, right? Oh Mr. Jeffrey Grubb.  And he said, I still have only ever personally heard 2022 for Switch Pro. And if that is still happens, I'll continue to speculate that we'll have the 4K output with a significant more efficiency with DLSS than. Anyone think this is the last Switch from a company that released six? Yes, six 3DS models? Fair point. Oh and yes remember Sam is Hunter of course. Let's just look at what she had to say on this because she actually never said we were getting a 4K Switch this year. Never, and in her history, never mentioned 4K Switch in 2021. Here is what she said, get ready because this is going to be a bit of a long thread. A couple of months ago, I talked about two models in development, a more powerful version and one that is on par with the basic, but with some of the features of the new model. Nintendo Switch OLED is exactly the latter. I knew the OLED version would come out sooner. Not surprisingly, I had talked about there would be no major changes in terms of chipsets used for the 2021 console. But what are Nintendo's plans? Simple, for the first few months, make two models coexist to dispose of the basic one. Then in 2022, place the OLED as the new base after a price cut. It's no coincidence that most of the accessories will be compatible between the two models and that the console itself inherits the Nintendo Switch, like branding, and written in brackets OLED version. With the light, it did not happen, and that led to the coexistence of the two systems. I know that many were disappointed to see this version announced. The problem is that many reports confused information in their possession, trying to always be the first to speak. Unfortunately, it happens, so it creates discontent of expectations unfulfilled. But before a more powerful model is scheduled for late 2022 or 2023, everything depends on the sales trend in the coming year. This model, will it be a new generation? I doubt it. There are many projects that will continue to support the current Switch, even until 2024. But it could be a console that will develop in a similar way to the Game Boy Color, initially as a pro model, and then become the main development console after a couple of years. The Switch generation isn't over yet, so don't worry, tons of games are coming in the next years. And Nintendo, by the way, does count Game Boy Color in the same generation as the original Game Boy. Just for clarification sake, Sam was basically saying that Game Boy Color was eventually treated from a game development standpoint as a new generation. But Nintendo considers it the same generation as the OG Game Boy, even though it had a bunch of exclusive games, and eventually they stopped making games compatible with the old Game Boy. So it did eventually take over, which I think is something plausible here. So what does all of this tell us? One, it's all rumors. So again, this is where we have to get into all those early comments. Remember all those people blasting me? Putting me on blast. Well, the funny thing about putting me on blast is I have all the receipts, and all the receipts are right here on my channel. In fact, take a look at this clip. Yes, I tried to make a new tinfoil hat. It didn't exactly go well, but let's just say we have some fresh rumors in about the Nintendo Switch Pro that sound very, very, very exciting coming from multiple sources, including manufacturing. But again, the hat's on, so you know what that means. Strange. That came from a video talking about Switch Pro rumors. I was wearing a tinfoil hat, or in this case, you can call me on it and be in a tinfoil hat. We call it a tinfoil hat because it's supposed to be a tinfoil hat reference. It's aluminum foil. Okay, but whatever. I did that in several pro videos. I also noted in all of these titles are rumors. And even when I didn't use the word rumor, I used may to infer it also may not. The point is that there has never been a guarantee about anything I've talked about with this platform for three years. I've been covering this stuff since Takahashi Machizuki first said something about it way back in 2017. I literally have never treated any of this stuff as fact.  I do think a more powerful Switch exists somewhere, right? I think it's been in development and exists somewhere. Whether or not it ever releases, I have no idea. Whether or not it's Switch 2, Switch Pro, I mean, I don't even like that pro moniker. I feel like the pro moniker has been kind of soured because what happened here? And this is what, this is just my opinion on all the coverage of this is. What happened is kind of similar with Sama Center said where everything was kind of jumbled together. Let's be clear about this. Switch Pro is a made up name, completely made up, right? Obviously, the inference of the pro moniker is to liken it to a PlayStation 4 Pro, which was a more powerful PlayStation. So the pro moniker infers more powerful. But it's really just a fan made up moniker that we were just kind of, you know, taking all of the rumors of a new Switch and just kind of compiling them under that moniker because we didn't know what to do, what to talk about. If you look at some other outlets, and this is credit to Digital Foundry, Digital Foundry said that they heard about two different units, that they heard about this unit that did get announced and a more powerful unit that's going to be released later.  And yeah, we'll have to wait and see if that's the trend that we're going to see here with Switch because I think there is a general, there's a couple of things happening here. One, you have Nintendo fans that are just generally upset because games like Age of Calamity. Age of Calamity runs fine, it's fine, it's a fun game. But yeah, it does have some frame rate issues. But I want to be clear about those frame rate issues. I don't know if you guys have played a Warriors game on the more powerful hardware, whether it's PlayStation 4, Xbox, you know, PC. It's got frame rate issues on everything. I think there's something up with the engine that they use for warrior games that just doesn't play nice with hardware. I'm not saying that you can't find a way to overpower it and get some smooth frame rates. I'm just saying that the Warriors series actually is well known for hard dips on every platform it's ever been on throughout the history of the franchise. So it's kind of, to me, a bad example. But Nintendo games have obviously had issues as well. We know obviously it's the Epic Chronicles. Two had frame rate issues and obviously resolution issues. We know that Mario Odyssey doesn't even hit a native 1080p. It kind of stops at 900p. Breath of the Wild obviously had its issues. And that was a Wii U ported game and you can argue maybe the issues were because it was a Wii U ported game, not made for the ground up, etc. So there's been issues over the years and we can't ignore those. I think what happens is Nintendo fans obviously are ready for a more powerful switch in some cases. And people want to know why am I not more upset about this just being a minor upgrade? I mean not really even an upgrade to specs, but like an upgrade to some faults with the platform. The LCD panel with that plastic screen isn't that great. The OLED panel is going to be factually better. It's also bigger. It's also got way better kickstand. And finally an ethernet port locally on the system. Or on the dock anyways. These can be better audio apparently. They're really focused on making this a better handheld experience, which is interesting when they have a system in the light specifically for handheld. But to me, and this has been clear to me, even before Samsung put this out here yesterday, was that hey this system, this system feels like it's just a newer version of the version 2. Like this is like a version 3 switch, but with actual improvements. If you look at version 2 switch, it's the same switch as version 1 just with the shrunk down chip. Because they shrunk down the chip for the light and in shrinking the chip, they closed one of the loopholes in the hacking community. Being able to cross those pins and get access, they were able to close that in this redesign of the chip. So this is kind of like that, except instead of redesigning the chip, they actually made actual quality of life improvements to the real switch itself. And right now they're charging you more. Now why are they charging you more? Well because it is better than the current switch. Now you could argue what they should do is lower the price of the current switch. But I think Nintendo's long haul strategy is what's Amazon said. Nintendo's going to discontinue that version 2 switch eventually. And this new OLED switch is just going to be the main switch. It's going to be price dropped to, I'd say $300 by holiday of next year even. Because I feel like they're going to slowly turn back development of the current switches and just ramp up the OLED versions and let that be the lead dog for them. I think that is their plan. They ended up doing this by the way with the 3DS and the 3DS XL. They stopped making the 3DS after like a year. I don't know people are aware of this, that OG FAT 3DS, they had the light version and then they had the XL version and they let the XL version overtake. And they stopped making the original version of 3DS quite quickly there. So I think that's what's going to happen here. And when that happened, they price dropped the 3DS to the price point of the 3DS. And then they had the new 3DS obviously come out. New 3DS XL, obviously they had the 2DS and 2DS XL versions as well eventually. So yeah, it's interesting here when I look at that and I start to think to myself, you know what? They're onto something here. The switch is going to have a really long life cycle. And if Sam is Hunter, who I don't know if they're correct, but if she is saying that look, she knows a book that Nintendo has plans for switch games all the way through 2024, at least through 2024, which is quite a ways away. Yeah, it would make sense if there was an upgraded model somewhere in there, a new switch that maybe that switch comes in at 350. And around the time, that one's going to get announced and come in at 350. They price dropped this one to 300 and discontinued the other one. I feel like there is a pattern here to do this. Now, some people are obviously still banking on the upgraded switch coming out around the same time as Breath of the Wild 2. We'll have to wait and see on that. I'm not so sure. I'm not so sure if it would even come out if they would release new models a year apart like that. I don't know. Obviously it's been two years since the switch light. So we'll have to wait and see. But yeah, look guys, it is true to a point that rumors on new hardware aren't going to go anywhere so long as the rumors exist, right? All I can do is give you the information that's out there and then give you my opinions. As always, everybody needs a hype response. I talked about this heading into E3. I'm going to talk about this again. No one is responsible for your hype and your disappointment because of that hype than yourself. A lot of people have been messaging me trying to get me to apologize or hitting me in those comments, hitting me hard to say it's your fault. You need to apologize. I was right. You were wrong. Wrong about what? I was just reporting on things and giving opinions. Just like they were giving their own opinions as well. My position as a content creator is to, one, deliver information to you and to give you my thoughts on that information because that's what I want to do. I care more about the conversation around the information than the raw information on its own. If I just wanted to deliver you raw information, this video would have been two minutes long. I would have just read off all these tweets and all this stuff and just called it a day. But instead, I decided that I wanted to kick off this video with a really long monologue of all these comments just trashing my channel and trashing Nintendo and then kind of get into, hey look, we are going to keep talking about rumors because as long as they exist, we're going to keep talking about them. You guys need to be responsible for yourselves. And I tell this to my children all the time.  Instead of pointing fingers, look in the mirror and ask yourself, what did I do to cause myself to be disappointed? Look, I want a more powerful switch. Am I disappointed that this switch isn't that? I guess, yeah, I would have liked it to be that. I would like the switch OLED to be the more powerful switch. But here's the bottom line. I was never disappointed with the switch I currently have. And if you are disappointed with the switch you currently have, I'm sorry.  I never sold the Switch Pro as something that's going to compete with PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X. That was never going to be a thing. It was a pipe dream. I kept saying at best, it was going to be like Xbox One levels of power boost. And even if it was smaller, which I did mention by the way, it could be a smaller power boost, that it would be something akin to, at least something like the new 3DS, which was a bigger boost than people realized, but it still wasn't one of those next gen kind of leaps. It's only like people expected Switch Pro or whatever that switch is, or this switch to be a next gen leap, which was not what we talked about. This was always just a mid-gen refresh that might have more power. And that could be next year. It could be the year after. I have no idea. It might not happen at all. It might be a next gen switch. We have other people claiming that, you know, maybe it'll be a VR system. I have no idea. Here's what I do know. Okay. Nobody has to buy this thing. If it's not for you, it's fine. I was always happy with my current Switch. When I'm playing Mario Golf Super Rush, I didn't think to myself, man, I really wish this system output in 4K. When I'm playing Metroid Dread later this year, or Skyward Sword 8G next year, I'm not going to be like, man, I really wish this system output in 4K, even though I do game on a 4K TV. And why is that? Because I'm already happy with what I have. We had that one commenter bringing up 8K TVs. Yeah, there's 8K TVs on the market. Can you afford one?  I'll show you guys. What 8K TVs cost. Like just the cheapest 8K TV I can find. So 8K TV, let's just do this. Is there an under 500 one? We have, oh, here we go. We have an Elite Screens Sable. You know, there's a top quality brand right there. B2, 135 inch projector screen. Not even including the projector. This is just a screen that's going to support 8K Ultra HD. Here is the next one is a Samsung QN32 Q50 RA FXDA flat 32 inch. Oh, 4K. Oh, look, nothing affordable is that. Okay, maybe at a thousand plus. Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Maybe we're looking at this wrong. Maybe we're dreaming of 8K at 500, right? All right, so let's just go back to the basic search then, right? Instead of trying to find some cheap one. Oh, look, Samsung 65 inch in class, Neo QLED 8K QN800 series, 8K Ultra HD, Quantum HDR 32X smart TV with Alexa built in $2,997. Now you can find a couple smaller ones like the 54. You can find a couple smaller ones like a 55 inch at 1800. And yes, eventually 8K TVs are going to become affordable. I don't think it's going to become affordable anytime in the next few years. I think if you get a decade out from now, it's going to be like 4K is now where you can get 4K TVs for like 300 bucks at Walmart, let alone Black Friday deals. I think it's going to be something like that where a decade from now, 8K TVs are just going to replace 4K organically as they try to just, you know, only make one type of screen instead of making 1080Ps and 4K, they can just make QLED 8K stuff and go with that. And eventually the prices will come down, but that's not anytime soon. Like why does 8K even matter? PlayStation 5 has 8K on the box. How many of you people own an 8K TV? And by the way, when I talk about these 8K TVs, I don't even know if these are good 8K TVs, right? We just being 8K doesn't make it a good TV. Just like being 4K doesn't mean it's a good TV. There's a lot of stuff that goes into high quality televisions, especially when you want the best viewing experience, the best gaming experience, you know, there's just a lot to consider when you're talking about these high resolution screens than just, oh my God, it says 8K on the box. So anyways, the point I'm trying to make here is, look, this is a really long video. There was a lot of the news in here. There was a lot of people pissed off.  I'm going to keep doing what I do because I love what I do. I have so much fun, guys. Talking about rumors is fun. Speculating is fun. And if it's not fun for you because you can't control yourself, then I'm sorry. I'm not on Nintendo Defense Force here. If you're not into the Switch, don't buy it, right? No one has to buy the Switch OLED. It's cool. I never felt a need for a new Switch, to be completely honest. Because what do I play Switch for? I play Switch personally to play exclusives. That's just me. Used to not be the case, but I have a PlayStation 5. I am blessed. I have a PlayStation 5, have an Xbox Series X, and I have a gaming PC. I don't need multi-platform games on Switch. I like them being there, but I don't need them. I play it for the exclusives. Shemigami Tensei 5 coming up. Metroid Dread. These are the kind of games I play Switch for. And I'm already happy with my Switch purchase. I'm thrilled with it. And I'll be thrilled with my current Switch for years to come. I'm going to be able to play Breath of the Wild freaking 2 on it next year. So it's only 3 on this Switch. That's awesome. I don't need the QLED or the OLED I should say.  And this is technically a better Switch in some aspects. So I'm going to get it, plus I'm a Switch YouTuber. So call me a shill or whatever you want. I really don't care. I also bought a billion 3DSs at one point. That's just what I do. Plus, guys, can we just say that white version of the Switch OLED? Oh my gosh. Is that not a Metroid Dread Switch? I'm sorry. That's a Metroid Dread Switch. I know it doesn't say it officially, but it releases the same day as Metroid Dread.  It's not a special edition and it won't be hard to get, but yeah, it will release eventually. So think what you want. Yeah, I'm sure rumors are going to continue to exist on a more powerful Switch. I'll probably, you know, I might swing away from the Switch Pro moniker. I feel like the Switch Pro moniker has been a bit soured.  We'll come up with a moniker that maybe other people aren't using to delineate, that this is talking about a potential next gen or more powerful Switch. This is just talking about the current OLED Switch. I don't know. You guys let me know your thoughts on all this. Sure, the comments are going to be hot fire as always. I am within a rubber jance from Nintendo Prime, and I'll catch each and every one of you in the next video.


I hold a lot of crypto, but it's pretty concerning when it comes to Al-Sabudur etc. If they generally believe they're going to be allowed to step away from the dollar in the long run, then I have some news for them. Never ever gonna happen. I can already smell the coup. Yeah, like... Be careful, gang. Be careful. As you know, I like blockchain technology. I start incorporating it into my life as soon as I heard about it, which was when you could buy hundreds of crypto for less than a dollar, less than ten dollars. Like there were spreadsheets of the cryptos being sold for like a hundred of them for five dollars people were doing, right? Bitcoin specifically, right? And I even mind a little bit of stuff like this. Blockchain technology, good. The lack of fungibility of Bitcoin is seriously problematic, and that wasn't as clear at the beginning as it is now, okay? The Wall Street getting into the crypto business is problematic. That's when I stepped away and when I heard Wall Street, we went into it, I stepped away. It was problematic. So, and roll out by certain governments, certain corporations, scumbags like Elon Musk and leeches really on society, and problematic Kaiser report, Max Kaiser, right? I listen to his stuff, but he does a lot of pump and dump. He does a lot of... He's good talking about economics and stuff, but he's pushing a lot of BS as well, right? He trash talks other crypto because maybe he doesn't understand it or maybe he's just fully vested in Bitcoin. Maybe he's being controlled in a certain way, right? He starts trash talking collectibles, which really Bitcoin is. Bitcoin is a digital collectible, but you can hear some of the people that are only pushing Bitcoin trash talking any place else that people are investing in, which is ridiculous, right? Which is ridiculous, right? We need decentralization. That means decentralization away from Bitcoin as well. We need multiple forms of currency, multiple forms of assets, multiple forms of collectibles, multiple forms of conducting business transactions. Anybody that's pushing any single thing is lying to you. There's an agenda there. What is their agenda, right? Be careful. Be careful. Be careful.