Hello everyone, this is Amit Dan of amitdan.com. You're watching one of my Australia travel videos in the Great Ocean Road playlist and today I'll be sharing some roadside scenes from my Great Ocean Road journey. This segment of Great Ocean Road roadtrip features sceneries from Apollo Bay to Port Campbell, Victoria, Australia. The Great Ocean Road, one of the world's most scenic routes, offers the stunning coastal scenery leading to the famous 12 episodes along the southwest coast of Victoria, Australia. I'll be sharing my complete Australia travel experiences in this video. Experience the beautiful Australia with me. Forget about subscribing this channel. Forget about liking this video. Thank you for watching and I'll see you shortly.


Well I don't drink enough so I thought I'd stop by the booth for the Bartesian Bartesian sorry Neil is already correcting me here Neil Mcvicker correct that's me all right so what are we looking at here sure so this is Bartesian you keep it stocked with the brands of your choice the foundational spirits whiskey vodka rum gin tequila and there's also a water source back here now our capsules have all of the juices and bitters and extracts all of the components above and beyond the spirits that go into making a premium cocktail so I should explain to the audio only listeners as well that basically we're looking at a curing for cocktails right you wouldn't be the first person to make that comparison absolutely absolutely on the screen here you've got you've got a display and then you've got a this what did you call these little caps capsules okay so that says pear nectar this is paper plane yes it's a relatively it's a modern cocktail is actually only it's only about three years old I'm old I got it I gotta find out about how the classic though okay absolutely so yeah essentially the process I'll just get this capsule out so he just took out the capsule and he's got a it's maybe twice the size of a curing is the way I would describe it it's I don't know about twice the size but twice the width maybe okay and it's it's four upside down bottles of the the four different liquors that you can put in right that's correct so it can in one of the slots can be either gin or rum so we can accommodate five spirits four of them at one at any one time all right so he's going to try to he's making a lot of drinks he needs a place to get rid of them all is the only problem all right so he's he's putting a what looks I make martinis in this shaker right so yeah shaker then I've taken my my cocktail capsule here oh and it's got a barcode on the top of it right absolutely so I closed the lid and you can see it's identified the drink already it says place shaker with ice under the dispenser it says next oh can I push I wanted to do what you can do is hit hit light we'll make a light one are you sure yeah because we've got okay yeah there we go that is not my drink I'm just said okay and you complete the whiskey here all right so the whiskey is is draining quickly it's also drawing from the water and what's important also is that each spirit drills from its own line so that way if we did a margarita next the tequila isn't going over the same line that the whiskey just traveled over that would be nasty right so you buy these the little capsules and you you buy these but you put your own liquor in them right and the advantage of this I heard you saying earlier to someone is that you don't have to buy all the weird little ingredients so when you think of how many times you might have had say a New Year's Eve party and you bought a big tin of pineapple juice only to use a couple ounces that night and the rest of it is growing fur in your fridge a couple of days later yeah well how did you know that well it's very common occurrence but you take that in all of those components some of them are really obscure you wouldn't even know where to get say a lavender extract for example all of those components are taken care of in the capsule the only thing you need to provide are the base spirits themselves is really really cool so you buy you buy packs of me here's Negroni cocktail mix we got a mint julep cocktail sazarak that sounds like something that was a stone in infinity so it's the tesseract I think right well we got a gimlet this is really really slick so it's is this on the market yet it is it's available on bartesian.com and we're expanding retail partners were on Amazon Bloomingdale's Bed Bath and Beyond Best Buy Dillards and it will be growing rapidly throughout the year what's the price point on this 349 that's not bad absolutely that is I thought this was gonna be one of those crazy expensive things all that liquor is what's gonna cost me the money but think of the money I'm gonna save on pineapple juice exactly exactly that money right here already saving money already and the capsules are recyclable which is very important as well yeah yeah that's very good okay so bartesian.com that's it that's it thank you very much Neil thank you my pleasure


Okay, thanks for the opportunity to talk here. So I'm gonna talk about some general gravitation theory of Dabaha-Gajibra. I've been working for almost more than three years and the draft keep growing. And I just tell you only a tiny part of my project because of the time limit. But I'll be here until the end of February so we can discuss if you have questions. So the goal of my talk is to just show some evidence between the relationship between I call A-brain category, a modular space of law connection of the one-spark-shot torus of S2C with certain simpler form. I'm going to explain is some, my conjecture is so which some relation between the representation category of Dabaha-Gajibra of rank one, of rank two. Okay, to tell you the story, so let me begin by theorem by Oblenkoff. Tells that the deformation quantization of the coordinate ring of modular space of law connection character variety of one-spark-shot torus of S2C in holomorphic, in holomorphic, holomorphic in holomorphic in complex structure, complex structure J. I call it J coming from the S2C. So the coming from this really good group is equivalent is isomorphic is the sphericata. I call it SHW dot is sphericata. So I'm going to explain what it means. So the modular space of law connection of one-spark-shot torus can be written the hypersurface in C3 in such a way that as a cubic surface, two plus T square plus T minus square, whether T is a monotony or a holonomy as a one-spark-shot, the puncture on the torus. So the holonomy is really D takes a value in SL2C. And so the X and the Y are holomorphic in complex, I call it J coming from this S2C. And if you do the deformation quantization, what you would end up is the following algebra. So the X, Y, and Q combinator will give you Q minus Q inverse of C and everything C click, Y, Z. I'm not going to write down everything, but just X and Z, X, Q combinator is Y, and also, so no longer X and Y are no longer commutative.  So this algebra is exactly the quantization, deformation quantization of this hyper surface. And so this is actually called a spherical Dabafake algebra and the relation to the Dabafake algebra is indeed given here. So I don't have a time, so just you can just read in this board. And I just want to study this representation theory of this algebra in terms of geometry of the homogeneous space of black connection. So to study first before going to the geometry, I just want to briefly review the representation of spherical Dabafake. So there is a polynomial so-called representation which sends the spherical Dabafake to the endomorphism of ring of symmetry functions of rank one, CQT is a functional field with variable Q and T and X plus X inverse is the variables and X sends to X plus X inverse and Y sends to the T, X minus T inverse, X inverse, X minus X inverse and the shift operator and T inverse X minus T, X inverse, T minus T inverse, W inverse. So shift operator acts on X, I just multiply by QX and Z is, similarly you get the difference operator but so the generator is just coming from the relation.  So this is called McDonald's difference operator, difference operator. So for instance, so this ring of symmetry function is spanned by McDonald's polynomial which is the eigenfunction of the McDonald's difference operator under the polynomial representation which whose action can be written as follows. Since this is rank one, this L is an integer which levels the number of boxes of young tableau of one row. And furthermore, so to study the representation theory, so you just define so called the raising or lowering operator so which increase the number of boxes or decreases number of boxes. So this R is a raising, L is a lowering and so on, P and S. And so where the L is defined by X plus Q L, T, Q minus inverse L, T inverse, Z and L L, lowering operator is X plus Q L, T, Z. And another polynomial representation, the act of McDonald's polynomial as follows. P L is equal to some number one minus Q three, two L inverse T minus two, P L plus one and the polynomial representation lowering operator. So it just increases the number of boxes and the lowering operator decrease the number of boxes Q to L, one minus Q to D to L minus one, T to D four divided by one minus Q to L minus one, T square P L minus one. So therefore, so lowering operator decrease the number of boxes. And so in the representation theory, the first thing is to study the finite dimensional representation. Finite dimensional representation arises when this lowering operator annihilates the McDonald's polynomial. So therefore the numerator here becomes zero and you can just quotient idea generated by this new vector and you get the finite dimensional representation. So I just want to classify when the finite dimensional representation appears. So the only denominator, sorry, numerator vanishes the finite dimensional representation appears. So the condition is when, so they just want to remind later. So when Q is root of unity, so this factor vanishes and also when T square is equal to Q three minus odd number to avoid the denominator vanishes. So you just, I just consider odd power here and the T square is minus Q to D minus N. So all the capital N, L, small N are integers. And then the second, the second, the third will vanish the second factor. So when under these conditions, so the finite dimensional representation appears. And then the goal is to see how this finite dimensional representation appear from the geometry. So that's the goal of my talk. To see the geometry, so let's look at, recall that the, not to be a harsh correspondence which states as follows, module is a flat connection of T two point of SL to C is the homomorphic to the module is a hex bundle of one puncture torus with SU two where the, so this is module is a hex bundle. So where the gauge connection at the, there is a puncture, so you have to impose the singularity which whose behavior, so the gauge connection, this is the hex field, is one half beta, sorry, I shouldn't say, beta plus I gamma DZ over Z. So I just consider the puncture and you just consider local corner Z and the setter is the angular variable around the punctures. So this is the ramification, the same ramification for hex bundle and it will go to the, here you have a parameter T, T is related by exponential, sorry, so the alpha and beta gamma, beta gamma are carton torus of SL to C, SL to C. So therefore T square ramification is indeed related to pi gamma plus I alpha. So that's the relation between the monotony of the puncture and the flat connection and the tameramification of the hex side. So this is not a big harsh correspondence and since this is hyper-genome manifold, so we have, I take I, J, K, so the I is a complex structure coming from Riemann surface, T two, point and J coming from character variety or SL to C. Okay, so that's the standard weight. And then homomorphic syntax of form, which is omega K plus I omega I is written by I times two pi dx, which dy, motor to Z minus x, y, x, y are written there. Okay, so moreover, so if you have the not a harsh correspondence one can use the heating vibration, so the geometry schematically can be written as follows. So you have a mh to the alpha in space, which is a parameter at trace of phi square, phi is a Higgs field. So it's a complete interval system, so it's a generic fiber, so this is a heating vibration. So the generic fiber are, in this case, rank one, so the generic fiber, I call it both F, is just two torres. However, it's elliptic vibration have a degeneration at the origin, so it's called a global nipotent cone. Global nipotent cone, sorry, I think the color doesn't work. The global nipotent cone, so the topology changes and the global nipotent cone look like a fine D for singularity. It's the elliptic vibration, the singular fiber is classified as codire, so therefore it fits into codire classification I zero star, and the center guard is the usual bungee. So when alpha, beta, gamma are nipotent, or if you turn off the time ramification, so these four divisor shrinks to the point, and you get the original D-Pero case T2 mod Z2, but if you turn on the ramifications, so you have an exception of D by the D1, D2, D3, and D4. So this is a geometry of the imaginary space of block connections. And to approach the geometric orientation theory of the, of the alpha-pank algebra, so I use the 2D model, two-dimensional model whose target is the character variety or huge motion space. So, so the, I use the trick, the physics approach is the 2D model, so this is the approach by Goukou-Fwitten. So the, so the trick is to use a big brain, so trick is to use big airbrain. So usually airbrains are the Lagrangian inside a simplex manifold, but so the, the Kapustin-Witten and Goukou-Fwitten introduce so-called canonical quiescentic brain, which I call the BCC, which is a line bundle over the, this target space, modular space of block connections. And a Fuss curvature is satisfied following condition F plus B is equal to a real part of the holomorphic simplex form, omega j, and also omega, omega is, I just consider 2D model, so which is the remand surface map to the modular space of block connections, and omega is a simplex form in a model. Omega is imaginary part of one over h bar, shifted, so scaled by scale omega j, holomorphic simplex form. And the proposal, physics proposal is that the, if you consider the algebra of the, the open string, whose boundary is BCC, specified BCC, is that the, will give you deformation quantization of the target space. Which is the Sprecher-Dacher, according to the Oblenkoff theorem I raised just now. So could you just say, is B a choice you wanna make, or more for me? Oh, this B field, sorry, in physics 2D model can have some B field in the, yes, yes, yes. And the parameter matching is as follows, so the Sprecher-Dacher has Q and T, small Q and T parameter. Small Q is, here is identified 2 pi i h bar, and T is a ramification of the modular space of block connections.  And you can consider the open string between the BCC boundary condition and the Lagrangian support boundary condition, and you can consider joining, you get another BCC BL plane. So therefore, so homo BCC BCC acts on the strip, another strip, so this will give you the module of the Sprecher-Dacher. So therefore, so given an A brain, you have corresponding the module. So here's the object in the A brain category is the A brain BL over there, and given BL, you have a corresponding representation theory, so that's why, so there's a conjecture between A brain category and the representation category, Sprecher-Dacher. And I just give you the concrete example, so this dimension of BL is just dimension of this home space of BCC, so it's a hubris space in physics language, it's given by the Groton-Dick Riemann-Lachformler, CH, BCC. So BCC is the line bundle, and also brain, usually A brain carries the local system or flow connection, inter flow connection, so you can consider the inverse bundle over the A brain and top class of the support L. So this is the Hilsberg-Riemann-Lachformler. So usually this is the general quantization story. So therefore, when L is a compact Lagrangian brain, so dimension is the finite dimensional. So therefore, if you look at the geometry of the Hitchi module space of module of the flux connection, the compact A brain provides a finite dimensional representation. And since we saw that from polynomial representation, we have a candidate, and we have a candidate for compact Lagrangian brain coming from Hitchi vibration we can compare. That's what I'm going to do the rest of 10 minutes. So the Hitchi vibration is a complete integral of a system, so the genetic fiber holomorphic in complex structure I, but it's Lagrangian, the other complex structure. So if you look at the genetic fiber, genetic fiber of the Hitchi vibration, I call both F, it's always the I, J, K, always the holomorphic in complex I in the language physics is a B brain, and Lagrangian in the other complex structure, okay. So therefore, so you have to tune, so this is always one of the H bar, sine, theta, omega I plus cosine theta, omega K, where I just take H, it's H, the absolute value, e to the I theta, theta is the angle, okay. However, so since genetic fiber is always B A brain, so you have to tune, so in order for the genetic fiber to the Lagrangian, you have to tune the theta always equal to zero, otherwise it makes the mixture between, seems like it forms a mixture between I and K, so it cannot be Lagrangian. So therefore, so in order for the genetic fiber to be Lagrangian, H, so the theta has to be zero, so this is the condition. And also if you can compute the dimension of the home space BCC, I call it, let's call the BC, B bold F, B bold F, so you will get the one over H bar, okay. So since, if you use the Groton-Degren-Riemann block form, this has to be integer. So therefore, so if you look at the parameter matching between Q and H bar, this will give you that the Q has to be a root of unity, pi I of some number, capital N, N is integer. So which is the one I have written down here, okay. So therefore, so the genetic fiber will give you first condition and is the final dimensional presentation. Another compact, evenness, okay, okay, I will tell you. So evenness comes from the following fact. If you look at the fiber, so during the class relation of homology, genetic fiber can be written in terms of two times bungee union with I, one to four dI, exceptional divisor. So therefore, so this is two and the volume is four, so it has to be even, okay, okay. And also if you look at the exceptional divisor dI, so dI is the, let's call the brain supported on dI. So this becomes Lagrangian for genic omega x when the alpha plus i gamma, so which is the ramification specified for Higgs bundle is proportional to IH bar. So proportional means it's a real. When this is condition satisfied, so the dI is Lagrangian with respect to omega, omega here, for genetic omega, for genetic H bar. And if you compute, so this dimension of BCC B and also which is equal to C minus one half is integer where the C, C is actually relation between Q and T, so this is called the central charge. And if you look at this relation, so this condition will give you T square is equal to Q to the minus two K minus one, okay. So this to L, sorry, where L is integer.  And furthermore, at the end, so you can ask the same question for Banji. I don't think so.  So this Banji becomes Lagrangian when this ramification satisfied the following condition. One half to alpha I divided by I over H bar is equal to, is proportional to I H bar, which is real. And if you compute dimension home, BCC B Banji, so this is equal to two C minus one over two H bar minus one, which is integer. So then, so you just use this condition and it just plug into E to the two pi I H bar, and so if you use this condition, you will get this relation. So this relation will give you the third condition. So therefore, the Banji will give you the third condition. So therefore, there's a one to one correspondence between finite dimensional representation of a spherical data and a compact A brain coming from hitching vibration. So that's the story. And furthermore, if you use the so-called fiber class relation, somehow, sometimes brain supported direct fiber can hits into the nepotent cone and then it splits into the two part of the nepotent, global nepotent cone. So the module for fiber is the extension of the sum Banji plus expression revised D1 plus D2 is splits into Banji plus D3 plus D4 by using fiber class relation. And for instance, at some certain condition you can have the extension module. So that can be understood that the brain is decayed to the two splits in the two Lagrangian brain when you hit in the global nepotent cone. So therefore, you can explicitly see how the representation appear coming from this hitching vibration. Thank you very much. Any questions? Maybe I'll ask a question since the various speakers mentioned the affine Youngians. Could you mention how this algebra relates to affine Youngians? Okay, so yes, I can explain to you. So this is the story of the, K-theorics story of the, the story of the morning sessions. And if you consider, in particular, so this Freckard Dacher can be understood as the algebra line operator in 40 n equals two star theory. And if you take, so 40 n equals two star theory are released on circle S1, you get a 3D n equals four theory, four star theory. And this, so the, so this Coulomb branch of 40 n equals two star theory can be identified as the module, so the flag connection I talked about. And the module's Coulomb branch of the three n equals four star theory, if you do the deformation quantization in the similar story, will give you the Freckard Dacher, but it's trigonometric version, trigonometric version. So the Kuiber diagram, 3D n equals four is, for instance, like SU2, which is gauge group in the Zildar joint. If you try to look at the Youngian version, is Youngian version indeed, you have to add one more, one more hypers, four. Then the Coulomb branch of this theory, and if you do the deformation quantization, will give you a spherical Dacher of rational chain algebra. Spherical rational chain algebra. So this is indeed the Youngian version of the Davao-Hecki algebra. So it's kind of a Li-Aziba version of the Davao-Hecki algebra. And it's indeed a Huber scheme of points. Okay, yes, and your case is not rational, it's not trigonometric, but it's like elliptic? Yeah, elliptic version. Yes, it's like elliptic toroidal. Yes, yes, yes, yes. If you take the rank goes to infinity, you get the elliptic whole algebra, GL1-Troidal. Okay, that's good. So if you take instead of one puncture, let's say n punctures, Yes. The n type is just increase the rank, rank. SL2 goes to SLN, or you just wrap the n and five rings. If you take n punctures. You get some different algebra line operator of classes theory specified by this n punctured torus. Right, which is a quiver with vertices. Yes, yes, so I think it becomes like this way, right? Like the quiver with this part. Here with vertices, the quantization of its column branch gives, if you do it like in the elliptic version, it gives a toroidal elliptic algebra of GLn, where n is the number of vertices. Oh, I see, I didn't know that. Maybe. In a piper of, Okay. Okay, so then maybe I should, there must be some real duality between them, Okay. Oh, okay, maybe I will learn from you during this time. Okay. I think I should stop it maybe.


All right, so now I will control this character with my eyes, so I'm just... And you're wearing glasses? I'm wearing glasses, yeah. And there's no problem with that, right? No problem. It sees through the glasses. It sees through the glasses. And so basically there's a little bubble on the game based on where you're looking. That's only for show. You wouldn't have that in the only game. So I know where I'm looking. That's only to show you where I'm looking. And how do you shoot? I just press... I just look at the target and I press a button. You just press B based on where you look? Yeah. So there's eye tracking technology going on here with IR and what's going on? Yeah, so this is an eye tracker. It's a camera with three illuminators and it takes a picture stream on your eyes. And then it's a set of algorithms in there that calculates the vector between my eyes and the screen. So suddenly this computer knows where you're looking on the screen. And you can use that as a way to interact in computer games like I'm doing here. Or you can use to interact with a normal computer. So can you stand up? So who are you? So I'm Oscar Warner. I'm president of Tobii Tech. That is the business unit that makes the eye tracking technology and brings it to the consumer market. So you are the world leader of high-tech, right? Yes. But you've been selling this for companies like Google and advertising agencies? Yeah, we've been selling it for 15 years, one about. We've been doing it for people with disabilities. And those guys, they use it for communications or for controlling computer devices, even if they're completely paralyzed, like the ALS or CP or something like that. And if people have object technology, who has this condition? Yeah, 30,000, something like that over the years. So it's really big. It's a lot of disabled people that you've been able to access here. And also it's been used for research and advertising. So a lot of researchers are using it for understanding human behavior. So how many are doing that? I don't know, but I think out of the top 50 universities, we have 49 or out... So the university is by itself? Yes. And the advertising agency is such a huge lever in Procter & Gamble. Isn't that the biggest market for you, the advertisers, so far? No, it's hard to say. No, well, the biggest market is the assistant technology market, so far. Going forward, it's the consumer market. So we start now with gaming. You start now, today? No, we started a year ago with the first consumer gaming device, which was Steve's series. So that's this one? Yes, it's a version of this. Which is $129. It's been available for a year? For a year. You plug it into a USB computer and you can control any Windows computer with your eyes. That's really awesome, but so 129 that means everybody has access. And how successful has it been so far? We have been very, very successful in the market, so it's going very well. What has happened in the gaming industry now is we have 130 games that have incremental eye tracking that you can play. The new two new games now that we're announcing is Assassin's Creed Syndicate from Ubisoft, which we're showing here, and also Tom Clance's derivation, which are going to be integrated with eye tracking. So when they integrate eye tracking, what do they consider the game design? So what they consider is suddenly they get another pointer. So normally you have just the controller or a mouse and a keyboard. You get another way to point at the screen. So you can suddenly drive in one direction and shoot in another at the same time because you have two pointers. Because you and me, we can move forward and we can throw something in this direction, but the game character can't really do that. So therefore you get another pointer and you get more degrees of freedom between the higher matter of communication bandwidth between the player and the game. It's not optimized for eye tracking, is it? The Grand Theft Auto V here, it's only... Well, we have a mod which is... So this is not Grand Theft Auto doing it. It's a mod that we paste, that we've done outside, outside, outside. But in Assassin's Creed Syndicate, which we're showing here, there Ubisoft can implement eye tracking into the core of the game. It's fantastic. So in the future maybe video games...  No, I don't think that's the way it's going to go.  You're just going to complement it with an additional layer of control. So the nice thing about eye tracking is you can play the game just as you did. You don't let go of normal controls, you just add another layer of control. So what I'd like to see is every laptop with this built-in. And right here you are launching the launchers. It's a laptop with integrated eye tracking. So you're working with MSI? MSI. So it's a 7.2. This is their high-end gaming laptop? High-end gaming laptop. And I have an integrated eye tracking. And is it fixed? It goes right there? It's fixed to the screen. But what would be awesome is to have this in every laptop. It's kind of like customizing information from the web, from any app, based on where people live. The 100% degree view.  It makes the computer understand what you're interested in. And it gives you another pointer. So it's very, very powerful for any computing device to know what you're interested in. It's like just browsing the web. It can display content based on where you're looking. It redesigns the websites in real time. Yes. If you look at the link, it can fetch the link quicker. So that the link loads quicker where you're looking. It's closing immediately what people are interested in. That's awesome. Yes. It's really important that everybody gets access to this. Yes. Maybe at the XCES, you'll be like XR and YR. Of course. Of course. And like basketball, how are people trying to achieve this? There are other eye tracking vendors. We are by far the largest in the world. But yes, there are a few. And they just have different ways of doing it? It's a different technology. I'd say, you know, that we stand out by our technology working best for most people. Which is super important when you go for the consumer market. It needs to work for everybody. And that's where we truly stand out. The technology, there's nothing stopping the technology from going into phone, or into VR, or into console, or into a car. So we work on the technology. Yes, we invest a lot in R&D. And we start with PC gaming and we start with VR. And then we gradually roll out into other form factors. Alright.


The only reason you love Billy, nigga is so hard to get. That's why motherfuckers love him. Hey yo, what's the next thing that's gonna come out of your mouth? Don't know about it now. But you know it's gonna be the truth. It's gonna be authentic. It's gonna be authentic. So that's the answer, nigga. That's the answer. That's the answer.


In the previous video, which you can find right here, we looked at the concept of a free body diagram and how you can go about creating one. One of the steps in that process was to examine the structural supports that are severed in the process of freeing a body from its environment and replace them with appropriate reaction forces. In this video, we will take a closer look at the process as well as look at some of the more common support types you may encounter in engineering structures. I keep talking about supports, but what is a support, really? Take a look at this model aircraft. We can clearly see that the aircraft is supported by the metal arm connected to the base that sits on a table. If I wanted to create a free body diagram of the model, I would cut away the surroundings like this. But if I did that in reality without the support, the model would simply fall, so support can be viewed as something that limits the motion of a structure. In engineering mechanics, when we talk about the possible motion of a body, we typically use the term degree of freedom. If you consider the degrees of freedom of a rigid body in two dimensions, you can see that the body can translate in two different coordinate directions, as well as rotate in a third direction. Any motion of this body in 2D space can be described by these two translations and one rotation. It thus has three degrees of freedom. In 3D space, we have six possible degrees of freedom, three translations and three rotations, and the motion of any body in 3D space can be described by a combination of these three translations and three rotations. We can thus easily evaluate the appropriate reaction forces and moments that can act at a support that we remove in our free body diagrams by looking at the motion that support would have restricted. Let's look at the procedure for this using a welded bicycle frame. Imagine we wanted to create a free body diagram of only the top tube of the frame. We would have to cut through the welded joint as shown here. To determine the appropriate reaction forces, there are some simple steps we can follow. First, we need to determine if the problem will be analyzed as two-dimensional or three-dimensional. As we saw earlier, this will influence the number of degrees of freedom to consider in the problem, and thus the potential number of reaction forces and moments. For this bike frame, we will consider it as a 2D problem, only considering forces acting in the plane of the frame itself, which we will label the XY plane. Next, we will look at what translational degrees of freedom are restricted by the support. For the bike frame, the weld prevents translation in the X and Y directions. Thus, we need a reaction force in the X direction to prevent translation in this direction, and similarly, we will need a reaction force in the Y direction to prevent translation in that direction. Translation is not the only possible degree of freedom, so we also have to look at what rotations are constrained by the support and add appropriate moments to replace that constraint. As a welded connection of the bike restricts rotation within the XY plane, we need to add a moment to prevent that motion, a moment in the Z direction. If the problem was analyzed as three-dimensional, then we would have to consider the other degrees of freedom as well. This welded connection would thus impart a reaction force in the Z direction and moments in the X and Y direction as well, but the overall procedure remains the same. Now that we know the procedure for determining appropriate reaction forces and moments, let's examine some of the more common engineering supports you will encounter in engineering problems. The first type of support we will look at are contact surfaces. A contact surface refers to two objects that are simply in contact with each other, but not otherwise joined or connected. We tend to further subcategorize contact surfaces as smooth contact surfaces with negligible friction, such as an ice gate gliding on a sheet of ice, or as rough contact surfaces where non-negligible friction forces can develop, such as in the landing struts of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. First, let's consider a smooth contact surface where friction is negligible. If we cut away the contact surface when creating the free body diagram, what reaction forces and moments need to be applied in order to emulate the constraints it places on the motion, or degrees of freedom, of the body? As the contact surface is frictionless, the body would be free to translate along the contact plane. Thus, there should be no reaction force parallel to the contact surface. However, a reaction force normal to the surface is necessary as the body would be constrained from moving through the contact surface. We even know the direction of this normal force as the body is only constrained from passing through the contact surface, but is free to be lifted off of it. For this particular contact surface, we can also see that the rotation would not be constrained. For a rough contact surface, friction is not negligible, or at least the contact surface has a potential to generate non-negligible friction if there is a large enough normal force acting on it. How would this affect the expected reaction forces acting on the contacting body relative to what we saw for smooth contact? The situation would be similar to smooth contact in that a normal force would prevent motion of the body through the contact surface. However, now we would also have a friction force parallel to the contact surface that would prevent the body from sliding along it. The total reaction force R would be the vector sum of these two components. So you can alternatively view the reaction at a rough contact surface as a single reaction force R acting at an angle theta relative to the contact surface. The next group of supports we will look at are wheel, roller, rocker, and ball supports. The reason we look at these together is that they all provide the same constraint to the motion of the body they support. They are simply different engineering solutions to provide that constraint. What constraint do they all share in common? Each of these supports is in fact an engineering solution to the reality of friction. They utilize rolling motion as a means to introduce a translational degree of freedom along a contact surface where there is friction. This is best exemplified by an inline skate which utilizes wheel supports to glide along a rough road surface, mimicking the smooth contact between the blade of an ice skate and a sheet of ice. As these supports mimic smooth contact surfaces, we indeed expect that they will produce the same reaction forces, a reaction force acting on the body which is normal to the supporting surface. We could be satisfied with this as a proof, but I find it useful to look a little more closely at exactly how one of these supports achieves this in order to prove it. Let's take the wheel support for instance. This support consists of a contacting surface, a wheel, a pin or bearing, and the body the wheel is supporting. We can draw free body diagrams for each of these components to see just how it is able to mimic a smooth contact surface. Starting with the wheel and contact surface, we can see this looks exactly like our previous scenario of a rough contact surface. However, as the wheel can roll, there will not be any reaction force parallel to the contact surface. Looking at the wheel, this normal force has to be balanced by an action force from the pin if it is in equilibrium. As the pin sits in a hole within the wheel, it can form a contact surface with the wheel in any direction and thus can support an action force in any direction. But since the force is only required to balance the reaction force present on the wheel, we will get an equal but opposite action force on the wheel from the pin. Using similar logic, we see that the reaction force on the pin from the wheel will be balanced by an action force from the body on the pin. This action force then leads to a reaction force on the body that is normal to the original contact surface. You can follow a similar line of reasoning to demonstrate how the other three support types achieve the same result, albeit with a slightly different series of contact surfaces. The next category is pin supports. You have likely seen such supports in many modern buildings constructed with tubular structural elements. You have almost certainly interacted with one of these on a daily basis as well whenever you open a door, although you might refer to it by an alternative name in such a case, a hinge. Looking at our pin support, we see that it is similar to our previous category of support, except that it is not free to translate. Thus, in addition to the normal force we had before, we also need to include a reaction force parallel to its base. Alternatively, you can also view this as a single resultant reaction force acting at an angle theta. No moments are generated at the pin connection as the pin permits the body to rotate, as it is in fact a hinge. The next category is known as a built-in or fixed support. The body is rigidly fixed to another body, preventing it from translating or rotating. How many degrees of freedom would such a constraint have in a 2D problem then? A fixed support constrains all degrees of freedom. In a 2D problem, this means we need to constrain the two translations with reaction forces and the one rotation with a reaction moment. This is precisely the case we analyzed earlier with the top tube of the bike frame. This covers some of the more basic supports we see in engineering structures, but it is by no means an exhaustive list. However, the process for determining what reaction forces a support can impart on a body remains the same. Look at the constraints the support places on the motion of the body and add the appropriate reaction forces and moments to maintain the constraint when the support is removed.


Hi there and welcome. I'm the Technician Projects and today's tutorial is going to show you how to do a picture in picture in Final Cut Pro X. So we're going to start off our tutorial today in Final Cut Pro X. We're going to have a picture inserted into our timeline. Now we want to insert a picture within a picture within Final Cut Pro X. Basically it shows two images or two video files at once. We're going to go to this clip here. We're going to expand our yellow box and we're going to click and drag that clip into Final Cut Pro X. And we'll make sure our top clip is highlighted. Like that we're going to go to this function here, this little drop-down menu here, and we're going to select Transform and that allows you to adjust the size of our clip. So we're going to adjust the size and we're going to move it to the bottom right-hand corner. And go back to the beginning and as you can see there's two pictures within the same timeline, a picture within picture. If you enjoyed the video today, please leave a like rating and subscribe for more. Thank you for watching and see you next time.


get started. Welcome, everybody. Thanks for joining us today. I'm Cliff Lynch, the Director of the Coalition for Networked Information. I'll be introducing this session. This is one of the project briefing sessions for week three of the CNI fall 2020 virtual meeting. To remind you, week three is focused on technology standards and infrastructure and certainly issues around privacy and the interactions of privacy and technology fit very squarely there. A couple of logistical things. We are recording the session and it will be subsequently available. There is closed captioning. Please make use of that if it's helpful. There is a chat and you're welcome to use that as we go. And there's a Q&A box. You can post questions as they occur to you. And after Ken finishes, he'll work through questions with the assistance of Diane Goldenberg Hart from CNI. So let me just very briefly introduce this session. I am, as always, delighted to welcome back to CNI the one and only Ken Klingenstein from Internet too, who has as good of view on privacy, identity, security, access management, related issues as anyone I can imagine. And we're not allowed to have bouffées anymore because of the pandemic. But if we were, I would characterize this as a bit of a bouffée of recent developments that are on Ken's mind and that have affected many of us and that promise to affect us in new ways in the future. I suspect you will have a lot of questions for Ken. I know I have a couple that I'm going to invite him to speculate on if there's time, particularly if you don't. But with that, I'll just thank Ken for coming to make us all smarter on these topics and turn it over to you. Welcome, Ken. Thank you, Cliff. Sound check, things okay? Sounds good. Okay. And thanks to all of you for attending and for finding the room as it were. I'm usually parked at the very end of the Omni. We were reminiscing about the Omni Hotel in DC. So I'm glad you found it. For those who are watching this in a delayed fashion on video, I'd be very interested in responding to any comments and questions you might have from this presentation. And I'm KJK at internet2.edu. My SCAT is at various places on the internet. You can find me and I'd be thrilled to answer stuff. For those who are participating alive, we do have Q&A. Diane's going to moderate things, but I'm glad to interrupt the flow along the way. And then finally, we're on the cusp, I believe, of being able to address some of the long-standing desires of the library community with regards to combining both privacy and access control. And now that that looks like we can get there, I'm curious about what the use cases are, what are the unique access control sets of issues that people might have that might challenge the approach that we're taking along the way? So I hope we can sink into that. With that, the set of topics. I want to begin with the stew. Talk about what's happening out there. This will be largely presentation before we get to the interactive part, which is the stewardship element. The stew will consist of updates on GDPR. It's been very active in the last year in terms of developments in that space of privacy and management of user rights. We'll talk a little bit about privacy shield. I'm not sure that for the community gathered here that privacy shield was in fact much of a shield, but for some of your universities and institutions and for a large number of corporations, privacy shield was a way to interact with the Europeans and that has been struck down and we'll spend a little bit of time talking about how to manage the aftermath of that. I want to look at the stuff happening up north in Canada, partially because some number of the attendees at CNI are traditionally Canadian, but largely because the Canadians are doing it really right and want to put a bit of a highlight on that. I'll just touch briefly on how COVID-19 tracing and privacy interacts. Many of you on this call may have a more profound understanding and it would be great to exchange that. Finally, I want to talk about a piece of work that we've been developing now for several years about attribute release with consent. In the last few weeks, that activity has started to engage with FIM4L, Federated Identity Management for Libraries, and we're getting to a point where we can begin to again start to do proper access control on our collections. The stewardship piece is a lot more about process. How do you chart a course given all the things that are happening there? Where in that path do libraries feed? How do you separate the wheat from the chaff? Many campuses have created a chief privacy officer. It's almost always a second title to somebody who already had a title. The question of what their responsibilities are and how they juggle that is interesting. Finally, we'll talk about how can you build some privacy partnerships on campus. Our examples for that will be how to manage these seamless access attribute bundles as they make their way into the IT world from a group that has been largely librarians shaping that. That's the map going forward. With that, I'd like to borrow a slide from Daniel Solov on GDPR. Daniel has a number of really good resources about this. He provides them freely with acknowledgement. I would point out that there's a lot of elements to GDPR. You might be familiar with some number of them and not the others. That player's list is important that there were data subjects, us data controllers, the people who own our data, data processes, the people who ask for our data from the data controllers, and the supervisory authorities, the people who kind of make sure that rules are being followed. At one point, there was concern that the GDPR only applied to Europeans and then all of the edge cases percolated up that made its impact far broader. If you have campuses in Europe, you're covered. If you have European students in the US on your campus, GDPR affects them. It is truly transnational in some of its impacts. That lawful processing list just below the territorial scope will get into a bit more. It's where I tend to live. You'll see consent right next to it. It says attributes can flow only if certain lawful conditions are met. A contract, a legal obligation in the interests of legitimate interests of the user, some national security issues or consent. Those are high bars. Then the EU has put on consent a very high bar, which is when can you use it and how well must you present it? When can you use it? It must be in a truly symmetric relationship. Often, all relationships with our data processors are not symmetric. There are instances where they are and then we can start to use consent. It has to be informed. I'll spend a bit of time on what that means. Unambiguous needs to be revocable, but not in the past tense. In the future tense, so you can't withdraw what's been seen already. There is something called the right to erasure of all of the aspects of GDPR that's been the most difficult to implement. Think about backup tapes. The enforcement levels are quite high. There needs to be special treatment for sensitive data, et cetera, et cetera. Again, a very comprehensive set of requirements, a high bar in general. In particular, two things have emerged in the last several years around GDPR that are relevant to the access control issues that libraries face. What's the basis of release for attributes and what's the purpose of use for the information that's been released? Again, basis for release, just a limited number of categories and very carefully identified and abused, frankly, and I'll come back to that in a second. Purpose of use is really pretty vexing. If you're releasing information, how is the relying party receiving this information going to use it? Various verticals have developed taxonomies for purpose of use. In particular, the Interactive Advertising Bureau has been very conspicuous in this space. We don't have one and that purpose of use field turns out to have percolated up in May when the European Court of Justice, I believe, tightened the, lots of the abuses around GDPR. In particular, there was a massive abuse of legitimate interest where people would say, I don't have to ask for your information. I can just take it because you came to this site, so you must have meant to give up that information. That's not clearly the case. Poorly done consent and cookie walls. So perhaps the most dramatic impact of these May rulings are now visible if you're visiting websites that are frequented by people who are covered by GDPR. You'll have noticed that the accept cookies category has been replaced with a finer grain set of options. You can click to accept all of them, typical cookie wall, accept all these cookies, or you can click on that box, typically at the bottom of the screen, and discover there's four sets of cookies, and you can choose which ones to accept. There's a set of functional ones, a set of style ones, a set of marketing and tracking ones. And in particular, I always go in now when I see that refined set of cookie options and deselect everything but the functional ones. I appreciate that control. And in fact, I assume I'm being tracked less as a result of that. And then this fine, again, that kind of pushes on this fine grain controls. I did include a citation. EDPB stands for the European Data Processing Board. So lots of commentaries about that. Before I move on to privacy shield, any questions, speed okay, any refinements that folks would like? Okay. So privacy shield was a clue to replace a hack. The original hack was Safe Harbor and it covered transfer of European data to the U.S. And it gave people a sense of comfort that data being sent to the U.S. was going to be protected. And it covered a whole lot of use cases. Some of the places where it got gunky is when you have a multinational company and they're trying to pass data from European employees to the U.S. headquarters and you need protections around that. There were also instances with customers and there were social use cases. And in fact, it was the social use cases that triggered the demise of privacy shield, which was the replacement for the original hack of Safe Harbor. And in particular, the European Court of Justice, ECJ, in Shrems II, Shrems is the German student who asked Facebook for all of his data that Facebook had. And Facebook sent an early list that was slim and then sent several hundred pages of data that they collected. Shrems sued in the European Court of Justice, won. And so privacy shield is toast. The core reason that the European Court of Justice struck down privacy shield, by the way, was they didn't trust the U.S. government. That might be a very reasonable policy, but they felt that the U.S. government had numerous legal mechanisms to force U.S. companies to provide data that was supposed to be protected by privacy shield. It impacts a lot, though in our community, not so much. But you may start to see some contract clauses in content being provided by European resources that are attempting to address some of the protection that ostensibly privacy shield gave. You can also do encryption upon encryption as a protection mechanism, but that comes with lots of costs, computational and otherwise. Moving up north, DIAX stands for the Digital Identity and Access Control Council of Canada, and they've created a pan-Canadian trust framework. It's a monitor. It's developed much as the U.S. tried to develop an effort around N-Stick. I am a survivor of that effort. Some of the software I'll talk about in a few minutes is also a survivor of that effort, but that effort went down in flames. And later on in the borough, we can talk about that one. They have a trust mark called Voila, which is appropriate for a bilingual country. And if you see that trust mark on a website, you should believe that that website is playing by the rules that the pan-Canadian trust framework sets out. It's an impressive list of identity providers. Those include banks, social media, governments, and an impressive list of allying parties, planning on using it. It's just starting to roll out now, but because it's embracing some existing infrastructure as part of its approach, you could say that it has a great deal of traction already. In particular, in British Columbia, you can use an identity issued by a bank, a government, a number of other places, a validated social identity that's been verified, and use that to file taxes, get building permits, do a lot of interactions with the British Columbia government. I'm very impressed with it because I live in the notice and consent space and they have some extremely nice notice and consent recommendations. First of all, they pull out notice and consent as full-fledged members of the protocol stack. It isn't an aside in GDPR use of all of those bases for release we talked about a few minutes ago. Here, when in doubt, use notice and consent. And I'll come back to that in a second. It has authentication, but it's no more important than notice and consent, which is wonderful. For those of us who got into federated identity to move attributes around, we lost our way and we ended up doing single sign-on across the internet because there was an immediate need with very few attributes flowing, and that's been the source of frustration. And now we might be able to get back into having attributes flow. I'll come back and touch that as well. They have the concepts of verified persons and verified organizations, and then they have some infrastructure. It's an elegant framework that privacy cuts across. For the notice and consent requirements, again, for those of us who live in this landscape, they're very welcome. Consent will normally be sought. It isn't determined if it's legitimate interest, determined if it's some kind of contract signed years ago. When in doubt, do consent or notice? Notice in the places where things have to be provided consent where there's some discretion. It's always opt-in. It takes place at the time of transaction, but it can be given for a period of time, like for a subscription service. Withdrawal of consent, as mentioned, applies to future transactions, where you've given it for an extended period of time, but you can't close the barn door when the horses have left. It's always explicit and in language that is easily understood, and that is quite a challenge, and I'll show you some screens where we've attempted to do that. And then this should be a place where you have a console, a dashboard where all of my consents are, and where I can manage them, and I'll give you an example of one of those as well. And that consent dashboard has just taken fire in Europe as well, and I expect that to be the next set of efforts going forward. So I just want to touch briefly on COVID-19 and privacy, because it had huge impacts on everything, including privacy, rapid adoption of new cloud services, which we all went through. We didn't really have the time to look at the data protection clauses or the intellectual property clauses, because we couldn't have stayed open without that. So there was a number of privacy concerns that got sidelined by the urgency of providing online education. I think we need to revisit those. At a recent conference in Europe, Gartner talked about how as a result of COVID-19, the future arrived 57 months early. I'm not quite sure how they got the number 57, but in fact, we're dealing in a future world now and scrambling to make it work. I won't get into the subtleties of contact tracing, but I would assume that some of you have followed the nuances of the various approaches. And we've gone, thankfully, from a very centralized approach that often would use mobile devices, but would use your phone numbers on the mobile devices and gather from the cell phone towers that your phone interacted with where you were and who was around you. And that had major privacy impacts along the way. We've migrated from that centralized approach, by and large, to have most contract tracing apps, and I have one on my phone, be decentralized. So my phone is keeping track of what other phones have come within Bluetooth range of my phone. But no one else knows that but my phone, but there is now a thread to be triggered. If somebody's phone has, the owner has come down with COVID-19, there is a path to be followed, a decentralized path that would let the owner of that phone notify owners of phones that had been proximate, that there was a positive test. And that came at some functionality expense, but I was pleased to see that. Ironically, that approach of privacy preservation and contact tracing was championed by Google and Apple, and I tend not to think of Google and Apple as being privacy-preserving companies, but in this case, they were inspiration. So before I dive into this one, let me just, this is a natural pause point. See if any questions have percolated up? Comments. I'm not seeing any questions right now, Ken. Thanks, Diane. Okay. So I want to talk about one tool in particular, and we're just starting to get serious engagement on this tool that has been in development for a number of years, consent-informed attribute release. It's a joint effort of Internet2 and Duke University, and the deep bench of talent that sits at Duke University. Disemerged from the NSTIC grant on scalable privacy, I think it might be the only floating guppy left over from that NSTIC effort. It provides effective end user management for attributes, for release of attributes and information items. You can do it in line, and there's a self-service mechanism as the DIAC and as the consent dashboards talk about. There's very effective enterprise management of how consent and notice are presented and how policy around that is formulated. I think we all have some use cases, and I'll touch on one or two in a second, where some information really needs to be provided by the user, and other information needs to be consented to be released by the user. Some of the information that has to be released might be in that functional category that we talked about in terms of cookies, and so it's necessary to have the access control function, and some of it might be compensatory stuff where a user has color blindness and wants the screen to be presented in a certain fashion, and those kinds of attributes could be consented. And then there are some things that are negative attributes where we don't want the user to not release them. We all have negative rights. Somebody is banned from using the VPN. Somebody is prohibited from using another resource. You don't want to have a user be able to suppress information that's important for the relying party to have. So there are mechanisms for both shipping information and giving users a choice about shipping information. It turns out there's unexpected compliance benefits. Your lawyers at your institution are probably keeping track of what attributes are being released to what relying parties that's a requirement of GDPR. They may be keeping that stuff on a spreadsheet. I know of a couple of universities doing that. That tracking of what information is being released to which relying parties per user is a simple report out from the car software. Click this button and your manual spreadsheet gets replaced with a report that's issued at whatever frequency. A car is open source software. By the way, it works for OIDC. It works for SAML and Shibboleth. It works for batch feed. So one of the painful aspects of our privacy actions to data on our campuses is that we're policing, maybe, the release of information via real time interactive stuff. But we have these batch feeds going on, batch feeds provisioning to Zoom, our user base, batch feeds provisioning to Google Docs, batch feeds provisioning to third parties who are doing alcohol education services for us. Those batch feeds are not covered by FERPA today. And so if a student has selected FERPA, it's not reflected in their privacy settings in these batch feeds. This gives us a mechanism for that. It's open source software. And for those of us who go back way too far, the original Shibboleth t-shirt said we'll work for attributes. This is what that's about. So I just wanted to show you a typical screen. The identity provider here is Amber from the, some arcade novels. And here I am going to a research R Us site. And they want attributes. I wanted to show you a couple of things about this screen. First of all, over here on the right, a reminder of what site you're going to, and the privacy policy for that site. Over here on the left, we say review and edit what you provide to this site because this is stuff that you have preset. And this is what you did last time, as it were. The release and deny are in the typical red and green permits and denies. The attribute being released is presented in English or in Spanish. A car is multilingual. It does Chinese quite well. The value being released is also present. Now you can't correct values that are being released in this environment. You'll need to go to the system of record to correct that, but at least you're notified in the case that a value is improperly set that you need to change that. And then underneath that in italics is the purpose of use. We're finally presenting for the first time why an attribute could be used or needed along the way. These things are easy to change. Just buttons. This has been tested extensively on user populations across a variety of ages and backgrounds and seems to be fine. In fact, the target moved on us while we were working on this. Early on in the days of federated identity, the general feeling was users couldn't do consent. And then Google and other social environments began to do consent screens badly at first, increasingly better over time, and users got used to the fact that they might need to do consent. And now we have a population that seems to be fairly comfortable with consent. Notice on the bottom, it says don't show the screen next time. So you don't, you know, unless you're a consent and notice person, you don't want to see this more than once to get to a resource. So you can suppress that. And then if you want to change your policy, you can go to the self-service console and change it. And if you as an institution want to have policies changed for users, when something changes in the environment, you can trigger those, we want you to re-consent. What kind of changes could happen in the environment? Supposing research or us change their privacy policy.  Could be a handy tool down the road. You can also reconcent if the value being released has changed. Here's another setting. I just wanted to give you a different view on this. This was for faculty trying to get to content. And this is important because it begins to do fine grain access control. So in this one, I'm releasing not identity, well, I'm releasing a display name, but that doesn't have to be identity. But I am releasing my affiliations. And it allows me to get to departmentally licensed content. And so we have access control. These these departmental funding controls and I'd welcome better wording on that from anybody in the community who has knowledge of that. But these are expressed as group memberships, very simple to manage from the identity provider viewpoint, and gives restricts content to members of the school of law or sociology, etc. And finally, here's my self service console. So here's all of the places I've set attribute, release and consent policies for. And when I've updated them, and the manage button will allow me to go in and change my policies. So if I've decided that a site is becoming uncomfortable to get certain information, I can manage that. If I decided that I really want to change the way the site presents information in response to an accessibility concern that I now have, I can manage that as well. This is for any geeks in the audience. There's API is all around the place. I just wanted to show you that in particular down at the bottom there are two figures. So you as a user, get to use that intercept interface. And you also get to do the self serve interface. As administrators, there are two other interfaces that I haven't shown in this one that would allow the sys admin to set institutional policies and would allow a privacy person or a librarian to administer a subset of those capabilities. So this would allow a librarian, for example, who has signed a contract for certain content to set an access release policy appropriate to that content. This stuff can get very complicated. I don't want to dive into it, given I want to leave time for questions. But let me pull up one example of where a institution has created a measure policies that need some triage. We'll talk about Harvard. We'll talk about Harvard, which allows you as a librarian when you buy content to set a release policy for all of the students and faculty so they can get to that content, except not all students. Because there is also at Harvard an office of special students, special in the sense that they're the children of presidents or the children of Shahs or other kinds of very important people and the office of special students sets policies for the release of information for those particular students. So we have the need to meld a comprehensive policy set by a librarian with a specific policy set by an office within the campus that protects certain students. That's a very interesting triage we think we can manage. Okay, that ends the stew part and I want to talk a little bit about the stewardship next. How does a campus manage all of these developments? How do you stay aware of this? And the answer I'll cut to the chase is poorly. The stewardship piece is not what we'd like it to be. I'm going to lean a bit on a publication that just came out from ECR. I want to thank them at EDUCORES about the evolving landscape of data privacy and higher education. And from that I've drawn a couple of graphs that we'll be talking about. I want to talk about who the players are, what the processes are, and what the partnerships are. So who are the players? Well, legal and compliance is very big in this. In fact, over the years I've seen an emergence of a lot more compliance aspects in enforcing privacy. I think that's a result of some of the hefty fines that are being administered out there. And the compliance officer is a natural place for this to reside. I'm the chief privacy officer. A number of campuses have created those offices frequently in conjunction with the security office. And it's not clear that that's an appropriate weaving of responsibilities, but it is what it is. Central IT is clearly a player in all of this stuff. Other registrar is also a player. They're typically the ones managing FERPER and other kinds of privacy regulations. And I put libraries in question because up to two years ago it's not clear that the libraries were as actively involved in some of this access control and privacy management as has happened recently. And I want to give lots and lots of credits to the group over at Seamless Access, RA21, NISO. They have convened a community and run a very timely process that has resulted in some access control opportunities that we'll come back and talk about. So that chief privacy officer, again thanks to ECAR, has so many responsibilities that I fear for executing them well. And first and foremost, there's been a privacy spill in IO4, would you please clean it up? Well, that's a large part of the work. And in fact, those things are hard to clean up. Sometimes you get to create policies about privacy, a lot of data governance issues. Sometimes it's important to do a stakeholder privacy training. One of the requirements of GDPR is to actually train the people in the organization who manage privacy. It's explicit. Sometimes there's providing thought leadership, protecting PII, etc. Dan at the bottom, there's some folks have unfortunately responsibility of trying to police the swamp of privacy issues that students create around social media and big tech. That's a lot of work. That means that often the CPO doesn't get to provide the right amount of focus on some of these issues. And I think in particular with the seamless access work, if that enters the portfolio of the privacy officer, it may not emerge. So I want to sound that caution. Again, from ECAR, here's some of the things that that privacy officer needs to do. It's a full-time job and it's typically given to somebody who already had a full-time job in the security space. So I want to talk a little bit about process going forward and I love for this to be interactive and I see something in, oh, I see a question. So let me answer Robin's question about sensitive attributes, institutional research analytics departments. So the sensitive attributes as defined by GDPR are stuff that I'm not quite sure Robin, research analytics will get to see a lot of. The sensitive attributes could, as GDPR assigns them, are about work, about religion, about sexual preferences, about accessibility sets of issues. So they're very much a set of personal sets of issues, race and sex. Oh, wow. So I can tell you that both race and sex are covered by GDPR. And so you might start to say, I think Robin, you said you were at Virginia. Good people at Virginia. You might start to try to find out who speaks GDPR at UVA and raise those issues with them. It turns out at least in my narrow view of how card handles sensitive attributes, we don't display them at first blush. So when you see a screen where you're saying, do you want to release information and there are sensitive attributes there, we require a second click to display those attributes. And that's the steps that we've done for protection. But I'm not quite sure if that's the kinds of concerns you were thinking about. I'd love to engage on that going forward. Anything else on that thread? Okay, seamless access. So this process has been underway for about two years. I find people in the community have been leading it and keeping a steady march. And out of it has emerged a set of attribute bundles. They're labeled in fact as, let me see if I have that on the next slide. They're labeled as entity categories, but they're really attribute bundles of attributes. And there's three bundles that have emerged to compensate for the only bundle that we've had so far in federated identity space, which is called the research and scholarship bundle. And it's highly identity oriented. So you release a number of attributes in that RNS bundle that indicate identity. And part of the reason for that is that you're typically accessing major scientific resources. And those relying parties are very concerned about abuse of those resources. And so they want identity if only for tracking purposes. So out of the work that has been happening in the seamless access activity, three bundles have been created. One that is just authentication. One that has anonymous authorization and one that has pseudonymous authorization. And on that screen that I showed you earlier in CAR where I was releasing some departmental fund codes, but not identity. Actually in that one I was releasing an email address. I could have suppressed that in that one screen I showed. That's a case where you're releasing some information that helps personalization or state or access control. The process that these bundles are going through is that seamless access created them. It then referred them over the transom to the identity crowd, which is typically an international group called REFEDS, Research and Education Federations. There's a group that does schema. They looked at these things. They had a fair bit of feedback. We're in the feedback processing stage. And I've got some hope about that that I'll talk about in a second. Once these bundles are anointed, we have to get adoption. It won't be easy. We're going to get need adoption at the federation level. And then we're going to need adoption at the identity provider level. A parallel action is being done by a contract language working group that's talking about how you put this stuff in contracts with content providers. That conversation has shown a whole lot of abuse by content providers who want identity. And so if it wasn't released by the identity provider, they'll ask you for identity out of band once you hit the content site. They'll ask you to create an account. They'll do a lot of things to grab you. I'm not quite sure why, what the business purposes are. But I think the contract language is going to be very important so that a lot of these content providers, including some very big scientific publishing houses, change their policies along the way so that they don't obviate privacy by asking the user after they're in for additional information. There was some concern about mixing attributes, about usage and metrics with other kinds of access control. So I want to talk a little bit about how Car could use these bundles. Turns out I've had conversations just today with the FIM for El crowd, a nice group of people. And we'll be doing some demos of how Car can serve library needs. But one of the ways that Car can use these new access bundles is to preconfigure IDP release. So in a typical consent screen that Car presents, gives you a list of attributes, allows you some control. It often can be displayed as to what the institution recommends for what you release. It's not binding, but it's recommendations, it will reduce the friction at the content provider if you release these attributes. We could take these attribute bundles, these entity categories that are being done by seamless access and use that to preconfigure the preference settings by the user and then as for consent, or if the campus is just comfortable just releasing that information without the user consent, they can do that. I think over time we're not going to be allowed to release attributes without consent though from the way that GDPR is. In any case, there's really good hygiene to notice and transparency. Even if you're not giving the user's control, it's really decent of the institution to let the user have an option of knowing what's being released. So I think we're into the discussion phase of this. Let's see. Let's see if there was another chat question. No, okay. So the question is for the folks who have gathered here, do you get called to the table about privacy? And if you don't get called to the table, where should you be called on? I'll tell you right off the bat that when these attribute bundles get released as maybe good things for federations and identity providers to adopt, my guess is having looked at the identity providers in the US, most of them will not track this. They won't even know about it. If they know about it, they'll say it's not for them. And so I think right off the bat there's a role for librarians in going over to the IT organization, the people running the federated identity and saying some stuff rolling down the pike when it hits, we'd like to be involved. That's going to result require learning some new language skills. And again, I think there might be some places beyond the access bundles where the unique perspectives of librarians, librarians have been critical since I watched the wonderful conversations about the importance of open shelves and the freedom to browse. And I think that philosophy has got to interject into other activities. With that, I'll take a deep breath. I'll stop and turn this over to you, Diane, for the next phrase. Thanks, Ken. That was a lot to think about and a really wonderful presentation and always so fun to hear it from you. So thanks. Thanks for coming back to CNI once again. And in the spirit of conversation, I just shared with our attendees an invitation to participate in dialogue. So I see that Robin has raised her hand. Go ahead, Robin. I've allowed you to unmute yourself and anyone else just raise your hand if you'd like to jump in as well. Go ahead. Thank you. I did want to leave you with the impression that the library has just gained in a lot of attributes and not handling it appropriately. But we had some research questions that had to do with diversity. And so this group was seeking more information about individuals who had access content. And so I went to the data stewards and got sent to the Institution Analytics Department. And, you know, they're going to identify the information when it comes back, but we're trying to deal with this gnarly thing of trying to keep that information separate from other information that we need to answer other kinds of research questions. And we want to de-identify everything and start rotating our logs so we don't actually have as much sensitive information. I realize this is not the bulk of your talk, and I'm really interested in you know, what you're coming up with and us providing more privacy to people and having their consent. Gotcha. And so, let's see. Couple comments. First of all, increasingly I'm pairing the words consent and notice in language. And even in the cases where consent is not appropriate, I'm a big fan of transparency and notice. We in CAR make notice very quiet, but it's there. And a user who's curious about what's being released can easily find it, but it isn't intrusive. Back to your particular situation, Robin. Was the content that was being accessed being accessed through IP access controls or by federated identity? Federated identity. So people use single sign-on and they check something out from the library and then that goes into a log. And we want to rotate those logs and not have information around forever, but we have to determine all the research questions that people have, you know, and retain enough information to answer those questions before we de-identify the information. So we're using Shibboleth basically. Right. So did you talk to the people when you said you talked to the data stewards, did you talk to the people over in IT, the Jim Jocles, etc., who run the Shibboleth environments and to see what they have in their log files? Yes. They wouldn't have any of their, well, they do have some easy proxy information for us. And I used to work for Jim and run identity management for him. So, you know, he and I are in discussion all the time about this sort of stuff. Gotcha. But it's more, you know, we know that this information is sensitive and we don't want it to get out and be coupled up with a person's identity. And so I wanted to go through the right data stewards. And I was just surprised when I got sent to the institution for research analytics. And I was wondering, you know, are we a one-off institution having that department have this responsibility? Or is it because we just don't have a privacy, a chief privacy officer other than our head of security? Good question. So can any of the other participants who want to raise their hand if they have an office of research analytics? You are alone. There is a someone just weighed in, in chat, or is it because Robin said research? Or is it because Robin said, quote, research? It might, yeah, Robin, that, you know, that, that, that, that through me, too. It was that you wanted to do research on the data. But the, in typical, my office of institutional research at my old university wouldn't have known where to start on this one. And actually, Mike Furlough, who made the comment, he would like to join the conversation, as would Cliff. So please go ahead, Mike. Yeah, I'm just going to make it very quickly. I just, I think that such offices of institutional, my, my guess, what I'm just wondering, Robin, whether that was like the office of institutional research, or an analog to that. But I was really kind of being facetious and didn't mean to interrupt the conversation too much. But I've had more than once people just shouldn't send me to the wrong place, because I said a magic word that they were in a hurry to get past me. So I'm not very helpful. Sorry about that. Well, it's just somewhat surprised. This is a fairly new department, but I think it is a new name for the institution. You know, data, the kind of people that would do analytics before. But it's just this new responsibility that they have now. And they told me, well, you give us the data, give us the logs with the authentication ID, and we'll give you back these attributes, or information and answer your research question. But we'll de-identify everything. That was just something completely different from what I've done before, where I'd talk to the data stewards and gain what we want. So let me appreciate that. Let me just jump in with, because this, you know, with one or two questions that we won't get a chance to answer. But I'm really curious about content that has access control that would be governed by attributes. For example, citizenship. Is there content or enrolled in a certain class? I showed you an example already of how we can control that. But citizenship, I know of some medical research journals and databases where you cannot have two different files open at the same time, because they were afraid of correlation attacks. And so the access control there is, if you have this open, you can't have that open. Vice versa. We have all of these new capabilities coming down the road in terms of access control. And I'm curious if we have previously intractable technical situations that we can now handle a bit more graceful. And I saw Don, what is on here? Don, you deal with some of that interesting stuff out there. And if you ever bump into some access control issues that you go, whoa, I'm here. Let me raise a figurative hand here and ask about something a little different. Before I do, I just want to mention Ken that within ARL, a leadership now, I believe there is quite a discussion going on about exactly what the role of research libraries is vis-à-vis privacy on campus. And there's at least one group that wants to position libraries is taking a very strong sort of educational and consultative role. Privacy is a service, if you will. So that might be in the questions you were asking about the roles and who comes to the table with chief privacy officers. That might just be something you want to explore a little further. The thing I wanted to ask about, though, was I am really nervous about issues about jurisdiction and patchworks here around privacy. I mean, we already saw a funny reaction in some ways to the GDPR in that, yeah, there were organizations that did business in Europe that had to deal with it. But there were also organizations that did very marginal business in Europe. For example, some local and regional newspapers in the States where people abroad would occasionally, expatriates and things would occasionally look at them, but they really didn't do enough business to bother. And you just see those things blocked when you go to Europe now. They're just doing geo-blocking, saying too much trouble to deal with GDPR, we just want to talk to people. I have seen some very ambiguous stuff about Europe attempting to essentially assert jurisdiction over Europeans anywhere they may be in the world. And various institutions worried about that. Most recently, we've seen legislation, for example, in California that raises the specter of a patchwork situation even within the US based on state law. I wonder if you have any predictions or reading on how that's going to play out. You're muted. Okay, interesting question, Cliff. And I thought about including CCPA, the California Consumer Privacy Act, in this thread, but it's going to be revised significantly this year if they get to it because they got a lot of things that they need to fix in that legislation. It was also consumer oriented for our particular use cases. That said, New York has done a privacy law, other States are following as well. Yes, it is a patchwork. I have almost no hope of it being anything but a patchwork in the US. And so I admire the Canadian effort. It's a tractable country. It's a tractable population even. And I think they're going to pull it off. And that might wash down to the US. With Biden coming in, he got to witness the N-Stick effort. I hope he learns all the lessons from that, but it seems to me, except for some of the big tech issues that the Republicans have embraced, that we're not going to get any kind of uniform legislation in the US around this. It's just really sad. It's a reflection in a way of the fact that surveys consistently show that in Europe, people trust the government more in terms of privacy, more than they trust corporations. And in the US, it's the inverse of that. They trust corporations more than they trust the government in terms of privacy. And what people hand over to corporations shocks me and it shocks you, I'm sure, as well. Is there going to be a patchwork? Probably is there hearing that there are cases where Europe is turning down US visitors because of the sets of issues around GDPR is intriguing. One of the things we were hoping to do and may still do is consent notices the service. And so we would be able to begin to deliver these capabilities that you saw in car without an institution standing up the full set of service offerings. We're a little confounded by a lack of data about where universities are using federated identity, who are the relying parties they deal with. I know at some campuses, there's far more local relying parties than there are in in common, but the Congress is true elsewhere. Whether we'll get to provide a service that could replace the patchwork with something so attractive and easy that people attend to that for uniformity, sad to say not on my watch. Thank you. That's helpful. Not necessarily the best news in the world, but very helpful. Ken, thank you so much. You've given us an incredible survey of developments, and I really appreciate it. This is a shibboleth and federated identity was sent here to serve this community. We got sidetracked, but we've come back home. Yes, you have. And this is one of the places where it started. Yep. Well, thank you so much, Ken, and thanks to all of our attendees. This was a really great session, very fruitful. And with that, I will close the session and wish everyone a great rest of your day or evening, wherever you are, and hope to see you back at CNI in the days and coming weeks. Take care. Thanks, guys. Bye. Bye. Bye.