Good morning, everyone. I'm Tom McCollum, Executive Director of the Kellogg-Hubert Library. We're very happy to be working on this continuing program with Vermont Digger, News and Brews. And it's a very timely series, all sorts of things happening in the news. And so it's a slightly different part of this. So our two presenters or coordinators or discussion leaders this morning are Ann Balloy, Ann is the Executive Director and the Editor of Vermont Digger, and Theresa Murray-Claussen. And Theresa is Director of Underwriting. So I'll turn this over to Ann and Theresa. Thank you, Tom. Welcome. We were a small, mighty group. So what we thought, we're also running a monthly series in Burlington as well. This is an opportunity for us based upon feedback that we've had from our readers that because we are an online digital news organization, there's somewhat of a mystery about us. And people really wanted to know who we were, put a face to the name of Digger. And so we're going out into the community. We do an event series. We have a large event coming up at the end of March in Burlington. We're bringing Warren Strubble up. Warren is the U.S. diplomatic editor for Reuters. It is the newspaper reporter who is credited for uncovering the non-weapons of mass destruction, which perhaps was our first foray into big, fake news time back in the day. So we're bringing Warren up to the phone space at the end of March. So we do large-scale events like that and then very intimate focus group events like this. So we really appreciate you coming out. Fortunately, it's a beautiful Monday morning. This will be a series on Mondays. You'll continue to get emails about them so that you'll know the dates in case we have to tweak them in any way. But we plan writing them through 2017. The same is in Burlington. So they could be topical in nature. This one is geared towards who Digger is. Ann's going to go through a little bit of history for those of you who may not know when Digger was born or how Digger was born. This is the mother, as she may tell you how that all came about. Mother of Digger. Mother of Digger. And she's going to bring us right up to 2017 in what we have in store for 2017. You are? My name's Ann Galaway. Hi Ann, nice to meet you. And we were doing a lot in 2017. As Tom said, it's a very busy news year. Whether we want to be or not, we are very busy. And then there's an opportunity for questions. We're really interested in hearing from you. How is Digger doing? What would you like to see Digger cover in the future? What are we doing a really great job on? What can we do a little bit better job on? That type of feedback is really important to us. And you're all readers, so we value it highly. And I think without any further ado, we'll start our little slideshow is basically an agenda. Again, we're digital, so we're trying to use as little paper as possible. So Ann will use the slideshow to kind of walk us through the agenda and there'll be plenty of time. We're hoping for at least 20 or 25 minutes at the end for questions. How does that sound? Sound okay? Bye. All right. Sounds good. All right, so this first slideshow is very good. But we have to thank the library. So I have to talk to a tiny little story. So we have a benefactor. Digger is very fortunate to have a number of donors who in some of you are here who support our work. And she was, she is the one who planted the seed. We were thinking about having these coffees in our office and our new office space. We went to 26 State Street, much larger space for us. Now we're not sitting on top of the Associate Publisher. We now have two chairs, we can separate ourselves. And we met with this particular donor and she heard about the event series, thought it was a great idea, but really said, what if you could do it with the library? And we thought, that is an awesome idea. And so we came to Tom and Rachel, who of course said, rock on, let's do it. And so we're very fortunate that the library was able to open up its doors to us and help us host this particular series. So we're thrilled. If I could expand on that a little bit, I should say because I didn't specifically note Rachel Sandshaw, who you work primarily with, Rachel in the second set. I did. And she's our coordinator of programming and development. Yeah. Rachel and I actually go way back with events. Yeah, I'll way back to see folks. Yeah, the humanities council. Yeah. And Orca. So Chris is here from Orca, so Orca is actually filming this. So for people who aren't able to attend, they'll actually be able to watch this. And we're hoping that a lot of people read Orca. Nice, Chris. A lot of people watch Orca in central Vermont and we're hoping that that might help build the audience. And please feel free when you leave here to go home, talk about this with your friends, family, coworkers, anyone who you believe might actually get something out of this. Because I think you are gonna leave here today with some pretty valuable information and encourage people to come. It's only an hour. And again, we're hoping that the Orca audience will see fit to join us in person if that's all possible. So, who we are. Okay. This is the eighth year of Digger. And when I started in 2009, this was just a crazy idea. I had been laid off. I was the Sunday editor of the Rutland Herald and the Times Archus. And that year was the beginning of the Great Recession. And a lot of people around the state were laid off, not just in the media, but in other kinds of jobs as well. And I moved, in a way, I was shocked because I'd never been laid off before. And I'm a very hard worker and I was devoted to the newspaper. And it was heartbreaking for me because I love the paper so much. And, but I knew it right away. I knew there were practical reasons why they had to lay people off. I understood that. The economic model for journalism is broken. And it started to break in a big way that year. And over the past eight to 10 years, we've seen a decline of 40% of all newsroom employees have been eliminated, essentially. And, you know, I don't want to get too far ahead, but I think that's a big reason why we are where we are now politically. But it started back when I got laid off, you know, and lots of other people were laid off in the industry too. And at the time, there was a lot of uncertainty about what might work and what might not work. And that uncertainty has not changed, except that in the interim, groups like Digger have formed across the country. We're one of the most successful news outlets, non-profit groups in the country. And that's because we, from the beginning, saw ourselves as a destination website. We saw ourselves as a watchdog organization and we keep an eye on the state government and also on business. And we're daily. When I first started Digger, though, I had this idea that we would just report on investigative stories. And I quickly realized that while that is the, that's certainly the spirit of Digger. The spirit of Digger is all about investigation. But we do it in an iterative way. And what I mean by that is we're kind of like the old fashioned newspaper that really reached its climax in the 70s with some of the big national stories that came out, including, of course, the Nixon administration and Watergate. But prior to that, there was this tradition of muckraking in journalism that had kind of fallen apart in the 90s and in the aughts. And that's largely because I believe the newspaper industry, in addition to suffering from changes brought by the internet, the newspaper industry also experienced mission drift. There was a sense that it was about profits. It was about making sure that the people who own the newspapers, whether it was shareholders or individuals, were making profits. And back in the day, in the 80s and 90s, newspapers were one of the most profitable businesses in the country. You could get guaranteed returns, practically, of 18% back then. I don't know of any other industry that really produced returns at that level. But that all fell apart, in large part, I think, because people started to realize that there was not as much emphasis on the kind of government accountability reporting that people needed. And there were more feature stories, less attention paid to nuts and bolts reporting in communities, and at the same time, advertising started to fall away because more and more readers were going to the internet. And the big problem here is that you have a couple of online giants, like Facebook and Google, who are basically eating up about 90% of the advertising market. So you only have about 10% of the market available for the media now. And this switch happened very, very quickly. And so at the same time, readers started migrating the internet and felt that newspapers weren't doing an adequate job of covering communities. At the same time, the advertising model completely fell apart. So these three factors have really led to a continued decline in media across the country. And we've seen this locally. It used to be that the Burlington Free Press had at least 50 people in their newsroom, and now they have many, many fewer than that. In fact, I'm told, I don't know this personally, but I'm told that we have more reporters now a digger than the Free Press has. And I'm talking about news reporters. I'm not talking about editors and feature writers and sports writers and that kind of thing. I wish, I mean, I have to say that I don't take any pleasure in that fact. It disturbs me that, I mean, I'm glad that we're filling a void, but we're still not big enough. There's still so many things we're not reporting on. I can't tell you how many tips I get on a daily basis, calls that we get, emails, tips through our anonymous tip line, that we still don't have the resources to cover, even though we're now the biggest news organization from a straight-up news reporting standpoint in the state. Anyway, to get back to why I started digger, the reason I started digger was because I felt that there wasn't enough reporting. And I believed that there was an audience. I believed that readers wanted this kind of news. And so we started a kind of blog-like news website in September of 2009. After I had done quite a bit of research, I looked at other news organizations around the country like menpost.com, Voice of San Diego, Texas Tribune. These are other online, nonprofit-only news sites. ProPublica had started for about that time. And I decided that something like that might work in her mind. And I didn't have any money. I didn't have any staff. I did have a group of advisors, including Con Hogan and a couple of other people, Cheryl Hanna, who were interested in the project and who were willing to meet with me and vet the idea. And I had a business plan. I submitted it to the Vermont Community Foundation. They gave us a $6,000 grant.  We were able to pay a few freelance reporters, and we were off. And within a couple of months, I realized that this original idea I had, which was just producing two to three investigative reports a week, was never going to cut the mustard, because we would never attract enough readers that way. And so I decided in December of 2009 that I should go to where government accountability was happening, which was at the State House. And so I started going to the State House every day. And I started writing a daily report on whatever it was I covered. And pretty much all I covered was house appropriations. And the first time I went in there, it was for budget adjustment and not really knowing much about what went on in that building. Because I've been an editor on the desk for a long time. I hadn't been a reporter for a while. I'd never done any reporting in the State House. So this was a big adventure for me. And the first time I went in there, I'd happened to have an accident that morning. I live in Hartwick. And we have 25 acres. And so we had this sort of mini farm thing going. And I had some chickens. And it had been raining, kind of like weather like this. And I went out to feed the chickens. And I slipped and fell in the mud. And I walked my head on a rock as I was going to feed the chickens.  And I had this big, like, gash on my head. And of course, I'm pretty hard-headed, so it didn't matter. And I was determined to go into house appropriations. And I had a camera with me. I was taking video. I had a little household camera, video camera. And I went in there with a video camera and looking like an absolute wreck. And the house appropriations chair and everybody in the room wanted to know who the heck I was. The camera was about this big, in case that she looked into that. No one had ever filmed the house appropriations before. So I got this great video of Otto Trouts. I don't know if you guys know who he is.  And that year, they'd gone through this big rescission process, because it was 2009. They had to lay off some state workers and so on. That ain't right. I made my mark that first day, just by being such a wreck. But I thought it was really important to cover house appropriations, because I wanted to understand what our values are as a state. And I figured the best way to figure that out is to look at how we spend our money. And what I didn't realize at the time was that this was a great opportunity to get a mini master's degree in state government. Because everybody who is anybody in state government has to hold his held account to the appropriations committees. They have to come in and report. Why do we need these positions? What are we doing? Are we meeting our goals? Are we using our money wisely? And so it was a wonderful way to be introduced to the legislature and to be introduced to the money side of it, which I think is really important. So at any rate, we started this coverage in January of 2010. And by May of 2010, we had a following of about 14,000 readers a month. And we still did nagging reporters. I was the chief auto washer and reporter and editor and everything. But we had gotten the attention of a group of people who had started a nonprofit call for Montgermas and Trust. And this group included Doug Clifton, who is the executive editor of the Miami Herald and the Cleveland Plain dealer at one point. And he and Sam Chauncey, who was based in Shelburne and Bill Shubard, who is a retired businessman here in Vermont, they met with me and said, we would really like to merge with VT Digger. Because we like what you're doing. We understand that you're really focused on government accountability. And we understand your vision. We get that you want to create a newsroom and that you want to fill voids in the media landscape. And I said, awesome, let's do it. And that was a wonderful moment in the evolution of VT Digger because I had no connections in the business community or with anyone who knew anything about fundraising. And my vision at that time isn't so different from what we've achieved now, which was to have at least 12 reporters on staff, to have professional editors on the desk, to sell underwriting, to offer memberships, to basically reach as many people in Vermont as we possibly could through the media. And over the course of the past seven years, as we have made more and more investments in reporting and we've expanded our website to include beat reporting on education, criminal justice, the environment, business, health care, politics. As we keep adding more topics to our daily coverage, more and more people have found us. And now we have community reporting as well. We have four reporters who are based in counties around the state. We have Morgan True and Chittenden County. And we have a freelance named Emily Greenberg who is there as well. And then last year we created a summer Vermont bureau. We received a $75,000 grant from Ethics and Excellence in Journalism, which is based in Oklahoma City. And they supported this project for a one-year launch. And we were able to hire a reporter in Rutland County, Bennington County, and Wyndham County. And what's unusual about this project is that in two cases, in Wyndham and in Bennington counties, we're sharing the cost of those reporters with local newspapers. So the Bradworth Reformer and the Bennington Banner and Manchester Journal share the cost of those two reporters. So the reason we did that was because the reason we even pursued the Southern Vermont project in the first place was because the Rutland Herald and those two local papers, the Banner and the Palmer, had laid off reporters in Southern Vermont. So we were down to just a couple of less than a handful of reporters in those counties. And we wanted to make sure that the local newspapers had adequate coverage. We also wanted to make sure that people in Northern Vermont understood what was happening in Southern Vermont, because we think there's too much of a gap. And so that's why we pursued that project. And it's been very successful. We've been able to boost reporting, especially on major topics that affect everyone in the state, like PFOA, Pollution Situation in Bennington County, Vermont Yankee Decommissioning. Those things have an impact statewide. In addition to stories about the local economies there, changes in education, they've had a huge demographic shift in Southern Vermont. It's been populated in a way that I think people don't realize up here. Southern Vermont has many fewer people now. And it did 10 or 15 years ago. And part of that has to do, I believe, with the decline in the media down there. People don't know what's going on. And as a consequence, there's a kind of falling away of community in those places, because there's less information about those communities. I heard your second speech, so that was slide five. Oh, OK. So we'll touch back on Southern Vermont. But when you mentioned Digger first starting at like 14,000, so this slide kind of brings us to where we are today, so that people can get an idea of Digger's growth over a very short period of time. Yes. Since 2009, we went from this being me as a volunteer for two years to now we have 17 people on staff. We have 200,000 unique readers a month. We have a million page views per month. And that means the page views are the stories that people actually click on. And then we have statewide reach now in a way that we didn't before. I think I also didn't explain that while we are focused on daily reporting, we publish six days a week, and then we have a weekly wrap up on Sundays. In addition to that, we have not lost our focus on investigative reporting. And so we have, for example, covered very extensively the situation at Maple Leaf Treatment Center. I don't know if you've been following that story, but more than true, we got tips. We rely on tips from readers. And someone's tipped us off back in December that there were some major problems at that treatment center, which is the second. It's one of the largest treatment inpatient treatment centers in the state. It's hugely important in coping with the opioid crisis. And we broke those stories. And it turns out that there are state investigations going on there, and to medicaid fraud, and to inappropriate behavior by people who ran the place at the Office of Professional Regulations looking into those allegations. Investigative reporting is controversial. People don't like it on news. But the fact is it's important for people to know what the truth is, so that we can fix our problems without knowing the extent of the issue. We can't make any effort to improve the situation. So that's why I'm so focused on that. You may be very familiar with our EB-5 coverage. I started investigating what was happening there. Good to see you, Steve. What was happening there in the summer of 2014 almost two years before the SEC allegations broke. And that's been a very rewarding and difficult project, because I live in the Northeast Indian. I live in Hardwick. And people gave me a lot of grief for the coverage, because they felt that I was hurting the local economy. We also have investigated a situation at Brattle River Treat, where there was an inadequate oversight of nursing staff, and there was a situation in which a young man died because of a drug overdose. He grabbed some drugs off of the nurse's cart because they weren't doing an adequate job of keeping track of pharmaceuticals there. We've done a variety of investigative pieces over time. But in addition to that, of course, we write about what's happening in state government. And our one big window into that is the state house. The reason why we started coverage in the state house is not only because people are drafting legislation there, but it's also because this is our one really, our one big chance to figure out what's happening in state government. Most of the time, the only way we really can see what's happening on the inside is through public records requests and through interviews with official sources. And those things are important. It's the legislature's oversight role that I think is often underestimated. And it's finally important because it helps the public understand what government is doing. And government is working on our behalf. And we need to know how our money's being spent. We need to know how resources are being spent. And whether or not things are working or not. Where am I on the slides? So we're getting rid of this. Oh, OK. This is just a snapshot of our demographic. So I think one of the points that we really wanted to hammer home today was the diggers growth has been extraordinary in a very short time. And we continue to grow very quickly. Both you can see, not only from readership, but also from our social media presence. And it's a very symbiotic relationship between what we're doing and your support and the readers. We couldn't exist without each other, which is why you are all so incredibly important to what we do, especially being able to offer the news for free. No paywalls or fees associated with digger. And we think that's just incredibly important. And we couldn't do it without the reader support that we get. So as those readers continue to grow, digger will continue to thrive and to fulfill its mission. So again, we're really grateful. Were those numbers just for Chittin and County or for the whole state? That's the entire, that's all of our readership. That's representative of our entire readership. And I think the number that we're most thrilled with up there is 36% or under the age of 44. We're actually beginning to attract a younger audience. Typically, youngsters don't like to read serious news very much, but we are attracting every day a younger and younger reader. So we're really happy about that particular statistic. But we're a pretty well-educated audience, a pretty well-heeled audience. These types of events, we hope, will help us to reach a broader audience. We would very much like to have everybody reading us in the entire state for a month. That would be awesome. So you're all now deputized. This is a nice deputization, so this isn't coming from a scary place. And in addition to the 200,000 unique readers we have coming to our website, we have a news distribution service, kind of like the Associated Press. And so local news outlets like The Valley News, The Waterbury Record, The Stone Reporter, The St. Albans Messenger, The Addison Independent, all these newspapers pick up our stories and publish them in the print product. So we're actually in newspapers around the state in addition to our website. And we reach another 150,000 people a month through that local readership. And we make a little bit of money on that. We charge a small fee to the newspapers. But our main interest is to make sure that people who are still reading newspapers have access to news about the state in addition to local news. And that's worked out very well. So these next few slides are and touched upon our expansion throughout the state of Vermont. And these next few slides, I guess you can just talk a little bit more. But they actually put a face, so this is Morgan True. Yeah, this is Morgan. In case you're ever wondering what that Morgan True looks like. Oh, yes. There it is. In the flash. It looks about 15. Yeah. I know. The ladies down at the betting divider really liked it. They really wanted to come down. There's some young women down there like, that's Morgan True! That's pretty funny. They're kind of celebrities. If you want to talk about Morgan's, what he's doing there. Sure. Interesting. Yeah, Morgan is focused on covering the city council. And he does some school district coverage. And then he also covers crime in Chittenden County and other issues. And he's been at this now for a year and a half. And he really enjoys it. He's met a lot of interesting people in Chittenden County. We also have a freelance reporter named Emily Greenberg, who lives in Charlotte. And she's starting to produce more coverage about some of the surrounding municipalities in Chittenden County. And she's also written some nice feature stories for us. So we're looking to broaden our coverage a bit more in Chittenden County. And so there's always too much to cover. And I don't even know how to, maybe from your vantage point, it may seem like we're covering a lot. But I think a lot about what we're not covering and how much more we need to do. But Morgan is doing a great job of keeping this narrow focus on city government and on crime, which are the two most important things in Chittenden County, I think, to pay attention to at this point. And here he is at V-CAN. He actually does a bi-monthly presentation on video. It's also a podcast that we run on VTDigger. So we're experimenting with some multimedia. And we're looking to do more of that in the near future. We would actually like to produce a daily video feature, like the New York Times does, on important issues with B-roll and narrative. And with information that people need, they can tease young people who may not be as anxious to read long stories, to tease people into reading longer stories online. That's one of our challenges is reaching people who don't like to read. So we're focusing more on that. And you may have noticed today, because Ann just launched it this weekend, but we do have a podcast series. Mark Johnson actually does a podcast series for us. They cover the legislature inside the Golden Bubble. And then we have Morgan's. And so there will be a section now on Digger, where you could actually go directly to the podcast section. And there'll be a variety of podcasts that you'll be able to select and listen to. Morgan's happens to be a hybrid of a visual and an audio. So you can listen to it in your car if you wanted to. But if you're on Digger's site, you could actually watch him talk. It's right at Morgan's Alley. And there are three guys, Southern Vermont. That's right. So on the left, we have Adam Fetterman, who was our reporter in Rutland County. He's just left. He is being replaced by Alan Keyes, who is a longtime editor at the Rutland Herald. The Herald last summer to join us. Adam was tapped by the Nation Institute. And he's going to be covering energy on a national scale. So we're very sad to leave Adam. But of course, we understand he had this great opportunity to take a fellowship with the Nation. So he won't be reporting with us anymore, which is really unfortunate. But Alan is a terrific reporter. He knows Rutland very well. He actually lives in Rutland. And then in the middle we have Mike Fair, who is our reporter in Wynnum County. And he now, I think, is the sort of national expert on Vermont Yankee. I think he knows more about Vermont Yankee than anybody in the country at this point. And he broke a great story last year. Someone came to our offices here in Montpelier and gave us some photos of kiddie pools with radiated water in the basement of the Vermont Yankee reactor. And we had these images. And Mike was able to go to the NRC and verify that, yes, they were, in fact, storing the radiated water in kiddie pools. And it was a great investigative series that we had last year. And Entergy owned up to it, of course. They wanted us to give them the photos. We said, no way. And they confirmed that this was happening. Some of the employees, through a source, also told us that water actually had gone down the drain at one point. They're at Vermont Yankee, but they didn't close up the drain. So there was concern that this radiated water was going to contaminate the larger environment. And any rate, Entergy eventually put the water into bladders, these large tubes. And then they shipped the water out of state for, I'm not sure what happened to the water after that. But at any rate, it was no longer being held in the basement of the reactor for Montpelier Yankee. So those are the kinds of stories that we end up pursuing because we have someone on the beat. If we hadn't been on the beat for a year, I'm not sure that the source would have felt comfortable giving us those images and that story. To the right is Jim Therrien. And he is a former editor of the Bennington Banner, who is now working as a full-time reporter there. And again, we share the cost of his reporting. And he's been focused on a variety. He's actually, because of his experience as an editor, he's familiar with a wide range of topics that are of statewide interest in Bennington County. And so he's written about everything from school district consolidation to crime, to PFOA, pollution. And we're very lucky to have him on staff. And so that's our southern Vermont bureau. This is Jasper Craven, who also looks like he's about 12. And he's actually 24, just so you know. We're not engaged in child labor. But Jasper is wonderful. He was our political reporter here in Vermont last year. And he covered the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. He read a number of investigative stories, too, about the presidential campaign. And now he's in DC. And he's covering congressional delegation, which is something that I've wanted to pursue ever since I started Digger. Because most of the information that we get about the congressional delegation happens to come from what they want to tell us, from press releases or interviews about things that they want to tell us. And Jasper is down there keeping an eye on what they're actually doing and saying and or not doing. And in addition, he's taking a hard look at what Trump's policies mean for Vermont. And you may have noticed that last week he had a very big piece about the Heritage Foundation's blueprint for Trump's budget and how that would impact our budget here in Vermont. And that's a very important story. I think because we have so much copy on a daily basis and that story kind of disappeared too quickly to my mind, I'm going to be republishing it today so that you can find it. Because it took Jasper several weeks to complete that story. And it's very thorough. It really tells you what the impact is in the Department of Environmental Conservation, which would be decimated if cuts the EPA went through. It tells you what the impact would be on Medicaid and on Medicare and so on. So Jasper is, I threw him into the shark pool, the swamp. I asked him in December if he'd like to go down. And he very graciously said yes. And I hope that he'll be able to stay a while longer. We'll see. But in any way, he's there now. And if he does end up getting tapped by the New York Times or Politico or something, I have other folks on staff who are willing to pick up the beat. But I feel it's very important for us to really know what's happening down there and how it's going to impact us directly. And because we were able to do this, I took a risk. We didn't have the money to do it. Because we were able to do it, because that's the way we roll. We're very entrepreneurial. Because I took a risk to do this, now other news organizations around the country are looking at this also as a possibility. And we belong to a group called the Institute for Nonprofit News. There are about 100 news organizations that are part of this group. And they've put a call out. And they're looking to see if they can get funding to basically make sure that there are reporters from around the country in DC doing the same kind of reporting for states. And I personally think that if there was more reporting coming out of DC about what representatives in Congress are actually doing, it could be a game changer, both in terms of limiting the partisanship in DC and also helping constituents back home understand what's really happening on the ground, whether their representatives are acting in the public's interest rather than their own interest or in the interest of corporations. And I think it could be a game changer. It will take time, of course, for this to seed itself. Hopefully, more news organizations will do this around the country. But I tried to talk Democracy Fund into funding as a few years ago, because I feel very strongly that it could have a huge impact nationally. They're interested now, though. So the other real effect of this is, well, a small Vermont local ripple effect is this JASPER's article was immediately shared by the Speaker of the House, our Vermont Speaker of the House, and a number of senators and representatives on Facebook. It got a huge share, which I thought was really critical. And they were encouraging on Facebook their constituents to read the article. So they were sharing the article, particularly so that their people would know what's going on. So I thought that was really important. The other ripple effect, which was meant to be a fun ripple effect, but it's turning out to be a little bit meatier than that, is that we are hosting, in collaboration with the Vermont State Society, our first ever event in Washington, DC, which is next week, which is March 7th on Town Meeting Day. And so it's a collaborative event with the State Society in celebration of Town Meeting Day. So we're going down to Washington, DC. Ann's going down. JASPER is going to be there. And they're going to hold just something like this in this really nice hotel in Washington in this little room. There are about 25 people going. And it's going to be a town meeting style discussion about Digger's work in Vermont and also in DC. And that attracted, believe it or not, the first entities that signed up for that event was Democracy Fund, the Center for Public Integrity in the New York Times. So we were thrilled. Now, I have to tell, the New York Times Hamilton Boardman, his mother is from Brattleboro. And she's a huge reader. And she all looked at it and told him, yeah, it took off. So when we found out the New York Times was going, we were very thrilled.  We'll take him however we can get. We don't really care. So that was awesome for me. Mom's. If I had a conversation with Ann, we provided her the contact names of a couple people from Democracy Fund. And one of them, we had a fascinating conversation. And I then forwarded on the email on to Ann that they said there was no other nonprofit news organization in the United States that had a reporter in Washington, DC. We were the only ones. The local ones. Yeah, they just like they said it needs to happen. So here's the time now to go back to Democracy Fund and say, remember that idea we had a few years ago about funding reporters in Washington. So we're hoping that this, again, as Ann said, we may have created the impetus for stronger local reporting in Washington. And if we did, thanks to you, that's how it all happened.  Yes. We became a nonprofit because when I founded BT Digger in 2009, there were no profits in media until the day that at one point they were making 18% a year. But by then, newspapers were really suffering and were cutting newsrooms because they simply didn't have the money. And that's continued to this day. And part of the reason why I thought a nonprofit was the appropriate business model was because I thought that people need, readers need to be able to buy into the news. They need to feel that news organizations are mission driven and that they're about the public interest. And that's why I thought that a nonprofit model could work. Of course, the most successful nonprofit model is national public radio and local public radio affiliates. We are very similar in our approach, except that we're online. And we have a slightly different take on our mission. Like I said, we have much more of a focus on investigative reporting and on government accountability. And while we're online, it's still really a print model. I mean, we're able to get into the kind of detail that one can only get in print. Radio is wonderful, but it's difficult to get into the sort of numbing detail that you need to get into to really understand what the Heritage Foundation budget is going to look like superimposed on for a while. It's like a newspaper. It's a newspaper online. That's really, I mean, I'm a print person. If I could still run out to the press at the time, Marcus, and grab that sheet, I would. I love that, but that's not possible now. But yes, it's the written word. That's our specialty. But the nonprofit model is also important because I wanted to be able to show readers how we spend our money and where our money comes from. So we have a commitment to transparency. We list our donors. We list our underwriters. And when I first started Digger, we didn't have any money for the first couple of years. In the third year, we had about $186,000, a budget of $106,000. And that enabled us to hire our first reporter and a couple of folks in the business office. And from there, we were able to immediately start working on the sort of three or four-legged stool that we have going for revenues. We were heavily reliant at the time on grant funding. At the time, about 75% of our funding came from foundations. Now, about 15% of our funding comes from foundations. So we flipped the model. In the beginning, I thought from the beginning, we should focus on, in addition to foundation grants, we should focus on membership and underwriting and resale of our content to other news organizations. And so we've built the business over time. And because of Teresa's great work, Paivon's great work, we're now at a point where we have a budget of $1.3 million. And 40% of our budget comes from readers, from donations. 40% of our budget comes from underwriting. 5% comes from a resale of our content to our media partners. And then the other 15% comes from foundations. And the other reason we needed to go to the nonprofit model is because advertising is very difficult to sell online. And as I said earlier, 90% of the advertising is held by Google, Facebook, Craigslist had a huge impact on newspapers around the country. Because newspapers relied on classified advertising a great deal. And because Craigslist is free, that eroded that market. We are still building underwriting. We think that advertising sales are still very important. But we would not be able to replace the funding we needed only through underwriting. We would only be able to do half the work that we're doing now. We would have half the number of reporters we have now if we were relying solely on advertising. That's why donations from readers are so important. And that has replaced the money that otherwise would come from advertising. So that's why we went with a nonprofit model. And people are always curious about it. And we do have an entrepreneurial approach. We're always looking for new ways to raise what we call sustainable funding. And what we mean by that is funding that is not from foundations. We'll always need some foundation support. We'll always need about 15%. But we've never had, as one former person in the business office put it, a football player. We've never had someone who gave us a million dollars. Or gave us half a million dollars to start what we're doing now. We've always had highly diversified funding. We have donations as small as $15. And we've received donations as big as $50,000. We have more than 2,000 people who gave to us last year. That's hugely important. Why? Because if we were relying on one person or one advertiser, all it takes is for that one person to leave and you're done. And our strength is actually in numbers. It's in this broad base of support from the public. And just so you know a little bit of what we're up against. So one of the revenue streams that we're attempting to diversify and that's sustainable would be classified. So we've had great interest from major institutions to begin a job section, an employment section, for middle to upper middle management positions. So UVM health care network, for example. Clara Martin would really love to see us offer that opportunity. Legal notifications. So this bill, there's a bill right now that's at the state house that you could talk to your representatives about. Because believe it or not, we're still fighting. I called us last week. I think I called us second class citizens. So the way the statute is currently written, online news organizations are not recognized as newspapers of record in the state of Vermont. And so any legal notices that a town might want to or that has to file or that the state has to file in relationship to rules or hearings or whatever, the state nor the towns can utilize VT Digger as a primary news source. So we're looking to get that statute changed. And you could certainly talk to your representatives about that and say, hey, I heard like that. There might be a bill out there. And this doesn't just mean Digger. This means any online news organization. And it wouldn't take the place of print. It would simply be another option that towns and the states would have as opposed to just the print newspaper. So these are kind of the obstacles that we face in trying to diversify our revenue stream. We're not even recognized by the Vermont Press Association right now as a newspaper of record in the state of Vermont. So that's a more personal dogfight that we're having. But these are some of the challenges that we face as this new beast attempting to survive in this turning out to be wacky world that we live in. So just to give you an idea. And a little teeny tiny call to action. If there's something you think, geez, what can I do for Digger aside from giving them $10,000? You could call your representative. You could email your representative and say, my understanding is there's a bill. Do you have the bill? The bill is being released tomorrow. Anthony Polina and Jeanette White are co-sponsoring the bill. Mary Hooper and Warren Kitzmiller are very aware of the bill. I haven't talked to Francis about it yet. But for sure it's on Polina's radar screen and Mary and Warren. So you could talk to them about it. Will it be a Senate bill? It's going to be introduced as a Senate bill with, we hope at some point, we think that there'll be tremendous bipartisan support for the bill, both on the Senate side and the House side. But it's going to be close because we're introducing it very close to crossover. So we're hoping that it's going to get pushed through. And then we'll see what happens to it. But there's a good chance of it passing. But it wouldn't hurt for the representatives to hear from their constituents about it. And it just so happens that a bunch of them are from here. So it's a match. What are some of the things you're planning to focus on in future sessions next month and the times? Here, you mean at the New Year's Day? Yes. These sessions here. Well, I think it would be helpful to talk about individual topics. And I'd be open to suggestions from you all. But I think there are a myriad of things we could talk about. I think we could talk about the event of fake news and what that means. We could talk about politics in Montpelier. We could talk about the state house. We could talk about we're going to be coming out with some data reports over the next several months. So we could also talk about a particular story if you wanted to and how we wrote that story or what the thinking was behind it. So there are a variety of things that we could talk about in the near future. And one of the things that I'm personally worried about with our newsroom, for example, is whistleblower protection. There is a bill right now that members of the press and the Broadcast Association are backing that it's a shield law that would essentially protect journalists from having to release their notes and other materials should they be subpoenaed in a court case regarding whistleblower leaks. And this came up last year with the McAllister case in seven days. And Vermont Public Radio were subpoenaed. It was kind of a weird situation because all of the things that McAllister had said were essentially on the record. So it was not, it actually muddies the waters a little bit, but the point is that news organizations like VTDiver and others rely on off-the-record tips from whistleblowers. And if the government is able to subpoena our records and force us to make a choice about whether to release that information or go to jail, the fact of the matter is that no matter what, we're potentially exposing the people who have risked their jobs, their livelihoods, perhaps even their safety to give us information. And I think that going forward, and this is going to sound a little bit paranoid, but I think given what we've heard from President Trump not so much, we're all faced with because of the way we use the internet and because of online snooping that's now done by the government, we're all a bit vulnerable now. There's no such protection now. There's no such protection in Vermont. So there are 30 states that have a shield law and Vermont is not one of them. And so I think there is support in the legislature for this. They've already accepted our testimony from last week, the folks in Senate government operations, they're more than willing to support the bill. And I think that that will pass and that will be very helpful. But in addition to the shield law, and I think that if there is some kind of controversy the next time we meet, I can tell you about it and you can call your representatives and tell them that you support this effort because I think it will pass in the Senate without a problem. I don't know if they'll have difficulty in the House or not. But in addition to that, I think that the onus is on us to take more steps to protect our sources and that means using secure encryption for email for cell phone use and for tips. And so our newsroom is moving in that direction because we wanna make sure that when we're investigating something and there's an FBI investigation happening in tandem, that we're not exposing our sources. And as we hear more and more about what's happening on the border, we wanna be sure to be able to make it possible for people to give us tips about what's really happening up there. And we don't want federal agents to be snooping in our email and with our cell phones. So we're going to be taking some additional steps. They will. I know they will. But they can't if it's encrypted. So we're taking those steps. So the law is one step and encryption is another. Yeah. Well, we hope that we'll... We have to do it. We have to do it. We can't. But there are a lot of things we can talk about. What do you want us to talk about next time? I mean, we didn't really give you a lot of time to talk, we kind of... I was kind of... Yeah, we didn't... Next time we could just have an open Q&A. Next time we'll be... And that would be fun too. Yes. I guess I have two comments. Yes. About what I read every day in the digger. Yes. One is that I find that the Sunday Rambo is a rerun. It's like... That's the point of it, yeah. Never redo it. Okay. Because I've already read all of it. I've already looked at it all week. And so it seems like kind of a waste. Does it come in your email, Michael? Do you get it in your... Does it come in your email? Do you get it in your email? Because we can unsubscribe you from the weekly wrap if you don't want to get it in your email. Don't bother. It's fine. It's easier to leave. It's true. It is redundant. That's for people who aren't as faithful as you are, Michael. Yeah, that's being read in the minority looking at it every day. But I kind of doubt it. Yeah, now it's true. And the other comment I have is about disgust. Yeah. Which, you know, I like disgust. Yes. But for national, you know, I have a disgust account, but it's not in my own name. And I would not want my own name blasted all over the country for all of these sites. They are on an enormous number of sites. Yes, let me... And I've commented on several. Yes. So let me just interrupt you there. Well, I have now opened a new account. We recognize this is a big problem. And so last week, we put together a system so that you can register your name on Digger only. You can comment only with your real name on Digger. The name that I usually use in this case, my usual, like Anna? Or Michael. You set up a separate login. It would be a separate. It'd be a separate login on Digger. Yeah, that's what I'm going to be able to do. Yeah, on Digger. I haven't put a passion to enough about it yet. Okay. To actually do that. I know it's annoying. And I wish that we didn't have to do this. And let me explain why we did this. I understand why you did it. Yeah, we did it for two reasons. I mean, they're good. I like them. Well, we didn't want to have to go to a third party commenting system, but the reality was two things. One, because all the comments were on our hosting service, it was dragging down our page loads. So the site was not running very quickly. And our hosting service said that it was a problem. And so we went to discuss for that reason. They also told us that if we didn't move to a third party system that we'd have to pay $10,000 more per year just for hosting the comments. And we're already paying an absolute fortune in hosting. And we just couldn't do it. So that was why we went to the third party hosting service. And I realized that it's annoying. People are using it. And especially now that we have a login just on BT Digger, people are using it because many people have the same problem you had. They didn't want to have their full names on the discus platform across news organizations. And I understand that. And we did come up with a solution, though. So hopefully we did come up with a solution and more people are commenting now. So it's already happening in there, but yeah. And we want to be respectful of your time because it is 11.10, but yeah. I have just two comments on your podcast. Yes. The person who reads it doesn't listen. Yes. Are your podcasts transcripted? Oh yeah, that's a good idea. I don't know. We'd have to probably have to get a transcription service to do that, but I don't know. Yeah, yeah. The other thing, the event you're having down in DC during town, meeting weeks, any more times it's going to be there, are other media outlets and invited, or do you know, tell them what's coming? Yes, I don't know. This is one of those events that they could just drop in. I mean the Washington Post could just drop in for all we know. The registration isn't required. Typical of us, it's a free and open to the public event. So the congressional delegation, for example, hasn't RSVP, but we know in fact that Senator Leahy's staff and Senator Wolch's staff are going to participate. So yeah, we could show. There are some other mothers out there that we can rely on to send their sons and daughters for major news outlets. So yeah, we could end up with a really interesting. I can probably send a couple of people your way. That would be awesome. Thank you. That would be awesome. That would be great. I think it's going to be a really fun event. Jasper, interesting. The two of them together is just a joy to watch. Young Cub reporter and the mother of Digger it's quite a combination. Jasper is dying in the Wilbur Motters. I don't know if you know anything about his family, that he is a Kingdom County production product. So Bessel Bryant is his mother and Jay Craven is his father. So Jasper helps her to do her own stuff. And actually we are thinking of, there's another podcast that I'm working on right now with Kingdom County production. We're looking for sponsorship, writers in recovery. So they have written a book. I don't know if you know anything. I don't know, Susan, if you know about this book, but Writers in Recovery was published last year through Kingdom County production. And it is Bessel's, it's a ripple effect of Bessel's work from Hungry Heart, which is the movie dedicated to opioid abuse and the crisis in Vermont. And what sprung from that was a book from writers who are actually in recovery. It's a book of poetry. It's absolutely stunning to read. And these are all Vermonters who are successfully recovered addicts. And we are gonna turn that into a podcast and put it on the site. And so that people will be able, by having it transcribed would be beautiful because it's a good idea. But it will be available, and it'll be in that section and you'll be able to go and it's a weekly series that we're hoping to start in the late spring and then run for 10 weeks. So again, it's another opportunity. We continue to cover the opioid addiction crisis. And we've done it through events. We've done it through our reporting. And this is just another very elegant way of bringing the issue to the forefront in a very different platform. So I'm kind of excited about it. But again, we are looking for sponsorship for that. So if you know of anybody who might be interested in underwriting that series, that would be awesome. Anything else? Thank you very much. Extremely informative. Yeah, that's great. Thank you. That's great. Impressive. Thanks. We'll be back next month and you'll get an e-mail. Well, the history at the beginning is all so interesting to hear about. There's some pieces I'm going to see through, but having a summary of the birth and the adolescence. We're trying to figure out how old we are actually. We're a teen here.  And it counts for all of the very friends. Thank you all for coming. Thank you. Thanks very much.


So, on the website you can find the answers, so you can look and read in detail about the answers. You have to return your exam today though. There are some statistics so you can compare against others. The mean, so the exam is out of 70, so your score is given out of 70. The mean was 26 or about 38%. And I haven't compared against previous years but I think that's a little bit lower than previous years. So it was a little bit disappointing. Standard deviation, maximum, someone got 68, someone got 4 out of 70. And the histogram, unfortunately there's not so many people and this is in the percentage here. Only one person between 90 and 100 and only another 4 above 60%. So this was not as good as I hoped, too many down this end. Regarding a few more statistics then we'll look at some of the questions. Maybe hard to see at the back but just the scores, the average scores for the eight questions in the exam. Question one on RSA, I thought I gave you some hint that you need to remember RSA and we'll look at it but unfortunately most people didn't remember or didn't know how to use it. So we need to recover that 2 out of 13 is almost made me cry when I mark some of people's exams. Question two, let me remember, question two was about a set of different questions, one time pad, vision air and so on, not so bad. Question three was, most people can do play fair, can do rail fence and so on, can do the classical cyphers. Many people have fun on those classical cyphers but you need to be able to do a little bit more than just encrypt with those classical cyphers. So most people were okay with the classical cyphers. In most cases with them I either marked it correct or correct I got four marks or if there's something wrong zero marks with those classical cyphers. Question four, about half marks, that was a double cypher and the meat in the middle attack and again most people got the meat in the middle attack because you remembered from the quizzes and from the practice how to do that but some of the concepts not many people got. Question five, not so good, a fine Caesar cypher, something different, required a little bit of thought and tricked most people I think. Security services, question seven was about again very hard for most people, average of less than one out of seven, about the pseudo random number generator XOR, exclusive OR, so that was a hard one. And question eight was the next exam will be easier, solve the classical cypher. So let's look at just some of the exams, some of the exam questions and their answers, maybe going from the end working backwards or just go scroll through some of the questions and answers and answer any of your questions you may have about the marking for example. Question eight, two steps involve the rose column and a Caesar cypher so you needed to work out that from the Caesar cypher that what the key was based upon that the letter L mapped to the letter E and then once you got that then you need to do the rose column which tried some trial and error and a lot of people worked it out eventually, it need to arrange a few words, arrange four letters into a word. Question seven, not many people got question seven, it was similar to a question from the exam last year so if you understood the exam last year you may have got been able to do this one quite easily. I'll let you have a look at it in your own time, it relies some knowledge of XOR so make sure you're experts in exclusive or because we still continue to use that through other parts of cryptography. Question six, most people did okay, services, you need to know those six services, they're common through all parts of computer and network security so what is confidentiality, well quite simply keeping the message secret, authentication, verifying who you're communicating with, access control, preventing unauthorized access to a resource, integrity, make sure things aren't changed along the way, maintaining the integrity of the data, non-repudiation, making sure someone can't deny something, availability, making sure the system is usable so you should always know about those six services because most of the things we talk about can be classified as one of those six. Have a look at the Affine Caesar cipher, it's an interesting cipher but not many people got it, I will not attempt to go through it today. Most people got the double desk or the double cipher, meeting the middle attack, I want to get through to one that we can go through in a bit more detail, maybe it's just the first question, maybe here, the one time pad is considered to be unconditionally secure, what does this mean, hard to crack is not a good enough answer, what do you mean, you mean it's hard to get a hammer and hit it and make a crack in it, you need to be a bit more precise when you explain what is unconditionally secure, you cannot hack is not a good enough answer, it's important to realise that unconditionally secure means that doesn't matter how much time you have, how many resources you have, you still cannot break the cipher, you still cannot find the correct plaintext given ciphertext, even if you have all the time in the world, an infinite power computer, you cannot find it because if you do a brute force attack, what happens is that you try all possible keys and you get many possible plaintexts, the point is that of those possible plaintexts, many of them make sense, let's say English sentences or phrases, therefore which one is the correct one, you will not be able to tell, so it's not that you don't have enough time to try all keys, it's as if you do try all keys, you still can't determine what was the original plaintext, that's what we mean by unconditionally secure, if you want to, you should understand why that's the case and why it's different from let's say practically secure, that is most ciphers we talk about are practically secure in that in reasonable time we cannot break them, even with brute force, but unconditionally secure means that we can never break it, even if we try brute force, on the course website there's a link to a description that gives an example of why or an example with a simple cipher, why it's unconditionally secure, giving numbers of how long it takes to try all keys and still if you try all keys that you'll still get many possible plaintext that may make sense. The other parts here were just short questions, chosen ciphertext with short answers required, there was a mix of success on those different questions. Here, what mode of operation was used? CFB, you don't have to give the full name, CFB or cipher feedback mode, but saying AES-128-CFB I would not give the correct answer. The mode of operation is CFB, it's not AES, that's the block cipher being used. CFB is how AES is used. Okay, RSA, two parts to this question, not two parts, but two things to understand to be able to be successful, at least in part A, okay? You need to remember the equation and I advise you again, even though this exam's over, we'll continue to use RSA and public key cryptography, you need to remember this equation. And it's not so hard to remember, it's just an exponential mod n. You just need to know, once you remember this equation, you just need to know, well, where does e and n and m come from? Well, c is a ciphertext, m is the message or plain text, we sometimes use p, then you need to know, well, what is e and n? And just to remind you, what's the decryption? To decrypt, so encrypt c equals m to the power of e mod n and decrypt, to get the original message back, c to the power of d mod n. So there's not much to remember, it's the same equation, but just different variables. It's just one number raised to the power mod n. You must remember it. But once you remember it, then you need to know how to use the keys. And let's remind you, with public key cryptography, there are two keys. Each user has a key pair, a public and a private key. Okay, so imagine all of you have your own key pair. I'll show you how to create it soon. Everyone has a key pair. So we have one person wants to communicate and send a message confidentially to another person. Confidentially, I mean that they want to send a message such that no one else can read it. What do you do? Which key do you use? You have a key pair and the key pair consists of the public and a private key. You have your own. The recipient, every other user has a key pair. You want to send a message to someone else. You encrypt using the RSA equation and which key? Which key do you encrypt with? That's the key, the important thing to remember. Do you know? You want to send a message to someone else? You use her key, good start, and which one? You use the destinations key, but which one? Remember, every user has a pair of keys, public and private. Which one are you going to use? Think carefully. You're correct and you say you use the destinations key and either their public key or their private key. Which one do you think? You're going to use her private key. Think about what you're saying. You're going to encrypt using someone else's private key. What does private mean? It's secret. So you shouldn't know someone else's private key. So that gives you the hint. Which key do you think you're going to use to encrypt a send someone else? Not the private key, the public key. Because that other persons, the only key of their pair which is available to you is their public key. So you need to remember, when you want to send confidentially to someone else, you encrypt using their public key. You use the destinations public key. And the other thing with public key crypto is that if you encrypt with one key in a key pair, you can only successfully decrypt with the other key in that same key pair. If you encrypt with someone else's public key, the only way to decrypt that cipher text is using the corresponding private key from that key pair. That is the other person's private key. So you get your message, you encrypt with the destinations public key, you send the cipher text, you receive the cipher text and how do you decrypt it? Using which key? Your key, which one? There's a public and a private key. He has created a message. He's encrypted using your public key. He sends you the cipher text and you decrypt it using your private key. Always the opposite key in the key pair. If I encrypt with your public key, you will decrypt using your private key. If you try some other key, it won't decrypt successfully. You'll get random looking output or produce an error usually. So you need to remember which keys to use. So in this question, if you could remember the equation and if you could remember the key to use, because the question is, you have a key pair, PU and PR, we'll come back to the numbers in a moment, but you have a public and a private key. So does everyone else. So does Steve and Tanneruck. But you only know Steve and Tanneruck's public keys, of course. You don't know their private keys, otherwise we couldn't call them private. So you know Steve's public key and Tanneruck's public key. You have a message to send confidentially to Steve. Therefore, you need to use which key to encrypt Steve's public key. The destinations public key, which is this value, is used to encrypt. So we have the encryption algorithm. We know which key to use. The last step in this question is, well, what do these numbers mean? And you had to know that we have two numbers, in fact, in each key. We usually write the first one as E or D if it's the private key, E for the public key, D for the private key, and the second one, which is the same in both public and private key, is N, the modulus. If you knew that, then what you do is that you know M is 10, you're going to encrypt with Steve's public key, which is 3, 319. That is E equals 3, N equals 319. You plug them into the equation and you get the ciphertext. You didn't really need a calculator for that one because you plug in M is 10, E is 3, mod 319, and in 1,000 mod 319, you can do that on paper quite quickly and you get 43 is the remainder. So the ciphertext is 43. Any questions on that? When we have the next quiz and we give you another RSA question, everyone will remember. Remember the equation. Remember how the ordering of the keys, how to use the keys, because we're going to continue to use RSA as an example of public key crypto in the next topic. Any questions? Everything 100% clear on this first question, the one that made me cry because I thought it was so easy, but maybe five out of 40 people got it. The other parts, they're a bit more involved or you had to think a little bit more. Note that you and Tanarak have the same E value. Your public key is E equals 7, N equals 527, and the private key is D equals 3, 4, 3, N, the same N is 5, 2, 7. And note that Tanarak has a public key. You only know his public key. You can't know his private key. Where E also equals 7. Is that a problem, the second part? No, it's not a problem. Remember E is public. A, you can know other people's public value. That's not a problem. Is it a problem being the same? Again, no. As long as usually N, as long as N is not the same, then we're safe. That is, even if N was the same, it's possible to have other private values. But having that same E value is not a problem. It's not less secure. In fact, in most practical uses of RSA, everyone uses the same E value. I'll show you the software that does it. We can specify which E value, but by default, everyone uses the same value. It helps with the performance. So the E value, not so important for security perspective. The D value, of course, needs to be kept private. Part C was a little bit harder. Actually, a few more people seem to make attempts at this than part A. This requires the knowledge of the key generation algorithm. How do we choose the keys? So I will not go through this one in detail. But this was breaking RSA. It turns out when you use small numbers like in this example, it's quite easy to break. That is, Steve sends Tanaraka confidential message. We don't know what it is. This M. You intercept the ciphertext C. So you need to find M. So you need to think from the attacker's point of view, what do you know? You know C is 71. You know Steve's key or Steve's public key. And you know Tanaraka's public key. So then you need to work out which one was used to encrypt and then need to try and work out their private key. So perform an attack on RSA. I'll answer questions about your exam later. But have a look. So this one's a bit more involved. So harder than part A. But I think you should try and remember those steps for generating the key and therefore how to attack. Actually, my description in the answer here is it's quite long. It turns out the main point of the attack comes to the idea is to guess or to work out the private key of the user to find the value of D. And it's given N, find the totion of N by breaking it into its prime factors. And several people found the answer. Several, two or three, I think, found the answer of D and then eventually found that the message could be calculated. So you must be able to do part A. If you can't do part A, then consider withdrawing. Because that's a key part. The mathematics is easy. The concepts you need to remember a little bit. But the ordering of the keys and how you use them is very important. Part C was a little bit harder. You should try and understand how that works. Part D was simply the general approaches. And again, you should know these that there are some problems, some mathematical problems, which when we use very large numbers, hundreds of bits long, even hundreds of decimal digits, very large numbers, that those problems of calculating the answer take so long to solve that we call them impossible to solve in any reasonable time. And that's where public keys, ciphers, have their security. And that to break the ciphers, you need to solve these problems. And with RSA, you either need to factor a large number into its primes, P and Q, taking some large number, which was obtained by multiplying two primes together. Someone took P and Q, multiplied together to get N. Now they give you N, you need to go back and find P and Q. That's the challenge there. If the numbers are large enough, you won't be able to do it. The other part is that find the totient of the value. Again, if N is large enough, calculating the totient will take too long, unless you know P and Q. But you don't know P and Q because you can't factor N into its primes. And the other part, and again we'll see it in another algorithm later, discrete logarithm. Remember, we use exponentiation, M to the power of E, C to the power of D. The inverse operation is a logarithm. In modular arithmetic, it's called the discrete logarithm. The mod, we call it the discrete logarithm, not a normal logarithm. Solving a discrete logarithm with large enough numbers, again, is considered impossible. And those are three problems that make RSA secure, and also other algorithms for public key crypto. So I wanted to say a bit about that because you need that in the subsequent topics. The others you still need, but I think you can look in your own time. Any questions on the exam? Question? Maybe I'll look at that one later. Let me look at it later. Okay. Remembering the formula is sometimes not so useful if you can't use it. Let me have a look at it again later. Not sure. I'll look at it. No questions. Everyone's happy with their exam score. What did you get? Above 50 percent? Above 35? 17 out of 70. Okay. Something like less than 20 out of 70, then you need to work on improving, especially for your final exam. Otherwise, you're looking at one of those lower grades. F, D, D plus. No one wants them. Everything okay? Any questions? Is that yours? Good. Any questions? How are you going to improve? How are you going to get a better score in your final? Why did you not do the old exams? Did you do the old exams in this one? Just last year. Okay. All the old exams are available on the website. So yes, use them and don't look at the answers first. It won't help. So download and even print out the past year's exam and try and actually do it. That's the best way to study. Now, some questions may not be relevant across the different years, but that's a starting point to study. Don't print out the questions and then print out the answers and just look at them. You will not learn much that way. A little bit, maybe, but the best way is to try, check your own answers or get your friend to check your answers and then try again, maybe with the year before. If you can do that, you'll see a lot of the questions are similar to the last two or three years. I think out of the eight questions, probably six are almost copy and pasted from the last three years, but you need to practice. You can't just turn up in most cases. Any other questions about the exam? Before we close that. Today, I'm just going to give a demo and we will not start a new topic.


Hello, this is LaptopMedia, and today, we will show you how to open the Asus Vivo Book 16X and what's inside of it. To access this notebook's internals, you need to undo a total of 10 Philips head screws. After that, pry the bottom panel with a plastic tool. Please remember, it would be of great help to us if you just hit the like button and subscribe to our channel. That would motivate us to make even more and better videos for you. Here, we see a 50 watt hours battery pack. It lasts for about 10 hours of web browsing, or more than 8 hours of video playback. To take it out, unplug the battery connector, and remove the 5 Philips head screws. This machine has 8GB of DDR4 RAM soldered to the motherboard. It can be expanded by the single Sodom slot. Storage wise, you get 1 M.2 PCI-EX4 slot, which only runs at Gen3 speeds. Interestingly, the cooling comprises 2 heat pipes, 2 heat sinks, and 1 fan. In addition, the VRMs are cooled by a heat spreader. If you'd like to see more disassembly videos of the latest notebooks, we would highly appreciate if you hit the like button and subscribe to the channel.


A couple years ago I was reading a book by the author of the Dilbert comic strip Scott Adams and he said something that I found very interesting. He said that your willingness to be humiliated was one of the biggest indicators of success.  There's this thing about in the business world, particularly if you need to be visible, but pretty much everybody who's in business needs to be visible. They have to get attention for themselves, for their business to attract clients and make sales. And I've noticed that the people at the very top can be absolutely shameless. They just do not care at all what people think about them and they're willing to do pretty much anything publicly despite the judgment that will come their way. And I've noticed that this actually works really well, just stopping caring what people think and worrying about the task at hand. But most people are completely unwilling to do this and this is what stands in between where they are now and where they want to go in life or their business.   So we're going to go over that today.  All you have to do is log on to your computer and go on the internet to find evidence of this. It is pretty much how the internet infrastructure functions. It's just a bunch of people arguing with people that are different from them. But you could also go to a dinner party with friends of friends and start talking politics.   So this is number one.  Number two, here's the deal. In the United States at least, these are sobering facts right here. Two thirds of adults are overweight in the United States and the average annual income is $48,000 a year. Now nothing's wrong with this. Nothing's wrong with making $48,000 a year if you can support yourself on it. The context that I'm speaking about this in is if you want to live a certain lifestyle, a certain life, if you're an entrepreneur. I imagine that you are if you're here right now and so generally we are interested in making a lot more than $48,000 a year. Those are our personal values. So if we look at the general public in the United States, hundreds of millions of people, two thirds of them are overweight and they're going to make $48,000 a year. That's where the average level of thinking is going to get you. If you think and behave the same way that everyone else thinks and behaves, statistically on average, these are the results you're going to get. If you believe the things that everyone else believes, this is exactly where those beliefs will lead you, exactly here.  Actions come from our beliefs. If we believe that doing a certain thing in life is the right thing to do, based on our values, we will do that thing and we will get said action. So if we believe that going into $200,000 worth of student debt is the responsible thing to do for our careers, then we will go into student debt and then we will be trapped to pay off that student debt. So people who are in that situation are that way because they've adopted a certain set of beliefs. Oftentimes unconsciously, they've just been raised this way, but our beliefs are really going to determine the actions that we take in life. So number four, I have different results require different actions. If you want to get different results than the average results, you have to take different actions than the average actions.  I want to circle back up to number one on here.  In order to get different results, if we want to be above average in income, in lifestyle, whatever else, we're going to have to take different results. People think that taking different actions makes us crazy.  You acting and behaving and believing things differently than almost everybody else that you are surrounded by.  Psychologists call this in-group values and this is biological. We are programmed to want to fit in with our tribe so that we can survive. And generally we will adhere to in-group values to stay safe. That means we'll share the values of the tribe that we are living in. Now, if people exhibit out-group values, that is they go against the tribe, the tribe will shame that person into behaving the same way as them. Again, these are survival mechanisms. If somebody steps out and they're acting crazy outside of the tribe, of course the tribe is going to want to bring them back in to behaving in a normal manner so that they're predictable so they're not putting anyone in danger. So you have to understand these beliefs, these actions we take to maintain the status quo. They're unconscious and they're biological. Evolutionarily, these have been advantageous in the past and that's why the masses behave this way. Obviously it's not for a good reason. Do you think everybody wants these results? No, but they all want to fit in because their prehistoric brain, their lizard brain is saying this is what you must do to survive. So generally, most of us are just going to fit in with everyone around us. This is why environment is so important. But once we start to behave differently than those people around us, they're going to, their brain, their survival brain is going to go, this is not safe and they're going to shame us into behaving the same way that they are. So that means if we step out and we start our own business, you know, our families might say do the safe responsible thing and get a job. Even if we show them on paper like this is a dumb move, the job market is changing rapidly. There's no more security in a job than there is in starting a new business and I'm becoming antifragile. I am becoming immune to chaos by building the skills that I will get in entrepreneurship. And when the future rapidly shifts as it is, I will be able to adapt whereas everyone else will not be able to. Even if you show them evidence of that, they're just going to point you back to their beliefs, even if it doesn't make any logical sense at all. So this is, stuff is not based on logic, it's based on the way that we feel in our bodies and then that's showing up in our actions.  But we have to continue this further.  So we've already decided that in order to succeed we have to do things differently than everyone else.  And again this is because of our survival mechanisms and our body, our body is going to scream at us. It's going to say this is unsafe to look stupid, this is unsafe to be humiliated. And it's going to start to rationalize our unwillingness to do what it takes. We're going to set our goals, we're going to tell ourselves the actions we're going to take this week. We might say we're going to reach out to 20 different businesses and then all of a sudden our brain is rationalizing things. Saying oh you know you really shouldn't do that this week because you're busy with this other thing. Or don't reach out to those businesses, they're not going to be interested anyways.  Just like if I film this YouTube video and I think I look dumb in it, my body is going to tell me not to publish it. But I know that consistent publishing is the path forward for me despite what my body is telling me. This is the challenge here. So number eight, if most people are unwilling to look stupid, that means that most people will never succeed beyond what's average. If we're unwilling to step outside the in-group values, to step outside the tribe and stand alone, then we will never succeed. Because if we want to move beyond average, that requires taking actions that are not average. And so if we're not willing to do that, we can never expect any different results than being overweight and making $48,000 a year. There's just no reasonable, there's no reasonable outcome where we would get anything different than that. If we take the actions that everybody else takes, we're going to get the results that everybody else gets. Something that we've never had before, that nobody else has. We have to do things that nobody else will do.  Now, this is a practice. Like anything else, it's a practice. It's not like a decision you make one day. It's a decision that you have to make every single day. And the more that you do it, the easier it will get. So some programs and some teachers, they have exercises for this. I think maybe even in the four hour work week, Tim Ferriss recommends that you go to a public place and you just lie down. You could go to a busy coffee shop downtown and he recommends you just lie down on the floor for 10 seconds and then you get back up. Now, why do you do that?  Practice being uncomfortable around other people. Now, there are more practical applications of this as well. Like if we are learning sales, we might go to a coffee shop and we might ask for 10% off of our coffee order. Because that builds the habit of asking for things and being uncomfortable asking for things from other people because most people cannot do that. A lot of times when people are new to sales or entrepreneurship, they get to the end of their pitch. They have this prospect on the call who really needs what they have to offer. They know they can help the business and they get to the pitch where they have to ask for money. And they are so uncomfortable that they blow it because they unconsciously communicate to their prospect, this isn't safe. I'm doing something wrong. And then the prospect unconsciously picks up on that energy and then they're going to bail on the pitch because they say this person isn't confident asking for money. Why would I give them money? And you have to understand, most of this is subtext. It's happening beneath the surface. It's not what's literally showing up. It is the tone of voice. It is body language.  Because our unconscious brain is like a supercomputer that's taking all of the data points and then it's spitting out a decision that we're not even really aware of how we came to that decision. We might have a reason for it. We might say, I'm not going to do this because it's not in the budget. But what's really happening is our internal algorithm spit out, do not work with this person because the person didn't feel comfortable pitching. So do you understand most of what's happening both with ourselves and in the interaction with the market is subtext. It's these subconscious forces working together. It's these hundreds or even thousands of little tiny data points and inflection in that one word you said in your pitch.  Tiny little things that all work together to inform a decision. So I just have this fun little formula. I don't actually remember transitive properties. I think that was maybe eighth grade algebra. But I was thinking about something the other day and this just popped up in my mind.    That person's just like naturally good at sales or something. And oftentimes that's not really the case. It's just that they aren't afraid to look that. So I'll go through this again.   It's just a fact. It's how our bodies work. Number two, two-thirds of adults are overweight and they make $48,000 a year. So if you don't want to look stupid, that's what you'll get. They are this way because of their actions and their beliefs. Different results require different actions. So we have to step out and do things differently.    That's just statistically true.  This is a tough one. In the beginning it's really hard.  I was talking with my friend the other day about this and we were discussing it and I said, yes, sometimes I just say, we'll die then.    So the more you do this, like anything the easier it becomes and one day you might wake up and realize you're basically unstoppable because you're not worried about any of this stuff. It also is kind of a silly way to do this but I hope this helps put in the comments.  What do you do to deal with it?  If you want to, go practice looking stupid, let me know how it goes and don't forget to subscribe to the channel like this video, share with a friend and I'll see you on the next one. And I love Tuesdays, surfing in Bali and Wednesdays, snowboarding in Colorado. I'm a bit of an adrenaline junkie. It turns out when you work from anywhere, you can live a life you don't need a vacation from. And no, I don't have a trust fund. My name is Christian Martin. I've used a new marketing technique called funnel cloning to work from 20 different countries and I've helped close to a thousand people implement this in their own advertising business that work from anywhere away. You see, there are millions of businesses out there who need your help, even if you have no background in marketing. Businesses like your local dentist, your local acupuncturist, or even a roofing company. Walk down Main Street in anywhere USA and there are businesses who will pay you to help them get more customers. Today, I'm going to show you how to do just that. Think of yourself like a modern day madman. Only instead of misogyny and whiskey, it's a one-man shop working from a laptop on a beach. What I mean is I can do my work on Thursday morning before I head to a swimming hole in Mexico or Friday evening after parasailing in Chile. My clients are happy as long as they get results. You don't care how long it takes me or when I get the work done. And the beauty of funnel cloning is even if you never went to school for marketing, which I didn't, even if you don't have any prior experience, which I did not, you can get your first client and change your life. Ditch the boss, say goodbye to rush hour, and hello to an adrenaline rush. Just like these people who got their very first client with no prior experience. So do you want to know how I made six figures working from the back of a car winding through the mountains in Morocco while my German friend was driving and in between Muay Thai training sessions in Thailand? I'm going to show you the email scripts that can help you get your very first client. Just show up to today's webinar and I'll send the script straight to your email. If you've been looking for the right online business to start and you don't want to sell knockoff household products from China, I know some people do this, but it's just not for me. Then this may be exactly what you've been looking for. When you work from anywhere, you can learn to love Monday again. So next Monday, instead of a Garfield level grumpiness, you wake up with a smile on your face. Ready to love Mondays? Take the magic back at digitalnomad.com.