I'm not going to adjust it. It's straight. It does here, isn't it? I mean, it doesn't look it. It really does not look straight. There it is. Yeah. Camera one. And again, apparently neither do we. Baaaaaame. So we had a chat in the office a couple of weeks ago. I mean, OK, we have today as well, but I'm talking about a specific chat we had. Specifically, where we were looking at code like this. So we've got your all scripty tag here. Scripty tag, always good. A couple of variables in there. Avar, const, all right, cool. And again, but this time, it's a module. It's a module, and then the question we were posing each other was like, well, what can be accessed? What is available in the third script tag, which in this case is a module tag? Well, OK, now the only reason it's a module tag, right?  The only reason it's a module tag is because if it was normal script tag, these would not run in this order. Oh, because? Modules are deferred. Buy it implicitly. Yes. So if it was a script tag with defer, what is it? It's ignored. Oh, because it's inline. Deferred is ignored on inline script tag. Yes, it is. Today you learned. There we go. Good tangent. Now we've got that out of the way. Yes, the only reason I put type module on this is. So we have a good order. They actually execute an order. They appear on the snippet, right? Exactly. Good. So you actually did a Twitter poll. I did a Twitter poll. It was not like this exactly, but related. Very similar. It had some of the same things. And we thought of doing an episode. Yeah, like I wanted to write it. I wanted to tweet this. I did a poll 24 hours. I wanted to tweet the solution. And I said, no. No, you don't. That's precious content. Hold on to that content. And I will take credit for it again. So this time we actually have semi-good content. Exactly. Well, let's not say that. Let the audience decide. Yes, let the comments decide if this is actually good. I don't know that the comments decide, mate. OK. So I figured let's start by talking about how scoping works in JavaScript. Yeah, I mean, that's really what this is all about. Exactly. But we'll go back to the start. So back in olden times, ye olde JavaScripty. This is like ES3. ES3 time. The only way you could create a variable was with var. Yes. Which is good because that's what var stands for, a variable. It is. But you could also create functions. Yeah, that was in ES3 as well. Yeah, we had those. But they behaved in very, very similar ways. So a var or a function would be scoped to the parent function or the global if there wasn't one. So here we got one. And I thought you had two boundaries that existed at the time, like either function or you had the global. Hold on to that. Oh, boy. Oh, boy. OK. So we've got, yes, a var one that is on the global, two on the global, and we've got three. It's in a function. So it's scoped to the function. And four is also scoped within two. So you couldn't call four out of here. That wouldn't work. So if you did something like this, if you did var five inside an if and a function six, they would actually now exist within two. Within two. So you'd be able to log them. Because blocks were just not a scoping mechanism. So you could naively say that the only thing that has a scope in JavaScript in this era was a function or the global. That's what I would have said. That is what you would have said. There are two cases where that was not true. It still isn't true. OK. So. And so I will give you a clue that these are not places that you can create variables as such. But there are places where an identifier has a scope, which is smaller than a function. Ooh, that's oddly. The phrasing was so oddly specific. Well, I'm trying to help. And I love putting you on the spot. I do this a lot in the videos. And it's stuff that I wouldn't get either. Technically, what about for loops? Go back. If I had to for var i equals zero, is that i available after the for loop? Yes, it is. So that would go up into the parent scope. And we've done a video about less. Well, I was letting const, right? I wasn't sure if that was also some weirdness. No. And I didn't. I thought this was going to be a short video, but I think now we should just sit here until you get it. Until a figure. You name every bit of construct in ES3. Shall I just tell you? Yeah, you can tell. Because I wouldn't have got this either. Go on then. Catch. The error. Should I try catch the thing? Yes, we had that. We had that in olden days as well. Thank you very much. But this error identifier is only available in the catch. Interesting. OK. So this bit I did know, or I knew catch had a scope associated with it. But actually, because I'd heard that, it misled me to think that variables would be scoped within it. They're not. You do have variable in here. Those, again, would bubble up to the outer function or scope while. But the error stays within the catch block. And the other one, which I will forgive you for not knowing, is width. Is that still a thing? Well, it was in ES3. I think. I mean, is it still a thing? I think in strict mode, it stops you using it, but don't hold me to that. What does width even do? Right. What it will do is it will. It's just like a replacement for scope block. A block scope. Well, so it will take all of the properties of object and create local variables for them inside the width block, but only inside the width block. So it is, I believe. And again, don't hold me to this. I believe it's the only thing in JavaScript where the variables that can exist within it are not deterministically. You can't just do it apart. You can't figure that out at parts time. I guess the other part is eval. And that's why both of these things, like if you're using eval, if you use width, a lot of the performance optimizations that engines have just go out the window. Because they can't. The fact is, since I said I got this means that it's a thing. It is a thing. It is a thing. So that's the two things that have a different scope. But then, right? Oh, yes. Special behavior. Special magic behavior. Oh, boy. How is this the hoisting? No, this is not the hoisting. The hoisting is like, ah. So it's going to be a short video. No, I'm not going to talk about hoisting. People can search for hoisting. I think we talk about hoisting once. Fine. Good. We'll just put a list. It's all my favorite words. Hoisting. Hoisting. Hoisting source. If you have a global variable with var or function, it does a magic thing in that it will also, well, it will put it on the global object. How's that magic? I thought that's the thing. That is the global, right? Well, you say that. But that's not because you're used to it, right? It's actually weird. Come on, it's weird. But I thought that's just the whole premise of JavaScript. You have this, that your global scope is also tied to a specific identifier. But maybe that's just me coming into JavaScript too late where all these things have already been figured out. Well, hold on to that. I would say just as an aside, yeah. So self is referring to the global object. That's what it is in the browser. Yes. You also have a window. That's only in windows. But you're currently talking ES3, right? Because this is already different. Well, no, your global object is self today. Your global object is window if you're in a document. Global is the global in node. And the new bit is global this, which is trying to standardize across all of those. Because it turns out we couldn't standardize on any one of these because people use it to identify if I'm running it. I thought there was a case where self and window might not be equal. Maybe I'm wrong. That's not, that's not, that's not, that's not. I definitely don't know off the top of my head. OK. So yeah, so this is the magic case. It's weird and magic that stuff in the global goes on. Is self still window in module script text? Yes. OK. Then I'm wrong. That much I know. So we got some new stuff. We got new stuff. New JavaScript stuff arrived. Along with Va, we got some new ones, const and let. Which we talked about on the show before. And these have more sensible scoping, should we say? More, yeah, less unorthodox. Specifically block level scoping. So inside this if, as we've already seen, one is going to be thrown into the parent scope, be it a function or a global. Whereas two will only exist inside the if block. And same with three. And that's true for while for two. There's any curly braces, right? In fact, you can do that. Ah, see, there you go. And there you go. And it works. So that's kind of how you think about it. If it's got the curly braces, two and three are going to do the right thing inside there. So I was playing around and it suddenly occurred to me. Yeah. What's going to happen there? This should not throw. I think this will work. What do you think will happen? Because the var one will bubble up to the containing scope, which might be the function of the global scope. And then the const one will shadow that. Because shadowing is a thing anyway. Yeah, no. That is not what happens. Generally, when I thought about this, I didn't know. And I agree with you, run time, this could be a thing. But it fails at parse time. It sees two identifiers being declared within the same scope, even though var will do something inside differently. So it will actually throw. Yes. Interesting. And I guess it might be down to that if you have const one in a block, you cannot, previous to that, refer to one in a parent scope. It will tell you you are trying to use the thing before it is declared. So I think that's where this comes from. I see. But if I move the var outside the curly braces, that's fine, right? Yeah, that's fine. Interesting. OK. So there we go. That was a pointless piece of information, but it's something I learned while making the slides for this. So I guess the first part of the question, really, is we've kind of seen these vars, we've seen these consts things. But across two script tags, how does they work? Yeah, how does it? How does they work? One goes onto the global, as we've seen. We are pretty sure about one at this point. It works. Two is already slightly a bit more questionable. Yes. So you could also do soft at one, fair enough. And yes, the questionable one is two. That was a good sentence to say, wasn't it? Questionable one is two. Questionable, the one that is questionable is two. Now, there's no good way of saying that. Do you know what? I went back and forth on the variable naming here, between just doing A, B, C, and D, or one, two, three, and four. And I felt like I'd done the right thing. Now, I realize I did not. OK, it's very confusing. Well, it's better than foobar buds. So that's what I started with, and I ran out with foobar, yo, I mean, there's crooks and all. I don't remember. I don't remember after that. Especially useless tangent. So, two. The thing is, I did the quiz. I looked at the solution. I don't remember. Really? Great. Excellent. So when you do const two at the top level, like for, it goes on the global scope. It goes on the global scope. OK, cool. So this works, because the two scripts share a global scope. So contrary to what I think most people on Twitter believed, a script tag is not equivalent with curly braces. It's not a scope. Exactly. Correct. But this is where things get different. Right. Yes, I remember now. And so, yes, it too does go on the global in terms of like ECMAScript. It is a global. But what it doesn't do, is it doesn't do the weird hooking it into the global object. Because technically, the global object is under the actual global context. It seems like that's how I understood Yang, one of our V8 engineers who wrote an explanation. Yes, yes, and sort of. In some ways, the global that one and two exist on are the same. In some ways, they are in some ways, they aren't. Because same again, if you did var one equals true and var const one equals true, you could think if they're sitting at a different level, it should all be fine, but it's not. It will stop you from doing that. So it's one global, except one. So I guess standard that it actually is magic, like you said, that the one gets additionally patched into the global object, which is something else from the global context. Yes, it's kind of object record thing in ECMAScript, and that's how that works. So yes, so there we go. One works, self.one works, two works, self.two will be undefined. It will be undefined. So there we go. OK. But what happens here? What changes? Well, I did know that module scripts don't bubble up to the global. You're sort of right. If you create, imagine that they're wrapped in a function. Right, so if you have a free floating var in a script module tag, that will not end up on the global context or the global object. Correct. So it will, you still have access to the global. But you can still access documents and blah, blah, blah. But if you want to put something on the global, you have to do it manually and explicitly. Absolutely. That is true. So that, I guess, takes us to this. The question on. The question on. The question on how the teacher used to say question used to wind me up. I mean, it's just wrong, isn't it? And do you know what, as a teacher, you say that word a lot. So it's really frustrating. This question. All right, so we know now that 1 and 2 will be, will, oh, no, now, they know that. Well, let's do the rest of the episode without actually saying proper words. That's fine. All right, so 1 and 2 are on the global context. The global context. But no, the lookups also happen on the global context. So this will work. So 1 and 2. 1 works. Self on works. Self on works. 2 works. Self.2 will be undefined. Self.2 will be undefined for the reasons we did before, because even though it's in a script module, it accesses it in the usual way. That will throw. That will absolutely throw. Yes. That's a pause to remember. Yes, because we treat module as if it's wrapped in a function. It's got its own kind of scope. So this will actually be an undeclared variable. Undeclared variable. Self.3 would be still undefined, because that's different. That doesn't throw. Looking up. A property is fine. So if you're undefined, it wouldn't throw. For. Same. Would also throw. Yeah. And that is it. That is how scopes work in JavaScript.  If you rely on variables being passed in between script tags, implicitly, probably, well, in that pattern. There are cases you would do this, because if you've got a, like you're doing a server render thing, but you also want to dump the initial set of data into a script tag, that is someone where you will want to do. I'm saying that if you want to do that, make it as explicit write self dot blah, blah, blah. Oh, interesting. Yeah, OK. Because don't rely on these implicit rules, because then everybody will look at this and have to go, oh, I don't remember how the details were of these global context scoping rules. I would actually agree with that. I think the whole thing about, well, there's a reason why Const 2 doesn't end up on the global object, because it's weird. And also, we kind of want to stop putting everything on the global object, right? Because it's been kind of polluted over time anyway. So let's only make that happen when it's a conscious choice by the developer to actually write down self dot blah equals fine. And we do see that with future JavaScript as well. Things like async functions generate as all of that. They're functions. They still behave like functions, but class behaves more like constant let, in that it will be block-scoped and not do the global thing as well. It's something I looked up in the train this morning thinking, so I might ask that. So I bet it wasn't my stuff. You didn't ask that, so I just thought I'd crowbar that little fact in, so I feel fulfilled. Right. Did you use all your knowledge you looked up now? Is there something else you want to sprinkle in? That is all the knowledge I had to give you in this episode. Done. Thank you very much for this insightful report. I've kind of gotten used to wearing my glasses for this shoot. And now I'm going to get to what point I can confidently pull out the rustle and go, like, and do you see that? Well, that's how I've noticed, actually, I've got, because I wear glasses at, you know. You have the two stripes of doom. They're really, my new glasses are actually really harsh like that. And so I've been thinking, if I just keep wearing them, it's going to get better.


Hello wiki tree years. Hello non wiki tree years. Hello all across the world. I'm sure we have people who are it's morning time, who it's afternoon, evening, maybe it's the middle of the night. Who knows? But hello everyone. How was everyone doing? I hope everybody's doing well today. We have a smaller crowd, this live cast, not as many fans built up. So we have as usual me and a one team members on wiki tree. Then we have Mindy over there. I can't see my finger. Mindy over there who's our wiki tree challenge coordinator. Then we have Lucy down there who is our team captain for Judy's week. And then we have Judy Russell. We're finishing up her week today. Right now it's pretty much over. It's happening. It's happening. So just for for those of you who maybe aren't wiki tree years, what is wiki tree? I would love to answer that. So wiki tree is a community of genealogists who are working together on a single family tree. Unlike a lot of other genealogy sites where you build your tree over here and I built my tree over here. And we never really talked to each other despite sharing several deep ancestors on wiki tree. When we get to a common ancestor, we get to work together to find information, share sources and resolve discrepancies. So in other words, we collaborate to grow an accurate single family tree that connects all of us. And the best part is 100% free free free. And then for those of you don't charge for anything. No, nothing. Just just your time. I guess. Yeah, you don't need your time. That's free. And then the wiki tree challenge another step. The wiki tree challenge is our year long event where each week we take on a different genealogy guest star and make their tree more accurate on wiki tree than it is anywhere else. For instance, this week we're working on Judy. Well, we finished Judy's last week. And then this is part of our year long. This is part of our year of accuracy where our goal is to make wiki tree more accurate, make connections and make friends like Judy. Judy is now our friend. So as we I guess we will just move on. That's wiki tree and the wiki tree challenge if you guys didn't know. And how you do now you do the more you know. So I guess we will move on to I guess we'll kind of just dive in to start talking about what we found for Judy. But we wanted to begin with. We're just talking about Judy's tree in general. I think real quick before we're going to do MVP. But whatever order you want to do it in. Nice and jazzy and bright there are most valuable participant or player was Nannette Pazudi. She was rocking this challenge. We really appreciate all the hours that you put in. Nannette, it was awesome. And then we also have our top five. Nannette of course was on the top there Ian Speed, Frank Yatsik, Paul Gierzewski and Chris Ferrielo. We also have a special mention to Dieter Lorentz. He actually wasn't in the competition signed up. He's one of our experts we've used for translations. But he got so interested and excited he joined in and was working on profiles and stuff this week. So so yay Dieter. Thank you very much. Now we do have a point system we give points for each profile that is a direct ancestor or their nuclear relative that is created. And then we give 10 points if you break a brick wall down. Now Judy already knew that her research is so impressive. There was a good chance we wouldn't have any brick walls broke broken down. But as a teaser, I can tell you we did give out one 10 point bonus. So you'll have to keep watching to find out who got that and where. Now for the individual members that I just mentioned that were top five and that's been with us since 2015. She's part of the part of several projects data doctors Italy military award presidents in 1776. Frank Yatsik has been a wiki trailer actually since just last year. He's fairly new. It's impressive that he's picked up as quickly as he can. He is a German researcher. And he was brought in by a fellow member by Hillary Yatsby. Paul Gierzewski. He's been with us since 2015. His projects are profile improvements and data doctors. We have a lot of data doctors like to do this. Ian speed, which you guys have met in a previous live cast has been a wiki tree here since 2017. Her projects. He's part of the England project, our ever important mentor project and a founder of the Accessibility Angels, one of our newer projects. And then last but not least, Chris very low has been with wiki tree since 2017. He is an ambassador spreads the wiki left. He's a team leader and a project coordinator. He is crucial to the Italy project. There's a lot of Chris going on that helps support that project and keeps it going. And he's involved in many, many other projects. Thank you for our top contributors for duties week. They did such a great job guys. Yes, we will start to go into maybe the details of what we've found. Lucy, do you want to start or do you want me to? I think you should. Now this is the start of Judy's story. Of course, Judy and the expected father and mother. Yes, you still have them even though we didn't have to research them. Our part of your story starts out on those eight great grandparents. So the lines that you see all the way to the right, that's where our researchers and team members started out at. Lucy's little bit of creativity. She wanted to warn you now you did say to read your blog and make sure we kept our research aligned with yours. As we read through it. And trust me, we were all reading it. We are captivated. You have just some really amazing articles in those. I'm definitely not a chore. But she did want to warn you that traipsing down that trail. There are more Johann Kristoff's than even you talked about. I can't say I'm shocked. Now, Lucy, you did say you thought there were five, right? At least five generations. So, okay, on this one on Johann Kristoff, is that Gromula? Gromula. Yeah. Okay. We didn't find any new information on Johann. He was born in 1823. Now, I know you had some that were in Reuters Dwarfs. I'm not in Reuters Dwarf. But for these, the records we found that's where this particular ancestor was. We had one of our fabulous team members had a power outage and she was hurting some very active young children and felt bad she couldn't research. So, she took the time and did this sketch for you. This is where he was married at and where his children were all baptized was in this church in Rudin's Reuters Dwarf. So, just a little side benefit of having that extra collaboration and team members working on it. We thought you would enjoy that. That's gorgeous. Elaine Weatherall. Weatherall. She, she drew the little photo. How cute. That is truly gorgeous. Yes, we can look at her. Oh no, what did I just do? Click something. Johann Kristoff's profile. Then we even added the the pictures linked to his um on his profile. So, if you wanted that, you're able to download it. Oh, I will want it for sure. Okay. And then on Johann Friedrich, now, we had several people that that were working just steadily around the clock on this and you can see in our changes log, that's another nice thing about WikiTree is that um you know, you can see what was done by who on what day. So, this is looking at the at Friedrich's changes log. Just a small portion of it and you can see where I went in, Frank went in, Paul went in um Dieter was in there several times. There was somebody else that went in and did little corrections. We all worked together and we've actually, you know, gotten pretty good. Anybody that's been on WikiTree long enough, we've gotten pretty good at that. We, we work with each other. If somebody's a little stronger at doing this part of the profile, I let them do it. You know, if we need help, we have somebody else jump in and do formatting or whatever needs to be done. Um at one point now, we had nine children for him and this was kind of a a hot topic for a little bit within our Discord channel where we communicate with each other while we're working because uh one of the records, as I'm sure you've seen of the daughters, said that she was the fourth child for surviving and so I took that to mean free children had not made it and I calculated and added those into the list of children. Um when one of the other researchers, researchers went in, they looked at the towns that were around that and they found records where they think those children actually did live. They just weren't baptized in that same church as the rest of the family members. So, I mean, breadcrumbs for you. It's something to keep in mind. That's true. There's a, they have eight children now. So, that's still a lot. That's still a busy family. Absolutely. That's really cool. I was working on this, this profile a lot too. I guess you mentioned that. Our German researcher. That'll be really helpful. Thank you. Anytime. And then we have Sophia and you know, you've already told us and especially in your blogs, it's just it's it's heartbreaking some of the times and you read about the women that have lost so many of the children and times were harder back then. Medical care wasn't what it is now. Um support wasn't what it is now. You know and and here Sophia Schuman was another one of those incredibly strong women because she had to be. You know her father died before she had even married. Um her husband died and left her with young children and so she had to be the one that kept the family strong and kept them together. You know and we saw no evidence that those children went to other family members. They stayed with Sophia. So, it was it was another one of those, you know, touching moments. Um the Friedrich, not sure how to say that one. Traga. Traga. Traga. He died before his 14th birthday and I know you have that name on your tree so you knew that already but it just kind of lends itself. You know here's somebody that's already lost so many people around her and then he got up to the age of 14 and something tragic happened. You know and she just kept on with the family. So, hats off to her. I mean incredibly brave woman. You almost think it's harder at that point. I mean if you lose them as an infant that's one thing but when you think you're going to raise them all the way and then lose them at that point that's got to be got to be tough. Yeah and you'd have some so many memories at that point.  You know there just would be so many times in your life that that would you would cross those memories. Now this was one that Lucy had worked on with her team and I mean they researched and debated and once again you know we we have the post in the G2G which I'm sure you've at least peaked out or did when we started. You're very welcome to read through and get to the end of it. But you know while we're working on the profiles and helping each other we're working at a discord and they just went you know for days solid on this line and could not get anything set in stone unfortunately but you got to give an A for effort. Absolutely that's a tough line to work on. Now we did find a few new details here for Heinrich. We found that his birthplace was confirmed as being in Reistead and I saw that you had what probably was a what maybe a transcription error that you had seen somewhere. You had a question mark by it on the primary tree but we did find records that confirmed that that was definitely his birthplace and where there was only one child listed when we started working on him and we looked we found a total of four children. So we wanted to welcome some new people to your family and that would be Johann Wilhelm Ehler Hünike. Is it Hünike or Hünike? I think it's probably Hünike. I think they probably don't pronounce the umlau that much. Yeah because it goes both ways in the records with and without the umlau. I have a problem with the German names. I try but yeah they never they never read like you know they never read like they're supposed to sound and then the other children were of course Anna Katharina and Carl Heinrich. Heinrich himself died on the 8th of November 1843 in Bremen. He was about 66 years old and was listed as a laborer by trade. Good to have those siblings to chase. You never know what you're going to find. Those can be valuable. Absolutely. I get the fan club. Mm-hmm. Oh Martin. Judy says oh Marty, Marty, Marty. Well he was actually called Gilbert. Oh okay. His grandfather was Martin. We should probably change his preferred name. It's it goes both ways. He was also called MG. Oh okay. That's pretty cool and so you already know that we didn't get any spectacular new finds but you know that's that's one of the other things we do like I kind of hinted at earlier is everybody has different strength. So you know the people that you saw the data doctors that are working those are people that just work on suggestions which could be errors or they just could be things you need to look at. We had a number of people that went through and cleared up a lot of the mistakes that we had on WikiTree. So getting us closer to our goal of accuracy and improving your branches and you know and they have some fun doing so. Good. Looks like they added some like the deserter to get here and the directories to his profile as well. Excellent. Yes we tried not to do the you know this person got married in 1843 because Judy said so. We actually did our own research and tried to see how much we could come up with on our own for all of these lines and you know I think the team did some pretty incredible work. The other thing that I really want to emphasize and this is true of all of us I can be wrong. I made every beginner mistake there is to make when I was a baby genealogist and some of those errors have not been corrected. So I'm really looking forward to seeing what you guys have done. That seems like our somebody in the netherworld changed the preferred name and added a nickname to his profile. Real-time changes that's what we do. That's really good. That's impressive. They're listening. We're on a spirit world. We are on those errors. And then also on that along that line one of the team members was feeling ambitious and started a really cool space page. So she took that engagement that had been talked about previously where they did the engagement party at a bridge party and they had had the brides picture on the tally cards and the whole bit and she created a space page and we're going to be creating profiles for all of those people and they'll be linked to that page so she already has some of them done. I thought it was pretty cool. That's really exciting. Is that space page linked to the profile that we can? It should be on your list. It wasn't on my list of links but I feel like we should probably have it's probably listed somewhere somewhere in here. For a lot of links. Yes there are. We have all these inline references for each little fact. So and then we did leave a lot of research in it. Mm-hmm. Sarah just really quick for people who might not know. Would you explain what a space page is? Yes so a space page. So on wiki tree we are able not only to create profile pages such as what you see but you're able to create a page where you can put whatever kind of information you want. So like they were talking about we have... Oh no. I wish I linked. But basically like if we if you wanted to collect a whole bunch of information about a certain... Like for one for one example a one-place study you can create a one-place study use a free space page to gather a whole bunch of information about the person and maybe put links to everybody who lived there and the census records. So it's not just about creating profiles but you can also create pages for whatever other kind of information that you want. So that's a free space page. So you can kind of have the freedom to add whatever different information not just about people. That could be done then for that church in Rooterstorff. Right. Absolutely. And we have a lot of people that do things like that. They'll take a group or a club or a church or something and start building that so that you can look and see everybody that was involved with whatever the event was. Really cool way to link people and also to research and know more about the families. That's really exciting. And this was if you see on the slide page this is kind of the a snippet of what was on what's on the free space page. They have who attended and they linked each. They will eventually have links to every single person but then it's like kind of collects things in nice in a nice way. That's really organization. Organization. Okay and this one of course was the Robertsons. So they were not able to find out much on these. Now these were those where they were looking at the slaves to see right that you had said you wanted to know more about and they did gather some information on them. Lucy did you have anything specific you wanted to share on those? Well the daughter married to get married but then they appeared on the 1880 census and that was just that's the last we could find and Anna was listed on there as disabled but it didn't it could be she was laying or bedridden you couldn't say but I couldn't find any I couldn't find them anywhere I searched the whole country and I tried to search the husband I couldn't find anything on him except public census records. But then the research will be the research will be on going on that now we have a US Black History Project and so they've taken an interest in that also and they're going to be doing further research on that. Terrific great thank you. What a great picture. Isn't that wonderful? That is. I love that one. Eula Lee I mean she's just you can just see so much character in that phase it's amazing. She didn't once again provide us a chance to get new information but it was another place where we could go ahead and focus on getting rid of some of the accuracies that we saw as this is one of our main you know tenants of the challenge and of the year to be more accurate. I think it was time well spent. I love it you know my whole reason for saying yes was because you guys were focusing on on accuracy and if the whole notion of a one world tree is really going to succeed it's going to have to be with verification and accuracy. Absolutely. So I'm I'm delighted. I'm thrilled with what you guys are doing. I was in a show we did have a free space page for all of our information that we collected for Judy. So just an example of a free space page before we move on so we. Wow. They did a really good job. So it's like a collection of everything before they started. So information shared by Judy photos problems interesting finds and then a whole bunch of other stuff. So example of a free space page and this specifically for Judy. Sounds great. And this is this is public so everybody can access this. And then I think our last one Mindy is do we get a drum roll? Is it time for a drum roll? It's a boy. Our one brick wall that we broke down for you Judy was for Johanna Sophia Schumann Geisler. That's Freddie Geisler's wife. Her father's name was Elias. He was a saddler by trade. Most likely died before 1806. So unfortunately we couldn't find a death record for him because they're not available online before 1799 in Cana. Right. Now the German records are from that part of Germany are very slow getting online. That's great. Yeah and I noticed in some of the collections like you look through them if you're actually paging through and some are indexed and some aren't so. It's just kind of hit and miss what they've indexed so far. Well and even harder is that you're dealing with the German script. Yes. So it's not even like reading regular you know what we've been trained to to read is colonial handwriting. This is not only colonial but German colonial. So someone in the comments said we found Friedrich's father as well. Was that a discovery today? See they've been working all the way up till now. Yeah so if anything if you guys discovered anything today I don't have it in my notes. Make sure you make sure you add it to that free space page so you know. Absolutely. Yes. So yeah one brick wall. Yay we found it. You know it had the only thing you've done been to focus on correcting mistakes. That would have been enough for me that really is what I wanted out of this challenge and and I'm I'm delighted. I'm I'm hopeful that as things go forward with that kind of an emphasis that that wiki tree can take you know can can really fill out a need here and that's our goal. Nobody will will commit to ensuring that what gets added gets added with verification. I think we've got we've got a real need for this. There's no doubt about it. And I agree you know and and like I said we left we left a lot of little breadcrumbs for you and for other researchers. I know we have several people that said oh we're not leaving this tree when the weekend. So we're going to keep working at the ranch. I'm they're they're interesting. I'll loan you any of your one. Judy says please share my ancestors. It's the kind of family on both sides with enough difficulty because of the the germination on one side and the southern US issue on the other with vital records being very late to get started. A scots irish bent which means that they tried not to leave records. It's it's a tough thing to try to trace some of these lines. So I'll take all the help. Yeah and for some of the southern states too. I mean you have so many counties in some of those states that are burned counties. You know there's a map online from the Alabama Department of Archives and History where they hash marked the counties with records lost. It's got to be at least half of the counties of Alabama. And of course one of the ones that had multiple records lost situations is the county where my family was located. So yeah I'm well familiar with the the difficulties of southern research. And it it's the kind of situation where you get somebody who wants to work on one of these families game. I'll work with them any way they want. I think it'd be terrific. They would love that. I think everybody just did a great job. I think they they they looked at what what my goal was and dovetailed that perfectly with what the goal was for the wiki tree challenge. And the two of those put together I won't say you've got me completely converted. Let's put it this way. I'm not I'm certainly not going to badmouth wiki tree anywhere you guys have done a great job. That a really really good job and I'm I'm very pleased. We did have a final from the captain Lucy. And Lucy said I am having great fun. I don't think we found out much that Judy didn't already know. But I know we did a good job in cleaning up a bunch of mistakes. We had one German member that worked himself into a migraine but recovered. We lost an English researcher this last week for the same thing a migraine. We had several people that had power outages and the server hiccup. So you know not only is it the German and the southern records but real life kept happening out there. So it just and then she said I hope Judy is happy with what we've done. Absolutely. I think you guys did a great job. And I personally am just very appreciative. Thank you for inviting me. Thank you for having me as part of this. And I can't wait to see what you do with everybody else all year along. It's been great so far.  So we're excited. Terrific. Looks great. Good luck with everything going forward. I guess I just wanted to show the tree. And then somebody was asking about the free space page. How to get to the free space page. But I guess what free space page you're talking about. The you can search the main free space page you can on Judy's profile or in G2G. Nope. That that's the wrong one. There are so many G2G posts. There we go. That's the one I'm looking for. So we have the her G. This is this is where we put all of the G2G posts for everyone was kind of communicating along with this cord. And we have some free space pages here. See link to free space page. And that's how we got to this one at least. Okay. And then. Do we have any other questions that were posed in the chat or do you have any questions or other comments or anybody have any questions or comments or Lucy. Did you want to add anything? Or we. Now the comments the comments people were really just listening. They thought it was pretty interesting. So they were unusually quiet. But you know usually this is tough stuff to do. And it gets to the point where you think I've been over this a dozen times. I'm not going to see anything new.  And I'm going to leave you with a little bit of a teaser because I know you you're going on to talk about the start of your next challenge. Right. So I'll leave you with a little bit of a teaser. But I did see one thing online. And I'm actually going to blog about it tomorrow. But you guys showed me that I have been making a mistake with respect to one of my sources for a long time. Wow. So it's now going to be corrected. And I'm going to blog about it because one of your people said you couldn't find something that you should have been able to find. And I figured out why. And it's my mistake. Wow. Looking forward to that. That would be great. Yeah. And speaking of next week we actually due to extenuating circumstances we don't have a genealogy guest start for this coming week. It'll be a rest week. So our hard our hard our WikiTrees who've been hard at work can take a break. I know some of them just don't really sleep. So we won't have a. Thank you for challenging us. Thank you for all the work that you did on my behalf. So thank you all. You did a great job. We appreciate you letting us look at your tree and taking a chance on us. I feel like I could have tied a song into that. I almost did. I almost did. Probably not. Don't want to do that. No. Yes. So we thank thank you Lucy for being such a great team captain this week and leading leading our team members to make Judy's tree the most accurate can be. We've got down one brick wall. Right. Just well let's look at the stats really quick. We didn't actually look at the our stats page. So at least on how many points total was it? It was I can't see this screen but 143 total points. 143. Nice. I hope that's good. That is good. Terrific. Yeah and it was it was Frank Yatsik who actually got the the bounty point who broke down who found that new ancestor of yours. Terrific. Chasing those cana people. I wish they worked on that. I couldn't even read. Yeah. Frank was actually brought on just they were like you need to work on Judy's tree. So you should be on Wicked Tree. Sounds good to me. Always delighted to be used as a bad example. Something for people to have to struggle with. Oh I was I wasn't even showing oops I thought I was showing this whole time but I wasn't. Now you are. Now I am. So it looks like things people got and it was MVP but now it doesn't look like so anymore. No she is. Oh she is we don't count. Because there's Lucy and Mindy it's top. They're the team they're team captains though and a challenge coordinator so. They don't count sorry. It doesn't count. Well you count a lot to me. They count and get points in other ways. We had a whole bunch of people participating. We almost had 2000 total contributions to your tree like edits and different changes here and there. And that doesn't count all the free space page edits that doesn't even count that. That's great. That's terrific. All I can say is thank you again. Great job everybody. I've got a lot to look at and and play with. Would you say you would give us an A prior to checking everything. A. Absolutely A for open. I mean that. And the fact that you were candid enough. To say that you had not made a lot of new discoveries. I would have been surprised if you had. And I would have been I would have been. Skeptical Skeptical if you had. And the fact that you were willing to say that your focus was on accuracy. Makes me feel better about the whole thing. So I was really pleased. I'm pleased with the way that it was handled. I'm pleased with the emphasis on accuracy. At least an A for effort. And the gentleman I believe it was. Who was working on my second great grandmother. And Louis Kessler says. Wicked tree challenge for publicity. Read the blog tomorrow. Louis Kessler. That's why I'm getting a thing on the blog tomorrow. Because that's why it came up. I would not have noticed this. It's something I literally didn't see at all. But the gentleman who left the note on my second great grandmother who was Martha Louisa Baker Cottrell. On her obituary. She's got a point. And I made a mistake. And he did a nice job in pointing that out. So that's the kind of thing that. When it's done right. Instead of just saying well she must be right about what she said. No I was wrong. There's a reason why I was wrong. And I'm not going to knock myself too hard for it. Wait till tomorrow. Wait till tomorrow. We're excited to read it. There you go. We will definitely make sure we share it with. The wicked tree community as well. Please please do. Because it really does point out how. What's that word again? Collaboration. Exactly. And point people in the right direction. Always helps with fresh eyes. Indeed it does. So again we thank you Judy so much. I know everybody had a blast working on your tree. Thank you Lucy. Thank you everybody who is watching. And everybody who will be watching in the future that maybe is not live. Thank you as well. And just it was it was great. Like we said we don't have a anybody for this week but still to stay tuned for next week. We have our next our next genealogy guest our Thomas McKinty will be next week Wednesday at 8 p.m. Eastern time. And then we still have our Saturday live cast at 10 a.m. Eastern time where we're just kind of recap the week. Kind of talk about the challenge a little bit. And any updates about wiki tree Saturday at 10 a.m. We do that. And other people are going to blog about wiki tree. Just do it. Blog about it. Tweet about it. Oh yeah. That's actually Ellen Thompson Jennings. She's got the shop the Hound site. She's our wiki tree guest in week 13. So. Oh week 13. Can't wait for that. Again. We're on week what. This is like six. Six. I think I'm sitting on six. Six weeks down. However many more to go. Minus 52. 652 minus six. However many more that is. That's how many more we have left. That's too much math for right now. Exactly. There are can never math. It is known. And thank you for having me as part of. Thank you everyone. We will see you guys next time. And that'll be all. That's all folks.


As an intern, I truly believe that you're in a unique position to understand the work that the agency does. So my name is Jaidah Davle. I'm a Dutch national of Indian origin. I like to see my work benefiting mankind. My name is Amelia Lee and I'm from Malaysia and I studied environmental science. You could say there's like a mini-earth in the VIC because everyone's come from different regions and they share their stories to what happens in their respective countries. I'm not only learning about science and different fields, but also learning how to communicate with people from different cultures. I'm straight out of university and I would have never thought maybe six months ago that I'd be working in Zika Diagnostics. My name is Frank Rufa. I'm Polish-Canadian and I have a Bachelor of Science in Biomedicine.  It's a lovely stepping stone to start your career on. This experience has certainly ignited a pretty deep desire for me to continue a career in this. At the end of the day, this is what prepares you for your adult professional life. And I was actually really looking forward to meeting new people. I guess for me that's the highlight of the internship. It's the portal for my future career. And the training I've received, kind of the networks I've built over time will definitely be a stepping stone for my future career no matter where I end up. A lot of internships are getting coffee and sending by a coffee machine. This is not the case here. It's something that I've wanted to do for a long time and I was very pleasantly surprised to receive this opportunity and I'm very grateful for all the help.


I've been meeting wonderful people here at BlockShow, great entrepreneurs from Asia, from all over the world are here and working on many exciting projects. I like to think of this industry as one big family or community. My partner Dan Larimer came up with this concept known as a DACRA, Decentralized Autonomous Corporation. I like to call it a Decentralized Autonomous Community because that's what this is all about. It's about building community. It's not trying to figure out what's best for you and what's going to serve you. It's about figuring out how to serve others and in doing so you're going to end up building a big community and that's what will make your project successful. And so there's lots of fantastic entrepreneurs here working on wonderful things and growing this big community of tribes and family. Jobless world we're moving into where all of us are going to be unemployed, which is a good thing. It will allow us to go back to basics and prior to the Industrial Revolution over 90% of the world's population were entrepreneurs. You only had two big centralized institutions, the church and state. And the Industrial Revolution is what gave rise to the megacorporation, which is what has slowly been turning all of us into robots, machines. So in that world we're going to be able to go back to building things that last. Instead of trying to hack together minimally viable products in a weekend to make money because that's our goal, we're going to go back to basics. And in those basics there's this wonderful concept known as Ikigai, it's a Japanese term, which means to figure out what you love, what are the things you're passionate about. Figuring out what you're good at, you know, there's a lot of things that some of us love but it might not be, you know, I'm never going to be the best basketball player. Just wasn't in the cards for me. But figuring out what you're good at and figuring out what the world needs, what's going to serve others. And if you can figure out what the world needs, what you're good at and what you love, you'll find eventually that center area there which the Japanese call Ikigai, which is finding your real life's purpose, which instead of spending one or two or three years working on something or three days, you'll spend your entire life developing and perfecting skills, things that I like to call superpowers. And that's what will eventually make you a superhero. And so it's figuring out those things and figuring out then with those things, those are your gifts that you can then serve and give to others.  Money is that thing that very sadly most people spend their life in pursuit of. And you know, the funny thing about the whole blockchain space is most people come into this in pursuit of money because they see great economic opportunity. And yes, there is. And lots of money is being made. But that's not really what this is all about. We're reinventing the idea. And so money is this very sad thing that a lot of people think that if they have it, it's going to bring them happiness. And so a lot of people spend half their lives in pursuit of money thinking it's going to bring them happiness because of advertisements that have been convincing them that if they have this thing, you know, it'll get them that thing that they want and, you know, happiness will be there. And for those fortunate few, those lucky ones that actually, you know, get that money, that goal that they're pursuing, they actually accomplish it. What's really sad is a lot of those people then spend the rest of their lives miserable in fear of losing it.  Money isn't a bad thing.  People kill people. Money isn't bad. It's what we do for it. That is, you know, life is about being in the now. It's about being present because that's the only time there is. And in the now, you don't need very much, you know, so money is that thing that still has, it's an important tool.  And, you know, fiat money is still very important, you know, because we still need to be able to transact in these local places and we don't want prices and things going up and down. I mean, blockchain currencies yet are not replacing sort of transactional money yet. You know, Bitcoin is a store of value. It's really more like Gold 2.0. And if you understand the origins of money, precious metals were the primary form of money for the last 5,000 years, Gold, Silver, Copper. And they were the primary form of money for very specific reasons. They had attributes that made them very useful for 5,000 years. And that is that it needed to be, you know, sufficiently scarce so that you didn't need truckloads of it to buy loaf of bread. You know, it had to be transportable. It needed to be malleable.  You wouldn't want money that if it was put in a safe a year later would, you know, have gone bad. And so Gold and Silver and Copper, you know, perform these things very well. If you look at Bitcoin, it actually has all of those attributes. It's just better at all of them. And the only difference between something like Gold and Bitcoin or potentially other cryptos in the future is that it's intangible. And I'd say that tangibility is not a positive trade. It's an actual flaw or a fault in comparison. I'd rather have an intangible thing because I can send it anywhere instantaneously. I can't really do that with something like Gold. And then Fiat Money is this kind of thing we've only had for, in its current form, less than 50 years. The entire monetary system of the world is a 50-year-old experiment. Something most people don't know. I want to see us decentralize all the things, decentralize everything. We're in the beginning sort of phase of all of this. Think of the Internet. If I were going to describe, so one of my superpowers, you know, we all have them. And if you don't know what your superpower is, I encourage you to spend some time actually dwelling on that. We all have them and we can have many of them. But one of my superpowers is that I'm fairly good at taking complex ideas and distilling them down into simple concepts that I could describe to a child. To anyone, I can find your vibration and learn how to communicate with you in a way that you'll understand. And I'm a reasonably good storyteller. And so the Internet, if I wanted to describe it in three words, is a data transport protocol. The problem is it's an insecure data transport protocol. What the blockchain is doing is it's upgrading the Internet into a secure data transport protocol, meaning the new Internet, the upgraded Internet, and the former Internet, the one we use today because it's insecure, has really only been able to do things around the movement of information. All of the really amazing things that can be done with the Internet haven't been possible yet because it hasn't been secure. And it wasn't that the people that were building the earliest of protocols that make up the Internet weren't smart, it's that we didn't have the processing power. We didn't have the ability to secure the Internet. Now we built the entire thing wrong and everything is gonna have to be rebuilt. So when we get scalable blockchains that secure everything that are fee-less, EOS I think is gonna do a very good job of that come June 1st of next year, the Internet's gonna start to fulfill its full potential. Right now it's only a small part of what it's able to do and soon we're gonna be able to do all the things. Which means there's an infinite number of opportunities and just ask yourself not what can you build but what should you build? Don't build things because you can. Build things because you should with a purpose, with intention, with meaning, hopefully to serve others. And if you do what you love and you do what you're good at and you're doing it to serve others, I promise you money and all the things you want will follow. Thank you.


Before starting to talk about the incentives, I wanted to give a quick introduction on Saturn. So Saturn is a project that is being built within protocol labs that is aiming to create a content delivery network or CDN for Falcon. So they are designing a network that aims to provide fast retrievals of content store on Filecoin, which is something we are thoroughly missing, right? It is decentralized, so this means that anyone can download Saturn code and contribute their resources to the network, and by doing that, they will earn some Filecoin. And so I want to stress that this is one of the teams working on this problem, is definitely not the only one, but for the context of this talk, I'll focus on this project. So in terms of roadmap, I just want to highlight that we hope to launch a first version before a field release when, so end of October, and then after that first launch, we will continue to iterate on it throughout 2022 and beginning of 2023. So it will be a work in progress, it's not something that we'll launch, and that's the final network and the final design, okay? So now moving on to the value flow within Saturn, so we start with the content publishers. So content publishers are websites and services that wish to deliver content that is stored on Filecoin. So examples could be NFT.storage, Internet Archive, or in the future Metaverse apps, gaming apps, so any sort of service that is trying to deliver content that could be stored on the Filecoin network. And these services will engage Saturn and buy the service of CDN, okay? So they will pay some Filecoin to Saturn to have their content accelerated. On the other hand, we have the end users. So the end users will be regular people coming into these services and using their service. So they would engage with Saturn through requests. So they would visit the website. The website would have to load some content, and so they would send a request to Saturn, and Saturn will give that content back. And they may have some financial relationships with the content publisher, so they could have sort of a subscription model or ad revenue or whatever, but this is independent of Saturn, okay? So this is would be a financial relationship that is sort of parallel to Saturn. And then finally, we have the node operators. So the node operators are the people or the computers that are committing resources to Saturn, and so the way it works is every time there's a request to Saturn, that request would be routed to the node operators, node operators would give back that content and then receive some Filecoin in return for doing or for fulfilling those requests. And so the money flow is sort of moving from the content publishers to the node operators through Saturn, okay? One thing I want to highlight here is that nodes are paid based on the logs that they are submitting to Saturn, okay? And the reason for this is there's no cryptographic proof or efficient proof of retrievals, so it's like you cannot prove that you made this retrieval without trusting the log you are receiving. And so these guides guide the design of what we call the Saturn Treasury, so it's the system that is sort of defining how nodes get paid, and the design includes a log detection system. So because we have to base the rewards on the logs that are being submitted, there's a tag vector here where nodes can game the system and do doctored logs or fake retrievals to try to get more rewards without actually giving out during like real retrievals to users. And so we have to have this sort of log detection system in place trying to flag these sort of behaviors, okay? And then we have the reward calculator which is the module responsible for taking all the performance metrics and all the logs and all the flag entities and then defining how each node will be paid. So they will be defining the payout. And finally we have the monitoring. So the monitoring here is really important because as I was telling you before, this will be an interactive development. So we will launch a first version and then we'll collect data on how the network is being used to improve the whole system. So improve both the log detection and the reward calculator. And so we have this monitoring here to store all the payouts, all the flags and everything so we can improve the system, okay? So now moving on to the incentives. So when we are designing incentives for any system, a first step is always to align on what behaviors we want to see. So what good looks like, okay? And in this case we have these two types of behaviors. So we want behaviors we want to see more of. So behaviors we want to incent and behaviors we want to avoid. On the side of the good behaviors, the first one is a high bandwidth service. So bandwidth is just essentially how much content you are serving in a certain time interval. And so the more bandwidth Saturn has, the more users it can serve, then the more content publishers it can serve. And so this is the top behavior we want. We want a really high bandwidth service, okay? But then this is a CDN, right? So we need fast retrieval. So speed is another behavior we want to incent and finally reliability. So we don't want nodes going offline out of the blue and users not getting their content. So we want nodes to be reliable. And within these behaviors then comes two questions that we need to answer. So first is how do we measure performance? So how do we transform these high level behaviors into actual metrics that we can compute? And then how can we use those metrics to redistribute rewards among nodes that are participating, okay? On the side of the bad behaviors, they essentially are focused on the sort of doctored logs and fake retrievals I was telling you earlier. So we want to avoid this sort of behavior of nodes trying to game the system. And questions here are first, how can we detect this? And then once we detect them, what should be the penalties? So we want to apply penalties to not have an incent for nodes to do this sort of behavior, okay? So on the log detection module, we started so our design choice was to start simple. So we start with the simplest model just catching the most basic behaviors we expect to see. And then after launch, we'll start collecting data on the actual users and use that data to improve the system. So in terms of the detection methods, we start with heuristics. So heuristics are essentially rules in coding simple behaviors. So an example could be we'll flag all nodes that have a bandwidth that is impossibly high. So we can find this threshold, right? Like we can think about what would be like the maximum upload speed that a network provider will give you. And so if we're reporting a bandwidth that goes above this, it's impossible, right? So we can flag those types of nodes. And so we start with these heuristics, simple rules. And then as we collect more data, we can use more data-driven methods. So we can use anomaly detection, which here is essentially flagging nodes that are very different from the normal data distribution. So you kind of learn what is the normal distribution and what usually nodes do. And you'll flag anything that is very far, very different from this. So this will be kind of finding anomalies or outliers. But then we can also use machine learning models such as supervised learning, semi-supervised active learning. But again, this would require data. So at the moment, we cannot build these methods. But then as we collect data, we can actually try out these and improve the whole system. Now moving on to the rewards. So the first question we needed to answer regarding rewards was how to measure performance. So for a bandwidth, it's quite straightforward. So we are just using how many bytes are served by giving node in a certain payout window. For speed, we have to use two metrics. So we are using time to first byte and total download time. And then for reliability, it's straightforward as well. So we are just using uptime. Now the second question was after having these metrics, how do you distribute rewards based on those metrics? And here we are using what we call service scoring functions. So these are essentially functions that map a service metric into a ratio of rewards. And the reason why we are using here ratio of rewards, it's because at each payout window, rewards are bounded. So we have a fixed pool of rewards that will be distributing for that payout window. And so we have to compute what will be the share of rewards of each node that participated during that window. And we came up with this sort of general function that is an adjusted share of performance. It's adjusted because it has that exponent k that is controlling how much we incentivize over-performance in relationship with under-performance. So for instance, if we were to use a k equal to 1, so a linear function, this will be just a proportional distribution of rewards. So an example, a node with a ratio of bandwidth of 40% would receive 40% of rewards. So it's linear and proportional. This is option 1. Option 2 is going for an exponent that is higher than 1. And this essentially means that over-performers are more incentivized. So an example here with a k equal to 2, a node that would be serving 40% of the bandwidth would receive almost 90% of rewards. So you are kind of pushing more over-performers and not as much the under-performers. The third option is to have a k less than 1. And so this means that the over-performers are incentivized less and you end up distributing more evenly the rewards. So an example here will be with a k equal to 0.5, so a square root. And a node that is committing 60% of the bandwidth will receive around 15% of rewards. So you are kind of not rewarding as much over-performers and you are kind of distributing everything more evenly. And this is a design choice. Okay. Okay, now moving on to the penalties. So when we were thinking about penalties, we thought about how can we define some theoretical upper bounds and lower bounds. And for that, we used two assumptions. So the first assumption led to a lower bound. And this assumption is essentially saying that the penalty should be large enough so that it is not economically advantageous to cheat. Okay. And what does this mean? This means essentially that if a node decides to consistently cheat, on average on the long run, their reward will be negative. So they will be losing money. Okay. And how do we actually encode this? So we know that the detection system won't be perfect. That's impossible. There's no detection system that will catch everything. And so sometimes it will catch the cheating node and other times it won't. So this concept of sometimes catching a cheating node is called the true positive rate. Or you can think of it as the probability of a cheating node being flagged. Okay. So we can use that probability and the expected reward in case of the node being flagged versus not being flagged to get that equation there. So you are saying it's like as we add up every payout time, on average, the total reward will be negative. That's the equation you see there. And then if you solve that equation for P, which is a penalty, you get a nice lower bound that depends on the average reward before penalties, which is that sum of the hours over n. And then one over the true positive rate. Okay. Now, for the upper bound, the assumption is that penalties should be small enough so it doesn't hurt too much honest nodes. Okay. And again, what we mean by this, we mean that on the long run, an honest node would receive enough rewards to not to continue operations and be sustainable. Okay. And once again, the log detection system won't be perfect. So sometimes an honest node will be flagged. It's just the nature of the game. And we can include that on the false positive rate. So this is essentially the probability of an honest node being flagged. And what we are saying here is that the rewards after penalties on the long run should be bigger than a certain percentage of the rewards before penalties. That's what that tau is doing there, is that ratio of rewards. And if we'll solve for that, then we have a upper bound that depends again on the average reward before penalties and depends on the tau and the false positive rate of the log detection system. So the nice thing about it is that if you plug in the values for different performances of the log detection system and tau, you get a really tight interval for the penalty parameter. So that this means that there's not a lot of values that actually fit and work. And so we already get a pretty good idea of what the penalty should be. But also, we get bounds for the performance of the log detection system. So we kind of get the goal of what is good enough because some values won't lead to intervals that you can intersect. So for very bad models, there's no penalty that would be higher, low enough or big enough. So it already gives us a goal of what the detection system should look like. For next steps, so before launch, we still want to run a Monte Carlo simulation of the whole treasury economy to fine-tune the final parameters. And after launch, we want to explore more detection system methodology, as I explained before. So as we collect data, we can explore these things. But there's still a lot of open questions. So one of them is how to leverage logs from clients and node operators to improve our fraud detection system. So at the moment, we are only collecting logs from the node operators. But as we onboard the content publishers into Saturn, we will be able to start collecting data from their side as well. And these two profiles, they are not incentivized to collude because one is paying for the service and the other is being paid. So if you use the logs of these two sites and they match, then you are fairly certain that there's no cheating going there. This is one of them. The other is how to open the log detection system. What I mean by this is, if you were to show everything, so if you show the rules, the thresholds, the models, everything, is the detection system not obsolete? Because if you show everything, usually, it's very easy to game, right? But can we design a smarter way of doing this that allows us to show everything and still be good enough? Okay. Cool. If you want to know more about this Saturn and Saturn incentives, I left a bunch of links here. Check out later. And I'm not sure how we are with time, but if you still have time, open for questions. And thank you for your attention. Yeah. I think we have time for a couple of questions. Thanks for the talk. You said there's a pretty tight bound between panel upper and lower bounds. What sort of assumption were you using for like false positive rate? Yeah. So for the, let me see if I can recall, so for the false positive, I think I was looking at around one or two percent, because it's like, it's, as I was saying, it's, we will be kind of moving towards not flagging as much at least in the beginning. And then for the true positive rate, it will be around like 60%, something like that. So you're kind of a bit more loose on the true positive than on the false positive. Okay. Awesome. And sorry, just, I may have missed this. What K value did you go with ultimately? So that's one of the parameters that are still fine tuning. So it's really a question of how much do you want to incent over performance versus being a bit more equalitarian and having reward distributed more. So it's still something we are fine tuning. Yeah. Thanks. Hi. It's really cool. Like how you, there's a tight bound. And I'm wondering like as, as the economy grows, and will the parameters change over time and will you like find, retune it again? And if that's the case, then you're like, it might go obsolete or like they can game it and things like that. Right. Yeah. Sure. So I think in the first stage for sure, I'm sure like after lunch will update it a lot. But I think the end goal should be that you have a stable enough detection system that doesn't lead to a lot of changes on the penalty side. But it's true. Like the performance of the detection system will change as time goes on. And we'll have to keep balancing that. But yeah, let's hope like, let's hope that as we start launching and iterating on it, we get to a performance that is stable enough for this to work.


Mr. President, I had about four more introductions to make of some of your friends from Hollywood. Would it be alright if I continued? Oh, good. Okay. Thank you. I abundant support. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for proving what I have always said to people when they inquire about Orange County. I've said it's where the good Republicans go before they die. Pete, thank you very much. Those kind words, I'm, well, Reverend MuMaw, the other guest here at the, on the top shelf. I, two friends of mine who worked for me at the White House are with us today. They brought the cake in, Chris Cox and Dana Rohrbacher. I know that both Chris and Dana, when they go to Washington in January, will be outstanding additions to the Congress and will serve our nation well. Also, I want to thank Congressman Bob Badham and David Dreyer, who have both been tireless supporters of this administration. Now, before we begin, I should set the record straight. To most of you, it must be seemed pretty obvious that I came here today to show my support for Pete Wilson's reelection in this critical race. Actually, I just dropped in hoping to get a little birthday cake. The truth is that I had a special reason for wanting to be here for this occasion. You see, I was very moved at my own 55th birthday when President Abraham Lincoln showed up and said, if you come here. Now, for some people, turning 55 is something of a milestone, not for Pete. He still gets carted in bars.  I was told that this would be just an intimate gathering of a few of your closest personal friends. I haven't seen so many people at a birthday party since I left the movie industry. But Pete Wilson is a man with a lot of friends and with the tremendous work that he does every day for the state of California. Pete Wilson deserves to have 27 million friends. Working people, senior citizens, entrepreneurs, families, every person who believes in a California that is beautiful, safe, and prosperous. That's who Pete Wilson works for. Pete Wilson is a Teddy Roosevelt Republican who wants to conserve the natural beauty and resources of our land and who also wants a strong America that maintains a strong presence abroad. He's been a leader for environmental protection, working to preserve millions of acres of California wilderness, working for the conservation of wild rivers and the protection of our shoreline. I know he would agree with Teddy Roosevelt who said that a grove of giant redwoods or sequoias should be kept just as we keep a great and beautiful cathedral. Well, in the Armed Services Committee, Senator Pete Wilson has been a strong voice for California and for the nation. He's been an important part of our efforts to revitalize America's defenses and restore what another Roosevelt so accurately called the great arsenal of democracy. Pete Wilson knows that a strong America is essential to world peace and vital for maintaining everything that we've accomplished in international affairs, especially our improved relations with the Soviet Union, which have produced the first treaty in history to eliminate an entire class of U.S. and Soviet nuclear missiles. Now, I think I should interject here that there are some people that worry that perhaps I'm being taken in. No, I learned a Russian proverb which I have repeatedly cited to the General Secretary Gorbachev in our discussions, doviye, noproviye. It means trust but verify. And he's gotten so tired of hearing that I'm now using an American one. I'm going to let him know where I stand. Trust everybody, but cut the cards. Well, Pete Wilson knows that a strong America is essential to world peace and vital for maintaining everything that we've accomplished in international affairs, as I say. Yes, we have improved those relations, as I just pointed out. Now, while the liberal opposition opposes the B-1 bomber, the MX, and our strategic defense initiative, Pete Wilson knows that peace flows from strength and that a return to weakness would jeopardize all that we've achieved and that that cannot be allowed. One of the most important issues, one that touches the lives of so many people, is the problem of crime. The physical and emotional wounds that are inflicted by violent criminals can take a lifetime to heal. Whole neighborhoods can be destroyed by hoods, thugs, and drug dealers. Crime is not a statistic. It's an outrage and a sin. And it must be fought. Pete's opponent, like so many of the liberal Democrats in the ballot this year, just can't seem to understand that the way to fight crime is to put criminals in jail and keep them there. To protect our communities, we need tough laws, strict sentencing, and no nonsense judges. We need Pete Wilson, who has always fought for strict drug enforcement, not someone who worked to liberalize the prohibition of illegal drugs, and who spent most of his career as an outspoken opponent of the death penalty. In fact, Pete's liberal opponent even opposed the crime victims' Bill of Rights. While Pete Wilson helped lead the successful effort to pass it, you know, ever since I was governor, I have felt that liberals need remedial instruction on the subject of crime. So if any liberals are listening, let's try it one more time. Criminals are not victims, and victims are not criminals. In the Senate, Pete has been a champion for law and order. He has helped pick strong judges for the federal bench and worked vigorously for their confirmation. When new vacancies occur on the Supreme Court, Senator Pete Wilson will continue to support strong men and women to fill those seats, while his liberal opponent would be on the opposite side. Just remember that when the people of California turned out one of the softest chief justices in the nation, Pete's opponent was on the wrong side, the far left side. I think you'll agree with me that the judicial policy of these liberal Democrats is strictly for the birds and has no place in the United States Senate. Four years ago today, I accepted for the second time my party's nomination for president. A few things have changed since then. America has become even stronger. The world has become even more peaceful. I know, yes, the economy today is even more prosperous than it was four years ago. And why shouldn't it be? With our pro-growth economic policies, things just keep getting better every year. But one other thing has changed. In 1984, our opponents, wrongheaded as their policies may have been, at least ran in the clear light of day. They ran as the liberals that they were. They told the American people what they believed and what they do, cut defense and raise taxes. But that's changed. The first sign of this deceptive strategy came in 1986 when many of their liberal Senate candidates ran stealth campaigns, avoiding the tough issues and using the language of conservatism to conceal their true beliefs. Well, in 1988, we're seeing this kind of covert liberalism at the national level and to an extraordinary decree. When challenged to say where they stand on the issues, their response is ideas don't matter. Policies don't matter. Ideology doesn't matter. For them, winning this election is all that matters, no matter what they have to say or not say to do it. In some ways, I can hardly blame them. If they told the truth, their campaign slogan would have to be, Malays. We did it before, and we can do it again. But no, the message from our liberal opponents is, you can take prosperity for granted. It's time for a change, so take a change on us. Well, that's sort of like someone telling you you've stored up all the cold beer you could want, so now it's time to unplug the refrigerator. But no more than with a refrigerator, you can't unplug our pro-growth economic policies and expect things to stay the same. And the funny thing is that sometimes our liberal opponents will even admit it. They like to say the beginning next year, the Reagan era will be over. Well, that's right, Vice President Bush and I, working with Senator Pete Wilson and others, have given America the longest peacetime expansion on record. The country has created over 17.5 million new jobs. Inflation is low. Employment is at an all-time high. The unemployment rate recently hit a 14-year low. And yes, if our opponents are elected, this era of record prosperity will be over. But I've got news for the liberals. It's not going to happen. There's an old saying that an optimist sees the doughnut while a pessimist sees the hole. But what about our opponents? They point at the hole in the doughnut and say they can fill that hole by reversing the policies that made the doughnut in the first place. They point at Swiss cheese and say they can fill the holes in Swiss cheese by reversing the policies that gave us cheese in the first place. They point at peace and prosperity and say they can expand the peace and prosperity. How? By reversing the policies that gave us peace and prosperity in the first place. My friends, the choices between people pushing an absurd line like that and our team, which promises to continue what's working and to keep America changing for the better. And with a choice like that, I just don't see how we can lose. While Pete's opponent opposes the balanced budget amendment and has supported high taxes, Pete Wilson has worked diligently for fiscal responsibility and as a defender of the taxpayer. Pete supports Graham Rudman, the balanced budget amendment, and yes, the line item veto, which 43 governors have. He has supported the policies that have brought record employment in California and brought the unemployment rate to its lowest level for over a decade and a half. Let's keep Pete Wilson in the Senate and keep California and America working. The Republican Party has shown America who talks and who delivers. We've shown them that our team can produce results today, tomorrow, and on into the next decade because our philosophy is sound and our policies work. If the 1988 election is a question, the answer is this. America is not going to trade away our winning team for third-stringers with a weak defense, a foreign policy of errors, curveball campaign promises, a set of policies to be named later, and billions of dollars in higher taxes. Well, just last week, Pete and I were at the Republican National Convention in New Orleans. And I can tell you, our party is strong, unified, and ready to work for victory. I'll be criss-crossing the country for our ticket, and California this year especially will be one of the truly critical states. With your tremendous support, I feel confident that when I return to my ranch, I'll have Pete Wilson representing me in the Senate. And with what I saw in New Orleans, I saw a real chance that Pete may be part of a Republican majority in the Senate. And wouldn't that be a nice gift for President George Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle? Well, happy birthday, Pete. Your present will arrive this November. I'm going to do something that wasn't planned right now. I'm just going to... You know I'm sort of addicted to stories, and Pete tempted me when he mentioned stories in mine. My latest hobby is collecting stories that I can absolutely establish are told by the citizens of the Soviet Union among themselves. And it reveals they got a great sense of humor and a little cynical approach to their present system. But I came home from the Moscow Summit with a new one that caught up with me on the way home. I hadn't heard it there, but one of our security detail had. And he said the story that they were telling among themselves had me in a limousine with Gorbachev and I had the head of our secret service unit with me and he had his head security man with him and we were sightseeing and we got to a waterfall and we all got out to see the beautiful waterfall. And Gorbachev said to my man, well go ahead, jump, go over the fall. And my man said, I got a wife and three kids. So Gorbachev turned to his man and said, jump, go over the fall. And he did. Well my man scrambled down the rocks around the fall. Oh, that's the waterfall. He wanted to see if he could be of help and he got down there and found the fella bringing out his clothes he'd gotten over safely.  And the fella said, why? I got a wife and three kids. It does demonstrate the difference between the two systems, but well, believe me, you can send this man back there. For six years, I had a Republican Senate and a Democrat House of Representatives, but at least having that one house, we couldn't have had the recovery that we have if we had not had that one house. The difference now in these final two years with both houses in Democratic hands is so apparent. And when you stop to think that out of 56 years, the last 56 years, the Congress of the United States has been dominated by the other party. For 46 of those 56 years, they've had both houses of the Congress and for 52 of the 56 years, they have had the House of Representatives. Every Republican president, except for a two-year period under Ike, has had a Democratic Congress. Every Democratic president, except for two years during Harry Truman's term, has had a Democratic Congress. I think it's time for us to prove that we have a right to be represented all the way around. And so let's go after him this time and make it work. Send Pete back there and thank you all and God bless you all. Mr. President, I cannot thank you enough, sir. Since it is my birthday, I wonder if you would allow me, if you would indulge me in giving a slight gift to you. As we were driving over here from the Marine Corps Air Station at Tustin, these young Marines who were lining the streets not only snapped off a snappy salute to their commander in chief, but then started cheering. And that's the effect that you've had on the men and women of our armed services, Mr. President. I'm sure you're aware that in addition to the big fights that we're all gonna be in this November, up in San Francisco, where the Navy wants to home port the battleship, Missouri, and where the people of that city want the privilege of being host to that battle group, Leo McCarthy's protege, who is the president, mayors, decided that they shouldn't have it. Well, they've managed to put that question on the ballot. So recalling the magnificent speech that you made in New Orleans, where you concluded by asking a favor of George Bush, that he go out and win one for the Gipper, we want you to remember this day and to be reminded of what you have meant to the men and women of our armed services and what you've really meant in terms of revitalizing the concept of peace through strength. So this T-shirt, which I think is your size, is something that you can wear out there on the ranch, and it says, win one for the Skipper. One more time, ladies and gentlemen, for our head table for honored guests at the fact that we know Pete Wilson is going back to Washington. Let's do it.