Hi guys, first of all thank you for your support in the last video. I will get right to the point, in my last video I developed a smart window and door sensor, and the last few weeks I have been researching methods to improve the energy efficiency of the SP32 and in general of the device I am designed. Also many of you gave me a lot of devices about power consumption, energy efficiency and so on. And I thank you for that. This video will be more a video update of the project, so I will show you some tests and how I plan to improve this prototype. But first this project is possible with the help of PCBWay. And yes, this video is sponsored by PCBWay. You can buy your PCBs for only $5, check the link below to place your first order now. Thank you again PCBWay for the support. So using a deep sleep of the SP32 to wake up the my controller is an efficient method because it does not allow us to go below 3 or 5 microampere. The problem can be solved in two ways by using a more efficient deep sleep my controller such as a Tini 10 or a STM32 or by using a power latch to control the SP32 power supply. Design a power latch can be more complex for some application like digital sensor without interrupt pin. A few weeks ago I designed this new version of the door sensor. The main changes from the previous version are first I removed the digital RGB led with the free leds that are powered only when needed. I replaced the read sensor with a magnetic sensor. It's a test to compare the two different solutions and then I added a Tini 10 to control the sensor interrupt and enable of the LDO that provides power to the SP32. And then the final change is try to replace the T9080 with SPX. Spoiler was not a good idea. And this guys was my first idea to improve the design. While the PCBs were in production I got the components and I test the SPX hoping it would be more efficient when the enable was disabled than the RT9080. But as you can see the LDO have the same efficiency and in general RT9080 it's better. Also one of you suggest me to try using a low power mic controller to handle the interrupt in the power block of the SP32. So I figured it was a good idea because I found several mic controllers that in deep sleep consume very low power in order of non on pair. This is the reason of the Tini 10. After place the order of the new PCBs I realized that the best solution is actually to develop a custom power latch. It's the only way to reduce the power consumption as much as possible. So the best idea is to use a power latch or design a power latch or something like that. Doing some research I found this component, the TPL by Texas Instruments. For this type of application it will be perfect maybe. You will say why isn't perfect for a window and door sensor. Because this design to have a transient height signal like a button. So zero I push button, one and go again to zero the signal. Actually this circuit is perfect for IOT button project, the power consumption is perfect only few non on pair. But for this project smart door sensor I only need to power the SP32 when the signal rises from zero to one and when it falls from one to zero. So when the door from closed opens and vice versa. So the door may stay open but the SP32 should not stay on. So when the door is open maybe the sensor give to my controller one or zero. If the signal go to zero to one or one to zero the power latch should power up the my controller. In addition using TPL means that the design depends on these components so I would like to develop something with MOSFET and transistor to avoid the problem for the shortage. This prototype I develop is more efficient than the previous version. I have decreased the power consumption of some components. I am also thinking of developing a single PCB design and not a modular design. As you know I like to develop modular solution with the idea of allowing easy use of the hardware. The problem is that for these kinds of application you need to optimize the hardware a lot. So it's difficult to ensure the modularity of the device. For sure modularity is useful to benchmark with different my controllers for the same final application. But on final device designed to be sold maybe it doesn't make sense. Guys what do you think about modular design it's useful for this type of project. I have already almost finished developing the new version of the project with a custom power latch that should ensure low power consumption. In the next video I will show you the new version of the dev kit for energy harvesting is an evolution to the previous solution I showed you a few months ago. But this time is compatible with Objects Link. Thank you again to PCBWay for supporting the project and guys thank you for watching until the end and see you next time in the next video and next project, bye.


Alright, we're ready to go. One. The Kestrel is over there. 100% 70% 100% 100% 100% If it goes down, it's gonna fall. Go ahead and look in there. As you see, I can move it left and right. Alright, you look right there. You'll see that we need to pop off and just grab this thing back up. You're good to go. If they don't see something, but I see something on the controller, I can take a picture.


Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we have with us Professor Ajaz Ahmed to discuss the latest scenario in Syria. Ajaz, the Syrian situation seems to be leading more to a confrontation at least at the international level with Russia and China of having vetoed the resolution. So how do you live in resolution? How do you look at the scenario that is developing right now, particularly the international level? Praveer, I think we are at a very, very dangerous point where the United States and the NATO powers, in my view, have overcommitted themselves to a regime change. And now they can't back off from there. So they will do everything that they can for this regime change. Even if they don't have even sanctions? Even if they don't have UN sanctions? So the question is what form will that take? The two Syrian opposition groups that they have fabricated have now taken the position that that an Arab intervention will not be considered a foreign intervention. So how does that play out? Would Qatar and Saudi Arabia and Libya will invade? And once they come in, then in order to obtain the peace, the NATO countries will come and so on. I mean, this is a fantasy scenario I am giving you. But to my mind, that is the real danger situation. So a shift has taken place in the Syrian groups in exile or outside, basically calling for an inter-military intervention from outside, which wasn't there. Only the groups that are aligned with the United States. One of the things about the opposition groups is that there are about 20 of them who have some kind of prominence that the Americans are trying to talk to and NATO countries are trying to talk to. But inner dissensions among them is so great that when they went to meet Hague, the foreign secretary, the British foreign secretary, they didn't even agree to meet with him together. Hague had to meet with them separately in London. They were they're all sitting in London, but they will not sit in the same room. So that's how splintered that opposition actually is. And this this does not even count the largest part of the actually secular opposition that is inside the country, which refuses to be a part of this Western intervention part. But these people who are sort of wanting Western patronage can't even sit in the same room. Interestingly, now reports are coming out that already basically intervention has taken place. There's a covert war going on inside Syria. Armed groups are not only operating, they're getting arms as well as people coming from outside. Some Libyan people have Libyan forces that actually died in this armed attacks and so on. So do you see this as something which is going to be further accelerated after this failure of their even resolution? May very well be may very well be. Although, as I said, the problem now for them is that having come to the United Nations and having lost it on that vote, they now don't really have a legal instrumentality to intervene. So stepping up of this covert and not so covert intervention is really the only option that they have got. How far that will succeed we still don't know. What we do know is that the entire Syrian establishment has stood behind the Assad regime. We know that popularity polls taken by a Qatari outfit show that Assad is more popular in Syria today than he was a year ago. Some 86% of the population is saying there should be no foreign intervention of any kind and the Arab League's economic sanctions against Syria must be lifted. So there is a kind of a coalescing both of the establishment and the vast majority of the population behind Syria, behind the regime. What they're going to do in this situation is very, very hard to tell. However, it seems to me that, A, what I said that it's very difficult for them to step back having gone as far as they have gone. But this is the first chapter of the war in Iran. Of course, this is really connected that we'll come back to that. So if you're going to step back on Syria now, then how do you de-escalate the entire project of containment of Iran? Coming to this other issue that you were saying, the overstep. What explains this overstepping going to the United Nations when they did not have Russia with them? And particularly after, in fact, having confronted Russia on the issue of this anti-ballistic missile treaty, which they're really breaking, setting up missile shields and so on. Don't you think it was rather infantile on their path to do this without having Russia on board? The United States simply does not know how to retreat gracefully as a global power. It does no longer see that there are power configurations in the world now that it cannot push around the way that it could. Five years ago, China and Russia were not as powerful as they are now. They're not as strong as they are now. So they are doing this kind of thing, which takes your breath away. One is knowing that Russia was going to veto it and China was going to veto it, knowing it. They went in for that veto. It's really quite extraordinary. That's a very important issue that the report that the Arab mission gave was very different from what the Arab League moved as a resolution after the report. Absolutely. And in fact, the report wasn't made public at that time. It was not made public. It had to appear as an annexure to the resolution because after all, if that is the basis, then you have to put it out there. But the authorities refused to allow the report to be translated into English. And did not allow the head of the mission to come as a delegate of Arab League into the United Nations Security Council discussions. Not even a translation because the Arab League's mission actually corroborates everything that the Syrian government has been saying and which the Russian media independently has been documenting. So if that is the case, then what kind of resolution is this? Let me read to you and extract from this report. It says, in Homs and Dera, the two major cities where Syrian army is supposed to have carried out these massacres. In Homs and Dera, the mission observed armed groups commuting acts of violence against government forces, resulting in deathly injury among their ranks. In certain situations, government forces responded to attack against their personnel with force. The observers noted that some of the armed groups were using flares and armor-piercing projectiles. In Homs, Idlib and Hama, the three centers of the power of the Iqwan Muslimin, of the Muslim Brotherhood, where all of these demonstrations are taking place. The observer mission witnessed acts of violence being committed against government forces and civilians that resulted in deaths and injuries. Examples of those acts include the bombing of a civilian bus, killing 8% and injuring others, including women and children, and the bombing of a train carrying diesel oil. A fuel pipeline and some small bridges were also bombed. The report speaks, and I can go on and on with this. There's a lot of detail in it. The report very interestingly speaks of there being an armed entity inside Syria, which is carrying out all this. Also said it is not included in the protocol with which they had come. That's right. That the protocol was only to check out on what the government was doing. Because only Syrian government is supposed to have been carrying out all the violence. And then they see it there on the ground and document it. The interesting part, to me this is very interesting, this armed entity. What is this armed entity? This is not the free Syrian officers so-called who are sitting in Turkey. This is an armed entity inside and it is an entity. It is not armed groups. Yes, that's interesting. So the phrasing is to me very intriguing that there is in fact an organized entity, which is not just the small groups running around. This is actually an entity, which is sending out these groups to do all that. Once you have got this report and then you read the text of the resolution, in the entire resolution towards the end of the resolution there are about nine demands. All of them are demands on Bashar al-Assad, on the government of Syria, demanding that he step down and hand over power to his vice president. All the demands are addressed to them and not nothing about any of this. In fact, that was the Russian amendment. Russian amendments, if you look at it, are very clear. They said also armed groups have to give up attacks on the state. Outside people have to stop supporting these armed groups, etc., which was found unacceptable by the United States. The other very important, I think, point in the mission state petition, 23 days, which is all they had on the ground. They actually said we could get people to disengage. We could bring some part in partial normalcy. People were actually going towards a peace position and also said that if we are given more time, if our mission is allowed to continue, we think we can bring back normalcy in Syria, which was not allowed by the Arab League. The mission report clearly says that the Syrian government helped them to the maximum degree to go wherever they wanted to go, talk to anybody they wanted, whether the people were for the government or against the government, etc., that they had maximum cooperation from Syria and maximum freedom of movement. So, they could observe, they could say we didn't. Secondly, they said that in all these three cities, the citizens there who even talked about the violence even from the side of the state, all of them said all we want is peace. We want violence to end from both sides. The mission statement has absolutely clarified it. And thirdly, the mission statement, diamond against us, the media outlets have been exaggerating and fabricating exactly what we have already said, gross distortions, you know. And this is, you know, one of the demands of the Syrian government is that Qatar in Saudi Arabia put some sort of, you know, protocol on what Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, the two channels that they own, have been doing. You know, interestingly as the international media and of course, the Qatari and Saudi media did not report the mission report. That's also interesting. That's been one of the things. Precisely. That is the other side of it. That on the one side, even the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations, if you look at the report of the Human Rights Commission of the United Nations, the entire thing is based on claims made by the opposition forces. And primarily by this thing called Syrian Human Rights Observatory, which is London based, which is London based, which we now know from Washington Post, we know that it has been given, it has been funded from a Dubai based entity, which has received six million dollars from the United States. So it's American money. And this is an incredible organization. It's not registered as anything. It has no office. It has no personnel. And Al-Jazeera actually does the communications for it. This also now has come out that all their communications things is being set up on Al-Jazeera. And Al-Jazeera has a blog by the person who runs that thing. And the blog runs 24 hours. And all this information that you see in the world media, in the human rights industry, comes from places like this. But when a mission of the Arab League actually lays it out, it gets blocked. Coming back to the earlier issue that you raised against Iran, there is no question that this seems to be a part of a larger containment of Iran project, both in Lebanon and in Syria. This is really a part of that process. So what do you think is the larger containment of Iran project going to happen in this context? The least that the Americans want in Syria, or what the NATO countries together want in Syria, is a regime change in which they will have, they want to have someone like Burhan Ghayloun to be the next head of the state. And Burhan Ghayloun has gone, the chairperson of the Syrian National Council, the opposition group that the West is backing. He has given an interview to the Ballistic Journal, in which he has said that when we come to power, the alliance with Iran will be broken. Hezbollah will not be what it is now.  You've also said that vis-a-vis Israel will only have peaceful negotiations. And we will have only, which essentially means conceding the Jalan. This is what they would like to have. So Syria is also tied up with Hezbollah. It is tied up with Hamas. It's the whole package. Now how much of it they will get, we don't know. Risks are so great that Hamas is largely, at the moment, leaving Syria and relocating themselves somewhere else if they can, where it is not very clear to me yet. But this has become tricky for them, just where all of this is going. Also, because section of the Muslim Brotherhood, if you look at Tunisia, you look at Egypt, you look at Turkey, all three of them have now very strong Muslim Brotherhood presence. And what they, I mean, you see, the Syrian National Council is an amazing contraption. There are these exile academics from Paris and Belgium and so on. And there are the top Muslim Brotherhood people, top Syrian Muslim Brotherhood personnel in it, in the top leadership.  So yes, that is what they would like to know. So it is a very interesting alliance. You have Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, Qatar and what Turkey being also part of the larger Islamic Muslim Brotherhood. The biggest intervention will be coming from Turkey. It is coming from Turkey. It is coming from Eastern Turkey. So it is basically an interesting alliance of actually Muslim Brotherhood Islamist forces, including Turkey, the monarchies who now all have become supporters of democracy and of course the NATO powers. That is what we are seeing vis-a-vis Iran. And it also tells you something about moderate Islam in general, that Muslim Brotherhood is no less a pliable instrument for the West than the monarchies and these Turkish Islamists. These are NATO's Islamists. A strong commitment to NATO and strong commitment to this kind of regime change in Syria. Ajaz, isn't it an irony of the situation that the monarchs in West Asia today supposedly bringing democracy to Syria? Absolutely, absolutely, absolutely. Yes, yes. But this medieval monarchs running completely undemocratic, autocratic, authoritarian, call it whatever they will. And then they are suddenly championing democracy and human rights in Syria. But listen, I mean, to be fair to the monarchs, that's not much more ridiculous than the idea that imperialism will bring you democracy. That's true. Colonialism and ex-colonialism bring democracy. And Americans will give you democracy and all of these people. No genuine democratic nationalist movement in the world has ever asked for an imperialist intervention. In this, what is being thrown is the Shia Sunni divide. And this is being aided by the Sunni monarchs in that sense. I mean, I think their religion is only just a fig leaf for what their other policies are. But this can really break the West Asian countries apart if this really spreads. In a certain sense, in a certain sense, but look, I mean, except for the really sort of Wahhabi Salafist kinds of people, the Sunni business really isn't, I mean, isn't very deep except for them. It still is something dangerous to be playing this car in the Middle East. It is a degeneration and a degradation of politics in general in the region. This is something that has emerged within the last 30 to 35 years after the defeat of the Arab secular national project. So with this, it does appear that Bashar is holding right now. Bashar al-Assad is holding right now. And if this violence continues, he may even gain more ground. Well, it depends how far it goes. It depends how far it goes. I mean, I go back to the question that you had where we began, that now that the Americans have gone to the Security Council, failed to do this, they might actually take the position that we tried to go the international law route. But the Russians and the Chinese just don't allow us to act legally. So we are going to have to act extra legally. I mean, this issue of extra-legality did not prevent them from going into Iraq. You know, labor of the Russian Foreign Minister has said, but of course, if there is a will to invade, we cannot prevent it. So it's not as if the Soviet Union, as if Russia and China are going to come and fight in Syria against them, they won't give them that resolution. But if they want to go ahead anyway as they did in Iraq, then nothing to stop them. So we really have to wait and see what happens. Thank you, Ajash. We'll continue to monitor the events and we'll discuss this with you as the time goes on and see what the events develop.


Welcome, everyone, to the evening talk. I'm very pleased to introduce our speaker, Ben Cotter. Ben Cotter was the driving force behind taking food automation service techniques incorporated from its beginnings in his garage 30 years ago to the leading manufacturer of appliance controls exclusively for the food service industry. Throughout his career, he has earned the reputation as a pioneer of process controls for multi-unit restaurants and currently holds more than 30 US and European patents. Ben is an active member of the National Restaurant Association and the International Food Service Manufacturers Association and is former chairman of the Connecticut and New York Council and former director of the American Electronics Association. His entrepreneurial achievements were recently featured in Forbes magazine. He earned a BA degree from Brown University and an MBA in finance from Columbia University. Ben is the Mises Institute's 2023 Entrepreneurship Award winner and our newest Hayek Society member. Tonight, he will speak to us on his entrepreneurial experiences life in the fast lane. Please join me in welcoming Ben Cotter. Thank you very much. It's great to be here. You know, the only reason I'm here is my father, George, was personal friends with Lou and Margaret Mises, Henry Hazlett and the list goes on. And I grew up in a cocoon of free market economics brainwashing me every night. So I want to just share with you some stories about my career.  I snuck in by Hooker, by Crook. My high school teacher told me I wasn't college material. I should go into military. I went to Brown and I got into the military at the same time and I did my military service. And I got out and I got a job where I learned how to sell and learned all the basic ropes of doing business. And I picked my wife. She's sitting in the back room hiding back there. So of the lessons I want to share with you tonight, the first thing is get a good education. And I can see you're already working on that. And you'll never be done. You've got to keep learning all the time. And you've got to get a good partner. And that's the most important thing is the partner. So my partner in the back of the room has been with me for, well, we argue about this. I say 64 years. She says 62. I count from the day I met her. That was my sentence for prison. So I'm serving my life sentence. And I'm doing all well. Anyway, so I went to work as a sales guy. And one day her father comes to dinner and he says, you know, the future is going to be in the hands of people who have an MBA. I said, what the hell is that? So I got myself in the Columbia University, moved to New York City.  And I got ensconced in a special dormitory for veterans and married people. So my cluster of friends were postgraduate level people, members of the faculty. I didn't really associate with the students, the rest of the student body, because they all came right up from college and they weren't interested in the things that I was interested in. And I wasn't allowed to be interested in the things that these young guys were interested in anymore. So I was stuck in the dormitory or in the professor's homes. I made very good friends with a guy named Martin Anderson. If you don't know the name, look it up, Google it. Martin took his MBA thesis at MIT. And he published it in the name of what was Federal Bulldozer. And it talks about urban renewal and government programs. So anyway, I was at Columbia. And they let me graduate. And I looked around for a strategic job. And whether they found me or I found them, we met each other through The New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. I don't remember which. And a recruiter spent a lot of time talking to me. And I had so many interviews. I couldn't believe what was going on. I said, well, tell me about the job. Finally, they said, OK, well, come on in. And we think we're going to offer you the job. But we want to tell you about what the situation is. I said, OK, well, he said, we have a company that has spent $20 million. That's about $100 million in today's dollars, over $1950. They spent $100 million. And they have zero sales. How many people would take that job? Not many. I did. I said, if they spent $100 million, there's got to be something there I can salvage. It's got to be a gold mine opportunity. Well, most people who are my age lover, they wanted to get on a slide that was running. An easy jump on, scoot along for a couple of years, get a promotion, and jump to the next. No, not me. I like the tough ones. So AMF was ranked 94 out of the Fortune 500 when I took the job. They're gone out of business today. You can see some of their logo in remnant bowling alleys around the country, AMF with AMF in a triangle. When I joined them, they had an incredible cash flow coming into the company from the bowling alley that they leased. So once they had an alley franchised or leased or built, cash flow from every game.  So they took that cash flow, and they invested it in lots of businesses. They had Ben Hogan golf clubs. They had bags to carry the ball, uniformed shoes. They'd get into bicycles at what Harley-Davidson motorcycles, and all that stuff. So my idea, they set up a research center in Stanford, Connecticut, similar to what Xerox had in Menlo Park, California. It was an academic place with all kinds of scientific disciplines and economists and sociologists. And the idea was to try to figure out new businesses. And their particular charter was get us a business that is like the bowling machine. We want to automate a high labor-intensive function. We want a lot of opportunity, and we want to make a ton of money. So they said, well, what we'll do is we'll automate restaurants. There's a lot of restaurants. There's more restaurants than there are bowling alleys. And I believe at that time, there were 900,000 eating establishments in the United States. So when I got there, they had under construction a half a dozen of these automated restaurants. And my job was to license more and make it profitable. Well, it didn't take very long to find out that the automated restaurant worked. It cooked great food, and it delivered the food in an organized manner. And it saved labor in the restaurant. Problem was we spent 10 times as much as the labor we saved in technicians and engineers to keep the machines running. So we didn't save the customer any money. And we quickly realized that we're not going to be able to franchise and sell this system. So my job was to figure out what could I get out of there that would make a profit. So I said, well, I think we had an electronic control system that's basically a point of sale function. And the transistor had been invented by now. And IBM and Burroughs and NCR were all fooling around with building electronic machines. There are adaptations of the old mechanical registers to go in department stores to help the department store collect data on sales so they could manage the inventory. So I said, well, we'll take that and we'll downscale it. And we'll put it in a restaurant. NCR had about 90% of the point of sale retail market. There were two or three other small players. Swede was one, R.C. Allen was one. Anyway, the National Retail Federation posted an RFQ for a prototype electronic point of sale machine. And there were three bidders, IBM, NCR, AMF. Nobody thought we had a chance. We won. We were on the cover of Time Magazine. And McDonald's was our test site, Old Brook, Illinois. And I envisioned selling hundreds of these. But we were an R&D function. Now we had to become a business unit. To become a business unit, we had to go to the Chairman's Joint Advisory Committee to make a presentation. Excuse me. So the presentations were held in New York City on Second Avenue. It's a Wednesday of the week, whatever it was. The Chairman always had all of his presenters to a lunch, two martini lunch, cigars, cigarettes, AMF manufactured most of the cigar and cigarette manufacturing equipment, so we all smoked. We go back from the two martini lunch. I used to have to go to these as a junior executive. And when I got back from lunch, I would go to my office, close the door, and lay down on the floor. So I had to go make this presentation at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I'm looking out over the room.  I wondered, I wonder how many people out there are still asleep. And OK, slide goes on. I get up and I make my presentation. And I thought, well, that's slam dunk. They're all going to say yes, because they spent $20 million. They've got to get their money back. In the back of the room, my hand goes up. Gentlemen, I is the largest stockholder in this here company. You bought my company last year and bought. You paid for it with shares. Now, I want you to know in my company, we used to use Freedon calculators and Monroe calculator machines. And we got rid of all that damn fool stuff. And we bought IBM. They are a wonderful company. I love those people. There's no way I'm going to vote yes. As a matter of fact, I say no. And I don't think there's anybody in this room who's going to dare vote against me, are you? You could hear a pin drop. So my boss is tugging at me from behind.  So I go home. Next morning, I walk in the office. And the boss is sitting there behind this big desk. He says, I accept your resignation. I said, sir, I interpreted as that. I was fired. Well, this is not a good place to be. So I thought about my professors back at Columbia. They had offered me a job the year before. This is 1967. They had offered me a job to join their Kabul. Martin Anderson called me on the phone. He said, when you come to New York, call me. I want to have dinner with you. I said, OK, Martin. So we went to dinner. And he said, do you like President Johnson? I said, no. Do you like the war in Vietnam? I said, no. He said, well, then you should join our team. We're going to elect the next president of the United States and then the war in Vietnam. I said, that's terrific. How much are you going to pay me? Oh, he said, you're going to volunteer. I said, wait a minute. I have a wife. I got at least one child. I might have had two. Check with her. The second one was there somewhere. Anyway, I said, we're struggling to put baked beans and hot dogs on the table every week because I have to pay my college tuition, my GI bill, and a mortgage on my house. I don't have any surplus money. You guys, who's on the team? Well, Arthur Burns, who was the chancellor of the university, retired head of the Federal Reserve. Martin Anderson. Sandy Burton, my finance professor. Ray Price, editor of the New York Time magazine. Pat Buchanan from the St. Louis Post-Spatch. I said, you guys all got money. You got big jobs. You're well-known. You do that. I'm going back to work. So here I am. I just resigned. So I called Martin and I said, Martin, I'm available. You got a job for me. Yeah, he said, you can come down and join the advanced staff and we'll assign you to the president's detail. You take care of Nixon and the family. I said, OK. I went back to AMF to my boss. Now, AMF made the Titan missile launch console equipment, the Minuteman launch equipment, and the torpedo launch mechanisms on submarines, and 500-pound bombs that were dropping in Vietnam. So I went to the boss and I said, I have a chance to be on Nixon's staff. He's going to be the next president of the United States. Everybody thought we were nuts, of course. But I said, he just won the primary in New Hampshire. So he is the candidate. And you continue to pay my salary. I'll work for him. I'll do what I can for you. And when he gets elected and I'm at the White House, I'll make sure you keep some of your contracts. Check with the boss on that. I'll check with the boss, of course. Next day, he said, fine, take the job. So I went on the road and I worked for the president and the family, traveled around the country. And he gets elected. So they called me up and they said, would you like to be the advance man for the inauguration? I said, sure. So I went down to Washington and we got everything organized, parade route through the Capitol, swearing in the whole deal. And the night before the election, everybody's in bed, all buttoned down. We're in hotel, security's all around the hotel. Somebody's at the door. I turned to my secret service guy. There was an agent at every turning in hotel. Every door was covered. How did somebody get knocking on our door at 11 o'clock at night? I'm sitting around the table with a, quote, ordered directors, Nixon's family, brother-in-law, Ned Sullivan, and the investment bankers that paid, largely paid for the campaign. So I opened the door and this character comes in to shovel a hat and a beard and old clothes. He smells and reeks of marijuana and everything. I said, my secret service guy, who the hell is that? He said, well, that's our undercover agent inside the SDS in the Weather Underground. And he wants to talk to you immediately. OK, what do you got on your mind? You will cancel the parade for tomorrow morning because it's published in the newspaper and I just came from a meeting. They're going to attack the president's car tomorrow morning. You could hear a pin drop. Everybody, of course, all the brass and the president's family are sitting there.  Think fast.  So I said to the secret service guy, or the underground agent, I don't know who you are. I never saw you. You were never here. I can't remember who you are. I'm going to give you one order.  You understand what I said? Take it out. There will be no threat tomorrow. You got it? Yes, sir, he goes. I said, well, I look at the table of the board level of people and the next, Ned Sullivan says, Ben, that sounds good, but supposing he screws up and there's an attack. I said, don't worry, I got that figured out. So downstairs in our security area, we have three cars, one for the president, one for Amy Eisenhower and my wife, and one for John Eisenhower and the kids. I said, in the morning, we're going to go downstairs. We're going to put the president in car number two. We're going to put my wife with Amy in car number one. We're going to leave the kids at the end.  I did not tell my wife. I never told that story until a couple of years ago, actually. So Ned turns around and he says, that's fantastic. You're terrific. What job do you want in Washington? I said, I don't want a job here. I need capital to start a business. So he reached into his pocket and he wrote a check for $10,000. And he said, he went to every guy around the table, write a check for $10,000 or write an IOU and give them to the investment banker. And they all did that. And then he said, now, then you have to write the business plan. And the investment banker has to agree to it. And if he does, you're off and running and make sure you've got plenty of capital. So I went home, told my wife she was very happy. And we started it. We sat down at the IBM Selectric typewriter I had, and she did all the typing. We wrote the business plan. Took the plan to the vulture bankers. So I went frowning 100% of the company in the 90, 80, 70, 60, 50, 40. I don't know how low it got. It got so low where I was thinking of, but I had no choice. I needed the money and I wanted to execute the plan. So finally we agreed to whatever the terms were. And I was supposed to come back the next morning with all the lawyers and accountants and sign all the papers. I went home, took the train in the following morning, got down to the Wall Street big board room. And I'm expecting to walk in with a room of lawyers and accountants and people to stamp the papers and seal all that stuff. There's only one guy in a room. He's standing there like this at the end of the room with his pockets turned inside out. I don't get it. What's going on? He said, didn't you read the Wall Street Journalist? I said, no, I didn't. The stock market fell yesterday 500 points of 10%. He said, we're out of business. Game over. But we appreciate your effort. We'll get a car, Lamo, to take you home. So I took the limousine home and told my wife, I said, well look, I gotta go get a job. We're out of money. She said, no, you're 30 years old. You're gonna go ahead and start the company now. Hook her by crook. If you don't know it now, you never will. So we sat down and we wrote letters to everybody that I had met over the last three years trying to develop this machine. And it was pretty impressive, I guess, when my prototype made the front page of Time Magazine. And so it wasn't long. A guy called me up, a guy named Rod Polly. And he said, would you meet me next week at Bookbinders Restaurant? And I said, sure. What do you want me to do for you? He said, I want you to make me perfect french fries. I thought, I don't know anything about french fries. Oh, he said simple. He said, we had a little machine. And McDonald's. And when you cook a french fry, you have a square rectangular piece. You can put one of those slides up. And when you cook it, the potato expands and takes a lot of space. If you overcook it, it shrivels up. So he said, we need to make sure that we cook our french fries so they're all expanded. So there's really three ways you cook. At that time, 1960s, restaurants cooked by eye or by fixed time. And the basket of french fries always had a different quantity in it because the employee just dumped it. So sometimes you've got a full basket, sometimes you've got a half a basket, sometimes you've got one, sometimes you've got two. Sometimes the fryer's at this temperature, that temperature. So the product is all over the place. But in a fast food restaurant, all of the profit comes from two products. Carbonated beverage and french fries. Everything else is a giveaway. So you have to control your yield on your syrup. You pay so much for the syrup and then you water it down with CO2 and water. That's called the bricks. If you do the right bricks, you control your profit yield on your carbonated beverage. And if you control the french fry, you got your profit on the french fries. So he said, meet me at Bookbinder's restaurant in Philadelphia. I want you to meet the chairman of the board. He said, can you build a machine? Of course I can build a machine. I'm out of work, I need money. What are you gonna say? Yeah, sure. So we had dinner. And Rod had told me a lot about it. I said, yeah, I can do it. So the chairman said, how much? I said, well, it's 10,000 now. 10,000 when I deliver the prototype. And I said, Rod and I have agreed that we'll lease it for $3 a day, including all service. It will pay you a commission on the money coming from the franchisees. You'll get your money back. Rod will get the yield in the french fries. He'll guarantee the profit so you can build a lot of stores. So he got the napkin out. He wrote the terms with a ballpoint pen on the napkin and we both signed it. And Rod took the napkin back to the lawyer and had him write a contract around the napkin. And I went down the next week and signed the contract and got my check. Well, we sat down and we started working on building the machine. And I said, well, I got a little money. I don't have an investment banker. Ned Sullivan stayed with me. Two or three of the guys stayed with me. We went and raised money from friends and family. And I went to the Hartford National Bank in Stanford, Connecticut, which was run by a guy named Bucky Bush who was a Bush family from St. Louis related to the Bushes in Connecticut. And I knew the Bushes in Connecticut because I worked in the Republican Party in Connecticut. And I went into the bank and I said, well, I worked for Nixon. I got this idea. I needed an SBA loan. He said, fine, he goes to the secretary, give him the loan. So I had the loan the next day. I think it was around 300,000. So we had enough money. I hired a couple of engineers. We made the first experiment in the garage. Then we had to get out of the garage and go somewhere else. And I went looking for a building. Well, first I got to go to put the logo up. So I called my old friends at the Nixon campaign, the guy who had made this stylistic Republican elephant you see everywhere today. Up until Nixon came in, we had a lumbering elephant with a long nose. That was the Republican Party image. So Jack Frost, who happened to be a guy in my church that carried the plane on Sunday, I went through the whole campaign. I didn't know that he was doing the advertising. I was doing the advance work. Secret. So he did the logo for Pan American. He did the advertising for American Express. Don't leave home without it. He did a couple of the big ones. And I said, come over for dinner and have a cocktail with me. I gotta tell you about my company and I'm gonna build a front computer and the company's gonna be called Fast Food Automation Service Techniques. So he, after a couple bottles of wine, steak dinner. He comes up with this logo. And it was made that way. I remember his presentation. He said, fast as the name of your company, we're gonna put it in brackets. We're making the F, S and a T. We'll intersect. We're putting a stop period and we're gonna give it a registered trademark and boom. That's it. So that's been the registered trademark all over the world. For the last 50 years.  Most important thing was find and need and fill it. Well, we were originally trying to force our point of sale machine into a market that was really kind of happy with the electromechanical machine. They weren't quite ready for the electronic machine. But this was a machine where the guy, I need it today. So we built the prototype. It took us about 90 days to make the prototype. We put it in a restaurant and rock him out. It worked fine. Within 15 or 20 months, we sold about 6 or 8,000 of those machines. And we leased them for $3 a day. We capitalized in that present value of a five year lease. It was a five year non-cancelable lease. I stole all those ideas from my AMF. That's the way they did it. So I said, it was good for AMF, it's gotta be good for me. So we leased all those machines and we were off and running. And my time is up, so we're gonna have to leave. But over time, we kept adding to the capability of that machine, or those machines or arm machines. We manufacture millions of devices. We're in 139 countries and the machines talk to each other. They talk to the cloud and that we now tell the people in the restaurant in the morning when they walk in. This is what you're gonna cook. This is how much you're gonna cook. This is when you're gonna cook it. This is how long you cook it. This is when you take it out. This is how you post-process it. And if you haven't sold it, we tell them when they have to throw it away. So I guess that's pretty much the story. Find a needed fillet, get a good partner when you start. Make sure it lasts to the end. So you mentioned I had over 30, I really got about 40 patents. And I know you intellectuals are gonna cross this mountain. Should we have patents or not? Well, let me tell you, I understand the intellectual and I'm a libertarian. Nobody's more libertarian than I am. Nobody. But I'll tell you this. I've been on both sides of the battle. I spent millions defending patents and suing people who violated my patent. I've also been sued by a lot of people. I probably spent as much money as I made. I wasted an incredible amount of time. All lawyers are crooks. I would put lawyers, bankers, of all kinds, lawyers and bankers, or all crooked. And they're the two principal forces that create politicians. So there you have the crooked pipeline. And I've worked through all of them. And I've spent a lot of time on the Capitol Hill being an illegal unregistered lobbyist. I worked and I lobbied with my father in Kodak and Ingersoll Rand. We created the Disc Corporation. You remember that? The Domestic International Sales Corporation which gave a tax break to US exporters. And the idea was to level the playing field because our markets in Europe had protections and we were disadvantaged. And so I went to Washington to help put that bill through Congress with the big guys. Big guys needed me as a little guy to prove that the bill was not just another corporate subsidy for Kodak and Ingersoll Rand but it also helped the little guys. And let me tell you, after 50 years of business we just liquidated my wife's. I gave her ownership in that company to keep her employed because I was afraid she was gonna leave me so I had to give her her financial incentive to stick around. So she just liquidated that company. She's got more money than I got. So anyway, you're gonna have that battle but I would tell you this. I wouldn't have been sued in the beginning when somebody tried to stop me because they had a patent. I resisted that patent lawsuit by not using a lawyer. I picked up the telephone call the chairman of the board of the other company and I said, look, I'm innocent. I didn't do anything wrong. Bring your lawyers and your engineers. I'm gonna give you the key to my building. You can stay as long as you want, rummage through everything and then you decide whether I was unethical or not. And they did that and we settled. So I said to the guy, look, now you know I'm innocent but if you need face saving, so you look with your team, I'll give you 5% royalty. He said, no, no, no, we don't need that. You're a good guy. We'll just compete. Go ahead. He cut his price in half. They tried to drive me out of the business by price competition. When I fought him back and I kept inventing better solutions. So I stayed in business. So that's the patent thing. I'm out but I'll also tell you this. I do, I service about 40 to 60,000 restaurants in mainland China. I opened the very first American restaurant in China. God, I can't remember what the year was. Very first one. And one of my sons is the president of a company based in Shanghai. So the Chinese have screwed us out of everything. Clinton was the guy that started. He gave them all of our missile, internet, satellite technology free. They understand patents and I've been in meetings with the Chinese and they said, your patents mean nothing. We're gonna copy everything you have. You have to manufacture here. We won't do business with you. So it's a tough game. So you pursue all your intellectual pursuit but remember at the end of the okay carol it's like showdown. Life's tough and you gotta be ready to pull a trigger. So fortunately I pulled all the right triggers at the right time. Thank you.


Hello. In this video, we're going to be taking a look at the permalinks settings. As usual, I'm starting on my dashboard. I'm going to go ahead and hover over settings and then select permalinks. Now, there's not a lot here, but it is important, and I'll just cut to the punch line here that we're not actually asking you to change anything. But for the record, we do want to explain what's going on here. What's going on here is under common settings, you have six different ways and then some optional ways down here to control what the URLs look like when people visit your website. Now, as you can see here, for the videos that we're using here in this test implementation, my URLs are going to be based on this IP address. In your case, it's going to say something like libraries.any.gov slash library name slash and then this bunch of different stuff on the end here. Now, what this should be set at for you by default is day and name. You set that up quite intentionally. If it doesn't, please take a moment right now to change this to day and name. And that way, what's going to happen is as people are clicking through your website, they're going to see your basic URL, libraries.any.gov slash library name. And then the URL is going to be based on the year, the month, the day, and the title of the content that you are creating on your website, whether in most cases posts but sometimes also pages. The benefit to doing it this way is basically what's called search engine optimization or SEO. The more ways you have kind of your content and indicators in your URL, the better things are going to show up in Google. If your URL just ends with something like P equals 123, to Google that doesn't really mean anything. But if you've titled your post, Stephen King is coming to the library, then Stephen King is coming to the library is going to show up in the URL of that post, not just in the title of that post. And that gives you kind of extra Google juice. There are reasons to use these other options here, but really we would like everybody to use this day and name format. It kind of keeps some consistency and it does work best for you in the long run when it comes to search engines. There's this optional area down here at the bottom for category base and tag base. We'll talk about categories and tags when we get to the video about creating posts and creating other content from your website, but again kind of how we've got things set up, the defaults work, there's no reason to put any information in here. So assuming that day and name is your current choice and the category base and tag base are empty, there's absolutely nothing you need to do here. If day and name is not what they're setting us right now, please take this moment, change it today and name and then go ahead and click that safe changes down at the bottom to make that stick. And that's all there is to this screen. Thanks for watching.